ML20081E165

Occupational Radiation Exposure Report.Thirteen & Fourteenth Annual Reports,1980 and 1981

ML20081E165
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/31/1983
From:	Brooks B, Mcdonald S, Richardson E NRC OFFICE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (ORM)
To:
References
NUREG-0714, NUREG-0714-V02-3, NUREG-714, NUREG-714-V2-3, NUDOCS 8311010490
Download: ML20081E165 (64)

Text

- _ - - - - - - -

NUREG-0714 Vols. 2 and 3 l Occupational Radiation Exposure Thirteenth and Fourteenth Annual Reports,1980 and 1981 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Resource Management B. Brooks, S. Mcdonald, E. Richardson

,s >= * %,,

\\

./,

.;;. 5 8y3 1 g p 831031 0714 R PDR

. ~-

l NOTICE Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in N RC publications will be available from one of the following sources:

1.

The NRC Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20555

2. The NRC/GPO Sales Program, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, WasHngton, DC 20555 4

3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 Although the listing that folluws represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publications, it is not intended to be exhaustive.

Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Docu-ment Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspect!

and Enforcement bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices; 1

Licensee Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee documents and correspondence.

?

The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales Program: formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference proceedings, and NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations. and Nuclear Regulatory Commission issuances.

Documents available from the National Technical information Service include NUREG series reports and technical reports prepared by other federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items, such as books, journal and periodical articles, and transactions. Federal Register notices, federal and state legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from these libraries.

4 Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations,and non-NRC conference j

proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited.

Single copies of NRC draft reports are available free upon written request to the Division of Tech-nical information and Document Control, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.

j I

Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process are maintained at the NRC Library, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, and are available there for reference use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copyrighted and may be -

purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the l

American National Standards Institute,1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018.

GPO Pnnted copy price: $MQ___ ___

,m,.

y--

_y

NUREG-0714 Vols. 2 and 3 Occupational Radiation Exposure Thirteenth and Fourteenth Annual Reports,1980 and 1981 Manuscript Completed: August 1983 Date Published: october 1983

8. Brooks, S. Mcdonald, E. Richardson Division of Data Automation and Management Information Office of Resource Management U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission W:shington, D.C. 20555

,p..,,,,

• 3 2

l

PREVIOUS REPORTS IN THE SERIES NUREG-0714 will become the permanent identification number for the Occupational Radiation Exposure report series.

The following is a list of all previous reports, along with their separate identification numbers,that have been published in this series.

WASH 1350-R1 through WASH 1350-R6 First - Sixth Annual Report of the Operation of the U.S. AEC's Centralized Ionizina Radiation Exposure Records and Reports System, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.

NUREG-75/108 Seventh Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for Certain NRC Licensees - 1974, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion, Oct. 1975.

NUREG-0119 Eighth Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for 1975, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Oct. 1976.

NUREG-0322 Ninth Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for 1976, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Oct.1977.

NUREG-0463 Tenth Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for 1977, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Oct. 1978.

NUREG-0593 Eleventh Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for 1978, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Jan.1981.

NUREG-0714, Twelfth Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Report for 1979, Vol. 1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Aug. 1982.

E i

11

1 OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION EXPOSURE ANNUAL REPORTS Thirteenth and Fourteenth 1980 and 1981 ABSTRACT This report summarizes the occupational exposure data that is maintained in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Radiation Exposure Information and Reports System (REIRS).

This report is usually published on an annual basis and is available at all NRC public document rooms.

The bulk of the information contained in the report was extracted from the 1980 and 1981 annual statistical reports submitted by four categories of NRC licensees subject to the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 520.407.

These four categories of licensees - operating nuclear power reactors, fuel fabrica-tors and reprocessors, industrial radiographers, and manufacturers and distri-butors of specified quantities of byproduct materials - also submit personal identification and exposure information for terminating employees pursuant to 10 CFR 920.408, and some analysis of this data is also presented in this report.

Annual reports were received from 410 NRC licenwes in 1980 and from 385 licensees in 1981.

Extrapolation of the 1980 data to account for the 48 licensees (10%) that failed to report indicated that approximately 161,560 individuals were monitored, 96,870 of whom received a measurable dose.

The collective dose incurred by these individuals was calculated to be 59,580 man-rems, and the average measurable dose was found to be 0.62 rems.

The large increases in the number of individuals and collective dose over that reported in 1979 was due primarily to the increase in these figures reported by comercial power reactors.

Extrapolation of the 1981 data to account for those licensees (16%) that did not report indicated that 160,690 workers were monitored and that 99,120 workers received a measurable dose.

The collective dose was caculated to be i

59,520 man-rems, and the average measurable dose was 0.60 rems, about the same as that found in 1980.

In both 1980 and 1981, about 20% of the individuals l

monitored received doses greater than 0.50 rems.

However, the number of those receiving doses greater than five rems decreased from 0.2% (331 persons) in j

1980 to 0.1% (203 persons) in 1981.

)

The number of termination reports submitted to the NRC increased sharply from 1979 to 1980.

In 1979 about 133,500 termination reports were received, while in 1980 some 175,400 were received.

In 1981 approximately 179,700 reports were received, representing only a two percent increase over the previous year. This brought the total number of monitored individuals for whom personal l

identification and exposure information has been incorporate ~dinto the Commis-sion's Radiation Exposure Information and Reports System during the thirteen years that it has been operating to about 250,000.

l l

l iii

Information on incidents involving personnel overexposures to radiation or radioactive materials (Section 5) was obtained from reports submitted by j

all NRC licensees pursuant to Parts 20.403 and 20.405 of Title 10, Chapter 1, Code of Federal Regulations.

The total number of reported overexposures reported increased in 1980, but in 1981 the number declined to about the same as that reported in previous years.

The number of incidents reported by radiography firms continued to decline from previous year's values.

The more significantoverexposures which occurred in 1980 and 1981 are summarized in Section 5.

)

b iv

CONTENTS P. age PREVIOUS REPORTS IN THE SERIES ii ABSTRACT.............................

iii 1.

INTRODUCTION....................

1 2.

LIMITATIONS OF THE DATA...................

2 3.

ANNUAL PERSONNEL MONITORING REPORTS - 10 CFR g20.407....

3 f

3.1 Whole Body Dose Distributions.............

3 3.2 Summary of Occupational Exposure Data By License Category...................

6 3.2.1 Industrial Radiography Licenses, Single and Multiple Location...........

6 3.2.2 Manufacturer and Distributor Licenses, Broad and Other.............

11 3.2.3 Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Licenses...

12 3.2.4 Water Cooled Power Reactor Licenses.......

14 3.2.5 High Temperature Gas Cooled Power Reactor Licenses...................

20

3. 3 Health Implications of Average Annual Doses......

20 4.

TERMINATION DATA SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO 10 CFR S20.408....

21 4.1 Termination Reports 1969-81..............

21 4.2 Limitations of the Termination Data..........

22 4.3 Transient Workers per Calendar Quarter....

22 4.4 Transient Workers per Calendar Year..........

24 4.5 Age and Dose Distribution of Terminated Workers....

26 4.6 Career Deses......................

26 5.

PERSONNEL OVEREXPOSURES - 10 CFR 620.403 AND 10 CFR $20.405......................

29 5.1 Types of Overexposure.................

29 5.1.1 Catego ry A...................

29 5.1.2 C a te go ry B...................

31 5.1.3 C a te g o ry C...................

31 5.2 Summary of Overexposures................

31 5.2.1 Overexposure Incidents - 1980..........

33 5.2.2 Overexposure Incidents - 1981..........

33 REFERENCES............................

35 APPENDIX A -

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHY LICENSES..........

37 APPENDIX B -

MANUFACTURER AND DISTRIBUTOR LICENSEES......

47 y

l CONTENTS (Continued)

.P_ay APPENDIX C -

FUEL FABRICATOR AND REPROCESSOR LICENSEES.....

49 APPENDIX D -

CAREER DOSE DISTRIBUTION FOR INDIVIDUALS TERMINATING FROM 1977 TO 1982...........

51 i

TABLES & FIGURES Table 1 Distribution of Annual Whole Body Doses by License Category - 1980...................

4 Table 2 Distribution of Annual Whole Body Doses by License Category - 1981...................

5 Table 3 Summary of Annual Whole Body Exposures for Four Categories of Licensees, 1968-1981..........

7 Table 4 Annual Exposure Data for Four Cate00 ries of Licensees, 1973-1981......................

8 Table 5 Extrapolated Annual Information for Industrial Radiographers, 1980 and 1981.............

9 Table 6 Extrapolated Annual Information for Manufacturers and Distributors, 1980 and 1981...........

11 Table 7 Summary of Annual Exposures Reported by Nuclear Power Facilities, 1973-1981.............

17 Table 8 Annual Doses at Fort St. Vrain, 1974-1981.......

20 Table 9 Termination Reports Submitted to the NRC, 1969-1981..

23 Table 10 Transient Workers per Calendar Quarter, 1972-1981...

25 Table 11 Transient Workers per Calendar Year, 1977-1981.....

24' Table 12 Age & Dose Distribution of Terminating Personnel....

27

.i Table 13 Summary of Career Doses for Workers Terminating from 1977 to 1982..................

30 Table 14 Personnel Overexposures to External Radiation, 1977-1981......................

32 Figure 1 Annual Dose Distributions of Workers at Industrial Radiography Facilities, 1980 and 1981........

10 Figure 2 Annual Dose Distributions of Workers at Manufacturing and Distribution Facilities, 1980 and 1981......

13 vi e

=.

d

[

CONTENTS (Continued) pg 4

l Figure 3 Annual Dose Distributions of Workers at Fuel Fabricators and Reprocessors...................

15 Figure 4 Total Annual Values at Light Water Cooled Power Reactors, 1969-1981.................

16 Figure 5 Comercial Light Water Cooled Reactors, 1969-1981...

18 i

Figure 6 Annual Dose Distribution of Workers at Light Water Reactor Facilities, 1981...............

19

)

Figure 7a Age Distribution of Terminating Reactor Personnel 28 Figure 7b Age Distribution of Terminating Non-reactor Personnel.

20 f

i

\\

f vii

... _ _. - _ _ _. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _. _, _. _ _. _. -. ~. _ _. _ -

i 1.

INTRODUCTION One of the basic purposes of the Atomic Energy Act and the implementing regulations in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I, Part 20, is to protect the health and safety of the public, including the employees of the licensees conducting operations under those regulations.

Among the regulations designed to assure that the standards for protection against radiation set out in 10 CFR Part 20 are met is a requirement that licensees provide individuals likely to be exposed to radiation with devices to monitor their exposure.

Each licensee is also required to maintain indefinitely records of the results of such monitoring.

However, there was no initial provision that these records, or any summary of them, be transmitted to a central location where the data could be retrieved and analyzed.

On November 4, 1968, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) published an amendment to Part 20 requiring the reporting of certain occupational radiation exposure information to a central repository at AEC Headquarters.

This information was required of the four categories

• of AEC licensees that were considered to involve the greatest potential for significant occupational doses and of AEC facilities and contractors exempt from licensing.

A procedure was established whereby the appropriate occupational exposure data 7

were extracted from these reports and entered into the Commission's Radiation Exposure Information and Reports System (REIRS), a computer system maintained at Union Carbide's Computer Technology Center in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

The computerization of this data assured its being kept indefinitely and facili-tated retrieval and analysis.

The data maintained in REIRS has been summarized and published in a report every year since 1969.

Annual reports for each of the years 1969 thrcugh 1973 presented the data reported by both AEC licensees and contractors, and were published in six documents designated as WASH-1350-R1 through WASH-1350-R6.

In January 1975, with the separation of the AEC into the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion (NRC), each agency assumed responsibility for collecting and maintaining occupational radiation exposure information reported by the facilities under its jurisdiction.

The annual reports published by the NRC on occupational exposure for calendar year 1974 and subsequent years do not contain informa-tion pertaining to ERDA facilities or contractors.

Comparable information for facilities and contractors under ERDA, now the Department of Energy (D0E), is collected and published by DOE's Division of Operational and Environmental Safety at Germantown, Maryland.

On September 29, 1978, 10 CFR S20.407 was amended to require that all NRC specific licensees submit annual radiation exposure reports for each of the calendar years 1978 and 1979.

The reports were statistical summary reports exactly like those that had been required of the previously named four categories of NRC licensees.

Therefore, the reports published for each of the years, 1978 and 1979 (NUREG-0593 and NUREG-0713, Vol. 1) summarized the annual exposure data that had been submitted by all types of NRC licensees.

Since A

Commercial nuclear power reactors; industr*al radiographers; fuel processors, fabricators, and reprocessors; manufacturers and distributors of specified quantities of byproduct material.

1

1 j

the requirement for the reporting of annual personnel monitoring results 4

reverted back to the usual four categories of licensees in 1980, this document contains exposure information pertaining to only these types of NRC licensees.

i 2.

LIMITATIONS OF THE DATA All of the figures compiled in this report relating to exposures and/or doses are based on the results and interpretations of the readings of various t

types of personnel monitoring devices employed by each licensee.

This infor-mation obtained from routine personnel monitoring programs is sufficient to characterize the radiation environment in which individuals work, and is used 1

in evaluating the radiation protection program.

However, it may not be i

directly suitable for use in the assessment of risk to the individuals involved.

j Monitoring requirements are based, in general, on 10 CFR 920.202 which requires licensees to monitor individuals who receive or are likely to receive a dose in any calendar quarter in excess of 25% of the applicable quarterly limits.

For most adults the quarterly limit for the whole body is 1.25 rems, so that 0.312 rem per quarter is the level above which monitoring is required.

Depending on the administrative policy of each licensee, persons such as visitors and clerical workers may also be provided with monitoring devices for identification or convenience, although the probability of their being exposed to significant levels of radiation is extremely small.

Licensees are given the option of reporting the dose distribution of only those individuals for whom monitorir:g is required, or the dose distribution of all those for whom monitoring is provided.

Many licensees elect to report the latter; however, this may increase the number of individuals that one could consider to be radiation workers.

In an effort to account for this, the number of individ-uals reported as having "no measurable exposure" has been subtracted from the i

total number of individuals monitored in order to calculate an average dose per individual receiving a measurable dose, as well as the average dose per monitored individual.

One source of error that is present in the calculation of the annual collective dose (i.e., the summation of each monitored person's whole body i

dose) incurred by workers is the assumption that the midpoint of the dose l

range is the mean dose of the individuals reported in each dose range.

This allows the collective dose to be calculated without knowing each person's actual annual dose by multiplying the number of individuals in each dose range by the midpoint of the range, and then summing these products.

Past expe-rience has shown that the actual mean dose of the individuals reported in each range is less than the midpoint.

Thus, the collective doses presented in this report may be 10% higher than the sum of the actual individual doses.

i 1

2 l

The average dose per individual, as well as the dose distributions shown for groups of licensees, also could have been affected by the multiple reporting of individuals who were monitored by two or more licensees during the year.

l Since individuals are not identified in the annual reports, an individual who was monitored by five different licensees would have been counted once on each report.

Therefore, when the data were summed to determine the total number of individuals monitored by a group of licensees, this person would be counted as five individuals rather than as one.

This could also affect the distribution of doses because the individual has been counted five times in the lower dose ranges rather than one time in the higher range in which his actual accumulated dose (the sum of his doses incurred at each facility) would have placed him.

This source of error has the greatest potential impact on the data reported by j

power reactor facilities since they employ many short term workers.

Further discussion of this is provided in Section 4.

Another fact that should be kept in mind before drawing any conclusions from the annual statistical data is that all of the personnel included in the reports may not have been monitored throughout the entire year.

Many licensees, such as radiography firms, and nuclear power facilities, may monitor numerous individuals for periods much less than a year.

The average doses calculated 4

from this data, therefore, are less than the average dose that an individual j

would receive if he were involved in that activity for the full year.

i 3.

ANNUAL PERSONNEL MONITORING REPORTS - 10 CFR 20.407 3.1.

Annual Whole Body Dose Distributions On February 4, 1974, 10 CFR 20.407 was amended to require the four categories of covered licensees to submit an annual statistical report indi-cating the distribution of the whole body exposures incurred by their employees.

In prior years the annual report was formatted differently and was not very useful as a basis for estimating man-rems.

Tables 1 and 2 are compilations of the statistical reports submitted for calendar years 1980 and 1981.

They show for each of the four categories, the number of individuals that incurred an annual whole body dose that fell within one of the 16 dose ranges and the collective dose (man-rems) estimated to have been received by these indivi-duals.

The collective dose was calculated by assuming that each individual received an annual dose equal to the mid point of the dose range in which he appears.

The number of individuals in each dose range was multiplied by this mid point, and then these products were summed.

Overall, the tables show that about 40% of the total number of individuals monitored each year received expo-sures that were too small to be detected by personnel radiation monitoring devices and that the collective dose appears to have levelled off at about 59,000 man-rems.

It should be pointed out that very few of the annual exposures that exceed five rems are classified as personnel overexposures.

Although 1.25 rems is the quarterly limit set forth in paragraph (a) of 10 CFR 20.101, paragraph (b) permits licensees, under certain conditions, to allow a worker to receive a whole body dose of three rems per calendar quarter (up to 12 rems annually). The conditions are that (1) the licensee must have determined and recorded the worker's prior accumulated occupational dose to the whole 3

,e

,.,,,-,n

..m y

,m,-.e eg..-g,--

.w.-,me---,-

-2

~--

i 2

t 4

i =

t i

TABLE 1 DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL WHOLE BODY DOSES BY LICENSE CATEGORY 1980 Number of Individuals with Whole Body Doses in Ranges"(rems)'

No Total LICENSE CATEGORY Meas-Meas-Total Collective urable urable 0.10-G.25-0.50-Exposure

<0.10 0.25 0.50 0.75 ~

0.75-1.0-2.0-3.0-4.0-5.0-6.0-

7. 0 -

8.0-9.0-Number Oose 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 >10 Monitored (man-rems) l Industrial Radiography p

Single Location 740 579 134 87 32 12 19 4

2 0

1 0

1 1,611 174 Multiple Locations 3,806 2,291 1,046 776 478 303 496 186 66 33 5

3 0

2 9,491 2,805 Total 4,546 2,870 1,180 863 510 315 515 190 68 33 6

3 1

2 11,102 2.979 Manuf. & Olstrib.

a Broad 2,007 893 313 155 83 42 126 61 35 41 6

2 3,764 941 Other 652 547 109 28 2

2 10 1

3 1

1,355 92 Total 2.659~

1,440 422 183 85 44 136 62 38 42 6

2 5,119 1,033 Fuel Fab.& Reproc.

i Total.

4,304 3,737 1,082 510 254 167 137 12 1

10,204 1,111 i

• Power Reactors l

BWRs 13,971 9,765 4,671 4,283 2,803 2,090

'5,884 2,831 1,073 503 129 60 2

48,065 29,530 PWRs 38,204 20,103 7.094 5,538 3,279 2,428 5,590 1,684 464 183 63 38 16 3

84,687 24,544 2

. Total.

52,175 29,868 11,765 9,821 6,082 4,518 11,474 4,515 1,537 686 192 98 18 3

132,752 53,810 Grand Total 63,684 37,915 14,449 11,377 6,931 5,044 12,262 4,779 1,644 761 204 103 19 5

159,177 58,933

• ,, Includes all reactors that reported although all of them may not have been in commercial operation for a full year.

Individual values' exactly equal to the values separating exposure ranges are reported in the next higher range.

I

TABLE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL WHOLE BODY DOSES 8Y LICENSE CATEGORY 1981 Number of Individuals with Whole Body Doses in Rar.ges (rems)

No Total LICENSE CATEGORY Meas-Meas-Total Collective urable urable 0.10-0.25-0.50-0.75-1.0-2.0-3.0-4.0-5.0-6.0-7.0-8.0-9.0-Number Dose Exposure

<0.10 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

7. 0 8.0

9. 0 10.0 >10 Monitored (man-rems)

Industrial Radiography Single Location 857 531 192 78 22 11 22 4

1 1

1,719 164 Multiple Locations 3,592 1,352 809 605 353 252 481 172 62 26 4

5 5

1 8,219 2,488 Total 4,449 2,383 1,001 683 375 263 503 176 63 27 4

5 5

1 9,938 2,652 Manuf. & Distrib.

. cn.

Broad 1,866 989 316 154 78 67 131 72 29 14 3,716 811 Other 585 394 87 37 6

5 7

6 3

1,130 93 Total 2,451 1,383 403 191 84 72 138 78 32 14 4,846 904 Fuel Fab.& Reproc.

Efotal 4,610 3,825 1,216 516 227 84 59 14 1

10,552 940 l,'

7

,, Power Reactors I

BWRs 15,345 11,130 4,869 4,536 2,939 2,326 5,373 2,485 911 224 32 4

2 0

0 1

50,177 25,471 r

7,563 5,868 3,699 2,581 6,394 2,061 882 262 61 77 9

2 1

82,361 28,800 d

gPWRs 33,541

• 19,450

Total ~

48,796 30,580 12,432 10,404 6,638 4,907-11,767 4,546 1,793 486 93 81 11 2

1 132,538 54,271 60,306 38,171 15,052 11,794 7,324 5,326 12,467 4,814 1,889 527 97 86 16 3

1 1

157,874 58,767 Grand Total

+

• Includes all reactors th,at reported although all of them may not have been in commerical operation for a full year.

• • Individual values exactly equal to the values separating exposure ranges are reported in the next higher range.

ql.!

+f

. < [+

<+

g s

j y

y' '> s ' v prs y

'I ny i

y

)

ie x

1

.y

body, and that (2) the worker's whole body dose when added to his accumulated occupational dose does not exceed 5(N-18) rems where "N" equals the individual's age in years.

Although there is no annual limit, annual exposures that exceed 12 rems indicate that an overexposure has occurred.

Any quarterly whole body exposure in excess of the applicable quarterly limits are considered overexpo-sures and must be reported.

A discussion of various types of overexposures that have occurred is given in Section 5.

A summary of the annual whole body exposures reported to the Commission by the four categories of NRC licensees required to submit reports during the past fourteen years is presented in Table 3.

One can see that about 95% of the exposures have consistently remained less than two rems, and that the number of individuals receiving an annual exposure in excess of five rems has remained at two tenths of one percent or less of the total number of indivi-duals monitored each year for the last four years.

3.2 Summary of Occupational Exposure Data by License Category As was previously explained, the statistical data contained in the annual reports required by 10 CFR 20.407 provide the dose distribution of the workers monitored by each licensee and permit an estimate to be made of the collective dose (man-rems) incurred by these individuals.

This information was collated and summarized to yield the information shown in Table 4.

Figures in the I

third column indicate the total number of individuals for whom monitoring was provided by the licensees in each category, and the fourth column gives the number of these individuals that received a measurable whole body dose (referred to as workers in this report).

If one then divides the total collective dose (shown in-the fifth column) by each of these figures, two average doses are found. 'The average dose per monitored individual is shown in the sixth column and is always smaller than the average dose per worker, shown in the seventh column.

The latter average is normally used for radiation workers because it deletes ~the minimal exposures of many individuals who are monitored for conven-yiice or for* identification purposes.

One of the parameters that the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation {UNSCEAR) recommends be calculated for occupational dose distributions to aid in the comparison of exposure data is the ratio "CR".

CR is defined to be the ratio of the annual collective dose incurred by individuals whose annual doses exceeded 1.5 rems to the total annual collective dose.

The latest UNSCEAR report [Ref. 1] states that normal values of CR should be between 0.05 and 0.50.

This means that, usually, no more than.50% of the collective dose should be due to individual doses that exceed 1.5 rems.

The last column in Table 4 shows the values of CR for the different Aypes of licenses, and one can see,that CR is usually close to 0.50 for,all but the Fuel Fabricators where it has fallen to a value of 0.09.

)

3.2.1{'4ndustrialRadiographyLicenses,SingleandMultipleLocations Nne5elicensesareissuedtoallow'thhuseofsealedradioactivematerials,

- us4 ally % exposure devices or " cameras',l that primarily emit gamma rays for non-desirLctive te' sting of pipeline weld joints, steel structures, boilers,

.airicr~ cit and ship,barts, and for other high~ stress alloy parts.

Some firms are license,d to conduct such activities in one-location, usually in plant, and j

~, others perfom radiography at multii;1e sites in the field.

j p.n w +'

r

'f

/*

<- ~ s

'Y%

W 2

.~

i l

l TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF ANNUAL WHOLE BODY EXPOSURES FOR FOUR CATEGORIES OF LICENSEES 1968-1981 Percent of Percent of Number of Total Number Individuals Individuals Individuals Individuals With Doses With Doses With Doses Year Monitored

< 2 Rems

> 5 Rems

>12 Rems 1968 36,836 97.2%

0.5%

3 1969 31 176 96.5%

0.5%

7 3

1970 36,164 96.1%

0.6%

0 1971 36,311 95.3%

0.7%

1 1972 44,690 95.7%

0.5%

8 1973 67,862 95.0%

0.5%

1 1974 85,097 96.4%

0.3%

1 1975 78,713 94.8%

0.5%

1 1976 92,773 95.0%

0.4%

3 1977 98,212 94.5%

0.3%

1 1978 105,893 95.2%

0.1%

3 1979 131,027 95.7%

0.1%

1 1980 159,177 95.3%

0.2%

0 1981 157,874 95.3%

0.1%

1 i

7

TABLE 4 ANNUAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR FOUR CATEGORIES OF LICENSEES 1973 - 1981 Number of Total Average Dose Number of Total Number Workers with Collective per Monitored Average Measur-LICENSE Calendar Licensees of Monitored Measurable Dose Individual able Dose per CATEGORY Year Reporting Individuals Doses (aan-rees)

(rems)

Worker (rems)

CR**

Industrial 1981 266 9,938 5,489 2,652 0.27 0.48 0.48 Radiography 1980 292 11,102 6,556 2,979 0.27 0.45 0.57 1979 341 11,969 6,904 3,461 0.29 0.50 0.47 1978 137 13,093 6,685 2,950 0.23 0.44 0.43 1977 339 10,569 6,197 3,159 0.30 0.51 0.45 1976 321 11,245 6,222 3,629 0.32 0.58 0.51 1975 291 9,178 4,693 2,796 0.30 0.60 0.53 1974 319 8,792 4,943 2,938 0.33 0.59 0.51 1973 341 8,206 5,328 3,354 0.41 0.63 Manufacturing 1981 29 4,846 2,395 904 0.19 0.38 0.52 and 1980 29 5,119 2,460 1,033 0 20 0.42 0.61 Distribution 1979 28 3,937 2.219 888 0.23 0.40 0.55 1978 27 3,973 1,886 851 0.21 0.45 0.61 1977 30 4,243 2,459 1,329 0.31 0.54 0.63 1976 24 3,501 1,976 1,226 0.35 0.62 0.67 1975 19 3,367 1,859 1,188 0.35 0.64 0.64 1974 24 3,340 1,827 1,050 0.31 0.57 0.63 1973 34 4,251 1,925 1,177 0.28 0.61 Fuel 1981 18 10,552 5,942 940 0.09 0.16 0.09 Fabrication 1980 18 10,204 5,900 1,111 0.11 0.19 0.12 and 1979 21 9,946 5,365 1,268 0.13 0.24 0.16 Reprocessing 1978 20 11,305 6,100 1,525 0.13 0.25 0.24 1977 21 11,496 7,004 1,725 0.15 0.25 0.34 1976 24 11,227 5,285 1,830 0.16 0.35 0.41 1975 24 11,614 5,602 3,175 0.27 0.57 0.54 1974 26 11,064 4,728 2,836 0.26-0.60 0.61 1973 27 10,610 5,056 2,400 0.23 0.47

• Commerical 1981 73 132,538 83.742 54,271 0.41 0.65 0.55 Light Water 1980 70 132,752 80,577 53,810 0.41 0.66 0.56 Raactors 1979 69 105,174 64,073 39,759 0.38 0.62 0.54 1978 68 77,523 47,245 31,910 0.41 0.67 0.58 1977 65 71,904 44,233 32,731 0.46 0.74

. 0.61 1976 62 66,800 36,715 26,555 0.40 0.72 0.62 1975 54 54,763 28,034 21,270 0.39 0.76 0.64 1974 53 62,044 21,904 14,083 0.23 0.64 0.62 1973 41 44,795 16,558 14,337 0.32 0.87 Grand Totals 1981 385 157,874 97.568 58,767 0.37 0.60 0.54 f

and Averages 1980 410 159,177 95.493 58,933 0.37 0.62 0.55 1979 459 131,027 78,561 45,376 0.35 0.58 0.52 1978 453 105,894 61,916 37,236 0.35 0.60 0.56 1977 455 98,212 59,893 38,944 0.40 0.65 0.59 1976 428 92,773 50,198 33,240 0.36 0.66 0.60 1975 388 78,922 40,188 28,429 0.36 0.71 0.62 33,402 20,907 0.25 0.63 0.60 1974 422 85,240

~ 28,867 21,268 0.31 0.74 1973-443 67,862

• Includes all LWRs that reported, although all of them may not have been in commercial operation for a full year.

" CR is the ratio of the annual collective dose delivered at annual doses exceeding 1.5 reos to the total annual collective dose. (See Section 3.2.).

8

As shown in Table 4, annual reports were received for 292 radiography licenses in 1980 and from 266 licenses in 1981.

Since a report was not received from all that were required to report each year, extrapolations were made for the number of persons monitored, the number receiving measurable doses, and the collective dose.

This was done by dividirg the reported values for these parameters by the fraction of licensees that reported, and the results are shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5 EXTRAPOLATED AhNUAL INFORMATION FOR INDUSTRI AL RADIOGRAPHERS Fraction of Extrapolated Extrapolated Estrapolated Average Licenses Number of W rhers with Collective Measurable Type of License Year Reporting Persons Measurable Dose Oose (Percent)

Monitored Doses (Man-Rems)

(Rees)

Single location 1980 121/133(91.0%;

1,770 957 191 0.20 Multiple locations 1980 171/205(83.4%)

11,380 6,817 3,363 0.49 Total 1980 292/338 13,150 7,774 3,554 0.45 Single location 1981 105/129(81.4%)

2,112 1,059 201 0.19 Multiple locatioes 1981 161/207(77.8%)

10,564 5,947 3,198 0.54 Total 1981 266/336 12,676 7,006 3,399 0.48 The extrapolated figures shown for the number of persons and workers at the two types of radiography firms are similar to those found in 1979.

The collec-tive dose, however, decreased somewhat so that the average measurable doses l

are less than their 1979 values of 0.27 rems for single location and 0.54 rems for multiple locations (Figure 1).

In 1981, the values of the parameters shown in Table 5 remained about the same for the single location-type of iscense, but the average measurable dose found for workers at firms having multiple location-type licenses again increased to 0.54 rems, the value found for 1979.

Overall, one finds that the average measurable dose for radiography workers has remained about one-half of one rem for the last five years and that'the average dose for workers performing radiography at a single location is usually considerably less.

This is probably due to the fact that it is much more difficult for workers to avoid exposure to radiation in the field where conditions are not the best and may change every day.

In order to see the contribution that each radiography licensee made to the total collective dose, a summary of the information reported by each of these licensees in 1980 and in 1981 is presented, in alphabetical order, in Appendix A.

Since personnel monitoring data has frequently been found to have lognormal distributions [Ref. 2], trends in the data reported by radiography licensees may be observed from log probability plots of the data.

If the data are lognormally distributed, the data points will form a straight line when plotted on log probability paper on which cumulative probabilities are laid off on the vertical axis at distances proportional to the corresponding number of standard deviations above or below the median, and the dose is plotted on the horizontal axis which has a logarithmic scale.

Figure 1 displays such plots for the two types of radiography licenses for each of the years 1980 and 1981.

One can 9

Figure 1 Annual Dose Distributions of Workers at Industrial Radiography Facilities 1980 and 1981 I

I I

I I

IIII I

I I

I II I

I 99.9 99.8 1980 - SINGLE LOCATION 93 g 98 u

a:

h 95 1981 - SINGLE LOCATION Ei

~

1980 - MULTIPLE LOCATIONS 90 u

1981 - MULTIPLE LOCATIONS

$g 80 P5 70 m

a

! 604 U

AVERAGE MEASURABLE 50 i

INDUSTRIAL g

t RADIOGRAPHY 1979 1980 1981 1979 1980 1981 SINGLE LOCATION 0.27 0.20 0.19 0.32 0.25 0.21 30 MULTIPLE LOCATIONS 0.54 0.49 0.54 0.48 0.46 0.48 20 10 I

I I

I I

IIII I

I I

l l

l ll l

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0 2

3 4

5 6

8 10 ANNUAL DOSE (rems)

• CR is the ratio of the annual collectrve dose dei;r; red at Individual doses exceeding 1.5 rems to the total annual collective dose.

Note: Each point on the curves represents the cumulative percentage of workers with measurable doses who received doses less than the indicated annual dose.

10

see that the plots of the dose distributions of workers at single location l

radiography facilities form fairly straight lines and usually lie above those 1

of the multiple location facilities.

An examination of the plots of the dose distribution of workers at multiple I

location radiography facilities reveals that the position of the 1981 plot below that of the 1980 plot again indicates an increase in the average dose and in CR (as shown at the bottom of the graph) and that the plotz start to curve upward at doses greater than one rem.

This curve is typical of distri-butions when there are several workers in the higher dose ranges, [Ref. 1, 3]

and indicates that the entire distribution is not a lognormal one.

A new theoretical analysis of occupational dose distributions [Ref. 4] has found that these data are fitted much better by a hybrid lognormal distribution.

At low doses, this distribution is lognormal, but at higher doses, where radiation control programs very closely monitor each worker's total dose so that the I

frequency of doses approaching the dose limits is reduced, the distribution is J

normal.

This method of analyzing occupational doses may prove to have several applications [Ref. 5] for individuals involved in radiation protection programs.

3.2.2 Manufacturer and Distributor Licenses, Broad and Other These licenses are issued to allow the manufacture and distribution of radionuclides in varicus forms for a number of diverse purposes.

The Broad licenses are issued to the large facilities having a more comprehensive radio-logical protection program, and the Other licenses are usually issued to the smaller firms requiring a more restrictive license.

Some firms are medical suppliers that process, package or distribute products such as diagnostic test kits, radioactive surgical implants, and tagged radiochemicals for use in medical research, diagnosis and therapy.

Other firms are suppliers of indus-trial radionuclides and are involved in the processing, encapsulation, pack-aging, and distribution of the radionuclides that they have purchased in bulk quantities from production reactors and cyclotrons.

Major products include gamma radiography sources, cobalt irradiation sources, well logging sources, sealed sources for gauges and smoke detectors and radiochemicals for non-medical research.

However, only those licensees that possess or use at any one time quantities of certain nuclides as listed in 10 CFR 920.408 (a) (6) are required to submit annual (10 CFR 20.407) and termination (10 CFR 20.408) reports.

As shown in Table 4, annual reports were received from 29 manufacturing and distribution licensees in 1980 and 1981.

Since a report was not received from all that should have reported each year, extrapolations were made for the number of persons monitored, the number receiving measurable doses and the cc11ective dose.

The extrapolations were performed the same as described in Section 3.3.1, and the results are presented in Table 6.

TABLE 6 EXTRAPOLATED ANNUAL INFORMATION FOR MANUFACTURERS AND b!STRIBUTORS j

Fraction of Extrapolated Ez3rapolated Extrapolated Average Licenses Number of Workers with Collective Measurable l

Type of License Year l

Reporting Persons Measurable Oose Oose (Percent)

Monitored Doses (Man-Rees)

(Ress) l M & D-Broad 1980 14/15 (93.3%)

4,034 1,883 1,008 0.54 M & 0-Other 1980 15/16 (93.8%)

1,444 749 98 0.13 M & 0-Total 1980 2 9/ 31 5,457 2,622 1,101 0.42 M & 0-8 road 1981 14/14 (1005) 3,716 1,850 811 0.44 M & 0-Other 1981 15/16 (93.85) 1,205 581 99 0.17 M & D-Total 1981 29/10 4,921 2,431 910 0.37 11

l l

The extrapolated number of workers receiving measurable doses reported by the Broad-type licensees in 1980 is about the same as that calculated for 1979; the collective dose, however, increased by about 190 man-rems so that the average dose increased to 0.54 rems.

The number of workers reported by the Other-type licensees more than doubled while the collective dose increased by only 88%.

This resulted in the average dose falling to 0.13 rems.

In 1981, the values of the number of workers and collective dose changed such that the average measurable dose found for each type of license was the same as that reported for 1979.

One can see that the values of all of the parameters remain higher for the Bread licensees, probably because this type of license allows the possession of much larger quantities of radioactive materials than does the Other license.

In order to see the contribution that each of these licensees made towards the total values of the number of persons monitorea, number of workers, and collective dose, Appendix B lists the values of these parameters for each licensee in alphabetical order by licen';ee name for 1980 and 1981.

Figure 2 displays log probability plots of the two types of manufacturing and distribution licenses for the years 1980 and 1981.

The position of the curves plotted for the Other-type licenses above those< plotted for the Broad-type licenses indicates that a larger portion of the workers reported by the Other licensees have lower doses than those reported by the Broad licensees. This is reflected in the values of CR, which shows that about 30% of the collective dose incurred by workers reported by the Other licensees is due to workers receiving doses greater than 1.5 rems, while more than 50% of the collective dose reported for the Broad licensees is due to such doses.

The curves in Figure 2 also show a tendency to curve upward at the higher doses which indi-cates that these distributions might be better analyzed using the hybrid-lognormal method as mentioned in Section 3.2.1.

3.2.3 Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Licenses The fuel fabrication licenses are issued to allow the processing and fabrication of reactor fuels.

In most uranium facilities, where light water reactor fuels are processed, uranium hexafluoride product enriched in the isotope U-235 is converted to solid uranium dioxide pellets and inserted into zirconium tubes.

The tubes are fabricated into fuel assemblies which are shipped to nuclear power plants. On a much smaller scale, fuel assemblies containing plutonium oxide pellets are similarly fabricated and used in reactors for experimental purposes.

Some facilities also perform chemical operations to recover the uranium and plutonium from scrap and other off-specifications materials.

Fuel Reprocessing licenses are issued to allow the separation of usable uranium and plutonium trom spent nuclear fuel.

There is only one licensed commercial facility that has ever reprocessed fuel, and it has been shut down since 1972.

However, the licensee was still doing some decontamination work and storing radioactive waste at the facility, and the annual report that was submitted each year was usually grouped with those of the fuel fabricators.

In February 1982, the Department of Energy assumed possession and control of the reprocessing facility to conduct waste soli:_ification activities necessary for final decommissioning.

During this period, the NRC license will, in effec!., be suspended, and no reports will be filed with the NRC.

12

Figure 2 Annual Dose Distributions of Workers at Manufacturing and Distribution Facilities 1980 and 1981 99 99 I

I I

I l

l l l l l

1 1

I l

l l 1 99.9 99.8 99 1980 - OTHER E

98

=

83 a5 o

90 1981 - OTHER o

1981 - BROAD b

80 i

a l

H g-70 m

60 1980 - BROAD o

1 50 40 AVERAGE MEASURABLE 30 DOSE (rems)

• CR MANUFACT, Et CIST.

1979 1980 1981 1979 1980 1981 20 BROAD 0.44 0.54 0.44 0.56 0.61 0.55 OTHER 0.17 0.13 0.17 0.34 0.27 0.33 j

i 10 f

5 I

I I

I I

I I I I

I I

I I

I I I 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.50.6 0.8 1.0 2

3 4

5 6 7 8910 ANNUAL DOSE (rems)

[

'CR (a the satio of the annual collective dose delivered at Individual doses exceeding i

1.5 rems to the total annual collective dose.

l Note: Each point on the curves represents the cumulative percentage of workers with i

measurable doses who received doses less than the Indicated annual dose.

13 i

As shown in Table 4, annual reports were received from 18 of these types of facilities in each of the years 1980 and 1981.

Since there were only 18 licenses considered to be in this category, no extrapolations were neces-sary.

One can see that although several facilities ceased fuel fabrication activities, about 600 more workers (10%) received measurable doses in 1980 than did in 1979.

The collective dose, however, decreased by about 10% to a value of 1,111 man-rems so that the average measurable dose fell to 0.19 rems.

The collective dose decreased by another 15% in 1981, while the number of workers remained about the same, which resulted in a average dose per worker of 0.16 rems.

The continuing decreases in the collective dose incurred by workers at these facilities over the last eight years reflects the many improve-ments that have been made in procedures and equipment.

Appendix C lists the number of persons monitored, the number of workers receiving measurable doses, and the collective dose for each of these licensees in alphabetical order by licensee name for 1980 and 1981.

Figure 3 consists of the log probability plots of the dose distributions of workers at fuel fabrication and reprocessing facilities for the years 1980 and 1981.

The shift upward in the plot of the 1981 data from that of the plot for 1980 is reflected in the lower values of CR (0.09) and average measurable dose (0.16 rems).

The departure of these curves from a straight line again demonstrates that these distributions are not completely lognormal.

3.2.4 Water Cooled Power Reactor Licenses These licenses are issued to utilities to allow them to use special nuclear material in a reactor to produce heat to generate electricity to be sold to consumers.

There are two major types of commercial reactors in the United States pressurized water reactors and boiling water reactors - each of which uses water as the primary coolant.

As shown in Table 4, annual reports were received from nuclear power facilities for 70 licensed reactors where 132,752 individuals were monitored for exposure to radiation in 1980.

Of this number 80,577 workers received a measurable dose and incurred a collective dose of 53,810 man-rems.

These figures show considerable increases over those reported in 1979, primarily because of the efforts being made to implement the lessons learned from the Three Mile Island accident.

In 1981, the values of all of the parameters shown for power reactors in Table 4 remained about the same as those reported for 1980.

Figure 4 provides plots of the total values of several of the parameters given in Table 4.

Table 7 shows the contribution made by the two major types of power reactors.

One can see that the average dose per worker, collective dose per reactor, number of workers per reactor and collective dose per megawatt-year I

have been greater for boiling water reactors (BWRs) than that found for pres-surized water reactors (PWRs) for the last eight years.

This can be easily seen in Figure 5, which plots the average values of the annual collective dose and number of workers for each year since 1969.

Figure 6 presents the lognormal plot of the distribution of the whole body doses received by radiation workers at nuclear power facilities in 1981.

Again we see departures from a straight line for doses that exceed one rem.

And, according to the hybrid-lognormal method [Ref. 4, 5] of analyzing these 14

Figure 3 l

Annual Dose Distributions of Workers at Fuel Fabricators and Reprocessors 1980 and 1981

"'88 i

i l

l 1

I i[

i i

e i

l I I i 99.9 99.8 99 un 98 my 1981 1980 m

g 95 u.

>O g s0 0

5 a.

80 5

g 70 s

l l

s 60 o

50 AVERAGE MEASURABLE 40 DOSE (rems)

• CR 1979 1980 1981 1979 1980 1981 g

~

0.24 0.19 0.16 0.16 0.12 0.09 l

20 10 I

I I

I I

I I I I I

I I

I I

I I I I

5 I

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0 2

3 4

5 6

8 10 l

l I

l ANNUAL DOSE (rems)

I

'CR is the ratio of the annual collective dose delivered at Individual doses exceeding 1.5 reme to the total annual collective dose.

Note: Each point on the curves represents the cumulative percentage of workers with measurable doses who received doses less than the indicated annual dose.

l 15

FIGURE 4 TOTAL ANNUAL V.\\ LUES AT LIGHT WATER COOLED REACTORS 1969-1981 1

I I

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I I

80 TOTAL ANNUAL VALUES:

WORKERS

- - MAN-REMS

-- MEGA-WATT YEARS

--- REACTORS 70 ro 70 R

W t

/

60

<c 60 f

k

/

o 5

8 y

/

3 50 0 05 50

/

A'

/

i O/

o m3!?-

?'4 '/

/!

i

/

/ /

y y%

y s.- 4 E

8 o

s

1. /

/

/ r yrs ~ /

[

30 30 e

rl!

/ /

o

/

o ew i

/

b lH%

/

Y(o A

20 z

20

/

f

/

/

j/

/

e'

/

10 10 f

f

'/

}s

.,. s-I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I O

0 1969 70

'71

• 72

'73

'74

'75

~76

'77

'78

'79

'80

' 81 1982 YEAR 16

TABLE 7 *

SUMMARY

OF ANNUAL EXPOSURES REPORTED BY NUCLEAR POWER FACILITIES 1973 - 1981 Average Total No. of Workers Total Average Collective Dose Average No.

Collective Reactor Number of Reactors Number With Measurable Megawatt Yrs.

Annual Dose per Reactor -

of Workers Dose per Year Type included of Man-Rems Doses Generated (RemsMforker)

(Man-rems)

Per Reactor Megawatt Yr, 1973 PWR 12 9,399 9,440 3,770 1.00 783 787 2.5 BWR 12 4,564 5,340 3,394 0.85 380 445 1.3 Total 24 13,963 14,780 7,164 0.94 582 616 1.9 1974 PWR 20 6,627 9,697 6,824 0.68 331 485 1.0 BWR 14 7,095 8.769 4.059 0.81 507 626 1,7 Total 34 13,722 18,466 10,883 0.74 404 543 1.3 1975 PWR 26 8,268 10,884 11.983 0.76 318 419 0.7 BWR 18 12,611 14,607 5,786 0.86 701 812 2.2 Total 44 20,879 25,491 17,769 0.82 475 579 1.2 1976 PWR 30 13,807 17.588 13,325 0.79 460 586 1.0 BWR 23 12,626 17,859 8,586 0.71 549 776 1.5 Total 53 26,433 35,447 21,911 0.75 499 669 1.2 1977 PWR 34 13,469 20,878 17,346 0.65 396 614 0.8

)

BWR 23 19,042 29,388 9,098 0.89 828 930 2.1

)

Total 57 32,511 42,266 26,444 0.77 570 742 1.2 l

1978 PWR 39 16,713 25,720 19,840 0.65 429 659 0.8 i

BWR 25 15,096 20,278 11,774 0.74 604 811 1.3 Total 64 31,809 45,998 31,614 0.69 497 719 1.0 1979 PW'R 42 21,437 38,828 18,249 0.55 510 924 1.2 BWR 25 18,322 25,245 11,671 0,73 733 1,010 1.6 Total 67 39,759 64,073 29,920 0.62 593 956 1,3 1980 PWR 42 24,266 46,237 18,287 0,52 578 1,101 1,3 8WR 26 29,530 34,094 10,868 0.87 1,136 1.311 2.7 l

Total 68 53,796 80,331 29,155 0.67 791 1,181 1.8 1981 PWR 44 28,671 47,351 20,552 0.61 652 1,076 1.4 BWR 26 25,471 34.832 10,899 0.73 980 1,340 2.7 Total 70 54,142 82,183 31,451 0.66 773 1,174 1,7 The figures on this table are based on the number of nuclear power reactors that had been in commercial operation for at least one year as of December 31 of each of the years indecated

FIGURE S COMMERCIAL LIGHT WATER COOLED REACTORS 1969 1981 AVERAGE ANNUAL COLLECTIVE DOSES AVERAGE NUMBER OF WORKERS 140o 1400

.................... ewe

....................W.

,2.

PWR

,2, _.

[

PWR

~

LWR LWR l.

~,

=

l e,ooo N

iooo

/

i

/

~

l"

~

,p

'* ]l i

T en

/

./

B **

f.

3 i.-

.l 2

/

l l

c

'/

/

'l si I

/

. l m

I f

eco s

8 I

i 5

a I

o

- 1

'/

/

(

/

i4oo-l

's

/

/% /

. _A i/

N' y/

J a

,o i<

/*.....

- l

,v, 200 2o0

-../

I I

I i

i i

I i

i i

i I

I I

I I

I I

I I

i l

1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1971 1978 1979 1980 1981 1988 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 190o 1981 Year y,

FIGURE 6 I

l ANNUAL DOSE DISTRIBUTION OF WORKERS AT LIGHT WATER REACTOR FACILITIES

(

1981 99.99

~

99.9 99.8 99.5

~

99

~

98 95 90

~

j c

{

5 5

80

-~

3 o

70 c

8 60 n

n-50 B

e2

'h 40g

~5

=

5 30'-

~

CR O

1981 1980 1979 20 All LWRs 0.54 0.56 0.54 BWRs 0.57 0.63 0.60 PWRs 0.52 0.47 0.49 I

10

?

5 I

l I

I I

I III I

I I

I I

I I l-I o

o

.o

.o P P.o o P "

w w

a

=

.= s.a m s a

u w

a m

aw==o o

o o

o o o o o.,

Annual Dose (rems)

NOTE: Each point on the curves represents the cumulative percentage of workers with mea =urable doses who received doses less then the irwficated annual dose.

'CR is the ratio of the annual colisetive dose delivered at ir.sividual doses exceeding 1.5 rems tothe total annual collective done.

19

1 dose distributions, the sharpness of the departure indicates that a strong feedback mechanism operates when workers begin to incur large doses.

Also shown at the bottom of the figure are the values of CR for the last three years.

It shows that about 54% of the collective dose at light water reactors (LWRs) continues to be due to workers receiving doses greater than 1.5 rems.

The value of CR is usually greater for BWRs than for PWRs; however, in 1981 the values of CR decreased to 0.57 at BWRs while CR increased to 0.52 at PWRs so that there was only a small difference.

More detailed presentations and analyses of the annual exposure information reported by nuclear power reactors can be found in the two annual reports, NUREG-0713, Vol. 2 [Ref. 6] and NUREG-0713, Vol. 3 [Ref. 7].

3.2.5.

High Temperature Gas Cooled Power Reactor Licenses A license to operate a power reactor is issued to utilities to allow them to use special nuclear material in a reactor to produce heat to generate electricity to be sold to consumers.

However, in this type of a reactor, a gas, usually helium, is used as the primary coolant.

Fort St. Vrain near Greeley, Colorado, is the only such reactor in operation in the U.S.

As shown in Table 8 annual whole body doses incurred by workers at the plant have been minimal.

In 1981, everyone monitored received a whole body dose that was less than 0.10 rems, and no one has ever exceeded an annual dose of 0.25 rems.

The average dose per worker remains at about 0.05 rems or less.

For the eight years ending on December 31, 1981, the total collective dose for workers at the site was 22.0 man-rems, and a total of 301.1 megawatt years of electricity had been generated.

This yields an eight year average of about 0.1 man-rems per megawatt year which is a small fraction of the average value (1.6 man-rems /

MW-Yr) of this parameter found for water cooled power reactors.

TABLE 8 ANNUAL DOSES AT FORT ST. VRAIN 1974 - 1981 No. of Individuals with Annual Doses in Ranges (Rees)

Average Total Annual Measurable No No. of Collective Gross Dose Per Measurable Measurable 0.10-Individuals Dose ped-Yrs Worker Year Dose

<0.10 0.25 Monitored (Man-Rees) Generated (Rees) 1974 1597 63 1

1.661 3.3 0.0 0.05 1975 1263 0

0 1,263 0.0 0.0 0.00 1976 4362 25 0

1,387 1.3 2.8 0.05 1977 946 55 1

1,002 2.9 29.8 0.05 1978 8%

34 0

930 1.7 75.7 0 05 1979 1149 120 2

1,271 6.4 16.0 0.05 1980 902 57 1

%0 1.0 83.2 0.05 1981 10 %

31 0

1,127 1.0 93 G 0.03 3.3. Health Implications of Average Annual Doses If any biological effects are caused by exposures to radiation in the r

work place, the effects are likely to occur only after many years because the most important effects are cancer induction and genetic damage leading to the transmission of hereditary diseases.

A vast amount of scientific information is available from which estimates of these risks can be made.

Much of this information has been obtained from epidemiologic studies of human populations at levels of exposures considerably higher than those normally experienced in 20 m

a

the work place.

Complementary to this, information obtained from many animal and cell biology studies have greatly enhanced our knowledge and understanding of the biological effects of ionizing radiation.

Although using this informa-tion to estimate risks in the work place introduces uncertainties, these uncer-tainties can be dealt with in such a manner that the risk is not likely to be underestimated.

Thus, the discussion below is likely to overstate the health implications rather than understate them.

Cancer induction as a result of radiation exposure has been examined by many organizations having scientific and medical expertise in the subject.

One of these, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), completed a comprehen-4 sive review of the biological effccts of ionizing radiation in 1980 and published its findings [Ref. 7].

Based on this report, a large working popu-lation receiving one million man rems might suffer an estimated 100 to 200 additional fatal cancers over the remaining years of their lives.

This risk estimate can be applied to the 59,000 man-rems that were incurred by the approximately 98,000 workers who received measurable exposures in 1981.

(Results derived for 1980 would be very similar to those for 1981)

The result is that for the total work force exposed in 1981, the number of additional cancer deaths, resulting from radiation dose received in that year, would be less than ten.

This addition is made to the 15,000 cancer deaths or so that would occur in the 98,000 workers normally, without exposure to this amount of radiation.

Perhaps more meaningful to the individual workers are the health implications to the worker receiving the average dose of 0.60 rems and the maximum dose, under normal conditions, of 9 rems or so during 1981.

The estimated risk of dying of cancer during the remainder of life is one chance in 10,000 for the average dose and one chance in 1,000 for the nine-rem dose.

The estimated risk for the accidental overexposure of 21 rems is one chance in 300.

Should a worker receive 0.60 rems per year continuously during his entire working career his risk of dying from cancer will increase by about 2% of the normal risk.

These risks can be compared to the American Cancer Society's estimates of one chance in four of developing cancer and one chance in seven of dying of cancer.

The potential genetic effects from a worker population receiving about 60,000 man-rems is very small compared to the genetic damages that normally occur spontaneously in this population.

Based again on the 1980 NAS report, from zero to four serious genetic diseases could be induced in first genera-tion children of the 98,000 exposed

• workers and from4 3 to 60 in all future generations. This number is compared to the approximately 100,000 serious genetic defects that occur normally in one million live births.

4.

TERMINATION DATA SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO 10 CFR S20.408 4.1 Termination Reports, 1969-1981 In 1969 the NRC (then the Atomic Energy Commission) began requiring four categories of licensees ** to submit personnel identification and exposure

• Assuming that each of them will have one child in the future.

• • Commercial nuclear power reactors; industrial radiographers; fuel processors, fabricators, and reprocessors; and manufacturers and distributors of speci-fied quantities of byproduct material.

21

~

.-_=_- - __

B j

information upon the termination of each monitored person's employment or work assignment in the licensee's facility.

The appropriate information on each l

report has been manually coded and entered into the Commission's computerized i

Radiation Exposure Information and Reports System (REIRS).

The data are retrievable through numerous ways - social security number, name, facility, 4

etc. - which allows statistical analysis of the data, as well as the tracing of individual dose histories.

During the years that this information has been j

collected, some 880,000 terminations records have been received for approxi-mately 250,000 individuals who have been reported as having terminated their employment at facilities in one or more of the four categories of licensees.

The figures given for the number of reports and the number of individuals are different because numerous individuals have been terminated more than once over the years and because some individuals may have had external doses reported for more than one part of the body, as well as estimates of internal depositions of radioactive material, each of which is counted as one record.

l Table 9 provides a breakdown of this information for individuals terminating during each of the. thirteen years and, since the majority of termination reports are now submitted by nuclear power facilities, the number of records and individuals that they reported are displayed separately.

One can see that the number of records continues to increase each year, primarily because of the growing need for workers at power reactors.

4.2 Limitations of the Termination Data

.I When examining or using the statistics shown in the report that are based on the termination data, one should keep in mind that these data have i

various limitations, such as the following:

some licensees submit a termina-tion report for each monitored non-utility employee at the end of each moni-toring period rather than waiting until the individual actually leaves the i

facility; the period (s) of exposure that are reported for terminating individ-uals may indicate the monitoring period during which he may have been exposed to radiation rather than the actual dates of exposure; some licensees report cumulative periods of exposure and doses rather than the actual periods and dose incurred during each period; licensees having more than one licensed facility sometimes file a termination report when the individual leaves the second facility that includes th'e dose which he incurred at the first facility which had already been reported.

Although attempts have been made to correct for some of these problems, they are still an additional source of error in any statistics developed from the termination data.

I 4.3 Transient Workers per Calendar Quarter One use that is being made of the information contained in the termination reports is the examination of the doses being received by short-term werkers.

Since nearly half of the termination reports indicated periods of exposure that were less than 90 days, it is possible that several thousand individuals could have been employed by two or more licensees during the same calendar quarter. Thus, in this report, a " quarterly transient" worker is defined to be an individual who began and terminated employment at two or more different i

licensed facilities within one calendar quarter.

This allows one to examine the doses of those workers most likely.to approach the quarterly limits without I

their employer's knowledge since they move so rapidly among facilities.

22 4

_.m_

___,._v

TABLE 9 TERMINATION REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE NRC 1969 - 1981 All Four Categories

• Power Reactor Licensees Number of Number of Number of Number of YEAR Termination Terminating Termination Terminating Records Individuals Records Individuals 1969 5,009 3,992 790 727 1970 8,606 6,069 2,126 1,908 1971 12,955 8,874 2,246 2,197 1972 15,685 10,353 4,997 3,888 1973 19,985 15,588 11,525 9,071 1974 30,389 21,499 16,946 11,603 1975 44,676 27,415 38,376 22,627 1976 70,230 40,079 63,593 35,294 1977 88,295**

42,183**

81,074**

36,864**

1978 96,010**

44,541**

85,308**

37,359**

1979 133,470**

58,913**

118,218**

48,305**

1980 175,408

.73,662 162,515 65,092 1981 179,727 69,299 174,546 65,747 I

• Commercial nuclear power reactors; industrial radiographers; fuel processors, fabricators, and reprocessors; manufacturers and distributors of specified quantities of byproduct materials.

• • These data were updated based on more recent compilations.

~.

i 4

d Table 10 displays some of the information gathered from these termination reports that were submitted by the licensed nuclear power facilities.

The number of these individuals has increased more than twentyfold during the five years 1972 through 1976, but now appears to be increasing at a much slower rate.

They have conprised about two percent of the number of workers receiving 1

a measurable dose (Table 4) for the last several years.

This probably reflects the rate of growth of the nuclear power industry and its need for short-term i

i workers, and the figures obtained from reports submitted by power reactors are shown separately.

The table also shows that the average individual dose (which is close to being a quarterly dose for these workers) has tended to decrease during this time and has remained less than half a rem during the last four years.

Examinations of these records also revealed that some indi-viduals have worked for as many as six different NRC licensees during one quarter.

However, very few instances have been found in which a worker may i

have slightly exceeded his quarterly limit of 3 rems as a result of his working at two different licensed facilities within one calendar quarter.

That is not to say, however, that no other workers' doses have exceeded the quarterly limit because the records of those who were employed by a secor.d licensee for a period spanning the end of a calendar quarter could not be examined in this manner, and the records of those employed by other than the four categories of 2

NRC licensees are not submitted to the NRC.

4.4 Transient Workers per Calendar Year Since the number of transient workers per calendar quarter comprise only j

a small percentage of the total number of individuals terminating each year, it was decided to chang the criteria such that the records of more workers would be examined.

This was done by selecting the records of all individuals j

who began and terminated two or more periods of employment with at least two j

different reactor facilities within one calendar year and by summing each worker's whole body doses.

An examination of this data would allow one to 1

l determine the number and average dose for these " annual transients." Since l

more than 95% of these transients are reported by nuclear power facilities,

'~~ _

only the termination records of these individuals were examined in detail.

l Table 11 summarizes the number and doses of these " annual transients" that was TABLE 11 i

TRANSIENT WORKERS PER CALENDAR YEAR AT NUCLEAR POWER FACILITIES 1977-1981 1

i No. of No. of Individuals Collective Average i

Commercial Terminated by Dose Dose i

i Year Reactors Two or More Licensees (Man-rems)

(Rems) l 1977 57 3,161 3,776 1.29 1978 64 3,202 3,231 1.01 l

1979 67 4,022 3,891 0.97 1980 69 5,463 6,028 1.10 l

1981 73 5,264 5,109 0.97 i

t I

24 i

i

j TABLE 10 TRANSIENT WORKERS PER CALENDAR QUARTER 1972-1981 All Covered Licensees No. of Persons Terminated Collective Average by 2 or more Licensees Dose Individual Year Within One Quarter (Man-Rems)

Dose (Rem) 1972 69 63 0.91 1973 157 138 0.88 1974 332 170 0.51 1975 709 508 0.72 1976 1299 904 0.70 1977 1481 870 0.59 1978 1570 720 0.46 1979 1809 836 0.46 1980 2355 1063 0.45 1981 2270 945 0.42 Power Reactor Facilities 1972 57 57 1.00 1973 146 123 0.84 1974 285 158 0.55 1975 684 493 0.72 1976 1257 889 0.71 1977 1437 851 0.59 1978 1500 680 0.45 1979 1754 802 0.46 1980 2218 1033 0.47 1981 2249 938 0.42 25

found among the individuals terminating during each of the five years 1977 through 1981.

The number of these transients has increased somewhat nearly every year, but they continue to constitute only six to seven percent of the number of workers that received a measurable dose (Table 4).

Also, the average dose has remained at about one rem for the last four years.

More details about these annual transients and a discussion of the impact that the inclu-sion of these individuals in each of two or more licensee's manual dose distri-bution reports had on the annual compilation of the reports submitted by all of the nuclear power facilities are presented in the NRC reports designated as 3

NUREG-0713, Vols. 2 and 3 [Ref. 6 and 7].

4.5 Age and Dose Distribution of Terminated Workers Since some of the termination reports provide the birth date of the individual, one could examine these records and determine the age and dose distributions of workers that terminated during the year.

The age would be that of the worker when he terminated the last time during the year, and the dose would be the total whole body dose that he had accumulated through that time. Table 12 provides the results of such compilations foi reactor and non-reactor personnel

• for the years 1980 and 1981.

The age and dose distri-butions for terminating power reactor personnel changed very little between 1980 and 1981, with about 53% of the personnel being less than 35 years old and accumulating about 60% of the collective dose.

Figure 7a illustrates the age distribution of the reactor personnel terminating during 1981.

The age and dose distributions for the non-reactor personnel are somewhat different from those of the reactor personnel since they have a considerably larger percentage of young workers (18-24 years) and of older workers (> 60 years).

Also, the older workers incur a larger percentage of the collective dose than those terminated by power reactors.

However, the number of terminating non-reactor personnel is rather small so that any differences seen in the distri-butions of these and other types of personnel, or in the distributions of these workers from year to year, may not be significant.

Figure 7b illustrates the age distribution of the non-reactor personnel terminating during 1981.

4.6 Career Doses The termination data also permit calculation of the accumulated whole body doses that workers have received during their total period of employment at those NRC licensed facilities ** that are required to submit termination reports to the NRC. This is done by summing each individual's periods of exposure and corresponding whole body dose to give the cumulative years of exposure and occupational dose.

It should be noted that the dates given in the termination reports may indicate the worker's complete period of employment or just the period that he was monitored while assigned to work in radiation areas, or the dates may reflect the processing frequency of the personnel monitoring devices rather than the exact periods of exposure or employment.

Also, a worker may be currently working for a licensee, but his dose will not

• Personnel terminating from the remaining types of covered licensees -

industrial radiographers, fuel fabricators and reprocessors, and manufacturers and distributors of byproduct materials.

• • Commercial nuclear power reactors; industrial radiographers; fuel fabricators and reprocessors; and manufacturers and distributors of byproduct material.

26

TABLE 12 AGE AND DOSE DISTRIBUTION OF TERMINATING PERSONNEL Power Reactor Personnel Non power Reactor Personnel 1960 1981 1980 l

1981 Age Terminating Persons Collective Dose Terminating Persans Collective Dose Teminating Persons Collective Dose Teminating Persons Collective Dose Number

(%)

Man-rems (%)

Number {%)

Man-rems (%)

Number

(%)

Man-rems

(%)

Number

(%)

Man-rem,

(%)

18-24 5,685 (14%)

3,354 (14%)

6,359 (15%)

3,843 (17%)

1,094 (21%)

468

( 8%)

808 (23%)

369 (16%)

25-29 7,590 (19%)

5,041 (22%)

8,444 (20%)

5,434 (24%)

977 (19%)

705 (13%)

696 (20%)

394 (17%)

30-34 7,773 (20%)

4.964 (21%)

8,253 (19%)

4,595 (20%)

881 (17%)

934 (17%)

615 (18%)

43?

(18%)

35-39 5,515 (14%)

3,244 (14%)

6,235 (14%)

3,223 (14%)

634 (12%)

758 (14%)

385 (11%)

291 (12%)

S 40-44 4,021 (10%)'

2,327 (10%)

4,380 (10%)

2,124 (10%)

422

( 8%)

424

( 8%)

265

( 8%)

226 (10%)

45-49 3,130

( 8%)

1,664

( 7%)

3,231 ( 8%)

1,397

( 6%)

265

( 5%)

339

( 6%)

195

( 6%)

204

( 9%)

50-54 2,613

( 7%)

1,268

( 5%)

2,580 ( 6%)

908

( 4%)

236

( 4%)

376

( 4%)

128

( 4%)

93

( 4%)

55-59 2,024

( 5%)

990

( 4%)

1,996 ( 5%)

584

( 3%)

420

( 8%)

868 (15%)

176

( 5%)

157

( 7%)

> 60 1,403

( 3%)

612

( 3%)

1,377 ( 3%)

354

( 2%)

308

( 6%)

681 (12%)

165

( 5%)

168

( 7%)

Totals 39,754 (100%)

23,464 (100%)

42,855 (100%)

22,466 (100%)

5,237 (100%)

5,558 (100%)

3,433 (100%)

2,337 (100%)

FIGURE 7a AGE DISTRIBUTION OF TERMINATING REACTOR PERSONNEL 3 5 - 44 (18,615) (25D

,,//,,' '

/'

/

_j

/

,7

-60 & up (1.377) (3D

+p

s.,

ys

<s - v

^

18-24(6,359) (ISD v 3 25 - 34 (16,697) 09D FIGURE 7b AGE DISTRIBUTION OF TERMINATING NON REACTOR PERSONNEL 35 44 (SSB) (19D

,'M,'

45 'J9 (499) (15D

/

/'

/

',9

/-

60 & up (ISS) (5D

. f

.,l i

/

' /.,

'.t 25 - 34 (1.311) G8D

- /-

18 24 (888) (23D

'_.//

28

be reported until he terminates.

Furthermore, doses incurred at facilities other than those required to submit termination reports to the NRC will not be included at all.

The termination data for some 230,800 individuals terminating from NRC licensed facilities between 1977 and 1982 were examined.

The periods of employment and whole body doses were summed, as described above, and were l

oroken down into ten ranges for the length of employment and fifteen dose ranges. Appendix D gives the detailed distributions for workers that have terminated from one of the covered types of NRC licensees *, and Table 13 summarizes the data and presents the average measurable doses, the highest 3

cumulative doses, and the years during which the highest doses were accumu-lated. One can see that the vast majority of the workers terminated from nuclear power reactors, where for employment periods less than four years, the workers had the highest average doses.

In general, Table 13 shows that the average annual dose appears to decrease with increasing length of employment,.especially in the case of industrial radiography firms who have reported the most individuals as having worked more than ten years.

It should also be pointed out that these statistics do not give a clear indication of the actual time period over which the doses were accumulated.

For example, a worker could be employed by a nuclear power facility for one month each year for ten years, and he would be placed in the employment range of 90 days to one year.

Therefore, care should be taken when making conclusion or extrapolations based on these data.

5.

PERSONNEL OVEREXPOSURES -10 CFR S20.403 and 10 CFR 620.405 5.1.

Types of Overexposures One requirement of the above referenced sections of Part 20, Title 10, Chapter 1, Code of Federal Regulations, is that all persons licensed by the NRC must submit reports of all incidents involving personnel radiation expo-sures that exceed certain levels.

Based on the magnitude of the exposure, the reports may be placed into one of three categories:

5.1.1 Category A 10 CFR S20.403(1) - Exposure of the whole body of any individual to 25 rems or more; exposure to the skin of the whole body of any individual to 150 rems or more; or exposure of the extremities (feet, ankles, hands or forearms) of any individual to 375 rems or more.

The Commission must be notified immediately of these events.

• Commercial nuclear power reactors; industrial radiographers; fuel fabricators and reprocessors; and manufacturers and distributors of byproduct material.

29

l TABLE 13 SUPHARY OF CAREER DOSES FOR WORKERS TERMINATING BETWEEN 1977 and AND 1982 License No. of Total Average Highest Years over Category and Workers with Collective Measurable Cumulative Which Total Length Measurable Dose Dose for Dose Highest Dose of Employment Doses (man-rems) Period (rems)

(rems)

Accumulated i

Industrial Radiographers

<90 days 1,255 375 0.30 15 1977 90d-l yr 2,594 1,719 0.66 28 1977 1-2 yrs 1,718 1,880 1.09 12 1977-1978 2-3 yrs 903 1,472 1.63 13 1968-1976 3-4 yrs 691 1,461 2.11 19 1976-1980 4-5 yrs 479 1,207 2.52 34 1975-1979 5-10 yrs 1,484 3,820 2.57 51 1974-1981 10-15 yrs 1,269 4,379 3.45 55 1963-1977 15-20 yrs 1,151 5,523 4.80 101 1963-1980

>20 yrs 2,096 6,056 2.89 110 1954-1977 Manufacturers and Distrib.

<90 days 273 41 0.15 2

90d-1 yr 454 218 0.48 6

1977-1978 1-2 yrs 282 330 1.17 12 1980-1981 2-3 yrs 175 232 1.33 13 1974-1977 4

3-4 yrs 113 234 2.07 17 1975-1978

'i 4-5 yrs 67 213 3.18 26 1976-1981 5-10 yrs 131 559 4.27 35 1970-1977 10-15 yrs 56 479 8.55 53 1968-1978 15-20 yrs 24 267 11.13 97 1962-1979

>20 yrs 30 371 12.37 86 1947-1977 Fuel Fab. and Reprocess.

<90 days 542 71 0.13 4

90d-1 yr 600 88 0.15 3

1-2 yrs 518 198 0.38 7

1979-1980 2-3 yrs 360 218 0.61 9

1975-1978 3-4 yrs 258 317 1.23 22 1974-1978 4-5 yrs 183 369 2.02 30 1973-197f' 5-10 yrs 409 1,430 3.50 40 1971-1990 10-15 yrs 203 1,418 6.99 50 1967-1981 15-20 yrs 184 1,075 5.84 74 1950-1978

>20 yrs 141 909 6.45 110 1960-1980 Nuclear Power Reactors i

<90 days 62,105 32,853 0.53 22 1980 90d-1 yr 45,242 48,735 1.08 21 1977-1978 1-2 yrs 14,701 28,750 1.96 28 1977-1982 2-3 yrs 6,105 15,197 2.49 33 1977-1981 3-4 yrs 3,007 8,524 2.83 28 1976-1981 4-5 yrs

.1,665 5,140 3.09 28 1977-1982 5-10 yrs 2,537 10,466 4.13 53 1974-1981 10-15 yrs 319 2,459

_ 7.71 60 1962-1976 15-20 yrs 60 834 13.90 54 1962-1977 l

>20 yrs 42 185 4.40 51 1959-1981 30 4

\\

5.1.2.

Category B 10 CFR 920.403(b) - Exposure of the whole body of any individual to 5 rems or more; exposure of the skin of the whole body of any individual to 30 rems or more; or exposure of the extremities to 75 rems or more.

The Commission must be notified within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of these events.

5.1. 3.

Category C 10 CFR S20.405 - Exposure of an individual to radiation or concentrations of radioactive material that exceeds any applicable quarterly limit in Part 20 or in the licensee's license, but is less than the values given above.

This includes reports of whole body exposures that exceed 1.25 rems, or that exceed 3 rems, as previously discussed in Section 3.1.

Reports of skin exposures that exceed 7.5 rems and extremity exposures that exceed 18.75 rems are included, and reports of exposures of individuals to concen-trations in excess of the levels given in 10 CFR 620.103 and Appendix B, usually fall into this category as well.

These

[

reports must be submitted to the Commission within 30 days of the occurrence.

A short description of the incidents occurring in 1980 and 1981 that resulted in nine individuals receiving exposures of the magnitude indicated in Category A or B is given in Sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2.

5.2.

Summary of Overexposures Table 14 summarizes all of the occupational overexposures to external sources of radiation as reported by Commission licensees pursuant to 620.403 and 920.405 during the years 1977 through 1981.

For 1980 and 1981, it shows the number of individuals that incurred various types of overexposures while employed by one of several types of licensees.

Most of the overexposures included in the "All Others" category come from research facilities and universities.

In 1980 the total number of individuals reported as being overexposed was 96, a considerable increase from the number reported for the previous several years.

This increase was due to the overexposure of some 67 individuals at one nuclear power facility during steam generator repair work.

They received doses between three and five rems.

In 1981, the total number of overexposed individuals decreased to 22, and the highest whole body dose was 21.2 rems.

In 1980, 1979, 1978, and 1977, the highest doses were 7.7 rems, 17.0 rems, 27.3 rems and 220 rems, respectively.

There were a few (8) reports of personnel exposures to airborne concentrations of radioactive materials in excess of applicable limits in 1980 and 1981.

There were three instances in which the estimated intake of radioactive material exceeded the quarterly intake limit, equivalent to exposure for 520 hours0.00602 days <br />0.144 hours <br />8.597884e-4 weeks <br />1.9786e-4 months <br /> at the maximum permissible concentrations (MPC-hours).

One of the incidents exceeded the annual intake limit, equivalent to 2000 MPC-hours, and is described in Section 5.2.2.

31

l TABLE 14 PERSONNEL OVEREXPOSURES TO EXTERNAL RADIATION 1977 - 1981 Types of Overexposures Persons &

Whole Body (rems)

Skin Doses (rems)

Extremity Doses (rems)

Year License Category Doses (ress)

<5.00

>5.00<25

>25

>7.5<30.0

>30<150

>150

>18.75<75

'>75<375

>375 Industrial No. of Persons 6

1 Radiography Sum of Doses 9.2 7.1 Power Reactor No. of Persons 6

1 8

Facilities Sum of Doses 14.4 21.2 Medical No. of Persons 2

1 Facilities Sum of Doses 4.2 9.7 1981 Marketing &

No. of Persons 1

Manufacturing Sum of Doses 25.2 All Others No. of Persons 2

1 1

Sum of Doses

5. 5 8.1 28.3 Industrial No. of Persons 4

1 1

Radiography Sum of Doses -

23.6

7. 7 56.0 Power Reactor No. o' Persons 74 1980 Facilities Sum of Doses 266.6 Medical No. of Persons 5

Facilities Sum of Doses 9.4 Marketing &

No. of Persons 1

3 Manufacturing Sum of Doses 19.9 33,000 l

All Others No. of Persons 5

2 1

Sum of Doses 9.4 53.6 i

D C

d No. of Persons 38 6

7 1

2 15 1

1979 Totals Sum of Doses 90.9 73.6 125.7 40.0 327 468.1 147 j

No. of Persons 16 5

1 2

2-1 1978 Sum of Doses 51.3 73.5 27.3 18.2 49.1 150 No. of Persons 45 2

1 3

10 1

1977 Sum of Doses 98.6 23.2 220 39.9-224.8 630

• This person simultaneously received an extremity overexposure of 21 ress'which is not shown in the Extremity section of the tabls.

I D0ne of these persons simultaneously received an extremity overexposure of 46 rems which is not shown in the Extremity section of the table.

COne of these persons simultaneously received an extremity overexposure of 45 rems which is not shown in the Extremity section of the table.

dTwo of these persons simultaneously received an extremity overexposure of 161 and 161 rems which are not shown in the Extremity section of the table.

32

}

1

,. /

s l

^^

y.-

,s 5.2.1.

Overexposure Incidents - 1980 Industrial Radiography - License Number 21-08606-03

,f On June 12, 1980, a radiographer received a whole body dose of 7.6 rems while performing radiography work at a gas storage. site.

The oG rexposure occurred because the 55 curie iridium-192 source was.not fully retracted into its shielded container after a radiography proc 6 dure.

The radiation survey performed by the radiographer was not adequate to detect the improper positioning of the radiation source.

/

Radioactive Source Manufacturer - License Number 37-00611-09 4

On February 2,1981, a licensee that manufact'ures radioactive sources.

which are used to x-ray material reported that the" thumbs and fingernails of two employees may have been overexposed during the previous year.

The NRC

~

investigation revealed that the employees' use of defectiGe procedures had

~

resulted in their thumbs and fingertips receiving large radiation doses.

It was estimated that the right thumbs of three employees received doses of 25,000 rems, 7,000 rems, and 1,000 rems.

One of the employees had probably o_

received doses of several hundred rems to the thumbs each month for-the previousy seven years.

The NRC suspended the company's license, placed.all of its licensed.

radioactive material in storage, and ordered the company to show cause why the suspension should not be continued pending further. notice; G ;,

t.

i 5.2.2.

Overexposure Incidents - 1981

'-f Industrial Radiography - License Number 12-00622-07 J

^I i

On February 5, 1981, a radiographer received a whole body dose of 7.0 l,,

rems while he was working at the licensee's Indianapolis Icboratory.

The radiographer took a large number of radiographs in a four-hour period,,.

during which he failed to make proper surveys, and disregarded the fact that his self-reading pocket dosimeter was off-scale.

Medical Facility - License Number 34-06295-03 On June 22, 1981, a hospital technologist received a whole body dose of 9.7 rems while attempting to close the shutter of a cobalt-60 teletheraphy unit after the shutter stuck in the open positiori.

The technologist told,-

hospital officials the following day of the malfunctioning shutter and the j.

possibility of being overexposed.

The overexposure was confirmed in August-when his film dosimeter was processed.

~

Nuclear Power Facility - License Number DPR-19 On March 5, 1981, a contractor employee received a whol6 body dose of '

21.2 rems and an extremity dose of 20.8 rems while removing shield plugs i

following the replacement of feedwater spargers at the Dresden 2 unit.

The' overexposure occurred when the reacter vessel water level instrumentation 1

indicated a water level higher than that which really existed,,and supporting.

radiation protection measures were inadequate.

~

Po*

33 d4

-J y

/,

/

Manufacturing FaciNty - License Number 74-04206-01 On July 29, 1981, an individual was working M the licensee's laboratory where iodine-131 diagnostic capsules are manufactured.

He was following routine procedures,for the disinfecting of the laborator'y.

Surveys performed later that day.injicated that tne worker had an elevated thyroid burden of iodine-131.

A series of thyroid burden measurements were performed, and it was calculated his thyroid say have received a dose of 75 rems.

The cause of the exposure was not determined, b'ut intentional ingestion of iodine-131 capsules was not eliminated.

n p

n J

J M

ed r

f O

a 1

F i

+

1 1

9 6-Y

/

34

/

REFERENCES

• 1.

United Nations, " Report of the Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation," Annex H, General Assembly of Official Records,1982, United Nations, New York.

2.

Brodsky, A., R. Specht, B. Brooks, et al; "Lognormal Distributions of Occupational Exposure in Medicine and Industry." Presented at the 9th Midyear Topical Symposium of the Health and Physics Society, 1976.

3.

B. G. Brooks, " Occupational Radiation Exposure Twelfth Annual Report 1979," USNRC Report NUREG-0714, Vol. 1, August 1982.

4.

Kumazawa, S. and T. Numakunai, "A New Theoretical Analysis of Occupational Dose Distributions Indicating the Effect of Dose Limits," Health Physics, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1981.

5.

Kumazawa, S. and T. Numakunai, "A Method for Implementation of ALARA for Occupational Exposure Using the Hybrid Lognormal Model." Presented at the 27th Annual Meeting of the Health Physics Society, July 1, 1982.

6.

B. G. Brooks, " Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors 1980," USNRC Report NUREG-0713, Vol. 2, 1981.

7.

B. G. Brooks, " Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors 1981," USNRC Report NUREG-0713, Vol. 3,1982.

L AReport is available for purchase from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161, and/or the NRC/GP0 Sales Program, Division of Technical Information and Document Control, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.

20555.

35

.1

I APPENDIX A Industrial Radiograpliers 1980 and 1981 L

(

r

- ~,..

a_

+

..a--

~a.--

..e a.-

n

---

.n---a 1=_e a,-

n a

-a.

-a

.s.-_a

-w-a a

i 4

i P

1 d

i h, g 1,

.... 0 0. -. O.. O.. _

. O. O.. O -

..~. O s.

.e e.e #. e.

O.

P.

O. O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

N.

O, c.eO.

C.t O.

O.

O. em.e. n.o O, N.

O.

O, O,

e, O

se ew Ws we og l

/3,

g e=

y p

b l

I em um j

^

K-p.

O A. k.

P*

O O N. O O h O N. O O h wt am O.. O O.

h,. O k k W4 N p.

O t.o em e en.s.e O. r.e e.

se. O. O.

1. .8 O.

N.

O.

e.

e. e. e. e.

O. c.e s.e O.

P. c.a e.

O. e. c.

O, ew

.e e

p

.e

+

• e e

e g

A e 4 M &

P.

r p.

er gt fy e.

Wh om N

e k

g me w

• 8 b

Y j

N.si O

f

, 4 e og og, e se O Wi p*

O O m e. O e. O cm en > eri en O > O m p+

C O pe s

.e e e s'5 O b en P O

'8

'8

• '* O 8*'

eP ir

• • P N

88 8*

b t

1 g

3 - ~.

s

=

• o * ~ ~ * * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * ~ ~ * * * ~

1. 4

_~ _s o ". ~ * = ~ *

• a n

- e.

~ - e e

-. a n

e.

o I

gun p.

pe i.

Il e

.. -. O. -. O. _ _.

~

O..

.-.~.e.

. f.,.y O.

O.

O.

O.

D.

C.

D.

D.

D.

U.

O.

O.

C.'

4

.e O.

O.

O.

C.

d.e e.>

t.s n s.o t.'

O.

O.

O.

4

• e eu en we s

g w

.I

(

r

.O.

_e c. n. n. u. o. e.

O.

e.

_e e.

e,.

e e o n O e,

n o.

e e e n 4.

as

.e.

O O.

e.

O

,e n O e

so e C.

e.

C.

O.

O.

.e 0

. 0

.e u s.,,

w

=

-k. - -. O

~. -

2

=

I O.

+*

,k

.$.k hi.

i i

. - - O

. O -..

p.

.. _ O.., _

,.e p=

a O. _ _ _

.e er se.

p.

se W

g en p=

.e a

a s

ee e

1

_...O

.O

.O

.e

- -. ~ -. -.. - _....... _...

O ~ -

. ~.

W..

i i sissijasisiliasisifissisisittaisfisitins p t 1.11.111.t 111 t.f. i t t f.r i..t 11.11.1..t i t 11. t t. i t. t i. l t. _t t i

.e e -.

.e

.e

. O o O O O.

e3

(*

C O si O.e

.e - - e -

Z.

e O ft F5 e O C O O t*

C U 4-O O O O O

O g-n O O 8.'*

g e et O sa t'*

O O O Cs

.e f

9 0

s e e e e t

t 6

0 6

.e

.t I

4 0

9 t

e 1

0 4

4 4

4 0

0 0

e g

e s

9

.e.e 3

a en s p.

@w

• s ee

• e

,. e es e e es s 9 ** e ** e P 7 e >> a - a ~> 0 e

e'

1

• =

• k en N l

me of' O eu me

.e 4 4 en O 4 N 06 9e 9% qo em 9 gm e me % 9 9 9 9s

1. Om Pm * ***

• 91 >- ** me $$

1. "6 4

.fe set

1. O e e est O p g q p p p

p pe em f-e P

t"t e

JE elm

.e #t *

• e d 8's 41

• e se

@ an d me es

,s'*

.e

.e A*

m.

P M N @9 p.

O 4 ee gu gg g

.en p.

1. est # # # er 9

,e*

("

ee d **

• P 864 m.

,e

,.. e a-s

• • ee O se O se O

.e

• )

fS ** #3 se 43 s*'

e.=.

,e p p p e -

(

os se O se O 43 n e

-e

1. 5 f*

r'

.e

.4 e.e CD O e J

o ts e,e

.3 e

g e 9 5

e i 6 it 0

8 1

0 9

9 0

9 e 6 e 9 e

t 8

4 9

e e e a0 9

4 6

0 9

8 3

e p

e 9 e p > e e d m.

e s,e,

. J r* *- e e e er*

• O e e e a e,

d vn a-a>

0 *

.e 9 m o

,e p.

e e m pa O 884 to d e't

1. ==

J'

==

e q F me r em Af d p'

• • ~

d*

4 98 e e'

4 P

• • se 89 pig a

en de en e gyn v

y y

b

.,e y

e es e

e e

as em es e*

I ab

?

. F F

W 6

.o

% $J O O

m

=e

)

e m

' y ane om v

• • f Y F F C

D O

tO se.

L

,y O,n O,n C,

e

,s.

e 4

er g.

e, p

s p pe g.

g ey

,a me y

he D - - >

I, e 1e:

.at b

ee 8.)

s'*

J a9 4

7 4.

F S k

e De

,e.

.a o I : 1 2 e

e g3 p.

.,e t

-.

F

.c.J

.,=

= F e_

m

.=.

w d,

-. e s

4 -

.e a

., O _,

.,,, g EL ir*

8

. I

(.*

qe gj 4,

y p

g (1 > e8 *

(

g gg r~

g 7r '

m.

r s

3 3 p F F 8.A 8**

P*

P= *, ~.

ve r-

.4 O

e

> s

.r u.e 1,,

s v g.

er er F ~

e > > >

8 f*

ai-e ot w-w 3 C')

F (J p er (e

• 4e w

e.e s

r.,

sa N.*

T f"

e 4J O j p D

4.

C%

O F O

..'s

>==

a-e.

> au p o

at w

• J (J nae 3

e6 e6 F e-

. J p,= q q==

y er **

.e*

G fa-e eE 4 e.* 2 J"

a-e ej h

.e ** en e4 er U en e e d 4 C.

4 9

("a **

.a e.,

w e

8 8'

L+

th **

W4 F F tse

• 4 4

F t

e '.. 4

& 4 E*'

4 6.,

48 4

. p

.4 U U e.6J E F

<r' 9

9 F E t.h '

g eg e-as

.4 es

.s e o e & est a=

U U ' 49

.se

• =

• g,

, e eat a p

d.'-

w. & T J - - O O > > > w = >

• e# e # e = w

• • De 4 &

.O h 81f me E D O w

O e >

m '.W=

j q.

y p..

w

1. ' "eF

• O U f8 d

'F

• F t'

• = tm

}

8""

w

• '* *=

g e.

== a v'

F to I.e tf.e F

f*

a gne F 4 44 e=0

+A sW" to M

e 9

e*

of F

M

1. w #%

F

• W b W & gae W Ltd M hm F

4 88 W

um. a

,J 44 en g3 og s e e.

=e F F er F ? *

==J mJ f 4 A S

A.

f 9

h T

.sp t9

• er y

p

-f g

g 3 y

• • O w 4 * **

• d'

• ts is w O U T

.e en er a 3

e.s "O

..J O ** O Q Q O P1 en td > me W

.V, e

m,e s,e 4

t,ad M.

W w

to eJ tem

.e

> = <

W e

W e.

("'

,r,

(3 g4

,e o

., 8 1 O e.

U Ue e,

.e no

• J O O F'

e 6

4 aA e#

7 41

,1 f

P*

W De W F 4 O he tap g

1. 9 4 9

"w" e4.e m.e gn g

gge p 8O '

'4 +

• es ts * > > > > > ta c's

.F.

"p.

7.a C

.e me 49 F 64 y

> Y u

n'*

.J am.es LA U ese s

as t*

9 O

4 y o d

y efn me me

% ee O O t*

F 9

8 9

9 a*' e e

v en'*

a

.3 y e er ee e,s ej g is l-g,,, g a a a g g g g

.,3 A

,.,a 8'e F r y e F F * #r e sr at 4'A 4 O, tas O_ Q 8 e=

er o at

• 4 ens me F1 4

W g "9

e O"*

q q q q q 4 4 F d,d 6 4 4 4 4 9 4 4 4

• 4 4 4 O @

W O O O 9 9 U'

U N

APPENDIX A (cont.)

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRPHERS 1980 1981 Total vuorters with CoMustrue Avereen Total teorhere Weh CeNestrue Aser4pm LI8"* W L

MdMduals. Mansurable

' Does teamsw Deas ladividuals hesamurshio Dese Messiste Dame mi Progre Type beenitored Done (men oms) teams)

Monrtered Does

!= n)

(rems)

CaptT4L u-eAv SE*VICE 35-I t t t 4-O t must. noc.

40 37 70.79 1.91 45 44 98 17 2.23 CAPtfDL STEEL C0t*044tt34 u-18 36 5-31 sme. loc.

6 9

.37

.07 No report sutritttd.

Cat!8E 5 4 ELL L f uM. 11C.

Sp-t p4 39-01 sme loc.

6 1

.17

.17 8

S 3.15

.23 CCR504 HEttCDPTE45 INC.37-17tS S-01must. soc.

No report sutaitted, 7

2

.10

.0S C49t0LL E1314 Eft 5 23-13042-31mult. lon.

4 3

40

.11 No report sutaltted.

CataLff!C INC 3 7-12 911-02 enuit. loc.

6 S

1.40

.28 to 3

.60

.27 CAf f ee tLL 44 TaACT14 Co o41f 12-0 3013-0 P mutt. noc.

3 2

.67

.34 3

2

.67

.34 C4fE481LL44 te4CT14 CDa*A1f 12-130?3-01 sme. loc.

7 1

.05

.05 11 0

.00

.00 CE4f!FIE3 TE5ft10 LatD24134tE5 29-16153-01 ault. loc.

21 21 9.07

.39 24 16 9.20

.57 bettis s p.

sijy34 tg.

g9 0ge tr-02 eme. toc.

4

?

47

.34 No report required for this year.

CHERNE C04f R ACit4G CORPOR ATION 22-19342-01 sme los.

11 7

47

.07 10 6

1.20

.20 C64tCAG3 8tt03E AN1 t a01 C 3 12-0 M3 7-O t smg. loc.

10 S

.37

.07 10 2

.50

.0S CHICA%Q att3sf AN3 teos C3 3 7-12 t S S -O l eing. loc.

17 5

75

.35 11 S

70

.14 CitC4:3 S4 f 00E 441 142's C3

• ?-13553-0*mult. loc.

457 494 111.40

.F1 9 8+

44a

'43.1'

.56 CHICA10 8480SE A11 1404 C1 4 3-OS 317-02 mult. soc.

13 S

90

.le No report sutaitted.

CL44t s.r)! a M 4 T C 119 4* y

?1-3 P f 7 '-11 ring. loc.

3 2

.10

.05 C

o

.N 93 CLAR4 1458ECT!11 SfevtCE INC.

3 5-liet s-01 mult. lor..

28 26 14.92 97 16 19 6.40 43 CLEVELA43 u-ety 111PE C IID's INC S S-I S 23 S-S t enuit. 4ac 99 97 105.92 1.09 No report sutritted.

CJL97 449 THtEtattfa 1Estima

'4-13737-01mult, sac 4

4 2.92

.73 S

S 2.42

.49 Coti tN3J5 ta f f $ JPet tit 1G Cle7 g a-c2)g y-01 smS oc.

S 1

.05

.05 9

4

.20

.05 l

W C3LurSta G45 T44'e59155131 C3e>

4 7-1 =36 3-C1 mult. loc.

S 4

1.35

.34 5

3 1.SS

.52 C'11e uS TIO1 E N3 t a:E t a tsc 15-02 32 5-02 sme. loc.

13 11 1217 1.11 17 to 9.25

.66 C019u5T111 EM314EEatisc I%C 06-34154-01muit. loc 44 39 6.92

.18 46 28 3.17

.51 C045fC3 I4C.

4 9-t '8 7 7* -S l inutt. loc.

2 I

.17

.17 2

1

.17

.17 CD't50L ID4f f 0 s-daf SE*VICE CO 47-09456-3?mult. loc-221 271 191.55

.47 234 228 175.95

.77 CD'eSuwfa5 80 Wit C1474xv 71-O t636-0 3 mult, tac 25 2'

19.65

.95 19 19 10.77

.37 C114 INLET y-aaf 11C.

53-17457-01must. ene 3

2

.75

.37 No report required for this year.

CD'Jeffe & C'3 PPA 1Y INC.

31-19493-01mult. acc.

0 0

.00

.03 No report sutaitted.

Ct4ME CO*Ptiv 24 -0 356 3-02 sing. loc.

14 10 4.42

.44 to 10 3.47

.35 CQ4mE C3p any - t431th leC44a3 20-33513-02seg. toe.

e 0

.00

.00 5

0

.00

.00 C4JC11LE STEEL CA3ft43 Comp 44Y 34-344S 7-02 smS oc.

5 S

1.15

.23 5

2

.22

.11 l

CTL ENGINEERING I4C.

34-09331-0!mult. loc.

No report sutaitted.

2 1

.05

.05 Cutits5 wet 3MT Ca**14Af!C1 24-04087-01 seg. loc.

14 14 4.65

.33 No report required for this year.

D A't ! E t 11f 8 P'taf!044L CC#P 19d t 2 41

• 3 2 mult. loc.

66 47 16.55

.19 67 45 20.97

.47 DAY AND FI**849A'81 INC.

42-I S C S I-C P smg. loc.

5 0

.03

.03 4

1

.09

.05 04ff11 a-4 4 f C0p t1Y 34-36943-01 must. loc.

2e 12 2.47

.21 16 11 S.50

.50 DEPA4f*F.4T OF f'ef 14VV 09-3 33 3 3-14 rnuit. sec 7

6

.30

.05 No report required for this year.

OEPT. OF NAVY, NAVAL EuPLOStVE 19-00314-03mult. loc.

22 0

.00

.00 11 1

.05

.05 DEpatf*ENT OF T '4 E 14VY 13-1?S15-S% sme. loc.

1 0

.00

.00 No report required for this year.

OE#T. OF 44*ve *C4LESTE4 3 5-1919 7-0 ? smg. 4ac.

13 0

.03

.00 49 0

.00

.00 3EPT. OF N4VT. *&#1 ISL AN) 34-33364*06mult, loc.

49 43 4.90 ett 40 37 2.67

.08 DE P T. '1F M4VV, U$1 AJan 04-17872-01mult. loc.

17 1

.60

.20 18 2

1.97

.94 DEPT. 'F.14VV. uil a4VC' C44 04-17731-0! wult. loc.

7 1

.17

.17 No report required for this year.

OEPt.

"F 14vv. US$ 31:15

? 4 -17 5 $.3- 01 mult. loc.

26 0

.03

.03 33 20 1.00

.05

.~ -

u_

l.

4 1

gna^

c. e

.-O e.

O..

. e. - O c O

. e -

-e e en O O e O O q

.e O

j "

O.

e.

es.e m.

e. m.a O.

N.

1. .e s%.

e.s

.e O.

O.

O.

• O e

pe es O O

.e O

~ ~

p o. e e.

e e e e e e e e

• e e

e I

b e

5w e

I-5 3

O O e O

O

~,

O.

O.,h, O..b. O O

• c * ~ * ~ n ~ O O

~, ~ <.

• e

~ O,.

• ~

• O e

O e e.,

- e,

c. ~.

t O,

O.

, ~.

e. O.

O.

. e

.e

~..

O. O.

O.

Y

.e.

.e O

o 1

ye

... e e 3~c e -

e y

, ~ -

~

3 3. -

.e

~ ~

a

~

~

~

~

b 2

.~.

-}

t.*

2 1

E R

5 3

3 3

3 g)

. ~

.e O ~

O O e e

.e

.e -.

- e 0 - O

....,.. e ~ - O -

O O

e 6'

60 Ma

• e

.e

.e sa

.e e' en ~

• n 9

se N

l b

e b

e.e b

g b

i 2

K

.a

.R i

i b

hm b

I,

b b

b O

O O

O O

O e

tre er e me ese

.e d M E d a.e E e

.M

.e

.e.

.e

.e We N 2

.e

.e p tri E pe

.e O h M d

.e

• e o e e E

.d

.d O.

[

} ij e e e

s.s

.e

'.e N

e o

.e e

.e

.e se

.e se se +

g II M

se p

' E $,

3 s.e.t

. e

• 8u 9*

E's e e O ft 4 pt e

.e O art e M e p G O O O art O e

.e 8"9 2

e ce e e e O d we eut e O.

s'.nN.

.O. N. e. s.e O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

. e.

• • W5

.e N O O 8

O e -.*

P*

O O gS.

O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

O. fe.

.e

• • d5 ~

e e e

. e

.e A

.e qs Ew1 k

&E 1

Wii O ma N OeO O O O e O su erg O

> > c O art As N er* O f*

O k e e

,ma

.N.

O pm O cs O N O O 86 O

.e.

)

- 0 3

O..e. e.

~. e.

O. =. c.

e. =.

.o #.

O.

~.

O.

e.. O. O.

O.

O.

O.

O.

u.

g

.e O.

e c.,

e 2

O. o.

O. e.

. ~.

e.

O.

. h y 4

d er4 en es=

p,

> g se N

gn N ];: gd 9

.e 9

i ~ e e,

~

x e e

U U

b g

5d 1

1, 5,

5 O O O O

• O > @ 85 O vi

.e d

8"t en e ** N

• O en O

.e e e p a'O g p.

~ fie O O O O

.e o p.

p.,

O.9 E

d.e m

.e es es at **

N

.e b

a N

se Y

g b

6

=

O O

O

E a

a*

2 g

Eg gg me d M e f e p p pm

.e.

.O de e @

.* 2 W*

~

s'

@ e O arn o e F*

e9 P.

e 4 4 e e a, vs e as e e.

.e g I *8

.ee 1

.e e

sus er=

8"'

f

(

d

.4 O

.e e

.e A

N f

p*

de 132iisiisiiis&issis&ssiisisssis&&&sistiiliis y J

, p 4

of M

3 el

.E

• 3

• I M

3 e3 M

.I

.I M

• 3 E

.3 3

.I 3

e,8

!.[-1 1 r i. f.f..f f 1 i i f 1. _1 11 1 f 11 1 1 i f i.t i l i i l e i f i t.f f f f 1 t i

. - - ~ - 0.

~.. ~.

.e - - --. -

O e

- ~

.e, a

(

o e c e O O O O C O set O e O O O O O g O O O e"*

O O O O O O 4'

O O O

.e O C O O O O e.

O O 9

6 8

8 8

0 8 e 0

e g g

g

,0

,6,,

,0,.,e,,e, 8

8 4

0 8

4 4

4 4

0 4

0 9

8 8

8 5

0 8

0 6

,I gp er yg y e ge g

g

,,g 6 e e 3

3 s,ege.n

.og

..e e,.n.

e ee e

a,

+

[

• • A

's p.

s er*

me

.t. n.

e,

.,e e.s e.t e,

s,. ~.

e e - e

- e e n e

e e

8,

.e

, e e'

e e n e

e ~,- e e,.,.

g e e O e ~, #

4 - - o, e e -- es e n

• e c e. = o.

I o n D m e e. -

s==

4

.e w

est e ere

.e se O O ** N e N e ers o.n.

s.a

.N

.,e og e

9=

8" N

• eh b.,

.a

. y p.

g.

g e c

• 9=

a # cm

.e e eo O r"p O gt O

.e

.O O,

4 O F

-(>

Q e O O e.*

1 g

e O e C O.* es, s.e

.J me

.e

.o

.e

.e

• e M se O d'm

(?

f f

i f

1. # 8 8 8

8 8

8 0 e 6 e e e e 6 8

e e a e

.e

.s a e e s 4

a e e e + e

,3

.f.

.f.

,f

,f 8

e n, di O e'

• O

1. .e m.e 9

g g

g g

p.

4 p.

e ce as e.

e og e.

d=

c n a # er t'm e

cd O 8h: ** ** ens *,

eg, es so ese ce ca d'*

O r?

r*

O 8

8

• • O M N N e

• M ** fy 8

8

O 8a es' N 4

.e e

F F

e-

.a w

e es

• F o.,

o.o s..

es 3

we es r=

rg i

d i

ey r*

e F F F F F m y

e 9

> d tb W U d

R 9 % &

. % \\

O O,

O C'

O enf i

F #

4e 88 ** 4 U e'

e v

em 3 > med at ear e

me me se y es' 7

e av P9 T a> s.9 4

e > > >

==

e 7 as er en F F *

• n e >

eA O

T E

O U as **

• e F F F em > > b e=

e.

F er.

F== f e.e e er o*

• e be >

T

.J r*

O ee at 4 et 4 et 4 4== ne

.#.e me w er en e &

e, a t*

& % F EP ea ao e.

tJ 6ed E g3 g > t &

.4 a g a g g my e ser e e 9

De t=

4 f"

a.

'd l

y

.n ay r og er G D 4 4 e e F F E

• O D G D 8"9

. M.

M P O 7

"'S e

1 44 1 4s er ahe

(,,

T &

O F9 f1 re Q & & 4 & 4 & U r"

O, eas ea

'I

• e

.A f"

Er 44 8er l

it - e 84 7 gs ei - F S 4J F O

• 8 u e as ee es e er se ve*

ar er F se F M V e e M F F w -

u 4 M

8 *

• O E us se*

u-

• a ae <* e4 s at om 44 W

m.

1*

p g1

• F id*

• e as 4 F e O M O O O O O O - -

[

d # #

'7

• 8 f

l'as w es em e4 e 43 a.3 u LJ 43 eJ (J qg tJ O

'4

.,9

• 5

• 9 "3

• ert e8 ead for & U D

e e O $p u gj e

me

. e er a-

> c es 4J 09 e em es* est ese 44 em se es,s es e. e..

e 3

a.

p F ens

.8 Le O

.J t.

st

• 79 as **== ee e

.e.,em m e e e a,

e e

> > >> > > > e 7 as at > J

• e U

&..8 W Y W F en, e e ** F 3 ei.

g.

u r C ft O.

n.

g eg t

F 7 4 ese se a

as er y D

3a D 3e > >

y e d s a.

p g es me 8

of W 4 4

"' es* f b

F" m > e a t F F 9 9

F F.* > J H O q M

W e

> Me et W d b

• & *** em 448 ese M en F w me ses ans o.

e.

e-

"' b as e er es e e 8'S F a y-y r*

ens ea D Y T @ M

& J > > d & J V V P O O O 4

P e9 w

• O O tas 46s cas F W F'

W" F t eas er r9 gj u F > taa 88

• = F ese ea8 4 5

F re U ta.e p g

.J O"9 em to

• )

(3 e4 7 ee sie E

.a F re ej g e

3 F

.e 64 es.

is to et E

• 9 r*

f"9 f"*

O O h 7

e.

F C3 U F F

• O U >

.a em E F

.e

.J

.J a J

.J 8

.J J

J

.J (9 se

> 2 A

es as er et at er 4 4 af es e e e.

/ tr r O ar O I

'48

> ff

• E b5 4

e

.a e

es, T et a sy e e ar a y e ser e as e e4 ans s th O 88*

• en e ei.

F O as Sea d ens d

e,

a.e e

e.e p.e 4

.ee se g m

44 4J q me er se e F M De e e d > de W e&P ess adm aap tag ese cas ese she eas tad O e O U "1

eg O

EA# D D 8 3*

4*

e e F eM r9 S'

es8h F F F F 2 F P Z F F F e O O.8 G.

& S & & &

("*

F O e gr em 4 E F F F 89 nr se o er 4 ee U e se 4 ens eas ins eas and. See nas w ene tea ene s s "1

.. d e me tas nas eat op sat est O "9

• )

O"9O ese one ens ans enf 488 ene she ene eed ese ese a es a w a m oe G e.g e o 43 O e.g o 40 e,p e g o O O O O O O O O O 40

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHERS l

1980 1981 i

l Total Workeo with Collective Average Total Workers wide ristectree Average License Number Indweduals Measurable Does Meestle Dose Indwiduels Memurable Donal Messhie Does tw %

and Program Tme Momtered Does (men.reens)

(rems)

Monetored Does (men + ems)

(, ems)

G44dE4 h14fMfAST 13-191ef-01 seng loc, 25 21 S.90

.29 No report sutaitted.

G'EDE F3J138tF5 I C14P244ff3 49-3?944-31sent loc.

7

?

42 ett 3

2

.22

.11 Get W LL C W ast. 140.

3 3-sp 91 #-a t mult. loc.

17 6

1.20

.23 S2 14 4.42

.32 4

C. TJff!47. C3.

3 4-14 9 M -01 muit. noc.

1 0

.00

.00 No report submitted.

l H. 4 INSPECit0's SERVICE INC.

15-06208-01 mult. loc.

11 11 13.1?

1.20 11 11 11.95 1.26 4

1

.05

.05 5

3

.27

.09 Haat!50's STEEL CAsi!NGS CO 13-02141-01 sing. loc.

NA4ffGRO 80tLER t i45 P(Cit 01 06-171SS-01 mult. loc.

17 13 31.75 1.01 26 17 18.02 1.06 Sl!G4 SitcL Sfaj0tJ4E5 1 40,

37-17S34-01sms oc.

ei S

.50

.13 No report sutzsitted.

s H3d9ff C148084tt'1 49-110#4-01smg. loc.

9 9

1.22

.35 6

2

.50

.05 raJTCHI N50"f. 4RE4 VO-T f.C H 22-! S S S$-01 mult. loc.

249 66 12.90

.19 No report submitted.

14:hf 5T 41 AL SA9at!CAft%4 CO.

31-1%444-31sme. tec.

4 7

1.05

.52 7

7 1 05

.15 140U5ftIAL GA4mA I45PECTIDg 24-196 S 3-01 must. loc.

No report required for this year.

I 1

.0S

.09 l

1% 3'J 5 t e l a t IM5escil's it1 J5 34-14071-01 mult. loc.

Its 15e 97.77

.90 157 147 143.77

.9s Illus t a t AL L A 39taf14 tt s 14C 41-04224-02mult. noc.

11 13 6.60 66 No report sutunitted.

l 143U5 fatal NOT SERVICE 5 13-06147-04nwt. loc.

No report required for this year 7

3

.27 09 l

111U5falAL e 4.)(134 te 4t C SE a SS-16734-01mult. loc.

4 4

3.10

.??

No report sutneitted.

I40U5ftIAL IESTING LA8 37-16436-01mult. loc.

Il 2

.50 05 11 2

.10

.05 I1GER50LL-tAND COMPANT 29-020lS-0Z smh. aoe.

3 3

92

.31 4

3

.60

.20 l'e5PECTIO1 StaVICE C0ap 37-11636-01mult. !cc.

fl 6

12.5%

2.09 10 10 9.07

.91 INTEC INSPECTIC's. Ise 35-19767-01muln soc-No report required for this year.

28 21 4.15 20

$ INTEtt0s, DEPARTMENT OF THE 24-02619-02 smS oc.

e 0

.00

.03 7

1

.0S

.0S l

I4fERMOUsefA14 TESTI1G CD 05-07972-01 mult. loc.

39 39 73.07 1.80 59 59 66.20 1.12 14f f e4 Af t34 AL TElil1G L AB$.

29-14027-01 seult. loc.

9 9

45

.05 10 1

.05

.05 III G4144 ELL 32-17346-151 mult. loc.

7 5

12.50 2.50 7

7 13.47 1.92 J. G. SYLWESTEP 4 5500 t Af C 5 20-00302-02mult. loc.

16 16 7.22 45 13 13 1.67

.13 J.T. CULLE's ConP Asaf INC.

12-19025-01 mult. loc.

6 6

1.07

.18 8

7 1.05

.15 J ACKSONWILLE SHIPfAa05 INC.

09-19611-01mult. loc.

8 7

4.72

.67 le 9

1.39

.15 J41 E-RAY SERVICES INC.

21-16560-01must..us.

No report submitted.

9 9

6.27

.70 J31N DEEaE FOUN0tf 12-09111-01s+ng loc.

3 1

.05

.05 5

2

.10'

.05 KAST METALS CORPotatt0's 14-07206-01sme loc.

5 2

.92

.46 5

2

.30

.05 KELSEY-Haft $ COMPA47 1400AP 12-02360-02sme. loc..

No report required for this year.

4 0

.00

.00 LASARGE INC.

31-1SS14-01 sens. loc.

7

• S 1.0?

.20 e

3 1.87

.23 LaitEMEAD TESTING L400eATORY 22-14897-01 mutt. loc.

10 5

3.e5

.77 e

8

.52

.07 LAW ENGINEERING TE5itMG CO 10-00346-03mult. loc.

256 214 26.70

.12 249 144 26.22

.19 l

LEMIG** TE S T 1% L t 314 4134 t E 5 37-01173-03 seg. loc.

16 12

.97

.09 No report submitted.

LOCKHEED SHIPSUILOING & C0457 46-06926-02mult. loc.

No report required far this year.

7 4

.65

.16 Lu(ENS $ FEEL COstramy 37-0292 7-01 ems. 4ps.

10 0

.00

.00 13 0

.00

.00 LYMCHSUeG F00N047 C0=P Aist SS-17464-01sene. loc.

9 1

.09

.05 No report submitted.

CAGNA CHEE IMC.

21-19111-01 mutt. loc.

S 4

.77

.19 No report submitted.

CAGN AFlus COR P0taf10's 12-03622-0 7 mult. Soc.

584 472 111.75

.70 no report submitted.

MaaATM0al Ott ConPamt 34-01541-02 sins. loc.

46 41 2 17

.05 49 5

.25

.05 NAR M081 14005TRIES INC.

35-14942-01 ems. loc.

S 2

.10

.05 S

1

.05

.05 MA50sl & HalsGEa-SILAS MA50e8 16-17692-01ssas. loc.

61 37 2.10

.06 79 28 1.52

.05 sta 64 Ac ceJee TT S se A TE e I AA.& NE St

' $6y g t W 1 mu6t. loc.

2,

,2

.10

.05 No report sutseitted.

- _ _ ~.

APPfleDIX A (contJ INDUSTRIAL flADIOGRAPHELS 1900 1981

.Totel' Weehers unth Collectrue Averess

, Tegel Werhers wHh Cepectme

, Average LI""

Llamenom Name indwiduals Mansurable

. Dome Mamminie Does-Indevaluels Measurehle Does Messiste Does and Program Type Monitored Does (manams)

(# erns)

Morutored Does (men < ems)

(rems)

N551LLOM S TEE L C 45f thG C'3 14-02435-01 sing. loc.

I 1

.05

.05 No report sutnitted.

E4TEstALS TE5flNC LAS3e4tQef 45-17151-01mult. loc 9

9 6.62

.76 9

9 4*82

• S%

RAYMae3 ELECitlC 5 FEEL Ca$ttus 45-07093-01sens. loc.

6 3

.52

.17 No report sutnitted, f:C m agd 5 141*ECit h StavlCE 4 4 -141S S-01 mult, lac 2

2

.10

.35 No report required for this year.

NET LAS 14C 45-09963-01seng. loc.

9 9

9.67

.e4 9

9 11.95' 2.32 NE T ALS ALES INC.

43-17141-0l mult aoc e

g 5.25

.66 10 9

4.10

.51 af t !LS IM.

42-14534-01mult. loc.

S S

14.50 2.90 10 10 16.62 1.66 et!C 415 4N GEPsti=E1T 15 5fafE 21-14034-01s ng. loc.

0 9

.30

.00 No report sutunitted.

KIDL AND-itos t. 40tPan AT104 34-01115-02mult. noc.

?

O 03

.00 4

1

.0S

.05 "T.isafE TE5f thG L480a Afott 11-1162 2-Ol n=tt loc 11 7

92

.13 7

4

.20

.05 E10 WEST 195PEtil04 SERvlCE LTD 49-16236-01mult loc.

17 12

%.10

.S2 19 12 S.45 45 K15500t1 STEEL C45flNG5 C3' 24-19152-01smo, loc.

4 0

.00

.00 4

0

.00

.00 Cail344L 4Ee044ditC5 44) 5P4CE 14'-11517-04seg. loc.

61 61 9.47

.15 79 79 4.40-

.06 441tDNAL 4F P01 AJf t:1 a%1 584CE 45-0 39 9 5-0! mult. loc 6

6 42

.47 No report setmettted.

6 6

.42

.07 I"Ai!OMAL 444E ALIN5 SOE ConPANY 3 7 -0 6 0

• 4 - 01 3.ng. loc.

e 9

.52

.07 E4fl04AL WALVE AN1 44esWF' 37*02375-0 3 muet loc.

No report sutsnitted.

0 6

.83

.13 N4 wye OEP44fMENT OF USS C 31-I S 015-01 mult. noc 15 15 3.93

.26 15 1S 1.gS

.g3 K4 wye OEPetIMENT OF USS F 31-19014-01mult, loc.

11 7

7.7S

.31 to 10

.56

.05 4Avve DEPatiMENT OF USS H 31-176? ?-Ol mult. loc 16

.M

.09 10 10

.62

.06 NAWfe OEPetiMENT OF USS L 31-179 73-01 mult. loc.

No report sutaitted.

10 10 97

.09 449fe OEP4tiRENT OF US5 3 31-19336-01mult. loc.

No report sutaitted.

9 2

.10

.05 14 WV e' OEP4timENT 3F USS P 31-17753-01mult. loc.

No report sutaitted.

39 0

.00

.03

~

14Wf. SEPA4f'Est )G USS P 31-1792 8-01 mult 6uc 157 S7 2.0S

.05 1p 7

.35

.Os Kaffe SE84*T*E4f ~1F US$ 5

?l-1 F*01-0 ! mult. loc.

9 0

.00 00 13

.v

. s vg N4d V e - 0F D 6 4 t#EN T - 1F ' USS T 11*17*32-01mult. loc.

7 3

.27

.09

-leo report submitted.

14Wy,'3EP48t*EMI 1F TH'04-017SF-01 sms. loc.

36 E

.22

.11 1*

1

.9

.s 14vf. JE*44faENT 38 T 6tE 24-31757-12smg. loc.

Reported with 04-Ot757-01.

Reported with 04-01757-01.

44vy.-Gep44f4rNT 15 fME 04 *0 ]I 41 -0 ! mult. Bot.

20 0

.00

.00 20 1

. 0 S.

.01 44Vfe 368441*Egf 15 i>E 04-0%145-01sms. loc.

41 12 2.97

.25 45 e

.40

.35 (4#fi DEP44f*Euf 1F fnf '

04-07361-01 sme. soc.

91 9

.1S

.05 105 6

.30'

.05 elawfi 1E*4*i**%f 35 **ar 06-13 ? H-01 mult. loc.

le 0

.03

.00 13 1

.05

.05 staf f.

3f 7 4

• T* E ss i '3F THE 04-07193-01smg. loc.

19 17 3.45

.21 14 14 3.02'

.22 E4W f, 3E 8te t*F 47 3F Tets

'9-11312-3f smg. loc.

46 44 S.7?

.11 39 36 4.65

.13 44vv. (*Esatf*Ewi 1F T4E 3 F-03 514-Os s ng soc.

17 4

.20

.05 54 20 2.15

.11 44sf. Die t el*Esi, 35 f*E 34-0412$-31 smo loc.

SS SS 4.00

.07 71 S9 4.97

.09 44vve'0EP4tTPEMT 0F TN 45-J! ?S 7-01 smg. loc.

3 1

.15

.09 3

3

.1S

.05 I

44tYi DEP4419ENT 1F ' f **E 4 5-0 4 3 52- 0 ? mult. loc.

59

?.57

.0S 77 69 S.45

.00 44vY. 34 e & 4 t

• t.11 18 TH' 45-1 MS 3-5 2 mult. loc.

8 0

.30

.03 8

4

.20

.05 K4Wfe OEPARTMENT OF THE 4S-17845-01sme. loc.

No regur6 sutmitted.

10 0

.00

.00 Mayf.- Ot pae1=E %f 3F TwE 44-04374-01 sing. toc.

93 92 11.67

.17 91 es e.62

.11 44tv, 3E*4ef=E%f it i t.E 4$-31411-01 seng. loc.

7 1

.05

.35 6

0

.00

.00 44WW. *E w a 4 Y"E st i 4 Ter.

4 5-13 ? S +-01 sing. loc.

1

.9S

.05 13 11

.67

.06

'14Vf. 08Psaf*E1T 7F'fut

$ 3-hJ0 7-01 mult. loc.

26 22 1.95

.09 22 22 1.35

.06 44WY. SE#44f>Fmt 15 fHE 5 3-13 22 6-O l nedt. loc.

17 12 1.13

.08 14 10

. 7 5-

.07

---.-__ ~ _ _ - _

APPENDIX A (eenL)

INDL'STF.lAL ftADIOGRPHERS l

1900 1981 Total Wo 6ers with Collectrue

. Averess Total wer6ers wnh Cenactne A"8' Licme Nuenhe' enderiduela Measurable Does Masah Does indsveduals. Mesourable Does Mess 1sie Does L'88"8'8 l

1 and Progre Type go,utored Does (marwoms)

'trums)

Morutored Does (men 4 ems)

(rems)

E A W Y'. OfPT. N e'u55 86444 C" 31-19283-01 sme loc.

16 11 1.50

.34 r

.eme

.u*

40E,Stav,1CES.'INC.

05-19821-01 mutt. toc ho report required foe this year.

25 22 10.57 49 4EW'V194 IESTING' L At3e AT04tE5 31-0 213 3-01 mult loc.

5 2

.55

.27 ho report submitted.

esEWPO4'T ME WS INDU5f pI AL CORP.

34-16405-01mult. toc.

19 19 6.75

.37 16 12 4 20'

.35 alEWP'Ott NE W5' 140U5f aI AL CotP 4 5-1158 9-01 mutt. 4cs S

9 1.97

.39 6

4

.65

.16 4EWPORT MEWS SMtPeuttot44' 45-0942 8-02 nd loc.

110 100 37.97

.38-105 101 40.8 %

.40 ICILES 5' FEEL TAsen COMPA47' 21-04741-01 smo. 4ec.

9 1

.17

.17 6

1

.05-

.05 4940E5f auCTIVE' Ite5PECit0se SER 47-118e 3-01 mutt. loc.

13 13 10.50

.91 12 12 S.02-42 1:34DE51RUCTIVE TESTING CDeP 29-19742-01mult. lac No report required for this year.

19 12 3.37

.28 400fEt C04P004i10ag' 24-03793-01mult. loc.

19 It 2.65

.14 20 16 1.67

.10 404FDLE SMIPlu!LOING AND 0470 45-12042-01mult. loc le 12 1 17

.10 17 13 1.35

.10

- E3t THE a4 TE 5114G L A43taf 0 TIE S 11-17996-02 must loc 37 11 1.02

.00 No report required for thit year.

40tinWEST Alett4E5 INC.

22=12063-01 smg. loc.

14 6

.30

.05 14 1

.09

.09 40 CLEAR E4ERGf SE4v!C5 INC 42-16558-01 muit. noc.

237 203 156.17

.78 222 163 153.02 94 4JCLEAR WELOI4G I4C.

12-17506-01mult. loc.

7 6

6.07 1.15 7

5 2.17 43 04L AM044 TE5f te G' L40044TottES 35-10577-01 mult. coc.

13 9

97

.12 16 6

12m

.20 0<LAH1pA u-eAY 14C.

35-17161-01 mult, loc.

2 1

.97

.07 No report submitted.

l OLD 00nI4104,140ee & STEEL CDeP 4N15Se t-01 mutt. loc.

6 4

1.47

.37 6

6 3.70

.62 024aK Alt LINE5e,INC.

24-13591-01must. +oc 27 4

.52

.13 24 1

.05

.05 h X. ENGIteffetNG COMPANY 14C.

20-1510 2*01 mult. noc.

7 5

1.65

.33 2

2

.75

.37 PA44440LE E45ffe4 PIPE LiisE CD 15-17727-01mult. noc.

e 6

1.00

.17 9

9 4.72

.52

~

Fatter 34005T R!aL t-Raf L AB 06-01337-03mult. noc.

?3 12 2.20

.18 41 33 5.72

.17 Rf21G TESTI4G Lats INC 14-18897-02 mult. Loc No report required for this year.

18 11 2.52

.23 FE 4 9 007

• I P E L ! f6 E TE5i!45 C3 35-16144-01 must loc.

39 34 10.40

.31 No report required for this year.

TELT04 CASTEEL INC 40-02669-02 seg. loc.

2 2

.10

.09 2

2

.10

.05 PtiT5004GM DES nothES STEEL CO 14-01837-04 mult. loc, 14 14 7.30

.16 16 15 2.02

.13 Flit 580eG4 TESTING L A804 AT0tY 37-03276-25 mult. aoc.

319 177

?6.35

.21 310 251 212.92

.e5 Etif54UaGM-DES 4014E5 STEEL CD 04-02299-04 sing. loc.

he report submitted.

19 e

.gg

,gg PQeT49LE AT0ntC K-taf C34PANY 35-07495-03 mutt. loc 3

2 92 46 3

3

,,y

,,7 F0WER PipI4G COMPANY

.37-09945-01 mutt. noc.

19 14 S.92

.36 14 9

1.80

.20 PROGRESS SERV 1CE5el4C.

34-19592-01 mult. loc 3

3

.15

.05 6

3

.15

.05 l

PutLMAN I4C.

42-16573-01 mult. noc

?9_

1.77

.44 6

)

.60

.20 4

PULL MA 4 P3 WER ' PR'000Ci5 e.

37-08042-03mult. los.

23

?1 6.?S 30 55 to 4.70

.3g avao CITV tesTlaeG tAeonatoav 14 17947-01 mult. loc.

4 4

3.34

.84 No report submitted.

00&sta ALLOT C ASTING C04PA47 37-03671-01smo. loc.

33 33 10.55

.32 29 29 6.27

.22 l

1 OJAllif ASSUR A4CE L A808473 TIE 5 te-19373-01au.at loc.

9 6

1.s2

.30 7

6 1.00

.17 OutLITV *14Tt1L.5Et W!CE S 11-14856-01mult. loc.

C 1

.00

.00 No report required for this year.

QUAltiv TE5ftieG 14C.

34-17791-01mult. loc.

8 6

2.45 41 7

4 1.67 42 REACTOR C04T40L5 14C._

04-153tS-01 mutt loc.

S 4

.32

.00 9

5

.25

.05 REFleef ty PRODUCTS CORPO44f104 48-03665-02 smg. loc.

6 1

.05

.05 5

1

.62

.62 RELI AMCE TEST!43 L43384T3t!!!

19-17174-01 mult. loc.

26 22 6.17

.29 ho report submitted.

EE t 4H D.14".'

49-35450-01 sing. loc.

4 0

.00

.00 ho report required for this year, t!CH A* G <t'JEGE L, 35A GF4E91L T 34-01037-01mult. ecc.

I l'

.37

.37 ho report submitted.

RICH 4340 94G14EEe!4G C34poer 4 5-$ p 344 -01 smg. loc.

IC 7

4.77

.%9 0

6 1.45

.24 t

APPENDIX A (cont.)

INDUS TRIAL RADIOGQAPHERS 1980 1981 Tetel Workers mith Colleetwo Average Total Workers wth Collective Average Ucense Number Individuals Meessable.

Oose Mess % Dose Individ aels Meesurable Does Mess *ble Done end Program Type Monitored pose (men.coms)

(rems)

Monitored Dose (men +ams)

(rems)

Ucensee Name 5 & $ IN5PECTION COMPA4f 12-19780*01muet. loc.

No report required for this year.

11 11 6.750

.61 5&o4#104 SIEEL CASTINGS C1

%-06664-0!smg. loc.

0 0

.00

. 0 0, No report submitted.

SawyEt etsEneCH P4000Cf INC.

34-0204 4-Cl sme. loc.

S 4

.32

.0, S

2

.300

.H Sl(TER 5 TEEL C ASI!NG C09Past 14-02407-01 smg. loc.

I 1

.17

.17 1

1

.179

.17 59tiH-EMEff C09P44f 04-1946 7-Ol mult, loc.

No report required for this year.

15 13 3.779

.29 SPACE SCIENCE SERVICES l'8C.

0 9-3 FS $ 3-01 mule. loc.

go og 76.22

.50 No report submitted.

SPECT4U9 L49H AT041ES 14C.

29-37246-01mult. Bar.

4 3

.15

.05 No report submitted.

St. L1015 STEEL C 45T!%3. 140.

74-o t S 9 7-01 smg. loc.

3 0

.00

.00 No report submitted.

31. t1u15 f t si!NG L as.

74-01149-0'mult. loc, 11 13 10.27

.79 14 14 10.629

.76 5719E E.ES$tte C 4GIM E 4113 C".

M-15 %11-0 2 mult. loc.

2911 7PO 151 72 45

?S74 410 111.350

.26

$I40 T'4E 85 WE LLS L94P.le AT I34 37-11152-01 m. set. soc.

14 7

.39

.05 14 4

453

.it 3J4 59te8JILDING E 38Y 00C4 C O.

17-0 2 5 0 0-01 smo. 8oc.

13 13 3.37

.26 21 4

1.100 14

$UP E t t oit 11005tatal E-44f C *L 12-02373-01 mult. loc.

29 26 16.95

.6S 27 27 25.975 96 I4YLOR 410 F E t t C1MP4%Y 06-02024-01smg. loc.

4 0

.00

.00 No report submitted.

8 8

6.350

.79 TELt0fH >1Hi% Asi 34-03412-03sme. loc.

e 7

S.10

.73 TEREK CORPORATION 34-19607-01 mult. loc.

No repors required for this year.

8 2

.100

.05 TEI45 GULF INC.

43-11148-02seg. loc.

No report w bmitted.

S 4

.325

.Os

. TEt45 PIPE 9E 40!N1 CP:Pa4y 52-11637-01mult. loc.

7 7

4.97*

.71 No report required for this year.

THAYE4 INSPECTION $ERVICE INC.

35-11239-01mult. loc.

17 17 S.45

.32 21 20 8.400

.gr THIDEOL CHEMICAL CORPORATI04 01-00856-02sme. loc.

9 1

.0S

.0S Reported with 508-1334.

I THIDEDL CHE MIC AL C08 POTATION-43-03227-01sme. loc.

13 11 67

.06 15 6

.300

.03 THIDE3L CotP0a4 TION 17-16383-01 sing. loc.

37 20 1.25

.06 41 26 1.300

.05 10d45ENO AND 80TTUN INC.

21-17095-01 mult. loc $

26 19 S.02

.26 13 0

.000

.00 194NE C09FANY (THE) 41-I t S16-02 smg. loc.

4 3

.15

.05 No report required for this year.

TuaN5 WORLD AlaLINES INC.

24-05151-OS seg. loc.

20 17 1.35

.00 22 14

.825

.06 I4445-E45fEAN INSPECTION SER.

3 7-14 8 S S-01 mult. toc.

$1 44 31.20

.71 94 84 122.775 1.46 TULI A Gam 44 RAY INC.

35-17178-01 mutt. loc.

23 2) 41.87

.99 Ps 28 43.550 1.55 Td!N Clif TESTING AND ENGINEER 22-01376-02 mutt. ios.

3S 34 24.05

.71 35 28 21.250

.76 U. S. A.

eltiHINGing Pump C O R D.

29-3 221 C-0 R sme. lac.

4 0

.00

.00 No report submitted.

U4104 80! lea COMP 44y 47-16192-01mult. loc.

Ao repeet required for this year.

18 12 10.075

.84 UNITED STATES PIPE AND FDJ40tf 29-07262-01seg. loc.

S 2

g10

.05 e

3

.150

.05 UNITES $iATE5 TESTING COMPANY 37-15445-02mult. loc.

102 84 12.0S

.14 110 70 15.925

.22 UNITED TECNNOLOGIES CORP.

06-07S22-OS mult. loc.

13 0

.00

.00 13 0

.000

.00 04tVER$AL TECHNICAL TE5f!4G 17-004S S-0 3 mult. loc.

17 14 6.80 49 17 15 6.950 46 UNIVER$4L TEsilmG Comp ANY 43-11213 01mult. loc.

27 2S 19.20

.77 27 23 15.700

.68 UMI V E R S AL TF5ftelG L480R4 TORIES 29-16397-01mult. Soc.

62 45 10.72

.24 No report submitted.

VE'ef G45 t'60us tel AL TE5f tNG L A8.

28-14847-02 mutt. loc.

S S

1 85

.37 No report submitted.

VIRGINI A DEPARTMENT OF HIGNW AT 4S-19380-02seg, loc.

4 2

.SS

.27 4

3

.150

.05 VtnGINIA ELECTRIC E 90wfR CO.

45-13670-07mult. loc.

flo report submitted.

0 0

.000

.00 VOLL84TH COMPANT ITHE3 48-05395-01 ne. loc.

e 1

.0S

.05 9

1

.050

.05 0.4 JOHN 50*l 4350CIATES INC.

29-18006-01mult. acc.

0 0

.00

.00 No report submitted.

W4L WO4 f H C OMP ANT 29-02282-02smo. soh.

3 1

.05-

.0S 3

1

.175

.17

, APPENDIX A (cont.). _.

m

._m

~..

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHERS 1980 1981 Total Workers with Collective Average

. Total Workers with ColWiv, Average Licensee Name License Number Individunts Measurable Dose Meas *ble Dose Individuals Measurable Dose Mees *bte Dose and Program Type Monitored Dose (man rems)

(rems)

Monitored Dose (man rems)

(rems) w u, a rs t :4 : usur 17-??445-0? smg. loc.

o 1

.05

.05 No report required for this year.

, dAU(ESHA FOUNDRY COMPANY IN 48-13776-01 smg. loc.

9 1

.00

.00 9

1

.05

.05 WEATHERLf FOUNDRY AND MANUF 37-09 % 1-01 sing. loc.

?

O

.C0

.00 2

0

.00

.00 WEHR STEEL COMPANY 48-02035-02 sing. loc o

7

.11 5

5

.70

.14 W'LDERS TESTING LABORATT1 RIES 02-19721-01 mult. loc.

No report required for this year.

'35 12 16.07

.50 WELn5J.C IR *H a r I9 4 M-7 H h-01 must. Inc.

12 1*

4.97

.49 No report required for this year.

WELDING INSTITUTE OF ALASRA 50-174 %-01 mult. m.

a 3

.15

.05 9

6

.75

.12 WESTERN ZIRCONIUM 43-19216-01 sing. loc 4

C

.00

.09 8

8

.40

.05 WESTINGH10SE ELECTRIC CORP.

3 7-3 36 3 2-01 sme. oc.

I' 11 65

.05 15 15 2.62

.18 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP 37-05809-02 sing ioc.

0

.00

.00 4

2

.10

.05 W.il T I ar, 00 ? p P tiIw 1 ?-3 e i ? I-91 smg. loc.

f 1

.15

.05 No report required for this year.

WILLIAM P3 DELL C01PANY (THEL 34-02963-01 seng. loc.

No report submitted.

4 4

.20

.05 WIL 501 INSPECTION SERVICES 35-19612-01 mult. loc.

No r* port required for this year.

3 3

1.42 48 WISCONSIN CENTRIFUGAL I4 CORP 48-11641-01 smg. loc.

=

5 45

.17 4

3

.47

• 16 WJRD IN30STRIES P!PE FA3 35-15459-01 sing loc.

e 6

4.ss 77 7

6 9.35 1.39 g X-RAY ENGINEERING COMPANY 04-00615-04 mult. sot b4 M4 150.07

.41 378 324 119.02

.36.

X-RAY INDUSTRIES'!NCORP 21-05472-01 mult. u>c.

3*

21 2.n

.10 50 23 6.12

.30.

1-RAY.'TC.

%- M 414-M mult soc.

,9 66 63.40

.66 No report submitted.

X-SCAN INSPECTION COPPANY 35-1950?-01 mult. loc.

No report required for this year.

4 4

5.50 1.37 YUSA HEAT TRANSFEt CORP 3 5-1373 5-01 mult. loc.

a 9

5.21

.g5 8

7 6.67 95

APPENDIX B Manufacturers and Distributors 1980 and 1981 I

i

APPENDIM B I

MANUFACTURERS AND DISTRIBUTORS 1980 1981 Total Workers with Collective Avera9e Total Workers with Coltective Average Program Licensee Name Lecain Nunsbe' Individuals Measurable Dose Meas'ble Dose individuals Measurable Dose Meas *ble Dose Type Monitored Dose (man-rems)

(rems)

Monitored Dose (man-rems)

(rems) 4933TT L431441041ES12-036?1-03 BLDAD

<st

.40 840 241 16.52

.07 40CURaf 00RPORATI3N 34-00255-03 OTHER 4.

a..a

.so 400 247 71.52

.09 AIRCO INC12PO44fE3 29-02005-01 OTHER as

.SJ 15 5

1.15

.21 4.as

.13 152 53 9.42

.18 49EeS$14F CORPORATION 12-129 % -01 BROAD a27 ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANA0a 12-19492-01 OTHER Combined with report for.another license.

Combined with a report for acotter license, Af011C ENERGY OF C4N404 54-00333-04 OTHER ta w

v.a.

.13 Combined with a report for another license.

9 9

5.12

.59 AUT094TI34 INJUSTRIES.INC0dp 37-07611-07 OTHER 7

2 a m.,,

..u.

42 0

.no

.00 4

444ER IN0JSTRIES INC.

29-04 %4-01 BROAD

.,a 25 13 14.67 1.13 C.

P.

CLARE CO.

12-16676-01 OTHER

..w 84 22 1.85

.17 CANiE4R4 INDUST 2IES06-155)i-01 BROAD saa et s a.,s

.wr i

C04 RUST 101 ENGINEERING.INC.

06-02,217-06 BROAD

<as

~

.. w 07 231 72 5.42

.07 I

o s n.e.o s as

.o s e r. s.1 w.

29-sSv & ct BRCAD f

,..w 25 No report required for this year.

. al m.a 2

.8%

195 147

??.67

.15 E.

R.

S3J138 AND SONS.INC.

29-00139-02 BROAD

-oo

.s

.u a...

.4 21

?1 1.05

.05 IN-VAL-C0 35-0076F-01 OTHF R M4LLINCKR00T/ NUCLE 4A 24-04206-01 BROAD a,<

w.

.ss o. a t

. v,.

369 365 299.30

.79 I

MEDI-PNYSICS,INC.

12-13013-01 BROAD 4.

=>

J'

• • 'd 65 62 73.m5 1.14 f

MIMME 5014 9INING AND MANUF, 22-00057-06 PRGAD No report submitted.

174 119 69.82

.58 NEd ENGLAND NUCLEAR CORE 20-C'020-03 BROAD sua e e.

v. w

.07 65 59 6.00

.10 NEd ENGL410 NUCLE 4R CO'P.

20-003M-13 BROA0 a.e s

<Se

m.. e

.ww 169 147 143.g7

,73 NEW ENGL410 NUCLEAR CORP 20-03120-1)

OTHER no report required for this year.

63 52 3.0*

.06 NEd ENGLAN1 NUCLEAR CORP 20-11869-01 BROAD (2.

<aa

.*s.oa

.oa 759 413 151.60

.37 i

ua

• /

v'

.66 No report submitted.

muu.t a4 m:c womA s it..

24-o.2J6-01 OTHER t.ht.4 4 014 G NO S T IC S,1 NC.

12-18229-01 CNR No report submitted.

2 1

1.50 1.50 ON94RT CORPORai!01 (THE) 34-00633-01 ER0AD 544 a.s. ra

.a e8 59 11.40

.19 RAMSEY ENGINEERIN3 C3.

42-01495-04 OTHER h

r*

a w aw

.26 gg 73 32.50

.44 8

.o

..a 37 7

.35

.05 SEe040 L43084 TORIES,INC.

20-15930-01 UTHER "3

8 6"d

.JJ 81 41 10.02

.24 TECHNICAL OPERATI315,INC.

20-01277-01 BROAD

• vs '

.*a 22 5

.25

.05 l

l TEST EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTORS 21-1 U.!0-01 OTHER No report required for this year.

to-a w>4-os OTHCR t

us

.us

.., o 771 w+wa,a s sui.

106 47 3.05

.06 OTHER-

.as as a.75

.c s TRAVE 10L L480RATORIES,11C.

20-13851-01, p

WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANf,INC, 24-06015-06 OTHER e.a a.m

s. s.

.w6 195 26 1.87

.07 WES T INGHOUSE ELEC TRIC ClR P.

17-05301-01 OTHER asa

/

a.., i

.s2 116 19 6.62

.17 l

t

APPENDIX C Fuel Fabricators s.1d Reprocessors 1980 and 1981 l

l i

.--y

---,e.

-w-m,--

a--

e

-e--

r-

A' J

APPENDIX C FUEL FABRICATORS AND REPROCESSORS 1981 1980 Total Worksrs with Collective Amage Total Workers with Collective Average Imle als Measurable Dose Mees h Dose Individuals Measurehte Dose Mess *ble Does Licenses Name Ucense &mboe Momtoral Dose (men < ems)

(rems)

Monitored Does (men < ems)

(rems) 4 TONICS INTERNATIONAL SNM-100; 127e 426 55 67

.13 1214 475 49.27

.10 O ABCOC K E WILCOX CO.

$4M-0145 21 21 4.25

.20 3C 30 2.25 07 B&BCOCK E WILCOX CD.

5NM-0414 105 1 G *>

33,47

.12 18 3P 24.70

.64 848 COCK AND WILCOE 5N9"1165 333 143 27.75

.19 328 175 21.17

.17 CONSUSTION ENGINEERING,1NC.

SN#=1067 202 157 95.45

.54 299 199 72.67

.36 r

l COMSUSTION ENGINEERINGe INC.

SNM-0033 61 46 3.55

.C8 8C 57 5.85

.30 j

EEION NUCLEAR COMPANT INC

$NM-1227 712 532 79.32

.15 1091 623 67.15

.11 GENERAL ATOMIC COMP ANY SNM-1696 590 620 112.90

.le 954 740 75.77

.11 GENERAL ELECTRIC CD.

SNM-5C97 1216 995 187.65

.19 1259 1049 194.30

.18 3NM..?c30 1c75 376 102.07

.27 1042 317 104.37

.34 gGENERALELECTRICCOMPA1f

-KERR MCGEE NUCLEAR CORP.

SNM-0042 2343 1080

.82.95

.08 2259 875 71.22

.08 NUCLEAR FUEL SEtwaCES,INC*

$NM-0124 7ec 611 45.37

.C7 925 609 45.77

.07

. NUCLEAR FUEL. SERVICES, INC.

CSF-1 e1 7?

17.17

.23 131 98 14.72

.17 84 75 5.50

.07 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC.

$NM*0073 73 36 4.12

.11 97 3

.15

.05 UNITED NUCLEAR CORP.

SNM-Oi77 17e 64 4.20

.C5 96 47 3.17

.07 UNITED NUCLE AR CORPOR ATION

$%M-0365 73 69 4.45

.06 543 509 171.52

.34 WESTINGNOUSE ELECTRIC CORP

$NM-1107 44 469 255.55

.52 77 34 5.02

.15 WESTINGNGUSE ELECTRIC CORP

$NM-1120

.: 4 40 5.25

.33

APPtiNDIX D Career Doses for Individuals Terminating Between 1977 and 1982 i

l l

m.

1 l

I APPEN011 D CAREER DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS TERMINATING BETWEEN 1977 and 1982 1

Number of Individuals with Whole Bo<ty Doses in the Following Ranges (Rems)

Total Number llCEfise No.

Indivf*

with Total Catecory and-Meas-Meas-duals Meas-Collective l

Total Length urable urable 0.10-0.25-0.50-0.75-

1. 0-

2. 0-3.0-

- 4.0-

5. 0-10.0-15.0-20.0-Ternt-urable Oose of Employment Exposure

<0.10 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.0

2. 0

3. 0 4.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

>25 nating Doses (man. rem )

Industrial R*dtographers

<t3 days 475 591 231 187 106 56 76 6

0 0

1 0

1 0

0 1,730 1,255 375 i

90 days-1 Yr, 428 777 381 423 272 174 371 124 41 16 12 1

1 0

1 3,022 2,594 1,719 1-2 Yrs.

215 471 199 185 138 106 311 130 77 47 51 3

0 0

0 1,933 1,718 1,880 1

2-3 Yrs.

127 240 93 71 76 41 108 86 72 41 68 7

0 0

0 1,030 903 1,472 4

3-4 Yrs.

97 164 58 72 39 30 93 54 52 37 72 17 3

0 0

788 691 1,461 4-5 Yrs.

72 128{

53 40 30 16 56 32 25 20 51 17 5

3 3

551 479 1,207 5-10 Yrs.

226 470' 129 135 99 62 136 83 67 57 138 54 30 19 5

1,710 1,484 3,820 10-15 Yrs.

119 376 131 92 67 36 107 75 58 47 137 65 39 19 20 1,388 1,269 4,379 15-20 frs.

78 272 108 102 40 45 128 65 44 37 122 60 51 36 41 1.229 1,151 5,523

>20 Yrs.

217 732 240 135 74 72 169 118 83 76 206 87 37 24 23 2,313 2,096 6,056 Manuf ec turers

& Distrib.

<C3 days 892 199 32 16 10 0

15 1

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 1,165 273 41 SO days-1 Yr.

397 238 61 40 22 18 39 23 11 1

1 0

0 0

0 851 454 218 1-2 Yrs.

110 117 44 19 14 8

23 15 10 8

23 1

0 0

0 392 282 330 2-3 Yrs.

53 72 18 13 11 7

17 9

9 8

8 3

0 0

0 228 175 232 3-4 Yrs.

24 36 11 19 4

2 14 4

4 2

10 4

3 0

0 137 113 234 4-5 Yrs.

16 20 10 7

6 2

3 6

1 1

3 3

2 2

1 83 67 213 a

5-10 Yrs.

12 17 17 16 9

8 14 7

5 3

17 7

4 1

5 143 131 559 10-19 Yrs.

5 6

4 8

3 3

4 5

0 2

7 2

4 2

6 61 56 479 15-20 Yrs.

0 0

0 3

0 2

3 3

0 0

5 5

0 1

2 24 24 267

>20 Yrs.

4 5

1 1

1 0

5 1

1 1

3 2

3 2

4 34 30 371 ruel f at yd R_yecm.

I l0

< 90 days 501 46>

32 2'

12 1

14 6

1 1

0 0

0 0

0 1,043 542 71 90 days-1 Yr.

330 sr.7 W

e9 23 4

14 0

1 0

0 0

0 0

9 30 s'n a3 1-2 Vrs.

117 2*a3 98 57 47 16 28 11 2

0 6

0 0

0 t

635 514

~198 2-3 Yrs.

47 140 94 37 23 12 23 14 5

2 10 0

0 0

0 407 360 Ila 3-4 Yrs.

35 87 36 40 16 12 28 13 "

3 4

8 3

2 1

0 293 258 317 4-5 Trs.

30 48 27 23 17 10 19 L

6 3

13 4

2 2

1 213 193 369 5-10 Yrt.

45 75 50 33 38 21 57 26 14 36 39 13 9

6 12 454 409 1,430 10-15 Yrs.

18 29 17 24 15 9

26 10 7

7 14 10 7

5 23 221 2C3 1,418 15-2f Yrs.

12 28 26 20 9

6 16 1C 11 5

17 11 6

4 9

196 144 1,075

> 2G #s.

7 12 12 11 6

13 31 13 7

3 10 a

5 3

11 148 141 909 nuc1-vr power R.acters

< 90 days 58,?74 J1,304 7,3 73 ' 5,153 3,442 2,426 7,473 3,030 1,078 346 176 2

0 1

0 120,879 ' e.2,*D5 ' 32,853 90 days-1 Yr.

9,14J 13,324 6,453 4.880 3,173 2,467 6,375 3,811 9,043 3.209 2,4b6 90 2

0 54,382 a5,142' 49,735 1-2 Yrs.

2,184 3,173 1,733 1,489

%0 709 1,962 3.275 977 671 1,490 238 a6 15 3

16,885 14,701 28,750 2-3 Yrs.

857' 1,301 692 544 324 274 F96 538 337 276 791 219 51 12 10 6,M2 6,105 15,197 3-4 Yrs.

335 534 346 294 175 148 355 224 177 156 3i,5 138 47 15 3

3,342 3,007 8,524 4-5 Yrs.

149 274 203 192 Ils 73 181 110 81 63 222 102 37 8

3 1,814 1,665 5,140 5-10 Yrs.

167 326 201 219 167 110 309 223 188 124 350 148 94 47 31 2,704 2,537 10,466 10-15 Yrs.

16 28 27 23 12 12 32 16 23 6

56 24 20 13 -

27 335 319 2,459 15-20 Yrs.

2 3

3 1

3 1

3 5

3 5

5 4

8 3

13 62 60 834

>20 Yrs.

21 7

6 1

7 0

8 2

4 0

5 0

0 1

1 63 42 185 62 f

'O U.S. NUCLE AR CEGULATORY COMMISSION BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET 4 TITLE AND SUBTsTLE (Add Volume No of wormreat68

2. (Leave blankl Occupational Radiation Exposure Report Thirteen & Fourteenth Annual Report,1980 and 1981

3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.

7. AUTHOR (S)

5. DATE REPORT COMPLETED B. Brooks, S. Mcdonald, E. Richardson Auoust 1983

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION N AME AND MAILING ADDRESS (/nclude 2,p Codel DATE REPORT ISSUED l ve883 a

==

Office of Resource Management October 1

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 6 /t's e uaa*/

Washington, D.C.

20555 8 ILeave Nanki

12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME %ND M AILING ADDRESS (include 20 Codel 10 PROsECT/ TASK / WORK UNIT NO.

Office of Resource Management U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission

11. FIN NO.

Washington, D.C.

20555 13 TYPE OF REPORT PE RIOD COVE RE D linclussve deresJ Annual Calendar years 1980 and 1981 t

15. SUPPLEMEN TARY NOTES 14 (Leave osan4J

16. ABSTR ACT (200 words or less)

This report sumarizes the information reported for calendar years 1980 & 1981 by four categories (comercial nuclear power reactors, industrial radiographers, fuel fabricators and processors and comercial distributors of byproduct materials) of NRC licensees for incorporation into the Comission's centralized repository of personnel occupational radiation exposure infonnation.

The bulk of the information in the report is derived from annual monitoring reports that were required to be submitted pursuant to 10CFR 20,407. Triose reports indicated that approximately 160,000 individuals were monitored by these types of licensees in 1980 and in 1981 and that the average annual dose was 0.37 res. The terminat h reports required to be submitted t,y the four categories of licensees pursuant to 10 CFR 20.408 were also analyzed and the results were presented. A brief description of persor.nel over-exposures reported by NRC licensees is included as well, e

l i

17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUME NT AN ALYSIS 17a DESCRIPTORS Not Applicable l

17b. IDENTIFIE RS/OPEN ENDE D TE RMS 1

VA ABI ITY STATEMENT 19 SE U C AS / / s report) 21 NO OF PAGES

'Wt"Wpn^cWit'"~'

";"'c' NmC FORM 335 of su

i

( j-l l

1lll I

D4A 33 >ZO $2 D4mm21I >zZC>r :mTO:

4I mm2N >2O mOC:

D I

R' A '$

1 E

1 C1 SS& 'f o,

=

t

=ag C

ss M'ua?w fn' w a o 'S u

tP s "U 5

g 5 i 5 n 0 U 2 N

y h

.L e

D D j

P 3

g h

j B

1 T

CG D,"

I 7 T a" 7

g 6 Fg N

6 O U

7 v" c

T N

0 G

O I

iy S

S Dcll S

0 Iui l

I 0

M5 atSS 3

5 8

M5 jD u A 0

E SO2 SS j AP ~a W E C.

SU T

C.

E E

Y N

A D

IT R

SO N.

SA T

UV i

T BR DA O LP T

A E L G

I R T U CO I

N IF NGI F

F Y UE H OT RS L

A A

R N

AW E

P E

LC U

N

,llir