Draft

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

SC&A’s Focused Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02, 

“External Dose Reconstruction” 

Contract No. 75D30119C04183

Document No. SCA-TR-2022-PR088, Revision 0

Prepared by

Ron Buchanan, PhD, CHP

SC&A, Inc.

2200 Wilson Blvd., Suite 300

Arlington, VA 22201-3324

January 7, 2022 

DISCLAIMER

This is a working document provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 

technical support contractor, SC&A for use in discussions with the National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health (ABRWH), including its Working Groups or Subcommittees. Documents produced by 

SC&A, such as memorandum, white paper, draft or working documents are not final NIOSH or 

ABRWH products or positions, unless specifically marked as such. This document prepared by 

SC&A represents its preliminary evaluation on technical issues.

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is 

protected by the Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 2 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

SC&A, Inc. technical support for the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health’s 

review of NIOSH dose reconstruction program

Document title SC&A’s Focused Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02, “External 

Dose Reconstruction”

Document number SCA-TR-2022-PR088

Revision number 0 (Draft)

Supersedes NA

Effective date January 7, 2022 

Task manager Kathy Behling [signature on file]

Project manager Bob Barton, CHP [signature on file]

Document reviewer(s) Kathy Behling [signature on file] 

Record of revisions

Revision number Effective date Description of revision

0 (Draft) 1/7/2022 Initial issue
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 3 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

Table of Contents

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

1 Introduction and Background.................................................................................... 5

2 Overview of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02.......................................................... 5

3 SC&A’s Focused Review of Changes in ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02.............. 6

4 SC&A’s Focused Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02, Addressing Previous 

Observations ................................................................................................................... 7

4.1 Observation 1: Need to retain information contained in ORAUT-PROC-0060 ... 7

4.2 Observation 2: Clarification of covered x-ray examinations ............................... 8

4.3 Observation 3: Unmonitored worker potential exposure .................................... 8

4.4 Observation 4: Use of multiple badge records ................................................... 8

4.5 Observation 5: Clarification of application of NCRP-to-ICRP correction factors . 9

5 Summary and Conclusions....................................................................................... 9

6 References ............................................................................................................. 10
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 4 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ABRWH Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DR dose reconstruction

ICRP International Commission on Radiological Protection

keV kiloelectron volt

LOD limit of detection

NCRP National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

ORAUT Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team

OTIB ORAUT technical information bulletin

SCPR Subcommittee for Procedure Reviews

TBD technical basis document
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 5 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

1 Introduction and Background

On November 3, 2021, the Subcommittee for Procedure Reviews (SCPR) tasked SC&A, Inc. 

with a focused review of ORAUT-OTIB-0088 (“OTIB-0088”), revision 02, “External Dose 

Reconstruction,” issued June 11, 2021 (NIOSH, 2021). According to revision 02 of OTIB-0088, 

the “Revision [was] initiated to provide additional guidance regarding the potential need to use 

ICRP 60 weighting factors with neutron missed dose after the ICRP 60 implementation dates for 

sites in the DOE complex” (p. 2). 

This report presents SC&A’s focused review to (1) compare the changes in OTIB-0088, 

revision 02 (NIOSH, 2021), to revision 01 (NIOSH, 2019) and (2) determine if the revisions in 

OTIB-0088, revision 02, addressed the observations identified by SC&A’s review of revision 01 

(SC&A, 2021). 

2 Overview of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02 

The following is a brief outline of OTIB-0088, revision 02 (NIOSH, 2021): 

• General approach – The OTIB-0088 methodology is based primarily on information in 

OCAS-IG-001, revision 3, “External Dose Reconstruction Implementation Guideline” 

(NIOSH, 2007). 

• Initial evaluation of a claim – Figure 2-1 of OTIB-0088 (p. 9) provides a condensed, 

overall view of the method recommended for sorting and processing a claim as an 

overestimate, best estimate, or underestimate.

• Hierarchy of data – Table 2-1 (p. 10) summarizes the order of importance of data 

sources used for dose reconstruction (DR). 

• Level of worker monitoring – Section 2.1 (pp. 10–14) recommends DR methods to be 

used for three levels of worker monitoring:

– Worker was monitored adequately. 

– Worker was not monitored. 

– Worker was monitored inadequately. 

• Types of external radiation –Section 2.2 (pp. 14–18) summarizes the types of potential 

radiation exposures and recommended energy intervals. 

– Photons – The total photon dose consists of measured, missed, occupational medical 

x-ray, and environmental dose. Photons can be <30 kiloelectron volts (keV), 30–

250 keV, or >250 keV in energy. Photon dose is typically assigned as an acute 

exposure, except environmental photon dose is always assigned as a chronic 

exposure. 

– Neutrons – The total neutron dose consists of measured and missed dose. Early 

neutron dosimetry is not always available or reliable; therefore, neutron-to-photon 
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 6 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

ratios must sometimes be used. Table 2-2 (p. 17) provides the recommended neutron 

energy intervals and weighting factors. Neutron dose is assigned as a chronic 

exposure. 

– Betas – The total beta dose consists of measured, missed, and skin contamination 

dose and is assigned as >15 keV electrons. Electron dose is assigned as an acute 

exposure. 

• Conversion of reconstructed external dose to organ dose – Section 2.3 (pp. 18–19) 

provides DR guidance on converting external dose to organ dose (exposure, absorbed 

dose, ambient dose, and penetrating dose). 

• Uncertainty –Section 2.4 (pp. 19–20) provides DR guidance on assessing uncertainty in 

assigning external dose.

• Attachment A – This attachment provides an overview, with example calculations, of 

the recommended methods to use to assess the potential number of missed zeros using:

– overestimating approach 

– underestimating approach 

– best estimate approach

• Attachment B – This attachment provides a general outline of the sources of onsite 

ambient dose. It recommends assigning ambient external dose as a chronic exposure of 

30–250 keV photons. The attachment offers some guidance concerning best estimate 

methods for ambient dose assignment. It does not provide any site-specific information or 

data tables concerning ambient external dose, as these data are contained in site-specific 

technical basis documents (TBDs). 

• Attachment C – This attachment provides dates when U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) sites incorporated the recommendations of International Commission on 

Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 60 (ICRP, 1991; “ICRP 60”) for neutron 

weighting factors.

3 SC&A’s Focused Review of Changes in ORAUT-OTIB-0088, 

Revision 02 

SC&A compared revision 02 of OTIB-0088 (NIOSH, 2021) to revision 01 of OTIB-0088 

(NIOSH, 2019) and found that the notable changes were as follows: 

• The following text was added on page 16: 

It is possible the site did not incorporate the ICRP 60 neutron weighting 

factors into the determination of the neutron LOD used for missed dose 

calculations after the implementation date (this issue should be addressed 

in the site TBD). If this is the case, or if this issue is not addressed in the 

current version of the site TBD, apply ICRP Publication 60 neutron 
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 7 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

weighting factors to neutron dosimeter missed dose after the dates listed in 

Attachment C.

• The following facility was added to the list of DOE sites in attachment C, page 29: Oak 

Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (K-25), ICRP 60 incorporated January 1, 2010. 

SC&A concurs with these changes and has no findings or observations in this section. 

4 SC&A’s Focused Review of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, Revision 02, 

Addressing Previous Observations

During the November 3, 2021, meeting, the SCPR, the National Institute for Occupational Safety 

and Health (NIOSH), and SC&A discussed the five observations identified in SC&A’s 2021 

review (SC&A, 2021) of OTIB-0088, revision 01 (NIOSH, 2019). This report satisfies the 

SCPR’s tasking of SC&A to perform a focused review of revision 02 of OTIB-0088 to determine 

if it has addressed SC&A’s previous observations about revision 01. For completeness, SC&A 

has also included a discussion of those findings that were closed at the November 3, 2021, SCPR 

meeting. The following sections summarize the current status of each of the five observations. 

4.1 Observation 1: Need to retain information contained in ORAUT-PROC-0060

Attachments A, B, and C of ORAUT-PROC-0060, revision 01 (NIOSH, 2006), are very 

informative sections of the procedure that provide the dose reconstructor with a quick reference 

for the assignment of site-specific onsite ambient dose. These attachments also help ensure the 

DR process is conducted in a consistent manner. The ORAUT-PROC-0060 attachments are: 

• Attachment A – External Onsite Ambient Dose Assignment for Monitored Site 

Employees 

• Attachment B – Maximizing Dose Summary

• Attachment C – Methods for Assigning Site-Specific Best Estimates of External Onsite 

Ambient Doses

Since OTIB-0088 lacks the valuable information provided in the ORAUT-PROC-0060 

attachments, the time to complete DRs would likely increase because the dose reconstructor 

would need to locate specific information now in the attachments, such as the current site 

environmental profile, personnel and control badge handling and storage policies, ambient dose 

levels, etc. In addition, this could result in inconsistences in DRs among different claims. 

SC&A strongly suggests reconsideration of the cancellation of ORAUT-PROC-0060 without an 

equivalent replacement document.

4.1.1 Discussion of observation 1

This observation was discussed during the SCPR meeting of February 13, 2019 (ABRWH, 2019, 

pp. 87–91). The subcommittee closed SC&A’s (2019) observation 1 with the understanding that 

NIOSH would consider SC&A’s recommendation further and issue an email with a path 

forward.
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 8 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

4.1.2 Current status of observation 1 

Although the SCPR had previously closed observation 1, this observation was discussed at the 

November 3, 2021, SCPR meeting, because SC&A was not aware of NIOSH providing a path 

forward regarding this issue. NIOSH indicated that the specific external ambient dose 

information (including the site-specific information previously in ORAUT-PROC-0060) for each 

DOE site would be included in revised site TBDs as they are updated. The SCPR accepted this 

explanation and closed the observation.

4.2 Observation 2: Clarification of covered x-ray examinations

The first paragraph of page 8 of OTIB-0088, revision 01, states that, “Only doses that were 

received before the diagnosis of the primary cancer are included in the dose reconstruction,” and, 

“If the worker received medical X-ray examinations for occupational health screening and as a 

condition of employment at a covered site, dose reconstruction includes those doses.” However, 

SC&A suggested that it would provide further clarification if the statement included the fact that 

x-ray examinations that were performed for diagnostic or therapeutic reasons are excluded.

4.2.1 Current status of observation 2 

This observation was discussed at the November 3, 2021, SCPR meeting. NIOSH indicated that 

dose reconstructors are aware that x-ray examinations performed for diagnostic or therapeutic 

reasons are excluded. The SCPR accepted this explanation and closed the observation.

4.3 Observation 3: Unmonitored worker potential exposure

Page 10 of OTIB-0088, revision 01, states, “In general, it is expected that reconstructed dose to 

unmonitored workers will be less than dose to monitored workers.” This statement does not 

appear to be substantiated, because it does not consider the fact that “unmonitored” workers also 

include workers whose records have been lost or destroyed or are illegible. Also, some classes of 

workers had their radiation exposures controlled by their primary employer (e.g., subcontractor), 

who did not necessarily follow the same procedures as the prime contractors.

4.3.1 Current status of observation 3

This observation was discussed at the November 3, 2021, SCPR meeting. NIOSH stated that this 

statement would be removed in the next revision of OTIB-0088. The SCPR accepted this 

explanation and closed the observation.

4.4 Observation 4: Use of multiple badge records

Page 13 of OTIB-0088, revision 01, states, “However, for cases in which multiple badges were 

issued for a particular monitoring period, only one zero measurement should be assigned per 

monitoring period.” While this policy may apply to multiple badges from the same facility worn 

during the same time period (e.g., the badges are redundant), there are instances where a worker 

may have worked at several facilities at a site and been issued different badges at each facility 

(e.g., Idaho National Laboratory). In those cases, all badge results should be analyzed. (SC&A 

does believe this is standard practice in DR.) 
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 9 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

4.4.1 Current status of observation 4

This observation was discussed at the November 3, 2021, SCPR meeting. NIOSH indicated that 

this statement will be reviewed, and that NIOSH will revise this statement in the next revision of 

OTIB-0088. The SCPR accepted this explanation; however, the status of the observation was 

changed to “In Abeyance” in order to track whether the next revision of OTIB-0088 has included 

this change. 

4.5 Observation 5: Clarification of application of NCRP-to-ICRP correction 

factors

Section 2.2.2 (p. 14) of OTIB-0088, revision 01, discusses the ICRP 60 neutron weighting 

factors, and attachment C provides the dates that DOE sites switched to using the ICRP 60 

neutron weighting factors. For consistency in DR, it would be useful to include a statement that 

indicates that the neutron National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements (NCRP)-

to-ICRP correction factors recommended in the site profile need not be applied after the 

implementation of the ICRP 60 neutron weighting factors in the 2009–2011 timeframe. A review

of several of the DOE site profiles for external dose issued after 2010 indicates that not all site 

profiles instruct the dose reconstructor not to apply the NCRP-to-ICRP correction factors after 

the ICRP implementation date.

4.5.1 Discussion of observation 5

This observation was discussed at the November 3, 2021, SCPR meeting. NIOSH indicated that 

this section was revised in revision 02 of OTIB-0088 (NIOSH, 2021). The SCPR tasked SC&A 

with a focused review of revision 02 to determine if this observation was adequately addressed. 

4.5.2 Current status of observation 5

SC&A reviewed revision 02 of OTIB-0088 and found that the text (p. 16), concerning the 

application of the ICRP 60 neutron weighting factors to missed neutron dose after ICRP neutron 

weighting factors were implemented at DOE sites, did not address observation 5. Observation 5 

recommends that it would be useful to include a statement that indicates that the NCRP-to-ICRP 

neutron correction factors recommended in the site profile need not be applied to measured

neutron dose after the implementation of the ICRP 60 neutron weighting factors at the site. 

SC&A recommends that this observation remain open.

5 Summary and Conclusions

SC&A performed a focused review of OTIB-0088, revision 02, to (1) evaluate the changes in 

OTIB-0088, revision 02 compared to revision 01, and (2) determine if the revisions in 

OTIB-0088, revision 02, addressed the previous observations identified by SC&A in its review 

of OTIB-0088, revision 01 (SC&A, 2021). For completeness, SC&A provided a summary of 

observations 1, 2, and 3, which were addressed and closed during the November 3, 2021, SCPR 

meeting. Based on SCPR discussions at the November 3, 2021, meeting, observation 4, 

concerning the use of multiple badge records, remained open pending the next revision of 

OTIB-0088. 

SC&A’s focused review of revision 02 finds that observation 5, on the application of NCRP-toICRP neutron correction factors to measured dose after the implementation of the ICRP 60 
Effective date: 1/7/2022 Revision No. 0 (Draft) Document No.: SCA-TR-2022-PR088 Page 10 of 10

NOTICE: This document has been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the 

Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a and has been cleared for distribution. 

neutron weighting factor at the site, was not adequately addressed in OTIB-0088, revision 02. 

SC&A recommends that observation 5 remain open. 

6 References

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Subcommittee for Procedure Reviews. (2019). 

Wednesday, February 13, 2019 [Transcript of teleconference meeting].

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/2019/sctr021319-508.pdf 

International Commission on Radiological Protection. (1991). 1990 recommendations of the 

International Commission on Radiological Protection (Publication 60). Ann. ICRP 21(1-3). 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2006). Occupational onsite ambient dose 

reconstruction for DOE sites (ORAUT-PROC-0060, rev. 01). 

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/arch/orau/orauprocs/or-proc-60-r1.pdf 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2007). External dose reconstruction 

implementation guideline (OCAS-IG-001, rev. 3). https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/dr/oc-ig001-r3.pdf

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2019). External dose reconstruction

(ORAUT-OTIB-0088, rev. 01). https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/arch/tibs/or-t88-r1-508.pdf 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2021). External dose reconstruction

(ORAUT-OTIB-0088, rev. 02). https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/tibs/or-t88-r2-508.pdf 

SC&A, Inc. (2019). SC&A’s evaluation of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, revision 00, “External dose 

reconstruction” (SCA-TR-2019-PR001, rev. 0).

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/scarpts/sca-tib88-010819-508.pdf 

SC&A, Inc. (2021). SC&A’s evaluation of ORAUT-OTIB-0088, revision 01, “External dose 

reconstruction” (SCA-TR-2019-PR088, rev. 0). 

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/scarpts/sca-tib88r1-r0-508.pdf