1 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL 

SAFETY AND HEALTH 

+ + + + + 

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND 

WORKER HEALTH 

+ + + + + 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PROCEDURES REVIEW 

+ + + + + 

WEDNESDAY 

APRIL 11, 2012 

+ + + + + 

The Subcommittee convened in the 

Brussels Room of the Cincinnati Airport

Marriott, 2395 Progress Drive, Hebron,

Kentucky, at 9:00 a.m., Wanda I. Munn, Chair,

presiding. 

PRESENT: 

WANDA I. MUNN, Chair

MICHAEL H. GIBSON, Member*

PAUL L. ZIEMER, Member 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

2 

ALSO PRESENT: 

TED KATZ, Designated Federal Official

BOB ANIGSTEIN, SC&A*

HANS BEHLING, SC&A*

KATHY BEHLING, SC&A*

STU HINNEFELD, DCAS

JENNY LIN, HHS

STEPHEN MARSCHKE, SC&A

JOHN MAURO, SC&A*

MUTTY SHARFI, ORAU*

MATTHEW SMITH, ORAU*

JOHN STIVER, SC&A

ELYSE THOMAS, ORAU*

BRANT ULSH, DCAS 

*Participating via telephone 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

3 

CONTENTS 

Welcome and Introductions ................. 4 

Database review and comments [SC&A/NIOSH] . 6 

OTIB-0070 status of DB entry review for

accuracy [NIOSH-Sharfi] .................. 61 

Status of PERs ........................... 63 

- 008 transcript notations sent to

Science Issues? [Katz]

- 018 written notation due to LANL 

workgroup [Munn]

- 020 any claimants affected by items 1

or 2? [NIOSH] 

OTIB-54 [Munn] ........................... 74 

Carry-over items: ........................ 78 

TIB 0010 Updated database status [NIOSH] 

TIB 0010 Updated database status cont'd

TIB-013 status - 04 re-review - overarching

or site applicable [DCAS]

OTIB-0052 Rev 1 review status [SC&A] 

Introduction of new Overarching Issues

database list [NIOSH]

Status of 2-pagers. [Munn] .............. 190 

Status of new `available for review' list for 

SC&A [NIOSH] ............................ 194 

Update on PER reviews [SC&A/NIOSH] ...... 206 

Off-agenda items

OTIB-6 [Munn] ........................... 250 

IG-003/IG-005 two-pagers [Katz] ......... 252 

PERs 17 and 29 [Stiver] ................. 261 

OTIB-52 [Marschke] ...................... 272 

Administrative detail [All] ............. 280 

Adjournment ............................. 283 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

4 

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

2 
 (9:00 a.m.) 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Good morning everyone in 

4 
 the room and on the line. This is the 

5 
 Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

6 
 Procedures Review Subcommittee. 

7 
 We are getting started. We will 

8 
 begin with roll call. There are no conflict 

9 
 of issue matters with our Members for this 

10 
 group for this agenda today so we don't need 

11 to address conflict of interest. 

12 
 But let's go with roll call. Board 

13 Members, beginning in the room. 

14 (Roll call.) 

15 
 MR. KATZ: Very good. There's an 

16 
 agenda for the meeting. It's posted on the 

17 
 NIOSH web page under the Board section, 

18 meetings. And off we go. Wanda. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: I assume everyone in 

20 
 the room has a copy of the agenda. If anyone 

21 
 needs a hard copy let me know. I have one 

22 extra copy here for you if you need it. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

5 

1 
 Before we go any further, are there 

2 
 any additions or corrections to the agenda 

3 
 other than the two items that Ted had 

4 
 mentioned, were not specifically called out? 

5 
 MR. STIVER: If I could say 

6 
 something. This is John Stiver. We do have a 

7 
 kind of a draft PER-12 dose reconstruction 

8 
 report that we -- if we have time for it this 

9 
 afternoon, Kathy put that together kind of at 

10 
 the 11th hour, but -- so we'd like to discuss 

11 it. 

12 
 We have one case of the nine that's 

13 
 addressed, and before we were to, you know, go 

14 
 ahead with the process we have in place and 

15 
 the format and everything, we would like to 

16 discuss it with the Subcommittee. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Very good. We'll see 

18 
 if we -- with any luck at all, I think we'll 

19 
 have adequate time for that and we'll just do 

20 
 that before we get to administrative detail in 

21 the afternoon. 

22 Anything else? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

6 

1 
 (No response.) 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Then let's move 

3 
 forward with the agenda. Our first item is to 

4 
 take a look at the database review and the 

5 
 comments. Steve Marschke. I want to thank 

6 
 Steve personally and all of the people that 

7 
 work with him to get a familiar format for our 

8 
 reporting of status to the Board Members 

9 
 today. 

10 This was certainly very helpful for 

11 
 me and I don't know whether everyone else 

12 
 feels that way or not, but this is by far the 

13 
 most meaningful presentation of the data that 

14 we have had in a long time, I think. 

15 
 Thank you again, Steve, and if you 

16 
 want to go through our report and give 

17 
 yourself and anyone else who wants to comment 

18 
 about it our usual discussion on where we are 

19 
 with our tracking system and how well we are 

20 
 doing in terms of being able to access the 

21 
 data we want, when we want, in the format we'd 

22 like to see. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

7 

1 
 Go ahead, Steve. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay well first, I 

3 
 think, Brant, I think you want to say 

4 
 something along the lines of Wanda's summary 

5 
 table? 

6 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, for the past, I 

7 
 don't know how many meetings, the Committee's 

8 
 expressed top priority has been to generate 

9 
 within the Board Review System the ability to 

10 
 generate this table that Steve did by brute 

11 force this time. 

12 
 I'm happy to report that you can 

13 now do it, and Steve is going to show you. 

14 
 MR. MARSCHKE: If you go up here 

15 
 onto the reports and you click on summary 

16 
 finding status report, on a dropdown menu you 

17 
 get voila. You get the summary table comes 

18 
 up, automatically generated, and so in the 

19 
 future we won't have to be generating this by 

20 
 brute force. We can basically use the BRS to 

21 generate this, and so that's very good news. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: Wait, let me do that. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 

1 
 That is wonderful, just --

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Go back here to 

3 
 where it says reports, Wanda, and you get a 

4 
 little dropdown menu, and it says summary 

5 
 finding status report, you click on that. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's it. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Now, there's an 

8 
 export -- by the printer icon there's a button 

9 
 that says export. 

10 MR. MARSCHKE: Is that up here? 

11 
 MR. HINNEFELD: That corner where 

12 
 Steve is showing it. You can select the 

13 
 format in that dropdown list. And you can 

14 export that report into a Word file or Excel. 

15 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: If you want to 

17 
 include this report into a Word document that 

18 
 you are sending out, you can export it 

19 directly, right into your document. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: Oh, that's going to be 

21 so convenient. 

22 
 MS. LIN: You're missing a 3D 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 

1 
 option. 

2 
 (Laughter.) 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you. Yes. 

4 
 That's about the only thing that's missing. 

5 
 MR. HINNEFELD: We don't have the 

6 
 glasses yet. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: That is very, very 

8 
 nice, complete with a PDF file. Thank you so 

9 
 much. 

10 MR. HINNEFELD: You laugh. Those 

11 guys might do it. 

12 (Laughter.) 

13 
 MR. STIVER: We'd probably make it 

14 a video game. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Really looking forward 

16 
 to it. That is wonderful. Thank you all. Go 

17 
 ahead Steve. Thank you, Brant. Thank 

18 
 everybody behind the scenes who worked on 

19 this. 

20 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, that's it, we're 

21 done. We're going home now. 

22 (Laughter.) 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

10 

1 
 DR. ULSH: There is also, just so 

2 
 you know, Steve, if you could go back to the 

3 
 first page, the summary page. Yes. The 

4 
 cumulative totals chart, this is the graph 

5 
 that typically goes with the -- what we call 

6 
 the Wanda report. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

8 
 DR. ULSH: Now, be careful with 

9 
 this one for now. This is all late-breaking, 

10 
 and neither Steve nor I are quite sure how 

11 
 these bars are built. I mean, it looks like 

12 
 we want it to look in the past, but I have to 

13 
 double check with Tom James to make sure that 

14 all the numbers are --

15 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: And how did you get to 

17 that, Steve? 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Basically you go to 

19 the same -- where did it go? 

20 
 MR. STIVER: Cumulative totals 

21 
 chart. 

22 MR. MARSCHKE: I lost -- I --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

11 

1 
 MR. STIVER: Back under Board 

2 
 review. 

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, once you get 

4 
 to the report, you get back to the main screen 

5 
 and you close out --

6 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- to the reports 

8 
 button, it's the second one underneath. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. Okay. It's the 

10 graph, I got it. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: But, again, use it 

12 
 with care because we don't -- we aren't sure 

13 
 exactly what's being put in there, because 

14 
 typically the BRS or the Access database 

15 
 before the BRS did not keep track of --

16 historical track. 

17 
 Now you can see, basically he's got 

18 
 every month, May, June, July, August, 

19 
 September, October, and that's not what I --

20 
 that's not what we typically do. We typically 

21 
 have these bars. These charts are typically 

22 
 the dates of the Subcommittee meetings, like 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

12 

1 
 March 2008 and so on and so forth. 

2 
 So I'm not sure, you know, I'm not 

3 
 sure that this chart that is being 

4 
 automatically generated is what we need. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, it was certainly 

6 
 helpful to me as an overall visual summary. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well we can -- but 

8 
 you have to be careful of the way you 

9 
 summarize it because you have to know what's 

10 
 in it before you can really, you know -- and 

11 
 it only goes back -- it doesn't go back -- it 

12 only goes back to May of last year. 

13 
 So you know, what we've been doing 

14 
 in the past is, again, I've been keeping the 

15 
 historical record of these in kind of like a 

16 
 separate Excel file and generating these 

17 
 charts from a separate Excel file which has 

18 the history back through time. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, that seems the 

20 
 logical thing to do unless we have some really 

21 
 compelling reason to transfer that material 

22 into the new system. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

13 

1 
 DR. ULSH: Well, let me -- let me 

2 
 make sure that I understand what you want in 

3 
 this draft, and if it's the Subcommittee's 

4 
 desire, now that we've had the Wanda table up, 

5 
 if this is your new top priority, then I can, 

6 
 you know, prioritize that appropriately with 

7 
 Tom James. 

8 
 But from what I hear, you want the 

9 
 dates along the bottom to be the dates of the 

10 
 Procedures Subcommittee meetings rather than 

11 
 monthly, and for each bar, let's say if I'm 

12 
 looking at the June 8th bar, the third bar in, 

13 
 you see the different colored bars there 

14 
 corresponding to different finding status. So 

15 
 the way I interpret that is, as of June 8th, 

16 
 the bottom bar shows you how many were closed, 

17 
 and on top of that on June 8th, how many were 

18 in abeyance, et cetera et cetera. 

19 Right? That's what we --

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: Correct. That was my 

21 interpretation as well. 

22 
 DR. ULSH: Okay. I will work with 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

14 

1 
 Tom to make sure that that graph reflects what 

2 
 you want it to reflect. I'm just saying the 

3 
 shell is there now, but don't put a lot of 

4 
 trust in that data until we V&V it. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's fine, and if 

6 
 there are -- yes, it seems logical to me to 

7 
 chart this from our Subcommittee view of it, 

8 
 which would be per our meetings rather than in 

9 
 -- by month or annually. 

10 
 Paul, do you agree that our 

11 
 meetings should be the -- that is to say at 

12 
 our meetings, that's when we have input to 

13 
 this, and other times we, as a Subcommittee 

14 really and truly don't. 

15 
 So from my perspective, that's 

16 ideal. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Also, Wanda, the 

18 
 only -- in theory the only time the statuses 

19 
 are supposed to change is at the Subcommittee 

20 meeting, and by the Subcommittee. 

21 
 So going month to month, when 

22 
 there's no Subcommittee, it would not -- the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

15 

1 
 bars would be unchanged from one month to the 

2 
 next. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: It would be 

4 
 meaningless to us because we wouldn't know who 

5 
 changed it and why. 

6 
 DR. ULSH: Can you go back to the 

7 
 one that we generated in the system because 

8 
 it's month to month and you see there are some 

9 
 changes, so that --

10 MR. MARSCHKE: Well there might 

11 
 have been some meetings because there might 

12 
 have been a meeting in September, and there 

13 
 might have been a meeting in January. There 

14 was a meeting in January. 

15 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, you can see 

16 there's kind of a step function there. 

17 
 DR. ULSH: Okay, well maybe you're 

18 right then. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: So, this looks like it 

20 
 reflects three different meetings here, which 

21 seems to be about right. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: We were meeting much 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16 

1 
 more frequently. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So it's only -- but 

3 
 in between, it's level. 

4 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, which is not 

5 
 terribly informative. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Which is not, you 

7 
 know --

8 
 DR. ULSH: Okay. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, I think we were 

10 changing it, essentially when we met. 

11 
 MR. KATZ: So this is consistent 

12 
 with what you'd expect. The data is probably 

13 right. 

14 DR. ULSH: Let me make sure. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. Has anybody 

16 
 else been working with this and having any 

17 
 problems at all with it? Have you tried 

18 working with the PDF files, et cetera? 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, you know, if I 

20 could continue on, Wanda --

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: Please. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Preparing for the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

17 

1 
 meeting, I guess it was the end of March, when 

2 
 I sent -- we were working with it and we 

3 
 found a few glitches and I sent an email, and 

4 
 I think they've been mostly taken care of. 

5 
 I CC'd you, Wanda, on this email --

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- that I sent to 

8 
 Brant. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: I have it. 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I did not cc the 

11 
 rest of the Subcommittee. I don't know how 

12 
 much the Subcommittee wants to follow the nuts 

13 and bolts of the BRS. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, I think it's 

15 
 worthwhile for us at least to touch on it and 

16 
 get it into the record, because it's helpful 

17 
 for anyone who is going to be working with it 

18 
 to kind of stay up to speed with where we are 

19 
 and our eventual goal to have this really 

20 super-smooth. 

21 
 DR. ULSH: Now these should be 

22 
 addressed by now, but you know, we have to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

18 

1 
 make sure --

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Let's touch on it to 

3 
 find out. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The -- I checked it 

5 
 this morning and I think TIB-9, OCAS-TIB-9 and 

6 
 OCAS-TIB-11 I believe are now in the system, 

7 
 so that's a good thing. 

8 
 The only thing is they have not 

9 
 been populated. 

10 DR. ULSH: Right, let me explain 

11 
 that. We discovered -- I can't remember who 

12 
 discovered it -- but I became aware that when 

13 
 we built the Board Review System from the 

14 
 Access database, there was a problem with not 

15 
 just 9 and 11, but I think many more of the 

16 
 DCAS TIBs or OCAS TIBs. Remember the names 

17 changed. 

18 
 And that is that those findings 

19 
 were not ported over into the new system. So 

20 
 we are aware of that issue, and we are working 

21 on it. 

22 CHAIR MUNN: Do we know why? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

19 

1 
 DR. ULSH: No. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: We love a mystery. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: See, you can see 

4 
 OCAS-TIB-9 for example is here. When you 

5 
 click on it, basically it says there are no 

6 
 findings to display. So that's what they're -

7 
 - they're working on that right now. 

8 
 DR. ULSH: And I'd asked Elyse, and 

9 
 I think she did it, to go back into the Access 

10 
 database and kind of print out that history so 

11 
 that we can then populate it here in the Board 

12 Review System. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I think it's only --

14 
 I think one of them had two findings and the 

15 
 other one might have had one finding, and I 

16 
 think all of them are either closed or in 

17 
 abeyance or something. It's very -- they're 

18 very -- there weren't many findings. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, I see 11 on my 

20 list, showing two findings. 

21 
 MR. STIVER: I'm not seeing nine on 

22 mine. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: But I don't see nine. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: What list are you 

3 
 looking at? 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: I'm looking at the 

5 
 master list. There's OTIB-0011, tritium 

6 
 calculated missed dose estimates. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, I go from TIB-8 

8 
 to 13. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. I go from 8 to 

10 
 10. And then 11, 12, 13, 14, everybody but 9. 

11 
 DR. ULSH: So we know that this is 

12 an issue and it's being worked right now. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. We can make a 

14 note of that. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The other one I saw 

16 
 was, when we were generating some of the PDF 

17 
 files I got some errors, when I was doing it 

18 
 for some of the findings, and I'm going to 

19 
 check that this morning, that seems to be 

20 working. 

21 
 The one that doesn't seem to be 

22 
 fixed, Brant, is the first one, OCAS-PER-3. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

21 

1 
 There was an issue loading this comment and I 

2 
 don't know what that -- OCAS -- OCAS-PER-3. 

3 
 When I click on that, I get this -- I get this 

4 
 error message. 

5 
 DR. ULSH: OCAS-PER-003. 

6 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, I get the same 

7 
 message. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: I thought we had PER-3 

9 
 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And also when you 

11 
 basically do -- you get the same message when 

12 
 you do ORAU-OTIB-10. You click on that, you 

13 
 get that same, there was an issue loading 

14 
 comment/finding details. So I don't know. 

15 
 There could be some corruption in someone's 

16 
 files someplace or something. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: That was OTIB what? 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That was OTIB-10. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: We had a -- we had 10 

20 
 on our carryover items. 

21 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Was the -- this is 

22 
 ORAU-OTIB-10. I don't think we've had OCAS --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

22 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, we had OCAS-OTIB2 
 10. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: OCAS, yes we had --

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Updated -- you later. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: I wonder if you could 

6 
 have just an administrator, database 

7 
 administrator email set up so you know, as you 

8 
 do with other CDC systems, so that when these 

9 
 just sort of unique little problems like this, 

10 
 someone can just send an email to the email 

11 box saying there's a problem --

12 
 They ought to involve you in all 

13 that each time. 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Let me tell you 

15 what that address is. Hang on. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: I'm sorry, Stu, I 

17 missed that. 

18 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I'll tell you what 

19 the address is, what address to send it to. 

20 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

21 
 MR. HINNEFELD: It's -- this is all 

22 
 caps, but I don't think it matters. CIN, as 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

23 

1 
 in Cincinnati, hyphen OCAS, hyphen NOCTS space 

2 
 -- support. Support is no longer in caps. 

3 
 Actually, I'm sorry. That's -- it's CIN-OCAS4 
 NOCTSsuppor, all one word. I was reading the 

5 
 shorthand. The actual address is, and this is 

6 
 not all caps, but it won't matter, cin-ocas7 
 noctssuppor -- doesn't have room for the T --

8 
 @cdc.gov 

9 
 And specify that you are sending it 

10 
 for the Board review application. That's our 

11 
 NOCTS support inbox. And so that's our guys. 

12 
 You can send it for -- even though it's not a 

13 NOCTS issue, you can send it to us. 

14 
 MR. KATZ: Sure, yes. It looks 

15 like that will be more efficient. 

16 
 MR. HINNEFELD: And then, Brant, we 

17 
 need to warn them that they will be getting 

18 
 emails from perhaps Work Group Members, 

19 
 Subcommittee Members and Steve and perhaps 

20 John or Kathy or some people like that. 

21 
 MR. KATZ: And then down the road, 

22 
 in case someone loses it, I don't know if it's 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

24 

1 
 easy for them to just put this help number at 

2 
 the top of this system or something so that --

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Oh, I suppose they 

4 
 could. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: If they can --

6 
 MR. HINNEFELD: In fact --

7 
 MR. KATZ: If that's easy to do, 

8 
 that would be nice, and they --

9 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

10 MR. KATZ: help number --

11 
 MR. HINNEFELD: There's a link in 

12 
 NOCTS that takes you to it, so they have to 

13 only put that same type of link on --

14 
 MR. KATZ: Okay. So that would be 

15 perfect. 

16 MR. HINNEFELD: You got that? 

17 DR. ULSH: Yes. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The other thing that 

19 
 we have talked about -- and I haven't checked 

20 
 this out so maybe it's been taken care of --

21 
 but the other thing that we had talked about 

22 
 at other meetings are basically the total 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

25 

1 
 findings and the total active findings 

2 
 columns, and what is meant by active findings. 

3 
 The last time we checked -- the 

4 
 last time we tried to do this, I think we used 

5 
 

6 
 DR. ULSH: That should be fixed 

7 
 now. Should be. I told Tom to redefine the 

8 
 definition. Sorry, redefine total active 

9 
 findings to be all findings except closed --

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: Closed, transferred --

11 
 MR. STIVER: Transferred and in 

12 
 abeyance. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: In abeyance. 

14 
 DR. ULSH: Whatever it is we 

15 
 decided, I told Tom to change it and he 

16 
 reported back to me that it had in fact been 

17 
 changed. This was late last week so I haven't 

18 
 had a chance to verify that. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, I think we had --

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The one that we were 

21 
 looking at was actually OTIB-54 and kind of 

22 
 using that as an example. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

26 

1 
 MR. STIVER: ORAU-OTIB-54? 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: See basically the 

3 
 problem I have is, if you look at OTIB-54, it 

4 
 shows 26 findings and 26 active findings and 

5 
 that's not right. So somehow it's not getting 

6 
 updated. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: Oh, here it is. Yes, 

8 
 26, 26. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And if you go, get 

10 
 down, if you go into the details, you can see 

11 
 basically that the first one is in abeyance, 

12 
 the second one is closed, the third one and 

13 fourth one are closed. 

14 
 So a lot of them have been closed 

15 
 or in abeyance, and it's just really -- so 

16 
 something's not being updated probably. But I 

17 
 mean he made -- probably made the changes to 

18 
 the definition but somewhere there has to be 

19 an update of that first table. 

20 
 MR. STIVER: There were nine in 

21 
 progress. All the rest are either closed or 

22 in abeyance. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: In abeyance. One, 

2 
 two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. I 

3 
 have eight in progress, but you say there's 

4 
 more? 

5 
 MR. STIVER: I might have 

6 
 miscounted, point being there's quite a few 

7 
 that are already closed. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

9 
 MR. STIVER: This is OTIB-54. Look 

10 under all Work Groups and then --

11 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: Five, six, seven in 

13 abeyance. And it's not picking it up. 

14 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, that's the main 

15 
 point is, whether or not there's how many 

16 
 there are, specifically the fact that it's not 

17 picking them up. 

18 CHAIR MUNN: Well now --

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So the question is, 

20 
 I mean, it's obviously, I think it's picking 

21 
 them up, obviously on the -- when it does the 

22 
 Wanda summary table, the new Wanda summary 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

28 

1 
 table, it's doing it right. 

2 
 So the data is being, you know, 

3 
 somewhere -- this screen is not being updated 

4 
 with the latest information. Should be a 

5 
 relatively minor thing. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: This is one of those 

7 
 that Ted had on his note that I had overlooked 

8 
 in my --

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, we weren't 

10 
 sure what Ted meant on his note, whether he 

11 
 meant this or whether he meant -- because we 

12 
 haven't really talked about OTIB-54 itself 

13 
 except for to use it as this example. We 

14 
 haven't talked about it itself since I think 

15 it was January of 2011. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: That's why I didn't have 

17 it for this particular concern. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Right, no. Yes. 

19 That's what I kind of thought. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: So, we'll just keep 

21 
 that as a checkpoint for how well the system 

22 is working next time, right? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

29 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, I mean this 

2 
 could be a very handy thing to have Wanda, 

3 
 because you could click on, you know, total 

4 
 active findings and it will order them in 

5 
 order and you could then use it and see which 

6 
 of the procedures are -- still have the most 

7 
 active findings associated with it so they can 

8 
 maybe pop up to the top of the list. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, that's marvelous. 

10 
 That was one of the big things that I had on 

11 
 my list of things to check out here, so the 

12 
 fact that you can get active findings is 

13 great. We'll just check 54 next time. 

14 All right. Anything else, Steve? 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I think that's all I 

16 wanted to say about the BRS. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Does anyone else who 

18 
 has been using the database have anything to 

19 add or anything to complain about? 

20 
 I still find this a little bit 

21 
 cumbersome, but I think it's my lack of 

22 
 facility with the process, not the database 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30 

1 
 itself, as best I can determine. 

2 
 You doing okay with it, Paul? 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, gradually. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. And we don't 

5 
 have anyone on the line who -- do we have Mike 

6 
 on the line? 

7 
 MR. STIVER: Mike Smith? 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: No. No. 

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: No, Mike Gibson. 

10 MEMBER GIBSON: I'm here. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: Have you had occasion 

12 to play with this at all, Mike? 

13 
 MEMBER GIBSON: No, I haven't, 

14 Wanda. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. Very good. 

16 Then I trust you don't have any complaints? 

17 MEMBER GIBSON: I don't. 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's good. And, 

19 
 Dick, are we going to have Dick at any time on 

20 the line? 

21 
 MR. KATZ: No. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, okay. All right 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

31 

1 
 then. Thank you very much Steve and all your 

2 
 associates. Brant, thanks. We really 

3 
 appreciate that. I feel like this is a 

4 
 significant help for me certainly. 

5 
 I would call to your attention a 

6 
 small, tiny little thing Steve, on the primary 

7 
 chart, the heading says, "Number 2, total 

8 
 findings" of the first column. I think you 

9 
 want that to be total of total findings. 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, well okay, 

11 
 well, the thing is -- what the, did they put 

12 it right in the --

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it says, "Number 

14 2, total findings." 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well they just have 

16 
 total findings. The new one, we will -- in 

17 
 the future we will be using the automatic 

18 system one. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: And the automatic 

20 
 system one says --

21 MR. MARSCHKE: It just says total 

22 findings. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

32 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: -- total findings, it 

2 
 doesn't say any of two or anything. That's 

3 
 good. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So, it doesn't have 

5 
 that problem. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. That's good. 

7 
 Then my little picky is of no consequence at 

8 
 all. All right. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I guess, I don't 

10 
 know if you want to talk about it now, but I 

11 
 mean we can basically talk about you know, 

12 
 where we are a little bit, if you want to look 

13 
 at this chart that was associated with the 

14 
 handout, as opposed to the one that was on the 

15 
 automatic chart with the system, you can 

16 
 really look and it gives you a good idea of 

17 
 the status that we are making and you see we 

18 are over 50 percent --

19 CHAIR MUNN: Done. Closed. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- closed. Well 

21 
 over 50 percent closed. Maybe 55 percent 

22 closed, if you look at the second one --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

33 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- which is not, 

3 
 which is not bad, and if you add in the ones 

4 
 that are in abeyance, that means we are over 

5 
 70 percent have resolutions to them. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The ones that are 

8 
 open is less than 10 percent, those are the 

9 
 ones we haven't talked about at all. It looks 

10 
 like we've got about 10 percent that are also 

11 
 

12 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: So go ahead, Steve, 

14 
 you're 11 percent --

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, I was just 

16 
 looking at the in progress one looks to be 

17 
 about, well, according to the chart it's about 

18 
 seven percent --

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, right. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- in progress, and 

21 
 so you know, if you look at the previous --

22 
 the previous chart, you can see for a long 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

34 

1 
 time, from May of 2009 to October of 2010, we 

2 
 didn't really add any new findings. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: No. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: But since we've 

5 
 added a few findings since October of 2010 to 

6 
 today, not very many, maybe a handful, I think 

7 
 most of these have, you know, came from Hans 

8 
 in his PER reviews --

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: I think so. 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- and maybe Report 

11 
 44 is in there. But again, you can basically 

12 
 go back up and look at either the summary --

13 
 the Wanda version here and you can see the 

14 
 from 2009 or from 2010 to now, you can see 

15 
 there's been 5, 10, depending on whether or 

16 
 not report PER-18 is included, findings that 

17 have been added since. 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: True. Now, it would 

19 
 be -- I was going to do this if we had time to 

20 
 do it later, but this is an excellent time for 

21 
 us to use the status filter to bring up all 

22 
 the open items to see if there's any way that 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

35 

1 
 we can specifically bring those up a little 

2 
 higher in our priority list, if it's feasible 

3 
 to do that so that we get a better feel for 

4 
 exactly what we have open that we have not 

5 
 addressed at all. We haven't done that in six 

6 
 or eight months, and it looks like we have 

7 
 IG-1 with a bunch of them open. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: We can basically 

9 
 order them. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, we have -- PER-3 

11 
 has one. PER-7 has five. PR-3, that 

12 
 surprises me, we have done a lot with that but 

13 it still has one open. 

14 
 We have OTIB-13 open. We have 

15 
 three open Paducah 37, a couple on Rocky, 38, 

16 eight on Hanford 39. That's interesting. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I don't know if this 

18 
 is correct. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, if it's not 

20 
 correct, then the data isn't where it needs to 

21 
 be as far as status is concerned, so it might 

22 be wise for us to take a look at those. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

36 

1 
 Stu, Brant, do you have any 

2 
 thoughts about those open items that we show 

3 
 on the list? 

4 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, one thing that I 

5 
 asked Elyse to do for specific documents this 

6 
 time was to go through and make sure that the 

7 
 findings in the Board Review System were up to 

8 
 date, the status of them. 

9 
 At the appropriate time, whenever 

10 
 you want to during this meeting, I think, you 

11 
 know, I'll ask Elyse to report what she has 

12 
 found, but we can also make that a priority 

13 for the next meeting as well. 

14 
 I think that there's going to be 

15 
 some history, some actions that have been 

16 
 taken on some of these findings that have not 

17 
 yet been loaded into the Board Review System 

18 and we can make a list of those. 

19 CHAIR MUNN: Is Elyse on now? 

20 DR. ULSH: Elyse, are you there? 

21 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, yes I am, and 

22 
 I've started that, but I don't really have 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

37 

1 
 anything yet to report, but I'll have 

2 
 something by the next meeting. It really just 

3 
 means going through a lot of different 

4 
 documents to, you know, see what the current 

5 
 status is. 

6 
 So it's just time-consuming, but 

7 
 you know, I'll go through that for next time, 

8 
 so I have something to report for next time. 

9 
 DR. ULSH: This is one of those 

10 
 things where I think perhaps since we are not 

11 
 going to be changing the status, we can report 

12 
 to Steve, you know if we find some that are 

13 
 out of date, because Steve will be the one to 

14 
 change them or someone on your side will be 

15 the one to --

16 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, we'll change 

17 it at the meeting, right? 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Usually we wait 

19 until the meeting. 

20 DR. ULSH: That's true. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, if we find 

22 
 situations where we have at some meeting done 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

38 

1 
 something and it just for some reason is not 

2 
 being accurately reflected in the database, 

3 
 then there is no reason why that can't be 

4 
 taken care of. But, yes, you're right --

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It's your call, 

6 
 Wanda, if that's the way you want to -- I 

7 
 would prefer to keep a list of them and then 

8 
 do it -- maybe to bring that list to your 

9 
 attention at the next status meeting and kind 

10 
 of do a real quick look at it, so that the 

11 
 Board is aware, or that the Subcommittee is 

12 aware when the BRS statuses are changing. 

13 
 MR. KATZ: But that's not necessary 

14 
 if this is -- if the -- if the Subcommittee 

15 
 has already taken its action and it's just 

16 that it's not correct in the system. 

17 
 DR. ULSH: Well, yes, I tell you 

18 
 what we'll do. We'll -- at least we'll 

19 
 proceed with our work, and when we are at a 

20 
 reasonable point, we'll send an email to you, 

21 
 Wanda, and to you, Steve, and you can decide 

22 whatever you want to do with it. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

39 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: Great, that's great. 

2 
 My note is that Elyse is on the hot seat for 

3 
 next time as far as accuracy of the database 

4 
 is concerned. 

5 
 DR. ULSH: Elyse is always on the 

6 
 hot seat. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you, Elyse. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Am I understanding 

9 
 this correctly? On the first one there for 

10 
 example, there's seven of them listed even 

11 
 though there should be eight open. Is that 

12 how to understand this? 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well let's go to --

14 
 some time to think. That would be kind of a 

15 
 different -- there may be a difference between 

16 
 active finding -- because again, going back, 

17 Paul --

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Active and open may 

19 be different. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Active and open may 

21 be different. 

22 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I got you, yes. In 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40 

1 
 other words it may be open versus what, in 

2 
 abeyance? 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, in process. 

4 
 MR. STIVER: In abeyance would 

5 
 still be considered active. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: In process --

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: In process would be 

8 
 open. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- may also be 

10 
 active. 

11 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Gotcha. 

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And I don't know 

13 
 what we determined transferred and I guess --

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: We said transferred 

15 
 and in abeyance and addressed would be --

16 
 would not be considered active. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So basically the 

18 
 active was just the open ones and the --

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: It was open and in 

20 
 progress. 

21 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- in progress ones. 

22 
 So --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

41 

1 
 MR. STIVER: Steve, I've got a 

2 
 quick question for you. When I click on the 

3 
 little plus sign over on the right-hand column 

4 
 under IG-001, all I get is a note that the 

5 
 Subcommittee on Procedures Review -- I'm not 

6 
 getting a list of the open findings. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Where are you? 

8 
 MR. STIVER: I was just looking at 

9 
 that same document, OCAS-IG-001. Now if I 

10 
 click on the little icon, the little negative 

11 
 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: The little plus? 

13 
 MR. STIVER: -- the little minus 

14 
 sign and a little plus, I'm not getting a list 

15 
 under there of the findings. Back out one 

16 
 level. Right there, see, now click the little 

17 
 blue icon there. 

18 
 MR. KATZ: To minimize. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, minimize it. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It'll go away. 

21 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, open it up. You 

22 
 see? I don't get that list. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

42 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Did you do a sort? 

2 
 Basically did you do the -- have you done the 

3 
 status filters -- have you done a filter? 

4 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Sort on open. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: If you did a filter 

6 
 on the open --

7 
 MR. STIVER: It's strictly pilot 

8 
 error then. Okay. 

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: There it is. 

10 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, there we go. 

11 Strike that from the record, please. 

12 (Laughter.) 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: That wasn't said. 

14 
 Could we then leave as an item for NIOSH to 

15 
 specifically review the open items that we 

16 
 have from this sort and identify whether these 

17 
 are actions that we can begin to address, or 

18 
 if for some reason, these, although they are 

19 
 shown as open, cannot be or should not be 

20 
 worked at this time? Just in an effort to try 

21 
 to identify the level of concern that we have 

22 
 with respect to these open items we haven't 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

43 

1 
 addressed. 

2 
 DR. ULSH: Okay, hold on a minute. 

3 
 I have as an action item for us to review the 

4 
 status of the findings and make sure they're 

5 
 correct. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

7 
 DR. ULSH: Is that what you're 

8 
 saying? 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Correct, and the 

10 
 second thing I'm asking is that you review 

11 them for their meaningful nature. 

12 DR. ULSH: Okay. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: That is to say should 

14 
 we be addressing these? Do we need to be 

15 
 closing these open items? Statistically it 

16 
 looks like we should be closing some of these 

17 
 open items, but statistics are only the first 

18 
 blush. If these are of such a nature that it 

19 
 would be creating a problem for extremely 

20 
 current work for us to begin to close them, 

21 
 then we need to know that. If not, then we'd 

22 
 like you to assess, that is I would like you 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

44 

1 
 to assess whether we need to be paying some 

2 
 attention to these. Is it time to move these 

3 
 up on your list of priorities? 

4 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So you're asking 

5 
 whether they have an importance level that we 

6 
 should do something now versus just leave it 

7 
 on the back burner? 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Exactly. 

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I got you. 

10 
 MR. KATZ: And you want DCAS to 

11 
 make those determinations as to what your 

12 priorities should be? 

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, we'll know 

14 
 for instance if there's a finding against the 

15 
 procedures -- or process -- you know, things 

16 not being done anymore. 

17 
 MR. KATZ: I see what you're 

18 saying. 

19 
 MR. HINNEFELD: We'll be able to 

20 
 say things like that. I don't know that we 

21 
 would suggest prioritizing beyond that very 

22 much. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45 

1 
 MR. KATZ: Right. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: It's sort of like, 

4 
 well, even if you don't close this, it doesn't 

5 
 affect anything. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, and I think --

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Because we're not 

8 
 doing that or --

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: -- the Subcommittee 

10 
 needs to know that. We need to have some feel 

11 
 for whether these are important, and are being 

12 overlooked, or whether it's --

13 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, particularly 

14 if you can do that easily. 

15 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Just look at it and 

17 
 say there's no particular problem if we delay 

18 
 any action on this item, so that we can focus 

19 on things that are critical. 

20 
 MR. HINNEFELD: It's a part of the 

21 other. It's an add-on to the original task. 

22 CHAIR MUNN: It is. It is. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

46 

1 
 MR. HINNEFELD: The original task 

2 
 was let's see if the statuses are right and by 

3 
 what we think -- see if we think they are 

4 
 current and up to date. One thing that should 

5 
 be clear is some in abeyances might be ready 

6 
 to be closed, if we issue the revised 

7 
 document. So that's one thing. 

8 
 And then -- but then following onto 

9 
 that, of the ones that statuses are open, are 

10 
 there any in there that we feel are 

11 
 unimportant or not relevant anymore and that 

12 
 we would suggest maybe these aren't worth the 

13 effort to resolve. 

14 DR. ULSH: Okay. I gotcha. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: As I understand, for 

16 
 example, IG-001 was a very, very early one, 

17 
 even though we are looking at Rev 2 in these 

18 findings. 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: This was like the 

20 
 second review by SC&A of IG-01. We reviewed 

21 
 Rev 1. I believe it was Rev 1. And we had a 

22 
 bunch of findings on that, and you can see 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

47 

1 
 that those have all been taken care of, at 

2 
 least they're no longer open, and then we went 

3 
 through and did a second review of Rev 2 of 

4 
 IG-01 because I guess it's a very important 

5 
 procedure. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: It is. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And we really 

8 
 haven't talked about -- all these findings 

9 
 being shown as open means we really haven't 

10 
 even talked about that second review from SC&A 

11 yet. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: And if we have not, 

13 
 the question for NIOSH is are you now ready to 

14 
 talk about those? Is it something that we 

15 need to --

16 
 MS. THOMAS: This is Elyse. If I 

17 can jump in here. 

18 CHAIR MUNN: Please do. 

19 
 MS. THOMAS: That is one that I did 

20 
 look at, as I mentioned. I did start this 

21 
 work. I am just not ready to report 

22 everything. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

48 

1 
 But if you look at all the NIOSH 

2 
 responses for the Rev 2 review, Rev 3 has been 

3 
 issued. So I would suggest that, you know, 

4 
 the step here now is for SC&A to look at Rev 3 

5 
 to see if those items have been addressed in 

6 
 Rev 3 as NIOSH is saying they are. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Probably. 

8 
 MS. THOMAS: Do you see what I'm 

9 
 saying? 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, if these -- if 

11 
 these are all essentially items that were a 

12 
 result of -- that were pushing Rev 3, and Rev 

13 
 3 has incorporated them, then we need to know 

14 that. 

15 
 MR. KATZ: That's fine. So that's 

16 just an example --

17 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

18 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: -- of the updating that 

20 
 we are looking for because we can't really 

21 task SC&A until we know what's on base. 

22 CHAIR MUNN: Exactly. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

49 

1 
 MS. THOMAS: Right, exactly. 

2 
 MR. KATZ: So, right. 

3 
 MS. THOMAS: So that's -- that's 

4 
 just one that I'm familiar with because I did 

5 
 look at that one. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I believe Kathy 

8 
 Behling I think did the review of IG-01 and 

9 
 maybe, Hans, maybe you did it as well, maybe 

10 you were involved with it as well. 

11 
 But I mean if you want to take an 

12 
 action -- if you want us -- if the 

13 
 Subcommittee wants SC&A to take an action item 

14 
 and look at Rev 3 of IG-1 and see whether --

15 how much it addresses these --

16 MR. KATZ: Remaining open items. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- the remaining 

18 
 open items before the next meeting, we can 

19 actually do that. 

20 
 MR. KATZ: That's fine. Might as 

21 
 well. Might as well pick it up since it's 

22 been raised. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

50 

1 
 DR. MAURO: Ted, this is John. 

2 
 MR. KATZ: Yes. 

3 
 DR. MAURO: This cascade effect 

4 
 which I think is good, what's happening here, 

5 
 should this be something that would be 

6 
 automatic? That is, given that we have an 

7 
 active review, for example Rev 0, when we --

8 
 and if we are watching the store and Rev 1 

9 
 comes out, should we automatically go into --

10 
 and do it, or should we await direction from 

11 the Subcommittee? 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, I think 

13 direction is in order, personally. 

14 
 DR. MAURO: Okay, so we don't take 

15 
 any action on Rev 2, 3 -- this will be like a 

16 
 general, you know, fundamental protocol, that 

17 
 though there may be a new revision of a 

18 
 particular procedure that has been issued in 

19 
 the interim, that may very well have addressed 

20 
 many of the issues, we don't look at it or 

21 
 take action on it until we are authorized to 

22 do so by the Subcommittee? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: I believe that's been 

2 
 the general process in the past. 

3 
 DR. MAURO: Okay. 

4 
 MR. KATZ: That's good, but then we 

5 
 need -- so we need notice when there's a new 

6 
 rev of something. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: Well, yes, I could see 

8 
 that happening where a new rev comes out just 

9 
 right after a meeting and --

10 
 MR. KATZ: Well just so the matter 

11 
 doesn't sit there forever before we even 

12 realize it, but --

13 
 DR. ULSH: I think the way that 

14 
 that would work would be -- like for instance, 

15 
 okay, SC&A has some findings on a particular 

16 document. We do a revision in response. 

17 
 So if we go in to respond in the 

18 
 Board Review System, we should let you know, 

19 
 hey, we've added some responses. We should 

20 
 probably add this to the Procedures 

21 Subcommittee --

22 
 MR. KATZ: Right, it should be on 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

52 

1 
 the agenda for the next meeting. Right. That 

2 
 would be great. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, because I don't 

4 
 think we've always been following that. 

5 
 Because I remember on OTIB-52, Rev 1 of OTIB6 
 52 came out, and I don't think -- and SC&A 

7 
 reviewed that to see how it would -- and it's 

8 
 on the agenda for later this afternoon. 

9 
 But I don't think -- I think we 

10 
 just took that on our own initiative to see 

11 
 how it addressed the findings that were with 

12 
 Rev 0. So -- but this is, you know, more 

13 
 formal, a little bit more formal if we go 

14 through the Subcommittee. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, I thought we had 

16 
 discussed 52 though, at the time that the new 

17 
 rev was coming out. I thought we had it here 

18 
 on our agenda at one point. Perhaps I was 

19 wrong. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Could be, I don't --

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: I don't know. 

22 MR. MARSCHKE: I don't know. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53 

1 
 DR. ULSH: Well, it just seems to 

2 
 me that any time, at least on our side, that 

3 
 we put a response in the Board Review System 

4 
 we should shoot you notice that we --

5 
 MR. KATZ: Put it on the agenda and 

6 
 then we don't have to wait until a 

7 
 Subcommittee meeting to task you but --

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: It's going to be on the 

10 
 agenda and you would be prepared to address 

11 it. 

12 MR. MARSCHKE: Right, yes. 

13 
 MR. STIVER: As long as Wanda is 

14 notified and then we can --

15 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Going forward that's 

17 the way we can --

18 CHAIR MUNN: That'll be fine. 

19 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: One other question 

20 
 on this summary findings table, where there 

21 
 are items indicated as being active -- I'm 

22 
 looking for example at the one called 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

54 

1 
 processing claims for construction workers and 

2 
 there are 10 active items, but there's no list 

3 
 under it. Does that mean none of them are in 

4 
 the category that we call open? 

5 
 In other words, the only ones 

6 
 showing up in the grey bars are the open 

7 
 items. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So if there's 

10 
 active items but there's no list underneath, 

11 
 I'm assuming that means the active items are 

12 in categories other than open. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: They should be in 

14 progress, then, if that's the case. 

15 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Maybe Elyse, when 

16 
 she reviews this -- do you understand what I'm 

17 saying, Elyse? 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I understand what 

19 
 you're saying. I don't -- I, again, we've had 

20 
 problems with the active finding columns and I 

21 
 don't know how this is -- if you go down 

22 
 construction worker, OTIB-52, you go down 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

55 

1 
 here, basically there should not be any -- you 

2 
 are correct, there aren't any open ones --

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, we've sorted 

4 
 for opens and none are listed --

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So why does this one 

6 
 even show up on the sort? 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well it should be that 

8 
 they are in progress then. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: But we sorted -- we 

10 
 filtered on open so why is this -- why is this 

11 document even showing up on the table? 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- why are some of 

13 these showing up without open items? 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, because it has a 

15 heading for total active findings, and --

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But we sorted for 

17 
 opens --

18 CHAIR MUNN: We sorted for opens 

19 
 and open gave us the total findings and the 

20 total active findings. 

21 
 MS. THOMAS: This is Elyse, and I 

22 
 think some of them may be that there was no 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

56 

1 
 initial NIOSH response. There's not a lot of 

2 
 those, but there are a few where, like for 

3 
 example, in a document that may have had, you 

4 
 know, five or six findings, we provided 

5 
 responses for -- or NIOSH provided responses 

6 
 for maybe four of those, and there's maybe one 

7 
 or two that, you know, we still haven't 

8 
 provided a response for. 

9 
 So it may not -- it may be open but 

10 
 there's not a response, or maybe it was never 

11 given the status of opened to begin with. 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well yes, but see, 

13 
 that's what's a little puzzling, if it's not 

14 
 given the status of open, why does it show up 

15 
 on the sort, because if you're sorting against 

16 that category --

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, open should be 

18 
 an automatic category. If we haven't 

19 addressed it, it's open. 

20 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, it's -- I was 

21 
 just thinking maybe it's because there's a 

22 
 finding but no response and so there's no 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

57 

1 
 status of --

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, it's almost -

3 
 -

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: There's been 

5 
 responses on -- on 52, the one that Paul 

6 
 pulled up, there's been a number of responses 

7 
 back and forth between NIOSH and SC&A. This 

8 
 has been going on since quite a while. 

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: There were 16 

10 
 original findings, and there are 10 active, 

11 
 but none show up as being open. That's what's 

12 a little puzzling. 

13 
 MR. STIVER: If you look on in 

14 
 progress though, it's giving you the right 

15 information, 13 and 14 show up there. 

16 MEMBER ZIEMER: Where is that? 

17 
 MR. STIVER: If you filter on in 

18 progress. 

19 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I see, okay. Okay, 

20 
 so it does mean that they are not open in the 

21 usual sense, but they are active. 

22 
 DR. ULSH: Okay, if I can maybe 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

58 

1 
 perhaps look at the forest through the trees 

2 
 here. It seems like a priority item for us is 

3 
 to again check this column of total active 

4 
 findings and see --

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Maybe it's sorting 

6 
 active versus open. 

7 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, there's something 

8 
 going on there still. We thought we had it 

9 
 fixed, but we apparently don't have it fixed. 

10 So that will be a priority item. 

11 
 The second priority item is to look 

12 
 at all of the findings that are still out 

13 
 there and make sure the statuses are up to 

14 
 date, current, accurate. And I think once we 

15 
 do that, maybe it will at least cut down on 

16 
 the number of problems that we are trying to 

17 deal with here. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The other thing I 

19 
 can like, say, on this sort, on open items is 

20 
 it's showing DCAS-TIB-10 as having --

21 
 everything is open, all the nine issues as 

22 being open. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

59 

1 
 I think when it was OCAS-TIB-10, I 

2 
 think we have, we have addressed a number of 

3 
 those. So you have -- when Elyse goes through 

4 
 this, she might want to look, I think a lot of 

5 
 those open ones that are associated with DCAS6 
 TIB-10 will go away, if you look at what was 

7 
 done on OCAS-TIB-10. 

8 
 DR. ULSH: Okay, that goes back to 

9 
 the problem that we were having with the 

10 DCAS/OCAS --

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes. Yes. 

12 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, and I think that 

13 
 -- isn't that an item a little bit later on in 

14 the agenda? 

15 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, we do have 10. 

16 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, because I do --

17 
 that is another one that I looked at 

18 
 carefully, and I have, you know, suggestions 

19 
 as to which one should be closed, in abeyance, 

20 or in progress or whatever. 

21 
 I sent those to Brant in an email 

22 
 so we can talk about that when it comes on 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

60 

1 
 further on in the agenda. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it's in our 

3 
 carryover items. All right. Are we all on 

4 
 the same page with respect to what our action 

5 
 items are for next time? Good. 

6 
 Anything else, Steve? 

7 
 (No response.) 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Anyone else have 

9 
 anything they want to say about the database, 

10 
 where we are, other than applause and gold 

11 ribbons? 

12 (Laughter.) 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: Then let's move on to 

14 
 our next item of business, which is the 

15 
 OTIB-70, status of the database entry review 

16 for accuracy. 

17 
 Mutty was going to take a look at 

18 that. NIOSH has a report. 

19 DR. ULSH: Mutty, you still there? 

20 MR. SHARFI: Yes. 

21 
 MR. KATZ: You're hard to hear, 

22 Mutty. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

61 

1 
 MR. SHARFI: Can you hear me now? 

2 
 MR. KATZ: Oh, yes. Perfect. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, good. 

4 
 DR. ULSH: So I don't know if you 

5 
 heard, Mutty, we are on the OTIB-70 agenda 

6 
 item. 

7 
 MR. SHARFI: And the question for 

8 
 me is? 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Our notes from our 

10 
 last meeting said that you were going to 

11 
 review the status of the entry for accuracy, 

12 
 to see if OTIB-70 was being reported properly. 

13 
 Do we have what we need in our 

14 official database? 

15 
 MR. SHARFI: The only thing that I 

16 
 have to verify was on the revision, there was 

17 
 a question about whether or not the 10 to the 

18 
 minus 6 resuspension was more of a guidance 

19 
 document in the revision, and I did verify 

20 that was true. 

21 
 The revision has been approved, so 

22 that is now out there. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So there's a revised 

2 
 OTIB-70, recently revised OTIB-70 out there? 

3 
 MR. SHARFI: Yes. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That addresses some 

5 
 of these --

6 
 MR. SHARFI: Should address all of 

7 
 them. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Should address all 

9 
 of these -- so this should be the same thing 

10 
 as we did for IG-1? We should basically take 

11 
 a look at the revised OTIB-70 and see whether 

12 
 we concur that it does address all the in 

13 abeyance findings? 

14 MR. SHARFI: Yes. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. It appears so. 

16 
 It looks like the action is now SC&A's. Good. 

17 
 That was quick and easy. At least we don't 

18 have to spend 15 minutes on that. 

19 
 The status of the PERs. We have 

20 
 three of them: 008 transcript notations. The 

21 
 last time Ted had said he was going to send 

22 
 those over to Science Issues and it hadn't 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

63 

1 
 happened. 

2 
 MR. KATZ: No, I copied you sending 

3 
 those to Dr. Richardson. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: That is done. And a 

5 
 written notation due to LANL Working Group. I 

6 
 started to do that last week and discovered 

7 
 that one of the wonderful things our database 

8 
 does for us now, is it gives us all the links 

9 
 when we pull up -- we have the PDF file issued 

10 
 so we now can do that, but it also gives us 

11 
 the links that we need for -- these things 

12 have been transferred to another procedure. 

13 
 So my -- what I was going to do, 

14 
 then, which was only forward the two 

15 
 outstanding items. By the way, the Work Group 

16 
 Chair already knows this and the Work Group 

17 
 has assumed this responsibility. This is just 

18 
 a formality of my getting this in writing so 

19 that we have it for the record. 

20 
 I had a little trouble getting the 

21 
 PDF file that I wanted to the links up there. 

22 
 But that's happening. It just has not 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

64 

1 
 happened yet. 

2 
 The other item is PER-20 and NIOSH 

3 
 was going to check to see whether any 

4 
 claimants were being affected by those two 

5 
 items that we had on that -- on the Blockson 

6 
 PER. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, I'm only 

8 
 preliminarily done with that, and maybe, SC&A 

9 
 may -- I'll tell you what I get in and maybe 

10 
 SC&A may have some comments on whether this is 

11 sufficient. 

12 
 The findings here related to the 

13 
 choice of class and solubility as the 

14 
 solubility of uranium at Blockson. DCAS's 

15 
 position is that the process that was used at 

16 
 Blockson would generate Class M uranium and 

17 
 there wasn't a heavy -- a high roasting, a 

18 
 high temperature roasting that would maybe 

19 make it Class S. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: There wasn't. There 

21 
 wasn't. 

22 MR. HINNEFELD: And so that's the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

65 

1 
 nature of the finding. The findings are that 

2 
 if you use Type S, then these doses, you know, 

3 
 the PER calls everything Class M so there 

4 
 would be some doses would be higher if you 

5 
 used Class S. And that's a true statement. 

6 
 And so I said, you know, it's not 

7 
 clear to me that anybody would even be 

8 
 affected if you used S or M because by and 

9 
 large that is a respiratory tract, lung and 

10 
 respiratory tract target organ. It wouldn't 

11 be an issue there. 

12 
 So what I did was I took the list 

13 
 of all the Blockson claims that had a dose 

14 
 reconstruction with a PoC of less than 50 

15 
 percent and looked for claims that would have 

16 
 had either lung, ET 1 or 2, or LNPH, or LNEP, 

17 probably, but I don't think any of them did 

18 
 In other words, had internal target 

19 
 organ that were Class Y -- Class S, Class S 

20 
 now, would cause a higher dose. There are 

21 
 about 12. Eleven of those are SEC cancer 

22 
 cases and they all have sufficient -- they all 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

66 

1 
 have a year of employment. 

2 
 There's one claim that has -- that 

3 
 is a Hodgkin's disease, which is a non-SEC 

4 
 case, Hodgkin's disease in the supraclavicular 

5 
 lymph node, so the target organ is LNE. 

6 
 So that's the one. There is one 

7 
 that might be affected and that's as far as 

8 
 I've gotten. I haven't determined whether it 

9 
 would actually determine, you know, change it 

10 or not. 

11 
 MR. STIVER: Whether it would be a 

12 change or not, yes. 

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. So we haven't 

14 gone that far yet. 

15 MR. STIVER: Okay. 

16 
 MR. HINNEFELD: And we have verified 

17 
 that the 11 that should be SECs were actually 

18 
 before the SEC -- because these were dose 

19 
 reconstructions that were done before the 

20 
 Class was added. So we won't necessarily now. 

21 
 We'd have to send those to Labor to see if 

22 they actually made it. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

67 

1 
 So that's where we are now. Our 

2 
 position is still that it was Type M, that it 

3 
 was Class M uranium and I have tried to find -

4 
 - what I've been studiously doing here is 

5 
 doing this and looking at transcripts from 

6 
 Blockson Work Group. The last discussion I 

7 
 saw that talked about anything other than 

8 
 radon was on October 15th of 2008. 

9 
 At that time Bob Anigstein 

10 
 expressed reservation about whether Class M 

11 
 was really the right way to go or whether 

12 there should be some consideration of Class S. 

13 
 That's the last thing I saw. Jim 

14 
 Neton said at that meeting, "Well, we've 

15 
 established long ago that this is a Site 

16 
 Profile issue, and this was all SEC 

17 
 discussion," and so on. I couldn't find that 

18 it actually went farther than that. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: If there was any 

20 resolution to that. 

21 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. That I can't 

22 
 find out. Our opinion still is that it was 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

68 

1 
 Class M uranium that came out of Blockson. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: That was certainly the 

3 
 opinion of the Blockson Chair. I can tell 

4 
 you. 

5 
 MR. HINNEFELD: That's where we 

6 
 are. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: So the next step is to 

8 
 reevaluate --

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: There's -- yes, I 

10 
 mean, we can -- the two ways to go here are to 

11 
 drag back out the evidence for Class M versus 

12 
 Class S in a future meeting and try to work 

13 through that. 

14 
 Or the possible shortcut is to take 

15 
 this one case and say, okay, if it were 

16 
 reworked with Class S material, would it 

17 
 change? See, the person had, oh, somewhat 

18 
 less than three years of employment. It might 

19 not change. 

20 
 So I mean we can -- we'll do that, 

21 
 but that's, that's a possible shortcut, in 

22 
 which case we would say none of the claimants 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

69 

1 
 would be affected. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: It would be my 

3 
 suggestion that we do exactly that, unless 

4 
 there's strong opposition to that position. 

5 
 DR. MAURO: This is John. To add a 

6 
 little bit to that, the reason we could take 

7 
 this quick approach, I mean, rather than have 

8 
 to resolve the fundamental issues, is: I think 

9 
 the Blockson situation was unique to Blockson. 

10 
 It wasn't that the issue of M versus S that we 

11 
 had before us was one that had far-reaching 

12 
 implications. I think that it probably was 

13 
 something that we expressed concern over that 

14 
 was specially unique to Blockson and what they 

15 were doing there. 

16 
 And so all I am really saying is 

17 
 that by dealing with it in a more practical 

18 
 way, the way Stu just described, you know, is 

19 
 a quick way to expedite the process without, 

20 you know, needing to go to the Board arena. 

21 
 MR. STIVER: John, this is John 

22 
 Stiver. I wasn't around for the Blockson 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

70 

1 
 discussions. This is kind of a pre-employment 

2 
 period for me. 

3 
 What was the issue, without having 

4 
 to drag all this out again, if you could just 

5 
 kind of give the 30-second sound bite? 

6 
 DR. MAURO: Yes, bottom line you've 

7 
 got the phosphogypsum material coming up from 

8 
 Florida, being processed for uranium using a 

9 
 relatively unique methodology --

10 CHAIR MUNN: All wet-process. 

11 MR. STIVER: Oh, okay. All right. 

12 CHAIR MUNN: All wet-process. 

13 
 DR. MAURO: And it generated what 

14 
 we were calling yellowcake but it was a unique 

15 
 form of yellowcake, and our position was well, 

16 is it going to be Type M or Type S? 

17 
 And typically NIOSH would assume 

18 
 the worst, but in this particular case I 

19 
 believe you adopted -- Jim felt strongly that 

20 
 no, this stuff is Type M, all right, I'm 

21 
 familiar with it, this is a special problem 

22 and it's Type M. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

71 

1 
 And that's where we left it, and we 

2 
 still had this concern that maybe, you know, 

3 
 it's -- if a person has respiratory cancer you 

4 
 should assume it's S, because that would of 

5 
 course give you a -- and we left it there. 

6 
 But the material itself, when we 

7 
 studied it, it became apparent that it wasn't 

8 
 your classic U308. It had its own unique 

9 
 characteristics because of the way in which it 

10 was produced. 

11 
 MR. STIVER: Okay, that satisfies 

12 
 me. That makes sense from a chemical 

13 standpoint. 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: One additional 

15 
 thing to keep in mind is, you know, those of 

16 
 us who have been in health physics probably 

17 
 will remember the last classification of 

18 
 solubilities, which was days, weeks and years, 

19 D, W and Y, where W was the intermediate. 

20 
 The Type M now, which now stands 

21 
 for middle, actually shows a much longer 

22 
 retention in the lung than the old Class --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

72 

1 
 actually pretty close. The retention is 

2 
 actually pretty close to the old Class Y. 

3 
 So you know, from our standpoint, 

4 
 you know, when you think about this, you don't 

5 
 want to translate W to M necessarily, because 

6 
 they don't -- it's not really the same model. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: It's not a one to one 

8 
 correlation. 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: The model stretches 

10 
 it out, and the retention is longer for M than 

11 
 the old model, the W. 

12 
 So in our view, M covers this 

13 
 material. There was some drying done. It 

14 
 wasn't like it was never heated. It was 

15 
 filtered and then dried, but that's the extent 

16 
 

17 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

18 
 MR. STIVER: But it wasn't hardened. 

19 
 MR. HINNEFELD: That's the extent 

20 
 of the heating that was applied. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, it was not 

22 
 hardened. The drying wasn't in the process. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

73 

1 
 MR. STIVER: Well, I'm satisfied 

2 
 with that explanation, so I think we can leave 

3 
 it --

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: You know, if we do 

5 
 the lung and using Class Y would change it, 

6 
 then we are back in here talking. But if it 

7 
 doesn't change it, then we're done. 

8 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, that sounds like 

9 
 the best approach, do the shortcut. 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: All right. Very good. 

11 
 MR. KATZ: So, we'll check on this 

12 at the next meeting. 

13 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, we will. 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I'll send -- I'll 

15 try and send --

16 
 MR. KATZ: I'll send an email 

17 
 before. 

18 MR. HINNEFELD: I'll try to send 

19 the report before. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: These issues are in 

21 
 the BRS and so if you really just want to put 

22 your response in the BRS, then --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

74 

1 
 MR. HINNEFELD: And then send an 

2 
 email that says -

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And send an email. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: The next item that I 

5 
 inserted here didn't have to do with PERs. It 

6 
 was OTIB-54 that had it brought to my 

7 
 attention, we had an action on it and I'm not 

8 
 sure exactly what action we had on OTIB-54. 

9 
 Can you help me out, Ted? 

10 
 MR. KATZ: No, all I can say is I 

11 
 don't know whether there's something ready to 

12 be discussed, but it's still in progress. 

13 
 DR. ULSH: Is this the one I sent 

14 an email on? 

15 
 MR. KATZ: I think you did. I 

16 think you said you're not ready. 

17 
 DR. ULSH: Right. The status on 

18 
 this one is we owe a revision of OTIB-54 to 

19 
 address some of the comments. I think the 

20 
 comments are largely in abeyance and we are 

21 
 just waiting to see whether the revision 

22 addresses those. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

75 

1 
 But we have not yet completed that 

2 
 revision. It is ongoing. We have made a lot 

3 
 of progress. But it's not finished. 

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: It's not finished 

5 
 yet. 

6 
 MR. KATZ: So, I just -- I keep 

7 
 these on the agenda until they're --

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, that's wise. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: -- until they're cleared, 

10 that's all. 

11 
 DR. ULSH: I don't want to 

12 
 interrupt, but Wanda, before you move on to 

13 the next --

14 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, please. 

15 
 DR. ULSH: Okay. While we were 

16 
 talking I emailed Tom James with the problem 

17 
 about total active findings definition. He 

18 reported back that it is now fixed. 

19 
 Steve did a quick spot check and it 

20 looks like it --

21 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Basically OTIB-54 up 

22 
 there, the third one down, the one with the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

76 

1 
 finger on it, before it had 26 total and 26 

2 
 active, and now basically with the fix it's 

3 
 got 26 total and 9 active. 

4 
 So, and then if you click on it, 

5 
 and go to the detail, you can see -- I don't 

6 
 know if you want to count the ones that are 

7 
 active, but there are a few in progress ones. 

8 
 I think John, you had counted up 

9 
 nine --

10 MR. STIVER: Yes. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- before so that 

12 
 seems to be -- so that portion of the database 

13 seems to be working. 

14 
 DR. ULSH: Well, that was a quick 

15 fix, according to this one spot check. 

16 
 MR. STIVER: Based on a sample size 

17 of one. 

18 (Laughter.) 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: It's better than the 

20 sample size we had. 

21 MR. STIVER: That's true. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So what you're 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

77 

1 
 saying is basically all these nine that are in 

2 
 progress, you expect to have a resolution to 

3 
 in the next revision, or --

4 
 DR. ULSH: I expect to have a 

5 
 response. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Response. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Do you think the 

8 
 revision will be done by the time we meet two 

9 
 months from now? 

10 DR. ULSH: I don't know. It's 

11 quite a complicated revision. 

12 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

13 DR. ULSH: There are a lot of --

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay, we'll just ask 

15 for a status on our revision next time. 

16 
 DR. ULSH: -- a lot of reactor 

17 modeling type --

18 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: This is the mixed 

20 
 fission products issue. It's going to be a big 

21 
 one. 

22 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. It is 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

78 

1 
 complicated. All right. That's a good thing. 

2 
 We are a little ahead of schedule. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: So I'll check before we 

4 
 put out the agenda, the Federal Register 

5 
 notice for the next, as to whether you think 

6 
 it will be on the agenda. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. That'll be good. 

8 
 We'll have it on the agenda and your response 

9 
 will determine what we have on the agenda. 

10 Thank you both. 

11 
 Let's go ahead and start the 

12 
 carry-over items and see if we can get one or 

13 
 two out of the way on TIB-10, updated database 

14 status. 

15 
 I had a note to question Brant 

16 
 whether the updates were made, specifically on 

17 
 Finding 8, something about correction factor 

18 on MCNP. 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I think this might 

20 
 have been what we talked about, what I started 

21 
 talking about a little bit earlier on the OCAS 

22 
 versus DCAS problem, and when you get into --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

79 

1 
 I mean, right now, the document that is in the 

2 
 database is DCAS-TIB-10. I believe we did our 

3 
 review on OCAS-TIB-10, which I think DCAS is a 

4 
 little bit more generic than OCAS but -- and I 

5 
 also believe that we had resolved, or at least 

6 
 I know we discussed, so there wouldn't be any 

7 
 open any longer, many of the OCAS-TIB-10 

8 
 findings. 

9 
 SC&A did not explicitly review 

10 DCAS-TIB-10. We --

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: DCAS-TIB-10 is the 

12 glove box workers. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Right. Well, OCAS14 
 TIB-10 was also glove box workers. You know, 

15 
 this -- what I believe these are, these 

16 
 findings that are in here for DCAS-TIB-10 are 

17 
 the OCAS-TIB-10 findings, but the statuses 

18 
 from the OCAS-TIB-10 findings, I don't think 

19 
 the statuses are correct for the -- as I 

20 
 recall. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: When I search for 

22 OCAS-TIB-10, what I get is DCAS-TIB-10. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80 

1 
 DR. ULSH: That's all I'm getting. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That's right, that 

3 
 OCAS-TIB-10 is not in the database. I mean, 

4 
 and it would be a duplicate, I mean, because 

5 
 DCAS-TIB-10 basically was a replacement, as I 

6 
 understand it, of OCAS-TIB-10. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: It was the earlier 

8 
 rev. it would be Rev 2 or Rev 1. 

9 
 MR. STIVER: So we have reviewed 

10 Rev 0, essentially. 

11 
 DR. ULSH: All right this is one 

12 
 where -- this document, DCAS-TIB-10 -- I asked 

13 
 Elyse to go through and check the status of 

14 
 these findings. It's one that we had to 

15 
 actually go back and load the findings in 

16 manually into the Board Review System. 

17 
 Elyse, do you want to walk through 

18 it or do you want me to? 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Go ahead, because we 

20 show all of them open. 

21 
 MS. THOMAS: Whichever you prefer, 

22 Brant, it doesn't matter. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

81 

1 
 DR. ULSH: I prefer you. 

2 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: Just walk through them 

4 
 one at a time, Elyse, so we know where we are, 

5 
 if you would. 

6 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay. So yes. I'll 

7 
 just call it TIB-10. I did check all the 

8 
 findings with the old Access database so the 

9 
 findings are the same. So --

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: We can stop worrying 

11 about that. 

12 
 MS. THOMAS: I guess what SC&A 

13 
 reviewed was OCAS-TIB-10. Anyway, TIB-10 

14 
 Finding 1, I think this status should be 

15 
 closed. Let's see. It's -- the Subcommittee 

16 
 discussed this at their meeting on three --

17 
 March 22nd of 2011, and so in the transcript 

18 
 for that meeting, on page 77, they I think 

19 
 decided to close it. So I think this one 

20 
 should be closed, and if you'd like you can 

21 open that transcript and check that page. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: What was the date of 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

82 

1 
 the transcript, Elyse? 

2 
 MS. THOMAS: It was March 22nd of 

3 
 2011, and that's page 77. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Thank you. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: And this is finding 

6 
 number one, right? 

7 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: That says internal 

9 
 review objective 1, rating 3, the TIB lacks 

10 
 transparency. The radioactive source is not 

11 
 identified, neither is its exact dimensions 

12 
 nor location given, nor is the thickness of 

13 
 the walls presented. The TIB lacks 

14 transparency. Oh, it repeats itself. 

15 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, everything here 

16 
 says changed to in abeyance. But, like I 

17 said, in the transcript --

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Excuse me. Anything 

19 
 from 2011 would not be in the BRS, I don't 

20 
 believe. I am looking at the Access, or 

21 
 printout of the Access database that I printed 

22 
 out quite some time ago. It has -- it's 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

83 

1 
 showing it being in abeyance as well but that 

2 
 was as of August 21st, 2008. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: And the current 

4 
 database shows it open so at the very least, 

5 
 you need to change status from open to in 

6 
 abeyance. 

7 
 MS. THOMAS: To in abeyance, at the 

8 
 very least, yes. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, if we, you 

10 
 know what was the -- let me see. Let me pull 

11 
 up --

12 
 MS. THOMAS: The transcript? Yes 

13 
 it was for the meeting on March 22nd, 2011. 

14 
 DR. ULSH: Hold on, Elyse we are 

15 
 getting the transcript. 

16 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

17 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Go to our web page, 

18 
 which is www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. Go to the 

19 
 Advisory Board box. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I know how to get it 

21 
 from here. 

22 
 MS. THOMAS: March 2011. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

84 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Twenty-second, right 

2 
 here. And here's the transcript. 

3 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay, and then page 

4 
 77. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay. 91 is new. 

6 
 It was in abeyance. We recommend that it be 

7 
 closed. Wanda Munn, Chair Munn --

8 
 MR. STIVER: We were recommending 

9 
 that it be closed. I just asked Bob to call 

10 in. So he should be getting online. 

11 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Yes, I'm here. 

12 MR. STIVER: Okay. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: "They did provide the 

14 
 information" -- source, spectrum and 

15 dimension. 

16 MR. STIVER: In Appendix B. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. So that should 

18 
 be closed. NIOSH just needed an opportunity 

19 to look at what it was seeing. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I don't see -- I see 

21 
 where Bob recommended it being closed. I 

22 
 don't see where Wanda or the Subcommittee 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

85 

1 
 actually said this is closed. 

2 
 MR. STIVER: We're not seeing any 

3 
 concurrence here. 

4 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Go back a little 

5 
 bit. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Basically, "We 

7 
 recommend that it can be closed. Finding 1 is 

8 
 in abeyance. We recommend that it be closed." 

9 
 And Wanda says, "All right. Again..." I 

10 
 don't know if that's concurrence when she 

11 says, "All right." 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, it's not, because 

13 
 later Bob says, "The finding is that they did 

14 
 not specify, it had not changed. It was not 

15 
 addressed. Rev. 3 did not address this 

16 
 finding. We were asked to see that it did, 

17 and in fact, it did not." 

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: As long as your 

19 confirmation is that it is appropriately --

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: So I said, "All right. 

21 
 Well, we will stand by our statement that not 

22 
 only item 8, which we have addressed at 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

86 

1 
 length, but, also, the other items that are 

2 
 involved in this response will be reviewed by 

3 
 NIOSH and we will see those back here next 

4 
 time, right?" 

5 
 MR. STIVER: I think that's in 

6 
 relation to Finding 9. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think that's 

8 
 nine, because one and nine are kind of 

9 
 similar. 

10 MEMBER ZIEMER: Item 9, is that --

11 
 MR. STIVER: Look at -- Finding 20 

12 on page 78, starting at Dr. Anigstein. 

13 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: "We are 

14 recommending it should be closed?" 

15 "Yes." 

16 
 "Okay. I think that should be part 

17 of the record." 

18 
 That's John Mauro. 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: "The Subcommittee 

20 
 wants to close it at this time, it sounds 

21 
 like, no, you would rather wait and hear back 

22 from NIOSH." 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

87 

1 
 "Not on 1." 

2 
 "Not on 1." 

3 
 "Not on 1." 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, this is clear as 

5 
 mud. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It is pretty clear. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I think we were 

8 
 saying 1 was closed and 9 is not. 

9 
 MR. STIVER: There's still some 

10 issues on 9, but 1 was closed. 

11 MR. KATZ: Right. 

12 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, you'll see when 

13 
 we get to 9, NIOSH did provide more 

14 
 information. So I interpreted that to mean 

15 for Finding 1 as well. 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So, basically we 

17 
 should go in and edit the status of Finding 1 

18 
 and change the status to closed, as per the 

19 
 March 22nd meeting Subcommittee meeting 

20 minutes -- transcript. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: Correct. Well, you 

22 
 see, Stu said, "John, my recollection of the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

88 

1 
 situation is that it was that passage was 

2 
 supposed to come --" is that passage we are 

3 
 talking about 1 here again? No, 9. 

4 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, they are kind of 

5 
 going back and forth on 9 and 1 here. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Back and forth between 

7 
 1 and 9. "That passage that was supposed to 

8 
 come out in Rev 3. It is a recommendation to 

9 
 remove something. Apparently it just got moved 

10 
 to an appendix. So, we will have to check on 

11 that." 

12 
 And Bob said, "I held Rev 2 and Rev 

13 
 3 side by side and there was absolutely no 

14 
 difference except for changing a figure, 

15 
 number and reformatting a table and adding the 

16 
 appendices. The main body of it was word for 

17 word." 

18 
 "I expected it to come out, and I 

19 
 don't think you will see my signature on 

20 there." 

21 
 "We will close No. 1 and everything 

22 
 else that is on this current report we are 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

89 

1 
 looking at will be reviewed by NIOSH, and we 

2 
 will have your report next time." 

3 
 But we didn't get it next time. 

4 
 Right? 

5 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, so 9 is still in 

6 
 question. 

7 
 DR. ULSH: Bob, do you want to get 

8 
 out of order --

9 
 MS. THOMAS: Well, do you want to 

10 go on to 2, or do you want to go on to 9? 

11 
 MR. STIVER: Just jump to 9, since 

12 it's related? 

13 MS. THOMAS: Okay. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Are the others still -

15 -

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, wait a minute, 

17 
 I mean, why don't we just go through them in 

18 order? 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, let's do. 

20 MS. THOMAS: Okay. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: Let's make sure that we 

22 
 are getting them, since we have -- we 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

90 

1 
 originally had 2 in abeyance and that's not 

2 
 what we have now, right? 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Based upon -- again, 

4 
 based upon the old Access database, as of 

5 
 2008, it was in abeyance. 

6 
 DR. ULSH: Okay. Elyse, do you 

7 
 want to talk about Finding 2 now? 

8 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. Finding 2, 

9 
 again, I am suggesting, should probably still 

10 
 be in abeyance. However there is a new NIOSH 

11 
 response in the Board Review System, and it's 

12 dated 11/1/2011. 

13 
 So that response must have been 

14 
 distributed by an attachment to an email. In 

15 
 other words, it wasn't able to be entered in 

16 
 the Board Review System when it was 

17 originally written. 

18 
 But the date on the document is 

19 
 11/1/2011. And so I kept that original 

20 
 response date when I put it into the Board 

21 Review System, if that makes sense. 

22 
 So in other words, it is a new 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

91 

1 
 response in the Board Review System but I 

2 
 guess it was originally distributed back in 

3 
 2011. 

4 
 That's for Finding 2. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: Right, so can we pull 

6 
 that up? 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It's right here. 

8 
 MR. STIVER: It's just out of 

9 
 order. 

10 MR. MARSCHKE: It's just out of 

11 order. 

12 
 DR. ULSH: Okay, I know who wrote 

13 
 this. That would be me. That's what I 

14 
 thought. I just wanted to read it first 

15 
 before I -- basically, to look at the big 

16 
 story on this document, it's the glove box TIB 

17 
 and SC&A questioned some of the MCNP runs that 

18 
 we added to address their concerns, and after 

19 
 going round and round about this, I just 

20 
 decided that the appendices, the additional 

21 
 MCNP runs, did not really -- they weren't 

22 
 necessary for the TIB. We just added them to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

92 

1 
 respond to SC&A's comments. 

2 
 They didn't serve that purpose. 

3 
 They wound up raising more issues than they 

4 
 solved. So we issued Rev 4 where we took that 

5 
 material out and you see that here in the 

6 
 response. So that's kind of what's going on. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: As I recall, when 

8 
 Bob looked at this, he looked at the MCNP --

9 
 he looked at the attachment. Bob, correct me 

10 
 if I'm wrong. I don't want to -- but he looked 

11 
 at the attachment and you're right, he 

12 
 basically said there wasn't enough information 

13 
 in the attachment for us to duplicate the MCNP 

14 
 run, so that's why we said it wasn't -- we 

15 didn't, we weren't --

16 
 DR. ULSH: Right, I think the 

17 
 original issue here was that SC&A questioned 

18 
 our use of the Attila software, and so we did 

19 
 some MCNP runs to try to show that it was okay 

20 
 to use that and it did not satisfy SC&A's 

21 
 concerns. It just wound up raising a whole lot 

22 more issues. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

93 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: At one point we were 

2 
 basically asking for the MCNP runs themselves, 

3 
 and I think the way you tried to address that 

4 
 was to put them in the attachments, and then 

5 
 when we looked at the attachment, they weren't 

6 
 -- you know, again, like I said, there wasn't 

7 
 enough information --

8 
 DR. ULSH: Well, I remember we 

9 
 provided the runs to Bob and --

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, there's another 

11 
 finding. Finding 8 has something to do with 

12 the version that was --

13 
 MR. STIVER: I think Bob can weigh 

14 in on this. 

15 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Yes, the issue was 

16 
 -- I mean, first of all it was just a 

17 
 technical issue that the -- that we did not 

18 
 actually have -- the format of the attachment 

19 
 was such that it was not usable in MCNP, so we 

20 
 asked for that. That's a purely technical 

21 issue. 

22 
 The real issue was that -- and I'm 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

94 

1 
 going from memory now -- if I remember 

2 
 correctly, the source now was changed. In the 

3 
 Attila code they had used a point source. And 

4 
 here they used a flat disc of plutonium and 

5 
 what happened was the way the MCNP run, the 

6 
 MCNP geometry was formulated, you were looking 

7 
 at this flat disc of very dense metal edge-on. 

8 
 So there was a huge amount of self9 
 absorption and therefore you actually got low 

10 
 doses immediately in the -- if you draw a 

11 
 plane that is, a horizontal plane that 

12 
 intersects with this, you actually got 

13 
 relatively low doses because the radiation 

14 couldn't get out. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Now, wait just a 

16 
 minute, Bob. I think you are talking about 

17 
 what I believe is Finding 8. We're on Finding 

18 
 2. 

19 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Oh I see. Okay. 

20 
 Well, we were talking about the MCNP run. 

21 
 That was the only place where MCNP runs were -

22 - okay, I'm sorry if I'm talking out of turn. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

95 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's all right. 

2 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Taking this out of 

3 
 turn. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: We're going to have to 

5 
 talk about that while we're talking about 

6 
 TIB-10. But the number 2 finding is just that 

7 
 the four lower torso organs were not 

8 
 specified. 

9 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: I have that in 

10 
 front of me. And yes, that is correct. I 

11 
 went ahead because you were talking about 

12 MCNP, otherwise MCNP doesn't --

13 CHAIR MUNN: Right. 

14 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Why was -- I'm 

15 
 sorry, but why was MCNP mentioned in this 

16 context then? 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: I don't know. 

18 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: I think it was because 

20 
 this all has to do with TIB-10 and it's hard 

21 sometimes to just sort out one of the --

22 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay. I'm sorry 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

96 

1 
 then. I just --

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, that's okay. 

3 
 MS. THOMAS: This is Elyse again. 

4 
 If I can interject something. As I was 

5 
 studying this, I -- it appeared that there's a 

6 
 -- that SC&A provided a response that was 

7 
 dated on March 21st, 2011 that doesn't appear 

8 
 in the Board Review System. 

9 
 So again, that would help kind of -

10 
 - if that response were entered into the Board 

11 
 Review System, it might help this sequence --

12 
 you know, reading this sequence and the 

13 history --

14 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay. I have this 

15 
 -- I see this here on my system, on my 

16 computer. Steve, wasn't that passed on? 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It was passed on. 

18 
 It wasn't entered into the Board Review 

19 
 System. I have that up on the screen right 

20 
 now, and basically Finding 2, lower torso 

21 
 organs not specified, and basically it says, 

22 "On September 7th, 2007 --" 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

97 

1 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. Yes, that 

2 
 response needs to get entered. And I think 

3 
 that will help the flow of the history. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I can take that as 

5 
 an action item to enter these --

6 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, and one other 

7 
 item --

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's Finding 8 

9 
 again. 

10 MR. MARSCHKE: No, that's Finding 

11 
 2. 

12 DR. ULSH: Finding 2. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Finding 2, right 

14 there. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Finding 2. Oh, I'm 

16 sorry. I was reading the one underneath it. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The date on the 

18 response is March 21st, 2001. The meeting --

19 MS. THOMAS: That's 2011. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: 2011, I'm sorry, I'm 

21 a decade behind the times. So it was the --

22 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: I also -- I have a 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

98 

1 
 revised version -- I don't know whether it 

2 
 would help -- on 7/14/2011. I don't know 

3 
 whether that was just something local here, or 

4 
 whether that was submitted. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Email it to me, Bob, 

6 
 and I will enter whichever is -- I will enter 

7 
 that probably into the BRS and then it will be 

8 
 up -- and then it will be in the BRS system. 

9 
 DR. ULSH: Okay, so that will help 

10 
 with, like Elyse said, that will help with the 

11 
 flow of reading the history of this. But I 

12 
 think the latest item is: we have entered a 

13 
 response to this dated 11/1/2011, and I think 

14 
 going forward, the action will be for SC&A to 

15 review our response. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: Or the Subcommittee 

17 right now to review --

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: The Subcommittee have 

19 
 to review it, because the recommendation is to 

20 
 close it. 

21 MR. KATZ: Right. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: and it's very clear 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

99 

1 
 that we, both the agency and the contractor, 

2 
 have looked at the specific finding, which is 

3 
 what's in lower torso, what do you mean by 

4 
 lower torso, and it's been very clearly stated 

5 
 here what's meant by lower torso, by both 

6 
 parties. We should be able to close this. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I guess that the 

8 
 thing is: we have to go -- we should probably 

9 
 go back, by rights we should go back to the --

10 and pull up Rev 4. 

11 
 MS. THOMAS: Right, there's been a 

12 
 whole new rev since these reviews and 

13 responses were written. 

14 
 DR. ULSH: And to make it easy, I 

15 
 can give you the short story on Rev 4. The 

16 
 only difference between Rev 4 and Rev 3, 

17 
 because I did it, was to pull out the MCNP 

18 
 material from the appendices, delete that, 

19 
 modify the parts of the text that referred to 

20 
 it. Those are the major changes. There's 

21 nothing else, really. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: So essentially that's 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

100 

1 
 Finding 8. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So we can close it 

3 
 based on this. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, what were we 

5 
 waiting for, then? Why, I mean, we were 

6 
 waiting before to close it. We had it in 

7 
 abeyance and we were waiting for some reason. 

8 
 It was in abeyance before, so we had agreed 

9 
 and Rev 3 -- "Rev 3 presents no additional 

10 
 explanation of which organs are in the lower 

11 
 torso, requires the use of the dose conversion 

12 factor presented in this bulletin." 

13 
 So I guess the question is: does 

14 
 Rev 4 provide the additional explanation of 

15 which organs are in the lower torso --

16 
 DR. ULSH: If you pull up the BRS 

17 and look at our response --

18 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Our response from 

19 
 November of '11 says why we have specified it 

20 
 as far, to the extent that we can, and that 

21 Rev 3 specified it to the extent that we can. 

22 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Excuse me. This is 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

101 

1 
 Bob Anigstein. I just went on the web, and 

2 
 the latest one is Rev 3 that's posted. 

3 
 DR. ULSH: All right. We'll take 

4 
 as an action item to post Rev 4. 

5 
 MR. STIVER: Okay, so we're going 

6 
 to keep this one in abeyance until --

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think you can 

8 
 still close it, because Rev 3 and Rev 4 say 

9 
 the same thing with respect to this issue. 

10 
 Do you believe our explanation 

11 
 that's in the BRS that says we have specified 

12 
 it as clearly as we can, and we don't specify 

13 
 it completely because we may not think of all 

14 
 the organs and all the cancers that may occur 

15 
 in that region? We have defined the region by 

16 
 the organs that we have listed and anything 

17 
 else that occurs in that region. I don't know 

18 what else we can do. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: Seems reasonable just 

20 
 to --

21 MEMBER ZIEMER: You guys are 

22 comfortable with that, right? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

102 

1 
 MR. STIVER: I'm comfortable with 

2 
 it. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I don't see why we 

4 
 shouldn't close it here. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Certainly item 2, yes. 

6 
 MR. KATZ: Okay, so today's date we 

7 
 close item 2. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Could I ask just a 

9 
 quick format question? I hate to keep coming 

10 
 back to format. These things don't seem to 

11 
 sort automatically in the order of the 

12 
 finding. When you get to -- when you get to 

13 
 this list of findings here, it goes 1, 4, 5, 

14 6, 7, 8, 9, 2. 

15 CHAIR MUNN: And then 3. 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Are these showing 

17 
 up in the order that we are dealing with them 

18 or why don't they jump into --

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: I think this is an 

20 error. I think it's a glitch. 

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: It's not a big deal 

22 but --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

103 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: No. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- one might 

3 
 otherwise say well, 2 must have been closed 

4 
 because it's not there, and then you find it 

5 
 at the end of the list for some reason. 

6 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I've got to believe 

7 
 there is a typing anomaly that made that sort 

8 
 out. So that would be something --

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Something sorted 

10 
 before the number looks somewhat different 

11 than --

12 DR. ULSH: Okay --

13 MEMBER ZIEMER: It's not obvious. 

14 
 DR. ULSH: Finding 2 on DCAS-TIB-10 

15 shows up out of order. That's the issue. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Correct. It's 2 and 3 

17 
 are both out of order. 

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, 2 and 3 show 

19 
 up at the end of the list, so it goes 1, 4, 5 

20 
 and 2, 3 end up at the bottom of the list. So 

21 it looks a little strange, I just --

22 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, it's easy to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

104 

1 
 look past something when it's --

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Because you say, 

4 
 well, it must have been closed, it's not --

5 
 MR. KATZ: The response date is 

6 
 11/1/11. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It's 11/1? 

8 
 MR. KATZ: 11/1. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: November? Or 11 

10 slash --

11 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, that would be 

12 November. 

13 MR. MARSCHKE: 11/01/2011. 

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But as they are in 

15 
 here now, they all have the same response 

16 
 dates on them, so that couldn't have been part 

17 of the problem. 

18 
 MR. KATZ: Oh, no, no, I was 

19 helping Steve. 

20 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, I know. I 

21 
 thought at first it could have been what dates 

22 are in here, but those are the same thing. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

105 

1 
 MS. THOMAS: And this is Elyse 

2 
 again. I'm sorry, Dr. Ziemer, if you -- I 

3 
 didn't mean to interrupt you. 

4 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: No, that's fine. 

5 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay. I have one 

6 
 other little housekeeping thing that I think 

7 
 probably just for -- if Steve is making some 

8 
 changes. 

9 
 There was a comment in Finding 1 

10 
 that I think belongs in Finding 2 because it 

11 
 makes more sense in that thread, and I just 

12 
 wonder if it was maybe entered correctly but 

13 
 if you want to just maybe make a note, Steve, 

14 
 to look at that, and maybe if you think it 

15 
 belongs in Finding 2, I guess you could change 

16 
 it. But the finding says something, what 

17 
 changes are going to be made to TIB-10 as a 

18 result of this issue. 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, just a minute, 

20 
 Elyse. Let me close out Finding 2, if Wanda 

21 
 and Paul and Mike agree, I'd just add this 

22 
 little note here and change the status to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

106 

1 
 closed based upon the explanation provided by 

2 
 NIOSH on the --

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Just put a past 

4 
 tense to closed. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Is that okay with you, 

6 
 Mike? 

7 
 MEMBER GIBSON: It is. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Closed based upon 

9 
 the explanation provided by NIOSH on November 

10 
 1st, 2011, and if everybody agrees then we 

11 will close this item. 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: And agreed to by 

13 SC&A, or does that need to be in there? 

14 
 MR. STIVER: Just probably put some 

15 comment about that --

16 
 MR. HINNEFELD: You can say that, 

17 you can say that. You don't have to. 

18 
 MR. KATZ: You don't need SC&A's 

19 approval. 

20 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: No, well, for the 

21 record, but I guess I --

22 
 MR. STIVER: We won't try to reopen 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

107 

1 
 at some future date. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay, forget it. 

3 
 (Laughter.) 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: We need plausible 

5 
 deniability here, you know? 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Did I hear you, Mike? 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, he said okay. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So, issue 2 is 

9 
 closed. Issues 1 and 2 are closed. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Now, Elyse, you said 

12 go back to issue -- or Finding 1? 

13 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, like I said, it's 

14 
 just -- it's kind of a minor, kind of 

15 
 housekeeping type of issue, and I'm wondering 

16 
 whether I should just email it to you, because 

17 -- especially if the item is closed. 

18 MR. KATZ: That sounds fine. 

19 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, don't -- email it 

20 
 to Steve. 

21 MS. THOMAS: Okay. Ready to go to 

22 
 Finding 3? Again, this is one that I think 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

108 

1 
 should be closed because if you look at the 

2 
 history of the Subcommittee comment for 

3 
 10/14/2008 states it should be closed. It's 

4 
 also closed in the previous Access database. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I agree with Elyse, 

6 
 and this is showing up on the -- I'm showing 

7 
 the Subcommittee or the people in the room 

8 
 here what it says in the Access database on 

9 
 item 3, issue 3, and it's showing it as 

10 
 closed, and as Elyse says, October 14th, 2008, 

11 
 was the date that the Subcommittee closed it. 

12 
 So -- item -- I've got to find it, since 

13 they're out of order. 

14 
 MR. STIVER: It's at the bottom of 

15 the page. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Right, it's all the 

17 way down at the bottom. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Can somebody give me 

19 the -- that was October --

20 
 MS. THOMAS: October 14th of 2008. 

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: 2008. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay, so change the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

109 

1 
 status to closed based upon the discussions --

2 
 discussions held on October 14th, 2008. Or 

3 
 basically, the status was closed --

4 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Shouldn't it be 

6 
 changed to, basically, the status was closed 

7 
 on October 14th, 2008. How's that? 

8 
 MR. KATZ: Good. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay. 

10 DR. ULSH: Ready for issue 4? 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Four is also closed. 

12 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, four is the same, 

13 
 exactly the same situation as far as I can 

14 tell. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Does the 

16 
 Subcommittee concur? 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Which one is that? 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Four. Analysis is 

20 needlessly complex, was the finding. 

21 MR. MARSCHKE: Fourteen? 

22 
 DR. ULSH: October 14, 2008. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

110 

1 
 Elyse, number 5? 

2 
 MS. THOMAS: On number 5 --

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: I am going to make a 

4 
 suggestion here before we go on. I hate to 

5 
 break in the middle of our work on 10 here, 

6 
 but the truth is we are past due for a comfort 

7 
 break and we are going to have, I suspect, a 

8 
 discussion on eight, when we get there. 

9 
 And so let me suggest that we take 

10 
 a break right now in the midst of TIB-10 and 

11 
 be back in 15 minutes. Let's come back at 11 

12 o'clock and let's give ourselves a break. 

13 MS. THOMAS: Okay. 

14 
 MR. KATZ: Okay, so I'm just 

15 putting the phone on mute. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thanks, we'll take up 

17 with item 5 when we return. 

18 
 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

19 
 matter went off the record at 10:47 a.m. and 

20 resumed at 11:01 a.m.) 

21 
 MR. KATZ: We're back. It's 11 

22 o'clock. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

111 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Mute your phones. 

2 
 MR. KATZ: And we're working on 

3 
 OTIB-24. 

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: DCAS-TIB-10. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: DCAS, I'm sorry, TIB6 
 10. What was I -- DCAS-TIB-10. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: We're starting with 

8 
 item 5. 

9 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay, for Finding 5, 

10 
 if you look down the string of comments and 

11 
 responses, 10/14/2008, it was determined to be 

12 
 in progress, so I think that's the correct 

13 
 status for now. It was in progress in the 

14 previous Access database also. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: So that's a change for 

16 
 us. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: What was the date, 

18 Elyse? 

19 MS. THOMAS: 10/14/2008. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Oh, again the 10/14 

21 date. 

22 MS. THOMAS: Yes. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

112 

1 
 MR. KATZ: So and what is -- when 

2 
 it's in progress, what progress is being made? 

3 
 What are we waiting on? 

4 
 MS. THOMAS: This one has to do 

5 
 with the angular dependence and so I don't 

6 
 know, there was -- I'm not sure that that 

7 
 issue has been resolved, and I think angular 

8 
 dependence got bumped to another group and 

9 
 whatever, so it may be waiting on that. 

10 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, I think on 

11 
 October 10th there's a hint here, the factors 

12 
 that affect conversion of particle flux to the 

13 
 dose rate must be accounted for by dosimeter 

14 
 calibration. Discussion of dosimeter 

15 
 calibration to be site-specific and cannot be 

16 resolved in discussion of the glove box TIB. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, they also 

18 
 referred to TIB-13 where it will be handled 

19 apparently. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: NIOSH will respond 

21 
 to that finding in discussion of TIB-13 where 

22 
 the issue was raised, rather than here, the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

113 

1 
 factors that affect conversion of particle 

2 
 flux to dose rate must be accounted for by 

3 
 dosimeter calibration. 

4 
 MR. KATZ: So, can we check. If 

5 
 this is under TIB-13, it seems like then we 

6 
 can close it here and --

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Change it to 

8 
 addressed in TIB-13 or close it or --

9 
 MR. KATZ: Close it here, with a 

10 
 notation that this is -- whatever, this is 

11 being addressed under TIB-13. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: Is anyone familiar 

13 
 enough with TIB-13 to know that that is in 

14 fact what we are doing? 

15 MR. KATZ: Pull it up. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: I guess we'll have to 

17 look and see. 

18 
 DR. ULSH: Is it DCAS-TIB-13 or 

19 
 ORAU-TIB-13? 

20 MR. KATZ: Good question. 

21 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think it's DCAS. 

22 Or OCAS. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

114 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: DCAS-TIB-13. 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: It's either OCAS or 

3 
 DCAS, I think, because it's --

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: No findings in the -

5 
 -

6 
 DR. ULSH: Okay. This goes back to 

7 
 the problem with the DCAS/OCAS TIBs, the 

8 
 findings. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: OCAS, there is no 

10 
 OCAS, so there is no OCAS-TIB-13 that I can 

11 see. 

12 
 MR. STIVER: DCAS-TIB-13 Rev 1 is 

13 the latest. 

14 
 MS. THOMAS: If you put in just 

15 TIB-0013, it comes up. 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I get DCAS-TIB-13, 

17 
 OCAS-TIB-2. I get ORAU-OTIB-13. I don't get 

18 OCAS-TIB-13. Maybe it's just a --

19 MR. STIVER: I got OCAS-TIB-13. 

20 
 DR. ULSH: Wait. There's a DCAS21 
 TIB-13 and then there's an OTIB-13, which is 

22 an ORAU document, so I think --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

115 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, the DCAS one 

2 
 has to do with geometric --

3 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: OCAS-TIB-13, wait a 

5 
 minute, I got it. I got it. It's not 0013. 

6 
 It's 013. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Let's make sure we 

8 
 have that right now. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Now what are we 

10 
 looking for? We are looking for angular 

11 dependence. 

12 
 DR. ULSH: I think that's in 

13 general what the issue was. 

14 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Writing style. 

15 
 That's not it. Well, the only one that is 

16 still in progress is Finding 4. 

17 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: This is Bob 

18 Anigstein, if I could break in and comment. 

19 CHAIR MUNN: Speak up, Bob. 

20 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: In the original 

21 
 SC&A review of TIB-10, we did not address the 

22 
 angular dependence, but when we went back and 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

116 

1 
 looked at it -- but then when we got to TIB2 
 13, not OTIB-13 at the time, it was TIB-13, 

3 
 which is related, it was originally for 

4 
 Mallinckrodt workers and then it got expanded 

5 
 to other sites, and then we found very similar 

6 
 issues as in TIB-10 and then in addition, we 

7 
 brought in the angular dependence, which made 

8 
 the correction factor, the recommendation for 

9 
 a correction factor, even larger. 

10 
 And so it would really apply here 

11 
 too. Procedurally, if I recall correctly, 

12 
 rather than addressing the same item twice, 

13 
 the Subcommittee decided we'll handle it as 

14 part of TIB-13. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay, so you are 

16 talking about the Mallinckrodt workers. 

17 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: We are talking 

18 about TIB-13. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Right, which is 

20 Mallinckrodt. 

21 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Which has been 

22 expanded beyond Mallinckrodt. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

117 

1 
 MR. KATZ: So it's now the DCAS --

2 
 if you go back to the DCAS, isn't the DCAS 

3 
 just an expansion of the Mallinckrodt 

4 
 procedure? 

5 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, if you look at 

6 
 the revision description under DCAS --

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I don't think the 

8 
 DCAS --

9 
 MR. STIVER: DCAS-TIB-13 has the 

10 changes that Bob was describing. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It's not filled out. 

12 
 MR. STIVER: But there's no 

13 
 findings associated with it, not in the 

14 system. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It's not populated. 

16 
 The findings have not been populated into 

17 DCAS. 

18 
 MR. KATZ: Okay, but this is the 

19 
 document Bob's referring to, it's the expanded 

20 version of, right, of the Mallinckrodt? 

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. 

22 
 MR. KATZ: So this is where it may 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

118 

1 
 have been already addressed. You don't have 

2 
 this laid out yet, but it may have been 

3 
 addressed in this document. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: So, we're going to 

5 
 need DCAS-TIB-013, right? 

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I think it's 0013. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Is it, 00? 

8 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, it depends on 

9 
 where you look at it. 

10 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: In the database 

11 it's 0013, right? 

12 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: But the findings 

14 are available as 00. 

15 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, I see. 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, the database 

17 has no findings associated with DCAS-TIB-13. 

18 
 MR. KATZ: We understand, right, so 

19 
 that's the issue, is the findings are under 

20 
 the old version of the document. There's a 

21 
 new version of the document and we need to 

22 
 sort out, it sounds like, whether these 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

119 

1 
 findings have been addressed. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: And do we need to 

3 
 populate --

4 
 DR. ULSH: Yes. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: 0013. 

6 
 DR. ULSH: Yes. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. Is that a NIOSH 

8 
 action? 

9 
 DR. ULSH: Yes. 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: So we are going to 

11 
 populate the database and we are going to 

12 
 verify that angular dependence is addressed 

13 properly. 

14 
 MR. KATZ: We're going to see what 

15 the status is of these findings. 

16 
 DR. ULSH: Right, we're going to --

17 
 I have as a NIOSH action item to populate 

18 
 DCAS-TIB-13 with the findings on that 

19 
 document. I think what we've said here under 

20 
 the finding on DCAS-TIB-10 is that this issue 

21 
 of angular dependence has been addressed in 

22 
 DCAS-TIB-13. Is that what we are saying, 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

120 

1 
 Elyse? 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: No, it says it will 

3 
 be. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Will be. But we don't 

5 
 know what's in DCAS-13. 

6 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, I think the 

7 
 safest thing to do right now today for Finding 

8 
 5 on TIB-10 is just to put it in progress, 

9 
 instead of open. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Agreed. 

11 
 MR. KATZ: I would just close it, 

12 
 because close it, we are moving it to TIB-13, 

13 
 and why do we want to track two? We have 

14 
 enough craziness without having to double 

15 track things. We are moving it to TIB-13 --

16 
 MR. STIVER: As long as we don't 

17 lose it in the interim. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, if you close it 

19 
 now before you open it, do you want to close 

20 it now before you open another one? 

21 
 DR. ULSH: Let me make sure that 

22 
 that particular issue was captured in the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

121 

1 
 findings for DCAS-TIB-13. 

2 
 MR. KATZ: And you may find them 

3 
 under the findings for the TIB-0013, the 

4 
 precursor, is where they may be. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So, basically 5 is 

6 
 changed to in progress. 

7 
 MR. KATZ: So you're going to put a 

8 
 note under there that it's being moved to 

9 
 DCAS-TIB-13. 

10 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Likewise, get a 

11 
 strenuous workout that I'll have to talk 

12 about. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. Okay. Are we 

14 okay with it? 

15 MR. KATZ: Yes. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Very good. Ready for 

17 item 6. 

18 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay. I think Finding 

19 
 6 has been that same -- is not the same exact 

20 
 same issue but it's the exact same thing, that 

21 
 it should be in progress, and if you look down 

22 
 at the end of the string, there's an entry 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

122 

1 
 there for 10/14/2008 that says it should be in 

2 
 progress. It also refers back to TIB-13. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: So, we're still in 

4 
 progress here. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay, so we want to 

6 
 change this to in progress with the same note 

7 
 that we made on --

8 
 MR. KATZ: Right, move the finding 

9 
 to 13. 

10 DR. ULSH: Wait, you're looking at 

11 
 6. This is 5. 

12 MR. MARSCHKE: I thought we just 

13 did 5. 

14 DR. ULSH: Oh, you're right. 

15 CHAIR MUNN: Five and six. 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Issue TIB --

17 
 basically I've got that on July 14th, 2011, we 

18 
 have issue TIB-13-06 is closed, since it is 

19 
 the same issue as TIB-13-04. Resolution of 

20 
 TIB-13-04 will also resolve TIB-13-06, so 6 is 

21 already closed in the database. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: Rather than in 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

123 

1 
 progress. Okay. 

2 
 DR. ULSH: And four is closed. So 

3 
 

4 
 MS. THOMAS: And 10, TIB-10-06 is 

5 
 closed? 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: 10-06 is closed. Oh, 

7 
 no, I'm looking at 13. Oh, my spread is 

8 
 screwed up here. I might have screwed up. 

9 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: No, I did that right. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, you're still on 

12 
 13. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I'm still on 13, 

14 
 yes, I know, I just want to make sure I didn't 

15 
 change the --

16 
 MR. STIVER: Inadvertently make any 

17 
 changes. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I mean, it changed 

19 
 to 13, when I was trying to make a change to 

20 
 10. DCAS-TIB-10. Is that the one we're 

21 
 doing? 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. Glove box 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 

 

 

124 

1 
 workers. Got it. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: When we transfer 

3 
 it, do we always close it, or do we put it in 

4 
 abeyance? Do we always close it? 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: We just call it 

6 
 transferred. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, is that a 

8 
 category? 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it is a category. 

10 
 DR. ULSH: That's when we transfer 

11 
 it to a different Work Group. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: And transferred is 

13 
 considered --

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Isn't that what we 

15 
 are doing --

16 
 MR. STIVER: Wasn't that 

17 
 transferred within the document though, if 

18 
 there's a --

19 
 MR. HINNEFELD: That's addressed in 

20 
 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's addressed in --

22 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Addressed in the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

125 

1 
 findings. 

2 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

3 
 MR. STIVER: That's right. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: -- moved it to some 

5 
 other Work Group to deal with. 

6 
 DR. ULSH: Procedure on Procedures. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. Let's not 

8 
 suggest that. A little macabre humor here.. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Six, basically. Now 

10 what did we decide on six? 

11 
 MR. KATZ: Six is the same as five. 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Is five transferred 

13 then? 

14 
 MR. KATZ: It's not transferred. 

15 It's just being dealt with. 

16 CHAIR MUNN: It's in abeyance. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Right now it's in 

18 progress. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: It's in progress and as 

20 
 soon as it's -- the finding is put into 13, it 

21 will be closed here. 

22 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Closed or 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

126 

1 
 transferred? 

2 
 MR. KATZ: Closed. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: It is in progress. 

4 
 MR. KATZ: Right now, but it's --

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Because it's going to 

6 
 be taken care of. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: No, but when it's 

8 
 transferred, does it show up here as closed or 

9 
 transferred? 

10 MR. MARSCHKE: That depends on how 

11 the Subcommittee wants it --

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: When it's transferred 

13 it shows up as -- it shows up as transferred. 

14 
 MR. KATZ: We're not transferring 

15 
 here. We're closing here. We're not 

16 transferring. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: That's why I'm 

18 asking the question. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: For our purposes, when 

20 
 we are looking at the database, anything that 

21 
 has been closed, transferred and in abeyance 

22 
 is closed for us. There's nothing we can do 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

127 

1 
 about it. Something is going on somewhere 

2 
 else. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So it's going to 

4 
 show up as closed? 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. It won't be in 

6 
 our list of closed files. It will be shown in 

7 
 those three categories. But when we are 

8 
 working with our agenda and what we are 

9 
 looking at, those are three things that we 

10 
 don't look at, simply because they are in the 

11 hands of someone else. 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, I was just 

13 
 asking, in this case, how is it going to show 

14 up here, as closed --

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: It will show up in 

16 progress. 

17 
 MR. STIVER: Once it's closed it 

18 will be transferred though --

19 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Once it's 

20 
 transferred where will --

21 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: Stop. Stop. It's --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

128 

1 
 the reason it's in progress is because NIOSH 

2 
 actively is working it, and then --

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I understand that, 

4 
 but --

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, and --

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But even if they're 

7 
 working it under the other one, how does it --

8 
 it's going to show up here once it's 

9 
 transferred in as closed. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. Once the --

11 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I want to make sure 

12 
 that Ted is saying the right thing. What 

13 you're saying is --

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Once 13 is answered, 

15 yes. But 13 is not in the database yet. 

16 MEMBER ZIEMER: I understand that. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay, ready for seven. 

18 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay. On Finding 7, 

19 
 again I think the status should be closed. If 

20 
 you look down at the end of the string it says 

21 
 that for the entry on 10/14/2008, and it was 

22 closed in the previous Access database, so --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

129 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: So it was carried over 

2 
 as open in error. Closed. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: As per --

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: October 14 -- October 

5 
 one-four. 

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: As per the October 

7 
 

8 
 DR. ULSH: The third word is a 

9 
 spelling error too. 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: October 14, 2008. 

11 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: The status has 

12 
 changed to closed as per October 16th, 2008. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Fourteenth. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Fourteen, at least 

15 
 mine says 14. 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: It's got both dates 

17 
 here, see that? Well, it's interesting, it's 

18 
 got both 14 --

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It didn't happen 

20 
 until --

21 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

22 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, that's a 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

130 

1 
 different thing, yes, October 14. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Seven is closed. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Okay, so that brings us 

4 
 to eight. 

5 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay, so Finding 8, 

6 
 NIOSH provided a response for November in 

7 
 November of 2011, and this response is now 

8 
 entered in the Board Review System with that 

9 
 date, so it's newly entered, it's not a new 

10 
 response. The status in the previous Access 

11 database was in progress. 

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: This is one that 

13 
 also Bob discussed in his March 2011 -- he 

14 
 gave a very long discussion on it, and it is -

15 
 - just scrolling down to the end, and 

16 
 basically SC&A recommends the status of 

17 Finding 8 be made in progress. 

18 
 So I need -- again, I already have 

19 
 an action item to go back and to enter Bob's 

20 
 March -- well, or his revised version of the 

21 
 March 2011 write-up and enter that into the 

22 database. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

131 

1 
 So I think that -- and I assume, 

2 
 Elyse, when you say that NIOSH, the finding 

3 
 here that is newly entered, is this in 

4 
 response to Bob's --

5 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. Yes it is. So 

6 
 you probably need to enter Bob's response and 

7 
 review the NIOSH response. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And review the NIOSH 

9 
 response and see whether or not we can -- so 

10 Bob, this is an action item for you, really. 

11 DR. ANIGSTEIN: To do what? 

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I will give you, 

13 
 when I get back, or you can go onto the Board 

14 
 review database, but I can give you -- or when 

15 
 I get back, I'll give you a printout of the --

16 NIOSH's response to your March response. 

17 
 MR. KATZ: Well, wait, I mean, can 

18 
 these --

19 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: But that's what he 

20 
 transmitted -- I have a version that was 

21 transmitted July 14th. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Okay, the July --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

132 

1 
 the one I'm looking at is March, but the July 

2 
 one, then. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Before we just bat it 

4 
 back can the Subcommittee take it up? I mean, 

5 
 Brant, you responded to it. 

6 
 DR. ULSH: I don't think it's going 

7 
 to be one where SC&A and us are easily in 

8 
 agreement. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: But do you want to 

10 
 discuss it before we just bat it back to SC&A? 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, we can -- Bob, 

12 
 I don't know that Bob can even look at it. 

13 Let's see. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: This was what Bob was 

15 
 talking about earlier when he was talking 

16 
 about the difference between the Attila and 

17 MCNP positions and results. 

18 
 MR. KATZ: Right, and Brant has 

19 responded to Bob's comments. 

20 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: If I can comment on 

21 
 that, the issue -- we raised the issue about 

22 
 Attila, but at this point the issue is not a 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

133 

1 
 technical one between the two codes. It's an 

2 
 issue -- the issue is the NIOSH model in the 

3 
 MCNP is radically different than the model 

4 
 they used in Attila, not the model of the 

5 
 code, but the model of the glove box and the 

6 
 geometry. 

7 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, you're correct, 

8 
 Bob, however you'll see in our response that 

9 
 we have revised the TIB to delete all that 

10 
 MCNP stuff out. So we are kind of back to 

11 square one --

12 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: But the result --

13 
 but the issue is not the MCNP runs and whether 

14 
 you are to include them. We are still -- I 

15 
 mean we are talking about the results. That's 

16 the only thing that's of significance. 

17 DR. ULSH: Okay. 

18 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: And we disagree 

19 with the results. 

20 
 DR. ULSH: I know. I really 

21 
 suggest that you take a look at our response 

22 in here. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

134 

1 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay, will do. 

2 
 DR. ULSH: And then if you don't 

3 
 like it, you can come back to the committee 

4 
 with a response to that. 

5 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Very good. 

6 
 DR. ULSH: This is not something we 

7 
 are going to be able to iron out today. 

8 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay. But this is 

9 
 something, Steve, you will send me. 

10 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes. 

11 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Very good. 

12 CHAIR MUNN: All right. 

13 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Just a question. 

14 
 So there is an earlier SC&A response that is 

15 not in here. Is that what you're saying? 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: There is -- yes. 

17 There is a version --

18 
 DR. ULSH: It's March 2011. 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: It was in March or 

20 
 July of 2011. I have the March version and we 

21 
 will look -- and Bob says he revised this 

22 slightly. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

135 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay, I see. 

2 
 There's a whole -- well, let's see. 

3 
 MR. STIVER: It never made it into 

4 
 the --

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The database wasn't 

6 
 working at that point in time. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: And it looks like 

8 
 there's another placeholder that has your name 

9 
 on it, Brant, for March 16th. Is that the one 

10 
 that should have been a placeholder for --

11 there. Right? See that? 

12 
 March -- wait a minute. Yes, see 

13 the March -- see the March 16th thing? 

14 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, where it says, 

15 "Files provided to SC&A" on 3/11/2011? 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, okay, that's 

17 your response. 

18 DR. ULSH: That's me saying --

19 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: And then there's --

20 
 yes, got you. 

21 MR. MARSCHKE: And there should be 

22 -- below that there should be --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

136 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Below that is where 

2 
 the --

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: -- where Bob's should 

4 
 be brought in. 

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Got it. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So, at the minimum, 

7 
 we should change the status from -- right now 

8 
 the status is open. We should change the 

9 
 status to in progress at a minimum. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, right. 

11 
 MR. KATZ: At the next meeting, 

12 
 this will be on the agenda for the next 

13 meeting. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Question. Are any of 

15 
 those responses -- it appeared that the --

16 
 Bob's most recent response, if that's what we 

17 
 were seeing on the screen earlier, was fairly 

18 
 lengthy. Do we need any links to any of that 

19 or is this all --

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well right now we 

21 
 should be able to basically -- if we do need a 

22 
 link to it, we should be able to do a link to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

137 

1 
 it. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, that's why I 

3 
 asked. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So we can either --

5 
 we can either bring it in as a -- you know, we 

6 
 can either paste it into the spot provided, if 

7 
 it works that way, or we can link it to either 

8 
 a PDF file or a Word file whichever one we 

9 
 pick. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: It depends entirely on 

11 
 the length of that response. It appeared to 

12 
 me that it was two pages long. And if it's 

13 
 two pages long then clearly we need to link it 

14 rather than copy it into the database. 

15 
 Is it in a document we can link 

16 easily? 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The only problem 

18 
 with linking it, Wanda, is, basically right 

19 now the document is, is --

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: Internal 

21 correspondence. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, internal 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

138 

1 
 correspondence, but it's -- it also has 

2 
 discussion of four findings as opposed to just 

3 
 the one finding, so I wouldn't -- if we're 

4 
 going to link it, what I would like to do is I 

5 
 would like to pull out the one finding, the 

6 
 information on the one finding and then 

7 
 include that. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, my only question 

9 
 is, without reading it, it's difficult for me 

10 
 to identify whether the verbiage there is 

11 
 really and truly pertinent to what we are 

12 
 trying to do, or if it needs to be summarized. 

13 
 And that's something we would have to read I 

14 suppose to see if it is. 

15 
 My instinct is that perhaps it 

16 
 could be summarized, but if that's not going 

17 
 to be feasible, now there's a diagram too. 

18 
 Perhaps this is one that you should pull out 

19 
 and make that response a standalone. We could 

20 do that okay? 

21 MR. MARSCHKE: We can do that. 

22 CHAIR MUNN: All right. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

139 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: There is an 08 

2 
 portion of the total report of the -- you can 

3 
 just pull that out. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's what he's 

5 
 looking at right here. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: We'll pull out the 

7 
 08 portion and link it in, either as a Word 

8 
 file or as a PDF file. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: Sounds good. Is that the 

10 end of the line for this? 

11 DR. ULSH: No. 

12 MR. KATZ: No? Okay. 

13 DR. ULSH: Finding 9. 

14 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay, are you ready 

15 for nine? 

16 MR. KATZ: Yes. Thanks, Elyse. 

17 
 MS. THOMAS: Okay. This was 

18 
 originally closed so if you look at the old 

19 
 Access database, Finding 9 was closed. But it 

20 
 was reopened at the Subcommittee meeting on 

21 March 22nd of 2011. 

22 
 That's what we were looking at 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

140 

1 
 before. So that was pages 80 and 82 of that 

2 
 transcript. However there is a new NIOSH 

3 
 response dated 11 -- November 2011 and then a 

4 
 new version, Rev 4. 

5 
 So this one was originally closed. 

6 
 It was reopened. So I'm not sure what the 

7 
 status should be today. 

8 
 MR. KATZ: So we can take up the 

9 
 DCAS response then, from November '11? 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: It appears that the 

11 
 action at this point should be SC&A's to 

12 respond to the --

13 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: This may be similar 

14 to the earlier one. It may be a lengthy --

15 
 MR. STIVER: It's similar to 

16 Finding 8. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: We may need to 

18 analyze that and --

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: It appears to be in 

20 progress. 

21 
 DR. ULSH: Well, to make a fairly 

22 
 lengthy response short, SC&A questioned the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

141 

1 
 use of Rocky Flats data and in Rev 4, we 

2 
 deleted it. So I don't know. If you want to 

3 
 take time to look at it you can, but --

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, the history 

5 
 behind this was that the original document 

6 
 pulled out some risks and whole body 

7 
 measurements from Rocky Flats glove box 

8 
 workers as sort of a check on what Attila came 

9 
 up with. And SC&A felt like that was not 

10 
 really a relevant check. I forget the whole 

11 nature of --

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: It was sort of a 

13 validation effort? 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, sort of a 

15 
 validation thing, and so since it wasn't 

16 
 really critical to the argument that was being 

17 
 made in the document, we thought, well, 

18 
 there's no need to put that in there, because 

19 
 I think there are -- there were clearly some 

20 
 weaknesses in using it, as SC&A pointed out. 

21 
 It's not that we objected. We kind of 

22 understood their objection to its use. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

142 

1 
 And so based on that, we said, 

2 
 well, not that we write a lot of these 

3 
 documents but we have developed a technique 

4 
 and say this is the technique without trying 

5 
 to throw in a validation approach also. 

6 
 So why don't we just take the 

7 
 validation approach out? So in -- ultimately 

8 
 I guess, in Rev 4, we say it has been taken 

9 
 out, whereas in Rev 3 it wasn't. It was just 

10 moved. So --

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: Since Bob is reviewing 

12 it --

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: -- someone would 

14 have to look at the Rev 4. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it's my 

16 
 understanding that we tasked Bob to look at 

17 
 Rev 4 in any case, and since he's going to be 

18 
 looking at Rev 4, then it appears logical that 

19 
 we can close out eight and nine simultaneously 

20 when that review has been complete. 

21 
 MR. KATZ: Is that clear to you, 

22 Bob? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

143 

1 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: No. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: No? 

3 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: It appears that you 

4 
 want to review -- I'm not sure what we are 

5 
 supposed to do about nine. I mean, nine is 

6 
 particular because nine was closed back in --

7 
 way back early and then we were told to look 

8 
 at it, even though it was closed. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, what you don't 

10 
 know, Bob, is that on November 1st of 2011, 

11 
 NIOSH provided a response and they also 

12 revised DCAS-TIB-10 that was right before --

13 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: I thought they just 

14 
 -- I thought, from what I heard was that the 

15 
 revision only consisted of taking out the 

16 appendix. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, they also took 

18 out the Rocky Flats data. 

19 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: I see, okay. Well 

20 
 I haven't -- you know, I was, I was not 

21 
 apprised of that and I have not seen either 

22 
 the version -- Rev 4, nor the November 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

144 

1 
 response. So --

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That is what you are 

3 
 being tasked to do right now. 

4 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Excuse me? 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: You are being -- at 

6 
 this meeting you are --

7 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay, right, okay, 

8 
 so you'll --

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: You are receiving a 

10 task to do that. 

11 
 DR. ANIGSTEIN: You know, I 

12 
 obviously am not clear what to do, but I 

13 
 haven't seen it. But once I see it, I'll 

14 figure it out or I will consult. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Right, so you'll 

16 
 review it between now and the next 

17 Subcommittee meeting. 

18 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Which is? 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: We haven't set it yet. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Probably three or 

21 four months down the road. 

22 DR. ANIGSTEIN: Okay. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

145 

1 
 DR. ULSH: So, status as of today 

2 
 is in progress. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: In progress. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: So, are we on -- is 

6 
 there a finding ten? 

7 
 DR. ULSH: That's the end of the 

8 
 findings for this packet. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: Okay. 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: Very good, that should 

11 clear us up with 10. Right, Elyse? 

12 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes, that's it. 

13 That's all the findings there. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. All right. 

15 
 Then let's move on to our next thorn in the 

16 
 side, TIB-13. 

17 Our agenda says we were to re18 
 review Finding 4 and determine whether this is 

19 
 an overarching issue or whether it's site20 
 applicable. And NIOSH was going to look at 

21 that, right? 

22 
 DR. ULSH: Yes, I mean that's what 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

146 

1 
 it says here, it's a DCAS action item. I 

2 
 don't think that we have done that yet. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: Haven't done that? 

4 
 MS. THOMAS: That one's also tied 

5 
 up in the previous issue we were discussing 

6 
 about OCAS-TIB-13 versus DCAS-TIB-13. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: And this is 013 TIB. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Is this the 

9 
 original Mallinckrodt one? 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it's the 

11 Mallinckrodt one, yes. 

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I screwed up earlier 

13 
 on this one and I changed the status of 

14 
 TIB-13-5 when I was supposed to change the 

15 status of TIB-10-5. 

16 
 And so what was the status of TIB17 13-5 going into today? 

18 
 MS. THOMAS: I think it was closed 

19 
 because the only one that was not closed, was 

20 
 04. 

21 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That's what I show. 

22 I show that on July 14th, we --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

147 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: We closed it. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: we closed it. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Right. 

4 
 MS. THOMAS: Yes. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And so --

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Right, so we need 

7 
 to remove that last -- wait a minute. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I don't know how we 

9 
 remove, but I do know I can just basically go 

10 in and re-change it. 

11 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Try editing, maybe 

12 the editing will allow you to delete it. 

13 
 MR. KATZ: I think this could -- I 

14 
 think you'll be able to go in and change the -

15 -

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: See, the editing 

17 
 allows me to edit the response. It doesn't 

18 allow me to change the status. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: You just have to change 

20 it and re-delete the --

21 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I'm just going to 

22 
 have to add another one, another one saying 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

148 

1 
 that the above entry was made in error. 

2 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: If you're allowed to 

4 
 edit it. 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Every time you make 

6 
 a mistake it's going to be --

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Recorded for 

8 
 posterity. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: If you're allowed to 

10 
 edit it, can you make that statement inside 

11 the same --

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I can't make it 

13 
 inside the same -- I can edit the same one and 

14 basically say that --

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's right. The 

16 previous sentences were entered in error. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, you don't 

18 
 even have to mention that. You can just say 

19 
 that we confirmed that it's closed or 

20 something. 

21 
 DR. ULSH: We didn't make a 

22 mistake, we just --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

149 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: You are doing a new 

2 
 finding then, or I mean, a new entry. Are you 

3 
 editing the --

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: No, I'm making a new 

5 
 entry because I can't edit the status. I can 

6 
 edit the words that explain the status. I go 

7 
 back and take -- but I can't edit the status 

8 
 itself. 

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: The top line there, 

10 change "the". 

11 MR. STIVER: Also, "remains." 

12 MR. MARSCHKE: What other one? 

13 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Remains, the second 

14 to last word. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Now I can go back 

16 
 and enter -- I can go back and change the -- I 

17 can go back and change this one. 

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: The paragraph 

19 
 marked between them sort of stands out. 

20 
 There. 

21 CHAIR MUNN: Good. Now we can go 

22 
 to our agenda item, which is the previous 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

150 

1 
 finding, number 4. So we are looking at TIB2 
 13, finding 4. We have a final statement that 

3 
 we had from that entry was from last 

4 
 September, where we said NIOSH was going to 

5 
 reexamine the SC&A comments and report back to 

6 
 the Subcommittee with respect to whether this 

7 
 was going to be considered an overarching 

8 
 issue or a site-applicable issue. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Right, and we didn't 

10 get that done. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: That is not done. 

12 
 It's going to be another carryover, which is 

13 
 fine, because we have to populate that anyway, 

14 right? 

15 MR. MARSCHKE: Right. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: The next item is OTIB17 
 52 Rev 1, reduced dose. That's an SC&A 

18 
 action. 

19 MR. MARSCHKE: Yesterday I updated 

20 
 the BRS on OTIB-52. So basically there was 13 

21 
 and 14 needed to be -- we had them in 

22 
 progress, and the entry that I made -- I 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

151 

1 
 reviewed the NIOSH response for 13. This is 

2 
 13 which is on the screen right now, and I 

3 
 reviewed the response for 13 and I concur with 

4 
 it and I recommend -- this is the whether or 

5 
 not, when they calculate the ratio of 

6 
 construction worker to other workers, whether 

7 
 they use other workers as defined as non8 
 construction trade workers or is it defined as 

9 
 all monitored workers, which includes 

10 construction trade workers. 

11 
 And I agree with NIOSH that it 

12 
 really, really doesn't make much difference, 

13 
 just a few percentage points difference, which 

14 
 is less than the 20 percent -- what they're 

15 using as a cutoff error, cutoff margin. 

16 
 So -- and I used SRS data. 

17 
 Actually I used SRA data, probably it should 

18 
 be SRS data, to come to that conclusion. So I 

19 
 agree with the NIOSH response on this one, and 

20 
 SC&A agrees with the NIOSH response on this 

21 
 one, and so we'd recommend that this -- at 

22 this time that this finding be closed. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

152 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: Any objection to that 

2 
 on the Subcommittee? 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: No objection. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Hearing no objection, 

5 
 Finding 13 on OTIB-52 will be closed. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Finding 14. This --

7 
 Finding 14 has to do with -- when you 

8 
 calculate the ratio of construction trade 

9 
 worker dose to other worker dose, whether or 

10 not you include the missing dose component. 

11 
 And you can see in the December 

12 
 16th, 2011, a reply from Matt Smith that they 

13 
 added a paragraph to 52 kind of explaining why 

14 they did it that way. 

15 
 Some sites, the all-monitored group 

16 
 includes construction trade workers, others it 

17 
 dose not. Some sites the comparisons are made 

18 
 using -- they have been corrected for external 

19 
 missed dose while others made without that 

20 
 correction, analysis made was appropriate --

21 
 was adopted to the differences in data but in 

22 
 all cases, the comparisons are consistent for 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

153 

1 
 each site. 

2 
 I don't think that really addresses 

3 
 the concern. The -- and I would like to see 

4 
 some kind of an analysis where the -- compares 

5 
 the dose -- the ratio of the construction 

6 
 trade worker to all-monitored dose worker 

7 
 dose, including the missed dose component 

8 
 versus when you take out the missed dose 

9 
 component. 

10 What concerns me is, when you add a 

11 
 constant to both the numerator and denominator 

12 
 of a fraction, you are going to drive that 

13 
 fraction towards one, since you're doing this 

14 
 across DOE sites, the fact that it's -- you do 

15 
 it constant or you do it consistently within a 

16 site, is good, but it's not sufficient. 

17 
 I mean, you have to do -- it should 

18 
 be done consistently across the sites because 

19 
 you are trying to come up with one fraction, 

20 
 this factor of 1.4, which is then going to be 

21 applied across sites. 

22 
 So I would like to see a little 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

154 

1 
 more about analysis as to what the differences 

2 
 are when you take out the missed dose 

3 
 component. 

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think we just 

5 
 should take this latest entry and write --

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, this -- we 

7 
 just got this, right? 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, I just -- yes, 

9 
 I just put this up yesterday. 

10 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Rather than trying 

11 to respond on the fly. 

12 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, take some time 

13 with it. 

14 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The one you -- yes, 

15 
 again, I do mention in here, you know, Rocky 

16 
 Flats in particular was one of the files that 

17 
 I looked at where they include them, the 

18 
 missed dose component, and they specifically 

19 include the missed dose component. 

20 
 They have it -- you know, they 

21 
 specifically add it in. And you can see the 

22 
 Excel file -- I've documented it there -- that 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

155 

1 
 I used. 

2 
 And so my recommendation at this 

3 
 point is to maintain the status as in progress 

4 
 and to ask for a little bit of additional --

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Just help me get a 

6 
 feel for it. Obviously if you had a constant 

7 
 numerator and denominator, it does drive it 

8 
 towards one. But how big is what you're 

9 
 adding, because compared to what's already 

10 there? 

11 
 I mean, what you say is 

12 
 conceptually true, but is it true as a 

13 
 practical point, if you are adding small 

14 increments to --

15 
 MR. STIVER: It should depend on 

16 the increments. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, I just -- let 

18 
 me kind of get a feel for -- is it likely to 

19 
 change the ratio to like, 1.39 or is it going 

20 
 to drive it down to 1.1 or 1.2? That's a kind 

21 
 of a feel for --

22 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, that's one of 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

156 

1 
 the things that we are asking to find out for 

2 
 sure. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, you're asking 

4 
 sort of the same --

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: But I think you can 

6 
 get a -- what I'm calling up here now, Paul, 

7 
 is the Rocky Flats file and I take it it's a 

8 
 big file so it will take some time to pull it 

9 
 up. But --

10 MEMBER ZIEMER: Maybe the answer to 

11 
 that is something that NIOSH wouldn't even 

12 
 look at. I mean, I think the point is 

13 
 theoretically correct. Whether it's of any 

14 
 practical value, I think, depends on what 

15 
 those starting numbers are and what you are 

16 adding to it. 

17 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Some of the missing 

18 
 dose components are rather large in the early 

19 years. 

20 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Ah, compared to 

21 what the ratio --

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That's what I'm 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

157 

1 
 trying to --

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, we don't 

3 
 really know --

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I'm not sure --

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I think that if you 

7 
 can look at this, let's see. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, I don't know 

9 
 that we necessarily solve this right now. I 

10 
 thought maybe you had a feel for something 

11 
 that was telling you that that ratio is 

12 changing significantly. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: This is the file 

14 
 that they used -- that was used to calculate -

15 
 - to generate this figure here. This is one, 

16 
 a figure 5.5 in the OTIB, and this shows --

17 
 the blue line shows the all-monitored worker. 

18 
 This is for Rocky Flats and it shows the 

19 
 monitored worker doses versus the construction 

20 
 worker doses, and again, if you put your thing 

21 
 here, you can see the data comes from the 

22 comparison worksheet. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

158 

1 
 So if we go all the way here to the 

2 
 comparison worksheet, you can see -- and also 

3 
 if you go back here, you can see that the --

4 
 for example, the construction workers are from 

5 
 column M of the comparison worksheet. 

6 
 So if we go back and we look at 

7 
 column M, we can see that column M is the sum 

8 
 of G, which is the missed dose component, and 

9 
 I. See what we've got up here, we've got G 

10 and I. 

11 
 So G is the missed dose component, 

12 
 and we are talking about 1,000 millirems. I 

13 
 is the measured component, and we are talking 

14 
 about 200 millirems. So the combined factor 

15 
 here is you know -- so, more than, what is 

16 that --

17 
 MR. STIVER: That's almost a factor 

18 
 of five. 

19 MR. MARSCHKE: The majority of it 

20 is coming from the missed dose component. 

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Got you, okay, 

22 
 well, take a look at it then. I was going to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

159 

1 
 say as soon as I saw that, I'm not going to 

2 
 answer that question. 

3 
 (Laughter.) 

4 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I mean, there is --

5 
 obviously there's cases and cases, and you 

6 
 have to see what it -- okay. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it is --

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Thank you. 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: -- early missed 

10 
 doses can be pretty big because of frequent --

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes. 

12 
 MR. HINNEFELD: That's the bad 

13 news. There is some good news --

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So this one is 

15 going to remain in progress. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it will be in 

17 progress still. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Now, let's see. For 

19 
 Findings 1, 15 and 16, we basically had 

20 
 transferred those to OTIB-20 and requesting 

21 
 that some wording change be made to OTIB-20. 

22 
 OTIB-20 has been revised since the issuance of 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

160 

1 
 Rev 1, the OTIB-52 and since the issuance of 

2 
 SC&A's critique of Rev 1. 

3 
 And in fact it does include the 

4 
 wording that we were requesting. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: I'm looking for it. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And I'm just going 

7 
 to see if I can pull that up here for you. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay, this is an 

9 
 example of what I was asking about before. 

10 
 Once it's formally transferred, does it have 

11 
 to be closed in the other system before it's 

12 closed here? 

13 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: See, that wasn't 

15 what I heard before. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: Right, and I don't see 

17 why. 

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: See, that's -- see, 

19 
 this shows as transferred and I think what Ted 

20 
 was saying before it -- once the transfer 

21 
 occurs, it's closed here, and I think you are 

22 
 saying, no, it's not closed here until you 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

161 

1 
 close it in the other system. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, that's the 

3 
 reason we track the transfers. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The other fact of 

5 
 the matter is I don't think it ever -- there 

6 
 was never a new issue opened under 20 that 

7 
 would have tracked this. 

8 
 So I don't -- even though we 

9 
 transferred it to 20, we transferred it saying 

10 
 that the action was going to occur in 20, but 

11 
 I don't think we ever opened an issue 

12 
 specifically to -- under 20 to track this 

13 particular problem. 

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So it sort of isn't 

15 transferred --

16 
 MR. KATZ: Right, it never was 

17 
 transferred actually. It was just that it was 

18 going to get resolved by a change in 20. 

19 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So this is really 

20 intent to transfer. 

21 
 MR. STIVER: We need a new category 

22 here. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

162 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay. I just 

2 
 wanted to make sure we are being consistent. 

3 
 I agree with how you want to do it. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, mechanically it 

5 
 should have been in progress. 

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: It hasn't really 

7 
 been transferred yet, but --

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Basically this is 

9 
 the sentence right here. Basically it also 

10 
 notes that in certain construction trade, pipe 

11 
 fitters may have received higher exposure than 

12 
 the construction trade in general, therefore 

13 
 they might fall into a category expected to 

14 have been monitored. 

15 
 So I mean that was really the 

16 
 sentence that we were looking for. We wanted 

17 
 the dose reconstructors to be aware that there 

18 
 are certain categories of construction workers 

19 that may require special attention. 

20 
 The 1.4 multiplier from OTIB-52 may 

21 
 not cover some particular construction 

22 
 workers, not just pipe fitters. So -- and now 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

163 

1 
 this has been showing up in OTIB-20. What we 

2 
 are recommending back in -- for example 15, 

3 
 52-15, basically we said -- you can see here 

4 
 we had it transferred to OTIB-20 and we are 

5 
 saying that on November 14th, OTIB-20 Revision 

6 
 3 was issued with the requested change to 

7 
 address the OTIB-52 findings. Thus SC&A 

8 
 recommended that these three findings be 

9 
 changed to closed. 

10 So that same wording has been --

11 
 I've added that same wording to basically each 

12 
 of these three 52 findings, 52-15, 52-16 and 

13 52-1. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: All three of them now 

15 have the same statement in it? 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: They have the exact 

17 
 same statement. 

18 CHAIR MUNN: Any objection from the 

19 Subcommittee? 

20 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So that means they 

21 are transferred? 

22 CHAIR MUNN: No. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

164 

1 
 MR. KATZ: They're closed. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: They're closed now. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: They're closed? 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, they will be 

5 
 closed if the Subcommittee agrees to close 

6 
 them. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: They were transferred 

8 
 and to --

9 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: And have been 

10 addressed. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: And have been 

12 addressed, yes. 

13 
 MR. MARSCHKE: And they have been 

14 
 addressed. And the action was taken by 

15 
 whoever was responsible for OTIB-20, the 

16 
 action was taken by that person and so now we 

17 can close these here. 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: Any objection from the 

19 Subcommittee? 

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: Sounds good. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: If not, OTIB-52, 

22 
 Findings 1, 15 and 16 are closed. How very 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

165 

1 
 nice. And this means -- what finding did I 

2 
 have where I made a note to myself that NIOSH 

3 
 was going to respond to SC&A's request for 

4 
 more analysis. What finding was that? 

5 
 DR. ULSH: Finding 14. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: That was 14? 

7 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, it's in progress. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: It's in progress. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: All right. 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Wait a minute, I'm 

11 
 just -- let me catch up, Wanda, because I want 

12 
 to talk about one more thing while we're on 

13 here. 

14 CHAIR MUNN: On 52? 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes. Kind of on 52. 

16 
 It's another one of these transferred things. 

17 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you very much. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: OTIB-14, finding 

19 
 number one, if we can go to that for a second. 

20 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: What's the title of 

21 
 it? 

22 MR. MARSCHKE: It's assignment of 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

166 

1 
 environmental internal doses to employees not 

2 
 -- wait a minute. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, not exposed to 

4 
 airborne? 

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Airborne 

6 
 radionuclides in the -- something. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, got you. 

8 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Basically there was 

9 
 only one finding in it and that one finding 

10 
 was transferred to OTIB-52, but obviously, 

11 
 again nothing had ever -- nothing was ever 

12 
 opened in OTIB-52 to receive it, so it's a 

13 
 similar type of thing as with OTIB-52 and 

14 OTIB-20. 

15 
 Now that we have this -- the 

16 
 wording in OTIB-52 and OTIB-20, I believe that 

17 
 the concern here was -- this was just a very 

18 
 generic concern saying that particular care 

19 
 must be taken when assigning a construction 

20 
 worker to a given category of exposure due to 

21 
 the highly diverse nature of exposures that 

22 some construction workers experience. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

167 

1 
 So really the question is: what 

2 
 does the Subcommittee want to do with this? I 

3 
 mean, I would recommend, I guess, at this 

4 
 point that this probably should be closed, 

5 
 because pretty much for all intents and 

6 
 purposes, OTIB-20 -- or OTIB-52 has all been 

7 
 taken care of --

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, back in December 

9 
 didn't we close it? We recommended that it be 

10 closed. NIOSH did. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: NIOSH recommended 

12 that it be closed. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: And we didn't close 

14 it? Why not? 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Because OTIB-14 is 

16 
 not applicable to construction trade workers. 

17 
 Finding -- well, I'm not sure that that's 

18 
 true. That's not really a true statement, I 

19 don't believe. 

20 
 Last time I looked at OTIB-52 --

21 
 OTIB-14 I should say -- OTIB-14, I mean if you 

22 
 go down and say they have this -- this is 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

168 

1 
 another reason for closing it, but I mean they 

2 
 say OTIB-14 specifically says, addresses, 

3 
 right here, it says construction workers and 

4 
 it has you know, pipe fitters, plumbers, and 

5 
 so on and so forth, so they do talk about 

6 
 OTIB-14 does apply -- to me it does apply to 

7 
 construction workers. 

8 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Can you just scroll 

9 
 up most of the three categories of workers 

10 
 that are on this page? So there's some 

11 
 potential for workplace exposure -- hang on --

12 
 specific, some potential for workplace 

13 
 exposures, and then have little or no 

14 potential for workplace exposures. 

15 
 So let's go to the top of the 

16 
 document, because if this is assigning 

17 
 environmental dose, that should only be done 

18 
 for people who have little or no potential for 

19 it. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That's what this is. 

21 
 This is basically -- these people up here 

22 
 have no potential. These people get the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

169 

1 
 environmental dose. 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Right. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The people in the 

4 
 middle here get the, you know, basically would 

5 
 receive the 50 percentile dose and the people 

6 
 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: What's the title of 

8 
 the document? 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The title of the 

10 
 document is environmental. Assignment of 

11 
 environmental -- internal doses to employees 

12 
 not exposed to airborne radionuclides. 

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, so the fact 

14 
 that construction shows up in those bottom two 

15 
 categories means that you wouldn't do this for 

16 
 them, because this is a document that you 

17 
 would -- this tells you to assign 

18 
 environmental to people who are not exposed 

19 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That's right. 

20 
 Basically, yes. The fact that -- the fact 

21 
 that the construction workers show up here in 

22 
 categories 2 and 3, you would not assign -- I 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

170 

1 
 agree with you on that. 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: So my thinking, the 

3 
 statement in a -- the statement here from 

4 
 December is correct, that 14, you know -- the 

5 
 assignment of environmental dose, which is 

6 
 what 14 speaks of, doesn't apply to 

7 
 construction workers. In fact, it 

8 
 specifically excludes construction workers 

9 
 from the assignment of environmental dose. 

10 
 And so we think -- I would support 

11 closing the finding based on that. 

12 
 DR. MAURO: I agree with Stu. It's 

13 John. 

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Thank you. 

15 CHAIR MUNN: Any opposition? 

16 (No response.) 

17 CHAIR MUNN: Please close this. 

18 
 DR. ULSH: That wasn't even on the 

19 agenda, was it? 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: No. Thank you for 

21 bringing it to our attention. 

22 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Maybe we get extra 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

171 

1 
 brownie points for all the things that need 

2 
 done but we didn't do. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: We can give you a big 

4 
 hurrah. 

5 
 MR. STIVER: And some compensation 

6 
 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: Now, while Steve is 

8 
 working away at our last entry that we just 

9 
 discussed, it's time for us, I think, to break 

10 
 for lunch. 

11 
 MR. KATZ: Before we do can I just 

12 
 -- a clarification for me if only for me. So, 

13 
 if Finding 14 is in progress, is everything 

14 
 else closed in 52? 

15 
 DR. ULSH: Finding 14. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: Fourteen, yes, that's 

17 
 what I said. 

18 
 DR. ULSH: I thought you said four. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: It is in progress. 

20 
 Finding 14 is in progress, but is everything 

21 
 else associated with 52 closed, so we --

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Oh, wait a minute. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

172 

1 
 Hans, are you on the phone? 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, we have Finding 14 

3 
 is outstanding. 

4 
 MR. KATZ: That's what I said. I 

5 
 said 14 is in progress, but is everything else 

6 
 other than Finding 14 --

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, of the 16 

8 
 findings, I believe what you said is true. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: Okay. That's what I 

10 thought. I understand. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Now on 52 I'd like to 

12 
 bring up one more thing, and when Hans was 

13 
 preparing PER for this, I think it was PER-14. 

14 MR. STIVER: PER-14, yes. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: He had some concerns 

16 
 about the way the database of doses was being 

17 
 utilized. Specifically, let me try to 

18 
 paraphrase what Hans's concern was, and John 

19 
 Mauro or John Stiver, you can correct me if 

20 I'm wrong. 

21 DR. MAURO: Yes, I'm listening. 

22 DR. H. BEHLING: I'm here too. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

173 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Oh good, Hans. 

2 
 DR. MAURO: Okay, we're all here. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Good. The concern 

4 
 was that construction workers do not spend --

5 
 may not spend the entire year at the site, so 

6 
 their annual exposure may represent not really 

7 
 an annual dose, but maybe a dose over a couple 

8 
 of months, a month, six months, some shorter 

9 
 time period. 

10 So if you include that shorter time 

11 
 period exposure, or that exposure is included 

12 
 in the database, and then it gets factored 

13 
 into the, kind of the roll-up, the 90th 

14 
 percentile, it may underestimate a true annual 

15 
 90th percentile, because the 90th -- the doses 

16 
 are being made up of -- the annual doses are 

17 
 not being made up not of annual exposures, but 

18 
 of exposures that occurred over a somewhat 

19 shorter period of time. 

20 
 So the concern is that the, you 

21 
 know, the coworker dose model, which is coming 

22 
 up, and coming up with the 90th percentile or 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

174 

1 
 the 50th percentile based upon these roll-ups, 

2 
 is not claimant-favorable. 

3 
 DR. H. BEHLING: And let me just 

4 
 make a comment here. This is Hans. I made an 

5 
 assumption that goes back to my experience 

6 
 within the utilities, with the utilities, 

7 
 which may not be specifically applicable here. 

8 
 But in the utilities, you'll hire 

9 
 transient workers during outages which are 

10 
 very, very brief, and in some cases you hire 

11 
 people from the union hall on an as-needed 

12 basis. 

13 
 And so when I look at the data that 

14 
 was used to reconstruct these values, I 

15 
 assumed that they used annual doses for people 

16 
 who were considered construction trade 

17 
 workers, versus all others, which in some 

18 
 cases also includes construction trade 

19 
 workers, and on the assumption that 

20 
 construction trade workers may have very brief 

21 
 periods of exposure, their annual doses are 

22 
 not exactly based on 50 weeks of work, and 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

175 

1 
 therefore when you look at those comparisons, 

2 
 you may be short-changing the true values that 

3 
 should have been used, and I will also assume 

4 
 that if you have now a construction worker and 

5 
 you go back to his employment history, if he, 

6 
 for instance, is shown to have an employment 

7 
 for one year for, let's say, a two-month 

8 
 period, I would assume that he will be 

9 
 prorated for that dose for two months as 

10 
 opposed to for the whole year, which means 

11 
 that in the end, you are mixing apples with 

12 oranges, and that was my concern. 

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, sitting here 

14 
 today, I don't know how they did that. I 

15 understand the point. 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, I think you 

17 
 can also -- this is, partially you can have a 

18 
 little bit of philosophical debate on this, is 

19 
 that the -- you have the workers that are, as 

20 
 Hans described, which have a shorter time 

21 
 span, but they are part of the distribution 

22 
 that represents the real distribution of the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

176 

1 
 real workers. It actually spreads it maybe 

2 
 toward the low end a little bit. Whether it 

3 
 affects the upper tail would remain to be seen 

4 
 because you do have a distribution. That's 

5 
 number one. 

6 
 Number two, you can probably argue 

7 
 that even regular workers have the same sort 

8 
 of thing in that they are not always in the 

9 
 exposure mode all the time they are working. 

10 
 They have other things that they are doing. 

11 
 Maybe they are doing paperwork. I mean, as an 

12 
 HP, I was not exposed 24/7 as it were. I was 

13 
 in the office recording surveys and so on part 

14 
 of the time. My exposure would not have been 

15 every workday either. 

16 
 So I am not necessarily saying that 

17 
 you shouldn't make it -- you know, normalize 

18 
 it to a year, but I think you have to think 

19 
 carefully about whether using the true 

20 
 distribution, which is what you have, versus 

21 
 -- because then, why wouldn't you do that with 

22 
 other workers, saying well, they are actually 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

177 

1 
 out in the radiological area only 50 percent 

2 
 of the time, so we are going to normalize 

3 
 their numbers upwards, and I think you have to 

4 
 have that discussion. I think Hans's point is 

5 
 one that is worth thinking about, and maybe 

6 
 NIOSH needs to think about that too, but I 

7 
 think you have to be careful in how you 

8 
 interpret that. 

9 
 DR. ULSH: Also, I suspect that 

10 
 even non-construction workers, if we didn't 

11 
 prorate the construction workers, we didn't 

12 prorate anyone else either. I do agree --

13 
 DR. H. BEHLING: If I could make a 

14 comment --

15 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

16 MR. KATZ: One at a time. 

17 
 DR. ULSH: Let me finish. I do 

18 
 agree with Hans that it would be a bigger 

19 
 issue for journeyman-type construction 

20 workers. 

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes. 

22 
 DR. H. BEHLING: But let me just 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

178 

1 
 make a comment here. For instance, when I was 

2 
 in the utilities, we had obviously rad techs 

3 
 who spent every day in the field too, and they 

4 
 would do obviously job coverage on RWPs and so 

5 
 forth. 

6 
 But then comes an outage, and you 

7 
 have people who are now representing 

8 
 rent-a-techs who are there for the duration, 

9 
 and oftentimes just for a few weeks or a few 

10 months, a couple of months. 

11 
 And you would now have, obviously, 

12 
 technicians, rad technicians who are in the 

13 
 field, who are in-house, versus the rent-a14 
 tech who may be there obviously for a very 

15 
 brief period of time or at least only a 

16 fraction of the year. 

17 
 And then both parties would be 

18 
 exposed, obviously, throughout the time period 

19 
 they were employed. One, the in-house tech 

20 
 would be by and large exposed for the 12 

21 
 months duration of a year, and the rent-a-tech 

22 
 would be there for perhaps two or three 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

179 

1 
 months. 

2 
 And so those are the comparisons 

3 
 that I was looking to draw attention to. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I believe that there 

5 
 was a discussion at some point about not 

6 
 necessarily construction workers, but the --

7 
 all site workers, about what to do with the 

8 
 first year and last year of their dose 

9 
 records, because, just exactly because of 

10 
 this, there may not be a complete year annual 

11 
 record, and I just can't put my finger on 

12 
 where that discussion was held and in what 

13 
 context that discussion was held, but I think 

14 
 that this has been brought up, not necessarily 

15 
 for the context of construction workers, which 

16 
 probably is more of a concern for them, but I 

17 
 do think that partial year exposure has been 

18 
 discussed as to you know, workers' beginning 

19 dates and workers' ending dates. So --

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, for some reason 

21 
 that I can't put my finger on, I'm thinking 

22 
 Rocky Flats. We had some kind of discussion 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

180 

1 
 many, many years ago about that. But Hans and 

2 
 John, aren't your concerns captured in Finding 

3 
 1 of your evaluation -- review of the PER? 

4 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Let me see here. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Your Finding 1 says, 

6 
 "In the event of annual doses for a CTWs and, 

7 
 to a lesser extent, for AMWs, we are not 

8 
 adjusting to account for exposure on 

9 
 employment periods of less than a full year, 

10 
 the recommended deep dose adjustment factor of 

11 
 1.4 may not be claimant-favorable." 

12 
 Although you only mentioned the 

13 
 deep dose adjustment, doesn't that capture the 

14 basic concern? 

15 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Yes, that's pretty 

16 
 much the sum of my concern, is that in your 

17 
 write-up you actually have the actual 

18 
 comparison. I don't know if anything like 

19 
 that was normalized. In other words, if the 

20 
 employment period between construction and 

21 
 non-construction workers were adjusted to 

22 
 reflect any changes or differences in terms of 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

181 

1 
 exposure period or employment period. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: I guess my only 

3 
 question is, our discussing this now, at this 

4 
 particular moment, I don't see that this 

5 
 particular PER has been populated yet on our 

6 
 database. 

7 
 It's showing in the database but 

8 
 not yet populated, as I see it, and if that's 

9 
 the case, then we have not had an opportunity 

10 to address your review here in this forum. 

11 
 Perhaps the discussion, although 

12 
 pertinent, is a little early for us to be 

13 
 addressing it. Am I misreading what the 

14 information is here that I have? 

15 
 DR. H. BEHLING: No, I think in 

16 
 fact I wasn't really prepared to even discuss 

17 
 it because I didn't really see it on the 

18 agenda for today. 

19 
 DR. MAURO: Wanda, this is John. I 

20 
 think the dilemma we have here is in the 

21 
 process of working through a PER which 

22 
 referenced OTIB-52, Hans said, jeez, I'm 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

182 

1 
 noticing something. There might be an issue 

2 
 on 52, even though it wasn't brought up, found 

3 
 as an issue. When we review OTIB-52, it may 

4 
 very well be an important issue to OTIB-52, so 

5 
 we are in this sort of uncomfortable position. 

6 
 We already sort of signed off, said 

7 
 everything's fine. But then Hans said, wait a 

8 
 minute, what about this? You know, when you 

9 
 reviewed OTIB-52, did you take into 

10 
 consideration this time period issue? For 

11 
 example, if you've got a guy who is a 

12 
 construction worker and you're going to use 

13 
 the OTIB-52 approach as a coworker model, and 

14 
 if that OTIB-52 approach, you know, didn't 

15 
 take into consideration that construction 

16 
 workers very well may not have been monitored 

17 
 for a full year, you have a dose for 1969 or 

18 
 whatever, but he really was only exposed for 

19 
 three months in 1969, so that coworker model -

20 
 - you see the nuance here. 

21 
 So unfortunately, what I think we 

22 
 are saying here is that I think we have a new 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

183 

1 
 issue for OTIB-52, or we might, that we really 

2 
 never explored, and we may not have it right, 

3 
 but the concept, as articulated by Hans, I 

4 
 think is worthy of some consideration by 

5 
 NIOSH. 

6 
 I think everyone understands the 

7 
 issue and I do believe that it goes to OTIB8 
 52, and of course it also goes to the PER, 

9 
 which relies on OTIB-52. 

10 
 MR. KATZ: Right, and John, there's 

11 
 nothing unfortunate about this. It's good. 

12 
 It's an issue that we need to resolve, and I 

13 agree that it should be added and we'll --

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: This is an interesting 

15 
 process question, because, to the best of my 

16 
 knowledge, we have not had an additional 

17 
 finding brought up after we have essentially 

18 
 closed out the original findings, and the 

19 
 question in my mind is how best to do that so 

20 
 that it establishes a precedent if we have 

21 this occasion. 

22 
 DR. ULSH: But it's already 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

-- 

 

 

184 

1 
 captured under the PER-14, so it could be 

2 
 addressed there rather than under --

3 
 MR. STIVER: Yes. Instead of putting 

4 
 it back under 52, we could address it under 

5 
 PER-14 --

6 
 MR. HINNEFELD: We've actually had 

7 
 

8 
 MR. STIVER: -- with appropriate 

9 
 linkages. 

10 
 MR. HINNEFELD: We actually did 

11 
 have an analogous finding, in the lymphoma PER 

12 
 when there was discussion -- it ended up not 

13 
 really being resolved or resolvable on the 

14 
 NIOSH side, but the discussion was about 

15 
 historically, how do we know that lymphomas 

16 
 were really correctly characterized as 

17 
 Hodgkins or non-Hodgkins, and that came up in 

18 
 the PER, and so we said, well, that was not 

19 
 something we could deal with because it's 

20 
 defined. I mean, Hodgkins is one -- and the 

21 
 law, since it distinguished between the two, 

22 
 it assumes the distinction. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

185 

1 
 MR. KATZ: So that's fine. So if it 

2 
 stays under the PER and the resolution is that 

3 
 there's some change needed to OTIB-52, then 

4 
 OTIB-52 will get changed. 

5 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. 

6 
 MR. STIVER: It's just another way 

7 
 of giving back to the --

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: So it appears that our 

9 
 primary necessity right now is to get the PER10 14 database, I mean 13 --

11 DR. ULSH: Fourteen. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: It is 14 -- database 

13 
 populated the way we already have TIB-13 that 

14 
 needs to be populated. Is there any problem 

15 
 with seeing to it that these two findings for 

16 PER --

17 
 DR. ULSH: I've taken it down as an 

18 
 action item for us. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Oh, you're going to 

21 
 do it -- usually, since they are our findings, 

22 you know, if you want to populate it --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

186 

1 
 DR. ULSH: I'll put it down as an 

2 
 action item for Steve. 

3 
 (Laughter.) 

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: If you guys have 

5 
 got your, you know, your finding summaries 

6 
 written, Steve, the database does that. It'll 

7 
 allow -- it should allow you to assign it to 

8 
 this Subcommittee and move it over. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, I agree. 

10 
 MR. HINNEFELD: PER-14 looks to be 

11 
 unassigned. If you go to the front page of 

12 our --

13 CHAIR MUNN: Is it not a summary? 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, it's in the 

15 unassigned queue. If you go up --

16 CHAIR MUNN: Oh, okay. 

17 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Go to the Board 

18 
 review unassigned queue, and then it will 

19 
 build it and then if you want, you can -- you 

20 
 can just look at PER, which you are not going 

21 to type --

22 
 MR. KATZ: So then this will be --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

187 

1 
 this could be an agenda item for the next --

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

3 
 MR. STIVER: It should be for the 

4 
 next meeting. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: PER-14. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, it would be. 

7 
 DR. ULSH: To talk about SC&A's 

8 
 findings. 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, in fact, now 

10 
 are there other PERs that -- I've lost track. 

11 I mean, if you guys have done reviews of --

12 
 MR. STIVER: This was really the 

13 
 only one that is new since the last meeting. 

14 
 We still have two others in the queue that we 

15 need to begin, 17 and 29. 

16 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, so, but when 

17 
 -- I mean, I think going forward, when you 

18 
 finish your review, it could just be the 

19 
 automatic step to take it from an assigned 

20 queue into the -

21 
 MR. STIVER: I think because this 

22 
 one is so recent that we just hadn't got to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

188 

1 
 that step yet. 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: All right. Okay. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: I agree. 

4 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So all we've got to 

5 
 do here is assign it and we can do it right 

6 
 now. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, you can assign 

8 
 it and then I don't know when it comes up. 

9 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Only choice we have. 

10 MR. KATZ: Right. 

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Assigned to Work 

12 Group. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: All right. Then we'll 

14 
 have an opportunity to address those two 

15 
 findings at our next meeting. So we'll have 

16 
 the database. Thank you, John and Hans. We 

17 appreciate it. 

18 
 Anything else? If not, then let's 

19 
 break for lunch, and let's take an hour and 

20 
 be back at 1:30. 

21 MR. KATZ: Okay. Thanks, everyone 

22 
 on the line. I'm cutting the line. See you 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
189 

1 
 at 1:30, or hear you. 

2 
 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

3 
 matter went off the record at 12:28 p.m. and 

4 
 resumed at 1:30 p.m.) 

5 
 

6 
 

7 
 

8 
 

9 
 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

190 

1 
 A-F-T-E-R-N-O-O-N S-E-S-S-I-O-N 

2 
 (1:30 p.m.) 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Good afternoon. We are 

4 
 back, dose reconstruction -- no. We are not. 

5 
 Procedures Review Subcommittee, Advisory 

6 
 Board on Radiation and Worker Health. Let me 

7 
 check on the line and see if we have our Board 

8 
 Member Mike Gibson. 

9 
 MEMBER GIBSON: Yes, I'm here Ted. 

10 
 MR. KATZ: Oh, that's great. Thank 

11 you. Wanda? 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: I'm ready. Let's take 

13 
 up our agenda where we left it, with our 

14 
 introduction of the new overarching issues 

15 database list. 

16 
 NIOSH made any progress on putting 

17 together that list? 

18 DR. ULSH: Not yet. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. We have no 

20 
 actions to carry over. The status of the 

21 
 two-pagers has not improved so far as I know 

22 
 very much from the last time. It was intended 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

191 

1 
 that we would try to put together a -- that 

2 
 three of us would be working on this in the 

3 
 interim. 

4 
 I have done one additional one 

5 
 myself but have not shared it with anyone, and 

6 
 that's not very helpful. Paul, do you have 

7 
 anything to add? 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, let me just 

9 
 confirm that we are talking about the 15 two10 
 pagers that were distributed in March of 2011. 

11 MR. KATZ: Yes. 

12 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

13 MEMBER ZIEMER: About a year ago. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Those 15 for starters. 

15 And the other full list actually. 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I have gone through 

17 
 all these and I have done markups but I had a 

18 
 sense of deja vu going through these that I 

19 
 might have done markups on these before on a 

20 
 tracking thing but I couldn't find it on my 

21 
 computer here or at home so maybe I never did 

22 that. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

192 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: Why don't I make an 

2 
 effort to --

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: See if I sent them 

4 
 to you but in any event I have got handwritten 

5 
 markups on all of them. I think there's only 

6 
 two that I thought were sort of clean and --

7 
 MR. KATZ: Ready to post. 

8 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- unadulterated, 

9 
 sort of ready to post, but I think we need to 

10 
 have everybody look at them, not just me and 

11 so --

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, we had agreed 

13 
 last time that if you and I and Dick had 

14 
 agreed that they were in pretty good shape, 

15 
 that we would just go ahead and accept them, 

16 provide them and accept them. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I can go ahead and 

18 
 convert these to track changes format and 

19 distribute them. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, if you have a 

21 
 couple of minutes after we adjourn here, 

22 
 perhaps you and I should take a look at some 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

193 

1 
 of them and we'll go from there and commit to 

2 
 doing a better job of bringing something for 

3 
 the rest of the group to look at on -- at our 

4 
 next meeting. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: I think in reality, I 

6 
 mean, what we talked about, the rest of the 

7 
 group is not going to look at -- anybody who 

8 
 wanted to provide discussions will have --

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

10 
 MR. KATZ: So it's not that, we'll 

11 just post them once you and Paul --

12 CHAIR MUNN: We'll just post them. 

13 
 MR. KATZ: So if you and Paul want 

14 to get together and --

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: We'll do that and 

16 
 we'll --

17 
 MR. KATZ: Just send me clean 

18 versions and we will get them posted. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: We'll start our web 

20 page here. Okay? 

21 MR. KATZ: Okay. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. Status of new 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

194 

1 
 available for review list for SC&A. NIOSH, 

2 
 has that been put together? 

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, we've got it. 

4 
 It may not be entirely up to date, but it's 

5 
 the unassigned queue in the application. 

6 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, we talked about 

7 
 that in the hallway after lunch. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Did you get a chance 

9 
 to look at that? 

10 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean we can go 

11 through their -- we can do that now. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: It's nice to have them 

13 in that concise list. 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: There may be a few 

15 
 more that can be added because this -- it 

16 
 doesn't get updated automatically. And when a 

17 
 new document comes out then -- that's the 

18 
 list. We can go through the list of all the 

19 
 documents. We divided them between the ones 

20 
 that had comments and the ones that -- there 

21 
 may actually be a couple in here that were 

22 
 reviewed and had no comments. That's the only 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

195 

1 
 thing we could do, we couldn't identify those 

2 
 easily and they might still be here. But for 

3 
 the most part these then have not been --

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: I guess the real 

5 
 question from the Subcommittee's point of view 

6 
 needs to be what SC&A views as of specific or 

7 
 particular interest to them, if at all, 

8 
 because the matter of fact that a procedure 

9 
 exists does not necessarily demand that it 

10 
 require SC&A review, and if there's 

11 
 outstanding interest in some of these, or 

12 
 concern with respect to how some of these 

13 
 specifics are approached, the Subcommittee 

14 would like to hear it. 

15 
 MR. STIVER: As at the last 

16 
 meeting, we have prepared a list. This is 

17 
 based on the 2009 summary table that Brant had 

18 
 produced. This was back in the time when we 

19 
 didn't have access to the -- the Board Review 

20 
 System wasn't working correctly, and we had 

21 
 identified 11 potential candidates for review. 

22 
 At this point though I think that 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

196 

1 
 we would want to go back and look through --

2 
 take a more careful look at the latest 

3 
 additions to that, maybe put together an 

4 
 updated list of things that we thought might 

5 
 be good candidates and then bring that back. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, you understand, 

7 
 I don't think the Subcommittee wants to 

8 
 encourage you to -- there's no interest in 

9 
 giving you things to review for review's sake. 

10 If you have --

11 
 MR. STIVER: Absolutely, that's why 

12 
 we had identified some that we thought might 

13 actually benefit from a review of the --

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: It would be helpful, I 

15 
 think, for us to have that. Are you prepared 

16 
 to mention any of those to us today? Or would 

17 you prefer to defer this item? 

18 
 MR. STIVER: I would prefer to have 

19 
 a complete listing actually. I mean we have 

20 
 the other ones from the previous meetings 

21 which we could run through I suppose --

22 CHAIR MUNN: Well --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

197 

1 
 MR. STIVER: I mean it wouldn't 

2 
 hurt to do that. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: I don't see that that 

4 
 would merit much -- would be very productive 

5 
 probably at this point. 

6 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, I think that it 

7 
 would be better for us to have a comprehensive 

8 
 list of everything that is available at this 

9 
 point that we -- after we have reviewed them 

10 
 and have a better feel for which ones might 

11 actually benefit from a review by SC&A. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: I think that would 

13 
 probably be helpful, especially now that you 

14 
 have this excellent unassigned queue from 

15 
 which to work. And as I said, we are not 

16 
 looking for something to assign to you. We 

17 
 are just asking if you have concerns based on 

18 -- perhaps links from one to the other. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, and I think that 

20 
 would be a good tasking for us then to go 

21 ahead and prepare a list for discussion. 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: All right. That's a 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

198 

1 
 carryover. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: All these documents 

3 
 that are in this unassigned queue, where can 

4 
 we get copies of the documents themselves? 

5 
 Are they all available on the -- a lot of them 

6 
 are basically like looking up in all these 

7 
 report documents. They are in the unassigned 

8 
 queue, but they are just given the number, 

9 
 like report 19, report 20, report 11 and 

10 
 report 10. You know, we don't know what the 

11 
 title is of it. We don't know -- so we can't 

12 
 really, from looking at this we can't really 

13 
 see whether or not we can make a 

14 
 recommendation as to whether it should be 

15 
 reviewed or not. We'd have to get a little 

16 
 bit more information than what is available in 

17 
 the --

18 MR. KATZ: So, when they are loaded 

19 
 on here there is not a link to the actual 

20 
 document? 

21 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, let's just try 

22 
 that. The last time I clicked on it, that's 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

199 

1 
 how we go to the -- that's how you get it 

2 
 assigned. 

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think in the 

4 
 unassigned queue that's not working. 

5 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

6 
 MR. KATZ: So maybe the thing to do 

7 
 is just to get them so that -- linked so that 

8 
 they can click on these and actually see the 

9 
 document? 

10 MR. HINNEFELD: We could do that or 

11 
 we could put the documents where we could see 

12 them. 

13 
 MR. STIVER: Either way it would 

14 
 work, as long as we have access to them 

15 without having to go up and down. 

16 MR. KATZ: Whatever's easiest. 

17 MR. HINNEFELD: They're on K: 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: It would be very 

19 helpful to have a --

20 
 MR. HINNEFELD: These are not on 

21 
 the public website. Most of them. I mean 

22 
 there might be a couple. But in general these 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

200 

1 
 

2 
 MR. KATZ: But on K: is fine. 

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I mean they are O: 

4 
 They are not currently on their O: We would 

5 
 have to put them there. We would make a file 

6 
 under ABRWH and then --

7 
 MR. STIVER: And call it 

8 
 unassigned. 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: And then Procedures 

10 
 Subcommittee and then put it in there and just 

11 
 say unassigned documents or something and you 

12 
 could write them in there, and then they come 

13 
 in several categories, you know, reports, 

14 
 PERs, they each have their own folder on our 

15 
 K: drive and so we can do that. 

16 
 But what we'll do is we'll check 

17 
 with TSD and say it would be better to do that 

18 
 or to build a link from this application to --

19 
 MR. KATZ: Whichever's easier. So 

20 
 when you come up with a new version of a 

21 
 document that has already been reviewed, does 

22 
 that also automatically end up in the --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

201 

1 
 MR. HINNEFELD: No, that's part of 

2 
 the process we have to build. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Okay. 

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Because it doesn't 

5 
 automatically go in here and that's why I 

6 
 think we are several behind on this. So you 

7 
 got that too Brant? 

8 
 DR. ULSH: Yes. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: I'm just going to 

10 
 assume that you are going to bring us some 

11 
 magic way that we can go from this unassigned 

12 list --

13 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, and I think we 

14 
 should have something ready on this well 

15 
 before the next meeting. It shouldn't take 

16 very much time --

17 CHAIR MUNN: Good. 

18 
 MR. HINNEFELD: -- either to decide 

19 
 what we are going to do on our side and either 

20 
 move them to where you can see them on your O: 

21 
 drive or build -- have the application linked 

22 on an open --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

202 

1 
 MR. STIVER: Okay, well we'll just 

2 
 stay in contact with Brant and --

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, there's no 

4 
 reason to wait until the next meeting to have 

5 
 that in place. I think we can have that in 

6 
 place pretty quickly. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's good. That 

8 
 would be helpful for everybody actually. 

9 
 Thank you Stu. Any other comments about this 

10 unassigned list? Then --

11 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, wait a minute. 

12 
 There is one other thing. I mean, in some 

13 
 cases we reviewed -- I mean if you look at the 

14 
 list that John was talking about, in some 

15 
 cases we have reviewed a version of the 

16 
 document, and then the document has 

17 
 subsequently gone and been reissued as to like 

18 
 this morning we talked about version 4 of OCAS 

19 
 or DCAS-TIB-10 or whatever it was. Now there 

20 
 may be other documents -- just because it's in 

21 
 the assigned queue, there may be documents 

22 
 that are in the assigned queue that have one 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

203 

1 
 or more revisions been issued since the last 

2 
 time SC&A reviewed it, because looking at the 

3 
 -- again, looking at the list that John was 

4 
 talking about, that was one of the reasons --

5 
 that was one of the criteria for putting it on 

6 
 as a potential re-review because it has a full 

7 
 -- been fully revised since the last time SC&A 

8 
 reviewed it. 

9 
 Now, again, it's up to the Board or 

10 
 the Subcommittee as to whether or not you 

11 
 would like us to take another look at some of 

12 
 these that we have -- I know that, like, we 

13 
 talked about IG-1. We have reviewed that one 

14 
 at least twice. There may be other ones which 

15 
 we would want to go back and re-review. So 

16 
 you know, I don't know that we would want to, 

17 
 you know, limit ourselves to the unassigned 

18 queue, let's put it that way. 

19 
 And that's why we were -- I know 

20 
 that in the past NIOSH has published 

21 
 periodically a complete list of all their 

22 
 documents, where they stood, and you know, 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

204 

1 
 which ones -- what versions they were, and 

2 
 kind of like for their own document control 

3 
 purposes, and that's the -- that's what John 

4 
 was talking about that we -- a version of that 

5 
 document we got from, that was a 2009 version 

6 
 of that document. 

7 
 But I don't know if they continue 

8 
 to do that anymore or --

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, we can -- I 

10 
 don't think we routinely generate it, but I 

11 
 think we could generate it. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: It might be very 

13 
 helpful for all involved to know exactly what 

14 
 

15 
 MR. STIVER: If you could do that, 

16 
 that would provide us -- that in addition to 

17 
 the unassigned queue would probably give us 

18 
 what we need to put together a complete list. 

19 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay. 

20 
 DR. ULSH: Can you review what that 

21 
 was again? 

22 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, generate a 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

205 

1 
 list of all the current -- the current 

2 
 documents, the current revisions of, you know 

3 
 

4 
 MR. KATZ: The rev status of all 

5 
 the --

6 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, the rev status 

7 
 of the documents. The list of the documents 

8 
 and the revs -- which rev that is. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, okay. 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I could send you a 

11 
 version of what I am talking about, Brant. 

12 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, send him the old 

13 
 trial that we had from before. 

14 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, I don't --

15 
 I'll send him the file that we used to 

16 
 generate her file if I can find it. 

17 
 MR. STIVER: I have it on my 

18 
 machine at SC&A if you can't find it. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: All right. Anything 

20 
 else on that topic? 

21 
 (No response.) 

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: Otherwise, update on 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

206 

1 
 the PER reviews? SC&A, do you have anything 

2 
 new to add on where you are with yours? 

3 
 MR. STIVER: We have a PER-14 that 

4 
 we talked about just this morning. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, that's out, if 

6 
 anyone hasn't had an opportunity to look at 

7 
 it, it's available to you. 

8 
 MR. STIVER: Right. Hans, are you 

9 
 on the line? 

10 MS. K. BEHLING: Hans is not on the 

11 
 line. I can put him on, hold on one second 

12 please. This is Kathy. 

13 CHAIR MUNN: Hi Kathy. 

14 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Hi Wanda, how are 

15 you? 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Just fine. It's good 

17 to hear your voice. 

18 MS. K. BEHLING: Oh, thank you. 

19 DR. H. BEHLING: I'm here. 

20 
 MR. STIVER: Hans, could you give 

21 
 kind of an overview of PER-14 for the 

22 
 Subcommittee, just kind of a broad brushNEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

207 

1 
 stroke overview of the issues? 

2 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Okay. I just put 

3 
 it away. I thought that was going to be a 

4 
 topic for next time. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, we are 

6 
 definitely going to do that next time. Well, 

7 
 we are certainly going to --

8 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Those who may have 

9 
 a copy of it, I can just briefly identify some 

10 
 of the leading findings that I had. I think 

11 we touched on --

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: We touched on Finding 

13 1, there were two findings. 

14 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Yes, hold on for a 

15 second. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: The two of -- they're 

17 -- it's on page 11. The two findings. 

18 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Let me just --

19 yes. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: And they aren't really 

21 
 that extensive, although judging from our 

22 
 discussion earlier this morning, and the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

208 

1 
 bearing that they have on OTIB-52, we are a 

2 
 long way from being completely done with it I 

3 
 think. 

4 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Yes, I think 

5 
 finding number two was the question that I had 

6 
 between trying to decipher what it means that 

7 
 the issue for condition number two for all 

8 
 sites seek internal dose to be determined 

9 
 using the same method as is applied to all 

10 other workers. 

11 I don't know what that means. 

12 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

13 
 DR. H. BEHLING: There were a 

14 
 number of things that were very difficult for 

15 
 me to get a full grasp because I was really 

16 
 not part of the discussion groups that 

17 
 involved the OTIB and therefore I was somewhat 

18 
 at a loss to really have a full understanding 

19 
 of what may have been discussed in previous 

20 sessions. 

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: That is always 

22 difficult. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

209 

1 
 DR. H. BEHLING: I don't know if 

2 
 someone from NIOSH can respond to that 

3 
 particular finding. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, we'll have an 

5 
 opportunity to begin to address that at our 

6 
 next meeting. That will be on our list. 

7 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Yes, and there 

8 
 were a couple of other things that I really 

9 
 had a question about, what happens to people 

10 
 whose dose reconstructions were performed 

11 
 prior to the development of a coworker model, 

12 
 and you realize -- and my review I had 

13 
 identified those various states, for the 

14 
 facilities that currently have a coworker 

15 
 model, but in many instances that was only 

16 
 made available in recent couple of years, and 

17 
 for anyone whose dose reconstruction took 

18 
 place before that, and who do not have any 

19 
 assigned coworker dose, what does that mean in 

20 
 terms of will they be given another chance to 

21 
 have their dose reconstruction done at another 

22 time frame under different circumstances? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

210 

1 
 That was really the key issue here. 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, this is Stu 

3 
 Hinnefeld. What should have happened in those 

4 
 situations is the claims that needed a 

5 
 coworker treatment shouldn't have been -- the 

6 
 dose reconstruction shouldn't have been done 

7 
 until the coworker was available. The dose 

8 
 reconstructions that would have been done, 

9 
 would have used one of the overestimating 

10 
 approaches that were used early on in the TIB11 
 2 or TIB-4, you know, whichever the pertinent 

12 
 overestimating approach was, and then -- and 

13 
 there shouldn't have been any dose 

14 
 reconstructions done for someone who needed a 

15 
 coworker approach until the coworker model was 

16 
 available, because that's, you know, in part 

17 
 why those overestimating approaches were 

18 
 adopted, because we thought we could 

19 
 disposition some claims in advance of doing 

20 
 the work necessary for the coworkers, the 

21 coworker studies. 

22 
 Now, so that's what should have 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

211 

1 
 happened. Now, you know, I guess the question 

2 
 remains: should there be an effort, or did we 

3 
 go back and look even when we posted coworker 

4 
 -- I don't know, to be honest, whether we did 

5 
 or not, if we looked in the posted coworker 

6 
 model and said okay, for the people we have 

7 
 done so far, are there any in there that we 

8 
 didn't appropriately overestimate, or 

9 
 something, or we didn't use an overestimating, 

10 
 and if we looked at it now, we said, when we 

11 
 get this coworker model, well, we'll use this 

12 coworker model. 

13 
 So, but, what -- it should not have 

14 
 been done if they required a coworker 

15 
 treatment, they should not have been done 

16 
 until the coworker was done. And the reason 

17 
 they would require a coworker treatment is 

18 
 because the overestimating approach would come 

19 
 above 50 percent, so you can proceed with 

20 that. 

21 
 So we'd say, well, this is going to 

22 
 be a coworker. I would think that we -- there 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

212 

1 
 were probably a lot of cases that had that 

2 
 pend designation a long time ago, I mean, 

3 
 we've pretty much got them all over the place 

4 
 now, so -- but we would pend those things, say 

5 
 we can't work it until we have a coworker. So 

6 
 that's what should have happened. 

7 
 MR. KATZ: That makes sense. 

8 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Stu, let me ask 

9 
 you, because, again, since I was really not 

10 
 privy to some previous discussions, when you 

11 
 go to page 14 of my write-up I make reference 

12 
 to the issue that's under the criteria, 977 

13 
 cases were selected that potentially would be 

14 
 affected, and at this point, I don't really 

15 
 know to what extent the criteria that I cite 

16 
 on page 14 have been applied to whittle down 

17 
 that 977 cases to something that is probably a 

18 small fraction of those 977 cases. 

19 
 And under criteria 2, that's really 

20 
 the key issue, it says review the external 

21 
 dose of the claim if no external coworker dose 

22 
 was assigned, and internal for Hanford, 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

213 

1 
 there's no OTIB-52 adjustment to be made. 

2 
 That's really the crux of the 

3 
 concerns that I have for this particular PER4 
 14. 

5 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, I'm not smart 

6 
 enough to -- knowledgeable enough about the 

7 
 PER and OTIB-52 to really respond here today, 

8 
 but --

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, we wouldn't expect 

10 
 that. That will be on our agenda for next 

11 time. 

12 
 MR. HINNEFELD: But I mean, we can 

13 
 work through this as we work through this PER 

14 
 review, I think would be the best way to do 

15 it. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: All right. We'll 

17 
 indicate that we will definitely -- we'll ask 

18 
 for some addressing of PER-14 next time. Is 

19 
 there anything else going on with the PER 

20 reviews that we ought to be on top of? 

21 
 MR. STIVER: I guess the only other 

22 
 thing, then, is what we brought up earlier in 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

214 

1 
 the day about the case reviews for PER-12, and 

2 
 the draft approach that Kathy Behling had put 

3 
 together, and which is not available really 

4 
 for review at this point for everybody, but 

5 
 Kathy could certainly -- is online and could 

6 
 explain the basic approach that we are 

7 
 planning on taking, and kind of go through 

8 
 some of the highlights of that. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: And refresh my memory, 

10 PER-12 is --

11 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay, PER-12 was 

12 
 the evaluation of a highly insoluble plutonium 

13 
 compound, the type Super S, and yes, if I can 

14 
 take a few minutes, it sounds like -- I wasn't 

15 
 on the line this morning, and I apologize for 

16 
 not getting this to you earlier, but it sounds 

17 
 like not everyone has a copy of what I 

18 
 provided to John Stiver late yesterday. Is 

19 that correct? 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: I think that's 

21 
 correct. 

22 MR. KATZ: Yes. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

215 

1 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay, if I can 

2 
 just take a few minutes, maybe I can walk you 

3 
 through what I have done, and because I know 

4 
 there is always a good deal of discussion as 

5 
 to how SC&A should approach the audits 

6 
 associated with these PERs, and so I thought 

7 
 if we could -- if I could work through one and 

8 
 briefly explain what I did to you, and maybe 

9 
 we could determine if I am on the right track 

10 here and maybe get some feedback. 

11 
 MS. LIN: Kathy, this is Jenny with 

12 
 HHS. Before you go on, we haven't PA-reviewed 

13 
 the document that you would be speaking of, so 

14 
 just be careful of any claimant-specific 

15 information. 

16 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay. I'll try to 

17 
 remember that, and please stop me along the 

18 
 way if I say the wrong thing. Hopefully, I 

19 will not do that. 

20 
 What I did in this report, and I 

21 
 did go back to the transcript to try to get an 

22 
 understanding of everything that we wanted to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

216 

1 
 put in this report, and again, this was our 

2 
 review of PER-12, which is the highly 

3 
 insoluble plutonium compound, and like I said, 

4 
 the Super S, and we were issued -- we were 

5 
 tasked to review that PER back in, I guess, 

6 
 October of 2009 and I started out a report by 

7 
 feeding some relevant background information 

8 
 on when we were assigned the PER and why that 

9 
 PER was in existence, you know, how it 

10 
 actually became something that was done 

11 
 because it was determined that there was the 

12 
 existence of this highly insoluble plutonium 

13 and therefore NIOSH issued OTIB-49. 

14 
 OTIB-49 was the estimating doses 

15 
 for plutonium strongly retained in the lung 

16 
 and that's what prompted the OTIB PER. SC&A 

17 
 was tasked to review that and as part of our 

18 
 review, we have five sub-tasks, and sub-task 4 

19 
 is actually conducting the audit of DRs 

20 
 accepted by the PER, and this is our first 

21 opportunity to do that, obviously. 

22 
 So, in my report, I indicated all 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

217 

1 
 this in the pertinent information. I'm sorry, 

2 
 did somebody -- okay. And one thing that we 

3 
 determined with PER-12 was there were various 

4 
 criteria that needed to be looked at under the 

5 
 OTIB-49. 

6 
 First of all, there were four 

7 
 different target organs that we needed to look 

8 
 at, and also you needed to assess how the 

9 
 individual was monitored. 

10 
 And so based on that, SC&A had 

11 
 recommended that there be a selection of 10 

12 
 different categories, or 10 different cases in 

13 
 each of the various categories or permutations 

14 that were part of PER-12. 

15 
 And back in -- it was the July 

16 
 15th, 2011 DR Subcommittee meeting, NIOSH 

17 
 provided the Subcommittee with a list of, I 

18 
 think, 50 cases, and from those 50 cases, 

19 
 there were nine cases selected that actually 

20 
 represented eight of the 10 DR categories. 

21 
 Two of the categories were not represented 

22 
 because there were just not enough -- they 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

218 

1 
 were the fecal samples associated with the GI 

2 
 tract and systemic organs and so there were no 

3 
 cases selected for those two categories. 

4 
 So what I did in the very first 

5 
 case is we selected -- I just took the first 

6 
 one off the list. I went in and I gave some 

7 
 background information on this particular 

8 
 case, just as we do with our normal dose 

9 
 reconstructions, indicating where the 

10 
 individual worked, what time frames he worked 

11 
 there, what locations. I identified both 

12 
 internal and external monitoring that was 

13 
 provided for the individual, when they were 

14 
 diagnosed with their cancer, and I was 

15 
 actually going to go through all of that in 

16 
 this case but I am a little bit reluctant to 

17 
 do that now, based on the earlier comment. 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, there's no reason 

19 to do that now, Kathy. 

20 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay. 

21 
 MR. STIVER: Kathy, this is John. 

22 
 Can I step in for just a second? I wanted to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

219 

1 
 let the Subcommittee know that I had just sent 

2 
 this document to all of your CDC accounts. 

3 
 So it is available. Sorry to 

4 
 interrupt, Kathy. I just wanted to --

5 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Oh, that's okay. 

6 
 And again, I'll keep this more brief than I 

7 
 was intending to. So, but once we get into 

8 
 the actual case review, my first section is a 

9 
 background information, as I just indicated, 

10 
 as we generally do with our dose 

11 
 reconstructions. And then under section 2, I 

12 
 did a comparison of NIOSH's original dose 

13 
 reconstruction, and then the rework of the 

14 dose reconstruction. 

15 
 Here's where I -- I decided to go 

16 
 in and talk about both the internal and 

17 
 external, even though in this particular PER 

18 
 we are only focused on the internal doses 

19 
 associated with plutonium, just because I 

20 
 thought it would be nice to know if this was 

21 
 the total dose, this was the PoC assigned for 

22 
 the initial dose reconstruction, and then this 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

220 

1 
 is how the dose ultimately changed and what 

2 
 the revised PoC was. 

3 
 Then I went into -- the final 

4 
 section is just specific issues related to the 

5 
 PER-12 for this particular case, and I walked 

6 
 through what was done in the original dose 

7 
 reconstruction in this particular case. This 

8 
 individual -- in both cases, the original and 

9 
 this rework, the dose reconstruction was done 

10 
 as an overestimate. The original was really a 

11 
 maximizing case where the internal was done 

12 
 with the OTIB-2 methodology, which is not even 

13 
 being used at this point. An OTIB-2 

14 
 methodology was that when they took -- there 

15 
 were 28 radionuclides that were assumed on the 

16 
 -- that were in -- yes, 28 radionuclides on 

17 
 the very first day of employment were assumed, 

18 
 and so it was a very -- it was a hypothetical 

19 
 internal dose, with a very maximizing 

20 approach. 

21 
 With the rework, they actually went 

22 
 into the monitoring data, looked at -- because 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

221 

1 
 the individuals did have bioassay samples. 

2 
 They did a fitted internal dose for the period 

3 
 where there were bioassay samples, and then 

4 
 for the remainder of the individual's 

5 
 employment, they looked at coworker data, and 

6 
 I reviewed all of that data, I made sure they 

7 
 made comparisons of the solubility classes, 

8 
 Type M and Type S, they assigned the highest 

9 
 dose and then they applied the appropriate 

10 
 adjustment factors for the -- both fitted and 

11 
 the coworker proportion of the employment, and 

12 
 I was able to verify that that was all done 

13 
 correctly. I looked at all of the IMBA runs, 

14 
 looked at all the guidance in the appropriate 

15 
 TBDs and in the OTIB-49, and for this 

16 particular case I had no findings. 

17 
 And so that's how I went about 

18 
 going -- actually doing this pre-work and I 

19 
 guess we have decided that we are going to 

20 
 make this one report so that all nine of the 

21 
 cases that have been selected will be part of 

22 this one report. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

222 

1 
 But I just wanted to have the 

2 
 opportunity of walking you through the 

3 
 approach that was taken and just get some 

4 
 feedback as to whether that's appropriate, and 

5 
 if I interpreted your direction correctly. 

6 
 I realize that you haven't had a 

7 
 chance really to look at this, but I didn't 

8 
 know if I had put in enough detail, too much 

9 
 detail or -- if you have any thoughts at this 

10 point. 

11 
 DR. MAURO: You know, this is John, 

12 
 Kathy. I read your report this morning, and I 

13 
 found it very interesting with regard to one 

14 
 respect, and I think it might be of interest 

15 also to the Subcommittee. 

16 
 I noticed that when this was 

17 
 reworked, it was reworked for a number of 

18 
 reasons. It looked like one of the main 

19 
 reasons was there was a second cancer, the 

20 
 colon cancer, I guess, came up, which then 

21 drove the need to redo this case anyway. 

22 
 And when the case was redone, in 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

223 

1 
 the process of doing that, there were a number 

2 
 of changes made, as is typical for a PER, one 

3 
 of which of course was the issue regarding 

4 
 high-fired plutonium, and I noticed that --

5 
 now, the question I have is, if there was no 

6 
 other reason to redo this one other than high7 
 fired plutonium, would this -- because the 

8 
 dose went down, the internal dose to the 

9 
 prostate went down, I believe. 

10 
 Stay with me a little bit. It's 

11 
 sort of a brain-teaser. Would there have been 

12 
 a need to redo this case? In other words, in 

13 
 a funny way, what we found ourselves doing is 

14 
 reviewing a case under the high-fired 

15 
 plutonium PER, but the reality is that the 

16 
 real reason this case needed to be redone 

17 
 wasn't because of that, it was because this 

18 
 other cancer showed up, which drove the need 

19 to redo this case? 

20 
 So -- unless I misunderstood. I 

21 just read it pretty quickly this morning. 

22 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay. No, you are 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

224 

1 
 correct, John. However, this case was done 

2 
 for two reasons -- for the high-fired 

3 
 plutonium issue and for the additional cancer, 

4 
 and I realize the additional cancer is what 

5 
 you might think drove this, but there was 

6 
 documentation in the file that indicated that 

7 
 this case should be reviewed under PER-12 and 

8 
 that a rework was to be done because you could 

9 
 not make a determination until there was a 

10 rework. 

11 
 So whether there would have been a 

12 
 second cancer or not, this case would have 

13 been looked at again. 

14 DR. MAURO: Oh, okay. 

15 
 DR. H. BEHLING: John, this is 

16 
 Hans. The real driver here was that the need 

17 
 to look at it was driven by a PoC that is --

18 
 that has to be greater than 16.97 percent. So 

19 
 even though this was originally a maximized 

20 
 dose reconstruction using OTIB-2, I think it 

21 
 would -- this was snagged on the basis of that 

22 PoC criteria. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

225 

1 
 DR. MAURO: Interesting, and as a 

2 
 result, by going to the more realistic model, 

3 
 the internal dose, to the prostate in this 

4 
 case of course, went down. 

5 
 I would suspect if it was a lung 

6 
 dose, it may very well have gone up, but 

7 
 that's -- it's sort of an unexpected outcome. 

8 
 It's just interesting that it turned out --

9 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Yes, but they did 

10 follow the guidance --

11 DR. MAURO: Oh, yes. 

12 
 DR. H. BEHLING: -- that are defined 

13 
 in PER-12 and that is driven by signs that 

14 
 this guy might have been exposed to Super S, 

15 
 and his original PoC exceeded the threshold 

16 for snagging him. 

17 
 DR. MAURO: Oh, no, I did read it 

18 
 and I followed it exactly and I just found it 

19 
 interesting that -- typically you expect a 

20 
 redo to result -- especially in the case of 

21 
 high-fired plutonium -- that the internal dose 

22 
 would go up. But not in this case, for the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

226 

1 
 reasons you very well explained. 

2 
 DR. H. BEHLING: Well, they might 

3 
 have, and in fact in the future maybe they may 

4 
 want to look at those cases if there is a 

5 
 highly-maximized PoC that goes above the 

6 
 threshold of the PoC that will pull it out, 

7 
 they may want to look at it and sort of say, 

8 
 look, is this reasonable, although I think 

9 
 what they did is probably the correct thing. 

10 DR. MAURO: Yes, yes. 

11 
 DR. H. BEHLING: To realize you 

12 
 don't want to make an assumption before you 

13 add to one of the numbers. 

14 
 DR. MAURO: Got it. Good, thank 

15 you. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you, gentlemen, 

17 
 for the discussion, and thank you, Kathy, for 

18 
 bringing us up to date. I think that we 

19 
 probably can't do anything with this until 

20 
 NIOSH has had an opportunity to look at it and 

21 respond. 

22 MR. HINNEFELD: We agree. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

227 

1 
 MR. KATZ: No, no. There's nothing 

2 
 to respond to at this point. They are just 

3 
 asking the Subcommittee are they on the right 

4 
 trail --

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: Are they on the right 

6 
 track. 

7 
 MR. KATZ: before they deliver 

8 
 their actual full report on all the cases, 

9 
 because this is just the first that they have 

10 gone through. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: This is -- I recognize 

12 
 this is not a complete report, but I guess 

13 
 what I should be asking instead is if you have 

14 
 a feel for when the completed PER review will 

15 
 be available? Will there be anything for us 

16 to discuss on this next time? 

17 
 MR. STIVER: I would say that we 

18 
 should be able to have it ready by the next 

19 meeting. Kathy, is there --

20 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Yes, that 

21 
 shouldn't be a problem. As Ted just 

22 
 indicated, what I am hoping to do is to get 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

228 

1 
 some feedback just to say should I continue on 

2 
 this path, have I given you enough information 

3 
 with this first test case, and I can complete 

4 
 the other eight cases associated with PER-8 in 

5 
 this fashion, or would you like me to make 

6 
 changes? Do you want more data, less data, do 

7 
 you want me to go into detail in the rework? 

8 
 That was my -- that was what I was trying to 

9 
 get an answer to. 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Paul, do you have 

11 anything to add? 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, of course we 

13 
 just saw it for the first time. I mean, my 

14 impression is that it's fine. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: It seems thorough to 

16 
 me. 

17 MEMBER ZIEMER: But I guess 

18 
 ultimately I would like to reserve judgment a 

19 
 little bit on that, but my feeling is she 

20 
 should proceed. I think she's on the right 

21 
 track here, and I'm not sure -- I mean, what 

22 
 else would you add at this point? It's not 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

229 

1 
 clear to me that there's any big pieces 

2 
 missing. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: So, let me give you some 

4 
 food for thought from just -- I haven't read 

5 
 it, Kathy. I just listened to you, that's 

6 
 all. But just my sort of thought in listening 

7 
 to you is, I mean, your final product is going 

8 
 to be a report on the review as a whole and of 

9 
 course you'll call out any instances or 

10 
 concerns that there may be with respect to 

11 
 implementation. I mean, that's sort of the 

12 
 purpose of this, to see was implementation 

13 done correctly. 

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Right, but it's not 

15 so much that it's the final numbers --

16 
 MR. KATZ: The individual cases are 

17 not important at all --

18 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- whether they go 

19 
 up or down because you know, with high-fired 

20 
 plutonium, you've got a longer residence time 

21 
 in the lung, and in a sense it's not 

22 
 surprising that it's the other organs that go 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

230 

1 
 down then because the material is not 

2 
 available for them to accumulate. 

3 
 MR. STIVER: Okay. This was kind 

4 
 of a unique case in that you did have the two 

5 
 drivers and one -- so you are trying to 

6 
 combine those in this particular thing, where 

7 
 really -- for the purposes of PER-12, you 

8 
 know, where really only the --

9 
 MR. KATZ: And I think you may find 

10 
 that you have quite a few instances of that 

11 
 because there are -- I think there will often 

12 be more than one driver of a redo. 

13 
 MR. STIVER: So in those cases, 

14 
 then, we should just strictly stick to the 

15 PER-12 aspect of it. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: The PER-12 issues are 

17 
 the ones that we are trying to examine, you 

18 
 know, their ultimate PoC and all that really 

19 doesn't matter. I mean, it --

20 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Right, and the --

21 
 I'm not sure if the second cancer sort of 

22 matters in this case even --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

231 

1 
 MR. KATZ: Right. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- so much. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, but with nine 

4 
 individual cases, by the time all nine of them 

5 
 have been covered, you are going to have such 

6 
 a variety of types and PoCs that certainly as 

7 
 far as the process itself is concerned, it 

8 
 looks thorough to me. 

9 
 DR. MAURO: Yes, Kathy, when I 

10 
 looked at it, you focused right in on the 

11 
 prostate and how the dose changes because of 

12 
 these changes, and of course you did not 

13 
 address the colon, which would not have been 

14 within the scope of this PER review process. 

15 
 MR. STIVER: There was a mention of 

16 it but, you know, there wasn't any --

17 
 DR. MAURO: Oh, no, it's mentioned, 

18 
 but I mean to -- so I think what my reaction, 

19 
 I guess, is when I read it, it did follow our 

20 
 instructions from what I understood at the 

21 
 time to be what we are supposed to do for a 

22 
 PER, and you know, so I guess I -- my sense 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

232 

1 
 is, I think, you know, the SC&A people have 

2 
 only recently looked at it is that, this is, 

3 
 this is, you know -- you are on the right 

4 
 path. That's my suggestion, yes. 

5 
 MS. K. BEHLING: And I guess what I 

6 
 was thinking about is: and I realize I believe 

7 
 that the -- our direction was supposed to be 

8 
 focused on the PER issue. But I know that 

9 
 there was a lot of discussion and dialogue 

10 
 back and forth, should we be making the 

11 
 comparison, should we be looking at PoC from 

12 
 the first -- from the original and compare it 

13 to the rework. 

14 
 And so I tried to blend both of 

15 
 those, you know, there were two different 

16 
 schools of thought, I think, when I read back 

17 
 through the transcript, and I tried -- I 

18 
 decided I was going to try and blend both so 

19 
 that we'd have everything here, so that we 

20 could look at the big picture. 

21 MR. KATZ: So, Kathy? 

22 MS. K. BEHLING: Yes. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

233 

1 
 MR. KATZ: Kathy, so again, my 

2 
 sense for that, as far as how that dialogue 

3 
 went, was that it was really not, I mean, the 

4 
 conclusion of that dialogue was we are not 

5 
 interested in -- I mean, it really is all 

6 
 about focusing in on the correct 

7 
 implementation of the PER and not other 

8 
 matters, you know, with respect to comparing 

9 
 the original dose reconstruction to the redo. 

10 
 It really is focused on the PER-12 question: 

11 
 is it implemented correctly? And everything 

12 
 else is really not germane to the process, and 

13 
 it's just going to slow you down in completing 

14 your evaluation. 

15 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, unless it's 

16 
 easy to do, I think knowing how it impacts is 

17 
 informative in a sense, that it gives you a 

18 
 feeling for the impact that you are having 

19 with the change, you know what I'm saying? 

20 
 The numbers are informative simply 

21 
 to give you a feel for the importance of the 

22 
 change. I mean, if you were finding that with 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

234 

1 
 or without this PER, it had very little effect 

2 
 on anything, then you'd be wondering about in 

3 
 the future --

4 
 MR. KATZ: Well, the PERs are done 

5 
 because they do have an impact, and that is 

6 
 sort of a foregone conclusion --

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: You're saying it's a 

8 
 priori -

9 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

10 
 MR. KATZ: -- if they don't get done 

11 
 in the first place. I mean, the point of this 

12 
 is to make sure, again, and then there's an 

13 
 evaluation of the methodology to make sure 

14 
 that's straight and Hans has done, I think, 

15 many of those. 

16 
 But then this process here and the 

17 
 tail end of it is simply to ascertain: was it 

18 actually implemented on cases correctly? 

19 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes. 

20 
 MR. KATZ: So that's really all we 

21 are trying to get at. 

22 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Whether or not it 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

235 

1 
 kicked them over the line or not --

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's moot. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Is really not the issue. 

4 
 MR. STIVER: I guess it is. But --

5 
 this is Stiver again -- but if you were able 

6 
 to get some of that after-diagnostic 

7 
 information, like Kathy has done, without an 

8 
 inordinate amount of extra effort, wouldn't 

9 
 that be something useful to the program that 

10 we might want to --

11 
 MR. KATZ: Well, I mean I guess you 

12 
 say inordinate effort. But I don't see why we 

13 
 would just have any extra effort. Why not 

14 
 just do the task and get it done as 

15 
 efficiently as possible? Why spend time and 

16 
 money on a matter that gets addressed 

17 
 elsewhere? Because we do case reviews for 

18 
 dose reconstruction in the Dose Reconstruction 

19 
 Subcommittee and that's really not the 

20 function here. 

21 
 DR. MAURO: Along these lines, let 

22 
 me jump in, this is John, a little bit. The 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

236 

1 
 key here, I think, I'm looking right now at 

2 
 Table 2 in Kathy's report where she shows the 

3 
 difference in the internal dose between --

4 
 before and after -- the difference, I am 

5 
 presuming, is entirely due -- and it's the 

6 
 prostate -- entirely due to going from OTIB-2 

7 
 to going to high-fired plutonium, which is the 

8 
 essence of what we were trying to do here. 

9 
 But what she also did in this very 

10 
 same table is that context. It showed the 

11 
 before and after for some of the external 

12 doses also, and medical. 

13 
 And what it does is, it does set 

14 
 context. In theory, Kathy, I guess you could 

15 
 have just put the internal dose and how it 

16 
 changed, and whether or not, you know, it was 

17 
 done correctly, going from OTIB-2 to the new 

18 
 approach to high-fired plutonium, OTIB-29, and 

19 
 maybe that's the question that should be 

20 
 before us at this time, because, I think, 

21 
 Kathy, you have presented your vision of what 

22 
 these case reviews will look like, and in this 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

237 

1 
 particular case, this had context by showing 

2 
 before and after for the full range of 

3 
 exposures, but of course the whole analysis 

4 
 and discussion where you want vertical, so to 

5 
 speak, is on how did the internal dose change 

6 
 because that's where the action is. 

7 
 And I guess that's a fair question 

8 
 maybe the Subcommittee doesn't want to address 

9 
 right now, but do they want to see context the 

10 way you have laid it out? 

11 
 I for one did like seeing it, 

12 
 because I understood the -- where this 

13 
 particular -- where the PER aspect, OTIB-49 

14 
 had play within the overall context of the 

15 case, so it helped me be oriented. 

16 
 But Ted, what you had just 

17 
 mentioned is a little bit more, I would say, 

18 
 narrow interpretation and I think that's the 

19 
 reason why, Kathy, you sent this out, to make 

20 
 sure that you are maybe not doing more than 

21 needed, or maybe we are not doing enough. 

22 MR. KATZ: That's exactly right. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

238 

1 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, in order to 

2 
 accomplish the task of determining that the 

3 
 information for IMBA was correctly entered, 

4 
 you don't actually have to do the final step 

5 
 and run it and calculate the dose, do you? 

6 
 MS. K. BEHLING: No, you don't. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But do you have to 

8 
 do everything up to that point? In other 

9 
 words, is the dose step simply a matter of 

10 
 pushing the button and letting something 

11 
 calculate, or is it -- I mean, some of these 

12 
 things don't change anyway, medical x-ray or 

13 
 so on, but -- ambient -- but you are going 

14 
 through and looking at the entry of all the 

15 
 other data, right, up to that point? You are 

16 
 verifying -- in fact, let me look at your 

17 
 words here -- you are verifying that the 

18 
 assumptions were appropriate and the data were 

19 entered into IMBA correctly. 

20 MS. K. BEHLING: That's correct. 

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Now, doing that 

22 
 last step, are you just looking at the input 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

239 

1 
 that they have used, just saying, yes, here's 

2 
 the number and they put it in correctly? Is 

3 
 that what's happening here? 

4 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Yes, and I did go 

5 
 -- that's where I went into detail, in this 

6 
 section 2.3, because those were the issues 

7 
 that were pertinent to the PER-12. 

8 
 It just felt to me when I went to 

9 
 write this that I couldn't help myself. I 

10 
 felt like I needed to tell the whole story and 

11 
 I thought perhaps others, you know, we'll have 

12 
 other discussions coming out of this, although 

13 
 I do agree with Ted, that really, it's my 

14 
 section 2.3 that is the -- that's the key, 

15 that's what we're trying to do here. 

16 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, if you are 

17 
 saying that they entered the numbers 

18 
 correctly, then they have already generated 

19 
 the table, the right-hand column of the table. 

20 Is that not correct? 

21 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Table 2? 

22 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes. If they 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

240 

1 
 entered the numbers correctly, you've verified 

2 
 that step, then wouldn't Table 2 be the 

3 
 numbers that they would have generated? 

4 
 MS. K. BEHLING: That's correct. 

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So you don't have 

6 
 to do that. 

7 
 MS. K. BEHLING: No, I was just 

8 
 trying to give the big picture. That's all I 

9 
 was trying to do. I had gone in and made sure 

10 
 

11 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: No, but what I'm 

12 
 saying is if you just went to NIOSH's final 

13 
 thing and said here's what they put down, you 

14 
 don't have to do anything. I'm trying to 

15 
 figure out whether or not SC&A is 

16 
 recalculating something that NIOSH is already 

17 
 calculating when they have already confirmed 

18 
 that they put the right numbers into the 

19 
 program. 

20 
 I mean, it's sort of getting at 

21 
 what you said --

22 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, again, my only 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

241 

1 
 issue is --

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I mean, it's nice 

3 
 to have these numbers, but if there is any 

4 
 extra work in doing it, it's beyond what we 

5 
 need. That's all I'm saying. 

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: The question, though, 

7 
 will be asked by someone. 

8 
 MR. STIVER: What was the net 

9 
 effect? 

10 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, what was the net 

11 effect. 

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But I'm saying 

13 
 NIOSH already has determined that, I guess, 

14 
 right? Isn't this what you would generate? 

15 
 If they say we put all the numbers, we checked 

16 
 all the numbers that NIOSH put in, and they 

17 are the right numbers, in the IMBA. 

18 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Well, isn't the 

19 
 ultimate check that the right numbers were 

20 
 entered into IMBA comparing the results that 

21 come out of IMBA? 

22 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I don't know the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

242 

1 
 answer. That's why I am asking the question. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That basically if 

3 
 the results come out the same, that means that 

4 
 they must have input the same -- the correct -

5 
 -

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But that's not how 

7 
 she's verifying. I think she's verifying by 

8 
 looking at the numbers. 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, based on the 

10 
 write-up, I don't know, Kathy, correct me if 

11 
 I'm wrong, but it appears that Kathy looked at 

12 
 what was different between -- really what she 

13 
 is writing about here is what was different in 

14 the internal dose between before and after. 

15 
 Okay. She wrote down those others 

16 
 for context because it will influence the net 

17 
 result of PoC. You know, when -- it will have 

18 
 an influence on actually what the PoC was, 

19 
 which she also describes, both before and the 

20 
 after. 

21 So it provides a complete picture 

22 
 of how that comes out. But the entire writeNEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

243 

1 
 up is about the internal dosimetry. She 

2 
 doesn't dwell -- she doesn't even describe why 

3 
 the those external doses went down. It's just 

4 
 reported on the table they went down. There's 

5 
 no description of why. The description is all 

6 
 about what was done on internal, which was the 

7 
 focus of it. 

8 
 You know, I don't know what's 

9 
 necessary and what's not. When I have just 

10 
 been reading through this, I can, it's kind of 

11 
 a pretty complete story, and it puts me in a 

12 
 good mood because she didn't find anything 

13 wrong with what we did. 

14 
 So -- but it seems like it's kind 

15 
 of a -- it's a little complete story there and 

16 
 you've got the idea, but it really is -- what 

17 
 she has really spent her time on is what was 

18 
 the internal done later, how does it compare 

19 
 to earlier and did they do what they should 

20 have done when they reworked this case. 

21 
 So to me, I don't -- we can, I 

22 
 guess you can equivocate. I don't know that 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

244 

1 
 there's a particularly better way to tell the 

2 
 story, because if she doesn't put those other 

3 
 numbers up there, then there's -- then you 

4 
 don't really have a full picture of what 

5 
 happened on the PoC and why did the net change 

6 
 in the PoC happen, if you're interested in it. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I think Ted is 

8 
 saying: do we need that information? 

9 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, my only question 

10 was: who cares about that? 

11 MR. HINNEFELD: About the PoC? 

12 
 MR. KATZ: If it was done 

13 correctly, we are not reviewing this case --

14 MR. HINNEFELD: Right. 

15 
 MR. KATZ: -- as a dose 

16 
 reconstruction review. All we are trying to 

17 
 answer is a simple question, which is: did we 

18 implement PER-12 correctly? 

19 MR. HINNEFELD: The way we said. 

20 
 MR. KATZ: And that's all we are 

21 
 interested in, so the other story, which is a 

22 
 story to tell, is not a story that I think we 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

245 

1 
 were intending to spend resources on, the 

2 
 bigger picture. But I don't have a strong --

3 
 you know, if it's not taking much resources 

4 
 then it's not a big issue to me. I just don't 

5 
 want us to just be spending our time, because 

6 
 then you know, whatever else there is, not 

7 
 only consumes their time in putting the story 

8 
 together, but it consumes, you know, it's so 

9 
 easy for everyone else then to start to talk 

10 
 about anything that is of interest, whether it 

11 
 is on topic or not, and I am just trying to 

12 
 help the Subcommittee stay on topic. That's 

13 all. 

14 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Let me ask Kathy. 

15 
 Kathy, are the numbers in Table 2, the right16 
 hand column, are those the same as the NIOSH 

17 
 numbers? 

18 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Yes. As a matter 

19 
 of fact, I pulled this table out of the rework 

20 of NIOSH --

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So you didn't have 

22 to generate this --

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

-- 

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

246 

1 
 MS. K. BEHLING: No. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, so she didn't 

3 
 

4 
 MS. K. BEHLING: I'm simply trying 

5 
 to tell the whole story, just to make it a 

6 
 picture. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I thought they were 

8 
 

9 
 MR. STIVER: It's not like we went 

10 
 through them and recalculated all the doses. 

11 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So you just 

12 
 confirmed that the right numbers in and here's 

13 
 what NIOSH said the answer was. 

14 
 MR. STIVER: Right. 

15 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So there -- okay. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: So I mean, for example, 

17 
 you talked about external dose, which isn't an 

18 
 element of this at all. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: But it's just in 

20 
 there. 

21 
 MR. KATZ: But it's in there. So 

22 
 if it doesn't take any time, it is not a 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

247 

1 
 matter to me to raise to you. 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: There's no 

3 
 additional calculations --

4 
 MR. STIVER: There's no additional 

5 
 effort expended really, other than just 

6 
 cutting and pasting the information. 

7 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I don't know, every 

8 
 three seconds multiplied by --

9 
 (Laughter.) 

10 
 MR. KATZ: So, Kathy just needs a 

11 
 nod from the Subcommittee to go forward and 

12 prosper this way or do something different. 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, as I said at the 

14 
 outset, this seems like a very thorough 

15 
 process that she is undertaking here, and it 

16 
 seems appropriate to me. If it is the general 

17 
 feeling that it may be overkill, then now is 

18 
 the time to address it. That's what we edit 

19 
 for. 

20 I don't see that it is, frankly. 

21 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, I think my 

22 
 view it's just there's no expert work done. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

248 

1 
 Cutting and pasting an extra column in there 

2 
 isn't any extra work. 

3 
 But I was concerned whether they 

4 
 were going through calculation of things and 

5 
 confirming all the other stuff, but it looks 

6 
 like they are not. 

7 
 MS. K. BEHLING: No, no, we are 

8 
 not. No. We're just simply going through a 

9 
 reworked case, in fact, like I said, this 

10 
 Table 2 comes right out of that rework, and I 

11 
 just felt it told the entire story. 

12 
 It's really a minimal effort for 

13 
 getting a complete picture of this particular 

14 
 case. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Kathy, you are good to 

16 
 go. 

17 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay, thank you. 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: Would you please make 

19 
 a special note to make sure that I know when 

20 
 this document actually hits the street, 

21 
 because it would be nice for us to know 

22 
 whether it is going to be there early enough 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

249 

1 
 for NIOSH to respond to it in any way, or 

2 
 whether it's only going to be out in time for 

3 
 us to say it's out next time. So if you'll 

4 
 let me know --

5 
 MS. K. BEHLING: I will certainly 

6 
 do that, and again, I do apologize that I 

7 
 didn't get this in your hands a few days ago, 

8 
 but I don't know when -- I don't think you 

9 
 discussed when the next meeting is going to 

10 be, but --

11 CHAIR MUNN: No. 

12 
 MS. K. BEHLING: I will definitely 

13 
 have this report in everyone's hands before --

14 well before the next meeting. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: Great. Thank you very 

16 
 much. We appreciate it. We'll have it on the 

17 agenda one way or the other next time. 

18 MS. K. BEHLING: Okay. Thank you. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: You bet, thank you. 

20 
 Now I did not have on the agenda one item 

21 
 which I picked up when I was reviewing our 

22 
 transcript from last time to make sure that we 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

250 

1 
 were all okay. 

2 
 One of the things that we spoke of 

3 
 was OTIB-6, which for the most part is pretty 

4 
 much done, but we raised a question about how 

5 
 tricky it would be to nest the attached files 

6 
 into the directory -- into a directory or the 

7 
 procedures list so that we don't have to save 

8 
 all of the PDF files in order to transmit 

9 
 them. 

10 And in my working with the current 

11 
 database that we have, I think I was able to 

12 
 do that. And I thought I was able to just 

13 
 transmit the whole thing, but I didn't 

14 
 actually follow through with my transmission. 

15 
 I got tangled up in some of the additional 

16 
 linked files that I wanted to transmit as 

17 well, and didn't complete my action. 

18 
 So has anyone used that aspect of 

19 
 the those things so that we know that they 

20 
 are properly nested and everything goes? Or 

21 
 is this something I just need to do myself and 

22 mark off my list? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

251 

1 
 It looks like it's one of those 

2 
 things I need to do myself. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: You're talking about 

4 
 generating the PDF files of the history of the 

5 
 issues? Is that what you are --

6 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, I think that is 

7 
 what we were talking about. 

8 
 MR. STIVER: This is John Stiver. 

9 
 I think I recall that. The issue was about 

10 
 whether -- I think it was about putting in 

11 
 links to these files, if you transferred that 

12 
 to somebody else, whether those links could be 

13 
 attached, would the recipients still be able 

14 to reach those files? 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: And as I said that's 

16 
 where I got jimmied up when I was trying to 

17 
 transmit the files that I intended to. So I 

18 
 didn't follow through. I'll just check it 

19 
 myself. And if it's okay, I just won't follow 

20 
 through, and if it's not okay, we'll talk 

21 about it next time. 

22 
 Is there any other specific issue 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

252 

1 
 that we need to address before we start 

2 
 looking at administrative? 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, we do. There's --

4 
 we talked about it offline but we need to talk 

5 
 about it online because we didn't get through 

6 
 it all. 

7 
 But at the last full Board meeting, 

8 
 we assigned seven procedures for two-pagers 

9 
 that -- where the review has been completed. 

10 
 But I had a list from SC&A of nine procedures 

11 that were ready for two-pagers. 

12 
 The two that we did not assign at 

13 
 the full Board meeting, as we discussed at 

14 
 that meeting, were IG-001 and 003. We didn't 

15 
 assign them because the SC&A listing that was 

16 
 given to me showed no findings for either of 

17 
 those and it didn't -- it just didn't make 

18 
 sense to so I didn't understand why we would 

19 
 be assigning them at this point because 

20 something was wrong. 

21 
 So, and today we have seen on the -

22 
 - in reviewing the database, that 001 in fact 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

253 

1 
 has a number of revisions that were findings. 

2 
 So it's not that there were zero findings. 

3 
 Many findings have been resolved. They are in 

4 
 progress, they are resolved, we don't know 

5 
 exactly what the status of all of them are, 

6 
 and there's a new rev up. 

7 
 So that one clearly is one that 

8 
 actually shouldn't have been assigned as a 

9 
 two-pager, and wasn't, but then the other one 

10 that was in that listing was IG-003. 

11 
 MR. STIVER: Ted, I think you might 

12 
 have the wrong -- I have 003 and 005 and not 

13 
 001. 

14 MR. KATZ: 003 and 005? 

15 MR. STIVER: Three and five. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: Okay, so I'm remembering 

17 
 it wrong. But, so it's 003 and 005, so 

18 
 anyway, these are the ones -- we don't know --

19 it shows zero findings. 

20 
 MR. STIVER: There were zero 

21 
 findings, yes, it was a matter of looking into 

22 
 ones that had zero outstanding findings and 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

254 

1 
 not actually --

2 
 MR. KATZ: These others show closed 

3 
 findings. It's not like they don't -- they 

4 
 show that they have four findings, three were 

5 
 closed, this one shows that there were no 

6 
 findings in the first place. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: And you know, Steve 

8 
 Ostrow went through and generated that list 

9 
 and I am not sure of all of the mechanics that 

10 
 went into that and whether there might have 

11 been a breakdown in doing it --

12 
 MR. KATZ: But whatever they -- the 

13 question --

14 
 MR. STIVER: But I can certainly 

15 check into that. 

16 
 MR. KATZ: the question for today 

17 
 that is just what -- again, so IG-003 and 005 

18 
 then -- sorry about 001 -- 003 and 005, the 

19 
 question is, are these ready for two-pagers. 

20 That's the question. 

21 
 MR. STIVER: I guess the question 

22 
 was -- I would assume they would be if there 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

255 

1 
 was a need for a followup, since they didn't 

2 
 have any findings to begin with. And that's 

3 
 like I guess where the disconnect is here. 

4 
 MR. KATZ: So that's what I'm 

5 
 trying to understand. I have never seen an 

6 
 SC&A review with no findings. These two --

7 
 MR. STIVER: There have been a 

8 
 couple. 

9 
 MS. LIN: Ted, at least 005, it's 

10 
 just the use of classified information is how 

11 
 we would -- the agency's commitment to use as 

12 little classified information, you know --

13 MR. KATZ: Okay. 

14 MS. LIN: It's more of a --

15 MR. KATZ: And we actually --

16 
 MS. LIN: It doesn't necessary 

17 
 impact dose reconstruction processes, health, 

18 or anything like that. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: So, and SC&A reviewed it 

20 nonetheless, and --

21 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, and I think in 

22 
 terms of putting out a short summary to 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

256 

1 
 indicate what the procedure is all about, 

2 
 that's certainly something we'd want to do. 

3 
 MR. KATZ: Well, I mean, the 

4 
 procedure is out there, it's just a question 

5 
 of -- so there's a review but the review 

6 
 didn't find anything -- so then it would just 

7 
 be sort of checking a box that the Board did 

8 
 review --

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: My recollection at 

10 
 least, and my idea of what the two-pagers are 

11 
 about, and why I was an advocate for something 

12 
 like a two-pager, was that the procedure 

13 
 review was on our website, with, you know, 20 

14 
 findings or 10 findings or whatever, and then 

15 nothing else goes up. 

16 MR. KATZ: No, I understand. 

17 
 MR. HINNEFELD: And so the two18 
 pager then provides, just saying, okay, we 

19 
 have worked through this, there have been some 

20 
 revisions, it's all taken care of, so that 

21 there is this closure rather than just --

22 MR. KATZ: I understand. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

257 

1 
 MR. HINNEFELD: But if you've got a 

2 
 review with no findings, it kind of obviates 

3 
 the need --

4 
 MR. KATZ: Not much need for 

5 
 closure. 

6 
 MR. HINNEFELD: -- for the two-pager 

7 
 to close it out. 

8 
 MR. KATZ: That's why I'm raising 

9 
 it here, because it's up to the Subcommittee 

10 
 what you want to do with these particular 

11 cases. 

12 
 MR. HINNEFELD: And it matters not 

13 
 to me, but my driver for wanting to have two14 
 pagers does not exist when there were no 

15 findings on the original. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, there wouldn't be 

17 
 just a heck of a lot we can say, except that -

18 
 - well, the review was done and it was found 

19 
 to be adequate as-is. No findings were the 

20 result. 

21 
 MR. KATZ: So then I don't think 

22 
 you need an SC&A product for that, I mean, you 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

258 

1 
 can you have a simple statement, no findings. 

2 
 So that statement can just go on the website, 

3 
 you don't need to hire SC&A to tell us that 

4 
 they didn't have any findings. 

5 
 CHAIR MUNN: That they didn't find 

6 
 anything. 

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Because they have 

8 
 already told us that. 

9 
 MR. KATZ: Yes. No, but we have to 

10 summarize that they told us that. 

11 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Summarize that they 

12 told us that. 

13 
 DR. ULSH: I'd like them to repeat 

14 that as often as possible. 

15 
 MR. KATZ: I'm sure you would, 

16 Brant. 

17 (Laughter.) 

18 
 MR. STIVER: You've got to enjoy it 

19 when you can. 

20 
 MR. KATZ: Okay. So if that's the 

21 
 case, then I just wanted to -- because it was 

22 
 very peculiar, I wanted to verify here 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

259 

1 
 whatever and figure out what our path forward 

2 
 is, so if that's true for both 005 and 003, 

3 
 then we know what our path forward is. We 

4 
 will just have a statement on the website when 

5 
 we load these other ones up on the website 

6 
 that says no findings, no concerns. 

7 
 CHAIR MUNN: And it would be nice 

8 
 of course to get those on the website, because 

9 
 these -- it would be nice to get them in our 

10 
 database that says as much, as well, because 

11 if we go to our database and don't find --

12 
 MR. KATZ: No, the database should 

13 
 reflect this. I mean, this is just the two14 
 pagers, right? The database should reflect 

15 the findings already. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: It should. But my 

17 
 question is, does it now? I do not believe 

18 that it does. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: I don't know. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: No. It does not. 

21 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I don't think IG --

22 
 CHAIR MUNN: They don't appear on 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

260 

1 
 there. 

2 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I can't find where, 

3 
 I mean, I looked at the three -- I've been 

4 
 looking in, while you guys have been talking, 

5 
 I have been looking at the three reports that 

6 
 were generated and I can't find IG-003 or IG7 
 005. I can't find where they are even in --

8 
 when we did those reviews. So --

9 
 MR. KATZ: Okay. So it would be 

10 good to get that material --

11 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

12 
 MR. KATZ: If DCAS doesn't have 

13 
 those reports, of course, I don't know. Then 

14 we need to get those in DCAS's hands. 

15 
 CHAIR MUNN: It seems logical to me 

16 
 that somehow, they should appear somewhere in 

17 
 the database. If for no other reason than 

18 
 it's an ideal way for it to get back to the 

19 
 original document. It just follows, it seems 

20 
 to me. 

21 
 MR. KATZ: Great. So SC&A will 

22 follow up on this? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

261 

1 
 MR. MARSCHKE: We'll follow up and 

2 
 try and figure out --

3 
 MR. KATZ: And maybe just send me 

4 
 the final reports again for these two, the 

5 
 SC&A reports. 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes, if we can find 

7 
 them. 

8 
 MR. KATZ: I mean, because these 

9 
 predated me, by a long ways, so if you'll send 

10 
 them to me I'll make sure DCAS has them and 

11 they can load them up. 

12 
 CHAIR MUNN: Good. All right. 

13 
 Anything else that we want to make sure we 

14 don't miss? 

15 
 MR. STIVER: I have one other thing 

16 
 I wanted to bring up regarding the PERs and 

17 
 that is in regards to PER-17 and 29, which we 

18 
 were authorized to review but which we had not 

19 yet begun a review process. 

20 
 And both of these are -- have 

21 
 updates that the actual documents that are 

22 
 referred to have been updated since the review 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

262 

1 
 was authorized. 

2 
 And I guess my question for the 

3 
 Board -- or for the Subcommittee, is whether 

4 
 we should hold off until the -- all PERs are 

5 
 updated before we were to progress on these 

6 
 two? 

7 
 Which is kind of the problem we had 

8 
 with 14 in that there was a revision to TIB-52 

9 
 that came out and we were -- found ourselves 

10 
 doing a review in relation to Rev 0 instead of 

11 Rev 1. 

12 
 And so I guess the question for you 

13 
 all is whether you would recommend that we 

14 
 hold off on those until everything is updated 

15 and complete, or --

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you for bringing 

17 
 that issue up. It seems to me that the 

18 
 logical thing to do in all cases, when we have 

19 
 a revision, an active revision in process, 

20 
 that it behooves us to not reinvent the wheel 

21 by reviewing both revisions. 

22 
 But that's just my knee-jerk 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

263 

1 
 reaction. Anyone else's thought? 

2 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: But you haven't 

3 
 started the earlier version yet. 

4 
 MR. STIVER: No, we haven't even 

5 
 started it yet. 

6 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: And when will the 

7 
 new version be out? 

8 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Which PER? 

9 
 MR. STIVER: It's 17 and 29. 

10 
 CHAIR MUNN: And so we are looking 

11 at --

12 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, 17 is evaluation 

13 
 is incomplete, internal dosimetry records from 

14 
 Idaho Argonne East and Argonne West national 

15 laboratories. 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's its title. 

17 
 What's its number? 

18 
 MR. STIVER: This is PER-017. 

19 CHAIR MUNN: 017, okay. 

20 
 MR. STIVER: And the second is 

21 
 OCAS-PER-029, which are Hanford TBD revisions. 

22 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

264 

1 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, and you've 

2 
 found out that these were being revised by, 

3 
 and what mechanism, did you tell them? 

4 
 MR. STIVER: There had been, the 

5 
 basis documents had been revised since we were 

6 
 authorized to review --

7 
 MR. HINNEFELD: The basis documents 

8 
 meaning the Hanford TBD. 

9 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, and so it's a 

10 
 situation where we don't want to find 

11 
 ourselves going back and reviewing a PER 

12 
 that's outdated. If you guys are planning to 

13 
 issue new PERs based on the changes, the 

14 documents themselves, the TBDs --

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Why would the PER be 

16 
 updated? The PER is just basically shows how 

17 
 it was -- how the change -- the previous 

18 
 change was implemented, and whether or not the 

19 
 previous change was implemented correctly or 

20 
 not is really what you are doing when you 

21 check the PER --

22 
 MR. STIVER: That's true but if 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

265 

1 
 there is going to be a new PER as a result of 

2 
 changes, additional changes since we were 

3 
 authorized, would you want to wait until the 

4 
 new PERs come out --

5 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I mean you are still 

6 
 going to have to basically look at PER-17 and 

7 
 see whether or not that first change was 

8 
 implemented correctly to make -- and then go 

9 
 and make sure that the second change is 

10 implemented correctly. 

11 
 MR. STIVER: Yes, then we'd have to 

12 
 put you a follow-on to that, but I guess to 

13 
 get to the point, if it's -- there's potential 

14 
 lag time that you might be addressing things 

15 
 that are no longer relevant or have been 

16 addressed in another --

17 
 MR. KATZ: I understand what John 

18 is saying. 

19 
 DR. ULSH: I do too. My question, 

20 
 though, is whatever the changes were that 

21 
 caused the revision, it would only be a PER if 

22 
 the doses went up. If the changes made the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

266 

1 
 dose go down, it so my question is, have you 

2 
 determined whether or not the revision would 

3 
 necessitate a PER, do you know that? 

4 
 MR. STIVER: At this point it's 

5 
 just more of a philosophical question, whether 

6 
 we need to wait until -- in my mind it's a 

7 
 moving target and there is always going to be 

8 
 revisions and there's always going to be 

9 
 refinements, and so once a PER is issued, we 

10 
 should probably go ahead and address those 

11 
 points that were tasked, and then if a new 

12 
 problem comes up later then we can visit that 

13 one. 

14 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think it might be 

15 
 a situation that has to be addressed 

16 
 individually, because we have some knowledge 

17 
 about what gave rise to this PER and what's 

18 going to be --

19 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

20 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Specifically with 

21 
 the ANL internal dose records issue, this goes 

22 
 way back. I'm really on a memory that is 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

267 

1 
 getting older by the day, but the issue that 

2 
 gave rise to this PER was a matter in which 

3 
 INL reported internal dosimetries in early 

4 
 days when we asked for an exposure, they would 

5 
 report no internal, essentially no internal. 

6 
 But they would report that whether 

7 
 or not the person was monitored or not. They 

8 
 wouldn't give us the zero bioassay results. 

9 
 They didn't have an internal dose on the 

10 
 person so they'd report no internals, which we 

11 
 interpreted as meaning there is no bioassay 

12 for this person. 

13 
 As a matter of fact, there was 

14 
 bioassay for that person. They just didn't 

15 
 provide it. They went through quite a lot of 

16 
 effort to get their records in the system 

17 
 where they could provide the bioassay and then 

18 
 we got the bioassay for people who, 

19 heretofore, had just been said no internal. 

20 
 That gave rise to this, and that is 

21 
 a discreet piece that we had to address to see 

22 
 have we short-changed any of these people 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

268 

1 
 because we thought they weren't monitored at 

2 
 the time. 

3 
 The kind of work going on at INL --

4 
 ANL =- is to take a careful look at how, on 

5 
 the Site Profile, I think there are a number 

6 
 of findings on the Site Profile that we are 

7 
 trying to come to grips with, and there will 

8 
 be some changes in the Site Profile. 

9 
 This is kind of a separate issue 

10 
 from that earlier reporting issue. So that 

11 
 specific one I think there is merit in going 

12 forward with 17. 

13 
 I think I know what's going on with 

14 
 Hanford but I don't remember exactly what gave 

15 
 rise to PER-29. If we get it while we do 

16 
 something else I'll go look at it and see if I 

17 remember it. 

18 
 The revision that is going to go on 

19 
 at Hanford is in all likelihood going to be an 

20 
 extension of the SEC Class into later years 

21 
 than what has been handled so far. So that 

22 
 will then cause some changes in the Site 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

269 

1 
 Profile because you essentially take out the 

2 
 internal dose assessment, whatever it is, the 

3 
 particular piece and when you said do the dose 

4 
 assessment this way, you determine well it was 

5 
 really not feasible to do that, you take that 

6 
 part out. 

7 
 And this may not be that big a 

8 
 change to the Site Profile. So in that case, 

9 
 probably I ought to figure out what this PER10 
 29 addressed and then I'll be able to speak 

11 
 more -- well, I will feel like I know more 

12 maybe but I may not. 

13 
 MR. STIVER: Okay that's something 

14 we need to do through emails or whatever. 

15 
 MR. KATZ: Yes, we can just do 

16 that. 

17 
 MR. HINNEFELD: But I would say 

18 
 that just looking at this and remembering the 

19 17 situation I think --

20 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

21 
 MR. KATZ: It sounds like it's 

22 
 likely you'll be okay with the PER-29 too. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

270 

1 
 It's just an extension of the --

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I suspect, I want 

3 
 to see what this one -- why we wrote this one, 

4 
 to be completely honest. 

5 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Excuse me just one 

6 
 second, this is Kathy. I think with Hanford, 

7 
 those were some earlier changes that were made 

8 
 for Hanford on the TBD, they were just an 

9 
 update to the TBD, 2008, or it was that time 

10 frame I believe, for the PER-29. 

11 
 But I thought that you were also in 

12 
 the process of changing the Hanford TBD, or 

13 
 it's been changed for the neutron issue, and 

14 
 that is a big -- that's a big issue. That's a 

15 significant change. 

16 
 And that will definitely require a 

17 
 PER. Now I haven't seen that PER come out 

18 
 yet. And so I guess I was thinking along the 

19 
 lines that we would want to wait to see, did 

20 
 the PER that comes out on Hanford associate it 

21 
 with the neutron doses and then do all of the 

22 
 -- do the PER-29 along with the PER that I 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

271 

1 
 assume is going to be coming out for Hanford 

2 
 for neutron. 

3 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, you're right. 

4 
 MR. KATZ: So the only question 

5 
 really is if the neutron overlaps whatever is 

6 
 covered in PER-29. If they don't overlap, 

7 
 then you still can just do them independently, 

8 
 right? 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I would think so. 

10 
 MS. K. BEHLING: Yes, that's 

11 
 probably true. I can go back and look at all 

12 
 of the details that into 29 and I don't think 

13 
 it would be an issue. I meant, sorry, neutron 

14 issue. 

15 
 MR. KATZ: So we can follow up on 

16 
 this by email. And sort it out as to whether 

17 
 there is an overlap or not. If there's an 

18 
 overlap, I think what you say makes a lot of 

19 
 sense, to amalgamate them. But otherwise, you 

20 can just carry it forward with PER-29. 

21 CHAIR MUNN: Okay. 

22 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Wanda, I have an 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

272 

1 
 item I'd like to bring up. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes Steve. 

3 
 MR. MARSCHKE: While we are talking 

4 
 about PERs and also going back to OTIB-52, Rev 

5 
 1 of OTIB-52 basically limited the internal --

6 
 the applicability of the internal procedure to 

7 
 uranium and plutonium isotopes, as opposed to 

8 
 all radionuclides. 

9 
 So in our review, you can see 

10 
 basically, what we are recommending, a PER be 

11 
 developed to determine whether or not OTIB-52 

12 
 was used for -- to calculate internal doses to 

13 
 construction workers when other radionuclides 

14 
 besides uranium and plutonium were the 

15 radionuclides of concern. 

16 
 Because basically all the OTIB-52 

17 
 analysis was done only for uranium and 

18 
 plutonium, so I don't know whether -- again, 

19 
 were, you know, -- in our report here we are 

20 
 kind of recommending that a PER be looked at 

21 to see whether or not that is a concern. 

22 
 I don't know about dose 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

273 

1 
 reconstructions but I do that OTIB-52 was used 

2 
 as a basis for an SEC at Savannah River 

3 
 internal doses for tritium as opposed -- and 

4 
 really there's no basis for using that for 

5 
 OTIB-52, for tritium, internal doses, because 

6 
 this is -- you know, all the analysis was 

7 
 done, only, again, on uranium and plutonium. 

8 
 DR. ULSH: You said tritium. Did 

9 
 you mean thorium? 

10 
 MR. MARSCHKE: No, tritium. 

11 
 DR. ULSH: Okay. 

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The other one, again 

13 
 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's surprising. 

15 
 MR. MARSCHKE: The other one was, 

16 
 as we mentioned this morning, right now we are 

17 
 basically putting the caveat in there about 

18 
 you know, being careful about applying the 

19 
 OTIB-52 methodology to some particular classes 

20 
 of construction workers, such as pipe fitters. 

21 
 And so the other potential PER that 

22 
 would be -- result from that would be to go 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

274 

1 
 back and look and see whether or not OTIB-52 

2 
 has been applied to pipe fitters, and whether 

3 
 or not it is still applicable to apply it to 

4 
 those particular individuals. 

5 
 Because right now, as we saw in the 

6 
 modification that was made to OTIB-20, there's 

7 
 a caution in there about you know, blindly 

8 
 just applying OTIB-52 to all construction 

9 
 trades, or workers in all construction trades. 

10 
 So again, those were two potential 

11 
 PERs that we identified when we did the review 

12 
 of Revision 1 of OTIB-52, and I don't know 

13 
 whether the -- I don't know how -- I don't 

14 
 know if there is a path forward on this, or 

15 
 what, if the Subcommittee wants NIOSH to take 

16 
 a look at it or what, but I just thought I 

17 
 would mention those because you know, they 

18 
 were in the report, and we hadn't talked about 

19 them. 

20 
 CHAIR MUNN: No, we hadn't. I'm 

21 
 surprised about the Savannah River situation 

22 
 you mentioned. Difficult to see for most 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

275 

1 
 construction trades why other nuclides, 

2 
 radionuclides would be of specific concern 

3 
 outside the transuranics. 

4 
 MR. HINNEFELD: What report are you 

5 
 showing us here Steve? 

6 
 MR. MARSCHKE: This is the report 

7 
 that we put together for our review of 

8 
 Revision 1 of OTIB-52. It was in July of last 

9 
 year. 

10 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Okay. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well --

12 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So that's 52-05, 

13 
 which was closed, right? 

14 
 MR. MARSCHKE: 52-05 was closed 

15 
 because they put a limit in the -- they 

16 
 changed -- what was 52-05 Paul, I --

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Let's see. Finding 

18 
 5, determine uranium used to compare internal 

19 
 CTW and ANW doses. 

20 
 MR. MARSCHKE: Yes. That was --

21 
 and the way they addressed that, the reason 

22 
 why we closed it, was because, when they did 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

276 

1 
 Revision 1, they basically put a limitation in 

2 
 and said that the internal dose calculation is 

3 
 only applicable for uranium and plutonium 

4 
 exposures. 

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: So it became a moot 

6 
 point. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: So basically they 

8 
 limited it. They limited the scope of OTIB-52 

9 
 from being -- from the internal portion of 

10 
 OTIB-52, from being you know, wide open, 

11 
 having no limits on it, to basically limiting 

12 it to only uranium and plutonium. 

13 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: The document you 

14 
 just showed us, is that the -- that's not the 

15 document that's on there. 

16 
 MR. MARSCHKE: That's our review. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: That's the Rev 1 

18 
 review. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: We have about five 

20 
 minutes before adjournment. Can we just have 

21 
 DCAS look at this recommendation and give us 

22 
 feedback at the next Subcommittee meeting, 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

-- 

 

 

 

 

 

277 

1 
 Wanda? Sounds like it is a little convoluted 

2 
 to resolve, as to whether there is a PER 

3 
 needed for these or not. 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. 

5 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: And you're just 

6 
 saying it may be needed. 

7 
 MR. MARSCHKE: I'm just saying, yes 

8 
 

9 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

10 
 MR. KATZ: I don't think we can 

11 
 resolve it --

12 
 MR. MARSCHKE: They went from a 

13 
 wide scope in Rev 0 to a narrower scope in Rev 

14 
 1 and so the question is, you know, was 

15 
 anybody evaluated under that wider scope who 

16 
 would be excluded now under Rev 1. 

17 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: Gotcha. 

18 
 CHAIR MUNN: That's worth looking 

19 
 at. We'll ask for a look-see from NIOSH. 

20 
 Okay. Ready for schedule? 

21 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I just, before we 

22 
 get to schedule, we are okay, really, right, 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

278 

1 
 on proceeding with PER-17, Idaho Falls, and my 

2 
 response is an opinion on 21. 

3 
 MEMBER ZIEMER: I guess you were 

4 
 saying 17 is going ahead. 

5 
 MR. HINNEFELD: I think 17 is kind 

6 
 of its own little thing. I'll go back and 

7 
 check on 29 and provide some --

8 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

9 
 MR. HINNEFELD: There's a certain, 

10 
 just off the top of my head, there's a certain 

11 
 clarity in dealing with each PER on its own 

12 
 because you are going to have different 

13 
 initiation dates, you know, for the first PER 

14 
 it's going to be DRs done before this date and 

15 
 when the next change comes out after that 

16 
 date, and when you kind of amalgamate and 

17 
 combine them, it's not going to be as easy to 

18 say. 

19 
 MR. STIVER: It's going to be a lot 

20 harder to deconvolute. 

21 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Yes. 

22 
 MR. STIVER: You'll need to go back 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

279 

1 
 later. 

2 
 MR. HINNEFELD: When you try to 

3 
 blend them together and just do it once, it's 

4 
 going to be a lot harder than you think. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: It almost sounds like 

6 
 you should just go forward --

7 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

8 
 MR. HINNEFELD: If it's okay with 

9 
 you guys. 

10 
 MR. STIVER: It's fine by us. We 

11 
 can certainly --

12 
 (Simultaneous speaking.) 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: I think so. Paul, do 

14 
 you have any problem with that? 

15 
 MR. STIVER: All right, well we'll 

16 
 take our marching orders then. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: Just follow along with 

18 
 it. 

19 
 MR. KATZ: You know, the quorum 

20 
 issue, I think, let's not do the scheduling 

21 
 now. We don't have a lot of Subcommittee 

22 
 Members here. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

280 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: Mike's gone. 

2 
 MR. KATZ: Well, we may have Mike. 

3 
 Mike, do we have you still? 

4 
 MEMBER GIBSON: I'm still here. 

5 
 MR. KATZ: We have three, but we --

6 
 we have three out of whatever it is, five, 

7 
 right? Four? 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Well, we need to at 

9 
 least look at a week, if nothing else. When 

10 we will get --

11 
 MR. STIVER: How far out are we 

12 looking? 

13 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, how far do we 

14 
 need to go? I had thought that perhaps we 

15 
 could do something in June, but I don't see 

16 
 how we can with the Santa Fe meeting going up 

17 in June. 

18 
 MR. STIVER: We have the Dose 

19 
 Reconstruction meeting. We moved that to the 

20 6th, Ted, is that the --

21 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes, the DR is going 

22 to be the 6th. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

281 

1 
 MR. KATZ: Well, it's not done yet. 

2 
 I haven't heard from everyone yet. 

3 
 CHAIR MUNN: And I don't know how 

4 
 much we would have done in six weeks if we 

5 
 tried to meet that same week. It wouldn't 

6 
 work. 

7 
 MR. STIVER: We have a lot of other 

8 
 things on our plate. 

9 
 CHAIR MUNN: So June is out of the 

10 
 question. It puts us into July, I think, 

11 
 which should be far enough out for everybody, 

12 
 and I'd be -- I think my preference would be 

13 
 probably the week of the 9th. How does that 

14 
 look for people? Is everybody here going to 

15 
 be possibly available or people on vacation? 

16 
 What? The week of the 9th look like it's a 

17 possible? 

18 
 MR. HINNEFELD: Looks like it works 

19 
 for me. 

20 MR. STIVER: No problem for me. 

21 CHAIR MUNN: No problem? 

22 MR. KATZ: Mike? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

282 

1 
 CHAIR MUNN: Mike, does the week of 

2 
 July 9th look possible for you? 

3 
 MEMBER GIBSON: July the 9th? 

4 
 CHAIR MUNN: Yes. That week. Not 

5 
 the date. 

6 
 MR. KATZ: The week of July 9th. 

7 
 So, say, the middle of the week, say the 11th 

8 
 for example. 

9 
 MEMBER GIBSON: Yes, that should be 

10 fine. 

11 
 CHAIR MUNN: Okay, I'll send out a 

12 
 request to our Subcommittee membership -- all 

13 of the mailing list for this Subcommittee. 

14 
 MR. KATZ: I'll cover that but, so 

15 which date are we suggesting, the 11th? 

16 
 CHAIR MUNN: Let's suggest the 

17 11th. 

18 MR. KATZ: Okay. 

19 
 CHAIR MUNN: And if not the 11th, 

20 
 ask if people are available on one day either 

21 side of that. 

22 
 MR. KATZ: Everyone here is saying 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

283 

1 
 the 11th is okay. 

2 
 CHAIR MUNN: They are saying the 

3 
 11th is okay. 

4 
 MS. LIN: I won't be here July --

5 
 MR. KATZ: But someone will cover. 

6 
 Yes. Okay. July 11th, question mark. Okay, 

7 
 I'll poll Dick. 

8 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you Ted. I 

9 
 appreciate that. And thank you Mike and 

10 
 everyone else on the line. We certainly 

11 
 appreciate it. 

12 
 MEMBER GIBSON: No problem. 

13 
 Thanks. 

14 
 CHAIR MUNN: Thank you. And are we 

15 
 adjourned? 

16 
 MR. KATZ: Yes. 

17 
 CHAIR MUNN: We are adjourned. 

18 
 (Whereupon, at 2:59 p.m., the meeting was 

19 
 adjourned.) 

20 
 

21 
 

22 
 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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