Memo to SRS Work Group 1 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

MEMO 

TO: Savannah River Site Work Group 

FROM: Joe Fitzgerald, SC&A 

SUBJECT: Discussion Items and Clarifications for February 26th Work Group Meeting 

DATE: February 24, 2014 

Based on our notes from the February 5, 2014, Work Group meeting, SC&A offers the following 

discussion and clarification regarding NIOSH’s response to SC&A’s original findings. These 

are intended to guide Work Group discussions during the upcoming February 26, 2014, meeting. 

Given the relatively short time period (several weeks) between recent Work Group discussions, 

these are meant to reflect SC&A understanding of the NIOSH responses and where we believe 

additional discussion with the Work Group would be helpful, both during the February 26th

conference call, and afterwards. A more definitive and detailed response can be developed at the 

Work Group’s direction. 

Neputunium: (NIOSH 1/9/2014 response to SC&A white paper of July 2013) 

Findings 1-8: Resolution deferred to SEC Work Group (albeit, for Finding 5, NIOSH agreed it 

needed to add actual construction trades worker (CTW) instructions for assigning 

Np dose in OTIB-081; NIOSH only provided conceptual approach during Feb 5th

mtg). As noted in SC&A’s One Person-One Sample (OPOS) response,1SC&A 

continues to disagree with NIOSH’s position that SRS worker bioassay data can 

be used in its comparison of non-construction worker (NCW) and CTW worker 

groups at SRS, both from a data adequacy standpoint, as well as statistical 

validity. 

Finding 9: SC&A did not question the use of the I-131 region of interest to calculate Pa-233 

exposures. SC&A was questioning the choice of whole body counter geometry to 

calculate the exposure, as opposed to chest geometry. SC&A reviewed data from 

several workers in the early 1970s to verify the geometry used and noted that 

sometimes the chest count geometry was used and not the 40 cm arc geometry. 

Specifically, Np-237 activities and I-131 activities were often both registered in 

chest count geometries. SC&A wants to know if those results were discarded by 

NIOSH, because they were not 40 cm arc geometries. In addition, there are many 

in-vivo results files where it is not clear which counting geometry was used. 

SC&A is assuming that NIOSH has taken the counting results from the files that 

clearly specify that the 40 cm arc geometry was used. 

 

1

 Issued to the SEC Work Group on February 21, 2014. 
Memo to SRS Work Group 2 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

SC&A agrees that the difference in the interpretation of results from chest counts 

to 40 cm arc geometry counts is due to the calibration factor used. As NIOSH has 

apparently used the calibration factor from 40 cm arc geometry, SC&A requests a 

clarification as to whether any of the chest counts were, in fact, discarded. The 

use of the correct calibration factor is essential for the correct interpretation of invivo monitoring results. It is not clear why NIOSH would not use chest 

calibration factors for monitoring results that specify the use of chest geometry, 

and 40 cm arc geometry calibration factors for monitoring results that specify 40 

cm-arc geometry. If no specification is available, NIOSH could either discard the 

results or use the most claimant-favorable geometry. SC&A notes that the intake 

rate derived for the time period of 1970–1974 was 93.5 dpm/d, while the intake 

rate immediately before this time, in 1968–1969, was only 1.79 dpm/d. 

Finding 10: SC&A has analyzed various results from several workers during the period 1974–

1979, when the “second geometry was used” to report in-vivo results. As 

explained in the SC&A review, all of those reports contained the MDA for Pu and 

Am, using chest geometry. SC&A questions whether NIOSH has examined the 

in-vivo results of all SRS workers during this period of time and concluded that 

the stretcher geometry was actually used in practice. In addition, a clarification is 

needed as to whether NIOSH has discarded or disregarded the monitoring results 

that were taken using the chest geometry. 

The use of the correct calibration factor is essential for the correct interpretation 

of in-vivo monitoring results. It would seem that one would use the use chest 

calibration factors for monitoring results that specify the use of chest geometry, 

and the stretcher geometry calibration factors for monitoring results that specify 

the stretcher geometry. Under the circumstances, SC&A requests clarification as 

to why NIOSH does not merely analyze each one of the existing real monitoring 

results and apply the correct calibration factor to each result. 

Finding 11: SC&A does not agree with NIOSH’s assessment that 86.5 keV photons are 

unsuitable for estimating Np-237 during the period 1980–1989, when phoswich 

detectors were used to quantify Am-241 exposures. The following example 

shows the calculation of Np-237 MDA following an inhalation intake in 

September 1988, when a phoswich detector was used for chest counts. Phoswich 

detectors can be used to detect Np-237 86.5 Kev. 
Memo to SRS Work Group 3 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

From this, SC&A believes that the use of Np-237 chest counts may be indicated 

when available. NIOSH should clarify in detail why the ROI that comprises 86.5 

KeV photons of Np-237 phoswich chest counts were not used to quantify Np-237. 

In addition, NIOSH has not explained why the ROI of Cr-51 was preferred over 

the ROI of I-131. 

Finding 12: SC&A agrees with NIOSH that the basic premise of having and using coworker 

intake data is that not all workers were monitored that should have been 

monitored by modern standards. As presented by NIOSH during the February 5, 

2014, meeting, there are several Np-237 urine monitoring results from accidents 

involving this nuclide, and (from NIOSH’s presentation) that the in-vivo results 

bounded the urinalysis data. While SC&A would like to review this data and 

analysis further (e.g., to perform a confirmatory comparison between the 50th and 

95th percentile intakes for Np-237 using WB/Chest results and intakes derived 

using urine excretion results for Np-237, for the years 1980–1982, and 1984, for 

example, when there were a sufficient number of samples to perform a 

comparison), we conclude that sufficient data exists for this purpose. 

Finding 13: SC&A questions NIOSH’s interpretation of bioassay results, and how it relates to 

assumptions made about the intake dates and the proportion of the activity of 

Np-237 to the activity of Pa-233 at the time of measurement. The assumptions on 

the time pattern of intake (acute intake date or chronic intake during a period of 

time) are made to assign an intake model to the 50th, 84th or 95th percentile of the 
Memo to SRS Work Group 4 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

lognormal distribution that comprises the in-vivo data of all workers that had 

results in a certain time period. In ORAUT-OTIB-0081, the time pattern of intake 

is assigned to the 50th, 84th and 95th percentiles of the lognormal distribution of all 

OPOS, as calculated for each worker in a certain year. 

The proportion of Np-237 to Pa-233 in each in-vivo monitoring result is 

independent of the assumed intake pattern of the 50th percentile of the distribution 

of all workers. For each individual worker, the proportion of Pa-233 depends on 

the age of the Np-237 source at the time of inhalation and on how long after 

exposure the worker has been monitored. For inhalation exposures to fresh Np237 and in-vivo monitoring in a small interval of time after exposure, the amount 

of Pa-233 will be low and the in-vivo monitoring will underestimate the Np-237 

lung or body burden. In addition, in the derivation of OPOS for each worker, invivo monitoring results with different proportions of Pa-233 may be used to 

calculate the MPM. 

In its last response, NIOSH noted the following without providing a basis in 

available documentation or specific examples to demonstrate its point: 

 

In actuality, most Np-237 intakes are more likely to be aged material 

characteristic of surface contamination on objects that may be aged 

weeks, months, or longer. Even though Np-237 billets were normally 

processed approximately 25 days after production, some occasions 

were longer and residual contamination in the processing line would 

be expected to be considerably older than the age of the billets. 

SC&A suggests that references or examples to substantiate these claims be 

provided to the Work Group. 

Finding 14: See SC&A’s response to Finding 13 above. 

 

Finding 15: See SC&A’s response to Finding 13 above. 

Finding 16: SC&A has always understood that NIOSH was not using I-131/Cr-51 as a 

surrogate, and was just using the ROI to assign Np doses. However, it will be 

important for NIOSH to be more explicit about its information regarding specific 

operations (and campaigns), locations, and times during which workers were 

potentially exposed to Np. While NIOSH’s original source term descriptions 

have been expanded via more recent data captures and presented (at least, in part) 

in the form of slides to the Work Group (on Feb 5th), documentation of this final 

scoping review needs to be made available in a form that can be reviewed by the 

Work Group and ultimately applied by dose reconstructors. 

 

SC&A has two specific questions of clarification: (1) Has NIOSH quantitatively 

determined how many workers included in the coworker study were actually 

working in areas where neptunium exposure was possible? (2) Of the known 
Memo to SRS Work Group 5 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

neptunium exposures, how many of those workers were actually included in the 

coworker distribution? And for clarification sake, will the most recent 

information obtained in the last few onsite data captures be reflected in revised 

Table 5-1 of OTIB-0081? 

Finding 17: See SC&A’s response in Finding 16 above. In addition, NIOSH states that the

“assumption of equilibrium is reasonable and any uncertainty is accounted for 

with the minimum factor of 3 uncertainty applied.” The minimum GSD of “3” is 

assigned to account for biological variation and uncertainty in the lognormal 

distribution and the derived 50th and 84th percentile excretion rates. It is a 

statistical parameter, and is not suppose to address errors on the equilibrium of the 

source. 

Findings 18 and 19: SC&A agrees with NIOSH that “a factor of ten drop in calculated intake 

rate is not uncommon in the coworker studies.” As stated in the response to 

Finding 18, “when the MDA of the bioassay method used decreases, the 

calculated intake rate typically drops as well and by a commensurate amount. In 

this case, the whole body counting methods improved with time with more and 

better detectors, leading to a decrease in the MDAs for most radionuclides.” 

However, SC&A notes that instead of dropping with time, the intake rates 

increased with time. The coworker 50th percentile intake rates for Np-237 for the 

period January 1, 1968–December 31, 1969, was 1.79 dpm/d, with a GSD of 3.21, 

while the derived intake rate for 1970–1974 was 93.5 dpm/d, with a GSD of 3.00. 

Apparently, there was a factor of 50 increase in the intake rate. This discontinuity 

could only have been caused by incoherent methods in assigning Np-237 

exposures (urine excretion rates versus WB results based on I-131 ROI) or due to 

a huge increase in worker Np-237 exposures. One avenue of inquiry for the Work 

Group would be to examine the urine results used in the coworker distribution to 

further evaluate this issue of inconsistent results. 

Thorium: (NIOSH 1/16/2014 response to SC&A white paper of September 2013) 

Finding 1: Regarding the revised Table 5-1, SC&A’s primary concern revolves around the 

completeness of film badge codes that NIOSH intends to use to assign workers to 

a given facility, although this may devolve into a question of sufficient accuracy. 

SC&A has observed temporal gaps in the available dosimetry area codes 

contained in a preliminary sampling of available claimant files. This is especially 

apparent in the 1973–1981 period when the primary source of external dosimetry 

information is the HPRED database. Additionally, SC&A has identified 

numerous additional dosimetry codes not listed in Table 5-1. Finally it can be 

observed in Table 5-1 that some dosimetry codes are associated with multiple 

facilities, which have differing radionuclide assignments. 

 

How does NIOSH propose to assign coworker intakes in cases where dosimetry 

codes are temporally incomplete, refer to multiple facilities, or cannot be 

associated with a listed facility in Table 5-1? [Presumably, in cases where there is 
Memo to SRS Work Group 6 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

uncertainty in the location code, the default assumption of applying all coworker 

intakes would be applied (i.e. the unknown facility designation). This would 

likely apply to a large number of unmonitored workers especially in the 1973–

1981 timeframe.”] 

Finding 2: NIOSH conducted additional research on thorium use at SRS and is proposing to 

apply a new methodology to bound potential doses due to thorium after January 1, 

1990 (i.e., primarily for Bldg 773-A, using an air concentration of 2 × 10 E-13 

μCi/cc). While this approach is described in NIOSH's response to Findings 27–32 

of the January 16, 2014, response, NIOSH/ORAUT notes that a report providing 

“additional rationale for use of the derived air concentration” has yet to be issued, 

but is intended sometime in the future. 

 

SC&A awaits this additional rationale, so that an informed review can be 

conducted for the Work Group. One question to be addressed in this follow-up 

review will be to confirm that Building 773 represented the sole source of thorium 

exposure potential after 1990. 

Finding 3: SC&A has found no specific incidents or incident databases that have not been 

addressed by NIOSH. We defer to the Work Group for further direction or 

closure. 

Finding 4: Thoron exposure was not addressed fully at the February 5th meeting; SC&A is 

prepared to discuss further. 

Findings 5–16, 19–23: OPOS-related issues for SEC Work Group consideration. As noted in 

SC&A’s OPOS response, SC&A continues to disagree with NIOSH’s position 

that SRS worker bioassay data can be used in its comparison of NCW and CTW 

worker groups at SRS, both from a data adequacy standpoint, as well as statistical 

validity. 

 

Finding 17: NIOSH agrees with SC&A's finding regarding chelation samples; that the use of 

chelation samples is technically inappropriate, though likely claimant favorable. 

Finding 18: SC&A’s examination of the raw data with reported results above the detection 

limit shows instances where the same urine sample, counted in different discs, 

presents inconsistent results. This indicates that the method used for detection of 

activity was not always reliable; such widely inconsistent results from the same 

urine sample cannot be trusted. 

It is obvious from the data recorded in the laboratory logbooks that the counting 

data were subject to imprecision. As a result, samples were counted multiple 

times and the results were averaged, a standard practice to reduce uncertainty. 

This would be expected, given that many of the results were near the MDA. Use 

of the averaging technique implies that the site was aware of the consistency 

issues and took steps to address it by averaging the results. 
Memo to SRS Work Group 7 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

SC&A derived spreadsheets of the raw data results and divided them into three 

tables attached here. The first table shows reported results higher than 

3 dpm/1.5L (higher than 10 times the MDA of 0.3 dpm/1.5L). The second table 

shows results between 1 dpm/1.5L and 2.9 dpm/1.5L. The third table shows 

results between 0.32 dpm/1.5L and 0.99 dpm/1.5L. The green highlighted results 

are the ones that show inconsistent discs results. The pink highlighted results are 

the ones in which the report result is not the average of the individual discs 

results. Most of the workers in this range had DTPA treatment for some specific 

contamination (i.e., Am-241, Pu or Cm). As the tabulated data below illustrate, 

there are several inconsistent discs results, even at levels much higher than the 

MDA. One example consists of the disc results 8.64, 6.79, 2.72, and 15.3, which 

were averaged to give a report result of 8.4. Other examples are highlighted in 

Tables 1 and 2, which contain most data in the report range higher than 1 

dpm/1.5L. Table 3 contains the most data in the range 0.32–0.99 dpm/1.5L. 

Although the range values of uncertainty for the disc results were chosen 

subjectively, it is important to notice that there were high variations among the 

same sample disc results for report values more than 10 times the MDA. In 

addition, as NIOSH pointed out, there are high uncertainties on the reported 

results near or at the MDA. Despite these uncertainties, thorium intakes were 

derived based on urine excretion results well below the MDA, as can be seen on 

Table A-5, page 46 of 96 of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Revision 2, 2013. 

The derivation of coworker intakes based on raw data measurements with this 

high degree of uncertainty is scientifically questionable and needs to be reviewed 

further by the Work Group in the context of its SEC evaluation review. 

Findings 24–26: Addresses how solubility will be interpreted for workers exposed to thorium 

compared with that attributed to Am/Cm/Cf bioassay data. Also, how assignment 

of a trivalent radionuclide dose conversion factor may influence claimantfavorability of lung and bone dose assignments. It is SC&A’s position that in 

order for a coworker model to be scientifically valid, the data being used should 

reflect actual exposure potential to the radionuclide of concern. 

While SC&A does not dispute how solubility will be addressed, SC&A agrees 

with the NIOSH proposal from the February 5th meeting to take the thorium 

workers that they have identified and look to see to what extent they are included 

in the coworker data (including some assessment of the relative magnitude of the 

“thorium worker” results to the entire distribution). The purpose of such a review 

would be further validation that the coworker distribution contains the sample of 

actual thorium worker data that is available and can be used to bound potential 

thorium intakes. 

Findings 27–32: Embodies new DAC-based approach to assigning thorium doses in the 1990–

2007 period (see response to Finding 2). 
Memo to SRS Work Group 8 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

A1 8/10/1976 8 3.53 4.583 4

1 1/27,29/82 Pu/Am, 1/29/82, 

wound 1/28/1982 11.502 8.157 7.977 9.2

1 1/29/1982 10.844 10.874 10.7

1 1/30/1982 2.14 3.939 4.316 3.5

2 12/12/1985 Pu/Am/Cm,11/19/8

5, inh 11/22/1985 Follow-up 34.923 42.122 34.644 37.739 44.341 39.355 38.9

2 11/23/1985 Follow-up 16.597 14.791 13.761 15.6

2 12/13/1985 Follow-up 9.65 9.594 8.373 7.819 8.9

2 12/14/1985 Follow-up 2.902 2.563 3.764 3.519 3.2

3 8/23/1979 Am/Cm, 8/23/79, 

inh 8/14/1979 24 hrs 8.774 10.45 8.104 8.19 27

3 8/23/1979 Special 17.046 17.156 51

3 8/23/1979 Special 8.399 10.603 29

B1 6/5/1974 Routine 40.47 29 29.485 27.8 35

4 5/9/1986 Pu/Am,5/8/86 , 

wound 5/10/1986 Special 777.9 537.5 658

4 5/12/1986 Follow-up 143.7 117.6 131

4 5/12/1986 Follow-up 122 123 122.5

4 5/13/1986 Follow-up 53 22.9 37.9

4 5/14/1986 Follow-up 39.1 50.2 44.6

4 5/14/1986 Follow-up 24.1 17.6 20.8

4 5/15/1986 Follow-up 27.1 20.7 23.9

4 5/16/1986 Follow-up 14.9 15 14.9

4 5/17/1986 Follow-up 8.64 6.79 2.72 15.3 8.4

4 5/18/1986 Follow-up 14.4 17.5 15.9

4 5/18/1986 Follow-up 14.6 9.8 12.2

4 5/19/1986 Follow-up 9.03 13 11

4 5/20/1986 Follow-up 6.21 11.9 9.1

4 5/20/1986 Follow-up 3.66 11.18 6.04 1.79 5.7

4 5/21/1986 Follow-up 12.5 14.8 17.9 30.5 18.9

4 5/22/1986 Follow-up 13.6 9.7 11.6
Memo to SRS Work Group 9 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

4 5/24/1986 Follow-up 2.56 5.15 8.48 8.39 6.1

4 5/24/1986 Follow-up 6.15 5.9 6

4 5/25/1986 Follow-up 1.47 -5.8 6.87 4.3 4.2

4 5/27/1986 Follow-up 5.14 4.49 4.8

4 5/28/1986 Follow-up 14.8 7.68 LIP 11.2

4 5/29/1986 Follow-up 3.63 4.86 4.2

4 5/30/1986 Follow-up 7.3 4.13 5.7

4 5/31/1986 Follow-up 7.97 11.4 9.7

4 6/1/1986 Follow-up 13 8.76 10.9

4 6/2/1986 Follow-up 2.6 3.5 3

4 6/4/1986 Follow-up 5.9 5 5.4

4 6/5/1986 Follow-up LIP 4.8 4.8

4 6/5/1986 Follow-up 4.1 2.8 3.4

4 6/6/1986 Follow-up 2.22 18.965 14.471 39.637 4.819 13.9

4 6/6/1986 Follow-up 5.96 2.7 4.3

4 6/7/1986 Follow-up 7.075 9.879 8.5

4 6/9/1986 Follow-up 6.923 10.652 8.8

4 6/10/1986 Follow-up 5.304 2.393 3.8

4 6/11/1986 Follow-up 8.438 10.354 9.4

4 6/12/1986 Follow-up 1.05 4.34 2.94 3.6

4 6/16/1986 Follow-up 4.5 5.34 4.9

4 6/20/1986 Follow-up 4.92 3.34 4.1

4 6/27/1986 Follow-up 4.15 3.4 3.8

4 7/1/1986 Follow-up 1.8 4.1 3.3

4 7/3/1986 Follow-up 4.76 0.236 3.2 4

4 7/6/1986 Follow-up 3.6 3.7 3.6

4 7/8/1986 Follow-up 0.695 4.33 3.1 3.7

4 7/9/1986 Follow-up 3.4 4.33 -0.109 3.8

4 7/10/1986 Follow-up -3.54 2.88 3.2

4 7/15/1986 Follow-up 3.54 -5.52 3.55 0.566 3.5
Memo to SRS Work Group 10 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

4 7/16/1986 Follow-up 3.63 -4.29 3.54 3.6

C1 10/19/1976 Resample 21.142 19.775 19.269 20

5 9/4/1984 Pu/Am, 9/4/84, inh 9/4/1984 Special 10.806 11.013 12.891 12.621 59

5 9/5/1984 Special 1.648 1.776 1.243 1.706 8

5 9/5/1984 Special 0.694 0.794 0.975 0.71 4

5 9/6/1984 Follow-up 0.516 0.366 0.867 0.403 0.495 1.001 3

5 9/6/1984 Special 0.673 0.455 0.651 0.632 3

C2 9/26/1983 Special 2.393 4.956 2.684 -0.032 3.3

D1 5/7/1979 5 35.932 0 72

E1 6/6/1974 Routine 11.961 12.661 12

6 2/8/1988 Pu/Am,2/8/88, inh 2/9/1988 Special 

Follow-up

16.5 12.7 14.6

6 2/9/1988 9.27 15.8 12.5

6 2/10/1988 Follow-up 10.9 9.23 10.1

6 2/10/1988 Follow-up 8.64 9.85 8.7

F1 1/25/1973 Routine 10.404 9.83 10

7 4/19/1974 Cm,ZrNb, 

Pu,Ru,Ce,4/11/74 4/12/1974 Special 2320 2180 2300

7 4/12/1974 Special 1260 1360 1250

7 4/13/1974 Special 248 308 250

7 4/13/1974 Special 100 106 100

7 4/14/1974 Special 57 54 55

7 4/14/1974 Special 45

7 4/15/1974 Follow-up 23.958 23.685 40

7 4/16/1974 Follow-up 24.399 22.849 40

7 4/16/1974 Follow-up 16.023 15.488 40

7 4/17/1974 Follow-up 29.968 30.063 30

7 4/18/1974 Follow-up 18.667 17.862 27

7 4/19/1974 Follow-up 14..922 16.35 16

7 4/19/1974 Follow-up 2.582 2.717 2.726 4.574 9.5
Memo to SRS Work Group 11 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

7 4/19/1974 Follow-up 3.265 3.049 3.004 3.184 9.4

7 4/19/1974 Follow-up 2.297 1.166 1.773 1.796 1.866 5.3

7 4/20/1974 Follow-up 23.599 21.727 16.256 16.804 20

7 4/20/1974 Follow-up 15.829 16.833 16

7 4/20/1974 Follow-up 10.363 10.38 8.341 7.87 12

7 4/21/1974 Follow-up 8.23 8.848 8.628 8.252 8.5

7 4/22/1974 28 hr 3.757 3.768 3.266 5.069 0 4.927 4.2

7 4/29/1974 Follow-up 2.525 3.306 2.283 4.2

7 4/30/1974 Follow-up 3.287 3.035 3.2

H1 6/25/1975 Routine 3.57 3.88 3.7

8 9/4/1984 Pu/Am, inh,9/4/34 9/5/1984 Special 18.332 16.321 19.93 19.682 93

8 9/5/1984 Special 12.67 12.309 13.156 11.741 62.3

8 9/5/1984 Special 9.629 10.958 9.3 9.713 49.5

8 9/6/1984 Special 2.558 2.852 2.393 1.776 12

8 9/7/1984 Follow-up 5.13 5.311 5.637 5.667 5.989 5.667 7.392 29

8 9/7/1984 Follow-up 1.447 1.76 1.095 1.212 1.354 1.627 7

8 9/11/1984 Follow-up 4.793 4.424 5.46 4.945 2.931 4.5

8 9/18/1984 Follow-up 2.593 2.564 3.997 3.892 3.2

9

Am/Cm cont. 

3/27/75 3/27/1975 Special 3.798 4.496 3.572 4

9 3/27/1975 Special 3.699 5.64 4.02 1.033 4.68 3.6

10 Cm-244 cont. in 

11/15/77 11/15/1977 Special 2.54 3.2 8.6

10 11/16/1977 Special 7.94 7.7 7.8

11 4/18/1974 Cm-244,4/18/74 4/18/1974 Special 39.897 32.3 36

11 4/19/1974 24 hr 196.414 185 165.042 177.9 180

11 4/26/1974 24 hr 5.537 4.809 4.884 5.359 5.1

11 5/3/1974 Routine 8.606 8.401 8.5

11 7/24/1974 24 hr 13.608 13.425 14

11 7/24/1974 24 hr 4.856 5.608 5.2

11 10/11/1974 DTPA 3.433 3.713 3.6
Memo to SRS Work Group 12 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

11 1/31/1977 Follow-up 16.76 18.584 17.7

11 1/25/1978 Cm-244/Am-241, 

1/25/78 1/26/1978 Special 530.9 478.9 504.6

11 1/26/1978 Special 314.6 422.5 368.4

11 1/26/1978 144.9 118.4 143.2 161.1 140

11 1/27/1978 177.6 165.4 203.6 196.1 190

11 1/28/1978 26.3 27.2 31.7 32.8 30

11 2/1/1978 Follow-up 11.24 10.249 13.56 10.112 11.3

11 2/6/1978 Follow-up 4.42 4.906 4.7

11 2/8/1978 Follow-up 6.55 5.944 6.2

K1 12/4/1975 Special 0.098 2.331 1.626 4

K1 12/5/1975 F Up 0.662 0.929 1.185 9

12 3/1/1973 Special 27.875 24.96 26

12 3/1/1973 Follow-up 4.722 4.559 4.6

12 3/2/1973 Follow-up 3.514 4.071 3.8

12 5/8/1975 Am-241/Pu-239, 

inh,5/7/75 5/8/1975 Special 4.708 5.031 3.568 4.739 4.5

L1 4/30/1975 F Up 3.32 2.93 3.1

L2 3/1/1973 Special 4.928 4.799 4.9

M1 5/5/1981 Follow-up 22.06 29.904 29.5

13 1/10/1984 Cm-244, 1/10/84 1/11/1984 Follow-up 457.788 452.295 469.291 566.764 471.694 590.06 501.3

13 1/11/1984 Special 197.195 190.506 193.828 291

13 1/12/1984 Follow-up 81.489 62.136 63.136 110.4

13 1/12/1984 Follow-up 35.212 34.393 29.717 33.1

13 1/13/1984 19.349 16.158 20.32 16.402 19.191 16.562 18

13 1/13/1984 4.526 15.007 15.1991 12

13 1/15/1984 7.75 6.41 7.52 8.35 8.656 6.6 7

13 1/15/1984 Follow-up 3.528 4.2 4.03 5.03 3.65 5.28 4.3

14 10/16/1973 Cm-244, 

inh/skin,10/16/73 10/16/1973 24 hrs 73.8 83.9 59.5 66.1 71

14 10/17/1973 24 hrs 19.1 23 21
Memo to SRS Work Group 13 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

14 10/18/1973 24 hrs 25 24.5 27.2 26.7 26

14 10/24/1973 Follow-up 5.77 6.15 6

14 10/25/1973 Follow-up 8.14 7.05 7.6

14 10/26/1973 Follow-up 3.41 3.27 3.33

14 10/29/1973 Follow-up 6.1 6.77 6.4

14 10/29/1973 Follow-up 5.18 5.11 5.1

14 10/30/1973 Routine 3.21 2.88 3

N1 5/1/1981 Special 11.437 12.381 11.056 11.8

N2 11/5/1986 Follow-up 46.4 45.9 46

N2 11/5/1986 Follow-up 17.2 16.2 16.7

N2 11/5/1986 Follow-up 8.91 7.57 8.2

N2 11/10/1986 Follow-up 2.86 3.82 3.3

P1 9/27/1973 Special 3.94 3.99 4

P2 1/22/1973 Follow-up 0.815 0 0.77 0.255 4

15 1/18/1973 Pu-239/Am-241 1/19/1973 Follow-up 3.93 4.74 4.3

16 10/4/1985 Pu-239/Am241,inh,10/4/85 10/7/1985 Follow-up 19.574 17.869 22.745 19.028 15.354 19.256 19

16 10/7/1985 Follow-up 8.459 9.03 7.784 8.057 8.725 8.4

16 10/7/1985 Follow-up 3.604 3.855 3.432 3.818 3.7

17 10/18,10/30/74 Cm-244, 4/18/74 4/18/1974 24 hr 43.652 46.3 24.525 22 34

17 4/18/1974 Special 16.043 13.7 15

17 4/24/1974 24 hr 3.867 3.647 3.917 8.561 8.427 8.521 6.2

17 5/9/1974 Follow-up 5.323 5.497 5.4

17 5/22/1974 Follow-up 4.01 3.805 3.024 3.142 3.5

17 5/23/1974 Follow-up 3.307 3.128 3.165 3.514 3.3

17 10/30/1974 DTPA 4.19 5.57 4.9

17 1/25/1978 Cm-244,1/25/78 1/25/1978 Special 44.1 33.3 38.7

17 1/25/1978 Special 34.9 36.5 35.7

17 1/26/1978 191.1 177.9 226.1 228 210
Memo to SRS Work Group 14 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

17 1/26/1978 Follow-up 131.2 156.9 144.3

17 1/26/1978 Follow-up 134.2 134.3 134.4

17 1/27/1978 105.8 107.7 135.6 140.9 0.609 0.828 0.696 0.675 120

17 1/30/1978 Follow-up 31.02 36.05 34.1

17 1/31/1978 Follow-up 24.204 20.01 28.408 36.25 27.2

17 2/8/1978 Follow-up 37.947 36.06 7.6 7.124 22.2

18 4/12,19/74

Cm244, ZrNb95, 

Pu239,Ru103/106,C

e144, 4/11/74

4/12/1974 Special 1040 1130 1000

18 4/12/1974 Special 340 317 340

18 4/13/1974 Special 50 61 50

18 4/14/1974 Special 40 56 40

18 4/15/1974 Follow-up 38.787 34.209 37

18 4/16/1974 Follow-up 62.268 62.029 56.7 62

18 4/16/1974 Follow-up 62.484 60.43 55.2 74

18 4/17/1974 Follow-up 61.942 69.465 1.65 73

18 4/18/1974 Follow-up 21.89 19.012 20

18 4/19/1974 Follow-up 8.086 6.83 7.288 8.981 23

18 4/19/1974 Follow-up 8.162 6.875 5.592 5.726 20

18 4/20/1974 Follow-up 22.194 23.139 23.714 18.956 22

18 4/20/1974 Follow-up 5.596 5.702 20.999 5.746 6.096 5.7

18 4/20/1974 24.5 hrs 6.057 5.789 6.146 5.725 5.9

18 4/21/1974 Follow-up 3.695 4.356 3.3

18 4/22/1974 21 hrs 2.152 3.102 4.89 4.592 3.7

18 4/29/1974 Follow-up 9.06 10.096 9.6

18 4/30/1974 Follow-up 6.688 8.365 7.5

18 5/1/1974 Follow-up 13.925 11.74 12.8

18 5/6/1974 Follow-up 5.962 7.197 7 6.7

18 5/7/1974 Follow-up 7.068 8.91 8

18 5/8/1974 Follow-up 8.308 8.661 8.5

18 5/14/1974 Follow-up 5.716 6.671 6.2
Memo to SRS Work Group 15 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 1: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results Greater than 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/ 

1.5L (2)

dpm/ 

1.5L (3)

dpm/ 

1.5L (4)

dpm/ 

1.5L (5)

dpm/ 

1.5L (6)

dpm/ 

1.5L (7)

dpm/ 

1.5L (8)

dpm/ 

1.5L (9)

dpm/ 

1.5L (10) Report

18 5/15/1974 24 hr 7.32 5.921 6.82 7.868 7

18 5/16/1974 24.5 hrs 3.732 4.083 4.507 3.722 4

19 11/19/1985

Am-241/Pu239,Cm-244, inh, 

11/19/85

11/21/1985 Follow-up 577.393 122.616 518.243 127.96 601.19 560.129 564.2

19 11/23/1985 Follow-up 98.316 109.827 92.192 95.518 99

19 11/24/1985 Follow-up 28.582 33.734 29.234 30.202 34.263 30.056 31

19 11/25/1985 Follow-up 41.145 47.309 39.547 41.262 42.3

19 11/25/1985 Follow-up 26.681 25.602 20.785 22.579 23.9

19 11/25/1985 Follow-up 20.226 26.008 17.735 25.029 29.211 22.325 23.4

19 11/26/1985 Follow-up 251.985 238.789 245.4

19 12/12/1985 12/12/1985 Follow-up 17.789 16.026 14.231 16

19 12/13/1985 Follow-up 7.23 9.174 12.089 10.941 9.9

19 12/13/1985 Follow-up 6.822 5.577 6.128 6.339 6.2

19 12/14/1985 Follow-up 4.242 3.854 3.521 3.57 3.8

20 4/18/1974 Cm-244, 4/18/74 4/18/1974 Special 95.279 101.9 100

20 4/19/1974 24 hr 130.336 126.3 169.404 162.7 150

20 4/24/1974 24 hr 

follow-up

27.821 30.819 26.708 28.909 28.6

T1 1/10/1975 Routine 3.4 4.07 3.7

21 11/15/1977 Cm-244, 11/15/77 11/7/1977 Special 1.88 2.25 6.2

21 11/22/1977 11 4.58 4.29 4.4

21 12/12/1985

Am-241/Pu239,Cm-244, inh, 

11/19/85

11/20/1985 Follow-up 13.078 12.682 9.762 12.346 8.883 15.802 12.1
Memo to SRS Work Group 16 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 2: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 1 and 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/1.

5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

A2 6/8/1978 5 1.14 1.605 1.22 0.58 1.1

1 1/27,29/82 Pu/Am, 1/29/82, wound 1/30/1982 1.04 1.297 1.2

2 12/12/1985 Pu/Am/Cm,11/19/85, inh 12/20/1985 Follow-up 2.61 2.735 2.59 2.29 2.6

B1 5/31/1974 Special 2.54 2.499 2.5

4 5/9/1986 Pu/Am,5/8/86 , wound 5/26/1986 Follow-up 3.58 4.14 1.65 1.95 2.8

4 5/29/1986 Follow-up 3.6 2.26 2.9

4 6/2/1986 Follow-up 2.6 3.5 3

4 6/4/1986 Follow-up 1.3 3.5 2.4

4 6/13/1986 Follow-up 1.05 1.84 0.44 1.1

4 6/14/1986 Follow-up 1.93 0.685 3.44 2

4 6/14/1986 Follow-up 1.49 2.34 0.94 1.6

4 6/16/1986 Follow-up 1.4 3.93 1.17 2.2

4 6/17/1986 Follow-up 1.09 0.982 3.14 2

4 6/18/1986 Follow-up 6.17 2.74 2.44 -0.15 2.8

4 6/19/1986 Follow-up 1.82 1.18 -0.63 1

4 6/22/1986 Follow-up 2.29 2.81 2.5

4 7/12/1986 Follow-up 1.46 1.51 1.5

4 7/20/1986 Follow-up 1.49 1.87 -0.17 1.7

4 7/22/1986 Follow-up 2.52 1.84 -4.12 2.2

4 7/23/1986 Follow-up 2.33 4.04 1.59 2.6

4 7/23/1986 Follow-up 1.4 1.05 1.2

4 7/27/1986 Follow-up 0.47 1.96 -0.83 1.2

4 8/12/1986 Follow-up 1.78 0.982 1.4

C3 5/18/1978 4 0.825 1.36 1.1

C4 12/6/1973 Routine 1.04 1.355 1.2
Memo to SRS Work Group 17 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 2: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 1 and 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/1.

5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

5 9/4/1984 Pu/Am, 9/4/84, inh 9/6/1984 Follow-up 0.52 0.366 0.87 0.4 0.5 1 3

5 9/6/1984 Special 0.67 0.455 0.65 0.63 3

5 9/11/1984 Follow-up 1.2 1.125 1.25 1.55 1.3

5 9/13/1984 Follow-up 1.14 1.597 1.4

5 9/18/1984 Follow-up 0.56 1.27 0.94 0.8 1

5 9/21/1984 Follow-up 1.08 0.978 0.97 0.9 1

C5 4/3/1974 Routine 1.55 0.929 0.93 1.1

E2 1/17/1973 Follow Up 1.17 0.857 1.05 0.15 1

E3 7/7/1975 Routine 1.31 1.86 1.6

E1 12/6/1973 Routine 0.94 1.546 1.2

6 2/8/1988 Pu/Am,2/8/88, inh 2/11/1988 Follow-up 1.62 1.14 1.4

27 3/14/1973 Pu-239 in 3/14/73 3/15/1973 Special 1.09 0.737 1.5

H1 3/22/1982 Routine 2.94 1.676 2.3

7 4/19/1974 Cm,ZrNb, Pu,Ru,Ce,4/11/74 5/1/1974 Follow-up 2.47 2.278 2.4

7 5/7/1974 Follow-up 1.36 1.899 1.55 3 2.41 3.08 2.2

7 5/8/1974 Follow-up 1.67 1.639 1.7

8 9/4/1984 Pu/Am, inh,9/4/34 9/11/1984 Follow-up 1.61 1.794 1.65 2.02 1.7

8 9/19/1984 Follow-up 2.43 2.553 2.49 3.35 2.7

9 Am/Cm cont. 3/27/75 3/27/1975 Special 1.86 3.321 2.31 2.5

9 3/28/1975 F Up 2.21 2.82 1.75 1.5 1.4

9 3/28/1975 Special 2.34 2.029 1.69 2

9 3/28/1975 Special 1.52 1.603 1.29 1.5

9 3/31/1975 Special 1.41 1.405 0.82 1.2

28 1/18/1973 Pu-239/Am-241, 1/18/73 1/19/1973 Follow-up 2.12 1.97 1.99 1.97 2

28 1/22/1973 Follow-up 1.5 1.414 1.16 0.81 1.2
Memo to SRS Work Group 18 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 2: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 1 and 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/1.

5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

28 1/31/1973 Follow-up 1.09 1.02 1

J1 5/17/1978 4 1.427 0.89 1.2

11 4/18/1974 Cm-244,4/18/74 5/22/1974 Follow-up 1.25 0.948 1.53 1.95 1.4

11 5/24/1974 Follow-up 1.22 1.116 1.28 1.03 1.2

11 5/28/1974 Follow-up 2.18 2.508 2.3

11 10/10/1974 DTPA 2.85 2.519 2.7

11 10/10/1974 DTPA 2.28 2.09 2.2

11 10/11/1974 DTPA 0.53 2.089 2.08 2

11 10/12/1974 DTPA 1.28 1.628 1.4

12 3/1/1973 Follow-up 2.1 3.239 2.7

12 3/2/1973 Follow-up 1.73 2.228 2.49 1.87 2

12 3/6/1973 Follow-up 1.99 1.92 2

12 3/8/1973 Follow-up 1.09 0.471 0.91 1.2

12 5/8/1975 Am-241/Pu-239, inh,5/7/75 5/9/1975 Follow-up 2.43 3.1 2.5 1.31 1.43 2

12 5/10/1975 Follow-up 2.83 1.946 2.1

L3 10/21/1987 Follow-up 1.27 -0.15 1.12 1.2

L1 1/10/1975 Routine 2.81 2.655 2.7

L4 2/26/1973 Routine 1.19 1.742 1.5

L5 3/12/1976 2 1.81 1.59 1.7

L2 3/1/1973 Follow-up 1.76 2.506 2.1

L2 3/2/1973 Follow-up 0.57 0.891 0.94 1.02 0.91 1

M2 6/6/1983 Routine 1.31 0.95 1.39 1.2

M2 6/6/1983 Routine 1.16 1.025 1.11 1.1

M3 4/13/1981 Routine 2.13 1.694 1.9

29 10/25/1979 Pu-239/Am-241, 10/25/79 10/27/1979 Follow-up 1.52 1.529 1.81 1.7 1.7

29 10/28/1979 Follow-up 0.98 1.504 1.8 1.85 1.6

M4 11/18/1978 11 1.4 1.483 1.4
Memo to SRS Work Group 19 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 2: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 1 and 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/1.

5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

14 10/16/1973 Cm-244, inh/skin,10/16/73 10/30/1973 Routine 3.21 2.88 3

N2 11/6/1986 Follow-up 2.8 2.9 2.8

N2 11/7/1986 Follow-up 1.44 1.2 1.3

O1 puncture wound Pu-239, 

07/10/85 7/11/1985 Follow-up 1.56 1.69 1.92 2.14 1.8

P2 1/19/1973 Follow-up 1.37 0.985 0.99 0.88 1

16 10/4/1985 Pu-239/Am-241,inh,10/4/85 10/6/1985 Follow-up 2.56 3.069 2.7 2.8

16 10/7/1985 Follow-up 1.29 1.065 1.39 1.25 1.2

16 10/8/1985 Follow-up 0.76 0.434 0.31 0.59 0.46 0.31 1.5

17 10/18,10/30/

74 Cm-244, 4/18/74 6/14/1974 Follow-up 1.17 1.465 1.3

17 10/30/1974 DTPA 1.84 1.07 1.92 1.44 1.09 1.6

17 10/30/1974 DTPA 1.23 0.94 1.85 1.41 1.4

17 10/31/1974 DTPA 1.82 2.382 2.1

17 10/31/1974 DTPA 1.04 0.857 0.97 1.24 1

17 11/4/1974 Follow-up 1.57 1.855 2.7 2.47 2.1

17 11/5/1974 Follow-up 1.28 0.862 2.14 2.87 1.8

17 11/6/1974 Follow-up 1.3 1.235 1.3

S1 2/14/1973 Follow-up 1.49 1.62 2.6

S2 9/7/1976 9 2.48 2.852 2.76 2.7

18 10/14/1974

Cm244, ZrNb95, 

Pu239,Ru103/106,Ce144, 

4/11/74

10/14/1974 DTPA 1.54 1.696 2

18 10/14/1974 DTPA 1.48 1.28 1.4

18 10/22/1974 DTPA 1.14 0.876 1

19 11/19/1985 Am-241/Pu-239,Cm-244, inh, 

11/19/85 12/10/1985 Follow-up 1.23 1.458 1.3 0.99 1.2

19 12/12/1985 12/19/1985 Follow-up 0.96 1.112 1.27 1.46 1.2

S3 3/5/1982 Routine 1.01 1.217 1.73 1.2
Memo to SRS Work Group 20 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 2: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 1 and 3 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/1.

5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

S3 3/5/1982 Routine 1.1 1.447 1.15 1.55 1.3

S4 5/2/1974 Routine 1.19 1.025 1.1

20 4/18/1974 Cm-244, 4/18/74 5/7/1974 24 hr 1.11 1.488 2.17 2.04 1.7

20 5/8/1974 24 hr 2.51 1.826 1.86 1.8 2

20 6/12/1974 24 hr 1.02 1.019 1.33 1.33 1.1

21 11/15/1977 Cm-244, 11/15/77 11/15/1977 Special 0.84 0.84 2.5

21 11/17/1977 Special 0.48 0.57 1.6

21 11/21/1977 11 3.58 3.23 1.72 2.8

T2 1/16/1976 Routine 1.37 1.241 1.3

22 12/12/1985 Am-241/Pu-239,Cm-244, inh, 

11/19/85 11/26/1985 Follow-up 1.01 0.981 1.04 0.96 1.12 1

22 12/13/1985 Follow-up 1.94 2.149 1.15 1.15 1.6

22 12/14/1985 Follow-up 0.95 1.045 0.95 1.22 1

W1* 8/5/1974 Follow-up 1.37 1.505 1.4

23 7/30/1986 Pu/Am, inh, 7/30/86 8/1/1986 Follow-up 0.84 -0.11 1.73 1.3

24 1/18/1973 Pu,Am 1/19/1973 Follow-up 1.01 0.878 0.58 1.35 1

 * Exposed to Pu-238, treated with DTPA in 10/14/74
Memo to SRS Work Group 21 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

A3 3/18/1984 Follow-up 0.775 0.676 0.864 0.961 0.986 0.531 0.8

A2 4/12/1985 Routine 0.588 1.036 0.535 0.123 0.6

A2 11/15/1978 11 0.292 0.643 0.651 0.5

A4 1/26/1978 Special 0.256 0.487 0.4

A5 1/27/1978 Follow-up 0.562 0.71 0.6

A6 4/15/1974 Special 0.38 0.524 0.5

A7 12/5/1988 Routine -0.08 0.699 0.35

A8 1/27/1978 Follow-up 0.479 0.594 0.511 1 0.6

B2 7/3/1976 7 0.463 0.674 0.307 0.5

B3 2/10/1976 Routine 0.688 0.656 0.7

B4 8/4/1987 Routine 0.387 0.511 0.4

B5 10/3/1988 Routine 0.621 0.079 0.35

B6 7/20/1983 Special 0.511 0.294 0.293 0.4

B7 2/12/1979 12 0.339 0.584 0.562 0.5

B8 9/9/1978 6 0.754 0.861 0.8

B9 12/11/1978 12 0.364 0.4

B10 12/12/1978 12 0.537 0.5

2 12/12/1985 Pu/Am/Cm,11/19/85, inh 12/12/1985 Follow-up 0.496 0.18 0.228 0.507 0.371 0.604 0.4

B11 3/28/1975 Routine 0.422 0.211 0.483 0.4

B12 1/20/1978 1 0.411 0.429 0.4

B13 6/26/1978 Resample 0.445 0.556 0.437 0.5

B14 9/14/1978 6 0.627 0.827 0.416 0.6

3 8/23/1979 Am/Cm, 8/23/79, inh 8/27/1979 Special 0.408 0.534 0.135 0.015 0.4

3 8/28/1979 Special 0.67 0.695 0.85 0.29 0.705 1.04 0.8

3 8/28/1979 Special 0.526 0.714 0.142 0.378 0.4

3 8/29/1979 Special 0.07 0.464 0.71 0.5

4 5/9/1986 Pu/Am,5/8/86 , wound 5/29/1986 Follow-up 0.691 0.738 0.7

4 6/24/1986 Follow-up 1.03 -0.309 0.999 0.575 0.6

4 6/26/1986 Follow-up -0.837 2 1.06 0.33 0.8
Memo to SRS Work Group 22 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

4 7/2/1986 Follow-up 1.16 0.778 0.213 0.7

4 7/4/1986 Follow-up 0.559 2.71 0.618 16.9 0.6

4 7/5/1986 Follow-up 0.461 0.717 0.6

4 7/6/1986 Follow-up 0.663 0.994 0.8

4 7/10/1986 Follow-up 0.619 0.632 -0.307 0.6

4 7/23/1986 Follow-up -0.325 0.895 0.308 0.6

B15 6/3/1974 Routine 0.29 0.44 0.4

B16 11/15/1977 Special 0.24 0.92 0.6

B16 11/16/1977 Special 0.44 0.52 0.5

B16 9/29/1978 Follow-up 0.357 0.04 0.656 0.099 1.609 1.423 1.144 0.8 0.8

B17 6/11/1981 Routine 0.933 0.488 0.4

C6 4/2/1975 Routine 0.435 0.534 0.615 1.03 0.7

C7 7/7/1981 Routine 0.622 0 0.79 0.5

C8 6/21/1978 5 0.395 0.532 0.533 0.5

C4 6/3/1974 Special 0.007 0.482 0.31 0.4

C4 6/13/1984 Special 0.633 0.777 0.551 0.6

C9 10/2/1978 Follow-up 0.205 0.178 0.554 0.078 0.31 0.619 0.593 0.4

C10 6/7/1978 5 0.533 0.534 0.775 0.6

C11 7/21/1987 Routine 0.598 0.441 0.5

C12 6/9/1978 5 0.43 0.437 0.4

30 10/25/1979 Am-241,Pu-239, inh,10/25/79 10/26/1979 Follow-up 0.92 0.79 0.9

30 10/27/1979 Follow-up 0.43 0.4 0.537 0.5 0.5

30 10/28/1979 Special 0.37 0.64 0.67 0.33 0.5

C13 6/26/1974 Follow-up 0.388 0.32 0.132 0.4

C14 12/18/1978 12 0.36 0.359 0.269 0.557 0.4

C15 5/24/1978 4 0.859 0.743 0.8

C16 1/2/1979 1 0.14 0.22 0.663 1.786 0.414 0.6

C2 11/17/1978 11 0.315 0.445 0.4

C17 7/13/1987 Routine 0.455 0.358 0.4
Memo to SRS Work Group 23 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

D2 11/4/1980 Routine 0.744 0.84 0.8

D3 4/19/1975 Follow-up 0.333 0.679 1.094 0.806 0.7

D4 5/4/1981 Special 0.429 0.336 0.4

D5 11/1/1978 11 0.927 1.171 0.737 0.9

D6 1/11/1979 1 0.353 0.506 0.34 0.4

D7 6/27/1978 Resample 0 0.481 0.679 0.351 0.4

D8 9/12/1978 6 0.533 0.41 0.5

D9 11/29/1978 11 0.575 0.6

E4 12/15/1988 Routine 0.061 0.673 0.38

E2 1/18/1973 Follow Up 0.727 0.257 0.42 0.189 0.4

E3 12/11/1978 12 0.675 0.94 1.094 0.9

E1 9/10/1973 Routine 0.61 0.95 0.8

E1 12/6/1974 Routine 0.593 0.372 0.5

E1 3/19/1975 Routine 0.358 0.496 0.4

E1 4/4/1975 Special 0.553 1.021 0.292 0.6

E1 4/4/1975 Special 0.328 0.739 0.219 0.4

E1 9/12/1978 6 0.426 0.852 0.332 0.5

6 2/8/1988 Pu/Am,2/8/88, inh 2/10/1988 Follow-up 5.71 0.413 1.05 0.475 0.4

6 2/10/1988 Follow-up 0.889 0.787 0.8

E5 11/16/1978 11 0.721 0.615 0.7

F2 10/3/1978 Term 0.643 0.705 0.7

F3 9/27/1978 6 0.149 0.421 0.691 0.4

F4 9/6/1988 Routine 0.725 0.673 0.7

F5 7/31/1988 Routine 0.274 0.569 0.422

F6 11/17/1978 11 0.876 0.781 1.013 0.9

F7 5/17/1978 4 0.627 0.341 0.96 0.6

F8 10/6/1986 Routine 0.602 0.36 0.5

F9 11/13/1978 11 0.709 0.727 1.152 0.9

27 3/14/1973 Pu-239 in 3/14/73 3/15/1973 Special 0.66 0.317 0.48 0.5

27 3/15/1973 Follow-up 0.326 0.523 0.4
Memo to SRS Work Group 24 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

27 3/15/1973 Follow-up 0.206 0.257 0.4

27 3/18/1973 Follow-up 0.625 0.231 0.4

27 3/18/1973 Follow-up 0.306 0.548 0.4

G1 9/14/1978 6 0.473 0.623 0.421 0.5

G2 1/9/1975 Routine 0.57 0.395 0.5

G2 1/10/1977 1 0.526 0.966 0.557 0.7

G3 1/16/1973 24 hr 0.547 0.266 0.4

G4 11/14/1978 11 0.441 0.395 0.4

G5 9/13/1978 6 0.535 0.435 0.664 0.5

G6 4/15/1976 Spec 0.453 0.38 0.4

G6 9/12/1978 6 0.389 0.325 0.689 0.5

G7 3/3/1976 3 0.323 0.501 0.35 0.4

G8 12/13/1978 12 0.402 0.636 0.5

G8 1/26/1982 Routine 0.372 0.391 0.502 0.4

H2 7/5/1973 0.894 2.13 0.664 0.8

H2 7/5/1973 1.08 2.02 0.387 0.7

H2 7/18/1973 24 hr 0.462 0.5

H3 1/9/1989 Routine 0.699 0.406 0.553

H4 4/20/1976 Spec 0.49 0.229 0.45 0.4

H4 2/28/1977 2 0.312 1.19 0.352 0.6

H4 1/26/1978 Special 0.425 0.434 0.4

H5 7/13/1983 Special 0.278 0.45 0.663 0.5

H6 12/12/1978 12 0.482 0.5

H7 6/8/1978 5 0.537 0.467 0.5

7 4/19/1974 Cm,ZrNb, Pu,Ru,Ce,4/11/74 5/7/1974 Follow-up 0.558 1.253 0.926 0.9

7 5/16/1974 Follow-up 0.842 0.569 1.197 0.816 0.5

7 6/12/1974 Follow-up 0.55 0.51 0.55 0.086 0.38 0.154 0.4

H8 4/30/1981 Special 0.829 0.9

H9 3/21/1975 Routine 0.954 0.952 0.828 0.524 0.8
Memo to SRS Work Group 25 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

H10 1/25/1979 1 0.422 0.447 0.804 0 0.77 0.4

H11 11/27/1978 11 0.569 0.521 0.5

H12 11/6/1980 Routine 0.365 0.367 0.4

H13 12/8/1978 12 0.408 0.69 0.5

H14 4/18/1974 Special 0.569 0.482 0.5

H15 1/10/1979 1 0.553 0.515 0.558 0.447 0.363 0.4

I1 4/1/1975 Routine 0.871 0.941 0.546 0.864 0.8

9 Am/Cm cont. 3/27/75 4/1/1975 Special 0.304 1.598 0.684 0.9

J2 1/30/1973 Routine 0.334 0.497 0.4

J3 1/12/1989 Routine 0.048 0.595 0.322

28 1/18/1973 Pu-239/Am-241, 1/18/73 1/23/1973 Follow-up 0.922 0.523 1.047 0.656 0.8

28 1/30/1973 Follow-up 0.471 0.574 0.5

28 2/1/1973 25.5 hr follow-up 0.626 0.471 0.763 0.514 0.6

J4 12/7/1978 Special 0.584 0.6

J4 12/7/1978 Special 0.517 0.5

10 Cm-244 cont. in 11/15/77 11/15/1977 Special 0.24 0.94 0.6

10 11/17/1977 Special 0.16 0.22 0.6

10 11/30/1977 11 0.428 0.4

10 12/1/1977 12 0.428 0.4

J5 10/3/1988 Routine 0.517 0.439 0.478

K2 1/9/1989 Routine -0.107 0.429 0.32

K3 11/15/1978 11 0.393 0.568 0.298 0.4

K4 11/27/1978 11 0.079 0.984 0.749 0.8

11 4/18/1974 Cm-244,4/18/74 7/29/1974 Follow-up 0.567 1.025 1.587 0.332 0.7

11 7/29/1974 Follow-up 0.343 0.679 0.731 0.536 0.6

11 10/10/1974 10/10/1974 DTPA 0.396 0.527 0.5

11 10/16/1974 DTPA 0.445 0.7 0.6

11 10/16/1974 DTPA 0.356 0.384 0.4

11 10/17/1974 DTPA 0.766 0.516 0.6
Memo to SRS Work Group 26 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

11 10/18/1974 DTPA 0.467 0.364 0.55 0.54 0.5

11 10/19/1974 DTPA 0.451 0.085 0.364 0.418 0.4

11 2/12/1975 Routine 0.295 0.349 0.458 0.4

K5 9/20/1978 6 0.592 0.463 0.5

K6 1/7/1976 Routine 0.378 0.6 0.176 0.4

K1 12/5/1975 F Up 0.662 0.528 0.6

K7 12/5/1988 Routine -0.146 0.777 0.32

K8 4/30/1981 Special 0.473 0.4

K8 5/1/1981 Follow-up 0.477 0.5

K8 5/6/1981 Follow-up 0.525 0.259 1.003 0.6

K8 5/6/1981 Follow-up 0.379 0.487 0.811 0.6

K8 5/6/1981 Follow-up 0.321 0.369 0.572 0.4

12 3/6/1973 Follow-up 0.754 0.874 0.531 0.694 0.9 0.9

12 5/8/1975 Am-241/Pu-239, inh, 5/7/75 5/9/1975 Follow-up 0.912 0.801 0.9

12 5/11/1975 Follow-up 0.934 0.929 0.9

12 5/14/1975 Follow-up 0.857 0.459 0.681 0.7

[redact] 11/15/1978 11 0.475 0.425 0.4

[redact] 4/25/1979 4 0.856 0.761 0.8

[redact] 8/13/1988 Routine 0.357 0.498 0.42

[redact] 5/17/1978 4 0.454 0.469 0.5

[redact] 8/7/1978 Resample 0.511 0.407 0.4

L5 1/19/1973 Routine 0.591 0.42 0.5

L5 2/26/1973 Routine 1.037 0.788 0.9

L5 6/11/1973 Routine 0 0.523 0.403 0.5

L5 1/6/1974 Routine 0.544 0.774 0.7

L5 2/11/1974 Routine 0.816 0.798 0.8

L5 2/27/1974 24 hr 0.216 0.497 0.379 0.368 0.4

L5 3/1/1974 24 hr 0.327 0.653 0.642 0.287 0.5

L5 1/21/1976 Routine 0.362 0.609 0.487 0.5
Memo to SRS Work Group 27 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

L5 3/21/1978 4 0.297 0.399 0.4

L5 1/24/1973 24 hr 0.506 0.557 0.626 0.934 0.7

L5 1/25/1973 24 hr 0.514 0.403 0.471 0.274 0.4

L5 1/26/1973 24 hr 0.737 0.694 0.643 1.08 0.8

L5 5/17/1977 5 0.38 0.4

L6 4/29/1981 Special 0.679 0.223 0.4

L7 5/1/1981 Special 0.888 0.8

L2 3/2/1973 Follow-up 0.66 0.746 0.728 0.788 0.7

L2 3/6/1973 Follow-up 0.377 0.077 0.394 0.24 0.491 0.403 0.4

L2 5/8/1974 Special 0.382 0.494 0.4

M5 11/27/1978 11 0.509 0.225 0.809 0.5

M6 1/25/1979 1 0.362 0.226 0.331 0.52 0.408 0.4

M7 9/9/1988 Routine 0.475 0.475 0.48

M8 9/6/1988 Routine 0.153 0.569 0.361

M9 8/15/1988 Routine 0.351 0.698 0.525

M10 3/17/1975 Routine 0.526 0.578 0.501 0.5

M11 1/17/1973 Follow Up 0.626 0.454 0.5

M11 1/18/1973 Follow Up 0.737 0.711 0.943 1.217 0.9

M11 2/21/1973 Routine 0.531 0.737 0.617 0.711 0.6

M11 8/13/1973 Routine 0.89 1.17 0.69 0.9

M11 6/27/1978 5 0.759 0.405 0.187 0.861 0.6

M12 11/14/1978 11 0.499 0.31 0.4

M13 4/4/1973 Routine 0.497 0.309 0.4

M14 9/12/1978 6 0.561 0.8 0.7

29 10/25/1979 Pu-239/Am-241, 10/25/79 10/26/1979 Follow-up 0.44 0.697 1.27 1.245 0.9

29 10/29/1979 Follow-up 0.48 0.35 0.29 0.3 0.4

29 10/30/1979 Follow-up 0.37 0.42 0.4

29 10/31/1979 Follow-up 0.144 0.38 0.64 0.4

29 1/11/1979 1 0.482 0.309 0.4

M15 10/1/1988 Routine -0.018 0.751 0.349
Memo to SRS Work Group 28 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

14 10/16/1973 Cm-244, inh/skin,10/16/73 9/14/1978 6 0.451 0.464 0.5

N3 1/15/1976 Routine 0.463 0.698 0.6

N3 3/8/1976 Resample 0.712 0.579 0.6

N4 10/19/1982 Routine 0.569 0.364 0.231 0.4

O2 9/25/1978 Term 0.634 0.898 0.7

O3 11/13/1978 11 0.839 0.727 0.8

31 7/10/1985 Pu-239, wound, 7/10/85 7/12/1985 Follow-up 0.376 0.322 0.32 0.658 0.427 0.4

O4 5/15/1981 Follow-up 0.467 0.359 0.4

32 3/14/1973 Pu-239, inh,3/14/73 3/15/1973 Follow-up 0.831 0.711 0.386 0.66 0.488 0.6

32 3/15/1973 Follow-up 0.84 0.557 0.463 0.403 0.266 0.35 0.6

32 12/10/1974 Routine 0.338 0.51 0.261 0.4

P3 5/2/1985 Follow-up 0.585 0.498 0.792 0.6

P3 5/2/1985 Follow-up 0.429 0.447 0.479 0.355 0.202 0.4

P1 1/26/1973 Routine 0.231 0.943 0.6

P4 11/16/1978 11 0.471 0.561 0.339 0.4

P5 4/3/1975 Routine 0.379 0.492 0.752 0.437 0.5

P6 3/6/1975 Routine 0.746 0.259 0.614 0.159 0.5

15 1/18/1973 Pu-239/Am-241 1/25/1973 Follow-up 0.548 0.548 0.5

15 1/31/1973 Follow-up 0.643 0.703 0.7

15 2/1/1973 Follow-up 0.668 0.72 0.7

15 2/1/1973 Follow-up 0.463 0.883 0.7

R1 9/25/1978 6 0.467 0.539 0.323 0.4

R2 1/26/1976 Routine 0.626 0.269 0.521 0.5

R3 1/12/1989 Routine 1.455 0.376 0.916

R4 8/11/1988 Routine 0.351 0.334 0.343

R5 1/2/1979 12 0.1321 0.523 0.103 0.506 0.339 0.4

R6 11/8/1978 11 0.414 0.912 0.7

R7 11/27/1978 11 0.396 0.385 0.707 0.511 0.5
Memo to SRS Work Group 29 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

R8 12/30/1986 Follow-up 0.405 0.557 0.5

R9 1/5/1989 Routine 0.491 0.498 0.5

R10 11/27/1978 12 0.404 0.4

16 10/4/1985 Pu-239/Am-241,inh,10/4/85 10/10/1985 Follow-up 0.376 0.252 0.204 0.541 -0.189 0.378 0.229 0.513 0.4

R11 11/13/1978 11 0.432 0.461 0.4

R12 5/1/1981 Follow-up 0.078 0.729 0.136 0.772 0.4

R12 5/1/1981 Follow-up 0.011 0.439 0.066 1.469 0.078 0.5

R13 1/17/1973 Follow Up 0.171 0.514 0.591 0.4

[redact] 1/25/1979 12 0.285 0.562 0.442 0.4

[redact] 3/16/1976 2 0.714 0.782 0.7

[redact] 2/2/1979 12 0.48 0.121 0.617 0.47 0.4

[redact] 1/8/1976 Routine 0.076 0.746 0.295 0.864 0.5

17 6/11/1974 24 hr 0.974 1.076 0.619 0.482 0.8

17 6/12/1974 24 hr 0.666 0.807 0.39 0.66 0.452 0.6

17 6/13/1974 Follow-up 0.563 0.435 0.5

17 6/17/1974 Follow-up 0.614 0.262 0.31 0.871 0.5

17 6/20/1974 Follow-up 0.324 0.664 0.304 0.4

17 6/21/1974 Follow-up 0.406 0.329 0.4

17 7/1/1974 Follow-up 0.609 0.446 0.544 0.77 0.6

17 10/18,10/30/74 Cm-244, 4/18/74 10/31/1974 DTPA 1.09 0.65 0.888 0.939 0.9

17 11/7/1974 0.231 0.322 0.83 0.931 0.6

17 11/8/1974 0.528 0.455 0.804 0.922 0.7

17 11/19/1974 Follow-up 0.312 0.602 1.31 0.528 0.6

17 1/25/1978 Cm-244, 1/25/78 9/11/1978 6 0.362 0.68 0.475 0.5

S1 2/19/1973 Follow-up 0.22 0.36 0.5

S1 2/20/1973 Follow-up 0 0.426 0.954 0.668 0.823 0.686 0.249 0.04 0.687 0.4

S5 9/8/1978 6 0.63 0.75 0.398 0.6

S6 2/5/1974 Routine 0.589 0.651 0.6

S7 9/8/1978 6 0.385 0.409 0.4
Memo to SRS Work Group 30 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

S7 12/28/1978 12 0.771 0.925 0 0.511 0.8

S8 9/11/1978 6 0.306 0.494 0.849 0.5

S8 1/15/1976 Routine 0.311 0.433 0.4

18 4/12,19/1974 Cm244, ZrNb95, 

Pu239,Ru103/106,Ce144, 4/11/74 6/11/1974 Follow-up 0.437 0.147 0.617 0.4

18 6/14/1974 Follow-up 0.484 0.555 0.5

18 6/27/1974 24 hr follow-up 0.689 0.597 0.311 0.295 0.5

18 6/28/1974 Follow-up 0.53 0.313 0.4

18 6/28/1974 24 hr follow-up 0.077 0.577 0.363 0.414 0.423 0.4

18 7/1/1974 Follow-up 0.228 0.878 0.405 0.5

18 7/3/1974 Follow-up 0.61 0.49 0.6

18 7/10/1974 Follow-up 0.3 0.54 0.4

18 10/14/1974 10/14/1974 DTPA 0.219 0.594 0.4

18 10/15/1974 DTPA 0.651 0.921 0.8

18 10/16/1974 DTPA 0.726 0.963 0.8

18 10/18/1974 DTPA 0.351 0.7 0.601 0.431 0.249 0.5

S9 5/24/1978 4 0.644 0.474 0.6

19 11/19/1985 Am-241/Pu-239,Cm-244, inh, 11/19/85 12/10/1985 Follow-up 1.015 0.412 0.948 0.614 0.416 0.741 0.7

S10 9/12/1978 6 0.672 0.245 0.947 0.419 0.6

S11 11/15/1978 11 1 0.294 0.6

S11 11/14/1978 11 0.563 0.601 0.6

S11 12/11/1978 12 0.406 0.4

S12 6/6/1978 5 0.519 0.504 0.5

T3 11/13/1978 11 0.761 0.564 0.878 0.659 0.7

20 4/18/1974 Cm-244, 4/18/74 6/11/1974 24 hr 0.5252 0.642 0.577 0.568 0.6

20 6/13/1974 Follow-up 0.594 0.387 0.8

21 11/15/1977 Cm-244, 11/15/77 9/28/1978 Follow-up 0.277 0.449 0.087 0.679 0.912 0.321 0.7

21 2/20/1979 2 0.24 0.647 0.692 0.5
Memo to SRS Work Group 31 SC&A – February 24, 2014 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not 

been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.

Table 3: Raw Am/Cm/Cf Results between 0.32 and 1 dpm/1.5L

Ref # DTPA Contamination Bottle Date Type dpm/ 

1.5L (1)

dpm/1.

5L (2)

dpm/1.

5L (3)

dpm/1.

5L (4)

dpm/1.

5L (5)

dpm/1.

5L (6)

dpm/1.

5L (7)

dpm/1.

5L (8)

dpm/1.

5L (9)

dpm/1.

5L (10) Report

22 12/12/1985 Am-241/Pu-239,Cm-244, inh, 11/19/85 11/23/1985 Special 0.379 0.541 0.5

22 12/26/1985 Follow-up 0.292 0.367 0.394 0.547 0.412 0.244 0.4

W2 11/14/1978 11 0.364 0.572 0.5

23 7/30/1986 Pu/Am, inh, 7/30/86 8/1/1986 Follow-up 1.04 0.827 0.9

23 8/6/1986 Follow-up 0.511 0.46 0.5

23 8/6/1986 Follow-up 0.487 0.281 0.4

W3 10/28/1975 Routine 0.11 0.599 0.44 0.4

W4 6/5/1978 5 0.486 0.366 0.4

W5 11/8/1978 6 0.857 0.818 0.8

24 1/18/1973 Pu,Am 1/22/1973 Follow-up 0.814 1.011 0.9

24 1/23/1973 Follow-up 0.285 0.323 0.961 0.457 0.5

24 1/24/1973 Follow-up 0.725 0.589 0 1.019 1.363 0.249 0.7

24 1/25/1973 Follow-up 0.746 1.131 0.9

25 2/11/1980 Pu-238, inh, 2/11/80 2/11/1980 Special 0.32 0.392 0.56 1.13 0.4

25 2/12/1980 Special 0.99 0.62 0.89 0.911 1.2 0.69 0.9 0.69 0.81 0.8

W6 9/12/1978 6 0.721 0.25 1.067 0.432 0.6

W7 7/15/1983 Special 1.027 0.689 0.69 0.7

26 5/31/1974 Pu, 5/29/74 5/29/1974 Follow-up 0.735 0.533 0.6

26 5/29/1974 Follow-up 0.55 0.419 0.5

26 6/1/1974 Follow-up 0.322 0.729 0.4

26 6/1/1974 Follow-up 0.41 0.284 0.4

W8 12/17/1980 Routine 1.083 0.654 0.533 0.7

W9 11/16/1977 11 0.465 0.455 0.5

W10 9/14/1978 6 0.601 0.728 0.7

W11 11/15/1978 11 0.293 0.381 0.24 0.566 0.4

W12 8/1/1979 2 0.468 0.4 0.534 0.16 0.4

W13 6/6/1978 5 0.571 0.209 0.311 0.752 0.5

W14 2/2/1973 Routine 0.3 0.651 0.5