185 Acute and chronic intakes of fallout radionuclides @ S. L. SIMoNn ET AL. Table 17. Comparison of estimates of absorbed dose to the thyroid from the Bravotest (acute intake) from this work and from Lessard et al. (1985) and Goetz et al. (1987); all entries are in mGy andrepresent the average for male and female adults (except Rongerik which pertains to adult males only), rounded to two significant digits (entries with dash were not estimated). Estimated thyroid absorbed dose (mGy) to adults S17 (8.02 d) Rongelap This work Lessard et al. (1985) Ailinginae This work Lessard et al. (1985) Utrik This work Lessard et al. (1985) Rongerik This work Goetz et al. (1987) E(2.3h) MIQ208h “166h “Te 30h) 'Te (3.2 d) Total 1,700 1,400 47 74 4,200 5,600 1,300 2,000 41 130 260 1,200 7,600 11,000 500 290 14 16 1,400 1,600 520 670 13 39 80 300 2,500 2,900 230 330 4.5 15 380 850 36 719 3.8 27 35 240 690 1,600 740 190 16 — 2,200 820 — 18 — 120 — 4,000 190 Table 18. Deposition density (kBq m~’) of *°*™°Puatthe time of fallout andthe variation of surface soil concentration (Bq q kg™' All values rounded to two significant digits. Kg in 0-5 cm) with time (y) y after deposition. Pp g 3°*Py soil concentration (Bq kg‘) as a function of time (y) after deposition Atoll Ailinginae Ailinglaplap Ailuk Arno Aur Bikar* Ebon Erikub Jabat Jaluit® Jemo Kili Knox Kwajalein Lae Lib Likiep Majuro* Maloelap Mejit Mili Namorik Namu Rongelap Island Rongerik Taka Taongi Ujae Ujelang Utrik Wotho Wotje Deposition density (kBg m~°) Oy 0.5 y ly By Sy 10 y 20 y 30 y 50 y TS 0.055 0.19 0.060 0.065 5.7 0.021 0.095 0.033 0.085 0.090 0.085 0.037 0.066 0.12 0.050 0.44 0.072 0.055 0.14 0.034 0.085 0.085 16 35 1.4 0.16 0.075 0.22 3.5 0.085 0.090 150 1.1 3.8 1.2 1.3 110 0.41 0.19 0.65 1.7 1.8 1.7 0.73 1.2 2.4 1.0 8.7 1.2 1.1 2.7 0.68 1.7 1.7 290 700 28 3.2 1.5 4.3 63 1.7 1.8 130 0.90 3.1 1.0 1.1 91 0.34 0.16 0.54 1.4 1.5 1.4 0.61 1.0 2.0 0.85 72 1.0 0.94 2.3 0.56 1.4 1.4 240 580 23 2.7 1.3 3.6 53 1.4 1.5 110 0.77 2.7 0.88 0.92 719 0.29 0.13 0.46 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.52 0.84 1.7 0.73 6.1 0.88 0.81 1.9 0.48 1.2 1.2 210 500 20 2.3 1.1 3.1 45 1.2 1.3 86 0.61 2.1 0.70 0.74 60 0.23 0.11 0.37 0.97 1.0 0.95 0.41 0.67 1.3 0.58 4.9 0.70 0.64 1.5 0.38 0.97 0.93 160 400 16 1.8 0.87 2.5 36 1.0 1.0 78 0.56 2.0 0.64 0.67 57 0.21 0.10 0.34 0.88 0.92 0.87 0.38 0.61 1.2 0.53 4.5 0.64 0.59 1.4 0.35 0.88 0.85 150 360 14 1.7 0.80 2.2 33 0.89 0.94 70 0.50 1.7 0.57 0.60 49 0.19 0.090 0.30 0.78 0.82 0.77 0.34 0.55 1.1 0.47 4.0 0.57 0.52 1.3 0.31 0.78 0.76 130 320 13 1.5 0.71 2.0 29 0.80 0.83 63 0.45 1.6 0.52 0.54 45 0.17 0.080 0.27 0.71 0.74 0.70 0.30 0.49 0.98 0.43 3.6 0.52 0.47 1.1 0.28 0.71 0.68 120 290 11 1.3 0.64 1.8 26 0.72 0.75 59 0.42 1.5 0.49 0.51 42 0.16 0.070 0.25 0.67 0.70 0.66 0.29 0.47 0.92 0.40 3.4 0.49 0.45 1.1 0.27 0.67 0.65 110 270 11 1.3 0.60 1.7 25 0.68 0.71 55 0.40 1.4 0.46 0.48 42 0.15 0.070 0.24 0.63 0.66 0.62 0.27 0.44 0.86 0.38 3.2 0.46 0.42 1.0 0.25 0.63 0.61 110 260 10 1.2 0.57 1.6 23 0.64 0.66 * Values scaled to those for Rongelap Island, using total '*’Cs deposition density (Table 5, Simonet al. 2010) as a guide. > Values from Namorik assumedfor Jaluit. “Values from Arno assumed for Majuro.