ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

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

Page 1 of 8

Document Title:

Atomics International – Introduction

Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 

Revision: 01 

Effective Date: 08/30/2006

Type of Document: TBD

Supersedes: Revision 00

Subject Expert: Melton H. Chew

Document Owner

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

Melton H. Chew, TBD Team Leader

Approval: Richard Merrill Signature on File for Approval Date: 08/03/2006

John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager

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

Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 08/07/2006

Kate Kimpan, Project Director

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 08/30/2006

James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science

 New Total Rewrite Revision Page Change

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

REVISION AND DISCARD / DESTROY ALL COPIES OF THE PRIOR REVISION.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 2 of 8

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

02/21/2006 00 New technical basis document for the Energy Technology 

Engineering Center – Introduction. First approved issue. Initiated by 

Melton H. Chew.

08/30/2006 01 Revision to change site name to Atomics International throughout 

document in keeping with revised DOE site naming conventions. 

Approved issue of Revision 01. Added information to Site 

Description in Section 1.2.1 on page 6. No further changes occurred 

as a result of formal internal review. Incorporates NIOSH 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 Melton H. Chew.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 3 of 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE

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

PAGE

4

1.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................5

 1.1 Purpose ...........................................................................................................................6

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

 1.2.1 Site Description .....................................................................................................6

 1.2.2 Occupational Medical Dose ...................................................................................6

 1.2.3 Occupational Environmental Dose......................................................................... 7

 1.2.4 Occupational Internal Dose ...................................................................................7

 1.2.5 Occupational External Dosimetry........................................................................... 7

References ..........................................................................................................................................8
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 4 of 8

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AI Atomics International

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

EEOICPA Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act

ETEC Energy Technology Engineering Center

LAT lateral 

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

PA posterior–anterior 

SSFL Santa Susana Field Laboratory 

TBD Technical Basis Document

U.S.C. United States Code

§ section

1 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 5 of 8

1.0

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 at 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 the NIOSH staff in the completion of the individual work required for each dose 

8 reconstruction.

1 INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

17 7384l(12)]. Accordingly, except for the exclusion for the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program noted 

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

19 facility encompassed by EEOICPA.

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

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

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

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

24 7384n(b)] says that an individual with cancer “shall be determined to have sustained that cancer in the 

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

26 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

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

32 premises, grounds, or operations covered by Executive Order No. 12344, dated February 1, 1982 (42 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

43 derived:

27 ] guidelines established under 

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

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

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

 

1 The U.S. Department of Labor is ultimately responsible under the EEOICPA for determining the POC. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 6 of 8

1 • Radiation from naturally occurring radon present in conventional structures

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

3 The facility, which includes four locations, has been identified in various ways over time. The name 

4 Atomics International (AI) is used to represent all of them unless more specific location information is 

5 warranted. In that context, AI includes Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory which has also 

6 been known as Nuclear Development Field Laboratory, Liquid Metal Engineering Center, and Energy 

7 Technology Engineering Center (ETEC), portions of the Downey facility, the Vanowen Building at the 

8 Canoga facility and the De Soto facility.

9 1.1 PURPOSE

10 The purpose of this document is to provide a site profile that contains technical basis information for 

11 evaluation of the total occupational dose for EEOICPA claimants who were employed at the Atomics 

12 International (AI) facility, as described above. 

13 U. S. Atomic Energy omission-funded work at the AI facility began in 1948. North American Aviation 

14 (NAA) entered into a contract with AEC to conduct nuclear research operations at Area IV and the 

15 Downey, Canoga and De Soto sites. At that time, Atomics International, an internal division of NAA, 

16 was the company’s designated nuclear research and development division. In addition to the 

17 employees of the AI division, other employees of NAA who worked at any of the above sites during 

18 the AEC contract period are potentially eligible for EEOICPA benefits.

19 1.2 SCOPE

20 This site profile consists of six TBDs: Introduction, Site Description, Occupational Medical Dose, 

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

1.2.1

23 The Site Description TBD (ORAUT 2005a) describes Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory

24 (SSFL) established by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in 1966 to provide management, 

25 engineering, testing, consultation, and project monitoring services for a wide range of DOE programs. 

26 Area IV of the SSFL includes government-owned buildings in the Simi Hills of Ventura County, 

27 California, about 30 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles. This TBD describes the site including 

28 the site areas or buildings, site processes, periods of operation, radionuclides of concern, and other 

29 information pertinent to dose reconstruction. In addition, the TBD describes AI-related activities at the 

30 Downey, Canoga Park, and De Soto facilities.

22 Site Description

1.2.2

32 The Occupational Medical Dose TBD (ORAUT 2005b) provides information about the dose that 

33 individual workers received from X-ray examinations required as a condition of employment. X-ray 

34 examinations were included in pre-employment physical examinations, and chest X-rays were 

35 included as part of periodic physicals. The review of records suggests that about half of the 

36 pre-employment examinations included both posterior–anterior (PA) and lateral (LAT) chest views and 

37 one or two views (PA and LAT) of the lumbar spine. The remainder included only one PA chest view. 

38 It was rare for an employee to have annual chest X-rays; most individuals were not subject to periodic 

39 radiographic reexamination. Of those who were, the typical frequency was 3 to 5 years. There was 

40 no evidence of collimation on the X-rays, and there was no evidence of the use of photofluorography. 

41 There was no evidence of the use of gonadal shielding in the lumbar spine views.

31 Occupational Medical Dose
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 7 of 8

1.2.3

2 The Occupational Environmental Dose TBD (ORAUT 2005c) discusses the doses received by 

3 workers on the grounds but outside the facilities at AI. The doses were from facility discharges to the 

4 atmosphere, from ambient external radiation originating in the facilities, and from inadvertent ingestion 

5 of radionuclides. The TBD describes the estimated annual intakes for inhalation exposure, the 

6 estimated radiation dose from ambient external exposures, and inadvertent ingestion at AI. Because 

7 environmental measurements do not distinguish the source of emissions, they reflect air 

8 concentrations from nearby as well as distant sources. The receptors addressed in the TBD are AI

9 employees who did not wear external dosimetry or who were not monitored for internal exposures. 

10 The TBD provides annual intakes and ambient external dose from 1959 to 1999.

1 Occupational Environmental Dose

1.2.4

12 The Internal Dose TBD (ORAUT 2005d) discusses the internal dosimetry program at AI. It provides 

13 supporting technical data to evaluate the internal occupational doses that can reasonably be 

14 associated with the radiation exposures of the AI worker. The internal occupational doses are from 

15 exposures in AI facilities and from onsite exposures to AI environmental releases. The document 

16 discusses the technical basis for methods used to prepare AI worker dose information for input to the 

17 NIOSH Interactive RadioEpidemiological Program. Information on measurement uncertainties is an 

18 integral component of the approach. The document describes the evaluation of uncertainty for AI

19 exposure and dose records. The TBD addresses missed doses as well as the evaluation of exposure 

20 to unmonitored and monitored workers. 

11 Occupational Internal Dose

1.2.5

22 The External Dosimetry TBD (ORAUT 2005e) discusses historical and current practices in relation to 

23 the evaluation of external exposure data for monitored and unmonitored workers at AI. In the 

24 beginning AI had its own dosimeter in addition to pencil dosimeters. AI started using commercial 

25 vendors in the early 1960s and continued that practice to the end of its operating life. This TBD

26 describes the external dosimetry systems and practices at the facility. Missed doses result from the 

27 minimum detectable levels of the dosimeters and the exchange periods. In cases of lost or destroyed 

28 dosimeters, estimates are based on past results or similar work, coworker results, or the product of 

29 instrument measurements and time spent in the radiation zone. Neutron doses were measured with 

30 nuclear track emulsion, Type A film for the start of reactor operations. Both fast and thermal neurons 

31 were measured and recorded as whole-body dose. Missed doses for unmonitored employees could 

32 be as much as 500 millirem or 10% of whatever standard was in effect at the time of employment.

21 Occupational External Dosimetry

33
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0038-1 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 08/30/2006 Page 8 of 8

1 REFERENCES

2 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005a, Technical Basis Document for the Energy 

3 Technology Engineering Center – Site Description, ORAUT-TKBS-0038-2, Rev. 00, Oak 

4 Ridge, Tennessee, November.

5 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005b, Technical Basis Document for the Energy 

6 Technology Engineering Center – Occupational Medical Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0038-3, Rev. 

7 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November.

8 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005c, Technical Basis Document for the Energy 

9 Technology Engineering Center – Occupational Environmental Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0038-4, 

10 Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November.

11 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005d, Technical Basis Document for the Energy 

12 Technology Engineering Center – Occupational Internal Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0038-5, Rev. 

13 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November.

14 ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005e, Technical Basis Document for the Energy 

15 Technology Engineering Center – Occupational External Dosimetry, ORAUT-TKBS-0038-6, 

16 Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November.