In no cases, however, were film badge data used in the dose calculations; rather, they have been and continue to be used solely for comparison with and validation of the calculations. In virtually all cases, comparison has been favorable and within the confidence limits established by the uncertainty analysis of each calculation. 7.6 RESULTS OF DOSE RECONSTRUCTIONS. Dose reconstructions have been completed for all operations for which there is no film badge dosimetry and there was a reasonably high potential for significant radiation exposure to large groups or units, such as ship crews or maneuver troop units. These reconstructed doses provide, in the absence of dosimetry, the readings of what would have been recorded on film badges, had they been worn. Because film badges did not record neutron doses or doses from inhaled or ingested radioactive contaminants, doses for these types of exposures, being much less prominent from a numbers standpoint, are being reconstructed separately. 7.7 REVIEW OF RECONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY. The dose reconstruction methodology and processes have been reviewed, in whole and in part, by several authorities over the entire term of the NTPR program. The first NIPR report dealing with dose reconstruction, that for Task Force WARRIOR at Shot SMOKY (3), was critically reviewed in 1979 by nationally recognized radiation experts from scientific laboratories, as well as by the Office of Technology Assessment (at the request of Senator Cranston), and the Medical Follow-up Agency of the National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences. These reviews provided the confidence to finalize the methodology and to adapt it to many other exposure scenarios. Other dose reconstructions were subsequently reviewed by committees appointed by the National Academy of Sciences. One such review was conducted in 1980-81 of the Hiroshima-Nagasaki dose reconstructions (18, 19), and another review, that of the entire dose reconstruction effort, was conducted in 1984-85 (20). In both instances, the reviews judged the dose reconstruction methodology and processes to have sound scientific merit. No major deficiencies were noted that would reflect unfavorably on the technical aspects of the dose reconstruction methodology or on the radiation doses calculated therefrom. 174