1 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

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 

+ + + + +

WORK GROUP ON WORKER OUTREACH

+ + + + +

WEDNESDAY

OCTOBER 20, 2010

+ + + + +

 The Work Group convened in the 

Montreal Room of the Cincinnati Airport 

Marriott, 2395 Progress Drive, Hebron, 

Kentucky, at 9:00 a.m., Michael H. Gibson, 

Chairman, presiding.

PRESENT:

MICHAEL H. GIBSON, Chairman

JOSIE BEACH, Member

WANDA I. MUNN, Member

PHILLIP SCHOFIELD, Member
2 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

ALSO PRESENT:

TED KATZ, Designated Federal Official

TERRIE BARRIE, ANWAG

GRADY CALHOUN, DCAS

BUCK CAMERON, ATL*

MARY ELLIOTT, ATL

JOE FITZGERALD, SC&A

EMILY HOWELL, HHS

J.J. JOHNSON, DCAS

JENNY LIN, HHS*

VERNON MCDOUGALL, ATL

ARJUN MAKHIJANI, SC&A

JOHN MAURO, SC&A*

KATHY ROBERTSON-DEMERS, SC&A

*Participating via telephone
3 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S 

Call to Order 5 

Roll Call 5 

Review of PROC-12 9 

 Finding 1 9 

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 9 

 J.J. Johnson 12

 Finding 2 96

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 96

 J.J. Johnson 97

 Finding 3 98

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 98

 J.J. Johnson 100

 Finding 4 110

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 110, 112, 129

 J.J. Johnson 111, 113, 131

 Finding 5 173

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 173

 J.J. Johnson 174

 Observations 1 and 2 191

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 191

 J.J. Johnson 193
4 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

 C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S (CONTINUED)

 Observation 3 196

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 196

 J.J. Johnson 198

 Observation 4 211

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 211

 J.J. Johnson 211

 Observation 5 212

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 213

 J.J. Johnson 214

 Findings from Review of 215

 ORAUT-PROC-0097

 Kathy Robertson-Demers 215

 J.J. Johnson 217

Review/Discuss Objective 3 of the 224, 266

Plan for Effectiveness of Worker

Outreach

Public Comment 263

 Terrie Barrie 264

 ANWAG

Administrative Detail and Calendar 290
5 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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

2 (9:04 a.m.)

3 MR. KATZ: So, good morning, 

4 everyone in the room and on the line.

5 This is the Advisory Board on 

6 Radiation and Worker Health, the Worker 

7 Outreach Work Group, and we are just getting 

8 started here.

9 Before we go on the record, we are 

10 going to do roll call, as usual, beginning 

11 with Board Members in the room, with the 

12 Chair.

13 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Mike Gibson, 

14 Board Member, Chair of the Work Group.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Wanda Munn, Board 

16 Member, Member of the Work Group.

17 MEMBER BEACH: Josie Beach, Board 

18 Member, Member of the Work Group.

19 MR. KATZ: And do we have any 

20 Board Members on the line?

21 (No response.)
6 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Okay. NIOSH ORAU team in the 

2 room?

3 MR. CALHOUN: Grady Calhoun, 

4 NIOSH.

5 MR. JOHNSON: J.J. Johnson, NIOSH.

6 MR. McDOUGALL: Vern McDougall, 

7 ATL.

8 MS. ELLIOTT: Mary Elliott, ATL.

9 MR. KATZ: And apologies to ATL 

10 again. I slop you in there with the NIOSH 

11 ORAU team.

12 And the same, on the line, NIOSH 

13 ORAU/ATL?

14 MR. CAMERON: Buck Cameron, ATL.

15 MR. KATZ: Okay, and then SC&A 

16 members in the room? Joe Fitzgerald is here, 

17 but he is making copies for us.

18 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Kathy 

19 Robertson-Demers, SC&A.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: Arjun Makhijani, 

21 SC&A.
7 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: And SC&A folks on the 

2 line?

3 DR. MAURO: John Mauro, SC&A.

4 MR. KATZ: Very good. HHS 

5 officials or contractors to the feds: HHS or 

6 other agencies in the room?

7 MS. HOWELL: Emily Howell, HHS.

8 MR. KATZ: And the same on the 

9 line?

10 MS. ADAMS: Nancy Adams, NIOSH 

11 contractor.

12 MS. LIN: And Jenny Lin with HHS.

13 MR. KATZ: And finally, there are 

14 no members of the public in the room, but do 

15 we have any members of the public on the line?

16 MS. BARRIE: This is Terrie Barrie 

17 with ANWAG.

18 MR. KATZ: Welcome, Terrie.

19 MS. BARRIE: Good morning.

20 MR. KATZ: Okay. Well, welcome to 

21 everybody, and we'll get started.
8 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Mike, it's your agenda.

2 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Okay. I guess 

3 everyone's got a copy of the agenda. We are 

4 going to start out with the review of PROC-12, 

5 the Issues Matrix. Joe should be back 

6 momentarily with copies of that for us.

7 Then, we are going to look at 

8 SC&A's review of the Objective 3 of our Plan 

9 for Effectiveness. 

10 Then, we are going to review the 

11 current format of the way we are tracking 

12 public comments, just take another look at it. 

13 There's really no specific issue, but just 

14 thought we would take a look at it while we 

15 are here together.

16 And then, we will open the line up 

17 after that for some claimant, advocate, worker 

18 comments, public comments.

19 Then, we will discuss any issues 

20 that may arise from that or that may arise 

21 that any members may have that they want to 
9 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 discuss. Then, we should be ready to close 

2 out for the day after that.

3 MR. KATZ: Perfect timing. Joe 

4 just walked in the room with the matrices.

5 MR. FITZGERALD: Well, not all the 

6 copies, but certainly enough to get started, 

7 and we will get some more copies.

8 MR. KATZ: Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: So, Joe's 

10 handing out the matrix of -- SC&A took a 

11 review of the OCAS PROC-12 and made a list of 

12 some of the issues and items they want to 

13 discuss, and they have put it into a matrix.

14 So, we will turn it over to SC&A, 

15 and they can go through the matrix. Then, we 

16 can just have some discussion of each issue.

17 MR. KATZ: And let me just, I 

18 forgot to say, but for folks on the line, 

19 except when you are addressing the group, 

20 would you please mute your phones? And if you 

21 don't have a mute button, *6 will work. And 
10 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 then you use *6 again to take it off of mute. 

2 Thank you.

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. This 

4 is Kathy Robertson-Demers.

5 I am just going to go down through 

6 the matrix items or the findings and 

7 observations that we had in the Procedure 

8 Review. I would assume that we are going to 

9 explain our finding and then allow NIOSH the 

10 opportunity to respond.

11 Okay. The first finding was the 

12 procedure does not provide direction for 

13 tracking, trending, evaluating or responding 

14 to worker input.

15 Our primary concern with this was 

16 that the procedure lacks direction for 

17 evaluating and responding to worker comments 

18 and incorporating substantive comments into 

19 the technical work documents. It does not 

20 provide clear direction on the disposition of 

21 worker input.
11 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 There is no explanation provided 

2 with regard to extracting substantive comments 

3 from worker outreach meeting minutes for 

4 consideration in technical work documents.

5 There is no requirement for 

6 capturing substantive comments from meetings 

7 that are primarily information-giving or 

8 information-giving/gathering, such as 

9 workshops, townhall meetings, et cetera.

10 The current procedure does not 

11 discuss how comments provided by workers are 

12 evaluated to determine their potential impact 

13 on technical work documents and how these 

14 comments are resolved. In fact, post-meeting 

15 activities receive only passing mention in 

16 PR-12.

17 And unlike the functional 

18 interface that existed with Procedure ORAU-97, 

19 there is no functional interface between the 

20 worker outreach procedure and the implementing 

21 documents for preparing Site Profiles and SEC 
12 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Evaluation Reports.

2 For example, there was an 

3 interface between PROC-97 and PROC-31, which 

4 was the Site Profile Development Procedure, 

5 and that interface required that, with the 

6 Site Profile development, you went back to the 

7 worker outreach comments and considered those 

8 comments in the development of a Site Profile, 

9 and -97 also referenced out to PROC-31. So, 

10 that interface is no longer in existence. So, 

11 that is kind of where we stood on that finding 

12 and an explanation of what that finding is all 

13 about.

14 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Kathy.

15 J.J., do you want to comment?

16 MR. JOHNSON: Procedure 12 

17 addresses action items, and action items are 

18 identified based upon professional judgment of 

19 the HP at the respective meetings. At the 

20 meetings there are ORAU HPs that, if there are 

21 action items, the interface between the two 
13 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 can come up with an association of updating 

2 Technical Basis Documents.

3 Any action item that is identified 

4 is put into a tracking system. The tracking 

5 system provides an initial date, what the item 

6 is, who generated the item, whether it was 

7 identified by somebody in the audience or it 

8 was an observation for needing some additional 

9 information.

10 Through the process of identifying 

11 the item, there's coordination between the HP 

12 and the individual who is the technical 

13 document owner. Through that effort, there is 

14 agreement as to when the item is to be 

15 addressed, and what timely manner, based upon 

16 level of effort, schedule, and the type of 

17 item.

18 We can also identify whether you 

19 can update the item on a routine basis, and 

20 the concurrence of whether the item is to be 

21 closed and how it is to be closed is concurred 
14 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 between the HP and the individual who the 

2 action item is assigned to.

3 MEMBER BEACH: Jay, I just have a 

4 question. Who takes on that responsibility if 

5 an HP isn't at a meeting?

6 MR. JOHNSON: In accordance with 

7 Procedure 12, we assign or we have individuals 

8 who go out to the meetings and those 

9 individuals are part of the DCAS HP group. 

10 That individual is responsible for, and with 

11 the editor and minutes writer, to come up with 

12 action items associated with the meeting. And 

13 those action items are then incorporated into 

14 the tracking system.

15 MEMBER BEACH: I just always have 

16 a problem when I see something, a procedure 

17 that says, professional judgment, because each 

18 individual has different professional 

19 judgments. So, how would you ever have any 

20 consistency when it's professional judgment?

21 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I think 
15 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 professional judgment does have its 

2 flexibilities, but that is why an individual 

3 who is working on a particular site is 

4 assigned, and they have the experience behind 

5 them, the knowledge of what they are working 

6 on, and therefore, the intuitiveness to 

7 understand what the issues are and how to pick 

8 those issues up.

9 MEMBER BEACH: Okay. So, now that 

10 you brought up a particular site, how will you 

11 have consistency amongst other different 

12 sites? Because if you use a person at one 

13 site because of their experience and knowledge 

14 of that site, and then you have another person 

15 at a different site, I guess the consistency 

16 issue and the professional judgment call in a 

17 procedure leads me to believe that, between 

18 the sites, even between individuals, it is not 

19 going to be consistent. I am wondering if we 

20 couldn't spell that out a little more.

21 MR. JOHNSON: Well, in my response 
16 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I have provided that.

2 MEMBER BEACH: I saw that, too.

3 MR. CALHOUN: It would be almost 

4 impossible not to use professional judgment. 

5 Because if you have ever been to one of these 

6 meetings, I mean, it ranges from something 

7 very specific like the TLDs on this board were 

8 never read or they didn't have film, all the 

9 way to, my cousin Bob used to come work in 

10 here at this place and ate nuts and berries, 

11 or even something more nondescript.

12 It would be impossible, in my 

13 opinion, to nail that down any further than 

14 professional judgment. Unfortunately, we are 

15 kind of stuck with professional judgment when 

16 it comes to listening to what people have to 

17 say about the site, trying to weigh that with 

18 what we have heard and what we haven't heard, 

19 and see what that impact is going to be on the 

20 document.

21 I have been to a lot of these 
17 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 outreach meetings myself, a lot of them. I 

2 don't know how you can spell out, well, we're 

3 going to look at this and track this, or we're 

4 not going to track this; this doesn't quite 

5 meet the threshold of what we're going to 

6 track.

7 I'm all open for suggestions. I 

8 don't know what the options would be, other 

9 than saying, you know, we've got trained, 

10 qualified people doing these outreach meetings 

11 and you have got to rely on those people for 

12 determining what is substantive and what is 

13 not.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Well, there is 

15 another kind of tangential aspect to that, 

16 too. That is the fact that, from the outset, 

17 when we tried to establish a QA program for 

18 how we were going to address procedures and 

19 the activities that were undertaken, we said 

20 from the beginning that it was going to be 

21 necessary to evaluate each item on the impact 
18 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that it had, the severity of the issue that 

2 was before us.

3 One has to prioritize in some way 

4 the information that pours into us because all 

5 information is not equal and all sites are not 

6 equal. The situations would vary enormously, 

7 depending upon the magnitude of the comment in 

8 terms of its impact on the rest of the 

9 program, either at that site or complex-wide.

10 It is hard to imagine eliminating 

11 judgment in --

12 MEMBER BEACH: And I don't think 

13 I'm saying eliminate it. I just want to make 

14 sure that it is consistent throughout and 

15 things aren't missed based on one person's 

16 professional -- I just want it to be 

17 consistent, I guess is what I am looking for.

18 I mean I understand professional 

19 judgment. It is important. I just wanted to 

20 make sure it was consistent.

21 MR. JOHNSON: Well, to attempt 
19 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that, I have indicated that I am going to put 

2 some additional guidance in the procedure.

3 MEMBER BEACH: I did see that.

4 MR. JOHNSON: That was in green.

5 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

6 MR. JOHNSON: So we are going to 

7 follow through on that.

8 MR. KATZ: I'm sorry. Just for 

9 the record, Phil Schofield, Board Member, has 

10 joined us.

11 Welcome, Phil.

12 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Thank you.

13 MR. KATZ: And why don't we, Kathy 

14 and Wanda, if you can slide down a little bit, 

15 then Phil can come to the table. Otherwise, 

16 we are not going to be able to hear him.

17 MEMBER MUNN: Keep him in the 

18 corner over there.

19 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Hey, I spent a 

20 lot of time in the corner.

21 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, I know. We all 
20 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 know about the corners, don't we?

2 MR. KATZ: Sorry. Sorry for 

3 interrupting. I just wanted to catch that. 

4 Thanks.

5 Sorry, Kathy. Go ahead.

6 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I have a 

7 couple of questions.

8 How do you determine what isn't 

9 actionable? What process do you go through?

10 MR. JOHNSON: As I indicated, the 

11 action item is determined based upon the 

12 professional judgment of the individual in 

13 review of the minutes, being there at the 

14 meetings, and conferring with the individual 

15 that supported writing the minutes, along with 

16 the HP associated with the respective site 

17 which might be an ORAU HP.

18 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I am 

19 getting a little ahead of myself. I guess one 

20 of the concerns I have is, in going through 

21 OTS, we have action items numbered up to 11. 
21 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 There's things out there, and we have 118 

2 meetings.

3 MR. JOHNSON: Well, you are 

4 looking at a lot of historical stuff that you 

5 asked to have put into the open list. We're 

6 working on that. And it's impossible to try 

7 to take an older system and a newer system and 

8 backfit it. We are trying to gather that 

9 information. The two systems are not 

10 compatible with each other.

11 So, the action items that you are 

12 referring to with regards to historical 

13 meetings are likely not going to that.

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I think it 

15 was a mix of some historical and some more 

16 current meetings.

17 MR. JOHNSON: Very few historical 

18 or mostly probably historical ones that you 

19 have identified, but more recent, newer ones 

20 from other meetings.

21 MEMBER MUNN: Is it possible as we 
22 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 go through these action items that we can zero 

2 in on that one that we were discussing at the 

3 time and clarify at this meeting what the 

4 current outstanding action items are? So 

5 that, what is being carried over is not quite 

6 as unclear to the rapid reader as the format 

7 that we have right now?

8 Perhaps I'm the only one that had 

9 some difficulty in trying to identify for 

10 myself what is on the table right now as 

11 opposed to what was considered an action item 

12 and has, even though it says action item 

13 closed there, it's not -- I'm not saying this 

14 well, but it is not clear to me exactly what 

15 the crucial outstanding action items on each 

16 of these items is to me right now.

17 I don't know whether it is just 

18 format or whether this is an issue that may 

19 not be closed in your view, and it is being 

20 closed in someone else's view.

21 But if we can, as we address each 
23 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 of these today, if we can be very specific 

2 about what outstanding action items we now 

3 have on each of these findings, it would 

4 really be helpful.

5 MR. JOHNSON: Perhaps if Kathy can 

6 be specific with her questions, then I could 

7 be specific with my answer.

8 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Well, I think 

9 part of the issue is that this first finding 

10 kind of spills over into other areas. At 

11 least I thought Kathy was trying to explain 

12 some issues, other issues, and how little 

13 effect, you know, what needs to be addressed 

14 in this first finding.

15 DR. MAURO: This is John Mauro.

16 I have a question that goes toward 

17 this, I think. When you have your minutes of 

18 a meeting captured in some level of detail --

19 I have to admit I haven't looked at the OTS 

20 and the level of granularity of the minutes, 

21 but I presume that embedded in that are a 
24 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 number of comments, suggestions, questions, et 

2 cetera, offered-up information by the people 

3 you are speaking to, either individually or in 

4 a group.

5 Is there any provision to create a 

6 log? That is, what I mean by that is, once 

7 you say there's a question, let's say someone 

8 raises a question similar to the way questions 

9 sometimes are raised at the full Board meeting 

10 during the open sessions for the public. And 

11 then, effectively, a log is maintained. Ted 

12 is maintaining a log of these things, and 

13 then, later on, the Board responds back on how 

14 they are being dealt with.

15 Is there a provision for that in 

16 your procedure to sort of, as you act on any 

17 given item that is in your minutes, is there 

18 any provision in your procedure for requiring 

19 a log be maintained of what the follow-up 

20 actions were? Or does it really just stop at 

21 that point? That is, you have logged it in, 
25 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 in the OTS and from there, it is used as 

2 people see fit to use, which is a little 

3 looser in terms of how to deal with these 

4 things.

5 What I am hearing is, if there was 

6 some kind of log of what is being done, you 

7 know, that goes with each item, to the degree 

8 to which you could itemize them sometimes is 

9 kind of blurry. But, anyway, that is what I 

10 am hearing is, is there any need to have such 

11 a log and tracking of followup to the material 

12 that is captured in the OTS?

13 MR. JOHNSON: Let me try to refine 

14 that. We don't have a log. We have minutes. 

15 We attend. We listen. We take notes. And 

16 during the session or at the end of the 

17 session, if we have any identified salient 

18 issues that we need to follow through on, they 

19 are placed in the Outreach Tracking System. 

20 In that system, there is a time basis by which 

21 it is inputted; it's identified when it should 
26 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 be completed. It is assigned to an 

2 individual. It is documented as to what the 

3 issue is. And on a periodic basis, the HP 

4 will check with the person who the issue is 

5 assigned to and see what the progress is.

6 In the results section of the 

7 action item, you can either type information 

8 in there as to what the status is or you can 

9 actually copy and paste emails in there.

10 DR. MAURO: Oh, okay. So, in 

11 other words, in practice, you are, in fact, 

12 logging in and tracking. Is that written up 

13 in the procedure, in PROC-12?

14 MR. JOHNSON: It is in the 

15 procedure, yes.

16 DR. MAURO: Oh, okay. All right. 

17 Thank you.

18 DR. MAKHIJANI: Could I follow up 

19 on what Josie was asking about? I want to 

20 focus on the worker, the information-gathering 

21 interviews, right, are they always initiated 
27 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 by somebody that is writing like a TBD or are 

2 they initiated from ATL or NIOSH or ORAU? 

3 Because information-gathering is initiated 

4 generally by somebody that is writing a 

5 document, right?

6 MR. McDOUGALL: Yes, basically, 

7 today, most of the information-gathering 

8 meetings that are taking place today are in 

9 support of a petition evaluation, in 

10 preparation for a Petition Evaluation Report.

11 So, the HP, the NIOSH HP who is 

12 working that particular petition requests us 

13 to go out and arrange for the gathering of the 

14 information he needs.

15 A good example of that is in the 

16 last couple or three months the GE Evendale 

17 meetings. They had a specific, the Board had 

18 a specific request of NIOSH. NIOSH asked us 

19 to go out and facilitate that.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: So, does the HP 

21 who requests that meeting attend the meeting 
28 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 to make sure --

2 MR. JOHNSON: Yes.

3 DR. MAKHIJANI: It's that specific 

4 HP who attends the meeting?

5 MR. JOHNSON: As far back as I can 

6 recall, even back when we were doing the Site 

7 Profiles, the NIOSH HP who was responsible for 

8 that document was, I think in nearly every 

9 single instance, at that meeting.

10 DR. MAKHIJANI: And do they make 

11 their own notes or do they just rely on your 

12 notes? And how do they get back to the HP?

13 MR. JOHNSON: I think they do 

14 both. I think they make their own notes. I 

15 have been in meetings with Grady, and I know I 

16 can recall him taking notes.

17 DR. MAKHIJANI: Right.

18 MR. JOHNSON: But they also have 

19 access to our minutes.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: So, there should 

21 be two sets, normally, from each of these 
29 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 information-gathering meetings, there should 

2 be two sets of documents that arise from that, 

3 right? A set of notes that was taken by the 

4 requesting HP who had a specific set of 

5 questions -- I mean we do this all the time, 

6 too. We have a specific set of questions, and 

7 we want to make sure they are all answered. 

8 We try to make sure that we go through them. 

9 And if the person is there themselves, then, 

10 presumably, if they have made notes, they have 

11 made some effort to make sure that all their 

12 questions were answered.

13 And is that posted on the SRDB? 

14 Or how does that work? How do you reconcile 

15 the --

16 MR. JOHNSON: If there are notes 

17 taken, then those notes can be easily worked 

18 with having looked at the minutes, once they 

19 are developed, to see if those components are 

20 addressed in the minutes or the notes can be 

21 given to the person developing the minutes to 
30 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 ensure that those issues have been fully 

2 addressed.

3 Now, when the minutes are 

4 developed, it is pretty much a complete 

5 dissertation of the meeting itself.

6 DR. MAKHIJANI: Now that doesn't 

7 show up in the procedure anywhere. Does each 

8 requesting HP make their own notes --

9 MR. JOHNSON: No. Of course not.

10 DR. MAKHIJANI: -- and then you 

11 incorporate that into the minutes?

12 MR. JOHNSON: No, it's not. No. 

13 It is just good business practice.

14 DR. MAKHIJANI: I don't understand 

15 that.

16 I'm just interested in the 

17 functional aspect of this thing. If you have 

18 information-gathering meetings, and then the 

19 HP has a set of questions, they make notes to 

20 make sure that they have the information they 

21 need. Then, there are two things that I think 
31 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 should happen, and maybe I'm wrong, and I 

2 should be happy to be corrected.

3 One is, when the HP actually uses 

4 that information in the document, there should 

5 be some reference to his notes from which he 

6 worked, because they are his notes and his 

7 understanding of what happened at the meeting. 

8 There should be some way of making sure that 

9 those notes were reflected appropriately, that 

10 they are posted.

11 And then, the second track of that 

12 would be getting back to the worker and making 

13 sure that the HP is properly using the 

14 information, that he understood what went on 

15 properly.

16 And there are a lot of different 

17 ways to do that. We have our own way of doing 

18 that, and you prepare these minutes.

19 But I would think that the notes 

20 taken by the originating HP would be the most 

21 document in a way operationally for the 
32 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 preparation of the TBD or Evaluation Report or 

2 whatever is happening.

3 Does the procedure specify that 

4 the originating HP be present? I mean, if 

5 they are always present, that is wonderful. I 

6 mean, that is a big concern that is allayed, 

7 and maybe it should just be mentioned.

8 But this operational thing is 

9 puzzling because I did not know that the HP 

10 made their own notes and that you reconciled 

11 those notes. Do the workers ever see those 

12 notes?

13 MR. JOHNSON: Let me just say that 

14 if they have notes -- the procedure doesn't 

15 require them to take notes because we have 

16 minutes, and then the minutes are reviewed by 

17 the HP.

18 So, if he has or she has notes, 

19 they can compare those notes to the minutes to 

20 verify that the points of interest that we 

21 have are addressed in the minutes.
33 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 If they have any issues, salient 

2 issues, that they want to follow, they address 

3 those.

4 DR. MAKHIJANI: Do the action 

5 items refer both ways? There's a set of 

6 action items for the HP to pay attention to 

7 that arose from the meeting and the 

8 preparation of the document and a set of 

9 action items that gets back to the workers in 

10 terms of their questions and informs them as 

11 to how the minutes were used in the ER?

12 MR. JOHNSON: There's no 

13 distinction between the two.

14 DR. MAKHIJANI: Because I am not 

15 aware of action items that refer to an HP, but 

16 I'm not comprehensively aware of the action 

17 items; Kathy and our team is.

18 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Perhaps one 

19 of the questions is once you kind of institute 

20 action items, how do these substantive 

21 comments get integrated into the Site Profile 
34 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and the SEC process?

2 MR. JOHNSON: Earlier I indicated 

3 that the OCAS HP be at the meeting. 

4 Associated with the OCAS HP is an individual 

5 who is assigned by ORAU to be the technical 

6 document owner. Between those two individuals 

7 and the assignment of the action item and the 

8 closure of the action item, if it requires to 

9 be something to update the Technical Basis 

10 Document, the closure will identify that, 

11 along with the coordination with the Technical 

12 Basis Document owner.

13 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. And 

14 how are the Technical Basis Document owners 

15 getting access to the historical comments 

16 which may be of relevance since the release of 

17 the last version of the TBD?

18 MR. JOHNSON: Well, if we are 

19 talking three years ago, those items should 

20 have gone through the WISPR system. And if 

21 there were issues that were identified at that 
35 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 point in time justifiable to update the 

2 Technical Basis Documents, they should be out 

3 there, and they should be in the cover letter 

4 of the technical document as to where the 

5 information came from and when it was updated.

6 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: The front, 

7 the summary page of the TBD?

8 MR. JOHNSON: Of the Technical 

9 Basis Document, TBD or technical document, 

10 right.

11 MR. McDOUGALL: Kathy, just one 

12 point. Any minutes, if the minutes or the 

13 source documents for any of these concerns, 

14 any minutes from any meeting going back to 

15 2003, if they are not in the OTS, they are 

16 certainly online. They are on the NIOSH 

17 website. It is not like they are hard to 

18 find. So, if you wanted to see the minutes 

19 from a meeting from 2004, 2005, they are right 

20 there on the NIOSH website.

21 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Or on the 
36 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 SRDB?

2 MR. McDOUGALL: And/or, yes. But, 

3 as a default, they are all on the NIOSH 

4 website. So, the worst thing, the worst case 

5 scenario is you just go to the public website, 

6 and there they are. There's 100-and-some-odd 

7 sets of minutes out there.

8 MS. ELLIOTT: And as of yesterday, 

9 the final minutes for all the historical 

10 before June 2007 are in the OTS.

11 MR. KATZ: That's great.

12 MR. JOHNSON: Another issue about 

13 the OTS is that anything that goes in as a 

14 document automatically goes into the SRDB 

15 associated with that particular site.

16 MEMBER MUNN: In my simplistic 

17 mind, I am attempting to go through the action 

18 items that we have before us. And as I see, I 

19 believe, a very simple way to address my first 

20 concern, which is how to address what is still 

21 an outstanding action item.
37 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 If we are going to look at this 

2 table at all, I am not sure, am I fouling up 

3 the process here by referring to the outreach 

4 program?

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: It was more 

6 meant as a guidance to do this meeting than 

7 anything else.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Well, good. Good. 

9 All right. Because that's what I'm trying to 

10 do, is get through the meeting.

11 Under NIOSH responses, there are a 

12 couple of things that I don't understand in 

13 Item F1. One of the things is I do not 

14 understand the marking after Action Item 

15 Source, and there are two parallel lines about 

16 halfway down the page where the first space 

17 occurs. Additionally, to aid in identifying 

18 the source or initiator for the item, an 

19 action item source --

20 MS. ELLIOTT: Those are quotation 

21 marks.
38 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes.

2 MEMBER MUNN: That's a quote?

3 MS. ELLIOTT: And they transferred 

4 somehow weird into the --

5 MEMBER MUNN: All right. All 

6 right. So that is just a typing thing.

7 On the next page is where I see 

8 the first indication of what my reading tells 

9 me is an outstanding action item. And it is 

10 near the bottom of the page on page, what is 

11 numbered 4 here.

12 It says, Action, and then follows 

13 some specification as to what actions are 

14 going to be taken. And then, on page 5, it 

15 again says, Action and again some 

16 specifications. Similarly, on page 6.

17 It seems to me if we, at the very 

18 least, would bold the word action in each 

19 case --

20 MEMBER BEACH: Well, those actions 

21 came up through -- J.J., you guys worked on 
39 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 those, right?

2 MR. JOHNSON: Right. What I did, 

3 I did not have this.

4 MEMBER BEACH: Sure. Sure. She 

5 just took care of that.

6 MR. JOHNSON: So, what I did is I 

7 just took what I had and went through, 

8 addressed the respective findings and 

9 observations. And then, anything that I was 

10 going to do in support of trying to heal or 

11 address that finding or observation, I put it 

12 in green.

13 MEMBER BEACH: Right.

14 MR. JOHNSON: Green is what I am 

15 going to do to update the procedures.

16 MEMBER MUNN: I understand, and I 

17 understand that that is a fine method of 

18 differentiating, except that, quite often, we 

19 don't get the coloring when we are -- it 

20 depends on what format we are looking at, 

21 whether we have the color or not.
40 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I am suggesting a very simple 

2 clerical way to help, I hope, identify what we 

3 are doing as opposed to what we have done. 

4 And if you used "Action" in bold, regardless 

5 of what color we are using it in, then 

6 anything that follows tells us what action is 

7 going to take place. Then, it is a very 

8 simple thing to, at the end, when any one of 

9 those action items is taken care of, to also 

10 bold Closed at the end of it, so that it will 

11 be easy for anyone glancing at it in any 

12 format to see that an action item has been 

13 addressed and closed.

14 I know I'm just talking clerics 

15 here, but is that feasible to ask that we do 

16 that in the future?

17 MEMBER BEACH: I think the timing, 

18 J.J. sent those out the day before Kathy got 

19 them, threw them in a document, so that we 

20 would have them for today.

21 But the action items, we haven't 
41 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 really discussed them as a group. They are 

2 great that you guys came up with your own 

3 action items, but there might be some 

4 additions that we decide, and it may change 

5 that form also.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, it may.

7 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

8 MEMBER MUNN: But, if it's all 

9 right with everyone else, then I will be 

10 quiet.

11 (Laughter.)

12 If it's patently clear to everyone 

13 sitting at this table exactly what everyone is 

14 doing, and Wanda is the only one that doesn't 

15 understand that, then Wanda will shut her 

16 mouth.

17 But I am just trying to identify 

18 the easiest, most clear way for anyone who 

19 picks this particular document up in the 

20 future to understand the format. To me, that 

21 is an easy formatting to do. If it's not 
42 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 sustainable, fine.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: It's 

3 doable.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Good.

5 MR. CALHOUN: And I agree with 

6 you, Wanda. I think it seems like we should 

7 get the action items, respond. If you accept 

8 them, you accept them; if you don't, you 

9 don't. And we'll decide to agree on that or 

10 not. Then, if we have new items, we will do 

11 them. That is the only way to get through 

12 these meetings, you know.

13 MEMBER MUNN: It seems so to me.

14 MR. CALHOUN: Yes.

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Do we want 

16 to go through the list of action items? Do we 

17 want to let J.J. do that, his list, and then 

18 discuss any additional?

19 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I can go 

20 through them.

21 Professional judgment, again, 
43 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 professional judgment is expected as a method 

2 of determining appropriate impact and follow3 through resolution of action items. And that 

4 was the expectation of the procedure.

5 To enhance that, I have proposed 

6 that additional guidance be placed in the 

7 procedure for action items, and those items 

8 are, the response will address action items' 

9 commitment date, based on priority, workload, 

10 level of effort, or resolution.

11 The response will be reviewed for 

12 technical adequacy. The response will 

13 designate whether a technical document 

14 requires an update. And the response will be 

15 coordinated to effect completion, whether it 

16 is an update of a document response to an 

17 individual or et cetera.

18 MEMBER MUNN: The response will be 

19 coordinated? I guess I understand everything 

20 except the response will be coordinated to 

21 effect completion. Coordinated with whom?
44 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. JOHNSON: Coordinated to 

2 either update a technical document, provide a 

3 response to an individual. It's a closing-out 

4 activity.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Okay. So all of the 

6 actions in the response will be coordinated, 

7 essentially is what we are saying?

8 MR. JOHNSON: Right.

9 MR. CALHOUN: Between the HP and 

10 the document development team, I would say, 

11 something like that. Is that --

12 MR. JOHNSON: Yes.

13 MEMBER MUNN: Perhaps I'm just not 

14 understanding the language properly.

15 DR. MAKHIJANI: Did you want it up 

16 there in the process part?

17 MEMBER MUNN: No. This raises the 

18 second issue in terms of handling the matrix, 

19 for me in any case. Will we attempt, are we 

20 going to attempt at this meeting to resolve 

21 these action items or at least to define the 
45 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 status for them, since the action item status 

2 for the entire issue is open?

3 As each of these goes along, is 

4 this going to continue to be considered? Is 

5 that action item going to continue to be 

6 considered a completely open item or are you 

7 identifying a separate status for it? Is 

8 there going to be a discussion of it here and 

9 some response from the SC&A team and from the 

10 Members of the Board as to whether this is 

11 acceptable to do, and if so, what we are going 

12 to call the status of it if it is acceptable, 

13 but we have to wait to see the fruition of it?

14 MR. KATZ: Wanda, maybe you want 

15 to, because not everyone here is familiar with 

16 how Procedures deals with those categories, 

17 why don't you sort of lay out the framework 

18 that you use in the Procedures Subcommittee 

19 for them to consider?

20 MEMBER MUNN: That is essentially 

21 what I was referring to. In the Procedures 
46 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Review Subcommittee, where we have multiple 

2 procedures to deal with all the time with 

3 multiple findings, literally hundreds of 

4 findings, what we attempt to do -- and I know, 

5 I am sorry, this is old stuff for you, Mike --

6 but what we attempt to do is just what I 

7 outlined.

8 We start with the finding. We ask 

9 for NIOSH to respond to the finding. When 

10 NIOSH responds to the finding, then the 

11 responses to that single finding are discussed 

12 at length in a setting like this one and we 

13 come to a conclusion of what the status of 

14 that is.

15 In some cases, SC&A accepts that 

16 response, that's fine, and that finding is 

17 closed. If SC&A does not accept that 

18 response --

19 MR. KATZ: Well, just to clarify, 

20 the Subcommittee, not just SC&A, has to accept 

21 the finding.
47 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, yes. But it's 

2 a rare occasion when NIOSH and SC&A agree on a 

3 finding and the Subcommittee does not.

4 But if this body sitting here now 

5 accepts the discussion that occurs in this 

6 meeting as being acceptable for closure of 

7 that particular action item, it is closed. If 

8 they do not accept it, then one of the other 

9 entities, either NIOSH or SC&A, is charged 

10 with an action item where they are to come 

11 back to the body with a response to whatever 

12 the issue is.

13 In that case, we do not consider 

14 that action open. As soon as we have 

15 addressed something -- only items that have 

16 been unaddressed are considered open. Once we 

17 have addressed it, then, if there is something 

18 going on with it, we call it in process.

19 If you are going to get back to me 

20 with a notation of here's the change that's 

21 going to occur in the procedure, then that 
48 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 item and our record will go into in abeyance, 

2 which means we're done with it until we see 

3 the response to what has been agreed to.

4 Something that is actively being 

5 addressed and there is no response to right 

6 now is in progress.

7 And in some cases, we decide that 

8 this particular finding should not be 

9 discussed in this forum; it should be in the 

10 hands of the work group that is assigned to 

11 that site or to that activity, and we will 

12 transfer to that organization, to that group, 

13 until they have completed their review of it, 

14 at which time they advise us of how it is 

15 being closed. And we then close the item.

16 So there are a half-dozen modes of 

17 approaching an action item the way we do it in 

18 our complex matrix. What I am suggesting is 

19 that not necessarily that specific form of 

20 process be addressed here, but that we 

21 consider something like it.
49 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 So that the next time we have this 

2 matrix, I can pick it up and very easily, by 

3 looking in a status column by each action item 

4 underneath the findings, I can identify in my 

5 own mind where we are with that. Then, I can 

6 look at it and see who owes what or whether it 

7 is, in fact -- I won't even look at anything 

8 if it's closed.

9 If it's closed, the history is 

10 here, which I think is vital for all of us. 

11 It's certainly vital for me. If I can't look 

12 back at the history six months from now and 

13 see what we did at this meeting, then I am 

14 completely at a loss because I have no memory 

15 at all of what I have done when I was sitting 

16 here or what I said when we were talking about 

17 this.

18 But the bottom line is I am 

19 suggesting that we adopt some type of 

20 differentiation as we go through these things, 

21 and that we normally go through them in a 
50 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 fairly constructive manner, so that we all 

2 know what to expect. And when we see this 

3 later, we will instantly remember what we have 

4 done rather than rehashing it.

5 MR. FITZGERALD: Maybe the 

6 importance is the context is the 

7 responsiveness as a procedure. I mean some of 

8 these new approaches or maybe some 

9 modifications we talked about might not be 

10 tested until they are actually used.

11 MEMBER MUNN: True.

12 MR. FITZGERALD: I mean I don't 

13 think we should conflate whether or not they 

14 end up demonstrating effectiveness, but we 

15 talked about whether it is responsive as a new 

16 procedure or a revised procedure.

17 MEMBER MUNN: We have to keep in 

18 mind, at least I have to keep in mind, what 

19 our purpose is here, what exactly are we 

20 trying to accomplish. And I don't think it's 

21 perfection, but in my mind it is some level of 
51 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 quality assurance with respect to how we 

2 approach worker outreach.

3 MEMBER BEACH: I think that is a 

4 great idea. Wanda, who takes responsibility 

5 for that? Because I know in some groups SC&A 

6 updates these, and in some NIOSH may take that 

7 role. I guess it is important to establish 

8 who is going to do that --

9 MEMBER MUNN: It is.

10 MEMBER BEACH: -- so they can 

11 start tracking it while we are going through 

12 this.

13 MR. KATZ: I think in most cases 

14 SC&A does the matrices. Even with our 

15 Procedures database, SC&A has someone who sort 

16 of does the paperwork part of it or electronic 

17 work of updating that database.

18 MEMBER MUNN: What we have tried 

19 to do is establish a point of contact, one in 

20 the agency and one in the contractor 

21 organization. So that, when anyone else has a 
52 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 question, they have a go-to person to ask the 

2 specific question of.

3 MR. FITZGERALD: But I think it is 

4 a secretariat-type function, though.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, it is.

6 MR. FITZGERALD: Because, really, 

7 it is for the Committee or for the Work Group. 

8 And the Work Group, in the end, has to agree 

9 with the nature of this.

10 MEMBER MUNN: True.

11 MR. KATZ: So, in Procedures, we 

12 do this in real-time. We have this database 

13 that eventually all the Work Groups will be 

14 able to use and it gets updated as you go 

15 finding by finding. So, this finding now is 

16 closed; this finding now is in abeyance; this 

17 is in progress. We do it as we go through 

18 each one, and then there's no sort of after19 action needed. It is all taken care of during 

20 the meeting. That is nice.

21 We are not quite ready to, I 
53 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 think, roll that out to other work groups, 

2 but --

3 MEMBER MUNN: It still has a 

4 couple of rough edges.

5 MR. KATZ: Yes. So I think it 

6 would be great if SC&A would just keep the 

7 matrix up on the status of items, Kathy, since 

8 you have already gotten the ball rolling with 

9 developing a matrix.

10 MEMBER MUNN: If that will work, 

11 it seems like a straightforward way to 

12 approach it.

13 And my concern, my personal 

14 concern, is that the next time I pick this up 

15 I won't remember what we did or what we said 

16 unless there is a notation of some sort to 

17 remind me.

18 MEMBER BEACH: I think it is a 

19 great idea. It works very well in 6000, in 

20 our Work Group 6000. Otherwise, we would all 

21 be in trouble.
54 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. FITZGERALD: I think the 

2 comment you made earlier about not leaving an 

3 action or an issue without at least knowing 

4 the disposition of it --

5 MR. KATZ: Yes.

6 MR. FITZGERALD: -- is a good one. 

7 Because I think leaving it until the end of 

8 the meeting would be really confusing.

9 MEMBER BEACH: Well, that just 

10 brings us right back. I was looking at 

11 Finding Number 1, and the first finding says, 

12 the procedure does not provide direction for 

13 tracking, trending, evaluating or responding 

14 to worker input.

15 When I look at J.J.'s action 

16 items, I see that some of those are addressed 

17 and possibly taken care of, but some of them 

18 are still not clear in my mind how those three 

19 or four items are going to be addressed by 

20 those action items.

21 So, I guess I would like to talk 
55 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 about that, to make sure that those items are 

2 covered with those action items or possibly 

3 add more to those actions. I think you have a 

4 good start here, but I just want to make sure.

5 And I am kind of curious. You 

6 say, additional guidance will be placed in the 

7 procedure. I'm curious to where in the 

8 procedure are we going to see that, if you 

9 have gone that far to look at that?

10 To me, just for my mind, it seems 

11 like the direction of tracking hasn't been 

12 answered. Trending has somewhat been 

13 answered. The response to work, I think the 

14 last bullet covers that, but it doesn't really 

15 give me a lot of information.

16 I am a real procedure person. So 

17 I want it spelled out a little bit clearer for 

18 me when I read it. But that is just my 

19 opinion. I don't know where everybody else 

20 sits.

21 MEMBER MUNN: Well, the problem 
56 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 with that is it may not turn out to be the 

2 best place to put it.

3 MEMBER BEACH: I don't even know 

4 where it is being put.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. But, in my 

6 mind, if I could identify, if this body agrees 

7 that these actions are the appropriate actions 

8 to address that portion of the finding, then 

9 this simply goes into abeyance essentially.

10 MEMBER BEACH: Sure.

11 MEMBER MUNN: And until NIOSH 

12 comes back to us with --

13 MEMBER BEACH: I understand.

14 MEMBER MUNN: -- this is what we 

15 have done and this is where it is going to 

16 go --

17 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

18 MEMBER MUNN: -- then, it can be 

19 taken off the board.

20 MEMBER BEACH: Sure.

21 MEMBER MUNN: But I guess my 
57 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 feeling is, if in the initial response we 

2 attempt to get too definitive, then we 

3 postpone the initial response sometimes longer 

4 than we need to.

5 But just identifying what is going 

6 to happen, not necessarily where and when, but 

7 what is going to happen, puts it in a 

8 different framework for this group, as I see 

9 it.

10 MEMBER BEACH: Okay. Well, for 

11 me, direction for tracking the first one, how 

12 is it covered by those action items?

13 MR. JOHNSON: For tracking, it is 

14 part of the tracking system. So that is the 

15 tracking, the tracking system. So that is the 

16 tool that we use --

17 MEMBER BEACH: So OTS?

18 MR. JOHNSON: Well, OTS is the 

19 overall Outreach Tracking System. There's a 

20 lot of components in there, but we have a 

21 specific area for tracking issues.
58 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Almost any of the fields, I have 

2 been instructed or told that any of the fields 

3 in the Outreach Tracking System can be pulled, 

4 and you can develop an ad hoc report that will 

5 show that.

6 Now the tracking aspect for 

7 issues, any of those deals can be identified 

8 and tracked.

9 MEMBER BEACH: But can I go to the 

10 Procedure 12 and find directions for tracking? 

11 Would it give me directions for tracking the 

12 comments? I guess I am looking for, what's in 

13 the Procedure 12, which is what we are 

14 discussing, that answers that specifically?

15 MR. JOHNSON: The procedure 

16 addresses tracking. The procedure has an 

17 attachment that shows and provides guidance 

18 for --

19 MEMBER BEACH: That is Attachment 

20 A, correct? Because I have that up, and it 

21 was really, I thought it was kind of vague. 
59 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 It gave you, if that is where you are talking 

2 about --

3 MR. JOHNSON: It is. In one of my 

4 responses, I indicated that the tracking 

5 system was very simplistic, but it could be 

6 self-driven with regards to the information 

7 that you put into it.

8 Now I can write a detailed 

9 procedure to address it to the nth degree, but 

10 I don't think it's necessary. I can address 

11 more about the tracking system, and we have 

12 talked about it. I can put in there, you 

13 know, I will be willing to listen to what you 

14 would like to see in there with regards to the 

15 tracking system more than what I have.

16 MEMBER BEACH: So what we are 

17 discussing is worker comments for situations 

18 that come up at these meetings. And to me, 

19 that is an important part of what we are doing 

20 with this procedure, unless I am missing 

21 something.
60 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 So, to me, it needs to be more 

2 clear. And I don't want to tell you how to do 

3 it exactly. But when I look at this and there 

4 are two places that say anything about 

5 tracking and it's vague, it just seems like 

6 there needs to be a little more robustness in 

7 the procedure.

8 MR. JOHNSON: I think when it 

9 comes to each of the respective sections that 

10 deal with an HP being at the meeting, there is 

11 discussion in that section that talks about 

12 identifying action items and putting them into 

13 the tracking system. Then, the attachment 

14 addresses and just identifies the respective 

15 parts of the tracking system itself.

16 I can go and amplify the 

17 discussion for the tracking system.

18 MEMBER BEACH: Anybody else?

19 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: The procedure is 

20 probably understood by the health physics 

21 people. Okay? But if there's a body that is 
61 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 charged with oversight and advising the 

2 program, we need to be able to see it in the 

3 procedures, so we understand it, not just --

4 and I appreciate professional judgment and all 

5 that, but we are supposed to be in the weeds a 

6 little bit and see how things are done. It 

7 seems to me there is a lack of clarity there 

8 in the procedures.

9 MR. JOHNSON: Well, as I 

10 indicated, I can address in a little bit more 

11 detail than what I already have the process 

12 for the tracking system that I have in here. 

13 I mean I will take that action on.

14 MR. CALHOUN: I think, first and 

15 foremost, our procedures have to be functional 

16 for us. Okay? We want you guys to understand 

17 them.

18 This Work Group and this topic is 

19 one of the most subjective topics that we will 

20 ever cover. It is more subjective than the 

21 Procedures Group. It is way more subjective 
62 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 than any of the actual scientific health 

2 physics-type subjects that we cover.

3 Basically, what we are coming down 

4 here to is a process and how you would like to 

5 see our process run versus how we are running 

6 the process. Certainly, we are open to any 

7 recommendations, but if we are going to go 

8 back and forth and back and forth on how you 

9 think it should be done against how we think 

10 it should be done, I don't ever see these 

11 things being closed out.

12 It has to be loose, this type of 

13 procedure. My philosophy is, when I go to 

14 these worker outreach meetings, I want to 

15 respond to that individual immediately and be 

16 done. I don't want to carry notes anywhere 

17 because I want that person to be satisfied 

18 that they have got an answer from me.

19 So the number of comments that are 

20 actually applicable to a TBD that would cause 

21 us to change something are very, very few, but 
63 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 we have to make the procedure such that it is 

2 workable for us.

3 Like J.J. is saying, I am sure he 

4 is open to trying to clarify that a little 

5 bit, but we really need to keep that in mind 

6 as we go through this whole process here of, 

7 what's our goal? We want a procedure that is 

8 workable and that we can incorporate the 

9 comments of people and make the TBDs better 

10 and make the people feel like we have dealt 

11 with their comments and given them appropriate 

12 response.

13 DR. MAKHIJANI: Now I'm totally 

14 confused by the last part of what you said. I 

15 am still focusing on these information16 gathering meetings, you know. Like when we 

17 prepare our reviews, my point of reference, 

18 just to be clear, is when we review a TBD or 

19 an Evaluation Report, we do interviews. We 

20 have these questions. Then we develop the 

21 questions because we think they are going to 
64 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 affect our review. Then, when we write the 

2 review, we publish the summary along with the 

3 review, and we indicate the points at which 

4 there is a contact between the substance of 

5 what was said and our review.

6 So that is my point of reference. 

7 Maybe you don't agree that it is the right 

8 point of reference. I would be happy to be 

9 corrected.

10 But if a health physicist has a 

11 question, a set of questions to be answered, 

12 and you are initiating a meeting, how can the 

13 result, how can the TBD or Evaluation Report 

14 not be affected by the outcome of the meeting? 

15 Because you started off with health physicist 

16 questions that you didn't know the answers to.

17 MR. CALHOUN: I agree with you. 

18 That is a very specific type of meeting, 

19 though, and this document covers all of them.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, that is the 

21 meeting I want to understand.
65 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. CALHOUN: This document covers 

2 all of the meetings.

3 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, I know that.

4 MR. CALHOUN: So I agree with you 

5 on that one.

6 DR. MAKHIJANI: That's the meeting 

7 that a lot of the unhappiness -- so there are 

8 two kinds of non-subjective from the -- well, 

9 they are subjective, but they are less 

10 subjective or there is a kind of a criterion 

11 by which you can evaluate whether you were 

12 successful or not.

13 So a worker gave you some 

14 substantial information. Say incidents are 

15 not being recorded or the special hazard 

16 incident investigation's index is incomplete. 

17 And I can give you three examples, or 

18 whatever.

19 It happened at Savannah River 

20 Site, and it is an open issue and we are 

21 discussing it. It is very complicated.
66 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Workers often have expressed, as 

2 quoted in our review, that they did come, they 

3 did listen; the meeting was great. And I 

4 think your process of your organizing 

5 meetings, and so on, is great. I mean it 

6 works. People come. People say stuff. They 

7 have the room to be able to express 

8 themselves, and they have said that. And I 

9 think that is wonderful.

10 But, ultimately, a lot of people 

11 are unhappy that the technical substance of 

12 what they gave isn't reflected in ORAU's or 

13 NIOSH's work. And so long as that unhappiness 

14 is more than some one odd party who may feel 

15 aggrieved or, you know, they got denied or 

16 some specific thing that is not really 

17 technical, generally speaking, but is about 

18 their personal claim, I would say that from a 

19 substantive point of view there's some problem 

20 in translating in how that judgment is being 

21 exercised, either in preparing the minutes, 
67 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 because they are not reviewed by all the 

2 workers who were present and what they said, 

3 to see if the things they said were important. 

4 I don't know where -- you know, there are a 

5 lot of gaps there, I think.

6 So the minutes are not reviewed by 

7 all the workers. So they may have said some 

8 very important things that they think that are 

9 not in your minutes.

10 Because they don't all get -- just 

11 the leader of the group gets to see them. You 

12 don't have the tapes for reference later on 

13 because you destroy the tapes.

14 The minutes are not included in 

15 the document being prepared by the person who 

16 originated the meeting. So there is no point 

17 when that document gets public that the worker 

18 who made a comment who feels aggrieved can 

19 see: I said X and really X was considered in 

20 the preparation of the Evaluation Report. It 

21 does acknowledge incidents are not, and here 
68 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 is how we are going to do the dose 

2 reconstruction, even though the incident 

3 indexes -- because incidents were very common 

4 and we have bioassay data. Some response.

5 So I am kind of thinking that 

6 there are gaps both ways. There's technical 

7 things that in this particular type of meeting 

8 it cannot be that you initiate a meeting 

9 having technical questions and have a 

10 satisfactory meeting, and the outcome of that 

11 meeting is not reflected in the Technical 

12 Document. It has to be reflected in the 

13 Technical Document because the technical 

14 questions started the meeting.

15 MR. CALHOUN: I would agree that, 

16 if there is something that comes out of that 

17 meeting that needs to go, that would change 

18 the TBD, yes. I would think, though, if 

19 there's things that don't change the TBD, we 

20 should get back with the claimant somehow and 

21 let them know that they are not in there. 
69 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Because we certainly don't want to clog up the 

2 TBD with this is why we didn't include that.

3 DR. MAKHIJANI: No, no, I'm not 

4 saying that. My own personal experience from 

5 the unhappinesses that are expressed to me 

6 about this process, as I have heard, and they 

7 have been cited in our review, so it is not 

8 just my sort of subjective thing. I mean 

9 people have said, we have given you the 

10 references and quoted, is, we said technical 

11 things that are not reflected in the document.

12 I am not talking about unhappiness 

13 about a personal claim, somebody who was 

14 denied. And I agree that, if you go to the 

15 Advisory Board meeting, then a lot of the 

16 comments about a personal claim, they are 

17 appropriately referred to NIOSH, and SC&A 

18 doesn't even get involved in all of that. 

19 Basically, you know, Stu Hinnefeld will be 

20 there, and he will take the person aside and 

21 refer them to the appropriate person, and 
70 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that's done.

2 The big issue is when somebody 

3 says something technical, people took off 

4 their film badges at work, for example, a big 

5 issue that comes up quite often, and then 

6 doesn't find it reflected in some way in the 

7 tracking system. And back to the HP that 

8 originated a question about film badges, if 

9 the purpose of the meeting is to inform the HP 

10 about question that he didn't have answers to, 

11 how can that meeting not be reflected in the 

12 TBD or ER when it is done? That is the 

13 question I am having.

14 If I don't know the answer to a 

15 question and I go to a tank farm worker and 

16 say, okay. How do you fix the transfer boxes, 

17 then if that question is important to me, and 

18 I get an answer to it, then it should be 

19 reflected in the document, right? What did --

20 MR. CALHOUN: See, I would say 

21 that sometimes -- I am not aware of too many 
71 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 meetings where the sole purpose is I'm going 

2 to go out here and find information that I 

3 don't have, other than when we interview folks 

4 for, say, ER.

5 Like I am familiar with Brookhaven 

6 because we just did that two weeks ago. So, 

7 we go through and we look and ask them, hey, 

8 what do you think about this, what do you 

9 think about that.

10 The majority of the other 

11 meetings, at least that I have been associated 

12 with, are kind of a free-form meeting that 

13 says, you know, it is a presentation of an SEC 

14 or it is a presentation of a new TBD, which 

15 doesn't happen very much anymore.

16 And if somebody, for example, said 

17 to me or in the meeting, hey, you know, we 

18 have badges that weren't worn; how do you deal 

19 with that. If I give him an answer, and he is 

20 satisfied with that answer, it is not going to 

21 go anywhere other than that.
72 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 DR. MAKHIJANI: How could you give 

2 him an answer to that? If a worker says, we 

3 weren't wearing badges, isn't it something for 

4 the Evaluation Report person to take --

5 MR. CALHOUN: Well, what I would 

6 do is I would talk to that individual, and I 

7 will just give you an example, say, okay, 

8 well, we didn't wear badges. Or one thing 

9 that has come up before is, our supervisors 

10 made us take badges off.

11 Well, one of the things that we 

12 have done in the past is that we have 

13 evaluated that person's dosimetry report. And 

14 what we have found, in very few cases, but we 

15 have found it, is that, as the end of the year 

16 is coming up, all of a sudden, they go from 

17 getting 500 millirem a month to none. So that 

18 is an indication to us that there is an issue 

19 there. So, then, we will make a judgment 

20 accordingly.

21 Now I can explain that kind of 
73 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 approach to somebody. And after that, it may 

2 not need to go any further than that. Because 

3 that is one of those items that has been 

4 brought up time and time and time again at 

5 many sites.

6 DR. MAKHIJANI: Actually, this is 

7 a huge thing that you have just said. Have 

8 you actually found cases -- because we have 

9 looked and we haven't found cases like this. 

10 Now, if you have actually found cases like 

11 this, this is a matter far beyond your getting 

12 back to the individual and saying, your dose 

13 reconstruction is fixed. This is a matter 

14 which is a generic matter and has been raised 

15 as a generic matter at a number of sites 

16 fairly frequently.

17 Now we have all had a very hard 

18 time actually verifying these things as a 

19 general matter. If you found specific 

20 examples, I would think that this thing needs 

21 to be reflected in an Evaluation Report and a 
74 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 TBD and should become a much bigger deal.

2 MR. CALHOUN: And it may be. I 

3 don't know. I don't know what site that was 

4 from.

5 DR. MAKHIJANI: But that has to go 

6 from the interview process into a document 

7 preparation process.

8 MR. CALHOUN: But if it has 

9 already been addressed in the TBD and I 

10 explain it to that individual, the only thing 

11 that I would have to do is either tell him 

12 that we have addressed this -- what's the 

13 other option, just responding to him after the 

14 meeting and saying, this has been addressed 

15 and it's in this document?

16 DR. MAKHIJANI: No, no, I'm not 

17 faulting your response to the individual and 

18 giving them satisfaction or finding some way 

19 to look at their claim. I mean that's fine, 

20 and I would do the same. I agree with you.

21 What I am saying, as I said, we 
75 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 are not concerned about the individual claim 

2 not being attended to properly. I think that 

3 you are doing that. I think NIOSH does that. 

4 I think the Advisory Board now has a process 

5 for making sure that individuals who feel 

6 aggrieved about their personal claims not 

7 having been done right, there are appeal 

8 procedures. So there are a lot of avenues for 

9 that.

10 The thing that I have always been 

11 concerned about in my role in this, and I 

12 think our review of your procedures, has been 

13 when there are generic concerns or something 

14 that affects an individual claim that is 

15 indicated to be a generic concern, like this 

16 particular example we are talking about, which 

17 is a generic concern beyond the individual 

18 case. How does that materially affect what 

19 NIOSH is doing or ORAU is doing?

20 And a lot of workers feel that it 

21 should materially affect when they are not 
76 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 being heard, even though they are saying 

2 technically important things.

3 And the second point about what 

4 you said that surprised me is we started the 

5 discussion with me thinking, obviously 

6 wrongly, that HPs have questions that they 

7 need answers, and they ask you to organize 

8 meetings. Some meetings, not all meetings, 

9 some meetings are organized for the purpose of 

10 answering HP's questions as they prepare a 

11 document.

12 MR. CALHOUN: That's generally in 

13 the Evaluation Report process that I have 

14 witnessed personally.

15 DR. MAKHIJANI: Okay.

16 MR. CALHOUN: That is when that 

17 happens most often.

18 DR. MAKHIJANI: What I am saying 

19 is, in that particular specific instance, we 

20 have a chance to make sure that we know 

21 exactly what was said and have a procedure 
77 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that documents that. And then, we have a 

2 chance to see whether the person who requested 

3 that meeting actually is using that 

4 information and it can also be documented and 

5 can be very transparent, so the workers who 

6 came can see. You know, a worker would not 

7 say, well, I said people, supervisors, were 

8 making us take off the badges, and how come 

9 that question isn't addressed in the 

10 Evaluation Report. You know, we spend a lot 

11 of time --

12 MR. CALHOUN: Well, generally, in 

13 Evaluation Reports they are clean, and it 

14 actually goes down, at least the ones that I 

15 have been associated with, and it will list 

16 the interview and what was said and how it was 

17 used in the document.

18 Now what I am wondering is let's 

19 just use either that explanation or another 

20 one that comes up is missed dose. I always 

21 got zeroes, but, you know, what happens? If I 
78 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 explain to that individual in the meeting how 

2 missed dose is taken into account when a dose 

3 reconstruction is done, what would you think I 

4 need to do in addition to that?

5 MR. KATZ: Can I help here, just 

6 ask a question? Because I think I'm 

7 understanding what you are saying, but I'm not 

8 sure of the difference here.

9 I think what I am hearing Grady 

10 say which relates to what J.J. presented is, 

11 if in one of these meetings a worker raises an 

12 issue that is already dealt with generically 

13 in the TBD, like missed dose, then they get an 

14 explanation. It doesn't even ever make it 

15 into the tracking as an action issue because 

16 there is no action to be taken. It is already 

17 addressed generically in the TBD. And really, 

18 it is only an education function to have the 

19 worker understand how that is already handled.

20 But if a worker raises an issue 

21 that is not handled in the TBD or the SEC 
79 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 evaluation, that would go in as an action 

2 item. Then, you would see in the tracking 

3 system how it gets dealt with. That is where 

4 the professional judgment is applied, as to 

5 whether that requires a change in the TBD or 

6 requires just a response back to, you know, 

7 this doesn't affect the TBD because X, Y, Z, 

8 or what have you.

9 DR. MAKHIJANI: Sure.

10 MR. KATZ: So it seems like the 

11 tracking system will only reflect those issues 

12 raised in the meeting that are actionable 

13 because they might impinge on an actual change 

14 that could be needed for the TBD or the SEC 

15 evaluation or whatever.

16 I mean that's what I heard, and 

17 correct me if I'm --

18 MR. CALHOUN: Yes. Yes, that is 

19 how -- the times I have been involved in 

20 these, and like I said, my participation is 

21 somewhat limited in ERs because I have only 
80 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 been involved in one. It has been at 

2 Brookhaven. And I point to Joe because Joe 

3 has been with me on a couple of them, at least 

4 on the phone.

5 Now the other outreach meetings 

6 that I have gone to, and I have gone to -- and 

7 I call them outreach because anytime we go 

8 out and present something, we are reaching out 

9 to the public. And I have been involved with 

10 the presenting of an SEC, and I have been 

11 presenting of new TBD documents, when we used 

12 to do that when it was an initial version of 

13 the TBD. And in those cases, you had to make 

14 the judgment as to whether or not the item was 

15 going to be an action item and would cause us 

16 to change something in our Technical Basis 

17 Document.

18 MR. KATZ: But just to link things 

19 together with what is coming later, we are 

20 going to be talking about evaluation of 

21 Objective 3, which gets into this matter of 
81 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 how contributions from workers are actually 

2 taken into account in DCAS documents.

3 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes.

4 MR. KATZ: So, I mean, it seems to 

5 me, then, when SC&A does its work on 

6 evaluation of Objective 3, it is going to be 

7 looking at the tracking system and the final 

8 documents and the original transcripts or 

9 minutes, I should say, of these meetings. And 

10 if there's stuff missing, in other words, if 

11 there's stuff in the minutes that would 

12 suggest to SC&A it should have been an action 

13 item and it never made it in the tracking 

14 system as an action item, that would be of 

15 interest.

16 And then, likewise, if there's an 

17 action item that doesn't get reflected in a 

18 document the way SC&A views it might have 

19 been, that would be another item of interest 

20 when SC&A does its evaluation of that.

21 Does that make sense?
82 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, I'm okay with 

2 what you say.

3 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: So, if everyone 

4 agrees, we will just put Item 1 in progress, 

5 and we will wait for the changes that J.J. has 

6 indicated here to come back to us, and we will 

7 review them. Is that okay with everyone?

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, 

9 there's a couple of things that aren't 

10 addressed in these action items that came up 

11 under Finding 1. And that is there is no 

12 requirement for capturing substantive comments 

13 from meetings that are designated as 

14 information-giving or information15 giving/gathering, for example, workshops.

16 MR. JOHNSON: There's not a 

17 mechanism, and the purpose of Procedure 12 

18 doesn't address that. The purpose of the 

19 training is to provide information to the 

20 personnel in attendance.

21 In the past, people have asked 
83 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 questions, and the Director has personally 

2 provided feedback to the individuals on those 

3 questions. And if there are situations where 

4 individuals say, well, I know about this or I 

5 know about that, they have been asked to 

6 provide that information on the website or to 

7 NIOSH through what documents they might have.

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Which no 

9 longer falls under the jurisdiction of 

10 PROC-12.

11 MR. JOHNSON: Well, it's 

12 communications at -- what doesn't fall under 

13 PROC-12?

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, for 

15 example, I will give you an example of when I 

16 was at the workshop, they were talking about 

17 the release of UF6 into the work environment 

18 which creates UO2F2, a light gas. And the 

19 response by Larry was, yes, this is something 

20 which should be considered in the Site 

21 Profile. Go on, submit it to the docket. 
84 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Okay?

2 Now that comment, as a worker 

3 outreach comment, no longer goes into -- it 

4 doesn't go into your tracking system, as I 

5 understand.

6 MR. JOHNSON: It did not. And it 

7 seems to me that, in that light, because there 

8 are no minutes of a training session, that in 

9 that light, guidance was provided, so the 

10 individual could turn around and provide that 

11 information to us in support of the Technical 

12 Basis Document.

13 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And what 

14 happened to the comment after that? That's 

15 what is important. If you have got a NIOSH 

16 representative saying that's important to the 

17 Site Profile and should be considered, then 

18 what happens to that comment if it is not an 

19 action item?

20 MR. JOHNSON: I believe at that 

21 point in time everything was done that could 
85 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 possibly be done at that point in time in 

2 order to try to support getting additional 

3 information that the individual felt was 

4 important enough to discuss at that point in 

5 time, that they would likely provide that 

6 information to NIOSH, based on the avenues of 

7 communication discussed with them.

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Last June, 

9 I think 2009, you guys provided us with a 

10 table of worker outreach meetings, and 

11 workshops were on there, listed as worker 

12 outreach --

13 MR. JOHNSON: That's exactly 

14 right, as a form of our desire to inform 

15 people, to help other folks support their 

16 issues within the program.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, it 

18 seems to me if things are coming up similar to 

19 this example, then they need to be reflected 

20 as action items or captured in some way. I'm 

21 not talking about the entire worker workshop. 
86 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I'm talking about key items that are brought 

2 up, substantive comments.

3 MR. CALHOUN: So, in that case, 

4 you would say that probably the action would 

5 be to get back to the individual and tell him 

6 what was done. Because the fact of the matter 

7 is the only thing that that really does is it 

8 may change solubility, and we are going to 

9 assign the solubility that provides the 

10 greatest dose.

11 So, you know, we address those 

12 kinds of issues dosimetrically. I think what 

13 you are thinking is the only outlier is that 

14 the individual who brought up the concern 

15 doesn't know we have addressed it, is that 

16 correct?

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, he 

18 was given a confusing message, you know.

19 MR. CALHOUN: Right.

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes, this 

21 could --
87 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. CALHOUN: I understand that.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: -- affect 

3 the Site Profile. So there needs to be a --

4 MR. CALHOUN: Had an HP been there 

5 to give that response, it probably would have 

6 been different, but that is water under the 

7 bridge. So I understand that.

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: There needs 

9 to be a response. And if it does truly impact 

10 the Site Profile, then it needs to be 

11 considered.

12 MR. CALHOUN: Now I can say, off 

13 the top of my head right now, that one 

14 wouldn't have, but I understand where the 

15 opening is, that we didn't let that individual 

16 know how that is being done.

17 But short of writing down 

18 everything that everybody says, you know, 

19 there are going to be things that fall through 

20 the cracks. We don't want to, and we are not 

21 going to, write down everything everybody says 
88 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and try to put them in an action thing.

2 It all comes to, again, 

3 professional judgment. Maybe that person 

4 should have been given a better answer. I 

5 don't know what the mechanism is.

6 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I am not 

7 talking about every comment that comes out of 

8 everybody's mouth. You know, like, for 

9 example, DOL has really screwed up the 

10 process, you know, that is a comment that may 

11 not impact documents or need a response.

12 But something that specific about 

13 release of UF6 on a routine basis to the work 

14 environment may require a response. And these 

15 may be raised in some of those information16 giving, information-giving/gathering meetings.

17 MR. JOHNSON: I guess what you're 

18 talking about is you can put anything in a 

19 procedure, but how do you raise the level of 

20 awareness with folks across all discussions? 

21 And then, how do you address those awareness 
89 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 issues in the process of getting back at the 

2 individual or putting it in a TBD or, 

3 actually, really understanding whether it is a 

4 salient issue or not? Because somebody could 

5 say something and it's out of my element 

6 because I'm a particular HP for a site, but 

7 you are talking about another site. I may not 

8 even realize that what they are discussing is 

9 a real issue.

10 So, you know, it's an awareness 

11 issue, not a procedure or process issue, that 

12 I think it is.

13 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, there 

14 needs to be something which indicates that 

15 these items are captured, and that they are 

16 put into the system.

17 MR. JOHNSON: But that particular 

18 issue now comes into a particular site. If I 

19 put it in, I don't have a real clear way of 

20 putting it into the Outreach Tracking System 

21 and tracking it because it is associated with 
90 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 a training session or it might be associated 

2 with a particular discussion, but it may not 

3 be associated with any of the activities that 

4 are addressed in the Outreach Tracking System. 

5 Meaning, if I put it under a 

6 particular site, now I am addressing it as a 

7 meeting because that is how my action items 

8 are set up, under respective sites for 

9 meetings. I don't have a separate tracking 

10 system to address all those issues outside the 

11 venues that I have addressed in Procedure 12.

12 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I guess my 

13 question would be, for that particular 

14 workshop, why wasn't it added as an action 

15 item under that workshop?

16 MR. CALHOUN: I don't know. I 

17 don't know the answer to that one. I think 

18 that, generally speaking, we have got a big 

19 enough umbrella that we catch all these, the 

20 vast majority of all the important comments. 

21 I don't know how many other examples there are 
91 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 like that. That is certainly a good example. 

2 You know, Larry went on and said, 

3 well, that's important, and that's the right 

4 thing to say. A better thing would have been 

5 to say, here's how we address that, and get it 

6 taken care of at that point.

7 So it is all going to come down to 

8 subjectivity. It is going to be a matter of, 

9 even if you say, write down all the important 

10 bullet points, some of them are going to be 

11 missed that somebody thinks is important and 

12 somebody doesn't. So I think that is always 

13 going to be an issue. It is going to be 

14 really hard to come together on that, short of 

15 trying to be so prescriptive that we end up 

16 writing down everything, and I know we are not 

17 going to do that.

18 MR. FITZGERALD: Isn't there 

19 something -- I mean we are sort of going, 

20 retrospectively trying to figure out if 

21 there's exceptions, but there's also a 
92 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 perspective where there's a consciousness now 

2 that these issues need to be tracked. So, to 

3 some extent, going forward, you are going to 

4 say, you know, a discipline for everybody is 

5 saying, well, we need to capture that. We now 

6 have a system. So make sure that gets into 

7 the system. Or, when someone says something, 

8 you know, Stu says something and clearly 

9 there's a hook on it, I think that 

10 consciousness -- you're going to say, well, we 

11 need to make sure that gets into the tracking 

12 system.

13 So, I think, going forward, these 

14 exceptions as they arise, I think people are 

15 going to be more conscious of them.

16 MR. CALHOUN: I think they are, 

17 too.

18 MR. FITZGERALD: It wasn't going 

19 to be perfect in the beginning.

20 MR. CALHOUN: Sure.

21 MR. FITZGERALD: And I think that 
93 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 is recognized, right?

2 MR. CALHOUN: Right. But, again, 

3 I think it is going to depend on the person. 

4 Because, I'll tell you, in that specific 

5 instance, if that question was asked to me, I 

6 would give that individual an answer. If they 

7 weren't satisfied with an answer, I would talk 

8 to them right after the meeting, and I do that 

9 all the time. And if they were satisfied with 

10 it then, it is done. It doesn't go anywhere 

11 else.

12 MR. FITZGERALD: Except if there 

13 was a professional judgment on your part that 

14 it had it in quotations --

15 MR. CALHOUN: Exactly. Exactly.

16 MR. FITZGERALD: -- then you would 

17 want to --

18 MR. CALHOUN: Exactly.

19 MR. FITZGERALD: -- because you 

20 would make a decision to put it in the system.

21 MR. CALHOUN: Exactly.
94 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. FITZGERALD: Right.

2 MR. CALHOUN: Exactly.

3 DR. MAURO: This is John.

4 I was trying to listen to the 

5 conversation. I hear some folks, I don't hear 

6 others. So, if my question or comment is 

7 misplaced at this time, please forgive me.

8 But what I'm hearing is that there 

9 are two aspects of concern here. One is that, 

10 of course, you capture, objectively and 

11 faithfully, the information communicated when 

12 you fill out your tracking system. And, of 

13 course, then there is the appropriate 

14 followup, followup being communicating with 

15 the person that originally made the comment 

16 that that is a part of making sure that the 

17 person knows he has been heard.

18 But, also, it is making it into 

19 NIOSH's work products. I don't know. When I 

20 review Site Profiles, I don't see attachments 

21 that summarize or describe the results of the 
95 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 various information-gathering.

2 In other words, it seems that I 

3 know, when we review a Site Profile, we always 

4 try to have an attachment that summarizes, in 

5 sometimes considerable detail, the information 

6 we obtained from the interviews that we hold. 

7 And I have seen these outreach meetings, that 

8 type of thing. You are gathering information 

9 that might be valuable.

10 Is there any thought to one of the 

11 things to track is to make sure that the 

12 information that is captured does find its way 

13 as an attachment or special chapter in a Site 

14 Profile or an ER?

15 MR. CALHOUN: No.

16 DR. MAURO: I don't believe I have 

17 seen that kind of thing in your work products.

18 MR. CALHOUN: That is not going to 

19 happen. It is definitely not going to happen 

20 in TBDs, you know. With ERs, you know, we 

21 reference individual interviews and things 
96 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that we have that affect the Evaluation 

2 Report. Interviews that are necessary or 

3 contribute to a TBD, we also have referenced 

4 in the TBD document.

5 Putting a separate attachment of 

6 meetings and what was said and how it was 

7 resolved, we will end up with huge, huge 

8 documents, and they will buy us very little.

9 The key really is to help the 

10 individuals, let them know that their voice is 

11 being heard.

12 DR. MAURO: I agree with that. I 

13 thought that that was one way that could be 

14 accomplished, to actually be on the record, 

15 you know, that they see, oh, look, here's some 

16 of the issues that I brought up. And they 

17 will actually see it in print.

18 But, you're right, it might be 

19 burdensome. I know that we are able to do it 

20 when we write our Site Profile reviews, and it 

21 usually ends up something that reflects what 
97 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 we heard.

2 But, in your case, the extent, I 

3 would imagine the extent to which you do this, 

4 the number of meetings, the number of people, 

5 the amount of feedback, its complexity, it 

6 might be a challenge. But it was a thought.

7 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, John. This 

8 is Joe.

9 I think the other thing, too, is 

10 the context of our interview process is 

11 different. I mean we are looking at input 

12 that would be relevant to our TBD or SEC 

13 review. So that is the context of our 

14 discussion. And we do get questions and 

15 comments that aren't relevant, and they, 

16 frankly, would be a question on a PIC or dose 

17 reconstruction, which we kind of put aside and 

18 tell them to talk to NIOSH or something.

19 But we kind of parse out that 

20 which is relevant as we go through. I think 

21 we use that as a judgment. We take what we 
98 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 think is relevant, and that gets recorded.

2 I think what we were talking 

3 about, maybe you didn't hear, was that NIOSH 

4 exercises that judgment as to what is 

5 educational, what they can explain to the 

6 individual and show accountability, and also 

7 to draw from that which is relevant to be 

8 captured by the tracking system that should go 

9 into considerations for revising the TBD or 

10 issues that may be relevant to an SEC.

11 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I tell you what. 

12 I think it is a good time for us to take a 

13 break. So, let's take a short break. Be back 

14 at 11 o'clock.

15 MR. KATZ: What time do you have 

16 right now, Mike?

17 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: 10:40.

18 MR. KATZ: Okay, 11 o'clock.

19 I am just putting the phone on 

20 mute. Thank you. Oh, I just hung up.

21 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 
99 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 matter went off the record at 10:42 a.m. and 

2 resumed at 11:00 a.m.)

3 MR. KATZ: Okay. Welcome back. 

4 We are just returning from a short break.

5 This is the Worker Outreach Work 

6 Group of the Advisory Board on Radiation and 

7 Worker Health.

8 We are still on Finding 1 of the 

9 matrix.

10 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes, I think we 

11 have had a healthy discussion on Finding 1 

12 this morning. DCAS has explained their 

13 position and what changes they are willing to 

14 make on the procedure for the first finding.

15 So we will mark that in progress, 

16 and we will await those changes and look at 

17 them when they come back.

18 And we will move on to Issue 2.

19 MR. KATZ: Oh, let me just, as a 

20 procedure for all work groups, just remind 

21 everyone what we try to do is have both DCAS 
100 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and SC&A, following the meeting, send an email 

2 to the full Work Group laying out what their 

3 action items are for the meeting, all of their 

4 action items, just so that everybody is on the 

5 same page as to who is doing what. Please be 

6 descriptive enough in your action items so 

7 that everyone will recognize exactly what it 

8 is that is intended. Thanks.

9 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Finding 2?

10 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Finding 2 

11 is: the procedure does not specify criteria 

12 for identifying action items or evaluating the 

13 accuracy and timeliness of response for 

14 resolution.

15 And this is very similar to what 

16 we just discussed, but I will go through it.

17 Action items have basically 

18 replaced the tracking and response to 

19 substantive worker comments which previously 

20 existed in PROC-97.

21 The appropriate determination of 
101 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 action items becomes, therefore, a critical 

2 part of being responsive to the workers and 

3 providing appropriate consideration of 

4 comments in the DR and SEC process.

5 PR-12 does not provide specific 

6 criteria for determining action items from 

7 outreach meetings. There is no timeframe 

8 specified for addressing and resolving these 

9 action items, and there is no mechanism for 

10 determining the appropriateness or 

11 completeness of the response.

12 And there were some action items 

13 addressed under Finding 1 which kind of get to 

14 the heart of this issue.

15 Do you want to go ahead?

16 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I think the 

17 response to this has already been addressed 

18 through the action items that are going to be 

19 performed under 1. And additional guidance to 

20 be provided in the procedure to address 

21 judgment for identifying action items, and 
102 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 additional guidance will be placed in the 

2 procedure to address action items' final 

3 disposition, which includes the timeliness 

4 which has been based on the priority workload 

5 and the level of effort resolution, to include 

6 to its closure.

7 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Any other 

8 discussion on Finding 2?

9 (No response.)

10 Do we just want to mark it in 

11 progress and see the changes?

12 (No response.)

13 Okay. Hearing no dissent.

14 Finding 3?

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. 

16 Finding 3 is, a majority of the expected 

17 documentation is not available in the OTS 

18 system for meetings conducted within the 

19 effective period of PR-12.

20 PR-12, in conjunction with 

21 additional material provided by NIOSH in June 
103 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 of 2009, provides a description of what 

2 documentation is expected for which type of 

3 meetings. And our concern was that we went 

4 through OTS and found that a lot of the 

5 documentation required under a particular 

6 meeting was absent from OTS.

7 Again, one of our concerns was 

8 that there was a limited amount of action 

9 items in OTS, which did not represent the 

10 depth and breadth of the concerns raised by 

11 workers in these meetings.

12 So that is where we kind of stood 

13 on that. We have put a table in our review of 

14 documents that were expected versus documents 

15 that were available.

16 At the time we did the review, 

17 there were five meetings which we considered 

18 information-gathering which should have had 

19 meeting minutes which did not at the time.

20 Now I will let J.J. kind of expand 

21 on this further. But, in their response, 
104 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 NIOSH indicated that some of these gaps have 

2 been mitigated since our review.

3 MR. KATZ: So, Kathy, can you just 

4 flesh out a bit, for people who may not have 

5 read the document, but other than meeting 

6 minutes, what other kinds of documents?

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: There's 

8 sign-in sheets. There's letters that go out 

9 inviting individuals to the meetings. There's 

10 follow-up documentation, for example, for one 

11 of the action items, emails. There's 

12 correspondence. Of course, the final meeting 

13 minutes. It's that type of documentation that 

14 is associated with the organization and 

15 follow-through of the meeting.

16 MR. KATZ: Thanks.

17 MR. JOHNSON: Well, since the 

18 review, we have put an extreme effort into 

19 addressing one of the concerns you brought up 

20 about historical data out of WISPR. And 

21 because of that, we were, to some degree, 
105 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 deficient in trying to keep up with the update 

2 of newer information into the Outreach 

3 Tracking System.

4 This is a resource issue when it 

5 comes to a large amount of information going 

6 into a data system like this, along with the 

7 fact of people have other responsibilities and 

8 accountabilities, and it wasn't all in just 

9 focusing their complete 100 percent effort 

10 into updating the tracking system. They have 

11 other responsibilities. Consequently, you try 

12 to balance the best you can.

13 So, we tried to put in historical 

14 stuff from WISPR and tried to get that up 

15 there, but in doing so, we failed in putting a 

16 lot of the newer information out there.

17 At this point in time, it is 

18 pretty much caught up, but, you know, we are 

19 still looking at it.

20 MR. McDOUGALL: I think, Kathy, if 

21 you went to look at it today, and I encourage 
106 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 you to look at it in the next few weeks, I 

2 think you will find the database in a lot 

3 better shape than it was when you looked at it 

4 before.

5 Now, having said that, one of the 

6 issues that J.J. addressed in here is that you 

7 are looking at minutes. You are looking for 

8 minutes, and minutes are probably the most 

9 important thing in any one file.

10 Please understand it takes a long 

11 time to get minutes developed, and especially 

12 through the DOE classification review. So, if 

13 you are looking for minutes of a meeting that 

14 is only four or five months old, you are 

15 probably not going to find them there. 

16 Sometimes they are a lot older than that.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: 

18 Historically, you guys have allotted, I think, 

19 90 days for turnaround of meeting minutes?

20 MR. McDOUGALL: Well, the problem 

21 with that is you rarely get the first draft of 
107 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 the minutes back from DOE in 90 days.

2 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I thought DOE 

3 was turning things around in two weeks most of 

4 the time.

5 MR. KATZ: In certain categories. 

6 I don't know what the situation is with 

7 meeting minutes and interviews.

8 SC&A, what's your experience with 

9 getting your interviews cleared?

10 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, that 

11 is what I was going to turn around a question 

12 on you. What's your process for submitting to 

13 DOE from the time you have generated them?

14 MR. McDOUGALL: Well, our process 

15 is that Mary develops the minutes and gives 

16 the draft to Grady, and Grady sends it to DOE.

17 MR. CALHOUN: Yes, Tim Taulbee 

18 does that now. I don't know what the 

19 turnaround time is in general, but I would say 

20 it is usually, unless they are swamped, it is 

21 usually not more than a couple of weeks. 
108 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 There are some sites that are difficult. 

2 Pantex is one.

3 And I'm guessing now because I 

4 have been out of it for a few months, but I am 

5 guessing it's a couple of weeks. I might even 

6 be able to actually pull up a tracking 

7 spreadsheet here and find out how long it has 

8 been taking.

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, is it 

10 going to the DOE site or is it going to DOE 

11 headquarters?

12 MR. CALHOUN: It depends.

13 MR. McDOUGALL: The Paducah -- the 

14 minutes of our December meeting with the 

15 Paducah Steelworkers Union aren't back yet 

16 from DOE.

17 MR. KATZ: From when? Sorry.

18 MR. McDOUGALL: From December.

19 MR. KATZ: From December?

20 MR. CALHOUN: I don't think they 

21 went. I don't know. I will have to check. 
109 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 That's hard for me to believe, because if they 

2 are that long, man, pound on me and I'll get 

3 an answer, because that's too long. For 

4 meeting minutes, that's way too long.

5 MR. McDOUGALL: And, actually, 

6 even the GE Evendale, which shouldn't be 

7 terribly challenging, as far as I know are not 

8 yet --

9 MR. CALHOUN: Yes, those would 

10 certainly go to HQ for GE Evendale.

11 MR. KATZ: And how long ago was 

12 that: GE?

13 MR. McDOUGALL: They were 

14 submitted to DOE in late August or, actually, 

15 one of them in early August.

16 MR. FITZGERALD: I think, in 

17 general, we have had some worse experiences at 

18 the sites. Some of the sites are a lot slower 

19 than that, than headquarters.

20 MR. CALHOUN: Right, I agree with 

21 that.
110 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. FITZGERALD: With 

2 headquarters, we tend to have much more 

3 influence.

4 MR. CALHOUN: I agree with you.

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And that's 

6 my experience with headquarters; it's a couple 

7 of weeks. With the field offices, it could be 

8 up to a year or so.

9 MR. FITZGERALD: I think in the 

10 field you just get put in a queue with 

11 everything else that they are doing, and who 

12 knows what else they're doing?

13 MR. KATZ: So, do you have a 

14 tracking system for when it is submitted to 

15 DOE and when it comes back?

16 MR. McDOUGALL: We do now, yes.

17 MR. KATZ: That sounds like a good 

18 idea.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. As 

20 far as the turnaround, well, I will save that 

21 for a later time.
111 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: Just so I'm clear, if 

2 you are moving on, what is the disposition of 

3 this finding, then? It sounds like they --

4 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, I 

5 actually had another question.

6 MR. KATZ: Oh, okay. Sorry.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Now if I 

8 can remember what it was? What are your plans 

9 for update of OTS from here on out? Do you 

10 have any other plans to do any more updates?

11 MR. JOHNSON: Updates like 

12 information updates, data updates? As we go 

13 along, there will be --

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, I 

15 mean for historical. Is that complete? Or 

16 did I hear you say up to 2007?

17 MS. ELLIOTT: Yes. June 2007. 

18 There is one site where we did not receive 

19 anything on the DVD that ORAU provided, and I 

20 have got to go searching for that. It is the 

21 Kansas City one. But, otherwise, most of the 
112 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 things that are supposed to be in there for 

2 historical meetings are in there now.

3 You know, we didn't have the files 

4 for a while. I don't know what happened to 

5 them between when I left and when I received 

6 that DVD.

7 The other one is, I think, a 

8 meeting that happened after the ORAU contract 

9 was terminated, and I don't know what became

10 of what they did with that.

11 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: The other 

12 question I had was, is it possible to get 

13 unredacted meeting minutes up there? Because 

14 in some cases we have the redacted meeting 

15 minutes.

16 MR. JOHNSON: It depends if we 

17 have the unredacted. We may only have the 

18 redacted.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, this 

20 is on OTS. So it would be --

21 MR. JOHNSON: You mean from the 
113 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 old system, from WISPR or -- what is the 

2 question?

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, there 

4 are some sites where you just have the 

5 redacted meeting minutes without the names.

6 MR. JOHNSON: Right. We have a 

7 little bit of a mix in there right now, 

8 meaning some with redacted and some with 

9 unredacted. And lately, we have just been 

10 putting the unredacted out there. So, if we 

11 have the unredacted we could put them out 

12 there.

13 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay.

14 MEMBER MUNN: Did I miss 

15 something? What is the unredacted data? What 

16 is the meeting data that you mentioned?

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, a lot 

18 of times, we will use that to figure out the 

19 meeting --

20 MEMBER MUNN: Well, you are 

21 looking at it for content, right?
114 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes, and 

2 who said what, and whether we need to go back 

3 and interview them.

4 MR. JOHNSON: Sometimes in the 

5 minutes, though, because if it is kind of like 

6 a townhall meeting, they may not be able to 

7 keep up with the names.

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. I 

9 understand.

10 MR. JOHNSON: So, therefore, you 

11 are not going to have names associated with 

12 that, but you will have a sign-in sheet.

13 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Are you 

14 satisfied with that?

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Unless you 

16 want us to go back and look at it.

17 MR. KATZ: Can I make a suggestion 

18 for that?

19 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

20 MR. KATZ: It sounds like this is 

21 -- I think Kathy said that they are now 
115 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 caught up, and that these should be in the 

2 system. So, I think maybe just for 

3 completion's sake, this would be in abeyance, 

4 because abeyance is basically what you say in 

5 terms of disposition when conceptually 

6 everybody agrees with the solution or that 

7 something has been done, but you just want to 

8 see the final product.

9 So it makes sense, I think, for 

10 SC&A to have a look and see that things are in 

11 order. And at that point, then SC&A can come 

12 back and say things are in order and we can 

13 close the issue.

14 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Okay. Sounds 

15 good.

16 MR. KATZ: Thank you.

17 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Finding 4?

18 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. 

19 Finding 4 was broken up into subcategories. 

20 So I am going to throw three sets of comments 

21 at you, and then we will discuss them.
116 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 The first comment is that there is 

2 no formal process discussed in PR-6 for 

3 documenting, tracking, evaluating, and 

4 responding to comments provided at workshops, 

5 invited forums, Board meetings, or through the 

6 website docket, which were defined as elements 

7 of the worker outreach program in 

8 classification of worker outreach meetings and 

9 types of NIOSH meetings which were the graphs 

10 and associated handouts that NIOSH provided to 

11 the Working Group in June of 2009.

12 The procedures should specify what 

13 documents are required in OTS for these 

14 meetings, describe how the comments provided 

15 by workers are evaluated and describe how the 

16 comments provided are made available for 

17 consideration and dose reconstruction, Site 

18 Profiles, and SEC evaluations.

19 Okay, that was the other venues 

20 that were included in those handouts that were 

21 provided in 2009.
117 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. JOHNSON: Those were stated as 

2 -- they were agreed that they were outreach 

3 efforts or outreach venues, but they were not 

4 part of 12. And they were never -- even 

5 before you looked at PROC-97 -- those issues 

6 weren't part of that discussion.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Let me 

8 cover the next one, and then we can get back 

9 to that.

10 MR. JOHNSON: Okay.

11 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Because I 

12 think that there are some things that are 

13 outreach venues that we need to kind of 

14 discuss and decide whether they should be 

15 there.

16 Okay. There are several 

17 additional activities that provide 

18 opportunities for workers to provide 

19 substantive comments, such as the CATI 

20 interviews, the closeout interviews, general 

21 information by email or letters, site expert 
118 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 interviews. There's no procedure-like process 

2 by which general site comments or information 

3 can be captured for consideration in technical 

4 work documents from these sources.

5 And let's stop there before we get 

6 to the two-track system.

7 So there are these other venues, 

8 and what you are saying is that they are 

9 outside the scope --

10 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, they've never 

11 been in the scope.

12 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: -- of 

13 PR-12, but they are still worker outreach. 

14 They are still considered a part of the worker 

15 outreach program?

16 MR. JOHNSON: They're aspects on 

17 which we get feedback from, sure. And I think 

18 that's what the Director agreed to or agreed 

19 on, is that we believe that they were outreach 

20 because of the information transfer associated 

21 with them. But there was never a 
119 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 consideration of them being part of Procedure 

2 12.

3 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I don't remember 

4 the transcripts from that meeting in `09, but 

5 it seems to me Larry put those examples up

6 there on the board just for that reason, so we 

7 could start putting our program together, this 

8 Work Group, on how to track things. And he 

9 was giving examples of outreach and what we 

10 were going to track.

11 MR. JOHNSON: I believe they were 

12 in there that they could be reviewed, but I 

13 don't know that there was an agreement that 

14 they were going to be looked at for tracking. 

15 I mean, we clearly had our two sides, 

16 information-giving, information-receiving, and 

17 then all others, to include the Board meeting.

18 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: We will have to 

19 look at the transcripts.

20 MR. CALHOUN: The COIs and the 

21 CATIs are used for individual dose 
120 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 reconstructions, and we will actually change 

2 dose reconstruction or develop it differently 

3 based on a CATI, if there is information 

4 there, and we will also modify a DR based on a 

5 COI, a closeout interview, if there is 

6 something there that comes up about the 

7 specific case.

8 If the individual has a broader9 ranging issue or type of information, you 

10 know, if they forward us that information, I 

11 will give that to the TBD writing group and 

12 they can incorporate that into the next 

13 revision of the TBD.

14 But every time an individual makes 

15 a comment about an incident or something where 

16 he feels he was exposed, we actually will put 

17 that in the dose reconstruction report and say 

18 why we used it or why we didn't use it.

19 So, COIs and CATIs, in my opinion, 

20 are more for individual dose reconstruction. 

21 But if there is something global and they 
121 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 forward it to us, you know, we certainly 

2 always have the ability to forward that to our 

3 technical basis writing group.

4 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And I think 

5 what we are talking about here with respect to 

6 the CATIs and the COIs, and even the letters 

7 and submittal to the dockets, are not 

8 claimant-specific topics, but generalized 

9 topics.

10 For example, if someone says, you 

11 know, at LANL we handled einsteinium, then 

12 that might be important to the Site Profile, 

13 and you need to have that information 

14 transferred, too.

15 MR. CALHOUN: What I would see is, 

16 I mean maybe it is something as simple as, you 

17 know, basically, what we are saying is anytime 

18 an HP or an interviewer sees something that 

19 may have global impacts on the program or a 

20 site, they can forward that information to the 

21 site Point of Contact. I mean, I don't know 
122 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 how much more detail you get than that.

2 MR. KATZ: Where does that 

3 procedure go? Does that go in the dose 

4 reconstruction?

5 MR. CALHOUN: Well, it would go if 

6 it was einsteinium, you know, if that is 

7 something that we never heard about before. 

8 But, then, there's got to be some reasonable 

9 assurance that einsteinium was there. If one 

10 person says that there was einsteinium there, 

11 I don't know if we stop everything we are 

12 doing and go look for einsteinium.

13 MR. KATZ: No, my question was 

14 just, where does the procedure go if you want, 

15 for example, your dose reconstructors to, when 

16 they come across an issue that might have 

17 broader significance, provide that to your TBD 

18 team? Then, does that instruction - does that 

19 become part of the procedures for dose 

20 reconstructors in that case?

21 MR. CALHOUN: Is a dose 
123 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 reconstructor going to find it? It is not 

2 likely that the dose reconstructor is going to 

3 get that information. It is going to come 

4 through the CATI probably or the closeout 

5 interview, at least in those two examples, 

6 which isn't usually the dose reconstructor.

7 I have gotten information, paper 

8 information, from people, and I forward it to 

9 the ORAU team, D team now.

10 MR. KATZ: I mean, what I am just 

11 saying is that it seems like for each of these 

12 categories, if you go through them, whether it 

13 is a closeout interview or a dose 

14 reconstruction interview, whether it is a 

15 docket submission, I think the initial 

16 question is, what is the system in place to 

17 make sure that, when there is something 

18 relevant, it is addressed?

19 So you could start with the 

20 closeout interview. Where do those 

21 instructions need to be, so that you know that 
124 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 a person in a responsible position will do 

2 that and that it will be captured somewhere?

3 MR. CALHOUN: Right, and in these 

4 particular cases, those specific instances, 

5 they would be in the CATI procedure or the COI 

6 procedure.

7 MR. KATZ: Yes, right. Right.

8 DR. MAKHIJANI: And that is not an 

9 ATL thing. It's more an -- DCAS thing, right?

10 MR. KATZ: Right, just like the 

11 docket. Again, what is the system in place 

12 for docket responses to track? Docket 

13 submissions are evaluated and then responded 

14 to as necessary or acted on as necessary, 

15 right?

16 I mean, that is what we are 

17 asking, in a sense. I think what Kathy is 

18 asking is, where are the systems if they are 

19 not in PROC-12?

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: From these 

21 substantive comments to integration into the 
125 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 technical work document, from these sources of 

2 outreach information.

3 MR. CALHOUN: From the CATI and 

4 the COI specifically?

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, I 

6 gave quite a --

7 MR. CALHOUN: I think that we are 

8 still going to have to rely on the person who 

9 hears the information to forward it to 

10 somebody, and they are going to have to call 

11 it and decide, well, this is reasonable or 

12 it's not.

13 So, you know, is adding a sentence 

14 that says, forward such information to the 

15 right people adequate or do we need more?

16 MEMBER BEACH: And I just found 

17 that chart we were talking about earlier that 

18 Larry put up, and it does seem like that is 

19 originally what some of our plan was, was to 

20 look at all those venues. And I think Kathy 

21 makes a good point that we should probably 
126 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 look into that a little bit further.

2 MR. CALHOUN: Well, I mean I guess 

3 we can explore how we would do it or if we 

4 would change anything, since this is kind of a 

5 new thing.

6 I don't know. What do you think 

7 there, J.J.? I don't know.

8 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I think, as 

9 discussed earlier, we had information10 giving/information-receiving and the others 

11 were things that the Work Group were going to 

12 look at as areas of outreach, and not at that 

13 point concurring that we were going to address 

14 those in a procedure or a process. Because 

15 they are all not necessarily interfaced or 

16 interfluenced with each other, as the CATI 

17 versus the web, versus an email, versus a 

18 letter, versus a Board meeting.

19 So, you know, it would be pretty 

20 difficult, I think, to tie it all together. 

21 But having said that, that was an avenue that 
127 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 the Work Group was going to look at, I 

2 thought.

3 MEMBER BEACH: I think it would 

4 probably be easier than -- to me, it doesn't 

5 seem like it would be so difficult to tie it 

6 all together.

7 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, this is 

8 almost -- listening to you talk about it --

9 the Site Research Database, the O: drive has 

10 become sort of the docket for pieces of paper, 

11 documents that are relevant to different 

12 subjects, different activities.

13 This is almost the analogue, the 

14 equivalent, you know -- is there something 

15 that systemizes what is captured in -- not 

16 pieces of paper, but information that is 

17 flowing from different sources in the system 

18 from workers? I think that is kind of where 

19 we are kind of gravitating to. Is there 

20 something that you can go to that will 

21 represent that capture, information capture in 
128 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 the larger sense, not just data capture, but 

2 information capture of the workers?

3 Right now, it is different 

4 sources, different judgments being made in 

5 different parts of the system, but how is that 

6 all tied together? Does that actually go 

7 where it needs to go?

8 MR. JOHNSON: Well, I guess what I 

9 was speaking of is, in your example, what 

10 would trigger somebody in each one of those 

11 different areas to take and look at that 

12 information, feel it is relevant, and put it 

13 in the SRDB?

14 MR. FITZGERALD: Well, that's what 

15 is kind of interesting because SRDB has pieces 

16 of paper of varying relevances. I mean some 

17 of it -- it may be a 1,000-page document, of 

18 which one or two pages is really relevant for 

19 an SEC. And I have gone through all of these, 

20 and it is amazing, but the data captures 

21 basically everything that touches, that has 
129 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 some relevance, even if it is relatively 

2 small, to the issue at hand.

3 I am not saying we duplicate that 

4 for information at large. But, certainly, the 

5 question is what is the threshold for what 

6 goes in and gets captured? It seems like 

7 there is a much more rigid, sort of rigorous 

8 system for grabbing data and grabbing 

9 documentation than there is for grabbing what 

10 may be worker input.

11 That's necessarily so because you 

12 have to make judgments as you hear this, but I 

13 think that is probably what people are 

14 grabbling over, what would be something that 

15 would capture without setting the threshold so 

16 low that you are not going to -- you know, 

17 there might be some things that would be 

18 relevant, but somebody in the lower parts of 

19 the system would say, you know, it's 

20 einsteinium; who cares about that?

21 But that might be an issue for 
130 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 exposure potential that may actually rise to 

2 an SEC significance later on. And it would be 

3 very helpful to know that somebody felt they 

4 were handling einsteinium and were exposed. 

5 But that may not get into the information 

6 capture -- I'll call it information capture --

7 because somebody made a judgment that 

8 somewhere down, and maybe it was the CATI 

9 interview, that einsteinium, that's not a 

10 primary nuclide; why are we worried about 

11 that?

12 And we're getting into this. In 

13 all these SECs I have been involved with, the 

14 worker input actually is a very important 

15 factor and may be one of the few factors that 

16 comes to play because there is no 

17 documentation on how einsteinium was handled.

18 So I guess I am here to testify 

19 that, yes, the worker input may be a deciding 

20 factor on an SEC if it comes down to some of 

21 these recollections that come up, and 
131 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 capturing that becomes a very critical part. 

2 But how do we do that when, in fact, it may be 

3 just a handful of workers that may have worked 

4 with it, and maybe only one worker that 

5 actually mentions it?

6 You know, we go out and do these 

7 interviews, but trying to find these handful 

8 of workers that may actually have firsthand 

9 experience is almost impossible. But, by 

10 virtue of a CATI interview during dose 

11 reconstruction somebody actually prints it up, 

12 that would be very important.

13 So, how do we do that? How do we 

14 make sure that at least the judgments that are 

15 made to that level bring this into the system 

16 somehow, so that it can be found? Maybe, as 

17 Grady was pointing out, somebody knows to send 

18 that over to a TBD review team or to even an 

19 active SEC. Maybe you are doing a claimant 

20 review or interview, and there is an SEC that 

21 is going on and somebody connects the dots. I 
132 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 don't know how that would be done, but that 

2 would be --

3 MEMBER BEACH: Or somebody doesn't 

4 and it's missed.

5 MR. KATZ: So, I mean, just along 

6 these lines, what I was trying to point to 

7 earlier to make it concrete, one solution that 

8 could be in place -- I think those need to be 

9 in PROC-12 -- but for all these other 

10 instances, one, you would want to know that 

11 the guidance is there to the person doing the 

12 interview, that should you come across it, 

13 right? If they don't even have that guidance, 

14 then you have no reason to believe that it 

15 will happen ever.

16 So, one, you would want to make 

17 sure that the guidance is there in the 

18 procedure that applies to that individual, 

19 whether it is the person dealing with the 

20 docket or whether it is the person doing 

21 closeout interviews, or whoever. So that is 
133 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 one element of a solution.

2 And the second is the tracking 

3 piece. And it seems like, if you have a 

4 tracking system already set up for worker 

5 outreach, these other items, maybe when they 

6 take that action, then, they put a note in the 

7 tracking system.

8 Otherwise, I don't see how Stu, or 

9 whoever, at the end of the day, when Stu wants 

10 to know how are we doing on capturing these, 

11 whether it's responding to dockets, or 

12 whatever, I don't know how he would go about 

13 that if he doesn't have somewhere to look to 

14 see what are the items that were put up for 

15 action, in a sense, if there is no formal way 

16 to capture that?

17 So, if you have a tracking system, 

18 that could be something you could do. So that 

19 could be -- even though PROC-12 doesn't cover 

20 everything, the tracking system might cover 

21 all of these things. They might all be put in 
134 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 the tracking system.

2 I'm just throwing out a solution, 

3 a possible solution, and then having 

4 accountability and management ability.

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, 

6 before we get too far, let me go over the 

7 third part because it kind of leads into this.

8 MR. FITZGERALD: Sure. Okay. Let 

9 me just touch on that. We were talking about 

10 this in the hallway, that a procedure does so 

11 much. There's a number of facets involved 

12 now, the procedure, plus tracking systems, 

13 plus management oversight, and maybe the kind 

14 of accountability that calls for -- we're 

15 going to be getting into this in Chapter 3, 

16 which is the occasional sampling to see how 

17 things are going. All those are facets of the 

18 same thing.

19 The procedure by itself isn't 

20 going to solve a lot of these issues. And I 

21 think that was your point, and I think that's 
135 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 a good one.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, there 

3 is one other element to this. That is that we 

4 feel there is a two-track system for obtaining 

5 employee or general worker insight, expert 

6 input.

7 One of these involves the worker 

8 outreach and is governed by PR-12. The other 

9 track is more informal and involves interviews 

10 with site experts.

11 Site expert interviews are a 

12 significant source of worker input for 

13 technical documents, but NIOSH has not 

14 established a formal process for selecting 

15 site experts, conducting interviews, assuring 

16 the accuracy of the interviews' statements, or 

17 evaluating information, reviews, and technical 

18 work documents.

19 The two-track system tends to give 

20 less weight to information provided in worker 

21 outreach meeting venues versus site expert 
136 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 interviews. There is no assurance that the 

2 technical personnel responsible for technical 

3 document preparation are aware of and consider 

4 inputs provided at worker outreach meetings.

5 There is no systematic method 

6 described for documenting and resolving 

7 differences in important issues that may arise 

8 from different settings. In other words, you 

9 may interview two different people, and they 

10 seemingly say opposite things. Which one is 

11 telling you factual information? Both tracks 

12 require a process for ensuring completeness 

13 and accuracy of the documented information and 

14 for ensuring appropriate consideration for 

15 inclusion in a technical work document.

16 So, when we talk about a two-track 

17 system, we are talking about information 

18 gathered during worker outreach versus 

19 information gathered in site expert 

20 interviews. And site expert interviews are a 

21 part of worker outreach and what NIOSH does, 
137 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and there is a concern there.

2 MR. JOHNSON: Well, again, I wrote 

3 the procedures such that, you know, it was 

4 transparent with regards to whether 

5 individuals worked in the field or whether 

6 individuals were in the office environment or 

7 whether they were engineers or whether they 

8 were technicians.

9 And in the view that I developed 

10 the procedure there was no difference with 

11 regards to those individuals. If a person was 

12 focusing on looking to retrieve information, 

13 you would put your expectations together, all 

14 the folks that you possibly can, and address 

15 your questions to find out, you know, to 

16 support the answers to the questions that you 

17 may have.

18 And initially when we looked at 

19 your assessment of Procedure 97 the concern 

20 that I thought I saw in there was the fact 

21 that one was giving credence to one group, 
138 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 credibility to one group more than another 

2 group. And when it comes to this outreach 

3 procedure, it gives credibility to all the 

4 folks and it reaches out to all the folks.

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And I don't 

6 think within the worker outreach procedure 

7 that we are saying that you are not reaching 

8 out to all types of workers within that 

9 procedure. I think the concern is that you 

10 have got this system of site expert interviews 

11 which are often, not always, HPs, which are 

12 done by the document lead, and they are given 

13 more credibility than worker outreach-gathered 

14 comments.

15 DR. MAKHIJANI: Let me amplify. I 

16 think there's a point on which we haven't been 

17 clear enough, and Kathy kind of indicated that 

18 by hand gestures a little bit.

19 It is not so much the meeting that 

20 you conduct and who's present, whether it is a 

21 machine operator or an HP. We are not saying 
139 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that you would treat their information 

2 differently when compiling the minutes or 

3 anything like that. I think Kathy says that. 

4 We're not saying that.

5 There are two ways in which 

6 information is gathered for the purpose of, 

7 from the HP's point of view, TBD/ER 

8 preparation. A guy is writing up something. 

9 He doesn't know whether there was egress 

10 monitoring or what the badging procedures were 

11 or when an integrated badge was interviewed 

12 and he picks up the phone and he calls up Bob. 

13 Bob, you were the HP. You were responsible 

14 for X. Tell me how the badges or when TLDs 

15 were introduced and what problems you had, et 

16 cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

17 You document it. It winds up in 

18 the Site Research Database, and it is 

19 reflected.

20 So there are two ways in which 

21 site expert information is being elicited. 
140 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Now, again, I am kind of focused only on the 

2 gathering of information that affects 

3 technical documents, dose reconstructions, 

4 TBDs, ERs.

5 In those, in the past at least --

6 I don't know how your new thing is going with

7 respect to doing these interviews for ERs, and 

8 then they are being referenced, and so on. I 

9 haven't reviewed any of that. Maybe it is 

10 fixed.

11 But it certainly was the case that 

12 in the past, and we have given examples 

13 specifically and in writing where information 

14 has been proffered and is now been used, 

15 whereas, other information was proffered and 

16 not used, or information that was 

17 contradictory.

18 One choice is made -- and this is 

19 not a problem of your conducting the 

20 interviews. It is an issue in the result that 

21 is proffered to the public and the workers in 
141 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 terms of the Evaluation Report, and so on.

2 And I think some of the problem of 

3 expressed dissatisfaction, whether appropriate 

4 or not, arises from that perception that there 

5 is a better credence to the health physics 

6 community. Now maybe NIOSH has the opposite 

7 impression, but I don't think it is restricted 

8 to how you are doing the interviews.

9 It is a two-track procedure for 

10 eliciting information. When you are going to 

11 do it yourself, and you want something right 

12 now and to document something, you make sure 

13 it is used because it is something you want 

14 right now.

15 And that's why my previous set of 

16 questions was, are there meetings initiated by 

17 the HP and what happens to those specific 

18 pieces of information? Are they treated 

19 equivalently, and can we track them?

20 I think it is not about how ATL is 

21 currently doing interviews, in my opinion.
142 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. JOHNSON: Let me just say that 

2 that wasn't my understanding of what the two3 track system was. My understanding of the 

4 two-track system was that we were giving 

5 higher preference to professional interviews, 

6 to like the HPs versus the outreach efforts, 

7 you know, in talking with the folks out there.

8 DR. MAKHIJANI: Do you mean in 

9 your procedure or in fact?

10 MR. JOHNSON: No, in fact, because 

11 that's what was recently just stated.

12 And what I tried to put into this 

13 procedure was the fact that there wasn't a 

14 two-track system, and if you so desired to 

15 have a focus group of professional people, 

16 then you could have that. Or if you had a 

17 focus group of a group of people that were 

18 from the site, you could have that. And there 

19 would be no difference with regards to the 

20 aspect of retrieving information.

21 There would be no segmenting of 
143 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 the -- I mean you could have a professional 

2 group. You could have a combination of 

3 outreach based upon the people you can 

4 retrieve information from.

5 The bottom line right now is that, 

6 when it comes to outreach efforts, our 

7 outreach efforts are focused on SEC and not 

8 highly focused on Technical Basis Document 

9 developments.

10 MR. CALHOUN: They were at one 

11 time. They were in the development --

12 MR. JOHNSON: They were, and I 

13 believe this two-track system that is now 

14 being addressed and clarified is something 

15 that was part of the history, could still be a 

16 part of history today, but is more of looking 

17 through the rearview mirror and seeing what 

18 was done in the past, and not what is being 

19 done today.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: I don't know, 

21 Kathy, maybe this is something we have to look 
144 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 at how these ER interviews and solicited 

2 information is being handled.

3 One suggestion that kind of came 

4 up, and this is a different way of saying the 

5 same thing, is really information-gathering, 

6 at least I think it is important that the 

7 people you are soliciting information from 

8 sign off on these minutes. Because if that 

9 doesn't happen, and not just a representative 

10 of them, because if that doesn't happen, they 

11 could feel that they said some things -- and 

12 I'm not talking about these big meetings, the 

13 townhalls. I'm not talking about that. That 

14 is clearly infeasible, and most of the 

15 information is not for gathering; it is for 

16 exchanging something.

17 And the other thing is the minutes 

18 are not voluminous. The minutes from these 

19 particular meetings can certainly be published 

20 with the Evaluation Reports, looking forward.

21 So that, because the tracking 
145 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 system is never seen by the workers, I mean it 

2 is not about us or NIOSH or you. It is about 

3 whether the workers who gave the information 

4 feel it was fairly represented and eventually 

5 used, because that is one of the problems that 

6 we are trying to remedy.

7 MEMBER MUNN: Arjun, do you have 

8 any suggestion how, short of every individual 

9 who provides information being followed up 

10 with a NIOSH representative to assure them 

11 that they have been heard, and that their 

12 information has been incorporated in the 

13 considerations and the procedures that are 

14 taking part, short of that, do you have any 

15 suggestion for how workers who feel they are 

16 being ignored can be reassured? Short of 

17 individual contact, how do you see that 

18 happening?

19 DR. MAKHIJANI: I don't think you 

20 can do that for all the workers who are 

21 gathered. That is clearly impossible.
146 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I mean that is why I put kind of a 

2 caveat that this should be a narrow effort, I 

3 think. There are lots of concerns, and I 

4 don't think I have the experience to address 

5 about these townhall meetings and information6 giving and the communications piece of it, and 

7 I don't claim to address that. So I am not 

8 addressing that. And I don't know how you can 

9 resolve the dissatisfactions that may or may 

10 not exist about that.

11 I am just focusing on the 

12 technical information. When the HP in NIOSH 

13 or ORAU is seeking technical information, what 

14 do you do in that case? That I don't think 

15 normally involves a large number of workers. 

16 Sometimes it might. But, normally, at least, 

17 and maybe it involves a much larger number of 

18 workers than is our experience, and it might 

19 be more of a problem.

20 But it is difficult to use in a 

21 way what becomes unvalidated information. We 
147 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 certainly have examples where workers don't 

2 get back to us, even though we have a smaller 

3 issue. So I just wanted to say that upfront.

4 And what we do in those cases is 

5 we tell them, if you don't get back to us, we 

6 won't use your information, and it's your 

7 problem. If you feel the information wasn't 

8 used, that's your problem.

9 And I think that can be certainly 

10 part of the procedure. You cannot force 

11 somebody to respond and tell you whether your 

12 minutes are accurately representing what they 

13 said, but you can tell them, if you don't 

14 respond, we won't use your information.

15 And I think, then, it is clear 

16 whose responsibility it is that the 

17 information didn't get in.

18 MEMBER MUNN: But am I reading 

19 between the words here? I am hearing you say 

20 that what you are suggesting, because I have 

21 asked how do you suggest this be done, are you 
148 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 suggesting, then, that the minutes of these 

2 meetings be sent to everyone who is signed in 

3 for these meetings with a note that, if they 

4 don't respond with respect to the clarity of 

5 what's been said, that it won't be used? Is 

6 that your --

7 DR. MAKHIJANI: No. I'm not 

8 suggesting that this be done for all meetings, 

9 for townhalls, for the meetings where there 

10 are lots and lots of workers and to the sign11 up sheets. And maybe this is impractical. 

12 It's just a suggestion that, actually, in a 

13 way doesn't affect the core of what we are 

14 doing in reviewing NIOSH documents.

15 I am suggesting that in the very 

16 restricted case of when HPs are explicitly 

17 seeking information that that be documented in 

18 this way. Maybe I'm wrong and not under the 

19 right impression that this does not involve a 

20 very large number of people relative to the 

21 townhalls and the other sets of meetings. 
149 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe the suggestion 

2 ought not to be adopted.

3 MEMBER MUNN: No, I think that you 

4 are correct that it doesn't affect a large 

5 number of people, if this is the kind of 

6 restriction you are putting on it.

7 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes.

8 MEMBER MUNN: But certainly in 

9 past terms, that's not the kind of restriction 

10 that was being discussed by this body or 

11 that's not the concern that was brought to 

12 this body.

13 The concern that was brought to 

14 this body is that a large number of workers 

15 made comments that they do not feel are being 

16 addressed. And the whole outreach concept is 

17 we go out to the workers, we get information 

18 from them. We come back and we do our work. 

19 And they don't believe they have been heard 

20 because whatever they felt they were telling 

21 us is not incorporated in some way in what 
150 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 they see. Now that was the premise on which, 

2 as best I can tell, this Work Group was put 

3 together.

4 So, what I am trying to ask from 

5 you is, are you suggesting a more narrow focus 

6 for this particular aspect of the Work Group 

7 or do you have a different process for 

8 responding in some way to what we were led to 

9 believe is a large number of workers who feel 

10 that they are not being heard?

11 DR. MAKHIJANI: I think a large 

12 number of people feel they are not being heard 

13 for different reasons. Some of them may feel, 

14 at least as I have observed people making 

15 comments here before you, when you meet as an 

16 Advisory Board, most people comment about 

17 their claims, about their family situation, 

18 and what they went through, and which cancer 

19 they had, and so on.

20 And NIOSH actually has done a 

21 wonderful thing by appointing an ombudsman, 
151 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and the Board has by having a procedure for 

2 actually addressing every one of those things. 

3 And maybe that ought to be extended to some 

4 of these things. From what Grady said, I 

5 think it seems to be, in form at least, 

6 operational.

7 DR. MAURO: This is John.

8 I have a thought.

9 DR. MAKHIJANI: Just hold on, 

10 John.

11 DR. MAURO: Oh, sorry, I thought 

12 you were through.

13 DR. MAKHIJANI: I'm not suggesting 

14 -- I don't know how wide a thing this would be 

15 in ATL's or NIOSH's bailiwick as compared to 

16 ours, certainly wider. And I don't know what 

17 I am suggesting is practical.

18 What I am suggesting is, in the 

19 specific instances where information is being 

20 gathered, and that has sort of been my 

21 participation in this group, and I don't know 
152 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 about the others, but my intent always has 

2 been to comment on technical information being 

3 gathered because that is what I understand and 

4 know about and I am experienced in.

5 This way assures not only the 

6 worker that they are being heard, but, from my 

7 point of view, when I do interviews -- and I 

8 do them quite a lot outside of the context of 

9 this particular job. You know, I interviewed 

10 the Director of Lawrence Livermore Lab once, 

11 and I sent him the notes, and I said, do you 

12 agree. Please fix it. And he did.

13 So that's the idea. Since I can 

14 now use that interview, I know that he saw it 

15 and he agrees with the content and fixed 

16 whatever he didn't agree with, because I want 

17 to use it in my work.

18 And that's the point. If we are 

19 going to use something that workers say in 

20 their work, you want to make sure that they 

21 don't have a different idea of what they said 
153 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 than you do.

2 And in a way, from a technical 

3 point of view, it is not more complicated than 

4 that.

5 MEMBER MUNN: So you are 

6 suggesting that, since we have two kinds of 

7 worker outreach that it is my understanding 

8 that we are supposed to address here, one is 

9 the type where we go out to try to find 

10 information, and the other is where we go out 

11 to give the information.

12 You're suggesting that the give13 information part, where there is often a great 

14 many personal comments made afterwards about 

15 individual claims and about specific groups 

16 and specific sites, you're not suggesting that 

17 all of those comments be tracked? You are 

18 suggesting only in the we are going out to get 

19 information case, when you have workers giving 

20 you information, that following that, you 

21 provide them with your concept of what has 
154 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 been said, and that workers are expected to 

2 buy off on it?

3 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, I think that 

4 is a pretty fair summary of what I am saying. 

5 It's, you know, I personally do not have the 

6 wisdom or experience in that other arena. 

7 Others in our team have commented on this, but 

8 I personally don't have any constructive 

9 experience to offer as to how you do all those 

10 other things. I mean, I think the Board, you 

11 all have dealt with it recently, you know, and 

12 I have admired what you have done.

13 But the complicating factor, one 

14 complicating factor which Kathy has brought up 

15 is that, when you have these information16 giving meetings, something will come up, and I 

17 really don't know how to address that. 

18 Somebody will say something that is important 

19 that could be used by an HP, and you do have 

20 to exercise professional judgment; I will 

21 agree with that. I certainly agree with that.
155 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 In those kinds of situations, how 

2 you manage and track that, I really haven't 

3 thought about that. But, for a specific kind 

4 of meeting, yes, I think you have accurately 

5 captured what I said.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Actually, quite a

7 few somebodies quite frequently have many 

8 things --

9 MEMBER BEACH: Well, I have a 

10 question. If you have a situation like Arjun 

11 just described, where you have a particular 

12 individual that has information to give you at 

13 a meeting that you aren't particularly -- you 

14 are not taking notes; you are not expecting to 

15 gather information. Have you ever asked that 

16 person or taken them aside and talked to them 

17 later, after the meeting? Is that a point 

18 where you might take notes about what that 

19 person, what kind of information that person 

20 is giving you? Or has that never happened?

21 MR. CALHOUN: No, that's happened, 
156 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and it has happened that somebody has come to 

2 the meeting with documents to give us. You 

3 know, it wasn't that kind of meeting. And 

4 when that happens, at least when they give us 

5 the documents, or if they have documents at 

6 home, we can say, try to send these to us. We 

7 will forward those to the TBD group and say, 

8 please incorporate or evaluate during the next 

9 revisions of the document.

10 Now is it tracked? No, it is not 

11 tracked. I can't point to one exactly and 

12 make you think I'm not lying, but it happens, 

13 not often, you know.

14 MEMBER BEACH: So there would be 

15 never an instant where you might take notes 

16 about what the person said, just for that 

17 particular instant because --

18 MR. CALHOUN: If it was something 

19 that was like a big incident, I could see that 

20 happening or some einsteinium or something 

21 like that. I can't recall any that I have 
157 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 personally done.

2 MEMBER BEACH: Okay. Well, it 

3 seems to me, just to throw it out, my opinion 

4 is, if the meetings are important enough to 

5 take minutes and not the meetings that notes 

6 are not taken, the information-giving, then, 

7 if you have a handful of individuals that give 

8 specific instants of topics that they want to 

9 relate to you, information that may be on an 

10 SEC or a technical document, would it be that 

11 difficult to take those notes and then get 

12 back to that person on those few incidents, 

13 not the whole group, not everybody who signed 

14 in, but on a smaller case, like what Arjun was 

15 saying, the handful of individuals?

16 MR. CALHOUN: I don't know. It 

17 seems like that's something I would hate to 

18 commit to because certainly you are going to 

19 find someplace where I'm not doing it.

20 Again, what you are doing is you 

21 are saying now we are going back to what we 
158 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 were kind of not wanting, or you guys weren't 

2 kind of wanting, is us assigning, using 

3 professional judgment and deciding which 

4 should be used and which shouldn't, and 

5 tracking those and having people sign them. I 

6 don't know if it is necessary to have people 

7 sign them.

8 DR. MAURO: I have a suggestion. 

9 It sounds like the problem is it is difficult 

10 to be prescriptive at this point where we are 

11 now regarding how we are going to deal with 

12 some upcoming or future outreach program, 

13 whether it is information-giving or receiving.

14 The idea -- it seems to me the 

15 problem is this: everyone is unique. Each 

16 one, you come back with. When you come back 

17 and you have your notes, and assuming that 

18 they are fairly complete and faithful to what 

19 has transpired, you have captured, even if it 

20 is giving information, you may come back with 

21 notes that say, well, we also obtained some 
159 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 information. And that is all collected.

2 Now the problem is this: once we 

3 have collected all that information and you 

4 have it before you, you have loaded it up into 

5 the tracking system, the question becomes, 

6 what do we do with this information, who do 

7 we follow up with , what should we do.

8 And I think that there needs to be 

9 some kind of plan. I think it is at that 

10 point where you become thoughtful about, okay, 

11 this is what we have in front of us. What is 

12 the sensible thing to do regarding followup? 

13 It may mean that, depending on the nature of 

14 the interaction, interfacing with some union 

15 representatives that organized the meeting or 

16 maybe particular individuals.

17 But I suspect that in each case 

18 how you follow up and the degree to which you 

19 follow is going to have to be tailored to that 

20 particular occasion. And maybe that is all 

21 that could be committed to, that there would 
160 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 be some, I guess it would be a follow-up plan 

2 that would be generated as a product, and it 

3 would be recorded. This is what we believe to 

4 be, based on what we brought home, a sensible 

5 follow-up plan of what we should do now.

6 Then you are held accountable to 

7 that. You have a plan, things you are going 

8 to do that are going to be different each 

9 time. So you can't be prescriptive now, but 

10 at least after you do it, you could sort of 

11 lay out what you plan to do, and then hold 

12 yourself accountable to doing that and 

13 recording what you have done.

14 So this sort of, like, leaves you 

15 still with the professional judgment on what 

16 you think you need to do. And I agree there 

17 is a lot of professional judgment, but it 

18 could be made in a collective sense. That is, 

19 it is not one person making it; it is the team 

20 that has brought back the basket of 

21 information, and they together decide what is 
161 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 the sensible thing to do, and you move forward 

2 in a way.

3 That way, you would not only have 

4 followup that is accountable and recorded, but 

5 it is also consistent. That is, the judgments 

6 are being by the team, and you could view to 

7 make sure that you are approaching each 

8 followup with a philosophy that is consistent 

9 with the followups that have been made in 

10 other venues.

11 I mean, that is how I would deal 

12 with this dilemma.

13 MR. CALHOUN: The issue is how to 

14 put that into a document, since this is the 

15 document-review of this process.

16 DR. MAURO: But couldn't that be 

17 something in your procedure?

18 MR. CALHOUN: That's what I mean. 

19 How do you put that into the document?

20 DR. MAURO: Just what I said.

21 MR. CALHOUN: Do your best to get 
162 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 back to people if you think something is 

2 important. I mean, I don't mean to be flip, 

3 but that's what we're saying.

4 DR. MAURO: All you are going to 

5 do is commit to prepare a plan.

6 MR. CALHOUN: We are committing to 

7 thinking about doing something because we are 

8 not going to create a plan necessarily if 

9 there is nothing to get back to.

10 DR. MAURO: And you'll say that.

11 MR. CALHOUN: So we've got to 

12 write something saying we're not going to do 

13 something, John?

14 DR. MAURO: In other words, you 

15 you'll be held accountable --

16 MR. CALHOUN: Come on.

17 DR. MAURO: Well, in other words, 

18 you're making a commitment that says, when you

19 bring this back, there will be a record 

20 created that you folks will prepare that will 

21 be part of your tracking system that would 
163 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 outline what your follow-up activity is going 

2 to be or what your planned activity is going 

3 to be. And it is a way to sort of hold 

4 yourself accountable to following up in a 

5 systematic way and recording what that 

6 followup is.

7 I guess I see that as a minimal 

8 approach to dealing with this situation.

9 MR. CALHOUN: It is a minimal 

10 approach as long as we refine it or keep it to 

11 only those meetings that are meant entirely 

12 for fact-gathering and not training meetings 

13 or information meetings, and things like that. 

14 Then, it's a little bit more manageable.

15 DR. MAURO: Well, I mean, I would 

16 leave it to your judgment, but when you come 

17 back from whatever your trip is -- and it 

18 doesn't really matter, in my mind, what the 

19 objective is -- but you bring back a piece of 

20 information that is valuable that needs to be 

21 followed up on in some capacity. I think that 
164 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 needs to be recorded and tracked, if you feel 

2 that way, whether that piece of information 

3 emerged from a giving or receiving.

4 It's a judgment call, of course, 

5 but it's okay that it's a judgment call. But 

6 there's a way to track it and hold yourself 

7 accountable to achieving closure on things 

8 that you think are important.

9 MR. CALHOUN: So, basically, we 

10 put into the procedure, if after any of these 

11 meetings the HP DCAS, or whoever, decides that 

12 there's information that needs to be followed 

13 up on, it will be.

14 DR. MAURO: No. The procedure 

15 would be NIOSH would make, would review --

16 MR. CALHOUN: Well, DCAS, yes.

17 DR. MAURO: -- review the notes 

18 that were collected.

19 MR. CALHOUN: Yes.

20 DR. MAURO: It's not the 

21 individual that does this. Like I said, you 
165 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 are bringing back, after the meeting you're 

2 bringing back your notes, which could be 

3 copious --

4 MR. CALHOUN: Yes.

5 DR. MAURO: -- all of which is 

6 going to be captured in your tracking system. 

7 Then, there is a procedure by which that 

8 material is reviewed, and it's not one person. 

9 It's a process, just like all of your other 

10 processes, a process that you go through that 

11 makes judgments on what the follow-up 

12 activities would be. And this is a commitment 

13 that is made.

14 Then, that may simply be a 

15 notation in the record that NIOSH has reviewed 

16 all of the material that was brought back and 

17 logged into the OTS and has determined that 

18 there is no follow-up action necessary. Or 

19 you may determine these are the follow-up 

20 actions that we feel are important, and it 

21 becomes part of the record. And tracking 
166 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 closure of those action items is on the 

2 record.

3 But, you know, as long as it can 

4 be shown that there is accountability, that 

5 you looked at the material, and listen, if you 

6 make a judgment that you don't need to follow 

7 up on anything, well, that should be 

8 transparent.

9 Now there may be people who don't 

10 agree with that, but at least you are laying 

11 it all out for everyone to see.

12 MR. CALHOUN: But you understand 

13 that during any one of these meetings there 

14 may be things that we don't even take notes 

15 on, that we make the determination to not take 

16 notes on because we don't believe that they're 

17 going to have an impact. And then to bring 

18 home everything --

19 DR. MAURO: Yes.

20 MR. CALHOUN: -- and then make a 

21 determination that we don't need to follow up 
167 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 on them, that could pose really a monster.

2 DR. MAURO: Well, no, I mean we're 

3 in the same position. That is, when we are 

4 out there talking to people, as Joe described 

5 earlier, and Arjun, yes, of course, we are 

6 going to make judgments, you have to, as a 

7 team, on what material, what information that 

8 you have heard that you think is important. 

9 No one could expect more than that. And you 

10 bring back what you think is important.

11 And it's true, you might have 

12 missed something important or you might have 

13 captured something that is unimportant, but 

14 all you can do is the best you can. But the 

15 idea being to collect it and then think, be 

16 thoughtful about it afterward.

17 If you miss something important, I 

18 mean no one could hold you accountable that 

19 someone may have made a judgment not to copy 

20 something down that turned out to be important 

21 later. I mean, I don't think anyone is going 
168 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 to fault you for that.

2 MR. CALHOUN: Well, it sounds to 

3 me that the changes that would be considered 

4 for the procedure would still be very generic.

5 DR. MAURO: Yes. All I was trying 

6 to do was not be prescriptive because it 

7 sounds like it is really inappropriate, given 

8 the complexity and the nuance that there is 

9 and all the facets of what you are dealing 

10 with. To be prescriptive may be burdensome 

11 and inappropriate and you are going to be held 

12 accountable to something that you really can't 

13 be held accountable to.

14 So I try to step it back and make 

15 it a little more general. It sounds like it 

16 is general, but at the same time you will be 

17 creating an accountability to yourself that 

18 you are going to do the best you can to track 

19 all this material. What that tracking will be 

20 is to be judged, determined on a case-by-case 

21 basis, but it would be in the record and 
169 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 transparent and available for everyone to see.

2 MR. KATZ: So, John, if I 

3 understand, I mean, it sounds pretty simple. 

4 It sounds like you're just saying, after you 

5 come back with your minutes, and so on, you 

6 have an action plan --

7 DR. MAURO: Yes, but it's --

8 MR. KATZ: -- you know, a note in 

9 the record, whatever you want to call it, an 

10 action plan which the team considers and lays 

11 out which ones are going to be actionable. 

12 Then, the actionable items, of course, end up 

13 in your tracking system.

14 DR. MAURO: Yes, I guess it's as 

15 simple as that.

16 MR. KATZ: And if there is 

17 nothing, then there is just a memo that says, 

18 you know, there was nothing that required 

19 actions, whatever, but it just sort of closes 

20 the loop on --

21 DR. MAURO: I guess that's all I'm 
170 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 saying. It's pretty simple. It doesn't seem 

2 to me very burdensome, but, at the same time, 

3 it does create a record and accountability 

4 that these judgments are made because the 

5 basket of information will be there in the 

6 OTS.

7 Now whether or not you want to 

8 make the tracking system information 

9 available, that's a different question. I 

10 guess I am more concerned that, once you do 

11 have the information, that it becomes 

12 transparent of the follow-up actions that are 

13 being taken regarding all these different 

14 matters and you have a record of what has been 

15 done.

16 I don't know. Maybe you are doing 

17 it already.

18 It seems to me it is in accord 

19 with what Arjun was talking about, but Arjun 

20 wasn't sure of how specific it could be and 

21 how prescriptive it needs to be. So, I just 
171 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 stepped it back to say, well, don't make it 

2 prescriptive. Just make it a system that at 

3 least holds the organization accountable to 

4 follow up.

5 MR. CALHOUN: Well, I think that 

6 certainly, if we come back from a meeting with 

7 something that we believe needs to be added to 

8 the tracking system, we would add it. Now, if 

9 somebody says that, we didn't wear TLDs or 

10 TLDs were zero or a missed dose, they were 

11 always zero, and how could I possibly get 

12 zero, I don't think I need to write something 

13 that says that I'm not going to address that.

14 DR. MAKHIJANI: I agree with that.

15 MR. CALHOUN: So, I would just as 

16 soon deal with the positives and make the 

17 professional judgment, if there's something 

18 that comes up that we believe is important, we 

19 add that into the tracking system and we track 

20 it to completion.

21 DR. MAURO: Okay.
172 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: So the only thing that 

2 is being said here is, after the meeting when 

3 you collect your thoughts, you write a little 

4 action memo that says, here are the items that 

5 are actionable --

6 MR. CALHOUN: They're actionable 

7 items.

8 MR. KATZ: -- if they are. Or 

9 there were no items that were. And then it's 

10 transparent.

11 MR. CALHOUN: But we don't do that 

12 right now.

13 MR. KATZ: You don't do that?

14 MR. CALHOUN: We don't say that 

15 there's no action items.

16 MR. KATZ: Oh, I know, but there's 

17 a suggestion on the table that that might be a 

18 good thing to do because it just gives 

19 accountability and closes the --

20 MR. CALHOUN: Suggestion noted.

21 MR. KATZ: Right. Okay.
173 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 (Laughter.)

2 That's progress.

3 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: So that's 4 or 

4 what do we call it?

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, we've 

6 got some action items.

7 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Do we call it a 

8 standoff or what?

9 (Laughter.)

10 MR. CALHOUN: No. I have to 

11 address it at the next meeting, obviously.

12 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: In progress.

13 MR. CALHOUN: And I don't know 

14 about this two-track system. I'm not sure 

15 what that means, and I don't know. That 

16 almost seems like that is beyond the scope of 

17 this document because that's like, how do you 

18 proceduralize that? Do you say, make sure to 

19 weight comments from workers as much as 

20 professionals. I don't know how to address 

21 that in a procedure.
174 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: You had an 

2 idea.

3 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: I think that's 

4 one terminology that you have got to be really 

5 careful when you say, well, we have comments 

6 from workers and we have comments from 

7 professionals. You're telling those workers 

8 they're not professionals. They are 

9 professionals.

10 MR. CALHOUN: No, we're not. 

11 We're just talking here in a group.

12 MEMBER MUNN: Plus, you tell the 

13 professionals they're not workers.

14 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Yes, yes. So, 

15 you've got to be careful exactly how you word 

16 it. Otherwise, one group or the other is 

17 going to be --

18 MR. KATZ: The finding was not 

19 that, about the sort of judgment that goes in 

20 terms of weighting. The finding was about 

21 treating them equivalently in terms of 
175 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 documentation, and so on, for these other 

2 venues.

3 So, I had suggested for all of the 

4 other venues that fall outside of PROC-12, 

5 like we talked about, like the docket, like 

6 closeout interviews, and so on, one way to 

7 treat those equivalently in terms of handling 

8 of the information would be to track also the 

9 action items that come out of those other 

10 venues in your OTS system, just as you do the 

11 ones that come under PROC-12.

12 And that would be responsive to 

13 the comment that is here from SC&A, which is 

14 treat them equally: the information. In other 

15 words, manage that information with equal sort 

16 of prudence or whatever you want to call that

17 tracking system.

18 MR. CALHOUN: Well, there's some 

19 mechanics that I don't know if we can do that 

20 with, with the OTS, and I'm not familiar with 

21 OTS all that much.
176 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: So, is that practical, 

2 to add those other items to OTS, the action 

3 items?

4 MR. JOHNSON: It would have to be 

5 a separate system.

6 MR. KATZ: Because?

7 MR. JOHNSON: Because the Outreach 

8 Tracking System, the focus is structured on 

9 meetings, meetings for a particular site, not 

10 the website, not the emails, not other 

11 perceived venues of outreach. And if I start 

12 doing this, it is just going to be a 

13 haberdashery of different things in the 

14 tracking system that will be trackable, but it 

15 is not going to have the same meaning 

16 associated with what the overall Outreach 

17 Tracking System was meant to do.

18 MR. KATZ: So someone has already 

19 done some software development to produce your 

20 OTS, right? But you're saying that you can't 

21 like add another column that is for these 
177 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 other venues that would -- I mean, basically, 

2 that's all you're talking about.

3 Beyond the venue, I mean, it is 

4 the same issue. You have an action item and 

5 you want to make sure that there's followup, 

6 what the followup was on that.

7 MR. JOHNSON: I am not a 

8 programmer, so I don't know how the 

9 intricacies go in the back of this whole thing 

10 and how it is written and stuff like that. 

11 And it is easy to say, yes, you can add 

12 another column on there and just say other, 

13 and the other could be all the other 

14 associated items.

15 I would have to go back and talk 

16 with these folks and see what their resource 

17 loading is in order to develop or backfit this 

18 thing to do something like that, and I would 

19 have to also go back and talk with Stu to make 

20 sure that he's in conjunction, you know, on 

21 the same page.
178 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: Right. No, there's no 

2 question, obviously, this is a management 

3 decision on the part of DCAS, and it would 

4 probably take programming.

5 I mean, in the Procedures 

6 Subcommittee we have been doing a lot of this 

7 database development work, and it does take 

8 resources and all that. So that's clear.

9 I mean, my point earlier was that, 

10 if management at DCAS thinks it's important to 

11 manage these other sources of information 

12 where they impact, then if don't you have a 

13 system, a management system, you know it is 

14 not going to happen. I mean, if there's no 

15 tracking, you know you have no way of having 

16 accountability internally.

17 MR. CALHOUN: How about saying we 

18 will look at the feasibility?

19 MR. KATZ: Yes, I think that would 

20 be good.

21 MEMBER BEACH: That would be 
179 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 great.

2 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: How cold it is 

3 in this room.

4 MR. KATZ: I spoke to them, and it 

5 seems to fluctuate. Every time I get ready to 

6 get up and go speak to them again, it goes on. 

7 So it seems like they have poor control over 

8 this room. It's not in the room. But if 

9 everybody is constantly cold, I will go speak 

10 to them again.

11 We will probably break for lunch 

12 pretty soon, and we can stand out in the sun 

13 like lizards.

14 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Just give 

15 everybody some habaneros for lunch.

16 MEMBER MUNN: We're consistently 

17 cold.

18 MR. KATZ: I'll speak to them and 

19 ask them to raise it another couple of degrees 

20 when we break for lunch.

21 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, that would be 
180 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 good.

2 MEMBER BEACH: So four is in 

3 progress, not abeyance?

4 MR. KATZ: So that sounds like an 

5 in progress.

6 MEMBER BEACH: In progress.

7 MR. KATZ: And DCAS is going to 

8 look into the feasibility --

9 MEMBER BEACH: Of adding another 

10 column or --

11 MR. JOHNSON: The feasibility 

12 of --

13 MR. CALHOUN: The feasibility of 

14 including other venues.

15 MEMBER BEACH: Okay.

16 MR. KATZ: In the tracking system.

17 MR. JOHNSON: Tracking other --

18 MR. KATZ: Other sources.

19 MEMBER BEACH: That might take 

20 care of some of Finding 1 also.

21 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Okay. It's 
181 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 12:20.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: We think we 

3 can get through 5.

4 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Oh, good.

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Finding 5 

6 is, the procedure does not prescribe a process 

7 for ensuring that worker feedback is 

8 accurately and completely documented.

9 Basically, the procedure contains 

10 no requirements for providing meeting minutes 

11 to participants for review or for the 

12 subsequent integration of those comments 

13 received by workers.

14 And then, the other part of this 

15 was a concern over the fact that there was no 

16 requirement to archive the worker outreach 

17 meeting recordings or to inform participants 

18 upfront that the recordings would not be made 

19 accessible to them.

20 MR. JOHNSON: Well, let's go 

21 backwards and then forward.
182 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 The expectation is not to keep the 

2 recording. And also, at the beginning, it is 

3 discussed that the recording is being taken as 

4 a tool in order to support the development of 

5 the minutes, and that the recording will not 

6 be kept. So, at that point in time, it is 

7 clear that they are not going to look at the 

8 recording and it is not going to be available.

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I guess 

10 there's some verbiage, you know, in small 

11 writing, and I don't know if this is stated in 

12 the meeting, that it states that the recording 

13 is not available through the Freedom of 

14 Information Act to workers?

15 MR. JOHNSON: I don't know if it 

16 goes that far.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, it's 

18 in the small print in the procedures.

19 MR. JOHNSON: I don't think so.

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And one 

21 resolution of that process is to make that 
183 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 statement upfront.

2 MR. JOHNSON: It says, this 

3 meeting is being recorded. The purpose of the 

4 recording is to help prepare the accurate 

5 meeting minutes. Thus, the recording is a 

6 tool and will be destroyed once the minutes of 

7 this meeting have been finalized. That's what 

8 it says.

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. 

10 Below that, I think it says something about --

11 MR. JOHNSON: It asks if anyone 

12 objects to this recording.

13 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I think 

14 it's on the next page.

15 MEMBER BEACH: J.J., what page are 

16 you on?

17 MR. JOHNSON: Fifteen.

18 MEMBER BEACH: Thank you.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: It says 

20 something to the effect of that these 

21 recordings are not available under the Freedom 
184 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 of Information Act?

2 MR. CALHOUN: Yes.

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And I guess 

4 part of the reason --

5 MR. CALHOUN: If someone requests 

6 a copy of the recording, the OST Team 

7 Facilitator and OST staff representative will 

8 explain that copies are not available for 

9 public distribution.

10 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. And 

11 I guess part of this is, if that statement 

12 were made upfront and in the meeting --

13 MR. CALHOUN: Oh, during the part 

14 that says that it is going to be destroyed, 

15 right after that?

16 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes.

17 MR. CALHOUN: That doesn't seem 

18 like a big deal, yes.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: So, that is 

20 part of informing them upfront that, hey, this 

21 isn't accessible to you.
185 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. What were the 

2 other issues?

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, you 

4 talked about your position on archiving the 

5 recordings. And the other one was that PR-12 

6 doesn't contain a requirement for providing 

7 meeting minutes to the participants for review 

8 or for subsequent integration of comments 

9 received.

10 MR. JOHNSON: We have just been 

11 hashing that around right now, previous to 

12 this. It does not.

13 In a townhall meeting, that is 

14 pretty difficult.

15 MR. CALHOUN: Aren't they posted 

16 on the web after six months?

17 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, they're posted 

18 on the web.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Can I give 

20 you kind of an example, a real quick example? 

21 We sat in on a meeting for Simonds Saw with 
186 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 NIOSH.

2 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Was that just 

3 recently?

4 (Telephonic interference.)

5 MR. KATZ: Wait one second.

6 Excuse me. It's not such a 

7 problem for us in the room, but for other 

8 people on the line, someone on the line does 

9 not have their phone muted, and other folks 

10 are having to listen to their conversation.

11 So, could you please mute your 

12 phone, *6, if you don't have a mute button? 

13 Press *6, and that will mute your phone. 

14 Thank you.

15 (Telephonic interference.)

16 Hello. Excuse me. Whoever is 

17 speaking right now on this telephone line, you 

18 shouldn't be speaking. Would you please mute 

19 your phone? Use *6, if you don't have a mute 

20 button.

21 Thank you.
187 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Sorry, Kathy. Go on.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. So, 

3 the NIOSH team sat in on this meeting, and I 

4 don't know if it was -- it was to gather 

5 information for the preparation of the Simonds 

6 Saw Evaluation Report, and we also sat in on 

7 that meeting. We prepared our own meeting 

8 minutes.

9 Now our process was to send those 

10 meeting minutes out to everyone at the meeting 

11 who we had recorded had made a comment for 

12 their reading, and we did so. And we received 

13 comments back and integrated that information 

14 into those notes that we had taken.

15 What I am talking about here is 

16 the process for doing that and how that is not 

17 really defined in the procedure.

18 MEMBER BEACH: Well, it was part 

19 of the 97 procedure.

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: It was part 

21 of the 97.
188 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER BEACH: Was there a 

2 rationale for dropping that out of 12?

3 MR. McDOUGALL: I don't recall it 

4 being -- to send the minutes out to everybody 

5 in the meeting?

6 MEMBER BEACH: No, not to 

7 everybody. It was to the host.

8 MR. McDOUGALL: Right. That's 

9 what we do now.

10 MEMBER BEACH: Oh, you still do 

11 that, then?

12 MR. McDOUGALL: Yes.

13 MEMBER BEACH: Okay.

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, it 

15 may be you do it, but it is not in the 

16 procedure.

17 MEMBER BEACH: I guess that is 

18 what my question is; why was it dropped from 

19 the procedure, if that is something that you 

20 do?

21 MS. ELLIOTT: We certainly have 
189 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 done it.

2 MR. JOHNSON: We do that.

3 DR. MAKHIJANI: Maybe it was an 

4 oversight and you could just fix it. You're 

5 doing it anyway.

6 MR. CALHOUN: Yes, we're doing it. 

7 Just add it in there, but --

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: We probably 

9 wouldn't know that you do that by reading the 

10 procedure, and how those comments are 

11 resolved.

12 MR. JOHNSON: Well, the comments 

13 would be resolved based just by the fact that 

14 they do a chop on the minutes, and then we 

15 accept them. And typically, we will send them 

16 out, and they will say, "We don't have any 

17 comments" or the time period has expired for 

18 their comment, and we move forward with them.

19 DR. MAKHIJANI: That's the point 

20 at which I have trouble, is the time period 

21 has expired, plus the destruction of the 
190 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 tapes.

2 In my book, just from the point of 

3 view of somebody who uses information given by 

4 interviews, the combination of that is 

5 unhappy, just from an accuracy verification 

6 point of view. So, if I had interviewed 

7 somebody and taped it, thinking I'm going to

8 make an interview record summary of what was 

9 said, and not send the interview back to the 

10 person, because I had a tape, and if that 

11 person had any question as to whether I made 

12 an accurate interpretation, I can always say, 

13 okay, here's the tape. Here's what you said.

14 And it happens all the time, you 

15 know. We see questions about this kind of 

16 thing in the public arena a lot. What was 

17 said? Do you have a tape? Give them the 

18 tape. You're accurate. You're right. You're 

19 wrong, or sometimes the tape is not clear. 

20 Okay.

21 But, if you send the minutes, you 
191 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 don't hear, a time period elapses, you don't 

2 know whether the person agrees. The people 

3 who have made comments that you have actually 

4 summarized -- and we all kind of -- you know, 

5 it is very rare to send an interview back that 

6 has any complexity where you get it back 

7 saying, you did a perfect job. I have no 

8 changes. At least, I haven't been that 

9 perfect.

10 And generally, you get back 

11 substantive changes that are more than typos 

12 and spelling mistakes, and so on; at least I 

13 do. That has been our experience with our 

14 interviews also. Also, people don't always 

15 think of everything they want to say. They 

16 don't say it in the way they would have said 

17 it, if they had some time to think about it.

18 But when you couple, your time's 

19 up with the destruction of the tapes, quite 

20 apart from whatever your other rationale might 

21 be, from the point of view of the accuracy of 
192 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 verifying of whether you got it right or not, 

2 I think it is a problem. You can't have both.

3 MR. McDOUGALL: Well, Arjun, first 

4 of all, we have, I think, pretty good 

5 transparency because everybody out there, 

6 everybody who was in the meeting, everybody 

7 who is interested in the meeting can go on and 

8 read the minutes. And that's kind of a 

9 backup.

10 And I don't recall, with the 

11 possible exception of one time where somebody 

12 said something before we started the meeting, 

13 I don't recall that anybody has ever 

14 questioned the accuracy of the minutes.

15 Now the other side of that is 

16 that, unlike your experience, I think our 

17 experience is that, if we waited for 

18 affirmative feedback, even to say, I have no 

19 comments, from everybody in the meeting, we 

20 would never have any minutes posted.

21 MEMBER BEACH: But you weren't 
193 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 saying everybody in the meeting? You're only 

2 sending them to the host. So maybe one 

3 particular person?

4 MR. McDOUGALL: If we insisted on 

5 getting affirmative feedback from the host, we 

6 would have a lot less meetings, a lot less 

7 minutes posted.

8 Generally, if people don't 

9 disagree with you, I think if people don't 

10 disagree with you very strongly, they don't 

11 tell you, I don't disagree with you.

12 So, we give people the opportunity 

13 to say, hey, you got it wrong. Okay? 

14 Actually, we give them the opportunity just to 

15 say, hey, you got it wrong at least twice: 

16 once when we formally send the minutes to 

17 them, and then, forever after, when it is 

18 posted online. And we actually go out and we 

19 teach stakeholders to use the NIOSH website to 

20 look at what's posted for their own site.

21 And through this all, nobody ever 
194 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 comes -- I don't recall one person one time, 

2 in something that happened before a meeting 

3 started, other than that, I don't recall 

4 anybody who has ever questioned the accuracy 

5 of the minutes.

6 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, sounds good.

7 DR. MAKHIJANI: The last actually 

8 alleviates the concern a great deal. I have 

9 integrated that piece of it in my thinking, I 

10 have to say, because you have to post the 

11 minutes and everybody can go and see that was 

12 there at the meeting. And then, you are 

13 telling them they are going to be posted. So, 

14 actually, that alleviates a great deal of my 

15 concern.

16 MS. ELLIOTT: In all the record 

17 files for over 100 meetings, there was one 

18 document, and it's posted on the OTS -- I 

19 can't recall right now for what site -- but 

20 there is one document that is a response from 

21 a union official that they had a difference 
195 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 with the minutes one time. We made it public, 

2 not public, but we put it into the OTS to make 

3 sure that that part was transparent, that they 

4 did have an objection. That was before my 

5 time, but I made sure that document was 

6 included.

7 DR. MAKHIJANI: As I said, I have 

8 not -- in a way, I kind of spoke without 

9 putting all the pieces together in my head. 

10 The fact that you actually -- like I don't 

11 normally pull from my interviews. I just use 

12 them and refer to them or I will attach them 

13 to whatever I'm publishing.

14 Because you post everything, yes, 

15 then the destruction of the tapes is a lesser 

16 issue.

17 MS. ELLIOTT: There are times when 

18 discussions are summarized and not 

19 transcripted because of discretionary issues, 

20 but, still, we try to accurately portray the 

21 content of the discussion.
196 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. CALHOUN: One reason we don't 

2 tape things is because all kinds of personal 

3 things get said and then you don't know what 

4 to do with that, and you can't actually 

5 circulate that in public. So we try to make a 

6 different kind of record that is as close to a 

7 transcript as possible without getting it all.

8 MEMBER BEACH: Correct. So, it 

9 sounds like just noting what you are doing in 

10 the procedure might solve that.

11 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, at least my 

12 concern, I have to say is much alleviated, 

13 yes, absolutely.

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: There's 

15 really no process for discussing the --

16 MR. CALHOUN: I mean, if we do it, 

17 is it a big deal to put it in there, J.J.?

18 MR. JOHNSON: No.

19 MR. CALHOUN: Yes, if we do it, we 

20 might as well take credit for it.

21 (Laughter.)
197 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 DR. MAKHIJANI: Thank you.

2 MR. KATZ: Is there more to that 

3 finding? Are we done?

4 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes.

5 MR. KATZ: So, is that one that 

6 the Work Group wants to close? Or do you want 

7 to wait and see that they have put the 

8 sentence in their procedure?

9 MEMBER MUNN: In abeyance.

10 MR. KATZ: In abeyance, I mean. 

11 Right.

12 MEMBER BEACH: In abeyance.

13 MR. KATZ: Okay, five is in 

14 abeyance.

15 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: With that, are 

16 we ready to break for lunch?

17 MR. KATZ: Sounds good.

18 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

19 MR. KATZ: What time should we be 

20 back? An hour?

21 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.
198 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: Okay, it's 12:35 by my 

2 watch, If that's what other people have, then 

3 1:35.

4 Thank you, everyone on the line, 

5 for hanging in, and we'll be back at 1:30, 

6 1:35.

7 (Whereupon, the above entitled 

8 matter went off the record at 12:36 p.m. and 

9 resumed at 1:40 p.m.)

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 
199 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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

2 (1:40 p.m.)

3 MR. KATZ: Okay. So, this is the 

4 Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, 

5 the Worker Outreach Work Group.

6 We are reconvening, having 

7 finished lunch here, and I think we have 

8 everyone. We're missing Phil, but I'm sure he 

9 will come in. I think we could get rolling, 

10 yes?

11 Okay, Mike?

12 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Okay. I guess 

13 the first thing, as far as scheduling for the 

14 afternoon, the first thing we will do is get 

15 back into the matrix and start with the 

16 observations, and we will get as far as we can 

17 on that.

18 At 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time, we are 

19 going to go to the phones and open it up for 

20 public comment and worker comments. If 

21 there's any, we will welcome those comments at 
200 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that time.

2 And then, if we have any time 

3 after that, we will go back to the agenda and 

4 plan on trying to wrap up about 3:30.

5 So, get back to the observations, 

6 SC&A?

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. I 

8 wanted to kind of go over both Observation 1 

9 and Observation 2 at the same time because 

10 they are very closely linked.

11 Observation 1 is, the procedure 

12 does not address the possibility that 

13 sensitive or classified information could be 

14 shared at a worker outreach meeting.

15 And Observation 2 is, the 

16 procedure does not provide an opportunity for 

17 workers to discuss potentially classified 

18 information. Particularly at NNSA sites, 

19 workers may be restricted from openly 

20 discussing site-specific information due to 

21 security concerns.
201 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 For Observation 1, at a minimum, 

2 we felt that the procedure should alert worker 

3 outreach staff to submit recordings, minutes 

4 and meeting notes for classification review if 

5 they have any doubt about classification 

6 status of information shared at an outreach 

7 meeting. I think, from earlier discussion, 

8 that may be happening, but there's no 

9 requirement to do so in the procedure.

10 For the second observation, we had 

11 two concerns. Worker outreach meetings at 

12 NNSA sites can solicit classified information, 

13 even if you don't want it to. A cautionary 

14 statement should be made upfront that reminds 

15 individuals to be cautious about the 

16 information they are sharing. In other words, 

17 notification that it's an unclassified meeting 

18 and they should not be sharing classified 

19 information in that meeting.

20 And for those who wish to share 

21 classified information, there wasn't a process 
202 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 described for them to do so in the procedure. 

2 A lot of times, they have critical 

3 information that can influence technical work 

4 documents. So, there should be an opportunity 

5 provided to them or a statement on how you are 

6 going to provide that opportunity to them, so 

7 that they can, if they feel that there's 

8 classified information they need to share, so 

9 that they can go ahead and share that in some 

10 capacity through the process.

11 MR. JOHNSON: Well, my response is 

12 that I have got an action here that says, 

13 provide additional guidance in the procedures 

14 to address discussion of sensitive or 

15 classified information prior to the beginning 

16 of the meeting.

17 Additionally, we have procedures 

18 that deal with the interface of personnel that 

19 may give sensitive or classified information, 

20 and that's under OCAS-PR-10, Data Access and 

21 Interview Process -- or Procedures. That will 
203 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 be used as a reference in here.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. So, 

3 you're saying that PR-10 is the mechanism by 

4 which you are going to offer that opportunity 

5 for people to share classified information, 

6 should they need to?

7 MR. JOHNSON: It is the tool, yes.

8 MR. CALHOUN: It might not be a 

9 bad idea to mention it in this document, but 

10 that is really more how we deal with it once 

11 we've got it. But as far as I know, what you 

12 are getting at, actually offering it to them, 

13 we generally shy away a little bit from 

14 saying, hey, if you want to have a classified 

15 interview, let's do it, because a lot of 

16 people will just start doing it.

17 I think that it should be in 

18 there, but we need to be careful about that. 

19 We do the same thing with CATIs, you know. I 

20 think that saying, hey, please don't give out 

21 any classified information because it's an 
204 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 unclassified interview. If you feel you have 

2 information that is classified that you need 

3 to talk to us about, we can arrange that, or 

4 something like that.

5 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Yes, that's a 

6 definite necessity.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. One 

8 site where this is of particular concern would 

9 be, say, Pantex. You can get yourself into a 

10 lot of trouble real quickly at that site.

11 MR. CALHOUN: Yes.

12 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: From our 

13 site expert interviews, there's a lot of 

14 valuable information that comes out of those 

15 classified interviews.

16 Now I thought I heard Vern say 

17 earlier that the worker outreach meeting, it 

18 is submitted to DOE for classification review.

19 MR. McDOUGALL: They all do, yes.

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: So, in 

21 referencing PR-10 and PR-11, in essence, you 
205 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 are dealing with that in the procedure itself.

2 MR. CALHOUN: Yes, and then, 

3 obviously, if we had the interview, if it was 

4 a planned interview that we had done, and 

5 knowing that we would get or perceiving that 

6 we get classified information, that would get 

7 done before we even left the site. You know 

8 how that is done.

9 So, yes, we couldn't leave with 

10 that. You know what? They wouldn't let us 

11 record it anyway.

12 MR. JOHNSON: Yes, and PR-11 was 

13 approved 4/22/2009, and our procedure was 

14 approved a little bit later, so about 

15 parallel. So both of those will be referenced 

16 in there.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay.

18 MEMBER BEACH: In abeyance?

19 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: In abeyance.

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. 

21 Observation 3 is, there are no provisions for 
206 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 soliciting comments from workers who are 

2 unable to physically attend worker outreach 

3 meetings.

4 And a method for individuals who 

5 cannot attend worker outreach meetings is not 

6 provided or discussed in the procedure. But 

7 the individuals can provide comments in 

8 writing via a letter or via the website or the 

9 docket. However, in our early discussion, 

10 these venues are not given the same 

11 consideration as far as development of action 

12 items and follow-through as worker outreach 

13 comments. There is no formal evaluation 

14 tracking or resolution procedures for comments 

15 provided in this way.

16 So, you've got somebody who can't 

17 come to a meeting. They have these other 

18 options, but there's no evaluation of those 

19 comments in the same manner as the worker 

20 outreach meeting minutes.

21 MR. CALHOUN: You know, that may 
207 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 not be procedure-wise, but I think we get that 

2 done. I don't know. J.J. may know more about 

3 it than I do, but I don't know if I'll say 

4 often, but it happens when we get input for 

5 questions electronically, and Chris Ellison 

6 ends up dealing with it. She will send them 

7 to one of us, so that she can respond to the 

8 person who sent the question.

9 Maybe we are doing that and it is 

10 just not specified in here. But I don't know 

11 if all of them go through that way. I know 

12 docket things will go through that.

13 MR. JOHNSON: The docket things go 

14 that way, but that's one of those other 

15 outreach venues.

16 MEMBER MUNN: I would imagine most 

17 of those actually get a one-on-one response.

18 MR. CALHOUN: I think they do.

19 MEMBER MUNN: At least an 

20 acknowledgment of receipt, if not a --

21 MR. CALHOUN: But I just don't 
208 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 want to say for sure because I'm not positive, 

2 but I think they do.

3 MEMBER MUNN: I can't imagine they 

4 are not being responded to.

5 MR. CALHOUN: But we will check 

6 that.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, one 

8 of the suggestions we had was to have a call9 in number.

10 MR. JOHNSON: Have a what?

11 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Have a 

12 call-in number where people could call in.

13 MR. McDOUGALL: What kind of 

14 meetings are you trying to --

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: These would 

16 be more --

17 MR. JOHNSON: We've got a call-in 

18 number, don't we?

19 MR. CALHOUN: I don't know. On 

20 some of them we do. I don't know if we do on 

21 that one.
209 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: This 

2 wouldn't be you're invited to meetings, you 

3 know, when you're inviting someone. This will 

4 be more open worker outreach information5 gathering meetings.

6 MS. ELLIOTT: We have attempted 

7 that.

8 MR. McDOUGALL: For example, 

9 information-gathering meetings are usually 

10 relatively small meetings, almost always under 

11 20 people, frequently under 10 or 12. And it 

12 is kind of an opportunistic kind of thing. If 

13 there are 10 people in Cincinnati who can give 

14 us information on GE Evendale, for example --

15 and I think this actually happened -- and one 

16 or two were in Florida, well, you kind of make 

17 a judgment call that what the one or two are 

18 going to add isn't going to be so critical. 

19 Unless you have some knowledge that they have 

20 something special, they are pretty much like 

21 the other folks.
210 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 You kind of make a judgment call 

2 that you are not going to go to extraordinary 

3 measures to get the input from other people, 

4 if you can get comparable quality of input 

5 more conveniently.

6 Now, having said that, in order to 

7 make it convenient, we make it as convenient 

8 as we can. We try to hold meetings in one9 story buildings and in locations that are 

10 convenient that people know about, to try to 

11 facilitate -- to try to remove as many 

12 barriers as possible. But, again, if you have 

13 got 10 in Ohio and one in Florida, you don't 

14 really need the one in Florida, unless they 

15 know something special.

16 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: What do you 

17 do in the case where they do know critical 

18 information?

19 MR. McDOUGALL: Well, actually, I 

20 imagine DCAS would conduct an one-on-one 

21 interview the way they frequently do, I guess 
211 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 with --

2 MR. JOHNSON: Like we recently did 

3 with Simonds Saw. The folks that were in the 

4 area that came to the meeting, their comments 

5 and discussions were noted. And those 

6 individuals that were in the system, in NOCTS, 

7 they were contacted by ORAU and personally

8 interviewed with the questions that were 

9 provided to the people that went to the 

10 initial meeting.

11 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And this is 

12 some of our concern about these -- this two13 track system we use. One set of comments is 

14 being tracked in OTS because it is designated 

15 as a worker outreach, but in these individual 

16 interviews with these couple of people, they 

17 are not being tracked. The comments for those 

18 are not being tracked.

19 MR. JOHNSON: They may not be 

20 tracked in OTS, but they are tracked in the 

21 SRDB through the information that is provided 
212 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 for those respective sites.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: What 

3 happens is you get a documented communication. 

4 In that documented communication, there's 

5 really no procedure for how to disposition 

6 those comments provided in that documented 

7 communication.

8 MR. JOHNSON: Well, in this case, 

9 all the comments went to the OCAS HP for 

10 review. And in the interview, he would take 

11 all those comments into consideration. So, 

12 the ones that were at the meeting, he was at 

13 the meeting, along with the ones that were 

14 provided through phone conversations. So, 

15 they didn't go on their two separate ways. 

16 They were reviewed and consolidated, reviewed 

17 by the OCAS HP.

18 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And for 

19 those documented communications, the items

20 that were in the SRBD, were action items 

21 tracked on that?
213 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. JOHNSON: I have no idea 

2 because they were part of an SEC.

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, how 

4 hard would it be to provide a call-in number 

5 for these people?

6 MR. JOHNSON: How hard would it be 

7 to what?

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: To provide 

9 a call-in number for people who can't get 

10 there?

11 MR. JOHNSON: I don't know. I 

12 would have to check into that.

13 MS. ELLIOTT: A lot of it depends 

14 upon the facility, whether it's available. We 

15 have gone to certain places and asked if that 

16 was possible, and until you get the facility 

17 to see what they have, there really isn't a 

18 way to tell. And even if they say, yes, we 

19 have a speaker phone system, you know, it may 

20 not be adequate to be heard in a large room. 

21 It probably won't be a Polycom.
214 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. JOHNSON: Oh, you mean a call 

2 to the meeting itself?

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes.

4 MR. JOHNSON: I think we tried 

5 that at Simonds Saw and the service wasn't 

6 available or something.

7 MS. ELLIOTT: We have asked in

8 several different venues, and it either is not 

9 available or what they do have is not 

10 adequate. As in the case for Blockson, 

11 somebody wanted to have a call-in for the 

12 Blockson meetings. It was in their city hall 

13 in a big, public, courtroom-type situation, 

14 and there was just no way. It would not have 

15 been even -- whoever was on the phone could 

16 not have heard most of what went on.

17 But we have made attempts for 

18 things like this, and you can only do what's 

19 available.

20 MR. McDOUGALL: But, again, if you 

21 are gathering information, it isn't really 
215 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that important to go to extraordinary measures 

2 to add one more person. If you can get the 

3 information you need from a representative 

4 group of people, if one or two are absent, 

5 they're absent.

6 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, I 

7 guess the main concern here is that you do 

8 have other avenues, but the comments provided 

9 to those other avenues are not being tracked 

10 in the same manner as the worker outreach 

11 meeting is -- the actions.

12 MS. ELLIOTT: I believe in one 

13 situation where we were -- this is not quite 

14 the same as what you're talking about -- but 

15 there was an individual who couldn't come to a 

16 meeting where we had a group of retirees and 

17 former workers that came together. The 

18 minutes were sent, actually, along to 

19 everybody else, to him as well, so he could 

20 comment. He was too ill to actually leave his 

21 home, but he had the opportunity to see what 
216 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 was going on at the meeting, so he could add 

2 anything -- something else, if he had 

3 something pertinent to add. And we do try to 

4 take measures to do that.

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And as long 

6 as the comments that are being provided in 

7 that way are being treated in the same manner 

8 as those being captured in the meeting 

9 minutes, then there is a mechanism for them to 

10 provide comments if they can't be there. But 

11 I don't see the process by which these other 

12 venues, the websites, the docket, providing 

13 letters -- I don't see the mechanism for 

14 tracking those comments and developing action 

15 items will ultimately lead to --

16 MS. ELLIOTT: I can cite a 

17 specific instance where that is in OTS and you 

18 can take a look at it and see that we have 

19 made attempts to do that, as well. There was 

20 a Pinellas meeting in November of 2005, and we 

21 had several people who could not come to the 
217 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 meeting that heard about it and provided 

2 letters through the docket and also through 

3 mail, also, some emails through the Docket 

4 Office, and they were forwarded on to Bill 

5 Murray, who at the time was in charge of the 

6 worker outreach. And Bill and the HP both 

7 looked at that, and they are in the OTS. I 

8 made sure to add those.

9 MEMBER MUNN: So that's the 

10 missing link, apparently, is there doesn't 

11 seem to be any word anywhere that says, 

12 comments received by mail, email, or other --

13 MS. ELLIOTT: I think I identified 

14 it in that manner when I put it in the OTS.

15 MEMBER MUNN: -- will be attached 

16 to the minutes or will be a portion of the 

17 minutes and will receive the same 

18 consideration. It sounds like a one-sentence 

19 fix, if we agree on where the one-sentence fix 

20 is going to be.

21 MR. KATZ: We discussed this 
218 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 before lunch. I mean, under Finding 4, J.J. 

2 said that they would look into the feasibility 

3 of adding to the tracking system for these 

4 other venues by which you receive information. 

5 So, that issue is in progress, and they will 

6 look into that.

7 MS. ELLIOTT: If they are provided 

8 to the team as part of the process of the 

9 meeting, I do make sure they go in there.

10 MR. KATZ: No, that's great. So 

11 you are already doing it, in part. So you are 

12 already somehow putting that in.

13 And I think the reason you can do 

14 it in that instance is because it is 

15 associated with a meeting. So that is already 

16 set up.

17 MS. ELLIOTT: Correct.

18 MR. KATZ: Whereas, these other 

19 venues, if they send in to the docket, for 

20 example, and it is somehow not connected with 

21 your meeting, it is not associated with your 
219 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 meeting, then it doesn't end up there. But 

2 that makes sense.

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: And I may 

4 be putting words into your mouth by saying 

5 that those are venues that a person who can't

6 physically get to a meeting can use to provide 

7 comments.

8 MR. JOHNSON: There are options 

9 that can be provided, and have been provided, 

10 to claimants to support their feedback.

11 MS. ELLIOTT: Even within the 

12 meeting, there is always something -- if 

13 there's a presentation, there is almost always 

14 a slide in that presentation that discusses, 

15 that notes that comments could be sent to the 

16 NIOSH Docket Office, and it gives the email 

17 address for that.

18 So, if there were to be something 

19 to the meeting, you know, we can't make them 

20 send an email, but at least they know that the 

21 option is there.
220 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: So we can look 

2 into putting a sentence somewhere just while 

3 you are doing this other stuff?

4 Perhaps we can mark 3 in progress?

5 MR. KATZ: Or actually, I mean I 

6 think that one is in abeyance then, because 

7 for that one it is not even a feasibility --

8 it is associated with a meeting we are talking 

9 about. As long as there is some instruction 

10 somewhere to do that, to put it in the 

11 tracking, it is already happening, is what 

12 Mary is telling us.

13 MS. ELLIOTT: I try to be pretty 

14 fastidious about that, if it's available.

15 MR. KATZ: Yes.

16 MS. ELLIOTT: It just took a while 

17 to --

18 MR. KATZ: So it's just addressed 

19 in --

20 MR. JOHNSON: Put a sentence in 

21 there.
221 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: Yes. So it seems like 

2 that is in abeyance.

3 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Okay. 

4 Observation 4?

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. 

6 Observation 4 is pretty simple. There is no 

7 requirement for disclosure of conflict of 

8 interest during the worker outreach meetings. 

9 So, in other words, particularly the person 

10 responsible for writing the document who 

11 happens to be at the meeting does not have to 

12 disclose conflict of interest.

13 So, for example, if you have 

14 someone who is holding an SEC focus group 

15 meeting, who is responsible for writing the 

16 Evaluation Report, they don't have to disclose 

17 conflicts of interest.

18 MR. JOHNSON: My understanding is 

19 that -- I don't know that we have people in 

20 these meetings that have a conflict. Am I 

21 wrong, Grady?
222 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. CALHOUN: I don't know if 

2 you're wrong or not, but, typically, what I 

3 have seen when we go through some of the other 

4 meetings, they just go around the room and 

5 just say it, you know.

6 As a matter of fact, I'm surprised 

7 we didn't say it today because usually it 

8 seems like we start out our Work Group 

9 meetings --

10 MR. KATZ: No, it's not site11 specific.

12 MR. CALHOUN: Oh, it's not. There 

13 you go, yes.

14 And say, I have no conflict at 

15 this site.

16 So I don't see any harm with that. 

17 It seems easy enough to do, yes.

18 MR. JOHNSON: Okay. I will add a 

19 sentence.

20 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Observation 5?

21 MR. KATZ: That, then, is in 
223 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 abeyance.

2 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. The 

4 Site Profile and Technical Basis Document 

5 development procedure are ORAUT-PROC-31, 

6 references ORAUT-PROC-97, which is the old 

7 worker outreach procedure. That procedure has 

8 been replaced by PR-12.

9 It is a little bit more 

10 complicated than just going in and doing a 

11 search and replace. What PROC-31 does is it 

12 used to interface and reference back to the 

13 old worker outreach procedure, PROC-97, and 

14 PROC-97 needs to reference the Site Profile 

15 development procedure. There was an 

16 interaction there between those two procedures 

17 that allowed for -- it provided direction for 

18 looking at the worker outreach comments and 

19 evaluating them and integrating those of 

20 substantial nature into the Site Profile.

21 So, partly the content would have 
224 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 to be updated, and partly you are still 

2 referencing the procedure that is no longer in 

3 existence in another procedure.

4 MR. JOHNSON: Well, that is why we 

5 have the Outreach Tracking System with 

6 tracking of issues set up the way it is. So 

7 that, when you have the OCAS HP interfacing 

8 with the Technical Basis Document owner at the 

9 meeting, they concur on what the action items, 

10 tracking items are. And that individual, 

11 then, on the OCAS ORAU side makes whatever 

12 changes they have to make based on their 

13 agreement. And then, when it is closed out, 

14 it goes through and indicates that either the 

15 Technical Basis Document was updated, no 

16 action was taken, or individuals were provided 

17 feedback.

18 So, the connection here between 97 

19 and 31 doesn't make a difference anymore.

20 MR. CALHOUN: It should be changed 

21 in the ORAU document ultimately, though, to 
225 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 make sure that we are not referencing a 

2 document that doesn't exist during the next 

3 time that they revise that.

4 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay.

5 MR. CALHOUN: And then we will 

6 have to make the appropriate fixes, too, you 

7 know. I don't know it off the top of my head. 

8 So, like I said, if it is not a simple just 

9 changing a reference, obviously, they will 

10 need to change that when they get around to 

11 revising that again. I don't know what the 

12 schedule is on that.

13 MEMBER MUNN: In abeyance.

14 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. It 

16 is my understanding -- and Wanda can help me 

17 here --

18 MEMBER MUNN: I'm not sure.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: -- yes, if 

20 this not the case, but it is my understanding 

21 from other members of SC&A that the findings 
226 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 from our review of ORAUT-PROC-97 were 

2 transferred from the Procedures Subcommittee 

3 Group over to the Worker Outreach Group.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, that was done. 

5 Maybe you have received, actually, an email 

6 from me. I don't think you have it.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: So there 

8 were a total of nine findings under that 

9 procedure, many of which were repeated in the 

10 OCAS-PR-0012 review. And I believe eight of 

11 those findings that were transferred are still 

12 open, and we kind of need to have some 

13 discussion on what you want to do with those 

14 findings, whether you want to close them out 

15 simultaneously with resolving the findings for 

16 OCAS-PR-0012 or whether you want to close the 

17 findings out for 97 and defer it to PR-12.

18 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I think what --

19 and Wanda can help me here, too -- the 

20 Procedures Subcommittee had in mind was, when 

21 they see findings that are more relevant to a 
227 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 specific group rather than the Procedures 

2 Subcommittee as a whole, they send just that 

3 finding to the group, and that's our 

4 objective, just to see that finding through to 

5 closure and then send a letter back to the 

6 Procedures Subcommittee telling them it's 

7 done.

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes, and 

9 part of the issue was, like I said, we tried 

10 to integrate some of the findings from 97 into 

11 PR-12. So there is a lot of redundancy.

12 MR. JOHNSON: Well, that is what 

13 made this review very difficult because they 

14 were integrated. If you just had gone and 

15 looked at PR-12 without 97, started with a 

16 clean slate, it would have been a lot cleaner.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Some of the 

18 issues were relevant -- well, the ones that we 

19 integrated into PR-12 were relevant, still 

20 relevant, to the review of PR-12.

21 MR. JOHNSON: No, I am not saying 
228 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that they weren't. I am just saying that, if 

2 you had just forgotten about Procedure 97 and 

3 just looked at PR-12 for its merits compared 

4 to what you saw in the rearview mirror on 

5 PR-97, and moved forward on that, it would 

6 have been a cleaner slate.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, don't 

8 misunderstand me, but there were a lot of good 

9 things about 97 that we were trying to bring 

10 out in our review that went away with PR-12.

11 MR. JOHNSON: Well, that could 

12 have been. You also have to look at change of 

13 command, that it is a situation where outreach 

14 didn't exist for six months, and OD decided to 

15 take action and move in a forward direction to 

16 start outreach again.

17 And so, from what WISPR was and 

18 what we have with something that we thought 

19 was reasonable, capable within the resources 

20 that we had, so that's why we have the product 

21 we have.
229 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, what 

2 is your preference? Do you want to go through 

3 these findings one at a time?

4 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Just however it 

5 is going to be easiest to explain and respond 

6 to.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Do you want 

8 to put a new status report based upon what we 

9 discussed with the other findings? I'm asking 

10 for guidance.

11 MEMBER MUNN: Currently, on the 

12 Procedures Subcommittee's tracking list, ORAU 

13 PROC-0097-1 and 0097-2 show that we are 

14 changing the status to reflect that the 

15 finding is addressed in PR-12, Observations 1 

16 and 2.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Right.

18 MEMBER MUNN: So, since that is 

19 the case, then if you are going to address 

20 these issues, then from the Subcommittee's 

21 point of view, they need to be addressed in 
230 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 PR-12, since I'm not sure how we want to make 

2 the two equitable, and perhaps we can't 

3 resolve it here. Perhaps some of us need to 

4 sit and identify the mechanics of precisely 

5 how we want to proceed with that.

6 But PR-12 is currently in a state 

7 of flux with respect to the Subcommittee's 

8 findings. So how we proceed is not going to, 

9 I think, affect much that is going on here, 

10 other than for us to come to the conclusion 

11 how you are going to deal with each of the two 

12 and who's got the action. I think that is 

13 really and truly what it boils down to.

14 I don't know what to tell you 

15 other than I will be glad to sit down offline 

16 with those of you who are intimately involved 

17 with this and talk about what we can do with 

18 PR-12.

19 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes, why don't 

20 we do that? Let's put these on hold until we 

21 can decide how to do it.
231 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

2 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: And just move on 

3 on the agenda to the next item there.

4 MEMBER MUNN: I think that would 

5 be the wisest thing to do right now because, 

6 otherwise, we are going to get caught up in 

7 who's on first with these.

8 MEMBER BEACH: Mike, before we 

9 move on to the next topic, can we try to see 

10 if we are working to the same version?

11 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

12 MEMBER BEACH: The latest one I 

13 could find was 12/3/09, but I am sure there 

14 was one after that, but I don't seem to be 

15 able to find it. So, maybe what I see, I've 

16 got some markups. So, if anybody can look and 

17 see what their latest copy of --

18 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: About which doc, 

19 though?

20 MEMBER BEACH: It's the Outreach 

21 Draft Implementation Plan, and we are looking 
232 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 at --

2 MR. KATZ: No, that would be the 

3 latest, I think.

4 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, I just wanted 

5 to make sure.

6 MR. KATZ: I didn't bring it with 

7 me this time: my version of it.

8 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: The one I am 

9 looking at is SC&A looked at -- Objective 3 

10 was sent by Joe on May 18th, 2010.

11 MEMBER BEACH: Okay. So that is a 

12 separate one then. I have that.

13 MR. KATZ: So I think what Mike is 

14 referring to is actually an Implementation 

15 Plan for Objective 3, right? Is that what you 

16 were referring to from May?

17 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: The Review Plan.

18 MR. KATZ: The Review Plan, but it 

19 is the implementing -- yes. And what Josie is 

20 talking about, I think, is the whole 

21 framework, right, Josie?
233 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

2 MR. KATZ: Yes. So that makes 

3 sense. So, Josie, I think your framework is 

4 the correct framework still.

5 MEMBER BEACH: Okay, but we are 

6 looking at the thing Joe sent?

7 MR. JOHNSON: But Joe transmitted 

8 something in May, right, that was a proposal 

9 for a path forward for reviewing Objective 3?

10 MEMBER BEACH: Okay.

11 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Do you have that 

12 document, Josie?

13 MEMBER BEACH: I do. I just have 

14 to find it again.

15 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I'll give that 

16 to you, Wanda.

17 MEMBER MUNN: Thank you. It was 

18 May you're looking for?

19 MR. KATZ: Yes, that sounds right.

20 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: It is dated May 

21 18th.
234 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER BEACH: Is it Review --

2 okay, I've got it, yes. Thank you.

3 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Shall I send it 

4 to you, Wanda?

5 MEMBER MUNN: I think I'll find 

6 it.

7 MR. KATZ: Kathy, do you have any 

8 printed copies of that?

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Just this 

10 one.

11 MR. KATZ: Okay.

12 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Do we need 

13 to make copies?

14 MR. KATZ: Well, that's what I was 

15 going to ask. If any people want me to make 

16 copies, I can run down there.

17 MEMBER MUNN: I think we are okay.

18 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, I think so.

20 That's where we are, right?

21 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.
235 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER MUNN: That's what our 

2 discussion is about, right?

3 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

4 So Joe has already left us. 

5 Kathy, Arjun, do you want to pick up the 

6 pieces here?

7 MR. KATZ: So, Arjun, we are 

8 talking about Objective 3, the Review Plan for 

9 Objective 3.

10 DR. MAKHIJANI: Oh, yes. Sorry.

11 Yes, I think earlier Kathy and I 

12 were kind of discussing that we might select a 

13 few of the recent examples. I mean Grady was 

14 talking about the changes that have occurred 

15 in these Evaluation Reports, worker gathering16 information meetings where you gather the 

17 information, and then it is referred to in the 

18 Evaluation Report, and there are SRD numbers.

19 So, a lot of the discussion at 

20 least that I have contributed would be useful 

21 for us to review are those minutes and to see 
236 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 how they were incorporated, and you know, 

2 maybe to talk to one or two of the 

3 interviewees and the document preparer who 

4 requested the meeting. Something like that I 

5 think might constitute an example of an 

6 evaluation.

7 I don't know. What do you think, 

8 Ted?

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Do you want 

10 me to read through the bullets that we have in 

11 here?

12 MR. KATZ: Yes, please do. Please 

13 do, Kathy.

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: We have 

15 proposed to do the following. Does everybody 

16 remember what the Objective 3 was or do I need 

17 to --

18 MR. KATZ: Go ahead and restate it 

19 to get everybody on track.

20 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Determine 

21 whether OCAS is giving thorough consideration 
237 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 to information received by workers through the 

2 worker outreach efforts, incorporating 

3 considerations of that material into its work 

4 products as appropriate and adequately 

5 communicating the impact of substantive 

6 comments to the workers.

7 Okay, that was the objective. And 

8 what we had proposed was to identify technical 

9 worker documents issued without the benefit of 

10 worker outreach meetings or any other form of 

11 having worker input.

12 Okay, that was one. So, what 

13 technical work documents were issued without a 

14 worker outreach meeting?

15 Identify technical worker 

16 documents issued within 90 days of the 

17 relevant worker outreach meeting for which no 

18 subsequent revisions of technical work

19 documents, such as Site Profiles, were issued 

20 within two years of receiving any substantive 

21 input from the outreach meeting. This would 
238 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 require that SC&A evaluate whether substantive 

2 comments were provided that deserve 

3 consideration.

4 So we have to get into review of 

5 the meeting minutes and comments provided at 

6 the worker outreach meetings.

7 Okay. Identify recurrent 

8 substantive worker comments related to 

9 specific sites from the inception of the 

10 worker outreach program. Evaluate how this 

11 information was incorporated into technical 

12 work documents and whether and how responses 

13 were handled with the commenters.

14 Next, identify worker input 

15 provided through other worker outreach venues, 

16 including the website docket, invited forums, 

17 dose reconstruction workshops, and formal 

18 letters submitted to NIOSH by workers, 

19 petitioners, and other interested parties. 

20 Evaluate how this data was incorporated into 

21 technical worker documents and whether and how 
239 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 responses were provided to the commenters.

2 And finally, identify substantive 

3 site expert input collected as a part of Site 

4 Profile and/or SEC evaluations. Evaluate how 

5 this information was documented and 

6 incorporated into technical work documents.

7 So, basically, taking the 

8 different venues of worker outreach, 

9 considering say, a sampling of the comments 

10 provided, and following it through on how it 

11 was incorporated into technical work documents 

12 and, also, how responses were being provided 

13 to the commenter that provided those 

14 substantive comments.

15 MEMBER MUNN: I now recall when I 

16 first read this communication that my single 

17 immediate reaction was this document is 

18 proposing a level of effort which is mind19 boggling to consider. There are certainly 

20 benefits to be considered in those five 

21 bullets, but if this body determines to do 
240 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 this, it seems imperative that we place 

2 limitations on the scope of this work at the 

3 outset. This could really take years to 

4 complete if it were done in an extensive 

5 manner.

6 It might behoove us to consider 

7 the possibility of evaluating these points 

8 individually and do a cost-benefit analysis in 

9 terms of what we achieve if we complete some 

10 or all of these.

11 These are certainly wonderful 

12 goals. I am not at all sure whether the 

13 program in its broadest sense would receive an 

14 adequate benefit for the expenditure of 

15 effort. And I am not at all sure whether that 

16 has even been considered or whether this was 

17 just these are things we could do or whether 

18 the magnitude of effort has even been thrown 

19 into the mix yet.

20 As best I can tell when I read 

21 this, it was my thought that these are 
241 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 excellent goals, but I don't know what the 

2 reaction of others was.

3 DR. MAURO: Wanda, would you mind? 

4 I would like to take a shot at that because I 

5 am tracking our budget and report it every 

6 month.

7 And you are correct, if we were to 

8 take on a program like this, it would 

9 definitely stress my ability to contain our 

10 budget within the limits we have for 

11 ourselves.

12 One suggestion might be, if it is 

13 desired by the Work Group to do something like 

14 this, it might be like the dose 

15 reconstructions. You know, the Board picks 30 

16 each year for us to look at, based on whatever 

17 criteria that they have developed, which keeps 

18 the cost contained and still accomplishes 

19 quite a bit, because we get a nice cross20 section of different cases and we report back. 

21 It accomplishes its intent.
242 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Perhaps one or two, one Site 

2 Profile could be selected, perhaps a recent 

3 one, that might have been done at a time that 

4 was at the same time that PROC-12 has been in 

5 place, and just look at one.

6 Or, alternatively, this is 

7 something that NIOSH could do and report back 

8 to the Board. Then, of course, the Board, 

9 with our help, as you see fit, could review 

10 NIOSH's report on that matter.

11 I mean, so there are ways. I 

12 certainly would agree 100 percent that, to try 

13 to do this on many Site Profiles or ERs, the 

14 cost would be burdensome. But I don't think 

15 it is necessary that a lot of them be looked 

16 at this way.

17 It is sort of like the Site 

18 Profiles, I'm sorry, the dose reconstructions. 

19 A reasonable sample would give insight. 

20 Especially if it is picked randomly or picked 

21 under certain criteria, it might accomplish 
243 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 what you are trying to accomplish.

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I think it 

3 was always our intent to do a sample. A 

4 sampling, because of the different venues, may 

5 be easier if we pick a site or a couple of 

6 sites.

7 MEMBER BEACH: I think I agree 

8 with what Wanda said completely. I think 

9 maybe a site, to see what the product is going 

10 to look like, what the value is. I hate to go 

11 in and spend money to decide how much money we 

12 are going to spend. Maybe just pick a site, 

13 one that we agree that's --

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, keep 

15 in mind, the first bullet on there, it is 

16 really not relevant to just one site. It has 

17 to do with identifying sites where there was 

18 no worker outreach meeting, but there is a 

19 Site Profile.

20 MEMBER BEACH: True.

21 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: So some of 
244 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 these are broader. There's not a lot of time 

2 commitment to it.

3 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, that one, it 

4 seems like we could do that fairly quickly, 

5 bullet No. 1. It's the Identify technical 

6 worker document. Yes, that would be 

7 interesting.

8 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Well, I think 

9 that sounds good. I think bullet No. 1 is 

10 doable. I think it would give us an overall 

11 picture, a good picture. But, then, we would 

12 come up with each site that meets all the 

13 criteria of the bullets that would be a good 

14 candidate to look into.

15 MEMBER BEACH: I guess, from that 

16 very first bullet, what if you did that first 

17 bullet, identified the sites where there was 

18 worker input and where there wasn't, and then 

19 maybe pick a site to do that had worker input 

20 and one that didn't have worker input? I 

21 mean, is that of value?
245 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I don't 

2 know how we would gauge the effectiveness of 

3 something that didn't have worker input.

4 MEMBER BEACH: Well, I guess we 

5 wouldn't be able to. I was thinking of the 

6 other side of it.

7 MR. CALHOUN: Is there any way to 

8 keep -- it seems like this is going to be a 

9 never-ending task. Is there any way to 

10 subtract that from this Work Group meeting, 

11 you know, the ongoing review, so that you can 

12 close out the issues in this Work Group 

13 meeting?

14 I mean we have got, with the dose 

15 reconstruction evaluation, that goes on and on 

16 and on. It will never stop. It seems like it 

17 might be smart to divorce the on-and-on review 

18 of worker input and taking some, like John 

19 suggested, if that is the way you decide to 

20 go, divorce that from this Work Group meeting. 

21 We would start a different task or something, 
246 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 so that this Work Group meeting can actually 

2 end at some point.

3 MR. KATZ: Well, I mean I think it 

4 makes sense, at this point at least, to pilot 

5 it here because I don't know really what other 

6 work group would take on sort of oversight of 

7 this.

8 MR. CALHOUN: Well, we first 

9 sample, but John suggested an ongoing --

10 MR. KATZ: But let's just see what 

11 comes one step at a time, is what I would 

12 suggest.

13 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: And that is also 

14 going to be a decision that the Board makes, 

15 if they want to separate this out.

16 MEMBER BEACH: Well, and this is 

17 part of our mission. This is what we created 

18 for this work group.

19 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Right.

20 MR. KATZ: This certainly does fit 

21 under this work group's authority.
247 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: The issues and 

2 things like this on this matrix, you know, we 

3 can have another meeting to get these closed 

4 out. But there's going to be ongoing things 

5 to do with worker outlook for the foreseeable 

6 future, I think.

7 DR. MAURO: I had another idea 

8 that goes along with this. It just dawned on 

9 me.

10 For example, let's say right now 

11 there are a couple of sites that are really 

12 undergoing very, very detailed investigation 

13 or have undergone very detailed investigation. 

14 Certainly, Savannah River is undergoing a lot 

15 of investigation, Mound, and others like 

16 Nevada Test Site, this has been done.

17 What I'm getting at is there are 

18 certain Site Profiles and Evaluation Reports 

19 where SC&A is intimately familiar with them. 

20 Unfortunately, many of them are pretty old. 

21 But if there is one or two that we have 
248 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 basically reviewed or are close to completing 

2 our review, then it just simply becomes a 

3 matter of let's go into the tracking system, 

4 and my guess is at a relatively quick 

5 turnaround, we could say the degree to which 

6 the collection of information that is in the 

7 tracking system for that particular facility, 

8 as long as the timing is right, that is, that 

9 the information came in and then the Site 

10 Profile, or whatever, came out, you know, it 

11 was some time period after.

12 We could probably, my guess is --

13 I mean this sounds a little optimistic, but 

14 the people who are doing the work on the 

15 different sections could quickly read the 

16 tracking system data, and right off the bat 

17 say the degree to which any particular issue 

18 raised or question or piece of information has 

19 been reflected in that Site Profile.

20 So, my first reaction was this is 

21 an enormous task, but, then, a light just went 
249 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 on. For ones we already did, it is not. For 

2 ones we need to do in the future, yes, it 

3 effectively would require us to review the 

4 Site Profile the way we would normally review 

5 any Site Profile, which is quite an 

6 undertaking, and include as part of that the 

7 degree to which the comments were, in fact, 

8 captured in the product.

9 So, anyway, that was just another 

10 thought. If we pick judiciously, it is not 

11 going to be burdensome.

12 DR. MAKHIJANI: John, I hate to 

13 disagree with you on the record here.

14 DR. MAURO: Okay.

15 MR. KATZ: That's fine.

16 DR. MAKHIJANI: In the spirit of 

17 just thinking out loud, you know, the tracking 

18 system is just a piece of this. The essence 

19 of this objective, as I see it, is to kind of 

20 see what happened substantively to the product 

21 that NIOSH produced.
250 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I think you don't want to be 

2 unfair. You don't want to shortcircuit that. 

3 If we do one, we should do it properly, and 

4 you don't want to be unfair to the authors, 

5 and you do want to give credit where they 

6 actually went out, took information, and it is 

7 reflected. If something really important 

8 slipped through the cracks and some worker is 

9 sad, you want to be able to reflect that, so 

10 that you have a document.

11 And I agree with Mike and what Ted 

12 said. At this stage, I think you may need to 

13 do one.

14 But for Grady's concern, I think 

15 you can close out the procedure review, 

16 because I think how you are going to fix the 

17 procedure, and then this can be an ongoing or 

18 not ongoing exercise, depending on what the 

19 Board and NIOSH decide. It can be separated 

20 from the procedure review.

21 But I think this one will take 
251 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 some work. I think we should do it very 

2 carefully and deliberately and be fair and 

3 talk to the people who have done the 

4 interviews and talk to the people who prepared 

5 the documents, and not kind of jump to a 

6 conclusion about what's there and what's not 

7 there. At least that is my opinion.

8 DR. MAURO: Arjun, I completely 

9 respect your opinion, and no need to 

10 apologize. This is what a work group is for. 

11 Thank you.

12 DR. MAKHIJANI: Thank you, John.

13 MEMBER BEACH: I would remind you, 

14 the procedure is just a small part of what 

15 this work group is, was formed for.

16 MEMBER MUNN: With one 

17 prerequisite in discussing this first bullet, 

18 for the slow member of the Work Group, we need 

19 to be very clear in specifying -- I would like 

20 to see an exhaustive list of what constitutes 

21 your concept of a technical worker document. 
252 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 What are we talking about? We 

2 have all kinds of documents that we use that 

3 are technical documents that are worker 

4 documents. If we are going to set forth as a 

5 goal to examine a technical worker document, 

6 let us first make a list, so that we know what 

7 we are talking about.

8 Are we talking about Site 

9 Profiles? Are we talking about Technical 

10 Basis Documents? What are we talking about?

11 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Site 

12 Profiles --

13 MEMBER MUNN: What's on the list?

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Evaluation 

15 Reports.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Okay, you're going 

17 to list them now, so that we will have it on 

18 the record.

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Site 

20 Profiles, SEC Evaluation Reports. The reason 

21 we generalize it is because it could be a TIB. 
253 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 It could be a generic procedure. I mean 

2 that's the three that I know of.

3 MEMBER MUNN: So we have three. 

4 Anybody going for four?

5 MR. KATZ: Well, I'm trying to 

6 understand. I mean I understand what we were 

7 talking about just a moment ago on this 

8 Objective 3, I mean this Bullet 1. I don't 

9 have it in front of me, but I'm trying to 

10 understand.

11 Are you trying to do a survey to 

12 see how many technical documents that are 

13 site-specific don't have, didn't involve any 

14 component of worker outreach? Is that the 

15 question you are trying to answer?

16 MEMBER MUNN: It says, identify 

17 technical worker documents issued without the 

18 benefit of a worker outreach meeting or any 

19 other form of evident worker input.

20 MR. KATZ: So, I mean that 

21 includes interviews of workers and all the 
254 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 other different venues. Is that what you 

2 mean? 

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. I'm 

4 going to throw out an example.

5 MR. KATZ: Yes, please do.

6 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Take Sandia 

7 National Lab, okay, first on my list. There 

8 was no worker outreach meeting. All I want to 

9 do is identify that.

10 MR. KATZ: I'm just trying to 

11 understand. So, I mean, a worker outreach 

12 meeting is just one approach to getting worker 

13 input, right?

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Right. And 

15 then, we might go and see if there is any 

16 documented communications associated with 

17 that.

18 MR. KATZ: So, my question is, are 

19 you trying to do some sort of comprehensive 

20 survey, just to identify which documents might 

21 have no worker input whatsoever? Is that the 
255 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 goal of this part of the evaluation?

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I think 

3 that mainly the goal of this particular item 

4 was to look at whether there was a worker 

5 outreach meeting, an opportunity for people to 

6 provide input, or site expert interviews 

7 associated.

8 DR. MAKHIJANI: Are we talking 

9 about different bullets? I think you're 

10 talking about the first bullet, and I was 

11 talking about the last bullet.

12 MR. KATZ: Yes. No, exactly, 

13 that's what I'm trying to distinguish. We are 

14 talking about different bullets.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, we are.

16 MR. KATZ: And so, I think it 

17 sounds like we have talked a bit about 

18 choosing one site for what you were talking 

19 about, Arjun.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, right.

21 MR. KATZ: And what John was 
256 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 talking about. This is an entirely separately 

2 thing.

3 My only concern is that, I mean, 

4 you could sort of randomly pick something that 

5 you might know about and explore them, but if 

6 you are going to look at every, if you are 

7 going to do a comprehensive survey to see how 

8 many documents there are that had no worker 

9 outreach, and then, if you are going to have 

10 to dig into expert interviews and other venues 

11 by which they get input from workers, I mean 

12 that is a horribly big job, it seems like.

13 And then, it is also highly 

14 retrospective since so many of the TBDs were 

15 done quite a long time ago and don't have a 

16 lot of value for looking forward.

17 MR. CALHOUN: And what do you do 

18 with them after you identify them?

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: What you do 

20 with them is you decide whether that's okay 

21 that they didn't have any worker outreach.
257 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ELLIOTT: Well, the website 

2 would be a perfect way to check all that out 

3 very quickly.

4 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes.

5 MS. ELLIOTT: Because you have the 

6 website that has the list of worksites. Each 

7 worksite, you can click on the worker outreach 

8 link.

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Right.

10 MS. ELLIOTT: You can click on the 

11 TBD links.

12 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Right.

13 MS. ELLIOTT: And the TBD front 

14 pages have whether or not there were worker 

15 comments from worker outreach that affected 

16 the TBD.

17 MR. KATZ: Yes, but that won't 

18 tell you whether there was worker outreach. 

19 That will only tell you whether there was 

20 anything that was actually cited in the TBD.

21 MS. ELLIOTT: If you go to the 
258 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 worksite and click on worker outreach, you 

2 will see whether or not there was worker 

3 outreach.

4 MR. KATZ: Well, worker outreach 

5 meeting.

6 MS. ELLIOTT: Correct.

7 MR. KATZ: Yes, which is one venue 

8 for getting worker input.

9 MS. ELLIOTT: Okay, but you're 

10 talking about whatever might be in that 

11 review.

12 MR. KATZ: But, I mean, they may 

13 have interviewed people individually as 

14 opposed to doing worker outreach, and so on. 

15 You wouldn't capture that there. So you are 

16 not answering the whole question by looking at 

17 that.

18 MS. ELLIOTT: Right, but likely 

19 that would be in the SRDB.

20 MR. KATZ: Yes, that is another 

21 source.
259 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER MUNN: Which is one 

2 technical document. That is why I was saying 

3 from the outlet, I would like to see an 

4 exhaustive list of what we are --

5 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, I 

6 think you go through the Technical Basis 

7 Documents.

8 MEMBER BEACH: So, but to what 

9 end? Okay, say we do all that work and we 

10 figure it out. What are we going to do with 

11 it? At this point, why do we need it?

12 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Let me give 

13 you an example, okay? Sandia National Lab, 

14 Livermore, had no worker outreach. Why did 

15 you need a worker outreach? Well, I cannot 

16 tell you how much --

17 MEMBER BEACH: Okay, now let's not 

18 confuse it because I know why we needed a 

19 worker outreach, but what will we do with the 

20 information? How will it help Sandia if we 

21 determine that they had no worker outreach?
260 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: First we 

2 need to identify where there was no worker 

3 outreach. Then, we need to determine whether 

4 we needed it and whether they need to go back 

5 and do it.

6 MR. CALHOUN: You know, that's 

7 tough.

8 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

9 MR. CALHOUN: That last sentence 

10 is tough.

11 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes.

12 MR. CALHOUN: You determine 

13 whether you need to go back and do it. Okay, 

14 Kathy?

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Or somebody 

16 needs to determine whether it needs to be 

17 done. And in the case of Sandia, we gained a 

18 tremendous amount of knowledge just from our 

19 site expert interviews that indicated to me, 

20 if NIOSH had gone out and done a worker 

21 outreach meeting, the Site Profile wouldn't 
261 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 have been deficient in the area of offsite 

2 exposures because these workers were telling 

3 us, every one of them --

4 DR. MAKHIJANI: Kathy, I guess it 

5 is my day to disagree with my colleagues. You 

6 know, we're reviewing, we've reviewed all the 

7 Site Profiles or we are in the process of 

8 reviewing all the Site Profiles. And it is 

9 part of our procedure, when we review the Site 

10 Profiles, to do worker interviews. That is 

11 how you know what you know about Sandia, 

12 right? We did interviews.

13 Then we have a matrix and a 

14 comment resolution procedure for the Site 

15 Profiles. So, what we do in practice, where 

16 retrospectively there were no worker 

17 interviews, something slipped through the 

18 cracks, or there wasn't an outreach meeting, 

19 it is part of our job in terms of our Site 

20 Profile review and Evaluation Report review to 

21 say that's just one of the things that happens 
262 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 from our procedures, you know, you interview 

2 the petitioners, and so on.

3 We say, well, these three things 

4 that the petitioners brought aren't reflected 

5 in your Evaluation Report, or whatever, and 

6 then it becomes part of our comment resolution 

7 process, wherever that leads.

8 So, I actually don't -- it just 

9 muddies the waters to make a list and say 

10 these were the Site Profiles -- it muddies the 

11 water even substantively -- these were the 

12 Site Profiles.

13 Sandia was a Site Profile where 

14 you didn't have worker outreach. And then, 

15 you don't have anywhere there to say, well, as 

16 part of the process, we actually did those 

17 worker interviews, SC&A, and now NIOSH has to 

18 take them into account if we learned something 

19 new.

20 So, if the object is to improve 

21 the technical document, which is really the 
263 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 ultimate objective, and to get worker input, 

2 and to ensure we have a retrospective way of 

3 doing that that's already there -- and you are 

4 in the center of our team for that.

5 So I actually am not seeing how we 

6 are going to benefit by identifying, unless 

7 the Site Profile hasn't been finished yet, and 

8 we haven't reviewed it, in which case we would 

9 catch it in the future.

10 DR. MAURO: Arjun, this is John.

11 In effect, you're saying, if you 

12 think about the Board's activities and the 

13 role of SC&A as part of the process of 

14 producing quality -- in a way, the way you 

15 have described it is SC&A is inside part of 

16 the NIOSH process, and it could be looked at 

17 that way. And therefore, any value we add in 

18 terms of our own work that contributes, as you 

19 just described, in effect, is a step toward 

20 outreach.

21 I don't think that is the mission 
264 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 of this -- I'll say it this way; I think this 

2 work group is really on the outside of the 

3 process saying, listen, is there anything 

4 about the process that's right now been 

5 implemented that could be improved.

6 So, even though what you said is 

7 exactly correct, that is, we do 

8 retrospectively capture this, and eventually, 

9 through this process, if there were already 

10 deficiencies, they are identified and they are 

11 fixed.

12 But I don't think that is what we 

13 are trying to do here. We are trying to say, 

14 is there anything that could be done by way of 

15 NIOSH's protocols that could help to improve 

16 the product with regard to outreach?

17 So, I mean, I see what you're 

18 saying, and it's interesting. I think that I, 

19 for one, feel that this should be a 

20 constructive process. That is, anything that 

21 we are asked to do by the work group, 
265 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 whichever one of these items that we have been 

2 covering, needs to be done in a way that is 

3 not accusatory; it is not judgmental. There 

4 has got to be a way to do this that says, 

5 listen, there is added value.

6 I am struggling. I'm putting 

7 myself in NIOSH's position right now and 

8 saying, listen, how do we go through a 

9 valuable process that this work group is 

10 contributing, but it not be a destructive one, 

11 where there is, you know, you should have done 

12 this; you should have done that. It has got 

13 to be a positive process.

14 And the feedback we give should be 

15 things that could be added to what already is 

16 being done or the documentation. It sounds 

17 like an awful lot is being done by way of 

18 outreach. And the only question really that I 

19 heard today was, you know, you are capturing 

20 all this information in your outreach program. 

21 It is going into the tracking system. What 
266 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 is not there is a log or a record of the 

2 follow-up activities and tracking that to 

3 completion.

4 I think, so in a funny sort of 

5 way, the criticism that we are offering up is 

6 not so much with the program, but the 

7 documentation of the program. And that's why 

8 we were making these suggestions that maybe 

9 you want to add this into your procedure, 

10 these kinds of things, because when you add it 

11 into the procedure, then you are sort of held 

12 accountable to it. Right now, it sounds like 

13 it's being done, but it is being done, you 

14 know, on an ad hoc basis.

15 So, if we were to do one of these 

16 things that we are talking about, it would be 

17 just to shed light on the degree to which the 

18 information that was valuable was, in fact, 

19 captured and incorporated into the product. I 

20 mean --

21 MR. KATZ: Right, John.
267 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 DR. MAURO: Yes, I had to react to 

2 your comment.

3 MR. KATZ: No, John, so I think we 

4 are all on the same page about that. I think 

5 we all agree that, take a TBD, or what have 

6 you, SEC evaluation, what have you, and let's 

7 thoroughly look at what input was received and 

8 how it was used or not used, and so on. I 

9 think we are all in agreement about that.

10 This bullet 1 that Kathy is 

11 talking about, here's my concern about it, 

12 which is really doing some sort of survey to 

13 see, on a very narrow question -- I mean the 

14 question is only, was there any worker input 

15 at all?

16 It seems to me it is a very 

17 broadly applied question that is extremely 

18 narrow and has very little utility. And that 

19 is my concern with it.

20 I mean, I understand Kathy is 

21 saying Sandia, she has concerns about what 
268 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 happened at Sandia. And that's one case that 

2 you might be concerned and want to look at 

3 further.

4 But, as far as doing a survey, 

5 that seems to me to have very little value 

6 other than answering this simple, dichotomous 

7 question, yes or no. In everything I have 

8 heard, it seems like, generally, the system is 

9 to try to get worker input in all sorts of 

10 ways. So you are not going to find many 

11 cases, I imagine, where simply nobody got any 

12 worker input in any way.

13 It seems much more valuable to me 

14 to dig into a couple of cases and see, what 

15 information did they get and how did they use 

16 it? All those rich questions that will affect 

17 practice going forward and how well they make 

18 use of worker input versus what seems to me 

19 just a very narrow question very broadly 

20 applied, and by being broadly applied, it is 

21 going to take real resources to answer the 
269 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 question.

2 Whereas, at the end of the day, so 

3 what? So you find out, okay, there were three 

4 TBDs, or whatever, and one SEC -- well, there 

5 will never be an SEC because you always have 

6 petitioner input. But, anyway, my point is --

7 MEMBER MUNN: By definition.

8 MR. KATZ: -- it doesn't seem like 

9 it has a chance of bringing a lot of 

10 productive information into the fold after you 

11 have done all the work, and yet it is a lot of 

12 trouble.

13 So, in my view, I just don't see a 

14 lot of value there for the buck, period, in 

15 going down that road. If the Work Group has a 

16 concern about Sandia specifically, that they 

17 understand that there wasn't worker input in 

18 Sandia in any form, or whatever, and wants to 

19 explore that, I mean that's one thing. But I 

20 don't see a survey of a narrow, narrow 

21 question like that as being very valuable and 
270 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 a good use of SC&A resources or the work 

2 group's resources. But that's just my 

3 perspective.

4 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: What I 

5 would suggest is you guys pick a site and we 

6 go through the bullets and figure out which 

7 ones we are going to look at for that 

8 particular site.

9 MEMBER BEACH: How about Savannah 

10 River? Anybody have any other thoughts?

11 MEMBER MUNN: That's a biggie.

12 DR. MAKHIJANI: Do you want to 

13 pick a site where the process is closed or 

14 where the process is open? I think that is a 

15 decision Mike and Josie and Wanda ought to 

16 make.

17 Because Savannah River is open. 

18 It is a complex beast.

19 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

20 DR. MAKHIJANI: I mean I have no 

21 objection to it. I am just pointing it out, 
271 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that it is a complex beast, and it is very 

2 open. There are lots and lots of issues. I 

3 was just writing the status report for the 

4 work group to be presented at the Board 

5 meeting. It's big.

6 MEMBER MUNN: I personally would 

7 not choose it, for the reasons that you have 

8 just stated. It's not that it's open, but 

9 because it is extremely complex. It is 

10 probably one of the most complex sites in the 

11 complex.

12 DR. MAKHIJANI: Hanford and 

13 Savannah River are about the most complicated 

14 there are, I think.

15 MEMBER MUNN: And we know, without 

16 even looking, that these documents were not 

17 put together in the absence of worker input in 

18 those two cases that you have just mentioned.

19 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes. Now Kathy 

20 has done, in fairness, Kathy has done a lot of 

21 interviews, together with NIOSH. We have had 
272 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 a lot of joint work. I don't know how you 

2 feel about that.

3 I'm not for it or against it. I 

4 am just pointing out that it is a complex 

5 site. There may be value to doing it that 

6 way, to picking a complex site, so you can get 

7 a more rich insight, or there may be value to 

8 starting with a simpler process.

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, the 

10 only advantage to picking a site like that is 

11 that you will have comments from other venues, 

12 the docket, the website, et cetera.

13 DR. MAURO: But isn't it expected 

14 that the Site Profile would reflect those? 

15 You see, one of our dilemmas is, let's say 

16 there's been a large data interview process 

17 that has taken place at some site.

18 Let's say, for example, right now, 

19 let me ask a question of NIOSH like, what site 

20 right now has a nice, rich record of 

21 interviews and you have populated the tracking 
273 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 system with a rich amount of information that 

2 might be valuable to the process? Is there 

3 one that comes to mind immediately?

4 MEMBER MUNN: Well, that is just 

5 the reverse of what we are looking for.

6 DR. MAURO: No, no, I understand, 

7 but I guess what I am getting at is, it may 

8 turn out that the only ones that have rich 

9 information don't have Site Profiles that are 

10 up-to-date right now and are yet to be 

11 revised.

12 And then, what we find is that any 

13 Site Profile we look at is going to look very 

14 poor in terms of reflecting this interview 

15 process that has been going on.

16 See, I don't know if it is 

17 possible to -- we had this problem originally. 

18 We said, well, when we did our review of 

19 PROC-12, we said, well, what are we going to 

20 look at. And the problem was this whole 

21 program with tracking is relatively new. And 
274 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 so, one would have a bit of a problem finding 

2 sites that have accommodated and have brought 

3 to fruition all this information.

4 I guess, if we could find one or 

5 two off the Board, the work group, that would 

6 be great. I just don't know whether or not it 

7 could be done.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Let me ask a couple 

9 of things. First of all, in our discussion 

10 here, we seem to have narrowed our focus down 

11 to Site Profiles. Is that what we are talking 

12 about now? We are talking about Site 

13 Profiles?

14 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: No, no.

15 MEMBER MUNN: No?

16 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: We are talking 

17 about the site.

18 MEMBER MUNN: All right.

19 DR. MAURO: Let me argue the 

20 answer is yes. Because all ERs depend on --

21 in the end, the main concern we have is to 
275 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 make sure that the information base regarding 

2 a given site, and what the issues are that 

3 need to be closed, that need to be dealt with, 

4 and how to deal with them, is the Site 

5 Profile.

6 The ER, when you read an ER, it is 

7 very rare that the ER stands on its own. It 

8 almost always goes to the Site Profile as the 

9 protocol and approach that is going to be used 

10 to deal with all technical matters.

11 Even though NIOSH would be the 

12 first to say that, well, all of our Site 

13 Profiles are living documents. So we have got 

14 a bit of a dilemma here. To me, the Site 

15 Profile is the single most important document 

16 that needs to reflect feedback from workers. 

17 So, I would argue, no, it is the Site Profile.

18 Now I am probably getting more 

19 aggressive than I should. But what else would 

20 you look at?

21 MEMBER MUNN: I'm happy with Site 
276 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Profiles myself.

2 MEMBER BEACH: I like the 

3 Evaluation Report also.

4 DR. MAURO: And when you do the 

5 Evaluation Report, remember, they always 

6 reference the Site Profile. So the source 

7 document, the rock that the ER stands on 

8 almost always is the Site Profile.

9 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Well, let's put 

10 our thoughts on pause for a few minutes. It 

11 is getting to be about three o'clock. So 

12 let's open the phone lines up to any claimants 

13 or workers' advocates who are on the line who 

14 might want to say something. Just identify 

15 yourself and make your comments.

16 MS. BARRIE: Hi, Mike. This is 

17 Terrie Barrie with ANWAG.

18 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Hi, Terrie.

19 MS. BARRIE: How are you? And 

20 thank you again for allowing public comments 

21 here.
277 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I do have a few thoughts I would 

2 like to share with you.

3 The most recent discussion about 

4 worker outreach and the Site Profiles, and 

5 Kathy had mentioned that there was no worker 

6 outreach at Sandia, that also happened with 

7 Rocky Flats. So you folks might want to 

8 consider taking a look at the Rocky Flats Site 

9 Profile.

10 The Site Profile was released 

11 April 2004, and the worker outreach meetings 

12 were in June of 2004, after the Site Profile 

13 was developed.

14 And getting back to this morning's 

15 discussions, I agree with Josie when she had a 

16 concern about the definition of professional 

17 judgment. And I realize that everyone needs 

18 to make a call here and there.

19 But when I was at the ATL meeting 

20 in Cincinnati last April, I saw or I actually 

21 heard two different health physicists say 
278 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 completely opposite things. So I would think 

2 that the team would be best when deciding 

3 which comments that they receive from the 

4 townhall meetings is worth pursuing as opposed 

5 to just one person making that decision, 

6 because, you know, there's the opportunity to 

7 have input from other people. I think that is 

8 well worth pursuing.

9 The other idea or thought I had 

10 was there was a discussion about, should every 

11 comment be tracked, and I believe it should 

12 be. Not every worker is aware of a worker 

13 outreach meeting or they couldn't attend that 

14 one, but they could attend a townhall meeting. 

15 So that is about the only opportunity they 

16 would have for submitting or writing the 

17 letters. And I think that all of them should 

18 be tracked and followed up.

19 And that is about all I have for 

20 today. Thank you.

21 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Terrie.
279 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Anyone else from the public who 

2 would like to comment at this point?

3 (No response.)

4 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Last call for 

5 any other workers or advocates on the phone 

6 who would like to make comments.

7 (No response.)

8 Okay. Then we will get back to 

9 our discussions on the Objective 3. 

10 MR. KATZ: Yes. Can I just add 

11 one thought to John's thought about TBDs being 

12 the rock?

13 But if you are exploring how 

14 worker input is made use of or not made use 

15 of, whichever, I mean, I think there are 

16 probably some cases with SEC evaluations, too, 

17 that might be interesting and illustrative, 

18 too. Some of these SEC evaluations have gone 

19 on for a long time in the Board's hands with a 

20 lot of petitioner input and interested worker 

21 input. So, I mean, some of those may be rich 
280 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 examples, even though they are SEC evaluations 

2 and not TBDs.

3 DR. MAURO: To respond, I agree. 

4 I think if you pick an ER, all I am really 

5 saying is, when you are going through that 

6 process, you have all defined that you are 

7 going to, in addition to all of the issues 

8 that surround the ER and the petition, you are 

9 going to find yourself quickly going to the 

10 Site Profile --

11 MR. KATZ: Right.

12 DR. MAURO: -- as part of your 

13 overall investigation.

14 MR. KATZ: Right. And for 

15 example, with AWE, sometimes the TBD has less 

16 weight, in effect, than all the work that gets 

17 done afterwards, than it would with a major 

18 DOE site.

19 DR. MAURO: Yes, that's true.

20 MR. KATZ: So, what I am going to 

21 suggest, because it doesn't sound like there 
281 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 is an obvious candidate that everybody is 

2 jumping on at once, but if we can agree in 

3 principle that we are going to do this focus, 

4 to begin with at least, on one site, whether 

5 it is a TBD, or what have you, then I think a 

6 way to go forward is to agree on that in 

7 principle, if the Work Group wants to, that 

8 that work ought to be done.

9 Then, I think both DCAS and SC&A 

10 might go back to their quarters and consider 

11 which might be a good, rich candidate to begin 

12 with. I think we can task that. Then we can 

13 send around the proposal for the sites. We 

14 can do that by email and go forward without it 

15 having to await another work group meeting.

16 MEMBER BEACH: I was going to 

17 recommend Terrie's suggestion of Rocky Flats, 

18 go with a closed site.

19 MR. KATZ: I mean one issue about 

20 Rocky Flats is the TBD was developed a long 

21 time ago, and if you are looking for value for 
282 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 going forward, you are dealing with a TBD that 

2 was developed under sort of an old system that 

3 is not in place anymore and that has been 

4 improved.

5 It is not giving you a lot of bang 

6 for your buck that way. So there may be a lot 

7 of sort of characteristics that you find 

8 lacking there, but that have already been 

9 corrected. And you really want to look at how 

10 things are being done, more or less, 

11 contemporaneously.

12 MEMBER BEACH: So maybe a more 

13 recent site like NTS?

14 MR. KATZ: So something a little 

15 more recent than that.

16 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I really don't 

17 know how, I mean if a Site Profile was put out 

18 when there was worker input, maybe there's 

19 been some applications, but how many?

20 MEMBER MUNN: Before we go off 

21 into old, old documents that were, as Ted 
283 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 pointed out, processed under a somewhat 

2 markedly different set of circumstances, I 

3 would like to hear from Kathy a little more. 

4 We have been beating up on her with our 

5 thoughts about these bullets.

6 And since we are focusing on the 

7 first one now, Kathy, you have already 

8 suggested that, from your own work, you are 

9 aware that Sandia would be one of the 

10 candidates for this. Do you, right off the 

11 top of your head, have others that you 

12 personally know of that might fit the criteria 

13 you believe were in mind when this stuff was 

14 first made --

15 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, that 

16 was for --

17 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, and are you 

18 still focused on the first bullet?

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: There's a 

20 couple. There's just a couple more, and I 

21 don't remember off the top of my head what 
284 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 they were. Medina and Clarksville doesn't 

2 have the worker outreach meeting.

3 MEMBER MUNN: It would be helpful 

4 for me to have some information about sites 

5 that you are already aware of that may be 

6 deficient in this regard, rather than have us 

7 start trying to search and turn over all the 

8 rocks.

9 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, I 

10 guess I am a little confused here because the 

11 first bullet, and really the second bullet, if 

12 we decided that we can't do anything with the 

13 data once we have got it, there's not a 

14 benefit to it, then do we want to go through 

15 that survey? Do we not want to go through 

16 that survey?

17 Bullet No. 2 is very similar 

18 because it has to do with, okay, well, you did 

19 a worker outreach, but you released the Site 

20 Profile right after, in too short a time to 

21 incorporate those comments.
285 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: See, I mean I think the 

2 first bullet and the second bullet, they are 

3 really not part of the framework that we are 

4 talking about of evaluating. Those are kind 

5 of separate questions that, to me, are very 

6 narrow.

7 But, anyway, if you were going to 

8 take a site and you take a TBD, or what have 

9 you, and you fully explore; you look at what 

10 was addressed, what was not addressed, what 

11 input was received -- you are looking at the 

12 whole spectrum of questions related to how 

13 worker input is being obtained, the extent it 

14 is being obtained, and how it is being made 

15 use of or not being made use of. That is sort 

16 of the full spectrum of questions that you 

17 want to evaluate as this Work Group. So you 

18 get sort of all your bang for your buck by 

19 finding a rich example and exploring it fully. 

20 Whereas, these first two bullets, 

21 again, they are both very narrow questions. I 
286 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 wouldn't expend my resources that way, if I 

2 were making the choice. I think that at least 

3 I wouldn't start that way. I would start with 

4 your one good horse and follow up as that 

5 illustrates you might need to follow up on 

6 more narrow questions.

7 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: If you want 

8 to select a site and then look at the site, 

9 that falls into the last three bullets. If 

10 you want a generic survey of what is 

11 available, then that is the first two bullets.

12 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: I'm still almost 

13 leaning toward thinking it is necessary to 

14 look at a site that the documents are closed 

15 and one that is still current, both. Again, 

16 Terrie gave the example of Rocky. I still 

17 think there is value in how well that stuff, 

18 how well those documents were modified based 

19 on the worker input. That is relevant 

20 because, if there needs to be more done and 

21 more is done, it could affect claims that have 
287 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 already been denied. Then, once we see how 

2 that works, then we can look at a program that 

3 is currently underway to see if the program 

4 has fixed the errors from the past.

5 DR. MAKHIJANI: Could I supplement 

6 what Mike just said? I think, while there was 

7 this problem with the Rocky Flats Site 

8 Profile, that the Site Profile was issued and 

9 the worker outreach meeting was done two weeks 

10 later, that was in 2004.

11 Then there was an SEC petition, 

12 and there was an enormous amount of 

13 interaction with workers from all sides. 

14 There was NIOSH's interactions with workers. 

15 Some of the worker site experts were involved 

16 with NIOSH in preparing the sites, which 

17 caused some controversy, but, nonetheless, 

18 they were involved and their input is there. 

19 SC&A was involved. And the process was, you 

20 know, the Board voted on it in a certain way, 

21 and there is a very rich record.
288 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 So I would really recommend that 

2 we consider a site, and it is useful to 

3 consider a site, where there's both been a TBD 

4 and an SEC process. So some of the warts with 

5 the TBD being issued -- it's a living 

6 document; we will go back and fix it; let's 

7 have something now for dose reconstruction --

8 get addressed, one way or another, to the

9 extent they are going to be, in an SEC 

10 process.

11 Rocky Flats, from my point of 

12 view, is fairly contemporaneous. And then, of 

13 course, NIOSH developed this whole model for 

14 Super S, which was in the center and there 

15 were worker interviews, site expert input, 

16 SC&A review. You know, there was a whole lot 

17 that went on. So it is a very rich site for 

18 examining these kinds of questions.

19 DR. MAURO: Arjun, I liked it, 

20 and, Mike, I like the idea. I'm coming around 

21 to think about this a little differently.
289 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Because what we have here is, if 

2 we go back to an older site, and Rocky is as 

3 good an example as any, one of the things that 

4 would be revealing is how it unfolded. In 

5 other words, it has a long history, and the 

6 way in which information from the workers and 

7 other interested parties found its way into 

8 the process, got into the process, how.

9 In other words, it is almost like 

10 a historical reconstruction of what transpired 

11 on Rocky with respect to and from the 

12 perspective of information that was acquired 

13 from the workers and experts and other 

14 interested parties, and the way in which it 

15 came into the record and was taken into 

16 consideration in decisions in the end. In 

17 other words, it is almost like from an 

18 historical perspective.

19 Then, if you went to a current 

20 one, now I could tell you that, if you go to a 

21 current one, I know of two that I am up to my 
290 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 eyeballs in right now. One is Linde, and the 

2 other is General Steel. These are living, 

3 breathing, ongoing interactions with 

4 knowledgeable people about the site who are 

5 continually feeding the process as the process 

6 matures. And it is being factored into White 

7 Papers that are unfolding in real-time.

8 This is an interesting 

9 perspective. Bear with me. We originally 

10 came into this thinking of it as a linear 

11 process. You know, you follow PROC-12. You 

12 go gather data. You've got the data. You 

13 load up your tracking system, and then the 

14 people who write the Site Profile go look at 

15 it and use that data and follow up as 

16 necessary, write a Site Profile.

17 It isn't that way. It is much 

18 more a brief, living process, for better or 

19 worse. I'm not saying that is the way it 

20 should be, but I'm saying that is the way it 

21 is.
291 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 The actual interactions may start 

2 out with some outreach that make it into the 

3 tracking system. But, then, when the process 

4 becomes richer in terms of especially when an 

5 SEC hits, and there are lots of interactions, 

6 I am starting to think that we are actually in 

7 a process that is non-linear. Unfortunately, 

8 it is non-linear because of the interaction of 

9 the Board and SC&A in this overall process.

10 You know, I am almost 

11 contradicting what I said before. Please bear 

12 with me. I'm thinking out loud right now.

13 Is it fair to think about the 

14 outreach program as a self-contained entity 

15 that finds its way into the process in a 

16 linear manner and then is reflected in a Site 

17 Profile, and, ultimately, perhaps in an 

18 Evaluation Report? Is it appropriate to think 

19 about it that way?

20 Then, we, as outsiders, the Work 

21 Group, and SC&A as your contractor, come in 
292 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 and take a look at it, and the degree to which 

2 the process unfolded the way it is supposed to 

3 unfold, according to the procedure. I think 

4 that is how I came into thinking about this 

5 when this meeting began.

6 And the more we talk about this 

7 example, we're trying to find examples of 

8 something we could look at, the more I realize 

9 that you probably can look at it from an 

10 historical perspective. That is how I came to 

11 this thinking with regard to Rocky, because 

12 that would be very informative, to see how it 

13 actually unfolded. So I could see that having 

14 value.

15 If we go to a current one, and the 

16 only ones I am very familiar with right now 

17 are the ones that are very alive and well and 

18 interactive and unfolding in real-time, that 

19 would be a very difficult one for anyone to 

20 sit in judgment of regarding where you could 

21 have improvements.
293 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 I am not sure, but this is a 

2 thought that struck me as we were having this 

3 discussion. I hope that it adds a little bit.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Well, John, I am 

5 sure nobody would daresay that this is a 

6 linear process, for goodness' sake.

7 (Laughter.)

8 I might suggest another site that 

9 might fit many of the criteria that have been 

10 thrown out here today, but hasn't been 

11 mentioned, and that is Bethlehem Steel. That 

12 is essentially a closed matter now, but it 

13 certainly, if you want to talk about outreach, 

14 now there's a rich lode that you might 

15 consider mining.

16 DR. MAURO: It would be a very 

17 good one. It would be a little simpler than 

18 Rocky, for obvious reasons.

19 But bear in mind that the 

20 interaction was very -- the Board and SC&A was 

21 very much involved. And Arjun could speak to 
294 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 that better than anyone.

2 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, it certainly 

3 was.

4 DR. MAURO: In the way in which it 

5 came to life, the interaction with the 

6 workers, and NIOSH's interaction, and the 

7 joint meetings -- so it unfolded in a way that 

8 it is almost impossible to segregate out the 

9 Board and its contractor from the process, if 

10 that is what your intention is, to try to see 

11 what has NIOSH done in terms of its PROC-12 

12 and meeting its intent and whether PROC-12 is 

13 functioning, is alive and well, independent of 

14 the role of the Board and its contractor.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Well, it is so 

16 relatively new that it gives us a much clearer 

17 picture of what we would think of as current 

18 process, as opposed to past historic process.

19 MR. KATZ: Are you saying 

20 Bethlehem Steel is new compared to Rocky 

21 Flats? Because Rocky Flats is --
295 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER MUNN: The actions that we 

2 have taken on it, the input.

3 MR. KATZ: Just the Board maybe, 

4 but all the work, I mean that is the most --

5 MEMBER MUNN: What I am talking 

6 about is the amount of interaction and the 

7 amount of worker outreach that was involved in 

8 Bethlehem Steel was extensive.

9 DR. MAKHIJANI: Well, it is 

10 actually quite complicated.

11 MEMBER MUNN: It is.

12 DR. MAKHIJANI: Just in terms of 

13 the history, SC&A first attended a NIOSH14 sponsored worker outreach meeting, and I was 

15 the one representing SC&A. It was the very 

16 first outreach meeting we attended, and it 

17 wasn't one organized by us. But a set of

18 technical observations came out of that for 

19 SC&A which we used in our review.

20 The sort of upshot of that was 

21 that Ed Walker, who was leading the Bethlehem 
296 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Steel action group, often communicated with us 

2 and put us in contact with workers who had 

3 more technical information.

4 So I think it would be very 

5 difficult to evaluate NIOSH's process -- and 

6 then, NIOSH was also, of course, involved --

7 and untangle it from what we did.

8 I think it is worth evaluating, if 

9 you want to evaluate that process, but very 

10 unique in that way.

11 MR. KATZ: I think, no matter 

12 which of these you choose --

13 DR. MAKHIJANI: It's going to be 

14 tangled in a different way.

15 MR. KATZ: -- the untangling the 

16 Board and SC&A, I don't think you will be able 

17 to entirely untangle it. But you still can 

18 look in a focused way at the questions of how 

19 well has NIOSH been obtaining input and making 

20 use of it or not making use of it. So you 

21 still can look at those questions in a focused 
297 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 way.

2 But there is lots of sort of mixed 

3 influence in that process, and none of them 

4 are linear, as John said. I think that is 

5 going to be true in every case.

6 DR. MAKHIJANI: No, no, I agree 

7 with you, Ted. Certainly, I wasn't saying 

8 don't look at Bethlehem Steel.

9 And in retrospect, I think you're 

10 right. It is going to be difficult to 

11 untangle. Rocky Flats would also be difficult 

12 to untangle.

13 MR. KATZ: Sure.

14 MEMBER BEACH: And at the risk of 

15 moving forward -- 

16 (Laughter.)

17 -- let's decide on Rocky or take a 

18 vote. Because I would like to see us start

19 with Rocky. I mean, I think we can argue all 

20 day about it or discuss all day the merits of 

21 all the sites, but Rocky would give us a good 
298 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 place to start, I think.

2 MR. KATZ: Yes. I mean, from what 

3 I said before, I think Rocky, given all the 

4 SEC work that happened after the TBD and 

5 everything, I think that is a rich example to 

6 plumb.

7 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: So are the rest 

8 of the Work Group Members okay with tasking 

9 SC&A to start on Rocky?

10 MEMBER MUNN: No, I would oppose 

11 that, but it is interesting. I wondered how 

12 Rocky was going to get back on the table.

13 (Laughter.)

14 MEMBER BEACH: And we're talking 

15 the last three bullets here.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, we are talking 

17 getting Rocky back on the table. That's what 

18 we're talking about.

19 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: We're talking 

20 let's see if there is a problem with the 

21 system, I believe.
299 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, that's what I 

2 think.

3 MR. KATZ: I mean the focus is 

4 worker outreach, not --

5 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

6 MEMBER MUNN: Today.

7 MR. KATZ: I think there needs to 

8 be more sort of the methodology clarified 

9 beyond these bullets. It seems to me at least 

10 that there is not a really clear methodology 

11 laid out yet, and I think it would be useful 

12 for the work group to have that to see exactly 

13 what the sort of path forward for how to do 

14 it.

15 I mean, it is going to take you 

16 some thinking on your part to produce that.

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: So 

18 something like more -- we will review the 

19 docket, you know, kind of a step-by-step?

20 MEMBER MUNN: And how many of 

21 these technical worker documents involving 
300 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 Rocky are we going to be looking at?

2 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: I thought 

3 we were looking like a step-by-step?

4 MR. KATZ: Yes, I don't really 

5 mean -- well, the methodology, I mean really, 

6 yes, you have to consider what sources you are 

7 going to for information, how you are going to 

8 evaluate those sources of information.

9 I mean, I can't do it on the spur 

10 of the moment here, but I could explain an 

11 evaluation methodology to you with some 

12 thoughts.

13 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes, I see your 

14 point, Ted, yes.

15 MEMBER BEACH: Starting with the 

16 bullets?

17 MR. KATZ: I mean the bullets are 

18 not really a methodology. They are just --

19 MEMBER BEACH: But I mean start 

20 with where you are going to take that, yes.

21 DR. MAKHIJANI: Why don't we try 
301 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 this on for size? I think, Kathy, what we 

2 might consider as a next step to develop is to 

3 tell the Working Group and NIOSH, Ted, the 

4 way, how we are going to conclude when a 

5 certain statement -- so, starting with a TBD, 

6 then a lot of the technical conclusions of the 

7 TBD are modified along the way. And how we 

8 are going to decide which modifications arose 

9 from worker inputs, with a simplest example 

10 being the worker input that Super S was not 

11 considered and a Super S model was developed. 

12 So that is sort of Exhibit A, very simple 

13 case that we have done.

14 But that is an example of what I 

15 think you are looking for, right? How are we 

16 going to conclude that worker input was 

17 ignored on the one extreme or fully taken into 

18 account and incorporated, or it wasn't 

19 relevant, and therefore, justifiably, you 

20 know --

21 MR. KATZ: Yes. I mean you start 
302 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 at the top with your evaluation questions. 

2 What are your very specific evaluation 

3 questions for this particular, if we say Rocky 

4 Flats, what are your evaluation questions? 

5 Then, how are you going to answer those? You 

6 have to sort of lay out. It is a hierarchy 

7 for an evaluation plan.

8 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Well, and 

9 we have partially got that answered in our 

10 questions under Objective 3.

11 MR. KATZ: Yes, right, that is 

12 very broad and generic, exactly. Now you have 

13 to just sort of lay out the details of how you 

14 are going to go about that. Right.

15 DR. MAKHIJANI: And we should 

16 translate that for Rocky and tell you, here is 

17 what we are going to look at for Rocky Flats.

18 MR. KATZ: Right. Here's what 

19 we're going to look at and how we are going to 

20 look at it.

21 But I just think that would be 
303 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 helpful, so that, then, if the Work Group has 

2 thoughts about other ways to go about that 

3 evaluation, whatever, they can give you input 

4 on that.

5 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes.

6 MR. KATZ: And you will need to 

7 have a game plan anyway before you actually 

8 get started.

9 DR. MAKHIJANI: I agree.

10 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay. So, 

11 are we going to pretend like we are doing it 

12 for Rocky and then come up with a game plan?

13 MR. KATZ: Oh, yes, not pretend. 

14 I think you decided that you are going to do 

15 it for Rocky.

16 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Okay.

17 MR. KATZ: So that sounds good.

18 DR. MAKHIJANI: I agree.

19 MEMBER BEACH: Well, whatever is 

20 formulated needs to be able to be consistent. 

21 So, if this is the first one, the next one we 
304 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 do, it needs to be consistent, so that the 

2 worker can --

3 MR. KATZ: Well, you may learn 

4 lessons in this first one, too --

5 MEMBER BEACH: Sure, sure.

6 MR. KATZ: -- and, then, make 

7 improvements. But the planning part of any 

8 evaluation study is really important for 

9 getting good answers.

10 DR. MAKHIJANI: And this is a 

11 really new activity.

12 MR. KATZ: Right, it is totally 

13 new, right. You haven't done this kind of an 

14 evaluation before. So you are really sort of 

15 cutting a new path here.

16 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Okay. So, it 

17 looks like now they have been trying to make 

18 sure we got everything covered, what we have 

19 done today, what actions we have got going 

20 forward, and trying to get a timeframe on 

21 that, and see if can we just schedule another 
305 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 meeting or if it is too early to do that.

2 DCAS is going to look at some 

3 issues in the matrix and make some modified 

4 statements or portions of procedures and get 

5 back with us.

6 And SC&A is going to put together 

7 a draft plan for reviewing the Rocky Flats 

8 plant and get that back to us.

9 Is there anything else that I have 

10 forgotten?

11 (No response.)

12 So, do we have any idea from DCAS 

13 or from SC&A how long it is going to take you 

14 to have some of these actions filled and ready 

15 for us to get back together?

16 DR. MAKHIJANI: Kathy, by the time 

17 of the Board meeting, just after the Board 

18 meeting?

19 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: Yes, we 

20 probably could --

21 DR. MAKHIJANI: I've got my hands 
306 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 full with Savannah River. I would like to 

2 kind of work along with you on this.

3 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: So we could 

4 probably pull it together. We also need to 

5 update the matrix, and there was one other 

6 action item we had.

7 DR. MAKHIJANI: Okay.

8 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: And, J.J., do 

9 you have any idea how long it may take you to 

10 make some of these changes?

11 DR. MAKHIJANI: I wasn't 

12 suggesting meeting before the Board meeting.

13 MR. KATZ: It's not going to 

14 happen.

15 DR. MAKHIJANI: I was suggesting 

16 that Kathy and I kind of produce an internal 

17 draft by the time of the Board meeting, so we 

18 can talk at that time.

19 MR. CALHOUN: We don't need to get 

20 this done for the next Board meeting. Before 

21 the next Work Group meeting.
307 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: Well, yes, that's what 

2 Mike is looking for a target date for the next 

3 work group meeting.

4 MR. CALHOUN: When do you want to 

5 have the next work group meeting?

6 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: We are leaving 

7 it up to you guys. What about --

8 MR. KATZ: In December? It will 

9 be in December, right?

10 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes.

11 MR. KATZ: Is the December 

12 timeframe practical for you to be able to 

13 follow up on some of these items?

14 MR. CALHOUN: I think so. We 

15 think so.

16 MR. KATZ: You don't have to put 

17 them all to bed, but like, for example, 

18 looking at the feasibility question for 

19 tracking, and so on.

20 MR. JOHNSON: Challenging, but 

21 doable.
308 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER MUNN: December 2nd?

2 MR. KATZ: I would say, why don't 

3 we push it a little later in December? 

4 Because people are going to be very busy 

5 preparing for the Board meeting.

6 MR. CALHOUN: And Thanksgiving.

7 MR. KATZ: Thanksgiving is there, 

8 too.

9 MEMBER BEACH: So, are we thinking 

10 after the holidays, like the last week of 

11 December?

12 MR. KATZ: I was thinking before 

13 Christmas, but not the first week in December 

14 maybe, if that's possible.

15 Let's see, we already have, let me 

16 tell you when we have something already 

17 scheduled because that might help some folks, 

18 too.

19 We have, let's see, okay, 

20 actually, what we have scheduled is the first 

21 week of December. So, how are people's 
309 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 calendars for the week of the 13th through the 

2 17th?

3 MEMBER BEACH: Mine is good at the 

4 last part of the week.

5 DR. MAKHIJANI: I'm not available 

6 on the 17th. I know that. I have to look at 

7 my calendar.

8 MEMBER BEACH: The 16th?

9 MR. KATZ: The 16th? How is the 

10 16th for people's calendars? That is a 

11 Thursday. That is the week before Christmas 

12 week. How's that? Wanda, okay, and Phil?

13 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: No, I don't 

14 think I have got anything scheduled that week.

15 MR. KATZ: Mike?

16 Kathy, is that good for you?

17 MS. ROBERTSON-DEMERS: That's 

18 fine, as far as I know.

19 MR. KATZ: You're happy with it? 

20 Is that good?

21 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, that's good.
310 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MR. KATZ: Okay. So, why don't we 

2 do that, December 16th? That gives everybody 

3 something to shoot at.

4 MEMBER BEACH: Mike, are you going 

5 to gather up the action items and send them 

6 out to us?

7 MR. KATZ: I think, Josie, the 

8 practice is for SC&A and DCAS each to send an 

9 email with their action items to the full work 

10 group.

11 MEMBER BEACH: Okay.

12 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Well, see, 

13 that's close enough to Christmas that, if 

14 anybody wants to spend Christmas in Denver, 

15 you can come through Denver airport.

16 MR. KATZ: Are you saying we 

17 should be meeting in Denver? Is that what you 

18 are saying?

19 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: I'm saying 

20 don't go through Denver at that time.

21 MR. KATZ: Oh, okay, I got you.
311 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: We had people, 

2 you'll remember, a few years ago, who spent 

3 from Christmastime to the first of the year in 

4 the airport. They couldn't get out.

5 MR. KATZ: Are we ready to 

6 adjourn?

7 CHAIRMAN GIBSON: Yes, anything 

8 else for the meeting today?

9 (No response.)

10 If not, this meeting will be 

11 adjourned.

12 MR. KATZ: Thank you, everyone, 

13 for your hard work, on the line and in the 

14 room.

15 And have a good rest of the week. 

16 Take care.

17 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

18 matter went off the record at 3:31 p.m.)

19 

20 

21 
312 

This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Worker Outreach Work 

Group, has been reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally 

identifiable information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been 

reviewed and certified by the Chair of the Worker Outreach Work Group for accuracy at this time. 

The reader should be cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change.

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 

2 

3