NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

1

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL

+ + + + +

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL

SAFETY AND HEALTH 

+ + + + +

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND

WORKER HEALTH 

+ + + + +

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOSE RECONSTRUCTION REVIEWS

+ + + + +

THURSDAY

SEPTEMBER 3, 2009

+ + + + +

The meeting convened at 10:00 a.m. 

in the Zurich Room of the Cincinnati Airport 

Marriott Hotel, Hebron, Kentucky, Mark 

Griffon, Chair, presiding.

PRESENT:

MARK GRIFFON, Chair

MICHAEL H. GIBSON, Member

WANDA I. MUNN, Member
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

2

ALSO PRESENT:

KATZ, TED, Designated Federal Official

ADAMS, NANCY, NIOSH Contractor*

AL-NABULSI, ISAF, DOE*

BEHLING, HANS, SC&A*

BEHLING, KATHY, SC&A*

BRACKETT, ELIZABETH, ORAU Team*

EAST, JAMES, SC&A*

ELLIOTT, LARRY, NIOSH OCAS

FARVER, DOUG, SC&A

HINNEFELD, STU, NIOSH OCAS

HOWELL, EMILY, HHS

SHARFI, MUTTY, ORAU TEAM*

STIVER, JOHN, SC&A*

*Participating via telephone
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

3

T-A-B-L-E O-F C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S

Call to Order and Welcome 4

 Ted Katz

Introductions 4

Agenda Overview 7

12th Set of Cases 10

 Vote 39

6th Set of Cases 42

7th Set of Cases 68

Discussion of the Summary

Findings in First Hundred

Cases Report

 Mark Griffon 198

 Larry Elliott 205

8th Set of Cases 270

Discussion of Future Meeting 285
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

4

1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

2 10:02 a.m.

3 MR. KATZ: Good morning, everyone 

4 on the phone.

5 This is Ted Katz, the Acting 

6 Designated Federal Official for the Advisory 

7 Board on Radiation and Worker Health, and this 

8 is the Subcommittee on Dose Reconstruction 

9 Reviews.

10 We are just convening. We will do 

11 roll call to begin with.

12 Board members first in the room?

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Mark Griffon, the 

14 Chair of the Subcommittee.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Wanda Munn, 

16 Committee member.

17 MEMBER GIBSON: Mike Gibson, 

18 member of the Board.

19 MR. KATZ: And on the line, do we 

20 have anyone? Do we have John? John Poston?

21 (No response.)

22 Okay, any other Board members?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

5

1 (No response.)

2 Okay. Then in the room, NIOSH 

3 ORAU team?

4 MR. ELLIOTT: Larry Elliott, 

5 Director of the Office of Compensation 

6 Analysis and Support.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Stu Hinnefeld, 

8 Technical Program Manager.

9 MR. KATZ: NIOSH ORAU team on the 

10 line?

11 MR. SHARFI: Mutty Sharfi, ORAU 

12 team.

13 MR. KATZ: Hi, Mutty.

14 MR. SHARFI: Hi.

15 MR. KATZ: And in the room, SC&A?

16 MR. FARVER: Doug Farver, SC&A.

17 MR. KATZ: And on the line?

18 MS. BEHLING: Kathy and Hans 

19 Behling, SC&A.

20 MR. KATZ: Welcome, Kathy and 

21 Hans.

22 MS. BEHLING: Hi.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

6

1 MR. EAST: James East, SC&A.

2 MR. KATZ: James East, welcome.

3 Okay, and then do we have any 

4 federal officials in the room first?

5 MS. HOWELL: Emily Howell, HHS.

6 MR. KATZ: And any federal 

7 employees or contractor staff on the line?

8 MS. ADAMS: Nancy Adams, NIOSH 

9 contractor.

10 MS. AL-NABULSI: Isaf Al-Nabulsi, 

11 DOE.

12 MR. KATZ: Welcome, Isaf, again, 

13 and Nancy.

14 MS. AL-NABULSI: Thank you.

15 MR. KATZ: Okay, and then any 

16 members of the public on the line?

17 (No response.)

18 Okay. I would just remind folks 

19 on the line to mute your phones except when 

20 you are talking to the group, please.

21 And it is all yours, Mark.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Today's meeting, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

7

1 just to give a quick agenda, because it will 

2 be pretty easy to describe the agenda. 

3 Really, there are three primary things.

4 The most important, I guess, is 

5 probably the 12th set of cases. We want to 

6 select the cases. At the last Board meeting, 

7 the Board approved the Subcommittee to make 

8 the final decision and authorize SC&A to work 

9 on these cases. So that is our main goal to 

10 accomplish today. I think we will do that 

11 first off.

12 Then we are going to continue our 

13 work on the sixth, seventh, and eighth set. I 

14 think that is probably as far as we can expect 

15 to get. It may be a little bit of going back 

16 and figuring out our notes.

17 The sixth set and seventh set I 

18 believe only have a few outstanding items that 

19 we have to resolve, and then the eighth set is 

20 a little further to go. I don't think we have 

21 made it through that entire matrix one time 

22 yet.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

8

1 Then the last item on the agenda 

2 comes from the Advisory Board meeting, the 

3 last Board meeting. I think at this meeting I 

4 would like to just kick off the discussion. 

5 I'm not sure we are going to get to a point 

6 where we can make a recommendation to the 

7 Board.

8 But if you remember at the last 

9 meeting, the Board tasked the Subcommittee to 

10 follow up on the summary findings in the First 

11 Hundred Case Report and just have a discussion 

12 of what impact on NIOSH's program do these 

13 findings have, if any, so to further, I guess, 

14 clarify what those summary findings mean and 

15 how they impact the NIOSH program.

16 I guess the bottom-line question 

17 that NIOSH has been asking us is, did we meet, 

18 did NIOSH meet the standards set out in the 

19 statute. Was it scientifically accurate and 

20 all that?

21 We did skirt around that 

22 definitive answer a little bit in our Hundred 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

9

1 Case Report. So we have been asked to sort of 

2 reassess that. I think we want to at least 

3 have some dialogue today and maybe think about 

4 what we can say and what we can't say about 

5 those summary findings, and we will bring that 

6 back to the Board in the future.

7 So that is what is on the agenda, 

8 as far as I can remember. Are there any other 

9 items? I think that is it.

10 Then for those of you who are on 

11 the phone, this is the trench work, so to 

12 speak. We will go through the case selection, 

13 but then we are going to go through finding14 by-finding. So it can be a little slow at 

15 times, especially after lunch, but we've got 

16 to work through these things. This is the 

17 details.

18 MR. KATZ: Do you want to confirm 

19 with John the number of cases that are needed?

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: John's not on the 

21 line.

22 MR. KATZ: Oh, John is not on it, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

10

1 but maybe Kathy or Hans could tell us.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Or Doug.

3 MR. KATZ: Or Doug.

4 MR. FARVER: It was, like you 

5 said, 42 or 46.

6 MR. KATZ: Forty-two to 46?

7 MR. FARVER: Yes.

8 MR. KATZ: Something in that 

9 ballpark is the number of cases that SC&A 

10 needs, is that correct?

11 MS. BEHLING: I believe that is 

12 correct. I can check on that number.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right. While 

14 we're doing it, maybe if you could check on 

15 that, Kathy, that would be great.

16 MS. BEHLING: Okay, very good.

17 MR. KATZ: Thanks, Kathy.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Alright. 

19 So I guess the best way to proceed is just 

20 everybody has the spreadsheet of the 12th set 

21 of cases. We have 82 from our last sort of 

22 triaged approach. NIOSH narrowed it down or 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

11

1 we narrowed it down to 82, and then Stu filled 

2 in these other fields that we have asked to be 

3 better described.

4 So if we want to just run down, I 

5 went down and highlighted sort of the ones 

6 that I was interested in. I like to work from 

7 a hard copy on this, but we will do the best 

8 we can here.

9 MEMBER MUNN: Mark, do you have 

10 any specific criteria you want for us or you 

11 would like us to prioritize as we are looking 

12 at this set?

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, I don't 

14 know, other than what we used in our first cut 

15 on this, I think, still applies, you know.

16 MEMBER MUNN: All right. I just 

17 wanted to make sure that hadn't changed.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: No. I mean, I 

19 noted the only criteria I was looking at as I 

20 went through here is in that external dose 

21 method and internal dose method I did look for 

22 best estimate although Stu cautioned us on how 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

12

1 that field was completed by people. But I did 

2 to some extent use that.

3 Then, as you remember, some of the 

4 cases we picked the first round through on 

5 this, we picked because it was a new site. So 

6 that is another thing I was looking for.

7 MR. ELLIOTT: Did you get copies, 

8 hard copies? We have a hard copy.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, if you don't 

10 mind, that might be helpful.

11 MR. ELLIOTT: Which ones? Do you 

12 want all of these?

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Stu, is that what 

14 you emailed around or is that the first 

15 version of it?

16 MR. HINNEFELD: This is the pre17 selection.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: These are the pre20 selected ones.

21 MR. ELLIOTT: Oh, so it's not 

22 going to be that helpful.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

13

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's okay. We 

2 will go with this.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: It's not the ones 

4 that were -- that was the original list that 

5 they pre-selected from at the Board meeting.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. So, going 

7 down, the first one I have is 211 and 212.

8 MEMBER MUNN: 211 and 212?

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Maybe if anybody 

10 has anything before that, just let me know. 

11 These are not -- oh, they are in numerical 

12 order. There's just some numbers skipped 

13 because they've been screened out.

14 So 211 and 212, looking at Column 

15 A and the last three numbers I am referencing 

16 here.

17 So I have 211, 212, 218, 219 --

18 oh, I mean 220. I'm sorry. I will stop 

19 there. If people agree with those or have any 

20 before that that I didn't name?

21 MEMBER MUNN: 211, 212, 218 and 

22 220?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

14

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Those are all the 

3 same site.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Are they all 

5 Savannah River?

6 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Keep an eye on 

8 that for later ones then.

9 MEMBER MUNN: And all the same 

10 decade.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: They all started 

12 early in the -- yes, a lot of years have 

13 worked, yes. So they were there multiple 

14 decades.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean is that 

17 still okay, Wanda?

18 MEMBER MUNN: Sure.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

20 MEMBER MUNN: We can always change 

21 anything we want with them.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes. Then I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

15

1 have 246, which is actually over 50 percent, 

2 but it is Albuquerque Operations Office. It 

3 is kind of a unique multiple-site thing.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. Interesting.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then I had 249.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, agreed.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Which is the 

8 Hanford. Again, over 50 percent, but full. 

9 MEMBER MUNN: It's still 

10 interesting.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: It looks like a 

12 lot of best estimates. Yes, yes.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then 266 also and 

15 275. And 283 and 284. So right in a row 

16 there.

17 And 285 I have. Over 50 percent, 

18 but multiple Oak Ridge sites, including the 

19 thermal diffusion. This goes back early.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: So I don't think 

22 we really talked about S-50 very much.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

16

1 MEMBER MUNN: No, I don't think 

2 so.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then I have 347. 

4 This is just for the oddity reason.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: It's very low work 

7 time and over 50 percent.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, it is strange.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Then 356.

10 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: And keep in mind, 

12 some of these we may lose once Labor looks at 

13 them, right?

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, Labor will 

15 look at them.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Do what they call 

18 post-closure.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right. So 

20 I am already up to 13. So if we go a little 

21 high, we are probably going to lose some.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: High is better.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

17

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

2 The next one I have is 364. 

3 Please, if I skip some that you want, let me 

4 know.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Why did you skip 

6 358?

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: 358?

8 MEMBER MUNN: Even though it's 

9 over 50.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I know.

11 MEMBER MUNN: Nevertheless, 

12 it's -- so we had that --

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I'm probably 

14 okay. It's best estimate internal, anyway.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: It's a little over 

17 50. But I know there were some other Fernald 

18 ones that were below 50, but that's fine; 358 

19 is okay with me.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Then you went to 64?

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Three sixty-four, 

22 yes. That was because of, again, that is over 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

18

1 50 percent, but it was like multiple labs, 

2 actually.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Right.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: It looks like the 

5 person went --

6 MEMBER MUNN: New in town.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

8 Then I had 377, although I am not 

9 sure -- well, yes, 377. I had a question on 

10 SEC for me on that one, but I forget -- that 

11 might be after the -- no, that's in the time 

12 period. I don't know. So we might lose some 

13 of these, you know.

14 MEMBER MUNN: And you skipped 369?

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, I didn't. I 

16 just forgot to say it.

17 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, okay.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Three sixty-nine. 

19 Then I have 381, 390, and 392. 392 is really, 

20 this one is for Paul. It's a Bethlehem Steel. 

21 It is a Bethlehem model, but Paul, I think, 

22 picked this the first round through because 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

19

1 49.57, his question about the round off.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Right.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is pretty close

4 to 50.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Sure.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Let's see, I'm on 

7 down to 403 now. General Steel. Honestly, I 

8 couldn't remember if we did any -- Doug, do 

9 you remember if we did General Steel at all?

10 MR. FARVER: Any cases?

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

12 MR. FARVER: Yes.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: We have done?

15 MR. FARVER: Yes.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, we have.

17 MR. FARVER: And that was one of 

18 John's questions. If you run across any of 

19 these AWEs that you would like to have a site 

20 profile, a mini site profile review, like we 

21 have done before.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. I think once 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

20

1 we get back from Stu the final list that we 

2 are allowed to do, then we can make that 

3 decision.

4 MR. FARVER: Sure. He just wanted 

5 me to bring that up, so you were aware of it.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes. Because 

7 some of these were clearly selected for that 

8 reason --

9 MR. FARVER: Right.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- that they were 

11 sites we hadn't seen before.

12 Well, if we have done General 

13 Steel before, I'm up to -- what am I up to?

14 MEMBER MUNN: You are up to 403 or 

15 something, but I am wondering --

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm up to 20 in 

17 terms of cases.

18 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, number. I see 

19 what you mean.

20 MR. KATZ: Can I ask you 

21 something, Mark --

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

21

1 MR. KATZ: -- that is substantive 

2 about the Beth Steel one?

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

4 MR. KATZ: I mean, since it is a 

5 model and it is just cranked out based on the 

6 exact parameters and latency and all that --

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know, it's more 

8 of a policy.

9 MR. KATZ: What do you really do 

10 with that?

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know, it's more 

12 of --

13 MR. KATZ: And in that case, does 

14 it really make sense to task SC&A with that or 

15 -

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right, 

17 right.

18 MR. KATZ: -- does it make more 

19 sense for the Board to have a discussion about 

20 a case like that?

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I think that 

22 is more of a policy question, actually. The 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

22

1 only reason I kept it on was because --

2 MR. KATZ: No, I understand. I 

3 remember it was all --

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- our Chair 

5 wanted it.

6 (Laughter.)

7 MR. KATZ: But, still, it seems to 

8 me like there's not much of a review --

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know, I know.

10 MR. KATZ: -- to be done with 

11 this.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, you're 

13 correct, yes. Because we have done other 

14 Bethlehem cases, yes.

15 I would just as soon drop that 

16 one, yes.

17 MR. KATZ: Do you have any other 

18 thoughts on that?

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, my thought 

20 on that is it is a lung cancer with nine years 

21 of employment. In order to not be compensated 

22 from the Bethlehem Steel model, it must have 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

23

1 been diagnosed pretty close to the start of 

2 employment.

3 MR. KATZ: Right. That's right. 

4 Exactly.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Because otherwise 

6 I am almost positive at nine years of 

7 employment at Bethlehem Steel would compensate 

8 a lung cancer.

9 MR. KATZ: Right.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: It's a latency 

11 issue.

12 MR. KATZ: There's not much for 

13 SC&A to put their teeth into in this.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Right, because 

15 they have reviewed the model.

16 MR. ELLIOTT: Other than the 

17 statistical approach we use for those between 

18 45 and 52, but that is all computer-driven.

19 MR. KATZ: That is routine, too.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: You are right, 

21 Ted, that might be more of a policy --

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Drop 392 off then?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

24

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, let's drop 

2 92, if that's okay with you.

3 Thank you, Ted.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: I think it would be 

5 good to have a policy discussion about it 

6 because, you know, there's one there, but 

7 there are others that are close.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

9 MR. ELLIOTT: Unfortunately, 

10 unless they get another cancer, and I don't 

11 know if this guy is deceased or not, that's 

12 not going to happen.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

14 MR. KATZ: Mark, on the 

15 teleconference next week you can talk about 

16 this case, since we have just gone through 

17 this --

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, we can do 

19 that, yes.

20 MR. KATZ: -- as part of your Dose 

21 Reconstruction Subcommittee.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: I can mention this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

25

1 as I report out, yes. Okay.

2 All right, how about 403 then, 

3 General Steel? This is a site model also. So 

4 if we have done one, we have done them all, 

5 basically, I believe, although there might be 

6 some differences in that. I'm not sure.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Boy, I can't 

8 remember General Steel now, whether we 

9 apportioned to different types of -- whether 

10 the radiographers get a different dose 

11 reconstruction than other people or not.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: That is what I was 

13 just wondering, yes.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't remember. 

15 I don't remember.

16 MR. KATZ: I have that same 

17 recollection that there are some different 

18 colors to it.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, let's 

20 leave that one on there, yes.

21 MEMBER MUNN: It is probably a 

22 good idea to.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

26

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, but then the 

2 job title is unstated. So we don't know much 

3 more.

4 MEMBER MUNN: What about -- before 

5 we get away from that fact, what about 397? 

6 That is one of those who have given job title 

7 and type of cancer. There's been so much 

8 interest in that particular type of claim. 

9 That might be an interesting thing.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: A short time 

11 period there.

12 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, but that's one 

13 of the --

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, all right, 

15 397.

16 That brings us up to 21, which is 

17 kind of halfway, but we want to go a little 

18 over. Alright.

19 MEMBER MUNN: But we decided 403?

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 403 I put on 

21 there.

22 What is that?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

27

1 MEMBER GIBSON: What about 422?

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: I didn't get that 

3 far yet, but I was going to add -- actually, 

4 I'm going to drop 416 now because we do have a 

5 lot of Savannah River that we have already 

6 done.

7 So 422?

8 MEMBER GIBSON: Yes. A different 

9 type of illness, it looks like, and then the 

10 job title is kind of strange, too.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. That one 

12 might be better than the other one for General 

13 Steel. We could drop 403 and do 422. What do 

14 people think about that?

15 MEMBER MUNN: They're both shown 

16 as overestimates.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, but I mean 

18 that is the site model.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: That is the dose 

22 reconstructor --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

28

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Exactly. It says 

2 overestimate, but --

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Because they feel 

4 like the site model is too big.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Right.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: If I were going to 

7 pick one, General Steel. I think 422. Mike is 

8 probably right. It looks a little more 

9 interesting.

10 Is that all right? I will drop

11 403 and put 422.

12 Alright. Then I have 430, and 

13 this, in my mind, was -- and 439, and these, 

14 Doug, to answer your question, were like mini 

15 site profile kind of ones because this is 

16 sites we haven't done before, I'm pretty sure.

17 U.S. Steel Company, National Tube 

18 Division.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, we haven't done 

20 that one.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: And Koppers 

22 Company, which I don't even know where the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

29

1 heck that is.

2 So 430 and 439.

3 Then 444. I don't think we have 

4 had a DuPont Deepwater Works, either.

5 MEMBER MUNN: No.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: So another mini 

7 site profile type of thing.

8 MR. FARVER: What was the next 

9 number?

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Four forty-four.

11 MEMBER MUNN: Four forty-four.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: And then 450 and 

13 451, those are my next two. And 451 looks

14 like it might be another site profile type of 

15 question. I don't think we have done that 

16 company before, Electro Metallurgical.

17 MEMBER MUNN: No, they're fairly 

18 recent as far as the SEC is concerned.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: And then 457, I 

20 wasn't sure on, if we had done Allied Chemical 

21 before.

22 MR. FARVER: It doesn't sound 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

30

1 familiar.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: We certainly 

4 wouldn't have done very many.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

6 MEMBER MUNN: I think we did one, 

7 but not a bunch.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: So 457 for that 

9 reason.

10 Then 460, Fernald site.

11 MR. KATZ: Mark, can I ask you 

12 another substantive question?

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes?

14 MR. KATZ: Some of these you have 

15 named, these metal ones that you say possibly 

16 need a mini site profile, are some of these 

17 TBD-6000/6001?

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

19 MR. KATZ: So some of those may 

20 not need -- do they need a mini site profile 

21 if they are getting a review by the TBD?

22 MR. HINNEFELD: I still think they 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

31

1 do.

2 MR. KATZ: Okay.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. There is a 

4 question there because TBD-6000 provides 

5 options of application. There is more than 

6 one approach defined in TBD-6000.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: And it would be an 

9 evaluation, essentially, a series of -- each 

10 one is an evaluation of that application of 

11 TBD-6000.

12 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Some of those 

14 don't sound familiar at all to me. Some of 

15 them do.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. We may have 

17 to coordinate with the TBD-6000 Group on that, 

18 as we go down this.

19 MEMBER MUNN: But that was the 

20 whole point in the 6000/6001 thing.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

22 MEMBER MUNN: To try to codify --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

32

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: To catch some of 

2 those, yes.

3 MEMBER MUNN: -- how we could do 

4 that.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

6 Okay. Then 466. Is that okay?

7 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then 480 and 482 I 

9 had.

10 MEMBER GIBSON: Hey, Mark, back on 

11 the 466 --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes?

13 MEMBER GIBSON: -- what about 471 

14 as opposed to that?

15 MEMBER MUNN: Or in addition to.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Or in addition to.

17 MEMBER GIBSON: It is a lot 

18 shorter work time. It is about the same PoC.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. And it is 

21 Paducah, though, instead of Portsmouth.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, instead of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

33

1 Portsmouth, yes.

2 MEMBER GIBSON: Oh, okay.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Why not both of 

4 them?

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean we can do 

6 it in addition to, yes. 471.

7 So then 480, 482, any questions, 

8 reactions to those?

9 (No response.)

10 Then I had 485, 487, and 488.

11 If I'm counting right, that brings 

12 me up to 35.

13 Then I have 501.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Five oh one.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know it is a 

16 Savannah River again, but it has best estimate 

17 on both, yes.

18 MEMBER MUNN: It is best estimate, 

19 yes.

20 MEMBER GIBSON: Mark, back on 489, 

21 have we done any from the Uranium Mill in 

22 Durango?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

34

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Four eighty-nine?

2 MEMBER GIBSON: Yes.

3 MEMBER MUNN: No.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: No. I missed that 

5 one. Okay. Yes, we should do that one, 489.

6 So I did 501. Then I went down to 

7 513 was the next one I had.

8 MEMBER MUNN: I am sorry, five 

9 what? I was reading.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Five thirteen. I 

11 might have missed a few in here, though. I 

12 was running out of time before we dialed in.

13 You know, actually, 502 is kind of 

14 interesting to me, now that I am looking. 

15 Five oh two is a Blockson lung, which was not 

16 compensable.

17 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: He says with 

19 emphasis.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Since we hear most 

22 of the lung cancers are compensable at 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

35

1 Blockson.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Five oh two (502).

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Five oh two (502).

4 MEMBER MUNN: And I was looking at 

5 509.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Five oh nine? 

7 Okay. And also, 507, is that a new company, 

8 the International Minerals & Chemical Corp?

9 MR. HINNEFELD: If I am not 

10 mistaken, it is uranium from phosphate plant.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Is it?

12 MR. HINNEFELD: I believe it is.

13 MEMBER MUNN: I don't remember it.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: So you said 509, 

15 Wanda?

16 MEMBER MUNN: I had suggested 509.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 507 and 509.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't remember 

19 ever doing one for International.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, I don't 

21 think we ever did do that. So I am going to 

22 say 507 and 509.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

36

1 That should bring me down to 513 

2 is my next one.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Five thirteen. Now 

5 that gives us 41. But, again, if we get up to 

6 50, it shouldn't be a problem because we are 

7 probably going to lose a few.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Five twenty-two would 

9 seem to be a logical choice.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Five twenty-two?

11 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. Not because of 

12 the site but because of the type of carcinoma 

13 and the fact it's best estimate.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is best 

15 estimate internal, yes.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I've got no 

18 problem with that: 522.

19 The next one I have is 537. 

20 Actually, 524 I missed. I am very curious 

21 about these couple from Paducah that were less 

22 than a year and got over 50. Those may be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

37

1 quick reviews.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, that's really 

3 strange, isn't it? Yes, 524.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: And then 537 was 

5 my next.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Actually, I have 

8 those four in a row, 537 --

9 MEMBER MUNN: And 540.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- 540. Now these 

11 are Savannah Rivers again. That is very close 

12 to 50.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: And it is a best 

15 estimate on both parts.

16 MEMBER MUNN: One over, one under.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: So 537, 540. 542 

18 is Mound. Again, best estimates --

19 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- although 

21 overestimates on the internal.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Okay, 542 and 545.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

38

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: And 545, yes.

2 And that's it.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: That gives us 47. 

5 Now that's a pretty good number.

6 MEMBER MUNN: That's pretty good.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

8 Anything I missed, Mike? Did you 

9 have any others that I went by?

10 MEMBER GIBSON: There was one, 

11 535, the type of job, again, or what they did, 

12 mixed resins and impregnated parts with 

13 resins.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know, and it is 

15 Pinellas. I don't think we've done many.

16 MEMBER GIBSON: Right.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: You know, if we 

18 have done any, we haven't done many. All 

19 right, 535.

20 Any others, Wanda?

21 MEMBER MUNN: No. I think all 

22 that I had mentally set aside --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

39

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I think, if 

2 everybody is okay with that -- is John on the 

3 line? Did he get on? No?

4 If that is okay with the rest of 

5 the Subcommittee, then I will make this --

6 well, we are voting on this right now. We are 

7 submitting this list to NIOSH, and pending 

8 DOL's review of the list, this will be turned 

9 over to SC&A as the task for the 12th set of

10 cases, if that is okay with everyone.

11 MEMBER MUNN: It's fine with me.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: No objections 

13 heard. I guess we'll pass that.

14 I will give a report out on the 

15 next phone call meeting next week. But, if my 

16 count was right, that is 48 cases, and 

17 hopefully, we won't lose that many when DOL 

18 reviews them to see if any are in the appeals 

19 process, or whatever. But we should have 

20 enough for SC&A, a good chunk for SC&A to work 

21 on. Doug's happy.

22 (Laughter.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

40

1 MS. BEHLING: Excuse me, Mark.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

3 MS. BEHLING: Just to answer, we 

4 are up to tab 258, and that would leave 42 

5 remaining to get to 300. However, I believe 

6 in the 9th set there were two cases that were 

7 eliminated. So I believe we need 44, if I am 

8 correct.

9 Is that correct, Doug?

10 MR. FARVER: Yes, those two cases 

11 were eliminated.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

13 MR. FARVER: I mean if we are 

14 trying to make 300.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: So we should be 

16 perfect, actually.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Very close.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, very close, 

19 yes.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: Like I said, there 

21 could be cases on here that have been returned 

22 since we selected them, pre-selected them.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

41

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Or there may be 

3 cases where Labor has gotten like a post4 closure appeal and there is an opportunity it 

5 might reopen.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, thanks, 

7 Kathy.

8 MS. BEHLING: You are welcome.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: Mark, I will send 

10 you the numbers I recorded.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: So you can 

13 verify --

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: We will cross15 check them again.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: -- and make sure I 

17 got them right.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Then I will just 

20 get the list out to Jeff. I just wanted to 

21 make sure I didn't miss any.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. And we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

42

1 changed a couple of times there, yes.

2 Okay. All right, that sounds 

3 good. Alright. I am just going to save this 

4 and then we can move on.

5 Okay. Now I want to go back to 

6 the 6th set of cases, the matrix, and we did 

7 work on all these in the April meeting. 

8 Unfortunately, I can't seem to find the 

9 updated matrix from April. So I have all the 

10 entered actions from the 3/12, the March 12th 

11 meeting.

12 So as we go through these, my 

13 matrix may be a little out-of-date. So if 

14 people have other notes saying that we closed 

15 something that I still have open, you know, we 

16 will have to just correct that. It shouldn't 

17 be too hard, though, because the 6th and 7th 

18 sets are near completion.

19 So does everybody have that matrix 

20 open, the latest version that they have, or 

21 their notes from the last meeting?

22 MEMBER GIBSON: That was dated in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

43

1 April, you say?

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, the one I 

have is dated March 12th, '09. It's 6th 3 20 

4 case matrix, March 12th, '09.

5 Do you have an April 15th file?

MEMBER MUNN: The title is 6th 6 20 

7 case matrix, December -- NIOSH, April 15, '09. 

8 Updates, but I don't see -- everything I am 

9 seeing is -- oh, I see.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: The yellow should 

11 be the remaining actions, at least in my 

12 version of it. The yellow highlighted actions 

13 are the ones that remain open, I think.

14 And the first one I have is 104.7.

15 MEMBER MUNN: That is to provide 

16 the concentration of transuranics?

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, this is the 

18 transuranic question, the recycled uranium 

19 transuranic question.

20 Stu, I see a note on 12/8 that you 

21 are going to look into that, and then there's 

22 a 3/12 follow-up that it remains active. I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

44

1 don't know if you have any other notes on 

2 that.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't have 

4 anything newer than that.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Do you have that 

6 in your --

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, I have the 

8 file from the staff meeting.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Maybe just 

10 corroborate that with your handwritten note, 

11 if you will go back to your notes from the 

12 April meeting, because I don't think we 

13 resolved that.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it is in my 

15 notes, and I have no note about resolving it.

16 Which site is this? Does anybody 

17 remember?

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: A good question. 

19 104.7, do you have the case?

20 MR. FARVER: Probably.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean I can find 

22 it. It will take me quite a while the way my 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

45

1 computer is running.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: The next one I 

3 have, while they are looking up the site, the 

4 next action --

5 MR. FARVER: Superior Steel.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, Superior 

7 Steel, yes, that's right.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: One oh four?

9 MR. FARVER: Yes.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: I can tell you 

12 briefly what's gone on on that recycle work.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: We were thinking 

15 OTIB-0053 would be the one that would explain 

16 everything and it turns out it didn't explain 

17 much of anything. It didn't really tell us to 

18 do anything different.

19 So we still need to compile the 

20 research that kind of backed up OTIB-0053, 

21 which the draft version we got didn't really 

22 elucidate on very much. We need to make sure 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

46

1 we are okay on that.

2 The whole issue is one that I feel 

3 pretty good about, that the numbers we are 

4 selecting on some of these sites are pretty 

5 good. Some sites are more complicated, but 

6 when you're talking about an AWE and getting 

7 some recycled metal.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: So OTIB-0053 is 

9 the general recycled uranium TIB?

10 MR. HINNEFELD: It was, and, you 

11 know, we got this and we said, hey, it doesn't 

12 explain things as well as we had hoped, and 

13 the explanation it does doesn't really give us

14 much -- change anything, and it kind of refers 

15 you to site-specific information and things 

16 like that.

17 So I don't know that we are even 

18 going to issue 53, but the issue still remains 

19 what evidence do we have, which was not stated 

20 clearly in that draft for a site, you know, 

21 for -- in general, for general use, especially 

22 things like AWE. So I will have to see what 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

47

1 we have got.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, the issue is 

3 evidence to support the numbers that you 

4 selected, the ratios that we selected, right?

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Now I am updating 

7 this for this meeting live.

8 The next one I have is 107.4.

9 And the note I have for 3/12, 

10 while I guess you guys are reading, if you 

11 have the same copy of the matrix I have, it 

12 says that NIOSH provided a response indicating 

13 that modeling exposure differently would not 

14 affect the outcome. But it says the 

15 Subcommittee had remaining concerns about the 

16 general guidelines used for this 

17 determination, and NIOSH was investigating 

18 this and will report back to the Subcommittee.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, boy.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: I've got to admit, 

21 you know, I've got to refresh my memory on 

22 this one.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

48

1 MR. HINNEFELD: This was an 

2 internal dosimetry finding where the dose 

3 reconstruction modeled the bioassay data by a 

4 chronic exposure, and the comment in the 

5 finding was that, what about a series of 

6 acutes? I believe it is because the job 

7 classification --

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's right.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: -- fed into that, 

10 that a series of acutes may be a better model 

11 for this.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: And would they be 

14 more favorable?

15 So our action, which, again, I 

16 have not provided anything on yet, is can we 

17 provide additional basis for why we chose the 

18 chronic versus a series of acutes. What other 

19 analyses did we look at?

20 My actual note was, could we 

21 include in the dose reconstruction record an 

22 explanation of why we chose chronic versus 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

49

1 serial acute.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Do you have the 

4 April 15th note that says --

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: No.

6 MEMBER MUNN: -- the file, SC&A 

7 6th set, 107.4, ORAU response, April 15, '09?

8 In quotes: describe the guidance 

9 that is used for cases like this.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, I don't have 

11 that.

12 MEMBER MUNN: I have that over in 

13 the original NIOSH response column, instead of 

14 in the NIOSH resolution column. I don't know 

15 why I do.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: So the note says 

17 -- can you read that again, Wanda? I'm sorry.

18 MEMBER MUNN: It's dated April 15, 

19 2009.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

21 MEMBER MUNN: It says the file, 

22 quote, SC&A6thset107-4ORAUresponseAPR15_09, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

50

1 because it's April 15th, describes the 

2 guidance that is used for cases like this.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Do you have that 

4 document? Do we have that document?

5 MR. HINNEFELD: I am sending it 

6 now.

7 MR. FARVER: I believe you sent it 

8 before, but it was a while before.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: I think I did send 

10 it, but I am sending it now. So let me try to 

11 get everybody on here. I've got all the Board 

12 members. I've got Doug and Kathy, Emily.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Doug, what I am 

14 going to ask is that you look at that, right? 

15 That will be our action.

16 MR. FARVER: Okay. I am reading 

17 it now.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, you got it? 

19 Okay.

20 MR. FARVER: I found it.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: I don't find it in 

22 my --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

51

1 MR. FARVER: I believe we've gone 

2 over this before. It could be an acute, 

3 several acutes; it could be a chronic. How do 

4 you know which one is best? Is it the one 

5 that gives the highest dose that is more 

6 claimant-favorable? Especially like in this 

7 case, I think it was two data points over 30 

8 years.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

10 MR. FARVER: Now the guidance that 

11 Stu is sending, really it is pretty generic.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, this sounds 

13 like a familiar discussion that we had before, 

14 yes.

15 MR. FARVER: Sure.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, actually, 

18 I'm trying to find it, figure out if I've got 

19 that folder. I've got one that almost reads 

20 that.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Was this case, 

22 what was the PoC on this case? Do you recall?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

52

1 MR. FARVER: I can find out.

2 MEMBER MUNN: The short message 

3 that I have doesn't go back far enough.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, it doesn't.

5 MR. FARVER: Thirty-five point 

6 five.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Actually, I hope I 

8 can find that easily.

9 MR. FARVER: I think I agreed that 

10 it could be done either way. It is just a 

11 matter of how you determine that --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

13 MR. FARVER: -- when you have 

14 similar data.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

16 MR. FARVER: And this was a person 

17 who is a security guard. His position really 

18 hadn't changed over that time period. Is it 

19 more likely for a security guard to have one 

20 lung acute or multiple chronic? I don't know.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

22 MR. FARVER: If it was a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

53

1 production worker, I would say it is more 

2 likely they are just going to have chronics. 

3 But if it is a security guard, I don't think 

4 they would be exposed to everything.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: What does NIOSH's 

6 guidance say? They're pretty generic, right?

7 MR. FARVER: Yes. It's true, it 

8 should be as simple as possible; no more 

9 complexity than necessary should be applied. 

10 If a quick and simple over- or underestimate 

11 can be performed using bioassay data, no 

12 further fittings should be tried.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

14 MR. FARVER: But if you're going 

15 for a best fit, how do you determine what is 

16 the best fit when you've got -- almost have no 

17 data?

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: So was this one of 

19 those cases?

20 MR. FARVER: Two data points over 

21 30 years.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

54

1 MR. FARVER: So how do we know 

2 what happened in between?

3 MEMBER MUNN: By the same token, 

4 he's on the security force.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Was highly unlikely 

7 to be subject to chronic exposure --

8 MR. FARVER: Well, I don't know. 

9 If you talk to security people, they'll say, 

10 no, they were even out quite a bit.

11 MEMBER MUNN: But lieutenants 

12 don't. I don't know this site.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, and you don't 

14 know if he was lieutenant the whole time, 

15 either.

16 MEMBER MUNN: It's a normal 

17 process of hierarchy. No security force that 

18 I know of would expect that kind of --

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I am just 

20 wondering whether we can take this one, too. 

21 That is what I'm trying to figure out.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Well, how much will 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

55

1 it change anything if we do?

2 MR. FARVER: Well, maybe it is 

3 more dependent upon the work or the 

4 occupation, or it depends also on the 

5 occupation, and not just assign a quick 

6 chronic.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Not just the data, 

8 right.

9 MR. FARVER: Yes.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: But in this case, 

11 there's two data points and they are separated 

12 by multiple years. So, I mean, your typical 

13 approach, if you were going to place an acute 

14 in here, it is the midpoint between -- is an 

15 acute exposure at that midpoint, in order to 

16 hit that second bioassay data, or just miss it 

17 if it was less than detectable. There's going 

18 to be this enormous acute intake.

19 How likely is that to happen 

20 without some other indicator that this was a 

21 pretty significant event that this person was 

22 exposed to? And therefore, there would be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

56

1 some follow-up or there would be some other 

2 records of some kind of an event like that.

3 I mean at some point you've got to 

4 decide which one you're going to do. Are you 

5 going to give it a chronic exposure and say 

6 that periodic acute exposure is pretty well 

7 approximated by a chronic exposure, which in 

8 most cases a chronic exposure is more 

9 favorable than periodic acutes with the same 

10 bioassay data.

11 So you've just got to kind of 

12 decide what you are going to do. I mean there 

13 is no real scientific explanation.

14 MR. FARVER: I guess one way to do 

15 it would be to bound it by the -- I won't say 

16 the maximum intakes at Savannah River.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, but the 

18 higher ones?

19 MR. FARVER: Yes, or percentage, 

20 the higher ones.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

22 MR. FARVER: It will give you a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

57

1 bounding anyway.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Since we have 

3 clearly talked about this many times before, 

4 and since that strange note that I just read 

5 from April 15th that says, the file, response 

6 on April 15, describes the guidance that is 

7 used in cases like this, I don't know what the 

8 April 15th response was.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: I think that file 

10 was the response, right? Yes, that was the 

11 response.

12 MEMBER MUNN: But it describes the 

13 guidance, and there's no agreement on the 

14 guidance? Is that what I'm hearing?

15 MR. FARVER: Oh, no, no, the 

16 guidance is fine, except it is pretty general 

17 guidance.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is a little too 

19 generic. Or that's your opinion?

20 MR. FARVER: Yes.

21 MEMBER MUNN: So we are back where 

22 we started?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

58

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right and I don't 

2 know that we are going to come --

3 MR. FARVER: I just wanted to 

4 bring up the difference in this case where it 

5 could be many small or one chronic. In this 

6 case, it probably doesn't matter or it may not 

7 matter.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Although with two 

9 separated that far, like what you said, if you 

10 really take the midpoint and assume an acute, 

11 it may be that the acutes --

12 MR. FARVER: And if you look at 

13 that --

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- bounding 

15 situation, I don't know.

16 MR. FARVER: -- you say that the 

17 intake that that would produce is six times 

18 the maximum we have observed at the site, and 

19 is unlikely, then you can go back and say --

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Or you can say 

21 it's so high that alarms clearly would have 

22 been going off.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

59

1 MR. FARVER: We are going to use 

2 the chronic.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. It is out of 

4 the realm of reasonable, yes.

5 Stu, did you examine it to that 

6 extent? I can't remember.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't remember. 

8 It's been too long since I thought about it 

9 very much.

10 MEMBER MUNN: But the bottom line 

11 is we need a response to NIOSH, right?

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: If I could ask you 

13 for that response, that specific one, examine 

14 the acute versus chronic. You might have done 

15 this already, but just to justify the 

16 selection of chronic in this case. We've got 

17 the general guidance.

18 MR. FARVER: And if it were a 

19 production worker, it probably wouldn't even 

20 be a question.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Yes.

22 MR. FARVER: So maybe there needs 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

60

1 to be certain occupations identified that are 

2 more likely acute than chronic. I don't know.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I did find 

4 the message I sent on April 15th. I can just 

5 resend it. I'm resending that to Board 

6 members and Emily and Ted. Do you want it, 

7 Doug?

8 MR. FARVER: No, I've got it here.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: So I will leave 

10 that part as an action, okay, Stu?

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Is that clear? 

13 Alright.

14 That might be it.

15 I have 118.1. I don't know what 

16 site this is. INEL. There it is, yes, INEL.

17 MR. FARVER: We do agree. We 

18 accept the interpretation of reported dose. 

19 It has to do with linearity, and a response 

20 would be type of film used.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: This may be one 

22 that we could track.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

61

1 MR. FARVER: It would be 

2 appropriate for that dose range in question.

3 MEMBER MUNN: My note says no 

4 further action.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

6 MR. FARVER: I believe we resolved 

7 this at the last meeting.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, this is one 

9 that was resolved. We met on it.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: We sent it April 

11 15th. What I think was that, even though it 

12 resolved that case, there's still this 

13 outstanding issue of linearity of that 

14 dosimeter in the range we were talking about. 

15 I believe that was the note I took, even 

16 though it was off that case.

17 MR. FARVER: Correct.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: So on the message 

19 I just forwarded there's two files attached. 

20 There's the one that specifically was 107.4, 

21 but there was also a matrix attached that 

22 included some additional response. It was 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

62

1 what Wanda read when she said it was filed 

2 under such-and-such.

3 This 118.1 includes that April 

4 15th of 2009 response from us as well. It 

5 refers to a document in SRDB about the INEL 

6 dosimeter.

7 MR. FARVER: I don't have that 

8 file. Was it like a Word file?

9 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it is a 

10 matrix. It's the matrix. It is a file called 

11 sixth -- it's the sixth 20-case matrix.

12 MR. FARVER: Okay.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: December 8th, `08, 

14 and then there is a response from NIOSH, April 

15 15th, 2009.

16 MR. FARVER: I've got that file, I 

17 believe.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: And then, again, 

19 this is over in our -- same column as our 

20 initial response.

21 MR. FARVER: Okay. All right, I 

22 have it.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

63

1 MR. HINNEFELD: It is not 

2 particularly relevant to this particular 

3 claim.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: If we decide it 

6 wasn't relevant, we can move on.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: So you added a 

8 response in the mail? I'm not sure I have 

9 that.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: It is on the email 

11 I just forwarded.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, okay.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: It is on there, 

14 along with the file that was specifically 

15 about 107.4.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right. I'll 

17 check that at the break.

18 But, basically, for this case, 

19 it's closed, there's no further action?

20 MR. HINNEFELD: That's my 

21 recollection.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: I think Stu is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

64

1 agreeing with that.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. Yes, I 

3 always agree with closing.

4 (Laughter.)

5 MR. FARVER: And it appears that 

6 it is appropriate for their range.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: That is based 

8 on --

9 MR. FARVER: Based on that 

10 document.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: -- these documents 

12 that were cited here.

13 MR. FARVER: Yes, I think we 

14 closed that last time.

15 MEMBER MUNN: I think we were 

16 trying to.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

18 Alright. So I'm considering that 

19 closed, if I don't hear anything otherwise.

20 Alright. Look at that; we did 

21 one.

22 (Laughter.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

65

1 All right, progress. Almost as 

2 much as the Procedures Subcommittee, right?

3 All right, 118.6. I actually have 

4 this closed. I still had some highlighted 

5 notes.

6 SC&A agrees with NIOSH's 

7 evaluation. No further action.

8 All right, that was an old 

9 highlight.

10 MEMBER MUNN: What about 118.1? 

11 Is that closed?

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I just said 

13 118.1.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, I thought you 

15 said 118.6. Sorry.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: 118.1 was the one 

17 we were just discussing, and then 118.6 I had, 

18 but it is closed according to my notes anyway.

19 Then 118.7, the same thing, that 

20 should be closed. I have highlighting left on 

21 there from the previous meeting.

22 And that's all I have. Is that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

66

1 all you guys have?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: That's all I've 

3 got as well.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: So we have two 

5 left, 104.7. That is the transuranic question 

6 with Superior Steel. And 107.4 check out the 

7 acute versus chronic for this particular case. 

8 We've got the general guidance. And that's 

9 it, right?

10 MEMBER MUNN: So 118.7 is closed?

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Do you have 

12 something on 118.7?

13 MEMBER MUNN: Well, it just says, 

14 well, last year, last December, action, NIOSH 

15 and SC&A to further review.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, from 

17 December, but then the 3/12 note said that it 

18 was closed.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Okay. I don't have 

20 the 3/12 note.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: I just forgot to 

22 un-highlight it, yes. The 3/12 note that I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

67

1 had said, SC&A agrees with NIOSH's 

2 reevaluation. No further action.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, the 

4 complication here, Wanda, is that we wrote, 

5 the additional information that we submitted, 

6 we wrote on a version before --

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's right.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: -- the version 

9 that Mark sent --

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's right.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: -- for the April 

12 meeting. You kind of have got to open them 

13 both and go back and forth.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right. I 

15 remember that now.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Okay. I just didn't 

17 have the note. Okay. Great. Thank you.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: So do you want to 

19 take five minutes? Let's take five minutes. 

20 We will take five minutes and then we will 

21 work through until lunch.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: I can use all the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

68

1 breaks I can get.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Stretch.

3 Okay, we're on break. Everybody 

4 on the phone, we are going to take --

5 MR. KATZ: Five minutes.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- five minutes.

7 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

8 matter went off the record at 11:07 a.m. and 

9 resumed at 11:16 a.m.)

10 MR. KATZ: We are back again, the 

11 Dose Reconstruction Subcommittee, Advisory 

12 Committee on Radiation and Worker Health.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, we are 

14 moving on to the 7th set.

15 Kathy, are you out there?

16 MS. BEHLING: I am still here.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, all right. 

18 This is your wake-up call. No.

19 Okay, we're on the 7th set. 

20 Again, I think we should be able to get 

21 through this before lunch. We have some 

22 remaining items, and I will go down my list.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

69

1 Like I said, apparently my matrix 

2 is going back to March instead of April. So I 

3 apologize if we have already resolved some of 

4 these. There might be a little redundancy, 

5 but it shouldn't take too long.

6 The first one I have is 149.1, the 

7 first one on the matrix. I have a note, NIOSH 

8 to review SC&A's analysis of badge data as 

9 compared to NIOSH model. No effect on the 

10 case since the case was compensable.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Let me see what 

12 I've got. I did, in fact --

13 MR. FARVER: We're on the 8th set?

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: I am on the 7th 

15 set.

16 MEMBER MUNN: And the number?

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: The number, 149.1.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: That is the 8th 

19 set.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, that's the 8th 

21 set?

22 MR. HINNEFELD: That is the 8th 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

70

1 set.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, let me 

3 go to the 7th. Sorry. I'll try that again.

4 How about 121.1? I have a note on 

5 3/4/09; this remains an outstanding item for 

6 NIOSH.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, now let me 

8 see what I've got. I sent something on April 

9 15th.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, okay, you were 

11 going to look at TIB-0070 and TIB-6000 versus 

12 the approach used in this case which was 

13 originally done earlier in the notice.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: And it appears 

15 that I didn't send anything.

16 MEMBER MUNN: I've got another one 

17 of those read-only files.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: I have nothing new 

19 on that.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: So this remains an 

21 open item?

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

71

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. 121.2, this 

2 may be the same thing. Yes, it is the same 

3 thing.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

6 MEMBER MUNN: It is the Y-12 case, 

7 right?

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm not sure. Is 

9 this Y-12?

10 MR. HINNEFELD: I wouldn't think 

11 121 would be Y-12. We are talking about using 

12 OTIB-6000.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, right, 6000.

14 And 121.3, it is still open. I 

15 mean I think these are all the same issue, 

16 right? Will consider TIB-0070 as it pertains 

17 to this case, is what my note says.

18 MEMBER MUNN: Appropriate data and 

19 appropriate method.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Some of these are 

21 all the same follow-up for you really, Stu.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

72

1 MR. HINNEFELD: On 121.3?

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Which file? Oh, 

4 wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let's get the 

5 right one.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Well, it appears the 

7 whole 121.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 121.1, 2, and 

9 3.

10 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, and all the 

11 rest of them.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: No. Some of 

13 these, I have SC&A agreeing.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, one or two, but 

15 the issue is all the same pretty much.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, I see that 

17 now. I've got that file open, and I see what 

18 you are doing there.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

20 MEMBER MUNN: They are questioning 

21 the adequacy of your choice of method or 

22 choice of data.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

73

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, the next one

2 I have is 122.1. This is this job-related 

3 question, validity of the approach, given the 

4 particular job on this case.

5 I think, is this an AWE one also?

6 MR. FARVER: Yes.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. I think it 

8 was this job title that sort of suggested a 

9 high level of exposure and did the 95th still 

10 down this person.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: I think I remember 

12 this one.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Yes.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: I think this was 

15 the comment that, since it was an AWE, John 

16 would have done the review.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: And the comment 

19 was, for this person's job, we don't think 

20 that this could be decided. You're using the 

21 distribution in this dose model. For this job 

22 title, we don't think the rate of distribution 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

74

1 is correct. Because he is more highly exposed 

2 than most, he should be at the top end.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Our initial take 

5 on that is, the way this model was built, the 

6 distribution is so high anyway, we think the 

7 distribution bounds the most highly-exposed

8 people.

9 He says, well, it's not really 

10 expressed that way. You know, you present 

11 this distribution. There is a median or a 

12 mean, a median probably or a most probable; it 

13 might be a most probable, in the 95th 

14 percentile, and you built it that way.

15 So from that, a lot of the 

16 conclusion is some people are appropriately 

17 approximated by the full distribution, but 

18 certain job titles would be at the high end. 

19 So it may be a matter of even just 

20 restructuring the site profile, as you do in a 

21 dose reconstruction, to see if it is, in fact, 

22 really convincing that the dose we would 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

75

1 assign by that midpoint is so high that it 

2 bounds the most highly exposed people. Then 

3 we would just want to restructure the site 

4 profile to more clearly state what we intended 

5 to build when we built that.

6 Because my argument at the time --

7 I remember this -- my argument at the time was 

8 we built the distribution with the idea that 

9 it will bound the most highly exposed people, 

10 and it doesn't really say in the site profile. 

11 So that is the issue, as I recall that.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: So it is a little 

13 different than -- I'm trying to recollect, too 

14 -- I think it is a little different than some 

15 of the sites where you have a lot of data from 

16 probably less-exposed people. In this case, I 

17 think they only modeled the highly exposed, 

18 and therefore --

19 MR. HINNEFELD: If this is the one 

20 I am thinking of, it was built, the 

21 distribution was built by proximity to a 

22 uranium source.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

76

1 MR. FARVER: A Simonds Saw case.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. So rather 

4 than having actually film data, we said let's 

5 assume that at the midpoint the person was one 

6 meter away for ten hours a week, or whatever 

7 we said, eight hours a week

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, okay.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: And at the 95th 

10 percentile, they were one meter away for 40 

11 hours a week.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Percentage, yes.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Those weren't the 

14 numbers, but it was like that.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: So I think our 

17 thought process was that will bound the most 

18 highly-exposed person.

19 MR. FARVER: And this guy happens 

20 to be a furnace operator.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: And this guy is a 

22 furnace operator, who was, quite likely, one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

77

1 of the most highly exposed people.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. So that is 

4 the evolution of the comment. So we've had 

5 this discussion, but we have never really 

6 provided anything more in writing.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I do remember 

8 the furnace-operator scenario that John 

9 described, yes.

10 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, all we need, 

11 really and truly, is just your quick summary.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, yes, if it's 

13 convincing.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: You know, I never 

17 want to take for granted that I know exactly 

18 how to pose these things.

19 (Laughter.)

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Experience would 

22 indicate that I don't.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

78

1 (Laughter.)

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Alright. 

3 Now is 122.3 a similar issue? No, this is 

4 slightly different. It's not really talking 

5 about the distribution; it is talking about 

6 your --

7 MR. FARVER: And I still think it 

8 is going to pass with the job title --

9 MR. HINNEFELD: It seems pretty 

10 similar.

11 MEMBER MUNN: It turns out to be 

12 pretty much the same thing.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Although it is 

14 similar, but it more has to do with, again, 

15 this person's job title would indicate that he 

16 would not be exposed to this 50 percent of the 

17 time to one, 50 percent to the other, but, 

18 more likely, all of his exposure would be to 

19 the higher dose.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I believe it is 

22 similar, but it is not --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

79

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: You could probably 

2 weave your answers together for those two, 

3 yes.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: I would think so. 

5 I would think so.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, 122.7 I 

7 have.

8 MR. FARVER: Yes, NIOSH entered a 

9 response on April 15th.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, they did give 

11 us one?

12 MR. FARVER: Yes. That day, 

13 which is saying we have not gotten a chance to 

14 review the responses.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

16 MR. FARVER: So that being said, 

17 having looked at this, I'm going to forward 

18 this to John because this has to do with the 

19 thorium inhalation of the furnace operator. 

20 So I don't want to make a call on this. This 

21 is an SC&A action.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

80

1 MR. KATZ: Is that 122.7?

2 MR. FARVER: Yes.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: One twenty-two 

4 point seven, yes.

5 So the 4/15 response, Stu, you 

6 recall --

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I can work with 

8 you offline on this. At the break, I will 

9 resend it. Because when I was looking for 

10 that 6th set response, I sent a 6th set and I 

11 sent three separate messages on 7th-set 

12 responses on that same day.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: I can remember 

14 cutting and pasting these from your document 

15 into my matrix, and I don't have that version 

16 saved for some reason.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: I will resend 

18 those messages at the break on that 7th set.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Thank you.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: For the 7th set.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, so that's an 

22 SC&A action.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

81

1 Moving on --

2 MEMBER MUNN: Those are the files 

3 I apparently received as read-only files.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know why 

5 we made them read-only.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Well, I just 

7 received -- it may be some way I saved them. 

8 Who knows?

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, 125.1 I 

10 have.

11 MEMBER MUNN: Before we leave 122, 

12 I was just going to ask, one of the actions 

13 preceding had been NIOSH was going to provide 

14 a response in the form of a generic white 

15 paper. Do we have that white paper?

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, I don't think 

17 so.

18 MEMBER MUNN: That's just one 

19 outstanding thing.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: There are a couple 

21 of these white paper questions.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

82

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: The ingestion 

2 approach, and this is the --

3 MEMBER MUNN: Inhalation.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- inhalation of 

5 resuspended --

6 MR. HINNEFELD: This is 

7 resuspension.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, resuspension.

9 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, right.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: I believe those 

11 are still hanging out there.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: I believe they're 

13 still hanging out.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 125.1 then. 

15 SC&A -- I have a note that says you couldn't 

16 find the 1984 dose.

17 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, but then that's 

18 one of the things that was answered in the 

19 April 15th --

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Was this answered 

on April 15th 21 ? What was the --

22 MEMBER MUNN: Status. It appears 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

83

1 that the QC file failed to enter annual dose 

2 for 1984. This was entered manually on the 

3 input sheet. All suggested doses for this 

4 claim from all comments neutron for 1961: 303 

5 millirem, 1962: 1,446 millirem, and 1974: 40 

6 millirem. Full-time dose for 1982: 30 

7 millirem, 1952: 60 millirem, and 1984: 30 

8 millirem, and the missed cesium-137 dose, 30 

9 millirem were added, which increased the dose 

10 from 23.780 rem to 25.982 rem and PoC from 

11 34.82 percent to 35.39 percent. The 

12 supporting files are attached.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. So on 4/15, 

14 NIOSH provided that response, right?

15 MEMBER MUNN: That is correct.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: And I will get 

17 that later.

18 But then did SC&A look at that?

19 MR. FARVER: Yes. I don't know 

20 what the original finding was.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

22 MR. FARVER: I guess one of the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

84

1 things I didn't understand about the response 

2 was that I guess a 1984 dose really wasn't 

3 included?

4 MR. HINNEFELD: That is correct.

5 MR. FARVER: Okay. So you were 

6 correct on the facts --

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Correct on the 

8 facts of the findings, correct.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: So you guys have 

10 changed the PoC slightly?

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, plus several 

12 other things. There were other comments. You 

13 know what I'm saying? Incorporating the doses 

14 associated with all these comments, this is --

15 MR. FARVER: Yes.

16 MEMBER MUNN: It doesn't change it 

17 even 1 percent.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is minimal.

19 MR. FARVER: This is one of these 

20 small QC things. The dose just wasn't in the 

21 files.

22 MEMBER MUNN: You missed 25.4, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

85

1 response --

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Wait a second. 

3 Let me just make a note that SC&A agrees with 

4 this response, just to close it out. Okay.

5 MR. FARVER: Sure.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: So that is closed.

7 I'm sorry, Wanda, go ahead.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, no, that's quite 

9 all right.

10 I was just saying, then, if you 

11 don't have the April 15 information, you don't 

12 have what we got on 125.4, which is here.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, and I'm 

14 going to get these. But I will get Stu to 

15 email this to me.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Okay.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: That will be 

18 easier than trying to copy all that.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Since mine is read20 only --

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: We didn't go over 

22 it. So, 4/15, NIOSH provided an additional 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

86

1 response.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: And do you have 

4 any reaction to that?

5 MR. FARVER: Yes. We still 

6 contend that it has to do with cesium whole7 body counts, and there is a table of predicted 

8 fallout values. If the cesium body count 

9 exceeds those values, it should be assessed as 

10 an occupational exposure. That is the gist of 

11 the process.

12 There is a whole-body count, and 

13 you exceeded the fallout values, and it was 

14 not assessed. So, really, they didn't follow 

15 their own guidance.

16 The NIOSH response says the doses 

17 were a little less than a millirem, and these 

18 NCRP levels were not evaluated originally.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: But does NIOSH 

20 agree that they should have procedurally done 

21 this, but it is a minimal effect, but, 

22 procedurally, they should have probably 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

87

1 assessed this dose or no?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: I think, 

3 procedurally, it should have been assessed 

4 although, in a sense, the procedure says that 

5 if it is above the fallout level, you should 

6 evaluate it. But this is a fairly complicated 

7 response. I'm trying to sort it out here.

8 It seems to say that when we did 

9 that, you know, after that fact, now we have 

10 gone and assessed it, and the dose is less 

11 than 1 millirem, which we normally don't --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Which means you 

13 wouldn't assign --

14 MR. HINNEFELD: We wouldn't put it 

15 in the dose reconstruction anyway.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. But you 

17 hadn't evaluated --

18 MR. HINNEFELD: But, again, the 

19 response that was on this day, you added the 

20 dose from that, and we did that in 125.1. I 

21 would have to find out whether that means --

22 it says, if you do that, it would be 30 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

88

1 millirems.

2 So unless they are considering it, 

3 the entire result could be not considering any 

4 background.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: You assess the 

7 entire amount, considering none of it fallout, 

8 but all occupational exposure. It would then 

9 be a 30 millirem.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Thirty millirem, 

11 right.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: That is part of 

13 the numbers, that was one of the numbers they 

14 included in the response to 125.1, and it had 

15 that whole string of doses that were added.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: It was 30 millirem 

18 of cesium intake.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: So it doesn't 

21 affect the outcome of the claim. Even if you 

22 assessed it as if there were no fallout, this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

89

1 would be the impact.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I think that is 

4 what the response says.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: But I think we are 

6 all in agreement that it is a pretty low dose 

7 being assigned.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: It sounds like 

10 procedurally you should have done it. But you 

11 couldn't know ahead of time that it was less 

12 than one millirem without at least assessing 

13 it.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Without doing the 

15 assessment.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Right.

17 MR. FARVER: And going back to the 

18 original dose reconstruction report, it says 

19 the EE had three whole-body counts in June 

20 until the termination of employment. There 

21 were no positive cesium-137, sodium-24, or 

22 zinc-65 bioassays during that period, which is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

90

1 an incorrect statement because there was 8.4 

2 nanocuries of cesium, which exceeded the 

3 fallout level. Then later on there was a 

4 zinc-65 which exceeded the MDA and should have 

5 been considered as a chronic ingestion in 

6 drinking water. I'm assuming this is at 

7 Hanford, the Hanford site.

8 So, really, there were two that 

9 should have been considered. Actually three. 

10 The other cesium also exceeded the fallout 

11 dose.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: I guess I am 

13 trying to simplify all this. I think it is a 

14 procedural -- I mean I think there is, making 

15 a decision, they should have done it, but --

16 MR. FARVER: But, number one, the 

17 DR report says that there were no positives.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MEMBER MUNN: That is incorrect.

20 MR. FARVER: That is incorrect.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, yes.

22 MEMBER MUNN: That's the biggie.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

91

1 MR. FARVER: Yes.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, that's true. 

3 Right. So there is more than just the one 

4 thing, yes.

5 I'm just trying to think of how to 

6 -- I would like to close this out because I 

7 really don't want NIOSH to go back and try to 

8 reevaluate the dose. I don't think the dose 

9 is the issue. I think it is the other things 

10 that have been done.

11 MR. FARVER: I will say it again. 

12 This is QA concerns. When you were reviewing 

13 it, you should have looked at that and said, 

14 all of these exceed the fallout levels. We 

15 should do something.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: So, I mean, that 

17 is my point. If NIOSH agrees that, based on 

18 the procedure, they should have assessed this 

19 dose and that there's a misstatement in the DR 

20 report, then I think SC&A would be in 

21 agreement that we could close this. But I am 

22 not sure Stu is --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

92

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I believe 

2 that is the case.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: I don't want to 

4 put words -- you know, if you want time to --

5 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't see the 

6 zinc actually included as one of the doses in 

7 125.1, but our response does say that if you 

8 assess these things less than two millirem 

9 before 1961, and then one millirem later --

10 MR. FARVER: I think the point was 

11 that it says they were all less than -- there 

12 were no positive bioassays. That is not 

13 really a true statement.

14 MEMBER MUNN: From the outset, 

15 before we even set this entire program up, one 

16 of our primary concerns was QA. That is one 

17 of the things we expect SC&A to find for us, 

18 is any QA issue and whether it is common or 

19 not.

20 That particular type of problem 

21 has not come up in my memory quite that way.

22 MR. FARVER: It has come up 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

93

1 occasionally where the fallout value has been 

2 exceeded and not assessed.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, but it's very 

4 rare that we have a -- I don't recall having 

5 encountered a statement like the one you just 

6 gave from the DR report.

7 MR. FARVER: Oh, where there were 

8 no positive bioassays.

9 MEMBER MUNN: No positive 

10 bioassays when we did, in fact, have positive 

11 bioassays. That is an unusual finding.

12 MR. FARVER: I believe that is 

13 unusual. It may have come up once before --

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

15 MR. FARVER: -- but I think that 

16 is not usual.

17 MEMBER MUNN: And, of course, that 

18 was our point in having people look at it, is 

19 to determine whether the findings were 

20 indicative of a trend or whether they were 

21 outliers. This appears to be an outlier, but 

22 it is there.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

94

1 MR. FARVER: Stu, is this 

2 something you would expect to catch on your 

3 reviews?

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Stu, if you are 

5 ready to say -- I don't want to -- you know, 

6 if you want to check back with this person 

7 that wrote the original response, or are you 

8 comfortable saying that according to the 

9 procedure, NIOSH should have evaluated this 

10 and there was a misstatement in the DR report, 

11 but that the overall dose would have been 

12 minimal?

13 MR. HINNEFELD: I think that's 

14 pretty clear. I can interpret this pretty 

15 well. I mean it is pretty clear that this 

16 shouldn't have had this statement in there.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. No, I mean I 

18 just wanted to make sure that you are okay 

19 with that.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then we would 

22 close that thing.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

95

1 MR. HINNEFELD: For this 

2 particular finding, there's no additional 

3 thing to do, but there's the remaining issue 

4 of that, the language of the DR.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: It could be a case 

7 -- I mean we have seen other cases where the 

8 language in the DR, not this exact passage but 

9 language in the DR doesn't really match what 

10 was done. The numbers are right, but the 

11 language in the DR doesn't match the numbers, 

12 which gets to an aspect of the quality of dose 

13 reconstruction. I mean it is right, but it 

14 didn't say it right.

15 MR. FARVER: Is this segment of 

16 the DR, is this boilerplate? In other words, 

17 do you select something and it puts this in?

18 MR. HINNEFELD: It could. See, I 

19 don't know.

20 MR. FARVER: I know there's 

21 different templates out there --

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, several 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

96

1 templates out there.

2 MR. FARVER: -- depending on what 

3 the case is.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

5 MR. FARVER: And I don't know if 

6 they may have selected the wrong template.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. It would 

8 seem at some point, though, you shouldn't be 

9 saying there are no positive counts if there 

10 were, even if the doses were trivial.

11 MEMBER MUNN: True.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean I think 

13 that is clear.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: So I worded it 

15 that way.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: If that is the 

18 case, then I think we are in agreement here, 

19 so we can close this. SC&A agrees with that?

20 MR. FARVER: Yes.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. All right, 

22 so I have it closed out then.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

97

1 The next one I have -- now, again, 

2 this doesn't have the April stuff in it 

3 probably, but 125.9.

4 MR. FARVER: Well, there is 125.6. 

5 This has to do with some dates that are 

6 listed in the TBD.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, okay, I have 

8 SC&A agrees based on current TBD. Remaining 

9 question is documenting what approach was 

10 used.

11 MR. FARVER: In other words, the 

12 TBD doesn't really match what is in the DR, 

13 but this is where they will issue -- what are 

14 they called, DR notes?

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, or guides.

16 MR. FARVER: Guides or something 

17 like that. Apparently between revisions, one 

18 or two of these guides were put out, which 

19 does have the correct dates in it.

20 This is where NIOSH provided that 

21 document, and we reviewed it. It is in that 

22 document.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

98

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I think we 

2 have kind of addressed this by putting in 

3 those applicable guides for the site, you 

4 know, those DR instructions.

5 What we are doing now, what we are 

6 supposed to be doing --

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: So in this case 

8 you went back and found --

9 MR. HINNEFELD: We found it. We 

10 went back and found it.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: But at this point 

13 now, if there are instructions, DR 

14 instructions, applicable to the site where the 

15 dose reconstruction is from, they are putting 

16 those in --

17 MR. FARVER: Okay.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: -- into the file. 

19 That is what should be --

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: So, for this, 

21 NIOSH provided the interim DR instructions, 

22 and SC&A agrees with it?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

99

1 MR. FARVER: Yes.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

3 MEMBER MUNN: That was on the 

4 April 15th information, too.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Alright. I 

6 can't believe I missed the April 15th thing 

7 somehow.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is somewhere on 

10 the computer, I'm sure.

11 Okay, now 125.9, is that next?

12 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, the next one is 

13 in the April 15th --

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, in the 

15 response, okay.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Additional details 

17 on what to address here.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: That was April 

19 15th?

20 MEMBER MUNN: April 15th.

21 MR. FARVER: Did we give you that 

22 information back on the last meeting, Stu?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

100

1 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know.

2 MR. FARVER: Just to give you a 

3 little update on what this is about, once 

4 again, this is Hanford. In the DOE documents, 

5 there were four documented incidents. One was 

6 a high dose rate and no bioassay requested. 

7 Three others were potential, let's see, 

8 elevated airborne, elevated airborne, positive 

9 nasal smears. On each of those, it says 

10 bioassay requested. These are in the form of 

11 little pink slips that were present at the 

12 time.

13 But the dates of the incidents and 

14 of the bioassay requested did not match any of 

15 the bioassay data. So our concern was do you 

16 have all the bioassay results.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay. So the 

19 bioassay request in the file, but no 

20 corresponding bioassay --

21 MR. FARVER: As I recall, it was 

22 an incident form.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

101

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

2 MR. FARVER: And it had all those 

3 little boxes, bioassay requests --

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay. So the 

5 person made this report, and one of the boxes 

6 was bioassay, and he checked yes, and there 

7 was no associated bioassay data.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: No data associated 

9 with it, right. Okay.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay? That seems 

11 clear to me.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Part of our 

14 response, though, was while there was not a 

15 bioassay after those incidents, there was a 

16 later bioassay. Is that true?

17 MR. FARVER: That's true.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: So there was an 

19 assessment, and your point is if that was, in 

20 fact, an intake or just do we make another 

21 request for bioassay data?

22 MR. FARVER: I guess the question 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

102

1 is what happened to the bioassay data.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, of course, 

3 we can't answer the question.

4 MR. FARVER: No, no, I understand 

5 that. Typically, these workers remember when 

6 they were involved in something and they 

7 submit a sample.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, if there's 

9 an incident report that says bioassay 

10 requested and you don't get bioassay data, one 

11 of two things happened. Either they didn't 

12 get the bioassay sample or Hanford lost the 

13 results.

14 Is that a Hanford case?

15 MR. FARVER: Yes.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: So I don't know 

17 what else.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean it might be 

19 the broader question, too, of are you getting 

20 all the data from Hanford? Could there be a 

21 database of special bioassays? You know, some

22 of those sites have special bioassays --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

103

1 MR. HINNEFELD: This is true.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- in a different 

3 place than their general, routine bioassays.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Hanford's 

5 reputation was this was very good. So it 

6 could be. I don't know.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: But I think your 

8 position --

9 MR. HINNEFELD: Our position was 

10 that --

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- is that you got 

12 data afterwards, so you can still bound --

13 MR. HINNEFELD: The dose 

14 reconstruction should still be valid because 

15 the assumption for that, the chronic 

16 assumption for the later bioassay data in 

17 virtually every case is more favorable than a 

18 series of chronics -- or a series of acutes. 

19 Because when you run a series of acutes, 

20 you've got that one intake, but from then on, 

21 that kind of dominates any subsequent -- we 

22 saw them. The tail on that first one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

104

1 dominates what is later on. So the later ones 

2 become sort of vanishing and small with the 

3 bioassay, whereas the chronic usually gives 

4 you a total intake over the input period that 

5 is higher. I mean that is typically what 

6 happens.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, right.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: How does that look 

9 on this case? I don't know.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: I guess I was 

11 looking at it more on the broader question, 

12 and maybe you have evidence that in most cases 

13 with Hanford cases you are getting the special 

14 data.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, we can check. 

16 I mean, we do have a number of --

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: That would be sort 

18 of the way I would look at it. If it is like 

19 it sounds, I'm pretty convinced that if you've 

20 got the data afterwards, you probably are able 

21 to bound the internal dose. So on other 

22 people, on other situations, if you are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

105

1 missing all that data set, then it could be a 

2 problem.

3 MR. FARVER: Could you put 

4 something in your write-up that says the 

5 person was involved in incidents --

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Good point.

7 MR. FARVER: -- requested 

8 bioassay; that data was not located?

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, right. 

10 Right.

11 MR. FARVER: But we found that 

12 this is -- we have before and after.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, that's a good 

14 point because you've got to remember who this 

15 is going to, and they are going to say, I was 

16 involved in three or four incidents that are 

17 not even mentioned in this.

18 MR. FARVER: And they do say 

19 something like that. They say there were

20 instances found in the files of contamination 

21 events that involved the EE. The EE was 

22 monitored for more internal and external 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

106

1 radiation. Exposure above the appropriate 

2 level of detection would have been measured by 

3 the dosimetry and bioassay methods at the 

4 time.

5 So it might just be a little 

6 statement in between those two --

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

8 MR. FARVER: -- about that. Even 

9 though bioassay was requested in three 

10 instances, it may not have been provided, or 

11 something like that.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

13 MR. FARVER: Because it should 

14 have been addressed, I believe.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, different 

16 people would argue with that, but I can see 

17 your point.

18 MR. FARVER: Yes. I could argue 

19 with myself.

20 (Laughter.)

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I do that 

22 sometimes with myself.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

107

1 MR. FARVER: I never win.

2 (Laughter.)

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Or I always win, 

4 it depends on how you look at it.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: So where do we --

6 I mean I understand both of your arguments. 

7 Where do we go with this?

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, our last 

9 response was we are not really sure what we 

10 are being asked to respond to. I think I have 

11 a little better idea now of what it is we are 

12 responding to.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. So you are 

14 going to follow up on it? Alright.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. Yes, I 

16 intend, if it sticks in my memory long enough, 

17 I intend to give some more clear direction to 

18 the people who fill out these responses and 

19 come up with something like, respond to these 

20 questions.

21 The questions I have are, should 

22 we check with Hanford to see if incident data 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

108

1 might be somewhere else. I think they are 

2 going to tell us no, if it is related to an 

3 individual, it is in the records. I think 

4 that is what they are going to tell us. We 

5 can check.

6 And should the DR mention 

7 incidents that, you know, where bioassay was 

8 requested but the bioassay is missing, and are 

9 we confident that our chronic assumption is, 

10 in this case, bound -- what would be the acute 

11 intake associated with --

12 MR. FARVER: Well, not necessarily 

13 mention in it in the DR report, but just a 

14 note in the file --

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay.

16 MR. FARVER: -- saying that there 

17 were four incidents on such-and-such date, 

18 requested bioassay on three of them. The 

19 dates do not seem to match the available 

20 bioassay data. Just a note in the file 

21 somewhere like that.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: An acknowledgment 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

109

1 that we noticed it and felt that we had done 

2 an adequate dose reconstruction --

3 MR. FARVER: Right, because you 

4 would expect them to match.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, you would.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, 

7 realistically, you would expect, if you ask 

8 for a bioassay, you would expect to be able to 

9 find it.

10 MR. FARVER: Something within a 

11 day or two of that date.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

13 MR. FARVER: Or even a week.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. 126.2, do 

16 we have a 4/15 response on this?

17 MEMBER MUNN: Not on my file.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Not on this one?

19 MEMBER MUNN: No.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: NIOSH to verify 

21 based on work history, OTIB-0002 as 

22 appropriate, and the certainty that it is
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

110

1 bounding.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, you know what? 

3 I have a note in bold on that April 15th that 

4 says there are additional files.

5 MR. FARVER: Right, you sent a 

6 bunch of files.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

8 MR. FARVER: And I looked at them.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: They don't talk 

10 about this?

11 MR. FARVER: I really couldn't 

12 make heads or tails out of what was applied 

13 and why.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, welcome to my 

15 world.

16 MR. FARVER: This is probably one 

17 of those I need to get together with Scott or 

18 someone who provided this response.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, if you could 

20 call Scott directly --

21 MR. FARVER: Okay.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Scott sends them 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

111

1 to me. I'm not sure, he may have to check --

2 MR. FARVER: I have to find my 

3 notes here.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay.

5 MR. FARVER: Get with Scott.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

7 MEMBER MUNN: The response, which 

8 was short, wasn't dated. Please see file 

9 SCA125, 126, 127, 130, 135, 136, and 144-

10 additionalresponses.doc.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Got it.

12 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, I thought you 

13 did.

14 (Laughter.)

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: 127.1.

16 MEMBER MUNN: There is an April 15 

17 response.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

19 MS. BEHLING: This is Kathy 

20 Behling. I think I can take care of this one. 

21 127.1, this was a Hanford PNNL site, and the 

22 individual worked in both the 100 and 300 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

112

1 areas. NIOSH did acknowledge that.

2 However, for this particular case, 

3 they assigned the EE strictly to the 300 area. 

4 We initially questioned that because of the 

5 information she had provided on the CATI 

6 report and the information we found in the 

7 files, along with the fact that this was 

8 actually a revised '03 construction report 

9 because of an additional cancer that had been 

10 added.

11 In the original dose 

12 reconstruction, NIOSH had included both the 

13 100 and the 300 areas and considered the 

14 potential for neutron doses. But in their 

15 April 15th response, which I did review and I 

16 did go into the files, they indicated that --

17 and this file is a three-ring binder file 

18 thickness, very large -- but it did indicate, 

19 they did indicate that on the X-ray records it 

20 looks as if she had been in Building 108 and 

21 also worked in the laboratory and then, 

22 ultimately, in Building 1713.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

113

1 I was able to confirm that. 

2 Looking at the Hanford records, it doesn't 

3 appear that there would be a significant 

4 potential for neutron doses in those areas. 

5 So I do agree with NIOSH's response here.

6 MEMBER MUNN: That's true, there 

7 would not be a neutron exposure there, except 

8 under extremely unusual circumstances. I 

9 can't imagine.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, so we have 

11 agreement on that, and that will be closed 

12 then.

13 MR. FARVER: Yes.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: 127.5.

15 MR. FARVER: That also relates 

16 back to the --

17 MR. HINNEFELD: That is where the 

18 person worked, 108. I think 117.1 would be 

19 relevant --

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: The same.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: -- to that 

22 finding.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

114

1 MEMBER MUNN: It would.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

3 Okay, 127.8, I think you have 

4 probably provided this, but I had NIOSH just 

5 send a response.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: We sent it on 

7 April 15th.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

9 MEMBER MUNN: April 15, yes.

10 MR. FARVER: Kathy, have you had a 

11 chance to look at 127.8?

12 MS. BEHLING: No, I haven't.

13 MR. FARVER: Okay.

14 MS. BEHLING: Sorry about that. 

15 I'm going to have to keep this one open.

16 MR. FARVER: That's okay. I 

17 believe this is partly the long-standing 

18 fission products.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: I think it is. 

20 From reading it, that's what it sounds like.

21 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

22 MR. FARVER: And that's why I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

115

1 would prefer Kathy look at this because it 

2 predates me.

3 MS. BEHLING: Is this one of those 

4 issues that you were going to provide a white 

5 paper on?

6 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. There is 

7 kind of, what we call, a global issue. I 

8 think the fission-product approach is sort of 

9 a global issue, and it may already be 

10 identified somewhere as a global issue, if 

11 this is a part of that issue.

12 I say there's a global issue about 

13 fission product internal doses, but I'm not 

14 sure that everything that everyone has ever 

15 commented on fission product internal doses is 

16 captured. I guess we try to capture 

17 everything that anybody has ever commented on 

18 in that, whatever we put together. As you can 

19 imagine, it is complicated.

20 MEMBER MUNN: You have 1954, '39. 

21 There's a lot more out there now.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, 127.10.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

116

1 MEMBER MUNN: April 15th response.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: This is also an 

3 April 15th response?

4 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: And did SC&A 

6 review that?

7 MR. FARVER: I don't have the 

8 response.

9 MS. BEHLING: I was going to say I 

10 didn't review it because I don't think I have 

11 it.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, really?

13 MEMBER MUNN: I have it.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Wanda has it.

15 MR. FARVER: I wonder where the 

16 response is. I do not have that one for 

17 127.10.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I am 

19 confident it was an email I sent on the 15th. 

20 So I will send that to everybody.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: When I have a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

117

1 break, I will send the emails I sent.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I think it must be 

4 there. I can't imagine how else the matrix 

5 came to be in my inbox.

6 MEMBER MUNN: You or I could read 

7 it to them.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, gosh, really?

9 MEMBER MUNN: Well, it's a short 

10 one.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, relatively 

12 speaking.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Do you want go 

14 ahead and read it, or do you want to send it? 

15 It doesn't matter to me.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: I can read it.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: As discussed in 

19 the response to finding 127.8, which is the 

20 fission products claim we have talked about, 

21 undetected internal doses from radionuclides 

22 typically detected by in vitro bioassay, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

118

1 including strontium-90, carbon-14, and 

2 phosphorus-32, have been bounded in accordance 

3 with ORAU-TKBS-65, which is a Hanford internal 

4 Rev 1 -- I think it is Hanford, whatever site 

5 we are talking about internal -- by the 

6 assignment of an inhalation intake of 1300 

7 picocuries per day and an ingestion intake of 

8 40 picocuries per day of ruthenium-106 type F.

9 So I mean it speaks to the 

10 approach of pick the fission product that is 

11 the worst, put the credible total activity for 

12 fission products into that radionuclide, and 

13 you have bounded the dose. I mean that's 

14 supposed to be the approach.

15 So that is what it says, but I 

16 think it must be attached to all those emails. 

17 Otherwise, I can't figure out where I got it.

18 MR. FARVER: Okay, we'll look at 

19 those two together then.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right. And 

21 let's see, apparently, there still are some 

22 more here. I don't know that we necessarily 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

119

1 have to finish this before lunch.

2 But I will move to 129.5, and why 

3 don't we pick it up there after lunch? Is 

4 that all right?

5 MR. FARVER: Yes.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: I will try to get 

7 some of these loose ends during lunch, too.

8 I apologize for not having the 

9 April 15th updates on my latest version here, 

10 but we will get up-to-speed.

11 MEMBER MUNN: Well, I apologize 

12 for not having the full matrix, too.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I think one 

14 problem, though, is, again, we entered them on 

15 probably the version before your 4/15 version. 

16 So you have a 4/15 version --

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: They crossed in 

19 the mail.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, and I really 

21 think my updated versions are on my other 

22 computer.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

120

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Anyway, we will 

3 work through it, though. We are getting 

4 there.

5 So we will pick it up on 129.5 

6 after lunch.

7 MR. KATZ: Go ahead, Kathy.

8 MS. BEHLING: Just one other 

9 question. I am thinking ahead to the 8th set 

10 matrix. What version of that matrix are we 

11 using?

12 (Laughter.)

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: The latest one I 

14 have is 3/12. So I may, during the break, 

15 look and see if we have a 4/15 one. We may be 

16 in the same position of looking at either 3/12 

17 or 4/15, would be the ones you should have.

18 MS. BEHLING: Okay. All right, 

19 thank you.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

21 MR. KATZ: So related to this, 

22 since you guys are now coming into OCAS 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

121

1 directly, can't you just keep a master matrix?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, we have --

3 MR. KATZ: I think if you just had 

4 a master matrix on the OCAS --

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, we can put --

6 MR. KATZ: You could?

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I think we should 

8 be able to use some business rules here to 

9 make sure that we know. See, when you do 

10 that, you've got to make sure that only one 

11 person tries to pull it up --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's right. 

13 Right.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: So Word won't 

15 stop, I don't think.

16 MR. KATZ: Right.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: So we would have 

18 to have some business rules about whose turn 

19 is it to write to it for this week.

20 MR. KATZ: Right.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: And then only that 

22 person writes to it.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

122

1 MR. KATZ: But it would be handy.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: But we could do 

3 that. It would be a place to put it.

4 MR. FARVER: You could just put 

5 the updated version up there, and you can 

6 protect it.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, we need to 

8 use the read-only --

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: For the read-only 

10 version we have.

11 MR. FARVER: That way, people can 

12 still see what's the most recent one, and what 

13 actions they have.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, actually, 

15 you're right. Putting a read-only up like 

16 that would be very similar to having like

17 maybe the access to DB.

18 MR. KATZ: It would be very easy 

19 to do.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: And then people 

21 can look at it, and then however we want to 

22 deal with updates. Mark, as the Chairperson, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

123

1 I guess would prepare the next version, put it 

2 out there.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: We can do that. 

4 Kathy has developed a draft database, but --

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, and the SQL 

6 version is there somewhere. In fact, I got an 

7 email from the developer today. So I, 

8 apparently, have some more work to do with the 

9 developer on the SQL version of the procedures 

10 DB.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, the procedures 

12 DB, yes. We also have a draft --

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, we have a 

14 draft.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- for the DR, 

16 which I still need to discuss with her a 

17 little bit further. But in the meantime, we 

18 can do the read-only, yes. Yes, we can work 

19 through some rules on that.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

21 MEMBER MUNN: We would hope that, 

22 even though the OCAS file was a read-only 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

124

1 file, anyone who downloaded it to their 

2 computer would be able to make personal notes 

3 on what they have, instead of getting what I 

4 get, which is this -- is a read-only file. 

5 You can't save the changes you have just made 

6 to it.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I think there is a 

8 way. You open it up and save it to a 

9 different name on your own computer.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I know there 

11 is a way.

12 MR. KATZ: Right.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Save it and change 

14 the name.

15 MR. KATZ: You just change the 

16 name.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, change the 

18 name on your computer.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: And you might have 

20 to change document properties, but it is 

21 pretty easy to get around that.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, you may have 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

125

1 to go to the property dialog box and take off 

2 the read-only.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Take off the read4 only, yes.

5 MR. FARVER: I have already done 

6 it where you just select all and you copy and 

7 paste it into another document.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, do a Save As.

9 MR. KATZ: If you change the name, 

10 usually that strips it away.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Anyway, we can 

12 work through this. Actually, I think our 

13 system was working pretty good until I lost my 

14 4/15 updates. It has been a while since our 

15 last meeting. So, anyway, we will work 

16 through that.

17 I think we are ready to break for 

18 lunch. Kathy and Hans, you are probably the 

19 only ones hanging on.

20 MS. BEHLING: Yes, we're still 

21 here. Going off for lunch?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, reconvene at 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

126

1 1:00, I guess, or a few minutes after 1:00, 

2 yes.

3 MR. KATZ: Five past 1:00.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, thank 

5 you.

6 MR. KATZ: Thanks, you guys.

7 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

8 matter went off the record for lunch at 12:09 

9 p.m. and resumed at 1:18 p.m.)

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21 A-F-T-E-R-N-O-O-N S-E-S-S-I-O-N

22 1:18 p.m.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

127

1 MR. KATZ: This is the 

2 Subcommittee on Dose Reconstruction Reviews. 

3 We are reconvening after lunch.

4 Do we have the Behling’s back with 

5 us?

6 MS. BEHLING: Yes, we do. We're 

7 here.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

9 MR. KATZ: Anyone else to check in 

10 with?

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Good afternoon, 

12 Kathy.

13 (No response.)

14 No, I don't think so.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Did Dr. Poston ever 

16 show up?

17 MR. KATZ: I am sure John would 

18 have said so if he had joined us.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, we are 

20 back on the 7th set of cases, finding number 

21 129.5.

22 Again, I may have to do the same 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

128

1 thing with the April update. If there was an 

2 April update, I don't know about it.

3 MEMBER MUNN: I don't have one on 

4 my computer.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: You don't have 

6 one? So I have a remaining action for NIOSH 

7 on this one.

8 This is fission products stuff, 

9 actually, TIB-0054.

10 MEMBER MUNN: TIB-0054.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: NIOSH will compare 

12 whole-body count results to the results from 

13 TIB-0054, I guess, that chronology.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: And we don't have 

15 anything to add right now.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, okay. So it 

17 is just going to remain an open action.

18 The next one I have is 130.6.

19 MEMBER MUNN: April 15th addition.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: There is an 

21 addition? Okay.

22 Can you summarize that in three 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

129

1 words or less?

2 MEMBER MUNN: Presumptive exposure 

3 to fission products that should be tied to 

4 reactor facility, and this one has bioassay 

5 monitoring records, different areas.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: So this is a 

7 question of where the person worked relative 

8 to fission product exposure. Is that the 

9 issue here?

10 MEMBER MUNN: His external dose is 

11 listed. Bioassay results, calculated whole12 body dose, entered in quarterly. No film 

13 badge records would be expected for that time. 

14 It is a Savannah River case.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Doug, did you get 

16 this one?

17 MR. FARVER: I'm coming up to it 

18 here.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

20 MR. FARVER: Trying to find out 

21 what the finding meant. Oh, yes, I remember 

22 looking at this now and getting confused by 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

130

1 it. Yes, I would rather go back to square 

2 one, the data files.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. So you've 

4 got their response, and you will have to look 

5 at it?

6 MR. FARVER: Yes.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: You have to review 

8 it further? Alright.

9 MR. FARVER: It's for an action.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. 131.4.

11 MEMBER MUNN: My screen doesn't 

12 show anything new.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: It says, NIOSH 

14 will provide a sample characterization, is the 

15 last thing I have for 3/12. I don't know if 

16 we got any further than that.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't see 

18 anything additional here.

19 MR. FARVER: I couldn't find any 

20 sample calculations.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I think that is 

22 still ours, though.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

131

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I will 

2 leave it as a remaining action for NIOSH.

3 131.6. Was that updated at all?

4 MEMBER MUNN: I don't see anything 

5 in here on my list.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: This says the same 

7 thing. NIOSH will compare the whole body 

8 counts to TIB-0054 result. That's the same as 

9 the last case. So I guess the same method was 

10 used.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Which one were we 

12 just on?

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: 131.6

14 MEMBER MUNN: It's the same thing, 

15 right?

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, it's the same 

17 as 130.6, yes.

18 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, it is the same.

19 MR. FARVER: Well, it is the same 

20 as 129.5.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm sorry, yes. 

22 Yes, 129.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

132

1 I'm assuming we haven't got an 

2 update on that, right?

3 MR. FARVER: Right.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Moving 

5 right along, I'm down to 135.1.

6 MEMBER MUNN: April 15 update. 

7 The worker was routinely monitored for 

8 external radiation exposure throughout his 

9 career. Therefore, the revised doses were 

10 base reported dose and missed dose based on 

11 actual badges.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Doug, had you 

13 received that before?

14 MR. FARVER: Yes. I'm trying to 

15 see if we can find the original finding.

16 MS. BEHLING: Excuse me. This is 

17 Kathy.

18 I believe that this might have 

19 been an issue of blanks in the record and how 

20 we treat blanks, and whether they were 

21 actually considered missed or they just were 

22 not counted at all.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

133

1 MEMBER MUNN: That's what it looks 

2 like. The language of the finding would lead 

3 that to be.

4 MS. BEHLING: This individual 

5 worked at Y-12 and K-25.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Doug, do you want 

7 a little more time on this? You don't need to 

8 be put on the spot here.

9 MR. FARVER: Yes, let me look at 

10 this.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

12 MR. FARVER: I think it is just a 

13 real simple one.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

15 MR. FARVER: I'll take that 

16 action.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: It looks like 

18 before we said, yes, valid comment.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know how 

21 we concluded the person was monitored. The 

22 response doesn't say how we concluded that. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

134

1 So we had a mixture of blanks and zeroes in 

2 the record.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. And if you 

4 just want to walk it through, that's fine, 

5 yes, just to make sure.

6 MR. FARVER: Yes, the part that 

7 threw me was their April response. I didn't 

8 understand that.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: The which?

10 MR. FARVER: Your April 15th 

11 response. It looks like it was about ready to 

12 close or something from up above. We said it 

13 is a valid comment. Okay, well that should 

14 have closed it, so I didn't understand. So 

15 that is what confused me.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, okay.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: It seems like 

18 there was a question from the December 

19 meeting, it looks like, about how was the dose 

20 assigned originally, and I didn't know. That 

21 looks like what it was.

22 But it appears that in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

135

1 original dose reconstruction a blank was 

2 treated as unmonitored. So the person was 

3 given an ambient dose, whereas we have 

4 concluded since then that they were monitored 

5 the entire time. So ambient is not correct 

6 even though the record shows a blank. This 

7 should get a missed dose for that period as 

8 opposed to an ambient.

9 So that appears to be what the 

10 response says.

11 MR. FARVER: It seems to be the 

12 zeroes are blanks.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

15 MR. FARVER: I don't understand 

16 why we didn't close it. That was all.

17 MEMBER MUNN: I don't either.

18 MR. FARVER: We are not going to 

19 do any more on it. Let's close it.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

21 MEMBER MUNN: It makes sense based 

22 on recorded dose and missed dose. That is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

136

1 what we anticipated should be done.

2 MS. BEHLING: I think we were 

3 questioning if it should be missed dose or co4 worker dose.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Co-worker dose, 

6 yes.

7 Why don't we just leave it open 

8 and let you review the record, just to make 

9 sure we get it right? Because, yes, I agree 

10 with Kathy, it was a question of missed or co11 worker. Since the person was monitored all 

12 the time, when you fill in the gaps, it would 

13 be simply a --

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Then the question 

15 would become how do we know it was monitored 

16 all the time?

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, that's true. 

18 Right, right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Because if they 

20 weren't monitored all the time --

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: I guess that is 

22 what we are asking.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

137

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: They could have 

3 not been monitored for good reason. They 

4 could have left the location or whatever.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, or if they 

6 were monitored full-time and those records are 

7 missing --

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: -- well, then, how 

10 do you know missed is right? Should it be co11 worker for the period that is blanks?

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: That sounds like 

14 that is the issue. I'm going to ask how did 

15 we conclude --

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: What set was this 

17 again?

18 MR. FARVER: K-25 and Y-12.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, yes, okay. 

20 All right, I'm going to leave that open.

21 135.4.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, we haven't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

138

1 provided anything.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: This is potential 

3 tritium exposure at Y-12, right?

4 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's the issue?

6 MEMBER MUNN: Correct.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. There was no 

8 April update, was there?

9 MEMBER MUNN: No.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. 136.3.

11 MEMBER MUNN: That is one of those 

12 where the NIOSH information that was sent out 

13 April 15th says, please see the file on all 

14 these, 125, 126, et cetera, and additional 

15 responses. They sent a document out.

16 MR. FARVER: I didn't see anything 

17 in that file that talked about X-ray 

18 frequency. That was the only thing.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: So that file was 

20 sent out for April 15th? That was part of the 

21 April 15th? Okay. What site is this?

22 MR. FARVER: I don't know.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

139

1 MS. BEHLING: Rocky Flats.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, that's an 

3 interesting one. It appears that we 

4 originally did the dose reconstruction based 

5 on the records we got. Is that what's 

6 happened?

7 Yes. It says, however, in this 

8 claim, worker's X-ray records were provided.

9 So we subsequently found out that 

10 the records we were given, the X-ray records 

11 from Rocky Flats, weren't necessarily 

12 complete, that there is a secondary storage 

13 that included the actual films at Rocky Flats.

14 Since then, we have gone and they 

15 have actually generated a record from those 

16 films that has all of the films. So all of 

17 the exams are there, but the record we were 

18 getting was not necessarily the complete 

19 record. It might have been, but it wasn't 

20 necessarily.

21 So this, then, becomes a question 

22 of, now that we have retrieved those other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

140

1 records, the complete set --

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: You have to 

3 reevaluate this?

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: I think that has 

7 been done. I think we evaluated each time 

8 each of those cases when we got them.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: But that would be 

11 the case here.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Above this it says 

13 this case is under PER review anyway. It 

14 might be for other parts of --

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it could be 

16 under PER because it is Super S or something. 

17 It could be under it for that.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: It's our action to 

20 figure out where we are --

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: -- and what 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

141

1 happened to it.

2 Actually, well, it would take me 

3 too long. I might be able to find out what 

4 happened to it, but it would take me too long.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right. Now 

6 this doesn't necessarily carry through to the 

7 other ones.

8 136.4, this looks like --

9 MEMBER MUNN: It says, see the 

10 files.

11 MR. FARVER: This is where they 

12 did send out many files.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Many files. This 

14 one is '06.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, yes, I do 

16 recall this one now.

17 MEMBER MUNN: One, two, three, 

18 four, five, six, seven files.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: So you shared the 

20 IMBA runs?

21 MR. HINNEFELD: We shared the IMBA 

22 runs, right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

142

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, right. And 

2 what is the outcome of that? Any outcome?

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I don't 

4 think we've talked about it.

5 MR. FARVER: We haven't talked 

6 about it, and this is one of those where I 

7 argue with myself on both sides. So I'm not 

8 sure.

9 If you just look at the data and 

10 fit the data, there's many fits to the data 

11 that look good. Now how do you show one is 

12 better than the other? This is what we come 

13 back to. When you are looking at a visual 

14 fit, how do you determine one fits better than 

15 the other? This has been brought up before.

16 That is the point I am struggling 

17 with. I want to go back and look at this and 

18 see if I can come up with a way.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: And does NIOSH, I 

20 mean you don't procedurally address goodness 

21 of fit in any fashion, do you, for your IMBA 

22 runs?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

143

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I don't know 

2 for sure.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

4 MR. FARVER: It has been talked 

5 about by --

6 MR. HINNEFELD: IMBA will do a 

7 best fit.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: This is a Liz 

9 question.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it's a Liz 

11 question. IMBA will do its best fit based on 

12 parameters that you give it. Essentially, the 

13 amount of error on each bioassay sample, 

14 whether it is absolute or relative to the 

15 result, what to do about less-than-detectable 

16 values, how those are treated. All these 

17 things affect how IMBA is going to fit it.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: So even using the 

20 data with existing bioassay points and even 

21 using IMBA's automatic best fit, depending on 

22 what you tell it to do, it will fit it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

144

1 differently, I think. I think that is a true 

2 statement.

3 MR. FARVER: Yes.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm pretty sure 

5 that's right.

6 MS. BRACKETT: This is Liz. I 

7 heard someone say this is a Liz question.

8 (Laughter.)

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Liz, didn't know 

10 you were there.

11 MR. FARVER: Liz is lurking.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Did you hear the 

13 question?

14 MS. BRACKETT: Yes. It's a 

15 professional judgment, and IMBA does the fit. 

16 You're right, it is not proceduralized, but 

17 the basic guidance about the dose 

18 reconstruction is that they should use 

19 defaults when possible. If they are not in 

20 the general ballpark of it being close, you 

21 know, 40 to 60, in that range, then they don't 

22 need to do anything more specific.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

145

1 But as far as them trying to get a 

2 best estimate, it is open to professional 

3 judgment. I am working on revising OTIB-0060, 

4 which is the internal dosimetry '02 guidance 

5 document. I'm trying to put in some details. 

6 But this is a really difficult thing because 

7 different people have different ideas on what 

8 is the best fit.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, that's why I 

10 asked.

11 MR. FARVER: So for this 

12 particular case it is probably not going to 

13 matter because it is a PoC of about 36 

14 percent.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: That was my next 

16 question.

17 MR. FARVER: And the dose we are 

18 looking at is somewhere between -- I don't 

19 know, what did we say, 8 and maybe 30 rem. I 

20 mean that is the range. I'm not even sure 

21 that is enough to kick it up.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. So with all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

146

1 the different variations on fit, the worst 

2 case would still not affect this PoC 

3 significantly; is that what you're saying?

4 MR. FARVER: I'm guessing that.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

6 MR. FARVER: I don't think it 

7 would.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

9 MS. BRACKETT: And that's why I 

10 try to tell the dose reconstructors not to try 

11 to get maybe the very best fit for every case 

12 because that would be very, very time13 consuming, if we did that on all cases. It is 

14 more important that you spend the time on the 

15 cases where it is going to make a difference 

16 than on the cases where it won't.

17 So if the defaults don't look too 

18 bad and they are not in the ballpark of it

19 making a difference, then they should not be 

20 going any further than that.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I'm asking 

22 for this particular case.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

147

1 MS. BRACKETT: Right. I haven't 

2 looked at this one.

3 MR. FARVER: It probably will not 

4 affect this case, but because we have this 

5 other issue ongoing about the newness of 

6 things, I mean, and professional judgment, and 

7 because we have some real data here from this 

8 case, I would like to look at it and see if 

9 you went and did that for this case and tried 

10 to do a really best fit, is there a way you 

11 could actually quantify it?

12 So let's just keep this open so we 

13 know to discuss it.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

15 MR. FARVER: And I will take the 

16 action to put something together.

17 MS. BRACKETT: Actually, I think 

18 the dose that we estimated was about 42 rem, 

19 and the NIOSH dose was like 18.6 on this 

20 particular case.

21 MR. FARVER: Yes, so you are 

22 looking at not too much difference, 20 rem. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

148

1 I'm not sure that that would kick it up from 

2 35 percent.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Probably not far 

4 enough. Well, it's a good test case to make 

5 the decision on.

6 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, considering the 

7 circumstances of the claim.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, the 

9 circumstances of the claim.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes. All 

11 right, so it's worth --

12 MR. ELLIOTT: But lung would be 

13 different than bladder, of course.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes, yes.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it is kind of 

16 an interesting case.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I won't get 

19 into it.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know all 

22 the specifics.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

149

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: And 136.5 is the 

2 same conclusion, I think. It is going to 

3 remain open.

4 MEMBER MUNN: It says, we will be 

5 providing response next week.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

7 MEMBER MUNN: That was in that 

8 list of things we got.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Is this more of a 

10 question, though, is this exactly the same 

11 issue or is this a little different? One 

12 thirty-six point five; it's a question on the 

13 CATI. So it is a question of where they 

14 worked there. Yes, it is the workplace 

15 issues.

16 MR. FARVER: This has to do with 

17 he worked in a building that caught fire.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MR. FARVER: So you would expect 

20 more of a type S uranium probably.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: But NIOSH says 

22 they -- NIOSH does agree the report 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

150

1 incorrectly references his work and so -- not 

2 the fire. Right. But, apparently, that 

3 didn't affect the -- well, I don't know. Stu, 

4 did that affect the assessment of intake or 

5 the assessment of dose?

6 You're saying that you agree. 

7 NIOSH does agree that the report incorrectly 

8 references his work, and somebody said it's 

9 just not the fire in 444. I think you're 

10 saying it wouldn't cause you to change the 

11 model.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Right, because 

13 there's an issue, I guess, with there is a 

14 fairly short latency on this period. It is 

15 oddball, but this one worked out.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, okay.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: The class, type M, 

18 actually gave a higher lung estimate than type 

19 S. It's an oddball thing because it doesn't 

20 usually work that way.

21 MR. FARVER: Well, it has to do 

22 with fitting lung and urine data.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

151

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, because 

2 you've got two sets of data. Anyway, I think 

3 it's similar. It's wrapped into it.

4 In fact, it is tied to the CATI 

5 because the person mentioned the fire and the 

6 CATI.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

8 MEMBER MUNN: There were two files 

9 that you transmitted about type S, which I now 

10 cannot open.

11 MR. FARVER: I would say these two 

12 findings tie together.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, so you're 

14 going to follow up on them? Yes.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: I just found a 

16 note that we may have something even more 

17 recently.

18 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, you did. You 

19 sent two, well, on 4/15, you sent two files on 

20 case 136, type S, but I cannot open them.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: So you think there 

22 was something else sent, Stu?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

152

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I think 

2 something else has been prepared, but it may 

3 not have been sent to the Subcommittee.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, okay.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: It's what I'm 

6 figuring out now.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, I left it as 

8 an SC&A action, but if you have more 

9 information, obviously --

10 MR. HINNEFELD: If I have more, I 

11 will get it to you.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Get it to 

13 all of us, and Doug especially, yes.

14 The next one I have is 137.4. 

15 This says, TIB-0017 does not deal with the 

16 radionuclide location question or the 

17 contamination question, and NIOSH will 

18 consider this as an overarching issue.

19 My last note says -- I'm trying to 

20 remember. Does anybody else have any notes on 

21 this one?

22 MEMBER MUNN: No. I'm wondering 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

153

1 why we still had it. Because unless there is 

2 a response from SC&A to NIOSH's original 

3 comment --

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, we have had 

5 discussions. I don't know if this is part of 

6 it. We have had discussions before about, 

7 what about undetected skin contaminations?

8 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: That is what the 

10 bottom says there of your May 30th, 2008 

11 response. It was an evaluation of potential 

12 dose to the skin from undetected skin 

13 contamination.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Right.

15 MR. FARVER: This says it has been 

16 properly addressed in OTIB-0017.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: What is OTIB-0017? 

18 I don't recall.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Shelter.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Shelter?

21 MR. FARVER: But that doesn't 

22 address the radionuclide location or 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

154

1 contamination.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I think 

3 there are a couple. I think the two issues, 

4 you know, radionuclide location I think 

5 relates to sort of the directional -- it is 

6 how you account for directional dependency of 

7 a film badge to a beta source, you know, I 

8 think.

9 Then the skin contamination 

10 question is what about unidentified at the 

11 time skin contaminant issues?

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: I think that is 

13 what we were talking about.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. My position 

15 on that has been I don't know what to do with 

16 that. You know, once you start speculating 

17 that there was a skin contamination, why 

18 didn't you do a response? Why did you stop 

19 with one contamination? Why did you stop with 

20 a particular period of time?

21 Unless you decide as a policy for 

22 certain sites you are going to say the policy 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

155

1 is that we are going to say that the skin 

2 contaminations are this -- otherwise, there is 

3 no other way that you can answer it.

4 MR. FARVER: True.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: So that is kind of 

6 where we left it. In subsequent discussions, 

7 I don't know that there's a lot of stomach in 

8 OCAS for trying to pursue a policy like that. 

9 I think there will have to be other people 

10 involved. If we are going to go down the 

11 route, it would have to be maybe a discussion 

12 strictly of that, and maybe some different 

13 people.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: And I'm not sure 

15 when we say location question if we meant 

16 location like physical location of the plant 

17 or the badges.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, I don't know.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Because it might 

20 be just -- I mean, I was thinking, when I read 

21 it, I was thinking maybe such a policy for 

22 certain areas or processes, you know, people 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

156

1 that worked in certain buildings because it 

2 was known.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, like 

4 Fernald. Say there was contamination around 

5 Fernald.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: A lot of the Oak 

8 Ridge operation plants that were essentially 

9 uranium plants were treated like chemical 

10 plants.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: So if some of that 

13 stuff was laying around, so what?

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: So there are sort 

16 of a handful of sites that you could say this 

17 might be an issue at.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: But I think it is 

20 that same question.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: I think Kathy may 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

157

1 be more familiar with this exact finding.

2 MS. BEHLING: Yes, this is a 

3 Paducah case. I believe when we refer to 

4 location we are referring to buildings because 

5 we specify certain buildings in here where 

6 this employee worked, and they were doing 

7 tech-99 recovery operations there. That is 

8 why we were questioning.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, that's what I 

10 thought when I read location, yes.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: In fact, our 

12 original response does say an evaluation of 

13 potential skin dose from an undetected skin 

14 contaminant. Well, it says it should be 

15 included.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Now we were 

18 planning to do that.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Could we put 

20 workplace location in there if that is, in 

21 fact, the case?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I will 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

158

1 clarify that, yes.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Because when I read 

3 that, to me, deal with the radionuclide 

4 location question, I instantly think is it on 

5 the shoulder of the clothing or is it in the 

6 eye?

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. No, I can 

8 see how that was not clear.

9 MEMBER MUNN: In the nails or 

10 what?

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. I would put 

12 workplace location in there.

13 MS. BEHLING: This is another area 

14 I have written down that NIOSH might write a 

15 white paper. I don't know why.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: That is why this 

17 came up. It says, overarching issues.

18 MS. BEHLING: Okay.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Which I guess is 

20 where we left it, Stu that you said you knew 

21 it was kind of a policy question and you would 

22 have to go back and think about it more.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

159

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, and I would 

2 have to say that I think we will have to give

3 this to some of the key people in the room 

4 about how to proceed with this, if need be.

5 I'm certain I don't know how --

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I wouldn't want to 

8 make that call for OCAS.

9 MEMBER MUNN: Well, have we 

10 captured the fact that this issue is being 

11 addressed in overarching issues?

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, see, I'm not 

13 even sure it is on that. You know, there is 

14 sort of a list of overarching issues. I'm not 

15 sure if this is on there yet.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I am not sure 

17 this made the list yet.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Once it is there, 

19 you feel like you have got to do something, 

20 and I am not so sure right now what to do. If 

21 you are talking about unidentified skin 

22 contamination, I don't know -- I mean most of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

160

1 the things on the overarching issues, we feel 

2 like there is a technical resolution. There 

3 is a way to resolve those kinds of cases. I 

4 don't know of a technical resolution to this.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. I know you 

6 are thinking of it globally, but I think this 

7 came up specifically because of something in 

8 this case where the guy was involved in the 

9 tech-99 recovery.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Tech-99, yes.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: I don't know what 

12 the CATI said, but maybe it was something that 

13 he alluded to that they weren't monitored or 

14 whatever, you know. So maybe it is not -- I 

15 don't know. I can see the reluctance to make 

16 some kind of global policy about it, but maybe 

17 it is more of a work site-specific issue, you 

18 know.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Or maybe even on an 

20 individual case.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Certainly, how many 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

161

1 cases are you going to get where you have both 

2 the technetium and thorium question about 

3 potential contamination on skin and clothing?

4 So how are we going to resolve it?

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, NIOSH is 

6 going to follow up on it.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: We just need to 

8 sort it out. I need to start asking what did 

9 the finding actually say.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: You know, what is 

12 the basis of it? And what can we do about it? 

13 If it is strictly a matter of tech -- I mean 

14 if it is a question of the person was in a 

15 radiation field, a beta radiation field that 

16 included some contribution of tech, and their 

17 badge was calibrated for the thorium-234 beta, 

18 which is a much higher energy, what are you 

19 going to do about that? How do you deal with 

20 that? Which is some sort of assessment of the 

21 badge because probably it is going to be less 

22 responsive to the tech dose, in effect. It is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

162

1 going to be hard to see a tech.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: How do you deal 

5 with that? If it is an issue, if it is a 

6 contamination issue, a skin contamination 

7 issue, that is a different issue.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: A different issue.

9 MEMBER MUNN: It is.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: So I just need to 

11 go back and see what it is.

12 MR. FARVER: As we move on to the 

13 next, there's a couple more findings in this 

14 case that I was going to talk about now.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, on 137.6 --

16 MR. FARVER: So he was putting on 

17 roofs.

18 MEMBER MUNN: This specific case 

19 you're talking about now?

20 MR. FARVER: He was the 

21 groundskeeper, maintenance, and mechanic. 

22 Apparently, he had many jobs over the years. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

163

1 Cutting cells, mowing, sandblasting, wetting 

2 down roofs, and grinding them up, putting new 

3 roofs in old buildings. So this guy was all 

4 around, which makes it even more difficult.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: So he was a 

6 roofer? I'm sorry --

7 MR. FARVER: Well, he was in 

8 everything --

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: We had a little 

10 sidebar going.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: It sounds like he 

12 was a laborer because laborers are just doing 

13 everything. What did you say most of the 

14 stuff he was doing, you said --

15 MR. FARVER: Everything from 

16 mowing to cutting out cells, to wetting down 

17 roofs, grinding up the roofing when they put 

18 on new roofs.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Cutting out what?

20 MR. FARVER: Cutting out cells.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Cells?

22 MR. FARVER: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

164

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Like cells 

2 on the gaseous diffusion. Yes, that is 

3 important for technetium, yes.

4 I mean that's where they had a lot 

5 of the technetium was in the seals and stuff 

6 with the -

7 MR. HINNEFELD: And it was in a 

8 cascade at different places.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: But the seals, it 

10 tended to collect there. We know that issue.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: They would get 

12 into it and didn't know they were into it 

13 sometimes.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

15 MR. ELLIOTT: And the seal would 

16 pull out, and there would be those, what they 

17 call, puffs and great smoke.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

19 MR. ELLIOTT: Just a puff.

20 MR. FARVER: This is more of a 

21 unique case.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

165

1 So when you look at it, Stu, 

2 definitely think about is that a case-specific 

3 thing or maybe it's not a global issue here 

4 per se.

5 So does it still apply on 137.6?

6 MR. HINNEFELD: I think it is the 

7 same thing. Our action was, we have to look 

8 at a program.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean this is for 

10 the internal dose, the appropriateness of 

11 solubility.

12 MEMBER MUNN: Well, yes, and they 

13 responded about solubility.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, you did?

15 MEMBER MUNN: They determined on 

16 April 15th about evaluating potential types 

17 and choosing which results result in the 

18 highest internal dose.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Is that 4/15? 

20 Okay, yes.

21 Did you see this response, Doug?

22 MR. FARVER: I saw the response. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

166

1 I didn't see -- well, I don't know if there 

2 were any files for this one that were sent. I 

3 don't believe so. So it is going to have to 

4 go back to the original data. So I will look 

5 at this one.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: The IMBA runs 

7 weren't in -- were there any IMBA runs or 

8 maybe it wasn't done?

9 MEMBER MUNN: In another case, 

10 137.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 137.6.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I mean, 

13 chances are it would include the IMBA run that 

14 was used, but not necessarily another -- I 

15 will decide if it will be able to run.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

17 MR. FARVER: I mean that is kind 

18 of what it says in the finding, that there was 

19 no real basis for selecting F. It really 

20 wasn't shown in the records why F was 

21 selected.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: So, SC&A, you are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

167

1 going to review this?

2 MR. FARVER: I am going to have to 

3 look it up.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Is this systemic 

5 or does the cancer --

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: We are just 

7 talking beta dose.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: But that really 

9 only enters into uranium.

10 MR. FARVER: Skin.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: It's skin?

12 MR. FARVER: Skin.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: So internal would 

15 have to be systemic. It would have to be 

16 systemic. You get a skin dose from internal. 

17 So there's usually not a lot of difference.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: If it's systemic, 

20 it's systemic, and it's a certain amount.

21 MR. FARVER: No, this question 

22 just went back to how do you know you are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

168

1 selecting the most claimant-favorable 

2 solubility class if it is not shown? We have 

3 had that discussion before.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, but, I mean, 

5 if you are doing a dose, if it is based on 

6 bioassays, you know, the urine data -- I don't 

7 know what it is based on, but if it's based on 

8 urine data --

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: It's probably 

10 based on urine data at Paducah, I would think, 

11 right?

12 MR. HINNEFELD: I would think so. 

13 A particular set of bioassay data, urine data 

14 translates into a particular systemic data. 

15 It is systemic uranium, which is going to be 

16 distributed in the same manner. So there's 

17 really not much difference, given the amount 

18 systemic is going to be and what it is.

19 MR. FARVER: I'll go back and look 

20 at that.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay.

22 MR. FARVER: It's probably --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

169

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: The original 

2 question really was relative really to showing 

3 the different --

4 MR. FARVER: Between F and M.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- different runs, 

6 right. I mean, yes, this is kind of how it 

7 came up.

8 MR. FARVER: I'll just go back and 

9 then run type N and compare the doses.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, yes. Yes. 

11 That's fine.

12 All right, 137.7, internal dose 

13 from fission products.

14 MEMBER MUNN: It also has an April 

15 15th.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

17 MR. FARVER: I do have a question 

18 about this one. The question is, I couldn't 

19 find anything in the Y-12 technical basis 

20 about their mobile counter. Is it in the Y-12 

21 technical basis or is it in the -- I didn't 

22 find it in the Paducah one, either.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

170

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, yes, I don't 

2 know where it is, but it's --

3 MR. FARVER: I'm sure it is 

4 somewhere.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, they 

6 definitely had the unit go to Paducah, yes.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I would bet 

8 that this isn't our site profile. I would bet 

9 this was the Y-12 technical basis document. I 

10 would bet that's what that is.

11 MR. FARVER: Okay. So is there 

12 any documentation of the Y-12 counter?

13 MR. HINNEFELD: We should have. I 

14 mean it should be referred to.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: We can look. I 

17 can try to find if it is in SRDB and what the 

18 reference number is.

19 MR. FARVER: No, I just couldn't 

20 find it. I mean I'm not saying that your 

21 response is wrong. It is just that I couldn't 

22 find it.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

171

1 MR. HINNEFELD: I am just guessing 

2 here that the Y-12 internal dose, that the 

3 technical basis document we referred to in our 

4 April 15th response is not the section of the 

5 site profile because DOE sites wrote things 

6 called technical basis documents.

7 MR. FARVER: Sure.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, I see. Yes, 

9 yes.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: And I suspect 

11 that's what it is talking about because that 

12 is where Y-12 would be likely to talk about 

13 that.

14 MR. FARVER: But is it talked 

15 about in any of the NIOSH documentation that 

16 has been written?

17 MR. HINNEFELD: That we have 

18 written?

19 MR. FARVER: Yes. The mobile 

20 counter.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: We wouldn't have a 

22 TIB or anything about it. I don't know that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

172

1 we have written anything about it. But we 

2 should have, I would think we would have 

3 copies of those documents that we're referring 

4 to. That would then allow us to -- it should 

5 be in SRDB with a reference number that we 

6 could look at it and see it.

7 MR. FARVER: Okay.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: I'm relatively 

9 familiar with it. I mean I just printed out 

10 this whole, big, long list of radionuclides.

11 MR. FARVER: So when you do a DR 

12 then, does that show up in the references?

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, do you mean

14 would the --

15 MR. FARVER: Would the normal 

16 counter reference show up in a DR report?

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Probably not. 

18 Probably not.

19 MR. FARVER: Okay. I am just 

20 wondering how you would get back to that 

21 reference.

22 MR. ELLIOTT: Would it be in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

173

1 dose information we've got?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I mean the 

3 printout. It is in the printout of the data 

4 reported, the in vivo. It could be in the DOE 

5 response, in part of the file. It could be. 

6 It wouldn't necessarily be. It depends on how 

7 the site is providing it.

8 The in vivo counter, the global in 

9 vivo counter printed out, quote, activity for 

10 all these different radionuclides based on a 

11 region of interest. No matter what the counts 

12 were in there, it printed it out with no 

13 indication of what the background is, you 

14 know, what the background of the body and the 

15 chamber is, none of that.

16 So it just would print out an 

17 activity. Some sites may have recorded all of 

18 those into a person's dose record. Some may 

19 have just said, well, we only have uranium

20 here, or only uranium and thorium here. I 

21 will only record those numbers into the 

22 record.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

174

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: The ones of 

2 interest, right.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Some sites may 

4 have taken that printout from the in vivo 

5 counter and put it in the employees' files, in 

6 which case you would have a whole long list of 

7 them.

8 So it is hard. You know, each 

9 site's recordkeeping would indicate --

10 MR. FARVER: Well, that's what I 

11 was asking. Is it discussed in the Paducah 

12 technical basis, what they did?

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Now when you say, 

14 technical basis, do you mean --

15 MR. FARVER: No, a site profile.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know. I 

17 don't know.

18 MR. FARVER: Okay. I didn't see 

19 it. That is why it would be nice to have a 

20 little blurb in there saying they used a Y-12 

21 mobile counter.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: And here's a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

175

1 reference to find some more information.

2 MR. FARVER: Yes, the reference 

3 would be to the site profile.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

5 MR. FARVER: I was just wondering 

6 how you could trace it back, and that would be 

7 the way.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know. I 

9 can find out. I think, certainly, it would be 

10 worthwhile. I would think that the technical 

11 basis -- I'm sorry -- the site profile would 

12 say in vivo counting during these years was 

13 performed with the Y-12 in vivo counter. I 

14 would think that it would say that.

15 Now whether or not it would then 

16 include a reference that would give the 

17 technical description of its capabilities, I 

18 don't know if it would say that or not. I 

19 would think that the site profile would have 

20 said that. That's the way it works.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, maybe you 

22 can talk offline about the reference, get back 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

176

1 to Doug on the reference, and you can follow 

2 up on this finding.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Or the NIOSH 

5 response.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: And I can take it 

7 back to us, look, how can we improve the trail 

8 for technical information on the in vivo --

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: And that may be 

10 the only outcome of this, but I guess, at 

11 least for now, let Doug see the reference.

12 MS. BEHLING: Now we're still on 

13 finding 137.7?

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

15 MS. BEHLING: Okay. I thought in 

16 this individual's file, the DOE file, we had 

17 both in vivo and in vitro monitoring for 

18 fission products. That is why we were 

19 questioning because, typically, when the 

20 individual is monitored, there is some missed 

21 dose calculated. In this case, it was both in 

22 vivo and in vitro. So I think they would have 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

177

1 gone out also.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Really?

3 MR. FARVER: It says that there 

4 was both in vivo and in vitro monitoring.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, that's what it 

6 says in the response from NIOSH.

7 MS. BEHLING: I mean, if we are 

8 going to be consistent with what we do in 

9 other cases, generally, even if it's less than 

10 the MDA value, usually, because he was 

11 monitored, they will still calculate a missed 

12 dose.

13 I don't know how relevant it is 

14 going to be, you know, dose to this case, but 

15 it is more, I thought, something more of a 

16 procedural issue.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. So that is 

18 sort of a second with respect to this, right?

19 MR. FARVER: Actually, that is 

20 part of the primary aspect.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's a primary 

22 aspect, yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

178

1 MR. FARVER: I think the secondary 

2 one is if you want to talk about the Y-12 

3 global counter, you know, if you want to 

4 discuss all that somewhere, about them only 

5 recording certain nuclides. I would suggest 

6 it go in a little blurb in a site profile.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: The 4/15 response, 

8 does that address the urinalysis question? 

9 No?

10 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't think so.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: No? So maybe 

12 there's like a dual follow-up here. I mean, 

13 is this the same question that we had before, 

14 that there are results that appear to be 

15 positive results that weren't assessed as far 

16 as dose, even though they might be fairly 

17 small?

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, in vitro 

19 bioassays, whether it was positive or not, 

20 when you do in vitro for fission products, 

21 then that argues against the conclusion that 

22 the cesium in vivo data is only there because 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

179

1 the mobile counter spit it out.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Yes, yes.

3 So I will put a NIOSH follow-up on 

4 that as well.

5 Okay, we're getting there. 137.8.

6 MEMBER MUNN: An April 15th 

7 response.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: There is an April 

9 15th response?

10 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

12 MEMBER MUNN: A significant one.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Did you look at 

14 this response, Doug?

15 MR. FARVER: Yes. The concern is 

16 that the CATI report, the individual indicates 

17 he had to wet down the roofs of the buildings 

18 and grind them up, put new roofing on the 

19 buildings, and when he did this job, his face 

20 and arms got burned because the dust got into 

21 the pores of his skin.

22 So the concern here is low-energy 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

180

1 beta radiation since we have a skin cancer 

2 case.

3 So what do you do about it? 

4 Should there be some calculations done? It is 

5 probably not going to be caught up in the 

6 routine dosimetry a person is wearing, which 

7 was a statement that was made in the DR 

8 report.

9 Dosing would have been received, 

10 and these incidents would have been reported 

11 in the dosimetry records. Probably not.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Do we have any 

13 information on the location of the cancer, the 

14 skin cancer? Was it on his face?

15 MS. BEHLING: On his face.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, okay. So 

17 it's definitely relevant.

18 MR. FARVER: I read the response, 

19 and they talk about cutting out cells and 

20 things. But, still, maybe it does need to be 

21 assessed somehow, and then that comes back to, 

22 okay, how do you do that?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

181

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Well, the NIOSH 

3 response then says, a direct and unmonitored 

4 skin contamination dose could be concluded 

5 appropriate since no specific information is 

6 available that exactly meet the criteria. 

7 Whether it is performed work or was it 

8 involved in an incident? With the technetium 

9 recovery areas, during the appropriate time 

10 period, the work cutting up the cells was 

11 discussed in the report, but it was assumed 

12 that the employee's monitoring was adequate.

13 The report would have been 

14 stronger if it had contained an evaluation of 

15 the potential for unmonitored skin 

16 contamination as it relates to the work and 

17 the cell maintenance work.

18 MR. FARVER: Well, I mean, if he 

19 was doing roofing, were there any Tc releases 

20 he would have gotten on the roof?

21 MEMBER MUNN: As I was 

22 interpreting what I just read, it says there 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

182

1 is no information that indicates that there 

2 was any kind of technetium incident recovery 

3 during the time periods that were appropriate. 

4 It says so.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay. Is the 

6 basis for this the statement in the CATI that 

7 he was removing this --?

8 MR. FARVER: Yes, that's what 

9 triggered it.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: And then he 

12 replaced the roof and the skin on his face was 

13 burned because that got on his skin?

14 MR. FARVER: That's what triggered 

15 it.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: We're not really 

17 talking about radiation burn to the skin, are 

18 we?

19 MR. FARVER: Possibly not.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean you're 

21 talking about over 100 rads or something for 

22 that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

183

1 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. Yes, I don't 

2 think so.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean there are 

4 chemicals or something like that that could 

5 have been introduced, I would think.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, but he may 

7 be correct about being contaminated in his 

8 face.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: It would seem to 

10 me that a mixture of stuff --

11 MR. ELLIOTT: It would burn 

12 exposed skin.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: It would seem to 

15 me that there is probably a better chance for 

16 getting into that than --

17 MR. FARVER: I know, but how do 

18 you handle it when a person makes statements 

19 like this? I mean I know the roofs at K-25 

20 were contaminated when they went to replace 

21 them.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Yes, sure.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

184

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, Fernald's 

2 were, too.

3 MR. FARVER: So these people have 

4 worked around that.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I mean, aside 

6 from the burn part, I think that the person's 

7 account of getting a lot of dust in his face 

8 is probably accurate. Now did it result in a 

9 significant skin dose? Who knows?

10 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know where 

11 we go. I don't know where we go.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Again, to me, this 

14 sounds a lot like not being undetected skin 

15 contaminants, which we were talking about 

16 earlier -- I don't know where you go with it.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

18 MS. BEHLING: And I guess it does 

19 go back to Finding 137.4, where we previously 

20 detected. But we also pulled a few sentences 

21 out of the Technical Basis Document that 

22 specifically say some skin contamination 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

185

1 events on tech-99 could have occurred without 

2 being detected at the time.

3 Now I don't know what time frame 

4 we are talking about here. So I would have to 

5 go back. But we do have some quotes in here 

6 from the TBD that also support our finding.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, this is the 

8 whole issue of tech-99 really wasn't 

9 recognized at the site for a while, and then 

10 it became a hot issue after a certain time 

11 period.

12 I don't know if Larry knows 

13 exactly the date and stuff, but that might be 

14 the time period referenced there in your 

15 quote.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: But this could 

18 have happened after that time period. So I 

19 don't know.

20 MEMBER MUNN: The whole business 

21 of saying something could have happened 

22 somewhere at some time is far, far too 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

186

1 amorphous to try to attach a, yes, in that 

2 case, therefore, statement.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: But it sounds like 

4 he is being fairly specific. I think we need 

5 to go back and say, if this was in 1990 on the 

6 roof, at that time period, you might be able 

7 to say measures were in place that would make 

8 this highly unlikely.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: The best you could 

10 hope for would be to have a time frame when, 

11 for instance, once it was there, but before it 

12 was particularly recognized in the work --

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Exactly.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: If you had the 

15 time frame and if you were to have something 

16 based on some experience and some indications 

17 that this is a reasonable event --

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: -- to me that is 

20 the best you would hope for. But, again, that 

21 is policy; there is no technical argument to 

22 be made.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

187

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, right. I 

2 know. I know.

3 MEMBER MUNN: No.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: What's the PoC?

5 MR. FARVER: Forty-three percent. 

6 Oh, no, let's see if I'm on the right one.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean the 

8 exposure, well, who knows, but the CATI says 

9 in the face, and the cancer was on the face.

10 MS. BEHLING: Forty-three percent. 

11 You're correct, Doug.

12 MR. FARVER: Forty-three percent.

13 MR. ELLIOTT: So could you come at 

14 it with a calculation trying to figure out how 

15 much technetium exposure you would have to 

16 have --

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, you might be 

18 able to do that, I mean if you go through it

19 case by case. But, then, what do you get when 

20 you get to a 49.4 percent one?

21 MR. FARVER: The employment period 

22 is 1974 through present.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

188

1 MEMBER MUNN: So the key really 

2 and truly is --

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: 1974, it might 

4 have been there, yes.

5 MEMBER MUNN: What was the time?

6 MR. ELLIOTT: When he did this 

7 activity.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: When he did the 

9 roofing stuff.

10 MEMBER MUNN: If it occurred much 

11 later, then --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is unlikely.

13 MEMBER MUNN: -- it is unlikely.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: To have that much 

15 of a concentration.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: The roofing 

18 doesn't seem like that good of a candidate to 

19 have the concentrate of tech.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: At that time, 

21 right.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: There might be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

189

1 some tech along with uranium, but I would 

2 think you would have mainly uranium, and that 

3 the concentrate of tech exposure would be more 

4 likely to occur in cascade work. That would 

5 be my take.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: The cutting of the 

7 cells. Yes.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know. To 

9 me, it is a fun, philosophical discussion, but 

10 I don't know where you end up.

11 MR. FARVER: And I am not familiar 

12 with the buildings at the Paducah, C-420, and 

13 C-410.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: No, I don't know 

15 those.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Is he saying C-410 

17 and 20?

18 MR. FARVER: Yes, the C buildings. 

19 Those are process buildings?

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Some of the 

21 nastiest buildings there, but I don't know 

22 whether they had tech in them as much.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

190

1 MEMBER MUNN: Well, 340, 412, 410, 

2 600.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 410 and 420

4 were the fluorination buildings.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, no.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I had a bad 

8 experience with steam plant ash which came out 

9 of fluorine. A major portion of my life for a 

10 couple of years.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, the ash from 

12 Paducah, yes. Yes, you know that stuff, yes.

13 MR. FARVER: Even though the dose 

14 reconstructor may understand some of these 

15 concerns, there is not a lot of records or no 

16 notes to follow. In other words, if he could 

17 look at that and say, well, his employment 

18 period during this time of the roofing was 

19 such-and-such a date, and therefore, we do 

20 consider it --

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

22 MR. FARVER: -- then all of this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

191

1 would go away.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. For me, I 

3 think this deserves a little more examination 

4 of the specifics of the guy's job, time 

5 period, et cetera, before we just dismiss it. 

6 That's my opinion.

7 MR. FARVER: Yes.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm curious, I 

9 don't have the case in front of me, but if 

10 there were any incident reports at all in his 

11 file. I know this is all out of the CATI, but 

12 was there any actual, you know, reported 

13 incidents or whatever? Probably not, but I'm 

14 just curious.

15 MR. FARVER: Gee, I don't know. I 

16 don't have the files here.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Anyway, so we have 

18 a NIOSH response.

19 Is this a NIOSH follow-up or kind 

20 of both follow-up?

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I am 

22 including it in what we're -- we have some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

192

1 other things to look into on 137.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I'm including it 

4 in that.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: If there is more 

7 we can do here, particularly in terms of the 

8 timing, potential timing, of the exposure.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: The timing of 

10 these exposures was relevant to radiological 

11 policies, yes, seriously.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know where 

13 else to go with it.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right. Yes, I 

15 know. I agree.

16 MR. FARVER: Yes, I think this 

17 goes back to the inadvertent skin exposure. 

18 What do you do? And how do you determine it?

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

20 MR. FARVER: It just almost seems 

21 like, when they make specific statements in 

22 there like that, that somehow it should be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

193

1 addressed --

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

3 MR. FARVER: -- because they are 

4 going to know what statements they made.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: To that extent, 

6 that's a good point. I made this statement in 

7 the CATI, and they ignored it, if you don't 

8 say anything back to them.

9 MR. FARVER: Yes.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, let's see, I 

11 am down to 144.2. We're almost at the end of 

12 this matrix, Larry. I'm sorry.

13 Was there a 4/15 response on 

14 144.2?

15 MEMBER MUNN: No. I was just 

16 looking at 143.1.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, is there 

18 something I missed?

19 MEMBER MUNN: Let's see. What 

20 follow-up?

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: 143.1?

22 MR. HINNEFELD: 143.1, Mark's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

194

1 version and our comments were not written on 

2 it, is that it is closed because it falls in 

3 the SEC class.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Thank you.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, NIOSH 

7 agreed, but then there was no further action 

8 because it falls in the SEC class anyway. 

9 Okay.

10 So now I'm up to 144. -- What was 

11 it? -- 144.2.

12 MEMBER MUNN: Apparently, in .1 we 

13 said SC&A is going to review the whole case.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, did we?

15 MEMBER MUNN: I thought.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, I have, on 

17 3/12, for 144.1, SC&A reviewed the NIOSH 

18 calculations and agreed that it was done in 

19 accordance with TIB-0017. That was 144.1.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: So I left that as 

22 no further action. Is that right?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

195

1 MR. FARVER: Yes.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, there is an 

4 April 15th response on 144.2.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Okay, 

6 there is. So 144.2, there was an April 

7 response.

8 Doug, did you look into that?

9 MR. FARVER: Yes.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

11 MR. FARVER: Yes. Apparently, 

12 they needed to modify or change their tables. 

13 It has to do with the maximum doses. Relies 

14 on the ambient dose, and Table 4-225 -- the 

15 maximum for each row and the maximum for the 

16 table was used.

17 So I went back and looked, and 

18 then they said they are going to correct it in 

19 the next revision to the TBD. So that is 

20 fine.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: So SC&A is in 

22 agreement?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

196

1 MR. FARVER: Yes.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: So that one is 

3 closed. Okay.

4 And that's it, right?

5 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, we made 

8 it. Everybody looks so chipper.

9 (Laughter.)

10 Well, let's see, I wanted to move 

11 up on the agenda this topic because Larry has 

12 been patient all day waiting for us, and 

13 really here for probably one primary topic of 

14 interest, which is the discussion of the 

15 Summary Findings in our First Hundred Cases 

16 Report, and what further we can do with this 

17 Summary Findings, what the Board can say about 

18 those Summary Findings.

19 So I thought we would at least 

20 have an initial discussion here on that, and 

21 I'm not sure we are going to finish today with 

22 a recommendation to bring back to the Board, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

197

1 but at least have some initial dialogue on 

2 that.

3 I actually would love to have John 

4 on the phone for this, too, but I don't think 

5 he has joined us yet.

6 Anyway, I would actually like, 

7 Larry, if you wouldn't mind, sort of 

8 refreshing us from what we said at the Board 

9 meeting. I guess the action that came back to 

10 the Subcommittee was we put this report out on 

11 the first hundred cases and we made some -- I 

12 guess the next challenge was, you know, well, 

13 what exactly does this mean relative to the 

14 NIOSH program? Have they been making the 

15 grade, basically? Is this an excellent job, 

16 good job, fair job?

17 Go ahead.

18 MR. KATZ: My memory of this, but 

19 it could be faulty because I didn't look at

20 this part. I have looked at some of the 

21 transcript, but I didn't come across this when 

22 I was.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

198

1 My memory was that the remaining 

2 issue which was kicked off at the Board 

3 meeting with a presentation from Stu, I think, 

4 was really to just go a little bit further 

5 into what changes have been implemented by 

6 OCAS in response to those issues. Stu gave a 

7 big summary to that.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: A short summary.

9 MR. KATZ: A short summary to 

10 that. A broad summary to that, I meant.

11 Then the thing was just to go into 

12 a little more detail, to have a good 

13 understanding for what positive progress has 

14 been in improving sort of procedures or 

15 quality assurance, depending on what the 

16 finding was in relation to that work of the 

17 Board.

18 But that is my rough memory of it.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. I think one 

20 thing was what changes have been made as a 

21 result of the DR review process?

22 But the one that keeps coming back 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

199

1 to my mind is the quality assurance question. 

2 I know this came up in our discussion at the 

3 Board meeting, and there are some of these 

4 findings that end up being, yes, we missed 

5 this, but it would have resulted in 1 millirem 

6 or something, or 2 millirem, and would have 

7 had hardly any effect on the PoC.

8 So, at the end of the day, we got 

9 the decision right, and that is what we are 

10 worried about, is getting the decision right.

11 Then I'm talking about -- and that 

12 is why I initially included that sort of case13 specific and then program-wide ranking of my 

14 findings or our findings. Then the question 

15 becomes, if you have a bunch of these quality 

16 -- sort of under the topic of quality control 

17 findings, what does that mean. Is it 

18 important? What's acceptable?

19 Stu and I were talking before the 

20 meeting started, you know, what level is 

21 acceptable in the program. I guess, from my 

22 standpoint, it gets a little more nuanced than 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

200

1 that even, in that I can see a certain level 

2 of acceptance for the sort of overestimating 

3 cases or underestimating cases as opposed to 

4 the best estimate cases. Then your QC grade 

5 might have to be a little higher. You know, 

6 the level of errors should be much smaller on 

7 those kinds of cases.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: If you do a thorough 

9 job.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes. I guess 

11 that is what we want to sort of wrestle with, 

12 is, how do we evaluate that? From the Board's 

13 standpoint, how do we evaluate that? How has 

14 NIOSH performed in that regard?

15 I don't know if we are ready to 

16 make sort of some conclusion on that, but at 

17 least just to think about how we evaluate it, 

18 so we have some sort of metrics outlined as we

19 go forward.

20 In addition to what Ted said, I 

21 think that is an important thing, is what has 

22 been changed as a result of this process. I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

201

1 think we also have to discuss -- we've got, as 

2 Larry, I think you pointed out in our 

3 discussion of this, you've got a boatload of 

4 findings, and somebody comes and says, look at 

5 all these findings, but a lot of them are 

6 almost the same finding repeated many times. 

7 The argument can be made of kind of a minute 

8 finding, you know, not very significant.

9 MEMBER MUNN: That is one of the 

10 reasons I think that we were very careful in 

11 our early establishment of what criteria were 

12 going to be included in our quality assurance 

13 process, and making sure that there was a 

14 differentiation made between low-impact, 

15 medium-impact, and large-impact, which SC&A 

16 has used consistently throughout this entire 

17 review process, and which we have paid very 

18 little attention to in this forum here.

19 We have taken each finding 

20 individually and given each one almost the 

21 kind of individual scrutiny that we would have 

22 anticipated from high-impact findings at all 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

202

1 times.

2 So we have debated the issues 

3 surrounding low-level issues quite strongly, 

4 and how we, therefore, would quantify these 

5 issues of impact. It is very difficult for me 

6 to try to get my hands around. I can't 

7 imagine, absent a significant data-capture 

8 program of some sort that compares the types 

9 of findings and the level of findings, I don't 

10 know how we would quantify it.

11 I think we have to make any 

12 assessment that we make in thoroughly positive 

13 terms.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know one thing. 

15 I mean, you are correct about our 

16 subcommittee meetings in general. We don't 

17 get into those. We debate each finding on 

18 almost equal merit, or whatever.

19 But our roll-up reports do attempt 

20 to include --

21 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. They 

22 identify --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

203

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean, some of 

2 the criteria was, for instance, if something 

3 was in -- I'm trying to think -- like 

4 TIB-0004. That was one of the ones that came 

5 up on several cases, and it also potentially 

6 affected a large number of claimants. So then 

7 it was viewed as a higher-level program-wide 

8 finding because it could have impact on more 

9 than just that case potentially.

10 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then we had some 

12 that were like site-wide, so they were medium 

13 or high because they could have affected a lot 

14 more people, that sort of thing.

15 Then there's the whole quality 

16 question. A lot of them on the case level 

17 were fairly low-level findings, but then when 

18 you see a pattern, then you question whether 

19 it had a higher ranking as far as program20 wide. Was it more significant than we view on 

21 an individual case?

22 I mean the questions that I had 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

204

1 had about the peer-reviewed stuff, I think it 

2 was at the last meeting when Doug was 

3 discussing one of the cases, and we were kind 

4 of going through the findings one by one and 

5 saying, well, NIOSH agrees, but it wouldn't 

6 have affected anything on this case; no 

7 further action.

8 And we went down that way like two 

9 or three times, and Doug says, I don't want to 

10 make a big issue out of any one of these 

11 findings. However, collectively, I'm a little 

12 concerned that peer review didn't get any of 

13 these, or it's not documented in the case 

14 file, anyway.

15 That may be another question of 

16 just how some of these things may not require 

17 a dose reconstruction to be reassessed by the 

18 original dose reconstructor, but a peer review 

19 might note that there is a discrepancy; 

20 however, no need to reevaluate because it is a 

21 minimal discrepancy or, you know, it would not 

22 affect the outcome.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

205

1 But those weren't included in the 

2 case files. So that was some of the ones we 

3 have talked about, and I will let Larry talk 

4 to some of this now.

5 MR. ELLIOTT: Okay. There are 

6 several things I would like to say.

7 First of all, let me start by 

8 saying that the Advisory Board and its 

9 process, and this Subcommittee's efforts, I 

10 think demonstrate a very thorough review, very 

11 thorough.

12 So, with that in mind, though, I 

13 would offer that we perhaps come from 

14 different places on what the acceptable level 

15 of quality is in a dose reconstruction. I 

16 think our, he starts from a place that says we 

17 need to make sure that we get our work done to 

18 assure that the answer given to the claimant 

19 by DOL is the correct answer.

20 So we also start from the position 

21 that perfect is the enemy of good. If we 

22 strive to be perfect in all aspects of a dose 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

206

1 reconstruction report for each individual, we 

2 certainly wouldn't have been able to get 

3 25,700 done in the amount of time that we have 

4 done them.

5 Nevertheless, Stu's review of 

6 changes that we have adopted or incorporated, 

7 based upon this Subcommittee's review of dose 

8 reconstructions, was very general, as we 

9 talked -- heard about a moment ago. On the 

10 outside, it probably seemed -- and I had a 

11 couple of people ask me about this -- doesn't 

12 seem like we have made many changes at all. 

13 Is it that NIOSH OCAS doesn't see any real 

14 value from the Subcommittee's reviews, and I'm 

15 saying, no, that's not the case.

16 Again, we start from different 

17 places when we approach this. So that has 

18 helped others understand.

19 But my ears pick up and I start 

20 listening very attentively and red flags go 

21 off in my mind when I hear things about 

22 quality control and, yes, Doug's point is well 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

207

1 made. If we see all of these little bitty 

2 deficiencies, nits, it leads one to think, 

3 well, if they're not worried about that, what 

4 are they worried about? How good is the work 

5 that they are doing?

6 Again, I often say we are trying 

7 to make sure we get the right answer as 

8 quickly as we can. And I have said at Board 

9 meetings that there are warts -- I think 

10 that's one of the terms and euphemisms I have 

11 used, analogies I have used -- there's warts 

12 on these things. They are not perfect.

13 They are perfect in a sense that 

14 we are trying to get the right answer, but 

15 they are not perfect in the sense that we have 

16 correctly perhaps addressed everything we 

17 should have.

18 What I find most disconcerting is 

19 when we hear something in the CATI and we 

20 don't speak to it in a DR. Anything that goes 

21 to responding to claimants' concerns, 

22 clarifying for a claimant, and providing a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

208

1 better understanding of how we treated their 

2 information is bothersome to me. Because 

3 whether or not we got the answer right or 

4 wrong, we owe that person, we are obliged to 

5 treat that person, that set of claimants, as 

6 compassionately and as fully and thoroughly as 

7 we can.

8 So I don't want to see us 

9 disregard or not speak to certain items that 

10 they bring up. I think that is when my 

11 stomach starts turning, and I start worrying 

12 about how well we are reporting out our work 

13 in dose reconstruction reports.

14 I am not going to preach here, but 

15 I just want everybody to understand that we 

16 kind of come at this from a different 

17 perspective. You do a very thorough review, 

18 and I appreciate that. We are looking very 

19 hard at what comes out of these reviews.

20 It probably doesn't appear that we 

21 are making changes, but when and where we feel 

22 that it is appropriate for a program concern 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

209

1 or an individual situation, we take action. I 

2 guess we would be hard-pressed to keep that 

3 documented and put it in front of you at all 

4 times.

5 But I had hoped what would come 

6 out of a discussion about this among the Work 

7 Group members and the Board itself is, if we 

8 can identify certain deficiencies or 

9 categories of deficiencies that you view as 

10 critical, and we can talk about those, and if 

11 we come to agreement and consensus that they 

12 are critical, then those are the things we 

13 should make sure we do tackle, make sure that 

14 we do modify our reports and our behavior.

15 Maybe we can come out of that with 

16 also an agreement on, well, what isn't so 

17 critical. That is the other side of the coin, 

18 you know. That may save SC&A some time. It 

19 may save the Subcommittee some time.

20 Because, at some point, I would 

21 hope that you would all agree that, if we have 

22 heard the same issue over and over and over 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

210

1 again, and we are not taking action, you 

2 should beat us up. Or, if we hear a spot 

3 issue here and a spot issue there, maybe we 

4 don't need to spend our time on those, and we 

5 can agree about that, and not have to hear 

6 those come out again.

7 But that's all I've got to say. I 

8 just felt that I wanted to speak to that that 

9 way at this meeting.

10 I don't know if Stu has other 

11 thoughts beyond that, but we struggle all the 

12 time with, where are we at on our quality 

13 assurance, quality control, and what is our 

14 acceptance criteria.

15 Stu?

16 MR. HINNEFELD: Nothing more, 

17 other than that, I guess the key question to 

18 me is, what is an acceptable dose 

19 reconstruction. We even talk about what needs 

20 are a little bit, Mark and Larry and I.

21 In a QA program, where there was a 

22 QA program that I was familiar with, there 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

211

1 will be a disposition of a deficiency that is 

2 accept as is. In that case, though, the 

3 deficiency is noted. There is a record 

4 generated of it, and you decide that this 

5 isn't serious enough that I'm going to make 

6 this guy rework the part or anything like 

7 that. We are just going to accept it as is. 

8 I guess that is QC because of the inspection 

9 element.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: Deviation.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

12 MR. ELLIOTT: It's a deviation 

13 report.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, a deviation 

15 corrective action report, is what we called 

16 it.

17 So, if we were to build something 

18 like that, we could then note when we observe 

19 these deviations and say that this one is not 

20 going to matter, so we are going to improve 

21 it. That, then, provides a record for the 

22 reviewers to see that, okay, that was noted 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

212

1 and it was accepted as is. Of course, you've 

2 got to be pretty confident when you accept as 

3 is that it really is okay.

4 But when you do that, there is 

5 more work to the review. Whether the peer 

6 reviewer does it or whether the HP reviewer 

7 does it, that adds time to the process. 

8 Because instead of clicking approved, you are 

9 going to click accept as is, and then you are 

10 going to describe what the deviation was.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: I see what you are 

12 saying with accept as is. The “accept as” is 

13 - I was thinking of approved, but I was 

14 thinking like three categories, like approve, 

15 don't approve with comment, or approve with 

16 comment.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: And a third 

19 category is like --

20 MR. HINNEFELD: That's what I was 

21 saying.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- approve with 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

213

1 comment, and that means we still accept it, 

2 but --

3 MR. HINNEFELD: We accept it, but 

4 we did note that there was a deviation.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: But we noted that 

6 there was a discrepancy or deviation, yes. 

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. I think that 

9 would be very useful.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: And if you see that 

11 and there is a common theme over time, then 

12 you've got a bigger problem.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Then you 

14 might say, wait a second, let's --

15 MR. HINNEFELD: So far, what you 

16 do in that program is then you trend --

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, and then 

18 you evaluate it. This is happening a lot. 

19 Why is this happening all the time?

20 MR. HINNEFELD: Why is this 

21 happening a lot?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

214

1 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean that's 

2 something we could build again. What you are 

3 doing, then, is you are spending your money 

4 doing that, spending your time. Money is not 

5 so important. The choke point here is --

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Time is money.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: You know me. Why 

8 don't we just take it away from the 

9 contractor?

10 (Laughter.)

11 MR. ELLIOTT: To have more 

12 production, we've got to find money to give to 

13 the contractor.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Production is the 

15 question --

16 MR. ELLIOTT: Production is the 

17 question.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: -- because the 

19 more effort you spend on that, whatever effort 

20 you spend on that, that's less effort to spend 

21 on production. So, if it takes me an hour 

22 instead of 50 minutes on average to review and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

215

1 approve or comment on a dose reconstruction, 

2 then that's a 20 percent reduction in my 

3 ability to get dose reconstructions put 

4 together.

5 So I just made those numbers up. 

6 That may be pessimistic because, 

7 theoretically, you won't be commenting on 

8 every one. You still will be, on the majority 

9 of them, theoretically, you will still be 

10 approving. You know, just hit the approved 

11 button.

12 It could be, though, that if a 

13 dose reconstructor is told, your review is 

14 expected to identify any deviation, that may, 

15 in fact, require more time than saying, okay, 

16 here's the case; the doses look like they are 

17 coming out about what I would expect. I may 

18 not reproduce all these numbers. There may be 

19 a mathematical error, a mistake in there, or 

20 something in there that gets by, but it is 

21 approximately right.

22 So it may, in fact, require more 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

216

1 time in the review. It may be more time than 

2 just writing a deviation.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: I've been asked, is 

4 there a bright line here? Is there a blue 

5 line that we could say, a finding, if it is 

6 beyond the line, that's really, really 

7 problematic? That's the issue. If it is on 

8 the other side of the line, it's not.

9 The only thing I can answer that 

10 question is, if we got the decision wrong, if 

11 our work yielded a false negative, I'm 

12 concerned. That's the bright, blue line for 

13 us.

14 So all the many dose 

15 reconstruction reviews that have been done, 

16 I've been asked how many flipped because of 

17 the Board's review process, and I don't know. 

18 What? There's been one or two?

19 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, it is hard 

20 to judge.

21 MR. ELLIOTT: It's hard to judge.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean there are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

217

1 PERs that have been done, I think, in part, 

2 because of the Board's review process.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: Right, yes.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: A specific case, 

5 can I think of a specific case; because of a 

6 deficiency in that case, it changed? I can't 

7 think of any, but I won't swear there weren't 

8 any.

9 But there are things coming out of 

10 Board review that would lead to a PER when, in 

11 fact, cases may have -- so it's not exactly an 

12 easy question to answer.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, but what 

14 about, going back to these criteria, I mean I 

15 like this discussion, but, currently, do you 

16 do, just what I was mentioning before, because 

17 I could see it does add time? And I agree, 

18 obviously, you are concerned about that with 

19 the production.

20 Can you see a system where you 

21 would peer review, or maybe you do it 

22 currently? Like if you have cases, well, your 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

218

1 low-level PoC cancers, maybe you don't need 

2 the level of scrutiny where they are looking 

3 for any deficiency in those cases.

4 So, if you have 40 to 60 -- I 

5 don't know what the range is --

6 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, I mean there 

7 aren't many at 45.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- but near the 50 

9 range, then you require a more --

10 MR. ELLIOTT: Or certain sites or 

11 certain time frames maybe, you could even 

12 speak to that as well.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: At 45, we require 

15 best estimate dose reconstruction.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: We could, in fact, 

18 you know, in that range, 45 to 52, or 

19 whatever --

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Require a more 

21 rigorous --

22 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean you could 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

219

1 base it on --

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Put the three 

3 criteria, yes, yes.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: I forget what the 

5 difference is at 45 percent.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm just thinking 

7 out loud now.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: At 40 percent PoC, 

9 you need half again as much risk --

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: -- to get to 50 as 

12 it took to get to 40. You're only two-thirds 

13 of the way there when you get to 40 percent.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: So 45, I think you 

16 are still --

17 MR. ELLIOTT: But if we say it is 

18 a best estimate, to me, that says we had 

19 better make sure we've got everything attended 

20 to.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Best estimate, 

22 best peer review, yes, yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

220

1 MR. HINNEFELD: And the guys do 

2 take more time on a 45-to-52 case. Nobody 

3 wants to pull them up because they take so 

4 long to do.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Yes, maybe 

6 implementing this kind of change also on top 

7 of that would reinforce that, that you are to 

8 document discrepancies, even if they don't 

9 impact the case.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: I have also thought 

11 of looking at our return rate --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's the other 

13 question I had, yes.

14 MR. ELLIOTT: -- and checking out 

15 what dose reconstruction drafts we return to 

16 ORAU, or whoever does them, and says they 

17 didn't meet -- and what are we catching there. 

18 You guys don't see this.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: You only see the 

21 final, finished version.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

221

1 MR. ELLIOTT: But I can tell you 

2 that we track that. We have a special graphic 

3 that we see every week, maybe it's every 

4 month, how many ORAU sends us and how many we 

5 have accepted, how many we have returned back 

6 and said it didn't meet the standard.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, you're talking 

8 internally return?

9 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Not from DOL?

11 MR. ELLIOTT: No, no.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, internally 

13 returned, yes.

14 MR. ELLIOTT: I'm talking about, 

15 what did the peer reviewers catch --

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

17 MR. ELLIOTT: -- and say, no, this 

18 isn't good enough; you've got to come back at 

19 us with a revision based upon these comments 

20 we're making.

21 I haven't done that, but I am just 

22 thinking that might be another way to look at 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

222

1 things that we have caught versus what we let 

2 get through --

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: -- and compare that 

5 with what you guys are identifying in your 

6 review of the findings.

7 MEMBER MUNN: Well, that is 

8 another one of those painful ways of 

9 quantifying things, though.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: I don't know if it 

11 would be informative or not. I don't know if 

12 you've got any thoughts on that, Stu, or not, 

13 but another way of looking at it.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: And if you have 

15 the ability to look at common threads for 

16 that, too, it might be interesting.

17 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

19 MR. FARVER: Let me make sure I 

20 have this straight. We have the dose 

21 reconstructors. They write the report.

22 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

223

1 MR. FARVER: Then it goes to 

2 someone in ORAU for a review?

3 MR. HINNEFELD: For a peer review, 

4 yes.

5 MR. FARVER: And then it goes to 

6 someone in NIOSH. Is that called a peer 

7 review?

8 MR. HINNEFELD: It's called the HP 

9 review.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: Technical peer 

11 review.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, the 

13 terminology we use is HP reviewer. There's a 

14 dose reconstructor that personally prepares 

15 it. There's a peer reviewer, and then that's 

16 an ORAU person.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: ORAU, right.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: And there's an HP 

19 reviewer.

20 MR. FARVER: Okay. So the HP 

21 reviewer follows different criteria than the 

22 peer reviewer --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

224

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

2 MR. FARVER: -- because the peer 

3 review is documented in Procedure 59.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, an ORAU peer 

5 review. We have a procedure.

6 MR. FARVER: It's the ORAU team.

7 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

9 MR. FARVER: Okay.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, that's 

11 right, it is a team.

12 MR. FARVER: Yes, and it's got a 

13 very specific checklist?

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, yes.

15 MR. FARVER: Is there a similar 

16 one for the HP review?

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

18 MR. ELLIOTT: Is it 

19 proceduralized? It's a checklist.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, HP review is 

21 proceduralized and it does have a checklist as 

22 well.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

225

1 MR. ELLIOTT: There's an OCAS 

2 procedure, but I don't know the number.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I can find it for 

4 you.

5 MR. FARVER: But I look at this 

6 checklist, and I bring this up periodically, 

7 but one of the first questions under internal 

8 dose, were all positive bioassay samples 

9 considered. Yes, No, N/A.

10 Well, we had that one finding 

11 where the whole-body counts --

12 MR. ELLIOTT: Weren't considered.

13 MR. FARVER: -- weren't 

14 considered. Someone should have checked no. 

15 How does that make it through, and then are 

16 those numbers being tracked?

17 And you guys can find other 

18 examples. I know in the past we have had the 

19 role-of-absorption type because we have put it 

20 into the report. Even though it may have been 

21 correct in the calculations, which one are 

22 they checking?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

226

1 MR. ELLIOTT: They should have got 

2 that as one --

3 MR. FARVER: And there are some 

4 very specific things that should be caught. I 

5 mean it is a very thorough checklist, but I 

6 don't know if it is being tracked or if it is 

7 being used.

8 We had the one that had the 

9 missing dose one year, for 1984, whatever case 

10 it was. There's a whole worksheet in here. 

11 It is a worksheet, deep dose, shallow dose, 

12 neutron dose, where you enter all the numbers 

13 and you tally them up.

14 So I don't understand how we are 

15 finding these things. So that is one of my 

16 concerns. It appears there's something in 

17 place, but things are still getting through.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I mean the 

19 other thing, Larry, that I was thinking about 

20 was, when we were talking this morning just 

21 offline, and sort of thinking about the 

22 production and the impact, and how good is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

227

1 good enough sort of thing, I think you also 

2 have to look at the end of this cycle. You 

3 sort of alluded to it. Return rate from you 

4 to ORAU is one thing; the return rate from DOL 

5 to you is another thing. Then I was thinking 

6 also like the number of appeals.

7 If it gets to the point where --

8 and I don't know how often this happens, but 

9 if there's claimants out there that get their 

10 report and are diligent enough, or whatever, 

11 to check every little item, and they find 

12 mistakes, discrepancies, then that is another 

13 cost at the end of cycle sort of, because 

14 you've got to come back and deal with that. 

15 It creates havoc at that point, I imagine, 

16 that it becomes --

17 MR. ELLIOTT: Well, we could 

18 provide more detail on this. You have heard 

19 me at Board meetings talk about the number of 

20 returns from DOL.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

22 MR. ELLIOTT: And primarily, they 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

228

1 are returned to us based upon changes in the 

2 claim information.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: The smaller portion 

5 is on technical issues. I don't have numbers 

6 right off the top of my head right now.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, but I 

8 remember.

9 MR. ELLIOTT: But we might be able 

10 to provide some more detail in that regard. I 

11 don't think we have had a very good success 

12 rate at trying to track over the course of 

13 history. We may have a better ability now 

14 than we did earlier on technical issues.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: I am not sure if 

16 Tracey is doing anything or not. She does 

17 now, I think, record --

18 MR. ELLIOTT: There were just so 

19 few, you know. I mean we could track them by 

20 hand, essentially.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I think she 

22 records -- I think they record down there when 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

229

1 we get a return. They just call it a DOL 

2 issue or a NIOSH issue.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, a NIOSH issue.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: So I think she is 

5 tracking those now. So I think we might be 

6 able to pull that up. For the longest time, 

7 we didn't.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: That will give you a 

9 snapshot of recent history.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: It would just be 

11 the last few months, I think.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: What about the 

13 appeals? I don't know how many. I have no 

14 sense of how often that is happening.

15 MR. ELLIOTT: Go ahead.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, we will have 

17 to chase that. I mean there are a number of 

18 appeals that are remanded.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: DOL probably 

20 tracks that, right?

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. It would 

22 come back to us. It would look to us like a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

230

1 remand.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: In other words, 

4 they remand it back to us. It will look like 

5 a remand.

6 MR. ELLIOTT: A technical remand.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Remands fit into a 

8 number of categories. Things are remanded 

9 back to us because of new demographics; a new 

10 employment that wasn't considered that DOL 

11 didn't know about, didn't tell us about; a new 

12 cancer. It is remanded if someone gets a 

13 cancer after their case is done; you know, 

14 he's still alive.

15 MR. ELLIOTT: New survivor.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: Those are 

17 remanded.

18 MR. ELLIOTT: New survivor.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: On occasion, a 

20 closed case comes back to us, yes. It can.

21 Then there are some cases that are 

22 remanded for technical objection. But, again, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

231

1 those are usually the minority of those kinds 

2 of cases.

3 I don't know if we will have a way 

4 to find those easily because they all look, 

5 whether it is a remand to DOL or something 

6 else --

7 MR. ELLIOTT: It depends on what 

8 stage the claim has achieved in DOL's 

9 adjudication process.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

11 MR. ELLIOTT: It could go just to 

12 the District Office, and somebody there, the 

13 claims examiner, or even if somebody before it 

14 gets to the FAB could say this doesn't look 

15 right to us. Or the claimant says to the DOL 

16 claims examiner, I got my dose reconstruction 

17 report. You know, you've got it now, but I 

18 don't believe it. There's an issue here. 

19 Or, in some cases, they throw up 

20 Board review as a reason why it ought to be 

21 reworked. In some of those instances, in that 

22 aspect, DOL will turn it over to one of their 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

232

1 health physicists, and if the health physicist 

2 agrees, then we might get it back that way, 

3 from the health physicist.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: You mean Board 

5 review; you mean that we are still reviewing 

6 the site or something?

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, yes.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: If there is an 

10 SC&A evaluation of the site profile --

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: Ongoing, right. 

12 Right. Yes.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: -- and that's out 

14 there, those will come back.

15 But the point I was going to make 

16 is that they all look like DOL returns. Our 

17 system, everything looks like a DOL return, 

18 whether it's found by the District Office --

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: You don't separate 

20 it out? Right, right.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: -- whether it is 

22 found by the District Office and sent back to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

233

1 us, whether it is found by the FAB and sent 

2 back to us, whether it is adjudicated, 

3 reopened, reopened upon appeal and sent back 

4 to us, whether it is closed altogether, or I 

5 don't mean reopened, but whether it goes to 

6 FAB and they get a recommended decision, and 

7 then they file an appeal, and then it comes 

8 back to us, or whether it is all completely 

9 adjudicated with a final decision, and then 

10 some new information comes up, like an 

11 additional cancer, and it is reopened and then 

12 it comes back to us.

13 All those situations, no matter 

14 where it is, they all look the same to us. 

15 They all are DOL returns.

16 And it may not be too important 

17 for the purpose for our discussion here. Our 

18 discussion is, what's the burden on technical 

19 objections, technical errors, no matter where 

20 they are found after we send them out? How 

21 much of that comes back?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

234

1 MR. HINNEFELD: That is the 

2 question. So it really doesn't matter how far 

3 it gets down DOL's route.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: True, true. 

5 That's right.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: So it doesn't 

7 really matter.

8 So that is something we can 

9 probably find just looking at DOL returns and 

10 whether it is a DOL issue or a NIOSH issue, 

11 based on what we're tracking. We might be 

12 able to find that.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes. Right, 

14 right, right.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: But I thought 

16 somebody else raised a pretty good point. I 

17 think it was Doug who raised the point in our 

18 pre-meeting discussion of this.

19 Part of the effort, the additional 

20 effort that goes along with the dose 

21 reconstruction that isn't done right, if it 

22 has deviations in it, is the effort we spend 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

235

1 here. The effort that SC&A, that it costs 

2 SC&A to do, to find those things and write it, 

3 and the effort we spend resolving it, we and 

4 us on the ORAU team --

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: -- writing a 

7 resolution. That is a fairly substantial 

8 burden, as well.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: So that all weighs 

11 into --

12 MR. ELLIOTT: It is very costly.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: -- the burden that 

14 we would avoid by having whatever system in 

15 place that indicates we looked at it; we found 

16 it.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: We said okay or we 

19 looked at it and we found it and it didn't get 

20 through.

21 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, if we could 

22 both start from the same place on what's the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

236

1 standard of quality, that might minimize a lot 

2 of the cost that we are encumbering on this 

3 process alone.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: We could allow for 

6 even some variations in process here. If we 

7 decide, for instance, to go by PoC and say 

8 that PoC is going to be determined, we are 

9 going to pick a range of PoCs, and in that we 

10 are really going to be careful. We are not 

11 going to have a deviation that we don't know. 

12 We are going to know any deviation.

13 If we find a deviation and it 

14 really is, and we are confident it is not 

15 going to change anything, we may accept it as 

16 is, but we are going to be very careful about 

17 that because we only need -- something will 

18 need a 10 percent change if you're at 45 

19 percent, and you leave out a 10 percent 

20 change, or 12 or something. So we are going 

21 to be very careful about that.

22 Then, when we get to this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

237

1 location, and there is a dose, and there is a 

2 review of a case that is 40 percent or 38 

3 percent, and you find something that is in 

4 there, and it maybe gets a different finding 

5 kind of category -- you have a Finding 

6 Category 1 and a Finding Category 2. Finding 

7 Category 1 is where he was in the 45 and you 

8 still found a deficiency, and then Category 2 

9 is that, well, you found a deficiency, but it 

10 was less than 45.

11 So that may be instructive. It 

12 may not. I mean I am just talking off the top 

13 of my head now. I haven't really thought a 

14 lot about this, but I'm not sure if that gets 

15 you where you want to be.

16 MR. FARVER: We have been kind of 

17 moving in that direction, I believe.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

19 MR. FARVER: When the program 

20 started, and we were looking at everything and 

21 all range of cases, and we are finding things 

22 like maybe an error in a workbook calculation, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

238

1 and that's a very wide thing.

2 As we move on, we are finding 

3 smaller things. The big ones are taken care 

4 of.

5 We started going from --

6 MR. HINNEFELD: That is good to 

7 hear.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes.

9 MR. FARVER: -- findings to 

10 observations.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, now there are 

12 some observations, yes.

13 MR. FARVER: So we are kind of 

14 moving toward that direction, and now we are 

15 trying to select cases at 40 percent and 

16 above, everything.

17 So, I mean, the Subcommittee could 

18 lax us up on our criteria or change the 

19 criteria, do whatever you wish, because now we 

20 are trying to narrow it down and maybe focus 

21 on big items. I don't know. But it has just 

22 been a progression.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

239

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

2 MEMBER MUNN: It has been, and one 

3 of the things that was discussed tangentially 

4 in the earlier discussion was the repetitive 

5 nature of some of the findings.

6 MR. FARVER: Yes.

7 MEMBER MUNN: Certainly, early on 

8 in the program, I would say the first half of 

9 the program, it was almost to be expected that 

10 every new report from our contractor would say 

11 something like, you haven't considered this 

12 radionuclide. You haven't considered this 

13 radionuclide.

14 And we would have this whole list 

15 of individual findings for individual 

16 radionuclides. It was, essentially, the same 

17 finding over and over, but for different 

18 individual cases, and in almost all cases it 

19 was low-impact, low-impact, low-impact. But, 

20 nevertheless, it racked up the findings 

21 significantly.

22 I think we have passed the point 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

240

1 where we get that repetitive kind of basic 

2 finding again.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: I wonder. I wonder 

4 because, I don't know, maybe we are beyond 

5 this, but the snapshot in time that you have 

6 been looking at in DR reviews has been a 

7 concern to me because you are looking at the 

8 oldest work that we have done, and you are 

9 lagging way behind.

10 MEMBER MUNN: We are.

11 MR. ELLIOTT: If we were to say --

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: But it is in part 

13 because we have to look at adjudicated cases.

14 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, you've got to 

15 look at adjudicated cases, but I think that 

16 has sped up quite a bit, too. I mean there's 

17 a lot more cases in the pool to choose from 

18 that are more recent --

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: -- is what I mean by 

21 that.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

241

1 MR. ELLIOTT: So maybe that is not 

2 something that you want to talk about, but I 

3 do think, if this was three years ago, I would 

4 have made that comment, or two years ago, I 

5 would have made that comment. You are looking 

6 back at 2002 or 2003, and you are not really 

7 seeing what we are doing in 2006.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

9 MR. ELLIOTT: And in 2006, that is 

10 a good year to take a look at, if you want to 

11 look at a year, because that is the peak year 

12 of our production. We have never been able to 

13 achieve that capacity again because of our 

14 funding issues.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

16 MR. ELLIOTT: But in 2006, we put 

17 out more than 6,000 dose reconstruction 

18 reports in that year. Production was the 

19 highest.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Well, what you are 

21 saying is particularly pertinent in view of 

22 the fact that what we are talking about here 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

242

1 is commenting on the first 100 set of cases. 

2 They all were way back at the beginning --

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: They're early, way 

4 back, yes. Yes.

5 I mean my sense would be, and 

6 there is a problem with the time lag here, but 

7 my sense is, if we can come up with -- you 

8 know, that recommendation on the QA procedure 

9 going forward seems logical to me. I don't 

10 know that the Board would -- I think we would 

11 make a general recommendation and then say, 

12 NIOSH, we are not going to, obviously, not 

13 going to be prescriptive in that, but how you 

14 view it.

15 But it does make a lot of sense to 

16 me to have a sort of tiered approach for the 

17 ones closer to 50, doing a more rigorous QA, 

18 and having those comments in the file.

19 Then I think the issue, 

20 notwithstanding this time-lag problem, the 

21 issue goes away in our review, because Doug is 

22 not going to have those findings because they 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

243

1 are going to have a comment in there that 

2 says, we saw this.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: We saw the findings.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Don't bother 

5 looking any further. We noted it.

6 Then I would expect SC&A would 

7 say, if anything, it's an observation. They 

8 missed this, but they noted it, and it is 

9 insignificant.

10 I don't even think it rises to an 

11 observation at that point, but there is a time 

12 lag on that, obviously. Because if you start 

13 doing that today or in six months, it is not 

14 going to be in the adjudicated cases for a 

15 while, right? So that is the only dilemma 

16 there.

17 MR. ELLIOTT: Maybe in six months 

18 you would start seeing some.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, that's the 

20 only dilemma there. But, I mean, I think 

21 that, from my standpoint anyway, that seems

22 like a logical recommendation from us.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

244

1 MR. ELLIOTT: Well, I want to work 

2 with you all on this.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: Because I have been 

5 fearful of getting a letter that you have sent 

6 to the Secretary bounced down to me, and we 

7 have to write the response for the Secretary. 

8 That's what's going to happen --

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: -- in case you don't 

11 know that.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

13 MR. ELLIOTT: It's not the 

14 Secretary who is going to say, oh, well, this 

15 is all well and good, and I'll crack the whip 

16 and they're going to make changes down there. 

17 He is going to kick it down to us, and I'm 

18 going to assign it to Stu, and Stu is going to 

19 decide what we're going to do.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: I would assign it 

21 to somebody else.

22 (Laughter.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

245

1 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, he would assign 

2 it to somebody else.

3 (Laughter.)

4 But we have had a recent shift in 

5 our assignments. Stu is no longer what was 

6 called the Technical Program or the --

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I used to be the 

8 Project Officer.

9 MR. ELLIOTT: The Project Officer 

10 on ORAU. Grady is now that. I have been 

11 talking to Stu about what that -- he's got a 

12 void now. So what are we going to fill it 

13 with? And I want him to be more involved in 

14 developing a better QA program than what we 

15 currently have.

16 So that is why I wanted this 

17 conversation to occur today, and I really have 

18 asked Stu to pick up the reins here and try to 

19 figure out, where can we improve. Where can 

20 we have a better quality assurance program? 

21 How can we bolster our quality control 

22 processes to get to where we all want to be?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

246

1 I don't think we want to do -- I 

2 mean we could do this alone. Stu can come up 

3 with his own ideas, and we can formulate the 

4 program, but it may not be what you guys want 

5 to audit. I would rather develop something 

6 that is auditable to your satisfaction.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean I think 

8 this was a good start. I don't think we are 

9 going to come to any conclusion today.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: No.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: But I think this 

12 is a good start on that. It helped me 

13 understand your process internally.

14 MR. FARVER: Yes. Now is your HP 

15 review procedure, is that OCAS-PR-007?

16 MR. HINNEFELD: I think so.

17 MR. FARVER: Okay.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: That sounds 

19 familiar.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: That sounds right.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: I can tell you for 

22 sure.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

247

1 MR. FARVER: Because that's got a 

2 checklist in it.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

4 MR. FARVER: But, like the ORAU 

5 procedures has nine pages of a checklist; this 

6 has just 18 little items, and the columns are 

7 adequate, yes or no; corrections, yes or no; 

8 and comments. So you could always say, yes, 

9 it's adequate and add comments to it.

10 But I'm not sure it is technical 

11 enough. It covers necessary things like, are 

12 headers and footers correct. I mean, 

13 obviously, you want things like that correct 

14 on your report. But it doesn't get into the 

15 technical detail, like all possible bioassays.

16 MR. ELLIOTT: It doesn't have a 

17 box for that?

18 MR. FARVER: No.

19 MR. ELLIOTT: But that is in the 

20 ORAU one.

21 MR. FARVER: That is in the ORAU 

22 one.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

248

1 MR. ELLIOTT: Does it have a box 

2 there that says, did the CATI interview get 

3 attended to fully in the DR.

4 MR. FARVER: It says, CATI 

5 information matches DR.

6 MR. ELLIOTT: There you go.

7 MR. FARVER: And that's a box.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: That's a box on 

9 our --

10 MR. FARVER: On yours.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's good. Yes, 

12 that should be.

13 Did we review those two procedures 

14 in the procedures review?

15 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, I think we --

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: I can't remember 

17 going through this checklist.

18 MEMBER MUNN: No, we didn't go 

19 through the checklist.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't recall.

21 MEMBER MUNN: No.

22 MR. ELLIOTT: You don't think so?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

249

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: I don't think we 

2 did.

3 MEMBER MUNN: I don't believe so. 

4 I don't remember going through checklists.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: I think we 

6 probably should, though.

7 MR. ELLIOTT: There's an 

8 opportunity there.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: We probably 

10 should, and then we can get together on this.

11 MR. FARVER: Those are very 

12 tangible items and very trackable, too.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I'm all about 

14 that. Reassign it to someone.

15 (Laughter.)

16 MR. ELLIOTT: Okay, I am going to 

17 leave now.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Your work is done 

19 here.

20 (Laughter.)

21 MEMBER MUNN: Thank you, Larry. 

22 You may go.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

250

1 MR. HINNEFELD: So far, he 

2 assigned more work to me than you on this very 

3 nice conversation.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: You know, I think, 

5 just to get back, for this Subcommittee, I 

6 think I will try to maybe put down some ideas, 

7 like a straw man of ideas on this, and 

8 circulate it for our next meeting.

9 MEMBER MUNN: That would be 

10 appreciated.

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: And then we can go 

12 forward with discussions.

13 MR. ELLIOTT: Could you work 

14 together to come up --

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, yes, yes, yes. 

16 Definitely.

17 MR. ELLIOTT: Because he may have 

18 ideas that you haven't, and you may have ideas 

19 he doesn't.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: That I never 

21 thought of, right. Right. Yes.

22 MR. ELLIOTT: Is that okay, Stu?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

251

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Sure.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm okay with 

3 that. So, okay, I will coordinate with Stu on 

4 it and circulate it to all members of the 

5 Subcommittee, obviously.

6 The only other things I was going 

7 to mention in terms of you were saying the 

8 outcome, you mentioned, identify certain 

9 deficiencies or categories of deficiencies. 

10 Some things that come to mind, and I think 

11 this is why I want to write it in this paper, 

12 but some things I have been thinking about are 

13 just these peer reviews and these checklists; 

14 I don't think they are included in the case 

15 files. I don't think I have ever seen those.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: No, I don't 

17 believe they are.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: That is something. 

19 So this case file to sort of show all your 

20 work kind of thing, all the IMBA runs. These 

21 are some things that keep coming up with us. 

22 I don't think it adds any work to the District 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

252

1 instructor, or maybe it does. I don't know.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Be careful here. 

3 That checklist is completed for only a 

4 fraction of the reviews. Isn't that true?

5 MR. ELLIOTT: Which checklist?

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: The peer review.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Ours.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, I think Grady 

9 has the answer to this. I'm not sure.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Grady would know 

11 it off the top of his head.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Maybe you can help 

13 me when we talk more of what the --

14 MR. HINNEFELD: The procedure 

15 would have to describe it.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Now you're 

18 supposed to check all those things every time. 

19 That is what the procedure says. These are 

20 the things you are checking for.

21 But, in terms of actually filling 

22 out the form, that's done when the system pops 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

253

1 it up. I think it's 20 percent of the 

2 reviews.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, I see.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: Something like that.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: The system 

6 automatically pops it up.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: But, either way, I 

8 don't think I have ever seen one in --

9 MR. HINNEFELD: No, but it doesn't 

10 go in there.

11 MR. ELLIOTT: No, it doesn't go in 

12 there.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: It doesn't go in 

14 the case file, yes.

15 MR. ELLIOTT: The review culture, 

16 you know, that has developed is so rote.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

18 MR. ELLIOTT: I've worried about 

19 that, too, you know, that aspect of it. I 

20 would rather it not be so rote, but there is a 

21 benefit to that in consistency.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

254

1 MR. ELLIOTT: So you want to keep 

2 your reviewers attentive and aware and on the 

3 ball, so you don't want to get them too mired 

4 down into, okay, here's my checklist -- check, 

5 check, check, check, check, check.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: I agree, yes, you 

7 don't want to be too -- yes.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: Whether they 

9 actually read it or not.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

11 MR. ELLIOTT: So we have struck an 

12 agreement with our reviewers where we do a 

13 percentage.

14 There is also an electronic QA 

15 done aside from that, I think.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: No, I believe 

17 that's it.

18 MR. ELLIOTT: That's it?

19 MR. HINNEFELD: That's electronic.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: Oh, that's the 

21 electronic?

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Twenty percent of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

255

1 the cases, the checklist pops up and has to be 

2 completed.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: It has to be done by 

4 the individual, by the reviewer.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: By the reviewer, 

6 by the peer reviewer.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: I think it is 20 

9 percent.

10 MR. ELLIOTT: So, when a reviewer 

11 comes up with his screen and he doesn't get 

12 this pop-up, he is supposed to touch base on 

13 all of those things in the list.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: He is supposed to 

15 make sure those things are done.

16 MR. ELLIOTT: Those things are 

17 supposed to have been done. He doesn't have 

18 to check the box.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: He can always 

20 choose to fill it out.

21 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, he can choose 

22 to fill it out.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

256

1 MR. HINNEFELD: Or she. We do 

2 have some she’s.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: But there is a 

4 percentage. I think you're right, it's 20 

5 maybe. I should know this, but that is 

6 ballpark, right, I think.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: But, in any case, 

8 that doesn't become part of the record?

9 MR. HINNEFELD: That does not go 

10 in the DR record. It's captured. I mean the 

11 data is captured somewhere, but it must be a 

12 data --

13 MR. ELLIOTT: Grady's got it, I 

14 think.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: And then there are 

16 some things we can do.

17 MR. FARVER: See, on the one hand, 

18 the processing is pretty thorough. On the 

19 other hand, we shouldn't be seeing these 

20 things.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, if the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

257

1 execution is that good.

2 MR. FARVER: That is what confuses 

3 me.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

5 MR. ELLIOTT: I will say one more 

6 thing here and then I'm going to bail.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

8 MR. ELLIOTT: On our side, we have 

9 to be concerned about those folks who are 

10 assigned to do these reviews. One, we want 

11 good performance out of them, but I just don't 

12 want to take them to a place where they feel 

13 they are getting reviewed on the review.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Reviewing the 

15 reviewer, right. Right.

16 MR. ELLIOTT: And their 

17 performance is affected by that. Do you see 

18 where I am going with this? I don't think 

19 that would be very helpful in our shop.

20 We have some people -- you know, 

21 we have never -- I don't know; they have 

22 talked about this. I have thought about this, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

258

1 but we have never gone in and looked on each 

2 individual reviewer, how well are they doing?

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. Right.

4 MR. ELLIOTT: Now ORAU I think can 

5 produce maybe some results that way. I don't 

6 know.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, it depends 

8 on what you are talking about.

9 MR. ELLIOTT: Well, do we have one 

10 reviewer that consistently misses? You know, 

11 is the CATI reflected in the DR? Is all the 

12 internal dose accounted for? Do we have one 

13 guy that continually seems to miss that?

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Missing a 

15 particular aspect.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: They are missing a 

17 high percentage of that.

18 MR. ELLIOTT: Right. Right.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: Now I think there is 

21 a casual supervisor-to-reviewer approach in 

22 that regard. Hey, I keep seeing you miss this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

259

1 thing.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: But never a 

3 formal --

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, because after 

5 the HP review, there is another kind of 

6 supervisor's final review of the DR. It's 

7 called a tech review. There is no spreadsheet 

8 on that. There is no procedure on that. They 

9 are just trying to make sure that they are 

10 looking for things that are fairly obvious. 

11 They are not going to open up all the files 

12 from the case and do all that stuff.

13 MR. FARVER: No, that is what the 

14 checklist is, more of an overview.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

16 MR. FARVER: But the ORAU one 

17 seems very technical and should catch a lot of 

18 these items.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, right.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: That's where we 

21 wanted to place the quality, see.

22 MR. FARVER: But I'm not sure that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

260

1 is being tracked by them.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: It is, apparently. 

3 Didn't you just say that?

4 MR. ELLIOTT: Well, tracked to 

5 what degree?

6 MR. FARVER: In the degree that 

7 you have all these specific items on nine 

8 pages, and can you tell me how many times item 

9 6 shows up?

10 MR. HINNEFELD: See, I don't --

11 MR. ELLIOTT: I don't know if we 

12 could -- we would have to follow up on that.

13 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know what 

14 they've got over there.

15 MEMBER MUNN: But this is another 

16 one of those questions that I was talking 

17 about earlier when I said, how much 

18 specificity can you get. How much can you 

19 really and truly quantify something unless you 

20 have a program set up that's tracking it?

21 Then the question arises, is the 

22 end result worth the time, effort, and energy 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

261

1 that goes into even setting up the program, 

2 much less tracking it all the time. There is 

3 a point of diminishing returns.

4 That is the real question, I 

5 think, that we, as a Subcommittee, have to 

6 struggle with in terms of making our report. 

7 How can you give a report that shows that real 

8 progress has been made without giving specific 

9 numbers? Because we are not tracking our 

10 process that way.

11 MR. ELLIOTT: Let's take you back 

12 to the standard of quality.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Exactly.

14 MR. ELLIOTT: We are saying to our 

15 reviewers, make sure we get the right decision 

16 out of DOL with our work. That is what we are 

17 most concerned about. We do not want any 

18 false negatives.

19 MEMBER MUNN: No.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: That is what we are 

21 most concerned about. So we are saying that, 

22 and every person hears that. I know they walk 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

262

1 away with a little bit different -- we've got 

2 certain reviewers that review x number in a 

3 week, and they are at the top of their form. 

4 We've got other reviewers that may review five 

5 a week and that are doing something else.

6 So, in the back of their mind, 

7 they are saying, hey, what we've got to look 

8 for is, are we getting the right decision out 

9 of this work, not is that “i” dotted. Is that 

10 t crossed? Did ORAU take care of that issue 

11 effectively in writing it up? Yes, they did, 

12 but maybe they didn't and it still gets the 

13 right answer.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: I think one thing 

16 for me, anyway, and I think for all the 

17 Subcommittee, would be to have a better 

18 understanding of all these -- like if ORAU 

19 already has and is collecting all their peer 

20 review data and can simply sort and find out 

21 on how many Question 6 was found, if that 

22 already exists --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

263

1 MR. HINNEFELD: I will have to 

2 find that out for you.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: I agree with 

4 Wanda. We don't want to ask, like you should 

5 be doing this and this and this, and then at 

6 the end of the day, it's not even telling us 

7 much.

8 MEMBER MUNN: No, it is not really 

9 relevant.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: But if it is 

11 already there, that is a different story.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: I don't know.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: So maybe just a 

14 little better --

15 MR. HINNEFELD: Or whether that 

16 checklist is like ours. I mean these are the 

17 things you are expected to check or to verify.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: If I could ask 

19 you, Stu, to give us --

20 MR. HINNEFELD: I will find out 

21 from them.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: -- a little better 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

264

1 report on what is out there right now?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: I will find out 

5 for you.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: That would be 

7 helpful, yes.

8 MR. FARVER: But, I mean, if we go 

9 back to that one case about the positive 

10 bioassays, if we go back and pull that 

11 checklist, is that box going to be checked yes 

12 or no for all bioassays that are concerned?

13 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

14 MR. FARVER: Okay.

15 MR. ELLIOTT: If it is checked yes 

16 and it wasn't, somebody should have written 

17 down, it doesn't make any difference.

18 MR. FARVER: And that is a valid 

19 remark.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, it does not 

21 make a bit of difference, and I am not going 

22 to waste more money and more time trying to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

265

1 fix this piece, when I could get it out and 

2 get an answer in the hands of a claimant.

3 MR. FARVER: I agree.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

5 MR. FARVER: That is why your form 

6 has the comments section, which how we used it 

7 is very good. It is only good if someone is 

8 looking at it.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I think 

10 that is a path forward. We will get a better 

11 description from Stu.

12 MR. ELLIOTT: Well, I would 

13 appreciate it if you and Stu will work 

14 together.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I will work 

16 with Stu on addressing --

17 MR. ELLIOTT: Because I don't want 

18 to set up -- I don't want to go off on our own 

19 and set up a system that you're not going to 

20 find auditable; you're not going to agree with 

21 it.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, no, no.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

266

1 MR. ELLIOTT: You're going to

2 audit the system itself and say it's not what 

3 we want.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I think we 

5 appreciate this input now, instead of waiting.

6 MR. KATZ: So are we going to have 

7 a standing item then for the Subcommittee of 

8 quality control, as an agenda item?

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: I guess so, yes.

10 MR. KATZ: Just for a little while 

11 at least?

12 MR. HINNEFELD: It is sort of like 

13 progress on the effort that we are 

14 undertaking.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

16 MR. KATZ: Yes.

17 MR. ELLIOTT: We may also have to 

18 have a conversation about definitions.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

20 MR. ELLIOTT: Because some people 

21 come at this with a different definition of 

22 what quality assurance means and about quality 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

267

1 control.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Definitely, yes.

3 MR. ELLIOTT: Having worked in the 

4 food industry, quality assurance means the 

5 product is developed and you assure its 

6 quality. Quality control means the steps 

7 along the way: building the Ford is checked. 

8 Well, I put the engine in and I put it in 

9 right. Now we put the wheels on, and I put it 

10 on right. And at the end of the line, 

11 somebody says, hey, yes, they're all there. 

12 The wheels are on and the engine is in. 

13 Quality is assured.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Mainly right now, 

15 we are talking about inspection.

16 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes, we're talking 

17 about inspection.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: We're talking 

19 about inspection. The inspection is quality 

20 control.

21 MR. ELLIOTT: Quality control.

22 MEMBER MUNN: Quality control, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

268

1 okay. Yes. That is my definition.

2 MR. FARVER: Well, it is kind of 

3 like the peer review is the quality control, 

4 and the HP review is the --

5 MR. ELLIOTT: It could be 

6 considered a quality assurance step, I guess.

7 MR. FARVER: Looking at the entire 

8 animal.

9 MR. ELLIOTT: Yes.

10 MR. KATZ: Actually, it depends on 

11 the sophistication of your quality assurance 

12 or quality program, because quality control, 

13 as you become more sophisticated, you do less 

14 and less inspection, even with the quality 

15 control aspect of it. But quality control, 

16 anyway, is a subcomponent of quality 

17 assurance, to be sure.

18 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it would 

19 include the training requirements --

20 MEMBER MUNN: The program's QA.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: -- for each of 

22 your positions.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

269

1 MEMBER MUNN: The action is QC.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: And you include 

3 clarity of the procedures and guidance for 

4 each of the procedures. We're going to have a 

5 problem with that. It's hard to specify clear 

6 procedure and clear guidance, given the amount 

7 of leeway or the amount of different kinds of 

8 conditions you can encounter in dose 

9 reconstruction.

10 You can specify clear guidance, 

11 but it is not very specific. If you try to be 

12 specific --

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: This gets back to 

14 the internal dose questions.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: -- it becomes too 

16 voluminous.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, yes. Yes, 

18 and that gets back to the --

19 MR. ELLIOTT: The standard of 

20 quality really. I mean, what are you going to 

21 do --

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, no, but, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

270

1 also, I think a lot of us, as a compromise --

2 I'm speaking for myself now, but that's where 

3 I get the show-us-the-work thing, because you 

4 can't be prescriptive with that kind of stuff, 

5 but at least we can see the thought process 

6 that the person went through, instead of 

7 trying to recreate it afterwards in this room 

8 or in that process.

9 Why don't we take a break? After 

10 the break, Stu is going to give us a lecture 

11 on Deming's theory of quality.

12 (Laughter.)

13 MR. HINNEFELD: A few years ago, I 

14 probably could have.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: I need a break. 

16 So let's take a break until 3:30, and maybe we 

17 can take another hour and see where we are on 

18 the 8th set. That will be about enough to 

19 wrap us up for the day.

20 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

21 matter went off the record at 3:22 p.m. and 

22 resumed at 3:40 p.m.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

271

1 MR. KATZ: This is the Dose 

2 Reconstruction Subcommittee.

3 Do we have the Behling’s' back 

4 yet?

5 MS. BEHLING: Yes, I'm back.

6 MR. KATZ: Great.

7 MR. FARVER: Kathy, did I send you 

8 the NIOSH responses for the site profiles, the 

9 attachments?

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: For Set Number 8, 

11 we're talking about.

12 MS. BEHLING: Yes, I believe you 

13 did, Doug, but I've got to look to see, 

14 obviously.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: If you can look 

16 for those because we can't seem to find them. 

17 That is why we are asking.

18 MS. BEHLING: Okay, let me see.

19 MR. FARVER: I may have sent you 

20 the matrix without the responses in it.

21 MR. STIVER: This is John Stiver. 

22 I'm online.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

272

1 MR. FARVER: Yes, John.

2 MR. STIVER: Yes, that last 

3 question, I believe there were no NIOSH 

4 responses for the attachments.

5 MR. FARVER: Okay. This is a case 

6 of having the wrong matrix.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's what I 

8 have, yes.

9 All right, let's just start from 

10 the matrix in the beginning then. We were 

11 thinking about doing those attachments, the 

12 site profiles, since Hans was available, and 

13 we might want to discuss those. But if we 

14 don't have NIOSH responses, I don't think it 

15 will be very worthwhile. I would just as soon 

16 start from the beginning of the matrix.

17 MR. FARVER: Yes. Well, I found 

18 the responses that we sent from NIOSH.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, you did find 

20 the responses?

21 MR. FARVER: But I don't think I 

22 sent them to Hans or John.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

273

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, you didn't 

2 send them, yes, okay.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: When did I send 

4 them?

5 MR. FARVER: Now you're going to 

6 ask questions like that.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I don't seem 

8 to have them.

9 MR. FARVER: January 26th, 22nd or 

10 26th, I believe.

11 So we may not be able to do those 

12 this time.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Which group?

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: This is at the 

15 very end of the 8th matrix; there are some 

16 things called attachments, which are basically 

17 the mini site profiles. That's what Doug is 

18 referring to.

19 But I would just as soon find out 

20 where we are within the matrix, starting from 

21 the beginning.

22 Now I'm afraid that I am missing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

274

1 the most updated matrix, but I left off, in 

2 the 3/12 version of the matrix, the last 

3 finding I have is 156.1, where we have a 

4 resolution down there. Actually, it is 155 

5 was the last one I have a resolution for, 

6 which was no action necessary. But that was 

7 an observation.

8 So then the next one, I don't know 

9 if, Stu, in your notes or anything, you show 

10 where we left off in this matrix, because I 

11 think we made it further.

12 MR. HINNEFELD: The last note I 

13 have actually refers to 144.2.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. Well, I'm 

15 not sure how much headway we are going to make 

16 on this until we find our notes.

17 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, I've got a 

18 file; I think it is from you, Mark, on April 

19 13th. Is that the one you are working on?

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, I don't know. 

21 Now that could be the updated one. Did you 

22 find that? What does that have as far as in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

275

1 the matrix? What is the tail of the file?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: The file is 8th 

3 30-case matrix from Mark April 13, '09.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, that might 

5 be the one I made my revisions in that's on my 

6 other computer at home. Can you email that?

7 MR. HINNEFELD: I can email it to 

8 everybody.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

10 MR. HINNEFELD: Let's see, we have 

11 highlighting into the 150s, through 153 maybe.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, is that it?

13 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I don't 

14 know. That is the last highlighting I see.

15 MEMBER MUNN: What was the date 

16 again?

17 MR. HINNEFELD: It is April 3rd, 

18 '09.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Thank you.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: If it stops at 

21 155 --

22 MR. HINNEFELD: It stops at 155. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

276

1 It sounds like it is the one you've got.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then it is the 

3 same thing. Yes, it is the same thing I have.

4 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. Okay, so 

5 I've got that one.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, I'm not sure 

7 how much -- let's see. We don't have the 

8 transcripts from this meeting, do we?

9 MR. KATZ: From?

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: From the last 

11 Subcommittee meeting, April?

12 MR. KATZ: We should.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean, do you 

14 have them that we can find out where we left 

15 off on this?

16 MR. KATZ: Let me ask Zaida to 

17 send them to me.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Alright.

19 MR. KATZ: I might be able to pull 

20 them up. Do you want me to look for that?

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: The only reason 

22 I'm saying is we could skip the ones that were 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

277

1 covered in the last meeting and then start 

2 from there on.

3 MR. KATZ: They should be on the 

4 website by now.

5 MEMBER MUNN: They should be on 

6 the website.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Oh, are they 

8 posted already?

9 MR. KATZ: If you had done it, 

10 then they should be --

11 CHAIR GRIFFON: I'm the 

12 bottleneck, huh?

13 (Laughter.)

14 MR. KATZ: They should be posted.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Then they're 

16 probably not, no.

17 Let's see who finds them first.

18 MEMBER MUNN: What was the date?

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: April 15.

20 MEMBER MUNN: That's when the 

21 meeting was?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: That's what we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

278

1 have been saying.

2 MR. KATZ: Is somebody at the 

3 website.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, I'm looking.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: April 16th.

6 MEMBER MUNN: April 16th.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

8 Are they still on your desk, 

9 Emily?

10 MS. HOWELL: I don't do that. For 

11 once, it's not me.

12 (Laughter.)

13 MR. KATZ: We have someone do 

14 that, but they don't take long, and the PA 

15 part isn't the hang-up.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: So you think those 

17 are with me?

18 MR. KATZ: I think they're with 

19 you.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, Stu probably 

21 has the draft ones, right?

22 MR. KATZ: No, no, he wouldn't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

279

1 have gotten them, but I can get the draft. 

2 Let me email Zaida.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: We don't have a 

4 lot of time left today anyway, but at least we 

5 can find out where we left off, and I'll look. 

6 They have to be on my other computer.

7 MR. FARVER: Yes, we definitely 

8 need to get an updated read-only file.

9 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

10 MS. ADAMS: Ted, what do you need 

11 me to send you? Zaida may be on her way.

12 MR. KATZ: Oh, okay, thanks. Hi, 

13 Nancy.

14 The transcript from the April 16th 

15 Subcommittee, Dose Reconstruction Subcommittee 

16 meeting.

17 MS. ADAMS: Okay, I will get it to 

18 you.

19 MR. KATZ: Thanks.

20 It just came to me. Did it come 

21 to you, Mark?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Can you forward 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

280

1 it?

2 MR. KATZ: Yes.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Because I can't 

4 find it. We've got an app for it.

5 MR. KATZ: I will forward it to 

6 you right now.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Is this a draft?

8 MR. KATZ: Yes.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I think our 

10 app won't show it until it's final.

11 MR. KATZ: Right. I just sent it 

12 to you, Stu. I will send it to Mark again, 

13 too.

14 MS. ADAMS: This is Nancy. Ted, 

15 that is the original transcript.

16 MR. KATZ: That's good. I will 

17 send it. It just means that it will have some 

18 problems with it, but it is the draft.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: Did I review that 

20 yet, Nancy?

21 MS. ADAMS: I don't know that I 

22 have your comments. I would have to go back 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

281

1 into that.

2 MR. KATZ: If it is not on the 

3 website, it means you haven't cleared it yet.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right.

5 Did you forward it to me?

6 MR. KATZ: I did.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

8 MR. KATZ: I sent it to you and 

9 Stu.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, I'm 

11 waiting.

12 MR. KATZ: It has to go to CDC and 

13 then to you.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

15 MR. KATZ: But if you're actually 

16 looking in your email at CDC, that will come 

17 quicker to that than your -- except I didn't 

18 send it to there, right? I sent it to your 

19 regular email.

20 CHAIR GRIFFON: It would take me 

21 about 10 minutes to log in.

22 MR. KATZ: Stu, have you gotten it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

282

1 yet?

2 MR. HINNEFELD: I have the 

3 transcript. I'm working backwards.

4 MR. KATZ: Okay.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: It should be at 

6 the tail end, and write it down.

7 Oh, there it is, okay.

8 MEMBER MUNN: If you have it, you 

9 might search for 155.

10 MR. KATZ: What are we searching 

11 for exactly?

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, the last 

13 case that we discussed.

14 MR. KATZ: What is a term I can 

15 search for?

16 MEMBER MUNN: Tab 155 would be a 

17 good place to start.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, 155.

19 MR. KATZ: Tab 155?

20 MEMBER MUNN: Tab 155.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

22 MR. KATZ: Okay.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

283

1 MEMBER MUNN: No luck?

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: I don't see 

3 anything else on Bridgeport now. I'm right at 

4 the end. Is Bridgeport one of the 

5 attachments?

6 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. We seem to 

7 end at talking about Bridgeport.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: Bridgeport, yes, 

9 because I see a comment that I would like to 

10 do Harshaw, but I think we are too tired. So 

11 Bridgeport was the last. Is that attachment 

12 1?

13 MS. BEHLING: Yes, Bridgeport is 

14 attachment 1.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. And 2 is 

16 Harshaw?

17 MS. BEHLING: Yes.

18 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean the only 

20 thing from my standpoint; I think it is more 

21 important to get the files with the NIOSH 

22 responses rather than have a description of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

284

1 these findings now at the end of today, when 

2 the next time we meet I will need another 

3 description of them, you know.

4 MR. FARVER: Yes, that's true.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: So I'm not sure it 

6 is worth our energy to go through and have 

7 SC&A describe the findings.

8 MR. FARVER: Well, I thought I 

9 sent the matrix with the findings in it.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

11 MR. FARVER: And I may have that 

12 matrix on the other computer.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know, and I have 

14 the same issues, yes.

15 MR. FARVER: So, until I get fully 

16 migrated over to this one, we both have 

17 problems.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

19 MR. FARVER: I did find those 

20 responses, and I emailed them to Stu. I don't 

21 know if you got them yet.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: But before we went 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

285

1 to Bridgeport, did you find out if we just 

2 left off on 155 or if we got further than 

3 that? Because just in terms of preparing for 

4 the next meeting, I would like to know where 

5 we left off.

6 So we had a preliminary discussion 

7 of Bridgeport, which is in this transcript.

8 Did anybody have any luck finding 

9 out what tab we left off, what number?

10 MS. BEHLING: The notes on my 

11 matrix indicate that we stopped with tab 154.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: So 154. Okay, so 

13 that was it? Then we went to the attachments. 

14 I guess we went from there to attachment 1, 

15 we decided, probably because Hans was 

16 available and we wanted to discuss that. So 

17 that makes sense. Okay.

18 Well, I think that's where we will 

19 pick it up next time. I mean I'm not sure --

20 Stu, do you agree? I will coordinate with Stu 

21 and Doug and get the 6th, 7th, and 8th matrix 

22 updated and sent out, and maybe we can talk 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

286

1 about how to post them in read-only format on 

2 the O: drive.

3 MR. FARVER: So we are going to 

4 start at 154?

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: Well, 156 really 

6 because we did 154, and then 155 was just an 

7 observation.

8 MEMBER MUNN: No action required.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right. I believe.

10 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. That's what 

11 your file says.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

13 MR. FARVER: So we are at 156?

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, as far as the 

15 first run-through. Now that doesn't mean --

16 MR. FARVER: Oh, I understand.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, there are

18 other ones that have actions, but as far as 

19 making a first cut through.

20 MR. FARVER: Okay, I just want to 

21 make a note.

22 MS. BEHLING: Now my matrix shows 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

287

1 155 having several findings.

2 MR. FARVER: Eight.

3 MS. BEHLING: Eight findings, yes. 

4 I think there was one observation on 154, and 

5 I'm not sure that we actually talked about 

6 that one.

7 MR. FARVER: Well, 154 has five 

8 findings and one observation.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: 154.

10 MS. ADAMS: This is Nancy.

11 If it is any help, this is about 

12 page 288 in the transcript.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Thank you, 

14 Nancy.

15 Tab 154, the observation, I show 

16 the one observation, too, Kathy, but it says 

17 the case is being reviewed under PER review.

18 MS. BEHLING: That's correct.

19 CHAIR GRIFFON: It doesn't really 

20 say anything more.

21 MS. BEHLING: Okay.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

288

1 MS. BEHLING: Right, but I think 

2 we will be starting with 155.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: No, I have a bunch 

4 of comments on 155.

5 MS. BEHLING: Oh, okay.

6 CHAIR GRIFFON: I mean, in terms 

7 of a first cut through, I have a bunch of 

8 either SC&A agrees or -- so I have comments 

9 all the way through 155.4. There is an 

10 action. NIOSH will consider adding the 

11 instruction into the site profile documents.

12 MR. FARVER: I think we agreed 

13 with most of them.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: There's a lot of 

15 agreement. NIOSH agrees no further action. 

16 SC&A agrees.

17 MS. BEHLING: Okay, yes.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: So I go up through 

19 the end of tab 155.

20 MS. BEHLING: Okay. I think what 

21 happened there, I had to cut off early on that 

22 day.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

289

1 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

2 MS. BEHLING: And I may not have 

3 listed your last one.

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: I will make a real 

5 effort in the next couple of days, because I 

6 don't like to let these things sit because I 

7 forget where we are at, to get all three of 

8 these matrices out: 6, 7, 8, you know, updated 

9 and to everyone.

10 I will talk to NIOSH about how to 

11 get them on the O: drive in a read-only 

12 format, so we don't have this issue of leaving 

13 them on other computers and stuff.

14 MEMBER MUNN: As long as what you 

15 send me is not read-only.

16 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right. So I 

17 don't think we can go much further today, 

18 unless anybody else has anything they want to 

19 cover.

20 MR. KATZ: Do you want to book 

21 another meeting?

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes, we should do 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

290

1 that. Let's book another meeting.

2 MR. HINNEFELD: On the 8th matrix, 

3 there are other NIOSH responses that were 

4 later, 156 and later. So, on those, SC&A is 

5 going to take the opportunity to evaluate what 

6 they thought of our response and determine. 

7 So we will be ready to discuss on those.

8 MR. FARVER: Yes.

9 MR. HINNEFELD: Then I will look 

10 for -- we may have some response. I'm trying 

11 to get responses back on the site profile.

12 MR. FARVER: Yes. I've been 

13 emailing them to you for Bridgeport.

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Thanks.

15 MR. FARVER: Because it was within 

16 a matrix. Harshaw was not in a matrix form. 

17 It was in a report form, which will have to be 

18 cut and pasted into the matrix.

19 MR. HINNEFELD: We can do that. 

20 We can do that.

21 MR. FARVER: I thought we had 

22 something from the Huntington plant, but I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

291

1 can't find it.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: I do remember --

3 MR. HINNEFELD: I know we have --

4 CHAIR GRIFFON: I know, now that 

5 we are discussing it.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: We have a 

7 Huntington finding from later on. I know that 

8 there are a number of Huntington findings from 

9 very early on.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

11 MR. HINNEFELD: And there have 

12 been some Huntington findings subsequently. I 

13 know that we have revised site profiles since 

14 very early on.

15 CHAIR GRIFFON: Right, right.

16 MR. HINNEFELD: And if these cases 

17 were all done in accordance with the first 

18 site profile, then it could be it resolved. I 

19 know we revised that site profile.

20 MR. FARVER: I thought you also 

21 provided responses to those files?

22 MR. HINNEFELD: I will, yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

292

1 MR. FARVER: Well, I thought you 

2 had previously.

3 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, okay.

4 MR. FARVER: You may not have, 

5 but --

6 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay, what about 

8 dates?

9 MR. KATZ: How about the first 

10 week in November? How does that look for 

11 people?

12 MEMBER MUNN: Not bad, 

13 surprisingly.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: Are there other 

15 meetings lined up in that time period?

16 MR. KATZ: No, there aren't, but 

17 the third week of November is a chopping block 

18 at this point. Then the end of that week, OGC 

19 is not available.

20 The second week in November, 

21 Veterans' Day is in the middle of it.

22 MR. HINNEFELD: There is a holiday 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

293

1 in there.

2 CHAIR GRIFFON: How about the 4th 

3 or 5th of November? Either of those a 

4 preference, Wednesday or Thursday?

5 MR. KATZ: They are both fine for 

6 me.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay.

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Good for me.

9 MR. KATZ: Emily, how do those 

10 look to you?

11 MS. HOWELL: They're fine.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Any preference one 

13 over the other?

14 MR. KATZ: The 3rd is great just 

15 because it gives a little latitude for other 

16 groups.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: The 3rd is not 

18 good for me.

19 MR. KATZ: Oh, the 3rd is not? 

20 Oh, 4th or 5th, you said?

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: The 4th or 5th.

22 MR. KATZ: Oh, then let's --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

294

1 MR. HINNEFELD: If you have any 

2 local elections or anything --

3 MR. KATZ: Oh, you're right, the 

4 elections, right. I'm sorry, I missed that.

5 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean it's not a 

6 big year, but there might be some local 

7 things.

8 MEMBER MUNN: But, nevertheless, 

9 there's a lot of stuff going on some places.

10 CHAIR GRIFFON: How about the 5th? 

11 Is that okay?

12 MEMBER MUNN: The 5th is fine with 

13 me.

14 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right.

15 MR. KATZ: The 5th is fine. Then 

16 if another Work Group wants to attach on 

17 either side of that, that works out well, too.

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. Now we don't 

19 know about John, but I will email him.

20 MR. KATZ: Right.

21 CHAIR GRIFFON: I would like him 

22 to be able to --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

295

1 MR. KATZ: Yes, it would be good 

2 to see him.

3 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes.

4 MR. KATZ: November 5. Okay.

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: All right, 

6 November 5th.

7 MR. KATZ: I'm going to book it 

8 for then.

9 CHAIR GRIFFON: Kathy, does that 

10 work for you?

11 MS. BEHLING: That's fine for me.

12 CHAIR GRIFFON: Can you be in 

13 Cincinnati with the dogs?

14 (Laughter.)

15 MS. BEHLING: If the dogs are 

16 invited.

17 (Laughter.)

18 CHAIR GRIFFON: Always. I think 

19 we use this hotel enough that we could 

20 probably swing that, you know.

21 (Laughter.)

22 MR. HINNEFELD: Right. As long as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

296

1 we are down here, we ought to be able to put 

2 our menagerie on there.

3 Are we going to do a 9:30 start 

4 time?

5 CHAIR GRIFFON: 9:30, yes.

6 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean it doesn't 

7 hurt me.

8 CHAIR GRIFFON: 9:30. I don't 

9 think we need until 10 o'clock, although that 

10 was nice, but 9:30 is fine because I get in at 

11 8:00 usually.

12 MR. KATZ: 9:30, done.

13 CHAIR GRIFFON: Okay. I'm sorry 

14 about the logistical problems, but we will 

15 have those worked out next time.

16 MR. FARVER: I hope so.

17 CHAIR GRIFFON: Yes. We missed a 

18 meeting there, and it threw us all off, you 

19 know. That wasn't my fault. Everybody's 

20 schedule was --

21 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, just terrible.

22 CHAIR GRIFFON: The Health Physics 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

297

1 meeting got in the way, too.

2 Alright. I think we are ready to 

3 adjourn.

4 Anything else?

5 MR. KATZ: No. Thank you, 

6 everybody.

7 CHAIR GRIFFON: Meeting adjourned.

8 MR. KATZ: Meeting adjourned. 

9 Thank you, Behling’s and Liz, if you are still 

10 with us.

11 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

12 matter went off the record at 4:06 p.m.)

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22