Draft 

SC&A’S ISSUES MATRIX FOR THE BROOKHAVEN 

NATIONAL LABORATORY SITE PROFILE TECHNICAL 

BASIS DOCUMENT 

Prepared by 

S. Cohen & Associates 

1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 

Vienna, Virginia 22182 

Saliant, Inc. 

5579 Catholic Church Road 

Jefferson, Maryland 21755 

May 2013

Disclaimer 

This document is made available in accordance with the unanimous desire of the Advisory Board on 

Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH) to maintain all possible openness in its deliberations. However, 

the ABRWH and its contractor, SC&A, caution the reader that at the time of its release, this report is predecisional and has not been reviewed by the Board for factual accuracy or applicability within the 

requirements of 42 CFR 82. This implies that once reviewed by the ABRWH, the Board’s position may 

differ from the report’s conclusions. Thus, the reader should be cautioned that this report is for 

information only and that premature interpretations regarding its conclusions are unwarranted. 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 2 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

This matrix contains a list of the issues (formally titled Findings in the site profile review) that 

SC&A identified in Rev. 00 of the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) technical basis

document (TBD) ORAUT-TKBS-0048 (ORAUT 2006), with status update considering the 

recent Rev. 01 edition of ORAUT-TKBS-0048 (ORAUT 2010) and Rev. 02 edition of ORAUTTKBS-0048 (ORAUT 2013). Two SECs presently exist for BNL; one for the period January 1, 

1947, through December 31, 1979, and one for the period January 1, 1980, through December 

31, 1993. 

This site profile issues matrix is based on assessments of the following: 

 The BNL TBD ORAUT-TKBS-0048, Rev. 00, August 30, 2006 (ORAUT 2006) 

 SC&A’s September 2009 review of the BNL site profile ORAUT-TKBS-0048, Rev. 00, 

August 30, 2006 (SC&A 2009) 

 The NIOSH SEC-00113 Evaluation Report dated September 29, 2009 (NIOSH 2009) 

 The BNL TBD ORAUT-TKBS-0048, Rev. 01, April 26, 2010 (ORAUT 2010) 

 The NIOSH SEC-00196 Evaluation Report dated January 5, 2012 (NIOSH 2012) 

 The BNL TBD ORAUT-TKBS-0048, Rev. 02, February 7, 2013 (ORAUT 2013), which 

will be referred to in this evaluation as the “revised TBD.”

Note that March 2013 updates to this issues matrix appear in blue text, except for any additions 

to the reference list, and May 2013 updates appear in red text. 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 3 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 1: Bioassay Monitoring Not Adequately Established

ORAUT-TKBS-0048 (ORAUT 2006) does not provide sufficient information to determine 

which workers were monitored for what radionuclides and what criteria were used to select 

workers for special, routine, and spot bioassay monitoring. To perform an adequate dose 

reconstruction, the dose reconstructor needs to know who, when, and why workers were 

bioassayed at a given DOE site. This information allows the dose reconstructor to determine if 

the worker should have been monitored, and prompts the dose reconstructor to search for such 

records, if applicable (especially important because of the lack of a centralized record system at 

BNL). Although bioassays for some radionuclides were conducted for some workers at BNL 

throughout the laboratory’s operating history, sufficient documentation of written procedures 

and requirements for bioassays is not apparent before the 1990s; this leaves 40 years of 

uncertainty concerning bioassay requirements. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: The SECs negate this concern through 1993. SC&A needs 

to determine if this issue is still applicable after 1993.

NIOSH Response: Bioassay records are sufficiently complete for DR after 1993.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: While addressing the SEC issues, it was found that analyses of 

the bioassay records and cases indicate that bioassay records are sufficiently complete for DR 

after 1993. Resolution of the SEC issue addressed this site profile issue.

Work Group Actions: SEC issue resolution accepted by WG on phone conference call of 

March 6, 2013.

Board Action: SEC issue resolution accepted at Advisory Board meeting of March 12, 2013.
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 4 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 2: Records of Bioassay Monitoring Not Centralized or Knowingly Complete

The site profile does not address the issue of the completeness and accessibility of the bioassay 

records. There were numerous bioassay data recording systems and filing methods at BNL. 

Many of these earlier records are still located in various departments, making it difficult (as 

confirmed by current BNL health physics personnel) for BNL to properly and completely 

respond to NIOSH requests for bioassay records to be used for dose reconstruction. It is not 

currently known by BNL health physics personnel if all the hardcopy records have been 

located, are legible, and are accessible for dose reconstruction. As various departments were 

formed and supplanted, and as department heads came and left BNL, the hardcopy records may 

have survived, or they may have been destroyed or removed from the site. There is presently 

no method available to determine if all the records for a given employee are available for dose 

reconstruction purposes, particularly before the records were centrally stored in electronic 

databases. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: The SECs negate this concern through 1993. SC&A needs 

to determine if this issue is still applicable after 1993.

NIOSH Response: Bioassay records are sufficiently complete for DR after 1993.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: While addressing the SEC issues, it was found that analyses of 

the bioassay records and cases indicate that bioassay records are sufficiently complete for DR 

after 1993. Resolution of the SEC issue addressed this site profile issue.

Work Group Actions: SEC issue resolution accepted by WG on phone conference call of 

March 6, 2013.

Board Action: SEC issue resolution accepted at Advisory Board meeting of March 12, 2013.
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 5 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 3: Minimum Detectable Activity and Uncertainty Values Not Sufficiently Defined

Minimum detectable activity (MDA) is mentioned several times in Section 5 of the site profile

(ORAUT 2006), and a list of whole-body counter (WBC) MDA values is provided in Table 5-3, 

pp. 78–79, for the years 1999 through 2005. Additionally, urinalysis MDA values for some of 

the common radioisotopes found at BNL are listed in Table 5-3, pg. 80, mainly for 1999–2006. 

Therefore, a reasonable amount of MDA information for common radioisotopes is provided for 

1999–2006. However, what is lacking is a comprehensive listing of urinalysis and WBC MDA 

values for the 1940s–1990s, such as is found in other NIOSH site profiles. Additionally, 

uncertainty values are not provided, and are apparently not available, for most of the bioassay 

reporting period from the 1950s–1990s.

SC&A’s February 2012 update: The SECs negate this concern through 1993. However, this 

issue is still pertinent for the period 1994–1998 for many of the radioisotopes.

NIOSH Response: MDA values updated in Section 5 of Rev. 02 of the TBD.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: SC&A evaluated the revised TBD and found that additional 

MDA data for some of the major radionuclides had been added to cover the period of interest 

(1994–1998), with expanded coverage of radionuclides and time periods in general. This issue 

has been satisfactorily addressed.

Work Group Meeting: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 6 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 4: Radionuclide Characteristics Not Sufficiently Known

Unfortunately, as stated in Section 5.10 of the site profile (ORAUT 2006), specific solubility

data, particle size, and activity fractions are not known, or are not available, for most facilities 

at BNL. Table 5-5 lists a few of the activity fractions, presumed to have come from stack 

emission data. However, stack emissions are not always a good indicator of the types of 

radioisotopes present, or their concentrations, in the worker’s breathing zone (this also applies 

to Table 2-2). Interviews with BNL workers indicate that Tables 2-2 and 2-3 do not correctly 

reflect the historic radioisotopes present at some of the BNL facilities. Without appropriate 

characterization of workplace exposures, the adequacy and completeness of the internal and 

external monitoring programs come into question and may result in a less than favorable organ 

dose reconstruction. In addition, workplace specific monitoring data and/or source term data

do not appear to be available.

SC&A’s February 2012 update: The SECs negate this concern through 1993. However, this 

issue is still pertinent after 1993.

NIOSH Response: Additional information in Rev. 02 of the TBD.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: SC&A evaluated the revised TBD and found no major 

additional data concerning this issue; however, the revised TBD instructs the dose reconstructor

to use the most claimant-favorable solubility, particle size, etc.; this would be claimant 

favorable and resolves the issue.

Work Group Action: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 7 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

 

Finding 5: No Internal Coworker Dose Database Available

The site profile (ORAUT 2006) does not address internal coworker dose data. In view of the 

issues with the lack of a coordinated, consistent bioassay program and the problems with the 

availability of historic bioassay records, it would be advantageous to have a viable coworker 

database to use to assign unmonitored dose. Unfortunately, the lack of a routine and 

comprehensive bioassay program before the 1990s may make it difficult to create an adequate 

coworker internal dose table for the dose reconstructor to bridge monitoring or recordkeeping 

gaps for sporadically monitored workers, monitored workers whose complete records are not 

available, and for unmonitored workers who should have been monitored. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: The SECs negate this concern through 1993. However, this 

issue is still pertinent after 1993.

NIOSH Response: NIOSH does not intend to develop an internal coworker model.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: This issue was resolved in SEC issue #12. A coworker internal 

model is not presently needed, because internal dose monitoring and records have been deemed 

complete for DR purposes after the SEC period ending in 1993. Resolution of the SEC issue 

addressed this site profile issue.

Work Group Actions: SEC issue resolution accepted by WG on phone conference call of 

March 6, 2013.

Board Action: SEC issue resolution accepted at Advisory Board meeting of March 12, 2013.
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 8 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 6: NTA Threshold Response Not Sufficiently Investigated

The threshold energy of NTA film and the amount of dose not registered due to this limitation 

is important in neutron dosimetry. NTA film decreases in response starting at neutron energies 

below 1 MeV, and is almost completely insensitive to neutrons below 0.5 MeV; therefore, 

radiation fields containing an appreciable percentage of the total dose equivalent due to 

neutrons below 1 MeV must be evaluated carefully, with attention given to the missed dose 

resulting from this threshold affect. The site profile does not specifically address the subject of 

the NTA film threshold. The site profile should address this issue and make clear and 

technically sound recommendations to compensate for the incomplete neutron doses as 

recorded by NTA film and contained in the dose of record. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: SC&A needs to determine if the revised TBD provides 

additional information that could be applied to this issue.

NIOSH Response: Section 6.10 expanded to cover this issue in 2013 TBD revision.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: This issue was generally covered in SEC Issues #1–#3; 

however, recent review of several BNL documents containing neutron dose equivalent (D.E.) 

measurements as a function of neutron energy (Preisig 1995, Ref ID 22845 pdf. 26–32) 

indicates that the D.E. under 0.5 MeV could range from 25% to 50% of the total dose at the

Alternating Gradient Synchrotron (AGS), and one measurement shows that NTA film would 

only register <2% of the total neutron D.E. (Xie 1986, Ref ID 121356, pdf. 53). Phillips states 

in a BNL document (Phillips 1974, Ref ID 22429, pdf. 17–21) that PuBe (4.5 MeV) neutron 

sources were used for fast neutron calibration, and that the calibration for neutrons of average 

energy of 1 MeV was 20 mrem per tack per 25 fields, and 10 mrem for 4.5 MeV neutrons 

(PuBe), a difference of a factor of 2. Table 6-5 in the revised TBD lists a significant portion of 

the neutron energy in the 0.1–2 MeV range, indicating part of the dose is below the 0.5 MeV 

threshold of NTA film, and below the average neutron energy of the calibration source of PuBe 

(4.5 MeV). Therefore, it should be determined if the recorded neutron doses for workers 

exposed to moderated lower-energy neutrons were too low because of the threshold of NTA 

film, or how/if this was accounted for.

NIOSH’s April 30, 2013, Response to SC&A’s March 2013 update: NIOSH agrees that an 

adjustment factor is needed to address the NTA energy threshold. NIOSH proposes to use NTA 

film and calibration data from the AGS facility to develop the adjustment factor. The AGS 

facility represents the largest and best characterized source of potential neutron exposure at 

BNL in the post-SEC period. The factor will be developed and incorporated into the next 

revision of the site profile.

SC&A’s May 2013 update: SC&A will need to review NIOSH’s recommended solution when 

it becomes available.

Work Group Actions: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 9 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

 

Finding 7: NTA Track Fading Not Covered in the Site Profile (ORAUT 2006)

The magnitude of the proton recoil tracks in NTA film resulting from neutron interactions 

depends on the energy of the interacting neutron. Lower-energy neutrons cause less dense 

proton recoil tracks; these tracks fade more rapidly with time than heavier tracks caused by 

more energetic recoil protons resulting from energetic neutrons (i.e., 0.5–1.0 MeV neutrons in 

the workplace versus 4 MeV neutrons from a calibration source). The site profile did not 

directly address NTA film track fading, provide evidence that it was not a problem at BNL, or 

describe any procedure necessary to compensate for it. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: SC&A needs to determine if the revised TBD provides 

additional information that could be applied to this issue.

NIOSH Response: Section 6.10 expanded to cover this issue in the 2013 TBD revision.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: This issue has been satisfactorily addressed in SEC Issue #1, in 

that the latest revised TBD recommends a fading factor of 1.81 be applied to the recorded 

neutron dose measured by NTA film processed at BNL before 1985. After the processing was 

outsourced to Landauer during 1985–1995, SC&A found that the vendor did calibrate the NTA 

film at the beginning of the exchange cycle and read them at the end of the cycle; therefore, 

incorporating fading in the calibration cycle as if the whole dose was received on the first day 

of exposure (NIOSH 2011), which is claimant favorable. This issue has been resolved.

Work Group Meeting: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 10 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

 

Finding 8: NTA/TLD/Lexan/CR-39 Problems

The problems associated with the NTA film threshold and track fading initiated a search for 

other neutron dosimeters; among those tested and selected for use at BNL were the TLD, CR39, and Lexan neutron dosimeters. However, these neutron dosimeters were not without their 

own shortcomings. There were issues with NTA film, CR-39, and Lexan neutron dose 

readings, and even the gamma-muon readings. None of the detectors appeared to establish a 

long-term “gold standard” to which results could be compared. During the 1980s and 1990s, a 

number of issues were ongoing between BNL and their dosimetry vendor, Landauer. The BNL 

site profile does not cite these dosimetry problems, if they were solved, or make any 

recommendations on the use of the neutron dose records, given the concerns and uncertainties 

associated with these issues.

SC&A’s February 2012 update: SC&A needs to determine if the revised TBD provides 

additional information that could be applied to this issue.

NIOSH Response:

SC&A’s March 2013 update: This issue was covered in SEC Issue #3, where it was found

from the documents reviewed to date that the highest of the neutron readings were recorded. 

Therefore, SC&A has no further comments on this issue and considers it resolved.

Work Group Actions: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 11 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

 

Finding 9: Potential Exposures at Accelerators Not Sufficiently Covered

High-energy accelerators, such as the many diverse types operated at BNL during its 60-year 

history, present the standard health physics problems, as well as emergent new challenges, 

typically unique to each type of new accelerator. There are many situations at high-energy 

accelerators that have the potential for unconventional exposures leading to unrecorded or 

under-recorded doses. The present BNL site profile does not address the unique dosimetry 

problems associated with high-energy accelerators, if the dosimetry systems were adequate 

during the startup periods, or if the dosimetry systems were sufficiently encompassing to 

accommodate operational changes. Nor does the site profile discuss adjustment factors for 

neutron doses, and if they are needed to compensate for the limitations of the dosimetry systems 

used as a function of time at different accelerator facilities.

SC&A’s February 2012 update: SC&A needs to determine if the revised TBD provides 

additional information that could be applied to this issue.

NIOSH Response: Updated facility information in Section 2 of the revised TBD.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: This issue was incorporated into SEC Issue #4. Which was 

satisfactorily addressed as follows:

The original issue was that even if the highest dose value was recorded, this does not mean that 

the highest dose value correctly represented the dose received for all exposure situations. 

According to several BNL articles (such as Xie & Rohrig 1985 and Kahnhauser 2011), there 

were issues concerning the ability of the BNL neutron dosimetry system to register all the 

neutron D.E. because of the energy response range of the various neutron dosimeters.

In a few instances, SC&A found locations where a portion of the neutron D.E. may result from 

neutron with energies greater than 20 MeV (such as 50% of the D.E. at 2 out of the 15 exposure 

areas characterized using Bonner spheres around the AGS in a memorandum by Xie & Rohrig 

1985). However, considering that a conservative relative biological effectiveness (RBE) [or 

Quality Factor (QF)] of 10 was used at BNL for determining neutron dose at all times (when the 

measured QF was approximately 5), and that an energy employee would only spend a small 

fraction of time in the vicinity of such an exposure area, additional adjustment factors applied to 

all neutron dose records would be excessively conservative and not warranted. Additionally, 

special precautions and dosimetry were in place when personnel worked in the beam areas.

SC&A considers this issue resolved.

Work Group Actions:

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 12 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

 

Finding 10: External Coworker Dose Data Not Addressed

Section 6 of the site profile (ORAUT 2006) does not address or provide any coworker data for 

use in assigning doses to workers who should have been monitored, but were not. Coworker 

data are needed in cases where the worker had the potential to receive greater than 

environmental doses, but by the criteria at the time, the individual was not considered a 

radiation worker and, therefore, was not badged, or the monitoring results cannot be located. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: Although some of the information has changed in the 

revised TBD, there appear to be no significant changes concerning this issue; therefore, this 

issue is still pertinent.

NIOSH Response: Average worker external doses included in revised TBD of 2013.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: SC&A evaluated the revised TBD and found that the 

information and data on pages 82–83, with the table of coworker data for 1947–2010 (which 

values were derived using a claimant-favorable method), along with the evaluation of external 

dose records, provide for resolution of this issue.

Work Group Actions: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 13 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 11: Incidents and Unanticipated Events Not Addressed

The site profile (ORAUT 2006) does not sufficiently address incidents or unusual events that 

could affect external dose reconstruction. Some examples of incidents were found in the BNL 

documents; however, the site profile itself did not address such incidents for their implications 

to dose reconstruction, and whether the doses of record were correct under these exposure 

conditions. Likewise, specific environmental-related incidents and releases and their impact on 

onsite occupational doses to unmonitored workers are not addressed.

SC&A’s February 2012 update: Although some of the information has changed in the 

revised TBD, there appear to be no significant changes concerning this issue; therefore, this 

issue is still pertinent.

NIOSH Response: 

SC&A’s March 2013 update: SC&A reviewed the revised TBD and found some increased 

coverage of incidents in Section 2.0. Information gathered during the evaluations of the two 

BNL SECs, including potential exposures and intakes, and external/internal dose records 

indicates that this issue has been satisfactorily addressed.

Work Group Actions: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 14 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 12: Potential Environment Exposures from Igloo Area Not Addressed

Nothing is mentioned in Section 4 of the site profile (ORAUT 2006) concerning the Igloo 

storage area in the Hazardous Waste Management Facility (HWMF) and its impact on 

localized environmental doses. Averaged site parameter yearly readings, and other readings 

inside the BNL site, may not reflect the true environmental doses received by unmonitored 

workers who spent any significant time in the areas outside the Igloo or other hazardous waste 

facility areas.

SC&A’s February 2012 update: Although some of the information has changed in the 

revised TBD, there appear to be no significant changes concerning this issue; therefore, this 

issue is still pertinent.

NIOSH Response: Additional information concerning the Igloo has been included in the 

revised TBD.

SC&A’s March 2013 update: SC&A evaluated the revised TBD and found that this issue is 

satisfactorily addressed in Section 4.4.1, where additional environmental monitoring 

information (including the Igloo and HWMF) was provided. This issue has been resolved.

Work Group Actions: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 15 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

Finding 13: The Site Profile has Inadequately Characterized the Number and Types of 

X-rays Received by BNL Employees in Early Years

The site profile (pg. 50) (ORAUT 2006) states that BNL had machines capable of 

photofluoroscopic/fluoroscopic exams in 1951 and 1960, but on page 50, it is concluded that 

only the diagnostic unit was used for routine exams, and on page 52, it is stated that it seems 

unlikely that the greater dose units were used for routine exams. These potential exposures 

were not further addressed in the site profile. It references Brodsky 1964 as one of its reasons 

to conclude that only the diagnostic unit was used routinely for examinations. However, 

Sunderman (1947) summarized the health program used for BNL employees in September 

1947. Sunderman recommended that employees of BNL be observed medically (1) upon hire at 

BNL, (2) routinely for employees requiring health maintenance, (3) when employees become 

sick or injured, and (4) when employees terminated. Candidates for employment were to 

receive “fluororoentgenograms of the chest, AP and LAT roentgenograms of the spine, and 

roentgenogram of one forearm.” During Health Maintenance exams of employees, an annual 

fluororoentgenogram of the chest was completed. 

SC&A’s February 2012 update: There have been some changes in this area in the revised 

TBD (ORAUT 2010); therefore, SC&A needs to determine if the revised TBD provides 

additional information that could be applied to this issue.

NIOSH Response: Revisions in Section 3 of the TBD address these issues. List of cases to 

support x-ray exam assumptions provided by e-mail of March 5, 2013 (NIOSH 2013).

SC&A’s March 2013 update: Finding #13, Item #1, concerning Table 3-1 has been 

satisfactorily addressed in the revised TBD. 

Finding #13, Item #2: SC&A reviewed the revised TBD and the types of medical x-rays 

performed in the 20 cases provided by NIOSH and concluded that PFG, PA, and LAT exams 

are sufficiently covered in the revised TBD, and that other views, such as spinal and forearm 

exams, were not indicated in the records, except some that were illness- or injury-related. 

Therefore, this item is completed.

Finding #13, Item #3, concerning Tables 3-2 and 3-3, has been addressed in the revised TBD, 

but the 2013 TBD edition still does not contain any information in the text of the TBD related 

to purpose, use, or derivation of Table 3-4 on page 52.

NIOSH’s April 30, 2013, response to SC&A’s March 2013 update to Finding #13, Item #3:

Table 3-4 on Page 52 simply shows the current skin dose guidance. It serves to document 

the basis for skin doses to particular areas of skin found in Table 3-5 on page 53. The TBD will 

be revised to add information that explains the purpose of the information in Table 3-4.

SC&A’s May 2013 update: SC&A agrees with this course of action and has no further issue 

with this finding.

Work Group Actions: 

Board Action: 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix 

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 16 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013 

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted. 

References:

Brodsky, A., 1964. Minutes of a meeting (no title) held on June 29, 1964 between A. Brodsky of 

BNL and Paul Klevin of the Atomic Energy Commission. Brookhaven National Laboratory, 

Upton, New York. SRDB Ref ID: 17344. 

Kahnhauser 2011. ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project from NIOSH Data Request, 

H. Kahnhauser to Dr. Falco, March 6, 2011. SRDB Ref ID: 93609. 

NIOSH 2009. SEC Petition Evaluation Report, Petition SEC-00113, Rev. 0. National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, 

Ohio. September 29, 2009. 

NIOSH 2011. Telephone Interview between Landauer Personnel and M.H. Chew personnel, 

July 27, 2011. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of Compensation 

Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. SRDB Ref ID: 100347. 

NIOSH 2012. SEC Petition Evaluation Report, Petition SEC-00196, Rev. 0. National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, 

Ohio. January 5, 2012. 

NIOSH 2013. E-mail to members of the BNL Work Group from by Grady Calhoun (NIOSH), 

Subject: RE: BNL TBD issues. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of 

Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. March 05, 2013. 

ORAUT 2006. Technical Basis Document for the Brookhaven National Laboratory, ORAUTTKBS-0048, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. August 30, 

2006. 

ORAUT 2010. Technical Basis Document for the Brookhaven National Laboratory, ORAUTTKBS-0048, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. April 26, 

2010. 

ORAUT 2013. Technical Basis Document for the Brookhaven National Laboratory, ORAUTTKBS-0048, Rev. 02, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. February 7, 

2013. 

Phillips, L. F., 1974. Personnel Dosimetry, Associated Universities, Brookhaven National 

Laboratory, Upton, New York, May. SRDB Ref ID: 22429. 

Preisig, J. R., 1995. “1995 Alternating Fradient Synchrotron (AGS) Bonner Multisphere 

Spectrometry and Carbon-11 Detector Results,” memorandum to E. Lessard and H. 

Kahnuhauser, Associated Universities, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, July 

24. SRDB Ref ID: 22845. 
Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Profile Issues Matrix

BNL Site Profile Issues Matrix 17 SC&A Updated – May 30, 2013

NOTICE: This May 30, 2013 Issues Matrix has been reviewed for potential Privacy Act-protected information and 

cleared as written. future versions of this issues matrix will not be freely distributed until further reviews for 

Privacy Act-protected information are conducted.

SC&A 2009. Review of the NIOSH Site Profile for the Brookhaven National Laboratory,

ORAUT-TKBS-0048, Rev. 00, 2006. SCA-TR-TASK1-0001. SC&A, Inc., Vienna, Virginia, 

and Saliant, Inc., Jefferson, Maryland. September 2009.

Sunderman, F.W., M.D., 1947. Health Program for Employees of the Brookhaven National 

Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York. August 27, 1947. SRDB Ref 

ID 55277.

Xie, Y., and N. Rohrig, 1985. BNL Memorandum from Xie and Rohrig to Malinowski, T. of

BNL. Bonner sphere neutron measurements at the AGS. November 22, 1985. Brookhaven 

National Laboratory, Upton, New York. SRDB Ref ID: 50833.

Xie, Y. R., 1986. “Neutron Measurements in JSW and 60” Cyclotron Maze Area,” 

memorandum to D. Schlyer, Associated Universities, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, 

New York, March 17. SRDB Ref ID: 121356.