1

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL

+ + + + +

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL

SAFETY AND HEALTH

+ + + + +

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND

WORKER HEALTH

+ + + + +

113th MEETING

+ + + + +

TUESDAY

OCTOBER 4, 2016

+ + + + +

The meeting convened via 

teleconference at 11:00 a.m., Eastern Time, James 

M. Melius, Chairman, presiding.
2

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

PRESENT:

JAMES M. MELIUS, Chairman

HENRY ANDERSON, Member

JOSIE BEACH, Member

BRADLEY P. CLAWSON, Member

R. WILLIAM FIELD, Member

DAVID KOTELCHUCK, Member

RICHARD LEMEN, Member

JAMES E. LOCKEY, Member

WANDA I. MUNN, Member

JOHN W. POSTON, SR., Member

DAVID B. RICHARDSON, Member

GENEVIEVE S. ROESSLER, Member

PHILLIP SCHOFIELD, Member

LORETTA R. VALERIO, Member

PAUL L. ZIEMER, Member

TED KATZ, Designated Federal Official

REGISTERED AND/OR PUBLIC COMMENT PARTICIPANTS

ADAMS, NANCY, NIOSH Contractor

AL-NABULSI, ISAF, DOE

BARRIE, TERRIE

BARTON, BOB, SC&A

FITZGERALD, JOE, SC&A

HINNEFELD, STU, DCAS

KINMAN, JOSH, DCAS

KOTSCH, JEFF, DOL

LIN, JENNY, HHS

MCKEEL, DAN

NETON, JIM, DCAS

RUTHERFORD, LAVON, DCAS

STIVER, JOHN, SC&A
3

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

Contents

No table of contents entries found.
4

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

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

2 11:01 a.m.

3 MR. KATZ: So let's get started. This 

4 is the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

5 Health, our teleconference between face-to-face 

6 meetings. The agenda for today is on the NIOSH 

7 website, not a lot of materials, although we're 

8 going to be discussing the dose reconstruction 

9 report at some point, and that is not yet posted 

10 but will get posted late to the website so people 

11 can, if you're interested, you can go look at that 

12 after our discussion.

13 Roll Call

14 Roll call, onto roll call. We don't 

15 have any conflict of interest actions, related 

16 actions today, any actions where a Board Member had 

17 a conflict, so I don't need to run through the Board 

18 Members conflicts for this call, but -- and I have 

19 Dr. Melius here. 

20 I'm just going to run through the rest 

21 of -- I've also got Dr. Kotelchuck here and Ms. 

22 Munn. Dr. Poston notified me that he won't be able 
5

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 to make this meeting, and I'll run through the rest 

2 of roll.

3 (Roll call)

4 MR. KATZ: Let me remind everyone on 

5 the phone, please mute your phones except when 

6 you're addressing your group. If you don't have 

7 a mute button, press *6 to mute your phone, and you 

8 press *6 again to take yourself off mute. Dr. 

9 Melius? 

10 Welcome

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank you. 

12 Welcome, everybody, and I'll start the agenda by 

13 turning it back over to Ted for the final tally from 

14 our August Board meeting vote.

15 August Board Meeting Final Vote Tallies

16 MR. KATZ: Right, thank you. So at the 

17 August Board meeting, we had two completed actions 

18 by the Board on SECs, one for Blockson Chemical 

19 Company. These are both for residual periods for 

20 Blockson Chemical Company and Westinghouse 

21 Electric Company. 

22 And for both of these sites, we received 
6

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 the final votes from September 19, two absentee 

2 votes, Dr. Richardson and Dr. Lemen, and both of 

3 those votes were then unanimous concurring with 

4 NIOSH that for those residual periods, dose 

5 reconstruction is feasible. 

6 And we read the letter written for 

7 Blockson at the August Board meeting. We have 

8 prepared the Westinghouse letter since then. Dr. 

9 Melius, do you want to read it in? Do you want me 

10 to read it in?

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I can read it in.

12 MR. KATZ: Okay. Super.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: You sent me the right 

14 copy here.

15 MR. KATZ: Right.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, the Advisory 

17 Board on Radiation and Worker Health, the Board has 

18 completed its evaluation of Special Exposure 

19 Cohort Petition 00217 concerning workers at the 

20 Westinghouse Electric Corporation in Bloomfield, 

21 New Jersey under the statutory requirements 

22 established by the Energy Employees Occupational 
7

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, 

2 incorporated into 42 CFR 83.13.

3 The National Institute for 

4 Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH, has 

5 recommended that individual dose reconstructions 

6 are feasible for all Atomic Weapons Employees who 

7 worked in any area of the Westinghouse Electric 

8 Corporation in Bloomfield, New Jersey during the 

9 time period from January 1, 1950 through January 

10 31, 1958; June 1, 1958 through May 31, 1959; and 

11 July 1, 1959 through April 30, 2000.

12 NIOSH found that it has access to 

13 adequate exposure monitoring and other information 

14 necessary to do individual dose reconstructions 

15 with sufficient accuracy for members of this group, 

16 and therefore a Class covering this group should 

17 not be added to the SEC. The Board concurs with 

18 this determination.

19 Based on these considerations and the 

20 discussion at the August 9 and 10, 2016 Board 

21 meeting held in Idaho Falls, Idaho, the Board 

22 recommends that this Class not be added to the SEC. 
8

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Enclosed is documentation of the Board meeting 

2 where this SEC Class was discussed. 

3 This documentation includes copies of 

4 the petition, the NIOSH review thereof, and related 

5 materials. If any of these items are unavailable 

6 at this time, they will follow shortly.

7 Bliss and Laughlin Steel SEC Petition

8 Okay, so the next item on our agenda is 

9 the Bliss & Laughlin Steel for SEC petition, and 

10 this is the one we presented and talked about at 

11 the August Board meeting, but we had several Board 

12 Members that needed to leave during that time 

13 period, so by the time we got ready to take action, 

14 we did not have a quorum, so we postponed any 

15 further action on that until we got to this meeting. 

16 And so we'll start first with Jim Neton 

17 who made his presentation at the August Board 

18 meeting. We'll give an update on that, and I think 

19 -- I'm not sure these are quite the same set of 

20 overheads or PowerPoints that Jim did there, but 

21 it's something similar, and he's going to sort of 

22 walk us through that and then summarize where we 
9

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 are. So, go ahead, Jim.

2 DR. NETON: Okay, thank you, Dr. 

3 Melius. This is a brief presentation. I want to 

4 try to go through it somewhat quickly, but I will 

5 certainly answer any questions that come up during 

6 the presentation.

7 This is SEC 230. It's the same 

8 presentation that I gave at the Board meeting in 

9 Idaho except for slides 11 and 12, which are the 

10 methodology for reconstructing internal/external 

11 dose. 

12 They were changed slightly, although 

13 not really significantly as far as dose is 

14 concerned, and I'll talk about that when I get to 

15 those two slides. Otherwise, all of the slides are 

16 the same, and all of you should have a copy of this. 

17 I believe Ted distributed it about a week ago or 

18 so.

19 A little bit of -- I'll go on to the 

20 second slide, which is a background slide. Bliss 

21 & Laughlin is located in Lackawanna, New York. 

22 It's not a huge building, 129,000 square feet. 
10

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 That's essentially the size, length and width of 

2 a football field, a little bigger than that. So 

3 all of the work that was conducted at this facility 

4 was done in 3,230 square foot special finishing 

5 area, which is only about two-and-a-half percent 

6 of the total area of the building. 

7 In 1992, a Residual Contamination 

8 Survey was done by ORISE, and they found 

9 contamination within the special finishing area, 

10 but nowhere else on the site. All of their 

11 buildings were not found to be contaminated. That 

12 caused the site to be added to the Formerly Utilized 

13 Sites Remedial Action Program, the so-called 

14 FUSRAP program, to put it on the list for 

15 remediation.

16 In 1995, another FUSRAP site survey was

17 conducted by Bechtel. I think this was in 

18 preparation for doing the remediation, and they 

19 pretty much confirmed what ORISE discovered in 

20 1992, although the 1995 survey was much, much more 

21 detailed, and we'll talk about that a little later.

22 Going on to slide three, there was a 
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

1 Special Exposure Cohort petition evaluated for 

2 this site back in 2009. That was SEC 131. It 

3 covered the operational periods of 1951 and '52, 

4 and a residual contamination period of '53 to '98. 

5 I'll remind people the operational period was a 

6 pretty small scale project. It only involved five 

7 days of machining and straightening uranium rods, 

8 one day in April and four days in September-October 

9 of 1952.

10 The Evaluation Report looked at all 

11 workers, and NIOSH found that we could estimate 

12 dose with sufficient accuracy. The Board 

13 concurred with that recommendation and did 

14 recommend to the Secretary to add the Class, which 

15 was added in June of 2011.

16 Subsequent to that Evaluation Report, 

17 SEC 131, research showed the remediation 

18 activities actually occurred into 1999, so the site 

19 -- the residual period originally that was 

20 evaluated in SEC 131 ended in '98. There was an 

21 additional three months of remediation activity 

22 that occurred in 1999. That will be important when 
12

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 we talk about this next petition.

2 The petition SEC 230, moving on to slide 

3 four, was received in March of this year, and 

4 petitioned for all workers at Bliss & Laughlin from 

5 January 1, '51 through January 31, 1999. That 

6 included a piece of this new three month period that 

7 was not really discussed or voted on in the original 

8 SEC period, so that ended up qualifying the Class 

9 -- or not qualifying the Class, qualifying the 

10 petition for evaluation.

11 So we ended up evaluating, in SEC 

12 petition 230, all employees who worked from January 

13 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999. I said the work 

14 only occurred in three months of that first part 

15 of the year, but the way the residual contamination 

16 period was added was for the entire year, but really 

17 only three months of work were conducted in that 

18 one year.

19 Moving on to slide five, it's our 

20 standard slide about the number of workers involved 

21 here. There were 54 total claims for Bliss & 

22 Laughlin as of June. Ten had employment during 
13

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 this January 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999 

2 period, and the slide said nine dose 

3 reconstructions have been done. I checked the 

4 record this morning, and all ten of those have now 

5 been completed. And as usual with most residual 

6 contamination periods, we don't have any dosimetry 

7 records.

8 Okay, a little bit about the FUSRAP 

9 remediation that occurred in those three months in 

10 1999, it was done by the U.S. Army Corps of 

11 Engineers, scheduled on weekends. It started 

12 December 19 of 1998, just towards the end of '98, 

13 and was completed in March of 1999. 

14 They remediated the Special Finishing 

15 Area I talked about, that little two-and-a-half 

16 percent area that's in the middle of the plant, and 

17 they remediated the floors, the trusses, and 

18 utility trench. 

19 They did air monitoring throughout this 

20 entire operation prior to, during, and after the 

21 work activities, and there were samplers adjacent 

22 to the Special Finishing Area to make sure to 
14

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 monitor plant worker exposures. The FUSRAP 

2 closure report said no exposures occurred for plant 

3 workers.

4 Going on to slide seven, remediation 

5 activities, the overhead trusses were done on the 

6 weekend of December 18-19. The nearby equipment 

7 was covered. The trusses were vacuumed, and a 

8 Confirmation Survey was done in March of 1999.

9 On slide eight, the remediation 

10 activities for the floor in the Special Finishing 

11 Area occurred on the weekend of January 9 and 10. 

12 They did all of the work inside an enclosure with 

13 HEPA filtration. The floor was scabbled using a 

14 HEPA vacuum to remove the dust and debris, and it 

15 was resurveyed in March.

16 The trench in the floor began 

17 remediation on January 2. It was completed March 

18 13. And again, the work was performed inside an 

19 enclosure with HEPA filters. The trench was 

20 scabbled and jackhammered, and again using a HEPA 

21 vacuum. The confirmation surveys were also done 

22 in March. That remediation activity resulted in 
15

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 about 60 cubic yards of presumed contaminated 

2 material shipped offsite.

3 The feasibility determination, based 

4 on the information we have that the covered 

5 employees were not present for the remediation 

6 activities, and operations were conducted in hoods 

7 with HEPA filtration, and air sampling performed 

8 that showed no elevated readings, we concluded that 

9 exposure for this period would not be any higher 

10 that what we had previously evaluated during the 

11 previous annual residual contamination period, so 

12 we believe that dose reconstruction is feasible.

13 Slide 10 talks about how we're going to 

14 do that. The inhalation exposures between 1953 

15 and 1990 in the original Appendix D of the TBD talks 

16 about basing the estimated work contamination 

17 using the work contamination of '53 and the highest 

18 removal alpha activity found in 1992, which was 430 

19 dpm per 100 square centimeters. 

20 That derives a contamination depletion 

21 factor of 1.88E-4 per day. So we can assume that 

22 that 430 -- we assume that that 430 dpm per 100 
16

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 square centimeters that was surveyed in 1992 was 

2 also there in 1999 during the remediation period.

3 So onto slide 11, it essentially says 

4 that, that the entire area was considered to be 430 

5 dpm removable, this was not -- 430 was not measured 

6 throughout the entire special area, but only in 

7 certain spots, but we'll assume that that was 

8 present throughout that entire area. 

9 Using a standard resuspension factor of 

10 1E-6 in an eight-hour workday, we will assume that 

11 -- not assume but determine that there was an 

12 inhalation potential in 1999 of 2.88 dpm per day. 

13 That would correspond to an ingestion impact intake 

14 of 1.1 dpm per day. That number is slightly 

15 different than the one that was presented at the 

16 Board meeting. 

17 That was because this is sort of a 

18 legacy issue with the application of TIB-9, as 

19 we've seen at other sites. I went back and checked 

20 the calculation and modified it to be in compliance 

21 with the correct usage of TIB-9, so that number is 

22 a little -- it's higher, but it's still a fairly 
17

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 small ingestion rate of 1.1 dpm per day.

2 Moving onto slide 12, which is the 

3 bounding method for external exposures, the 

4 beta/gamma survey that was done in 1995 was a pretty 

5 detailed survey by Bechtel. They did what they 

6 call a five point survey. 

7 They did every corner of a square meter 

8 and then a point in between, which ended up with 

9 733 contamination measurements taken in that 

10 little small area. The 50th percentile of those 

11 measurements was 489 dpm per 100 square centimeters 

12 with the 95th percentile at 1731 dpm per 100 square 

13 centimeters. 

14 They did detect some hot spots. The 

15 highest hot spot detected was 280,000 dpm per 100 

16 square centimeters, which they zoomed in on it. It 

17 was much smaller than the square meter they 

18 measured. It was a spot very much near where one 

19 of the grinding machines had processed some of the 

20 uranium. But again, there were ten spots and 

21 280,000 was the highest.

22 If we use a beta dose conversion factor 
18

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 out of TBD-6000, that is 3.82E-08 millirad per hour 

2 per dpm alpha per square meter, you end up with an 

3 external beta dose, essentially a skin dose, of 3.7 

4 millirad per year if you use the 50th percentile, 

5 or 13.2 millirad per year if you use the 95th 

6 percentile.

7 Using a similar conversion factor 

8 that's in TBD-6000, photon exposures are much lower 

9 than that, and the numbers on slide 12 indicate that 

10 at 0.04 millirem per year at the 50th percentile 

11 and 0.14 millirem per year at the 95th percentile. 

12 So these numbers are fairly small. 

13 They're an extension of what would be used for the 

14 earlier residual contamination period. Going 

15 onto slide 13, given that, we believe that dose 

16 reconstruction is feasible for all forms of 

17 exposure at the site in that three-month period in 

18 1999, with the exception that we don't believe 

19 neutrons are applicable, so we wouldn't 

20 reconstruct neutron exposures, but everything 

21 else, we would.

22 That concludes my formal remarks. 
19

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I'll answer any questions if there are any. 

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any questions for 

3 Jim Neton?

4 MEMBER MUNN: No. Well done.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, I don't know if 

6 we have a motion pending or what. Ted, do you 

7 remember what we have?

8 MR. KATZ: Yes, we did have a motion 

9 because we actually attempted a vote before we 

10 learned that we didn't have a quorum.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, I think we were 

12 losing people as we got into the vote part of it.

13 MR. KATZ: Right.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So I believe the 

15 motion was to, you know, essentially agree with 

16 NIOSH's conclusion that dose reconstruction was 

17 feasible for Bliss & Laughlin Steel during the time 

18 period of January 1, 1999 through December 31, 

19 1999.

20 MR. KATZ: Correct, so I'll take the 

21 roll.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.
20

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MR. KATZ: I'll do this 

2 alphabetically. Dr. Anderson?

3 MEMBER ANDERSON: Yes.

4 MR. KATZ: Ms. Beach?

5 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

6 MR. KATZ: Mr. Clawson? Brad? I'll 

7 come back to Brad. Dr. Field?

8 MEMBER FIELD: Yes.

9 MEMBER CLAWSON: Can you hear me now?

10 MR. KATZ: Oh, there, I hear you, Brad.

11 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, sorry, my phone 

12 may have stopped.

13 MR. KATZ: That's all right. Thanks, 

14 Brad. Dr. Kotelchuck?

15 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

16 MR. KATZ: Dr. Lemen?

17 MEMBER LEMEN: Yes, sir.

18 MR. KATZ: Dr. Lockey?

19 MEMBER LOCKEY: Yes.

20 MR. KATZ: Dr. Melius?

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

22 MR. KATZ: Ms. Munn?
21

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

2 MR. KATZ: Dr. Poston?

3 MEMBER POSTON: Yes.

4 MR. KATZ: Dr. Richardson?

5 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes.

6 MR. KATZ: Dr. Roessler?

7 MEMBER ROESSLER: Yes.

8 MR. KATZ: Mr. Schofield?

9 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Yes.

10 MR. KATZ: Ms. Valerio?

11 MEMBER VALERIO: Yes.

12 MR. KATZ: And Dr. Ziemer?

13 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes.

14 MR. KATZ: So it's unanimous, and all 

15 attending, the motion passes.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, and I will read 

17 the letter into the record. Prepare to, again, it 

18 will sound familiar. The Advisory Board on 

19 Radiation and Worker Health, the Board has 

20 completed its evaluation of Special Exposure 

21 Cohort Petition 00230 concerning workers at Bliss 

22 & Laughlin Steel in Buffalo, New York under the 
22

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 statutory requirements established by the Energy 

2 Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

3 Program Act of 2000, incorporated into 42 CFR 

4 83.13.

5 The National Institute for 

6 Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH, has 

7 recommended individual dose reconstructions are 

8 feasible for all Atomic Weapons Employees who 

9 worked in any area at the Bliss & Laughlin Steel 

10 site in Buffalo, New York during the period from 

11 January 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999.

12 NIOSH found that it has access to 

13 adequate exposure monitoring and other information 

14 necessary to do individual dose reconstruction 

15 with sufficient accuracy for members of this group, 

16 and therefore a Class covering this group should 

17 not be added to the SEC. The Board concurs with 

18 this determination. Based on these 

19 considerations and the discussion at the August 9 

20 and 10, 2016 Board meeting held in Idaho Falls, 

21 Idaho, and the Board meeting held by conference 

22 call on October 4, 2016, the Board recommends that 
23

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 this Class not be added to the SEC. 

2 Enclosed is the documentation from the 

3 Board meeting where this SEC Class was discussed. 

4 The documentation includes copies of the petition, 

5 the NIOSH review thereof, and related materials. 

6 If any of these items are unavailable at this time, 

7 they will follow shortly. So it took us two 

8 meetings to get through that one, but it's done. 

9 Dose Reconstruction Review Report to HHS

10 Okay, then the next item on our agenda 

11 is the report to HHS. And the middle of last week 

12 or the end of last week, I can't remember exactly 

13 when, I circulated a revised report that 

14 incorporated nearly all of your suggestions and 

15 comments that we received from everyone. 

16 I think they're all, they're good 

17 comments, and helpful, and to that end 

18 surprisingly, I think we only had one or two that 

19 were somewhat in conflict, so I'd say they 

20 generally were incorporated. Thanks to Dave 

21 Kotelchuck and everybody else who worked on the 

22 report, and again, all of you that submitted 
24

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 comments.

2 I also included in that a draft, and 

3 this is, I think, the first draft that we've 

4 circulated, a letter to the Secretary. We 

5 transmit the report, but also it attempts to do a 

6 brief summary, essentially an executive summary of 

7 the report with some background and then, you know, 

8 a brief summary of our conclusions.

9 I don't think we want to try to edit the 

10 report or the letter, for that matter, over the 

11 phone. I think we would like to take comments on 

12 it. There are probably still some other 

13 corrections we need to make, and certainly, though, 

14 the letter is open to review since everybody's -- 

15 This is the first time everyone has seen 

16 the letter, and I'd be certainly interested if you 

17 think we need to be more expansive or less expansive 

18 with that summary, but it's a little hard to -- I 

19 tried to sort of be on the sort of the short side 

20 in terms of writing up the conclusions because 

21 really I don't think we have sort of the space. 

22 To do a longer summary I think sort of 
25

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 defeats the purpose of doing the letter, and I'm 

2 not sure that all of the data that was compiled in 

3 the report is of, you know, interest to the 

4 Secretary or the Secretary's office, but open to 

5 comments on that issue. And also, I think what 

6 we'd like to do is set some deadlines for people 

7 getting additional comments back to us for that. 

8 I did discover one interesting piece of 

9 information is that we've -- in our report and some 

10 of our previous correspondence about this 

11 Subcommittee, we had about five or six different 

12 names for it, so Ted became our official records 

13 keeper and checked and found out what the official 

14 name is in the charter was for the Subcommittee.

15 MEMBER MUNN: That's correct.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, so I at least 

17 tried to correct that in the report for that. So 

18 any comments on the letter or the report at this 

19 point?

20 MEMBER MUNN: This is Wanda. I have a 

21 couple of comments. One, I agree with you with 

22 respect to the summary to the letter. That, in my 
26

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 view, was very well done. The entire report is 

2 also in my view looking quite good. 

3 I have one comment that I believe I have 

4 made before. I feel it's necessary to make it 

5 again, and that is the final item in our 

6 recommendations. I'm a little concerned over the 

7 fact that we operate in a world of incomplete 

8 information and statistics and computer models 

9 which are by definition flawed, and for us to 

10 approach the potential attempt to eliminate 

11 judgment of properly trained qualified 

12 professionals is a matter which needs to be handled 

13 very delicately. 

14 These are folks who have information 

15 that is the best we can get and must be called upon 

16 to make some judgments. It's wise I think to 

17 approach it, but I think it needs to be handled very 

18 delicately and very carefully. 

19 I personally am extremely reliant on 

20 the judgment of people who have been trained to do 

21 this, and I rely on that training to be good and 

22 complete, and on the individuals to be fair and 
27

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 unbiased. 

2 So I don't have any comment with respect 

3 to the wording of the recommendation. I just feel 

4 this Board should be very cautious as we approach 

5 that.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I agree with you, and 

7 I think in certainly our discussions in the Work 

8 Group, and I believe otherwise, we've emphasized 

9 that. We're not sort of questioning the integrity 

10 or the background knowledge of the people doing the 

11 dose reconstructions, nor are we assuming that they 

12 are wrong in what they are doing. We just have an 

13 obligation to evaluate that and assure that they 

14 are doing the dose reconstruction correctly. 

15 And so, I mean that's, I think, the 

16 spirit that we've always done with this program, 

17 and I think with the recognition that this is a, 

18 you know, there's not always sufficient 

19 information or information that's -- all of the 

20 information that would be helpful to have is not 

21 always available, so I think I agree with that. I 

22 think most of the Board members agree with you on 
28

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that, Wanda. Any other comment?

2 MEMBER ANDERSON: This is Andy. I 

3 thought the summary was great. That was really the 

4 only thing I had to recommend in the last go around, 

5 and I think the letter and the summary and the 

6 report now fit together very nicely. 

7 MEMBER RICHARDSON: This is David 

8 Richardson. In the, well, I guess there's a one 

9 sentence final paragraph, but the paragraph 

10 preceding that in the letter, I wondered about the 

11 -- the first sentence in that paragraph says there 

12 are 232 individuals whose dose reconstructions 

13 were reviewed. 

14 There were 626 findings and 22, four 

15 percent, were judged to have potential for impact 

16 on the dose reconstruction. There are various 

17 ways of calculating that four percent, and I think 

18 it's sort of calculated from our perspective of 

19 like the Subcommittee which was interested in 

20 findings and classification of findings into 

21 different groups. 

22 But I wonder if the perspective that the 
29

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Secretary takes is the percentage of individuals 

2 whose dose reconstructions had an issue which could 

3 have significant impact on them. So that would be 

4 22 over 232, I think, as opposed to 22 over 626. 

5 And, I mean, it's never actually clear to me, I 

6 think in the report either, but I believe those 22 

7 relate to 22 different individuals. 

8 I could be wrong about that, but that 

9 seems to me, from the perspective of somebody who 

10 wants to make sure that people are being treated 

11 fairly as opposed to the classification of 

12 different types of findings, that would be the 

13 percentage we would want to quote. 

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I mean, I think we 

15 can clarify that, and maybe I think it would involve 

16 some expansion of, you know, another sentence or 

17 two in that paragraph, but they really are two 

18 separate numbers. 

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: They have different 

20 implications.

21 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes, I mean, what 

22 I'm asking is what you had heard from other people, 
30

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 versus --

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So what you're 

3 saying is the four percent was the one that was, 

4 say, I guess, more emphasized in the report, but 

5 you let me look at that and see if I can clarify 

6 that without getting bogged down in all of the 

7 details. Any other comments?

8 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Dave Kotelchuck. 

9 First, on the cover letter, I think it struck, 

10 excellently struck a balance between brevity and 

11 having a summary that was useful, so I really liked 

12 it. I had one small editorial change which I will 

13 just send in to you, Jim. It's minor.

14 As far as the 22, the 22 findings that 

15 may have had a significant impact may well be --

16 there may well be less than 22 people there. I 

17 venture some of those findings that had a 

18 significant impact may have been one or two 

19 findings or a couple of findings on some individual 

20 cases, so somebody ought to take a look at that for 

21 you, Jim, on, you know, our -- 

22 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Right, I agree, 
31

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Dave. I couldn't find that in the report, but to 

2 me, that's -- if what we're saying is we reviewed 

3 232 people's dose reconstructions, and if it's the 

4 case that we found 22 of them had the potential for 

5 some significant impact, we're saying there's 10 

6 percent of a very small sample for which we thought 

7 there was significant impact. And that's, you 

8 know, I couldn't parse that out from the report, 

9 but --

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: It's not in the 

11 report. It's not in the report.

12 MEMBER RICHARDSON: We're taking a 

13 small sample, and we want to get a sense of the 

14 validity of the information based on a small 

15 sample. 

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, I think another 

17 point there though is, and I think the reason why 

18 this is what's emphasized in the report, the 22, 

19 or the four percent, is that we're not, you know, 

20 looking at just the impact on that individual case, 

21 but the potential for other cases. 

22 So, and so the final finding, you know, 
32

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I actually think we have to be careful how we 

2 describe that, but I will look at that. If we 

3 don't, if the dose reconstruction -- and I didn't 

4 hunt through the -- I haven't -- I don't recall all 

5 of the tables, but we don't have that number of how 

6 many of the 232 individual dose reconstructions 

7 that there were potentially significant findings 

8 on. I think we need to ask SC&A to come up with 

9 that number for us. 

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes, I believe it 

11 will be less than 22.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, that's my 

13 assumption also, but, so --

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: But I don't know.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: John Stiver, if 

16 you're on, if you can follow up with your staff and 

17 check on that?

18 MR. STIVER: Okay, will do.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other comments?

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: This is Paul Ziemer. 

21 I also think the cover letter is just about the 

22 right balance of what we need. I have one item I 
33

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 think we might want to add to that. Where we talk 

2 about the fact that the reviews represent one 

3 percent of the dose reconstructions, that 

4 statement is in isolation. It might lend the HHS 

5 staff to believe that there's another 99 percent 

6 of things to be done, and I'm suggesting that we, 

7 and I'll send some wording on this, but I think we 

8 have to put in the cover letter the fact that we 

9 have established, it's in the report, that the 

10 Board has established the one percent goal, and 

11 that gives a framework for this statement about the 

12 one percent here. 

13 So that was the main thing that I was 

14 concerned about, that this stands in isolation 

15 without any background as to what the one percent 

16 is all about --

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

18 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- other than that's 

19 what we did, and I say, okay, we have 99 percent 

20 of our work ahead of us. No, that's not right.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

22 MEMBER ZIEMER: The other question I 
34

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 had, and again this is in the main body, I thought 

2 in Dave's earlier draft that we had said that --

3 and this has to do also with the one percent, but 

4 that was the -- and it's at the top of page 10 of 

5 the report, that the Subcommittee achieved the one 

6 percent, and that's what it says in the final 

7 report. And the earlier report said the Board 

8 achieved the one percent, and there's sort of the 

9 issue of who are we attributing this to? 

10 I know the Subcommittee does the actual 

11 work, and with the help of a contractor, but at the 

12 top of page 10 of the final -- I think I have the 

13 final version. The Subcommittee has never 

14 exceeded the one percent. I'm thinking it's 

15 really the Board that should get credit for what 

16 they do. 

17 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I agree. I agree.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And again, I tried to 

19 use appropriate references.

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: It seems like it got 

21 changed back. Because Dave, I think you had it as 

22 the Board in your version.
35

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I think I did. I 

2 would say that throughout the -- well, not 

3 throughout the text, but I haven't looked at that 

4 again. I originally said the Board, and then for 

5 some reason, I changed a number of them to the 

6 Subcommittee, and I think that was a mistake 

7 because ultimately it is the Board's decision, and 

8 the Board, if you will, approves the way we conduct 

9 our business. 

10 So A, I agree with you that Subcommittee 

11 should be Board, and I think we should take a look, 

12 and I would be glad to take a look in there, 

13 Subcommittee should really be replaced by Board. 

14 It is the Board that's reporting, and the Board has 

15 oversight on the Subcommittee.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And I think I tried 

17 to do that in this latest version, and I may have 

18 missed a few places. I also got the -- I was trying 

19 to pay more attention to what the name of the --

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: Right.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Right, so that was --

22 (Simultaneous speaking)
36

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- with my comment, so 

2 you can handle it, yes.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thanks, but I 

4 certainly agree with the comment to clarify the one 

5 percent as a goal, in meeting the goal. Any other 

6 comments?

7 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I have one more 

8 comment on the report itself.

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: On page 15 on 

11 recommendation two, on recommendations in general, 

12 we basically -- the first one said, "The Board will 

13 continue," the second one, "The Board will modify," 

14 and the third, "We should continue," so there's a 

15 quality of continuation, and so I had expected in 

16 recommendation two that we would give an example 

17 of how we might try to modify, and I was hoping, 

18 Jim, that you would do it. 

19 I have to say, I tried myself just as 

20 an experiment to try to put in a sentence about 

21 modification, the modification that we are 

22 currently experimenting with. I admit it was --
37

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 what is to say -- that is to say on number two, it 

2 would be nice to give an example, but I could not 

3 suggest or develop an example that didn't get me 

4 into a long song and dance, but --

5 And I just raise this with you in the 

6 hopes that someone else might be able to say 

7 something about the fact that we are changing, in 

8 other words so that the quality of the 

9 recommendations will continue. Everything is 

10 okay, will continue, will continue, except for 

11 number four, of course, recommendation number 

12 four, so I don't know how to leave it. 

13 I just maybe will make that comment, and 

14 Jim, if you could come up with something, or if 

15 others could, it would be -- I think it would add 

16 to it, but I could not. I could not do it 

17 effectively. 

18 MEMBER ZIEMER: This is Ziemer. Could 

19 I comment on that?

20 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

21 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, the modification, 

22 we've talked about how to do this more efficiently, 
38

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 but I don't think we've finalized this. It seems 

2 to me that putting something in the report that 

3 commits us to how we're going to do this might not 

4 be a good thing to do. I think just committing to 

5 the fact that we are determined to modify that is 

6 almost all we can say right now. 

7 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Well, we certainly 

8 have not adopted the change, although we've 

9 started. I'll report on it later. And it seems 

10 like it's working out well. Maybe we might think 

11 about something like, "The Board is in the process 

12 of modifying the review process to make it more 

13 efficient," or something like that.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, I mean, let me 

15 -- I'll work on it.

16 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay.

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: It's a tricky --

18 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: It is.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- area right now.

20 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: It is. I just 

21 want to give a quality that we're not sitting on 

22 what we're doing and saying we're doing a great job.
39

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

2 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: But that always 

3 one can improve, and I want to get that spirit in 

4 there.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, I agree. 

6 Other comments? If not, what's a reasonable time 

7 period for people to look at that and send any other 

8 comments back in, say, Friday the 14th or Friday 

9 the 21st of October? Will the 21st give you 

10 adequate time?

11 Yes. As I said, I know people have 

12 other commitments, including myself, so, but so 

13 let's aim for comments in to me by the 21st, and 

14 then plan to circulate this with an updated letter 

15 and report, and I think we should be able to 

16 hopefully approve this by our Board meeting at the 

17 end of November if that's agreeable.

18 Ted, I've lost the agenda now, so --

19 MR. KATZ: I've got it.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: No, I've got it, 

21 okay. Oh, the most exciting part of our agenda. 

22 Let's move on. 
40

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER LEMEN: Hi, this is Dick. I'm 

2 at the airport, and I have to get on my flight, so 

3 I'm cutting out. 

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Can't you tell them 

5 to wait?

6 MEMBER LEMEN: Well, I could, but they

7 for some reason won't.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Oh, okay, well, have 

9 a good trip.

10 MEMBER LEMEN: Thank you.

11 Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petitions Status Update

12 MR. RUTHERFORD: All right, let's move 

13 on. We will have one new Petition Evaluation to 

14 present at the November meeting. We will present 

15 an 83.14 for Santa Susana Field Lab. We do have 

16 two addendums, one at LANL and one at INL that we 

17 will be close, but I don't think they'll be ready 

18 for the meeting. 

19 Also during the last Board meeting, the 

20 Board asked for a status report of open SEC 

21 petitions. I'm preparing that report and plan to 

22 have it to the Board within the next several weeks, 
41

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 and that's all I had.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: How was the fishing?

3 MR. RUTHERFORD: You know, it wasn't 

4 good as the previous years, but anytime, you know, 

5 fishing is good, so --

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Oh, Henry said he and 

7 Brad caught a lot out in Idaho.

8 MEMBER ANDERSON: Catch and release. 

9 Hey, Brad, I really liked that video you sent me. 

10 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, well, that was 

11 just a couple of weeks ago.

12 MR. RUTHERFORD: Brad, I did a fly 

13 fishing trip in Idaho this summer, too, a great 

14 time.

15 Plans for the November 2016 Board Meeting

16 MR. KATZ: With respect to what LaVon 

17 just raised with these, the Santa Susana and then 

18 the two addendums that will probably come out late, 

19 for all of these, we have Work Groups, and so the 

20 question is -- I think it's okay, but it's up to 

21 really the Board, that these get presented to the 

22 Work Groups first and not have to wait on the Board 
42

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 meeting or following the November Board meeting, 

2 the next Board meeting, to get some consideration 

3 from the Work Groups.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think that's fine.

5 MR. KATZ: Okay.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I just think you have 

7 to just keep in mind so that the petitioners are 

8 in the process, and particularly so the full Board 

9 members sort of don't lose the input from the 

10 petitioners.

11 MR. KATZ: Right, and I think the 

12 scheme we've used before is, although they present 

13 to the Work Group in advance, they'd make a full 

14 presentation also to the Board, giving the 

15 petitioner opportunities in both places --

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

17 MR. KATZ: -- to comment.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

19 MR. KATZ: Yes.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

21 MR. KATZ: Okay, thanks.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, let us skip 
43

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 down to the next meeting since LaVon -- and then 

2 we'll come back to the Subcommittee reports and 

3 Work Group reports, okay? 

4 MR. KATZ: Sure, so let me just run 

5 through. I have sort of a draft with some 

6 uncertainties about some items, but it will give 

7 you a sense. I mean, the big picture is it looks 

8 like a day, not even a day-and-a-half, but a day 

9 and a morning or part of a morning meeting for the 

10 November meeting. 

11 This will be in Santa Fe. We don't have 

12 a hotel yet, so I can't give you that. So we're 

13 talking about November 30 and December 1, and let 

14 me just run through. So I don't -- I'll just talk 

15 about key issues in the agenda. 

16 I don't have a DR report session per se 

17 because I think we don't have much -- it won't 

18 require much time if we're just finalizing and 

19 sending out the report to the Secretary. I don't 

20 have a session for that, but I think we can handle 

21 it during work session unless you want it 

22 differently.
44

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think it should be 

2 listed on the agenda, but it can be, you know, in 

3 15 minutes or whatever.

4 MR. KATZ: Okay.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Tied into, you know, 

6 just before the Board Work Group session or 

7 something.

8 MR. KATZ: Okay, we're tight on time, 

9 but okay, I'll add that. Then going on from there, 

10 we have the usual suspects. In the morning, we 

11 have a review of the Hooker Site Profile by Dr. 

12 Anderson's AWE Work Group. They have completed 

13 the review, but there wasn't time for the August 

14 Board meeting to report out on that. 

15 We have the Carborundum Work Group is 

16 ready to report out on the SEC petition, so we'll 

17 have that session. Grand Junction is meeting 

18 tomorrow actually, the Work Group, so we'll know 

19 better where that stands after tomorrow's meeting, 

20 but they could be ready to report out, in which case 

21 we'll have a session for that SEC. 

22 We'll have an SRS update session, 
45

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 relatively brief, but just to keep on top of 

2 progress and schedules there. Then we will have 

3 -- for LANL, as LaVon just reported, they don't 

4 think they'll have their addendum out in time for 

5 Board consideration or action, but we'll certainly 

6 have an update on LANL, possibly with a preview of 

7 whatever that addendum is, depending on where that 

8 stands.

9 We also then, as LaVon reported, will 

10 have a Santa Susana addendum. That will be ready 

11 for action, and that covers the items I have. Any 

12 questions? 

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So just so everyone 

14 knows, the current timing on this is all day 

15 Wednesday, and then Thursday until about 

16 10:00-10:15, that time frame.

17 MR. KATZ: Right, and I'll, because I 

18 know people would like to get home that next day, 

19 I will shorten or lengthen the day on Wednesday to 

20 make that work.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

22 MR. KATZ: Depending on whether things 
46

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 drop off or remain of our potential items.

2 MEMBER ANDERSON: Where is it going to 

3 be again?

4 MR. KATZ: It's going to be in New 

5 Mexico in Santa Fe, but we don't have a hotel yet.

6 Updates from Work Groups and Subcommittees

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other questions 

8 on the November Board meeting? Okay, Work Groups 

9 and Subcommittee reports, Dave, you already 

10 volunteered.

11 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Right, well, the 

12 Dose Reconstruction Reviews Subcommittee is -- we 

13 started our first effort using the categorization 

14 of the cases in advance by SC&A and NIOSH. We 

15 started out with those that are easier to cover, 

16 so we did. I thought it went very well. 

17 We covered lots of ground, and 

18 generally members were pleased with what had 

19 happened, and so I would say that that experiment 

20 has started well, and we -- I think we really can't 

21 say we've completed it until we go through not only 

22 some of the category one cases, but the more 
47

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 difficult category two, but it's a good start. But 

2 we are meeting next on Tuesday, November 22.

3 I wondered if other members of the 

4 Subcommittee wanted to say anything about our 

5 experiment so far, the changes? Do I hear anybody? 

6 Wanda.

7 MEMBER MUNN: This is Wanda. My 

8 comment is that I was impressed with the enormous 

9 amount of energy and effort that went into 

10 producing the material, this first time. That was 

11 pretty awe-inspiring, and I think all of the staff 

12 that was involved in that gets a gold star.

13 It will be interesting to see, as you 

14 said, Dave, how this progresses as we get into the 

15 stickier wickets, but certainly the start was 

16 auspicious in my view, and everyone needs to be 

17 commended for the effort that went into that. 

18 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I'll second that.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, all right, 

20 next, any other Chairs of the Work Groups or 

21 Subcommittee wish to report?

22 MEMBER MUNN: Well, I can very quickly 
48

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 tell you that the Subcommittee on Procedures has 

2 not met since last May. All of the staff and 

3 personnel that were involved in what we're doing 

4 were very heavily engaged in other more significant 

5 items that are pressing. 

6 We are currently looking at where we are 

7 with respect to how quickly we can put together --

8 whether we have adequate material to put together 

9 a meeting toward the end of November or the first 

10 part of December after our Board meeting.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. 

12 MEMBER CLAWSON: Hey, Jim, this is 

13 Brad.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Go ahead.

15 MEMBER CLAWSON: I just wanted to 

16 mention that the Savannah River Work Group met 

17 September 26. We discussed with NIOSH, their path 

18 forward and where we're at on some of the documents, 

19 and we're just pushing forward with that. 

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank you, 

21 Brad. Anybody else?

22 MEMBER BEACH: Jim, this is Josie. 
49

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 The Mound Work Group met last Thursday to review 

2 and discuss Site Profile issues. We are really 

3 close to agreeing upon the internal issues, but 

4 we're awaiting NIOSH's report for external issues. 

5 So I don't think we'll have anything for this next 

6 meeting, but possibly the one after.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank you.

8 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Rocky Flats. 

9 Dave.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

11 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: LaVon has 

12 indicated to us that the data capture has been 

13 completed for the Critical Mass Lab, which was the 

14 one outstanding issue on Rocky Flats. So he hopes 

15 to have it finished around the time of our Board 

16 meeting. 

17 That being the case, I think we will 

18 have to -- we will need to schedule a meeting of 

19 the Subcommittee, and I think we might at that 

20 point, since Critical Mass Lab is the last issue, 

21 make a recommendation to the Board. And the Board 

22 meeting after Santa Fe seems to me that we can make 
50

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 a recommendation, we will be able to make -- I think 

2 we will be able to make a final recommendation to 

3 the Board.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, good. Any 

5 other Work Groups?

6 MEMBER ZIEMER: Jim, this is Ziemer 

7 with a brief report on TBD-6000. I just want the 

8 Board to know that SC&A has completed their review 

9 of Appendix BB, Rev. 2, which is General Steel 

10 Industries, and there appear to be a couple of 

11 issues with reports of NIOSH's, and we are awaiting 

12 NIOSH's response on those, so I'm going to assume 

13 we'll have that for determining what needs to be 

14 done in terms of any Working Group matters we have, 

15 but hopefully by our upcoming Board meeting, we'll 

16 know a little more and maybe be able to have an 

17 action report. 

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank you, 

19 Paul.

20 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Jim, this is Phil.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Hi, Phil.

22 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: On INL, we still 
51

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 have the outstanding issue of first responders, and 

2 we have some interviews with workers in November, 

3 so we won't have anything new to report at that 

4 time.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank you, and 

6 we had a short Work Group meeting also.

7 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Yes, we did. I 

8 forgot that.

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other reports? 

10 Okay, hearing none, I hope no one is struggling to 

11 get off of mute, but I think that finishes up our 

12 meeting. Anything else to report, Ted?

13 MR. KATZ: No, I think that takes care 

14 of it.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Is the Government 

16 still open for a while?

17 MR. KATZ: Yes, we have a lease on life 

18 until early December.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, not December 

20 1, I hope.

21 MR. KATZ: No, December, I think, 9 or 

22 something like that.
52

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, so we may get 

2 stranded in Santa Fe.

3 MR. KATZ: Yes, that would be terrible.

4 Adjourn

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, okay, anyway, 

6 thank you, everybody, and we'll see everybody in 

7 Santa Fe at the end of November. Have a good 

8 Thanksgiving.

9 MR. KATZ: Thanks, everyone.

10 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

11 went off the record at 12:01 p.m.)

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20 

21

22