ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

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

Page 1 of 9

Document Title:

Idaho National Laboratory – Introduction

Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1

Revision: 01

Effective Date: 12/13/2006

Type of Document: TBD

Supersedes: 00

Subject Expert: Norman D. Rohrig 

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 11/29/2006

Daniel Mantooth, Document Owner

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 11/29/2006

John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 11/28/2006

Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 12/01/2006

Kate Kimpan, Project Director

Approval: Brant A. Ulsh Signature on File for Approval Date: 12/13/2006

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-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 2 of 9

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

05/07/2004 00 New document for the INEEL Introduction. Incorporates responses 

to OCAS comments. First approved issue. Initiated by Norman D. 

Rohrig.

12/13/2006 01 Approved revision as a result of biennial review. Revised language 

in the Purpose section as required by NIOSH. Attribution and 

Annotation section added. Constitutes a total rewrite of document. 

Incorporates internal, NIOSH and DOL formal review comments. 

This revision results in no change to the assigned dose and no PER 

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

Initiated by Norman D. Rohrig.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 3 of 9

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE PAGE

Acronyms and Abbreviations ...............................................................................................................4

1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................5

1.2 Scope.......................................................................................................................................6

1.3 Attributions and Annotations ....................................................................................................8

References ..........................................................................................................................................9
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 4 of 9

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

CFA Central Facilities Area

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

EEOICPA Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000

IMBA Integrated Modules for Bioassay Analysis (computer program)

INL Idaho National Laboratory

IREP Interactive RadioEpidemiological Program

MDA minimum detectable activity

mi mile

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

POC probability of causation

TAN Test Area North

TBD technical basis document

U.S.C. United States Code

§ Section or Sections

1
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 5 of 9

1 1.1 PURPOSE

2 Technical basis documents and site profile documents are not official determinations made by the 

3 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) but are rather general working 

4 documents that provide historic background information and guidance to assist in the preparation of 

5 dose reconstructions for particular sites or categories of sites. They will be revised in the event 

6 additional relevant information is obtained about the affected site(s). These documents may be used 

7 to assist NIOSH staff in the completion of the individual work required for each dose reconstruction.

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

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

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

11 Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act [EEOICPA; 42 U.S.C. § 7384l(5) and (12)]. 

12 EEOICPA defines a DOE facility as “any building, structure, or premise, including the grounds upon 

13 which such building, structure, or premise is located ... in which operations are, or have been, 

14 conducted by, or on behalf of, the Department of Energy (except for buildings, structures, premises, 

15 grounds, or operations ... pertaining to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program)” [42 U.S.C. § 

16 7384l(12)]. Accordingly, except for the exclusion for the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program noted 

17 above, any facility that performs or performed DOE operations of any nature whatsoever is a DOE 

18 facility encompassed by EEOICPA.

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

20 eligibility for a dose reconstruction, which is a prerequisite to a compensation decision (except for 

21 members of the Special Exposure Cohort). The compensation decision for cancer claimants is based 

22 on a section of the statute entitled “Exposure in the Performance of Duty.” That provision [42 U.S.C. § 

23 7384n(b)] says that an individual with cancer “shall be determined to have sustained that cancer in the 

24 performance of duty for purposes of the compensation program if, and only if, the cancer ... was at 

25 least as likely as not related to employment at the facility [where the employee worked], as 

determined in accordance with the POC [probability of causation1

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

31 premises, grounds, or operations covered by Executive Order No. 12344, dated February 1, 1982 

32 (42 U.S.C. 7158 note), pertaining to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program” [42 U.S.C. § 7384l(12)]. 

33 While this definition contains an exclusion with respect to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, the 

34 section of EEOICPA that deals with the compensation decision for covered employees with cancer 

35 [i.e., 42 U.S.C. § 7384n(b), entitled “Exposure in the Performance of Duty”] does not contain such an 

36 exclusion. Therefore, the statute requires NIOSH to include all occupationally derived radiation 

37 exposures at covered facilities in its dose reconstructions for employees at DOE facilities, including 

38 radiation exposures related to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. As a result, all internal and 

39 external dosimetry monitoring results are considered valid for use in dose reconstruction. No efforts 

40 are made to determine the eligibility of any fraction of total measured exposure for inclusion in dose 

41 reconstruction. NIOSH, however, does not consider the following exposures to be occupationally 

42 derived:

26 ] guidelines established under 

27 subsection (c) ...” [42 U.S.C. § 7384n(b)]. Neither the statute nor the probability of causation

28 guidelines (nor the dose reconstruction regulation) define “performance of duty” for DOE employees 

29 with a covered cancer or restrict the “duty” to nuclear weapons work.

43 • Radiation from naturally occurring radon present in conventional structures

44 • Radiation from diagnostic X-rays received in the treatment of work-related injuries

 1 The U.S. Department of Labor is ultimately responsible under the EEOICPA for determining the POC.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 6 of 9

1 This Site Profile documents historical practices at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) site and can be 

2 used to evaluate internal and external dosimetry data for unmonitored and monitored workers and 

3 serve as a supplement to individual monitoring data. This document provides a site profile of the INL

4 that contains technical basis information to be used to evaluate the total occupational radiation dose 

5 for EEOICPA claimants.

6 This Site Profile can be a tool when performing dose reconstructions for INL workers. The Integrated 

7 Modules for BioAssay Analysis (IMBA) computer code is a tool useful for internal dose calculations. 

8 Information on measurement uncertainties is an integral component of the NIOSH approach. This 

9 document describes how to evaluate uncertainty associated with INL exposure and dosimetry 

10 records.

11 1.2 SCOPE

12 The Site Profile consists of six TBDs: This Introduction, Site Description, Occupational Medical Dose, 

13 Occupational Environmental Dose, Occupational Internal Dose, and Occupational External Dosimetry. 

14 Site Description

15 The Site Description TBD (ORAUT 2005) briefly describes the facilities and processes at INL since 

16 the early 1950s. The INL site, located about 50 mi west of Idaho Falls in the Arco desert, covers 

about 890 mi

2 17 . Many additional offices and a few laboratories are in Idaho Falls, Idaho. Previous 

18 names for the INL site were the National Reactor Testing Station (1949-1974), the Idaho National 

19 Engineering Laboratory (1974-1997), and the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental 

20 Laboratory (1997-2005).

21 The Central Facilities Area (CFA), formerly a Navy gunnery testing facility, now provides support 

22 facilities, central services, and laboratories. Radioactive wastes from the site and from the Rocky 

23 Flats Environmental Testing Station are handled and stored at the Radioactive Waste Management 

24 Complex. Argonne National Laboratory-West developed and operated reactors at two locations:

25 1) south of CFA and 2) at the east edge of the site. High-enrichment uranium spent fuel was 

26 reprocessed at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and the resultant high-level waste was 

27 processed there. The Test Reactor Area supported three large research reactors, several smaller 

28 reactors, and several laboratories. Test Area North (TAN) was home to the Aircraft Nuclear 

29 Propulsion Program. The Loss of Fluid Test program was later conducted there. Armor for the 

30 U.S. Army is constructed at the Specific Manufacturing Capability facility at TAN. Reactor safety tests 

31 were conducted at the Special Power Excursion Reactor Test facilities. The Army Reactor Area was 

32 used to test reactors and was the site of an accident at Stationary Low-Power Reactor No. 1 (Horan & 

33 Gammill 1963).

34 The site description TBD provides information about the facilities and identifies unusual events that 

35 took place at INL facilities.

36 Occupational Medical Dose

37 The Occupational Medical Dose TBD (ORAUT 2004a) provides information about the dose that 

38 individual workers received from X-rays that were required as a condition of employment. These 

39 X-rays included chest X-rays taken during preemployment and during periodic physical exams. The 

40 frequency of required X-rays varied over time and as a function of the worker’s age. Both the X-ray 

41 equipment and the techniques used for taking chest X-rays covered by this TBD have changed over 

42 the years. These factors have been taken into account in determining the dose that a worker would 

43 have received from the X-ray. When there was a doubt about the technique used, assumptions that 

44 are favorable to claimants have been made to ensure that the dose has not been underestimated. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 7 of 9

1 Important parameters include the tube current and voltage, exposure time, source-to-skin distance, 

2 and view (posterior-anterior or lateral). Doses to other exposed organs from the chest X-ray have 

3 been calculated. The uncertainty associated with the calculated dose takes into account the 

4 uncertainty associated with each of the parameters mentioned above (ORAUT 2004a). Tables list 

5 doses received by organs in the body for convenient reference by dose reconstructors.

6 Occupational Environmental Dose

7 The Occupational Environmental Dose TBD (ORAUT 2004b) is the maximum dose to the whole body 

8 and body organs that workers could have received when working outside buildings at a given location 

9 on INL from inhalation of radioactive materials in the atmosphere, from direct radiation from effluent 

10 plumes, and from direct exposure to radionuclides and radiation sources that might have become 

11 incorporated in the soil.

12 The radionuclide concentrations at INL areas are based principally on measurements of stack 

13 effluents coupled with ground-level maximum annual average air concentrations provided by the 

14 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Of the 56 radionuclides assigned to the annual 

effluent list, nine radionuclides (144Ce, 131I, 147Pm, 238Pu, 239/240Pu, 106Ru, 89Sr, 90Sr, and 91 15 Y) have been 

16 demonstrated to contribute about 95% of the total internal dose by a screening process using dose 

17 conversion factors from the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ORAUT 2004b). 

18 Annual intakes of these radionuclides were calculated with standard breathing rates and exposure 

19 times. 

20 Annual external whole-body dose to workers from ambient radiation and from submersion in the 

21 annual radioactive material concentration is provided by the measurement of direct gamma values at 

22 the INL facility fences (ORAUT 2004b).

23 Occupational Internal Dose

24 The Occupational Internal Dose TBD (ORAUT 2006a) discusses the internal dosimetry program at 

25 INL.

26 This TBD contains a comprehensive default table to guide internal dose reconstruction in cases with 

27 minimal data. In addition, the TBD discusses in vitro minimum detectable activities (MDAs), analytical 

28 methods, and reporting protocols for radionuclides at INL. As expected, these parameters varied 

29 somewhat over the years for each of the radionuclides evaluated, although the capabilities were 

30 relatively consistent through the history of the site. The primary radionuclides of concern are those 

31 associated with spent high-enriched fuels – mixed fission products (from a variety of reactor types), 

mixed activation products, plutonium (with a predominance of 238 32 Pu), americium, and uranium (high33 enriched and depleted) (ORAUT 2006a). This TBD discusses in vivo MDAs, analytical methods, and 

34 reporting protocols for X- and gamma-ray emitting radionuclides.

35 This TBD presents information for workers who could have been exposed in the early days but had no 

36 confirmed intakes. This could have occurred under circumstances in which monitoring programs were 

37 not required, or when the monitored readings were below detection limits. The document discusses 

38 methods for evaluating potential doses that fall in this category and provides additional data for the 

39 evaluation of the worst-case scenario and for unmonitored workers.

40 Occupational External Dosimetry

41 The Occupational External Dosimetry TBD (ORAUT 2006b) discusses the program for measuring skin 

42 and whole-body doses to workers. This document describes dose reconstruction parameters, 

43 practices, and policies, and dosimeter types and technologies for measuring doses from different 

44 types of radiation. Discussion includes evaluation of doses measured from exposure to beta, gamma, 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 8 of 9

1 and neutron radiation. Tables provide test results for various dosimeters exposed to different 

2 exposure geometries, radiation types, and energies. Sources of bias, workplace radiation field 

3 characteristics, responses of beta/gamma and neutron dosimeters in workplace fields, and 

4 adjustments to the recorded dose measured by these dosimeters during specific years are discussed 

5 in detail.

6 Missed dose is discussed as a function of dosimeter type, year, and energy range. In addition, the 

7 document describes the use of external dosimetry technical basis parameters to facilitate the efforts of 

8 dose reconstructors.

9 1.3 ATTRIBUTIONS AND ANNOTATIONS

10 None

11
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0007-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 12/13/2006 Page 9 of 9

1 REFERENCES

2 Horan, J. R. and Gammill, W. P., 1963, The Health Physics Aspects of the SL-1 Accident, Health 

3 Physics, Vol. 9, pp 177-186. [SRDB Ref ID: 26108]

4 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associate Universities Team), 2005, Technical Basis Document for the Idaho 

5 National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) – Site Profile, 

6 ORAUT-TKBS-0007-2, Rev. 02, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 29. [SRDB Ref ID: 19513]

7 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associate Universities Team), 2004a, Technical Basis Document for the Idaho 

8 National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) – Occupational Medical Dose, 

9 ORAUT-TKBS-0007-3, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, May 28. [SRDB Ref ID: 19516]

10 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associate Universities Team), 2004b, Technical Basis Document for the Idaho 

11 National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) – Occupational Environmental 

12 Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0007-4, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 30. [SRDB Ref ID: 

13 19518]

14 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associate Universities Team), 2006a, Idaho National Engineering and 

15 Environmental Laboratory – Occupational Internal Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0007-5, Rev. 01.PC16 1, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 5.

17 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associate Universities Team), 2006b, Idaho National Engineering and 

18 Environmental Laboratory – Occupational External Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS-0007-6, Rev. 01, 

19 Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October.