Status of Upcoming SEC Petitions

LaVon B. Rutherford, CHP

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

June 2012

Santa Fe, NM 
Purpose

 Provide an update to the Advisory Board on the 

current number of qualified petitions under 

evaluation and sites being evaluated through the 

83.14 process.

 Provide SEC information to the Advisory Board in 

support of its preparations for future Work Group 

sessions and Advisory Board meetings.
SEC Summary Table

(as of June 12, 2012)

 Petitions received 204

 Petitions in qualification process 1 

 Petitions qualified for evaluation 125

• NIOSH evaluation in progress 5

• NIOSH evaluation completed 120

– SEC Evaluation Reports 

 with the Advisory Board 

 for recommendation 12 

 Petitions not qualifying for evaluation 79

Note: Petitions not qualifying include five petitions received prior to the 

rule becoming final and Petition 34 where the site was de-listed. 
SEC Petition Evaluations Presented 

at this Board Meeting

 Winchester Engineering and Analytical Center

 Hanford 

 Clarksville Modification Center

 Medina Modification Center

 Titanium Alloys Manufacturing
SEC Petition Currently in the 

Evaluation Process

 Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)

• Location: Oak Ridge, TN

• Class being evaluated: All employees who worked at 

ORNL from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1952

• Date received: July 18, 2011

• Expected completion: August 2012

—Data became available in May that was not previously reviewed. 

A determination was made that we should review the data prior 

to completing the evaluation. 
SEC Petition Currently in the 

Evaluation Process—cont. 

 Rocky Flats Plant

• Location: Golden, CO

• Class being evaluated: All employees who worked at 

Rocky Flats Plant from January 1, 1972 through 

December 31, 1989

• Date received: August 23, 2011

• Expected completion: August 2012
SEC Petition Currently in the 

Evaluation Process—cont. 

 Nuclear Metals, Inc. 

• Location: Concord, MA

• Class being evaluated: All employees who worked at 

Nuclear Metals, Inc. from January 1, 1958 through 

December 31, 1983

• Date received: October 20, 2011

• Expected completion: September 2012
SEC Petition Currently in the 

Evaluation Process—cont. 

 Ventron Corporation

• Location: Beverly, Massachusetts

• Class being evaluated: All Employees who worked at 

Ventron Corporation from January 1, 1942 through 

December 31, 1948

• Date received: December 5, 2011

• Expected completion: June 2012
SEC Petition Currently in the 

Evaluation Process—cont. 

 Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company

• Location: Fort Wayne, IN

• Class being evaluated: All employees who worked at 

Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company from January 

1, 1944 to December 31, 1952

• Date received: March 15, 2012

• Expected completion: September 2012
Petition Qualification

 As noted earlier, 73 of the 202 petitions did not 

qualify for evaluation

 Major reasons petitions did not qualify are:

• Petition basis not met (48)

• Petitioning for multiple sites or site is not an authorized 

site (8)

• Petitioner withdrew petition (6)

• Petitioning for a site that’s already covered by an SEC (5)
Petition Basis

 A description of the basis for believing records and 

information available are inadequate to estimate 

radiation doses, based on one of the following:

• Lack of monitoring

• Destruction, falsification, or loss of records

• Expert report

• Scientific or technical report

Note: Documentation or statements in the form of an affidavit must be 

provided to support the first two categories
Petition Basis—cont.

 Federal Regulation criteria:

• Lack of monitoring – radiation exposures and doses to 

members of the proposed class were not monitored 

either through personal or area monitoring

• Destruction, falsification, or loss of records – radiation 

monitoring records for members of the class have been 

lost, falsified, or destroyed
Petition Basis—cont.

 Federal Regulation criteria:

• Expert Report – A report from a health physicist or other 

individual with expertise in dose reconstruction 

documenting the limitations of existing DOE or AWE 

records on radiation exposures at the facility, as relevant 

to the petition. This report should specify the basis for 

believing these documented limitations might prevent the 

completion of dose reconstructions for members of the 

class. 
Petition Basis—cont.

 Federal Regulation criteria:

• Scientific or technical report – a scientific or technical 

report published or issued by a government agency of the 

Executive Branch of government or the General 

Accounting Office, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, or published in a 

peer-reviewed journal, that identifies dosimetry and 

related information that are unavailable for estimating 

the radiation doses of employees covered by the petition.