NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION 

+ + + + + 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL 

SAFETY AND HEALTH 

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH 

+ + + + + 

61st MEETING 

+ + + + + 

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2009 

+ + + + + 

 The meeting came to order at 

9:00 a.m., in the Coral Room of the Doubletree 

Hotel Albuquerque, 201 Marquette Avenue 

Northwest, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Paul L. 

Ziemer, Chairman, presiding. 

PRESENT: 

PAUL L. ZIEMER, Chairman 

JOSIE M. BEACH, Member 

BRADLEY P. CLAWSON, Member 

MICHAEL H. GIBSON, Member (via telephone) 

MARK A. GRIFFON, Member 

JAMES E. LOCKEY, Member 

JAMES MALCOLM MELIUS, Member 

WANDA I. MUNN, Member 

ROBERT W. PRESLEY, Member 

JOHN W. POSTON, SR., Member 

GENEVIEVE S. ROESSLER, Member 

PHILLIP M. SCHOFIELD, Member 

THEODORE M. KATZ, Acting Designated Federal 

 Official
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 1a

REGISTERED PARTICIPANTS 

ADAMS, NANCY, NIOSH CONTRACTER 

BRADFORD, SHANNON, NIOSH 

BREYER, LAURIE, NIOSH 

BROEHM, JASON, CDC 

DEGARMO, DENISE, SIUE/DOW 

EVASKOVICH, ANDREW, LANL 

FITZGERALD, JOE, SC&A 

HANSON, JOHN, SIUE 

HINNEFELD, STU, NIOSH 

HOMOKI-TIDUS, LIZ, HHS 

HOWELL, EMILY, HHS 

JACQUEZ-ORTIZ, MICHELE, SENATOR UDALL 

KINABREW, CLIFF 

KOTSCH, JEFF, DOL 

LEWIS, MARK, ATL 

MAKHIJANI, ARJUN, SC&A 

MAURO, JOHN, SC&A 

MCFEE, MATT, ORAU 

RUTHERFORD, LAVON, NIOSH 

WADE, LEWIS, NIOSH 

ZARCHERO, MARY JO, ORAU
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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

I. Welcome 3 

II. SEC Petition Status Updates 5 

III. Science Update -- 

IV. Subcommittee and Work Group 26 

 Reports 

V. Board Working Time 84 

VI. Future Plans and Meetings 149 

VII. Adjourn 

*note: Throughout the transcript, AFDTPCO 

shall indicate an audio failure due to phone 

connection outage 
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

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

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

 (9:04 a.m.) 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Good morning, 

everyone. We are going to get underway here. 

 I know that some of you have plane flights 

scheduled for midday, so we are hoping to 

conclude our agenda by that time. 

 We have a number of items that on 

paper look like they might go until 4:00, but 

some of them have already been covered, so we 

will be able to shorten things a bit and add 

some efficiency factors, and we will shoot for 

completing by the noon hour. 

 Usual reminder. Register your 

attendance with us, if you haven't already 

done so. 

 Mr. Katz, do you have any 

announcements or other business items for us? 

 MR. KATZ: Let me just ask the 

people on the telephone if you can hear us 

now. And when we start the first 

presentation, if you would just let me know 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 

 4

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

it's audible to you, that would be great. 

 And the other thing to note is just 

please to mute your phone while you are 

listening, and use the *6 button if you don't 

have an actual mute button on your phone. 

 Much thanks. 

 PARTICIPANT: I have a lot of audio 

feedback. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. I think 

it's the same problem with this phone line. 

Unfortunately, we are not able to remedy that 

at this time, and I regret that. We will do 

the best we can. 

 Our first speaker this morning will 

be LaVon Rutherford. LaVon is going to give 

us the petition update for the various SEC 

petitions, and basically a summary of where we 

are in the SEC petition process, an overview. 

 LaVon? 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: Let me see if I 

can get this up there. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: 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 

 5

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

wondering, you may want to come over here. Do 

you have to click something there? Oh, you do 

have to click that. Okay. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes. I've got -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Get close to the 

mic. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Perhaps even hold 

it up. Is that removable from the stand? Get 

it right up there, right against your -- 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: Now I'm going to 

feel like I'm singing or something. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: That's what we 

want you to do. Get it up there as close as 

you can, so the folks on the phone can hear 

you. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: Okay. I am LaVon 

Rutherford, and I am the Special Exposure 

Cohort Health Physics Team Leader for NIOSH. 

I am going to talk about the status of 

upcoming SEC petitions. 

 We do this normally at the Board 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 6

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

meetings to provide the Board and the public 

an update. It also allows the Board a chance 

to prepare for upcoming work group meetings 

and Board meetings. 

 As of February 5, 2009, we have had 

137 petitions. We have 12 petitions that are 

currently in the qualification process. We 

have 72 petitions that have qualified. Of 

those 72, 67 we have completed our evaluation, 

and five are in the evaluation process. We 

have 53 petitions that did not qualify. 

 We have a number of petitions that 

are with the Advisory Board for 

recommendation. I am not going to go through 

every step of this, but what you will see in 

the presentation is a chronological order of 

all of the events that have occurred. I am 

going to try to hit some of the highlights of 

that so we can move through this. 

 Chapman Valve, the evaluation 

report, was approved and sent to the Advisory 

Board and Petitioners on August 31, 2006. 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 

 7

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

we presented our evaluation at the September 

2006 Advisory Board meeting. And the Advisory 

Board established the work group at that 

September meeting, and the work group 

presented its findings at the May 2007 

Advisory Board meeting. 

 A number of events occurred. The 

Advisory Board voted in a six-six tie on a 

motion to deny the class. There was some 

discussion, over time, of whether the Dean 

Street facility should be added or not. So we 

had some correspondence back and forth with 

Department of Labor and Department of Energy. 

 NIOSH issued a revised evaluation 

report on February 5, 2008, that included the 

Dean Street facility, but it did not change 

NIOSH's findings. 

 The Advisory Board decided to 

reconvene the work group to discuss the path 

forward. The work group met on May 1, 2008, 

and there was still some concern by the work 

group because of issues surrounding a 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 

 8

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

enriched uranium sample that was discovered 

during a survey, during decommissioning 

activities. 

 The Advisory Board voted again on a 

motion to deny any class to the SEC at the 

June 2008 Advisory Board meeting. However, 

the vote ended in a six-six tie again. 

 The Advisory Board asked that NIOSH 

contact the Department of Defense about any 

radiation-related contracts for Chapman Valve 

to try to explain the enriched sample. NIOSH 

made those contacts. The Department of 

Defense responded with no confirmation that 

Chapman Valve did or did not work for DoD. 

 And on January 6th -- and that 

should be 2009, not 2008 -- NIOSH sent a 

letter to the Advisory Board's Chairman 

summarizing the results of the NIOSH's followup activities related to Chapman Valve. And 

the current status is the petition evaluation 

report is with the Advisory Board for 

recommendation. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 Blockson Chemical. Again, I am not 

going to go over everything. There was a 

lengthy discussion yesterday on Blockson 

Chemical. I will hit a few highlights. We 

did initially approve an evaluation report on 

September 5, 2006, and presented our report in 

December of 2006. However, we withdrew that 

report because it was recognized that we did 

not address all covered exposures. We issued 

a revised evaluation report on July 3, 2007. 

 A number of work group activities, 

public meetings were held over a period during 

2007. And on January 2008, Dr. Melius 

indicated he wanted to review the pedigree of 

bioassay data, and he wanted to discuss the 

radon model with Mark Griffon. 

 The work group met on June 5th, 

June 24th, and June 25th, to discuss 

resolution of the radon model and any 

outstanding issues. 

 The work group -- or SC&A issued a 

draft report on the evaluation of radon levels 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

in Building 40 on August 12, 2008. A number 

of discussions were -- again, the work group 

met on October 15th. We had a technical call 

on December 3 and December 12, 2008. And 

there was also a teleconference meeting on 

January 23rd. 

 Again, the petition evaluation 

report is with the Advisory Board for 

consideration, and it was discussed at this 

meeting. 

 Feed Materials Production Center -- 

the evaluation report was approved and sent to 

the Advisory Board and the Petitioners on 

November 3, 2006. We presented our evaluation 

report at that February 2007 Advisory Board 

meeting, and a work group was established. 

 In May 2007, SC&A provided a draft 

review of the evaluation report, and then the 

work group has met August 8, 2007, 

November 13, 2007, March 26, September 15, and 

October 28, 2008. The current status is 

research and discussion on the petition 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

continues among the work group, SC&A, and 

NIOSH. 

 Bethlehem Steel. The evaluation 

report was approved and sent to the Advisory 

Board and the Petitioners on February 27, 

2007. We presented that evaluation report at 

the May 2007 Advisory Board meeting. 

 The Advisory Board ended up tabling 

the discussion on Bethlehem Steel SEC 

evaluation report until the surrogate data 

work group had a chance to look at the use of 

the surrogate data for that report. And the 

current status is the petition evaluation 

report is with the Advisory Board for 

recommendation. 

 Hanford. Evaluation report was 

approved and sent to the Advisory Board and 

the Petitioners on September 11th. 

 PARTICIPANT: I can't hear any of 

the speaking. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: I've got it pretty 

-- I can bring it in closer. Can you hear 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

that? 

 MR. KATZ: How is that? How is 

that on the telephone? 

 PARTICIPANT: I can hear you, but 

not the speaker. 

 (Audio failure due to phone 

connection outage.) 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We are going to 

move the speaker here to see if we can at 

least get it a little better. There must be 

something about the echoes in this room, 

because it is very loud here in the room. But 

this device doesn't seem to be picking it up 

well. So we're going to bring LaVon over here 

right adjacent to the phone monitor. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: All right. Is 

that better? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Go ahead, LaVon. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: All right. We are 

going to talk about Hanford. The evaluation 

report was approved and sent to the Advisory 

Board and the Petitioners on September 11, 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

2007. We prepared our evaluation report at 

the October 2007 Advisory Board meeting. 

 The Advisory Board sent the report 

to their contractor and the work group, and 

the Advisory Board's contractor issued a white 

paper questioning whether additional buildings 

should be included in the proposed class 

definition. In March of 2008, NIOSH issued a 

revised evaluation report with a modified 

class definition. 

 NIOSH presented the revised class 

definition at the April 2008 Advisory Board 

meeting, and the Advisory Board concurred with 

NIOSH's recommendation. The current status is 

research and discussion on the petition 

continues among the work group, SC&A, and 

NIOSH. 

 Nevada Test Site. The evaluation 

report was approved and sent to the Advisory 

Board and the Petitioners on September 2007. 

We presented our evaluation report at the 

January 2008 Advisory Board meeting. 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 

 14

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

Advisory Board sent the report to their 

contractor and the work group for review. 

 The work group met on October 29, 

2008, and the current status is research and 

discussion on the petition continues among the 

work group, SC&A, and NIOSH. 

 Mound Plant. The evaluation report 

for Mound was approved and sent to the 

Advisory Board and the Petitioners in December 

of 2007. NIOSH presented that evaluation 

report at the January 2008 Advisory Board 

meeting. The Advisory Board concurred with 

NIOSH's recommendation to add a class for the 

early years, but sent the report to their 

contractor for review and established a Mound 

work group. 

 The work group has met on a number 

of occasions -- April, July, and October of 

2008 -- and the current status is research and 

discussion on the petition continues among the 

work group, SC&A, and NIOSH. 

 Texas City Chemical. 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 

 15

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

completed their evaluation report and sent it 

to the Advisory Board and the Petitioners on 

January 18, 2008. We presented that 

evaluation report at the April 2008 Advisory 

Board meeting, and the Advisory Board gave the 

petition evaluation report to the surrogate 

data work group for review. 

 SC&A completed a focused review of 

the Texas City Chemical evaluation report in 

July of 2008, and the current status is the 

petition evaluation report is with the 

Advisory Board for recommendation. 

 Area 4, Santa Susana Field 

Laboratory. The evaluation report was 

approved and sent to the Advisory Board on 

February 15, 2008. We presented our 

evaluation report at the April 2008 Advisory 

Board meeting. The Advisory Board indicated 

they would not take action on this petition. 

We had recommended a class from early years, 

but there were issues with that class 

definition. So they wanted until SC&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 

 16

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

completed the review of the site profile. 

 SC&A issued their draft review of 

the Santa Susana site profile on August 5, 

2008, and the work group had their first 

meeting on August 26, 2008. The current 

status is the petition evaluation report is 

with the Advisory Board for recommendation. 

 Dow Chemical. We issued an 

addendum. We had completed an evaluation, an 

83.14 evaluation, some time ago. There were 

issues that -- for the residual period. That 

residual period only addressed uranium. At 

that time, thorium was not considered a 

covered exposure with respect to AWEs, atomic 

weapons employers. 

 However, after review by Department 

of Energy and Department of Labor, it was 

determined that the thorium exposure should be 

included. So we went back, issued an addendum 

to our report, which is Addendum 2, to address 

the thorium exposures during the residual 

period. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 We issued that to the Petitioners 

on June 3, 2008, and the Advisory Board. And 

we presented that addendum at the June 2008 

Advisory Board meeting. The Advisory Board 

asked the procedures work group to review the 

recently approved dose reconstruction 

procedure for residual contamination, and 

assigned the addendum evaluation to the work 

group on SEC issues. 

 In September of 2008, SC&A 

completed a focused review of the addendum. 

And on November 17, 2008, the work group met 

and discussed the report. The general 

conclusion from the work group was NIOSH's 

dose model was bounding, but NIOSH needed to 

verify a couple of numbers for the work group. 

 On January 12, 2009, NIOSH sent the 

work group written comments to issues on the 

report. Current status is the evaluation 

report addendum is with the work group for 

recommendation. 

 Pantex. The evaluation report 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 

 18

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

approved and sent to the Advisory Board and 

Petitioners on August 8, 2008. We presented 

that evaluation report at the September 2008 

meeting, and the current status is the 

petition evaluation report is with the 

Advisory Board for recommendation. 

 Savannah River Site. The 

evaluation report was approved and sent to the 

Advisory Board and Petitioners in November of 

2008. We presented that evaluation report at 

the December meeting, and the current status 

is the petition evaluation report is with the 

Advisory Board for recommendation. And there 

is the Savannah River Site work group that is 

reviewing that. 

 General Steel Industries. We 

approved the evaluation report and sent it to 

the Advisory Board and Petitioners on October 

2008, and we presented that at this meeting. 

And the Advisory Board determined that there 

will be continued review of that petition. 

 Tyson Valley Powder Farm. 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 

 19

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

evaluation report was approved and sent on 

January 20th to the Advisory Board and the 

Petitioners. And, actually, it was approved 

on January 20th and sent to the Advisory Board 

and Petitioners on February 3rd. You will 

notice the difference in the following 

evaluation reports. There are additional 

reviews that are now required that we will 

approve it, but we can't release it until a 

little time after that. 

 So that report, again, was approved 

on January 20th, and then issued on February 

3rd. And we presented that evaluation report 

at this meeting, and the Advisory Board 

concurred with our recommendation to add a 

class. 

 Westinghouse Atomic Power 

Development. We approved the evaluation 

report on January 21st, and the report was 

issued on February 6th to the Advisory Board 

and the Petitioners. We presented that 

evaluation report at this meeting, 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 

 20

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

Board concurred with our recommendation to add 

a class. 

 Los Alamos National Lab. The 

evaluation report was approved on January 

22nd, and it was sent to the Advisory Board 

and Petitioners on February 5th. NIOSH 

presented that evaluation report at this 

meeting, and the evaluation report has been 

turned over to the LANL work group, the Los 

Alamos National Lab work group. 

 Linde Ceramics. The evaluation 

report was approved and sent to the Advisory 

Board and Petitioners on November 6, 2008. 

The Petitioner asked that we not present that 

evaluation report at the December or the 

February Board meeting, because of preparation 

issues that they had. They asked that we do 

our presentation at the May meeting, which we 

are scheduled to do. 

 All right. We have SEC petitions 

currently in the evaluation process. 

Brookhaven National Lab, we received 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 

 21

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

petition on May 9, 2008. We have had a 

lengthy evaluation with this one because of 

issues we have had with data capture, and not 

all of the issues are associated with the 

Department of Energy. And issues with that 

are more -- a lot of the issues are associated 

with the site records management has not been, 

I would say, very cooperative and very good at 

times. 

 We continue to do that evaluation. 

 We plan to have that evaluation report 

complete in April and present at the May 

meeting, but we are still retrieving data at 

this time. 

 United Nuclear Corporation. We 

received that petition on June 19, 2008. We 

plan to have that complete -- the evaluation 

report complete in March and present at the 

May meeting. 

 Standard Oil. We received that 

petition on September 18, 2008, and we 

anticipate completing that report in March 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 

 22

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

presenting at the May meeting. 

 Piqua Organic Moderated Reactor. We 

received that petition on August 21, 2008, and 

the anticipated completion is May of 2009. 

However, we don't believe we will have that 

completed in time to present it to give the 

Board and Petitioners enough time to review 

that for the May meeting. 

 Bliss and Laughlin Steel. We 

received that petition on October 14, 2008, 

and we anticipate completion on July of 2009. 

 Just a final thing, we have had 

some changes in our processes and reviews that 

have pushed our completion of reports. The 

Board received the reports for this meeting 

only a week or two prior to the meeting. We 

have made adjustments in our project plan to 

address future reviews that will get us back 

on schedule to get the reports to the Board in 

a period of time for them to review them prior 

to the meeting. 

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

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 23

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you, LaVon. 

 We did receive an e-mail note while 

you were speaking from one of the phone 

listeners, and there apparently is a terrible 

roar on the line. They are still having a 

great deal of difficulty hearing. 

Unfortunately, we are not able to correct that 

for some reason. I think it must be in the 

lines. The landlines here at the hotel are 

either defective or have some sort of 

interference, but it is not something we are 

going to be able to correct readily. 

 So our apologies to those on the 

line if they can even hear the apology. 

 Okay. Questions for LaVon? Dr. 

Melius. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. You mentioned 

the change in review processes. What were 

those? You make it sound so mysterious. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: Well, we have had 

additional review requirements from the 

Department of Energy for all our documents. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

In the SEC world, in our process, we always 

have a detailed project plan that we set up 

for us to complete our evaluation reports 

within the 180-day criteria. 

 Back in the September/October 

period, we had changes in that process that 

forced us to add additional reviews during 

that period that, at that time, we were well 

along in our evaluations, and so it forced us 

into a position where current petitions that 

were under evaluation we lost some time in 

completing them. And so that ultimately ended 

up with the Board not getting the reports 

until a few weeks prior to that. 

 We have made adjustments in that 

project plan for all petitions from this point 

forward, that that issue should not be a 

problem. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I have a follow-up 

question. I don't remember all of the dates, 

but it appeared as if you were not making the 

180-day requirement most of the time. 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 

 25

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

were missing that. 

 MR. RUTHERFORD: We actually did, 

and we did send a letter to the Advisory 

Board, and we actually mentioned it actually 

at the last Advisory Board meeting. We had a 

number of petitions over a period of time, due 

to not one issue, there were four or five 

different issues that caused us to exceed the 

180 days. 

 We had changes in how data captures 

were going to occur with points of contact 

from the Department of Energy that we lost 

some time on some evaluations. We had some 

additional reviews that cost us some time in 

evaluations. 

 Also, a couple of the petitions 

were just very large petitions with, you know, 

40-year timeframes, 50-year timeframes, that 

it was just not reasonable for us to complete 

within 180 days those evaluations. 

 We also had petitioner issues, with 

one petition, the Linde Ceramics petition. 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 

 26

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

received the petition, went through 

qualification. Ultimately, in the end we were 

not going to qualify the petition, and the 

petitioner changed the basis of the petition, 

recognized, and provided new information that 

allowed us to qualify that petition. But if 

you look at that, you're 80 days into the 

process at that point. So -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Other comments? 

Questions? 

 (No response.) 

 Okay. Thank you very much, LaVon. 

 We have already had our Science 

Update from Dr. Neton. So let us proceed to 

Subcommittee and Work Group Reports, and we 

will go down through the list, although those 

that have already reported out previously in 

this meeting, I think, Ted, we can probably 

skip over, unless the chairs have anything 

additional to add. 

 Hold on. We are determining a 

procedure here. Okay. Go ahead, Ted. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: Sorry about the 

interruption. 

 Okay. So we are just doing these 

more or less alphabetically. Blockson 

Chemical, that we have already covered. So 

the next is Chapman Valve. Dr. Poston? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Let me repeat it. 

 I'm not sure that carried. No report from 

Chapman. 

 MR. KATZ: Yes. I'll repeat it, I 

guess, so that people can hear. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Can I ask a 

question? LaVon mentioned in his, and I 

should probably have asked this of LaVon 

earlier, but in his report on Chapman, he 

mentioned the letter from Larry that we 

received in January updating on their search. 

 And there is one point in that 

letter where trying to locate records and 

working with the Defense Department, there is 

a limited computer search that you can do. I 

think I've got that correct. But there are 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 28

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

original contracts from a prior time period, 

which may very well be the time period of 

interest for the Chapman site. 

 That could be accessed. 

Apparently, you have to go to the National 

Archives. There are a lot of logistical -- 

but what is not clear from Larry's letter is 

whether NIOSH intends to do it or not. He 

doesn't -- what it says is to view the 

original contracts would require a timeconsuming and costly manual search through 

boxes of records at the National Archives. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: And Jim Neton 

perhaps has a comment on that. 

 DR. NETON: Yes. We don't intend, 

at this point, to engage in that activity 

because of those reasons that were cited. And 

on top of that, I'm not sure it came through 

in the letter, but the titles -- the contracts 

themselves are fairly non-descriptive about 

radiological activities. They are contractual 

documents that contract people to manufacture 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

valves. 

 And I think it would be probably 

not in the contract to say, "Oh, and by the 

way, they might be contaminated with, you 

know, X, Y, and Z." So I just don't sense 

that there is going to be anything fruitful 

coming out of a search of these contracts that 

are specifically contracts just to manufacture 

uncontaminated equipment. 

 MR. KATZ: The other piece of 

information I know about this -- I don't know 

if it was addressed in the letter, Dr. Melius, 

or not, but that was whether the Navy group 

that has sort of ownership of those records, 

even though they're in the Archives, 

apparently you need the support of the agency 

who is responsible for those records to obtain 

them. 

 And I think we have had 

difficulties with that group on epidemiologic 

work unrelated to this program, and not being 

willing to provide the support that we need 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 

 30

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

be able to obtain records from the Archives. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I am familiar with 

that difficulty. It actually goes back about 

30 years, so I -- Admiral Rickover days, 

actually. But I question whether it is still 

relevant, but I know that, on the other hand, 

the Defense Department does tend to be very 

protective about these issues, so it may still 

be. 

 But I just think it is disturbing 

that there is no further follow-up of this. 

And I couldn't actually tell from Larry's 

letter whether he was looking for the Board to 

say something or give him advice on this, or 

what -- or if this was a NIOSH decision not to 

do it, not to follow up. I guess. 

 DR. NETON: We believe that we 

pulled the thread as far as we can go at this 

point, and we don't believe it would be 

fruitful to pursue this avenue. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Dr. Lockey, did 

you have a comment? 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER LOCKEY: No. I was 

wondering, would it be possible, rather than 

going through all of the records, just do a 

random sample of 10 percent or five percent, 

and just make sure in fact that's the case, 

there's nothing in there that's useful? Or is 

that problematic? 

 DR. NETON: Well, anything is 

possible. I mean, we could certainly do that 

if -- 

 MEMBER LOCKEY: How laborious would 

that be? 

 DR. NETON: I really don't know. 

We would have to research it in a little bit 

more detail. You know, there's a point where 

there is a cost-benefit here of, you know -- 

 MEMBER LOCKEY: Right. 

 DR. NETON: -- and how much money 

are we going to spend? And what is the 

chance, if we do spend all of that money, that 

anything is going to surface of relevance to 

this 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 

 32

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER LOCKEY: Okay. That's why I 

was sort of mentioning if you would take a 

random sample that is five percent of the 

records, and there is nothing there, and then 

you could probably stop at that point. 

 DR. NETON: Yes. I will be happy 

to look into that in a little bit more detail. 

 MEMBER LOCKEY: Okay. 

 DR. NETON: I'm not prepared to 

comment on that. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Mark. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: This isn't really 

to John. This is more directed to NIOSH also. 

 There was another part of the follow-up, and 

I don't know if you had any luck following up 

on -- 

 DR. NETON: Yes. I think that was 

addressed in the letter. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Oh, okay. 

 DR. NETON: This was in relation to 

the -- 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Decommissioning 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

work. 

 DR. NETON: -- decommissioning 

work. We went through the entire court docket 

that was filed at the end of the 

decommissioning period. There were 

indications about where the material was 

actually transferred. I believe it was 

Envirocare. There was no indication in that 

documentation that there was any enriched 

uranium of any type that was shipped, no 

mention at all. 

 We did not locate the original 

shipping manifest, though, but clearly if you 

follow the thread in the document, there is no 

hint of any special care that was taken with 

these samples, because they might have been 

enriched in uranium. 

 There was another indication, there 

was some concern about the -- I'm working from 

memory here, so bear with me. There was some 

concern about the fact that one of the two 

samples that were measured for isotopic came 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

back positive, potentially indicating that, 

you know, maybe there were a lot more. 

 There was a survey in that docket 

that was conducted where they did a number of 

isotopic analyses. And I forget how many now, 

but a fair number, and all of the results -- 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Eleven. 

 DR. NETON: Eleven? Okay. I guess 

11 is a fair number. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: It's in the -- 

 DR. NETON: Yes, it's in the 

letter. There were 11 samples, and all of 

those the analyses came back consistent with 

natural uranium. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: And were you able 

to -- I should have looked over the letter. 

But were you able to contact the contractor? 

I know at one point you had talked about -- 

 DR. NETON: No, it is covered in 

the letter. We had contacted -- we attempted 

to contact the contractor who performed the 

operation. I think 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 

 35

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Bechtel. 

 DR. NETON: -- Bechtel, yes, on a 

number of occasions, and -- 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Good memory. 

 DR. NETON: -- it's listed in the 

number of times we have tried to make contact 

to no avail. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: To no avail. 

 DR. NETON: Yes. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Actually, since the 

last meeting, there has been more contact with 

Bechtel. That's in the letter that -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: -- the conclusions 

process is a little bit more -- they have had 

some contact and gotten some information. It 

is not helpful. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you. 

Further comments or questions? 

 (No response.) 

 Okay. Continue. 

 MR. KATZ: Fernald site profile 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 

 36

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

special exposure cohort. Mr. Clawson? 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes. We've got 

several issues that we're dealing with right 

now. SC&A is developing a sampling plan. 

Everybody remembers at the last work group 

meeting, the sampling plan they had didn't 

quite fit what everybody would have hoped, and 

what we were going to gain from it. 

 So they are in the process of 

developing a sampling plan, and we have had 

several white papers issued, mainly dealing 

with radon breath and with the K-65 silos. 

And we have a tentative work group scheduled 

in April. That's about it. 

 MR. KATZ: Any questions? 

 (No response.) 

 Okay. Hanford site profile and 

special exposure cohort. Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. We recently 

received a review, sort of an abbreviated 

review from SC&A on some of the work that 

NIOSH had been able to complete. And we need 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

to schedule a work group meeting shortly to 

have some discussion and try to resolve and 

deal with issues. 

 I will say that all of the work 

that -- to some extent the work that NIOSH is 

doing at Hanford, and certainly SC&A's access 

to any information at Hanford has been 

severely constrained by some of these ongoing 

issues with the Department of Energy. That 

apparently is the site where even the 

Department of Energy is having the most 

difficulty trying to resolve some of these 

records access stuff. 

 So the review by SC&A is limited. I 

think it is worth having some discussion on, 

but we really do need to resolve these records 

access issues. They are -- I think both for 

NIOSH, but probably for SC&A, if we are going 

to have any meaningful review of the 

incredible review of the NIOSH documents. 

 So we can, I think, do the meeting 

by conference call. We will probably schedule 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

it some time in the next few weeks. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. Any 

questions? 

 (No response.) 

 So INL. Mr. Schofield? 

 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: I think we are 

ready to get scheduled or use the mic. I 

think we are at a point everybody has had 

enough time to look at the documents that we 

can go forward to schedule a work group 

meeting on the issues, to look at the document 

and see if there is anything we want further 

review or study on. 

 MR. KATZ: I'm sorry. Did you ask 

me a question? 

 (No response.) 

 Okay. Sorry. 

 Los Alamos. Mr. Griffon? 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. I think, you 

know, and after this meeting obviously we have 

had the presentation and heard from the 

Petitioner, and I think we are ready B 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 (AFDTPCO.) 

 PARTICIPANT: The parties aren't 

able to hear you from that line. Do you have 

a Blackberry or anything next to the phone. 

 MR. KATZ: Ma'am, this is the 

conference that is broadcasting this 

conference call. 

 PARTICIPANT: It is putting a bad 

buzzing into the conference call. 

 MR. KATZ: I know, I know. We have 

been plagued with this for three days now, and 

there is no Blackberry close to the -- 

 PARTICIPANT: Did you try to switch 

phones or anything? 

 MR. KATZ: I don't know if the 

issue is that we have a lot of wireless mics, 

and I don't know if they are somehow 

interfering with the phone line. 

 PARTICIPANT: Yes. You're on that 

mic. Have you tried a different one? 

 (Laughter.) 

 MR. KATZ: Yes. We have tried 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 

 40

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

about everything I think. And I think we are 

just going to have to suffer through it for 

the rest of this meeting. But if you can't -- 

if there is nothing you can do to clear the 

line. 

 PARTICIPANT: Not really. 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. Thank you. 

 PARTICIPANT: I will just have to 

-- it's hard for them to hear you. 

 (Laughter.) 

 MR. KATZ: I understand that, and I 

am very sorry for them. Having been in their 

position, I understand that. But there is 

nothing technically we can do to resolve this 

now, then, if you can't somehow improve the 

line quality. But thank you. Thank you for 

trying. 

 PARTICIPANT: You're welcome. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. All I was 

saying is for LANL we heard a presentation 

yesterday of the evaluation report from NIOSH, 

and we heard a presentation by 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 

 41

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

Petitioners, who obviously put a lot of time 

and research into their issues regarding the 

petition. 

 At this point, I don't know if -- I 

think we have officially already tasked SC&A 

to review this report. If not, Paul, I would 

offer that we should do it now or -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We did. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: We did. Okay. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We did. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Okay. So SC&A 

will start reviewing the evaluation report. I 

will coordinate with all parties, and once we 

are ready for a meeting we will schedule a 

work group meeting to move forward on that. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Mark. 

 Mound. Ms. Beach? 

 MEMBER BEACH: At this time, Mound 

work group is waiting for six white papers 

between SC&A and NIOSH. All six have gone 

through their DOE security review, and we 

anticipate delivery of those hopefully by 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 

 42

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

1st of March. Right now, the work group is 

looking at scheduling a meeting the week of 

the 20th. It will be a two-day meeting, 

hopefully to get through all of the work that 

is coming at the same time. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. 

 The Nevada Test Site. Mr. Presley? 

 MEMBER PRESLEY: We have not had a 

meeting since our October meeting. But there 

has been a whole lot going on. Contractor 

SC&A has been checking on some of the last 

items that we had to try to get this TBD issue 

settled. 

 John Mauro wrote a white paper on 

the 15th on the outcome of some of this data. 

 I would like for John to come to the mic, if 

he would, and tell the Board what he found out 

about the -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: John? 

 DR. MAURO: Yes. Good morning. I 

sent out what I call a one-pager to the work 

group members. I hope you found that useful. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 It was sort of as succinct as I can summarize 

our understanding of where we are on matters 

related to many of the SECs that have just 

been mentioned. 

 Nevada Test Site. I prepared that 

one. There are fundamentally three issues 

that we are reviewing within an SEC context. 

In other words, these are issues that we 

consider to be SEC issues, and, when resolved, 

all issues will be resolved. 

 The issues include badges left 

behind. We all are familiar with the subject. 

 SC&A has delivered a number of reports 

related to badges left behind -- one which you 

could consider to be a review of records to 

see if there was any data in the historical 

records of a selected number of workers. We 

picked ten workers to see if there were any 

disparities between the film badge records and 

the PIC data. And we concluded that, though 

there was one out of the 10 that had somewhat 

of an anomaly there, it wasn't an unexpected 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

anomaly. It was something that could 

reasonably occur. 

 We were looking for a situation 

where we consistently found low or zero 

readings for film badges, but positive 

readings on the PICs. And we didn't find 

that. So the result of that limited 

investigation -- those only 10 individuals by 

the way -- it was quite an undertaking, 

because we had to go into original records. It 

actually consisted of thousands of pages of 

handwritten records, and extracting the 

salient information. 

 The bottom line is we did not find 

any evidence in that review of a systematic, 

widespread badges left behind issue as within 

that context of comparing PIC to film badge 

data. So that is done, delivered, the Board 

has it. 

 Related to that matter, we also 

submitted two studies. One I will call the 

[Identifying Information Redacted] study, 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 

 45

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

the other I will refer to as the interviews 

studies. 

 If you call, as part of the work 

related to badges left behind, at one of our 

meetings in Las Vegas, there were a number of 

workers who were there who indicated that they 

had in fact left their badges behind. Our 

team of folks interviewed those individuals, 

and we prepared two reports addressing those 

matters that are in the hands of the work 

group. 

 The reports indicate that there is 

very little doubt that badges were left 

behind, that it was a failure widespread. But 

the important conclusion is that we come out 

of this is we can't say that because of that 

practice which took place based on these 

interviews that it was of such a nature that 

it was not possible to create a co-worker 

model. 

 Think of it this way. If you have 

a collection of film badge data, and you plot 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

it, and you create a log normal distribution 

out of that plot, and you decide that you 

would like to use the upper end of that 

distribution as a co-worker number to assign 

to workers, we don't have any indication, 

based on the work that we did, that the upper 

tail somehow has been compromised. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: John, I'm going to 

interrupt you for a minute, because we are 

starting to get into work group business. And 

I am going to ask you to be more brief. Just 

describe what you did and -- 

 DR. MAURO: My apologies. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: I think we will 

let the work group deal with those details, in 

the interest of time here. Sorry. 

 DR. MAURO: I'll move on to the 

last item. Well, that was really the first 

item -- namely, badges left behind. 

 The next item has to do with the 

reconstruction of airborne -- of external -- 

of internal exposures to workers that worked 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

in the Flats. There was a methodology 

proposed by NIOSH. We reviewed that. Lynn 

Anspaugh presented his results at the last 

work group meeting, and we have lots of 

concerns. 

 NIOSH had indicated that they would 

look into those concerns, and that is 

reconstructing internal doses to workers who 

are outdoors in the Flats. 

 The third and last item, and what I 

consider to be an extremely important item, is 

NIOSH's proposed methodology to develop a coworker model for workers who enter controlled 

access areas. And the plan is to use the 

bioassay data from 100 workers listed in Table 

7-1 of the evaluation report. 

 We have prepared a review of that 

report, and we have raised a number of 

concerns whether or not that group of 100 

workers is a good group to build an internal 

dose reconstruction co-worker model. 

 NIOSH is aware of our concerns, 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 

 48

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

had indicated in our last meeting that they 

will look into those issues. 

 I apologize for being a little bit 

lengthy. 

 MEMBER PRESLEY: Thank you. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you very 

much. 

 MEMBER PRESLEY: Can I finish, 

please? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Go ahead, 

Robert. 

 MEMBER PRESLEY: John knows they're 

all SEC issues. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes, they are. 

 MEMBER PRESLEY: Issues for the 

technical basis document have been solved. I 

would love to vote on that today, but what I 

am going to do is ask for this issue to be put 

on the telephone conference date for us to be 

able to bring this issue to the Board and us 

vote, and go ahead and get this TBD out of the 

way, so that we can start working on 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 

 49

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

profile and hopefully help some of these 

people that aren't getting paid. 

 Thank you. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Thank you 

very much. Ted will go on to the next one, 

then. Well, I should ask for questions here 

on that report. Okay. Go ahead. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Can I -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: A suggestion. If 

we are going to be voting on this in the March 

conference call, or whenever the conference 

call is, I would hope we would get some 

information, so the Board could have some of 

this information to look at in a way that is 

succinct and focused, and we would be able to 

then know what we are voting on. That's all. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes, a summary of 

what the recommendation is and the salient 

points. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Thank 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 

 50

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. Let's see 

where we are here. 

 Okay. Pantex. Mr. Clawson? 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: As of yet, we -- 

the work group has not met. But in March 15th 

we are doing what they would classify as an 

information-gathering opportunity. Pantex is 

a very difficult place to be able to deal 

with, so we are going to have a tour of the 

area, and also somewhat of a security 

briefing, so that we can understand what the 

issues are and how we can deal with them, and 

work with DOE to be able to do that. Then, we 

are going to set up a working group after 

that. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Brad. 

 Pinellas. Mr. Schofield? 

 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Right now, there 

are two white papers from NIOSH under review 

by DOE. After those come out, we will then 

have a date where we can schedule a work group 

meeting. We have three major outstanding 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

issues to address. 

 MR. KATZ: Rocky Flats. Mr. 

Griffon? 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Rocky Flats -- 

this is pertinent, since we heard from one of 

the petitioners yesterday on the phone. There 

was some follow-up on Rocky Flats. The 

Ruttenberg database -- NIOSH now has the 

Ruttenberg database. 

 I went with Brant Ulsh and Mutty 

Shafi to Denver to -- just to be a Board 

representative there while this exchange 

occurred. We briefly looked at the database, 

but really we have to review it completely and 

compare it with that. 

 So this is the University of 

Colorado database, which has neutron data in 

it. The question, just to refresh people's 

memories is, you know, was it the same 

original source data? There is some 

indication that it was. University of 

Colorado then did some different things 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 

 52

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

the data for their own research, and now we 

have to sort of tease all of that out and look 

through that. NIOSH is beginning that 

process. 

 Brant Ulsh has assured me that he 

will post the database on the O drive, so that 

work group members can look at this as well in 

our normal location where we have this data. 

 And then, if -- I think it would be 

warranted to have a follow-up work group, 

since there is a lot of interest from the 

petitioners here once we are at a point where 

we have a more definitive answer on the 

review, on what it shows. So that is sort of 

an update on the University of Colorado 

database. 

 That is all I had at this point 

from the last meeting. 

 MR. KATZ: Any questions? 

 (No response.) 

 Thank you, Mark. 

 I just realized we were amiss 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 

 53

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

not even checking in on Mike Gibson. Mike, 

are you with us on the phone? Mike? 

 (AFDTPCO.) 

 (No response.) 

 Okay. So we don't have Mike. I 

was just thinking -- Josie, do you have 

anything? Do you think you can pinch-hit for 

Mike, or -- 

 MEMBER BEACH: Without talking to 

Mike -- 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. 

 MEMBER BEACH: -- no. 

 MR. KATZ: Sure. Sure. We'll just 

move on, then. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: He's on the line. 

He e-mailed just five minutes ago saying he 

couldn't hear. 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. So let's move on. 

 We can come back to this, if we get this 

corrected. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: His last note said 

the line is completely 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 

 54

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: Hold on. Then, I'm 

going to see -- maybe I should hang up on this 

line and reconnect. 

 PARTICIPANT: Why don't we go on 

and do our break and -- 

 MR. KATZ: Do you want to -- okay. 

 All right. All right. Savannah River Site. 

 Mr. Griffon again. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: A quick update on 

Savannah River. SC&A has been tasked to 

review the evaluation report, and it is in 

process. So SC&A is working on that. I think 

NIOSH has also asked Savannah River -- are 

getting additional data that they needed. 

 So they are in the process of 

reviewing the evaluation report, and we will 

schedule a work group meeting as soon as it 

makes sense to do so. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. 

 SEC issues. Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. We have some 

ongoing things to deal with. One is -- 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 

 55

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

main thing is the Dow site. And we have been 

holding off on a meeting waiting -- hoping 

that [Identifying Information Redacted] would 

get his information finally. And Ted has been 

trying heroically, is it would fair to say, to 

try to resolve a whole bunch of issues, 

including some that apparently are new issues 

in regards to FACA and FOI that required some 

legal sleuthing, or whatever, review to decide 

how to do that. 

 I am hopeful, and I think Ted is 

hopeful, that those issues will get resolved. 

 And I think we can try to schedule a meeting 

between now and the next Board meeting to -- 

work group meeting to discuss -- you know, 

further discuss the Dow site. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. Any 

questions? 

 (No response.) 

 Okay. Then, we have -- let's get 

the subcommittees at this point, but -- 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Actually, the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 56

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

second part of that is the 250-day issue. I 

was waiting for Dr. Ziemer to come back. But 

we have one item there that I think is left 

over from the last meeting, which is the 

Metallurgical Laboratories that -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. The issue 

at the Metallurgical Lab was the point that 

that work was a critical experiment. And 

there was some question on I think -- well, a 

number of those workers were there less than 

250 days. 

 And I think there was a tentative 

conclusion last time -- and, Jim Neton, you 

may have to help me on this -- but there was 

some thought that that could be bounded, but 

it -- and it is not an incident in the sense 

of a -- it was not an uncontrolled critical 

event. It was a planned event. It was 

controlled. 

 But, nonetheless, there is the 

issue of a lot of these were less than 250 

days. We are pretty confident there was 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 

 57

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

shielding. I think Dr. Poston confirmed that 

to us based on some historical information he 

had that there was primarily use of distance. 

 And there is data on that experiment, but 

anyway that -- there is that issue for the 

Metallurgical Lab on 250 days. 

 I think perhaps the subcommittee 

was going to look at that. So we don't need 

to discuss it necessarily here, but -- 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Do we need to task 

-- I think we need to task SC&A to look at it 

from a 250-day perspective. I think since 

they have not reviewed the site -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Well, and 

this may be one of those things where -- and 

we want to make -- I don't know that there has 

been any attempt to bound that already. So I 

am not sure that we are there. You know, I am 

concerned about the issue of who does what 

first. There has not been an effort to do 

bounding. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Well, the other -- 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 58

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

the other possibility is we have been dealing 

with the 250-day issue. Some of that we have 

been approaching and sort of tasking NIOSH. I 

don't know if that is a fair way of putting 

it. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Asking. Asking 

and tasking. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: But looking at it 

as to whether these can be done through dose 

reconstruction, and that has some -- you know, 

we think it may actually be feasible -- for 

example, the Ames Laboratory to handle that -- 

those issues in that way. And Jim Neton is 

working on that portion of it. 

 And maybe rather than tasking is we 

hold a meeting of the SEC review group. Maybe 

we will just sort of look at Metallurgical 

Laboratories and see how that would fit in 

with the thing. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: The issue. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: The issue that we 

have looked at so far, and then decide whether 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

-- you know, whether further work needs to be 

done on it and who should do that work. Is 

that -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: That is exactly 

in line with my thinking, Dr. Melius. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Okay. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: I think a little 

more discussion needs to occur, because it's 

not clear to me how all of these pieces fit 

together -- the reactor versus the 

radiochemical operations that occur, which is 

why the class was added in the first place. 

And is there another class possibly there? So 

we need to talk through this. 

 DR. NETON: That's exactly what -- 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I think it is just 

helpful to deal with the 250-day issue to have 

other examples to consider, because I think it 

is -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Arjun would like 

to speak to some of this. 

 We got the line back here, and 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 

 60

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

probably know it because the buzzing has 

returned, I suppose. But in any event, we 

have a comment now from Arjun. And you may 

need to use this mic up here. 

 This is Dr. Makhijani coming to the 

mic. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: Just a question, 

Dr. Melius. Did you want us to familiarize 

ourselves with the Met Lab question without 

any evaluation, so we can discuss? Or should 

we hold off until the meeting? I'm not clear 

on what we should do. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I'm not sure 

either, but familiarize would probably be 

useful before the meeting. I'm not so sure 

whether that's a task -- familiarizing is a 

task or -- 

 (Laughter.) 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Well, I think, as 

a minimum, if you look at the evaluation 

report for that petition, you will know what 

the issue is. And then, we will discuss -- 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

and you are sort of generally, you know -- I 

know you are familiar with the CP-1 program 

and the criticality experiment of Enrico Fermi 

and his colleagues. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: So that’s what 

we’re talking about and many of those workers 

were there very briefly for that particular 

event and the preparation. And, of course, 

after that much of it moved to what is now 

Argonne National Lab. But some of those 

workers moved to other places. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes. So we will 

just look at it enough to know what NIOSH has 

done and prepare for a discussion. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: Thank you. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: And I guess that 

is sort of a tasking. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We are not asking 

you to -- you know, just read the documents 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

and be familiar with what the discussion is 

going to be. Does that seem reasonable? 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: And it would be 

within the existing 250-day working group, 

so -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: I just needed 

clarification. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. And you 

are already sort of tasked to work on the 250-

day issue. So this is possibly one of those. 

 DR. MAKHIJANI: Yes. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. 

 We have Dr. Ziemer, TBD 6000, 6001. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. Earlier 

this week we did task SC&A to begin review of 

the general steel industries, which is really 

the Appendix BB, but the petition portion of 

that, so that is underway. 

 The work group has not met since I 

last reported last month and identified a 

number of tasks that were underway. We 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 

 63

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

have, I will report to you, a tentative date, 

which I have not yet checked out with NIOSH, 

but all of the working group members are 

available. 

 And that would be on March 11th, 

but that will also be dependent on completion 

of some tasks that were underway. And I will 

have to confirm with NIOSH on that and try to 

get that confirmed within either today or 

tomorrow, because I know if it's February 11th 

we only have a few weeks to get this on the 

schedule. 

 And I think, Ted, you were also 

clear on that date as well. 

 So the plan is to meet, if 

possible, on the 11th. And we will be dealing 

both with the TBD 6000 matrix, as well as the 

-- and we won't be ready yet for the -- well, 

I am not expecting SC&A to have their review 

of the petition evaluation report by that 

time. 

 But at least we have some other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 64

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

issues that we are dealing with, including the 

-- some issues on the Landauer film badges. 

And there are some differences between 

[Identifying Information Redacted]'s badge 

information that he received from Landauer and 

the NIOSH, and that has not yet been resolved 

either. 

 So that is our report. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Dr. Ziemer. 

 Surrogate data. Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. Surrogate 

data -- two things. One is we -- I think we 

need to have another meeting of the work 

group. Dr. Ziemer submitted comments that 

unfortunately are diametrically opposed to 

comments from another member of the work 

group. And I think we -- the only way to do 

it, I think we need to sit down and resolve. 

 I thought I had a resolution until 

I got Dr. Ziemer's comments. And I think it 

is worth further discussion and maybe some 

further work on it. The comments are fine, 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

but not -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: No. I was 

worried about the other person's comments. 

 (Laughter.) 

 How could they be so far off? 

 (Laughter.) 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I'm not naming 

names. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: No. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: This is to -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Actually, just to 

point out that SC&A has been utilizing the 

criteria, as you recall, in the Texas City 

case. So the main thing I would like to have 

happen is for the work group to make a final 

recommendation to the full Board on the 

criteria. And I think that will be helpful. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I also think in 

terms of that meeting we should also discuss 

the Texas City, because, again, hopefully 

[Identifying Information Redacted] and the 

petitioners -- 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 OPERATOR: Excuse me. This is the 

conference coordinator. Is there anyone on 

this line? 

 MR. KATZ: Yes. Yes, although we 

just heard -- 

 OPERATOR: There is a loud buzzing 

coming from your mic. Are you on 

speakerphone, or are you -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. 

 MR. KATZ: We are on speakerphone. 

 OPERATOR: Okay. I don't know how 

to change the buzzing, because you're on 

speakerphones. Is there a way you can 

disconnect and call back, please? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We have done 

that. 

 MR. KATZ: We've done that. We've 

done everything. I think the last time you 

came on, or someone came on to do this, it 

somehow disconnected the whole line, and we 

lost our audience who is on this phone line, 

too. 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 

 67

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 OPERATOR: Okay. I'll reconnect 

you, but I can pretty much guarantee you your 

participants are not able to understand you. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. We realize 

that, and we have been struggling with this 

for three days. There's something in the line 

here that we are unable to correct. 

 OPERATOR: Okay. I'll go ahead and 

return you. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. 

 I'm sorry. I lost track here. Are 

we -- did we finish up with surrogate? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Texas City. We 

need to -- I think we need to discuss that 

also. There are some outstanding FOI issues 

related to that from [Identifying Information 

Redacted] and the petitioners, and I think we 

need to -- to the extent we can resolve those, 

or you can get me a schedule on when you think 

some of those will be addressed. I'm less 

familiar with those than I am with the Dow 

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 

 68

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. I'll look into 

those. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Okay. 

 DR. MAURO: If I may, I'm not sure 

if -- this seems live, this microphone. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: They're not 

hearing us anyway I guess. 

 DR. MAURO: SC&A was tasked to 

review OCAS IG-004, which explicitly deals 

with the use of surrogate data. We will have 

that draft report in the Board's hand by next 

week. So it is one more piece of information 

that should be helpful for the meeting. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Very good. 

 Thank you. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you, John. Okay. 

 Mike Gibson, can you hear us? Are 

you on there? Do we have anyone on the phone? 

 PARTICIPANT: Yes. 

 PARTICIPANT: Yes, Ted. 

 MR. KATZ: Ah. You guys sound 

clear to us. 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 

 69

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 Mike, are you on there? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Mike Gibson? 

 MR. KATZ: Mike Gibson? 

 PARTICIPANT: Mike was on a couple 

of minutes ago, and then the line went blank. 

 So maybe he tried to redial. 

 MR. KATZ: Yes. We had an operator 

interrupt and mute the line. So, should we 

give them a minute to -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We can do it 

after the break. 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. We can go with 

the subcommittees, and then we'll go to Mike 

last. So we have two subcommittees now for 

public interest, because we established a new 

subcommittee on procedures review. This was 

formerly a working group, but because their 

activities are routine they really deserve to 

be a subcommittee, and so they are now. 

 So let's start with you, Mark, with 

dose reconstruction. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: 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 

 70

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

on Dose Reconstruction did not meet since the 

last Advisory Board meeting. We were really 

intending to. We got snowed out, and so did 

the procedures. We had a back-to-meeting 

scheduled. 

 What I am proposing is that we have 

two subcommittees -- and I've sent around some 

e-mails this morning that I'm sure everyone 

has got -- two subcommittee meetings before 

the next full Board meeting, primarily because 

we have -- I think Stu might have passed out a 

draft matrix with the 11th set. 

 This is a list of cases -- I think 

there's 37 of them -- that actually fall 

between 45 and 49.9 percent POC. I've gone 

ahead and asked Stu -- if you recall, we do 

this in a two-phase step. We first get 

initial cases, and then we -- as a 

subcommittee, we usually go through them and 

say, okay, these are of interest, then we ask 

for expanded information on a certain subset 

of the larger 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 

 71

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 In this case, the list isn't that 

big. Stu said he could expand it and just do 

all of these and bring it to the next 

subcommittee meeting to expedite the process a 

little bit. And then, hopefully, in the next 

two subcommittee meetings before the next 

Board meeting, we'll be able to come back with 

a proposal to get an 11th set of cases. 

 Stu has also generated two other 

lists that I'm sure the subcommittee members 

have, but they are larger lists, so we want to 

bring those lists to the subcommittee meeting, 

cull those down a bit, and then go through our 

normal two-step selection process. 

 But the full intention of this is 

to have a proposed list of 11th set of cases 

ready for action by the Board at the next full 

Board meeting. We are a little delayed here, 

and I want to make sure that SC&A has 

continued work in that regard. 

 A couple of other items that we -- 

we were going to discuss at the last 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

subcommittee meeting, but I am just going to 

-- they are still on the agenda. And they 

include selection protocol, case selection 

protocol. We wanted to sort of revisit that. 

 I think we should still -- we will 

revisit that. I think we should do it at the 

subcommittee meeting. We can have more time 

for a lengthy discussion on that and bring 

back a proposal. If it is not to change 

anything, that's what it is. But we can bring 

back a proposal to the full Board meeting. 

 The other outstanding item is the 

first 100 cases report, and we have been asked 

by the Board to go back -- we had a draft 

report at the last meeting. We were asked by 

the Board to go back and basically beef it up, 

answer some baseline questions that were not 

addressed in the report. So we agreed to do 

that, and we will discuss that at the next 

subcommittee meeting as well. 

 So two subcommittee meetings coming 

up, barring snow delays, and hopefully we will 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 73

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

have more to report next meeting. 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. Let me -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Could I ask a 

question? Mark, I think -- do we now have the 

results of the blind reviews from SC&A? And 

are those going to be also reviewed by the 

committee? 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. We have -- I 

didn't go through all of -- 

 OPERATOR: I am pulling this line. 

 MR. KATZ: It does hum, and there 

is nothing that can be done to correct it at 

this time. 

 OPERATOR: Okay. I'll let the -- 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. 

 OPERATOR: Can you let the parties 

know? Because they keep on requesting. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We've let them 

know. 

 MR. KATZ: They understand that we 

have a problem. Thank you. 

 OPERATOR: 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 

 74

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. I didn't go 

through -- we are still working on the six set 

of cases and the seventh set, and we will 

initiate the eighth set resolution process. I 

think SC&A has almost completed the tenth set 

of reviews. 

 John, can you give us an update on 

that? 

 But you have also submitted blind 

reviews. As Paul said, they will be in the 

hopper for the subcommittee to discuss. 

 DR. MAURO: Yes. The tenth set are 

done. We are getting ready for the one on one 

conference calls, should happen very soon. We 

delivered one blind. The other blind is in 

the home stretch, so we have basically cleared 

the decks on that. And I would like to 

request -- yes? 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: And do we have a 

ninth set matrix yet? I don't know if -- I 

think you did -- 

 DR. MAURO: I don't know. I'd 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 

 75

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

to check. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: I'm not sure on 

that. But everything else is in motion and -- 

 DR. MAURO: And I would like to ask 

-- one of the things, we were hoping that the 

next set would have been available. That does 

set us back a little bit in terms of this next 

set of numbers. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. 

 DR. MAURO: And so I would just 

like to ask if we could move that as quickly 

as we -- 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes, we -- 

 DR. MAURO: -- we have a team 

waiting. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: -- full intention 

to move it along as quickly as we can. I 

mean, my intent is if -- if we get this 

expanded version, that's why I asked Stu to go 

ahead and expand this 37, because these are 

the cases of most interest to us -- the 45 to 

50 percentile. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 If out of those we find 20 cases 

that are good for review, that we all agree 

on, I think we have a phone meeting scheduled 

before the next full Board meeting, so we may 

be able to take action, you know, in between 

and get some cases at least available. I 

think you want 30 overall, but, you know -- 

 DR. MAURO: I wasn't quite sure. 

When it comes to directing your contractor to 

do the next set, that is something that is a 

full Board, or is that something that could be 

authorized through the subcommittee or through 

-- in other words, I will explain my concerns. 

 We have four individuals who basically are 

dedicated to doing this work. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Right. 

 DR. MAURO: They are done with 

their old work, which means that they are sort 

of in limbo now for -- until the next batch 

comes in. And if it -- if we can as quickly 

as plausible get that into the pipeline, that 

would be very helpful. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 77

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Well, I know so 

far anyway, Paul, our protocol has been that 

we bring back to the Board, and the Board 

makes the decision. Right, right. So, you 

know, we are going to do the best we can. I 

understand your dilemma, John. 

 The other thing that will be in the 

hopper for your folks to work on -- I assume 

if I get one of the -- I'm trying to schedule 

two subcommittee meetings, one in March and 

one in April. And if we get one in March out 

of that resolution discussion, usually we end 

up with some work follow-up that needs to be 

done. So -- but we understand the dilemma, 

and we will expedite it as quickly as 

possible. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: I might add to 

that, the Board would have the prerogative, 

for example, during our March meeting to 

authorize the subcommittee to do a tasking 

from a main list, if we didn't have concerns 

on the overall list, and say, "You go ahead 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

and choose the ones from the list that you 

believe are suitable." 

 I'm not suggesting that we will do 

this necessarily, but we are certainly 

empowered to ask the subcommittee to act in 

our behalf on that matter. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Mark. 

 And, Wanda, the Procedures. 

 MEMBER MUNN: As you recall, at our 

last Board meeting we reported that we were 

now doing our work entirely electronically. 

We had scheduled a face-to-face meeting in 

Cincinnati on January 28th, which was not able 

to happen since even our folks who live here 

in Cincinnati -- who live in Cincinnati 

couldn't get to the hotel in order for us to 

have our meeting. That was canceled. 

 We currently have scheduled a 

teleconference for March 24th, one week prior 

to the full Board teleconference. We are 

going to be doing something new at that one, 

too. Since the chair will be unable to travel 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

at that time, we are going to try handling 

that electronically by telephone for me, and 

with the remainder of the subcommittee face to 

face in Cincinnati. 

 Our current status as of December 

when we last met was that we had a total of 

497 findings to address; 250 of those have 

already been closed, 160 are in the status 

that we refer to as open, which means that we 

haven't had any meeting discussion about that 

finding, but the finding is there. And open 

in progress, 16 items, which means that we 

have just started the discussion and someone 

is working on them. 

 So we are making progress 

reasonably well with these procedure bases 

that we have, operating from our matrix on the 

O drive almost entirely. 

 We will try to have a different 

report for you on the teleconference March 

31st. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you. Thank 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 

 80

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

Wanda. 

 Let me check in now and see if -- 

Mike, do we have you back on the telephone? 

Mike Gibson? 

 (No response.) 

 Do we have anyone on the telephone? 

 PARTICIPANT: Yes, Ted. We can 

hear you. 

 MR. KATZ: Okay. Thank you. 

 Okay. So Mike is chair of two -- 

two work groups, but he won't be able to 

report of course on those. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Well, let's see. 

 Who else is here from the outreach work 

group? Who is on that? 

 MR. KATZ: Josie. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: My understanding 

is that the outreach work group is going to 

focus some on specifying or spelling out a 

little more what their mission, if I can call 

it that, to try to be more specific on what it 

is they are trying to accomplish. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 When we originally set up that work 

group, it was kind of broad and general. The 

understanding was that they would participate 

and track and perhaps evaluate some of the 

outreach meetings, even though many of those 

were labor things, but to determine the extent 

to which the outreach activities were 

beneficial or could be improved as far as what 

this part of the program is doing. 

 But I think the group has learned, 

as they have proceeded, that they need a 

little better, sharper mission statement of 

exactly what their responsibilities are. And 

so basically they are going to work on that, 

amongst other things, and perhaps you can 

elaborate on that, Josie. 

 MEMBER BEACH: Well, at this time, 

SC&A did provide a report to Mike on a mission 

statement. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Sort of a 

straw man mission statement for them -- 

 MEMBER BEACH: Yes. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 82

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: -- to evaluate as 

a starting point. 

 MEMBER BEACH: Correct. That 

initiated some talk on maybe this work group 

becoming a subcommittee also. No? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Well, it 

certainly might. I think it is going to 

depend on what that mission is. And if it's 

an ongoing thing, then it may. But the first 

step is to get that mission spelled out, and 

then bring that back to the Board and make 

sure -- 

 MEMBER BEACH: Correct. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: -- that we are 

all pointed in the same direction on what it 

is this work group is to do. 

 MEMBER BEACH: My guess is Mike 

will want to reconvene the work group to 

discuss SC&A's report and the mission 

statement, and then go further from there. I 

don't know if everybody on the Board got that 

mission statement. I actually have a copy 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 

 83

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

it, if anybody is interested. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Well, it probably 

would be good to distribute that at some 

point. Is that an official deliverable? That 

is just a working thing within the work group 

right now. 

 DR. MAURO: Yes. We delivered it 

as a white paper to the work group, not as a 

full distributed -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. That 

probably should stay there for now. 

 MEMBER BEACH: Okay. And, like I 

said, Mike is going to have to make the 

decision on where to go from here on that 

statement. 

 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Josie, for 

covering that. That concludes the discussion 

to the work groups and the subcommittees. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Let's go 

ahead and take a comfort break now. Again, in 

order to move things along, particularly for 

those who have plane schedules, let's try 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 

 84

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

be back within 15 minutes, so we can proceed 

with the rest of the items. 

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went off 

the record at 10:23 a.m., and 

resumed at 10:42 a.m.) 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. If you 

will take your seats, we will proceed. Again, 

our apologies to the folks on the line. We 

understand the problem. We cannot fix it. 

 Our next topic on the agenda is our 

Board Working Time. The first item there is 

the write-ups on the SEC recommendations. We 

have approved all of those earlier. You have 

the copies. 

 I want to touch base with both 

NIOSH and Labor. Did you look at the copies, 

and do you -- are the descriptions of the 

classes suitable as far as you are concerned? 

 Particularly I would to ask Jeff, are there 

any concerns from Labor at this time on the 

descriptions? Jeff indicates there are none. 

 Any comments, Board members? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 85

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 (No response.) 

 If not, we will consider that taken 

care of. No further items with regard to the 

recommendations to the Secretary. 

 Next, we have a discussion of the 

dose reconstruction interview scripts, and 

this is what are typically called the CATI 

interviews. When Larry Elliott talked with us 

at the last meeting, he indicated that he was 

querying the various health physicists to see 

whether they could simplify the forum, whether 

there were questions that could be eliminated 

and the forums be streamlined. 

 I believe you all heard from Larry 

recently that they could not come to agreement 

or closure on what should be eliminated, so 

that we are back to the original forms that 

were distributed to the Board at our last 

meeting. 

 At that time, I believe there were 

some suggested changes, although as far as I 

was concerned they were fairly minimal, 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 

 86

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

CATI interview. There was some language that 

was eliminated, but most of it, as we had it, 

was very similar to what has been used right 

along. 

 Now, I am uncertain as to the 

status of the documents in terms of commenting 

on them. I believe there was also an 

extension of the comment period. I'm going to 

ask, Ted, can you clarify for us the status of 

the documents and what the comment period is? 

 MR. KATZ: Yes. I believe what the 

situation is that while I think Larry shared 

with the Board a proposed revision to the CATI 

script, what he effectually did after that was 

instead of going forward with that with OMB he 

has asked for an extension of the current 

approval with OMB, so that as far as the 

Board's work is concerned the Board can 

proceed and make any recommendations, and then 

OCAS would integrate those recommendations 

into the current draft before anything went to 

OMB. So that when a revised CATI goes to OMB, 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

it would incorporate the Board's 

recommendations as well. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: So does that mean 

there really is nothing on the official docket 

at this time as far as the -- 

 MR. KATZ: That means that there is 

no -- there is no revised CATI script, C-A-T-I 

script, you know, computer-assisted script, on 

the OMB docket. That is correct. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: So, basically, 

there is an action, however, before OMB simply 

to renew the current script, and that does not 

preclude coming in -- 

 MR. KATZ: That is correct. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: -- whenever -- 

 MR. KATZ: So OMB will presumably 

grant an extension, so that the current script 

can be used for a few months more, so that the 

Board can then wrap up its business, make its 

recommendations, and then OCAS would submit 

those to OMB per proposal for a revised CATI. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: So that gives us 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 88

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

a little breathing space. The original plan 

was to have the procedures work group review 

the Board's input -- and, Wanda, I'll have you 

comment on this in just a moment, but -- in 

the procedures work group had a meeting 

scheduled. That was one of the ones that got 

snowed out in Cincinnati last month. But 

perhaps now we have a little breathing space. 

 Wanda, do you have a comment on 

this? 

 MEMBER MUNN: Procedures -- we 

actually discussed -- we originally discussed 

-- there is no reason why we should have to 

shift mics. That's silly. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Go ahead. 

 MEMBER MUNN: Well, really, it is. 

 We discussed procedures in procedures, what 

was happening with the CATI, and what changes 

we felt were reasonable, at quite some length. 

 And our discussions with Larry made 

it fairly clear that a couple of the concerns 

that had been expressed by one or more 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 

 89

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

Board members may not have been concerns of 

the magnitude that we had first taken them to 

be when we heard them. One of those, which we 

have heard repeatedly I think, is the concern 

about whether the people who were interacting 

with the claimants were in fact trained 

properly to discuss these things with the 

folks. And it would appear that that is the 

case. 

 I know there was some concern to 

begin with that someone who was familiar with 

the technical aspects of the file should 

perhaps be speaking with these folks, but that 

doesn't seem to be as reasonable as -- or as 

well intentioned as perhaps was the thinking 

at the time the suggestion was made. 

 The concern seems to be more around 

the fact that people felt they were being 

tested rather than asked for assistance at the 

time that they were being interviewed on 

CATIs. We have been assured that the 

individuals who perform these CATIs repeatedly 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

try to reassure the folks that this is not a 

test, this is a request for additional 

information or just talking to you a little 

bit to see if you have better information that 

you weren't aware of the fact that you had. 

 Leading that discussion, there were 

less concerns in my mind with respect to how 

the CATI was being used than there were going 

in. We haven't had a significant number of 

suggestions from around the Board with 

specifics that needed to be done to change it. 

 And in light of the fact that it 

has served a purpose for a number of years 

here, it is always worthwhile I think to 

review them. But the current feeling, at 

least here, is that perhaps the desire to make 

real remedial changes to this process might 

not be the wisest thing we could do. 

 But, in brief, we have discussed it 

at considerable length, and I am quite sure 

that our transcript will reveal that for 

anyone who wants to follow that 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 

 91

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 Mark? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: One of the 

problems, in my mind, is that this letter goes 

out before the interview. And although the 

interview itself may be more reassuring, I 

believe the letter still has the potential of 

raising great anxiety prior to the interview, 

because it is not clear, in my mind, in the 

letter that the burden is not on the claimant 

to come up with all of this information. And 

that I personally would like to see some 

revisions that spell that out much more 

clearly. 

 I have tried to work on some 

wording for that myself this week, but I 

wasn't quite sure on exactly what the status 

of the whole thing was at this point. But 

let's get some other input. 

 Mark, and then Jim. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. I guess I 

agree with one part that Wanda said, 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 

 92

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, good. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: -- we discussed it 

at length. That was the part I agree with. 

 (Laughter.) 

 MEMBER MUNN: Well, thank you. 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: I think I might 

have a different opinion on the rest of it. I 

think there was concern expressed about the 

question of it could be perceived as a test or 

-- you know, and I don't disagree with that. 

 I guess the question of technical 

expertise was still an issue in my mind, not 

necessarily for the interviewer but available, 

and I think that was still a finding that we 

were going through in one of the procedures. 

 And then, the other question -- the 

other comment I had -- and I am trying to 

remember that -- I was just trying to pull up 

the new version of the questionnaire, which 

actually as I look through did look like it 

had some improvements. And the question that 

I have been wrestling with is, to what extent 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

is it used? 

 And I think there is a frustration 

among the claimant population that this CATI 

is -- the CATIs are not being used. And I'm 

sure NIOSH would disagree with that, but, I 

mean, there is a perception about that. And 

if there is -- you know, and in this revision 

I think -- and, again, I am going by memory, 

but I think a question about co-workers was 

taken out. 

 And I'm not sure whether the 

rationale wasn't because it has been kind of 

an embarrassment. And we have asked our coworkers for five years to be listed on these 

things, and NIOSH hasn't contacted but four or 

five, by their own admission. So these people 

are offering up these supervisors and other 

people that can substantiate their claims in 

their CATI, and they are never contacted. 

 And rightly -- I will say, you 

know, I don't expect that that would be 

necessary in all or even a lot of cases, 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 

 94

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

it surprised me when, you know, the answer is 

a handful have been contacted. 

 The other -- I think the other 

thing out there is we asked for information on 

incidents. And now, the way we are addressing 

incidents is -- in my opinion -- this is my 

opinion, but -- and it certainly wouldn't 

apply for every case. 

 But it seems that incidents are 

being addressed now by revising the template 

for the DR report, saying that the methods we 

employed, you know, are overestimating 

techniques that bound any incidence that you 

may have been involved with, including those 

listed on your CATI report. That, to me, is a 

little bit concerning that, you know, if 

people really had issues about certain 

incidents. 

 On some, I think the thread -- it 

may be important to pull the thread. 

Certainly, again, I agree that in all cases 

many of these incidents are, you know, 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 

 95

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

commonplace and it is -- you can look at them 

and say, okay, you know, we know we've got 

urinalysis data after that fact, and, you 

know, there are several reasons why. 

 But when it's addressed in sort of 

this generic form language, I think that 

creates another perception problem that, you 

know, they didn't even look into this at all. 

 They just sort of threw some template form 

language back at me that says it's addressed, 

trust us, you know? 

 So I think there are still some 

outstanding issues beyond the question of it 

just, you know, being up to the claimant to 

provide the information, that it is a test, 

that is an issue. But I think there are some 

other things. 

 So, that's all I have. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I looked through 

the information, and also the -- part of the 

transcript from -- that discussed some of this 

-- I think Wanda sent down, which I 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 

 96

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

thought was very, very helpful. And I think 

one of the problems with the -- making 

comments on the interview script per se is 

that this is -- there is both sort of content 

issues and there is also process issues. 

 And I think, Mark, that you had 

made that point very well in the discussion. 

And that it is very hard to sort of, you know, 

figure out where certain things are addressed 

in the process. And details of one point may 

not be appropriate. They may be helpful to 

get them later. But this -- then, what 

assurance is there that there will be followup. 

 And I just also think that there is 

a terrible amount of frustration with the -- 

with that initial interview document, both the 

letter that goes out, the way it is handled, 

and the fact that in the case of survivors 

they may not be familiar, and the people 

interviewing them are not familiar with the 

site. And so it -- I think that raises 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 

 97

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

number of problems. 

 I think that procedurally this is 

best handled within our procedures work group. 

 What we had planned before the weather 

disrupted was for the procedures work group -- 

because you are going over other procedures 

and are familiar with sort of the context and 

reviewing the context for some of them -- for 

them to come back and discuss this and come 

back with a recommendation to the Board. 

 And I think we -- if I understand 

right, we have time now. That was my 

understanding of the letter and doing it in 

that way. We have specific comments we can 

put in, but I am little hesitant to -- because 

you have already discussed a lot of the 

process part of it, and I think we need both 

-- I think part of the comments included need 

to be put in the context of the process, with 

some agreement for NIOSH, if there are going 

to be changes in the process to address some 

concern that we -- you know, that that 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 

 98

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

firmed up, so that we know it is going to 

occur. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Thank you. 

 And I should note that -- or maybe repeat 

that in fact we do have time to do it the way 

we had originally talked about before we got 

snowed as it were. 

 And just to follow up, Mark, on 

your comment, because as you commented I was 

looking at the actual questions that -- and, 

interestingly, it says this. "We will try to 

speak with your supervisor, co-workers, and 

others who will help us confirm your dose 

reconstruction." It says that in the -- just 

prior to the question where it asks them to 

name these people. 

 It sounds like a commitment by 

NIOSH to do that. So this is part of what the 

problem is, and I don't think that was -- I 

think when it first was written that probably 

was the intention, but it turns out it is 

usually not necessary to do that with the co-
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

worker models. 

 Wanda, you have an additional 

comment? 

 MEMBER MUNN: Well, after you have 

done 35,000 interviews, you know, you have to 

wrinkle your eyes, and also remember the fact 

that we are not talking about a single 

interview form here. We are talking about two 

different interview forms, one for claimants 

and one for survivors. 

 And the -- a great deal of concern 

has been heard from survivors regarding their 

confusion about what they should do and what 

they should not do. The survivors themselves 

are in an entirely different mental state than 

a live claimant, who would have different 

expectations of what might come through there. 

 But as we discussed in the 

procedures work group, in one of our earlier 

work groups where we had been reviewing 

finalized letters that went out to disallowed 

SECs, we had suggested that the tenor 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 

 100

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

letter be changed markedly, because it was 

very -- it would seem to be unduly harsh and 

bureaucratic in style, and I think that was 

well taken at that time and was actually 

undertaken as a correction to the process. 

 That was one of the items that we 

also talked about here. The tenor of the 

letter itself perhaps needs more attention 

than the actual questions on the CATI. That 

was just a part of our deliberations in 

procedures. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Well, I am 

wondering if, then, the original path forward 

wouldn't still apply then, and that is for a 

procedures work group to put this on the 

agenda for their next meeting. And, again, 

although we would expect a recommendation from 

them for the Board to act on, it nonetheless 

would be helpful if Board -- other Board 

members who are not on the work group would 

provide comments. 

 If you have particular items 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 

 101

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

have sort of jumped out at you as being of 

concern, I think the work group would find 

that helpful -- Wanda, would it not -- to get 

some additional input from other Board 

members, in advance of a final discussion. 

 MEMBER MUNN: I would reiterate the 

request that I made twice by e-mail -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

 MEMBER MUNN: -- that all Board 

members who have any interest in this go 

through the documents, provide some -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Provide those 

comments. 

 MEMBER MUNN: -- they have to Mr. 

Katz and to me, and we will see that they are 

brought to the procedures group. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you. Any 

further discussion on this? 

 (No response.) 

 I don't think we need a formal 

action, since the previous action or the 

previous approach that the Board delineated 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

now can proceed, and we will look forward to a 

final resolution of this in the hopefully 

foreseeable future. 

 Okay. Thank you. 

 Next, we have new SC&A tasks. 

Well, we have already tasked SC&A several 

items in this meeting. There is one document 

-- and, John, I'd like you to take a minute 

and just remark on it. Everybody should have 

received from SC&A a document entitled -- I 

guess it's entitled Planning for New Work 

Assignments. There is a cover letter with it 

from John. It's dated February 10th. It 

says, "Material for consideration by the Board 

regarding new work for SC&A." 

 It's a nice summary that I am 

hopeful SC&A will provide for each of our 

Board meetings as an update, which gives us 

both budget information and tasking things 

that have occurred and things that may be on 

the horizon. 

 John, if you would come to 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 

 103

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

table and give us a brief overview of this 

document. 

 MEMBER ROESSLER: Is this a Word 

file dated February 10th? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: This was -- yes, 

it was a Word file e-mailed to us. Okay. 

 DR. MAURO: Yes. This is a Word 

file that I sent out. In fact, I worked with 

Ted in putting it together as being something 

that you folks might find useful. The most 

important aspect of it is on page 3, and that 

is the page where I summarize -- first, if 

everyone has page 3 in front of them, you will 

see it is pretty straightforward. 

 The first row simply says, "This is 

the amount of resources that are in our 

contract for this year," which will end at the 

end of December -- 3.4 million. Now, the next 

series of items -- the $400,000 number, the 

340,000, those series of numbers are, for all 

intents and purposes, work that has already 

been obligated, whereby, for example, 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 

 104

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

$400,000 value is -- that is the amount of 

work that we are carrying over from last year. 

 In other words, this is the work 

that goes toward all of those activities, 

closing out procedures, issues, all of the 

issues resolution work. When all is said and 

done, that is what it really comes down to is 

a lot still needs to be done. And we -- that 

is our estimate. 

 So for all intents and purposes, 

unless the Board decides to cut back a bit on 

some of the closeout, or we find ways to get a 

little bit more efficient, for example, in 

closing out, we estimate that $400,000 is 

going to be needed to close out all of the 

work that was done up through the end of the 

last contract. 

 The next line item is that 

$342,000. That is a number that is going to 

be changing regularly. This is the amount of 

work that, under the new contract that started 

February 1st for SC&A, that the Board has 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

already authorized us to work on. This is the 

work that we have been asked to perform at one 

of the previous meetings, and, of course, this 

is going to -- number is going to go up in the 

next report, because you have already 

authorized us to do a couple of new tasks 

during this meeting. So that is the number 

that is going to be changing. 

 The next one down is program 

management, $500,000. By the way, the reason 

that is a large number is our participation in 

these full Board meetings, our accounting 

system, we bill it against that account. So 

we do -- for all intents and purposes, for 

SC&A to continue to perform its program 

management activities and support these full 

Board meetings, that money is obligated. In 

other words, that has to be spent in order for 

us to do what we do. 

 The next number -- $648,000 -- that 

-- it's my sense that we are going to review 

60 dose reconstructions this year, new ones. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

That is part of our scope of work, and I know 

that is -- for all intents and purposes, that 

has to be done, that will be done, so I put 

this in as effectively obligated resources. 

 Which leads us to the number that 

says 1.89 million. That means as of this 

date, for all intents and purposes, the Board 

has committed SC&A to spend effectively $1.89 

million. 

 And that leads us to the last 

number, which I like to call discretionary 

funds. Right now, the Board has available to 

it approximately $1.59 million to draw down 

from. That is, that is the resources 

available. So at every meeting you will get 

an update of this, so that you have a good 

one-page feel of how much resources is left. 

 But, then, the following pages, 

which go on quite a bit, and I'm not going to 

go into detail. For example, the next one is 

a list of all of the unreviewed and new site 

profiles and AWEs that have not yet been 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

reviewed. That is, they're out there, they 

are sitting on the web, that were not reviewed 

yet. So it is a menu, so to speak. 

 And what I have indicated -- and I 

am only going -- and I have a sheet like this 

for PERs, I have a sheet like this for 

procedures. So, in effect, you will have an 

idea of what has not been reviewed, what is 

sitting out there on the website by way of 

site profiles, by way of PERs, by way of 

procedures, that have not yet been reviewed. 

 And to give you an idea of their 

importance -- for example, on this page I 

indicate, for example, Pacific Northwest 

Laboratory is a -- has 424 cases. We have not 

reviewed that site profile, and we estimate 

that to perform that review will cost about 

$70,000. 

 So, in effect, what you have is 

what I see as a high level view of work that 

the Board may or may not want done, set its 

priorities, decide what is important, what 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 

 108

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

not, and where you would like to invest those 

resources. So this series of tables lays all 

of that out. What work is out there that you 

might or might not want to be done, how much 

that work for our best estimate at this time 

will cost, and how much resources is left this 

year in order to do that work. 

 I thought this would be useful for 

you folks to decide what type of work you 

would like done. One of the things that is 

not in here that is very important is SECs. 

We have no way of knowing, you know, which 

ones might or might not -- the Board might 

want reviewed. We do not have the list. 

 You know, so as the new SEC 

positions emerge from meetings like this, you 

know, you -- I presume that is going to be a 

high priority item. So, and keep in mind that 

a full SEC review typically costs on the order 

-- so when you authorize us to do a full SEC 

review, it typically costs about $100,000 to 

$150,000. So, and I know that's very high 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

priority to the Board, to stay in front of 

those SEC issues. So I guess that -- and that 

is in the cover letter, by the way. 

 So I don't have a table in here 

listing all of the unreviewed SECs that are -- 

because that is something we are not in a 

position to put into a table. So you'll want 

to keep that in mind. 

 And I am hoping that if you found 

this -- or find this to be useful, I will 

update you a couple of weeks before every full 

Board meeting. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Regarding the 

SECs -- and, John, this is very helpful. 

Thank you very much. 

 Regarding the SECs, we do have a -- 

we have the 180-day period that we know in 

advance when something has qualified, so we do 

know a little bit what is coming down the 

pike, and perhaps that listing of upcoming 

SECs could be included each time from -- for 

example, LaVon gave us today the next group 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

that have qualified and that are coming down 

the pipeline. So we have the -- roughly a 

six-months notice of what is there. 

 DR. MAURO: The reason they are 

there, though, we don't know whether they are 

going to be recommended for -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

Understood. But I am just saying that we 

could have that -- well, LaVon gives it to us. 

 But in any event, that is a changing picture, 

and we don't know what will come in. 

 Thank you very much. 

 Are there questions or comments for 

John? Yes. Dr. Roessler? 

 MEMBER ROESSLER: John, I assume 

you have the personnel and the infrastructure 

in place to expend this -- to be able to 

handle this kind of a budget? 

 DR. MAURO: When we put our 

proposal together for the new contract, we 

greatly expanded access to more resources. 

What we did was we brought in associates. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

These are individuals with lots of experience 

who have agreed that if the workload starts to 

grow we could draw upon. 

 Bottom line is we could -- 

3.4 million is the budget. We could handle 

twice as much work as that. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Other 

questions or comments? Ms. Munn? 

 MEMBER MUNN: Just a comment. It 

would be -- I may cut this out and plasticize 

it, because it is one of the things that one 

has a tendency to not have fully in mind at 

the time we would likely say, "Let's task our 

contractor to do this." 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

 MEMBER MUNN: And having this kind 

of numerical data in front of one keeps you 

sort of aware of the fact that there are real 

dollars involved here when we set about making 

these requests. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. And there 

is an annual budget, and we have some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 112

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

discretion on where we spend that money. And 

this will help us make those decisions in a 

more informed manner. So, again, it is a 

useful tool I think to assist the Board. 

 Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. I was 

intrigued by John's mention of new staff 

people, or new associates I guess is a better 

way of putting it. And those of us who weren't 

involved in reviewing the application have no 

idea who those people are or what their 

capabilities are. And I think it would be 

useful for us to have some sort of summary of 

that. And it is also -- in terms of work 

group and issues as they come up, and in terms 

of how we think about getting various 

documents reviewed -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: That certainly 

can be complied with. 

 DR. MAURO: I would be glad to 

forward it to you. It's a table, a large 

table, 11 by 17 table, in our proposal 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 

 113

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

lists everyone on the team. And you will see 

it greatly increases the number of folks that 

we had previously. I would be glad to forward 

it to you. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Why don't we make 

it available to all of the Board members. 

That would be excellent. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: And it would be 

even better if you could make it available in 

normal size, so that we don’t have to -- 

 DR. MAURO: Well, you know what it 

is? It has their qualifications in each of 

the areas. When you write these proposals, 

you like to say, "Here is the person's name, 

and here is his experience in this area, this 

area, this area." 

 MEMBER MELIUS: So it is a way of 

beating the page limit. 

 (Laughter.) 

 Smaller font, bigger tables -- 

 (Laughter.) 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: In any event, 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

we'll get you the material. That will be 

excellent. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. While we 

are talking about SC&A, and we have done a lot 

of tasking already, there is one item that 

relates to their tasking. And I distributed 

this I think last week. 

 We received a letter -- or, 

actually, it was an e-mail with a letter 

attachment that came from [Identifying 

Information Redacted] regarding Linde, with a 

specific request that the Board task SC&A to 

begin the review of the Linde SEC petition and 

the evaluation report. We have not tasked 

that, and one reason we haven't is the 

evaluation report has not been actually 

presented to the Board yet. Normally, we 

don't do that tasking until we hear the 

evaluation report. 

 But I did commit to [Identifying 

Information Redacted] that -- and her request 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

that I would bring to the Board her request. 

I did distribute it by e-mail to all of you, 

and the attached letter, which comes from -- 

was written on behalf of the Linde Ceramics 

facility and the workers there. 

 So, I bring that to you and ask the 

Board if you do wish to task SC&A at this time 

to begin this effort, or do you prefer to wait 

until the evaluation report is formally 

presented? And the evaluation report is 

available, but it has not been formally 

presented to us in open meeting. I believe we 

all have it, though. You should have it. 

 Josie? 

 MEMBER BEACH: I think we should 

entertain tasking SC&A with looking at that 

report. I also think that we need to possibly 

reenact the work group that was closed out. I 

don't know how Gen feels about that. She was 

the chair of the site profile, Linde group. 

 MEMBER ROESSLER: I agree with you 

on both points. I think since we have 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 

 116

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

evaluation report, and since we would like to 

get things moving as soon as possible, we 

should task SC&A -- and I agree with you on 

the work group. I would agree to continue as 

chair with the same work group. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Since the work 

group is familiar with the Linde site and 

materials, it would seem appropriate that we 

can -- if others found that -- did not wish to 

continue, they could be replaced. But I would 

entertain a formal motion to the effect that 

Josie has suggested and that Gen has 

suggested. 

 MEMBER BEACH: Then, I would like 

to propose a formal motion that we reenact the 

Linde group, and we task SC&A to look at the 

evaluation report. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Is there a 

second? 

 MEMBER MUNN: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: It has been 

seconded. Comment? Any comments? 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 (No response.) 

 We will vote by voice vote. All in 

favor, aye? 

 (Chorus of ayes.) 

 Any opposed? 

 (No response.) 

 Mike, if you are on the line, did 

you hear the motion? And do you wish to vote? 

 MEMBER GIBSON: Well, I'm going to 

have to abstain. I couldn't really hear 

enough of the discussion to know what I am 

voting on. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Okay, Mike. 

 We will e-mail you -- can we e-mail Mike with 

-- we don't actually need the vote at this 

time. Mike, it was a vote to proceed with the 

-- to task SC&A to evaluate the Linde petition 

and evaluation report. 

 MEMBER GIBSON: Okay. If that's 

the case, I vote yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you. And 

so the vote is unanimous to proceed with 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 

 118

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: And, Mike, the other 

part of this I believe is to reactivate the 

Linde work group. Is that correct, Dr. 

Ziemer? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. The Linde 

work group will -- that was evaluating the 

site profile or the equivalent of the site 

profile will have the responsibility for 

handling the SEC portion now. It will be the 

same work group chaired by Dr. Roessler. 

 MR. KATZ: So I raise this, Mike, 

because you were a member of that work group. 

 It is Dr. Lockey, Mike, Ms. Beach, and Dr. 

Roessler as chair. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: So we are tasking 

you with work, Mike, while you are unable to 

protest very well. 

 Okay. We will proceed. Are there 

-- while we are talking about SC&A, is there 

any other tasking that needs to be done for 

them today? 

 (No response.) 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 119

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 There is a sort of related issue. 

John pointed out when we had the report from 

the Subcommittee on Dose Reconstruction that 

they are ready to proceed with the next group, 

and expressed some concern about the delay, 

since the Board won't be meeting for a while. 

 During the break, we checked on the 

possible dates that the subcommittee would 

meet to review or to select cases versus the 

time when the Board would meet next by phone 

to affirm cases. And there still, it appears, 

will be a several week time lag between the 

date Mark has selected, which is early March 

-- that is not finalized yet, but early March 

-- and the Board's conference call on March 

31st. 

 So it has been suggested that -- 

and I indicated earlier that we can certainly 

empower the subcommittee to do the tasking if 

we wish to give them that responsibility. And 

I think it would be in order for us to do so 

to empower the subcommittee to make 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 

 120

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

selection of cases from the proposed list and 

assign or task SC&A to begin work on those. 

 If the Board believes that that is 

appropriate, we can certainly entertain a 

motion to do so. Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. I will move 

that on this one-time basis we task the 

subcommittee with selecting the next round of 

cases for review, and then tasking SC&A with 

that review. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: All right. You 

have heard the motion. And there is a second? 

 MEMBER BEACH: I'll second it. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Josie has 

seconded. Any discussion? 

 (No response.) 

 I will simply ask as part of the 

discussion that when the selection is made 

that the subcommittee inform the Board members 

of the selections, so that we have that 

information early on as well. 

 Are you ready to vote, 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 

 121

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: Mark? 

 MEMBER GRIFFON: I would just add 

that it -- you know, if we generate a list of 

cases for review, I will get them to all of 

the other Board members, but also to Paul to 

assign the teams, because you have done that 

all the time, so -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: So there will be 

a team tasking, but the actual work of the 

teams won't occur until SC&A completes their 

reviews in any event. So that will not be so 

critical at that point. 

 Okay. Josie, another comment? 

 MEMBER BEACH: It is related, but 

not -- go ahead. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. So we can 

do a voice vote on this. All in favor, aye? 

 (Chorus of ayes.) 

 Mike, if you heard any of that? 

 MEMBER GIBSON: No. Could you 

repeat it for me? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We were tasking -- 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

or we were authorizing the Subcommittee on 

Dose Reconstruction to task SC&A with the next 

group, without having to bring it back to the 

next Board meeting, because of the delay 

before that could be done. 

 So the motion was to authorize the 

Subcommittee on Dose Reconstruction to select 

the next set of cases and to task SC&A to 

begin work on them. And that was -- there was 

a motion to authorize the subcommittee to do 

that tasking on behalf of the Board. 

 MEMBER GIBSON: Yes, I agree. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you. 

 So the motion carries, and it is so 

ordered. 

 Under Board discussion, I have 

added to our annotated version that many of 

you have to return to the discussion on the 

Board's -- or on the DOE security plan, and 

the Board's role in the security issues. 

 I would like to -- and we have had 

-- we had a fair bit of discussion on 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 

 123

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

earlier in the session, and I would like to 

have the Board now consider how it wishes to 

proceed with respect to the DOE security plan 

and the role of the Board and its contractor 

vis-a-vis that plan. 

 It was quite clear during the 

discussion that there were concerns about the 

manner in which the Board's role was spelled 

out in the NIOSH security plan. And 

subsequent to that discussion there have been 

some inquiries made by our federal official as 

to what the legal issues were -- that is, 

discussions with counsel -- in terms of what 

the Board's legal stance could be on this in 

terms of whether or not -- let me just state 

it this way -- whether or not there could or 

-- could be, for example, a separate Board 

security plan, perhaps somewhat similar to the 

NIOSH but being its own entity, or something 

like that, including things such as the point 

of contact, and so on. 

 So, Ted, if you would frame for us 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 124

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

at least the boundaries as you see them, and 

then we can proceed from there. 

 MR. KATZ: Sure. I mean, let me 

clarify this. This really isn't a legal -- 

this wasn't a legal discussion, but a 

discussion with DOE actually to see what is 

workable and acceptable with them. And let me 

just preface it and say, I mean, I fully 

appreciate -- understand and appreciate the 

importance of the Board's independence. And 

it is not just a matter of practical 

independence, but also the perception, the 

image, of its independence. I think that is 

critical to the public's, you know, 

substantial trust in this Board. 

 So I did speak to DOE subsequent to 

the initial discussion of the Board on this, 

and they are very accommodating. With respect 

to, for example, the point of contact 

question, it is perfectly acceptable to 

Department of Energy for the Board to have, 

for example, if this is its wish, for SC&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 

 125

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

for each site -- for SC&A to have its own 

point of contact to serve both the Board 

members and SC&A in terms of making requests 

for information and access to the site and all 

of these things. 

 You know, the critical issue for 

DOE is that we still do the coordination that 

was envisioned in the current arrangement that 

we have right now. So there is not 

duplicative requests, and so that when things 

need to be coordinated they can be 

coordinated. But absolutely, however the 

Board wants to configure it, it can have its 

own point of contact, make its own requests, 

and so on, for access documents, etcetera. 

 So that was one point. And, 

secondly, there is no issue as far as DOE is 

concerned with respect to documents of the 

Board's, you know, policies for implementing 

its compliance with the DOE security 

requirements. 

 If the Board wishes to have its own 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

stand-alone documents that are not OCAS 

documents whatsoever, that is perfectly 

acceptable to DOE. If the Board decides it 

wants to, you know, modify the OCAS documents, 

whatever, that is all acceptable. I just 

wanted to make those parameters clear. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Thank you. 

 So it provides a fair amount of opportunity I 

think for the Board to delineate how it wishes 

to address these. So let's hear some 

discussion. Dr. Melius, Ms. Beach, Mr. 

Clawson. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Yes. I would 

suggest that we have a small work group work 

on this as expeditiously as possible to, you 

know, pull the other -- I don't know if we'll 

call it a policy or a document or at least 

what would be needed. Whether it's part of 

the OCAS document or how it is done I don't 

think is as important as we just delineate the 

procedures. 

 And to the extent they can rely 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 

 127

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

OCAS procedures, and so forth, in place that 

is fine. But I think it just -- the 

independence needs to be delineated, and, 

certainly, with SC&A for access to information 

and documents needs to be clearly spelled out. 

 But I think if we had a small work 

group that could work with SC&A on this. Joe 

Fitzgerald has already done a lot of work, had 

some very good comments on the documents, is 

familiar with DOE procedures. And I think 

working with Joe or whoever else from SC&A 

would be satisfactory. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Thank you. 

 Josie? 

 MEMBER BEACH: We had asked on 

Monday to hear from SC&A on how this is 

affecting them. Is it possible to do that 

now? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Joe is here, and 

we will hear from Joe in just a moment. Let me 

see -- Brad, did you have an additional 

comment? 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes. I just 

wanted to further expand on what Dr. Melius 

had already said. I think that would be a 

good idea. I think another thing that we 

really need to look at is we can understand 

the information, so we don't double request 

and everything else like this. 

 But that also means that when 

NIOSH, or even SC&A, go in and they do these 

site profiles that means that they need to 

give -- they need to communicate and give all 

of the information to the other groups. I 

think our biggest problem is there is not the 

communication that needs to be there. It 

seems like it is a little bit one-sided on 

things. 

 From what I've seen, at the site 

where I was at, and what NIOSH people 

understand this procedure to say, is two 

totally different things, too. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Thank you. 

 Joe, I wonder if you would mind 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

just making some general remarks. I don't 

think we need to go through the matrix or to 

-- we have all seen that. And I think we 

understand the concerns you raised, and there 

was a lot of agreement amongst Board members 

in any event. But do you have some additional 

comments that would help us as we think about 

this? 

 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. I think, 

first off, this has been a work in progress. 

And, you know, this notion of -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Get close. 

 MR. FITZGERALD: How is that? This 

notion of coordinating onsite activities I 

think -- 

 MEMBER GIBSON: Is anybody there? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: We are going to 

bring -- 

 MEMBER GIBSON: What is going on? 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Hang on. We 

are going to bring the speaker up here by the 

phone thing. We are still having problems. 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 

 130

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

know you are having problems hearing us, but 

here is Mr. Fitzgerald. 

 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, thank you. 

First off, you know, this has been an evolving 

thing. We started out I think with the Mound 

site profile, working with NIOSH trying to 

figure out how we could meet DOE's desire for 

a coordinated onsite review, meaning is there 

any efficiencies that could be gained, any 

duplications that could be avoided. And I 

thought that prototype worked pretty well, 

which probably led to some of the activities 

to kind of formalize this. 

 Now, in our comments, I think we 

were just pointing toward the future more than 

the present. At the present, under this new 

policy, I think we haven't gotten very far. 

We are probably, you know, just beginning to 

get into a number of new SECs and site 

profiles using this approach. 

 I don't think we have changed 

anything we have done before. I think what we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 131

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

have done, though, and done this more 

systematically, is to baseline our request for 

documentation against all of the documents 

that NIOSH has collected on the site to date. 

 Now, we have done that in the past, 

but not as systematically as we are doing now. 

 And the intent -- and this is something that 

DOE supports -- is to really make sure we are 

not asking for anything that has already been 

collected in the process. 

 And some of these evaluation report 

collection processes are very extensive, so, 

you know, this is the step I think Brad was 

referring to, which is there is a real need 

for SC&A to communicate with NIOSH, to make 

sure that we have the benefit of their 

listings, their holdings, before we submit 

something to DOE. And I think that is what 

DOE is looking for. 

 That is the heart, I think, of this 

process. Now, what we identified in our 

comments was some concerns about the interface 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

that we would enjoy at the site or that we 

have traditionally enjoyed at the site with 

DOE. And it is not so much the process as the 

advantage of having this iterative interaction 

with DOE that permits us to do interviews, 

collect information, in a very effective 

manner. 

 And I think the concerns we 

expressed in our comments were the filtering 

process may both slow that down and may cause, 

you know, communication issues and also maybe, 

just because you are going through these 

different steps, cause some misunderstandings. 

 And that is -- that was the caution 

I think we expressed in our comments. But the 

process of coordinating on site, I think we 

are already doing that. I think it has a lot 

of merit to it, and so far I don't think there 

are any issues. I think we have worked very 

effectively with the NIOSH and ORAU context. 

They have been forthgiving -- forthcoming with 

the lists of documentation and interviews 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 

 133

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

have done. 

 So I think that process is already 

working, so I would just tell the Board that 

that -- you know, that is the core of this, 

and the rest of it I think we just need to 

focus on what process would work effectively. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Very good, Joe, 

and we appreciate those comments. And as was 

indicated, part of the overall issue is also 

the perception from outside. And even when 

the process works good, and it could 

conceivably work very well even under the 

proposed NIOSH document, but there still is 

the perception that we need to deal with. 

 And I think it probably will do us 

well either to ask for a revision of the NIOSH 

document or to develop our own. The chair's 

preference would be for us to have our own, 

but I am -- that is just one opinion. 

 But I have taken the liberty of 

going through the NIOSH security plan and 

looking at how we would frame out our own 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

plan. And it appears to me that we can do 

this very readily. We could have a document 

-- it would look very much like the NIOSH 

document in structure. There would be some 

different identities. We would have our own 

points of contact, and so on. 

 And other than -- and it has to -- 

it has to meet the DOE requirements. And so 

it would have to go to DOE for approval as 

well, but it's -- it would appear to me that 

it would not be a difficult task to do this. 

And I had already talked with Ted about an 

approach. I just wish I had said this before 

Dr. Melius, so I could take credit for it. 

 But it is basically the same idea, 

and that is a small group, which would be, 

really, a work group that would come together 

and outline for us either a revision to the 

NIOSH document, a proposed revision, or a 

stand-alone document that would be the Board's 

security document. And it would spell out 

what the points of contact would be for us 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 

 135

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

the contractor. 

 This would be a work group that we 

would have. We would have SC&A sitting on it 

as -- with us as well, and probably could work 

this out between now and the next Board 

meeting even. I don't think it is a big task. 

 Brad? 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: But my question is 

now we have a document that sits before us 

that is already in place, and already has put 

-- been put in place. And through some of the 

phone calls that we have had, they do not 

represent what is basically in that procedure. 

 So until that time, how are we going to be 

able to function? Because from what I 

witnessed myself, there was a difference of 

opinion from the head of NIOSH to the points 

of contact of NIOSH of how this was to work. 

And this is -- this is a very difficult thing 

to be able to work through. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: It appears to me 

that in the interim we will have to proceed 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

under those existing documents. We will have 

to -- to the extent that Greg and Gina can 

help us when needed, and Joe and others, with 

SC&A, I think, you know, in a sense we are 

working under the existing plans in any event. 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: So -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: And then, I don't 

think we can avoid -- until we have our own 

plan that has been accepted by DOE, we are 

working within the existing framework. In a 

sense, we have been anyway, with or without 

those individual documents. 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: And I understand 

that, but there has been communications back 

and forth. There had been a letter of 

clarification to this procedure that all 

people weren't involved in. And I want to 

make sure that we are working to that letter 

of communication, because it -- the procedure 

created quite a bit of friction in any kind of 

a site profile, retrieving documents or 

whatever. 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 And we understand the basis of it. 

 But in the phone call that was discussed with 

Larry Elliott, I want to make sure that -- and 

John sent out a very good clarification of 

what that was. I want to make sure that we 

are working to that, so that we are all on the 

same page, because right now we have a 

procedure and we have a letter that basically 

contradict one another. 

 So I just want to be clarified that 

we are going to work to the procedure, but the 

clarification of what Mr. Elliott put out. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: I don't -- I 

can't comment on that. I don't know the 

answer to that. 

 MR. KATZ: I think I understand 

what Brad is saying. I haven't been privy to 

some of this. I think -- and maybe even John 

can provide more clarification than I can. 

But part of it is I think the letter of the 

current procedures would have SC&A at more of 

an arm's length in terms of point of contact 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

once things get going than the clarification 

letter. Is that right, Brad? Is that what you 

are discussing? 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes. Part of the 

thing is, the way the procedure reads out is, 

the way it read was that everything had to go 

through the point of contact for NIOSH, dah, 

dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. In the telephone 

conversation, no, that's not right, it was the 

initial site interview. After that, then SC&A 

would be able to start to function. 

 But if there was any allocation of 

any kind of DOE money, then we would have to 

work through the point of contact for NIOSH. 

That is what I wanted to make sure, because 

we've got a lot of outreach and a lot of 

worker information coming up, and I want to 

make sure we do this right. 

 MR. KATZ: John, do you -- I am not 

clear about the money -- the money point. I 

do know that it was relaxed, so that SC&A 

could have this iterative interactions 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 

 139

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

on their own without having to go through the 

point of contact, but -- 

 DR. MAURO: Yes. Brad, you hit the 

nail on the head. The procedures that are in 

place right now, both the plan -- the security 

plan put together by DOE, and the implementing 

procedures prepared, there is a level of 

granularity there that is not there that we 

clarified in a series of conference calls with 

Larry, and that I did the best I could to 

communicate that understanding to everyone 

regarding the way we understand that it would 

work. 

 And up until this point -- now I 

know things are changing now, which is, in our 

opinion, you know, to the advantage of the 

Board and SC&A, but the way in which it would 

work is as soon as the Board authorized SC&A 

to do any work, which would require data 

capture and a site visit, the first thing we 

do is to get in touch with the NIOSH point of 

contact, very first thing we 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 

 140

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 At that point in time, we are free 

to open up a communication with DOE for 

clarification purposes on ground rules, how to 

proceed, the types of material. But we do not 

have the authority to ask them to do any work. 

 In other words, we just gather information, 

so that, then, we can communicate to the NIOSH 

point of contact our needs, the people we 

would like to interview, the record searches 

we would like to perform, the records we would 

like to look at. 

 The way it is right now, how we are 

operating right now, we communicate that to 

the NIOSH point of contact, who then 

communicates it to DOE, and at the same time 

arranges for all of the sigmas and opening up 

all of the doorways that need to be opened up 

so that visit can be made. 

 Once we are there at the site, we 

are free to interact and communicate with the 

DOE representative, but we are not free to ask 

them to do work over and above that which 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 

 141

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

originally laid out in the original plan for 

the site visit. So, really, the essence of it 

was, as a contractor, we are not in the 

position under the current set of guidelines 

and -- to direct or ask -- or ask DOE to do 

work on our behalf. It is something that only 

NIOSH can do. 

 So that is the way in which we have 

been operating. That is the way we are 

operating right now, as of this moment. And 

until that protocol is changed as a result of 

any revisions to the procedures, that is the 

way in which we will continue to operate. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you, John. 

 And it is not obvious to me at this point 

whether or not such a plan that we are talking 

about solves that problem on the budgetary 

issue. I assume that DOE is using its own 

dollars for this. They are not back billing 

NIOSH or anybody, so they have a budget. Pat 

Worthington has a budget for this. 

 But the way it stands now, if 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 

 142

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

had such a document and DOE approved it, I 

assume that gives some sort of tacit approval 

for them to be able to expend from their 

budget for this activity. Is that correct? 

 MR. KATZ: Absolutely. I mean, 

they were very clear about this, that SC&A 

could serve as the point of contact, make 

requests for documents, requests for entry, 

all of those things. It would not require a 

point of contact from OCAS. 

 I mean, the only -- the only thing 

is if there are issues that arise that they 

need a federal person with their problems that 

arise -- and that could be the designated 

federal official, it doesn't need to be 

someone in OCAS. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Other 

comments? Did you have another one, Brad? 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes. I just 

wanted to make sure that we were clarified on 

that, because that is -- that is the issue 

that I had in mind, because even 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 

 143

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

perception we -- we need to be able to keep 

this independent, or so forth, and the 

questions already arise, everything going 

through NIOSH, and they are basically 

controlling what we were seeing, or so forth. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. Dr. Melius? 

 MEMBER MELIUS: But until then, we 

will operate as was laid out. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Yes. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I'm sorry, I got 

called out. But I don't -- I think what Ted 

just was talking about is -- can be made to 

work. I don't think it has to be the SC&A -- 

there can certainly be involvement from the 

NIOSH. I think we just need to have it 

outside the line of command of the OCAS 

program -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: -- to do that. So 

-- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: -- but much as 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 

 144

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

have handle the contract. I mean, that's -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: I think we are 

ready for a motion, and a motion would be to 

the effect -- I am going to use -- try to use 

the Melius idea, which while you were out I 

claimed was also mine, but -- 

 (Laughter.) 

 But the idea would be to have a -- 

 MEMBER MELIUS: I was patenting it. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: -- a work group 

that would make -- develop a recommendation to 

the Board either in the form of an amendment 

to the NIOSH document or a separate Board 

document, security plan, within the framework 

of the requirements of the DOE, and present to 

the Board, hopefully at its next face-to-face 

meeting, a proposed security plan, either a 

self-standing one or an amendment to the NIOSH 

plan. 

 And I would entertain a motion to 

that effect. And if the motion passes, we 

will populate the work group. And who made 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 145

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

the motion? Phil? 

 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: I think actually 

Jim -- I will make the motion for the work 

group. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Phil 

Schofield has made a motion that we establish 

a work group to do what the chair has just 

described. And Brad -- 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: I second it. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: -- seconded it. 

Is there further discussion? 

 (No response.) 

 If not, I am going to ask for, 

first of all, volunteers. I want to keep this 

small, so I don't want six -- you know, two or 

three people, so that we can get the meeting 

done quickly. Are you -- Josie, are you 

volunteering? 

 MEMBER BEACH: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: And Mr. Presley 

is volunteering. And Brad. The three of you, 

and Ted will work with them. And who will -- 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

 146

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

Joe, will you be the contact from SC&A to work 

with this group? 

 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. And OCAS 

will certainly be welcome to sit in on this, 

whoever they wish to provide I think will be 

fine. We are not appointing Joe. I was 

really asking who SC&A would provide for this 

activity. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: But it should be 

Joe. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Brad, will you be 

willing to chair this activity with -- 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Sure. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: -- your two 

colleagues there? And we will ask you to try 

to get it underway as soon as possible. I am 

going to provide you some ideas that I have 

independently, but keep us all informed and we 

would like to move this along as rapidly as 

possible. 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: 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 

 147

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Thank you very 

much. 

 MEMBER MUNN: Call the question. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Oh, we do need to 

vote. 

 (Laughter.) 

 Okay. Well, I'm just moving along 

so fast. Did you miss the vote, John? 

 (Laughter.) 

 Okay. All in favor of the motion, 

say aye. 

 (Chorus of ayes.) 

 Any opposed to the motion? 

 (No response.) 

 And, again, I don't know, Mike 

Gibson, if you heard all of those 

deliberations. It was -- are you on the line, 

Mike? 

 MEMBER GIBSON: I'm here, Paul, but 

I'm not sure what we're voting on. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Well, what 

we have done is we had a motion to establish 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 

 148

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

work group to develop a Board security plan, 

which would provide some independence for the 

Board from the NIOSH security plan. And Ms. 

Beach and Mr. Clawson and Mr. Presley have 

volunteered to serve on a work group for such 

a -- on the work group, which we just called 

for the vote. It was unanimous here. 

 But if -- for the record, we would 

be pleased to have you vote as well. 

 MEMBER GIBSON: I vote yes, but I 

would also like to volunteer if you need me. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Yes, we 

can certainly put your name in as the 

alternate. Okay. But we are going to need to 

move very rapidly on this, so -- 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: We don't need -- 

this doesn't need a security clearance, to be 

able to discuss this. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: No. You do not 

need a security clearance to be on this group. 

 No. This is just to develop the plan. 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: 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 

 149

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Right. 

 Future meetings. We all have the 

schedule. We don't need to add any right now, 

do we? 

 MR. KATZ: We do not need to add 

any meetings. And I also do not believe we 

need to pin down any more locations at this 

point -- 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. 

 MR. KATZ: -- because we are 

scheduled with locations all the way until 

next February. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Let's take 

IT arrangements. Give us -- question first. 

 MEMBER ROESSLER: One question on 

the Amarillo meeting. On the Amarillo 

meeting, do you know what time it will start? 

 MR. KATZ: I don't know. Until we 

have sort of a sense of the agenda, it is hard 

to -- I just haven't looked. I don't know at 

this moment, but I can get something out soon 

on that. I don't even know what day 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 

 150

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

week it begins on. 

 MEMBER MELIUS: Do we have the 

locations for the October meeting? 

 MR. KATZ: October we do. I 

believe we are going to be in Port Jefferson. 

 This is -- Long Island. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Brookhaven area. 

 MR. KATZ: Brookhaven area, right. 

 Because there is an SEC -- Brookhaven SEC 

that should be -- Brookhaven, right. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. IT 

arrangements? 

 MR. KATZ: Just very quick. So all 

of the Board members I believe at this point 

but two are fully ready for their laptops when 

Dell should provide them. And then, it is 

amazing the government has worked ahead of the 

private sector here. But, so that is what -- 

we are still awaiting the computers is the 

main hang-up. 

 And just related to the Board, of 

course, SC&A we have got processes underway 
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 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

for that quite big job of getting them all 

lined up as well. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Any 

questions on IT? 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: One of my 

questions was is I have been told that no more 

information is going on to the -- our O drive 

at this time for -- for this. It was told to 

me that until we start -- nothing new was 

going to go onto the O drive. It was going to 

go onto the new system. I need to make sure. 

 Is that correct, or -- 

 DR. NETON: I'm not aware of any 

restrictions on adding new information to the 

O drive at this time, so I'm not sure where 

that came from. 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Well, maybe this 

kind of came from the Pantex part of it, but 

they were saying that we were going to be 

switching over to this new system, and that no 

new data would be put on there. And I need to 

make sure that is not so, 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 

 152

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

 MR. KATZ: They may be switching, 

you know, the arrangements, I know, and I 

don't -- I don't really follow O drive, K 

drive, what have you. But there is certainly 

going to be full Board access until we -- 

until the Board is inside the CDC firewall. 

So there will be no interruption in Board 

access, I can assure you that. 

 MEMBER CLAWSON: Okay. That's all 

I need to make sure. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Phil? 

 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Any idea when 

this is going to take place, that we will 

actually start -- 

 MR. KATZ: Well, I just inquired as 

recently as last week with Dell, I mean, 

through CDC to Dell, and they were thinking 

that towards the end of the month they would 

get the computers in. But then, the CDC IT 

people have to load software, security 

encryption, and all that business onto these 

things, and then we will ship them out to 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 

 153

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

 And, quite frankly, CDC -- it could take them 

a while to get that done. 

 CHAIRMAN ZIEMER: Okay. Are there 

any other items that need to come before this 

Board today? 

 (No response.) 

 There being none, I will declare 

the meeting adjourned. 

 Thank you all very much. 

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter was 

adjourned at 11:54 a.m.)