ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

Oak Ridge Associated Universities I Dade Moeller I MJW Technical Services

Page 1 of 104

DOE Review Release 05/03/2013

Document Title:

Historical Evaluation of the Film Badge 

Dosimetry Program at the Y-12 Facility in 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Part 1 – Gamma 

Radiation

Document Number: ORAUT-OTIB-0044

Revision: 01

Effective Date: 04/29/2013

Type of Document: OTIB

Supersedes: ORAUT-RPRT-0032 Rev 00

Subject Expert(s): George D. Kerr and Janice P. Watkins

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 04/23/2013

George D. Kerr, Document Owner

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 04/22/2013

John M. Byrne, Objective 1 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 04/22/2013

Edward F. Maher, Objective 3 Manager

Concurrence: Vickie S. Short Signature on File for Concurrence Date: 04/22/2013

Kate Kimpan, Project Director

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 04/29/2013

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-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 2 of 104

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

04/14/2005 00 This report was previously published as an Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities document and has been incorporated as an ORAU 

Team controlled document. Future revisions will be reviewed and 

approved by NIOSH. Initiated by George D. Kerr.

04/29/2013 01 Revision initiated to update Figure 6-1. Sections 7.4 and 7.6 were 

deleted and replaced by Sections 5.6 and 7.5. Section 5.6 in the 

current document is essentially Section 7.4 from OTIB-0044 Rev. 01-

B. Section 7.5 is new and provides examples of the application of 

techniques developed in this work for the estimation of whole-body 

doses from gamma rays to Y-12 workers not monitored in years prior 

to 1961. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. 

Constitutes a total rewrite of the document. Training required: As 

determined by the Objective Manager. Initiated by George D. Kerr 

and Janice P. Watkins.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 3 of 104

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE PAGE

Acronyms and Abbreviations..................................................................................................................7

1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................9

2.0 Purpose.......................................................................................................................................9

3.0 Y-12 Film Badge Program ........................................................................................................10

3.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................10

3.2 1948 to 1949 .................................................................................................................13

3.3 1950 to 1951 .................................................................................................................14

3.4 1952 to Mid-1956 ..........................................................................................................14

3.5 Mid-1956 to 1960 ..........................................................................................................15

3.6 1961 to 1979 .................................................................................................................16

4.0 Y-12 External Dose Database ..................................................................................................16

4.1 Data Delivered to ORAU/CER ......................................................................................16

4.2 Subgroup Data for Regression Analysis of Gamma Doses ..........................................17

5.0 Statistical Methods....................................................................................................................18

5.1 Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Lognormal Data with Nondetects .........................18

5.2 Upper Confidence Limit for pth Percentile with Nondetects..........................................18

5.3 Prediction Density with Nondetects...............................................................................19

5.4 Nonparametric Methods for Samples with Nondetects .................................................20

5.5 Nonparametric Upper Tolerance Limit ..........................................................................20

5.6 Scaling Procedure Based on Maximum Likelihood Methods ........................................20

6.0 Evaluation of Film Badge Doses Over Time.............................................................................20

6.1 Annual Doses................................................................................................................20

6.2 Quarterly Doses ............................................................................................................21

6.3 Quarterly Gamma Doses from 1956 to 1979 ................................................................22

6.4 Comparing 1961 Gamma Dose Distributions of Workers Monitored versus Not 

Monitored in 1960 .........................................................................................................23

6.5 Limitations of Doses for Dose Reconstruction ..............................................................27

7.0 Estimates for Unmonitored Quarterly Doses ............................................................................31

7.1 Procedure Used through Third Quarter of 1956............................................................31

7.2 Procedure Used after Third Quarter of 1956.................................................................33

7.3 Parameters for Lognormal Prediction Densities............................................................35

7.4 Application of the Scaling Procedure ............................................................................35

7.5 Comparison of Regression Model/Scaling Procedure Distributions to Recorded 

Dose Distributions .........................................................................................................38

8.0 Summary...................................................................................................................................41

References ...........................................................................................................................................43
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 4 of 104

ATTACHMENT A, DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY 

YEAR......................................................................................................................49

ATTACHMENT B, QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 

1952 TO 1979.........................................................................................................77

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

3-1 Historical radiation protection guidelines for the Y-12 Plant .....................................................11

3-2 Exchange frequencies for film badges used to measure gamma and beta doses ...................11

3-3 MDLs and assigned MDL doses in mrem for film badges used to measure gamma and

beta doses ................................................................................................................................12

4-1 Job activities and duties for 147 long-term Y-12 workers selected for regression 

analysis of gamma doses .........................................................................................................18

6-1 Descriptive statistics for 1961 Y-12 quarterly gamma doses in mrem for two groups of 

workers partitioned by monitoring status in 1960......................................................................25

6-2 Job and 1961 gamma dose information for Y-12 workers not selected for monitoring in 

1960 with a quarterly dose above 300 mrem in 1961 ...............................................................28

6-3 Summary statistics for Y-12 quarterly gamma doses, 1956 to 1979 ........................................29

7-1 Parameters for lognormal prediction density, 1947 to 1965 .....................................................33

7-2 Parameters used in scaling-factor calculations.........................................................................36

7-3 Calculation of scaling factor for Section 7.4 example ...............................................................37
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 5 of 104

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

6-1 Annual employment and film badge monitoring of Y-12 workers for gamma exposure............21

6-2 Quarterly gamma doses, 1952 to 1979.....................................................................................23

6-3 Y-12 quarterly gamma doses in 1961 for two groups of workers partitioned by 

monitoring status in 1960..........................................................................................................25

6-4 Modified boxplot for Y-12 quarterly gamma doses in 1961 for two groups of workers 

partitioned by monitoring status in 1960 ...................................................................................27

7-1 Regression of quarterly gamma dose data from 1956 through 1965 for a subgroup of 

147 workers monitored before and after 1961 ..........................................................................32

7-2 Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma doses for a 

worker with earliest doses similar to 1961 to 1965 and other doses lower than 1961 to 

1965..........................................................................................................................................38

7-3 Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma doses for a 

worker with zero doses early and mainly higher doses in 1961 to 1965...................................39

7-4 Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma doses for a 

worker with somewhat lower doses before 1961 than from 1961 to 1965................................40

7-5 Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma doses for a 

worker with similar doses before and after 1961 ......................................................................40

7-6 Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma doses for a 

worker with very early doses over a wide dose range ..............................................................41

A-1 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1952.....................................................................49

A-2 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1953.....................................................................50

A-3 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1954.....................................................................51

A-4 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1955.....................................................................52

A-5 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1956.....................................................................53

A-6 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1957.....................................................................54

A-7 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1958.....................................................................55

A-8 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1959.....................................................................56

A-9 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1960.....................................................................57

A-10 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1961.....................................................................58

A-11 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1962.....................................................................59

A-12 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1963.....................................................................60

A-13 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1964.....................................................................61

A-14 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1965.....................................................................62

A-15 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1966.....................................................................63

A-16 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1967.....................................................................64

A-17 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1968.....................................................................65

A-18 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1969.....................................................................66

A-19 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1970.....................................................................67

A-20 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1971.....................................................................68

A-21 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1972.....................................................................69

A-22 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1973.....................................................................70

A-23 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1974.....................................................................71

A-24 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1975.....................................................................72

A-25 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1976.....................................................................73

A-26 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1977.....................................................................74

A-27 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1978.....................................................................75

A-28 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1979.....................................................................76

B-1 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1952.....................................................................77

B-2 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1953.....................................................................78
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 6 of 104

B-3 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1954.....................................................................79

B-4 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1955.....................................................................80

B-5 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1956.....................................................................81

B-6 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1957.....................................................................82

B-7 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1958.....................................................................83

B-8 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1959.....................................................................84

B-9 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1960.....................................................................85

B-10 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1961.....................................................................86

B-11 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1962.....................................................................87

B-12 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1963.....................................................................88

B-13 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1964.....................................................................89

B-14 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1965.....................................................................90

B-15 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1966.....................................................................91

B-16 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1967.....................................................................92

B-17 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1968.....................................................................93

B-18 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1969.....................................................................94

B-19 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1970.....................................................................95

B-20 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1971.....................................................................96

B-21 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1972.....................................................................97

B-22 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1973.....................................................................98

B-23 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1974.....................................................................99

B-24 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1975...................................................................100

B-25 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1976...................................................................101

B-26 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1977...................................................................102

B-27 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1978...................................................................103

B-28 Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1979...................................................................104
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 7 of 104

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEC U.S. Atomic Energy Commission

AM arithmetic mean

CDF cumulative distribution function

CER Center for Epidemiologic Research

cm centimeter

COC Cincinnati Operations Office

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

gal gallon

GM geometric mean

GSD geometric standard deviation

HP health physics

ID identification number

K-M Kaplan-Meier

MDL minimum detection level (same as the LOD)

MeV megaelectron-volt, 1 million electron-volts

mg milligram (1/1000 of a gram)

ML maximum likelihood

MLPD maximum likelihood prediction density

mm millimeter

mrem millirem

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NTA nuclear track emulsion, Type A

ORAU Oak Ridge Associated Universities

PIC pocket ionization chamber (same as a “pencil dosimeter’)

PLE product limit estimator

Q calendar quarter

q-q quantile-quantile

RPG radiation protection guideline

TIB technical information bulletin

TLD thermoluminescent dosimeter

UCCND Union Carbide Corporation-Nuclear Division

U.S.C. United States Code

UTL upper tolerance limit

wk week
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 8 of 104

Y-12 Y-12 plant

§ section or sections
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 9 of 104

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

To use data appropriately it is essential to understand the context in which they were collected. An 

awareness of the developing dosimetry program is particularly important for proper evaluation of the 

external dose records of individuals employed at the nuclear facilities operated by DOE or its 

predecessors over half a century ago. The startup period for the nuclear industry was of critical 

importance in the development of occupational safety standards and practices designed to protect the 

health of nuclear workers (Struxness 1949a; Inkret, Meinhold, and Taschner 1995; Strom et al. 1996). 

Monitoring policies, recording practices, and personnel dosimeters were repeatedly modified and 

updated over time as knowledge increased and technology advanced (ORAUT 2009a). The purpose 

of this TIB is to provide definitive documentation of these changes over time at the Oak Ridge Y-12 

Plant and to furnish information that allows recorded gamma doses measured with film badge 

dosimeters to be used appropriately in dose reconstruction. Other TIBs have been prepared that deal 

with film badge dosimetry for beta radiation (ORAUT 2007) and neutron radiation (ORAUT 2009b). 

Maximum likelihood (ML) methods used to estimate parameters for randomly left-censored lognormal 

data are described by Frome and Watkins (2004). A summary of these methods is provided in this 

report. These parameters can be used to determine quarterly lognormal prediction densities for 

gamma radiation doses to Y-12 worker populations. Tables of geometric means (GMs) and geometric 

standard deviations (GSDs) defining the prediction densities are supplied for 1947 to 1979 and can be 

used for sampling individual worker doses. 

Graphical methods were used to evaluate the lognormal assumption for the quarterly dose data. 

Modified boxplots and quantile-quantile (q-q) plots with accompanying summary statistics supplied 

detailed information on quarterly doses and supported lognormal distributions for quarters after 1956. 

Quarterly data before 1956 were not found to fit a lognormal or other statistical distribution, and details 

of the monitoring policies and recording practices for this period confirmed that these data might not 

be suitable for use in estimating quarterly missed doses. 

As an alternative, parameters for quarterly lognormal prediction densities before 1956 were obtained 

from ML regression based on data from a subgroup of 147 workers monitored regularly before and 

after 1961 and who worked in departments with potential for exposure to gamma radiation. Although 

all employees were to be monitored with film badges from 1961 to 1979, before 1961 only workers 

with the largest exposure potential were routinely monitored. As a consequence, it is to be expected 

that estimated doses based on the regression analysis of these subgroup data are favorable to the 

claimant.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 10 of 104

All statistical analyses were carried out using the R system (RDCT 2008). The R system is an 

integrated suite of free software for data manipulation, calculation, and graphical display. Detailed 

documentation of the R system can be found on the internet at http://www.r-project.org.

3.0 Y-12 FILM BADGE PROGRAM

3.1 OVERVIEW

Ground was broken for the first building at the Y-12 Plant in February 1943, and the first production 

unit was in use by January 1944 (Marsden 1945; Jones 1985). The Y-12 Plant was managed by 

Tennessee Eastman Corporation for the Manhattan Engineer District of the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers and produced enriched uranium by the electromagnetic separation process (Marsden 

1945; Jones 1985). The primary hazard from this process was internal radiation exposure from alpha 

radiation from dust of natural and enriched uranium (Dupree et al. 1994). In May 1947, the U.S. 

Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) transferred management of Y-12 to the Union Carbide Corporation

Nuclear Division (UCCND), and the mission of the facility changed to nuclear material processing and

fabrication (Watkins et al. 1993, 1997). Internal radiation exposure from alpha radiation from dust of 

uranium was still the largest concern at Y-12, but there were increased concerns over the external 

radiation dose from gamma rays and beta particles in the uranium metal fabrication departments 

(Emlet 1952). 

The Y-12 film badge dosimetry program evolved as improved technology was developed and as the 

complex radiation fields encountered in the workplace were better understood (ORAUT 2009a). The 

routine film badge exchange frequency was gradually decreased and corresponded to sequential

reductions in the radiation protection standards (Morgan 1961). An excellent discussion of the 

sequential reductions in radiation protection limits over time is in Inkret, Meinhold, and Taschner 

(1995). Table 3-1 summarizes the radiation protection guidelines used at Y-12, Table 3-2 

summarizes the exchange frequencies for film badge dosimeters, and Table 3-3 provides information 

on minimum detection levels (MDLs) of the film badges and the gamma or beta doses that were to be 

assigned to workers when their film badge readings were less than the MDL. The film badge period 

ended in 1979 when film dosimeters at Y-12 were largely replaced by thermoluminescent dosimeters 

(TLDs) (McLendon et al. 1980; Howell and Batte 1982; BWXT Y-12 2001).

The first film badge dosimeter used at Y-12 in 1948 (West 1993a) was identical to the badge that was 

used at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1949 and described by Thornton, Davis, and Gupton 

(1961). This badge was an AEC Catalog Number PF-1B film badge manufactured by the A. M. 

Samples Machine Company in Knoxville, Tennessee (Patterson, West, and McLendon 1957; West 

1993b). The radiation-sensitive medium (photographic film) in the PF-1 badge was encased in a 

protective packet with a clip for attachment to clothing or a lanyard (Handloser 1959, Figure 8-1). The 

film badge was normally worn on the front of the torso between the neck and the waist. A portion of 

the film was covered by a 1-mm-thick cadmium filter to determine the dose from gamma rays and 

high-energy X-rays, and the remaining uncovered portion of the film (open window) was used to 

determine the dose from beta particles and low-energy X-rays (Handloser 1959; Morgan 1961). 

This film badge was used until 1961 when a newer film badge dosimeter was adopted for use at all 

UCCND facilities (Thornton, Davis, and Gupton 1961; McLendon 1963; McRee, West, and McLendon 

1965). It served as a security badge and provided for monitoring of both routine and accident-related 

radiation exposures. As in the PF-1B, a cadmium filter with a thickness of approximately 1 mm or 

mass density of 1,000 mg/cm2 was to measure the penetrating whole-body dose from gamma rays. 

In addition, Y-12 film badges continued to include an open window to measure beta radiation and to 

distinguish film exposures due to beta and gamma radiation. Plastic and aluminum filters were also 

incorporated into the UCCND film badge. The areas behind
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 11 of 104

Table 3-1. Historical radiation protection guidelines for the Y-12 Plant (rem) (Wiley 2004).

Dates

Exposure 

periods

Dose to 

lens of 

eye 

Dose to 

extremitiesa

Shallow 

or skin 

dose

Deep or 

penetrating 

whole-body dose

Total effective 

dose 

equivalentb

1944 to 1948 Day 0.1 0.1

1949 to 1950 Week 0.3 0.3

1951 to 1953 Week 1.5 0.3 0.3

1954 to 1957 Week 0.3 0.6 0.3

1958 Week 0.3 1.5 0.6c 0.3d

1959 to 1960 Quarter 1.2 25 6c 3d

Year 75

1961 to 03/29/1977 Quarter 5 25 10 3d

Year 75 30

03/30/1977 to 1988 Quarter 15 25 5 3

Year 75 15 5

1989 to 11/30/1992 Year 15 50 50 5

12/01/1992 to present Year 15 50 50 5e

a. The extremities are defined typically as the hands and arms below the elbow and the feet and legs below the knee.

b. DOE has used the total effective dose equivalent to limit the sum of the internal and external whole-body (effective) 

doses since 1989.

c. Accumulated dose not to exceed 10(N-18) rem, where N is the age in years.

d. Accumulated dose not to exceed 5(N-18) rem, where N is the age in years.

e. Accumulated dose not to exceed N rem, where N is the age in years.

Table 3-2. Exchange frequencies for film badges used 

to measure gamma and beta doses.

a

Periodb Exchange frequency

May 1948–September 1958 Weekly

October 1958–December 1960 Monthly

January 1961–December 1979 Quarterly

a. McLendon (1958a,b), Reavis (1958), West (1993a), Watkins 

et al. (1993, 1997), Souleyrette (2003), and ORAUT (2009a).

b. Dates are approximate because changes did not occur for all 

employees at the same time.

the plastic and aluminum filters were read, but results were not used routinely in the evaluation of a 

worker’s dose from beta and gamma radiation at the Y-12 Plant (Sherrill and Tucker 1973).

Film badges were calibrated (1) for beta particles by placing the badges face down on a slab of 

natural uranium (ORAUT 2007) and (2) for gamma rays by exposing the badges in air at known 

distances from a calibrated gamma-ray source (Struxness 1951a, McRee et al. 1965). The gamma 

dose to the film badges was determined by exposing a Victoreen R-chamber at the same distance 

from the gamma ray source as the badges (Struxness 1951a; McRee et al. 1965). A radium source 

encased in 0.5 mm of platinum was used initially as the gamma-ray source (Struxness 1951a), and a 

60Co source was used starting in the early 1960s (UCNC 1963). The average energy of the gamma 

rays from the 60Co source was approximately 1.25 MeV (Shleien, Slaback, and Birky 1998) and the 

average energy of the gamma rays from the radium source encased in 0.5 mm of platinum was 

approximately 1.15 MeV (Handloser 1959, Table 7-1). The film badge dosimeters typically exhibited 

about the same sensitivity to gamma and beta radiation (i.e., 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 badges were essentially the same for beta and gamma radiation (Table 3-3). 

An MDL of 10 to 30 mrem is usually reported for the types of films used to measure the gamma dose 

at the Y-12 Plant (Morgan 1961; Wilson 1987). An MDL of 10 mrem was possible if an experienced

film-badge technician read the exposed films in small batches (Morgan 1961). During film badge 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 12 of 104

Table 3-3. MDLs and assigned MDL doses in mrem for 

film badges used to measure gamma and beta doses.

a

Periodb MDL Assigned dose

May 1948–December 1949 30 30c

January 1950–December 1951 30 0

January 1952–September 1952 50 50d

October 1952–December 1952 43 43d

January 1953–June 1954 50 50d

July 1954–December 1954 30 30d

January 1955–December 1957 30 15e

January 1958–October 1979 30 Not applicablef

a. ORAUT(2009a), Souleyrette (2003), Watkins et al. (1993, 1997), 

West (1993a), McLendon (1958a,b), and Reavis (1958).

b. Dates are approximate because the changes did not occur for all 

employees at the same time.

c. Assigned to both the gamma dose and beta dose if shielded and

open-window film readings were less than the MDL.

d. Assigned to gamma dose for workers with a high potential for 

exposure to gamma rays or to beta dose for workers with a high 

potential for exposure to beta particles (or soft X-rays) if shielded 

and open-window film readings were less than the MDL.

e. Assigned to beta dose if shielded and open-window film readings 

were less than the MDL.

f. The actual shielded and open-window film readings were used to 

calculate the gamma and beta doses even when the film 

readings were less than the MDL.

exchange, when thousands of films were read in large batches by film badge technicians with widely 

varying experience, an MDL of about 30 mrem was about as good as could be expected (Morgan 

1961). Assigned doses to monitored workers at the Y-12 Plant were particularly significant in the 

1950s when film badge dosimeters were exchanged on a weekly basis (Tables 3-2 and 3-3). For 

example, a monitored worker could have a quarterly assigned gamma dose during 1953 of as much 

as 650 mrem (i.e., 13 weeks times 50 mrem/wk). The large amount of assigned dose to workers in 

the early 1950s resulted in quarterly dose data that were found not to fit lognormal or other commonly 

used statistical distributions (Attachment B, pages 1-4).

Neutron-sensitive films were added to the film badge dosimeters in 1949 for the assessment of 

neutron exposures to workers (Struxness 1949b; Long 1950; ORAUT 2009b), and were exchanged 

initially on a biweekly schedule (Souleyrette 2003). These neutron-sensitive films were nuclear track 

emulsions, Type A (or NTA films) that had been calibrated using neutrons from a polonium-beryllium 

(

210Po-Be) source starting in 1949 (Souleyrette 2003; Struxness 1953) and an americium-beryllium 

(

241Am-Be) source starting in the early 1960s (Souleyrette 2003; UCNC 1963). Neutron doses were 

recorded as zero if (1) the worker was not exposed to neutrons and the neutron film in the worker’s 

film badge was not processed or read and (2) the neutron film in a worker’s badge was processed but 

the reading was less than the MDL of the neutron film. The MDL of the neutron film is believed to be 

50 mrem for all years of use at Y-12 (ORAUT 2009b).1

 There were only a few locations at the Y-12 

Plant where neutron exposures were routinely possible, and in these cases personnel monitoring was 

provided by the use of NTA films in the film badge dosimeters (Emlet 1956).

During the last quarter of 1962, the NTA films were desiccated and sealed in a moisture-proof “pouch” 

of paper (Morgan, Davis, and Hart 1963). It had been shown by Cheka (1954) that fading of the latent

 1 An MDL of 50 mrem for NTA film applies to neutron energy spectra similar to those from a 210Po-Be or 241Am-Be neutron 

calibration sources. The MDL of the NTA film can be greater than 50 mrem for a workplace spectrum of neutrons that is 

severely degraded in energy compared to that from a 210Po-Be or 241Am-Be neutron calibration source. The neutron 

spectra from all radionuclide sources using the (α,n) reaction in beryllium are similar, and the average energy of the 

neutrons is about 4 MeV (Nachtigall 1967; Kerr, Jones and Hwang 1978).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 13 of 104

image of neutron-produced recoil ions was reduced by an appreciable factor when the film was 

packaged in a moisture-proof container. Thornton, Davis, and Gupton (1961) experimented with

moisture-proof pouch paper and found that the latent image of neutron-produced recoil ions could be 

controlled while the film remained in the film badge dosimeter (Morgan, Davis, and Hart 1963, Figure

23). Before this time, it was necessary to process and read NTA films on a two to four-week period 

for workers who were routinely exposed to neutron radiation. Starting in late 1962, however, it was 

possible to achieve complete film badge dosimetry for gamma, beta, and neutron radiation on a 

regular quarterly exchange cycle (Morgan, Davis, and Hart 1963).

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

early 1990s for use in epidemiologic studies by the Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU) Center 

for Epidemiologic Research (CER) (see Section 4.1). These records were quarterly data with each 

record containing a two-digit year and single-digit quarter. The study of the Y-12 monitoring program 

over many years has confirmed the use of weekly and monthly exchange schedules during the earlier 

years of Plant operation, rather than a quarterly schedule as implied by the records themselves. In 

addition, many of the nominal quarterly results in earlier years are equal to the product of the existing 

MDL times 13 weeks, which lends further evidence for a weekly exchange frequency (Table 3-2). For 

some time, it was assumed that no external monitoring records were available before 1950. Following 

considerable investigation by the ORAU Team, 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 external monitoring 

data file with 11,492 records (ORAUT 2013).

Recorded doses throughout the film badge period reflect not only individual radiation exposures but 

also changing recording practices and other administrative procedures and policies. In addition, 

calibration equations and other technical aspects had an effect on the quarterly doses recorded for an 

individual worker. The recorded dose from penetrating radiation was the sum of the doses from 

gamma rays and neutrons during the exposure period, and the recorded dose to the skin was the sum 

of the dose from beta particles and the penetrating dose from gamma rays plus neutrons. The 

recorded quarterly dose to the skin (or shallow dose) to a Y-12 worker should always be equal to or 

greater than the worker’s quarterly penetrating (or deep) dose. 

3.2 1948 TO 1949 

The first experience with the machining of uranium metal at the Y-12 Plant occurred in December 

1947 in a shop in Building 9766 (Murray 1948a; Emlet 1952). In the spring of 1948, steps were taken 

for the transfer of certain weapon fabrication functions from Los Alamos National Laboratory to 

Building 9212 of the Y-12 Plant, where the chemical processing of uranium had long been in 

existence. At this time, responsibility for studying and monitoring the uranium machining operations 

was transferred from a Special Hazards Group to a Health Physics (HP) Department set up under the 

Y-12 Medical Division (Struxness 1948; Emlet 1952). 

The HP Department started an external dosimetry program in 1948 to monitor exposures to Y-12 

workers in the Assay Laboratories, Radiographic Shop, Spectrographic Shop, and Machine Shops 

where uranium metals were handled (Murray 1948b,c; Struxness 1948, 1949b). Radiation doses to 

the hands were measured using finger film pads exchanged on a daily basis (Larson 1949) or rubber 

finger rings containing film (Struxness 1949c) that were exchanged on a daily basis. The radiation 

doses to the whole body were recorded using both pocket ionization chambers (PICs) exchanged on 

a daily basis and PF-1B film badge dosimeters exchanged on a weekly basis (Souleyrette 2003). The 

MDLs for these dose measurements during the 1948-1949 period were approximately 5 mrem for the 

PICs and 30 mrem for the film in the finger film pads, film in the rubber finger rings, and sensitive film 

in the badge dosimeters. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 14 of 104

The single Y-12 external monitoring file for 1948 and 1949 contained weekly records with dose fields 

based on PIC and film badge doses (ORAUT 2013). Although 69% of the 11,492 records in this 

monitoring file were blank for all dose fields, analysis of the 3,616 records that contain dose values 

was carried out with results published in a report (ORAUT 2013). The external monitoring data for 

1948 and 1949 are not readily available by social security number and are not being supplied by Y-12 

in response to Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act requests (Souleyrette 

2003). The data from the Y-12 external monitoring file for 1948 and 1949 have been posted on an 

internal server at the ORAU Team Cincinnati Operations Office (COC) and linked to other worker 

information for dose reconstruction purposes for Y-12 workers. The film badge period for Y-12 is 

considered to range from 1950 through 1979 because nearly all film badge doses for 1948 and 1949 

had the value of the MDL, and the PIC reading was the dose of record for this period (ORAUT 2013). 

3.3 1950 TO 1951

An extensive documentation of the worker radiological protection programs beginning in the 1950s is 

in Recycled Uranium Mass Balance Project for the Y-12 National Security Complex Site Report

(BWXT Y-12 2000). The external dosimetry program in place in 1950 was expanded to include all Y12 personnel working with (1) depleted uranium metal, (2) discrete sources of gamma rays or beta 

particles, (3) X-rays, and (4) materials contaminated with fission products (McLendon 1960). The film 

pads and rubber film rings were replaced with plastic film rings to assess beta dose to the hands of

depleted uranium metal workers (Struxness 1951b, 1952, 1953). The film badge and plastic film rings 

were normally exchanged on a weekly basis (Souleyrette 2003).

It was the policy at Y-12 in the 1950s to monitor all workers whose potential radiation exposure might 

exceed 10% of the radiation protection guidelines (RPGs) in affect at that time (Souleyrette 2003). 

The RPG for the deep or penetrating dose from gamma rays in 1950 and 1951 (Table 3-1) was 

0.3 rem/wk (3.9 rem/quarter) and the 10% value for this RPG was 30 mrem/wk (390 mrem/quarter). 

Other workers at Y-12 were monitored because they had the potential to exceed the 10% value of the 

RPGs for the shallow or nonpenetrating dose from beta particles (ORAUT 2007). 

Dosimetry practice was to record weekly open-window dose or nonpenetrating dose from beta 

particles (and low-energy X-rays) or the penetrating doses from gamma rays behind the 1-mm 

cadmium filter as zero if they were less than 30 mrem (West 1993a). As a result, there was only one 

positive penetrating gamma-ray dose of 65 mrem to the whole body among the 268 quarterly doses 

for the 148 workers monitored in 1950, and none of the 406 gamma-ray whole-body doses were 

positive for the 184 workers monitored in 1951. There were, however, a number of positive skin 

doses (or nonpenetrating doses) from beta particles among monitored workers in 1950 and 1951 

(ORAUT 2007). 

3.4 1952 TO MID-1956

The documented dosimetry policy at the Y-12 Plant during this period was to assign the MDL dose for 

weeks with results less than the MDL for either gamma or beta radiation (Table 3-3). The MDL was 

estimated to be 50 mrem during weeks 1 to 38 of 1952, 43 mrem during weeks 39 to 52 of 1952, and 

50 mrem during all of 1953 and weeks 1 to 30 of 1954. For the remainder of 1954, all of 1955, and 

the first half of 1956, the MDL was 30 mrem. The assigned MDL dose (Table 3-3) was recorded as 

gamma or beta radiation according to a worker’s potential type of exposure as judged by the HP staff 

(West 1981). That is, the MDL was assigned to gamma rays and to penetrating radiation for persons 

with potential for that kind of exposure. For persons working with natural or depleted uranium, which 

involves exposure to nonpenetrating radiation such as beta particles and low-energy X-rays, the MDL 

was assigned to beta radiation. In practice, however, weekly doses less than the MDL were often left 

blank in the computer records for the Y-12 film badge program (ORAUT 2009a). 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 15 of 104

In 1981 a discrepancy was noted in the penetrating radiation doses recorded for Y-12 workers in 1954 

(Beck 1981; West 1981). The average yearly value for a Y-12 worker in 1954 was only about 

10 mrem, whereas it was several hundred mrem for 1952, 1953, and 1955. A review of the 1952–

1955 data by Plant personnel indicated that many workers assigned to departments with a penetrating 

dose potential showed elevated nonpenetrating (or skin) doses in 1954 (Beck 1981). However, these 

same workers showed elevated penetrating radiation doses and low nonpenetrating radiation doses in 

1953 and 1955. For 61 workers, it was decided to exchange the penetrating and nonpenetrating 

radiation doses in the computer records for the Y-12 film badge program in 1954 (West 1981). 

From 1952 to mid-1956, the differences between the doses summed to get the skin and penetrating 

doses now appear to be random, with some being greater than the skin or penetrating doses and 

others being smaller. In general, comparisons between the skin and penetrating doses and the sums 

of the beta, gamma, and neutron doses used to determine these doses are highly consistent during 

the film badge program at the Y-12 Plant from 1952 to 1979.

3.5 MID-1956 TO 1960

The radiation dosimetry policy to monitor only selected workers (approximately 10-20%) was 

continued (Watkins et al. 1993, Figure 6). Line supervision at the Y-12 Plant, with the assistance of 

the HP Department, decided which groups and which persons in a group would be assigned to the 

film badge monitoring program, and kept the list of assigned workers up to date (Patterson, West, and 

McLendon 1957; West 1993b). The workers typically selected for the program were those whose 

potential radiation exposure might exceed 10% of the RPGs in effect at that time (Souleyrette 2003). 

For example, the 10% value for penetrating dose was 30 mrem/wk (390 mrem/quarter) from 1956 

through 1958 and 300 mrem/quarter from 1959 through 1960 (Table 3-1). The line supervisor 

initiated requests for the HP Department to either add or remove workers from the film badge 

program. HP forwarded the request to the monitoring laboratory, with all necessary data on a formal 

request card. The film badge dosimeters were exchanged on a monthly basis (Table 3-2). Monthly 

doses for film badge dosimeters reading less than the MDL were recorded as 15 mrem, half the MDL 

(Table 3-3), and entered as beta doses. 

In 1958, the external monitoring of 704 workers was reviewed during the switch from a weekly to a 

monthly badge exchange frequency (McLendon 1958a,b; Reavis 1958). Some of the factors 

considered in the review were (1) type of exposure expected, (2) exposure potential involved, 

(3) typical experience over the last year with respect to average and high exposures, (4) expected 

changes in this typical experience in the near future, and (5) statistical limit of errors and detectability. 

As a result, it was decided to make a number of changes in the external monitoring program during 

April 1958 (McLendon 1958a). The reasons for and the nature of the changes were discussed with, 

and agreed upon, by supervision for the various departments (McLendon 1958a). Of the 704 workers 

involved in the initial review, 89 were dropped from the external monitoring program and 615 were 

selected to remain in the program (McLendon 1958a). The workers in the program were distributed 

among departments as follows (department number in parentheses): 207 in A Wing, H2, and F Area 

(2703), 58 in Z-Area (2701), 53 in Product Control (2665), 45 in Production and Inspection (2233), 38 

in H-2 Foundry (2702), 34 in Product Processing (2617), 31 in the 9215 Rolling Area (2793), 25 in the 

Fire Department (2093), 24 in Uranium Chip Recovery (2618), 23 in Mechanical Inspection (2044), 

and 77 in 10 other departments [Electrical Maintenance (2077), Medical Department (2090), Guard 

Department (2091), Health Physics (2108), Plant Superintendent and Directors (2200), Shift 

Superintendents (2205), Special Testing (2231), Development Operations (2301), Product Chemical 

(2616), and Chemical (2619)]. During October 1958, the switch from a weekly to a monthly badge 

exchange frequency was extended to all departments at the Y-12 Plant (McLendon 1958b, Reavis 

1958).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 16 of 104

On June 16, 1958, an unexpected nuclear excursion occurred in the C Wing of Building 9212 at the 

Y-12 Plant (UCNC 1958). An enriched uranium nitrate solution, sufficient to become critical, was 

drained from a bank of “always safe geometry” cylinders with small diameters into a 55-gal drum 

during an operation in which only water was expected to be in the cylinders. Workers who were not 

expected to be exposed to radiation during this operation and were not wearing film badge dosimeters 

received penetrating doses from gamma rays and neutrons ranging from about 23 to 365 rem (Hurst, 

Ritchie, and Emerson 1959).2

 These workers were identified by neutron activation of an indium strip 

in their security badge and neutron activation of sodium in their blood. Their radiation doses were 

estimated using each worker’s blood sodium activation data and other data obtained from a controlled 

physical mockup of the accident (Callihan and Thomas 1959). More information on these workers 

and 23 other workers who were in the area of the excursion but exposed to much smaller radiation 

doses based on neutron activation of the indium foil in their security badges are available on an

internal drive of a data server at ORAU-COC (ORAUT 2006). 

3.6 1961 TO 1979

As a result of the 1958 criticality accident at the Y-12 Plant, a program was instituted in 1961 to 

monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation exposure using a newer dosimeter system that was an 

integral part of the worker’s security badge and contained components for routine and accidentrelated dosimetry (Thornton, Davis, and Gupton 1961; McLendon 1963; McRee, West, and McLendon 

1965; ORAUT 2009a). The film badges were read quarterly (Table 3-3), and the quarterly readings of 

the film badge dosimeters were recorded as determined, even if the readings were less than the MDL, 

and thus essentially not different from zero (West 1993a). 

In 1962 a semiautomatic film reader was developed and installed during the third quarter (Q3) to 

measure simultaneously the transmission of light through four film areas: the open window and three 

areas with plastic, aluminum, and cadmium filters. Light transmission measurements through each 

filter area were recorded in volts on punch cards (UCNC 1963). Factors for converting the volts to 

radiation doses were calculated from sets of calibrated films. The radiation doses were tabulated by 

computer using the volts on the punch cards, and the computer-tabulated doses were used as the 

dose of record for each quarter. The film control program was reviewed at that time and was changed 

to focus on dose levels of chief interest (i.e., at ranges from 120 to 2,500 mrem) (UCNC 1963; 

McLendon 1963). As a result, the calibration films were exposed to gamma doses ranging from 0 to 

5,000 mrem (i.e., 0, 30, 120, 240, 480, 720, 960, 1440, 1920, 2880, 3840, and 5000 mrem). In 1972, 

additional gamma doses of 1400, 1750, and 3250 mrem were added to the films to better define the 

calibration curve for the film badge dosimeters at higher gamma doses (Sherrill and Tucker 1973). 

The external doses to Y-12 workers were always determined from the film readings behind the 

cadmium filters and open windows of the film badges (Sherrill and Tucker 1973). The film areas 

behind the plastic and aluminum filters in the newer dosimeters were read and recorded, but they 

were not used in the normal evaluation of worker doses. The film badge period ended in 1979 as film 

dosimeters at the Y-12 plant were largely replaced by TLDs (McLendon et al. 1980; Howell and Batte 

1982; BWXT Y-12 2001).

4.0 Y-12 EXTERNAL DOSE DATABASE 

4.1 DATA DELIVERED TO ORAU/CER 

From 1978 through the early 1990s, the Y-12 Plant delivered electronic files of worker data to CER as 

a resource for the Health and Mortality Studies conducted for DOE and its predecessor agencies. 

 2 The accident doses for the eight most highly exposed Y-12 workers were summed with data on the film-badge doses 

from gamma rays for other Y-12 workers to obtain the very large entry for the collective penetrating dose in 1958 to all 

workers at the Y-12 Plant in Strom et al. (1996, Table 4). 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 17 of 104

Data in these files had been obtained from hard-copy records and manually transcribed by UCCND 

beginning in 1965 at the request of the AEC (Denton and Fore 1979). Files containing records for 

more than 17,000 Y-12 workers were received on magnetic tapes that included beta, gamma, and 

neutron radiation measurements, penetrating dose and skin dose, and additional relevant information. 

Due to changes over time in recordkeeping practices and procedures at Y-12, the files were in several 

similar but not identical formats. Most data elements were represented in all format types but differed 

by label, measurement units, and other properties. CER transferred all the data from tape to disk and 

constructed a carefully linked relational database with a standardized file format (Watkins et al. 1993, 

1997). 

The data set underlying this analysis consists of more than 512,000 records for 1950 to 1988 with 

more than 425,000 records pertaining to 1979 or earlier. Records contain all data elements received 

from the original Y-12 files, including first, middle, and last name, plant badge number, social security 

number, year of record, quarter of record, quarterly summations of dose readings for the monitoring 

period (weekly, monthly, or quarterly), and other work history, processing, and demographic data. 

The quarterly summations are of beta, gamma, and neutron measurements in mrem. Although each 

record has a flag to note an error condition, this flag had all null values before 1980 and was not 

relevant for the film badge period of interest. The database records from the film badge period 

(through 1979) were converted to a text file used for developing methods to provide individual doses 

for unmonitored quarterly periods of employment. To maintain confidentiality of worker data, personal 

identifying information was not included. 

4.2 SUBGROUP DATA FOR REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF GAMMA DOSES

Data for a subgroup of 147 Y-12 workers provide the basis for the regression analysis to evaluate the 

time trend in the dose potential from gamma radiation during the period from 1956 to 1965. The 147 

workers in this subgroup were employed in departments where most job tasks involved a potential to 

gamma radiation and were monitored before and after 1961. The regression model can be used to 

describe the temporal pattern of the gamma dose, and the results can be used to estimate quarterly 

distributions of gamma dose for unmonitored quarters before 1956. 

Job titles with corresponding dates were obtained for each of the 147 long-term Y-12 workers from 

data acquired by ORAU/CER from the Y-12 Plant. Frequently, multiple job titles for individuals 

showed a progression of promotions as they gained skills and seniority. A recurring example was the 

progression from machine operator to specialty machinist to machinist and, occasionally, to 

supervisor of machining. For each individual in each group, the job held during the majority of the 

period from 1956 to 1960 was selected, and the job was classified by type of activity (e.g., machining) 

and duties (worker, foreman, supervisor, or manager).

Table 4-1 lists the results of the job analysis for the gamma dose regression group. Among the 147 

employees, 129 or about 88% were involved in performing tasks that involved no management or 

supervisory duties. Most of these 129 were machinists, chemical or production operators, or fire and 

security workers. Another 14 members or about 10% of this group were laboratory, inspection, or 

production supervisors, fire captains, or foremen, and carried out some supervisory tasks. The 

foremen probably had similar exposure potential as their workers since they performed similar tasks.

The supervisors probably had similar or somewhat lower exposure potential as the workers they 

supervised since they may have had less direct contact with radioactive materials. Only four 

members or about 3% of the 147 individuals were managers, including one superintendent of utilities, 

one shift superintendent, and two assistant shift superintendents.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 18 of 104

Table 4-1. Job activities and duties for 147 long-term Y-12 

workers selected for regression analysis of gamma doses.

Activity Duties

Number of 

workers

Fire and security Supervisor 5

Fire and security Worker 14

Inspection Supervisor 1

Inspection Worker 6

Laboratory work Supervisor 3

Laboratory work Worker 6

Machining Worker 71

Management Manager 4

Medical Worker 1

Production Foreman 4

Production Supervisor 1

Production Worker 28

Production support Worker 2

Research and development Worker 1

5.0 STATISTICAL METHODS 

5.1 MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION FOR LOGNORMAL DATA WITH NONDETECTS 

For notational convenience, let the m detected radiation doses di be listed first followed by the * di

indicating nondetects, so that the data are d = {di, i = 1,...,m, * di , i = m+1,...,n}, and let xi be the row 

vector of explanatory variables for each value of i. If the value of * di is the MDL, then di is in the 

interval (0,di*) and this is an example of a left singly censored sample (Type I). The situation where

the * di are different is known as randomly (or progressively) left-censored data (Cohen 1991; 

Schmoyer et al. 1996). If a value of zero is recorded for di if the measured dose is less than the MDL, 

this is sometimes referred to as a “missed dose” and should not be confused with an unmonitored 

“missed dose.” 

Assuming the data are a random sample from a lognormal distribution, the log of the likelihood 

function for the unknown parameters β, σ, given the data, is:

L (β,σ) = ∑=

m

i log 1 [g (di ; μi, σ)] + ∑= +

n

i m log 1 [G ( * di ; μi ,σ)], (5-1)

where μi = μ(xi , β), g(d ; μ,σ) is the probability density function for lognormal distribution, and G(d*; 

μ,σ) is the lognormal cumulative distribution function (CDF) [i.e., G(d*;μ,σ) is the probability that d is 

less than or equal to d*]. The ML equations are obtained by differentiating the log-likelihood function 

(1) with respect to the βj, j = 1,..., p and σ. The resultant equations cannot be solved directly, so a 

Newton-Raphson iterative algorithm is used to find a root of this system of equations. The numerical 

approach to obtain a unique global maximum of (1) can be implemented based on the R function 

“optim(),” a general-purpose optimization. The large sample variance-covariance matrix of the ML 

estimate ∧

β ,

∧

σ can be obtained by inverting the information matrix evaluated at ∧

β ,

∧

σ . Further details 

and instructions on how to obtain and use R can be found in Frome and Watkins (2004). 

5.2 UPPER CONFIDENCE LIMIT FOR PTH PERCENTILE WITH NONDETECTS 

Let dp denote the 100pth percentile of the lognormal distribution. For complete samples the point 

estimate is dp = exp ( y

− + zp sy) where zp is the pth quantile of the standard normal distribution. U(p,γ) 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 19 of 104

is the value such that we are γ% confident that at least p% of the values is below this tolerance limit. 

In small samples without nondetects, exact 100γ% for dp can be obtained using the method of 

Johnson and Welsh (1940). 

For censored data, the large sample ML approach can be used to obtain a point estimate of

yp = log (dp), which is yp

∧

= ∧

μ + zp σ

∧

with

variance:

The 100γ% upper confidence limit for dp (i.e., the estimated 100p-100γ geometric tolerance limit) is: 

 U(p, γ) exp[y t(γ,m -1)var( y ) ]. 1/2 p p

∧ ∧ ∧

= + (5-2)

All of the above quantities can be obtained from the R function “lnmlnd()” (Frome and Watkins 2004). 

5.3 PREDICTION DENSITY WITH NONDETECTS 

To estimate the prediction density for an unmonitored quarterly dose z = log(d) at known values of the 

explanatory variables xf, we use the “large sample” maximum likelihood prediction density (MLPD)

proposed by Lejeune and Faulkenberry (1982):

q(z; xf ,y, X ) = n[μ(xf, β

∧

), 2 σˆ + var[μ(xf, β

∧

)]] , (5-3)

along with the ML estimate θ

∧

, and the estimated variance-covariance V( θ

∧

). If the mean is linear in X

then μ( xf, β

∧

) = xfβ

∧

, and var(xfβ

∧

) = xfV( β

∧

) x f

′ , where V( β

∧

) corresponds to the p × p submatrix of V(

θ

∧

) obtained by deleting the last row and column. It then follows from large-sample results for ML 

estimators (Frome and Watkins 2004, Section 3.4) that the prediction density for z is approximately:

 q(z|xf) = n(xfβ

∧

, 2 σˆ + xf V( β

∧

) x f

′ ) , (5-4)

(i.e., the prediction density for d is lognormal). In particular, if p=2, β = (α,β), and x = (1, xf), then 

μ(xβ)

∧ ∧

= α

∧

+xfβ

∧

and var[ ∧

μ (xf β

∧

)] = var[ α

∧

+xf β

∧

]. The MLPD is 

q(z|xf) = n( αˆ +β

∧

xf , 2 σˆ + var[ αˆ + xf β

∧

]), (5-5)

where var[ α

∧

+xf β

∧

] = var( α

∧

) +2 xf cov( α

∧

,β

∧

) + x

2

f var(β

∧

).

var( p

∧

y ) = var( ∧μ + z p σ

∧

)

= var( ∧

μ ) + z2

p var ( σ

∧

) + 2z p cov( ∧

μ , σ

∧

).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 20 of 104

5.4 NONPARAMETRIC METHODS FOR SAMPLES WITH NONDETECTS 

The product limit estimator (PLE) of the CDF was first proposed by Kaplan and Meier (1958) for rightcensored data. For randomly left-censored data, Schmoyer et al. (1996) defined the PLE as follows: 

Let a1 < . . . < aL be the L distinct values at which detects occur, rj be the number of detects at aj, and 

nj be the sum of nondetects or detects that are less than or equal to aj. Then the PLE is 0 for 0 ≤ x ≤ 

a1

’

where a1

’

is a1 or the value of the detection limit for the smallest nondetect if this limit is less than 

a1. For a1

’ ≤ x < aL, the PLE is j

∧

F = j

∏ (nj – rj)/nj, where the product is over all aj > x, and the PLE is 1 

for x ≥ aL. If there are only detects, this reduces to the usual definition of the CDF. The R function 

“plend()” can be used to compute the PLE (Frome and Watkins 2004).

The PLE is used to determine the plotting positions on the horizontal axis for the censored-data 

version of a theoretical lognormal q-q plot (Chambers et al. 1983; Waller and Turnbull 1992). The q-q 

plot is obtained by plotting aj (on log scale) versus Hj = G-1

(( j

∧

F +F − 1

∧

j )/2), where G-1 is the inverse of 

the CDF of the standard normal distribution. If the empirical distribution approximates log normal, the 

points on the plot will fall near a straight line. The square of the correlation coefficient R2 = cor(log(aj), 

Hj)

2 is an objective evaluation of the lognormal fit. In the complete data case, this will closely 

approximate the Shapiro-Wilk W statistic used as a test for normality (Royster 1982). A formal test for 

normality of randomly left-censored data has not been developed.

5.5 NONPARAMETRIC UPPER TOLERANCE LIMIT 

A nonparametric upper tolerance limit can be obtained using the method described by Somerville 

(1958). Given a random sample of size n from a continuous distribution, with a confidence level of at 

least γ, 100p% of the population will be below the kth-largest value in the sample. The value of k for 

specific values of n, p, and γ can be obtained from the R function “nptl()” (Frome and Watkins 2004). 

The 100γ% upper tolerance bound is equivalent to an upper 100γ% confidence interval for the 100pth 

percentile of the population.

5.6 SCALING PROCEDURE BASED ON MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHODS

Let dt be the worker’s recorded dose during quarter t and μt and σt be known lognormal parameter 

values for that same quarter. Then yt = log(dt) follows the normal distribution with mean μt + φ, and 

standard deviation σt , where the scaling factor φ represents the average relative difference (on the 

log scale) of the individual’s doses from the population values. The ML estimate of φ is ∧

φ = Σt wtvt/Σt

wt , where wt = 1/σt

2 , and vt = yt-μt. The variance of φ = [Σt wt]

-1

. If for any quarter dt = 0 (indicating a 

nondetectable dose), replace yt with o yt , the conditional expectation of y given that it is less than the 

log (MDL). To obtain o yt , first calculate zt = [log(MDL) - μt] /σt. Then o yt = μt - [n(zt)/N(zt)] σt , where 

n(z) is the standard normal density and N(z) is the standard normal cumulative distribution function 

(Johnson, Kota, and Balakrishnan 1994, Section 10.1). 

6.0 EVALUATION OF FILM BADGE DOSES OVER TIME 

6.1 ANNUAL DOSES 

Figure 6-1 shows the annual employment figures for Y-12 during the film badge period along with the 

total number of workers monitored at least one quarter during the year and the number whose dose 

was recorded as zero for every time the employee was monitored during the year. Figure 6-1 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 21 of 104

confirms that nearly all Y-12 workers were monitored for gamma radiation beginning in 1961 (Watkins 

et al. 1993, 1997). 

Figure 6-1. Annual employment and film badge monitoring of Y-12 workers for 

gamma exposure.

6.2 QUARTERLY DOSES 

As seen in Table 3-2, film badges were routinely exchanged on a quarterly basis from 1961 to 1979. 

Although film badges were read more frequently (generally weekly) in earlier years, only quarterly 

summations were available. The general Y-12 policies for this period (Table 3-3) suggest that there 

would be no quarterly doses less than 30 mrem with the exception of the period from 1956 to 1961 

when the lowest recorded dose could be half the MDL (15 mrem). There were no doses recorded 

between 0 and 30 mrem before 1956. However, from 1956 to 1961 there were doses between 0 and 

15 mrem every year (1956, 1; 1957, 96; 1958, 19; 1959, 70; 1960, 339; 1961, 2,601). From 1962 to 

1979 the number of recorded quarterly doses less than 30 mrem ranged from 2,555 in 1979 to 18,090 

in 1971, and the number less than 15 mrem ranged from 1,749 in 1964 to 8,708 in 1971. 

Histograms were constructed for exploring the distributions of gamma doses for each quarter 

beginning with 1952, because all quarterly doses in 1951 and all but one dose in 1950 were zero 

(Watkins et al. 1993, 1997). Attachment A includes annual graphs for 1952 to 1979 with a separate 

plot for each quarter. In addition to the quarterly histograms, the graphs contain the number of doses, 

number of zeros, percent of zeros, and maximum dose for each quarter. An examination of the 

shapes of the quarterly histograms before 1957 revealed little resemblance to a normal, lognormal, or 

any other statistical distribution. In general, the histograms in this period showed a large number of 

zeros and a cluster of values around 400 or 600 mrem (Attachment A, pp. 1–4). Film badges were 

read weekly before 1960, and there were 13 weeks in a quarter. If the MDL was assigned to doses 

below the MDL as was general policy (Table 3-3), the clustering of quarterly doses around 400 and 

47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

Year

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Employed at least one quarter during the year

Monitored at least one quarter during the year

Had an annual gamma dose of zero

Number of workers
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 22 of 104

600 mrem could be influenced by these dosimetry practices (Section 3.1). After 1956 the histograms 

showed distributions that typically resembled lognormal with a cluster of values at low doses near 

zero and skewing to the right.

To further investigate the suitability of fitting lognormal models to the quarterly gamma dose data after 

1956, q-q plots and R-square statistics were produced for each quarter (Section 5.4). Attachment B 

contains these graphs. With few exceptions, R-square was well above 0.9 for quarters in 1956 and 

later but was much lower in earlier years.

6.3 QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES FROM 1956 TO 1979

Figure 6-2 shows quarterly gamma doses from 1956 to 1979 in a modified boxplot. The modified 

boxplot was obtained by calculating the first and third quartiles (i.e., the 25th percentile, xq25, and 

75th percentile, xq75,) using inverse interpolation from the PLE to take nondetects into account. The 

modified boxplots in this TIB show xq25 as an inverted triangle, the median as an open circle, and 

xq75 as an upright triangle; the box connecting these quartiles is not drawn. The maximum dose is 

represented by a red bull’s eye, and the minimum dose is a diamond if no left-censored data were 

present. Each dose in a quarter that exceeded (on log scale) log(xq75) + 1.5 × [log(xq75) - log(xq25)] 

appears as a black plus sign (+). All data points in a quarter that are less than (on log scale) 

log(xq25) - 1.5 × [log(xq75) - log(xq25)] are also shown as plus signs, although these might be 

incomplete if there were a large number of zero doses. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 23 of 104

Figure 6-2. Quarterly gamma doses, 1952 to 1979.

In addition to the modified boxplot, Figure 6-2 includes a green vertical dashed line to indicate where 

complete monitoring began for the Y-12 workforce and a short blue vertical line to mark the year when 

lognormal distributions generally began to fit the quarterly data. The horizontal blue lines indicate the 

dose that was 10% of the RPG for the various time periods. The solid red line is the regression line 

derived from the doses for the subgroup of 147 workers described in Section 4.2. Details of the 

regression are in Section 7.1. The distributions before 1961 are for workers who were selected for 

monitoring based on their potential for exposure (i.e., individuals with low exposure potential were not 

included). The abrupt drop in these distributions in 1961 demonstrates clearly that individuals with 

low exposure potential were being excluded before 1960. If large groups of individuals with high 

exposure potential were not excluded before 1961, the distributions and related statistics should 

increase in 1961. This is clearly not the situation shown in Figure 6-2. 

6.4 COMPARING 1961 GAMMA DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS OF WORKERS MONITORED 

VERSUS NOT MONITORED IN 1960

A further assessment of the 1961 gamma doses to appraise whether workers with higher exposure 

potential had been selected to be monitored before 1961 is presented below. Because reportedly 

workers monitored before 1961 were selected because of higher dose potential, the distribution of the 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 24 of 104

doses in 1961 for previously monitored individuals should be higher than the distribution of doses for 

workers who were first monitored in 1961. To verify this selection criterion, the 1961 doses were 

separated into two groups partitioned by each worker’s monitoring status in 1960. “Group 1” 

consisted of doses for workers monitored in both 1961 and 1960, and “Group 2” included workers 

monitored in 1961 but not in 1960.

Figure 6-3 provides an initial look at the 1961 Q3 and Q4 gamma doses of the two groups of workers. 

Because Group 2 was approximately four times the size of Group 1, histograms were based on 

percents rather than counts. The top two graphs for Group 1 show relatively fewer doses in the lower 

dose range and distinctly more doses above 100 mrem than the corresponding Group 2 doses. 

The statistics above each plot were based on a lognormal model with EX indicating the expected 

value of the doses, SDX the standard deviation, GM the geometric mean, and GSD the geometric 

standard deviation. The indicated parameters derived from each of the lognormal models are the 

natural logarithms of the GM and GSD. These statistics verify that the average doses were higher for 

workers who had been selected for monitoring in 1960.

Statistics for 1961 quarterly gamma doses are listed in Table 6-1 for the two groups of Y-12 workers. 

For each group and each quarter the percentiles, Kaplan-Meier (K-M) means, and adjusted 

cumulative doses were calculated taking into account doses recorded as zero, which indicated film 

badge readings below the MDL. These statistics were derived using nonparametric left-censored 

methods with the nondetectable doses designated to have an upper limit of 30 mrem, as described in 

Frome and Watkins (2004, Section 4.4). In Q1 of 1961 the percents of nondetectable doses were 53 

and 86 for the previously monitored and newly monitored groups, respectively, which substantially 

increased the adjusted cumulative doses, percentiles, and K-M means, particularly for Group 2.

Because there were very few zero doses in Q2, Q3, and Q4 of 1961, the left-censored methods had 

little impact on the calculated statistics, as can be seen by comparing the directly calculated 

cumulative doses to the adjusted cumulative doses in Table 6-1. In every quarter of 1961 the 25th, 

50th (median), and 75th percentiles for Group 1 workers were higher than those for Group 2. Further, 

with the exception of Q1, medians for previously monitored individuals were higher than the 75th

percentiles for the newly monitored, verifying that workers who were selected to be monitored in 1960 

had higher exposure potential. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 25 of 104

Figure 6-3. Y-12 quarterly gamma doses in 1961 for two groups of workers 

partitioned by monitoring status in 1960 (Group 1 monitored in 1960; Group 2 not 

monitored in 1960). 

Table 6-1. Descriptive statistics for 1961 Y-12 quarterly gamma doses in mrem for two groups of 

workers partitioned by monitoring status in 1960. 

Group

Quarter 

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1a 2b 1 2 1 2 1 2

25th %tile 5.4 3.7 43.8 30.4 18.9 9.9 46.2 34.4

median 12.8 10.2 63.4 38.5 35.8 16.3 67.2 45.1

75th %tile 27.8 16.8 98.2 51.3 67.1 25.5 103.7 56.4

max dose 1,810 1,621 710 1,276 1,791 2,173 483 1,413

K-M meanc 38.4 15.8 84.5 47.3 52.4 25.4 82.6 55.4

cum dosed 39,350 25,943 103,323 202,773 63,123 108,285 99,946 241,033

cum dose adje 47,078 64,385 103,428 203,437 63,142 108,941 99,962 241,267

% below MDLf 53.1 85.9 0.5 0.7 0.1 1.2 0.0 0.1

Ng 1,226 4,075 1,224 4,301 1,205 4,289 1,210 4,355

a. Y-12 workers in 1961 who were monitored in 1960.

b. Y-12 workers in 1961 who were not monitored in 1960.

c. K-M mean; product-limit estimate of mean using censored data methods with upper limit of 30 mrem for doses recorded as 0. 

d. Dose accumulative by adding all recorded quarterly doses for the group.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 26 of 104

e. Cumulative dose adjusted upward by using left-censored methods with upper limit of 30 mrem for doses recorded as 0. 

f. Percent of records recorded as 0 to indicate below MDL.

g. Number of quarterly doses for the group. 

A modified boxplot, as described in Section 6.2, was used to summarize the quarterly gamma dose 

data for the two groups. The statistics in Table 6-1 are shown in the modified boxplot of Figure 6-4. 

There are four pairs of boxplots in Figure 6-4, one for each quarter in 1961. The left-hand plot in each 

pair is for Group 1 and the right-hand plot is for Group 2. A horizontal line is shown at 300 mrem, 

corresponding to 10% of the quarterly RPG dose in 1961, and it is clear that fewer than a dozen 

workers from either group had doses above this level in any quarter. Because Group 1 contained 

approximately 1,200 workers each quarter and Group 2 more than 4,000, at most one-half of one

percent of the doses for either group in any quarter were above 10% of the RPG.

Altogether 65 workers, including 35 in Group 1 and 30 in Group 2, had at least one quarterly dose 

greater than 300 mrem. Group 1 workers were known to have higher exposure potential because

they had been selected for monitoring in 1960. Group 2 workers were not expected to have potential 

for higher exposure, although these 30 individuals received a quarterly dose above 300 mrem in 1961 

when all workers began being monitored. Information was gathered to investigate why these 30 

workers had not been selected for monitoring in 1960. Collected data included hire dates, dates of

change for job titles and departments, monitoring data for earlier years, and all quarterly gamma

doses for 1961 through 1965. The 30 Group 2 workers who were not monitored at Y-12 in 1960 and 

had a quarterly doses greater than 300 mrem in 1961 will be referred to as the “why not monitored?” 

group. Results of this investigation are listed in Table 6-2. For individuals whose annual gamma 

dose was above 1,200 mrem, which was 10% of the yearly RPG, each quarterly dose for 1961 and 

the highest quarterly dose for 1962 are also listed.

The total number of workers in Group 2 was approximately 300 greater during the latter part of 1961 

than in Q1, indicating that new employees were probably hired during Q1. Hire dates revealed that 

four of the “why not monitored?” group were not employed at Y-12 in 1960, and two additional

members worked only part of 1960. Among the remaining 24 individuals, 18 had only one quarter 

with dose above 300 mrem. Dates of change for job titles and departments uncovered five more 

members of the “why not monitored?” group who changed departments in the second half of 1960 or 

early in 1961, which might have resulted in increasing their exposure potential. Seven group 

members had been monitored during the late 1950s and were found to have low gamma doses at that 

time, with the exception of one quarterly dose of 337 mrem. For the remaining 12 members of the 

“why not monitored?” group, the explanation of why they were not selected for monitoring in 1960 is 

less obvious. In 1961 eight of these 12 workers had only one quarterly dose above 300 mrem and an 

annual dose below 10% of the yearly RPG. The highest quarterly dose in 1962 for six of these eight 

workers was below 300 mrem; two individuals had a quarterly dose in 1962 above this limit. Among 

the workers with annual doses in 1961 above 1,200 mrem, one had three quarterly doses each below 

80 mrem and a Q3 dose of 1,413 mrem. The final individuals had quarterly doses consistently above 

300 mrem.

The dose assignment methodology for unmonitored quarters before 1961 includes an upward scaling 

factor based on an individual’s doses after 1961 (ORAUT 2004a,b). Details of the scaling factor are in 

Section 7.4. This scaling factor would be implemented to adjust doses derived for each unmonitored 

quarter before 1961 for all of the approximately 4,000 Y-12 workers (including members of the “why 

not monitored?” group) who met the two criteria. In particular, the few individuals for whom there is no 

clear explanation of why they were not monitored before 1961 would have received doses that were 

favorable to claimants due to the scaling factor adjustment. Out of more than 5,000 Y-12 workers

only six (approximately one-tenth of one percent) might have been overlooked when selecting the 

workers to be monitored in 1960.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 27 of 104

Figure 6-4. Modified boxplot for Y-12 quarterly gamma doses in 1961 for 

two groups of workers partitioned by monitoring status in 1960. 

6.5 LIMITATIONS OF DOSES FOR DOSE RECONSTRUCTION

After reviewing the quarterly histograms, q-q plots, and R-square statistics, as well as studying the 

monitoring and recording practices during the film badge period, it was decided that a lognormal 

model could be used with quarterly dose data after 1956 for estimating the prediction density for the 

dose reconstruction procedure described in ORAUT (2004a). However, quarterly data before 1956 

could not be used justifiably for such estimation. 

Certain summary statistics were investigated and confirmed the suitability of using the lognormal 

model and data from the quarter where the unmonitored dose occurred in the process of 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 28 of 104

Table 6-2. Job and 1961 gamma dose information (mrem) for Y-12 workers not selected for 

monitoring in 1960 but with a quarterly dose above 300 mrem in 1961.

Annual 

1961 dose

Highest 

1961

dose Dept Comments

Monit.

qrtrs

61-65a

Not a Y-12 employee during all of 1960

1518 1413

2703

Hired 4/10/61. 1961 doses – Q2 = 41, Q3 = 64, Q4 =

1413. All 4 doses for 1962 below 80. Had Group 2 

max Q4 dose.

16

1198 1170

2619

Hired 1/9/61. 11

1163 871

2722

Hired 1/31/61. 20

614 362

2003

Hired on 10/3/60. 20

516 460

2077

Hired 1/16/61. 17

501 322

2259

Hired 3/1/60. Changed from Dept. 2230 on 8/7/6; 

high dose in Q4.

13

Previously monitored in late 1950s with same job tasks

1493 2173

2703

Monitored in 1956 and 1957; low doses. 1961 doses 

– Q1 = 8, Q2 = 220, Q3 = 2173, Q4 = 92. Highest 

1962 dose 98. Had Group 2 max Q3 dose. 

19

1745 883

2018

Monitored in 1958 and 1959; low doses. 1961 doses 

– Q1 = 305, Q2 = 883, Q3 = 230, Q4 = 327. Highest 

1962 dose 429.

19

1298 552

2018

Monitored in 1958 and 1959; low doses. 1961 doses –

Q1 = 212, Q2 = 129, Q3 = 552, Q4 = 405. Highest 

1962 dose 215.

5

792 323

2701

Monitored in 1958 and 1959; three low doses and one 

dose of 337. Changed from Dept. 2128 on 10/3/60.

20

756 337

2776

Monitored in 1957; dose 0. 19

368 318

2003

Monitored in 1958 and 1959; low doses. 20

362 316

2659

Monitored in 1958 and 1959; low doses. 20

Change in department or job tasks between 1960 and 1961

1686 1621

2057

Changed from Dept. 2058 on 8/1/60. 1961 doses –

Q1 = 1621, Q2 = 23, Q3 = 16, Q4 = 26. Highest 1962 

dose 6. Had Group 2 max Q1 dose. 

5

1202 401

2018

Switched from machinist on 9/19/60. 1961 doses –

Q1 = 337, Q2 = 309, Q3 = 157, Q4 = 401. Highest 

1962 dose 557. 

20

775 395

2638

Changed from Dept. 2638 on 6/27/60. 20

516 356

2722

Changed from Dept. 2687 on 1/16/61. 20

Unclear why not monitored in 1960

2443 1127

2018

1961 doses – Q1 = 590, Q2 = 360, Q3 = 366, Q4 =

1127. Highest 1962 dose 1018.

19

2210 1276

2018

1961 doses – Q1 = 378, Q2 = 1276, Q3 = 316, Q4 =

240. Highest 1962 dose 277. Had Group 2 max Q2 

dose.

20
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 29 of 104

Annual 

1961 dose

Highest 

1961

dose Dept Comments

Monit.

qrtrs

61-65a

1582 617

2018

1961 doses – Q1 = 362, Q2 = 617, Q3 = 323, Q4 =

280. Highest 1962 dose 956.

19

1557 1413

2158

1961 doses – Q1 = 14, Q2 = 77, Q3 = 1413, Q4 = 53.

Highest 1962 dose 178.

19

1106 624

2820

Highest 1962 dose 200. 20

905 624

2018

Highest 1962 dose 71. 20

798 381

2018

Highest 1962 dose 296. 20

751 309

2617

Highest 1962 dose 59. 20

683 310

2619

Highest 1962 dose 264. 19

649 333

2617

Highest 1962 dose 569. 19

504 327

2018

Highest 1962 dose 861. 19

370 318

2158

Highest 1962 dose 65. 18

357 300

2018

Highest 1962 dose 19. 20

a. Number of quarters of monitoring data from 1961-65. Any worker with at least 5 monitored quarters in 1961-65 (with 

similar job duties and location before and after 1961) has a scaling factor applied to the assigned dose for each 

unmonitored quarter before 1960. Scaling factors less than one are changed to one so that scaling cannot lower dose. 

estimating the dose for years after 1956. Table 6-3 lists the summary statistics based on application 

of a lognormal model to each set of quarterly film badge data beginning with 1956. The five-fold jump 

between 1960 and 1961 in the number of dose measurements per quarter corroborates the policy 

change from monitoring selected workers with higher exposure potential to monitoring all workers. 

Including workers with lower exposure potential led to a generally higher percentage of nondetectable

quarterly doses, although this percentage varied substantially from quarter to quarter. The log-scale 

mean, standard deviation, and standard error of the mean can be used to determine a lognormal 

prediction density for sampling a dose for an unmonitored quarter. 

Table 6-3. Summary statistics for Y-12 quarterly gamma doses, 1956 to 1979.

Year Qtr.a Nb %ndc μd σe se(μ)f GMg AMh KMi d99j UTLk npUTLl

1956 1 448 71 2.296 2.086 0.178 10 87 67 1272 1957 1207

2 492 58 3.042 1.220 0.075 21 44 54 358 443 1282

3 617 40 3.648 1.264 0.058 38 85 83 726 875 977

4 620 20 4.480 1.184 0.049 88 178 155 1387 1631 935

1957 1 565 10 4.550 0.747 0.032 95 125 119 538 598 612

2 595 29 3.646 1.191 0.052 38 78 78 613 725 756

3 668 32 3.563 1.286 0.054 35 81 83 702 835 955

4 678 57 3.038 1.002 0.052 21 34 41 215 248 586

1958 1 704 25 3.726 0.965 0.038 42 66 67 392 444 484

2 694 15 4.385 1.187 0.046 80 162 145 1269 1474 875

3 689 13 4.549 1.020 0.039 95 159 149 1015 1155 1056

4 788 24 4.116 1.065 0.040 61 108 104 731 833 600

1959 1 844 5 4.727 0.870 0.030 113 165 155 854 941 710

2 854 44 3.612 1.244 0.049 37 80 70 669 785 595

3 909 23 3.793 1.025 0.036 44 75 74 481 540 530

4 1,053 20 4.174 1.004 0.032 65 107 103 671 745 564

1960 1 1,148 28 3.569 1.114 0.035 35 66 66 474 530 502
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 30 of 104

Year Qtr.a Nb %ndc μd σe se(μ)f GMg AMh KMi d99j UTLk npUTLl

2 1,104 11 3.961 1.055 0.032 53 92 88 611 678 517

3 1,055 4 4.216 1.015 0.031 68 113 104 719 794 452

4 985 7 4.459 0.937 0.030 86 134 127 764 842 521

1961 1 5,301 78 2.060 1.238 0.035 8 17 21 140 150 222

2 5,525 1 3.815 0.598 0.008 45 54 56 183 187 269

3 5,494 1 3.013 0.853 0.012 20 29 31 148 153 178

4 5,565 0 3.951 0.530 0.007 52 60 61 178 183 244

1962 1 5,583 0 2.460 0.940 0.013 12 18 22 104 108 178

2 5,352 0 3.910 0.584 0.008 50 59 62 194 199 329

3 5,394 0 3.630 0.795 0.011 38 52 52 240 248 355

4 5,327 0 3.346 1.079 0.015 28 51 47 350 366 257

1963 1 5,456 58 2.419 1.217 0.023 11 24 25 190 202 227

2 5,536 57 2.757 0.882 0.016 16 23 27 123 128 208

3 5,549 66 1.996 1.581 0.033 7 26 26 291 315 300

4 5,461 78 2.432 0.903 0.025 11 17 22 93 98 165

1964 1 5,477 83 2.186 1.300 0.047 9 21 34 183 199 255

2 5,314 83 2.181 1.266 0.046 9 20 35 168 182 230

3 5,360 14 3.090 1.207 0.017 22 46 41 364 384 288

4 5,122 73 2.182 1.336 0.033 9 22 25 198 213 276

1965 1 5,037 35 2.735 1.044 0.017 15 27 27 175 183 206

2 4,474 42 2.433 1.158 0.021 11 22 24 168 179 252

3 4,345 0 2.713 0.935 0.014 15 23 26 133 139 230

4 4,336 0 3.505 0.529 0.008 33 38 40 114 117 252

1966 1 4,333 61 1.977 1.436 0.032 7 20 21 204 221 242

2 4,339 41 2.471 1.284 0.023 12 27 28 235 251 285

3 4,400 0 2.889 1.416 0.021 18 49 39 484 518 340

4 4,485 37 2.767 1.074 0.018 16 28 32 194 204 374

1967 1 4,515 76 2.112 1.333 0.039 8 20 26 184 199 326

2 4,613 45 2.457 1.221 0.022 12 25 27 200 213 280

3 4,753 9 2.532 0.991 0.015 13 21 22 126 132 176

4 4,797 47 2.307 1.048 0.019 10 17 19 115 121 189

1968 1 4,884 23 2.027 1.179 0.019 8 15 19 118 125 167

2 4,974 1 3.971 0.336 0.005 53 56 57 116 118 169

3 5,212 91 1.612 1.161 0.062 5 10 15 75 80 136

4 5,293 1 3.468 0.744 0.010 32 42 40 181 187 211

1969 1 5,398 8 2.993 0.742 0.010 20 26 26 112 116 169

2 5,466 6 2.947 0.883 0.012 19 28 28 149 154 194

3 5,935 7 3.191 1.022 0.013 24 41 40 262 274 311

4 5,882 10 2.839 1.044 0.014 17 29 30 194 203 279

1970 1 6,024 6 2.938 1.045 0.014 19 33 32 215 224 242

2 6,002 5 2.333 0.932 0.012 10 16 16 90 94 95

3 6,509 6 3.268 0.914 0.011 26 40 39 220 228 225

4 6,672 19 2.983 0.990 0.013 20 32 32 197 205 243

1971 1 6,759 0 3.230 0.632 0.008 25 31 34 110 113 201

2 6,757 26 2.012 1.019 0.014 7 13 13 80 83 131

3 6,629 1 3.225 0.778 0.010 25 34 34 154 158 196

4 6,556 10 2.651 0.924 0.012 14 22 22 122 126 164

1972 1 6,525 23 2.561 0.970 0.013 13 21 22 124 129 187

2 6,400 75 2.069 1.115 0.026 8 15 17 106 112 177

3 6,403 92 1.566 1.106 0.056 5 9 14 63 67 113

4 6,194 90 1.723 1.123 0.048 6 11 16 76 81 141

1973 1 6,311 58 2.059 1.143 0.020 8 15 16 112 118 162

2 6,062 89 1.762 1.237 0.055 6 13 19 104 111 144

3 5,880 35 2.225 1.080 0.016 9 17 18 114 120 190

4 5,398 96 1.005 1.280 0.133 3 6 15 54 59 79

1974 1 5,298 5 3.277 1.058 0.015 26 46 45 311 325 346

2 5,359 40 2.203 1.222 0.020 9 19 19 155 164 198

3 5,364 13 2.630 0.964 0.014 14 22 23 131 136 188

4 5,214 71 1.997 1.131 0.027 7 14 15 102 109 127

1975 1 5,168 21 2.209 0.988 0.015 9 15 17 91 95 151

2 4,917 88 1.678 1.170 0.050 5 11 15 81 87 142
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 31 of 104

Year Qtr.a Nb %ndc μd σe se(μ)f GMg AMh KMi d99j UTLk npUTLl

3 4,483 91 1.537 1.112 0.059 5 9 13 62 66 94

4 4,540 89 1.610 1.075 0.049 5 9 12 61 65 86

1976 1 4,618 45 2.390 0.847 0.016 11 16 17 78 82 131

2 4,605 83 1.869 1.065 0.036 6 11 13 77 82 126

3 4,572 46 2.445 0.954 0.018 12 18 19 106 111 143

4 4,694 95 1.669 0.928 0.072 5 8 13 46 49 70

1977 1 4,933 74 1.825 1.025 0.026 6 10 12 67 71 92

2 5,021 81 1.869 0.924 0.028 6 10 11 56 59 59

3 5,058 54 2.325 0.984 0.019 10 17 18 101 106 177

4 4,902 72 1.646 1.013 0.025 5 9 9 55 58 81

1978 1 5,007 61 1.684 1.038 0.022 5 9 10 60 64 75

2 5,073 50 2.214 0.972 0.018 9 15 16 88 92 114

3 5,202 8 3.460 0.724 0.010 32 41 41 171 177 189

4 5,255 77 1.616 1.108 0.030 5 9 10 66 70 83

1979 1 5,169 77 1.672 1.021 0.027 5 9 10 57 61 87

2 5,512 83 1.939 0.924 0.029 7 11 12 60 63 80

3 5,196 86 1.801 1.185 0.044 6 12 18 95 102 236

4 5,489 88 1.840 1.091 0.043 6 11 16 80 85 142

a. Qtr. = quarter (1, 2, 3, or 4).

b. N = number of quarterly doses.

c. %nd = percent of nondetectable quarterly doses (< MDL).

d. μ = mean of the doses on log scale.

e. σ = standard deviation of doses on log scale.

f. se(μ) = standard error of μ.

g. GM = exp(μ); geometric mean; median of doses on original scale.

h. AM = exp(μ + σ2

/2); estimate of arithmetic mean of doses on original scale; expected value of dose based on lognormal 

model.

i. KM = nonparametric K-M (product-limit) estimate of mean of doses on original scale, adjusted for censoring.

j. d99 = 99th percentile of doses on the original scale.

k. UTL = 99-95 geometric upper tolerance limit based on lognormal model.

l. npUTL = nonparametric 99-95 geometric upper tolerance limit.

As expected, beginning in 1961 the estimates of mean, median, 99th-percentile, and upper tolerance 

limits dropped substantially from earlier years because the population of monitored workers was no

longer restricted to individuals with higher exposure potential. During the period before 1961, which 

had numerous unmonitored quarters, the expected dose derived from the quarterly lognormal model 

[the arithmetic mean (AM)] was generally higher than the mean dose estimated nonparametrically (the 

PLE). In addition, beginning with Q4 of 1956 through 1960, the upper tolerance limit (UTL) based on 

the lognormal model generally exceeded the nonparametric estimate (npUTL). These findings 

support the use of the model-based approach because it would be likely to result in estimated doses 

that were somewhat higher and therefore favorable to the claimant. In addition, the UTLs

demonstrate compliance with the radiation protection guidelines in force during the film badge period 

(Section 3.1).

7.0 ESTIMATES FOR UNMONITORED QUARTERLY DOSES

7.1 PROCEDURE USED THROUGH THIRD QUARTER OF 1956 

As discussed in Section 6.2, information gathered from the histograms and q-q plots led to the 

determination that quarterly dose datasets before 1956 might not be suitable for estimating doses for 

unmonitored quarters. An alternative approach was developed in which unmonitored doses were 

estimated from a regression analysis based on data from the subgroup of 147 workers from 1956 to 

1965 described in Section 4.2. Because workers selected to be monitored before 1961 had higher 

exposure potential, it was likely that the subgroup had higher recorded doses in those quarters than 

doses received by workers who were not monitored. Figure 7-1 shows all quarterly doses for the 

subgroup, which is the set of data used for the alternative approach based on regression modeling. 

Because the vertical axis is on a logarithmic scale, for graphing purposes each subgroup member’s 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 32 of 104

zero doses during a quarter were replaced by half the worker’s minimum nonzero quarterly dose. The 

smoothing function “supsmu()” in the computer program R (RDCT 2008) produced the green curve 

that begins with a slight rise then dips steeply and ends with another small rise. The red line from 

upper left to lower right shows the expected dose for each quarter determined by the ML estimates 

based on the 5,686 data points by fitting a lognormal model for left-censored data with zero doses 

replaced by the MDL of 30 mrem. These plots show a general trend of decreasing dose with 

increasing time. 

Figure 7-1. Regression of quarterly gamma dose data from 1956 through 1965 

for a subgroup of 147 workers monitored before and after 1961.

ML estimates were used to obtain the GMs and GSDs for the prediction densities before 1957. The 

ML parameter values were determined using data for the subgroup of 147 workers and a lognormal 

model where the expected dose E(log(dose)) = μi = α + β xi, where xi = ti - 61 for ti the time in years 

(i.e., the last two digits of the year) and quarters (i.e., 0.25 for Q1, 0.50 for Q2, 0.75 for Q3) for the ith

observation. The following estimates were obtained: αˆ = 3.628126, β

ˆ = -0.121503, σˆ = 1.147311, 

var(αˆ ) = 0.000263, var( β

ˆ ) = 0.000030, and cov(αˆ , βˆ ) = 0.000005. These quantities were used in 

equation 5-5 to determine the prediction density for each quarter of this period. As an extra 

assurance of favorability to the claimant, σˆ was replaced by its upper 95th% confidence limit when 

regression model parameters were used to calculate the GM and GSD for prediction densities. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 33 of 104

The intersecting horizontal and vertical blue lines in Figure 7-1 indicate that the expected dose from 

the regression for the first quarter of 1961 (year = 61.25) was about 70 mrem. These ML estimates 

are equivalent to parameter values obtained from a least-squares regression using the logarithms of 

the doses with a normal model. 

7.2 PROCEDURE USED AFTER THIRD QUARTER OF 1956 

Exploratory data analysis showed that it was reasonable to fit lognormal models to the actual quarterly 

dose data beginning with Q4 of 1956 (Sections 6.2 and 6.3). The period before 1961 was of particular 

interest because unmonitored quarters after 1960 were rare. Lognormal parameters were calculated 

from each quarterly dose dataset using ML methods for left-censored data as described in 

Section 5.1. These parameters were used to determine separate lognormal prediction densities that 

could be sampled to estimate dose for a worker’s unmonitored quarter. The ML prediction density in 

any quarter for z = log(d) is normal with mean ∧

μ and σpd = ( ∧

σ 2 + var(

∧

μ ) )

1/2. This equation is 

equivalent to equation 4 if there are no predictor variables so that ∧

μ = α

∧

and var(

∧

μ ) = var( α

∧

). 

Values of ∧

μ , ∧

σ , and var(

∧

μ ) can be determined from columns 5 to 7 [μ, σ, and se(μ)] in Table 6-3. 

For easier implementation in dose reconstruction, the quantity ( ∧

σ 2 + var(

∧

μ ) )

1/2 was calculated for 

each quarter and appears in column 4 [σ] of Table 7-1. The GSD in Table 7-1 was calculated using 

the variance of the prediction density. 

Table 7-1. Parameters for lognormal prediction density, 1947 to 1965.

Yr Qtr μ σ GM (reg) GSD (reg) E(dose)

1947 3 5.2684 1.1710 194.1093 3.2254 385.3264

4 5.2380 1.1710 188.3017 3.2251 373.7602

1948 1 5.2077 1.1709 182.6679 3.2248 362.5419

2 5.1773 1.1708 177.2026 3.2245 351.6610

3 5.1469 1.1707 171.9009 3.2243 341.1072

4 5.1165 1.1706 166.7578 3.2240 330.8709

1949 1 5.0862 1.1706 161.7685 3.2238 320.9423

2 5.0558 1.1705 156.9285 3.2235 311.3123

3 5.0254 1.1704 152.2334 3.2233 301.9717

4 4.9950 1.1703 147.6787 3.2230 292.9120

1950 1 4.9647 1.1703 143.2603 3.2228 284.1247

2 4.9343 1.1702 138.9740 3.2226 275.6015

3 4.9039 1.1701 134.8161 3.2224 267.3344

4 4.8735 1.1701 130.7825 3.2222 259.3159

1951 1 4.8432 1.1700 126.8696 3.2220 251.5383

2 4.8128 1.1699 123.0738 3.2217 243.9945

3 4.7824 1.1699 119.3915 3.2216 236.6773

4 4.7520 1.1698 115.8194 3.2214 229.5801

1952 1 4.7217 1.1697 112.3542 3.2212 222.6961

2 4.6913 1.1697 108.9927 3.2210 216.0189

3 4.6609 1.1696 105.7317 3.2208 209.5423

4 4.6305 1.1696 102.5683 3.2206 203.2603

1953 1 4.6002 1.1695 99.4995 3.2205 197.1670

2 4.5698 1.1695 96.5226 3.2203 191.2567

3 4.5394 1.1694 93.6347 3.2202 185.5239

4 4.5090 1.1694 90.8333 3.2200 179.9633

1954 1 4.4786 1.1693 88.1156 3.2199 174.5698

2 4.4483 1.1693 85.4793 3.2197 169.3381

3 4.4179 1.1693 82.9218 3.2196 164.2636

4 4.3875 1.1692 80.4409 3.2195 159.3415

1955 1 4.3571 1.1692 78.0341 3.2193 154.5671

2 4.3268 1.1691 75.6994 3.2192 149.9361
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 34 of 104

Yr Qtr μ σ GM (reg) GSD (reg) E(dose)

3 4.2964 1.1691 73.4346 3.2191 145.4441

4 4.2660 1.1691 71.2375 3.2190 141.0869

1956 1 4.2356 1.1690 69.1061 3.2189 136.8606

2 4.2053 1.1690 67.0385 3.2188 132.7611

3 4.1749 1.1690 65.0328 3.2187 128.7846

4 4.4804 1.1849 88.2670 3.2705 178.1117

1957 1 4.5501 0.7481 94.6429 2.1129 125.1996

2 3.6461 1.1926 38.3236 3.2957 78.0411

3 3.5629 1.2870 35.2668 3.6219 80.7312

4 3.0381 1.0032 20.8654 2.7271 34.5129

1958 1 3.7262 0.9659 41.5229 2.6271 66.2019

2 4.3848 1.1877 80.2184 3.2794 162.3934

3 4.5488 1.0210 94.5197 2.7759 159.1748

4 4.1164 1.0660 61.3370 2.9037 108.2611

1959 1 4.7269 0.8700 112.9481 2.3870 164.9118

2 3.6119 1.2450 37.0373 3.4730 80.3958

3 3.7927 1.0253 44.3740 2.7880 75.0609

4 4.1739 1.0040 64.9716 2.7293 107.5551

1960 1 3.5687 1.1147 35.4690 3.0488 66.0222

2 3.9611 1.0556 52.5129 2.8736 91.6675

3 4.2164 1.0153 67.7919 2.7602 113.5069

4 4.4589 0.9375 86.3962 2.5535 134.0703

1961 1 2.0601 1.2387 7.8465 3.4512 16.8995

2 3.8154 0.5982 45.3955 1.8188 54.2889

3 3.0126 0.8528 20.3409 2.3463 29.2623

4 3.9514 0.5300 52.0060 1.6990 59.8494

1962 1 2.4602 0.9398 11.7075 2.5595 18.2078

2 3.9103 0.5839 49.9146 1.7931 59.1934

3 3.6301 0.7948 37.7183 2.2141 51.7299

4 3.3465 1.0791 28.4022 2.9419 50.8382

1963 1 2.4188 1.2168 11.2322 3.3763 23.5485

2 2.7574 0.8825 15.7582 2.4170 23.2612

3 1.9958 1.5818 7.3584 4.8636 25.7093

4 2.4319 0.9032 11.3810 2.4674 17.1123

1964 1 2.1856 1.3008 8.8959 3.6723 20.7314

2 2.1811 1.2667 8.8559 3.5490 19.7529

3 3.0904 1.2067 21.9863 3.3425 45.5361

4 2.1823 1.3366 8.8664 3.8062 21.6621

1965 1 2.7352 1.0437 15.4128 2.8396 26.5709

2 2.4326 1.1580 11.3883 3.1837 22.2673

3 2.7133 0.9351 15.0795 2.5474 23.3482

4 3.5052 0.5286 33.2881 1.6965 38.2786

1966 1 1.9772 1.4366 7.2223 4.2062 20.2675

2 2.4709 1.2845 11.8327 3.6130 27.0013

3 2.8886 1.4160 17.9675 4.1208 48.9677

4 2.7667 1.0745 15.9067 2.9285 28.3323

1967 1 2.1120 1.3340 8.2651 3.7962 20.1221

2 2.4571 1.2213 11.6708 3.3917 24.6041

3 2.5324 0.9914 12.5839 2.6951 20.5711

4 2.3066 1.0483 10.0406 2.8528 17.3936

1968 1 2.0275 1.1793 7.5948 3.2521 15.2235

2 3.9709 0.3359 53.0336 1.3992 56.1115

3 1.6120 1.1632 5.0130 3.2000 9.8600

4 3.4677 0.7441 32.0645 2.1046 42.2925

1969 1 2.9932 0.7417 19.9487 2.0994 26.2637

2 2.9467 0.8831 19.0424 2.4183 28.1224

3 3.1905 1.0226 24.3011 2.7803 40.9903

4 2.8390 1.0444 17.0981 2.8417 29.4989

1970 1 2.9383 1.0453 18.8832 2.8442 32.6087

2 2.3328 0.9323 10.3065 2.5403 15.9164

3 3.2685 0.9138 26.2714 2.4939 39.8865
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 35 of 104

Yr Qtr μ σ GM (reg) GSD (reg) E(dose)

4 2.9826 0.9899 19.7397 2.6910 32.2203

1971 1 3.2304 0.6317 25.2897 1.8808 30.8742

2 2.0116 1.0196 7.4756 2.7721 12.5717

3 3.2247 0.7777 25.1451 2.1765 34.0246

4 2.6512 0.9245 14.1717 2.5207 21.7287

1972 1 2.5615 0.9698 12.9550 2.6373 20.7324

2 2.0685 1.1157 7.9132 3.0517 14.7452

3 1.5660 1.1079 4.7873 3.0280 8.8436

4 1.7225 1.1241 5.5986 3.0774 10.5308

1973 1 2.0587 1.1435 7.8361 3.1377 15.0673

2 1.7620 1.2384 5.8243 3.4501 12.5393

3 2.2251 1.0806 9.2547 2.9464 16.5928

4 1.0047 1.2874 2.7312 3.6233 6.2552

1974 1 3.2767 1.0585 26.4875 2.8820 46.3800

2 2.2031 1.2222 9.0535 3.3945 19.1056

3 2.6296 0.9638 13.8678 2.6216 22.0654

4 1.9974 1.1317 7.3699 3.1009 13.9820

1975 1 2.2088 0.9884 9.1049 2.6869 14.8391

2 1.6778 1.1706 5.3537 3.2240 10.6224

3 1.5370 1.1138 4.6508 3.0459 8.6479

4 1.6097 1.0764 5.0012 2.9340 8.9259

1976 1 2.3905 0.8472 10.9189 2.3331 15.6328

2 1.8695 1.0656 6.4850 2.9025 11.4411

3 2.4448 0.9544 11.5278 2.5971 18.1777

4 1.6694 0.9306 5.3088 2.5361 8.1857

1977 1 1.8246 1.0249 6.2001 2.7868 10.4832

2 1.8694 0.9248 6.4843 2.5213 9.9441

3 2.3250 0.9847 10.2263 2.6769 16.6056

4 1.6465 1.0129 5.1886 2.7535 8.6661

1978 1 1.6841 1.0384 5.3875 2.8248 9.2374

2 2.2135 0.9717 9.1477 2.6424 14.6669

3 3.4596 0.7243 31.8027 2.0632 41.3399

4 1.6158 1.1084 5.0318 3.0295 9.3004

1979 1 1.6718 1.0216 5.3215 2.7777 8.9676

2 1.9389 0.9249 6.9514 2.5216 10.6618

3 1.8009 1.1861 6.0554 3.2744 12.2363

4 1.8403 1.0917 6.2985 2.9792 11.4291

7.3 PARAMETERS FOR LOGNORMAL PREDICTION DENSITIES 

Columns 5 and 6 in Table 7-1 contain the GM and GSD of each quarterly lognormal prediction 

density, which can be used in estimating a dose for an unmonitored quarter. Even though Table 7-1 

covers the years from the takeover of Y-12 by UCCND in 1947 to the end of the film badge program in 

1979, the GMs and GSDs for earlier and later years were obtained by two distinct processes. The 

values for 1947 through Q3 of 1956 were calculated using the subgroup regression approach 

discussed in Section 7.1. In contrast, from Q4 of 1956 through 1979, the GMs and GSDs for each 

quarter were determined by applying a lognormal model directly to the doses for that quarter, as 

discussed in Section 7.2. 

7.4 APPLICATION OF THE SCALING PROCEDURE 

Although it is unlikely that a worker was unmonitored before 1961 while having exposure potential 

above 10% of the RPGs in effect at that time, a procedure was developed to derive an individual 

upward scaling factor that provided an additional guarantee against possible underestimation of dose 

(ORAUT 2004a,b). This factor could be applied for any worker with unmonitored quarterly data before 

1961 and satisfying these two conditions: (1) the worker must have monitoring data for at least five 

calendar quarters from 1961 through 1965, (2) the worker’s routine duties and work location must 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 36 of 104

have remained essentially the same during the 1950s and early 1960s. The unmonitored missed 

dose estimated by this procedure is conceptually equivalent to the recorded quarterly doses at the 

Y-12 Plant before 1961. These quarterly doses were sums of 13 weekly badge exchanges from May 

1948 to September 1958 and sums of 3 monthly exchanges from October 1958 to December 1960.

A Y-12 worker’s unmonitored quarterly dose from 1947 through 1960 can be assigned by beginning 

with the appropriate quarterly GM and GSD from Table 7-1 and applying an individual scaling factor φ 

as described in Section 5.6. Table 7-2 lists the values of μ, σ, w, and o y that are based on a value of 

30 mrem for the MDL. If the two criteria listed above are met, this individual’s monitoring data can be 

used to “adjust” upward the quarterly dose distribution by increasing the GM and GSD. This method 

assumes that the individual’s potential for exposure from 1947 to 1960 is similar to that from 1961 to 

1965, that the individual’s doses differ from the population dose by a constant factor, and that an 

unmonitored quarterly dose can be described by a lognormal distribution. Any calculated scaling 

factor that is less than one is changed to one so that the value of the expected quarterly dose can be 

increased but not decreased.

Table 7-2. Parameters used in scaling-factor calculations.

Year Qtr t μ σ w y0

1961 1 1 2.060 1.239 0.651 1.740

2 2 3.815 0.598 2.794 3.047

3 3 3.013 0.853 1.375 2.559

4 4 3.951 0.530 3.559 3.127

1962 1 5 2.460 0.940 1.132 2.190

2 6 3.910 0.584 2.933 3.079

3 7 3.630 0.795 1.583 2.843

4 8 3.346 1.079 0.859 2.520

1963 1 9 2.419 1.217 0.675 1.975

2 10 2.757 0.883 1.284 2.406

3 11 1.996 1.582 0.400 1.473

4 12 2.432 0.903 1.225 2.196

1964 1 13 2.186 1.301 0.591 1.779

2 14 2.181 1.267 0.623 1.799

3 15 3.090 1.207 0.687 2.316

4 16 2.182 1.337 0.560 1.753

1965 1 17 2.735 1.044 0.918 2.275

2 18 2.433 1.158 0.746 2.025

3 19 2.713 0.935 1.143 2.343

4 20 3.505 0.529 3.575 3.015

Let t indicate a quarter of the year, between the first quarter of 1947 and the last quarter of 1960, for 

which a dose distribution is required because a worker was unmonitored. Without scaling, the 

unmonitored dose is lognormal with parameters (on the log scale) μt and σt (from Table 7-1); that is,

yt = log(dt) is normally distributed with mean μt and standard deviation σt. When applying the scaling 

procedure, the mean and standard deviation of the adjusted log dose are

where the unmonitored dose in quarter t is lognormal with mean * μt and standard deviation σt

*

. If a 

worker was unmonitored for all four quarters in a given year, the adjusted lognormal parameters are 

* μ t = μ t + ∧

φ

σt

* = [σt

2 + var( ∧

φ )] 1/2 ;
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 37 of 104

calculated separately for each quarter and the annual dose estimate is obtained by Monte Carlo 

sampling as described in ORAUT (2004b).

Example

Consider a worker with recorded dose dt for each quarter from 1961 to 1965 as listed in column 8 of 

Table 7-3. The calculated values of yt and vt are in columns 9 and 10 of Table 7-3 so that 

 

 Table 7-3. Calculation of scaling factor for Section 7.4 example.

Year Qtr mu sig w y0 d y v

1 1961 1 2.060 1.239 0.651 1.740 12 2.4849 0.4249

2 1961 2 3.815 0.598 2.794 3.047 74 4.3041 0.4891

3 1961 3 3.013 0.853 1.375 2.559 62 4.1271 1.1141

4 1961 4 3.951 0.530 3.559 3.127 98 4.5849 0.6339

5 1962 1 2.460 0.940 1.132 2.190 43 3.7612 1.3012

6 1962 2 3.910 0.584 2.933 3.079 88 4.4774 0.5673

7 1962 3 3.630 0.795 1.583 2.843 46 3.8286 0.1986

8 1962 4 3.346 1.079 0.859 2.520 51 3.9318 0.5858

9 1963 1 2.419 1.217 0.675 1.975 32 3.4657 1.0467

10 1963 2 2.757 0.883 1.284 2.406 52 3.9512 1.1942

11 1963 3 1.996 1.582 0.400 1.473 66 4.1897 2.1937

12 1963 4 2.432 0.903 1.225 2.196 0 2.1960 -0.236

13 1964 1 2.186 1.301 0.591 1.779 0 1.7790 -0.407

14 1964 2 2.181 1.267 0.623 1.799 0 1.7990 -0.382

15 1964 3 3.090 1.207 0.687 2.316 47 3.8502 0.7601

16 1964 4 2.182 1.337 0.560 1.753 8 2.0794 -0.103

17 1965 1 2.735 1.044 0.918 2.275 50 3.9120 1.1770

18 1965 2 2.433 1.158 0.746 2.025 17 2.8332 0.4002

19 1965 3 2.713 0.935 1.143 2.343 25 3.2189 0.5059

20 1965 4 3.505 0.529 3.575 3.015 23 3.1355 -0.369

The values in columns 4 to 7 of Table 7-3 are the same for each worker, whereas the values in 

columns 8, 9, and 10 are determined by the individual gamma doses recorded for each quarter of 

employment from 1961 through 1965.

To estimate the unmonitored dose in Q1 of 1957 for the worker in this example, use 

∧

φ = 0.4698 and var( ∧

φ ) = 0.0366 from above, so that

μt

* = 4.5501 + 0.4698 = 5.020 and

σt

* = [0.7481 2 + 0.0366 ]

1/2 = 0.772

where μt = 4.5501 and σt = 0.7481 are from Table 7-1. The scaled unmonitored dose for this worker 

for the quarter is lognormal with * μt = 5.020 and σt

* = 0.772. The adjusted GM is exp( * μt ) = 151.41 

and the adjusted GSD is exp(σt

*

) = 2.164.

∧

φ = Σt wtvt/Σt wt = 0.4698 and

var( ∧

φ ) = 1/Σt wt = 0.0366.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 38 of 104

7.5 Comparison of Regression Model/Scaling Procedure Distributions to Recorded 

Dose Distributions

Comparisons were made between dose distributions from actual recorded doses during monitored 

quarters before 1961 and dose distributions created by applying the gamma regression model values 

and scaling procedure as if these quarters had not been monitored. The dose distributions from 

actual recorded doses were calculated with the GM equal to the recorded dose and the GSD 

determined according to the discussion in NIOSH (2007, pp. 14-15), using an MDL of 30 mrem and a 

30% standard error. For graphing purposes, for recorded doses of 0, indicating a nondetectable 

value, the GM = MDL / 2 = 15 and ln(GSD) = ln(MDL / GM) / 1.645=0.195. 

Results of comparisons for workers typical of several different situations appear in Figures 7-2 to 7-6. 

The scaling factor shown in each plot is on the logarithmic scale. For example, in Figure 7-2 the 

scaling factor is 2.666 on the logarithmic scale, which is exp(2.666) = 14.382 on the original scale. 

These figures demonstrate a variety of situations, but the scaling procedure should be used only if

there were similar job activities and dose potential before 1961 and between 1961 and 1966. These 

examples demonstrate that dose distributions calculated by the regression and scaling procedures 

are repeatedly favorable to claimants.

52.1 53.1 54.1 55.1 56.1 57.1 58.1 59.1 60.1 61.1 62.1 63.1 64.1 65.1

Year.Quarter

101

102

103

104

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Q99 - assigned

GM - assigned

 Q1 - assigned

Q99 - recorded

GM - recorded

 Q1 - recorded

Gamma dose in mrem

scale = 2.666

Figure 7-2. Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma 

doses for a worker with earliest doses similar to 1961 to 1965 and other doses lower 

than 1961 to 1965.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 39 of 104

52.1 53.1 54.1 55.1 56.1 57.1 58.1 59.1 60.1 61.1 62.1 63.1 64.1 65.1

Year.Quarter

101

102

103

104

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Q99 - assigned

GM - assigned

 Q1 - assigned

Q99 - recorded

GM - recorded

 Q1 - recorded

Gamma dose in mrem

scale = 1.0

Figure 7-3. Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma 

doses for a worker with zero doses early and mainly higher doses in 1961 to 1965.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 40 of 104

52.1 53.1 54.1 55.1 56.1 57.1 58.1 59.1 60.1 61.1 62.1 63.1 64.1 65.1

Year.Quarter

101

102

103

104

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Q99 - assigned

GM - assigned

 Q1 - assigned

Q99 - recorded

GM - recorded

 Q1 - recorded

Gamma dose in mrem

scale = 2.281

Figure 7-4. Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma 

doses for a worker with somewhat lower doses before 1961 than from 1961 to 1965. 

52.1 53.1 54.1 55.1 56.1 57.1 58.1 59.1 60.1 61.1 62.1 63.1 64.1 65.1

Year.Quarter

101

102

103

104

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Q99 - assigned

GM - assigned

 Q1 - assigned

Q99 - recorded

GM - recorded

 Q1 - recorded

Gamma dose in mrem

scale = 1.915

Figure 7-5. Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma 

doses for a worker with similar doses before and after 1961. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 41 of 104

52.1 53.1 54.1 55.1 56.1 57.1 58.1 59.1 60.1 61.1 62.1 63.1 64.1 65.1

Year.Quarter

101

102

103

104

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 Q99 - assigned

GM - assigned

 Q1 - assigned

Q99 - recorded

GM - recorded

 Q1 - recorded

Gamma dose in mrem

scale = 1.979

Figure 7-6. Distribution of scaled prediction densities versus actual monitored gamma 

doses for a worker with very early doses over a wide dose range. 

8.0 SUMMARY

The purpose of this TIB is to provide useful, comprehensive, and accurate background information on 

the film badge program through 1979 at the Y-12 Plant as a resource for dose reconstruction. This 

closure date was chosen because film badges were replaced by TLD badges for monitoring external 

radiation in 1980. The statistical methods reported herein were developed for determining prediction 

densities to estimate gamma doses for Y-12 workers during unmonitored quarters. These prediction

densities were derived using different methods before and after 1956. After 1956, the recorded 

quarterly doses for workers were used to derive parameter estimates by ML methods for quarterly 

lognormal prediction densities. Before 1956, however, the prediction densities were derived from a 

ML regression based on data from a subgroup of 147 carefully selected Y-12 workers. Individuals in 

this subgroup were judged to have had higher exposure potential, as evidenced by their having been 

selected to be monitored for all four quarters during a year for at least five years before 1961. 

Subgroup members also had recorded gamma doses for four quarters at least five years after 1961,

allowing for investigating a trend with dose levels over time. As extra assurance that the dose 

estimation process would be favorable to the claimant, the standard deviation of the dose was 

replaced by its upper 95% confidence limit when calculating the prediction density lognormal

parameters from the regression model.

A comparison of the quarterly dose means based on 1948 and 1949 monitored gamma doses to the 

mean quarterly dose estimates from the regression methods in this report [see E(dose) in Table 7-1] 

confirm that the regression methods provide values for the late 1940s that are favorable to claimants 

(see ORAUT 2013, Tables 6-2 and 6-3), even without the scaling factor being applied. The quarterly 

results from Table 7-1, adjusted for the possibility of missed dose from null dosimeter readings, have 

been used to derive Y-12 coworker data distributions for use in the evaluation of gamma doses for 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 42 of 104

time periods when workers were potentially exposed but individual monitoring data were not available 

(ORAUT 2013). 

The following items provide a summary of the information that supports the favorability to the claimant 

of the analytical approach used in this report.

• Beginning in 1961 nearly all workers were monitored with film badges (see Figure 6-1).

• The abrupt drop in dose distributions in 1961 demonstrates that workers excluded from film 

badge monitoring before 1961 were individuals with lower exposure potential (see Figure 6-2 

and Table 6-3).

• Further evidence for higher exposure potential for workers monitored before 1961 came from 

separating the 1961 doses into two groups. Group 1 doses came from workers who were also 

monitored in 1960 and Group 2 from workers not monitored in 1960. The 1961 average doses 

and other statistics for Group 1 were higher than those for Group 2 (see Figures 6-3 and 6-4 

and Tables 6-1 and 6-2).

• After 1956 Q3, lognormal models were suitable fits for quarterly data as shown by the figures 

in Attachment A. The ML lognormal parameters can be used to calculate GMs and GSDs for 

estimation of gamma doses for unmonitored quarters (see Table 7-1).

• Through 1956 Q3 data for a subgroup of 147 workers employed before and after 1961 

(Section 4.2) were used in a ML regression analysis to obtain quarterly GMs and GSDs that 

can be used to estimate doses for unmonitored quarters (see Figure 7-1).

• As an extra assurance of favorability to the claimant, the standard deviation of the regression 

analysis was replaced by its upper 95% confidence limit when calculating quarterly GMs and 

GSDs for 1947 Q3 to 1956 Q3 (see Table 7-1).

• A job analysis of the subgroup of 147 whose data was the basis for the regression analysis 

found that only 3% were managers and 88% had no supervisory duties (see Table 4-1).

• A scaling factor was calculated to allow for increasing nonmonitored doses before 1961 if the 

worker had higher than average doses after 1961 (see Table 7-3, the example in Sections 7-4 

and 7-5, and Figures 7-2 to 7-6 in Section 7-5).
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 43 of 104

REFERENCES

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

K.Z. Morgan and J. E. Turner, eds., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York, pp. 215–

241.

Beck, W. J., 1981, “Corrections to 1954 Y-12 Film Badge Data,” memorandum to Donna Hudson, Oak 

Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, December 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 12503]

BWXT Y-12, LLC., 2000, Recycled Uranium Mass Balance Project Y-12 National Security Complex 

Site Report, Y-LB-16,036, Rev. 1, Y-12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 

December. [SRDB Ref ID: 16500]

BWXT Y-12, LLC., 2001, Technical Basis for the External Dosimetry Program at the Y-12 National 

Security Complex, RCO/TBD-007, Revision 3, Y-12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, 

Tennessee, August 2. [SRDB Ref ID: 8467]

Callihan, D., and J. T. Thomas, 1959, “Accidental Radiation Excursion at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant –

Part I. Description and Physics of the Accident,” Health Physics, volume 1, number 4, pp. 

363–372. [SRDB Ref ID: 8606]

Chambers, J. M., W. S. Cleveland, B. Kleiner, and P. A. Tukey, 1983, Graphical Methods for Data 

Analysis, Duxbury Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Cheka, J. S., 1954, “Recent Developments in Film Monitoring of Fast Neutrons,” Nucleonics, volume 

12, number 6, pp. 40–43. [SRDB Ref ID: 25005]

Cohen, A. C., 1991, “Truncated and Censored Samples,” Theory and Applications, Marcel Dekker, 

Inc., New York, New York.

Denton, L. F., and H. L. Fore, 1979, Review of the Current Status of the DOE Health and Mortality 

Study (HMS) Data at UCC-ND/CSD, Technical Report No. 0003246, Union Carbide 

Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 11. [SRDB Ref ID: 44453]

Dupree, E. A., J. P. Watkins, J. N. Ingle, P. W. Wallace, C. M. West, and W. G. Tankersley, 1994, 

“Uranium Dust Exposure and Lung Cancer Risk in Four Uranium Processing Operations,” 

Epidemiology, volume 6, number 4, pp. 370–375.

Emlet, L. B., 1952, “Contamination Control: Appendix A – Health Physics Aspects,” letter to R. C. 

Armstrong (Oak Ridge Operations, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission), Union Carbide Nuclear 

Company, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 21. [SRDB Ref ID: 20122]

Emlet, L. B., 1956, “Radiation Protection at UCNC Production Facilities,” letter to S. R. Sharpie 

(Manager, Oak Ridge Operations, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission), Union Carbide Nuclear 

Company, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, August 29. [SRDB Ref ID: 23616]

Frome, E. L., and J. P. Watkins, 2004, Statistical Analysis of Data with Non-detectable Values, 

ORNL/TM-2004/146, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, August. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 24176]

Handloser, J. S., 1959, Health Physics Instrumentation, Pergamon Press, Oxford, England.
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 44 of 104

Howell, R. L., and Z. Batte, 1982, Thermoluminescent Dosimetry for Union Carbide Corporation 

Nuclear Division Personnel, Y/DK-291, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, April. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 8603]

Hurst, G. S., R. H. Ritchie, and L. C. Emerson, 1959, “Accidental Radiation Excursion at the Oak 

Ridge Y-12 Plant − Part III. Determination of Radiation Doses,” Health Physics, volume 2, 

number 2, pp. 21–29. [SRDB Ref ID: 10132]

Inkret, W. C., C. B. Meinhold, and J. C. Taschner, 1995, “Protection Standards,” Los Alamos Science, 

volume 23, number 4, pp. 117–123. [SRDB Ref ID: 43192]

Johnson, N. L., and B. L. Welch, 1940, “Application of the Non-Central t-Distribution,” Biometrika, 

volume 31, numbers 3/4, pp. 362–389.

Johnson, N. L., S. Kota, and N. Balakrishnan, 1994, Continuous Univariate Distributions, volume 1, 

2nd edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York.

Jones, V. C., 1985, Manhattan: The Army and the Bomb (United States Army in World War II Special 

Studies), Center of Military History, United States Army, Washington, D.C. [SRDB Ref ID: 

6603]

Kaplan, E. L., and P. Meier, 1958, "Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations,” Journal 

of the American Statistical Association, volume 53, pp. 457–481.

Kerr, G. D., T. D. Jones, and J. M. L. Hwang, 1978, “Neutron-to-Dose Conversion Factors for Am-B 

and Am-Be Sources,” Health Physics, volume 35, pp. 572–574.

Larson, C. E., 1949, “Finger Film Pad,” letter to Hanson Blatz (Manager of Operations, U.S. Atomic 

Energy Commission), Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Corporation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 

December 16. [SRDB Ref ID: 4298]

Lejeune, M., and G. D. Faulkenberry, 1982, “A Simple Predictive Density Function,” Journal of the 

American Statistical Association, volume 77, number 379, pp. 654–657.

Long, E. C., 1950, Weekly Neutron Film Report for the Period Beginning 4-16-50 and Ending 4-23-50,

Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 30939, p. 20]

Marsden, E. H., 1945, “Clinton – a Monument to Teamwork,” Engineering News-Record, Special 

Number Featuring Construction for Atomic Bomb Production Facilities, volume 135, number 

24, pp. 115–117. [SRDB Ref ID: 44454]

McLendon, J. D., 1958a, “Change in Y-12 Film Badge Program,” internal correspondence to E. W. 

Bailey et al., Union Carbide Nuclear Company, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 31. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 20093]

McLendon, J. D., 1958b, “Change in Y-12 Film Badge Program,” internal correspondence to J. C. 

Bowles et al., Union Carbide Nuclear Company, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 6. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 20092]

McLendon, J. D., 1960, “Personnel Radiation Exposure Data,” internal correspondence to G. W. 

Flack, Union Carbide Nuclear Company, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, August 25. [SRDB Ref ID: 

3694]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 45 of 104

McLendon, J. D., 1963, Y-12 Radiation Safety Manual, Y/KB-29, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 

October 31. [SRDB Ref ID: 8541]

McLendon, J. D., R. G. Affell, A. G. Bailey, K. A. Davis, and E. D. Gupton, 1980, External Radiation 

Monitoring of Union Carbide Nuclear Division Personnel, Y/DD-268, Union Carbide 

Corporation, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 23. [SRDB Ref ID: 8589]

McRee, P. C., C. M. West, and J. D. McLendon, 1965, Y-12 Radiation Safety Manual, Y-1401 

Revised, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 8577]

Morgan, K. Z, 1961, “Dosimetry Requirements for Protection from Ionizing Radiation,” in Selected 

Topics in Radiation Dosimetry, Proceeding Series, STI/PUB/25, International Atomic Energy 

Agency, Vienna, Austria, pp. 3–23. [SRDB Ref ID: 8345]

Morgan, K. Z., D. M. Davis, and J. C. Hart, 1963, Applied Health Physics Annual Report for 1962, 

ORNL-3490, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, September 25. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 12093]

Murray, R., 1948a, Health Physics Progress Report, December 1-31, 1947, Y-94 Rev. 1, Y-12 Plant, 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 483–502]

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

Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 476–482]

Murray, R., 1948c, Health Physics Progress Report, February 1-29, 1948, Y-134, Y-12 Plant, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 469–475]

Nachtigall, D., 1967, “Average and Effective Energies, Fluence-to-Dose Conversion Factors and 

Quality Factors of the Neutron Spectra of Some (α,n) Sources,” Health Physics, volume 13, 

pp. 213–219.

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety), 2007, External Dose Reconstruction 

Implementation Guideline, OCAS-IG-001, Rev. 03, Office of Compensation Analysis and 

Support, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 1. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2004a, Accounting for Incomplete Personal 

Monitoring Data on Penetrating Gamma-Ray Doses to Workers in Radiation Areas at the Oak 

Ridge Y-12 Plant Prior to 1961, ORAUT-PROC-0042, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 

September 9.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2004b, Individual Dose Adjustment Procedure 

for Y-12 Dose Reconstruction, ORAUT-OTIB-0013, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 

September 9. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2006, External Radiation Dose Estimates for 

Individuals Near the 1958 Criticality Accident at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, ORAUT-OTIB0057, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, May 15.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2007, Historical Evaluation of the Film Badge 

Dosimetry Program at the Y-12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Part 3 – Beta Radiation, 

ORAUT-OTIB-0046, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 22. 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 46 of 104

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2009a, Technical Basis Document for the Y-12 

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

Rev. 02, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, December 18. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2009b, Historical Evaluation of the Film Badge 

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

ORAUT-OTIB-0045, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November 30. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2013, Coworker External Dosimetry Data for the 

Y-12 National Security Complex, ORAUT-OTIB-0064, Rev. 02, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, April 

29.

Patterson, C. M., Jr., C. M. West, and J. D. McLendon, 1957, The Y-12 Health Physics Program, 

Y-1186 Deleted Revision, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November 1. [SRDB Ref ID: 

14022]

RDCT (R Development Core Team), 2008, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, 

R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [SRDB Ref ID: 44452] 

Reavis, J. P., 1958, “Frequency of Film Badge Analysis,” internal correspondence to J. C. Bowles

et al., Union Carbide Nuclear Company, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, September 30. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 20092]

Royster, P., 1982, “An Extension of Shapiro and Wilk’s W Test for Normality to Large Samples,” 

Applied Statistics, volume 31, pp. 115–124.

Schmoyer, R. L., J. J. Beauchamp, C. C. Brandt, and F. O. Hoffman, Jr., 1996, “Difficulties with the 

Lognormal Model in Mean Estimation and Testing,” Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 

volume 3, pp. 81–97.

Sherrill, M. W., and W. O. Tucker, 1973, Evaluation of New Film Badge Reader and Revised 

Exposure Computations, Y/DK-11, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 12. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 8590]

Shleien, B., L. A. Slabeck, Jr., and B. K. Birkey, editors, 1998, Handbook of Health Physics and 

Radiological Health, Third Edition, Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, Maryland, January. 

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. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 8586]

Strom, D. J., M. H. Smith, K. L. Swinth, and H. J. Pettengill, 1996, “Dose to Workers in the United 

States Nuclear Weapons Program Due to External Irradiation at the Dawn of the Atomic Era 

(1940-1960),” Health Physics, volume 71, pp. 50–57.

Struxness, E. G., 1948, Health Physics−Industrial Hygiene Progress Report, May 1-31, 1948, Y-181, 

Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 16. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 456–467]

Struxness, E. G., 1949a, Maximum Permissible Dose Limits, Memorandum to distribution, Y-12 Plant, 

Oak Ridge Tennessee, October 21. [SRDB Ref ID: 12503]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 47 of 104

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

Y-429/Rev. 1, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 11. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 296–

305]

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

Y-318/Rev. 1, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, January 11. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 364–

374]

Struxness, E. G., 1951a, Health Physics Progress Report, November 1, 1950 – December 31, 1950, 

Y-780, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 14. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 215–256]

Struxness, E. G., 1951b, Health Physics Progress Report, January 1, 1951 – June 30, 1951, Y-836, 

Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, December 15. [SRDB Ref ID: 8602, pp. 257–294]

Struxness, E. G., 1952, Health Physics Progress Report, July 1, 1951 – December 31, 1951, Y-858, 

Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March 15. [SRDB Ref ID: 8620, pp. 110–178]

Struxness, E. G., 1953, Health Physics Progress Report, January 1, 1952 – July 1, 1952, Y-940, Y-12

Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, February 19. [SRDB Ref ID: 8620, pp. 180–214]

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, 

December 5. [SRDB Ref ID: 8573]

UCNC (Union Carbide Nuclear Company), 1958, Accidental Radiation Excursion at the Y-12 Plant, 

June 16, 1958, Y-1234, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 16. [SRDB Ref ID: 8387]

UCNC (Union Carbide Nuclear Company), 1963, Y-12 Plant Quarterly Health Physics Report – Third 

Quarter CY 1962, Y/KB-24, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, February 7. [SRDB Ref ID: 

23617]

Waller, L. A., and B. W. Turnbull, 1992, “Probability Plotting with Censored Data,” The American 

Statistician, volume 46, number 1, pp. 5–12.

Watkins, J. P., J. L. Reagan, D. L. Cragle, E. L. Frome, C. W. West, D .J. Crawford-Brown, and W. G. 

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

Facilities Mortality Study, Technical Report ORISE 93/J-42, Oak Ridge Institute for Science 

and Education, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 10133]

Watkins, J. P., D. L. Cragle, E. L. Frome, J. L. Reagan, C. W. 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, volume 12, 

number 3, pp. 195–205.

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

Y-12 Record Center,” internal correspondence to H. B. McBride, Jr., Oak Ridge Gaseous 

Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 16. [SRBD Ref ID: 24018]

West, C. M., 1981, “Discrepancy in 1954 Y-12 Film Badge Results,” internal correspondence to H. L.

Fore (Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant), Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee, August 18. [SRDB Ref ID: 28125]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 48 of 104

West, C. M., 1993a, “Brief History of the Y-12 External Monitoring Program,” memorandum to Donna 

Cragle, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 7. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 8532]

West, C. M., 1993b, “Addendum to ‘Brief History of the Y-12 External Monitoring Program,’” 

memorandum to Donna Cragle, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Oak Ridge, 

Tennessee, June 15. [SRDB Ref ID: 13296]

Wiley, S. W., 2004, “Y-12 Historical Radiation Standards,” letter to G. D. Kerr (Kerr Consulting), 

BWXT Y-12, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, June 3. [SRDB Ref ID: 28131]

Wilson, R. H., 1987, Historical Review of Personnel Dosimetry Development and Its Use in Radiation 

Protection Programs at Hanford 1944 to the 1980’s,” PNL-6125, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, 

Richland, Washington, February. [SRDB Ref ID: 262]
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 49 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 1 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-1. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1952.

Quarter= 1 N= 206 

Zeros= 62 ( 30.1 %) Max Dose= 825

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0

20

40

60

80

Quarter= 2 N= 253 

Zeros= 89 ( 35.2 %) Max Dose= 1702

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0

20

40

60

80

Quarter= 3 N= 308 

Zeros= 82 ( 26.6 %) Max Dose= 1945

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0

20

40

60

80

Quarter= 4 N= 386 

Zeros= 182 ( 47.2 %) Max Dose= 2174

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0

20

40

60

80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 50 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 2 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-2. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1953.

Quarter= 1 N= 147 

Zeros= 30 ( 20.4 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 157 

Zeros= 35 ( 22.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 151 

Zeros= 46 ( 30.5 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 334 

Zeros= 218 ( 65.3 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 51 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 3 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-3. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1954.

Quarter= 1 N= 332 

Zeros= 247 ( 74.4 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 205 

Zeros= 124 ( 60.5 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 202 

Zeros= 135 ( 66.8 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 497 

Zeros= 440 ( 88.5 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 52 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 4 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-4. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1955.

Quarter= 1 N= 525 

Zeros= 460 ( 87.6 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 525 

Zeros= 430 ( 81.9 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 468 

Zeros= 371 ( 79.3 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 398 

Zeros= 307 ( 77.1 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 53 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 5 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-5. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1956.

Quarter= 1 N= 448 

Zeros= 319 ( 71.2 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 492 

Zeros= 283 ( 57.5 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 617 

Zeros= 249 ( 40.4 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 620 

Zeros= 121 ( 19.5 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 54 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 6 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-6. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1957.

Quarter= 1 N= 565 

Zeros= 58 ( 10.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 595 

Zeros= 173 ( 29.1 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 668 

Zeros= 216 ( 32.3 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 678 

Zeros= 388 ( 57.2 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 55 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 7 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-7. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1958.

Quarter= 1 N= 704 

Zeros= 177 ( 25.1 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 694 

Zeros= 104 ( 15 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 689 

Zeros= 93 ( 13.5 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 788 

Zeros= 188 ( 23.9 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 56 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 8 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-8. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1959.

Quarter= 1 N= 844 

Zeros= 44 ( 5.2 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 854 

Zeros= 375 ( 43.9 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 909 

Zeros= 210 ( 23.1 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 1053 

Zeros= 214 ( 20.3 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 57 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 9 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-9. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1960.

Quarter= 1 N= 1148 

Zeros= 319 ( 27.8 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 2 N= 1104 

Zeros= 123 ( 11.1 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 3 N= 1055 

Zeros= 42 ( 4 %) Max 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

Quarter= 4 N= 985 

Zeros= 69 ( 7 %) Max 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 20 40 60 80

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 58 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 10 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-10. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1961.

Quarter= 1 N= 5301 

Zeros= 4153 ( 78.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5525 

Zeros= 35 ( 0.6 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5494 

Zeros= 54 ( 1 %) Max 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5565 

Zeros= 3 ( 0.1 %) Ma 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 59 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 11 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-11. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1962.

Quarter= 1 N= 5583 

Zeros= 5 ( 0.1 %) Ma 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5352 

Zeros= 0 ( 0 %) Max 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5394 

Zeros= 11 ( 0.2 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5327 

Zeros= 18 ( 0.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 60 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 12 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-12. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1963.

Quarter= 1 N= 5456 

Zeros= 3182 ( 58.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5536 

Zeros= 3138 ( 56.7 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5549 

Zeros= 3686 ( 66.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5461 

Zeros= 4283 ( 78.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 61 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 13 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-13. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1964.

Quarter= 1 N= 5477 

Zeros= 4520 ( 82.5 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5314 

Zeros= 4394 ( 82.7 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5360 

Zeros= 731 ( 13.6 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5122 

Zeros= 3719 ( 72.6 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 62 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 14 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-14. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1965.

Quarter= 1 N= 5037 

Zeros= 1782 ( 35.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 4474 

Zeros= 1871 ( 41.8 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 4345 

Zeros= 0 ( 0 %) Max 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 4336 

Zeros= 8 ( 0.2 %) Ma 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 63 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 15 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-15. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1966.

Quarter= 1 N= 4333 

Zeros= 2664 ( 61.5 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 4339 

Zeros= 1778 ( 41 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 4400 

Zeros= 1 ( 0 %) Max 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 4485 

Zeros= 1680 ( 37.5 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 64 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 16 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-16. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1967.

Quarter= 1 N= 4515 

Zeros= 3442 ( 76.2 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 4613 

Zeros= 2091 ( 45.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 4753 

Zeros= 410 ( 8.6 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 4797 

Zeros= 2270 ( 47.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 65 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 17 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-17. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1968.

Quarter= 1 N= 4884 

Zeros= 1129 ( 23.1 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 4974 

Zeros= 59 ( 1.2 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5212 

Zeros= 4763 ( 91.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5293 

Zeros= 36 ( 0.7 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 66 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 18 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-18. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1969.

Quarter= 1 N= 5398 

Zeros= 457 ( 8.5 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5466 

Zeros= 346 ( 6.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5935 

Zeros= 399 ( 6.7 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5882 

Zeros= 593 ( 10.1 %) 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 67 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 19 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-19. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1970.

Quarter= 1 N= 6024 

Zeros= 372 ( 6.2 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 6002 

Zeros= 325 ( 5.4 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 6509 

Zeros= 372 ( 5.7 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 6672 

Zeros= 1255 ( 18.8 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 68 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 20 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-20. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1971.

Quarter= 1 N= 6759 

Zeros= 13 ( 0.2 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 6757 

Zeros= 1757 ( 26 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 6629 

Zeros= 89 ( 1.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 6556 

Zeros= 636 ( 9.7 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 69 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 21 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-21. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1972.

Quarter= 1 N= 6525 

Zeros= 1528 ( 23.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 6400 

Zeros= 4819 ( 75.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 6403 

Zeros= 5919 ( 92.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 6194 

Zeros= 5552 ( 89.6 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 70 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 22 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-22. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1973.

Quarter= 1 N= 6311 

Zeros= 3662 ( 58 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 6062 

Zeros= 5389 ( 88.9 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5880 

Zeros= 2072 ( 35.2 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5398 

Zeros= 5205 ( 96.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 71 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 23 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-23. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1974.

Quarter= 1 N= 5298 

Zeros= 283 ( 5.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5359 

Zeros= 2121 ( 39.6 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5364 

Zeros= 696 ( 13 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5214 

Zeros= 3697 ( 70.9 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 72 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 24 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-24. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1975.

Quarter= 1 N= 5168 

Zeros= 1076 ( 20.8 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 4917 

Zeros= 4339 ( 88.2 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 4483 

Zeros= 4093 ( 91.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 4540 

Zeros= 4058 ( 89.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 73 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 25 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-25. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1976.

Quarter= 1 N= 4618 

Zeros= 2063 ( 44.7 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 4605 

Zeros= 3809 ( 82.7 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 4572 

Zeros= 2100 ( 45.9 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 4694 

Zeros= 4468 ( 95.2 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 74 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 26 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-26. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1977.

Quarter= 1 N= 4933 

Zeros= 3659 ( 74.2 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5021 

Zeros= 4076 ( 81.2 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5058 

Zeros= 2725 ( 53.9 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 4902 

Zeros= 3526 ( 71.9 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 75 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 27 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-27. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1978.

Quarter= 1 N= 5007 

Zeros= 3069 ( 61.3 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5073 

Zeros= 2536 ( 50 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5202 

Zeros= 432 ( 8.3 %) M 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5255 

Zeros= 4065 ( 77.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 76 of 104

ATTACHMENT A 

DISTRIBUTIONS OF QUARTERLY GAMMA DOSES BY YEAR

Page 28 of 28

Note change in vertical scale, frequency, or number of workers having dose of a given range. Vertical 

axis ranges from 0 to 100 for 1952 to 1960 and from 0 to 4,000 for 1961 to 1979, which corresponds 

to the policy change in 1961 to monitor all Y-12 workers for external radiation.

Figure A-28. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1979.

Quarter= 1 N= 5169 

Zeros= 3987 ( 77.1 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 2 N= 5512 

Zeros= 4595 ( 83.4 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 3 N= 5196 

Zeros= 4450 ( 85.6 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

Quarter= 4 N= 5489 

Zeros= 4804 ( 87.5 % 

Dose(mrem)

Frequency

0 200 400 600 800

0 1000 3000

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 77 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 1 of 28

Figure B-1. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1952.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 206 

GM= 58.3 GSD= 3.1 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 253 

GM= 116.6 GSD= 7.9 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 308 

GM= 181.5 GSD= 5.5 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 386 

GM= 55.9 GSD= 12 Rsqua 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 78 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 2 of 28

Figure B-2. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1953.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 147 

GM= 286.7 GSD= 4.6 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 157 

GM= 211.2 GSD= 5.2 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 151 

GM= 189 GSD= 7.8 Rsqua 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 334 

GM= 10.3 GSD= 31.2 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 79 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 3 of 28

Figure B-3. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1954.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 332 

GM= 3 GSD= 45.9 Rsquar 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 205 

GM= 17.3 GSD= 28.5 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 202 

GM= 8.2 GSD= 39 Rsquar 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 497 

GM= 0.1 GSD= 225.4 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 80 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 4 of 28

Figure B-4. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1955.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 525 

GM= 0.7 GSD= 26.8 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 525 

GM= 0.8 GSD= 60.9 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 468 

GM= 1.7 GSD= 39.2 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 398 

GM= 2.2 GSD= 41 Rsquar 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 81 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 5 of 28

Figure B-5. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1956.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 448 

GM= 9.9 GSD= 8.1 Rsqua 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 492 

GM= 20.9 GSD= 3.4 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 617 

GM= 38.4 GSD= 3.5 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 620 

GM= 88.3 GSD= 3.3 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 82 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 6 of 28

Figure B-6. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1957.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 565 

GM= 94.6 GSD= 2.1 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 595 

GM= 38.3 GSD= 3.3 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 668 

GM= 35.3 GSD= 3.6 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 678 

GM= 20.9 GSD= 2.7 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 83 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 7 of 28

Figure B-7. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1958.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 704 

GM= 41.5 GSD= 2.6 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 694 

GM= 80.2 GSD= 3.3 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 689 

GM= 94.5 GSD= 2.8 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 788 

GM= 61.3 GSD= 2.9 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 84 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 8 of 28

Figure B-8. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1959.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 844 

GM= 112.9 GSD= 2.4 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 854 

GM= 37 GSD= 3.5 Rsquar 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 909 

GM= 44.4 GSD= 2.8 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 1053 

GM= 65 GSD= 2.7 Rsquar 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 85 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 9 of 28

Figure B-9. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1960.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1

5

50

500

5000

Quarter= 1 N= 1148 

GM= 35.5 GSD= 3 Rsquare= 0.956

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1

5

50

500

5000

Quarter= 2 N= 1104 

GM= 52.5 GSD= 2.9 Rsquare= 0.986

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1

5

50

500

5000

Quarter= 3 N= 1055 

GM= 67.8 GSD= 2.8 Rsquare= 0.958

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1

5

50

500

5000

Quarter= 4 N= 985 

GM= 86.4 GSD= 2.6 Rsquare= 0.965

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 86 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 10 of 28

Figure B-10. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1961.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5301 GM= 7.8 GSD= 3.4 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5525 GM= 45.4 GSD= 1.8 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5494 GM= 20.3 GSD= 2.3 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5565 GM= 52 GSD= 1.7 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 87 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 11 of 28

Figure B-11. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1962.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5583 GM= 11.7 GSD= 2.6 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5352 GM= 49.9 GSD= 1.8 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5394 GM= 37.7 GSD= 2.2 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5327 GM= 28.4 GSD= 2.9 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 88 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 12 of 28

Figure B-12. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1963.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5456 GM= 11.2 GSD= 3.4 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5536 GM= 15.8 GSD= 2.4 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5549 GM= 7.4 GSD= 4.9 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5461 GM= 11.4 GSD= 2.5 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 89 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 13 of 28

Figure B-13. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1964.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5477 GM= 8.9 GSD= 3.7 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5314 GM= 8.9 GSD= 3.5 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5360 GM= 22 GSD= 3.3 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5122 GM= 8.9 GSD= 3.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 90 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 14 of 28

Figure B-14. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1965.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5037 GM= 15.4 GSD= 2.8 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 4474 GM= 11.4 GSD= 3.2 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 4345 GM= 15.1 GSD= 2.5 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 4336 GM= 33.3 GSD= 1.7 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 91 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 15 of 28

Figure B-15. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1966.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 4333 GM= 7.2 GSD= 4.2 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 4339 GM= 11.8 GSD= 3.6 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 4400 GM= 18 GSD= 4.1 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 4485 GM= 15.9 GSD= 2.9 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 92 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 16 of 28

Figure B-16. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1967.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 4515 GM= 8.3 GSD= 3.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 4613 GM= 11.7 GSD= 3.4 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 4753 GM= 12.6 GSD= 2.7 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 4797 GM= 10 GSD= 2.9 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 93 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 17 of 28

Figure B-17. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1968.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 4884 GM= 7.6 GSD= 3.3 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 4974 GM= 53 GSD= 1.4 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5212 GM= 5 GSD= 3.2 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5293 GM= 32.1 GSD= 2.1 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 94 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 18 of 28

Figure B-18. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1969.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5398 GM= 19.9 GSD= 2.1 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5466 GM= 19 GSD= 2.4 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5935 GM= 24.3 GSD= 2.8 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5882 GM= 17.1 GSD= 2.8 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 95 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 19 of 28

Figure B-19. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1970.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 6024 GM= 18.9 GSD= 2.8 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 6002 GM= 10.3 GSD= 2.5 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 6509 GM= 26.3 GSD= 2.5 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 6672 GM= 19.7 GSD= 2.7 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 96 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 20 of 28

Figure B-20. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1971.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 6759 GM= 25.3 GSD= 1.9 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 6757 GM= 7.5 GSD= 2.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 6629 GM= 25.1 GSD= 2.2 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 6556 GM= 14.2 GSD= 2.5 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 97 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 21 of 28

Figure B-21. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1972.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 6525 GM= 13 GSD= 2.6 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 6400 GM= 7.9 GSD= 3.1 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 6403 GM= 4.8 GSD= 3 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 6194 GM= 5.6 GSD= 3.1 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 98 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 22 of 28

Figure B-22. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1973.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 6311 GM= 7.8 GSD= 3.1 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 6062 GM= 5.8 GSD= 3.4 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5880 GM= 9.3 GSD= 2.9 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5398 GM= 2.7 GSD= 3.6 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 99 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 23 of 28

Figure B-23. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1974.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5298 GM= 26.5 GSD= 2.9 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5359 GM= 9.1 GSD= 3.4 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5364 GM= 13.9 GSD= 2.6 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5214 GM= 7.4 GSD= 3.1 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 100 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 24 of 28

Figure B-24. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1975.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5168 GM= 9.1 GSD= 2.7 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 4917 GM= 5.4 GSD= 3.2 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 4483 GM= 4.7 GSD= 3 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 4540 GM= 5 GSD= 2.9 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 101 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 25 of 28

Figure B-25. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1976.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 4618 GM= 10.9 GSD= 2.3 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 4605 GM= 6.5 GSD= 2.9 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 4572 GM= 11.5 GSD= 2.6 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 4694 GM= 5.3 GSD= 2.5 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 102 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 26 of 28

Figure B-26. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1977.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 4933 GM= 6.2 GSD= 2.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5021 GM= 6.5 GSD= 2.5 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5058 GM= 10.2 GSD= 2.7 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 4902 GM= 5.2 GSD= 2.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 103 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 27 of 28

Figure B-27. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1978.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5007 GM= 5.4 GSD= 2.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5073 GM= 9.1 GSD= 2.6 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5202 GM= 31.8 GSD= 2.1 Rs 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5255 GM= 5 GSD= 3 Rsquar 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

 
Document No. ORAUT-OTIB-0044 Revision No. 01 Effective Date: 04/29/2013 Page 104 of 104

ATTACHMENT B

QUANTILE-QUANTILE PLOTS OF QUARTERLY DOSES, 1952 TO 1979

Page 28 of 28

Figure B-28. Quarterly Y-12 film badge gamma dose for 1979.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 1 N= 5169 GM= 5.3 GSD= 2.8 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 2 N= 5512 GM= 7 GSD= 2.5 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 3 N= 5196 GM= 6.1 GSD= 3.3 Rsq 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

1 5 50 500 5000

Quarter= 4 N= 5489 GM= 6.3 GSD= 3 Rsqu 

Lognormal Quantile

Dose mrem