ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

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

Page 1 of 15

Document Title:

External Radiation Monitoring at the Y-12 

Facility During the 1948-1949 Period

Document Number: ORAUT-OTIB-0047

Revision: 00

Effective Date: 09/20/2005

Type of Document: OTIB

Supersedes: None

Subject Experts: George D. Kerr, William G. Tankersley and Janice P. Watkins

Document Owner

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 09/12/2005

William E. Murray, TBD Team Leader

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 09/12/2005

Judson L. Kenoyer, Task 3 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 09/12/2005

Richard E. Toohey, Project Director

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 09/20/2005

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-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 2 of 15

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION 

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

06/21/2005 00-A New ORAU Team technical information bulletin to summarize 1948-

1949 monitoring data for the Y-12 site. Initiated by George D. Kerr, 

William G. Tankersley, and Janice P. Watkins.

07/03/2005 00-B Incorporates internal review comments. Initiated by George D. Kerr, 

William G. Tankersley, and Janice P. Watkins.

08/30/2005 00-C Incorporates NIOSH review comments. Initiated by George D. Kerr, 

William G. Tankersley, and Janice P. Watkins.

09/20/2005 00 First approved issue. Training required: As determined by the Task 

Manager. Initiated by George D. Kerr, William G. Tankersley, and 

Janice P. Watkins.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 3 of 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS..................................................................................................

Page

4

1.0 PURPOSE ..................................................................................................................................5

2.0 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................5

3.0 EXTERNAL RADIATION MONITORING DEVICES .................................................................... 6

3.1 Pocket Ionization Chambers................................................................................................6

3.2 Film Badge Dosimeters .......................................................................................................6

4.0 Y-12 EXTERNAL DOSE DATABASE..........................................................................................7

5.0 EVALUATION OF 1948-1949 EXTERNAL DOSE DATA ............................................................ 7

6.0 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................................12

REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................14

LIST OF TABLES

Table

5-

Page

1 Number of Y-12 monthly external monitoring records for 1948-1949........................................ 8

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

6-1 Number of Y-12 monthly external dose records for 1948-1949 ................................................

Page

9

6-2 Y-12 1948-1949 monthly sums of recorded doses (mrem)..................................................... 10

6-3 Monthly statistics for R1 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)........................................................ 10

6-4 Monthly statistics for R2 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)........................................................ 11

6-5 Monthly statistics for R3 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)........................................................ 11

6-6 Monthly statistics for R4 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)........................................................ 12
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 4 of 15

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEC Atomic Energy Commission, one of the predecessor agencies of DOE

COC Cincinnati Operations Center

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

EU enriched uranium

eV electron volt

hr hour

ID identification

keV one thousand electron volts

MDL Minimum Detectable Limit

MeV one million electron volts

mm millimeter

mR milliroentgen, a unit of radiation exposure

mrem millirem, a unit of radiation dose

NBS National Bureau of Standards, now the National Institute for Standards and Technology

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NR no reading/no response

ORAU Oak Ridge Associated Universities

ORAUT ORAU Team

PIC Pocket Ionization Chamber

R1 PIC reading

R2 sensitive film reading under open window

R3 sensitive film reading under 1 mm-thick cadmium shield

R4 insensitive film reading under 1 mm-thick cadmium shield

rem roentgen equivalent man, a unit of radiation dose

SSN Social Security Number

TEC Tennessee Eastman Corporation

TIB Technical Information Bulletin

UCC Union Carbide Corporation
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 5 of 15

1.0

Technical Information Bulletins (TIBs) 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. TIBs may be used to assist the 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in the completion of individual dose 

reconstructions (NIOSH 2002).

PURPOSE

The purpose of this TIB is to discuss and summarize the 1948-1949 external monitoring data that are 

now available for use in the NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Project for workers at facilities operated by 

the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies (NIOSH 2002). The 1948-1949 

external monitoring data were previously made available to Oak Ridge Associated Universities 

(ORAU), along with other data for use in epidemiological studies of workers at Y-12 and other DOE 

sites in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (Watkins et al. 1993, 1997). These 1948-1949 data have been placed 

on the O: Drive of the secure data server at the ORAU Cincinnati Operations Center (COC) for use in 

dose reconstructions for workers at the Y-12 facility. 

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 facility” as defined in the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. § 7384l(5) and (12)). 

2.0

The Y-12 Plant, now the Y-12 National Security Complex, was first conceived in the fall of 1942 by 

engineers of the Manhattan Engineer District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and construction 

of the first building was completed in 1943 (Wilcox 2001). The Tennessee Eastman Corporation 

(TEC) operated Y-12 from 1943 to May 1947. During this period, operations at Y-12 primarily 

involved the use of the electromagnetic separation process to enrich uranium; the enriched product 

was shipped to Los Alamos for production of nuclear weapons. Until the latter part of 1945, Y-12 

converted UO3 to UCl4, which was subsequently enriched by the electromagnetic separation process 

using two calutron stages (termed “alpha” and “beta”). In the latter part of 1945, Y-12 discontinued 

the use of the alpha calutron stage and began receiving UF6 from the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion 

Plant, also called the K-25 Plant. The UF6 from K-25 was converted into UCl4, enriched using the 

beta calutrons, converted to UF4, and shipped to Los Alamos. In these early days of Y-12, TEC relied 

entirely on facility monitoring to measure and control both occupational external and internal radiation 

exposures to workers. The nature of the work at the Y-12 facility in these early years primarily

resulted in occupational internal exposure from uranium dust particles, which was a greater potential 

hazard than occupational external exposure.

BACKGROUND

In May 1947, management of Y-12 was assigned to the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), and 

emphasis was directed away from enrichment of uranium to the fabrication of parts for nuclear 

weapons. Numerous changes have occurred over the years in the fabrication procedures, but the 

general procedures have remained essentially the same. Enriched uranium (EU) typically was 

received at Y-12 in the form of UF6, converted to UF4, reduced to a metal, and then fabricated into 

weapon parts. These fabrication processes involved casting, rolling, forming, and machining of the 

EU metal and recycling of the EU salvage. In addition to facility monitoring to measure and control 

the radiation exposure to workers, an external dosimetry program was started in 1948 to monitor 

individual personnel working in the Assay Laboratories, Radiographic Shop, Spectrographic Shop, 

and the “Metal” Machine Shops. Other groups of workers were added in July 1948, January 1949, 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 6 of 15

and July 1949. The occupational external monitoring since 1950 has previously been reviewed by 

Kerr (ORAUT 2003) and Kerr et al. (ORAUT 2005a,b). 

3.0

Doses to the whole body from external radiation exposure at the Y-12 facility during 1948-1949 were 

measured using Victoreen pocket ionization chambers (PICs) exchanged on a daily basis and film 

badge dosimeters exchanged on a weekly basis (Souleyrette 2003; ORAUT 2003). The minimum 

detectable limits (MDLs) for these dose measurements during this period were approximately 5 mrem 

for the PICs and 30 mrem for the film badge dosimeters. 

EXTERNAL RADIATION MONITORING DEVICES

3.1 POCKET IONIZATION CHAMBERS

The Victoreen PICs were condenser-type ionization chambers that were used with a separate charger 

and charge reader (Price 1958; Handloser 1959). The PICs were charged to a known voltage by 

inserting them into the charger, which connected an internal power supply across the chambers. The 

charge reader, a string electrometer, indicated the charge. The PICs were the size of fountain pens 

and had clips similar to those on fountain pens so they could be carried securely in the pocket of a 

shirt or coverall. Exposure to ionizing radiation discharged the chamber, and the decrease in voltage 

provided a measurement of a worker’s radiation exposure. The PICs were calibrated using integrated 

exposures of 100, 200, and 300 mR from a radium source (Struxness 1948a).

Properly operating PICs were not bothered by charge leakage over a period of a few days, but their 

use was generally restricted to 1 day (Price 1958; Handloser 1959). At Y-12 and most other DOE 

sites, it was general practice to provide each worker with two PICs, and the lower exposure reading 

was taken as the significant reading because any malfunction of a PIC resulted in a charge decrease 

indicating a higher exposure. Malfunctions of a PIC were usually due to either charge leakage across 

the insulators or mechanical shock such as being dropped on the floor. 

The energy response of the PICs, like film, was not flat but peaked at low X-ray energies (Price 1958; 

Handloser 1959). At gamma-ray energies of approximately 0.3−1.2 MeV, the energy response was 

linear, but it was about 1.4 times the linear response at an energy of approximately 0.1 MeV. Below 

0.1 MeV, the response dropped rapidly because the photons (X-rays or gamma rays) underwent 

significant attenuation in the walls of the PICs. The readings indicated by the PICs were much less 

than the actual doses at energies below about 40 keV. The walls of the PICs were thin enough to 

allow some response to beta particles with energies of approximately 1 MeV or more.

3.2 FILM BADGE DOSIMETERS

The film badge dosimeter used at Y-12 was the same badge used at the Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory in 1949 (ORAUT 2005a) and described by Thornton, Davis, and Gupton (1961). This film 

badge was an AEC Catalog Number PF-1B film badge manufactured by the A. M. Sample Machine 

Company in Knoxville, Tennessee (ORAUT 2005a). The photographic film in the badge was encased 

in a protective cover of stainless steel with a clip for attachment to the pocket or collar of a shirt or 

coverall. One portion of the film (shielded window) was covered by a 1-mm-thick cadmium filter to 

determine the penetrating whole-body dose from gamma rays. The uncovered portion of the film 

(open window) was used to determine the skin dose from beta particles and low-energy X-rays 

(Handloser 1959). 

The film badge dosimeters used at Y-12 from 1948 to 1963 contained DuPont type 552 film packets 

(Souleyrette 2003). These packets contained two film emulsions: (1) a so-called sensitive 502 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 7 of 15

emulsion with an effective dose range of approximately 30 mrem to 10 rem, and (2) a so-called 

insensitive 510 emulsion with an effective dose range of approximately 500 mrem to 20 rem (Craft, 

Ledbetter, and Hart 1952; Thornton, Davis, and Gupton 1961; Parrish 1979). Film badge dosimeters 

typically exhibited about the same sensitivity to beta and gamma radiation; that is, a 1-rem dose of 

beta particles yielded about the same response in the film as 1 rem of gamma rays (Auxier 1967). 

Thus, the MDLs of the film badge dosimeters were approximately the same for beta particles and 

gamma rays (ORAUT 2005a). 

The DuPont 552 film packets were calibrated using X-rays, beta particles from a uranium slab, and 

gamma rays from a radium source (Struxness 1949). The gamma-ray calibrations used integrated 

exposures of 100, 250, 500, 750, and 1,000 mrem from the radium source (Struxness 1948a). The 

film badges were calibrated for beta particles by placing the film badge face down on the slab of 

natural uranium (Struxness 1949). The dose rate to skin from the beta particles at the surface of the 

natural uranium slab was taken to be 270 mR/hr (Murray 1948). The currently accepted value for the 

dose rate to skin from beta particles at the surface of a natural uranium slab is approximately 235 

mrem/hr (DOE 2004). If one makes the common assumption that 1 mR/hr is approximately equal to 1 

mrem/hr (Whyte 1959; NBS 1962), the beta-particle calibrations during the 1948-1949 period provide 

conservative estimates of a Y-12 worker’s exposure to beta particles during that period.

4.0

External monitoring records for 1950 to 1988 were provided by the Y-12 staff from 1978 through the 

1980s for use in epidemiologic studies by the Center for Epidemiologic Research of the Oak Ridge 

Associated Universities (ORAUT 2005a). These records contained beta, gamma, and neutron results 

for individuals, summarized by quarters. For some time, it was assumed that no external monitoring 

records were available prior to 1950. Following considerable investigation, including interviews with 

knowledgeable Y-12 staff members, it was discovered that a limited set of external monitoring data 

did exist for 1948 and 1949 (West 1980). Further investigation resulted in the retrieval of a single 

electronic file with 11,492 records. Each record in the file included film badge ID, date of weekly 

readings, four dose fields, and descriptive comments. The four dose fields consisted of the PIC 

reading and three photographic film dose readings. Efforts were made to link the film badge ID in the 

Y-12 pre-1950 external monitoring file with Y-12 worker names and departments in the ORAU DOE 

facility database.

Y-12 EXTERNAL DOSE DATABASE

Basic characteristics of the dataset are as follows. Each film badge ID in the file had 26, 52, 78, or 

104 records, corroborating that monitoring results were recorded on a weekly basis during this period. 

A total of 240 distinct film badge IDs were identified among the 11,492 records in the dataset. As 

listed in Table 5-1, 3,599 of the records were reported for 1948, and 7,893 were reported for 1949. 

Table 5-1 indicates that the total number of monitored Y-12 workers was approximately 26 during the 

first half of 1948, 107 during the second half of 1948, 141 during the first half of 1949, and 168 during 

the second half of 1949. Although each record in the dataset had a value for all four dose fields, 

many of the results were recorded as “NR” (i.e., “no reading” or “no response”). In fact, 7,876 of the 

total 11,492 records reported NR in each of the four dose fields. Therefore, only 3,616 of the records 

supplied any information on external occupational doses. The information provided by these 3,616 

records is summarized in the next section. 

5.0

The doses listed as PIC readings are referred to as R1. Doses from readings of sensitive film with 

open window, sensitive film shielded, and insensitive film shielded are designated R2, R3, and R4, 

EVALUATION OF 1948-1949 EXTERNAL DOSE DATA
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 8 of 15

Table 5-1. Number of Y-12 monthly external 

monitoring records for 1948-1949.

Month

Monthly external monitoring records

1948 1949 Total

January 130 564 694

February 104 564 668

March 104 564 668

April 130 705 835

May 104 564 668

June 104 564 668

July 535 840 1,375

August 428 672 1,100

September 428 840 1,268

October 535 672 1,207

November 428 672 1,100

December 569 672 1,241

Total 3,599 7,893 11,492

respectively. All results in this section are based on all records occurring in a month, although an 

individual worker could provide multiple records each month. 

Figure 6-1 shows the total number of records per month, along with the number of blanks (i.e., NR) for 

each of the four dose fields. From January through March 1948, all dose field readings were blank. 

Figure 6-2 shows the sum of all the records in each dose field by month. In 1948, the monthly dose 

sums were nearly identical for R2, R3, and R4, with the exception of a slightly lower R4 dose in July. 

The monthly sums for the PIC readings starting in July 1948 were generally about one-third as large 

as film badge sums in the fields R2, R3, and R4. In 1949, the monthly PIC sums were about one-third 

or less of the R2 sums, with the exception of the period from March through June, when the R2 sums 

dipped much lower. 

Figures 6-3 through 6-6 show monthly descriptive statistics for R1, R2, R3, and R4, respectively, 

where statistics were based on only nonblank values (i.e., excluding the NRs). The 75th percentile for 

R1 was near 30 mrem for the entire period (April 1948-December 1949), indicating that approximately 

three-fourths of the PIC readings each month had a value of 30 mrem or less. However, maximum 

R1 readings were generally above 60 mrem after October 1948. For R2 from July 1948 through 

1949, the 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile were all 30 mrem, suggesting that a dose of 

30 mrem might have been assigned if all weekly badge readings in the month fell below MDL. For 

R3 from July 1948 through March 1949, it appears that a dose of 30 mrem was assigned if all weekly 

badge readings in the month were below MDL, and from April 1949 to December 1949, it appears 

that a dose of zero was assigned if all week badge readings in the month were below MDL. For R4, 

the MDL was 500 mrem, but it appears that much lower dose values were assigned for the month 

based on the lowest recorded value of either R1 or R3 for the same monthly period. Several very 

high maximum doses were recorded for R2, including 760 mrem in July 1948 and 2,500 mrem in 

both January and February 1949 (see Figure 6-4). With the exception of one R3 dose of 640 mrem 

in July 1948, R3 and R4 have only doses of 30 mrem from July 1948 through March 1949 and then 

no additional dose records except one R4 dose of 30 mrem in November (see Figures 6-5 and 6-6). 

No doses above 30 mrem were recorded for R4 in either 1948 or 1949 year.

The two very high R2 doses in January and February 1949 to a worker in the Chemical Department 

(Dept. 2619) suggest a large skin dose that may not have been detected by the PICs. These two high 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 9 of 15

R2 doses do not appear to be due to beta particles because the ratio of R2 to R3 of approximately 

100:1 is much larger than the expected beta-to-gamma dose ratio from exposure to uranium. The two 

high R2 readings in January and February 1949 are more likely the result of exposure to very-low 

energy photons leaking from an X-ray spectrograph or other devices, a problem that was noted in 

Jan48

Feb48Mar48

Apr48

May48

Jun48

Jul48

Aug48Sep48

Oct48

Nov48

Dec48

Jan49

Feb49Mar49

Apr49

May49

Jun49

Jul49

Aug49Sep49

Oct49

Nov49

Dec49

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Total Number of Records

Number of R1 Records with NR

Number of R2 Records with NR

Number of R3 Records with NR

Number of R4 Records with NR

Number of Y-12 Monthly External Dose Records for 1948-49

 Figure 6-1. Number of Y-12 monthly external dose records for 1948-1949.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 10 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Month

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

1949

1948

Y-12 1948-49 Monthly Sums of Recorded Doses (mrem)

R1

R2

R3

R4

 Figure 6-2. Y-12 1948-1949 monthly sums of recorded doses (mrem).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Month

0

30

60

90

120

0

30

60

90

120

1949

1948

Maximum

75th percentile

Median

Mean

25th percentile

Monthly statistics for R1 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)

 Figure 6-3. Monthly statistics for R1 doses in mrem (NRs excluded).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 11 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Month

0

100

200

300

0

100

200

300

1949

1948

Maximum

75th percentile

Median

Mean

25th percentile

Monthly statistics for R2 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)

Jan. and Feb. 1949 maximums truncated from 2500 for graphing

July 1948 max truncated 

from 760 for graphing

 Figure 6-4. Monthly statistics for R2 doses in mrem (NRs excluded).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Month

0

30

60

90

0

30

60

90

1949

1948

Maximum

75th percentile

Median

Mean

25th percentile

Monthly statistics for R3 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)

July 1948 maximum truncated 

from 640 to 100 for graphing.

 Figure 6-5. Monthly statistics for R3 doses in mrem (NRs excluded).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 12 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Month

0

10

20

30

0

10

20

30

1949

1948

Maximum

75th percentile

Median

Mean

25th percentile

Monthly statistics for R4 doses in mrem (NRs excluded)

 Figure 6-6. Monthly statistics for R4 doses in mrem (NRs excluded).

early Health Physics reports (Struxness 1948b,c). The R2 reading from the 502 sensitive film under 

the open window of a film badge show a response to photons with energies less than 0.1 MeV that is 

as much as 15-20 times greater than the response to photons of higher energies (Handloser 1959; 

Thornton, Davis, and Gupton 1961), whereas PICs have trouble detecting photons with energies less 

than 0.1 Mev because they are heavily attenuated in the wall materials of the PICs as discussed 

previously in Section 3.1. The high R2 reading for another worker in the Fire Department (Dept. 

2093) in July 1948 appears to be an artifact for a couple of reasons: (1) the R2 and R3 readings for 

the skin and whole-body doses are nearly equal (see Figures 6.4 and 6.5), and (2) the high R3 

reading for the whole-body dose is not observed in either the R1 or R4 readings for the worker (see 

Figures 6.3 and 6.6). The recorded R3 dose of 640 mrem was greater than either the R1 MDL of 5 

mrem or the R4 MDL of 500 mrem. 

6.0 DISCUSSION

The external monitoring data for the 1948-1949 period at the Y-12 facility have been reviewed in 

this report. During the 1948-1949 period, both PICs and film badge dosimeters were used at Y-12 

(Souleyrette 2003; ORAUT 2003). The PICs appear to provide the doses of record during this period. 

This is consistent with practices at other DOE facilities such as the Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

and Hanford Site (Ostrouchov, Frome, and Kerr 2000). Initially, PICs were considered the primary 

device for monitoring worker exposures, and film badge dosimeters were considered a valuable 

adjunct (Hart 1966). This practice was eventually reversed with the film badge dosimeters providing 

the dose of record, and the PICs became the day-to-day means of monitoring worker exposures 

(Wilson et al. 1990). The switch from PICs to film badge dosimeters to provide the doses of record at 

Y-12 occurred in 1950 (ORAUT 2005a).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 13 of 15

Pre-1950 film badge data have been considered questionable because of frequently changed 

procedures and a perceived general lack of monitoring quality control during this period (Tankersley 

1982). For example, for R2, R3, and R4 in the Y-12 data, it appears that either 0 or 30 mrem might 

have been assigned if all four weekly readings in the month fell below the MDL during certain periods 

of time. In addition, the very large doses observed in the R2 and R3 film badge responses were 

sometimes absent in the PIC data (see Figures 6-3 through 6-5). The PIC data were obtained with 

devices that were very simple to use; they should provide reliable data regarding whole-body doses 

from gamma rays and high-energy beta particles during the 1948-1949 period. Several R2 readings 

suggest high exposures to the skin from either beta particles or low-energy photons that may not have 

been detected by the PICs (see Figure 6.4). The 1948-1949 personnel dosimetry studies at Y-12 

demonstrated that film badges provided a reliable and convenient method for monitoring the shallow 

doses to basal layer of the skin from both beta particles and low-energy photons and penetrating 

whole-body doses from gamma rays. In 1950, NTA film emulsions were also added to the film badge 

dosimeters to provide the capability of monitoring whole-body penetrating doses to workers exposed 

to neutrons (Souleyrette 2003; ORAUT 2003). 

The 1948-1949 monitoring data appear to be useful in a variety of ways in dose reconstructions for 

Y-12 workers. In a prior study, for example, gamma-ray dose data for Y-12 workers from 1950 to 

1979 were reviewed, and a method was developed for estimating gamma-ray dose starting with the 

UCC management change in the third quarter of 1947 (ORAUT 2005a). Doses estimated by this 

method for Y-12 workers during the 1948-1949 period are found to be very claimant-favorable in 

comparison to the actual external monitoring data reported herein obtained using PICs. The MDL 

for the PICs was approximately 5 mrem, and monitoring appeared to be inclusive because many NR 

doses were recorded for workers who were judged to have external exposure potential. Therefore, it 

is not likely that a substantial amount of external dose was unrecorded. The 1948-1949 monitoring 

data reviewed in this report are now available on the O: Drive of the secure data server at the ORAUCOC. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 14 of 15

REFERENCES

Auxier, J. A., 1967, “Special Methods in Radiation Dosimetry,” in Principles of Radiation Protection

(K. Z. Morgan and J. E. Turner, eds.), pp. 215-241, John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York.

Craft, H. R., J. C. Ledbetter, and J. C. Hart, 1952, Personnel Monitoring Operating Techniques, 

ORNL-1411, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy), 2004, Guide of Good Practices for Occupational Radiological 

Protection at Uranium Facilities, DOE-STD-1136-2004, Washington, D.C. 

Handloser, J. S., 1959, Health Physics Instrumentation, Pergamon Press, New York, New York.

Hart, J. C., 1966, A Progress Report Dealing with the Derivation of Dose Data from ORNL Personnel 

Records Applicable to the Mancuso Study, ORNL/M-2614 (formerly, ORNL CFM 66-1-84), 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Murray, R., 1948, Health Physics Progress Report, January 1-31, 1949, Y-120, Y-12 Plant, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee.

NBS (National Bureau of Standards), 1962, Physical Aspects of Irradiation, Recommendations of the 

International Commission on Radiological Units and Measurements, Handbook 85, U.S. 

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

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

Implementation Guidelines, OCAS-IG-001, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, 

Cincinnati, Ohio.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2003, Technical Basis Document for the Y-12 

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

Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005a, Historical Evaluation of the Film Badge 

Dosimetry Program at the Y-12 Facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Part 1 − Gamma Radiation, 

ORAU-OTIB-044 Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005b, Historical Evaluation of the Film Badge 

Dosimetry Program at the Y-12 Facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Part 2 − Neutron Radiation, 

ORAU-OTIB-0045 Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Ostrouchov, G., E. L. Frome, and G. D. Kerr, 2000, Dose Estimation from Daily and Weekly 

Dosimetry Data, ORNL/TM-1999/282, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 

Parrish, B. R., 1979, Analysis of External Monitoring Devices and Data for Oak Ridge Epidemiological 

Study, Masters Thesis, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 

North Carolina.

Price, W. J., 1958, Nuclear Radiation Detection, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, New 

York. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0047 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 09/20/2005 Page 15 of 15

Souleyrette, M. L., 2003, Summary of Historical Monitoring Techniques Provided to NIOSH for 

EEOICPA Requests, Y-12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, February 18.

Struxness, E. G., 1948a, Health Physics − Industrial Hygiene Progress Report, May 1-31, 1948, 

Y-181/1R, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 16.

Struxness, E. G., 1948b, Health Physics – Industrial Hygiene Progress Report, September 1-30, 

1948, Y-259, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (October 8).

Struxness, E. G., 1948c, Health Physics – Industrial Hygiene Progress Report, November 1-30, 1948, 

Y-300/1R, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (December 15).

Struxness, E. G., 1949, Health Physics − Industrial Hygiene Progress Report, December 1-31, 1948, 

Y-318/1R, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, January 11.

Tankersley, W. G., 1982, “Pre-1950 Y-12 Radiation Records,” memorandum to S. A. Fry, Oak Ridge 

Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 22.

Thornton, W. T., D. M. Davis, and E. D. Gupton, 1961, The ORNL Badge Dosimeter and Its Personnel 

Monitoring Applications, ORNL-3126, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Watkins, J. P., J. L. Regan, D. L. Cagle, E. L. Frome, C. M. West, D. J. Crawford-Brown, and W. G. 

Tankersley, 1993, Data Collection, Validation, and Description for the Oak Ridge Nuclear 

Facilities Mortality Study, ORISE-93/J-42, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee.

Watkins, J. P., J. L. Regan, D. L. Cagle, E. L. Frome, C. M. West, D. J. Crawford-Brown, and W. G. 

Tankersley, 1997, “Collection, Validation, and Treatment of Data for a Mortality Study of 

Nuclear Industry Workers,” Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 12(3), 195-205. 

West, C. M., 1980, “Names of Persons Having Dosimetry Information in the 1947-1950 Period in the 

Y-12 Record Center,” Union Carbide-Nuclear Division Internal Correspondence to H. B. 

McBride, Jr., Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 16. 

Whyte, G. N., Principles of Radiation Dosimetry, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York.

Wilcox, W. J. Jr., 2001, An Overview of the History of Y-12, 1942-1992, American Museum of Science 

and Energy, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 

Wilson, R. H., W. V. Baumgartner, J. J. Fix, and L. L. Nichols, 1990, Description and Evaluation of the 

Hanford Personnel Dosimeter Program from 1944 to 1989, PNL-7447, Pacific Northwest 

Laboratory, Richland, Washington.