DRAFT 

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR 

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH 

A FOCUSED REVIEW OF ORAUT-OTIB-0034, REV. 01 

INTERNAL DOSIMETRY COWORKER DATA FOR X-10

Contract No. 200-2009-28555 

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085, Revision 0 

Prepared by 

U. Hans Behling, PhD, MPH 

SC&A, Inc. 

S. Cohen & Associates 

1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 

Vienna, VA 22182 

November 2013 

Disclaimer 

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

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

contractor, SC&A, caution the reader that at the time of its release, this report is pre-decisional 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:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

2 of 19

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 and Worker Health 

Review of NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Program

Document No. 

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Effective Date:

Draft – November 20, 2013

Revision No. 

Draft – 0

A Focused Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0034, Rev. 01

Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for X-10 Page 2 of 19

Task Manager:

______________________ Date: ____________ 

U. Hans Behling, PhD, MPH 

Supersedes:

N/A

Project Manager:

______________________ Date: ____________

John Stiver, MS, CHP

Reviewers:

 John Mauro

 John Stiver

Record of Revisions

Revision 

Number

Effective 

Date Description of Revision

0 (Draft) 11/20/2013 Initial issue.
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

3 of 19

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 

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

1.0 Statement of Purpose ...........................................................................................................5

2.0 Overview of OTIB-0034, Rev. 00 and Current Status of SC&A’s Review 

Comments/Findings .............................................................................................................6

3.0 Changes Introduced to OTIB-0034 Under Revision 01 ......................................................8

3.1 Intakes of Pu-239 Type S in Table 5-5 were Revised/Expanded to Include 

Bioassay Data for All Years ....................................................................................8

3.2 The 95th Percentile Intakes were Added for All Radionuclides Assessed in 

OTIB-0034 ...............................................................................................................8

3.3 Statistical Summary Tables as Cited in Attachment A of OTIB-0034, Rev. 

01, were Expanded ...................................................................................................9

4.0 SC&A’s Review of Revisions Incorporated in Revision 01 of ORAUT-OTIB-0034 .......10

4.1 Revision of Pu-239 Intakes Type S .......................................................................10

4.2 Addition of 95th Percentile for All Radionuclides .................................................10

4.3 Expansion of Statistical Summary Tables in Attachment A ..................................13

5.0 Summary Conclusions .......................................................................................................15

References ......................................................................................................................................19
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

4 of 19

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.

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 

ABRWH or 

Advisory Board Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

AWE Atomic Weapons Employer 

BRS Board Review System 

CER Center for Epidemiologic Research 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

d day 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

dpm disintegrations per minute 

EDP Electronic Data Processing 

GSD geometric standard deviation 

hr hour 

ICRP International Commission on Radiological Protection 

IMBA Integrated Modules for Bioassay Analysis 

ml milliliter 

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

OCAS Office of Compensation Analysis and Support 

ORAUT Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team 

ORISE ORISE Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education 

ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

OTIB ORAUT Technical Information Bulletin 

PER Program Evaluation Report 

POC Probability of Causation 

SC&A S. Cohen and Associates (SC&A, Inc.) 

TIB technical information bulletin 
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

5 of 19

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 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE 

This report presents a “focused” review of Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for X-10, 

ORAUT-OTIB-0034, Revision 01, dated April 23, 2013 (ORAUT 2013b), by S. Cohen & 

Associates (SC&A, Inc.) as directed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

(Advisory Board) on September 5, 2013. 

This focused review of OTIB-0034 principally addresses those changes that were introduced 

under Revision 01. As such, this review supplements SC&A’s previous draft review (SC&A 

2007) submitted on October 29, 2007 of OTIB-0034, Revision 00 (ORAUT 2005), which was 

issued by NIOSH on December 13, 2005. 
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

6 of 19

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 OVERVIEW OF OTIB-0034, REV. 00 AND CURRENT STATUS OF 

SC&A’S REVIEW COMMENTS/FINDINGS 

For Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) (X-10) workers who may have had occupational 

internal dose from intakes of radionuclides, but were not monitored or inadequately monitored, 

the stated purpose of ORAUT-OTIB-0034, Revision 00 (ORAUT 2005), was to provide 

coworker models for estimating intakes and doses for strontium, uranium, plutonium, and 

americium during discrete time periods of facility operations. 

Radionuclide-specific coworker models were based on urinalysis records for the ORNL site for 

the period 1951 through 1988. A lognormal distribution for the annual bioassay data for each 

radionuclide was assumed and the 50th and 84th percentile values were derived. The Integrated 

Modules for Bioassay Analysis (IMBA) Expert OCAS-Edition computer program along with 

standard assumptions (e.g., breathing rate, particle size distribution, etc.) were used to fit the 

bioassay data to a series of inhalation intakes based on solubility type. Each fit was based solely 

on bioassay data representing that time period. 

SC&A’s previous review (SC&A 2007) of OTIB-0034, Rev. 00 (ORAUT 2005), identified four 

findings. These findings were discussed during several Procedures Review Subcommittee 

meetings held on October 29, 2007; January 20, 2009; March 9 2009; and June 9, 2009. A 

summary of these findings and their current status is provided below: 

 Finding OTIB-0034-01: The procedure is not complete in terms of required data. The 

document references and uses data and procedures from other documents that need to be 

known in order to understand the described procedures in OTIB-0034. 

Current Status: Closed. 

 Finding OTIB-0034-02. The procedure points out that “a chronic exposure pattern was 

assumed.” This may not be claimant favorable in many cases at ORNL (X-10), 

considering the fact that numerous buildings exist on the site where exact dates of 

operations are not known, and the site depended on area health physicists to determine if 

in-vivo monitoring should be done. Thus, identification of the workers to apply 

coworker models to is difficult, if not impossible. 

Current Status: Open. 

 Finding OTIB-0034-03. For plutonium Type S, the chronic intake for the entire set of 

years was fitted to the bioassay data for the last 3 years (1986 through 1988) and all the 

previous years of much higher values were ignored. It appears that the authors have 

selectively chosen the 50th percentile bioassay results for only the last 3 years and 

ignored all the previous data that are greatly elevated over these values to derive the 

inhalation intake model for the Type S Pu-239. This does not provide a claimantfavorable model for reconstruction of doses. 
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

7 of 19

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.

Current Status: In Abeyance. It should be noted that in Revision 01 of OTIB-0034, 

Table A-11 has been changed to reflect all bioassay data for years 1951 through 1988. 

Therefore, the BRS should be changed from “in abeyance” to “closed.”

 Finding OTIB-0034-04: The assumed and predicted intake fits versus the values in the 

first approximately 5 years are much less, and from about 3,800 days to 7,200 days; the 

model fit is much higher, indicating that the percentile used for deriving the intake 

should be greater. This would, in turn, be more claimant favorable. 

Current Status: Open. 
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

8 of 19

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 CHANGES INTRODUCED TO OTIB-0034 UNDER REVISION 01

Under Revision 01 of OTIB-0034 (ORAUT 2013b), a total of three major changes were 

introduced, which are summarized below and are the subject of this focused review.

3.1 INTAKES OF PU-239 TYPE S IN TABLE 5-5 WERE 

REVISED/EXPANDED TO INCLUDE BIOASSAY DATA FOR ALL 

YEARS

In Revision 00 of OTIB-0034 (ORAUT 2005), predicted intakes of Type S Pu-239 for the entire 

38-year period of 1951 through 1988 were based on a bioassay fit defined by the last three 

years (i.e., 1986, 1987, and 1988), as shown in Figure A-23 of OTIB-0034. This resulted in the 

inhalation intake rate defined in Table 5-5 of OTIB-0034, Rev. 00 (ORAUT 2005) (reproduced 

below in Table 1). (Note: This was identified by SC&A as Finding OTIB-0034-03.)

Table 1. Annual Pu-239 Type S Intakes and Rates 

Year Pu-239 Type S Intake Rate, dpm/d

50th Percentile GSD

1951–1988 4.15 5.50

 Source: ORAUT-OTIB-0034, Rev. 00, Table 5-5 (ORAUT 2005)

In Revision 01 of OTIB-0034 (ORAUT 2013b), all bioassay data for Pu-239 Type S were fitted 

for six time periods. For comparison, Table 5-5 of Revision 01 is also reproduced below in 

Table 2.

Table 2. Pu-239 Type S Intake Periods and Rates (dpm/d)

Year

Pu-239 Type S Intake Rate

50th percentile GSD 95th percentile

1951–1952 1,489 3.00 7,178

1953–1959 159.8 11.06 8,325

1960–1968 159.8 3.00 730

1969–1972 118.5 3.40 886

1973–1984 118.5 3.00 536

1985–1988 36.26 5.46 592

 Source: ORAUT-OTIB-0034, Rev. 01, Table 5-5 (ORAUT 2013b)

3.2 THE 95TH PERCENTILE INTAKES WERE ADDED FOR ALL

RADIONUCLIDES ASSESSED IN OTIB-0034

In Revision 00 of OTIB-0034 (ORAUT 2005), Tables 5-1 through 5-6 only cited intakes (dpm/d) 

and corresponding geometric standard deviation (GSD) values for the 50th percentile. For 

Revision 01, the 95th percentile intakes and GSD values were added to Tables 5-1 through 5-6.
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

9 of 19

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.

3.3 STATISTICAL SUMMARY TABLES AS CITED IN ATTACHMENT 

A OF OTIB-0034, REV. 01, WERE EXPANDED

For statistical summary Tables A-1 through A-4 of Attachment A of OTIB-0034, Rev. 01 

(ORAUT 2013b) information pertaining to the annual total number of personnel assessed by 

urinalysis for Sr, U, Pu, and Am and the annual total number of bioassay samples used in the 

statistical analysis for deriving intakes were added.
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

10 of 19

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 SC&A’S REVIEW OF REVISIONS INCORPORATED IN 

REVISION 01 OF ORAUT-OTIB-0034

Presented below are comments pertaining to each of the three revisions to OTIB-0034 cited in 

Section 3.0 above.

4.1 REVISION OF PU-239 INTAKES TYPE S

The inclusion of bioassay data for all 38 years for deriving intake rates of Pu-239 Type S 

addresses concerns raised by SC&A in our review of OTIB-0034, Rev. 00 (SC&A 2007). The 

expanded use of available bioassay data for the full 38 years not only increased intake rates by as 

much as a factor of 358 for years 1951 and 1952, but also established significantly higher intake 

rates for 5 other intake periods, as shown above in Table 2.

SC&A concurs with the revision of Table 5-5, and there is no specific finding with the associated 

revision. However, SC&A does note that neither the ORNL Site Profile for Occupational 

Internal Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0012-5 (ORAUT 2013a), nor ORAUT-OTIB-0034, Revision 01 

(ORAUT 2013b) issued April, 23, 2013, mention/address potential exposures to Pu Type Super 

S.

A review of Attachment A of OCAS-PER-012, Evaluation of Highly Insoluble Plutonium 

Compounds (OCAS 2007), identifies X-10 (ORNL) among “. . . sites where Type Super S is to 

be considered.” Thus, if Pu Type SS were to be considered in the OTIB-0034 coworker model 

for ORNL, intakes would increase by a factor of 4.

Finding #1: ORAUT-OTIB-0034 Fails to Mention/Address Potential Exposure to Pu-239 

Type SS in its Coworker Model

4.2 ADDITION OF 95TH PERCENTILE FOR ALL RADIONUCLIDES

For an assumed lognormal distribution of data, the GSD, 50th percentile, and 95th percentile are 

defined by the following equations:

GSD = Eq. 1

 or

50th percentile = Eq. 2

 and

GSD1.65585 = Eq. 3

 or

95th percentile = (50th percentile)(GSD1.645) Eq. 4
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

11 of 19

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.

By means of Equation 4, SC&A checked every 95th percentile number added to Tables 5-1, 5-2, 

5-3, 5-4, 5-5, and 5-6. SC&A duplicated all values except the following three 95th percentile 

values contained in Table 5-5:

Comparison of 95th Percentile Values (dpm/d) from Table 5-5

Year NIOSH SC&A

1951–1952 7,178 9,073

1960–1968 730 973

1973–1984 539 722

Finding #2: Three of the Six Values for the 95th Percentile Intake of Pu-239 Type S in Table 5-5 

of ORAUT-OTIB-0034 are Significantly Lower than Values Derived by SC&A and Should Be 

Reassessed

Of greater concern to SC&A is why the 95th percentile values were added, since OTIB-0034 

Rev. 01 offers no guidance for their use, as given by the following statements in Section 5.0,

“Assignment of Intakes and Doses:”

. . . For each radionuclide, the 50th- and 95th-percentile intake rates, and the GSDs, are 

provided in specific tables. In most cases, doses for individuals who were potentially 

exposed routinely should be calculated from the 50th-percentile intake rates by assuming 

the solubility type that results in the largest probability of causation (POC).

. . . [Emphasis added.]

The term “potentially exposed routinely” suggests that the 50th percentile values are appropriate 

for facility operators, radiation safety personnel, and others who are likely to represent persons 

with the highest exposure potential.

While guidance in other coworker models also states that “. . . For most cases, individual doses 

are calculated from the 50th percentile intake rates,” subjective and diffuse guidance for 

assignment of the 95th percentile is provided, as given for the following coworker models:

 ORAUT-OTIB-0061, Rev. 02, Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for the Mound Site

(ORAUT 2012b). From Section 5.2:

There are situations when the 95th percentile of the coworker distribution and a constant 

distribution are more appropriate than the 50th percentile and lognormal GSDs. For 

cases where the 50th-percentile intake rates are not appropriate, dose reconstructors 

should use the 95th-percentile intake rates. The 95th-percentile intakes should be 

assigned as a constant rather than lognormal distribution. [Emphasis added.]

 ORAUT-OTIB-0078, Rev. 02, Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for the Fernald 

Environmental Management Project (ORAUT 2012d). From Section 5.2:

. . . For cases where there is justification that the individual may have had larger 

intakes than the 50th-percentile intake rates, dose reconstructors should use the 

95th-percentile intake rates. . . [Emphasis added.]
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

12 of 19

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.

In reviewing Section 5.2.3, “Bioassay Programs,” of Oak Ridge National Laboratory –

Occupational Internal Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0012-5, Rev. 02 (ORAUT 2013a), it is clear that 

the bioassay data used for the coworker data described in OTIB-0034 Rev. 01 represent a highly 

heterogeneous worker population (see Table 5-5 of ORAUT 2013a). The degree of 

heterogeneity representing intake coworker values cited in OTIB-0034 Rev. 01 is further 

supported by GSD values of up to 10 and greater (see Tables 5-1 and 5-5).

The need to account for heterogeneity in coworker models has been addressed by NIOSH in the 

past. For example, Section 1.0 of ORAUT-RPRT-0053, Analysis of Stratified Coworker 

Datasets (ORAUT 2012c), states:

It is reasonable to postulate that the population of all monitored workers is a 

conglomeration of a number of smaller subgroups of monitored workers, where 

the subgroups could receive significantly different average doses. . . . In 

sampling theory, these relatively homogeneous subgroups are called strata.

Breaking a truly heterogeneous population into a number of relatively 

homogeneous strata is often desirable because the variance of the estimated 

parameters will be smaller than the variance of the parameters estimated for the 

whole population of monitored workers and in general the parameter estimates 

will be more accurate. . . . For example, criteria are needed to identify 

meaningful strata and assign workers to the appropriate stratum. The term 

meaningful refers to the assumption that there are groups in the population of 

monitored workers that have significantly different average doses and that we 

know how to identify these groups. . . . Thus, it is important to decide if strata 

constructed from a population of monitored workers are significantly different 

before constructing coworker models for each stratum. 

In select instances of facility workers with significant differences for exposure potential, NIOSH 

employed stratification based on job classification, facility-specific operations, and/or time 

periods. An example of NIOSH’s guidance for the assignment of potential intakes based on job 

classification, location, as well as time periods is given in Table 5-8 of the Site Profile for Ames 

Laboratory, ORAUT-TKBS-0055, Rev. 02 (ORAUT 2012a).

Consistency and fairness in the adjudication of claims is best achieved by a highly prescriptive 

process that minimizes the need for subjective interpretation of protocols/guidance issued by 

NIOSH for use in dose reconstruction. Guidance that is limited to statements such as the 

following are far too vague for consistent interpretation by dose reconstructors to categorize an 

unmonitored worker as eligible for a 95th percentile intake rate:

. . . There are situations when the 95th percentile of a coworker distribution . . . 

[is] more appropriate than the 50th percentile . . .

 or

. . . For cases where there is justification that the individual may have had larger 

intakes than the 50th-percentile intake rates, dose reconstructors should use the 

95th-percentile intake rates. . .
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

13 of 19

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.

Finding #3: For the X-10 Internal Coworker Model (as well as other internal coworker models), 

Guidance for the Assignment of the 95th Percentile Intake Values to Unmonitored Workers is 

Currently Inadequate

4.3 EXPANSION OF STATISTICAL SUMMARY TABLES IN 

ATTACHMENT A

The inclusion of number of samples and number of employees representing bioassay data for 

each of the four nuclides provides insight to the data’s statistical power. However, SC&A does 

question whether there is adequate support for the interpretation of the ORISE/CER bioassay 

data, which contain urinalysis records from the ORNL site from 1951 to 1988. Specifically, 

SC&A’s concern centers around the following statements:

 From Section 2.0 of OTIB-0034

. . . The database [ORISE/CER Dosimetry Database] results are in units of 

disintegrations per minute (dpm)/24 hours . . . [Emphasis added.]

 From Section 4.1 of OTIB-0034

. . . All results were assumed to be representative of a full day (24 hours) of urinary 

excretion. [Emphasis added.]

In an attempt to gain a more complete understanding of the bioassay data used, SC&A reviewed 

NIOSH’s database “tblORNL_Urinalysis_rawData1951-1978.” Exhibit 1 shows a representative 

dataset during 1951. Inspection of Exhibit 1 identifies (1) dpm/sample in Column #5 and 

(2) dpm/24 hr in Column #6.

Based on the above-cited statement from Section 2.0 of OTIB-0034 Rev. 01 it is uncertain 

whether the ORISE/CER database contained both the dpm/sample and the dpm/24 hours. If, in 

fact, the original ORNL data had been recorded as dpm/24 hours, there would be no need for 

NIOSH to state that “. . . All results were assumed to be representative of a full day (24 hours) of 

urinary excretion.”

Independent of the answer to this question, further inspection of Exhibit 1shows that for all 

bioassays, the dpm/24-hour activity values are consistently a factor of 10 higher than the

dpm/sample values. This relationship would imply a constant sample volume of 140 ml that was 

analyzed for all nuclides and all personnel monitored.

On the assumption that the ORISE/CER urinalyses data do not consistently reflect the collection 

of a quantified 24-hour urine volume from which defined aliquots of samples were taken for 

analysis, these data must be questioned.

Alternatively, if urinalyses were based on spot samples (i.e., less than a 24-hour sample), a 

volume greater than 140 ml would have been collected from which a constant volume of 140 ml 

per sample would have been analyzed. However, the choice of a 140-ml volume of 1,400 ml/day 
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

14 of 19

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.

for Reference Man had not been formally identified in 1951. A review of earlier scientific texts 

that reference the 1,400 ml/day excretion volume include ICRP Publication 2 (ICRP 1959), 

ICRP Publication 23 (ICRP 1975), and the Radiological Health Handbook (PHS 1970), but 

postdate the earlier years of the ORISE/CER database.

Finding #4 (Conditional): Pending Answers to the Aforementioned Questions, NIOSH’s 

Assumption of ORNL Bioassay Data as Representative of a Full Day (24 hours) of Urinary 

Excretion is Subject to Question
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

15 of 19

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 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

For a substantial number of Department of Energy (DOE)/Atomic Weapons Employer (AWE) 

facilities, failure to adequately monitor workers has been recognized by NIOSH as a limitation 

affecting dose reconstruction and the need for developing coworker models in accordance with 

42 CFR 82 §82.17.

SC&A’s focused review of Revision 01 of ORAUT-OTIB-0034 (ORAUT 2013b) identified a 

total of four findings. Findings #1 and #2 have a limited potential to alter the reconstruction of 

doses for unmonitored workers and will likely require minimal discussion/effort for resolution. 

Of greater significance and higher potential to affect the reconstruction of dose for unmonitored 

workers are Findings #3 and #4. For Finding #3, resolution would require prescriptive/ 

definitive guidance for the assignment of 95th percentile coworker intake values to unmonitored 

workers; and for the resolution of Finding #4, there is a need for additional information that 

explains the data shown in Exhibit 1 and supports NIOSH’s “assumption” that all bioassay data 

represented a full day (24 hours) of urinary excretion.
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

16 of 19

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.

Exhibit 1: Representative Data Set of 1951 Urinalysis Results from the ORNL Database

EmployeeID Year Month GDate EDP-Code DPM/Sample DPM/Sample_Sngl DPM/24

1951 1 29-Jan-51 UR0 3.2 3.2 000000032

1951 4 23-Apr-51 FP0 30 30 000000300

1951 9 17-Sep-51 UR0 2.3 2.3 000000023

1951 9 17-Sep-51 FP0 24 24 000000240

1951 9 17-Sep-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 3 05-Mar-51 UR0 0.8 0.8 000000008

1951 3 05-Mar-51 GU0 0.3 0.3 000000003

1951 3 05-Mar-51 FP0 52 52 000000520

1951 12 23-Dec-51 FP0 12 12 000000120

1951 12 23-Dec-51 UR0 3.2 3.2 000000032

1951 12 23-Dec-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 7 06-Jul-51 FP0 46 46 000000460

1951 3 12-Mar-51 UR0 6.1 6.1 000000061

1951 1 02-Jan-51 UR0 4.6 4.6 000000046

1951 1 29-Jan-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 4 20-Apr-51 SR0 2.4 2.4 000000024

1951 3 12-Mar-51 FP0 44 44 000000440

1951 4 16-Apr-51 UR0 7.9 7.9 000000079

1951 4 16-Apr-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 4 16-Apr-51 FP0 17 17 000000170

1951 12 01-Dec-51 UR0 16 16 000000160

1951 12 01-Dec-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 3 12-Mar-51 GU0 0.3 0.3 000000003

1951 3 16-Mar-51 UR0 7.5 7.5 000000075

1951 3 16-Mar-51 FP0 51 51 000000510

1951 5 24-May-51 FP0 100 100 000001000

1951 1 02-Jan-51 FP0 16 16 000000160

1951 12 20-Dec-51 SR0 7.3E3 7300 000073000

1951 1 29-Jan-51 FP0 32 32 000000320

1951 7 30-Jul-51 FP0 9.6 9.6 000000096

1951 8 23-Aug-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 12 03-Dec-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 3 12-Mar-51 UR0 2.6 2.6 000000026

1951 3 12-Mar-51 GU0 0.3 0.3 000000003

1951 3 12-Mar-51 FP0 40 40 000000400

1951 9 16-Sep-51 UR0 1.8 1.8 000000018

1951 9 16-Sep-51 FP0 9.2 9.2 000000092
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

17 of 19

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.

EXHIBIT #1 (Continued)

EmployeeID Year Month GDate EDP-Code DPM/Sample DPM/Sample_Sngl DPM/24

1951 9 16-Sep-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 5 25-May-51 FP0 32 32 000000320

1951 5 25-May-51 UR0 3.3 3.3 000000033

1951 10 08-Oct-51 FP0 5.4 5.4 000000054

1951 10 08-Oct-51 UR0 2.2 2.2 000000022

1951 4 23-Apr-51 UR0 7.4 7.4 000000074

1951 7 30-Jul-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 4 23-Apr-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 7 30-Jul-51 UR0 4.9 4.9 000000049

1951 4 16-Apr-51 FP0 16 16 000000160

1951 4 16-Apr-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 1 30-Jan-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 1 30-Jan-51 FP0 54 54 000000540

1951 1 15-Jan-51 FP0 13 13 000000130

1951 1 15-Jan-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 8 06-Aug-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 8 06-Aug-51 UR0 1.7 1.7 000000017

1951 8 06-Aug-51 FP0 9.6 9.6 000000096

1951 1 15-Jan-51 FP0 10 10 000000100

1951 1 15-Jan-51 UR0 3.5 3.5 000000035

1951 5 24-May-51 UR0 2.9 2.9 000000029

1951 10 08-Oct-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 5 18-May-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 8 04-Aug-51 FP0 8.0 8 000000080

1951 7 26-Jul-51 SR0 10 10 000000100

1951 7 26-Jul-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 7 26-Jul-51 UR0 3.9 3.9 000000039

1951 6 07-Jun-51 FP0 41 41 000000410

1951 4 13-Apr-51 UR0 3.2 3.2 000000032

1951 10 04-Oct-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 10 04-Oct-51 FP0 38 38 000000380

1951 10 04-Oct-51 UR0 4.8 4.8 000000048

1951 4 13-Apr-51 FP0 26 26 000000260

1951 4 13-Apr-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 5 11-May-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 1 02-Jan-51 GU0 0.5 0.5 000000005

1951 5 18-May-51 FP0 72 72 000000720

1951 6 07-Jun-51 GU0 0.3 0.3 000000003

1951 6 27-Jun-51 FP0 55 55 000000550
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

18 of 19

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.

EXHIBIT #1 (Continued)

EmployeeID Year Month GDate EDP-Code DPM/Sample DPM/Sample_Sngl DPM/24

1951 6 27-Jun-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 12 17-Dec-51 FP0 9.2 9.2 000000092

1951 12 17-Dec-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 12 17-Dec-51 UR0 5.2 5.2 000000052

1951 11 12-Nov-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 11 12-Nov-51 UR0 4.7 4.7 000000047

1951 8 23-Aug-51 UR0 1.8 1.8 000000018

1951 8 01-Aug-51 GU0 0.3 0.3 000000003

1951 8 01-Aug-51 SR0 19 19 000000190

1951 8 01-Aug-51 UR0 2.8 2.8 000000028

1951 8 23-Aug-51 FP0 70 70 000000700

1951 5 11-May-51 FP0 16 16 000000160

1951 7 28-Jul-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 5 04-May-51 FP0 30 30 000000300

1951 5 04-May-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 6 29-Jun-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 6 01-Jun-51 FP0 11 11 000000110

1951 6 29-Jun-51 UR0 3.7 3.7 000000037

1951 6 29-Jun-51 FP0 23 23 000000230

1951 6 01-Jun-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 4 10-Apr-51 FP0 27 27 000000270

1951 4 10-Apr-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 4 30-Apr-51 FP0 4.8 4.8 000000048

1951 4 30-Apr-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 5 28-May-51 FP0 59 59 000000590

1951 8 04-Aug-51 UR0 1.7 1.7 000000017

1951 7 28-Jul-51 FP0 7.6 7.6 000000076

1951 8 04-Aug-51 GU0 0.2 0.2 000000002

1951 7 28-Jul-51 UR0 1.7 1.7 000000017

1951 8 16-Aug-51 FP0 40 40 000000400

1951 8 16-Aug-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 8 16-Aug-51 UR0 12 12 000000120

1951 11 08-Nov-51 FP0 0.8 0.8 000000008

1951 11 08-Nov-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001

1951 11 08-Nov-51 UR0 1.6 1.6 000000016

1951 12 06-Dec-51 GU0 0 0 000000000

1951 12 06-Dec-51 FP0 44 44 000000440

1951 5 11-May-51 FP0 70 70 000000700

1951 5 11-May-51 GU0 0.1 0.1 000000001
Effective Date:

 November 20, 2013

Revision No.

Draft – 0

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2013-0085

Page No.

19 of 19

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.

REFERENCES

42 CFR Part 82. 2002. Methods for Radiation Dose Reconstruction Under the Energy

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule Federal 

Register / Vol. 67, No. 85 / Thursday, May 2, 2002.

ICRP 1959. Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation. ICRP Publication No. 2. International 

Commission on Radiological Protection, Pergamon Press, New York.

ICRP 1975. Reference Man: Anatomical, Physiological and Metabolic Characteristics, ICRP 

Publication No. 23. International Commission on Radiological Protection, Pergamon Press, New 

York.

OCAS 2007. Evaluation of Highly Insoluble Plutonium Compounds, OCAS-PER-012, Office of 

Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. August 7, 2007.

ORAUT 2005. Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for X-10, Rev. 00, ORAUT-OTIB-0034. 

Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. December 13, 2005.

ORAUT 2012a. Site Profile for Ames Laboratory, Rev. 02, ORAUT-TKBS-0055. Oak Ridge 

Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. January 3, 2012.

ORAUT 2012b. Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for the Mound Site, Rev. 02, ORAUTOTIB-0061. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. April 13, 2012.

ORAUT 2012c. Analysis of Stratified Coworker Datasets, Rev. 01, ORAUT-RPRT-0053. Oak 

Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. July 16, 2012.

ORAUT 2012d. Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for the Fernald Environmental 

Management Project, Rev. 02, ORAUT-OTIB-0078. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. December 12, 2012. 

ORAUT 2013a. ORNL Site Profile for Occupational Internal Dose, Rev. 02, ORAUT-TKBS0012-5. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. February 8, 2013.

ORAUT 2013b. Internal Dosimetry Coworker Data for X-10, Rev. 01, ORAUT-OTIB-0034. 

Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. April 23, 2013.

SC&A 2007. Review of the Third Set of Procedures (45 procedure reviews), SC&A-TRTASK3-0003. S. Cohen & Associates, Vienna, VA. October 29, 2007.

PHS 1970. Radiological Health Handbook. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and 

Welfare, Public Health Service, Rockville, Maryland. 1970.