Draft White Paper 

SC&A REVIEW OF TABLE 5-1 OF 

INTERNAL DOSIMETRY DATA FOR THE SAVANNAH RIVER 

SITE, ORAUT-OTIB-0081, REV. 2 

Contract No. 211-2014-58081

Prepared by 

Bob Barton 

S. Cohen & Associates 

1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 

Vienna, Virginia 22182 

Saliant, Inc. 

5579 Catholic Church Road 

Jefferson, Maryland 21755 

July 2014 

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.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 2 of 62

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. 

S. Cohen & Associates:

Technical Support for the Advisory Board on

Radiation & Worker Health Review of

NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Program

Document Description:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, 

Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Effective Date: 

Draft – July 22, 2014

Revision No. 0 (Draft)

SC&A REVIEW OF TABLE 5-1 OF 

INTERNAL DOSIMETRY DATA FOR THE 

SAVANNAH RIVER SITE, 

ORAUT-OTIB-0081, REV. 2

Page 2 of 62

Task Manager: ___________________ Date:

 Joseph Fitzgerald

Supersedes:

N/A

Project Manager: _________________ Date:

 John Stiver, MS, CHP

Reviewers:

 Joseph Fitzgerald

 Harry Chmelynski

 John Stiver

 

Record of Revisions

Revision 

Number

Effective 

Date Description of Revision

0 (Draft) 07/22/2014 Initial issue
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 3 of 62

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 OF CONTENTS 

Acronyms and Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................6

Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................7

SC&A Findings ....................................................................................................................7

SC&A Observations.............................................................................................................8

1.0 Background and Prior Discussions Regarding Table 5-1 ..................................................10

2.0 Characterization of Dosimeter-based Location Information Contained in Claimant 

Files and Additional SRDB Logbooks ..............................................................................11

3.0 Availability, Legibility and Completeness of Available Logbook Data in the SRDB ......16

4.0 Completeness and Accuracy of Area Dosimeter Codes Forming the Basis to Assign 

Workers to a Specific Work Location ...............................................................................19

5.0 Temporal Characterization of Claimant DOE Files and Supplemental Monthly and 

Quarterly Summary Reports on the SRDB ........................................................................23

6.0 Comparison of Claimant Dosimeter Location/Area Codes to Alternate Available 

Location Information .........................................................................................................28

7.0 Summary Conclusions .......................................................................................................31

8.0 References ..........................................................................................................................33

Attachment 1: Recreation of Table 5-1 of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2 .....................................34

Attachment 2: Examples of Discrepancies in Dosimeter Results that Would Result in 

Neutral or Claimant-Favorable Contaminant Intakes ........................................................37

Attachment 3: NIOSH Provided Listing of Available Dosimetry Logbooks on the Site 

Research Database Covering the SEC Period ....................................................................59

Attachment 4: Email from NIOSH in Response to 4/26/2014 Work Group Action Items 

Related to Documenting Table 5-1 ....................................................................................61
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 4 of 62

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. 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1: Examples of Dose Threshold Requirements for Inclusion in 

Cycle Statistical Reports ...............................................................................................14

Table 2: Completeness and Legibility of Quarterly Exposure Summary Reports ........................18

Table 3: Completeness and Legibility of Cycle Exposure Statistical Reports .............................18

Table 4. Description of Dosimeter Codes Contained in Table 5-1 that could Not be 

Verified via Supplied References..................................................................................19

Table 5. Discrepancies Between SRS HP Reports Provided by NIOSH and Table 5-1 

Locations .......................................................................................................................20

Table 6. Employment Periods and Job Titles of Sampled Claimants ...........................................23

Table 7. Summary of Temporal Dosimeter Area Code Information for Sampled Claimants ......26

Table 8. Example of a Comparison of External Dosimetry Codes and Alternate 

Information such as Bioassay........................................................................................28

Table 9. Summary Characteristics of Discrepancies Observed between Dosimeter Results 

and Other Location Information....................................................................................30

Table 10. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other 

Work Location Information that Would Produce Unfavorable Intake 

Assignments ..................................................................................................................37

Table 11. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other 

Work Location Information that Would Produce Intake Assignments of Unclear 

Favorability ...................................................................................................................42

Table 12. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other 

Work Location Information that Would Produce Intake Assignments of Neutral 

Favorability ...................................................................................................................44

Table 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other 

Work Location Information that Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments ........49
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 5 of 62

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. 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1: Example of HPRED Entry in Individual Claimant File ................................................11

Figure 2: Example of a Cycle Exposure Summary Logbook Contained in an 

Individual Claimant File ...............................................................................................12

Figure 3: Example of a Quarterly Exposure Summary Logbook Contained in an Individual 

Claimant File .................................................................................................................13

Figure 4: Example of a Neutron Exposure Summary Logbook Contained in an Individual 

Claimant File .................................................................................................................13

Figure 5: Example of a Cycle Statistic Logbook Contained in the Site Research Database ........14

Figure 6: Example of a Dosimetry Logbook with “Minor” Legibility Issues ..............................16

Figure 7: Example of a Dosimetry Logbook with “Significant” Legibility Issues .......................16

Figure 8: Example of a Logbook File Deemed “Illegible” ...........................................................17
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 6 of 62

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. 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ABRWH Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

CATI Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview 

CMX Code Designation for a Facility 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

ETF Effluent Treatment Facility

HANM Code Designation for a Facility 

HAOM Code Designation for a Facility 

HP Health Physics 

HPRED Health Protection Radiation Exposure Database 

mR milli-Roentgen 

mrad milliradian 

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

NOCTS NIOSH/OCAS Claimant Tracking System 

ORAUT Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team 

PSF Plutonium Storage Facility 

RBOF Receiving Basin for Off-Site Fuel 

RRF Resin Regeneration Facility 

SC&A S. Cohen and Associates 

SEC Special Exposure Cohort 

SRDB Site Research Database 

SRTC Savannah River Technology Center 

SWDF Solid Waste Disposal Facility 

TBD Technical Basis Document 

TNX Code Designation for a Facility 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 7 of 62

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. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Internal Dosimetry Data for the Savannah River Site, ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2 (ORAUT 

2013), provides the framework for administering the various coworker intake models at the 

Savannah River Site (SRS). Contaminants of concern provided in that document are americium, 

californium, curium, fission products, tritium, neptunium, plutonium, thorium and uranium. 

Table 5-1 of that document (recreated as Attachment 1 of this report) presents a methodology for 

applying the appropriate contaminant mixture based on the work location of the individual at the 

site. To accomplish this, Table 5-1 utilizes “dosimeter area codes” (also referred to as “HP 

Area” codes in this report) to place the worker in a specific location that has a unique mix of the 

aforementioned coworker intakes. 

This report presents SC&A’s review of the proposed method of administering the multiple 

contaminant intakes at SRS. The review mainly focuses on the portion of the Special Exposure 

Cohort (SEC) evaluation period, which extends from October 1, 1972, up through the 1980s,

where significant temporal completeness concerns had previously been identified (see Section 1

for prior discussions). Note that many of the overall findings and observations also pertain to 

earlier and later periods where noted. The review has three main facets: 

1. An evaluation of the availability and completeness of dosimeter area code information 

that can be utilized to assign individual workers to a specific work location (see Sections 

2 and 3).

2. A review of the accuracy and underlying references used to relate specific dosimeter 

codes with different areas of the SRS plant (see Section 4).

3. An analysis of the practical implementation of such a model as it relates to a sample of 20 

individual claimants. The evaluation includes temporal considerations (see Section 5) as 

well as a comparison of how well HP Area codes comport with alternate work location 

information when available (see Section 6). 

To facilitate this review, NIOSH provided SC&A with a list of references underlying the 

formulation of Table 5-1. In particular, references were provided to demonstrate the relationship 

between the HP Area codes and specific site locations (SRS Various Dates), but also 

supplementary dosimeter logbooks that could be used to fill in any temporal gaps identified in an 

individual claimant’s monitoring record. These latter references are listed in Attachment 3 for 

convenience. 

SC&A has developed three main findings as a result of this review and one overarching finding,

which are presented below. Additionally, SC&A made a number of “observations,” which are 

presented after the findings. 

SC&A FINDINGS 

Finding 1: Based on information contained in the claimant file and supplemental dosimetry 

logbooks available on the SRDB, dosimeter area codes are generally only available on a 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 8 of 62

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. 

quarterly basis for the period beginning in October 1972 and extending up to the early 1980s. 

From this period to approximately 1988, dosimeter area codes are available on a monthly basis if 

the claimant had a recorded dose during the cycle. Beginning in July of 1989, dosimeter area 

codes are available on a monthly basis regardless of whether or not dose was actually accrued. 

Finally, the listing of multiple dosimeter codes during the same badging period (indicating 

multiple work locations) was observed beginning in approximately 1990. (See Sections 3 and 5.) 

Finding 2: The technical basis underlying the relationship between dosimeter area codes and 

their associated locations shown in Table 5-1 of OTIB-0081 is incomplete. Additionally, SC&A 

observed apparent discrepancies between the dosimeter code/location combinations presented in 

Table 5-1 and the codes/locations listed in the underlying references provided by NIOSH. (See 

Section 4.)

Finding 3: A review of 20 claimant files and associated logbook data demonstrated that 

discrepancies exist between the location indicated by the dosimeter area code and other location 

information, such as bioassay sampling, in-vivo counts and other investigative documents 

(missing exposure reports, decontamination forms, etc.). In some observed cases, the application 

of coworker intakes based on the dosimeter code would underestimate the internal exposure 

potential experienced by the claimant. (See Section 6 and Attachment 2.) 

Overarching Finding: Given the noted deficiencies in completeness and accuracy of relating 

dosimeter area codes with specific areas, significant temporal considerations in available 

dosimeter codes for claimants during some periods, and observed discrepancies between 

dosimeter area codes and other available location information within a claimant file, SC&A does 

not feel that the use of such codes forms a sufficiently accurate and robust basis for the 

assignment of specific contaminant coworker intakes. This is particularly true in the earlier 

period (1972 into the early 1980s) when dosimeter area code assignment is generally restricted to 

a quarterly basis. However, discrepancies between claimant dosimeter codes and alternate work 

location information were also observed as late as 1993, when area codes are frequently 

available on a monthly basis. SC&A recommends that NIOSH should only consider limiting 

what contaminant intakes are assigned in cases of clear and documented evidence that a worker 

could not have been exposed to the specific radionuclides present at SRS. Examples would 

include irrevocable statements made by the claimant during the Computer-Assisted Telephone 

Interview (CATI) process or a complete record of bioassays in a specific location (such as daily 

tritium monitoring in a reactor area). 

SC&A OBSERVATIONS 

Observation 1: Table 5-1 dosimeter area assignment begins in 1961; however, SC&A notes 

that the use of dosimeter area codes extends as far back as 1958. SC&A observed at least 22 

distinct area codes used prior to 1961, and the compilation of SRS Health Physics reports 

provided by NIOSH (SRS Various Dates) is dated 1959. 

Observation 2: SC&A noted that the codes “2F” and “5G” were in use in 1972, although 

Table 5-1 does not acknowledge them until the 1973–1990 timeframe. This is evidence that 

there is likely some overlap in the use of codes that is not discussed in ORAUT-OTIB-0081. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 9 of 62

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. 

Observation 3: SC&A observed the use of the codes “6E” and “12J” in 1960 that are not 

included in Table 5-1. 

Observation 4: 735-A and 735-11A apply to “environmental radionuclides” and neptunium in 

1962; however, starting in 2004, Table 5-1 instructs dose reconstructors to apply 773-A intakes. 

It is unclear if there is any reason for the change other than that the dosimeter area code was 

changed to SRTC (Savannah River Technology Center). 

Observation 5: It is unclear why the 235-F Vaults assign thorium intakes, but “F Area 

Unknown Location” does not assign a thorium intake.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 10 of 62

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. 

1.0 BACKGROUND AND PRIOR DISCUSSIONS 

REGARDING TABLE 5-1 

ORAUT-OTIB-0081 Rev. 2 was first released on December 16, 2013, with the main addition 

being the inclusion of Table 5-1, which instructs the dose reconstructor on how to apply the 

multiple coworker intakes to a specific individual. The revision documentation specifically 

states: 

Revision initiated to add dose reconstruction guidance for radionuclide 

assignment in response to the ABRWH request. Text added in Section 5.0 and a 

new Table 5-1 added. Intake rates for Cm and Cf added for the pre-1995 time 

period. (ORAUT 2013) 

A preliminary review of Table 5-1 was performed by SC&A to aid in discussions during the 

February 26, 2014, Savannah River Site (SRS) Work Group meeting. During that meeting,

SC&A raised the following concerns:

 SC&A was unable to review the accuracy of the dosimeter code-facility relationship, 

because Table 5-1 was not sufficiently referenced and/or annotated. 

 SC&A had observed large temporal gaps in a handful of available claimant files (on the 

order of multiple years) in which no HP Area codes were listed. 

 SC&A had identified additional HP Area codes not included in Table 5-1, and it was 

unknown to what facilities those codes might refer. 

In response to these concerns, NIOSH provided direct references to validate the HP Area codeto-facility relationship, as well as additional references to fill in the observed temporal gaps. 

These references were provided in an email dated March 4, 2014 (see Attachment 4). Based on 

the provided references and other information contained in the Site Research Database (SRDB) 

and NIOSH/OCAS Claims Tracking System (NOCTS), SC&A performed the review detailed in 

this report. Section 2 provides an overview of the characteristics of available area-based 

dosimetry information both in the individual claimant files and supplementary material located 

on the SRDB. Sections 3–6 provide the main body of the analysis approach as outlined in the 

Executive Summary. Finally, Section 7 provides SC&A’s overarching conclusions regarding the

feasibility of utilizing Table 5-1 of ORAUT-OTIB-0081 Rev. 2 to administer the proposed 

coworker models. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 11 of 62

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. 

2.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF DOSIMETER-BASED LOCATION 

INFORMATION CONTAINED IN CLAIMANT FILES AND 

ADDITIONAL SRDB LOGBOOKS 

The use of dosimeter area codes (alternately known as “HP Area” codes) was found in several 

forms, both in the individual claimant files located on NOCTS and in the external dosimetry 

logbooks available on the SRDB. Available dosimeter-based information fell into the following 

categories and is described in this section: 

 HPRED database entries 

 Cycle dosimetry logbooks 

 Quarterly summary dosimetry logbooks 

 Neutron monitoring logbooks 

 Monthly, quarterly, and annual statistics reports 

The most common form found in individual claimant files comes from the electronic “HPRED” 

database, an example of which is shown in Figure 1. As can be seen in the example, dosimetry 

data for 3 years are presented (1979, 1981 and 1982). The areas circled in red for 1979 and 1981 

are an example where the HP Area code was not entered into the database; this was a 

characteristic of the database from 1972 through 1981 for all claims examined. Beginning in 

1982, HP Area codes were generally included in the HPRED entries. However, note that only 

select months/dosimeter cycles are presented in Figure 1. It is believed that only entries with 

positive recorded doses were included in the HPRED database, and that the missing months are 

not reflective of actual badging frequency. Note that there is no entry at all for 1980, shown in 

the example, although in this particular case, the claimant was badged and even submitted 

urinalysis samples during that year. Additionally, it can be observed that in 1982, a positive 

recorded neutron dose was noted during cycle 7 (July badging period) that also included an HP 

Area code. 

Figure 1: Example of HPRED Entry in Individual Claimant File 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 12 of 62

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. 

Some claimant files also provided cycle (or monthly) dosimetry logbooks as well as quarterly 

summary logbooks, examples of which are shown in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Whereas the 

HPRED data only displayed the cycles where a positive dose was accrued, it is clear from 

Figure 2 that even when monitored workers did not accrue any external dose during a badging 

period, they were included in the logbook with an associated area code. This is similarly true for 

the quarterly summary reports; in both formats, the entries simply appear as “blank” if there was 

no recorded exposure. As can be seen in Figures 2 and 3, these logbook-style reports show an 

employee number, cycle exposure date, HP Area code and employee name.1 In the quarterly 

exposure summaries, the cycle exposure dates would always correspond to the last month in the 

given quarter. In the case of Figure 3, this quarterly report would represent the 3rd quarter of 

1978 (cycle date given as “9” or “September”).

In general, these types of reports were only sporadically included in the claimant files provided 

by the Department of Energy (DOE). SC&A could not determine any discernible pattern as to 

why they were sometimes included in a given claimant’s file for individual months/quarters and 

sometimes were omitted completely. Cycle exposure summaries were not available in the 

SRDB; however, quarterly exposure summaries are available from 1972 through the beginning 

of 1989. A discussion of the completeness/legibility of quarterly exposure summaries available 

in the SRDB is contained in the next section. 

Figure 2: Example of a Cycle Exposure Summary Logbook Contained in an 

Individual Claimant File 

 

1 The employee names and employee numbers have been removed from the examples in this report for 

Privacy Act concerns.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 13 of 62

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. 

Figure 3: Example of a Quarterly Exposure Summary Logbook Contained in an 

Individual Claimant File 

Neutron logbooks were also sometimes included in individual claimant files; they follow the 

same format as the cycle and quarterly summary logbooks described above. An example of a 

neutron exposure logbook is shown in Figure 4. Observed neutron logbooks always appear to be 

on a monthly/cycle basis, although they also contained tabulations for the quarter, year, and total 

employment (this last category is shown as the “Plant” column seen in Figure 4). 

Figure 4: Example of a Neutron Exposure Summary Logbook Contained in an Individual 

Claimant File 

Also contained solely in the SRDB are “exposure statistics” reports; these are very similar in 

format to the other exposure summary reports, such as the examples shown in Figures 2–4. 

However, the statistics reports only contain lists of workers who have reached a certain external 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 14 of 62

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. 

exposure threshold. An example of such a report is shown in Figure 5, which shows a list of 

workers with HP Area code “2F” who had reached a shielded threshold dose of 2,250 mR for the 

year. Other observed threshold values contained in the statistical reports are shown in Table 1. 

Figure 5: Example of a Cycle Statistic Logbook Contained in the Site Research Database 

Table 1: Examples of Dose Threshold Requirements for Inclusion in 

Cycle Statistical Reports 

Statistical 

Duration Dosimeter Measurement Threshold Example Reference

Individual Cycle Open Window 1800 mrad SRS 1979 , pg 40

Individual Cycle Shielded 300 mR SRS 1979, pg 39

Plant to Date Shielded 20 Highest SRS 1979, pg 43

Quarter Open Window 3600 mrad SRS 1979, pg 299

Quarter Shielded 600 mR SRS 1979, pg 98

Year to Date Neutron 20 Highest SRS 1979, pg 45

Year to Date Open Window 13,500 mrad SRS 1974, pg 78

Year to Date Open Window 20 Highest SRS 1979, pg 42

Year to Date Shielded 20 Highest SRS 1979, pg 41

Year to Date Shielded 2250 mR SRS 1979, pg 30

Year to Date Tritium 20 Highest SRS 1979, pg 44

Table 1 is meant to be illustrative and not an exhaustive listing of the threshold values employed 

in the statistical reports. For example, other thresholds might be “Year to Date, shielded, 

500 mR” but evaluated at the end of January, or “Year to Date, open window, 3,000 mrad” 

evaluated at the end of February. Because a worker must reach a certain dose threshold in the 

given period to be included in the statistical reports, the reports contain only a small fraction of 

the actual monitored worker population. As an example, the 3rd quarter of 1979 contains over 

8,000 individually monitored workers; the monthly statistical reports over the same time period 

contain just over 200 workers. 

Additionally, it should be noted that the “statistics” reports are organized either by area code or 

by magnitude of the dose accrued and not by employee name or number. This, combined with 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 15 of 62

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. 

the noted legibility issues in Section 3, would make searching for an individual claimant 

significantly more cumbersome in the statistical reports than the standard quarterly dosimetry 

reports, which are organized by a roll code and specific employee number. This, in addition to 

the already small pool of workers included in these types of statistical reports, makes them of 

negligible use in establishing a worker’s HP Area code.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 16 of 62

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. 

3.0 AVAILABILITY, LEGIBILITY AND COMPLETENESS OF 

AVAILABLE LOGBOOK DATA IN THE SRDB 

As noted previously, individual claimant files do not have a complete set of bioassay logbooks 

from which to establish dosimeter codes for each badging period during a worker’s employment. 

However, NIOSH has identified a number of external dosimetry logbooks on the SRDB that 

could be used to fill in some of the temporal gaps observed in the claimant files. A full listing of 

these SRDB references provided by NIOSH and relevant to the SEC period can be found in 

Attachment 3. SC&A examined these logbooks for completeness and legibility. Since legibility 

is somewhat of a subjective judgment, SC&A developed three categories with which to evaluate 

the records; “minor issues,” “significant issues,” and “illegible.” Illustrative examples of what 

each category represents are provided in Figures 6–8. A summary of the availability and 

legibility of the SRDB logbooks is found in Tables 2 and 3 for “quarterly” and “summary 

statistical” reports, respectively. 

Figure 6: Example of a Dosimetry Logbook with “Minor” Legibility Issues

Figure 7: Example of a Dosimetry Logbook with “Significant” Legibility Issues
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 17 of 62

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. 

Figure 8: Example of a Logbook File Deemed “Illegible”

As can be seen in Table 2, quarterly reports are available for all quarters from the fourth quarter 

of 1972 through the first quarter of 1989. Although some minor legibility issues were identified, 

they were generally very limited in scope and do not represent a significant hindrance to the 

ability to use quarterly logbooks to identify claimants with a specific dosimeter code in a given 

quarter. The cycle or monthly statistical reports had more significant legibility issues, with about 

half of the available reports showing at least some legibility issues. Additionally, statistical 

reports are not available for the year 1973 and any time after 1979. As noted in the previous 

section, “statistical” reports available on the SRDB are of negligible use in establishing 

dosimeter codes for claimants. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 18 of 62

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: Completeness and Legibility of Quarterly Exposure Summary Reports 

Year(s)

Quarterly 

Reports 

Available*

Legibility 

Determination Additional Comments

1972 Q4 No issues There is also a full cycle report (not statistical) for the month of 

October.

1973–1974 Q1–Q4 No issues

1975 Q1–Q4 Minor Issues

(Q2, Q4)

Q2: Most of the content can be figured out by zooming directly 

on specific values.

Q4: Many area codes have only one visible character.

1976 Q1–Q4 No Issues

1977 Q1–Q4 Minor Issues 

(Q3)

First 30 pages have a few legibility issues in the HP Area column 

on some entries; sporadically elsewhere in document.

1978 Q –Q4 No Issues

1979 Q1–Q4 Minor Issues 

(Q1)

Q1: Most of the content can be figured out by zooming directly 

on specific values.

1980–1988 Q1–Q4 No Issues

1989 Q1 No Issues No quarterly dosimetry records could be located after the first 

quarter of 1989.

* “Q” values represent quarters. For example, Q1 = the First Quarter. 

Table 3: Completeness and Legibility of Cycle Exposure Statistical Reports 

Year

# Available

Monthly 

Statistical 

Reports

Legibility* Additional Comments

1972 1 No Issues

October report that was not a statistical report, but 

rather a normal cycle report; no statistical reports were 

available for the 4th quarter of 1972.

1973 0 N/A No statistical summary reports were found for this year.

1974 12

2 Minor Issues (Jan, Mar) Illegible report is assumed to be November based on its 

place in the document. 1 Significant Issue (Sep)

1 Illegible (Nov)

1975 12

1 Minor Issue (Aug)

Names, employee numbers, and area codes in February 

report are illegible; other portions of February report 

can be read.

2 Significant Issues 

(Apr, Sep)

1 Illegible (Feb)

1976 12

6 Minor Issues 

(Jan–Mar, May, Nov–Dec)

2 Illegible (Apr, Sep)

1977 12

2 Significant Issues 

(Jun, Jul) Illegible record due to one of the two HP Area code 

characters cut off. 1 Illegible (Sep)

1978 12

5 Minor Issues 

(Feb–Mar, Jun–Jul) October through December reports are actually 

contained in the 1979 monthly statistical summaries. 1 Significant Issue (May)

1979 12

5 Minor Issues 

(Jan–Mar, May, Nov)

1 Significant Issue (May)

* Legibility issues apply to the entire month(s) listed. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 19 of 62

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. 

4.0 COMPLETENESS AND ACCURACY OF AREA DOSIMETER 

CODES FORMING THE BASIS TO ASSIGN WORKERS TO A SPECIFIC 

WORK LOCATION 

Part of SC&A’s investigation was to review the underlying references that associate certain 

dosimeter “HP Area” codes with specific facilities and areas at SRS. NIOSH provided SC&A 

with several reports from SRS that document dosimeter codes and their associated areas; these 

reports were consolidated into a single document titled, SRS HP Area and Department Codes 

1959–1992 (SRS Various Dates). SC&A examined this document and found that many of the 

dosimeter codes listed in Table 5-1 could not be traced to the original HP documents. Table 4 

displays the dosimeter codes that could not be verified given the documents supplied by NIOSH. 

For example, in the 1973–1990 portion of Table 5-1, 10 of the 76 dosimeter codes could not be 

traced back to the original reference. No documentation or references concerning the codes 

assigned for the period “2004–present” were provided. As discussed during the February Work 

Group meetings, NIOSH indicated that some of the information provided in Table 5-1 is a result 

of programmatic experience gained. SC&A cannot affirm or refute this statement, but 

acknowledges that a rigorous quality assurance process, additional explanation, and annotation 

provided by NIOSH may alleviate these apparent discrepancies.

In addition to the codes in Table 5-1 that could not be verified via the SRS Health Physics 

reports provided by NIOSH, SC&A also identified apparent discrepancies between the codes and 

locations in Table 5-1 and what is presented in the SRS HP reports; these discrepancies are 

described in Table 5. 

Table 4. Description of Dosimeter Codes Contained in Table 5-1 that could Not be 

Verified via Supplied References 

Period

# of Dosimeter 

Codes Not Listed in 

Source References/ 

Total Number in 

Period

List of Dosimeter 

Codes Not Identified 

in References

Additional Comments

1961–1972 0/24 N/A

Note: The use of dosimeter codes extended prior to 

1961. The earliest use of such codes SC&A observed 

was in 1958. The earliest listing of dosimetry codes 

with specific locations is 1959 (SRS, Various Dates).

1973–1990 10/76 12B, 15A, 1D, 1N, 1S, 

1U, 1W, 2S, 6E, 8J, 

1991–2004 33/97

A05, B12, D, D01, 

E06, F, F04, F07, H, 

H09, J04, J07, J13, 

J15, J16, J19, J22, J23, 

J27, J28, J29, J32, J33, 

J34, J35, J36, J37, J38, 

J39, S01, T, U, U01

The majority of unreferenced dosimeter codes during 

this period referred to the central shops in Table 5-1

(J Series). Many other “J Series” dosimeters referred 

directly to a type of trade worker (such as a Laborer or a 

Carpenter) and not to an actual location at SRS. 

However, this is not necessarily always the case; other 

“J Series” results in this period refer to jobs such as 

“Operations Escort” “Not designated.” 

2004–

Present See comments See comments No references were provided to assess the completeness of dosimetry codes post-2004.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 20 of 62

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 5. Discrepancies Between SRS HP Reports Provided by NIOSH and Table 5-1 Locations

Effective Date 

Range from 

Table 5-1

Code

Location from 

SRS HP Reports 

(SRS Various 

Dates)

Table 5-1 Location(s) Additional Comments

1961–1972 12A 618-G E-Area Solid Waste Disposal Facility

SRS at 50, pp. 539–540: “E Area which is situated between the two 

separations areas, is the locus of most of the Site's disposal and 

storage facilities. Waste generated from site operations is stored or 

treated at: the Solid Waste Management Facility (E Area)... The 

Solid Waste Management Facility ... because operational in the 

1990s, some after extensive planning that occurred in the previous 

decade.”

1961–1972 6C 720-A

Central Shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

It is not clear why this area was assumed to be "Central Shops & 

Maintenance, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory."

1961–1972 6H 725-A

Central Shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

It is not clear why this area was assumed to be "Central Shops & 

Maintenance, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory."

1961–1972 6I 722-A

Central Shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

It is not clear why this area was assumed to be "Central Shops & 

Maintenance, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory."

1961–1972 6M 724-A

Central Shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

It is not clear why this area was assumed to be "Central Shops & 

Maintenance, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory."

1961–1972 6R 717-A

Central Shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

It is not clear why this area was assumed to be "Central Shops & 

Maintenance, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory."

1973–1990 1H 200-H Eff. 

Treatment Fac.

H-Area Unknown Facility

H-Canyon and A-Line

New Special Recovery

Plutonium Storage Facility (PSF)

Receiving Basin for Off-Site Fuel (RBOF)

Resin Regeneration Facility (RRF)

The code listed in Table 5-1 for the ETF (Effluent Treatment 

Facility).

1973–1990 3H H-WMO, 200-H 

241-84H (ETF)

H-Area Unknown Facility

New Special Recovery

Plutonium Storage Facility (PSF)

Receiving Basin for Off-Site Fuel (RBOF)

Resin Regeneration Facility (RRF)

The Effluent Treatment Facility is labeled as either 5F or 5H in 

Table 5-1. The TBD notes that Building 241-84H is part of the ETF 

facility located in the H Area (ORAUT 2005,page 147).

1973–1990 5J Operations 

Escorts

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Unclear why escorts would be associated with the Central Shops & 

Maintenance, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 21 of 62

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 5. Discrepancies Between SRS HP Reports Provided by NIOSH and Table 5-1 Locations

Effective Date 

Range from 

Table 5-1

Code

Location from 

SRS HP Reports 

(SRS Various 

Dates)

Table 5-1 Location(s) Additional Comments

1973–1990 6F 247-F Naval 

Fuels 232-H, HANM, HAOM, Tritium Complex

Based on the building code lettering, the naval fuels program was in 

the F Area, not the H Area tritium complex. Table 5-1 does not 

have a category for the naval fuels area; this dosimeter code should 

refer to "F Area Unknown Facility."

1973–1990 7F 716-A, 716-A 

Auto Shop

F-Area unknown facility

F-Area A-Line

221-F B-Line (FB and JB lines)

221-F Canyon

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area.

1973–1990 7I 720-A, 720-A 

WSI

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area.

1973–1990 7K 722-A, 722-A 

E&I

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area.

1973–1990 7L 723-A, 723-A 

EED

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area.

1973–1990 7M 724-A, 724-A 

Training

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area.

1973–1990 7N 725-A, 725-A 

Maint

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area, though the code does indicate "maintenance."

1973–1990 7Q 722-4A, 722-4A 

E&I

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Based on the building code lettering, these locations are in the 

A Area.

1973–1990 8G 618-G, 618-G 

Class. Yard

E-Area Solid Waste Disposal Facility

(SWDF)

600 series building codes simply refer to "general purpose" 

facilities; likewise the G designation does not refer to an area, but 

rather to the "general purpose" buildings found all across the site. It 

is not clear how this code was related to the E Area Solid Waste 

Disposal Facility.

1973–1990 9H 719-4A 

Employment 221-H Area Outside Facilities Area designation indicates this facility is in the A Area.

1991–2003 A03 703-A (B Wing) 735-A and 735-11A 703-A is the main administration building; 735-A houses the health 

physics laboratory.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 22 of 62

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 5. Discrepancies Between SRS HP Reports Provided by NIOSH and Table 5-1 Locations

Effective Date 

Range from 

Table 5-1

Code

Location from 

SRS HP Reports 

(SRS Various 

Dates)

Table 5-1 Location(s) Additional Comments

1991–2003 A09 703-A (A Wing) 735-A and 735-11A 703-A is the main administration building; 735-A houses the health 

physics laboratory.

1991–2003 A12 720-A WSI Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Area designation indicates this facility is in the A Area, likely 

related to Wakenhunt Securities Incorporated, who was contracted 

by DOE starting in 1983.

1991–2003 A15 773-A (Main 

Building) 776-A

773-A contained numerous radiological laboratories at SRS; 776-A 

housed the waste treatment facilities for materials produced in 

773-A. Their intake assignments should be identical.

1991–2003 B01 WSI 703-1B 735-A and 735-11A

This badge number refers to the security office in the main 

Administration Building of the A Area, not the 735-A HP 

Laboratories.

1991–2003 F06 247-F Naval 

Fuels 232-H, HANM, HAOM, Tritium Complex

1991–2003 H01

200-H Eff. 

Treatment Fac., 

Not Designated

H-Area unknown facility

H-Canyon and A-Line

New Special Recovery

Plutonium Storage Facility (PSF)

Receiving Basin for Off-Site Fuel (RBOF)

Resin Regeneration Facility (RRF)

200-H Effluent Treatment Facility is shown as H05 and F05 in 

Table 5-1.

1991–2003 J26 Not Designated Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory "(Not Used)" written next to area code.

1991–2003 J40 Operations 

Escorts

Central shops & Maintenance, Pittsburgh 

Testing Laboratory

Unclear why an operations escort badge would be considered 

Central Shops.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 23 of 62

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. 

5.0 TEMPORAL CHARACTERIZATION OF CLAIMANT DOE FILES 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL MONTHLY AND QUARTERLY SUMMARY 

REPORTS ON THE SRDB 

To assess the feasibility of implementing the Table 5-1 methodology, SC&A performed a semirandom sampling of 20 claimants. Ten (10) of the 20 claimants were selected at random from 

among all radiological job types who had significant employment during the SEC evaluation 

period (in particular the period up until about 1989). The remaining 10 claims were selected to 

represent maintenance and other construction trades that would be more likely to have variable 

work locations during the evaluation period. A description of the job titles and employment 

periods for the 20 sampled claimants is contained in Table 6. 

Table 6. Employment Periods and Job Titles of Sampled Claimants

Ref # Employment 

Start(s)

Employment 

End(s) Position (s)

1 [redacted] [redacted]

NOCTS: Unknown

CATI: [redacted]

2

[redacted] [redacted]

NOCTS: Blank

DOE_Response: [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

3 [redacted] [redacted]

NOCTS: [redacted]

CATI: [redacted]

4 [redacted] [redacted]

NOCTS: [redacted]

CATI: [redacted]

5 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

6

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

7 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

8

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

9 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

10 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

11 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

12 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

13 [redacted] [redacted][redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 24 of 62

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 6. Employment Periods and Job Titles of Sampled Claimants

Ref # Employment 

Start(s)

Employment 

End(s) Position (s)

14

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

15 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

16 [redacted] [redacted][redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

17

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

18

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted]

19 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

20 [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]

The intent of the study was to establish the frequency with which dosimetry area codes could be 

applied to an actual claimant, as well as the extent to which dosimetry area codes comport with 

other location-based information in the claimant file. The former examination is discussed in 

this section; the latter is discussed in Section 6. 

Claimant files were examined by SC&A and any dosimetry area codes were noted (including 

HPRED entries, dosimetry logbooks and neutron badging results when available). Where gaps 

were identified in the claimant file, the quarterly dosimetry logs located in the SRDB were 

consulted. For the purpose of evaluating temporal distance between the assignments of 

dosimeter area codes, monthly entries were assumed to apply to the first day of the month and 

quarterly logbooks were assumed to apply to the first day of the first month of that quarter. For 

example, if a claimant were employed for 1 year and only had quarterly dosimetry logs available,

the area code assignments would be applied to 1/1, 4/1, 7/1, and 10/1. The average number of 

cycles between area codes would then be three. 

A summary of the results of the frequency of area codes is found in Table 7. As seen in the 

table, the maximum number of cycles between the assignments of an HP Area code ranged from 

two to nine. The maximum number of badging cycles between assignments of a dosimeter area 

code ranged from three to nine. Although as noted for claimant 18 (the lowest value with a 

maximum of 1.5 cycles), an entire year of covered employment (1/1/1988 to 1/31/1988) 

contained no dosimeter area codes, as the claimant could not be identified in the quarterly 

logbooks. This year of employment was not used in calculating claimant #18’s average or 

maximum frequency. 

In general, most sampled claimants averaged between two and three dosimeter cycles between 

area code assignments. The average for all 20 claimants was 2.1 dosimeter cycles between code 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 25 of 62

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. 

assignments. It was observed that prior to 1982, dosimeter area code assignments are essentially 

only available on a quarterly basis. From 1982 to approximately 1988, dosimeter code 

assignments are available on a monthly basis in the HPRED data, if the claimant had a recorded 

dose during that badging cycle. Beginning sometime in 1988, dosimeter area codes are generally 

reported for every badging cycle, regardless of whether dose was accrued during that period. It 

was observed in 1989 and later years that often multiple dosimeter codes might be listed for the 

same badging cycle (which likely indicates multiple work locations).
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 26 of 62

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 7. Summary of Temporal Dosimeter Area Code Information for Sampled Claimants

Claim 

Ref #2

# Dosimeter 

Cycles in 

Employment

Maximum # of 

Cycles Between 

Area Code 

Assignment

Average # of Cycles 

Between Area Code 

Assignment (All 

Years)

Additional Comments

1 177 3 2.4

2 48 3 1.5

3 222 6 2.4 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

4 171 3 1.8

5 135 3 2.1

6 55 3 2.7

7 111 3 1.2

8 219 6 2.5 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

9 253 6 1.7 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

10 135 3 2.9

11 223 6 2.5 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

12 125 6 3.0 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

13 253 6 1.4 Six- month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

14 252 6 2.1 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

15 252 6 2.0 Six-month gap in area code occurred in early 1989 due to the unavailability of the 

2

nd quarter bioassay log.

16 22 3 1.3

Claimant had a ~5-month employment period in 1975 in which no dosimetry 

records could be located (this employment was not used in calculating the average 

cycles between area code assignment). Additionally, the claimant had dosimetry 

results from March–December of 1986, which is not considered covered 

employment.

 

2

 Note: This is not a NOCTS or other identifying number, it is a randomly assigned number for the purposes of this review. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 27 of 62

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 7. Summary of Temporal Dosimeter Area Code Information for Sampled Claimants

Claim 

Ref #2

# Dosimeter 

Cycles in 

Employment

Maximum # of 

Cycles Between 

Area Code 

Assignment

Average # of Cycles 

Between Area Code 

Assignment (All 

Years)

Additional Comments

17 82 9 2.4

9-month gap in dosimeter area codes occurred from October 1982 to July of 1983. 

Prior to this time, the claimant had dosimeter area codes for each of the previous 

six months using code “99.” It is unknown what this code represents.

18 18 2 (see additional 

comments)

1.5 (see additional 

comments)

Claimant’s last employment at SRS was from [redacted]–[redacted]; no external 

dosimetry or location information could be located during this time in either the 

DOE_Response or the logbook files. This year of employment was not considered 

in calculating the maximum or average time between assignments of dosimeter 

area codes.

19 108 3 3.0

20 169 3 2.2
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 28 of 62

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. 

6.0 COMPARISON OF CLAIMANT DOSIMETER LOCATION/AREA 

CODES TO ALTERNATE AVAILABLE LOCATION INFORMATION 

In addition to temporal considerations discussed in Section 5, one important facet of the 

Table 5-1 methodology is establishing the effectiveness and accuracy of location assignment 

when applied to real claimant data. To this end, SC&A used the same sample of claimants 

described in Section 5 and evaluated the available dosimeter area-specific information versus 

other information on job location available for the individual claimants.

Other location-based information can consist of, but is not necessarily limited to: 

 Bioassay sampling

 In-vivo monitoring 

 CATI interviews

 Contamination incident/skin decontamination documentation

 Missing exposure investigations (i.e. a “lost badge” report) 

By far, the most common source of alternate work location information is present in the internal 

monitoring records (bioassay and in-vivo sampling). In reality, this type of information would 

not exist for the hypothetical unmonitored worker to which coworker intakes would be applied. 

However, the comparison using workers who have both external dosimetry and other alternate 

sources of work location information is illustrative of the accuracy of using external dosimetry 

alone to establish a claimant’s work area. 

As noted in Section 2, up until 1989, only a single dosimeter area code is available for each 

badging cycle. For the period 1972–1981, dosimeter area codes are commonly only available on 

a quarterly basis. For the purposes of this comparison, the assignment of the dosimeter area code 

was evaluated on the first day of an individual badging cycle (i.e., the first of the month) or the 

first day of the quarterly evaluation report (1/1, 4/1, 7/1, 10/1). Alternate location information 

was based on the date of the sample or incident and assessed for the appropriate month. To 

better explain this approach, the reader can refer to Table 8, which shows an example of a typical 

comparison. 

 

Table 8. Example of a Comparison of External Dosimetry Codes and Alternate 

Information such as Bioassay 

Badging 

Period

External 

Dosimetry

Area Code

Alternate 

Location Type of Record(s) Reference

4/1–30/74 3M Quarterly Logbook Ref 50121

5/1–31/74

6/1–30/74 M Area, 313M Bioassay cards, In vivo DOE_Response

7/1–31/74 3M M Area Quarterly Logbook, Bioassay card Ref 50126, DOE_Response

This example shows a situation in which a worker had quarterly monitoring records for the 

second and third quarter of 1974 (showing area code “3M”). According to Table 5-1, dosimetry 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 29 of 62

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. 

code “3M” refers to the “300 M-Area, M area unknown facility.” In addition, there are two 

bioassay samples in June and July of 1974 (M Area) and an in-vivo count in June (313-M). In 

this example, there is no discrepancy between the work area assumed from the external 

dosimetry area code and the other information available. 

However, discrepancies in other situations did arise during the course of this review and 

generally fell into four categories with regard to the claimant favorability of the proposed 

approach: 

1. Not claimant favorable: Use of the dosimeter area code to assign coworker intakes 

would result in fewer contaminant intake assignments than other information would 

indicate. 

2. Unknown or Variable Favorability: Use of the dosimeter area code would assign a 

different, but not necessarily unfavorable, mix of contaminant intakes compared to other 

information. An example of this might be the dosimeter area assigning thorium where 

the alternate information might assign fission products. 

3. Neutral Favorability: While there was a discrepancy in location, the dosimeter code 

and alternate information would result in the same mix of contaminant intakes. 

4. Claimant Favorable: Use of the dosimeter area code would assign a larger mix of 

contaminant intakes than would be assigned using alternate information. 

The number of discrepancies identified during the claimant sampling and how they fit into each 

category is shown in Table 9. As can be seen, the majority of cases where discrepancies were 

observed would result in a claimant-favorable coworker intake assignment. Three quarters of the 

sampled claimants had at least one instance where the application of Table 5-1 over other 

specific area information would result in favorable intake assignments. Just over 50% of the 

total observable discrepancies among all sampled claimants would have a claimant-favorable 

result. It is not clear whether this result is an artifact of the subset of workers chosen or rather a 

slight systemic bias in favor of the claimants. 

However, on the other hand, use of the Table 5-1 methodology would also have a negative 

impact in at least some circumstances for 13 of the 20 sampled claimants (65%). Just under one 

quarter of the observed discrepancies would result in a claimant-unfavorable result if the 

dosimeter area code methodology were adopted; 4 of these 13 cases with claimant-unfavorable 

observations also had no corresponding favorable discrepancies. For specific information on 

each of the observable discrepancy cases, please refer to Tables 10–13 in Attachment 2.

It is SC&A’s position that the aforementioned analysis demonstrates that the Table 5-1 suggested 

methodology, while largely resulting in claimant-favorable results, also has the potential to 

underestimate coworker intake assignments for at least some workers. Additionally, Table 9 

demonstrates the potential for variable work location assignments, which could realistically be 

missed by utilizing dosimeter area locations. This is particularly true in cases where dosimeter 

information is only available on a quarterly basis. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 30 of 62

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 9. Summary Characteristics of Discrepancies Observed between Dosimeter Results and 

Other Location Information 

Category of 

Discrepancy

Number of 

Claimants 

Affected in 

Sample

Total Number of 

Observations in 

Sample 

(% of Total)

Additional Comments

Not Favorable 13/20 22 (22.7%)

Many of the cases deemed to be unfavorable were 

instances where the dosimeter indicated a reactor area;

however, bioassay or other information indicated another 

area with a larger exposure potential to other 

contaminants.

Unknown/

Variable 3/20 8 (8.2%)

Most of the unknown or variable cases involved the 

juxtaposition of F and H Areas (i.e., dosimeter indicates 

F Area, while other information indicates H Area).

Neutral 4/20 16 (16.5%)

Favorable 15/20 51 (52.6%)

A little over half of the cases with contradicting 

information would be deemed favorable to the claimant 

using Table 5-1.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 31 of 62

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. 

7.0 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS 

SC&A evaluated the completeness of dosimeter area code data available in the SRDB to fill in 

temporal gaps observed in individual claimant dosimetry files (see Sections 2 and 3). SC&A’s 

conclusion from that review is that dosimetry logbooks exist on a quarterly basis from 1972 up 

through 1989 that can be used to fill in the large temporal gaps (on the order of multiple years) 

observed in actual claimant files during this period. No significant legibility issues were 

identified by SC&A in the dosimetry logbooks that would preclude their use. 

Secondly, SC&A reviewed the ability to trace the relationship between dosimeter area codes and 

work locations in Table 5-1 to the source documentation provided by NIOSH. While many of 

the dosimeter codes could be traced to the original health physics documentation, several area 

codes contained in Table 5-1 could not be identified in the source documents (see Section 4, 

Table 4). Additionally, it appears to SC&A that there are discrepancies between the area 

code/work location presented in Table 5-1 and the information provided in the source references 

(see Section 4, Table 5). SC&A acknowledges that a vigorous quality assurance analysis, 

additional technical rationale, and specific annotation of Table 5-1 provided by NIOSH could 

potentially alleviate these concerns. 

Finally, SC&A examined a sample of 20 claimants to assess the temporal completeness and 

characterization of any observed contradictory location information contained in the individual 

worker monitoring files. Temporally, the assignment of a dosimeter area code averaged once 

every 2.1 months from 1972–1989 (after this time, dosimeter area codes were generally on a 

monthly basis or less). The maximum length of time between the assignments of dosimeter area 

codes was 9 months, although one sampled claimant had an entire single year employment 

period with no identified dosimeter area codes. In general, area dosimeter code assignments are 

only available on a quarterly basis from 1972 into the mid-1980s. After this time, the frequency 

of dosimeter area code assignments increased until approximately 1992, when it was observed 

that area codes were reported on a monthly basis. Some observed cases showed multiple 

dosimeter area codes for the same badging period (indicating documentation of multiple work 

areas within the period). 

As described in Section 6, SC&A identified examples within the claimant sample in which 

discrepancies exist between dosimeter area code and other alternate location information in the 

worker’s dosimetry file. Observed discrepancies had varying effects on the hypothetical 

claimant favorability of coworker dose assignment based on Table 5-1. These discrepancies are 

summarized in Section 6, Table 9. Specifics on each observed example are shown in 

Attachment 2, Tables 10–13. Although a large portion of the observed discrepancies would 

result in claimant-favorable coworker intake assignments, SC&A also noted several claimant 

“unfavorable” intake assignments on at least some occasions for 13 of the 20 sampled claimants.

Tables 10–13 in Attachment 2 underscore SC&A’s primary finding that the use of dosimeter area 

codes does not provide a sufficiently accurate or reliable basis to assign a unique mix of 

contaminant intakes forming the basis of the proposed SRS coworker models. This is 

particularly true of the period prior to July of 1989, when there is greater uncertainty concerning 

the temporal assignment of badges. SC&A recommends that parsing workers by area for the 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 32 of 62

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. 

purposes of coworker assignment only be used in instances of irrefutable evidence of work 

location.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 33 of 62

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. 

8.0 REFERENCES 

ORAUT 2005. ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH – Savannah River Site. 

ORAUT-TKBS-0003, Rev. 03. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

April 5, 2005.

ORAUT 2013. Internal Coworker Dosimetry Data for the Savannah River Site. ORAUTOTIB-0081 Rev. 02. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. December 16, 

2013.

Reed, M.B., M.T. Swanson, S. Gaither, J.W. Joseph, and W.R. Henry, 2002. Savannah River 

Site at Fifty. Prepared under a Cooperative Agreement (DE-FC09-97SR18903) between 

Department of Energy, Savannah River Site Operations Office, and New South Associates, Inc. 

Published 2002. 

SRS Various Dates. SRS HP Area and Department Codes 1959–1992 Compilation. Savannah 

River Site Health Physics Program. 1959 (unknown author), January 1973 (from Roscoe Hall’s 

Files), April 1977 (unknown author), January 1984 (unknown author), August 1990 (unknown 

author), January 1992 (unknown author). 

SRS 1974. 1974 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetr, Bioassay and Whole 

Body. Savannah River Site. December 31, 1974. SRDB Ref ID: 57123.

SRS 1979. 1979 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and 

Whole Body. Savannah River Site. December 31, 1979. SRDB Ref ID: 57161.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 34 of 62

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. 

ATTACHMENT 1: RECREATION OF TABLE 5-1 OF 

ORAUT-OTIB-0081, REV. 2 

(See ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, page 26) 

Building/ Facility

Dosimeter 

Codes 1961–

1972

Dosimeter 

Codes 1973–

1990

Dosimeter 

Codes 1991–

2003

Dosimeter 

Codes 2004–

Present

Radionuclides of 

Concern

Reactors

(R, P, L, K, C)

7A, 8A, 9A, 

10A, 11A

1C through 6C, 

1K, 1P, 1L, 1R

C01, C02, C03, 

K01, L01, P01

LLL, NMM, 

SDDa Tritium, fission products

F-Area unknown 

facility 1A 1F through 5F, 7F through 9F

F, F01 through 

F05, F07 

through F09

235, CLB, FBL, 

FCA

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium,

F-Area A-Line 1A See F canyon See F canyon FCA Uranium

221-F B-Line 

(FB and JB lines) 1A 1F through 5F, 7F through 9F

F, F01, through 

F05, F07 

through F09

FBL, FCA Plutonium mixture, 

americium

221-F Canyon 1A 1F through 5F, 

7F through 9F

F, F01, through 

F05, F07 

through F09

FBL, FCA

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission 

products, thorium 

(through 1966), 

neptunium

F-Area Outside 

Facilities 1B 9F F09 FCA

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission products

PuFF and PEF 

(235-F) 1A 5F, 8F F05, F08 235

Plutonium mixture, 

americium, neptunium, 

thorium

235-F Vaults 1A 2F, 5F, 8F 2F, F05, F08 235

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, neptunium, 

americium, curium, 

thorium

772-F and 772-1F 

Laboratories 1A 1Ab A01 CLB

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission 

products, americium, 

tritium, neptunium

F/H Tank Farms, 

Effluent 

Treatment Facility 

(ETF), Cooling 

Water and 

Retention Basins

5F, 5H F05, H05 ETP, FTF

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission 

products, americium, 

neptunium

H-Area unknown 

facility 2A 1H through 6H H01 through H06 299, HBL, HCA

Tritium, plutonium 

mixture, uranium, 

americium, fission 

products, neptunium

HB Line Facility 2A 6H H06 HBL

Plutonium mixture, 

fission products, 

americium, neptunium, 

uraniumd

H-Canyon and 

A-Line 2A 1H, 2H, 5H, 6H H, H01, H02, H05, H06 HCA

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission 

products, neptunium

221-H Area 

Outside Facilities 2A 9H H09 HCA

Tritium, plutonium 

mixture, uranium, fission 

products, neptunium
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 35 of 62

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. 

Building/ Facility

Dosimeter 

Codes 1961–

1972

Dosimeter 

Codes 1973–

1990

Dosimeter 

Codes 1991–

2003

Dosimeter 

Codes 2004–

Present

Radionuclides of 

Concern

232-H, HANM, 

HAOM, Tritium 

complex

6F, 4H F06, H04, T TEF, TRI Tritium

300 M-Area, M 

area unknown 

facility

3A 3M M03 SDDa

Uranium, thorium, 

plutonium mixture, 

neptunium, americium, 

curium (1964–1965)

704-U, 704-B 1U, 6E, 7G U, U01, E06, 

G07 No active codes Fission products

723-A, 773-A 5A, 6N 1A, 5A A01, A02, A05 SRTC

Plutonium mixture, 

americium, curium, 

californium, thorium, 

(October 1972 and after), 

uranium, neptunium, 

fission products, tritium

735-A and 735-

11A 6F 5D A02, A03, A09, A16, B01

SRTC (apply 

773-A Intakes

Environmental 

radionuclides, neptunium 

(1962)

776-A 1A, 15A A01, A15 SRTC (apply 

773 A intakes)

Plutonium mixture, 

americium, curium, 

californium, thorium, 

uranium, neptunium 

(1961–1988), fission 

products, tritium

777-M 5B 5B A33 No active codes

Uranium, fission 

products, neptunium 

(through 1984)

CMX and TNX 5C 5C T01 No active codes Uranium

Central shops & 

Maintenance, 

Pittsburgh Testing 

Laboratory

6C, 6H, 6I, 6M, 

6N, 6R, 12D, 

12E, 12I

5J, 5W, 6B, 

6W, 7A, 7B, 

7G, 7I, 7J, 7K, 

7L, 7M, 7N, 7R, 

7Q, 7W, 8A 

through 8C, 8H 

through 8M, 8P, 

8S, 8T, 1N

A12, A24, A25, 

A26, A27, A29, 

A34, J01 

through J08, J12 

through J41

No active codes

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission 

products, tritium, 

americium, curium, 

neptunium, thorium

D-Area 4A 1D, 4D D, D01, D04 SDD Tritium

E-Area Solid 

Waste Disposal 

Facility (SWDF)

12A 12B, 4F, 3G, 8G B12, G03, F04 SSS

Tritium, plutonium 

mixture, fission 

products, neptunium

New Special 

Recovery

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

MPF

Plutonium mixture, 

americium, uranium

Plutonium 

Storage Facility 

(PSF)

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

MPF Plutonium mixture, 

americium, uranium

Receiving Basin 

for Off-Site Fuel 

(RBOF)

See H-Area 

unknown facility

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

RBO Plutonium mixture

Resin 

Regeneration 

Facility (RRF)

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

See H-Area 

unknown 

facility

RBO Fission products
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 36 of 62

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. 

Building/ Facility

Dosimeter 

Codes 1961–

1972

Dosimeter 

Codes 1973–

1990

Dosimeter 

Codes 1991–

2003

Dosimeter 

Codes 2004–

Present

Radionuclides of 

Concern

S-Area DWPF 1S, 2S, 1W, 2W S01, S02 SWM Plutonium mixture, 

fission products

Waste 

Certification 

Facility

3G G03 SSS Tritium, plutonium 

mixture, fission products

Z-Area 2Z Z02 ZZZ

Tritium, fission products, 

plutonium mixture, all 

transuranic elements

Not identifiable or 

unknownc

7Y, 8D, 8E, 

000, missing

R01, Y01, 

missing

Blank, any code 

not already 

listed

Plutonium mixture, 

uranium, fission 

products, tritium, 

americium, curium, 

californium, neptunium, 

thorium

Note: Any code with X should not be included. These indicate off-plant assignment. 

a. Code SDD is used both for the reactors and 300-M area. If no other information regarding work location is 

available, the applicable radionuclides for both locations should be assigned. 

b. Code 1A is used for both 772 and 773 prior to 1991. If no other information regarding work location is 

available, the applicable radionuclides for both locations should be assigned. 

c. Unknown facility radionuclides should only be assigned if no information is available from any source 

regarding the worker’s work location.

d. U-232/233 in Tables 5-8 through 5-10 should only be assigned for the HB Line for January 1, 1964, through 

September 30, 1972. 
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 37 of 62

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. 

ATTACHMENT 2: EXAMPLES OF DISCREPANCIES IN DOSIMETER RESULTS THAT WOULD 

RESULT IN NEUTRAL OR CLAIMANT-FAVORABLE CONTAMINANT INTAKES 

Table 10. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Unfavorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker Intake Additional Comments

2 3/1/90: L01

In Vivo on 

3/2/90: Central 

Shops

Unfavorable: 

Dosimeter code (L Reactor): Fp, H-3

Alternate Location (Central shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

DOE Response indicates the worker was a [redacted]and [redacted]. 

M03 is only listed in Table 5-1 beginning in 1991, but was in use at 

least as early as 1990.

2 4/1/90: M03

Bioassay on 

4/17/90: Central 

Shops

Unfavorable: 

Dosimeter code (300 M Area, Unknown 

facility): Am, Np, Pu, Th, U.

Alternate Location (Central shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

M03 is only listed in Table 5-1 beginning in 1991, but was in use at 

least as early as 1990.

3

1/1/89: 2F

7/1/89: F02

Bioassay on 

2/9/89: H Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter code (F Area Unknown Facility): Am, 

Fp, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

2F and F02 refer to various F Area facilities according to Table 5-1. 

“2F” appears as one of three codes for the 235F area, but F02 does 

not. Therefore, it is assumed that 2F and F02 refer to “F Area 

Unknown Facility” for this comparison.

4 7/1/76: 1P

Bioassay on 

7/26/76:

F Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter code (Reactors): H-3, Fp

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U.

Bioassay sample was for uranium, which is not assigned for the 

P Area reactors.

Note: assignment to F Area would also leave out assigning H-3 such 

as the reactor area prescribes.

8 9/1/89: F02

Special 

Bioassay 

Request on 

9/6/89:

772-F

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter code (F Area Unknown Facility): Am, 

Fp, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (772-F): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, 

Pu, U

According to Table 5-1, dosimeter code F02 wasn’t in use until 1991. 

Table 5-1 also attributes code F02 to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B Line (FB 

and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different radionuclide 

mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 38 of 62

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 10. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Unfavorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker Intake Additional Comments

9

7/1/74: 3M

10/1/74: 3M

Bioassay on 

9/18/74: 

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” and so 

may have the same contaminant mix.

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation might be 

used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U. In this case, the 

assignment of M Area Unknown Facility contaminants would be 

claimant unfavorable.

9 1/1/75: 1K

Bioassay on 1/6 

and 1/8/75:

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” which 

assigns Am, Np, Pu, Th and U. 

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation might be 

used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U.

In either of the above cases, the assignment of reactor 

contaminants would be claimant unfavorable.

9 7/1/75: 1K

Bioassay on 

7/15/75:

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD “A Area” is very close to “M Area” and is 

often referred to as the “Administration Area” (ORAUT 2005, pg. 57) 

it is also appears to encompasses laboratory areas like Building 773-A 

(ORAUT 2005, pg. 36, and Reid et al 2002, pg. 226). For the 

purposes of comparison it was assumed “A Area” bioassay 

represented Building 773-A.

9 10/1/75: 1K

Bioassay on 

10/7/75:

M Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Alternate Location (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Assignment to M Area Unknown Facility would omit intakes 

for Fp and H-3.

10

11/1/83: 1C

Terminated 

12/31/83

In Vivo on 

12/6/83: 182F

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Alternate Location: (F Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 39 of 62

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 10. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Unfavorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker Intake Additional Comments

11 1/1/76: 3M

4/1/76: 3M

Bioassay on 

2/5/76: A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” and so 

may have the same contaminant mix.

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation might be 

used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U. In this case, the 

assignment of M Area Unknown Facility contaminants would be 

claimant unfavorable.

11 4/1/76: 3M

Bioassay on 

4/2/76:

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD “A Area” is very close to “M Area” and so may 

have the same contaminant mix.

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation might be 

used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U. In this case, the 

assignment of M Area Unknown Facility contaminants would be 

claimant unfavorable.

11 10/1/76: 3M

Bioassay on 

10/7/76:

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” and so 

may have the same contaminant mix.

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation might be 

used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U. In this case, the 

assignment of M Area Unknown Facility contaminants would be 

claimant unfavorable.

11 1/1/77: 3M

In Vivo on 

1/20/77:

717A

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Not identifiable or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

11 1/1/78: 3M

Bioassay on 

1/6/78:

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” and so 

may have the same contaminant mix.

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation might be 

used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U. In this case, the 

assignment of M Area Unknown Facility contaminants would be 

claimant unfavorable.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 40 of 62

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 10. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Unfavorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker Intake Additional Comments

11 4/1/80: 3M

7/1/80: 3M

Bioassay on 5/2 

and 6/25/80: 

“717”

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Not identifiable or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

12 7/1/75: 2H

Bioassay on 

7/10/75: Central 

Shops

Unfavorable: 

Dosimeter Code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Central shops): Am, Cm,

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

13 10/1/81: 2F

Bioassay on 

10/30/81:

A Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

13 10/1/93: A03

Bioassay on 

10/13/93: 

Facility – H

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (735-A and 735-11A): 

environmental radionuclides

Alternate Location (Tritium Facility, see 

comments): H-3

It was assumed for this comparison that “Facility H” refers to the 

tritium complex, since it is a tritium bioassay result. It is also possible 

that “Facility H” refers to the H Area, which would assign Am, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, and U. 

14 9/1/93: A03

Bioassay on 

9/16/93: F Area

In Vivo on 

9/15/93: 703-F

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (735-A and 735-11A): 

environmental radionuclides

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 41 of 62

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 10. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Unfavorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker Intake Additional Comments

15 1/1/92: K01, 

HB2, H02

Bioassay on 

1/17, 1/19, 1/29, 

1/30/92: H Area, 

C Area

Unfavorable:

Dosimeter Code (Reactors, H-Canyon and ALine): Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown Facility,, 

Reactors): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: HB2 is not included in Table 5-1 and so is not evaluated for its 

effect on intake assignment.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code H02 with “H Area Unknown 

Facility.” If this location is selected instead, then the comparison 

between dosimeter codes and alternate locations is identical.

It is not clear from OTIB-0081 how periods with multiple dosimeter 

area codes are used; SC&A has assumed that the contaminant 

groupings are combined.

18 1/1/76: 4H

4/1/76: 4H

Bioassay in 

March 1976: 

G Area

Unfavorable: 

Dosimeter Code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Not Identifiable or 

Unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Date in bioassay logbook only says “3/76.”

Note: 4H is one of two dosimeter codes used to refer to the 232-H, 

HANM, HAOM, Tritium Complex (the other is 6F). This facility only 

assigns tritium intakes and so selection of this location would be very 

claimant unfavorable.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 42 of 62

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 11. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Unclear Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

11 1/1/80: 3M

In Vivo on 

1/15/80:

717F

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (M Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U

It was assumed for this comparison that 717F was an F Area facility. If 

instead “Not identifiable or unknown” were assumed, then the following 

radionuclides would have been assigned: Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, 

Pu, Th, U. These selections would make the use of the dosimeter area 

code unfavorable.

12 4/1/78: 2F

7/1/78: 2F

Bioassay on 

5/15/78: 

H Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.

12 1/1/79: 2F

4/1/79: 2F

Bioassay on 

2/26 and 

3/6/79: H 

Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.

12 7/1/80: 2F

Bioassay on 

7/30 and 

7/31/80:

H Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.

12 4/1/81: 2F

Bioassay on 

4/15/81:

H Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 43 of 62

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 11. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Unclear Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

13 4/1/76: 2F

Bioassay on 

4/19/76:

H Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.

13 5/1/80: 2F

Bioassay on 

5/24/80:

H Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.

13 6/1/87: 2F

Bioassay 

6/16/87:

H Area

Unclear Favorability:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, 

Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Location): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Note: Assignment of 235-F Vault contaminants would omit Fp and H-3;

assignment of H Area Unknown Location would omit Cm and Th.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2F to 221-F Canyon, 221-F B 

Line (FB and JB lines), and F Area – A Line. All have different 

radionuclide mixes that are bounded by F Area Unknown Facility.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 44 of 62

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 12. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Neutral Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

3 1/1/91: H06

Bioassay on: 

1/29: F Area

In Vivo on: 

1/9/91: 200-F

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (HB Line Facility): Am, Fp, 

Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U

Since H06 is the only dosimeter code associated with the HB 

Line Facility, that location is assumed for this comparison. 

However, Table 5-1 also associates “H06” with H Area 

Unknown Facility (Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U) and the H-Canyon 

and A-line (Fp, Np, Pu, U). 

If the former location is assumed, the dosimeter code is claimant 

favorable; if the latter location is assumed, then the dosimeter 

code is not claimant favorable.

11 4/1/83: 7G

7/1/83: 7G

In Vivo on 

6/8/83: 

784-1A

Neutral Favorability (see comments):

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Not identifiable or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

11 3/1/91: A24

In Vivo on 

3/27/91:

717A

Neutral Favorability (see comments):

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Not identifiable or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

15 5/1/82: 7L

In Vivo on 

5/28/82:

723-A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 45 of 62

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 12. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Neutral Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 7/1/83: 7L

In Vivo on 

7/18/83:

723-A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

15 7/1/84: 7L

In Vivo on 

7/12/84: 

723-A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

15 9/1/89: A27

Bioassay on 

9/4, 9/15, 

9/21/89:

L Area

In Vivo on 

8/28/89: 

723-A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Alternate Location (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

15 4/1/90: A27

Neutron 

logbook for 

April shows 

“A15”

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (776-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 46 of 62

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 12. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Neutral Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 5/1/90: A27

Neutron 

logbook for 

April shows 

“A15”

Bioassay on 

5/7/90:

A Area

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (A Area): see comments

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” 

which assigns Am, Np, Pu, Th and U. If this contaminant mix 

was selected, it would omit the Cm, Fp and H-3 assigned to the 

central shops.

Alternatively, the “not identifiable or unknown” designation A 

Area might be used which assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, 

U; these are essentially the same contaminants assigned to the 

central shops.

15 7/1/90: A27

In Vivo on 

7/3/90:

723-A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.

15 8/1/91: A27

In Vivo on 

8/28/91:

700-A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Note: Central Shops does not list californium as a contaminant of 

interest; it is unknown if this was simply an oversight.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 47 of 62

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 12. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Neutral Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 8/1/92: A27

In Vivo on 

8/12/92:

723-A

Bioassay on 

8/1, 8/17, 8/25, 

8/28, 8/30/92:

H Area, C 

Area

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (723-A, H Area Unknown 

Facility, Reactors): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

15 5/1/93: A02, 

H09

Incident report 

on [redacted]:

723-A

Neutral Favorability

Dosimeter Code 1 (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Dosimeter Code 2( 221-H Area Outside 

Facilities): Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Np 

Alternate Location: (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: 2 dosimeters issued for May 1993.

Incident report from May shows claimant was involved in a 

contamination incident in [redacted].

Table 5-1 also attributes “A02” with 735-A and 735-11A, this 

area assigns only environmental radionuclides. If this area were 

to be selected instead of 723-A/773-A it would be claimant 

unfavorable.

15 7/1/93: A02, 

H06 N/A

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code 1 (723-A, 773-A): Am, Cf, 

Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Dosimeter Code 2 (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu

Note: 2 dosimeters issued for July 1993.

It is not known when the dosimeters might have been changed 

out during the monitoring period, or if they were worn in tandem 

for a period of time.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimetry code H06 to the HB Line 

Facility and H-Canyon and A-Line – each has a different mix of 

radionuclides.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 48 of 62

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 12. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Intake Assignments of Neutral Favorability

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 9/1/93: A02, 

H06

In Vivo on 

9/27/93:

723-A

Bioassay on 

9/28/93:

A Area

Neutral Favorability:

Dosimeter Code 1 (723-A, 773-A): Am, Cf, 

Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Dosimeter Code 2 (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu

Alternative Location 1 (723-A): Am, Cf, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternative Location 2 (A Area): see comments

Note: 2 dosimeters issued for July 1993.

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimetry code H06 to the HB Line 

Facility and H-Canyon and A-Line – each has a different mix of 

radionuclides

According to the TBD, “A Area” is very close to “M Area” 

which assigns Am, Np, Pu, Th and U. Alternatively, the “not 

identifiable or unknown” designation might be used which 

assigns Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Pu, Th, U. This mix of 

radionuclides is the same as for 723-A/773-A.

17 None 

Available

Bioassay on 

8/21/76: 

Central Shops

Neutral Favorability

Dosimetry Code: None available, see 

comments

Alternative Location (Central shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Note: An external dosimetry logbook exists that covers August 

of 1976; however, the claimant was not found in the logbook. 

Furthermore, August 1976 is not considered covered 

employment for the claimant despite the urinalysis sample 

present in the DOE records.

Since no external dosimetry area code is available, the category 

of “Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 49 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

1 1/1/80: 4H

In Vivo on 

1/23/80:

704-2F

Favorable: 

Dosimeter code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U.

Alternate location (F Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U.

Unclear if In Vivo location refers to the counter location or work 

location.

3

1/1/73: 2F

4/1/73: 2F

Bioassay on 2/1, 

2/6, 2/14, 

3/25/73: 

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): H-3, Fp

Dosimeter code 2F could also refer to “F Area Unknown Facility” 

instead of 235-F. This area does not assign thorium or curium, but 

does assign fission products.

Note: Assignment to 235-F would also leave out assigning H-3 

and Fp such as the reactor area prescribes.

3

10/1/73: 2F

1/1/74: 2F

Bioassay on 

11/19/73:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): H-3, Fp

Dosimeter code 2F could also refer to “F Area Unknown Facility” 

instead of 235-F. This area does not assign thorium or curium, but 

does assign fission products.

Note: Assignment to 235-F would also leave out assigning H-3 

and Fp such as the reactor area prescribes.

3 7/1/88: 8T

In Vivo on 

7/20/88:

704-16F

Favorable: 

Dosimeter code (central shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U.

Unclear if In Vivo location refers to the counter location or work 

location.

4 1/1/76: 2F

Bioassay on 1/6, 

1/15, 1/23 and 

1/30/76:

P Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): H-3, Fp

Dosimeter code 2F could also refer to “F Area Unknown Facility” 

instead of 235-F. This area does not assign thorium or curium, but 

does assign fission products.

Note: Assignment to 235-F would also leave out assigning H-3 

and Fp such as the reactor area prescribes.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 50 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

6 3/1/75: 7A

Bioassay on 3/17 

and 3/19/75:

K Area

Favorable: 

Dosimeter code (central shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): H-3, Fp

Covered employment for this period ceases on 3/20/75; however,

the claimant file contains external badging records into May of 

1975. 

6

7/1/78: 7A

10/1/78: 7A

Skin 

Decontamination 

on 8/3/78: 241-H 

Tank 16

Missing 

Exposure 

Investigation 8/1 

– 8/30/78: 241-H 

Tank 16

Bioassay on 

8/4/78: F Area

Favorable: 

Dosimeter code (central shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown Facility, 

H Area Unknown Facility): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, 

Pu, U 

Note: Alternate locations involve both Unknown H and Unknown 

F Areas; for the purposes of this comparison the two were 

combined.

7

9/1/77: 2H

11/1/77: 2H

Bioassay on 

10/31/77: F Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U

8

4/1/82: 2H

7/1/82: 2H

Bioassay on 

6/21/82: C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 51 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

9 4/1/76: 2H

In Vivo on 

4/21/76:

221-F

Bioassay on 

4/2/76:

F Area

Favorable: 

Dosimeter Code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (221-F Canyon): Fp, Np, 

Pu, U 

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code 2H to the H-Canyon and 

A-Line (assigns Fp, Np, Pu and U, the same mix as 221-F Canyon) 

as well as New Special Recovery area, Plutonium storage facility 

(PSF), Receiving Basin for Off-Site Fuel (RBOF), and the Resin 

Regeneration Facility (RRF). Each of these areas assumes the 

same radionuclide mix as H Area Unknown Facility.

221-F could also refer to the “221-F B-Line (FB and JB Lines), this 

area only assigns Am and Pu.

9 1/1/85: 3H

Bioassay on 

1/17/85:

K Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code “3H” with the New 

Special Recovery area, Plutonium storage facility (PSF), Receiving 

Basin for Off-Site Fuel (RBOF), and the Resin Regeneration 

Facility (RRF). Each of these areas assumes the same radionuclide 

mix as H Area Unknown Facility.

9

5/1/89: 2H

7/1/89: H02

In Vivo on 

6/19/89: 105K

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

10 7/1/79: 2F

10/1/79: 2F

In Vivo on 

9/26/79: 484D

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (D Area): H-3

Location “484D” is not contained in Table 5-1, it was assumed for 

this comparison that it represents the “D Area.” However, if “Not 

Identifiable or Unknown” were selected instead, the use of the 

dosimeter code would be claimant unfavorable. 

Note: Selection of dosimeter code location would omit tritium.

12 10/1/74: 2H

1/1/75: 2H

Bioassay on 

12/13/74: P Area

Favorable: 

Dosimeter Code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 52 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

13 7/1/78: 2F

Bioassay on 

7/23/78:

D Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (235-F Vaults): Am, Cm, Np, 

Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (D Area): H-3

Note: Selection of dosimeter code location would omit tritium.

15 7/1/76: 5A

10/1/76: 5A

Bioassay on 

8/9/76: F Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (723-A, 773-A): Am, Cf, 

Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

15 4/1/82: 7L

Bioassay on 4/26 

and 4/30/82:

L Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 6/1/82: 7L

Bioassay on 6/14 

and 6/17/82:

L Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 10/1/83: 7L

1/1/84: 7L

Bioassay on 

11/16/83: L Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 3/1/84: 7L

Bioassay on 

3/14/84:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 53 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 6/1/84: 7L

Bioassay on 6/4, 

6/5, 6/16/84:

K Area, L Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 4/1/85: 7L

Bioassay on 4/6 

and 4/20/85:

P Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 7/1/85: 7L

Bioassay on 

7/11, 7/18, 7/21, 

7/25, 7/27/85:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 9/1/85: 7L

Bioassay on 9/2, 

9/7, 9/13/85:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 10/1/85: 7L

Bioassay on 

10/2, 10/7/85: P 

Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 2/1/86: 7L

Bioassay on 2/1, 

2/5, 2/17, 2/18, 

2/19, 2/20/86:

L and K Areas

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 54 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 4/1/86: 7L

Bioassay on 

4/3/86:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm,

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 7/1/86: 7L

Bioassay on 7/1, 

7/10/86: C and 

K Areas

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 8/1/89: A27

Bioassay on 8/9, 

8/12, 8/19, 

8/20/89: L Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 11/1/89: A27

Bioassay on 

11/14/89:

P Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 2/1/91: A27

Bioassay on 

2/7/91:

H Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

15 7/1/91: A27 Neutron logbook 

for July: H02

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H-Canyon and A-Line): 

Fp, Np, Pu, U

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimeter code H02 with H Area 

Unknown Facility which assigns the following contaminants: Am, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U. If this location were selected, it would omit 

Cm and Th.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 55 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

15 4/1/92: A27

Bioassay on 

4/28, 4/29/92: C 

Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 5/1/92: A27

Bioassay on 

5/11/92:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 6/1/92: A27

Bioassay on 

6/23, 6/25 –

6/30/92:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 7/1/92: A27

Bioassay on 7/1, 

7/3, 7/16, 7/18-

7/20, 7/23, 7/25, 

7/30/92:

C Area, H Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown Facility, 

Reactors): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

15 9/1/92: A27

Bioassay on 

9/10, 9/17/92:

C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, 

Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

15 2/1/93: A02

Bioassay on 

2/18, 2/25/93:

L and H Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter Code (723-A, 773-A): Am, Cf, 

Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown Facility, 

Reactors): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Table 5-1 also attributes “A02” with 735-A and 735-11A; this area 

assigns only environmental radionuclides. If this area were to be 

selected instead of 723-A/773-A, it would be claimant unfavorable.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 56 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

17 5/1/82: “99”

Bioassay on 5/5, 

5/7, 5/19, 5/21, 

5/28/82:

L Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Dosimetry code “99” is not mentioned in Table 5-1; for the 

purposes of this comparison, it was assumed that the category of 

“Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.

17 6/1/82: “99”

Bioassay on 

6/11, 6/28/82: L 

Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Dosimetry code “99” is not mentioned in Table 5-1; for the 

purposes of this comparison, it was assumed that the category of 

“Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.

17 7/1/82: “99”

Bioassay on 7/2, 

7/9, 7/16, 

7/30/82:

L Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Dosimetry code “99” is not mentioned in Table 5-1; for the 

purposes of this comparison, it was assumed that the category of 

“Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.

17 8/1/82: “99”

Bioassay on 8/6, 

8/13, 8/20, 

8/27/82: L Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Dosimetry code “99” is not mentioned in Table 5-1; for the 

purposes of this comparison, it was assumed that the category of 

“Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.

17 9/1/82: “99”

Bioassay on 9/3, 

9/10, 9/17, 

9/27/82: L Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Dosimetry code “99” is not mentioned in Table 5-1; for the 

purposes of this comparison, it was assumed that the category of 

“Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 57 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

17 10/1/82: “99”

Bioassay on 

10/1, 10/8, 

10/15, 10/22/82:

L Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Unidentified location or 

unknown): Am, Cf, Cm, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, Th, 

U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Dosimetry code “99” is not mentioned in Table 5-1; for the 

purposes of this comparison, it was assumed that the category of 

“Unidentified location or unknown” would be applied.

19 10/1/80: 4H

1/1/81: 4H

Bioassay on 

11/26/80: C Area

Favorable:

Dosimeter code (H Area Unknown Facility): 

Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

Alternate Location (Reactors): Fp, H-3

Table 5-1 also attributes dosimetry code “4H” as one of only two 

dosimetry codes used to refer to 232-H, HANM, HAOM, Tritium 

Complex. This location only assigns tritium intakes. If this 

location were selected, it would be very claimant unfavorable.

20 3/1/75: 7A

Bioassay on 

3/13, 3/17 - 

3/19/75:

F Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U

20 4/1/75: 7A

Bioassay on 

4/28/75:

F Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp, 

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U

20 1/1/79: 7A

Missing 

Exposure 

Investigation for 

January 

monitoring 

period: 235-F

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp,

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (235-F): Am, Cm, Np, Pu, 

Th, U

Work area in Missing Exposure Investigation report was listed as 

235-F Regulated Areas. Claimant [redacted]and [redacted]. He 

wore [redacted]. Claimant missed dose from 1/2 - 1/10 was 

estimated to be 80/80.
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 58 of 62

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 13. Examples of Location Discrepancies between Dosimeter Area Code and Other Work Location Information that 

Would Produce Favorable Intake Assignments

Worker 

Ref #

Dosimeter 

Location 

Data

Alternate 

Locations 

Identified

Comparison of Hypothetical Coworker 

Intake Additional Comments

20 4/1/80: 7A

7/1/80: 7A

Bioassay on 6/3, 

6/4, 6/5/80: 

H Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp,

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U

20 7/1/80: 7A

10/1/80: 7A

Bioassay on 

8/25, 9/17/80: 

F Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp,

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (F Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, Np, Pu, U

20 4/1/81: 7A

7/1/81: 7A

Bioassay on 

6/8/81: H Area

Favorable:

Dosimetry code (Central Shops): Am, Cm, Fp,

H-3, Np, Pu, Th, U

Alternate Location (H Area Unknown 

Facility): Am, Fp, H-3, Np, Pu, U
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 59 of 62

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. 

ATTACHMENT 3: NIOSH PROVIDED LISTING OF AVAILABLE 

DOSIMETRY LOGBOOKS ON THE SITE RESEARCH DATABASE 

COVERING THE SEC PERIOD 

Timeframe 

Covered

SRDB 

Reference 

ID

SRDB Title

1972, Oct. 50496 Personnel Dosimetry and Exposure for 1972

1972, Q4 50363 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1972

1973, Q1 50187 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Reports for Period Ending March 1973

1973, Q2 50197 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Reports for Period Ending June 1973

1973, Q3 50202 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending September 1973

1973, Q4 50211 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending December 1973

1974, Monthly 

Statistics Only 57123 1974 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and Whole Body

1974, Q1 50102 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending March 1974

1974, Q2 50121 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending June 1974

1974, Q3 50126 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending September 1974

1974, Q4 50124 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending December 1974

1975, Monthly 

Statistics Only 57181 1975 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and Whole Body

1975, Q1 50207 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending March 1975

1975, Q2 50193 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending June 1975

1975, Q3 50204 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending September 1975

1975, Q4 50179 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending December 1975

1976 Monthly 

Statistics Only 57127 1976 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and Whole Body

1976, Q1 50082 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending March 1976

1976, Q2 50083 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending June 1976

1976, Q3 50086 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending September 1976

1976, Q4 50087 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending December 1976

1977 Monthly 

Statistics Only 57149 1977 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and Whole Body

1977, Q1 50267 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1977

1977, Q2 50264 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1977

1977, Q3 50271 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1977

1977, Q4 50270 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1977

1978 Monthly 

Statistics Only 57155 1978 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and Whole Body

1978, Q1 50294 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1978

1978, Q2 50292 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1978

1978, Q3 50289 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1978

1978, Q4 50288 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1978

1979, Monthly 

Statistics Only 57161 1979 Quarterly Summaries, Quarterly Summaries of: Dosimetry, Bioassay and Whole Body

1979, Q1 50210 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending March 1979

1979, Q2 50213 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending June 1979

1979, Q3 50216 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Reports for Period Ending September 1979
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 60 of 62

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. 

Timeframe 

Covered

SRDB 

Reference 

ID

SRDB Title

1979, Q4 50222 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending December 1979

1980, Q1 50156 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending March 1980

1980, Q2 50158 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending June 1980

1980, Q3 50173 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending September 1980

1980, Q4 50175 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending December 1980

1981, Q1 50438 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1981

1981, Q2 50437 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1981

1981, Q3 50436 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1981

1981, Q4 50432 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1981

1982, Q1 50462 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1982

1982, Q2 50461 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1982

1982, Q3 50456 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1982

1982, Q4 50455 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1982

1983, Q1 50448 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1983

1983, Q2 50446 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1983

1983, Q3 50463 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1983

1983, Q4 50470 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1983

1984, Q1 50476 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1984

1984, Q2 50483 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1984

1984, Q3 50486 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1984

1984, Q4 50502 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1984

1985, Q1 50517 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1985

1985, Q2 50515 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1985

1985, Q3 50547 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1985

1985, Q4 50551 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1985

1986, Q1 50613 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1986

1986, Q1 Tritium 50614 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1986, Tritium

1986, Q3 50556 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1986

1986, Q4 50611 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1986

1987, Q1 50618 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1987

1987, Q2 50504 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1987

1987, Q3 50506 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1987

1987, Q4 50521 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1987

1988, Q1 50093 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Period Ending March 1988

1988, Q2 50525 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Second Quarter 1988

1988, Q3 50530 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Third Quarter 1988

1988, Q4 50532 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for Fourth Quarter 1988

1989, Q1 50538 SRS Dosimetry Quarterly Report for First Quarter 1989
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 61 of 62

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.

ATTACHMENT 4: EMAIL FROM NIOSH IN RESPONSE TO 4/26/2014 

WORK GROUP ACTION ITEMS RELATED TO 

DOCUMENTING TABLE 5-1

From: Taulbee, Timothy D. (CDC/NIOSH/DCAS) 

Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 11:00 AM

To: [Joe Fitzgerald – SC&A][redacted]; Barton, Robert (CDC/NIOSH/OD) (CTR)

Cc: Katz, Ted (CDC/NIOSH/OD); Neton, Jim (CDC/NIOSH/DCAS); Rutherford, LaVon B. 

(CDC/NIOSH/DCAS); Griffon, Mark; Clawson, Bradley P. (CDC/NIOSH/OD); 'Lockey, James ([redacted])'; 

Schofield, Phillip M. (CDC/NIOSH/OD); [redacted]

Subject: NIOSH Response to Action #4 (Dosimetry Codes and Quarterly Reports)

Joe and Bob,

Please find attached a spreadsheet which lists the SRS Quarterly Dosimetry reports. If you need help 

reading these printouts just let me know and I can go over them with you. The important point in 

reading the files is the combination of Roll, Payroll Number and Name to identify a worker and then the 

HP Area for the location. A breakdown of the rolls is taken from DPSOP-45 (SRDB# 53157 pdf page 57).

Code (Roll) Number

1 Operation Wilmington Salary (This group comprises the salaried technical engineers, chemists, 

and managers)

2 Operations Local Roll (This group comprises the operators, technicians, instrument technicians, 

maintenance, etc...)

3 Construction Wilmington Salary (This group comprises the construction managers, planners, 

etc...)

4 Construction Local Roll (This group is the “DuPont Construction Workers” however, many of 

them are actual from Miller-Dunn, BF Shaw, prime construction subcontractors. Further

delineation of this group is the subject of NIOSH’s action item #8 to better understand 

whether the minor subcontractors are actually in this group.)

Within the Construction group, the Prefix in addition to the Roll number is also important.

This describes the craft of the particular employee. On the last page of the SRS HP Area and 

Department Code Compilation document you will find the craft codes.

5 AEC Personnel

As noted above, I have also attached the HP Area and Department code compilation. This compilation 

are snapshots in time and contains the translation as the codes changed from one time period to the 

next. We have code listings for 1959, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1984, 1990, 1992. So the bulk of the 

information we have is for the time period of interest.

I think this is all that you need to get started with your review of Table 5-1 from ORAUT-OTIB-0081. We 

have done our best to be comprehensive with the goal of inclusion in Table 5-1 and look forward to 

hearing the results of your review. As for other source documents used to develop Table 5-1, it largely 

comes from site knowledge gained during the past 5 years of research of the Monthly Reports and 

descriptions of radiological work in the various areas from historical documents. There are several 

historical documents I would point you to in the SRDB if you are looking for an overview of potential 

exposures. These include the following:

SRDB# Title

11249 History of DuPont at the Savannah River Site 

10931 History of Personnel Radiation Dosimetry at SRS
Effective Date:

July 22, 2014

Revision No.

0 – Draft

Document Description: White Paper:

Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0081, Rev. 2, Table 5-1

Page No.

Page 62 of 62

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.

45046 50 Years of Excellence in Science and Engineering at the SRS

24750 Savannah River Site at Fifty Reactor On

71618 300/M Area Fuel and Target Fabrication

93961 CMX and TNX Savannah River’s Pilot Plants

89232 History of the Savannah River Laboratory Volume I – Production Reactors

89523 History of the Savannah River Laboratory Volume II – Separations Technology

90054 History of the Savannah River Laboratory Volume III – Power Reactor and Fuel 

Technology

89234 History of the Savannah River Laboratory Volume IV – Isotope Technology

89532 History of the Savannah River Laboratory Volume XII – Spent Fuel Technology

Let me know if you have any questions or need further information. I believe this competes our 

response for NIOSH Action #4 listed in your summary.

Thanks,

Tim