Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


The Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 


National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 


Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 


_________________________________________________________________ 


Summary Minutes of the Forty-first Meeting 


held telephonically on October 18, 2006 


_________________________________________________________________
 

The Forty-first Meeting of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 


Health (ABRWH or the Board) was held telephonically on October 18, 


2006. The meeting was called by the Centers for Disease Control and 


Prevention's (CDC's) National Institute for Occupational Safety and 


Health (NIOSH), the agency charged with administering the ABRWH. These 


summary minutes, as well as a verbatim transcript of the meeting 


certified by a court reporter, are available on the internet on the 


NIOSH/OCAS web site located at www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. 


* * * * *
 

Dr. Paul Ziemer, Chairman of the Advisory Board, called the meeting to 


order and announced a quorum was present. 


Dr. Lewis Wade, Designated Federal Official, indicated the following 


members were present: Dr. Ziemer, Mr. Brad Clawson, Mr. Michael 


Gibson, Mr. Mark Griffon, Dr. James Lockey, Dr. James Melius, Ms. Wanda 


Munn, Mr. Robert Presley, and Dr. Genevieve Roessler. Dr. John Poston 


was unable to attend. 


In the interest of time, staff and contractor participants, as well as 


members of the public, were not asked to identify themselves at the 


outset, but were urged to introduce themselves should they become 


participants in the meeting. 


Dr. Wade asked if any representatives of members of Congress might be 


present, and Ms. Felicia Escobar introduced herself as a member of 


Senator Ken Salazar's staff. 


Dr. Ziemer welcomed all present, noting that the time frames designated 


for various agenda items were estimates and need not be followed 


precisely. 


Dr. Wade joined in expressing his appreciation to participants, and 


emphasized the purpose of the phone conferences were to wrap up loose 


ends and clarify issues between Board meetings. 


1
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


* * * * *
 

Before addressing scheduled agenda items, Dr. Ziemer asked for the 


status on Round 5 of the individual case reviews. Ms. Kathy Behling
 

from SC&A reported that one more two-member team was to go through 


their assigned cases, which would be done by the following day. All 


others were complete. 


With no further questions or comments offered on Round 5 cases, Dr. 


Ziemer recognized Dr. Roessler for her effort in reviewing the cases 


assigned to her team without the aid of Dr. Roy DeHart, who retired 


from the Board before the reviews were complete. 


* * * * *
 

INDIVIDUAL CASE REVIEWS 


ROUND 6 CASE SELECTIONS
 

Having confirmed everyone had a copy of the 20 cases selected for the 


next review, Dr. Ziemer called on Dr. Wade to announce conflicts of 


interest. Dr. Wade noted the HHS Office of General Counsel indicated 


the following specific member/case conflicts: 


Case 18 -- Griffon and Presley 

Case 19 -- Gibson, Griffon, and Poston 

Case 22 -- Griffon 

Case 31 -- Munn 

Case 48 -- Munn 

Case 49 -- Griffon and Presley 

Case 96 -- Griffon and Presley 

Case 106 -- Clawson and Griffon
 

Case 144 -- Munn
 

Case 163 -- Munn
 

Case 166 -- Griffon, Poston, Presley and Ziemer
 

Case 171 -- Gibson and Griffon
 

Dr. Ziemer discussed team organization, and adjustments were made to 


form five two-member teams. Cases were then assigned to each team, 


being mindful of conflicts of interest, with the following results: 


Dr. Roessler/Dr. Lockey -- Cases 18, 19, 22 and 163; 


Mr. Presley/Dr. Poston -- Cases 26, 31, 33 and 48; 


Mr. Gibson/Dr. Ziemer -- Cases 49, 93, 96 and 106; 


Mr. Griffon/Mr. Clawson -- Cases 113, 125, 136 and 144; 


Ms. Munn/Dr. Melius -- Cases 166, 171, 181 and 8. 


2
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


Mr. Griffon expressed his belief that he should have shown to be 


conflicted on only one case, and Dr. Wade agreed the discrepancy will 


be resolved. 


There were no objections or further comments regarding the case 


assignments. At Dr. Ziemer's request, Ms. Behling suggested the 


reviews for the sixth set of cases should be completed in time for 


presentation at the December Board meeting. 


* * *
 

Dr. Ziemer raised the issue of the matrix for the fourth set of cases. 


Ms. Behling reported she had completed the matrix for that set and 


provided it to NIOSH. She announced she would develop and circulate 


the matrix for the fifth set of cases shortly. The matrix for the 


sixth set would follow and could be discussed by conference call prior 


to the December Board meeting. Ms. Behling noted there would be three 


sets of matrices that will require resolution by the end of the year. 


Dr. Ziemer, Mr. Griffon and Mr. Stu Hinnefeld from NIOSH discussed the 


meeting of the new subcommittee and the matrices to be reviewed prior 


to the December Board meeting. It was suggested there might be a 


telephone conference meeting around Thanksgiving. 


* * * * *
 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST UPDATE 


 SC&A CONTRACT
 

Mr. David Staudt, NIOSH 


Contracting Officer
 

Mr. Staudt discussed the firewall plan SC&A has recently implemented, 


and noted SC&A is required to update their conflict of interest plan 


each December. He indicated a request has been made that SC&A include 


the firewall plan in their comments to his office as part of the COI 


plan updates. Mr. Staudt stated he anticipated that would be done by 


December or January, and will be available to the Board and posted on 


appropriate web sites. Those actions are expected to resolve the 


issues raised by SC&A's DTRA work. 


* * *
 

A second issue discussed by Mr. Staudt was special conflict of interest 


situations. The example provided was that of Dr. Lynn Anspaugh and an 


unidentified colleague, and their work on the Nevada Test Site and 


Pacific Proving Ground site profiles. Mr. Staudt and Dr. Wade
 

3
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


discussed the situation and determined Dr. Anspaugh's and others' 


participation was transparent to the specific workgroup, and when their 


work was done they would stop performance on the contract. Mr. Staudt
 

then asked for guidance on how to proceed in future special situations 


so that the work of the Board keeps moving forward. 


Dr. Wade explained that where there is variation in the plan, the 


government has certain responsibilities. In addition, there are 


certain responsibilities the Board wishes to reserve. Essential to 


this process, there must be complete and accurate disclosure by SC&A. 


While the Board can take formal action only with a quorum, chairs of 


workgroups have certain prerogatives. The government has certain 


prerogatives with respect to its opinions. And so the question becomes 


at what point does the Board wish the government to interject its 


opinions/decisions. 


Dr. Ziemer observed that the answer may vary in each case. While the 


government may think the transparency of a given case meets the 


requirements of COI, the Board -- or some members of the Board -- may 


have questions about individuals involved in the case. Further, the 


Board has explicitly authorized working groups to act on its behalf in 


very limited ways, primarily in determining types of information 


required to develop matrices, for example. Final actions are always 


the Board's prerogative. 


Dr. Melius remarked he had raised the issue because he was disturbed 


when there was no consultation between NIOSH, the contracting office 


and the Board about how the two individuals would be used. He felt the 


Board should have been informed of the limitations imposed on those 


individuals, although he thought the specific limitations were not 


appropriate. He added the situation had created conflict then between 


himself and SC&A's Dr. John Mauro, and the Board should be informed 


when such action is contemplated. 


As a second point Dr. Melius suggested members of the Board should be 


allowed to express opinions on matters of this sort to their Chair and 


perhaps work out differences with the government and the contractor. 


This could be done without unduly delaying a project, and is important 


because the Board's credibility is on the line. 


Dr. Wade agreed the responsibility for notifying the Board members is 


an issue that needs resolution. He noted he was informed by an e-mail 


which indicated working group chairs had been notified. He had assumed 


from the e-mail that Board members were notified. 


Acknowledging he had received the initial e-mail, Dr. Melius commented 


there was no further consultation. He added the initial information 


4
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


was also incomplete and he had gained additional information from the 


SC&A web site. If there had been a system in place to facilitate 


communications, he would have asked for additional information. 


Dr. Wade queried whether the Board preferred notifications from SC&A or 


the contracting officer. As contracting officer, Mr. Staudt agreed 


with the suggestion that it should come through his office. As the 


next step in the process, it was suggested that Board member concerns 


be referred to the Chair to determine their disposition. It was 


further agreed that all Board members be notified of issues rather than 


the chairs of appropriate workgroups. 


Dr. Wade explained the contracting officer might not be bound to follow 


recommendations made as a result of these notifications, although in 


all likelihood he would attempt to comply with the Board's wishes. 


Further discussion clarified the mechanics of the notification and 


comment process, with Dr. Mauro providing input on SC&A's part. Dr. 


Wade agreed to document the process described in the discussion and 


distribute it to the individuals involved. 


* * * * *
 

Prior to receiving the following reports, Dr. Wade reminded everyone 


that the telephone conference is not intended to include in-depth 


technical discussions of subcommittee or workgroup issues. 


REPORT FROM THE 


SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOSE RECONSTRUCTION
 

Mr. Mark Griffon, Chair
 

The subcommittee includes members Mr. Gibson, Ms. Munn and Dr. Poston, 


with Mr. Clawson and Mr. Presley as alternates. Mr. Griffon began by 


suggesting there may be a need for a subcommittee meeting before the 


next Board meeting to allow their review of the matrices one item at a 


time. They would anticipate completing the fourth matrix and get into 


the fifth matrix, to some extent. Mr. Griffon added that Mr. Hinnefeld
 

has been compiling NIOSH responses, and those need to be incorporated 


into the matrices before a meeting is scheduled. 


* * * * *


 WORKGROUP REPORTS
 

Nevada Test Site 


 Site Profile 


5
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


Mr. Robert Presley, Chair
 

Members include Mr. Clawson, Ms. Munn and Dr. Roessler. Mr. Presley 


reported that a document NIOSH is currently reviewing is relevant to 


their next meeting and the workgroup is waiting to hear that review has 


been completed. He hoped that meeting could be scheduled during the 


same block of time as some other groups, as memberships overlapped. 


Dr. Jim Neton from NIOSH noted there might be some concern about the 


Anspaugh writeup. Mr. Gene Rollins from ORAU had been asked to begin 


working on that, but it might take three to four weeks to accomplish 


the analysis. If that is to be a topic this group plans to address 


when they meet, it should be planned with that review time in mind. 


Mr. Presley stated the plan was to have Dr. Anspaugh and Mr. Rollins
 

present at the workgroup meeting to review the writeup. Dr. Neton
 

cautioned that the resuspension calculations Dr. Anspaugh believes are 


incorrect will require three to four weeks for Mr. Rollins to 


accomplish. However, it is possible he could get to a point that he 


could estimate the significance of the difference and determine if it 


is a major issue. 


Mr. Presley agreed to communicate with Mr. Rollins to discuss the 


meeting time. 


* * *
 

Savannah River Site 


 Site Profile
 

Mr. Michael Gibson, Chair
 

This workgroup includes Mr. Clawson, Mr. Griffon and Dr. Lockey. Mr. 


Gibson reported he had been in contact with Mr. Joe Fitzgerald of SC&A 


and Dr. Sam Glover from NIOSH in an effort to reach closure on some 


issues. Items of discussion include the fault tree data bank 


compilation about the other nuclides for the tank farm, and some so-


called 3x5 data cards that bear some dose results. There is need for 


further discussion, but if things go well, there is a possibility the 


group can meet during the same block of time as other groups. 


Mr. Clawson inquired as to the name of the incident database from the 


previous contractor for Savannah River Site. Neither Mr. Gibson nor 


Dr. Neton were able to provide the name, but agreed it is important to 


the review of the site. 


* * *
 

6
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


 Rocky Flats 


Site Profile and SEC Petition
 

Mr. Mark Griffon, Chair
 

Members of the workgroup include Mr. Gibson, Ms. Munn and Mr. Presley. 


Mr. Griffon reported that NIOSH and SC&A have responded to various 


items, but the critical question that remains is data reliability. 


Many others are close to resolution. 


Speaking on behalf of Senator Salazar, Ms. Escobar emphasized that the 


Senator is following this review, and data reliability is an important 


part. It is important that time be available to study the issue and 


analyze it fully. Ms. Munn offered her reassurance that the workgroup 


is spending a considerable amount of time addressing data reliability. 


Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Griffon discussed the number of cases and the 


data that would be available for discussion at the next workgroup 


meeting. 


* * *


 Chapman Valve 


 SEC Petition 


Dr. Wade announced the members of this workgroup include Mr. Clawson, 


Mr. Gibson, Mr. Griffon and Dr. Roessler, and is Chaired by Dr. Poston, 


who is not present. 


Dr. Mauro was asked to provide a briefing on the workgroup's 


activities. He indicated Dr. Poston had expressed a desire to have a 


conference call meeting in late October or early November. Dr. Mauro
 

noted SC&A's report might not be finished by that time, but there would 


be enough material to allow the workgroup to accomplish a great deal. 


That material would be graphs and tables that might be called talking 


points. 


In a discussion with Mr. Griffon, Dr. Neton reported that revisions 


have been made to the Chapman Valve site profile. Some items have been 


strengthened by comments in the evaluation report. The internal 


dosimetry analysis has been partially redone, and work on draft dose 


reconstructions is underway. 


* * *
 

SEC Petitions -- 250-day Issue 


7

Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


Dr. James Melius, Chair
 

This workgroup includes Mr. Griffon, Dr. Roessler and Dr. Ziemer. Dr. 


Melius reported that scheduling of his group's next meeting is 


dependent on a report from SC&A which is forecast to be ready mid-


November. The report is more conceptual in nature and looks at 


background material, so will not require NIOSH review. 


Dr. Arjun Makhijani announced the report is currently in rough draft, 


suitable for internal review only. He suggested sending memoranda to 


Dr. Melius' workgroup for their use at a meeting in mid-November, with 


the final report ready for the Board meeting in December. 


Dr. Mauro inquired about the status of a list of controlled documents, 


part of DTRA's NPTR program, which he hoped to obtain. Dr. Melius was 


unfamiliar with the list and suggested NIOSH might be helpful. Mr. 


Larry Elliott from NIOSH interjected he had been in touch with DTRA, 


and three of the four items could be provided. The fourth would 


require clearance from legal. 


Dr. Wade expressed concern that Dr. Melius had no knowledge of the 


request, but it was clarified that the problem was simply a failure to 


identify the nature of the question. 


* * *
 

SEC Petitions Not Qualified 


Dr. James Lockey, Chair
 

Members of the workgroup include Mr. Clawson, Dr. Melius, Ms. Munn and 


Dr. Roessler. Dr. Lockey announced the schedule for the group's first 


meeting. 


* * *


 Hanford Plant 


 Site Profile 


Dr. James Melius, Chair
 

Members include Mr. Clawson, Dr. Poston and Dr. Ziemer. Dr. Melius
 

reported there are several updates underway. There is a review and 


response from NIOSH, and a conference call is needed to determine a 


work schedule and focus for the workgroup. In consideration of the 


heavy workload, scheduling of a conference call was postponed. 


8
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


* * *
 

Board Conflict of Interest Policy
 

Dr. James Lockey, Chair
 

Members include Dr. Melius, Mr. Presley and Dr. Ziemer. Dr. Lockey 


suggested the business of this workgroup could be done later in the 


year. Dr. Wade suggested the group meet informally during the December 


Board meeting to schedule further conferences. 


* * *
 

Subcommittee and Workgroup Schedule Summary
 

Currently Scheduled Meetings: 


November 6: 


Rocky Flats site profile and SEC Petition workgroup 


10:00 a.m., Cincinnati 


November 9: 


SEC petitions not qualifying workgroup 


9:00 a.m., Cincinnati 


November 14: 


Savannah River Site site profile workgroup 


1:00 p.m., Cincinnati (tentative) 


November 15: 


Nevada Test Site site profile workgroup 


10:00 a.m., Cincinnati 


November 16: 


Subcommittee on Dose Reconstruction 


10:00 a.m., Cincinnati 


November 17: 


SEC petition 250-day issue workgroup 


8:00 a.m., November 17, Cincinnati 


Planned but not Scheduled: 


Chapman Valve SEC petition workgroup -- Teleconference late 


October/early November; Dr. Poston will inform by e-mail 


9
 
Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


Hanford site profile workgroup -- Teleconference to be scheduled; Dr. 


Melius to provide details 


Board Conflict of Interest Policy workgroup -- To be scheduled 


* * * * *
 

SITE PROFILE REVIEW ASSIGNMENTS 


 FY 2007 


Dr. Ziemer reminded the members that the two site profile review 


candidates judged to be top priority were Lawrence Livermore and Oak 


Ridge K-25. Others selected, in order of priority, were Pantex, 


Portsmouth and Argonne West. The Board has already authorized SC&A to 


begin work on the first two, and SC&A has announced it has resources to 


undertake a third at this time. 


After discussion it was agreed Pantex should maintain its current 


position on the priority list, and will be the third site profile 


review conducted in FY 2007. 


* * * * *
 

BOARD WORKING SESSION
 

The issue was raised regarding the appointment of new working groups. 


Dr. Mauro reminded the Board it has identified 15 procedures for 


review, and their contract for 2007 calls for 30. Work has already 


begun on the first 15, one of which is OTIB-52 dealing with 


construction trades workers. This is an issue of widespread interest. 


Dr. Mauro suggested it would be advantageous to have the full list of 


30 by the December meeting, noting an additional seven have been 


reviewed, bringing the final list for '07 to 37. 


Dr. Wade and Dr. Mauro agreed it would be beneficial to appoint a 


workgroup during this call which would be responsible for studying 


SC&A's procedures reviews. With Ms. Munn volunteering as chair, the 


group will include Mr. Gibson, Mr. Griffon and Dr. Ziemer. Mr. Presley
 

expressed his interest in the task, and was added as an alternate. 


A question was raised about the Battelle contract and whether there is 


a product for the Board. Mr. Elliott reported the Battelle contract is 


being modified to extend it through May, 2007. By that time the 


remainder of the funds will be used, and what they are expected to 


accomplish with those funds has been specified. 


10
 
 

 

---------------------------------------- 

---------------------------------------- 

Summary/Minutes October 18, 2006 
 

NIOSH/CDC Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health


The issue of information on pay for Board members was raised, including 


a need for a way Board members can see what they're paid for meeting, 


expenses, et cetera. Other matters of interest included withholding of 


Georgia state tax. Dr. Wade agreed to make the matter an agenda item 


for the next meeting. It was recommended an expert on pay, per diem, 


et cetera, be present at the December meeting. 


Discussion followed regarding specific locations for the Chicago 


meeting, and the impact of weather on meeting sites as it relates to 


travel issues. 


* * * * *
 

With nothing further to come before the Board, the meeting was 


adjourned at 12:05 p.m. 


Ë Ë Ë 

End of Summary Minutes 


Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë 

I hereby confirm these Summary Minutes are 


accurate, to the best of my knowledge. 


Paul L. Ziemer, Ph.D., Chair 


Date 


11