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

+ + + + +

119th MEETING

+ + + + +

THURSDAY

OCTOBER 5, 2017

+ + + + +

The meeting convened via 

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

M. Melius, Chair, presiding.

PRESENT:

JAMES M. MELIUS, Chair

HENRY ANDERSON, Member

BRADLEY P. CLAWSON, Member

DAVID KOTELCHUCK, Member

RICHARD LEMEN, Member

JAMES E. LOCKEY, Member

WANDA I. MUNN, Member

GENEVIEVE S. ROESSLER, Member

LORETTA R. VALERIO, Member

PAUL L. ZIEMER, Member

TED KATZ, Designated Federal Official
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 

REGISTERED AND/OR PUBLIC COMMENT PARTICIPANTS

ADAMS, NANCY, NIOSH Contractor

AL-NABULSI, ISAF, DOE

BARRIE, TERRIE

BARTON, BOB, SC&A

BUCHANAN, RON, SC&A

CRAWFORD, CHRIS, DOL

FITZGERALD, JOE, SC&A

HINNEFELD, STU, DCAS

LIN, JENNY, HHS

NETON, JIM, DCAS

PRESTER, JOSHUA

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

Welcome and Roll Call............................. 4

August Board Meeting Final SEC Petition........... 6

Vote Tallies...................................... 6

Savannah River Site SEC Petition (1997-2007;..... 15

Aiken, SC)....................................... 15

Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petition........... 52

Status Update.................................... 52

Updates from Work Groups and Subcommittees....... 57

(as necessary)................................... 57

Plans for the December 2017 Board Meeting........ 60

Board Correspondence............................. 64

Adjourn.......................................... 65
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 

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

10:59 a.m.

Welcome and Roll Call 

MR. KATZ: Okay. Welcome, everyone. 

Welcome to Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health teleconference. Folks on the line, the 

agenda for today's meeting is posted on the NIOSH 

website under this program, the Board section, 

special meeting, today's date.

So posted there is the agenda for 

today and the only thing special, this is a 

traditional teleconference except for, you know, 

continuing the discussion on the SRS SEC, so 

that's one additional item.

And then I posted for everyone and the 

public the documents and presentations that we 

used at that SRS session, the August Board 

meeting, just for your convenience. And you can 

also get it from that meetings's date on the 

Board's website.

Other just administrative note, 

everyone who is not speaking, please keep your 

phones muted for the duration of this call. 
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 

There's no public comment session. And to mute 

your phone, press * and then 6. That'll mute 

your phone if you don't have a mute on your phone 

and for Board Members to come off of mute press 

*6 again.

So roll call, we have no Board 

conflicts for this site, so I don't need to 

address conflicts of interest with the Members, 

so I'll just run through the roll call, see who 

we have among Board Members, and I'll just do 

this alphabetically. I know a couple of Board 

Members who will be absent already, but let's go 

through the list.

(Roll call)

Any others? Okay. Welcome all of 

you. Let me just check, go back around and check 

on a couple of Board Members who might be joining. 

Dr. Poston, John Poston, are you on the line? 

How about Dr. Richardson, Dave Richardson?

Okay then, that takes care of roll 

call and administrative matters. Dr. Melius, 

it's your meeting.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes. I get to give a 
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 

long speech here. Welcome. And then I turn it 

back to Ted.

August Board Meeting Final SEC Petition 

Vote Tallies 

MR. KATZ: Thank you, Dr. Melius. So 

this is now actually to register the completed 

votes from the August meeting captured the 

absentee votes. So we had three actions in 

August.

The first Fernald site was a -- yes, 

SEC and Site Profile review. The SEC review was 

completed. The Board voted that the site, that 

the SEC, well, it voted to deny an additional SEC 

Class for Fernald for the final period covered by 

the petition. And the vote was 11 to 2, Beach 

and Lemen were 2. There was a lot more people. 

Dr. Lockey, one abstention, Dr. Poston.

INL, the Board voted to support the 

NIOSH recommendation to add a Class for CPP and 

that vote was 10 to 2, Dr. Lemen and Melius were 

opposed. There were two recused votes -- Clawson 

and Valerio, and one abstention, Dr. Poston.

And finally, Grand Junction SEC. The 
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 

Board voted 14 to zero, so unanimously with one 

abstention, Dr. Poston in support of the NIOSH 

Board Work Group recommendations that dose 

reconstruction is feasible and to deny the Class 

for Grand Junction. And those were the action 

that were taken up.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay. Thank you. 

Should I do the letters now?

MR. KATZ: Sure, yes.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes. Because we have 

and forgive me, I said one word before. I get 

lots of words now. We've got letters to go 

through.

With that, I'll start with Fernald, 

which is the Advisory Board on Radiation and 

Worker Health, the Board has completed its 

evaluation of Special Exposure Cohort petition 

00046 concerning workers at the Feed Materials 

Production Center, Fernald, Ohio under the 

statutory requirements established by the Energy 

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program Act of 2000 incorporating the 42 CFR 

83.13.
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 

National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health has recommended individual dose 

reconstructions are feasible for the following 

two groups of workers.

All employees of the Department of 

Energy, its predecessor agencies and their 

contractors and subcontractors who worked in any 

area of the Feed Materials Production Center, 

Fernald, Ohio from January 1, 1984 through 

December 31st, 1989.

And, two, all employees of the DOE, 

its predecessor agencies, National Lead of Ohio 

or NLO, Inc. in any area of the Feed Materials 

Production Center from January 1st, 1979 through 

December 31st, 1983.

NIOSH found it has access to adequate 

exposure monitoring and other information 

necessary to do individual dose reconstructions 

with sufficient accuracy for members of these two 

groups of workers and, therefore, a Class 

covering these groups should not be added to the 

SEC. The Board concurs with this determination.

Based on these considerations and 
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 

discussions at the August 23rd and 24th, 2017 

Board meeting held in Santa Fe, New Mexico, the 

Board recommends that this Class not be added to 

the SEC.

Enclosed is the documentation from the 

Board meeting where this SEC Class was discussed. 

Documentation includes copies of the petition, 

the last review thereof and related materials. 

If any of these items are unavailable at this 

time, they will follow shortly.

That's the first letter. The second 

letter -- Jenny, have you had a chance to review 

this letter? Jenny Lin?

MS. LIN: Yes, I'm here. What second 

letter are you referring to?

CHAIR MELIUS: The Idaho, INL.

MS. LIN: Idaho? Yes, I did review 

it.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay, good. So the INL 

was reviewed. The Advisory Board on Radiation 

and Worker Health, the Board has evaluated SEC 

petition 00238 concerning workers at the Idaho 

National Laboratory under the statutory 
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 

requirements established by EEOICPA incorporate 

the 42 CFR, Section 83.13.

The Board respectfully recommends 

that SEC status be accorded to all employees of 

the Department of Energy, its predecessor 

agencies and their contractors and subcontractors 

who worked at the Idaho National Laboratory, INL, 

in Scoville, Idaho and who were monitored for 

external radiation at the Idaho Chemical 

Processing Plant (that's CPP -- e.g. at least one 

film badge or TLD dosimeter from CPP) between 

January 1st, 1975 and December 31st, 1980 for a 

number of work days aggregating at least 250 work 

days, occurring solely under this employment or 

in combination with work days within the 

parameters established for one or more other 

Classes of employees in the SEC.

This recommendation is based on the 

following factors. The primary function of INL 

CPP during the period in question was processing 

spent fuel elements containing enriched uranium 

in order to recover un-fissioned uranium.

Principal sources of internal 
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 

radiation, for members of the proposed Class, may 

have been included exposures to uranium, mixed 

fission and activation products (MFP/MAP), exotic 

radionuclides produced from, or as a result of, 

reactor neutron irradiation and transuranic 

radionulides. Potential exposures would likely 

be from inhalation and ingestion during the 

processing operations.

 Routine monitoring of potential 

internal intakes of radionuclides was limited 

during this time period.

NIOSH's review of available 

monitoring data, as well as available process and 

source term information for this facility found 

that NIOSH lacked the sufficient information to 

allow it to estimate with sufficient accuracy the 

potential internal doses from exposure to 

transuranic radionuclides, to which employees 

working in this facility may have been subjected. 

The Board concurs with this determination.

And finally, NIOSH determined that

health may have been endangered for workers from 

chronic intakes of the radionuclides during the 
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 

time period in question. The Board also concurs 

with this determination.

Based on these considerations, 

discussions held at our August 23rd to 24th, 2017 

Advisory Board meeting in Santa Fe, New Mexico 

the Board recommends that this Class be added to 

the SEC.

Enclosed is the documentation from the 

Board meeting where this SEC Class was discussed. 

The documentation includes copies of the 

petition, the NIOSH review thereof and related 

materials. If any of these items are unavailable 

at this time, they will follow shortly. 

Finally, the Grand Junction, the 

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, 

the Board has evaluated Special Exposure Cohort 

Petition 00175 concerning workers at the Grand 

Junction Facilities site, in Grand Junction, 

Colorado under the statutory requirements 

established by the Energy Employees Occupational 

Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 

incorporating 42 CFR 83.13.

National Institute for Occupational 
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 

Safety and Health recommended that individual 

dose reconstructions are feasible for all 

employees of the Department of Energy, its 

predecessor agencies.

So its contractors and subcontractors 

who worked at the Grand Junction Facilities site, 

Grand Junction, Colorado during the period from 

January 1st, 1986 through July 31st, 2010.

NIOSH found that it has access to 

adequate exposure monitoring and other 

information necessary to do individual dose 

reconstructions with sufficient accuracy for 

members of this group, and therefore a Class 

covering this group should not be added to the 

SEC. The Board concurs with this determination.

Based on these considerations and 

discussion at the August 23rd and 24rd, 2017 

Board meeting held in Santa Fe, New Mexico, Board 

agrees with the NIOSH recommendation that this 

Class not be added to the SEC.

Enclosed is the documentation from the 

Board meeting where this SEC Class was discussed. 

Documentation includes copies of the petition, 
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 

NIOSH review thereof and related materials. If 

any of these items are unavailable at this time, 

they will follow shortly.

So, I believe that two of the letters 

that were circulated to the full Board just 

before the meeting and the third one we will 

circulate after the call. A little confusion on 

where the letters were and getting them together. 

So, okay. Anything else on that?

MEMBER ZIEMER: Question, Dr. Melius?

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes.

MEMBER ZIEMER: Just out of curiosity, 

do we know who the letters will go to at this 

time?

CHAIR MELIUS: That's a good question. 

Ted?

MR. KATZ: Well, it all depends on 

timing. So for example, our August letters are 

going to the new secretary. I mean, our letters 

for the prior meeting are going to the new 

secretary.

We don't -- it just depends on whether 

there's an appointment. If there's not an 
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 

appointment. I don't -- it's mainly that the 

Deputy HHS Secretary. The Senate has approved 

the second DAS, so that person would be in 

position if we don't have a secretary.

MS. LIN: So we do have the acting 

secretary for HHS, Dr. Don Wright and so he will 

be the one that we would talk to during the 

interim unless they appoint a new secretary. 

MR. KATZ: All right. Thanks, Jenny.

MEMBER ZIEMER: That's not stopping 

this, I guess, right?

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes.

MR. KATZ: It takes a little while to 

get the background materials together and then 

the letter goes with that and at that same time 

when we send it out, that will be decided.

Savannah River Site SEC Petition (1997-2007; 

Aiken, SC) 

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay. Next item on our 

agenda is the Savannah River Site SEC petition. 

At the last meeting in Santa Fe, we lost our 

quorum right towards the end of the meeting due 

to some travel arrangements for people, and we 
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 

were unable to sort of reestablish that.

Bill Field did try to call in from the 

airport while he was waiting to leave, but 

unfortunately that was after we had already had 

to discontinue the meeting for that.

Where we were for those of you that 

weren't at the meeting or have forgotten is we 

were in the discussion of the Savannah River Site 

petition. We had a report from NIOSH concerning 

sort of a completeness of monitoring data for 

construction workers during the time period.

And then we had another report from 

Joe Fitzgerald from SC&A looking at the exposure 

monitoring period of time of what we, several --

Tim's was focused on one area. Joe's was a 

little, had a little wider both in terms of time 

frame and in terms of in the coverage, though 

most of his time frame was later than the time 

period covered by Tim.

We had discussions among the Board 

about that and then we had the comments from the 

petitioners, representatives about the SEC. And 

then Brad was about to speak and discovered, at 
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 

that point in time, that we lacked a quorum.

So I think what we'll do is I'll start 

with Brad and at least continue the discussion 

there, and we can decide what further action and 

so forth. And so this is part of a -- there's 

also other parts of this SEC that are under 

evaluation, but I'll start with you, Brad.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Thanks, Jim, I 

appreciate that. One of the things I want to put 

out there is there's an awful lot of information 

to be able to go through on this. They're 

covering a long area.

But one thing that I want the full 

Board to remember when they're looking at this, 

this portion that Tim is putting out there is one 

quarter of one year, in one facility.

Now, SC&A did a marvelous capture. 

They went a little bit broader and everything 

like that. But, they still came up with that

we're about 30 percent short, roughly, basically 

right in there.

The problem that I have with this is 

we just found out about this notice of violation 
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 

in there. Now, to correct this notice of 

violation, they did a hundred percent check of 

everything.

Now, picture this. This is in the 

time period that the people are there. They have 

followed the RWPs. They have all the safe work 

permits. They have all the information. They're 

not trying, like us, to be able to come back 20 

to 30 years later and try to reconstruct this.

And they basically came up that there 

was a 69 percent to 79 percent -- Joe was it 69 

percent that they were off or was it --

MR. FITZGERALD: For that survey, it 

was 79 percent nonparticipation.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Seventy-nine percent 

of the people were nonparticipation to the 

bioassays that they were being required. I have 

said this from the very beginning of this, and I 

am not, understand, I am not saying in any way, 

shape or form that, you know, this wasn't done 

right. We are dealing with the information that 

we have. And I think everybody has done a very 

good job.
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 

One of the things that impressed me 

about this was that Tim took this one facility 

and he did what he did with it, and we came out 

with about 30 percent.

Joe did a much broader spectrum and 

hit several of them, a few later years and stuff 

like that where he could get some fairly good 

information, and he come up basically about the 

same, 30 percent.

But what bothers me is the notice of 

violation. The corrective action is go back a 

hundred percent check and everything else like 

this, but we're sitting there at 79 percent 

weren't done. I do not think that there is any 

way, shape or form we're going to be able to come 

off with a decent coworker model.

Now, even the papers that Tim sent out 

here on the SRS, the comparison that he did on 

this at the bottom of Page 2, see right down there 

between the years and stuff and like that, you've 

got between '77 and '89 we were questioning for 

Dr. Kotelchuck the difference between the DuPont 

construction trades and the DuPont workers. And 
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 

we've got a 2 percent to 5 percent higher 

percentage for plutonium through there.

I just really have a hard time 

believing that we can come up with a decent 

coworker model for this. And we have been going 

at this for years. I believe that we're onto the 

fifth year for this coworker model, and I'm 

really getting to the point to where enough is 

enough.

You know, we can't make up data or 

anything else like that. But, we can connect a 

lot of dots and that's wonderful, but the thing 

is, as we're -- as what has been shown to me with 

this notice of violation, we can only deal with 

what the information that we have on this, but we 

don't have what it takes.

These people were in the time frame. 

They pulled everything that there was. They were 

right there, and they're showing 79 percent 

nonparticipation. I don't think there's anything 

else that we can do. This completeness of this 

data to me is, it's off.

And I don't think -- I think we ought 
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 

to quit messing around with it, and we ought to 

get to the SEC process. That's just my personal 

opinion. I have other Board Members that are 

hearing the same stuff with me, but this just, 

there's no place else to go with this, in my eyes.

So all right, Jim or Stu or Joe, did 

I mislead in any way in any of this?

MR. HINNEFELD: Well, this is Stu. 

I'll comment that the NOV, the notice of 

violation, the 79 percent noncompliance was an 

evaluation of a job-specific bioassay, which was 

a subset of the total bioassay.

I mean, there were far more people on 

routine, far more samples were collected in the 

routine bioassay program than under the jobspecific bioassay program.

I think that gets, you know, the 

excerpts from the SC&A review say that like 95 

percent of the bioassay requirements and samples 

were from the routine program and that those were 

compliant. And that the nonsubmittal or the 

nonavailablility is in the 5 percent that were 

job-specific bioassays.
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 

So I think the question that I think 

needs to be firmly decided is what population are 

we describing here by the job-specific bioassays 

that are 79 percent noncompliant. Now, what work 

population is that? Because that seems to be the 

population then that would be affected if there's 

an SEC decision.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Well, you know, right 

now, to me, we're looking at the construction 

trades. And that --

MR. HINNEFELD: I think that's 

probably right, I mean, but you know, there's 

subcontractor construction and then there's sort 

of in-house construction or maintenance or 

however they're described, I think.

Now, I'm trying to get smart on this 

kind of late in the game since Tim's not here 

this week. So I think it's kind of important to 

understand exactly what population are we talking 

about when we're talking about the people who are 

on the job-specific bioassay program and thereby 

are not, you know, submitting samples in a great 

frequency.
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 

So to me that's the question I think 

I -- my feeling is, I would like to, you know, it 

seems like the Savannah River Work Group might 

have a little bit of work to do to kind of decide, 

okay, what's the Class we're going to define here 

and what are the years of it.

I mean is '98 a good ending year, 

because that seems to be when corrective actions 

were put in place from the NOV. And then as far 

as I know we didn't find anything, a recurrence 

later than '98. We certainly saw the same 

situation or same comments similar to the ones 

from the '97 NOV.

We see those in some earlier 

assessments too, so it's not strictly a 1997 

issue, but better they know what's the time that 

we're defining and what population are we 

defining, I think, are the key questions here.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Well, another key 

question too, and Stu correct me if I'm wrong on 

this, the '89 time period is when Westinghouse 

came in, and we saw a dramatic change from DuPont 

and how DuPont was doing business at that time.
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 

MR. HINNEFELD: Yes, that comports 

with what's in the SC&A report and that there 

seemed to be quite a lot more, I think there were 

four subcontractor construction workers engaged 

in the radiological work after that.

It may have been an operating 

philosophy of the different contractor or it may 

also have been the actual work that was going on, 

which is the restart of the K reactor, which 

involved a lot of construction workers.

So at least, now I'm only -- I'm 

trying to quote from the SC&A report, because I 

haven't researched this independently. I was 

just looking at that. So my only thought was 

let's make sure we know what population we're 

talking about and what years we're talking about 

when we go down, you know, when we do this.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, and this is Joe 

Fitzgerald. I think the other consideration, 

too, is, you know, we're basing a lot of the 

analysis on the 256 workers, this '97 sampling 

that Westinghouse had done.

And the challenge going back in time 
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 

before that '97 time frame is the missing RWPs 

and job plans. I think we made that very clear, 

I think Tim did as well that, very surprisingly, 

we were unable to find or locate a lot of these 

RWPs, most of them, for the preceding years.

You know, Tim only found the 

construction job plans for that one facility for 

those five or six years in the early '80s. We 

only found something like 14. Fourteen RWPs for 

the 20-year period from the early '80s through 

the '90s. So clearly there's a lot missing. So 

in trying to even demarcate what cohort you're 

talking about, it's going to be a challenge.

The other issue, and I know Tim was 

pursuing this with Savannah River, was to 

establish if there were any other samplings, any 

other follow-up reviews, anything that would 

provide alternate monitoring data, as you may, 

similar to what was done for the '97 sampling. 

And I think what we got back in terms of some of 

the documentation was it does not appear to be 

the case.

One of our questions for Tom LaBone 
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 

was to frankly confirm that, because based on the 

enforcement conference notes and other documents, 

it appears they did the resampling only for the 

'97 missing data, but not for the '96 and before 

that.

So you know, as far as trying to get 

your arms around the scope of this, you know, I 

think that that's going to be hard. I think you 

can probably back-extrapolate from the '97 

workers, you know, who are they, as Stu was 

pointing out establishing, you know, if they're 

CTWs or the subcontractors within that group.

But that's all you have. I mean, 

essentially that's probably the best data that 

you do have in that time period other than what 

we sampled earlier in the '90s. So that's kind 

of the configuration at this point.

CHAIR MELIUS: Any other comment? 

Yes, I would just add I think following what Joe 

was saying, I just agree it would be nice to have 

a better, you know, definition, but I don't see 

it going beyond subcontracting construction 

workers.
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 

I mean, I don't know how we'd pin it 

down in the absence of work records or detail, 

because we'll never know what we're missing. And 

the scope of who was missed in terms of monitoring 

seems to be very high.

And therefore, again, without good 

records, how do we, you know, define the narrower 

Class so to speak?

MEMBER CLAWSON: Well, correct me if 

I'm wrong, but for Savannah River the only 

petition out there is for the construction 

trades. Correct?

CHAIR MELIUS: Correct, yes.

MEMBER CLAWSON: And that's why we 

have been focusing on this. But I can tell you 

that there was a lot more out there than '97 

construction trades workers. So to me, the 

amount of people that are missing out of this is 

just astronomical to me, especially in this time 

period.

Because, remember, this is the time 

period where K reactor was trying to come back up 

online, and they were trying to bring everything 
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 

into compliance. And I gather -- you know, if 

you go back and look at the manpower in that time 

period, it's a third higher, and we've got less 

data.

So that's part of my issue and, you 

know, I agree with what Joe and Stu are saying 

and what you're saying too. It's just it's been 

a long time coming to this, and data completeness 

to me should have been along a lot sooner.

MEMBER MUNN: There still is the 

problem existing though with the cherry picking 

of data when you're trying to establish a certain 

Class in an SEC, and it appears that that actually 

is what we're doing.

We're saying that -- I guess what I'm 

trying to say is 80 percent of 5 percent is still 

a small number and to make the assumption that 

this, by definition, was a group of people whose 

exposure was far outside the limits of those that 

we have does not seem to compute.

Understandably, construction workers 

do have counterparts inside the governmental 

structure of the permanent facility itself, and 
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 

those folks are included in rather good records.

So we can't just say all those people 

were exposed in some way that was far in excess 

of the good record that we have of permanent 

workers. It flies in the face of common sense, 

I think.

And the lack of the work permits is a 

different question entirely. But, you know, we 

need to be careful about using the right language 

here if we can.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes, but -- it's Jim 

Melius -- again, the test is can we do individual 

dose reconstruction with sufficient accuracy? 

And with so much missing data, I think that sort 

of belies the ability to do individual dose 

reconstruction with sufficient accuracy for 

people within whatever the defined Class may be.

So it, you know, it's just that we 

don't know. We know there was some potential for 

exposure and without monitoring and without, you 

know, work records that would allow us to see 

that kind of comparison, how do we know?

And is it, you know, fair given so 
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 

much missing data to make the assumption that we 

can do that whether through, you know, a coworker 

model or whatever?

MEMBER CLAWSON: And, Jim, I want to 

point out so that everybody understands that 

Savannah River is a unique facility and a whole 

unique site in itself.

They are certainly one of the first 

ones that you keep hearing us talk about DuPont 

construction workers and then CTW workers. This 

is one of the first sites where I've seen that 

they actually use the trades in there as their 

own and separating these out.

If you remember years ago, Tim was 

trying to separate these out from the 

construction trades by using codes and that got 

blew down because we couldn't do this because 

they could also be used for overtimes in other 

areas and everything else like this.

But this is also unique from the 

standpoint how they would also use construction 

trades to be able to come in and do some of the 

hotter jobs to be able to do this because their 
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 

operations personnel were getting burnt out on 

this and they were too high. We've seen many 

references to this, and there are a lot the 

interviews this was talked about.

But this is why this makes this site 

so unique and so very hard to be able to pin it 

down to say a pipefitter. Okay, this pipefitter 

probably would be able to get this.

This site is unique in this process, 

the way that it has been set up with the 

construction and everything else. And this time 

period that we're looking at right now is the 

startup of K reactor.

They were trying to get the K reactor 

online, and they were going into this hot and 

heavy. This was when they came into it, and their 

construction went up dramatically through these 

time periods.

And this is a very difficult site, and 

I understand what you're saying, Wanda, but also 

too I have to look at what the SEC is shooting 

for, because we have enough things from the other 

side. We're looking at construction trades and 
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 

anyone in the service. And that's why we're 

looking at this point too.

MEMBER MUNN: I understand that, but 

I really don't see anything unique in what you 

said. It's not uncommon at all to bring in 

additional subcontractor people to avoid 

overexposure of individuals that you have, but 

it's not for the purpose of overexposing the 

construction workers, for goodness sake.

And that's -- we've all had situations 

around the country where especially in restart 

our reconfiguration of major facilities it's been 

necessary to have large construction groups. 

That's what these folks do. That's what they 

sign up for.

And this doesn't mean that they are 

ignored in terms of exposure potential, but it 

does mean that some will refuse, actually, to do 

the kinds of administrative functions and safety 

functions that are often, that are required for 

permanent employees in long-term situations.

I just don't know of any excess 

cancers shown in these populations. And, because 
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 

of that, it's very difficult to accept that the 

possibility that one person or a small group of 

people may be overlooked in such a way that their 

exposure would far exceed that of what is 

routinely recorded is a stretch. It's an 

imaginative stretch.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Being imaginative 

like that, we really ought to be able to have all 

the data then. You know, that would be what would 

be really nice, if we could have all the data.

MEMBER MUNN: Well, that would --

MEMBER CLAWSON: But we don't.

MEMBER MUNN: We never have and we 

never will.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Right so we have to 

be able --

MEMBER MUNN: We've known that from 

day one.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes. But, for you to 

say that they couldn't, just is very broad then. 

This is the thing, we're coming back and this is 

what this notice of violation to me showed.

We're here with -- we're a small 
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 

amount of the data, and we're trying to make this 

work. I know that this is what we've been given, 

so you know --

MEMBER MUNN: There's nothing new in 

the argument that if you don't have perfect 

information then you can't make a decision that 

is scientifically valid.

And that is, frankly, a flawed 

definition, but it's one on which we've operated 

for 15 years, so I can't see that there's any 

probability of our changing that now.

CHAIR MELIUS: Any other comments?

MEMBER ZIEMER: Question, this is 

Ziemer. I'm asking here is Tim on the line or is 

--

CHAIR MELIUS: No, Tim's on vacation 

this week.

MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, maybe then Joe 

can answer this. On the specific work orders 

where we do not have the bioassay, do we normally 

have routine bioassays on those workers or are 

they -- I just don't remember whether we have 

other bioassays done on the workers for these 
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 

specific jobs.

MR. FITZGERALD: I think I caught most 

of that. This is Joe. First off, I think I made 

it clear in my presentation, the RWPs were 

flawed. There were three or four different types 

of formats, some of which did not even include a 

check-off for a bioassay even though the job 

entailed bioassays.

For the RWP job-specific 

requirements, if the bioassay was required, we 

found, and this is in our survey, found about 

two-thirds of the workers complied, and we could 

find a bioassay, you know, following the job.

But, I think, you know, there's an 

inherent problem just with the way the system 

worked and the fact that the job plans and the 

RWPs were not very well done and not uniform so 

that it's hard to track that down.

And that was corrected, by the way, 

following the NOV. That was one of the findings 

in the NOV was the -- one of the source issues 

with the RWPs themselves.

MEMBER ROESSLER: Jim, this is Gen.
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 

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes.

MEMBER ROESSLER: I'm not sure if 

we're heading for a vote today, but I feel pretty 

uncomfortable with making any decision on it 

today without Tim being here to respond, because 

he's for NIOSH probably the most knowledgeable 

about this.

And I also, although I certainly 

understand what Brad is saying that it's been 

around for a long time. It seems to me the Work 

Group ought to reconvene on this. I think 

somebody mentioned that maybe they have some work 

yet to do on this. So that's kind of where I 

stand.

MEMBER CLAWSON: And Gen, I agree with 

you wholeheartedly, but the thing that we're 

trying to do right now because we this is very -

- it's been a long drawn process, and to be able 

to get to this point where we're at, we're trying 

to make it so that the full Board is aware of 

where we're at and what we're dealing with so 

that when it does come to a vote, that we have 

all the information that we can.
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 

And I wanted to say one thing -- and, 

Joe, I'm trying to find that notice of violation 

here in my paperwork and I can't. But one of the 

reasons why I really like their statement at the 

bottom of it where they were talking about that 

they kind of risked so much in their routine 

bioassay.

Do you remember that statement in 

there? I can't find my paperwork right now.

MR. FITZGERALD: I think the 

Department of Energy's conclusion was that, even 

though they acknowledged that Westinghouse had a 

pretty thorough skilled indicator program, which 

included air sampling and other, you know, 

management systems, the bioassay was ultimately 

necessary as a means to verify that these systems 

were working and that there were no perhaps 

errors or unexpected occurrences on the job.

And that without the bioassay, you 

didn't have that safety net. So that in fact, 

and they cited one example, and I think that was 

from the routine bioassay program, one example 

where it was the bioassay that picked up on a 
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 

significant intake.

The other thing I'd like to add, and 

I think, Brad, you touched on this earlier is 

that, in response to Dr. Kotelchuck's question, 

Tim sent an email to Brad and Dr. Melius just 

basically regarding a comparison of subcontractor 

versus CTW bioassay results.

And this was sort of the DuPont era, 

and I thought it was probably the best comparison 

we've seen yet on that question of -- and this 

has come up a couple of times this morning, on 

you know, CTWs and this is in-house CTWs versus 

subcontractor CTWs.

And to make a long story short since 

you have the memo, the conclusion was that 

there's no systematic difference between DuPont, 

and this is DuPont now, construction trade 

workers and subcontractor CTWs.

But, I have a problem with that 

conclusion, and it goes to the findings that 

actually Tim and his staff had come up with, so 

for six years from the late 70s through the 80s, 

essentially half of the 12 years that marked the 
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 

end of DuPont's tenure at the site, six out of 12 

years, the subcontractors actually showed at the 

95th percentile, a factor of two to five higher 

bioassay results, this is on plutonium, than did 

the in-house CTWs.

And I think Tim and his crew were 

opining that that may have been because the 

subcontractors were brought into save the 

exposure of the on-site CTWs.

In other words, to bring in the 

subcontractors to absorb this additional exposure 

to keep the exposures down for the in-house CTWs. 

And this is pretty telling.

I mean, you're talking two to five 

times. And if you look at the graph, it stands 

out. And this is the kind of issue I think that 

one is concerned about with the subs, that very, 

you know, very clearly they're not necessarily 

going to have the same exposure profile as the 

CTWs.

And in this instance, which has been 

analyzed for the last 12 years of DuPont, 

essentially in the 12 years the subcontractors 
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 

were two to five times higher.

So I wanted to point that out but I 

think that's certainly useful review, even though 

I think the conclusion is otherwise. But I think 

that's something as sort of a cautionary note on 

looking at, you know, what the potential might be 

for subs versus in-house CTWs.

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: This is Dave 

Kotelchuck. I asked that question at the Board 

meeting. I don't recall having seen -- I 

shouldn't say, I don't recall. I did not se the 

result or the letter that you're talking about, 

report that you're talking about.

CHAIR MELIUS: It --

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I would love to 

see it. Did I miss it?

CHAIR MELIUS: You missed it. It went 

to everybody on the Board. It went to your CDC 

address.

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay.

MR. KATZ: Yes, and I actually -- this 

is Ted, and I distributed it beyond that too, 

because a number of Board Members don't have CDC 
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 

emails. So everybody should have gotten it. But, 

you just received it, because it was just I think 

it was the end of last week, and I probably just 

sent it out to the non-CDC addresses early this 

week.

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay. I looked 

over and I thought I reviewed all of the things 

that you sent. Perhaps, I made a --

CHAIR MELIUS: I think it was sent 

separately.

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay.

CHAIR MELIUS: And I don't think, it 

was not included in what was attached with the 

agenda.

MR. KATZ: Correct.

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay. Then I will 

double-check and go back to it. I don't want to 

interfere further. I just hadn't seen it. Okay. 

Please go on.

MEMBER LOCKEY: Jim Melius?

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes?

MEMBER LOCKEY: Jim Lockey. Jim, I'd 

like to ask you question. When I reviewed that 
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 

yesterday, Ted was saying that the model would 

include all combined CTW coworkers, but that 

would include both DuPont, as well as 

subcontractors. Correct?

So that data you were talking about 

would be included in regard to the application of 

the 95 percentile. Is that correct?

MR. FITZGERALD: I'm not quite sure 

what you're referring to. I'm just looking at 

the comparison.

MEMBER LOCKEY: I saw the comparison, 

but you know, at the end of the -- at the lowest 

number of years, the subcontractor plutonium 

levels were definitely higher. There's no 

question about that. It started in '96 and then 

went on again in 1990, I mean 1980.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. Figure 3 shows 

--

MEMBER LOCKEY: Correct. I have that. 

So --

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.

MEMBER LOCKEY: But Ted was going to 

include all that data, you know, right, in 
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 

relationship to dose reconstruction.

DR. NETON: This Jim Neton. Yes, 

that's correct. All data would be combined into 

one pool.

MR. FITZGERALD: I think the point on 

that one was just simply looking at the two 

groups, the subs versus --

MEMBER LOCKEY: No, that I understand, 

I understand your point.

MR. FITZGERALD: Okay versus the inhouse CTWs. That's, you know, so.

MEMBER LOCKEY: Right. I understand 

your point. The other question I had, are the 20 

percent and maybe, bad news, it's I just can't 

recall, the 20 percent of where there's a 

specific reason, a specific incident that workers 

should have been sampled, 20 percent of the 

workers were sampled, 80 percent were not. Is 

that correct, Brad?

MEMBER CLAWSON: I'm sorry, what? I 

was --

MEMBER LOCKEY: We know about the 79 

percent of the 5 percent who never had any 
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 

bioassays done. Correct?

MEMBER CLAWSON: Right.

MEMBER LOCKEY: What about the 20 

percent that did have bioassays done? I just 

don't recall the distribution of their bioassays. 

Does anybody recall that, the results?

CHAIR MELIUS: That's a later time 

period. I'm not sure that NIOSH have ever 

reported on that. I don't think they have a 

report on the post-'89 coworker model on that. 

Am I right on that, Jim Neton?

DR. NETON: Yes. I'm not sure what 

we're talking about here. The 20 percent missing 

--

CHAIR MELIUS: Is '97, right?

DR. NETON: Well, '97 was the notice 

of violation where they found that probably 16 

percent of the people left samples. Right? But 

that was on job-specific samples.

CHAIR MELIUS: Right, yes. I mean, 

it's -- we're looking at apples and oranges, but 

--

DR. NETON: Right. And the 
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 

completeness analyses were done by SC&A and NIOSH 

in two separate time periods.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: I think what he's 

asking is for the 20 percent that in fact gave 

samples in '97 --

DR. NETON: Right.

MR. FITZGERALD: -- what were the 

actual results. I know the follow-up sampling 

showed no intakes. I don't know what the original 

showed.

DR. NETON: I don't know this for a 

fact, I think I know this for a fact, but I'm not 

100 percent certain, I don't think there were any 

positives in 1997 for any job-specific bioassay

samples.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Well, this is for 

that one quarter.

DR. NETON: For all of 1997?

MEMBER CLAWSON: No, that -- remember 

when Tim did this and this notice of violation, 

they only went back, my understanding was for one 

quarter and checked and had everybody give the 
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 

bioassay.

DR. NETON: No, I'm not talking about 

the follow-up samples being not positive. I 

think for the entire year of 1997, I don't think 

there was a positive bioassay sample among all 

the actinide bioassay samples for job-specific 

purposes taken. I would have to verify that, but 

that's my recollection.

MEMBER CLAWSON: For job-specific?

DR. NETON: Yes.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Not routine?

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes. And a sort of 

question would be, there would be an 

incompleteness issue prior to the second quarter. 

From the second quarter on, they went back and 

re-verified, but I'm not sure they re-verified 

for all of '97.

The enforcement conference notes 

indicate that they did verification samplings on 

the second quarter and for the rest of '97. So 

that's the juncture where you have some of this 

verification going on.

But before the second quarter of '97, 
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 

there's uncertainty because, again, the same 

issue of incompleteness would be there, and 

there's no verification samples for those 

apparently.

DR. NETON: I'm not talking about 

verification samples. I'm just talking about 

actual samples taken.

MEMBER LOCKEY: That's what I'm 

talking about.

DR. NETON: Samples that were taken 

and analyzed.

MR. FITZGERALD: Oh, as far as what 

was in fact taken?

DR. NETON: Exactly.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, okay.

DR. NETON: And I don't think there 

were any positive exposures among the samples 

that actually were taken in 1997.

MEMBER LOCKEY: And that's what I'm 

asking.

DR. NETON: Yes, again, I would not 

take that to the bank, but I'm pretty sure that 

I think Tim is trying to track this down.
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 

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.

DR. NETON: But that's my impression 

is what the situation is.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Well, you know, okay. 

Let's take a look at '96. It's in this notice of 

violation for DOEs. They're talking about --

because Westinghouse is trying to put a log on 

their margin or error samples and everything 

else.

It says, for example, at this blank 

facility in '96, one worker received an 

unexpected intake of redacted material that 

resulted in an organ dose exceeding specific 

amounts redacted, a dose that far exceeds DOE 

regulatory limits of 50,000 millirem.

The dose to this worker was not 

identified by the Workplace Monitoring Field 

Indicators Program, but will be verified through 

the Bioassay Program.

I would really be surprised, Jim, to 

say, in 1997, that we didn't have any that had 

positives, especially with the K reactor going 

on. I think I'd run that in the ground, but I 
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 

think that would be kind of pretty surprising.

DR. NETON: We need to verify that.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, we do. I agree 

with you.

MR. FITZGERALD: Well, there's no way 

to verify it. You can verify that which was 

collected, but that's maybe 20 percent to 30 

percent of the total if you want to backextrapolate. There's always going to be some 

missing bioassays.

MEMBER MUNN: Well, we can't shrug 

that small figure off just because it doesn't fit 

the biometric concept of what the total was and 

that's, you know, if we're going to look at it, 

we have to look at it all.

No positives means no positives unless 

you want to argue about how all the ways that you 

can show that it might not be no positives.

MEMBER CLAWSON: So Wanda, help me 

understand on this the no positives. So you've 

got 30 percent that show no positive and 70 

percent that we can't even find.

MEMBER MUNN: Yes.
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 

MEMBER CLAWSON: So that's kind of a 

stretch on that one, but we'll have to run that 

in the ground, though.

MEMBER MUNN: My point is if knowing 

it is not acceptable, but we've done a lot of 

that and it really isn't acceptable.

CHAIR MELIUS: Any other comments? 

Questions? So Brad, is the plan then that the 

Work Group will reconvene before our next 

meeting?

MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, we are going to 

try to come to grips with all of this. I think, 

and I'm going to be honest with you, I'm going to 

probably be pushing for a face-to-face, because 

there is too much stuff that we need to be able 

to go through and go over. But we've got to sit 

down with SC&A and the Work Group and try to set 

this up.

MEMBER LOCKEY: Jim Lockey. I agree. 

I think it has to be face-to-face.

MR. KATZ: So this is Ted, Brad. I'm 

open with that. I'll have to schedule that. I'm 

just a little concerned, you're going to be away 
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 

for quite a while. So before you leave, can you 

--

MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes. I was --

MR. KATZ: If you can just give me 

your good days before you hop on a plane today, 

I will work to get that scheduled for you.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Right. What I was 

looking at Ted was mid-November.

MR. KATZ: Okay. I don't recall 

exactly when you're coming back. I know, Josie 

doesn't get back until mid-November.

MEMBER CLAWSON: I come back November 

7th.

MR. KATZ: Okay. Josie comes back a 

little later. Okay.

MEMBER CLAWSON: That's fine. Okay, 

thanks.

MR. KATZ: Okay. I'll work on that, 

Brad.

MEMBER CLAWSON: Okay.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay, thank you. Okay. 

And we'll continue this discussion in 

Albuquerque, as well as the Work Group.
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 

MEMBER CLAWSON: Sounds good.

CHAIR MELIUS: Thanks. LaVon?

Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petition 

Status Update 

MR. RUTHERFORD: All right, let's see 

if I can get this right. Thank you, Dr. Melius.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes. But you can thank 

Dr. Ziemer. He's on the phone also, though.

MR. RUTHERFORD: Thank you, Dr. 

Ziemer, too. All right. Dr. Ziemer and I will 

discuss this after the meeting.

MR. RUTHERFORD: All right. For the 

December Board meeting, NIOSH plans to present 

one new SEC Petition Evaluation at the meeting 

and that's an 83.14 for the Ames Facility.

We did a data capture in June hoping 

to find the information necessary to finalize 

that report, but we still have some little open 

ends. We had a couple of interviews scheduled, 

and we're working to have the report tied up in 

time to present at the December meeting.

We also intend to present an update on 

where we are with the Sandia Petition Evaluation. 
53 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

We are working as scheduled to complete this 

report by the April 2018 meeting.

So all's we have at the December 

meeting is the Ames Facility presentation, that 

is an 83.14 presentation, and an update on 

Sandia, and that's it. Any questions?

CHAIR MELIUS: That's all you're going 

to get done in the next two months?

MR. RUTHERFORD: Well, that's it, you 

know.

CHAIR MELIUS: But that was a 

question.

MR. HINNEFELD: Bomber, this is Stu. 

Do we have any hope to have on INL to have some 

finalization of the dosimetry records for the 

earlier CPP Class? Is there any hope of that 

wrapping up?

MR. RUTHERFORD: You know, I'm not 

sure on that. I know, you know, there were some 

things that we were waiting from INL, and I'm 

sure that with, you know, the budget shouldn't 

really be an issue.

I believe I've heard from DOE budget 
54 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

shouldn't be an issue, so you know, I don't know. 

I don't know the final word on that. Jim may 

remember.

DR. NETON: No, I don't. I'm sorry.

MR. RUTHERFORD: I can check on that, 

though.

MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, it was just a 

thought that if things come together there, there 

might be time for a Work Group meeting and some 

discussion of that prior to the next Board 

meeting.

MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes.

MR. BARTON: This is Bob --

MR. HINNEFELD: I would be able to 

help on that a little bit.

CHAIR MELIUS: Bob?

MR. BARTON: Yes, I think what we're 

referring to is the earlier period of 1963 up to 

the beginning of 1970. And I think one of the 

major things still on the table was an expanded 

V&V study about some missing records, 

particularly temporary badge reports.

And what we did is we have a sampling 
55 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

plan together, and we have made requests through 

the normal dose reconstruction channels that 

NIOSH uses for individuals. And last I checked, 

which was about mid-last week, those had not come 

in yet for the first set of 30 claims.

But as soon as those come in, we're in 

a position to immediately get the results of 

that. So the first wave of V&V studies are those. 

And so I think that was one of the major items

left to discuss about that earlier period.

MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, Bob, this is 

Stu. You described that as a first layer of 

samplings, so there will be -- the 30 cases 

doesn't represent the entirety of the sample that 

needs to be looked at? 

MR. BARTON: That is correct. What we 

decided in the Work Group was we were going to 

sort of take a graded approach. We'd send 30 in. 

When we got those 30 back, we'd immediately send 

a second batch of 30.

And I think the plan then would be 

we'd certainly look at the first wave and see 

what we got and then if we really needed to look 
56 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

at that second wave of claims, then we'd wait on 

those results.

Again, until we see what we get back 

and how well the recording effort of that 

temporary badge report, I don't know what could 

really be concluded out of the first wave or if 

we'll really need the second wave.

And all these document requests are 

actually part of the normal dose reconstruction 

requests, because regardless of any SEC 

determinations, these were people that would 

require at least a partial dose reconstruction.

MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, so it may be the 

entirety of the sample, but it may not be the 

entirety of the sample is needed?

MR. BARTON: I think that's accurate.

MR. HINNEFELD: Okay, thank you.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay. So we'll move 

on. You might have more to report.

MR. RUTHERFORD: Well, at this time, 

I don't have any more to report on.
57 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

Updates from Work Groups and Subcommittees 

(as necessary) 

CHAIR MELIUS: Oh, okay. Okay. 

Updates from Work Groups and Subcommittees. 

Anybody want to volunteer?

MEMBER MUNN: This is Wanda, but she 

just has no report except that we do have a 

meeting scheduled in November prior to the next 

Board meeting.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay. Very good.

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: The DRC, we have 

a meeting scheduled in January. We also have a 

report from Rosanna, that she, it looks like we 

may actually get up to date after the next two or 

three meetings so that by summer or fall, we might 

be ready to move on to another set, which has to 

be assigned, according to Ted, after our December 

Board meeting.

CHAIR MELIUS: Very good.

MR. KATZ: Yes, just to add to what 

Dave just said. What I had suggested to Dave is 

that after we have the Methods Work Group meeting 

when it gets its report from NIOSH then we'll 
58 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

know sort of what our path forward is, and at any 

point after that I think we could, with the 

Board's agreement, the Work Group's 

recommendations, then I think it might be the new 

assignment.

CHAIR MELIUS: And this is Jim Melius 

for the Dose Reconstruction Review Methods Work 

Group. We will be planning a meeting I think 

before the December meeting with or without 

Mark's report. I suspect it will be done and be 

ready.

I think we need to sort of move that 

issue along and get prepared at least in terms of 

what we want if any changes, but probably some 

changes we may want to make in terms of at least 

some of the dose reconstruction reviews that we 

need to do and that needs to really be discussed 

with the whole Board.

So I think we'll plan on a Work Group 

meeting before the December meeting and then come 

back and a make recommendation. Hopefully, we'll 

have Mark's report in time for the Work Group 

meeting.
59 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Excellent.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes. Any other Work 

Group chairs, who wish to make --

MEMBER ZIEMER: Dr. Melius, this is 

Mr. Ziemer. I have a report on TBD-6000.

CHAIR MELIUS: Go ahead.

MEMBER ZIEMER: TBD-6000 effort that 

the reports --

MR. KATZ: Sorry. Paul? Paul?

MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes?

MR. KATZ: Paul, I'm sorry, but you're 

very garbled as if you're on the bottom of a fish 

tank or something.

MEMBER ZIEMER: Is this better? So 

then on September 25th, TBD-6000, I had two items 

on the agenda. One was to review the Program 

Evaluation Report PER-63, which is Alcoa, 

Pennsylvania and the other to review PER-65, 

which is Anaconda.

So actually we looked at the 

evaluations on both those PERs. All the internal 

comments and concerns were taken care of, and we 

have instructed SC&A to proceed with the dose 
60 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

reconstruction for each of those PERs working 

with NIOSH.

There will be ten samples from each of 

those PERs, so that's underway and probably 

report to the full Board on the final results in 

December. That's it.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay. Thank you. 

Others? Okay. Very good. Plans for the December 

Board meeting. Ted?

Plans for the December 2017 Board Meeting 

MR. KATZ: Yes, so this has been --

it's a little bit more difficult planning in this 

case, because we haven't really had enough time 

from the last meeting, so some of these are fairly 

uncertain, some of these items that I'm going to 

run through here.

But here's what I have as the 

possibilities right now. And in terms of timing, 

I have right now a day and a short half basically. 

But let me run through not the routine business, 

but the special items. And this is, by the way, 

beginning on December 13th.

So as Dr. Melius mentioned, we have 
61 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

the Dose Reconstruction Review Methods Work 

Group. I have them slated for the morning that 

day to report out.

Then it's a little bit uncertain about 

whether everything is buttoned down, ready, but 

we should in all likelihood be ready for a Work 

Group meeting on Weldon Spring Site Profile, long 

time in coming, but most of the work has been 

done back and forth between the two technical 

staffs. So I'm hopeful that that will be ready 

to report out assuming there's no snarls in the 

final issues to be resolved.

So Weldon Spring Site Profile review. 

Also Pacific Proving Grounds Site Profile. As 

you may all recall, we discussed this and largely 

covered it at the August meeting, but there's a 

remaining matter, and NIOSH is working on that, 

and we're hopeful too, but that one will be ready 

to bring to ground.

So we would have a Work Group meeting 

and then that could be presented as well. And 

then, as LaVon said, we have the Ames Laboratory 

SEC petition. So those are all things for the 
62 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

morning of the first day.

In the afternoon, I have SRS SEC, a 

big item. And then you have, late in the day 

then we have again LaVon mentioned, we'll have an 

update on the Sandia SEC petition and hopefully 

that might even be useful in attracting comments 

from some of the local people related to what 

they're trying to do but not necessarily and SEC 

Petition Evaluation. And that takes care of the 

first day, a bit of a long day, but it works.

The second day, what I have as a 

possibility is the Area IV Santa Susana Field Lab 

SEC petition. I'm not sure whether that will be 

ready or not. I'm not positive about that, but 

SC&A report will be ready in November for its 

review. And I'm hopeful that we can have a Work 

Group meeting before the Board meeting and then 

it, of course, depends on whether there's any 

difficult issues to resolve that don't get 

resolved at that Work Group meeting, but I have 

that slated for the morning.

And that's the other major item, and 

that's not a work session. But that's what it 
63 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

looks like right now. I have it right now as 

adjourning at 11:00 a.m., so that would be the 

latest.

And the only thing I don't have 

accounted for here but that might substitute for 

something else if it does get buttoned up, of 

course, is the INL petition, the element that was 

discussed earlier today, and we could swap that 

in for something else that falls off if it does 

or what have you. So that's a possibility too 

that I'm aware of.

CHAIR MELIUS: Any questions on that? 

So again, I think we can plan a day and, you know, 

at least fill a mid- or late morning the second 

day. Ted and I talked and if this appears to 

change in the next, you know, couple of weeks, 

you know, if LaVon changes his mind on finishing 

up or whatever or suddenly discovers they can 

finish something up, we'll let everybody know. 

You can always make travel arrangements for that.

MEMBER ROESSLER: Jim, this is Gen. I 

think I missed it. Where is the meeting being 

held?
64 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

CHAIR MELIUS: At Albuquerque.

MEMBER ROESSLER: Okay. I heard that. 

I wasn't sure.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes.

MEMBER ROESSLER: Okay, thanks.

CHAIR MELIUS: So it should be a 

little, hopefully it will be better in terms of 

flight arrangements, more flexible. It's not a 

major airport. Okay.

And then you have an item on here 

Board Correspondence. What's that?

Board Correspondence 

MR. KATZ: That's a standing item. --

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay.

MR. KATZ: -- if you happen to have 

any correspondence to address. We do have -- we 

just received a letter to Dr. Melius from someone 

from Fernald, and it was I think an individual 

who had spoke at the last meeting, and it really 

covered the same issue that you had spoke to at 

the last meeting.

But we may have correspondence back to 

him just to explain, look, I think Dr. Melius 
65 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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

covered a response to him at that meeting.

CHAIR MELIUS: Yes, that's been, it 

basically reiterated what was said at the 

meeting.

MR. KATZ: Yes.

CHAIR MELIUS: Okay. Thank you. Any 

other business?

MR. KATZ: That takes care of it.

Adjourn 

CHAIR MELIUS: Anybody else? If not, 

I believe we can adjourn.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 12:14 p.m.)
66 

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

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