Titanium Alloys Manufacturing

Special Exposure Cohort 

Petition Evaluation Report

James W. Neton, PhD, CHP

Associate Director for Science

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

June 2012

Santa Fe, NM
Petition Overview

 July 28, 2011: NIOSH received an 83.13 

petition for period of 1950 through 1956

 November 17, 2011: Petition qualified for 

evaluation

 February 14, 2012: Evaluation Report 

approved

 SEC class recommended: None
Background

 Titanium Alloys Manufacturing (TAM)

• Located in Niagara Falls, New York

 TAM produced zirconium tetrachloride for the 

AEC from 1950 through 1956

• The process did not involve radioactive material

 TAM melted 70 pounds of contaminated scrap 

metal for an AEC experiment in 1955

 TAM also reduced uranium in samples in July 

1956
Background—cont.

 Covered period for TAM as an AWE was 

previously listed as 1950 through 1956 (same as 

the SEC petition)

 NIOSH requested DOL review the basis for the 

covered period

 The covered period as an AWE was changed to 

1955 through 1956
Proposed and Evaluated SEC Class

 Petitioner-Proposed class:

All employees performing their duties who worked at 

Titanium Alloys Manufacturing Company in Niagara 

Falls, NY from 1950 to 1956

 Class Evaluated by NIOSH:

All employees who worked in any area or building at 

Titanium Alloys Manufacturing from January 1, 1955, 

through December 31, 1956
Petition Basis and Concerns

 Unmonitored workers

• Petitioner presented an affidavit indicating a lack of 

monitoring for radiation exposures

• NIOSH had a limited amount of records available for 

airborne radioactivity and surface contamination 

during uranium reduction in 1956
Sources of Available Information

 Battelle-TBD-6000, Site Profiles for AWEs that 

Worked Uranium Metals

 NIOSH Site Research Database documents

 DCAS and ORAUT technical bulletins

 Case files in NIOSH OCAS Claims Tracking System
Additional Information Obtained 

During SEC Petition Evaluation

 Published reference on the AEC scrap metal 

melting operation in 1955

• Quantity of material

• Airborne radioactivity and contamination measurements

 AEC Source Material License issued in 1956 for 

possession and processing of 100 pounds of 

uranium contained in ore concentrates
Previous Dose Reconstructions

NIOSH OCAS Claims Tracking System 

Information available as of January, 2012

 TAM claims submitted to NIOSH 14

 Claims in the evaluated class 12

 Dose reconstructions completed for energy 12

employees in the evaluated class 

 Claims containing internal dosimetry 0

 Claims containing external dosimetry 0
Potential Radiation Exposures 

During the Contract Period

 Exposure to uranium from melting contaminated 

stainless steel and aluminum in 1955 and from 

reduction of uranium samples in 1956

• Both were experimental operations with limited 

quantities of material

• External dose from exposure to photon and beta 

radiation

• Internal dose from airborne radioactivity and surface 

contamination
Source Term for Exposure

 Contaminated scrap stainless steel and 

aluminum (1955)

• 40 pounds of stainless steel 1/4 inch thick

• 30 pounds of aluminum 1/16 to 1/4 inch thick 

• Total mass of uranium estimated to be 90 grams 

based on analytical data

• Maximum surface contamination (total alpha) was 

26,800 dpm/100 cm2
Source Term for Exposure—cont.

 Reduction of uranium in samples (1956)

• Uranium compounds including UF4, UO2, and UF6

• Occurred over a two-day period

• An AEC license issued in 1956 authorized TAM to 

possess up to 100 pounds of uranium contained in ore 

concentrates for experimental work related to the 

production of uranium fluorides

• Reports indicate bench-scale type operations 

involving gram quantities of material
Approach to Dose Reconstruction

 Air sampling and surface contamination data 

from the operations can be used to estimate 

bounding intakes of uranium

 TBD 6000 can be used to estimate external dose 

from uranium
Pedigree of 1955 Air Sample Data

 Air samples taken by the AEC’s Health and Safety 

Laboratory (HASL) using their standard methods

 Work requested by HASL for the purpose of 

gathering air data for reclaiming contaminated scrap 

metal

 Experiment described and air sample results 

summarized in an article written by two HASL 

employees and published in Nucleonics

 HASL known to employ valid measurement 

techniques using standard methods and procedures
 Each type of scrap metal melted in a separate 

crucible

 Work area had only natural ventilation

 Process air samples had a maximum air 

concentration (alpha) of 80 dpm/m3 

• All others less than 10 dpm/m3 based on air 

concentration for the three days in 1955 

Intakes of Uranium from Scrap Melting
 Workers presumed to be exposed to the 

maximum concentration for two days of melting

• One day of decontamination is presumed to have 

occurred at a concentration of 27 dpm/m3 

 Annual inhalation and ingestion intakes derived 

based on air concentration for the three days in 

1955 

Intakes of Uranium from Scrap 

Melting—cont. 
Pedigree of 1956 Monitoring Data

 NIOSH has copies of the original air monitoring 

and surface contamination data sheets

 Recorded on standard forms used by National 

Lead of Ohio (NLO)

 Forms are the same as those used by HASL

 Data sheets include information on sample 

location, type, background count-rate, detector 

efficiency, volume, and filter efficiency

 Alpha measurements made using a scintillation 

counter
Intakes from Uranium Reduction 

Activities (1956)

 Air sample and contamination data are available 

for July 10-11, 1956, during laboratory and 

furnace work

 The highest reported air concentration (alpha) 

was 6 dpm/m3 

 Intakes are based on the minimum detectable 

activity of the air samples, 15 dpm/m3 

 Annual inhalation and ingestion intakes were 

derived based on air concentration for the two 

days of work 
Potential External Exposure

 Exposure to photons

 Exposure to beta radiation

 Dose from required medical X-rays
Potential External Exposure—cont.

 Photon dose rates estimated from TBD 6000 

Table 6.1 values for a uranium slug

• Continuous exposure at one foot distance for all days 

of uranium work (<3 mrem total exposure)

• Shallow dose from beta particles presumed to be a 

factor of 10 times higher than the photon dose

 Annual medical X-rays presumed to be required 

during the AWE period and doses assigned per 

TIB 6 
Evaluation Process

 Two-prong test established by EEOICPA and 

incorporated into 42 C.F.R. § 83.13 (c)(1) and 42 

C.F.R. § 83.13 (c)(3):

1. Is it feasible to estimate the level of radiation doses 

of individual members of the class with sufficient 

accuracy?

2. Is there a reasonable likelihood that such radiation 

dose may have endangered the health of members of 

the class?
Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction

The process and source term information provide 

sufficient information to estimate doses 

associated with uranium work at Titanium Alloys 

Manufacturing
Summary

Feasibility Findings for Titanium Alloys Manufacturing Petition

January 1955 – December 1956

Source of Exposure Reconstruction 

Feasible

Reconstruction 

NOT Feasible

Internal

 - Uranium X

External

- Uranium beta-gamma X

 - Neutron N/A

 - Occupational

 Medical X-ray

X