ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

Oak Ridge Associated Universities I Dade Moeller & Associates I MJW Corporation

Page 1 of 17

Document Title:

Energy Technology Engineering Center – 

Occupational External Dose 

Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 

Revision: 00

Effective Date: 02/22/2006

Type of Document: TBD

Supersedes: None 

Subject Expert: Leo G. Faust

Document Owner

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 02/08/2006

Melton H. Chew, TBD Team Leader

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 02/09/2006

Judson L. Kenoyer, Task 3 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 02/07/2006

Kate Kimpan, Project Director

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 02/22/2006

James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science

 New Total Rewrite Revision Page Change

FOR DOCUMENTS MARKED AS A TOTAL REWRITE, REVISION, OR PAGE CHANGE, REPLACE THE PRIOR 

REVISION AND DISCARD / DESTROY ALL COPIES OF THE PRIOR REVISION.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 2 of 17

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION 

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

02/22/2006 00 New technical basis document for the Energy Technology 

Engineering Center – Occupational External Dose. First approved 

issue. Training required: As determined by the Task Manager. 

Initiated by Melton H. Chew.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 3 of 17

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SECTION TITLE

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

PAGE

4

6.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................5

6.1.1 Purpose........................................................................................................................6

6.1.2 Scope........................................................................................................................... 6 

6.2 Missed Dose ............................................................................................................................6

6.3 Radiation Energies and Percentages at Selected ETEC Facilities ........................................... 7

6.4 Neutron Radiations and Percentages.......................................................................................9

6.5 Recorded Dose Practices....................................................................................................... 10

6.6 Interpretation of Reported Doses ........................................................................................... 10

6.7 Adjustments to Recorded Dose.............................................................................................. 11

6.8 Bias and Uncertainty..............................................................................................................11

References ........................................................................................................................................13

Glossary ............................................................................................................................................15

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE

6-1 Missed dose.............................................................................................................................

PAGE

7

6-2 Beta and photon energies and percentages (reactors and C.F.) .............................................. 7

6-3 Beta and photon energies and percentages (support facilities) ................................................ 9

6-4 Facilities, neutron energies and percentages ......................................................................... 10

6-5 Recorded dose practices........................................................................................................ 10

6-6 Interpretation of reported data................................................................................................ 11

6-7 Adjustments to recorded dose................................................................................................ 11

6-8 Bias and uncertainty..................................................................................................................12
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 4 of 17

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AETR Advanced Epithermal Thorium Reactor

cm centimeter

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

EEOICPA Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000

ETEC Energy Technology Engineering Center

LM Liquid Metal

MDL minimum detectable level

MeV mega electron-volt

mR milliroentgen 

mrad millirad

mrem millirem

MWt megawatts thermal

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NMDF Nuclear Materials Development Facility

NTA nuclear track emulsion, type A

NVLAP National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

OMR Organic Moderated Reactor

OW open window

QF quality factor

R roentgen

rem roentgen equivalent man

RMHF Radiation Materials Handling Facility

S10FS3 SNAP 10 Flight Simulation Reactor

S2DR SNAP 2 Development Reactor

S8DR SNAP 8 Development Reactor

S8ER SNAP 8 Experimental Reactor

SER SNAP Experimental Reactor

SGR Sodium Graphite Reactor

SNAP Systems for Nuclear Auxiliary Power

SRE Sodium Reactor Experiment

STIR Shield Test and Irradiation Reactor (Modified STR)

STR Shield Test Reactor

TBD technical basis document 

WB whole body

WBC whole-body count

U.S.C. United States Code
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 5 of 17

6.1 INTRODUCTION

Technical basis documents (TBDs) and site profile documents are general working documents 

that provide guidance concerning the preparation of dose reconstructions at particular sites or 

categories of sites. They will be revised in the event additional relevant information is obtained 

about the affected site(s). These documents may be used to assist the National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in the completion of the individual work required for 

each dose reconstruction.

In this document the word “facility” is used as a general term for an area, building, or group of 

buildings that served a specific purpose at a site. It does not necessarily connote an “atomic 

weapons employer facility” or a “Department of Energy [DOE] facility” as defined in the Energy 

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act [EEOICPA; 42 U.S.C. § 7384l(5) 

and (12)]. EEOICPA defines a DOE facility as “any building, structure, or premise, including 

the grounds upon which such building, structure, or premise is located ... in which operations 

are, or have been, conducted by, or on behalf of, the Department of Energy (except for 

buildings, structures, premises, grounds, or operations ... pertaining to the Naval Nuclear 

Propulsion Program)” [42 U.S.C. § 7384l(12)]. Accordingly, except for the exclusion for the 

Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program noted above, any facility that performs or performed DOE 

operations of any nature whatsoever is a DOE facility encompassed by EEOICPA.

For employees of DOE or its contractors with cancer, the DOE facility definition only 

determines eligibility for a dose reconstruction, which is a prerequisite to a compensation 

decision (except for members of the Special Exposure Cohort). The compensation decision 

for cancer claimants is based on a section of the statute entitled “Exposure in the Performance 

of Duty.” That provision [42 U.S.C. § 7384n(b)] says that an individual with cancer “shall be 

determined to have sustained that cancer in the performance of duty for purposes of the 

compensation program if, and only if, the cancer ... was at least as likely as not related to 

employment at the facility [where the employee worked], as determined in accordance with the 

[probability of causation] guidelines established under subsection (c) ....” [42 U.S.C. § 

7384n(b)]. Neither the statute nor the probability of causation guidelines (nor the dose 

reconstruction regulation) define “performance of duty” for DOE employees with a covered 

cancer or restrict the “duty” to nuclear weapons work.

As noted above, the statute includes a definition of a DOE facility that excludes “buildings, 

structures, premises, grounds, or operations covered by Executive Order No. 12344, dated 

February 1, 1982 (42 U.S.C. 7158 note), pertaining to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program” 

[42 U.S.C. § 7384l(12)]. While this definition contains an exclusion with respect to the Naval 

Nuclear Propulsion Program, the section of EEOICPA that deals with the compensation 

decision for covered employees with cancer [i.e., 42 U.S.C. § 7384n(b), entitled “Exposure in 

the Performance of Duty”] does not contain such an exclusion. Therefore, the statute requires 

NIOSH to include all radiation exposures in its dose reconstructions for employees at DOE 

facilities, including radiation exposures related to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. As a 

result, all internal and external dosimetry results are considered valid for use in dose 

reconstruction. No efforts are made to determine the eligibility of any fraction of total 

measured exposure for inclusion in dose reconstruction.

The ETEC site had it’s own dosimeter in the beginning that is expected to be very similar to 

the two element film dosimeters used at ORNL (ORAU 2005) and Hanford (OARU 2004) 

based on the design developed by Pardue et al (1944) as well as pencil dosimeters (PIC). It 

started using commercial vendors in the early 1960’s and has continued that practice 

throughout the rest of it’s operating life. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 6 of 17

6.1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this TBD is to describe external dosimetry systems and practices at the Energy

Technology Engineering Center (ETEC). This document discusses historical and current 

practices in relation to the evaluation of external exposure data for monitored and unmonitored 

workers.

6.1.2 Scope

This TBD contains supporting documentation to assist in the evaluation of occupational 

external doses from processes that occurred at ETEC. An objective of this document is to 

provide supporting technical data to evaluate, with claimant-favorable assumptions, 

occupational external doses that can reasonably be associated with worker radiation 

exposures. This document addresses the evaluation of unmonitored and monitored worker 

exposure, missed dose, and the bias and uncertainty associated with the monitoring of 

external dose.

6.2 MISSED DOSE

Missed doses at ETEC and associated facilities were basically those resulting from dosimeter 

minimum detectable levels (MDLs) and exchange periods. In reviewing an individual dose 

record from 12-31-1956 to 12-30-1957, entries were both weekly and bi-weekly with the former 

starting May, 1957,( Unkown-1956). This would suggest that exchange periods varied with 

time, job, and individual. Further review (AI-Memo-5468-1960) states that “Normally film 

badges are to be worn for monthly periods except where the possibility of exceeding 100

mrem/week exposure is expected. Then the badges are to be analyzed more frequently”. 

Therefore missed doses prior to 1963, if not derived by review of individual records, would be 

based on weekly exchanges and would be applicable to both Hp (0.07) and Hp (10). Starting 

in 1963, most dosimeters were processed by their vendor (Landauer or its predecessor) 

(Garcia and Carpenter 1963). On occasion, workers wore special dosimeters to monitor 

nonroutine work such as “hot jobs or cell entries” and always without their regular dosimeter.

These special dosimeters were always worn in pairs with the results averaged and that result 

sent to the vendor for inclusion to the total dose for that periods regular dosimeter result. It has 

not been determined if the special dosimeter procedure was in effect pre -1963. Extremity

finger ring film dosimeters were worn on both hands with individual results recorded for each 

hand. It was not determined when this practice started but it was in place in the 12-31-1956 

dose record (Unknown-1956) including what appears to be the same exchange periods.

In cases of lost or destroyed dosimeters, results were derived from past results of similar work, 

 coworker results, or the product of instrument measurements and time spent in the radiation 

zone. These practices are typical of sites with similar circumstances.

Neutron doses were measured with NTA film beginning with the start of reactor operations and 

the use of Van de Graff accelerators. Both fast and thermal neutrons were measured and 

recorded as whole-body (WB) dose (rem). The NTA film is not effective at energies <.500 MeV 

or at exposures of < 50 mrem (Kerr, 2005). It has not been determined what quality factors

(QFs) were used. However, because a Po-Be neutron source was used for calibration, a 

reasonable assumption would be QF = 10 (Garcia 1970).

Missed doses for unmonitored employees could be as much as 500 mrem or 10% of whatever 

standard was in effect at the time of employment. Workers who did not enter radiation areas 

did not receive dosimeters if the probability of exceeding 10% of the allowable standard was 

small. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 7 of 17

Table 6-1 lists the period of use, type of dosimeter, exchange period, MDL, and estimated

annual missed dose.

Table 6-1. Estimated Annual Missed Photon, Beta, and Neutron dose (rem). 

Period of usea Dosimeterb 

Exchange 

period

MDLc 

(rem)

Estimated annual

missed dosed 

(rem)

1954 through 

1962

Pocket Dosimeter (PIC)

Site-specific two-element 

film

Daily

Weekly

Biweekly

Monthly

0.005

0.04

0.04

0.04

0.525

1.04

0.52

0.24

1963 

through1979 

Landauer multi- element 

film

Monthly

Quarterly

0.04

0.04

0.24

0.08

1980e to present Landauer multi-element film Quarterly 0.01f 0.02

1954 to present NTA Film Bi-weekly

Monthly

<50

<50

0.650

0.300

a. Estimated use periods for first entry. Landauer or its predecessor was the vendor in 1963 and maybe 

earlier (Garcia and Carpenter 1963). 

b. Actual number of dosimeter elements of the first entry dosimeter has not been determined nor has 

the period of use of PIC.

c. Estimated MDLs for each dosimeter in the workplace even though many doses were reported at less 

than the MDL.

d. Estimated annual missed dose calculated using MDL ÷ 2 from NIOSH (2002).

e. Neutron dosimeters continued monthly exchanges (Tuttle 1979).

f. Yoder (2005). 

6.3 RADIATION ENERGIES AND PERCENTAGES AT SELECTED ETEC FACILITIES

As described in ORAU (2005), there were many different types of facilities and processes at 

ETEC and other facilities during their periods of operation; these include reactors, critical test 

facilities, fuel preparation and postirradiation examination facilities, accelerator and calibration 

facilities, and support facilities. Most reactors were low power (a few kilowatts), with the 

maximum being 20 MWt, and all had relatively short operating histories. The major accelerator 

was a Van de Graaff D-T (Deuterium-Tritium) machine producing neutrons with a maximum 

energy of 14 MeV. The fuel examination, manufacturing facilities, reactors and critical facilities

handled fissionable fuels with various enrichments, mostly compounds of uranium including 

carbides. They also handled relatively small quantities of plutonium and thorium with the 

exception of buildings 4023, 4029, 4030, and 4363. They did not perform separations of 

irradiated fuel and, therefore, there were minimal gross fission product problems. They did 

declad some fuels in their hot cells, resulting in considerable quantities of those fission 

products with high fission yields (e.g., 90Sr and 137Cs). There was some 152Eu and 154Eu along 

with some 3

H. Tables 6-2 and 6-3 list the facilities and related data.

Table 6-2. Beta and photon energies and percentages (Reactors and Critical Facilities). 

Process/

building Description

Operations Radiation

type

Energy

Begin End (keV) Percentage

All Reactors 1956 1980 Beta

Photons 

>15

30-250

>250 

100

25

75

4143 SRE reactor 1957 1964 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4010 SER and S8ER 1959 1965 Beta

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 8 of 17

4024 S2DR

S10FS3 

SNAP test 

facilities

1961

1965

1971

1962

1966

1971

Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4028 STR, STIR 1961 1972 Beta

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4059 S8DR 1968 1969 Beta

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4009 OMR, SGR 1958 1967 Beta

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4100 AETR 1960 1974 Beta

Photons

(Thorium)

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 9 of 17

Table 6-3. Beta and photon energies and percentages (support facilities). 

Building Description Operations Radiation

Energy 

KeV Percentages

*SRE-4003, 4163, 4041, 4654, 

4689, 4653, 4606, 4773

Support facilities 1954 1964 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25 

75

*4020 Hot Laboratory 1957 1988 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

*4064 Fuel Storage 1958 1993 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

*4011 Rad Inst. 

Calibration 

Laboratory

1984 1996 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

*4021/4022 RMHF 1959 Prese

nt

Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

*4100 Calibration

Laboratory

1985 Prese

nt

Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4363 Mech. 

Component 

1956 1963 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

50

50

4029 Radioactive 

Measurement

Laboratory

1959 1974 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4030 Van de Graaff 1960 1964 Beta 

Photons

<15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

4023 LM Component 

Testing

1962 1986 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

50

50

*4005 Union Carbide 

Fuel Pilot Plant

1964 1967 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

*4055 NMDF 1967 1979 Beta 

Photons

>15

30-250

>250

100

25

75

*For operations involving Th-232, 1964 and 1979. 

6.4 NEUTRON RADIATIONS AND PERCENTAGES 

Table 6-4 lists facilities with neutron radiations. They are reactors, accelerators and fuel 

storage facilities. The table includes the plutonium fuel storage facilities buildings 4005, used for 

Pu storage, from 1967-1987 and 4064 from 1958-1993. However they are assumed to be a 

negligible contributor to neutron doses due to the limited quantities of fuel present at any one 

time. As near as can be determined NTA film was incorporated in the film dosimeters if there 

was a potential of exposure>100mrem in those facilities where neutron exposures were 

possible. How that was determined has not been found. In the dose record there are entries in 

the “n” column. It is assumed that the dose recorded was the result of fast neutron exposure. 

A neutron survey report of the “SRE Hot Cell” containing a 14 MeV neutron Generator (Clow, 

1966), lists dose rates of 75 mrem/hr fast and 11.8 mrem/hr thermal with “the assumption that 

all fast neutrons are 14 MeV”. It also states that “As further surveys are taken and the spectrum 

completely analyzed, the dose rates may be reduced”. These surveys were done on the roof of 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 10 of 17

the facility and were higher than those taken at “a window”,(62.2 mrem/hr fast and 7.1 mrem/hr 

thermal) or” at the console” (7.1 mrem/ hr fast and 2.2 mrem/hr thermal). The Van de Graaff 

with it’s D-T reaction generates 14 MeV neutrons that are quite monoenergetic in the 0 and 180 

degree directions, (Etherington, 1958). This may support the assumption that all fast neutrons 

can be treated as 14 MeV. The distribution of energies and ICRP 60 conversion correction 

factors are also listed in Table 6-4. The correction factor for the 2 to 14 MeV energy grouping 

was calculated from data given in the Y-12 TBD, (Kerr, 2005).

Table 6-4. Facilities, neutron energies, percentages, and correction factors. 

Facility Source Neutron energy (MeV)

Default dose %

and correction 

factors

Reactors Reactors 0.1 to 2.0, Wr=20 100%

Correction factor 

= 1.91

Pu fuel storage

Bldg. 4005 & 4064

Spontaneous fission 

and alpha, n reactions

4030 Van de Graaff D-T reaction 2 to 14 max, Wr=20 100%, correction 

factor =1.32

6.5 RECORDED DOSE PRACTICES

Recorded doses at ETEC are given in Table 6-5 and include those provided by the site, by

Landauer (the site vendor) and special dosimeters (Hart 1975). The special dosimeters were

processed by site personnel, using site calibrations, with only the results sent to the vendor for 

inclusion in the individual’s total dose for that period. This could have resulted in different 

quantities, on occasion, from those listed in Table 6-5. 

Table 6-5. Recorded dose practices. 

Year Dosimeter measured quantities Compliance dose quantitiesa

1954 through 1962 + NTA film Beta = Open Window, mremb

Photon (P), mR

Fast Neutron (FN), mrem

Skin = OW + P

WB = P + FN

1963 through 1984

Landauer +NTA film

beta (B) or nonpenetrating, mR

Photon (P), mR

Fast Neutron (FN), mrem

Skin = (B) + P

WB = B + P + FN

WB = 0.15 (B-Xray) +P+ FNc 

1985 to present Nonpenetrating (Npen)

Penetrating (Pen)

Fast Neutron (FN)

Skin = Npen + WBd

WB = Pen + neutronsd 

a. Prior to 1985, Landauer assessed or calibration quantity was the roentgen at the surface of the body. In 1985, 

Landauer switched to International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements tissue doses in compliance with 

then-current DOE and American National Standards Institute standards (Yoder 2005).

b. Garcia and Carpenter (1963) discusses the use of eye and gonadal shields that, if used, reduce beta values by a factor 

of 2.

c. Garcia and Carpenter (1963).

d. Garcia (1970).

Garcia and Carpenter (1963) provides a formula for correcting beta doses measured by the 

special dosimeters that is different from that in Garcia (1970). The differences are not great 

and are limited to beta dose corrections. The differences could be the result of a change from 

DuPont to Kodak film, which could have occurred in the period between the two procedures. 

Landauer changed to Kodak film in 1968 with the introduction of its Gardray film badge (Yoder 

2005).

6.6 INTERPRETATION OF REPORTED DOSES 

Personnel doses from Landauer prior to 1985 were reported in units of mR, either penetrating 

(photon) or nonpenetrating (beta) exposure if beta activity was present. The reported total 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 11 of 17

values included any special dosimeter results sent by ETEC for that exchange period. If it is 

necessary to obtain organ doses, dose reconstructors should use External Dose 

Reconstruction Implementation Guidelines (NIOSH 2002). 

In general, reported doses have been background-corrected using site-furnished controls. 

The controls were dosimeters kept in locations on the site used for storing personnel 

dosimeters. All personnel dosimeters were stored in storage racks when workers left the site 

at the end of their shifts. No workers took their dosimeters home at night; all were kept at the 

site and, as far as could be determined, this practice was in place since startup.

The exception to background correction could occur if individual dosimeters were not 

exchanged in time to be included with the regular exchange, because controls were sent only 

with each exchange batch. While this could lead to an incorrect result, that result would be 

claimant-favorable because it would include background and, therefore, err on the high side

(Rowles 1988).

Table 6-6. Interpretation of reported data. 

Period

Reported 

quantity Description

Interpretation 

of zeroes

Interpretation of 

blanks (no data)

Rollup of 

individual and 

annual dataa 

Monitored/

unmonitored

1954 to 1960 Skin = rad

WB = mR

Neutrons = rem

mrad, mR, and 

mrem used 

interchangeably

MDL/2 times 

number of zeroes

If no dosimeter for 

that period, treat as 

unmonitored.

If special 

dosimeters were 

used, include

results.

All personnel expected 

to be exposed to > 100

mrem in an exchange

period were monitored.

1960 to present Skin = mrem

WB = mrem

Neutrons = mrem

mrem used for 

all

MDL/2 times 

number of zeroes

If no dosimeter for 

that period, treat as 

unmonitored. 

If special 

dosimeters were 

used, include

results. 

Only those > 10% of 

current standard were 

monitored. Those 

entering controlled 

areas were issued a 

visitors dosimeter.

a. If special dosimeters were used, the results were forwarded to the vendor for inclusion in the totals for that period. It has not been determined if this was 

always accomplished.

6.7 ADJUSTMENTS TO RECORDED DOSE

Because most but not all penetrating photons are above 30 keV, it is suggested that an

adjustment is necessary to account for the contribution to Hp(10) from low-energy photons 

from uranium and thorium. It is estimated that a correction equal to 10% of the < 250-keV 

values be made. However corrections can be applied to the total WB dose by using the 

product of 10% of the < 250keV, which is 25% for a total of 2.5%. Therefore a correction factor 

of 1.025 should be applied to the total WB doses. This adjustment also increases the nonpenetrating Hp(0.07) dose, regardless of which dosimeter was used because that dose was 

always the sum of the “open-window and the WB doses”. Table 6-7 lists these corrections.

Table 6-7. Adjustments to recorded dose. 

Period Dosimeter Facility Adjustments to reported dose

1954 to 1963 Site-specific All facilities Multiply reported WB dose by 1.025 to estimate Hp(10).

1963 to 1985 Landauer All facilities Multiply reported WB dose by 1.025 to estimate Hp(10).

1985 to 

present

Landauer All facilities Same as above even with Landauer becoming NVLAPcertified.

6.8 BIAS AND UNCERTAINTY

Bias and uncertainty values were not found in any site data. Values given in Table 6-8 list 

those from the Hanford TBD (ORAU-2004) which should be similar to those at ETEC for the 

Multi-element dosimeter. These values agree with those of Landauer. In addition, ETEC used 

NTA film for it’s neutron dosimeter, as did Y-12, so data from the latter’s TBD was used to 

estimate the ETEC dosimeters bias and uncertainties. The results are an estimated error of 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 12 of 17

+/- 50% at a 100 mrem for the 0.1 to 2MeV energy range and +/- 35% for the 2 to 14 MeV 

range. The latter estimate was obtained using the product of the ratio of the correction factors 

given in Table 6-4, for the two energy ranges and the +/- 50% error. This is a reasonable 

assumption since most if not all the neutrons energies are above 0.5 MeV.

Table 6-8. Bias and uncertainty

Site specific 

dosimetry system

Bias magnitude and range Uncertainty factors

Overall biasb Range in biasc Systematicd Randome

Two element (1954 to 

1963)

1.27 1.13-1.60 1.2 1.8

Multielement (1964 to 

present)

f 

1.02 0.86 – 1.12 1.1 1.4

NTA film

0.1 to 2 MeV

2 to 14 MeV

1.5

1.35

0.5—1.5

0.65—1.35

1.5

1.35

a. Table 6-8 values are repeated here from the Hanford External Dosimetry TBD, ORAU (2004)

because the dosimeters in use at ETEC are assumed to be similar.

b. Based on the most likely distribution of energy levels and geometry. Divide recorded dose by 

table’s bias value to determine deep dose.

c. Range of overall bias values.

d. Systematic uncertainty due to lack of knowledge of actual distributions of energies and geometries.

e. Random uncertainty due to variation among workers in energy levels and geometry.

f. These values agree with Landauer since NVLAP certification (Yoder 2005). 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 13 of 17

REFERENCES

AI-MEMO 5468, Radiological Safety at Atomics International, A division of North American Aviation, 

Inc., Issued July 13,1960, ( Data Capture Document Discovery, 030005858,November 

10,2005). 

Clow, H. E. to E.T.Bramlitt, Neutron Survey of “SRE Hot Cell” Containing a 14 MeV Neutron 

Generator, Internal Letter, Atomics International, Issued February 3,1966, ( Data Capture 

Document Discovery,030005737,November 10,2005).

Etherington, Harold, Editor, Nuclear Engineering Handbook, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.,1958.

Garcia, R. R., 1970, Dose Interpretation, Reporting, and Controls in the AI Personnel Film 

Badge Program, PM-15, Health and Safety ,North American Aviation Inc.,Issued October 30 

1970 (DOE Site Images-ETEC: Data Capture Document Discovery,030005857 November 10, 

2005). 

Garcia, R.R. and G.D.Carpenter, Handling of Routine Film Badges, North American Aviation Inc., 

Issued April 5, 1963 ,(Data Capture Document Discovery, 030005886 November 10,2005). 

Garcia, R. R., and G. D. Carpenter, 1963, Dose Determination, PM-14, Health and Safety, North 

American Aviation Inc., Issued July 15 1963. 

Hart, R. S., 1979, Annual Review of Radiological Controls-1975, N001T1990002, Rockwell 

International, Atomics International Division, Issued July 2. 1979 :( Data Capture Document 

Discovery, 030005851 November 10, 2005).

Hinter, B. R., and Carpenter, G. D., 1963, Verification of Vendor Film Badge Charges, PM-7, North 

American Aviation Inc, Issued August 26 1963 ,( Data Capture Document Discovery, 

030005886). 

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), 2002, External Dose Reconstruction 

Implementation Guidelines, OCAS-IG-001, Rev. 1, Office of Compensation Analysis and 

Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

ORAU (Oak Ridge Associated Universities), 2004, Technical Basis Document for the Hanford Site – 

External Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS-0006-6, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

ORAU (Oak Ridge Associated Universities), 2005, Technical Basis Document for the Energy 

Technology Center – Site Description, ORAUT-TKBS-0038-2, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

ORAU (Oak Ridge Associated Universities), 2005, Technical Basis Document for the Y-12 National 

Security Complex- Occupational External Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS-0014-6, Oak Ridge, 

Tennessee.

Pardue, L. A., N. Goldstein, and R. O. Woltan, 1944, Photographic Film as a Pocket Radiation 

Dosimeter, CH-1553.

Rowles, J. A., 1988, External Radiation Dosimetry Program, N0010P00005, Rockwell Aviation, 

Rocketdyne Division, Issued March 29 1988: (Data Capture Document Discovery 030005857, 

November 10,2005). 

Unknown, 1956, Examples of Data from Old Dosimetry Files: (Data Capture Document Discovery 

0300063724, December 10, 2005).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 14 of 17

Tuttle R. J., 1979, “Modification of Film Badge Program”, letter to “Those Listed”, Rockwell 

International; August 2 1979. (Data Capture Document Discovery, 030006186, December 7, 

2005). 

Yoder, R. C., 2005, “Landauer film info,” e-mail to L Faust, Landauer Inc, Glenwood, IL, December 7 

2005. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 15 of 17

GLOSSARY

accreditation

Recognition that a dosimeter system has passed the performance criteria of the DOE 

Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP), (DOE 1986), in specified irradiation categories 

or the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP). 

accuracy

If a series of measurements has small systematic errors, they are said to have high accuracy. 

The accuracy is represented by the bias.

beta particle

A charged particle of very small mass emitted spontaneously from the nuclei of certain 

radioactive elements. Most (if not all) of the direct fission products emit (negative) beta 

particles. Physically, the beta particle is identical with an electron moving at high velocity.

claimant-favorable

The process of estimation based on technical considerations such that the estimated dose is 

not underestimated.

deep dose equivalent [Hp(10)] 

The dose equivalent at the respective depth to 1.0 cm in tissue.

dose equivalent (H)

The product of the absorbed dose (D), the quality factor(Q), and any other modifying factors. 

The special unit is the rem. When D is expressed in gray, H is in sieverts (1 sievert = 

100 rem.)

dosimeter

A device used to measure the quantity of radiation received. A holder with radiation-absorbing 

elements (filters) and an insert with radiation-sensitive elements packaged to provide a record 

of absorbed dose or dose equivalent received by an individual.

dosimetry system

A system used to assess dose equivalent from external radiation to the whole body, skin and 

or extremities. This includes the fabrication, assignment, and processing of the dosimeters as 

well as interpretation of the results.

exchange period (frequency)

Period (weekly, biweekly, monthly, quarterly, etc.) for routine exchange of dosimeters.

exposure

A measure expressed in roentgens of the ionization produced by gamma (or X) rays in air.

film

Generally means a “film packet” that contains one or more pieces of film in a light-tight 

wrapping. The film when developed has an image caused by radiation that can be measured 

using an optical densitometer.

film dosimeter

A small packet of film within a holder that attaches to a worker.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 16 of 17

filter

Material used to adjust radiation response of a dosimeter to provide an improved tissue 

equivalent or dose response.

gamma rays

Electromagnetic radiation (photons) originating in atomic nuclei and accompanying many 

nuclear reactions (e.g. fission, radioactive decay, and neutron capture). Physically, gamma 

rays are identical to X-rays of high energy, the only essential difference being that X-rays do 

not originate in the nucleus.

ionizing radiation

Electromagnetic radiation (consisting of photons or particulate radiation consisting of 

electrons, neutrons, protons, etc.) capable of producing charged particles through interactions 

with matter.

neutron

A basic particle that is electrically neutral weighing nearly the same as the hydrogen atom.

nonpenetrating dose [Hp(0.07)] 

Designation (i.e., NP or NPen) on film dosimeter reports that implies a radiation dose, typically 

to the skin of the whole body, from beta and lower energy photon radiation.

open window (OW) 

Designation on a dosimeter that implies the use of little or no shielding. It commonly is used to 

label the film response corresponding to the open window area.

penetrating dose Hp(10)

Designation (i.e. P, Pen, or Neutrons and Gamma) on a dosimeter of the dose recorded at 

depth of 10 millimeters.

Personal Dose Equivalent, Hp(d)

Radiation quantity recommended for use as the operational quantity to be recorded for 

radiological protection purposes by the International Commission on Radiological Units and 

Measurements. The Personal Dose Equivalent is represented by Hp(d), where d identifies the 

depth in millimeters and represents the point of reference for dose in tissue. For weakly 

penetrating radiation of significance to skin dose, d = 0.07 mm and is noted as Hp(0.07). For 

penetrating radiation of significance to whole-body dose, d = 10 mm and is noted as Hp(10).

photon

A unit of electromagnetic radiation consisting of X- and/or gamma rays.

PM

A procedure detailing specific actions or directions and usually limited to one service or 

Activity.

rad

A unit of absorbed dose equal to the absorption of 100 ergs per gram of absorbing material 

such as body tissue.

radioactivity

The spontaneous emission of radiation, generally alpha or beta particles, gamma rays, and 

neutrons from unstable nuclei.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 02/22/2006 Page 17 of 17

rem (roentgen equivalent in man)

A unit of dose equivalent in human tissue equal to the product of the number of rads and the 

quality factor and any other modifying factors.

rep (roentgen-equivalent-physical)

Historically, used extensively for the specification of permissible doses of ionizing radiations 

other that X-rays or gamma rays. Several definitions have appeared in the literature but the 

most widely adopted is a unit of absorbed dose with a magnitude equal to 93 ergs per gram.

roentgen

A unit of exposure to gamma or X-rays. It is defined precisely as the quantity of gamma (or X) 

rays that will produce a total charge of 2.58 × 10-4 coulomb in 1 kilogram of dry air. An 

exposure of 1 roentgen is approximately equivalent to an absorbed dose of 1 rad in soft tissue.

sievert

The SI unit for dose equivalent. (1 sievert = 100 rem).

skin dose

Absorbed dose at a tissue depth of 7 mg per square centimeter.

tissue equivalent

Term used to imply that the radiation response of the material being irradiated is equivalent to 

tissue.

whole-body dose

Commonly defined as the absorbed dose at a tissue depth of 1.0 cm (1,000 mg per square 

centimeter); also used to refer to the “dose of record”. 

X-ray

Ionizing electromagnetic radiation of extra-nuclear origin.