10

aal

12

alc!

14

LS

16

17

18

al}

20

21

22

23

24

25

356

it, let me remind you just a little bit about Oak
Ridge site. And it is one site with three
individual plants. We’ve got the K-25 plant or
the gaseous diffusion plant or the -- I guess it’s
the ETTP now, East Tennessee Technology Plant or
something. And of course we have the Y 12 weapons
plant where I work, and the X-10 national lab.

Let me find my place here. A lot of things
I've lost; I miss my mind more than anything a lot
of times.

Though all three plants are different, and
basically all the exposures were the same and the
monitoring was the same, is one reason that I
think that all plants should be in the special
cohort. But like I say, there's three plants on
one site and of course K-25 is in the special
cohort by virtue of being a gaseous diffusion
plant. But the ATLC, if you have a opportunity to
advise the powers that be on inclusion of people
in the special cohort, the ATLC would like to have
the current and former workers at Y-12 and X-10
who are affected or have been affected by one of
the specific cancers be included in the special
cohort as a class of people. Justification for

the SEC for KX and Y worker is that, like the

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

alls

12

13

14

LS

16

17

18

Le

20

21

22

23

24

25

361

document it, so would that be -- would that
recognize my record from E.I. duPont, my check
stubs? Just a copy of my check stubs, you know,
like they’re saying they can’t find the records
for some of the employees.

DR. ZIEMER: I don’t know the answer Lo that.
Again, can we ask you to work individually with
one of the staff and maybe --

MR. ANFIELD: Well, who is the staff?

MR. ELLIOTT: (Off microphone) Labor’s not
here right now (Inaudible) clarification.

DR. ZIEMER: That’s a -- oh, that’s a
Department of Labor employment verification issue.

MR. ANFIELD: Yes.

DR. ZIEMER: Can we provide this gentleman
with the person he should contact?

MR. ELLIOTT: (Off microphone) Maybe
(Inaudible) resource center can help (Inaudible).
DR. ZIEMER: We’ll try to help you, sir.

MR. ANFIELD: Okay. Thank you very much.

DR. ZIEMER: This then concludes our open
session of the Board meeting. Let me ask if there
are any other announcements or issues that need to
come before us in open session today.

(No responses)

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

LL

12

alls}

14

a5

16

aly f

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

358

and also they have the scat can -- CAT scan truck
that is used for early lung detection. And from
what I've heard of the people at K-25, it’s -- it
does work. Tt’s a good thing. The ATLC would
like to see that same process come to -- for the
current and former workers at Y-12 and X-10.

Now we worked on a screening process with
Mark and some more of them on the needs assessment
for the screening program, and the last I found
out that the medical screening program was in the
works and probably will happen. But the CAT scan
truck and the early detection system was not going
to be part of it. And the ATLC would like to see
that -- you know, whatever we can do, whether we
borrow it from PACE, which is an outstanding
organization, or get a CAT scan truck of our own
for the workers at X-10 and Y-12.

DR. ZIEMER: Thank you very much. Are there
any -- those are the four commenters that have
signed up. Are there any others here who didn’t
get a chance to sign up that wish to make public
comment?

MS. GANTZ: Hello. I’m Julie Gantz. I‘ma
former employee of Savannah River Site. Like I

stated last night, I worked in 773-A on D wing and

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

alas

12

ae

14

LS

16

17

18

al)

20

21

22

23

24

25

357

gentleman that spoke first, talked about the
construction workers moving from site to site, the
Oak Ridge workers -- maintenance workers routinely
went from one site to the other, for training or
one reason or another. Another justification for
the SEC classification is workers at X-10
developed and tested many of the diffusion
processes that are used around -- around the
country. And in bygone years, accident and
exposures happened, especially at the Y-12 plant.
We‘ve all read about those that -- in those days -
- well, not the criticality one, but the others
were considered normal or everyday occurrences.
And today they're not, they’re considered off-
normal occurrences and incidents and they're --
just aren’t acceptable today, where in days gone
by, they were. And I mention that because I want
to know if NIOSH can or has taken that into
consideration when they’re doing the dose
reconstruction, or is it possible to -- to
estimate those things.

The second issue and final issue that I need
your help with is the health screening program.
Here again, there’s a difference among the three

plants on the same site. K-25 has the screening,

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

12

12

13

14

BD)

16

17

18

ite)

20

21

22

23

24

25

360

documentation since that is protected information
that probably wouldn’t be in public record, but
maybe one of the staff can talk with Ms. --

MS. GANTZ: ‘Cause there are two other women
besides me and -- plus my boss, we all had cancer
and my boss has died, so you can’t exactly talk to
him.

DR. ZIEMER: It appears that this could also
be a case where there were some chemical
implications if they were doing circuit board
melting, as you described. Unfortunately, this
program doesn’t address the issue of chemical
exposures and health effects of thal, but the
documentation at least on the radiation dose
reconstruction I think -- whatever is needed can
probably be provided. Is that -- is that -- I
don’t think we need to necessarily do that here,
but we could have the staff work with -- with you
on that.

MS. GANTZ: Okay. Thank you.

DR. ZIEMER: Thank you very much.

MR. ANFIELD: I have one more question.
Reflect back to just one small question. I have
one -- they was talking about how can they lose

the record, T got my check stubs right here to

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

11

12

13

14

15

16

ay

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

352

different sites -- SRS, Hanford and Oak Ridge are
the ones that I’ve dealt with mostly -- is that
DOE says it does not have the records for workers
who have presented Social Security records, W-2
forms, affidavits from fellow workers saying that
they worked at the site. I’ve just really been
appalled at DOE’s lack of thoroughness in getting
records, particularly when they -- they have
duPont, Westinghouse or Bechtel that they’re
dealing with. They know these people have the
records and all DOE has been doing is just simply
asking them and then saying okay, well, if you
don’t have them, that’s it, and workers claims
then getting denied.

I think by continuing to be persistent in
asking for the records, NIOSH can at least
document that they are asking for the records over
and over again. What I’ve had in several cases is
they say there’s no records, and then finally when
it gets up to Workers Advocacy in Washington,
suddenly all the records are there. And by that
time NIOSH has already done the dose
reconstruction on a very abbreviated work history
and they’ve lost. And so we get up -- all the way

up there.

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



363

CERTIFICATE

STATE OF GEORGIA )
COUNTY OF FULTON }

I, STEVEN RAY GREEN, being a Certified Merit Court
Reporter in and for the State of Georgia, do hereby
certify that the foregoing transcript was reduced to
typewriting by me personally or under my direct
supervision, and is a true, complete, and correct
transcript of the aforesaid proceedings reported by
me.

I further certify that I am not related to,
employed by, counsel to, or attorney for any parties,
attorneys, or counsel involved herein; nor am I
financially interested in this matter.

WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL this agu day

of February, 2004.

- S aN
STEVEN -RAY GREER, CVR-CM
GA CCRNo:; A-2192

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

ds2

12

13

362

If not, we are going to recess for lunch, and
the Board will reconvene at 1:30 p.m., at which --
which is a closed session. I want to announce to
members of the public that that session will be
confined to discussion and review of the task
order proposal and independent government cost
estimate for the Board’s contractor, and no other
business will be conducted. Thank you very much.

(Whereupon, the public portion of the meeting

was adjourned, 12:30 p.m.)

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

L2

12

alii}

14

15

16

alla |

18

aE)

20

21

De

23

24

25

359

I have been told that the office that I worked in
at one time was a contaminated lab that was
supposedly cleaned up. It backed up to a fab lab,
which was in RCA, and there were several times
that they would melt the -- I knew that they were
melting circuit boards to get the precious metals
and fumes would come over into my office and I
would get headaches and my eyes would burn
immediately. I never knew when they were down
there or what they were doing. I never -- did not
know until several incidents went by when they
were forced to stop and build a retaining wall.
There was no retaining wall in between my office
and that RCA, and I have since been -- the
recommended decision from NIOSH is to deny my
claim, and in my report it says that the dose
reconstruction likely overestimates my actual
exposure. Well, where’s the documentation for
that? You know, most of this stuff doesn’t really
tell you a whole lot, just you know, that... I’m
getting nervous. I just wanted to know what
documentation that, you know, they used to get all
this.

DR. ZIEMER: Again, I think in this case we

can ask NIOSH staff to individually provide that

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

alll

12

aes

14

1:5

16

7

18

19

20

21

we

23

24

25

355

finding that there is at least a 50 percent
probability of causation in these particular
cases, at least from the cases I've seen. Please
look into this problem because I think something
is very wrong with the NIOSH procedures for this
particular type cancers, the thyroid, the
leukemias and the lymphomas.

Thank you very much. Any questions?

MR. ELLIOTT: Questions for Mr. Warren?

(No responses)

MR. ELLIOTT: Last person we have on the
sign-up list is Howard Lawson.

MR. LAWSON: Good afternoon. I guess --
yeah, it’s afternoon already. I am Howard Lawson.
I'm electrician by trade and a union health and
safety representative for the atomic trades and
labor council at the Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge. And
I’ve got a couple of issues to lay on you, a
couple of bricks -- more bricks for your load.
But first, on behalf of the ATLC in Oak Ridge, let
me thank the Board, each of you, for the work that
you do.

And one of the issues that I have is the one
that we've heard a lot about, and that’s the

Special Exposure Cohort. But before I get into

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

11

12

13

14

i5

16

17

18

aL)

20

21

22

23

24

25

354

to a radiation zone that wasn’t separated by any -
- any lead or anything else, then there’s
something that could have happened to these
workers. I know of two other workers who were
secretaries and they were diagnosed with different
cancers. One died in the forties, the other one
died in her thirties. And these cases are just
the ones I know about or the ones you know about
and I know about from last night.

I would join David (sic) Miller in asking
that the members of this panel look into this
situation and do a -- some type of cancer
screening of administrative personnel who were
almost 100 percent women and who worked in the 700
areas at SRS.

The last point I would make is that I hope
some of you on this committee will also use your
expertise to -- with NIOSH’s help, to actually
perform a dose reconstruction on workers who had
lymphomas, leukemia or thyroid cancer. I don’t
think it’s a secret in the scientific community
that if you have large numbers of people exposed
to radiation that the expected result would be
thyroid cancers, lymphomas and leukemias. Somehow

the NIOSH dose reconstruction process is not

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES



10

11

12

13

14

iS

16

17)

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

353

I would point out that the status report sent
out by NIOSH that you send out normally really
doesn’t help much when a dose reconstruction is
started and then the status report comes out every
month just showing that the dose reconstruction
started on the same datc, with no changes. I have
about a half a dozen clients who have been waiting

for more than 180 days for a dose reconstruction

and all they get every month is a call saying -- I
mean a report, then they call me -- well, all this
says is the same thing last month. If it was some

kind of expectation or estimate of when the dose
reconstruction was going to be completed, then
that would give you useful information, I think.
Now in light of the testimony of the two
ladies last night, I also want to know -- want you
to know about several other women who had worked
in this administration building at SRS. They
worked as secretaries and then had breast cancer.
One client of mine with breast cancer was denied
benefits because the NIOSH dose reconstruction
procedure was based upon her 30 millirems of
exposure over seven years, and it was based
supposedly on the most favorable dose. But if --

as you heard last night, if they were working next

NANCY LEE & ASSOCIATES