ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

Oak Ridge Associated Universities I Dade Moeller I MJW Technical Services

Page 1 of 22

DOE Review Release 11/26/2013

Document Title:

Internal Coworker Dosimetry Data 

for Nuclear Metals, Inc.

Document Number: ORAUT-OTIB-0084

Revision: 00

Effective Date: 11/15/2013

Type of Document: OTIB

Supersedes: None

Subject Expert(s): Matthew G. Arno 

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 10/29/2013

Matthew G. Arno, Document Owner

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 10/29/2013

John M. Byrne, Objective 1 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 10/29/2013

Edward F. Maher, Objective 3 Manager

Concurrence: Vickie S. Short Signature on File for Concurrence Date: 10/30/2013

Kate Kimpan, Project Director

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 11/15/2013

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-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 2 of 22

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION 

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

11/15/2013 00 New technical information bulletin to provide internal coworker data 

for Nuclear Metals, Inc. workers. Incorporates formal internal and 

NIOSH review comments. Training required: As determined by the 

Objective Manager. Initiated by Matthew G. Arno.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 3 of 22

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE PAGE

Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 5

1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 6

2.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................... 6

3.0 Data Overview ......................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Bioassay Data Selection............................................................................................... 6

3.2 Analysis........................................................................................................................ 7

4.0 Intake Modeling........................................................................................................................ 8

4.1 Assumptions................................................................................................................. 8

4.2 Bioassay Fitting ............................................................................................................ 8

5.0 Assignment of Intakes and Doses ............................................................................................ 9

6.0 Attributions and Annotations .................................................................................................... 9

References ........................................................................................................................................ 10

ATTACHMENT A, COWORKER DATA FIGURES ............................................................................ 14

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

5-1 Type F uranium intake rates.....................................................................................................9

5-2 Type M uranium intake rates....................................................................................................9

5-3 Type S uranium intake rates ....................................................................................................9

A-1 Worker urinalysis sampling frequency.................................................................................... 15

A-2 50th- and 84th-percentile urinary excretion rates of uranium, 1978 to 2000 ........................... 17

A-3 Type F uranium intake modeling results................................................................................. 18

A-4 Type M uranium intake modeling results................................................................................ 19

A-5 Type S uranium intake modeling results................................................................................. 22
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 4 of 22

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

A-1 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, all years, type F................................. 17

A-2 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, all years, type F................................. 18

A-3 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, all years, type M................................ 18

A-4 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, all years, type M................................ 19

A-5 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, 1978–1983, type S............................ 19

A-6 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, 1984–1994, type S............................ 20

A-7 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, 1995–2000, type S............................ 20

A-8 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, 1978–1983, type S............................ 20

A-9 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, 1984–1994, type S............................ 21

A-10 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, 1995–2000, type S............................ 21

A-11 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, all years, type S ................................ 21

A-12 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake 

rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, all years, type S ................................ 22
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 5 of 22

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

d day

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

dpm disintegrations per minute

GSD geometric standard deviation

ICRP International Commission on Radiological Protection

IMBA Integrated Modules for Bioassay Analysis

L liter

m meter

mg milligram

mL milliliter

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NMI Nuclear Metals, Inc.

ORAU Oak Ridge Associated Universities

OPOS one-person, one-sample

pCi picocurie

TIB technical information bulletin

U.S.C. United States Code

μCi microcurie

μg microgram

μm micrometer

§ section or sections
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 6 of 22

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Technical information bulletins (TIBs) are not official determinations made by the National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) but are rather general working documents that provide 

historical background information and guidance to assist in the preparation of dose reconstructions at 

particular sites or categories of sites. They will be revised in the event additional relevant information 

is obtained about the affected site(s). TIBs may be used to assist NIOSH staff in the completion of 

individual dose reconstructions.

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 (DOE) facility” as defined in the Energy Employees 

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

2.0 PURPOSE

Some employees at DOE sites were not monitored for potential intakes of radioactive material, or the 

records of such monitoring are incomplete or unavailable. In such cases, data from monitored 

coworkers can be used to assign an internal dose to address potential intakes of radioactive material. 

The purpose of this TIB is to provide monitored coworker information for calculating and assigning 

occupational internal doses to employees at Nuclear Metals, Inc. (NMI) for whom no or insufficient 

monitoring records exist.

ORAUT-OTIB-0019, Analysis of Coworker Bioassay Data for Internal Dose Assignment (ORAUT 

2005), describes the general process used to analyze bioassay data for the assignment of doses to 

individuals based on coworker results. ORAUT-PLAN-0014, Coworker Data Exposure Profile 

Development (ORAUT 2004), describes the approach and processes to develop reasonable exposure 

profiles based on available dosimetric information for workers at DOE sites and was used in 

conjunction with site specific information in ORAUT (2012b).

A statistical analysis of NMI bioassay data was performed according to ORAUT-OTIB-0019 (ORAUT 

2005) and ORAUT-PROC-0095, Generating Summary Statistics for Coworker Bioassay Data

(ORAUT 2006), as well as the statistical methods in ORAUT-RPRT-0053, Analysis of Stratified 

Coworker Datasets (ORAUT 2012a). The results were entered in the Integrated Modules for 

Bioassay Analysis (IMBA) computer program to obtain intake rates for the assignment of dose 

distributions.

3.0 DATA OVERVIEW

This section provides information on the general selection characteristics of the data and the methods 

of analysis. More detailed radionuclide-specific information is provided in Section 4.0.

3.1 BIOASSAY DATA SELECTION

Urinalysis bioassay data were obtained from NMI historical documents (see the Data References 

listing in the References section). These records contain data from NMI and from analytical 

laboratories that performed the urinalyses. Ideally, for a given bioassay sample, there would be only 

one record. However, many instances were noted where a given bioassay result was reported 

multiple times. Other instances were identified where many names (particularly last names) were 

spelled incorrectly, either in the original records or during the data entry process. First names were 

also entered as a combination of initials, full names, and nicknames. The bioassay data records were 

reviewed by a Project health physicist to exclude duplicates and to uniquely identify the individual for 

each record. This was necessary both to exclude the duplicates and for further statistical analysis as 

discussed below. The review was conducted with a combination of professional judgment and “fuzzy 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 7 of 22

matching” techniques. The software package R has a function called “agrep” that searches for 

approximate matches. This function was applied to each record name. For a single last name, the 

function computes a distance measure (based on the minimum number of insertions, deletions, and 

substitutions needed to change one last name into the other) for each of the other last names. The 

function returns all of the last names that are within a certain distance of the last name of interest. 

The same technique was used for the first and middle names. After matching using the R code, 

manual matching was performed, then duplicates were identified and excluded.

Little data is available prior to 1978. In 1978, the amount of bioassay data increased substantially due 

to a recommendation to increase urinalysis frequency and the receipt of a large contract to supply 

depleted uranium (ORAUT 2012b). Data from before January 1, 1978, and after December 31, 2000 

(the last year with a complete dataset) were not used. Only uranium fluorometric bioassay data were 

evaluated. Records for other radionuclides or uranium activity data were excluded. Uranium activity 

data is redundant to fluorometric data for the same samples and therefore excluded. Before the 

statistical analysis, the data were converted from mass units (μg/L or mg/L) to activity units (pCi/L) 

using a uranium-specific activity of 0.36 pCi/μg. This specific activity was used because this is the 

specific activity noted in the NMI bioassay results that were reported both in μg/L and μCi/L. In 

addition, all sample results were adjusted based on a daily urinary excretion of 1,400 mL to yield data 

in pCi/d.

The data sources are believed to result in a complete or nearly complete data set for the years 

evaluated. Any missing data is presumed to be missing at random, permitting statistical analysis of 

the data. No attempt was made to identify or exclude data based on incidents which may have 

occurred.

3.2 ANALYSIS

Bioassay data were analyzed by year since there was sufficient data to evaluate it on an annual basis 

for the time span evaluated. A lognormal distribution was assumed. After log-transforming the data, 

the 50th and 84th percentiles were determined for each period through the use of the methods 

described in ORAUT (2012a).

In ORAUT-OTIB-0075, Use of Claimant Datasets for Coworker Modeling (ORAUT 2009), arguments 

were presented to support the practice of treating a claimant dataset as a simple random sample from 

the population of all monitored workers. One potential issue posed by using a claimant dataset is that 

the workers who are involved in incidents usually submit more samples than workers who submit only 

routine (non-incident related) samples. This can skew the results because a small number of workers 

who are involved in incidents can dominate the claimant sample in a given year through the sheer 

number of samples and because the samples in the dataset are no longer independent of each other. 

At NMI, the small population of workers subject to bioassay testing resulted in a similar problem. To 

compensate for the unequal number of samples from the workers, the “one-person, one-sample” 

(OPOS) technique was used, where only one result was used for each person for each radionuclide 

for a given year. The OPOS statistic is calculated using the maximum possible mean methodology in 

ORAUT-RPRT-0053 (ORAUT 2012a). Table A-1 shows the number of workers with a given number 

of samples per year for each year evaluated.

For data prior to October 14, 1994, results of 1 μg/L were treated as censored results. Depending on 

the format of the data source, “<” symbols were not always used, especially for results on 

computerized printout. This permits consistent treatment of the data.

To permit lognormal fitting, zero values were considered to be censored values that were censored at 

the smallest positive value in the records for the period being evaluated.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 8 of 22

Two high results were excluded from the analysis. One result was inconsistent with other bioassay 

results for the same individual shortly after the high result, and the second was noted in the records 

as being an error.

4.0 INTAKE MODELING

This section discusses intake modeling assumptions, intake fitting, and intake materials.

4.1 ASSUMPTIONS

Each result that was used in the intake calculations was assumed to have a normal distribution. A 

uniform absolute error of 1 was applied to all results to assign the same weight to each result. 

Because of the nature of work at NMI, intakes could have been chronic or acute. However, a series 

of acute intakes can be approximated as a chronic intake. Therefore, intakes were assumed to be 

chronic and to occur through inhalation with a 5-μm activity median aerodynamic diameter particle 

size distribution.

A specific activity of 0.36 pCi/g, the conversion factor used in the source bioassay records, was used 

to convert fluorometric data to data in units of activity.

For intake modeling, all uranium activity was assumed to be 234U. This assumption does not affect the 

fitting of the data for intake determination because all uranium isotopes have the same biokinetic 

behavior and the isotopes that were considered in this analysis all have long half-lives in relation to 

the assumed intake period. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) 

Publication 68 dose coefficients (also referred to as dose conversion factors) for 234U are 7% to 31% 

larger than the dose coefficients for 235U, 236U, and 238U (ICRP 1995). Therefore, the assumption that 

the intake is 100% 234U provides a result that is favorable to claimants.

4.2 BIOASSAY FITTING

IMBA was used to fit the bioassay results to a series of inhalation intakes. Data for each radionuclide 

were fit as a series of chronic intakes. The intake assumptions were based on observed patterns in 

the bioassay data. Periods with constant chronic intake rates were chosen by the selection of periods 

in which the bioassay results were similar. A new chronic intake period was started if the data 

indicated a significant sustained change in the bioassay results. By this method, the years were 

divided into multiple chronic intake periods for each radionuclide (ORAUT 2005).

Because the uranium isotopes that were present at NMI have very long radiological half-lives, and 

because the material is retained in the body for long periods, excretion results are not independent. 

For example, an intake in the 1970s could contribute to urinary excretion in the 1990s and later. To 

avoid potential underestimation of intakes for people who worked at NMI for relatively short periods, 

each chronic intake was fit independently using only the bioassay results from the single intake period 

for type S solubility. This method results in an overestimate of intakes for exposures that extended 

through multiple assumed intake periods. However, these intake rates are to be considered bestestimate intake rates. Only the results in the intake period were selected for use in the fitting of each 

period. Excluded results are shown in light gray or red in the figures in Attachment A. Included 

results are dark gray or blue. For type M and F solubility, this approach was not used. The results of 

the uranium statistical analysis that was used to calculate the intakes are provided in Table A-2.

Uranium Type F: The solid lines in Figures A-1 and A-2 in Attachment A show the fits to the 50thand 84th-percentile excretion rates, respectively, for type F materials. Table A-3 lists the 50th- and 

84th-percentile intake rates that were determined from the uranium urinalysis along with the 

associated geometric standard deviations (GSDs).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 9 of 22

Uranium Type M: The solid lines in Figures A-3 and A-4 in Attachment A show the fits to the 50thand 84th-percentile excretion rates, respectively, for type M materials. Table A-4 lists the 50th- and 

84th-percentile intake rates that were determined from the uranium urinalysis along with the 

associated GSDs.

Uranium Type S: The solid lines in Figures A-5 to A-10 in Attachment A show the individual fits to 

the 50th- and 84th-percentile excretion rates, respectively, for type S materials. The same intake 

periods were applied for both percentiles because the values followed a similar pattern. Figures A-11 

and A-12 show the 50th- and 84th-percentile predicted excretion rates, respectively, from all type S 

intakes. Table A-5 lists the 50th- and 84th-percentile intake rates that were determined from the 

uranium urinalysis along with the associated GSDs.

5.0 ASSIGNMENT OF INTAKES AND DOSES

This section describes the derived intake rates and provides guidance for assigning doses. For the 

calculation of doses to individuals from bioassay data, a minimum GSD of 3 has been used to account 

for biological variation and uncertainty in the models. It was considered inappropriate to assign a 

value less than 3 for the coworker data. Therefore, a GSD of at least 3 was assigned for each of the 

intake periods. The original GSDs are provided in the tables for each radionuclide and solubility type 

in Attachment A. The 95th-percentile values are based on the adjusted GSD for the intake period. 

For cases in which there is justification that the individual might have had larger intakes than the 50thpercentile intake rates, dose reconstructors should use the 95th-percentile intake rates input into 

IREP as a constant

Tables 5-1 to 5-3 list the uranium intakes and associated GSDs to be used for each year of potential 

uranium exposure. The 2000 intake rates can be extended past 2000 as a measure favorable to

claimants.

Table 5-1. Type F uranium intake rates (pCi/d).

Start End 50th percentile GSD 95th percentile

1/1/1978 12/31/1983 7.83 3.00 47.7

1/1/1984 12/31/1994 3.98 3.00 24.2

1/1/1995 12/31/2000 0.899 3.00 5.48

Table 5-2. Type M uranium intake rates (pCi/d).

Start End 50th percentile GSD 95th percentile

1/1/1978 12/31/1983 32.6 3.00 199

1/1/1984 12/31/1994 15.9 3.00 97.0

1/1/1995 12/31/2000 3.26 3.05 20.4

Table 5-3. Type S uranium intake rates (pCi/d).

Start End 50th percentile GSD 95th percentile

1/1/1978 12/31/1983 574 3.00 3,497

1/1/1984 12/31/1994 243 3.00 1,479

1/1/1995 12/31/2000 69.7 3.00 425

6.0 ATTRIBUTIONS AND ANNOTATIONS

All information requiring identification was addressed via references integrated into the

reference section of this document.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 10 of 22

REFERENCES

ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection), 1995, Dose Coefficients for Intakes of 

Radionuclides by Workers, Publication 68, Pergamon Press, Oxford, England.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2004, Coworker Data Exposure Profile 

Development, ORAUT-PLAN-0014, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November 24.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2005, Analysis of Coworker Bioassay Data for 

Internal Dose Assignment, ORAUT-OTIB-0019, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 7.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2006, Generating Summary Statistics for 

Coworker Bioassay Data, ORAUT-PROC-0095, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 5.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2009, Use of Claimant Datasets for Coworker 

Modeling, ORAUT-OTIB-0075, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, May 25.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2012a, Analysis of Stratified Coworker Datasets, 

ORAUT-RPRT-0053, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 16.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2012b, SEC Petition Evaluation Report Petition 

SEC-00195, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, August 30.

DATA REFERENCES IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1959–1982, NMI: collection of “Medical Sample” 

forms, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled letters to NMI, Boston, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 26863]

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1978–1979, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Cambridge, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 113312]

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1980–1981, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Cambridge, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 29174]

Kinneman, J. D., 1981, “Evaluation of Bioassay Data,” memorandum to A. W. Grella, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Region 1, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, December 8. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 107973]

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1981–1982, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Cambridge, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 29175]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1981–1992, collection of “Urinalysis History Form,” H. P. Form No. 25, and 

“Personnel Exposure Information Annual Summary,” HP Form No. 36A, Concord, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 113397]

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1982, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Cambridge and Boston, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 28443]

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1983–1984, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Boston, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 113271]

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1983–1984, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Boston, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25074]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 11 of 22

Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1984, collection of untitled letters to Nuclear Metals, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 113213]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1984, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, August 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 113590]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1984, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, August 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 24979]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1984, NMI: collection of “Urine Sample Collection 

Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled letters to 

NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25075]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and B&G (Bolton and Galanek), 1984–1985, NMI: collection of “Urine 

Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; B&G: untitled letter to 

D. Allard (NMI), Boston, Massachusetts (B&G), June 28. [SRDB Ref ID: 113211]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1985, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” January 8. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 113403]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1985, NMI: collection of Urine Sample Collection 

Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled letters to 

NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 113457]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1985–1986, NMI: collection of “Urine Sample 

Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled 

letters to NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25006]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1986, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 27. [SRDB Ref ID: 25083]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1986–1987, NMI: collection of “Urine Sample 

Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled 

letters to NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25007]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1987, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, and 

Fluorometric Laboratory Environmental Sample Analysis Report, Concord, Massachusetts. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 113217]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1987, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 15. [SRDB Ref ID: 25031]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1987–1988, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 

20, and Fluorometric Laboratory Environmental Sample Analysis Report, Concord, 

Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 24980]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1988, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 20. [SRDB Ref ID: 29147]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1988–1989, NMI: collection of “Urine Sample 

Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled 

letters to NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 113139]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 12 of 22

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and B&G (Bolton and Galanek), 1988–1989, NMI: collection of “Breathing 

Zone Air Sample Record,” Health Physics Form 97, and associated memoranda, Concord, 

Massachusetts; B&G: collection of untitled letters to NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 113252]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1988–1989, NMI: collection of “Urine Sample 

Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled 

letters to NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 24999]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1989, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 26. [SRDB Ref ID: 24990]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1989–1990, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 

20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 26872, p. 3]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1990, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, 

Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25077]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1990–1991, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 

20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25060]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1991, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 28. [SRDB Ref ID: 25061]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1991–1992, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 

20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25066]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and Bolton, M. M. Jr., 1991–1992, NMI: collection of “Urine Sample 

Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 20, Concord, Massachusetts; Bolton: collection of untitled 

letters to NMI, Boston, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 29177]

Vumbaco, F. J., 1992, untitled letter to J. Kinneman (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission), Nuclear 

Metals, Inc., Concord, Massachusetts, March 10. [SRDB Ref ID: 110113]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1992, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 24. [SRDB Ref ID: 29148]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1992–1993, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 

20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 28590]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1993, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, February 1. [SRDB Ref ID: 29157]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1994–1995, collection of “Urine Sample Collection Form,” H.P. Form No. 

20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 25068]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1994–1995, collection of “Bioassay Sample Collection Form,” Health and 

Safety Form 20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 29167]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1995–1996, collection of bioassay records, Concord, Massachusetts. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 25064]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 13 of 22

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.) and VGK (V. G. Khlopin Radium Institute), 1995–1996, NMI: collection of 

“Bioassay Sample Collection Form,” Health and Safety Form 20, Concord, Massachusetts; 

VGK: collection of “Report of Analytical Results,” St. Petersburg, Russia. [SRDB Ref ID: 

113449]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1996, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, February 8. [SRDB Ref ID: 29165]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1996, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 29166]

VGK (V. G. Khlopin Radium Institute) and NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1996, VGK: collection of 

“Report of Analytical Results,” St. Petersburg, Russia; NMI: collection of “Bioassay Sample 

Collection Form,” Health and Safety Form 20, Concord, Massachusetts. [SRDB Ref ID: 

29193]

NMI (Nuclear Metals, Inc.), 1996, “NMI - Health Physics Urinalysis Data Listing,” Concord, 

Massachusetts, January 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 113377]

Starmet, 1999–2000, collection of “Bioassay Sample Collection Form,” Health and Safety Form 20, 

and “Report of Chemical Analysis,” Concord, Massachusetts, and Barnwell, South Carolina. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 113421]

Starmet, 1999–2001, collection of bioassay sample reports, Concord, Massachusetts, and Barnwell, 

South Carolina. [SRDB Ref ID: 113569]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 14 of 22

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

A-1 Worker urinalysis sampling frequency ....................................................................................15

A-2 50th- and 84th-percentile urinary excretion rates of uranium, 1978 to 2000............................17

A-3 Type F uranium intake modeling results .................................................................................18

A-4 Type M uranium intake modeling results ................................................................................19

A-5 Type S uranium intake modeling results.................................................................................22

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

A-1 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, all years, type F.......................17

A-2 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, all years, type F.......................18

A-3 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, all years, type M......................18

A-4 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, all years, type M......................19

A-5 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, 1978–1983, type S..................19

A-6 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, 1984–1994, type S..................20

A-7 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, 1995–2000, type S..................20

A-8 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, 1978–1983, type S..................20

A-9 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, 1984–1994, type S..................21

A-10 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, 1995–2000, type S..................21

A-11 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 50th percentile, all years, type S ......................21

A-12 Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium 

intake rates compared with bioassay results, 84th percentile, all years, type S ......................22

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 1 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 15 of 22

Table A-1. Worker urinalysis sampling frequency.

# 

samples 

per year 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988

1 72 14 185 245 256 252 227 271 213 224 208

2 30 1 69 100 83 40 57 86 63 48 31

3 11 0 35 45 42 27 27 27 24 27 16

4 2 0 26 30 21 14 14 10 13 12 14

5 0 0 11 22 24 15 10 9 19 11 5

6 2 0 14 23 12 11 10 7 8 14 8

7 1 0 9 16 15 9 16 12 8 17 13

8 1 0 11 9 22 16 12 3 6 11 11

9 1 0 6 11 19 18 19 6 11 15 9

10 2 1 3 10 35 13 18 8 6 12 20

11 2 0 0 9 52 30 19 17 18 13 22

12 4 0 5 8 72 72 26 27 20 33 47

13 2 0 1 8 51 101 66 47 57 76 54

14 1 0 3 9 41 55 73 49 44 60 47

15 0 0 4 5 25 36 37 46 19 22 24

16 0 0 3 5 35 18 24 11 16 8 5

17 1 1 2 8 26 6 8 16 10 5 9

18 0 0 1 8 5 4 6 7 3 4 2

19 0 1 0 4 10 1 3 5 3 3 3

20 0 0 3 9 5 4 3 2 7 2 0

21 0 0 0 4 4 1 0 2 1 2 1

22 0 0 1 12 3 0 0 2 1 1 0

23 0 0 1 4 0 1 1 0 1 0 0

24 0 0 4 3 2 0 0 1 1 0 1

25 0 0 4 4 0 1 1 1 2 0 0

26+ 0 1 16 45 3 2 2 2 9 7 6

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 2 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 16 of 22

# 

samples 

per year 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1990 2000

1 60 201 189 147 11 75 97 117 2 60 53 7

2 12 26 23 76 0 14 11 23 0 21 12 3

3 3 7 5 9 0 4 5 5 0 12 11 1

4 3 28 8 1 0 3 4 4 0 2 4 4

5 1 17 1 4 0 2 2 4 0 0 3 2

6 2 3 2 5 0 7 3 1 0 0 7 1

7 1 7 2 8 0 6 3 2 0 1 2 5

8 1 2 1 14 0 6 0 4 0 1 1 2

9 0 5 5 14 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 2

10 0 5 0 10 0 4 1 5 0 0 5 5

11 0 7 10 12 0 3 8 7 0 0 3 0

12 0 17 28 19 0 6 14 14 0 0 0 0

13 0 67 56 27 0 8 7 10 0 0 0 0

14 0 34 42 21 0 10 7 7 0 0 1 0

15 0 14 15 6 0 6 2 1 0 0 0 0

16 0 12 5 7 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0

17 0 3 2 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0

18 0 3 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

19 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

21 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

23 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

24 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26+ 0 9 9 2 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 3 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 17 of 22

Table A-2. 50th- and 84th-percentile urinary 

excretion rates of uranium, 1978 to 2000 (pCi/d).

Effective

bioassay date

50th

percentile

84th

percentile

No. of

employees

1/1/1979 0.910 6.194 145

7/1/1980 1.777 5.405 417

7/1/1981 3.454 7.729 656

7/1/1982 2.514 4.763 863

7/1/1983 2.038 4.002 747

7/1/1984 1.413 2.717 679

7/1/1985 0.693 1.660 674

7/1/1986 1.549 3.101 583

7/1/1987 1.125 1.928 627

7/1/1988 1.343 2.278 556

7/1/1989 0.812 2.160 83

7/1/1990 1.028 1.777 473

7/1/1991 0.785 1.492 406

1/1/1993 1.323 2.644 390

7/1/1994 1.072 2.829 167

7/1/1995 0.341 0.935 173

7/1/1996 0.283 0.686 209

1/1/1998 0.244 0.801 97

7/1/1999 0.214 0.630 102

7/1/2000 0.287 0.825 33

Figure A-1. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 50th percentile, all years, type F.

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 4 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 18 of 22

Figure A-2. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 84th percentile, all years, type F.

Table A-3. Type F uranium intake modeling results (dpm/d).

Year(s)

50th

percentile

84th

percentile GSD

Adj.

GSD

95th

percentile

1978–1983 7.83 20.5 2.62 3.00 47.7

1984–1994 3.98 8.01 2.02 3.00 24.2

1995–2000 0.899 2.61 2.91 3.00 5.48

Figure A-3. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 50th percentile, all years, type M.

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 5 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 19 of 22

Figure A-4. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 84th percentile, all years, type M.

Table A-4. Type M uranium intake modeling results (dpm/d).

Year(s)

50th

percentile

84th

percentile GSD

Adj.

GSD

95th

percentile

1978–1983 32.6 84.6 2.60 3.00 199

1984–1994 15.9 31.8 2.00 3.00 97.0

1995–2000 3.26 9.95 3.05 3.05 20.4

Figure A-5. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 50th percentile, 1978–1983, type S.

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 6 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 20 of 22

Figure A-6. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 50th percentile, 1984–1994, type S.

Figure A-7. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 50th percentile, 1995–2000, type S.

Figure A-8. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 84th percentile, 1978–1983, type S.

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 7 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 21 of 22

Figure A-9. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 84th percentile, 1984–1994, type S.

Figure A-10. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 84th percentile, 1995–2000, type S.

Figure A-11. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 50th percentile, all years, type S.

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 8 of 9
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0084 Revision No. 00 Effective Date: 11/15/2013 Page 22 of 22

Figure A-12. Predicted uranium bioassay results calculated using IMBA-derived uranium intake rates 

(line) compared with bioassay results (dots), 84th percentile, all years, type S.

Table A-5. Type S uranium intake modeling results (dpm/d).

Year(s)

50th

percentile

84th

percentile GSD

Adj.

GSD

95th

percentile

1978–1983 574 1,395 2.43 3.00 3,497

1984–1994 243 496 2.04 3.00 1,479

1995–2000 69.7 200 2.88 3.00 425

ATTACHMENT A

COWORKER DATA FIGURES

Page 9 of 9