in

NV

From the analysis of uncer fainty in

population-average dose, the relati

2}

®

between cumulative exposure time t a
confidence limits of D(t) uncertainty

a 15
1

Figure 21 was calculated. Figure 22h
how uncertainty in D(t) is predicted fo become
effectively independent of time after ~5 y of
E ;

g

©

-

3 os _
o
a
°
5

a

3
Go

R

o

Rongelap residence, by which timd residual
10

15

2

£42

30

Time (y)

interindividual variability in expected dose
from hypothetical residence on Rongelap Island

starting in 1995 as ratios of the corresponding
value

the

that D(30) > 1.0 cSv is ~1% (Figure $B). Based

Figure 19. Two-tail 95% confidence limits on

population-average

and is characterized by confidence lint:

a factor of 2 of (D(t)). In particular,

of

this

dose

(horizontal line) at specified residence times.

lving 500
people starting in 1995, the charactegization of
uncertainty in population-average dofe implies
the

population-average

lifetin

D(Lifetime) shown in Figure 24, whi

and an 87% chance (i.e., it is more kely than
not) that zero cancers will arise as <

@

9°

Cumulative fraction

ah

fallout-related exposures on Rongelap

2

o

Ny

o
>

2°

nn

be available. It is not clear, howeve
local-foods-only assumption would best be
reflected in an analysis of unde
variability of the type conducted hert
this assumption is substantially at
0.5

1

1.5

2

25

3

Maximum expected 1-y dose (mSv)
Figure 20.
Estimated distributions of
interindividual variability in the lifetime

maximum of expected annual doses corresponding

.to hypothetical residence on Rongelap Island
starting in 1995. Distributions corresponding to

the LLNL imports-available model diet (bold

curve) and a hypothetical local-foods-only diet

assuming twice the local caloric intake shown in

Table 20 (light curve) are shown.

by a factor of two).

As discussed] above in

reference to Figure 18, a local-foods
that assumed twice the caloric inta
corresponding LLNL model diet
approximate 5-fold increase in expectPd dietary
dose and 3.3-fold increase in expected
1-y dose to potential 1995 Rongelap ree

49

Select target paragraph3