This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL

+ + + + +

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL

SAFETY AND HEALTH

+ + + + +

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND

WORKER HEALTH

+ + + + +

96th MEETING

+ + + + +

TUESDAY

JANUARY 28, 2014

+ + + + +

The meeting convened at 9:15 

a.m., Central Standard Time, in the Crowne 

Plaza Kansas City Downtown, 1301 Wyandotte 

Street, Kansas City, Missouri, James M. 

Melius, Chairman, presiding.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

PRESENT:

JAMES M. MELIUS, Chairman

HENRY ANDERSON, Member

JOSIE BEACH, Member

BRADLEY P. CLAWSON, Member

R. WILLIAM FIELD, Member*

MARK GRIFFON, Member

DAVID KOTELCHUCK, Member

JAMES E. LOCKEY, Member

WANDA I. MUNN, Member

JOHN W. POSTON, SR., Member

DAVID B. RICHARDSON, Member*

GENEVIEVE S. ROESSLER, Member*

PHILLIP SCHOFIELD, Member

LORETTA R. VALERIO, Member*

PAUL L. ZIEMER, Member

TED KATZ, Designated Federal Official
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

3

REGISTERED AND/OR PUBLIC COMMENT

PARTICIPANTS

ADAMS, NANCY, NIOSH Contractor

AL-NABULSI, ISAF, DOE*

BATTS, ALICE

BERROTERIAN, LEO

BROCK, DENISE, DCAS

BURGOS, ZAIDA, NIOSH

BURTON, DONALD

BURTON, GAYLA

BYERS, SLYVIA

CALHOUN, GRADY, DCAS

CAPRA, JOE

CARNAHAN, CLYDITH

CHAMBERS II, REED

CODY, ELIZABETH

COPELAND, MAURICE

COUCH, JEANNETTE

CRAWFORD, CHRIS, DOL*

CROWLEY, SHARON

EVERET, CLARENCE

FIGGOUS, JOHNNY

FITZGERALD, JOE, SC&A

GLOVER, SAM, DCAS*

GOOLSBY, BELINDA

GOOLSBY, MAE

HAND, DONNA*

HARRIS, J. OLIVER

HARTSFIELD, DEKEELY, HHS

HAYES, LYNN

HINNEFELD, STU, DCAS

KINMAN, JOSH, DCAS

LONG, SHARON

LYNCH, ALICE

JACKSON, WILLIE

JAYROE, JEFF

JOHNSON, FRED

KLAMMER, TOM

KNOX, WAYNE

LEWIS, GREGG, DOE

MALONE, ROSE

MAY, WALTER
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

MCDANIEL, ARLESTIA

MCDANIEL, LEVI

REGISTERED AND/OR PUBLIC COMMENT 

PARTICIPANTS

MCFEE, MATT,

ORAU Team

MCKEEL, DAN*

MOORE, NADINE

MOORE, ROBERT

MOSLEY, SASTEH

MURPHY, DONNA

MURPHY, JOHN

MURPHY, MARVIN

NETON, JIM, DCAS

OWSLEY, CAVEN

PHILLIPS, THERESA

RAMSPOTT, JOHN*

REED, ELOISE

REED, JAMES

RUTHERFORD, LAVON, DCAS

SAWYER, JERRY

SHACKELFORD, LARRY

SHAW, MONTANO

SMITH, MARLON

STIVER, JOHN, SC&A

TAYLOR, JOHN

THURBER, BILL, SC&A*

VALENTINE, JACQUEY

WALKER, NINA

WASHAM, NORMA

WATTS, MAGGIE

WORTHINGTON, PATRICIA, DOE
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

5

*Participating via telephone

T-A-B-L-E O-F C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S

PAGE

Welcome and Introduction

Dr. James Melius, Chair ................... 7

Mr. Ted Katz .............................. 7

NIOSH Program Update

Mr. Stuart Hinnefeld ..................... 13

DOE Program Update

Dr. Patricia Worthington ................. 30

DOL Program Update

Mr. Chris Crawford ....................... 53

SEC Petitions Status Update

Mr. LaVon Rutherford ..................... 65

Sufficient Accuracy/Coworker Dose Modeling

Dr. James Melius, Chair .................. 73

Dr. James Neton .......................... 74

General Steel Industries Technical Basis

 Document (TBD) 6000 Review (PV)

Dr. Paul Ziemer .......................... 78

Dr. James Neton .......................... 89
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co.

 SEC Petition (1948-1952) (PV)

Dr. James Melius, Chair ................. 109

Dr. Paul Ziemer ......................... 128

Ms. Kristi Keller (by Ted Katz) ......... 143

Board Work Session

 October comments

Dr. James Melius, Chair ................. 157

 Scheduling meetings

Mr. Ted Katz ............................ 175

 Work Group Reports

Dr. James Melius, Chair ................. 189

Kansas City Plant SEC

Petition Evaluation (PV)

Mr. Grady Calhoun, DCAS ................. 235

Mr. Maurice Copeland, Petitioner ........ 257

Mr. Wayne Knox, Petitioner .............. 272
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

7

Public Comment .......................... 299

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

4 (9:18 a.m.)

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, we'll 

6 convene the 96th Meeting of the Advisory 

7 Board on Radiation Worker Health. And let 

8 me turn it over to Ted for introductions.

9 MR. KATZ: So, thank you, Jim. 

10 Welcome, everyone in the room and on the 

11 line. Let me just tell you a few things 

12 about this meeting first.

13 Materials, all of the 

14 presentations that you'll hear today, are on 

15 the NIOSH website, under the Board section, 

16 under Meetings for today's date. So you can 

17 pull up any of those presentations and 

18 follow along that way.

19 There are also -- all the 

20 presentations are being shown on Live 

21 Meeting, and that is -- the address to find 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that is on the agenda for this meeting which 

2 is also on that website. So you can pull up 

3 the Live Meeting session and follow along 

4 and you'll see the slides, then, turned as 

5 they're turned here in the room. Live 

6 Meeting does not have a video component of 

7 the room, so you're not looking a the Board 

8 Members or anything, just the presentations.

9 There's a public comment session, 

10 I'll mention this again, it begins at 5:30 

11 this afternoon. So, if you are interested 

12 in giving public comment, please be present 

13 at the front end of that session. It'll run 

14 5:30 to 6:30, but should we get through 

15 sooner it'll end sooner. So, please be in 

16 attendance at the beginning of the public 

17 comment session.

18 And for people that are listening 

19 on the line, please keep your phones muted 

20 except when you're contributing, if you're, 

21 for example, a Board Member. But, 

22 otherwise, everyone please keep your phones 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

9

1 muted because otherwise the audio from your 

2 phone will detract from everybody's audio 

3 pleasure in this meeting. To mute your 

4 phone you just -- if you don't have a mute 

5 button press *6, and then press *6 again to 

6 take it off of mute. But please do mute 

7 your phone at all times.

8 And at no time put the phone on 

9 hold because that has bad effects for 

10 everyone else. So, if you need to leave the 

11 meeting at some point and you're attending 

12 by phone, just hang up and dial back in.

13 So, that covers those issues. 

14 I'm going to do roll call. And I'm going to 

15 address, instead of members having to 

16 address for themselves, I'm going to address 

17 conflicts where they potentially -- where 

18 the site could be mentioned today. There 

19 are really no conflicts with the sessions , 

20 you know, where there's Board action today, 

21 but I'm going to address the key conflicts 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 for sites that may be mentioned today as we 

2 go through roll call.

3 And I'm going to do this 

4 alphabetically beginning with Anderson.

5 MEMBER ANDERSON: Here.

6 MR. KATZ: And for Dr. Anderson 

7 no conflicts. Beach?

8 MEMBER BEACH: Here.

9 MR. KATZ: And for Beach it's 

10 Hanford and Rocky Flats SEC. Clawson?

11 MEMBER CLAWSON: Here.

12 MR. KATZ: And for Clawson it's 

13 INL. Bill Field?

14 MEMBER FIELD: Here.

15 MR. KATZ: He's on the line. And 

16 for Field it's Lawrence Berkeley National 

17 Lab. 

18 Mark Griffon is -- I'll get back 

19 around to him, he's out of the room at the 

20 moment. Dr. Kotelchuck?

21 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Here.

22 MR. KATZ: And no conflicts. 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

11

1 Dr. Lemen? Okay, I'm not -- I 

2 wasn't sure whether Dick could stay with us 

3 for the rest of this meeting. He may not be 

4 in attendance. Dr. Lockey?

5 MEMBER LOCKEY: Here.

6 MR. KATZ: And for Dr. Lockey the 

7 key ones that might be mentioned today, I 

8 guess, are Fernald, Portsmouth, Mound, K-25, 

9 and X-10.

10 Dr. Melius?

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I'm here.

12 MR. KATZ: He's here. And there 

13 are no sites that would be addressed today. 

14 Munn, Wanda Munn?

15 MEMBER MUNN: Here.

16 MR. KATZ: And for Munn it's 

17 Hanford. Dr. Poston?

18 MEMBER POSTON: Here.

19 MR. KATZ: And for Poston it's X20 10, Sandia National Lab, LANL, and Y-12. 

21 Dr. Richardson?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Here.

2 MR. KATZ: And no sites. Dr. 

3 Roessler?

4 MEMBER ROESSLER: Here.

5 MR. KATZ: Also no sites. Mr. 

6 Schofield?

7 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Here.

8 MR. KATZ: And for Schofield it's 

9 LANL and Sandia National Lab. 

10 And Ms. Valerio?

11 MEMBER VALERIO: Here.

12 MR. KATZ: And for Valerio it's 

13 all sites in New Mexico, as well as NTS and 

14 Pantex. 

15 And Dr. Ziemer?

16 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes.

17 MR. KATZ: For Dr. Ziemer it's X18 10, and LANL after 2000. 

19 So, that completes roll call, 

20 except of Mark Griffon. I will address just 

21 his conflicts, then. He is in attendance, 

22 he just stepped out of the room, and his 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

13

1 conflicts of relevance for today is just 

2 Mound.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Very good.

4 MR. KATZ: It's your meeting, Dr. 

5 Melius.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

7 you, Ted. And I'd like to introduce one 

8 other person who is here, DeKeely 

9 Hartsfield, who is our new counsel and made 

10 it to this meeting because the government's 

11 open, which it wasn't at the last meeting, 

12 but someone I've had the pleasure of working 

13 with on lots of other issues.

14 MS. HARTSFIELD: Thanks.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So, anyway, 

16 welcome to working with us.

17 MS. HARTSFIELD: Thank you.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And we'll start 

19 with a NIOSH Program Update from Stu 

20 Hinnefeld. Stu?

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Thank you, Dr. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Melius. Back here in my same old role 

2 again, so, as usual, I -- well, usually my 

3 slides work. Okay, operator error, they do 

4 work.

5 I wanted to spend a little bit 

6 about program news and speak about the 

7 budget deal, the recent budget deal that the 

8 government passed, and what it means.

9 In the budget deal that was 

10 passed in January there was relief given to 

11 some of the sequesters, the reductions, 

12 funding reductions, that had been planned, 

13 that had been part of the law up until the 

14 most recent budget bill. But that relief 

15 did not extend to what are called mandatory 

16 programs, which is what ours is. Ours is a 

17 mandatory program because Congress told the 

18 government to specifically do this, run this 

19 program. It's called a mandatory program 

20 and the sequester was left in place for 

21 those programs.

22 So, we are facing a sequester 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

15

1 again in fiscal 2014. That means that our 

2 new budget authority in 2014 will be 

3 slightly less than we had in 2013. We had a 

4 7.9 percent sequester in 2013. You know, 

5 that means that was 7.9 percent lower than 

6 our funding the year before.

7 And this year, when I was told 

8 our sequester was 9.8 percent, I about 

9 panicked because I thought it meant 9.8 

10 percent lower than last year, but it 

11 doesn't. It means 9.8 percent lower than 

12 the unsequestered amount back in 2012.

13 So we have a slightly reduced 

14 amount of money this year compared to last 

15 year because of some things -- I won't get 

16 into very much about complications with 

17 administrating contracts. We actually 

18 probably won't feel too much effect of this 

19 year's sequester because we've been spending 

20 on the program at such a low rate because 

21 the way the 2013 sequester was implemented.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 So we think that there shouldn't 

2 be any less progress, or any slowing of 

3 progress this year compared to last, and in 

4 fact we might be able to even accelerate 

5 progress a little bit.

6 But a lot of that depends upon 

7 some administrative things within the Agency 

8 and contract awards and things like that. 

9 But we think we will at least be no worse 

10 off than last year and should be a little 

11 better off.

12 I'll try to answer any questions 

13 about that, but it's -- there's not a lot 

14 more that I know. I do know that we're 

15 facing a sequester also in 2015, meaning 

16 that we will have less money in 2015 than we 

17 had in 2012.

18 I suspect it'll be less than we 

19 have this year, but I don't know what the 

20 amount is now. I asked and was kind of told 

21 I can't know that yet. So, I wish I were 

22 making that up.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

17

1 Then the other activities that 

2 have been going on, we kind of are 

3 continuing some of our outreach activities. 

4 I put those up here because those are, while 

5 they're routine -- or we do them on a normal 

6 fashion, none of them are particularly 

7 routine.

8 In January of this year, our 

9 Ombudsman, Denise Brock, and the DOL 

10 Ombudsman's Office, sponsored an outreach 

11 meeting here in Kansas City. And I believe 

12 -- my reports from that, that was very well 

13 attended. There was a lot of the 

14 information shared. I think they probably 

15 provided a lot of good information to the 

16 community here concerning our program and 

17 its effects.

18 In February of this year there 

19 will be an outreach meeting in Denver. This 

20 is mainly sponsored by the Department of 

21 Labor and this is their SEC town hall 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 meeting. Whenever a new SEC Class is added 

2 they usually, very frequently, they'll go to 

3 the area of the site where the SEC is, has 

4 been added, and have a public meeting to 

5 kind of explain how the SEC works to the 

6 affected population.

7 We attend those routinely in 

8 order to answer questions that come up that 

9 may, you know, pertain to our part of the 

10 program. And so we'll be in Denver later on 

11 in February.

12 In addition, the three agencies 

13 involved in the program, the Department of 

14 Energy, the Department of Labor and us, have 

15 agreed to meet with a collection of 

16 advocates.

17 This meeting was arranged by the Department 

18 of Labor, really, with -- I think largely 

19 with some ANWAG representatives. And so 

20 we're going to meet in Denver on February 

21 20th to talk about items of interest to the 

22 advocate community, and we'll all three be 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

19

1 doing that.

2 We've done that a few times over 

3 the years, maybe about once a year, maybe 

4 less often than that, but I know I've been 

5 to meetings in Washington with the 

6 advocates. And Denise hosted a workshop for 

7 advocates that sort of turned out to have 

8 the same purpose, because she had all three 

9 agencies in there.

10 Let’s see, that was back in 

11 November of 2012. So, it kind of had the 

12 same purpose of this information exchange 

13 with the advocates, and it usually turns out 

14 we get some pretty good feedback from that. 

15 The advocates are appreciative and feel like 

16 they've learned something about the topics 

17 we cover.

18 The final item on my list I've 

19 mentioned because there's a possibility 

20 it'll effect the functionality of the 

21 applications that everybody uses on a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 program. This is kind of a downstream sort 

2 of thing.

3 As you know, our program holds a 

4 great deal of personally identifiable 

5 information, things that have to be held 

6 private. The computer systems, the CDC 

7 computer systems, treats that information 

8 securely as it's transferred within the 

9 system so it's encrypted during transfer.

10 However, it's not encrypted at 

11 rest, meaning on the servers where it 

12 resides. And that is the requirement that 

13 we're facing that our servers be encrypted. 

14 This is not a simple, technological fix.

15 We've been dealing with our 

16 computer gurus for quite a while to arrive 

17 at a fix. We are trying to be insistent 

18 that our applications should continue to 

19 look like they look now, and we should be 

20 able to do the things we do now in order to 

21 run our program.

22 So they're struggling with making 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

21

1 the technology, obtaining the technology, 

2 that allows us to do that and still allows 

3 the data to be encrypted at rest. So, it's 

4 been a longstanding process. It will 

5 probably cost us some money, cost the 

6 program some money that will just kind of 

7 disappear from our available funds. But I 

8 don't think it's such a great amount that'll 

9 have any particular impact on the program's 

10 progress.

11 And it may, in fact, if there is 

12 no solution, it may be that some of our 

13 applications and how they look may have to 

14 be altered in order to accomplish this. 

15 We've been really been resisting that. 

16 We've been telling our computer folks, look, 

17 you're the ones that want us to do this, 

18 give us the technology that supports the 

19 program. So, that's just kind of an ongoing 

20 discussion. We've been in these discussions 

21 probably for a year now, and so on. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I'll mention one more piece of 

2 news that isn't on my slide because I only 

3 learned of it about 15 minutes ago. Most of 

4 you know Christina Batt, who is our liaison, 

5 works in our Congressional Liaison Office, 

6 she let me know 15 minutes ago she's going 

7 to be leaving that post in the near future.

8 So, for our next meeting, 

9 presumably we'll have a new Congressional 

10 Liaison. And I know, you know, she's moving 

11 on to another opportunity. I'm always 

12 pleased when people go take a job that they 

13 feel like they would like better, but it's 

14 also very sad for us when one of our people 

15 moves on. And I've enjoyed working with 

16 Christina and we'll miss her support in that 

17 role.

18 So, if anybody wants to say 

19 goodbye to her, you can say goodbye to her 

20 at the meeting at breaks or something. Of 

21 course, I don't think she's going completely 

22 away, she's just changing jobs.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

23

1 I'll just go very quickly through 

2 our statistic slides. They're the same 

3 slides that I show every time, they're just 

4 updated. The first slide, the numbers tend 

5 to go up at a rate of about 200 a month. 

6 That's about how many we get in from DOL, 

7 new claims, and that's about how many we 

8 send out.

9 The number of cases affected by 

10 SEC is -- that's not the total number of 

11 cases that have been affected by SECs we've 

12 added, but that is the number that have the 

13 status of pulled for SEC in our system. And 

14 so that's the ones we can easily identify. 

15 Any claim that came in after we've added an 

16 SEC, we don't see. So we wouldn't know 

17 about that. So, we don't really know a true 

18 count of cases, claims that were affected by 

19 SEC additions.

20 The number of cases with us has 

21 kind of been pretty steady for awhile. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 We're at the current funding level, we're 

2 not making any dents in that, but we managed 

3 to maintain the pace, the incoming pace, so 

4 it's not going up.

5 And if any additional resources 

6 become available, we try to work on site 

7 research activities, rather than try to 

8 reduce that any further. We feel like 

9 that's at a manageable level now.

10 Okay, then just to break down 

11 where the cases are, as always, there are a 

12 number of cases that we consider with us 

13 where we have completed a draft dose 

14 reconstruction and the claimant has that 

15 draft dose reconstruction in their hands and 

16 we're waiting for the return of the OCAS-1 

17 form. So, the actual number of cases we 

18 have in front of us is somewhat less than 

19 the 1356. 

20 And here are the percentages of 

21 successful and unsuccessful claims. I think 

22 I did the arithmetic, it's not on the slide, 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

25

1 but I think that's about 28 percent of the 

2 claims done through dose reconstruction are 

3 above 50 percent. That number has declined 

4 a little bit over the last few years and I 

5 attribute that to the addition of SEC 

6 Classes during that time.

7 And the removal of those claims, 

8 then, from dose reconstruction and some of 

9 the cancers that we're usually most likely 

10 to have success with, like lung cancer, on 

11 dose reconstruction are compensated through 

12 the SEC, and so we don't get a successful 

13 dose reconstruction out of those cases. 

14 They just go to the SEC.

15 Just our standard submittal 

16 versus production, you can see for quite 

17 some time these are -- yeah, these are 

18 quarterly numbers, so you can see the line 

19 of receipts and incoming and outgoing kind 

20 of, you know, hangs around 600 per quarter 

21 there for the last few years, actually.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And status of claims and our 

2 early claims, any claim that's not done or

3 claims that have been reinstated recently, 

4 both for the 5000 and the 10,000. Some of 

5 these claims, the initial ones were cases 

6 that were CLL cases that were submitted in 

7 error originally and then essentially were 

8 cancelled because CLL wasn't a covered 

9 condition.

10 Once it was a covered condition 

11 then these claims came back, but those are 

12 all in the process of being completed now 

13 and we have methods now for doing the CLL 

14 dose reconstruction for all the claims. So, 

15 we don't have any claims pended for that 

16 anymore.

17 This is our count of the DOE 

18 statistics. You can see, these are -- I 

19 believe this is a pretty good improvement 

20 from my last report, especially on the 

21 greater than 60 days.

22 DOE's electronic transfer system 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

27

1 that we're all using, we call SERT, which is 

2 Secure Electronic Records Transfer, allows 

3 us to submit requests and DOL to submit 

4 responses electronically rather than sending 

5 paper back and forth. And that's been a 

6 real good process improvement and is -- I 

7 think, all of the agencies engaged in that 

8 are really appreciative of that.

9 So, that, I think, is part of 

10 this, and then the DOE does continue to 

11 focus on getting these responses to us. The 

12 SEC summary table, which you'll see again in 

13 LaVon's presentation later on, I won't go 

14 through that very much, but that's the 

15 totals on the SEC's activity.

16 We took a little effort to make 

17 sure that this slide in my presentation 

18 matched the slide in his presentation, so 

19 unless something changed since Friday they 

20 should be the same.

21 And I believe that might be the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 last one I have. Any questions?

2 (Pause.)

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Very quiet 

4 group today, this morning. Must’ve been the 

5 ethics review.

6 Okay. We'll keep moving, then. 

7 Thank you.

8 MEMBER ANDERSON: Just one quick. 

9 When do you expect -- the petitions that are 

10 under HHS review, when would you expect 

11 those to be completed?

12 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, there's no 

13 clock on that. That is --

14 MEMBER ANDERSON: How long have 

15 they been there, I guess, is the question?

16 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, General 

17 Steel's record is really voluminous and that 

18 just got there.

19 MEMBER ANDERSON: Okay.

20 MR. HINNEFELD: So, that just got 

21 there. Hooker Electrochemical has been 

22 there for a while, and I haven't heard any 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

29

1 activity on that one very recently.

2 The Weldon Spring Plant, we 

3 received maybe a month ago a series of 

4 questions from the panel that we then 

5 responded to at that time. So, you know, 

6 that's what we know about that.

7 The panels, you know, these are 

8 HHS panels that are empaneled for a specific 

9 site. There's no group of people set aside, 

10 you know, there's no review organization out 

11 there. It's a group of people who are 

12 selected and empaneled to do a specific 

13 review and they tend to work at their own 

14 pace.

15 And, honestly, we don't -- we're 

16 not really privy to their operation so we 

17 don't really hear much unless they have 

18 questions.

19 MEMBER ANDERSON: It just seemed 

20 like a longer list than usual.

21 MR. HINNEFELD: Well, the HHS 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 reviews are prompted by a petitioner 

2 appealing the decision of the Advisory Board 

3 that a Class is not warranted. And so there 

4 have been some of those decisions in the 

5 past year or so and so those decisions had 

6 been appealed.

7 MEMBER ANDERSON: Okay, thanks.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Just so 

9 everybody on the Board knows and so forth, 

10 Stu and I have talked with the budget 

11 changes and so forth underway, and once Stu 

12 gets a better idea on what the impacts may 

13 be and so forth we'll be talking some more.

14 If you remember, we did the same 

15 thing during the last year with the 

16 sequester. And we are trying to, you know, 

17 make sure that the higher priority items 

18 keep moving along and we have a schedule and 

19 that we're coordinated between, you know, 

20 the Board's activities and NIOSH's 

21 activities so that resources are sort of 

22 paired up correctly to, you know, lessen any 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

31

1 impact of the cutbacks as much as possible.

2 So, we'll be keeping you informed 

3 on that. I think we're a little ways away 

4 from fully understanding what needs to be 

5 done, mainly due to some of the contract 

6 issues.

7 MR. HINNEFELD: We have really --

8 it almost never happens that we have a 

9 reason to have a priority to do something 

10 other than what the Board's priority is. 

11 You know, we will work these in accordance 

12 with the Board's priority. There might be 

13 one small exception to that going on right 

14 now, is that we are trying to get some 

15 information from U.S. Enrichment Corp, which 

16 is about the Paducah Plant, and this relates 

17 to our gaseous diffusion plant, work as well 

18 as highly enriched uranium neutron dose 

19 work.

20 And it's been very difficult, 

21 since they're not DOE, they're not DOE 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 funded, it's been sort of a difficult 

2 conversation and we finally got an okay to 

3 go look at some records that they generated. 

4 And so we do want to get that done before 

5 they forget about us. But other than that, 

6 we just intend to work with the Board's 

7 priorities.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. Any 

9 other questions? If not, thank you, Stu. 

10 And next we'll turn to DOE 

11 Program Update with Pat Worthington and Greg 

12 Lewis. Welcome, Pat, we appreciate you being 

13 here with us. We appreciate Greg, too, but 

14 we see him all the time.

15 DR. WORTHINGTON: Good morning. 

16 It's always a pleasure to come before this 

17 Board and talk about a very important 

18 program to the Department of Energy and to 

19 just remind you of our commitment.

20 So, again, I would like to say 

21 good morning. I'm joined today here in the 

22 room by Greg Lewis, and Isaf is actually on 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

33

1 the phone as well.

2 So I want to talk just briefly, 

3 you've heard many of these things before, 

4 and to be available along with Greg to 

5 answer any questions that you might have.

6 Our commitment, our purpose, our 

7 mandate is very clear, it's very simple. On 

8 behalf of the claimants, we want to make 

9 sure, because these are in fact DOE workers, 

10 we want to make sure that all of the 

11 information that's available regarding the 

12 workers, their records, as well as facility 

13 information, is made available. And so that 

14 is our charge.

15 DOE's responsibility splits 

16 around a number of areas, and I'll mention 

17 them just briefly. One is to respond to the 

18 Department of Labor/NIOSH requests for 

19 information. It's very important that 

20 information is made available on employment 

21 verification exposure records. It's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 important: did they work at DOE and what 

2 were they exposed to during the time that 

3 they were working here? 

4 We want to provide support and 

5 assistance to the Department of Labor and 

6 NIOSH, as well as the Advisory Board, on 

7 large scale research and site 

8 characterization projects. These things are 

9 important. 

10 Conduct research in coordination 

11 with DOL and NIOSH as needed to cover 

12 information regarding covered facilities.

13 Our roles and responsibilities 

14 are clear, but, again, as I said, they're 

15 very powerful. And it certainly isn't 

16 something that we can do as one individual, 

17 and so Greg's office, he works very well 

18 with what we call site contacts. The 

19 information is pretty much at the sites, 

20 it's not at DOE Headquarters in most cases. 

21 And so there's a network of 

22 individuals that Greg is working with on a 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

35

1 regular basis regarding budgets and 

2 delivering documents and interfacing to make 

3 sure that NIOSH and DOL can get the 

4 information, you know, that's needed.

5 Individual records. In the end, 

6 it gets down the individual and what 

7 information can be provided regarding the 

8 individuals. Our workload over the years, 

9 the last few years, has remained pretty 

10 constant in terms of employment 

11 verifications: about 6,000 a year; dose 

12 records for NIOSH, less than 5,000; and for 

13 DARs, less than 6,000 a year.

14 So these are very important 

15 things. We continue to work on them and to 

16 look for ways to improve our efficiencies in 

17 these areas.

18 We find that in DOE, that in some 

19 cases workers work at multiple sites, or 

20 within a site they may work for multiple 

21 contractors and multiple missions. And so 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 sometimes it's a very interesting assignment 

2 to search for records over the career, full 

3 career of these DOE workers.

4 Our record packages that DOE 

5 provides to DOL and NIOSH, sometimes they're 

6 simple, one page documents. There could be 

7 things that are hundreds of pages. And so, 

8 again, we're looking to work on these 

9 regardless of scale.

10 Typical work records, many 

11 departments over the years, DOE, in terms of 

12 delivering the mission, the contractors 

13 certainly have been diverse in terms of the 

14 way that they're structured and organized.

15 And typically when you have a new 

16 group come in, they are certainly different 

17 in structure and the way things are done. 

18 So you're looking for different -- sometimes 

19 the same information, but different 

20 department names, locations, and 

21 organization structures.

22 But our goal is to make sure that 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

37

1 we're able to deliver these documents and 

2 not return a decision that we cannot locate 

3 them. And they certainly are provided in 

4 various forms.

5 The large scale research products 

6 that are driven by the needs of DOL and 

7 NIOSH. Again, we're not just offering up 

8 records, but we're offering up things that 

9 these organizations have indicated that they 

10 need in order to be able to make a decision. 

11 Some of these projects can be very simple, 

12 some can be very costly. But again we're 

13 working to sort of deliver the information.

14 At any given time, DOE is 

15 supporting multiple large scale projects. 

16 We are trying to balance these at various 

17 sites and various organizations to provide 

18 the information.

19 Currently, here's a list of 

20 things that we're working on. It's 

21 certainly quite extensive: Kansas City, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Rocky Flats, Savannah River, Hanford, 

2 Sandia, Los Alamos, Oak Ridge. Many of these 

3 are very large, complex sites, and 

4 certainly, you know, a challenge.

5 But I think, over time, we've 

6 been able to come up with various ways in 

7 terms of being more efficient in delivering. 

8 And one of the things that we've mentioned 

9 over the years when we've come before this 

10 group, that we certainly work very well with 

11 organization at DOE called Legacy 

12 Management. That organization is very 

13 experienced in looking for records. And so 

14 we certainly work with them, and I believe 

15 that we've been able to improve on our 

16 delivering and on the quality and 

17 completeness of work in terms of working 

18 with Legacy Management.

19 Document reviews, again, we are 

20 committed to reviewing documents as needed 

21 and returning them in a timely manner. I 

22 believe I was before this Board maybe two or 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

39

1 three years ago. It could've actually been 

2 longer. We were working, I think, with the 

3 different organizations, with the Board, in 

4 trying to address security needs that we 

5 had.

6 And so we were able to develop, I 

7 believe, in collaboration with you, with all 

8 of you, a security plan that would work in 

9 terms of delivering the documents that are 

10 needed, but also meeting the requirements 

11 that were placed upon us in terms of 

12 security.

13 I mentioned early, in the early 

14 part of the discussion, that we view 

15 ourselves as having a responsibility for 

16 delivering what is needed for the claimant. 

17 We also have the responsibility of meeting 

18 certain other requirements, like security. 

19 And so we are certainly juggling these 

20 things and trying to -- but I think that our 

21 security plan and working with you and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 getting people to sign up to that plan, I 

2 think, has certainly improved across the 

3 board in that area.

4 The average turnaround time for 

5 reviews is typically about eight weeks. 

6 But, again, any given review can be shorter 

7 or longer. And certainly -- and we 

8 understand the need to be flexible. And so 

9 when there is a need for expedited review we 

10 have the full support of people in 

11 headquarters to do that, as well as reach 

12 into the sites when we need to have them to 

13 review documents as well.

14 Certainly, Glenn, one of the 

15 things, because he has safety and security, 

16 has been able to, you know, put the pressure 

17 on, when we need to do it, to get these 

18 things out.

19 Facility research, we have over 

20 300 facilities, covered facilities, under 

21 the DOE program here, and the full listing 

22 can be found in the website that you see 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

41

1 here on this slide.

2 I believe that Stu mentioned our 

3 SERT, which is our Secure Electronic Records 

4 Transfer system. We are very proud of that 

5 system. We had, as you know, some 

6 challenges over the years in delivering 

7 things in a secured manner. And many of 

8 you, probably in your own personal lives as 

9 well as in your work assignments, are very 

10 much more aware and more sensitive of 

11 protecting private information, or PII.

12 And so we believe the secured 

13 network where we can transfer information, 

14 and quickly and securely, you know, has 

15 solved a number of issues and also allowed 

16 us to be more efficient. And also it's 

17 allowing us to be more transparent. As we 

18 look at the data that we have there in SERT, 

19 it can tell you, you know, right away, you

20 know, how long they've had the records, how 

21 long the request is out there, what's still 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 outstanding.

2 And I know, for us at DOE, it's a 

3 driver, it's a reminder, that where we have 

4 things that are, or becoming a little bit 

5 too slow, that we need to certainly push on 

6 that.

7 And one of the things that Greg 

8 has been doing in his organization is 

9 looking at that data and going to the 

10 various sites and having to work with them 

11 to get something resolved in terms of moving 

12 forward more quickly, or identifying that 

13 there's a major issue and what do we do to 

14 solve that issue.

15 So, I think that SERT's been kind 

16 of a win-win for all of us. We think it's 

17 working, but we always welcome feedback in 

18 terms of how we can improve more.

19 Outreach. Outreach is very 

20 important. You can have a good program that 

21 you're working on for improvement, but if 

22 you're not reaching the people that you need 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

43

1 to reach then you're certainly not as 

2 successful as you want to be.

3 So, we certainly believe that 

4 outreach is important and that it's 

5 important in collaboration with DOL and 

6 NIOSH. And so we work together. We've had 

7 town hall meetings and other kinds of 

8 activities to kind of get out and reach 

9 people and get the word out. And so we want 

10 to continue to do this as we move forward. 

11 A little bit about the Former 

12 Worker Medical Screening Program. I talked 

13 just briefly about kind of our processes and 

14 where we are on EEOICPA, which is for 

15 current and former workers.

16 And I'll talk now just about the 

17 Former Worker Medical Screening Program. We 

18 believe that, you know, this is, you know, 

19 the right thing to do for the Department, 

20 for the country, in terms of DOE has some 

21 very interesting, exciting, and in some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 cases hazardous work going on.

2 And so this is a program where we 

3 asked, we offered to former workers so they 

4 can return to one of the locations for 

5 Former Worker Medical Screening and get a 

6 screening that's designed for them, in terms 

7 of here are the hazards you were exposed to 

8 and here are the kinds of things you should 

9 be screened for to see if you had any 

10 adverse health effects.

11 And that's one of the things we 

12 do with the outreach. It's not just on 

13 EEOICPA, but it's outreach on Former Worker 

14 Medical Screening Program as well.

15 And there's a link here that, if 

16 you need more information, certainly you can 

17 go to that link and look for it. 

18 I'll mention two pieces of the 

19 Former Worker Medical Screening Program on 

20 this slide. One is the National 

21 Supplemental Screening Program. It's a 

22 program that, wherever you are in the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

45

1 country, if you're a former worker, there's 

2 a number that you can call and we can 

3 arrange for a medical screening that's 

4 unique to the occupational hazards that you 

5 were exposed to when you were working at 

6 DOE.

7 We also have the Building Trades 

8 National Medical Screening Program. And 

9 some of them may be here today, at this time 

10 or later on. Those are ones that are 

11 actually in this area and that could also 

12 provide -- or wherever you are, screening 

13 for construction and subcontracted workers.

14 This is, I think, a very 

15 important one, as all of the medical 

16 screening programs are, but I'll talk about 

17 this one just for another minute.

18 Construction workers are moving 

19 around quite a bit. They're exposed to a 

20 lot of unique hazards. And subcontractors 

21 are certainly bouncing around and they need, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 you know, at some point when they've the 

2 workforce, to kind of reflect on those 

3 things that were unique to them, and so this 

4 is a great opportunity for them to be 

5 screened.

6 That was a very quick overview of 

7 kind of where we are, here are the things 

8 that we've been doing, you know, all along. 

9 But I'm here to answer any questions that 

10 you may have about -- I see that people are 

11 reaching for microphones quickly, so I'll 

12 ask Greg to join me here at the podium, and 

13 so, collectively, together, we'll answer 

14 questions.

15 MR. KATZ: And just to remind 

16 Board Members, please speak directly into 

17 your mics so that it's very audible in the 

18 room, but some of the folks on the line are 

19 having a hard time hearing Board Members' 

20 questions. Thanks.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We'll start 

22 with Paul.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

47

1 MEMBER ZIEMER: Thank you for the 

2 presentation. I did notice, on Slide 17, I 

3 actually clicked on your link there on the 

4 Former Worker Medical Screening Program. 

5 But when I click on that link, what I get is 

6 something called "latest enforcement 

7 documents."

8 DR. WORTHINGTON: We're not the 

9 enforcement arm, so --

10 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yeah, I knew 

11 that, so it's not so much a question, but 

12 maybe at some point you can give us the 

13 correct link.

14 DR. WORTHINGTON: We will 

15 certainly look at that and get it back, you 

16 know, to the Board Members and correct the 

17 record on that.

18 We've had some issues across the 

19 Department with some PII breaches and links 

20 and things like that. And so every time we 

21 find out that there's one that's broken or 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 incorrect we want to fix it, so thank you 

2 for that comment.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Anybody 

4 else with questions? If not, I have a, I 

5 guess, question/concern. First of all, we 

6 appreciate all of your efforts in sort of 

7 putting together a program that's been, you 

8 know, very responsive to -- and activity has 

9 been very responsive to our needs and the 

10 needs of NIOSH and, I believe, the 

11 Department of Labor in this program.

12 It's certainly a large task. 

13 It's largely hidden from view, to some 

14 extent, except when something's delayed or 

15 there's a problem, but we do appreciate it.

16 And I will say, in terms of the 

17 classification issues, I think that's worked 

18 remarkably well given some of the problems 

19 there. I guess my question is, is what we 

20 had talked about a little bit earlier with 

21 Stu was the issue with the budget changes 

22 and what's going to happen.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

49

1 You know, we've had episodes 

2 where there have been delays and, 

3 particularly, with so-called research 

4 projects where we were asking for, you know, 

5 some additional amount of work from the 

6 particular sites and, you know, they have 

7 competing priorities and staffing issues and 

8 budget issues also.

9 And I was wondering if you have 

10 any comments on where you see that going 

11 this current sort of fiscal year and beyond 

12 that? Then I sort of have a follow up 

13 question.

14 DR. WORTHINGTON: Sure. In terms 

15 of the budget, as you know, we were on a CR 

16 through sometime in January. We actually 

17 have budget now, but the money, you get the 

18 okay that you have it, but the money has to 

19 flow to you. So we don't have the funds in 

20 the bank for all of the projects yet.

21 But in terms of this particular 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 program, it has always been, you know, 

2 difficult, since the creation of HSS, to 

3 determine how many dollars are really 

4 needed, you know, for the program.

5 And so Greg is good at those 

6 different POCs and the different monies that 

7 we have out there in terms of looking at 

8 where we are and where we need to move money 

9 around.

10 And so when we find that we have 

11 a scenario where we're almost on hold or 

12 something on a given project, we look within 

13 the project in terms of where best to, you 

14 know, to shift the funds.

15 I do not believe that we've ever 

16 had a scenario where we said that this one 

17 is cut down, you're not getting anymore this 

18 year, you can't do anything. So we're 

19 moving money around, and while there were 

20 some delays with the CR, we believe that 

21 shortly we'll be able to, you know, put the 

22 monies where they need to go and things will 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

51

1 be up and running quickly.

2 And if that's not the case, then 

3 we always want to hear back, because we 

4 never want to say, well, we're not looking 

5 for records anymore at that site until six 

6 months from now, or three months. It's 

7 always supposed to be an active program and 

8 if we need to locate things we will do that.

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. No, we 

10 appreciate that. I would just ask that we 

11 maybe try to coordinate up front a little 

12 bit in terms of where the priorities are, 

13 where we see the needs from this program 

14 going.

15 Stu and I had breakfast this 

16 morning and I noticed one site that was 

17 missing from your list there, and again not 

18 your fault, but one where I think we foresee 

19 a fair amount of activity this year is the 

20 Idaho site, and I think could very well 

21 develop into a research project.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 We've just, the Board and NIOSH, 

2 for various reasons have not really engaged 

3 in that site. A review of the Site Profile 

4 there, and I can, you know, envision, you 

5 know, a fair amount of activity there. 

6 Again, I don't know what resources are 

7 already there. There may be other sites, 

8 too, coming up. 

9 So I think it's this sort of 

10 budget issues evolves as you sort of, you 

11 know, DOE and NIOSH and DOL get their handle 

12 on the budget for this year, that we try to 

13 coordinate and try to see what extent we can 

14 identify where we think, you know, the 

15 resources will be needed in the coming year 

16 and try to avoid those delays.

17 We certainly want to avoid the 

18 situation where there are such long delays 

19 in getting necessary documents that, you 

20 know, we have to make a decision as to 

21 whether we recommend basically saying we 

22 can't complete work on this project, or 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

53

1 address this SEC issue, because basically 

2 the information isn't there, available.

3 And we've avoided that so far, 

4 but we've come close, at least one site, and 

5 I think we need to do as best we can to work 

6 together to try to avoid that situation.

7 DR. WORTHINGTON: I think the key 

8 is communication, communication, and it's on 

9 our part, on DOE's part. We need to 

10 continue to reach out to DOL and to NIOSH, 

11 as well as our site POCs about, you know, 

12 about fundings. Priorities do change and we 

13 need to -- as I said, with this program we 

14 try to watch where do we need to go and how 

15 do we need to shift money around.

16 And so we hope that we will, you 

17 know, reach out more, but when we don't just 

18 do it, you know, we need to hear from, you 

19 know, from our counterparts as well. If you 

20 see it looks like we're not really, you 

21 know, watching an area and we need to move 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 forward. 

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other Board 

3 Members? Yeah, Dave?

4 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I was 

5 curious, former colleagues of mine at the 

6 City University at Queens College, Dr. 

7 Markowitz and others, are doing medical 

8 screenings of radiation workers. Is that in 

9 any way affiliated with your Former Worker 

10 Medical Screening Program?

11 DR. WORTHINGTON: Yes, yes. 

12 That's one of our major principal 

13 investigators for the Former Worker Medical 

14 Screening Program, one of the big pieces of 

15 that program. So, yes.

16 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: But he does 

17 also, I think, workers who are not former

18 workers, but people who are currently 

19 working?

20 DR. WORTHINGTON: There's one 

21 part of the Former Worker Program, in terms 

22 of the things that he's actually doing, 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

55

1 where there are some former workers that get 

2 the CT scans, yes. Current workers, I mean, 

3 yes. There are a few current workers in his 

4 program, yes.

5 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Thank you.

6 DR. WORTHINGTON: By some with a 

7 different mandate, that's correct.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other 

9 questions?

10 MEMBER ROESSLER: Jim, this is 

11 Gen. I don't know if anybody else is having 

12 trouble on the line hearing. I can hardly 

13 hear you. I heard Paul quite well, I hear 

14 Ted well, the speaker kind of comes and 

15 goes. I think people need to make sure 

16 they're speaking into their microphone.

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. We'll 

18 remind people, Gen.

19 MEMBER ROESSLER: You're still 

20 very weak. Maybe the microphones need 

21 adjusting.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Okay, 

2 we'll do the best we can.

3 MEMBER ROESSLER: Thanks.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And, okay, 

5 thank you.

6 DR. WORTHINGTON: Thank you very 

7 much.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And how are we 

9 handling the DOL?

10 MR. KATZ: They should be on the 

11 line.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

13 MR. KATZ: So that's Chris 

14 Crawford from DOL, who is speaking for Jeff 

15 who is out with an illness.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Chris, 

17 are you on the line?

18 MR. CRAWFORD: Yes, I'm here.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. We can 

20 hear you fine. And Stu is getting your 

21 slides up. And Stu's brought in his 

22 assistant LaVon to handle this presentation.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

57

1 He's ready, so go ahead whenever 

2 you're ready, Chris.

3 MR. CRAWFORD: Very good. My 

4 name is Chris Crawford. I am a health 

5 physicist and I am filling in for my boss, 

6 Jeff Kotsch, who had planned to be here, but 

7 unfortunately was unable to. So we're 

8 having to do this remotely.

9 And I'd like to thank LaVon and 

10 Stu for putting up the slides.

11 MR. RUTHERFORD: No problem, just 

12 tell me when to turn them.

13 MR. CRAWFORD: Okay. Let's go to 

14 the second slide. I'm going to just talk 

15 about some of the changes. I think anybody 

16 who's interested in the many details on 

17 these slides, many of which are repetitive 

18 session-to-session, should please go to the 

19 Board's website and view them there.

20 On this slide we see that there's 

21 just over 168,000 cases that have been filed 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 under EEOICPA and over $10 billion in 

2 compensation has been paid out to-date.

3 Also we see that there's 41,000 

4 cases that have been sent to NIOSH for dose 

5 reconstruction. Thirty-nine thousand cases 

6 have been returned by NIOSH; 33,000 with the 

7 dose construction and about 5,800 without 

8 dose reconstruction.

9 And we show about 2,200 cases 

10 currently at NIOSH. I have no doubt that 

11 these figures will vary a little bit between 

12 NIOSH's figures and ours, but we do the best 

13 we can to reconcile them.

14 Let's proceed to the slide with 

15 NIOSH-related cases, SEC and DR 

16 compensation. So we see that of $4.34 

17 billion in compensation, based on 46,000 

18 claims, $1.3 billion was based on dose 

19 reconstruction, and that’s for 12,500 

20 claims; and another $3 billion on SEC cases, 

21 which accounted for 33,674 claims.

22 Next slide, please. I think the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

59

1 interesting thing here is the 

2 approval/denial ratio. Of the 27,000 cases 

3 with a dose reconstruction and a final 

4 decision, we show 9,559 final approvals and 

5 17,506 final denials, or about a 35 percent 

6 approval rate and a 65 percent denial rate.

7 As Stu has already noted, the 

8 approval rate is slowly declining, and he 

9 mentioned one factor in that. Another is 

10 probably that, in a sense, the claimants are 

11 working later in the history of the nuclear 

12 weapons program. And the later you worked, 

13 the tighter the standards were, the more 

14 monitoring there was, so that that probably 

15 has an impact on how many claims are 

16 approved because our certainty is higher.

17 Next slide, under Part B cases 

18 filed, this is a nice pie chart. For those 

19 of you at home it's worth, perhaps, going to 

20 the site to see this. With the Part B 

21 cases, we show that NIOSH got 34 percent of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 them, RECA cases were 10 percent of them. 

2 SEC cases not referred to NIOSH are 12 

3 percent, and then SEC cases referred to 

4 NIOSH are 13 percent.

5 The other 31 percent, I'm not 

6 sure what those cases are. Some of them no 

7 doubt were cases that actually were rejected 

8 by DOL, either because there were no 

9 eligible survivors or it wasn't the cancer 

10 case or various factors of that type.

11 The next slide, Part B cancer 

12 cases with final decision. We show accepted 

13 dose reconstruction cases of about 8,800 

14 with $1.3 billion in paid compensation, and 

15 accepted SEC cases just over 20,000 with 

16 about $3 billion in paid compensation.

17 Now, there's another category 

18 that overlaps, which is cases accepted both 

19 on SEC status and with a Probability of 

20 Causation over 50 percent. You'll see 

21 that's a small number: about 673 and $100 

22 million paid in compensation. But that is 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

61

1 normally from those cases where medical 

2 benefits are sought and the case is -- a 

3 dose reconstruction is generated as well the 

4 accepted SEC status. 

5 So for all accepted SEC and DR 

6 cases we have about 30,000 with $4.4 billion 

7 paid in compensation.

8 The next slide are the top four 

9 work sites. I think we have the usual 

10 suspects here: Hanford, Savannah, Y-12, Los 

11 Alamos are still generating our biggest 

12 number of cases.

13 Next slide. We see now that 

14 final decisions for denied are 49 percent 

15 versus accepted 51 percent. Those are for 

16 Part B, of course.

17 Next slide. We look at DOE 

18 versus AWE. The only thing notable here is 

19 that AWE seems to be abating, only that we 

20 have now, I believe, handled a lot of the 

21 AWE sites. There have been quite a few SEC 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 determinations and so forth. So less and 

2 less of our workload is now AWE cases.

3 Next slide. I'll just mention 

4 the outreach events very briefly. We have 

5 town hall meetings and the traveling 

6 resource centers.

7 Next slide. Under the auspices 

8 of the Joint Outreach Task Group, which has 

9 members from my own organization, DEEOIC, 

10 also the Department of Energy, the 

11 Department of Energy Former Worker Program, 

12 NIOSH itself, the Ombudsman for NIOSH, and 

13 the Ombudsman for EEOICPA.

14 Next slide. We see though for 

15 fiscal year 2013 and 2014 we've had outreach 

16 meetings in Farmington, New Mexico; 

17 Livermore and Emeryville, California; 

18 Portsmouth, Ohio; Santa Fe, Albuquerque, and 

19 Grants, New Mexico; Bolingbrook, Illinois; 

20 Hanford; Knoxville, Tennessee; Los Alamos; 

21 Oak Ridge, X-10; then Fermi National 

22 Accelerator Laboratory and Argon National 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

63

1 Laboratory; Clarksville; Hanford Engineer 

2 Works. 

3 And next slide again. We have a 

4 future outreach event, which I believe Stu 

5 already mentioned, involving the Rocky Flats 

6 SEC event to be held in Denver.

7 Next slide. These are the SEC 

8 petition site discussions on the agenda. 

9 They're useful in the sense that we see how 

10 many claims have been submitted in these 

11 cases, Part B and Part E claims. I won't go 

12 into the individual numbers here unless 

13 someone wishes, but they will all be on the 

14 site. And we're looking at General Steel, 

15 Joslyn and Kansas City today.

16 And the next few slides are done 

17 for every presentation having to do with 

18 employee eligibility, covered conditions, 

19 survivor definitions and benefits. I won't 

20 go through those individually also. They 

21 will all be on the website.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Unfortunately, since Jeff can't 

2 be with us, I don't have quite his knowledge 

3 about strategic direction and management 

4 issues, but I'll be happy to entertain any 

5 questions. And if I don't know the answers, 

6 Jeff and/or I will reply to anybody who asks 

7 by email. Any questions?

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yeah, we have -

9 - first of all, thank you, Chris. And Josie 

10 Beach has a question.

11 MEMBER BEACH: Yeah, I just have 

12 a question on future outreach events. Have 

13 you got anything on the schedule for INL, 

14 Idaho?

15 MR. CRAWFORD: I will have to 

16 find out. I don't know personally if we do 

17 or not. That would seem to be a natural, 

18 because we're expecting activity there, but 

19 I can't answer you right now, and I'll be 

20 happy to send that to the entire Board.

21 MEMBER BEACH: Thank you.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

65

1 questions from the Board? Yes, Wanda, I 

2 think, down there?

3 MEMBER MUNN: Thank you, Chris, 

4 that's very much appreciated. 

5 In earlier reports that we've had 

6 from DOL you have given us the statics on 

7 the larger sites and the amounts that were 

8 paid specifically by site. I see that that 

9 is not included in this particular 

10 presentation. I hope that doesn't drop off 

11 your radar and that from time to time we 

12 will continue to see that type of 

13 information.

14 MR. CRAWFORD: Wanda, I'll be 

15 happy to put in that request. I don't know 

16 why it isn't there this time, but no doubt 

17 there's a good reason for it. But I will 

18 see if I can get that reinstated, certainly 

19 by the next Board meeting.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Thank you, 

21 appreciate that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MR. CRAWFORD: Thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Brad Clawson?

3 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, thanks, 

4 Chris. I was just wondering where we are 

5 here in Kansas City. Are we looking at 

6 having any for Kansas City in the future?

7 MR. CRAWFORD: Are you talking 

8 about outreach meetings?

9 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes.

10 MR. CRAWFORD: Right. Again, I 

11 can't answer of my own knowledge, and I'll 

12 have to get back to you and the Board on

13 that, which I'll be happy to do in the next 

14 day or so.

15 MR. HINNEFELD: This is Stu. 

16 About two weeks ago the Ombudsman, our 

17 Ombudsman and DOL's Ombudsman, sponsored the 

18 outreach, but the other agencies were here 

19 as well. I mean, DOE was here and DOL 

20 program was here as well. So there was one 

21 here about two weeks ago.

22 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, okay. I 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

67

1 didn't hear that. I just noticed that it 

2 hadn't made the list so I just wanted to 

3 make sure.

4 MR. CRAWFORD: I had to think on 

5 that, too, Stu.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Anybody 

7 else? Okay, Dave, yes. Dave please in the 

8 future put up your name. That's the rule, I 

9 can't --

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes, indeed. 

11 Yes, indeed. Thank you.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I'm not a mind 

13 reader.

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Under covered 

15 conditions, what is the condition CBD, 

16 excuse me?

17 MR. CRAWFORD: Chronic beryllium 

18 disease.

19 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Ah, thank 

20 you.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, there's --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MR. CRAWFORD: That was a stumper 

2 for me for a few minutes, too.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, there's a 

4 whole section of the original EEOICPA that 

5 dealt with that in an ongoing fashion. It's 

6 a fairly large program. Anybody else?

7 Okay. Thank you very much, 

8 Chris, for filling in and filling in from a 

9 distance.

10 MR. CRAWFORD: Thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Now we have the 

12 presentation we've all been waiting for all 

13 morning, this session, the highlight of the 

14 initial session here.

15 MR. RUTHERFORD: Everybody can go 

16 home after this, right?

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Except for you. 

18 So, LaVon Rutherford will give us his SEC 

19 update. Normally we put this at the end of 

20 the day, but it was just, you know, people 

21 are just --

22 MR. RUTHERFORD: Anxiously 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

69

1 awaiting.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- too excited, 

3 couldn't wait.

4 MR. RUTHERFORD: That's right. 

5 Okay. I'm going to give the status of 

6 upcoming SEC petitions, which is kind of, 

7 it's changed over time, upcoming SEC 

8 petitions are not as many lets put it that 

9 way.

10 We provide this update to the 

11 Board and also during the public, to allow 

12 the public to know what petitions we have, 

13 if they're in the qualification phase and 

14 the evaluation phase, 83.14s that we're 

15 working on, this allows the Board a chance 

16 to prepare for upcoming Work Group meeting 

17 and Advisory Board meetings.

18 And you've seen this slide 

19 earlier, Stu had presented it, I will talk a 

20 little about it a little bit more. As you 

21 notice we're up to 215 petitions that we've 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 received since 2004.

2 We have one petition that is in 

3 the qualification process, however, I will 

4 say that that petition is not going to 

5 qualify. It is for a site that did not have 

6 any radioactive material and it's going to 

7 be administratively closed here soon.

8 So we really have none in the 

9 process. We have no evaluations in progress 

10 at this time, and you can see that we have 

11 eight evaluations with the Advisory Board 

12 that are in some phase.

13 Seven of the eight petitions that 

14 are with the Advisory Board have had some 

15 action taken by the Advisory Board, meaning 

16 that a Class has been added, but they have 

17 left open that petition for additional work, 

18 Hanford, Los Alamos National Lab, Savannah 

19 River Site, Nuclear Metals, Inc., Joslyn 

20 Manufacturing, ORNL, and Rocky Flats.

21 The Hanford, we have been 

22 prioritizing our work because of the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

71

1 sequestration, the government shutdown, the 

2 CR, some of the sites had very little 

3 funding to finish out the year last year as 

4 Dr. Worthington had mentioned, and Hanford 

5 was one of those sites.

6 Los Alamos National Lab, Savannah 

7 River Site, we were affected by it a little 

8 bit, Oak Ridge National Lab, all of those 

9 sites had reduced funding in such that they 

10 were unable to complete some of the tasks 

11 that we needed completed.

12 So Hanford, what we've done was 

13 we prioritized some of the work to focus on 

14 addressing things that we can address with 

15 the information that we have available 

16 currently.

17 Los Alamos National Lab, we're 

18 doing, we have a questionnaire with them 

19 that has gone back and forth to try to 

20 address some concerns.

21 Savannah River site, we're 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 working hard to prepare for a February 5th 

2 Work Group meeting to try to close out some 

3 issues and preparations for the April 

4 Advisory Board meeting.

5 Nuclear Metals, Inc., we have 

6 continued our work on that and we are going 

7 to present at the April Board meeting a 

8 recommendation for an additional Class for 

9 Nuclear Metals, Inc., and I think we can 

10 work to closure pretty quick on that one 

11 from that point.

12 Joslyn is up for discussion at 

13 this Board meeting. Oak Ridge National Lab, 

14 our goal has been to have ORNL prepared for 

15 the April Advisory Board meeting.

16 However, we did have this delay 

17 as I had mentioned with getting data, so we 

18 are still waiting on some data from ORNL to 

19 support some final closure work that we have 

20 for that site. So the April Board meeting 

21 is a little bit in question for us.

22 And Rocky Flats, the Rocky Flats 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

73

1 that we had added the Class at the last 

2 Board meeting and we continue to work on 

3 four to five issues with that and I really 

4 can't give you a good end date for that one 

5 yet.

6 We have one petition evaluation 

7 that we recently completed and we will be 

8 presenting at this Board meeting and that's 

9 for the Kansas City Plant.

10 Potential SEC petitions, this 

11 slide hasn't changed much. What we've found 

12 is that some of these potential SECs getting 

13 a litmus claim to move forward for those 

14 petitions has been difficult, they're not 

15 coming through.

16 Sandia National Lab, Albuquerque, 

17 this was the old Z Division for LANL, 1945 

18 to 1948. What's happening is we believe 

19 that most of those claims are being 

20 processed under the SEC, the previous, the 

21 LANL SEC, so if any of those claims do move 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 forward we will move forward with the 83.14.

2 I think also what we plan to do 

3 is when resources are available we will 

4 basically draft our Evaluation Reports for 

5 these sights and have them prepped and ready 

6 to go so when a petition does, a litmus 

7 claim does come along we can move them 

8 forward quicker.

9 General Atomics, this was an old 

10 Class Definition that we've looked to modify 

11 to standards of basically how we would 

12 identify a Class today.

13 Dayton Project was, we're looking 

14 at an 83.14 based on the changes in the 

15 facility designation, the change to a DOE 

16 site, and also to add a 9-month period where 

17 operations shifted from Dayton Project to 

18 Mound.

19 Again, as I mentioned, we have 

20 one petition in the qualification process 

21 and that was Linde Air Products, 1945 to 

22 '47, however that petition is not going to 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

75

1 qualify and we have no other petitions that 

2 are in the evaluation process. And that's 

3 it.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. 

5 Questions for LaVon? Maybe we'll save up 

6 our questions until the very last thing on 

7 the program, but thank you, LaVon. Yes?

8 MR. HINNEFELD: Jim, if I could, 

9 I just wanted to clarify one thing I said 

10 while giving a response to Dr. Anderson's 

11 questions about the administrative reviews.

12 I said the General Steel 

13 Industries review had just gotten there. In 

14 fact the review was requested in April and 

15 essentially was accepted in May, but the 

16 record of the GSI discussion covered what 

17 five years?

18 And with many, many, many 

19 meetings, a lot of information submitted for 

20 those meetings, and the task of assembling 

21 the record and trying to put it in the, you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 know, sorting the information as it's 

2 requested and trying to minimize the 

3 duplication and putting that information 

4 together took quite a long time.

5 And so the entirety of the record 

6 didn't get to the administrative panel until 

7 pretty late in 2013, I don't remember the 

8 actual date, but it was last year, but it 

9 was toward the end of the year.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

11 you for that clarification, Stu. Any 

12 questions for LaVon? So we will try, just 

13 for Board Members, since somewhat LaVon 

14 predicts is the basis for how long our next 

15 Board meetings will last and how busy we 

16 will be the week before, since that's when 

17 we get all the reports.

18 We will update it at our next 

19 Board call and try to get a better idea of 

20 where we are and what to plan on for our 

21 next meeting the end of the April.

22 We are pretty well set on going 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

77

1 to Augusta and there is a Work Group meeting 

2 set up in early February, so I think we'll 

3 be, you know, at least have a good idea of 

4 the schedule and what may be on the agenda 

5 for that meeting by our Board call.

6 So, with that, we are now 

7 scheduled for a break and why don't we 

8 return at 10:45 or so. The first session 

9 there will be, probably will not take a half 

10 hour, so if you want to stretch the break a 

11 little bit and maybe come back at ten of or 

12 so, why don't we plan on that.

13 So we'll reconvene at 10:50. 

14 Thank you.

15 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

16 matter went off the record at 10:27 a.m. and 

17 resumed at 10:54 a.m.)

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Why don't we 

19 get seated. We'll get started, I think, if 

20 we have the key people here. I'll send Ted 

21 out and round up people.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Okay. We'll reconvene now and 

2 welcome back everybody.

3 And we are going to have an 

4 update on the sufficient accuracy/coworker 

5 dose modeling. I'll do a brief introduction 

6 here and then let Jim Neton say a few words.

7 We've had a short Work Group 

8 meeting basically which Jim can sort of 

9 update us on in terms of some of the work on 

10 sufficient accuracy and so forth.

11 We did this Work Group on Friday 

12 and we also had a brief update at that 

13 meeting from SC&A about their work on the 

14 one person, one sample, OPOS, or OPUS, 

15 whatever we're calling it, it keeps 

16 changing, work.

17 But both NIOSH and SC&A need to 

18 turn their preliminary work into full 

19 reports and get those to us. So we will be 

20 planning some follow up here, but I'll let 

21 Jim Neton, you know, just briefly tell us 

22 what, sort of an update on what NIOSH's 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

79

1 progress is and so forth on this issue. 

2 Jim?

3 DR. NETON: Okay. I don't have 

4 any formal slides for this presentation, 

5 it'll just be a brief update as to what 

6 we've accomplished since the last Working 

7 Group meeting, not the Friday one, but the 

8 prior one. I forget which date that was.

9 But we were exploring the idea 

10 during the Working Group about what would 

11 constitute, what we ended up terming a 

12 practically significant dose. In other 

13 words, how much dose really matters when you 

14 start adding the dose reconstructions to 

15 affect the Probability of Causation which, 

16 of course, is the ultimate analysis.

17 So we had proposed at that 

18 Working Group meeting to select from our 

19 NOCTS case files cases that had Probability 

20 of Causation between 45 and 50 percent and 

21 had a single cancer so we could do some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 direct comparisons.

2 We ended up looking through 

3 35,000-38,000 dose reconstructions and it 

4 turns out that only 174 cases had a 

5 Probability of Causation with a single 

6 cancer between 45 and 50 percent.

7 So we selected that number of 

8 cases, 174, and we ended up adding 100 

9 millirem dose, external dose only, to each 

10 of those cases.

11 At the point in the exposure 

12 profile where we thought it would make the 

13 maximum, had the maximum effect. We reran 

14 those and, a considerable effort, I mean we 

15 reran these case 30 times at 10,000 

16 iterations each. That's the standard 

17 protocol for how we analyze a case that 

18 falls between 45 and 50.

19 We reran them adding a zero dose, 

20 which would reset the random number seed and 

21 adding 100 millirem dose using the same 

22 random number seed as the zero dose 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

81

1 addition.

2 And when you directly compare 

3 those of interest it turns out that none of 

4 the cases that we analyzed went over 50 

5 percent, which really surprised me. I 

6 thought for sure we'd have some that were up 

7 against the edge.

8 It turns out that the mean, the 

9 average additional PoC added to those 174 

10 cases was 0.06 percent. So it's a very 

11 small incremental increase.

12 The distribution of cases was 

13 somewhat interesting as well. I think lung 

14 constituted about 50-something cases and 

15 basal cell carcinoma had another 11 or 20, 

16 between those two it was about 50 percent of 

17 the cases were represented by those two 

18 cancers.

19 The rest were sort of distributed 

20 randomly about. There didn't seem to be any 

21 real difference between solid cancers and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 leukemias, but we just received these 

2 results a few days ago.

3 We're analyzing them, and as Dr. 

4 Melius said we're going to be providing a 

5 full report on this as to what we found, 

6 what we think it means, and where we need to 

7 go from here.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thanks, 

9 Jim. Any questions for Jim? As I said this 

10 is a, he said it's sort of a work and those 

11 are very preliminary results on that.

12 If you remember this is coming 

13 back, some of our struggles to deal with 

14 coworker models and we're going to be doing 

15 statistical comparisons in determining 

16 issues related to coworker models.

17 We sort of need to know how much 

18 of a difference are we trying to find? How 

19 much a difference is meaningful? Obviously 

20 it relates to other dose reconstruction 

21 issues, residual periods, but really it, 

22 almost any situation we're dealing with.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

83

1 So I think it's, you know, sort 

2 of an important first step in doing this. 

3 SC&A had some interesting findings on the, 

4 comments on the OPOS, the one person, one 

5 sample issue also.

6 We'll be getting to both of their 

7 reports. NIOSH will be writing up theirs 

8 and SC&A will be finishing their report and 

9 we'll have a Work Group meeting and believe 

10 we should have more to report back by the, 

11 if I'm guessing right, by the April Board 

12 meeting.

13 So we are making progress there 

14 and we'll give feedback to the entire Board 

15 at our April meeting. Our next issue is 

16 General Steel Industries and the TBD-6000 

17 Work Group and Paul Ziemer will be 

18 presenting.

19 MEMBER ZIEMER: Thank you, Jim. 

20 While we pull the slides up, oh, I guess 

21 they're here now.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 If I might, Mr. Chairman, as a 

2 courtesy make sure that both the co3 petitioner and the site expert are on the 

4 line.

5 I want to make sure that they're 

6 at least present at this part of the 

7 presentation. Dr. Dan McKeel and Mr. John 

8 Ramspott, are you folks on the line?

9 DR. MCKEEL: Dr. Ziemer, this is 

10 Dan McKeel, I'm listening.

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: Thank you.

12 MR. RAMSPOTT: I'm listening as 

13 well. Thank you, Doctor.

14 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay, thank you. 

15 Okay, let me proceed through the slides and 

16 after I finish Dr. Neton will also have a 

17 brief presentation to summarize the NIOSH 

18 position on the issue of the lost radium 

19 source as well as the summary of how they're 

20 handling the various aspects of the dose 

21 reconstructions.

22 First of all, I just wanted to 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

85

1 remind you of who the Work Group Members 

2 are. I serve as Chair, Josie Beach, John 

3 Poston, and Wanda Munn, are the other 

4 participants in the Work Group.

5 I reported to the Board at the 

6 telephone conference call on December, in 

7 mid-December, and since then the Work Group 

8 has had two conference call meetings. The 

9 first of which was on December 19th of last 

10 year and then we met recently on January 

11 16th.

12 At the December 19th meeting, 

13 I've simply summarized here very briefly 

14 what issues we were addressing at that time, 

15 and I believe we had reported prior to that 

16 to the Board that we would be addressing 

17 these.

18 Specifically, skin dose 

19 calculations and the SC&A review of the 

20 MCNPX calculations for betatron exposures. 

21 Also, the DCAS review of the resuspension 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 factor for the residual period, and then the 

2 DCAS review of a report that was provided, 

3 or we were made aware of by Dr. McKeel, AEC 

4 Report NYO 4699, which was a report on a 

5 variety of accelerators that were used 

6 around the country and the issue of 

7 considering whether or not there was a 

8 potential in using some of the, one or more 

9 of those sites for surrogate data for the 

10 GSI site.

11 And so we had a discussion of 

12 that and NIOSH's review of that report. And 

13 then at our January 16th meeting we focused 

14 on the MCNPX calculations for neutron and 

15 other external exposures.

16 That also involved the issue of 

17 whether or not film badges would be used, 

18 and I believe the, all of the Board Members 

19 have received the interchanges on that, both 

20 of the material provided to the Board and 

21 also the concerns of the co-petitioner on 

22 that issue as to the use of the Landauer 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

87

1 film badges and the NIOSH position on why 

2 they would not use those any longer.

3 We can develop that further if we 

4 need to in this Board meeting, but I believe 

5 everybody's aware of that. Then we also 

6 addressed the Appendix BB matrix issues and 

7 the resolution of those issues and I will 

8 summarize that here momentarily.

9 And then finally at that meeting, 

10 again the site expert and the co-petitioner 

11 raised concerns again about the missing 

12 radium source and whether or not that was 

13 appropriately considered in the external 

14 exposure models and I'll address that in a 

15 little more detail in just a moment.

16 Now let me summarize the Appendix 

17 BB matrix issues, I'll go through them 

18 individually in a moment, but I'll just 

19 indicate here in summary.

20 All of the open issues were 

21 either closed or designated to be in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 abeyance, and by in abeyance, in essence, 

2 that means that we have completed our work 

3 on the issue and we are awaiting its 

4 appearance in a revised Appendix BB to 

5 confirm that the agreed to change has 

6 actually occurred.

7 This also includes several issues 

8 from the SEC Issues Matrix that were 

9 transferred to Appendix BB at the time that

10 the Work Group recommended that the SEC 

11 Class be denied.

12 And then simply make this comment 

13 that with the resolution of these issues the 

14 Work Group felt that revision of Appendix BB 

15 by NIOSH could get underway.

16 Here is a summary of the Appendix 

17 BB Issues Matrix, as far as I know everybody 

18 has the latest version of the matrix. It's 

19 extremely long and detailed, so I have 

20 simply identified the issues by a brief 

21 title.

22 I did ask SC&A to review this and 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

89

1 make sure that they were comfortable with 

2 how I described the actual finding. The 

3 first finding had to do with the data 

4 sources and that is now in abeyance by 

5 action of the Work Group.

6 All of these items were 

7 individually voted on by the Work Group and 

8 we were in agreement on all of them. The 

9 second item is an old one which had been 

10 agreed to quite awhile back that the, well 

11 not -- I'm sorry this is not the one that 

12 was agreed to a long time ago, this was more 

13 recent.

14 The period of covered employment 

15 has changed. There was an earlier period 

16 that has been added and that issue now is 

17 agreed to and closed.

18 The issue of the betatron beam 

19 intensity that was originally questioned by 

20 SC&A, that now is closed. Under estimate of 

21 stray betatron radiation, and this one also 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 included issues from the SEC Issue Matrix, 

2 Issues 2, 6, and 8, that now has been agreed 

3 to and is in abeyance.

4 The presence of other radiography 

5 sources, this includes Issue 3 from SEC 

6 Issue Matrix, that has been closed. The 

7 handling of skin dose, which was also Issue 

8 9 in the SEC Issues Matrix, that's in 

9 abeyance.

10 Residual radiation from betatron 

11 apparatus, that's closed. I might add in 

12 case there's any confusion, this has nothing 

13 to do with the residual period. We're 

14 talking about radiation that's present after 

15 the betatron is turned off.

16 It lingers for some period of 

17 time, sometimes short, sometimes longer, but 

18 that has been dealt with. Number 8 is one 

19 that was agreed to quite awhile back that 

20 the work hours were longer than originally 

21 shown in the Appendix BB Matrix and that 

22 issue is closed.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

91

1 Work practices, that is in 

2 abeyance, dose rates from uranium in 

3 abeyance, dose to other workers, this is 

4 workers in other parts of the plant, in 

5 abeyance, and then the surface contamination 

6 and resuspension, those have been agreed to, 

7 this also goes into the residual period and 

8 that is in abeyance.

9 And there was one that simply 

10 involves incorrect use of units and that has 

11 been agreed to and is in abeyance and should 

12 show up correctly in the revised report.

13 At our last meeting, as I 

14 indicated a moment ago, Mr. Ramspott and Dr. 

15 McKeel reiterated particular concerns about 

16 the lost radium source.

17 You may recall, and I think all 

18 of you have tracked this issue for several 

19 years, initially there was debate about 

20 whether such an incident had actually 

21 occurred.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I know that Dr. McKeel had 

2 indicated to us and was concerned about our 

3 use of the words "urban legend," and I want 

4 to clarify that I have been misquoted on 

5 that.

6 I said it may or may not be an 

7 urban legend. I never declared that it was. 

8 I said it may or may not be, because 

9 originally it appeared to be, to have been 

10 treated as such and we indicated that it may 

11 not be.

12 And indeed the site expert and 

13 the co-petitioner were able to find 

14 additional documentation confirming that in 

15 fact the source, there was a plumb bob type 

16 radium source that was missing on that site 

17 and that particular source of 500 

18 millicuries I indicate in the second point 

19 here had been missing for at least a week 

20 and probably closer to ten days in October 

21 of 1953.

22 There were a number of news 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

93

1 articles and I believe the latest document 

2 on this, I believe has been distributed to 

3 all of the Board Members, there were several 

4 news stories there.

5 And some differing things, but 

6 one news story said that the source was lost 

7 in the plant, another one indicated it was 

8 found outside the plant, but there appeared 

9 to be some uncertainty about that in terms 

10 of when and, between when the source was 

11 missing and when it was found.

12 I added the fourth bullet here, 

13 and I know Dr. McKeel objected to this, 

14 indicating that he did not state that the 

15 person who lost the source died and I agree 

16 he did not say that.

17 What he told us and what I've 

18 quoted here is that a clerk reported this to 

19 him and I simply quote this from one of Dr. 

20 McKeel's reports to us that this shows 

21 additional uncertainty about what happened.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 The official story in the 

2 newspaper says no one was hurt. There was 

3 one clerk apparently that had a conflicting 

4 story. But, in any event, those reports 

5 give some uncertainty about this.

6 One thing appears fairly clear 

7 from the news reports is that the searching 

8 was done with the assistance of a Geiger 

9 counter.

10 One recently located news account 

11 was not available at the time of the January 

12 meeting and Mr. Ramspott had located that 

13 and identified that he had found an 

14 additional article and we basically agreed 

15 to wait and have this distributed to the 

16 Work Group and the Board after the meeting 

17 so that NIOSH could have a look at any 

18 additional information before making a final 

19 judgment on how they would handle this lost 

20 radium sources part of dose reconstruction, 

21 and Jim can report on that in a moment when 

22 he speaks.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

95

1 So that summarizes what we 

2 covered in the meeting. I think we can open 

3 it for questions, or perhaps you want to 

4 hear from Jim first? Mr. Chairman, I leave 

5 that to you.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, why don't 

7 we let Jim clarify that last issue and then 

8 --

9 DR. NETON: Well I'm prepared to 

10 speak on two points, one is the agreed upon 

11 dose estimates and the other one is to speak 

12 briefly, no, maybe not so briefly, on the 

13 lost radium source.

14 There's been a lot of 

15 deliberation that's gone on with the dose 

16 calculations at GSI. Ultimately, at the end 

17 of the day, that we ended up with some 

18 fairly simple models that are going to be 

19 applied to only two Classes of workers as it 

20 turns out.

21 We have administrative personnel 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 and those are people who we conclusively 

2 know did not work in the plant, may have 

3 walked through the plant on occasion, but 

4 really didn't work with sources, and for all 

5 years, for all administrative workers, we're 

6 going to end up assigning about 570 millirem 

7 per year. That was agreed upon at the 

8 Working Group level.

9 All other workers are going to be 

10 bounded by either having, for external 

11 exposure by either having worked with radium 

12 sources or in what we called the so-called 

13 radium era, or later on, are bounded by 

14 having been the layout man who was the 

15 maximally exposed individual in our 

16 estimation when the betatron was being used.

17 So between 1952 and 1960 we have 

18 a triangular distribution that's applied 

19 with the maximum dose of that triangular 

20 distribution being 15 rem, which is equal to 

21 the exposure limit recommended at the time.

22 The central estimate is 9.7 rem, 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

97

1 which is based on a workers badge results 

2 that were interpolated, and the 6.3 rem 

3 lower bound is based on time-motion studies 

4 that we've done trying to reproduce what 

5 might have been a realistic exposure 

6 scenario.

7 So for all those years, between 

8 '53 and 1962, the upper bound will be 15, 

9 except for '61, '62, it went down to 12 rem 

10 and that's what will be assigned.

11 After '63, that's during what we 

12 called the radium era, after '63 to '66, 

13 June of '66, the layout man, who is a person 

14 who is stationed outside the betatron 

15 working with materials, will receive a gamma 

16 exposure of 9 rem and neutron exposure of 

17 557 millirem.

18 So this will be -- we cannot 

19 differentiate worker types and Classes at 

20 GSI so everyone will be, or they're assumed 

21 to be, a layout man in that era or in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 earlier years of radiography, unless they 

2 were an administrative worker.

3 Internal doses, we agreed upon, 

4 well I'm not going to give doses because 

5 they're intake rates, but we identified, 

6 finally settled on a surrogate exposure 

7 scenario that resulted in a 68.7 dpm per 

8 cubic meter air concentration based on the 

9 handling of uranium.

10 That will be assigned to all 

11 workers except administrative personnel, and 

12 it'll be prorated based on the number of 

13 work hours per year that they worked with 

14 uranium up to, I think it's about 400 hours 

15 was the maximum number of hours we 

16 estimated.

17 And we also agreed to use a 

18 resuspension factor of ten to the minus 

19 fifth versus our proposed ten to the minus 

20 sixth resuspension factor. That's a brief 

21 summary of what the doses are. They're 

22 fairly large. They're distributions to 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

99

1 account for uncertainty.

2 We believe that they adequately 

3 bound all Classes of workers at the site. 

4 There's a lot of other miscellaneous, not 

5 miscellaneous, but other types of work that 

6 went on, but we believe that these 

7 particular doses are put in upper cap on 

8 what the exposures might have been.

9 Unless there's any questions on 

10 that I can move on to the radium source. 

11 Brad, do you have a question?

12 MEMBER CLAWSON: Help me 

13 understand how you're classifying these 

14 people.

15 DR. NETON: Okay.

16 MEMBER CLAWSON: Because to be 

17 right honest with you I guess I'm wondering 

18 because we really haven't been able to do 

19 that any other site and --

20 DR. NETON: Well, there's only 

21 two Classes. One is what we call 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 administrative and then there's all other 

2 workers. Administrative personnel are 

3 people who worked in office environments, 

4 that sort of thing, where they would not 

5 have had routine access to the plant and 

6 walking, you know, working with the sources, 

7 that sort of thing.

8 There aren't going to be very 

9 many of those. I mean I've looked through 

10 the data set and it's going to be a small 

11 number of workers that we would be able to 

12 conclusively identify that that was their 

13 exposure.

14 MEMBER CLAWSON: Well I just look 

15 at the time era of this and to be right 

16 honest there's a lot of sketchy information 

17 and I'm just really trying to get my hands 

18 around how you guys will actually be able to 

19 do that.

20 But, you know, I know this comes 

21 to the Work Group and goes from there, but 

22 it's, we've done this at other sites and 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

101

1 really had a terrible time with it and 

2 that's why I was just wondering.

3 DR. NETON: Yes. I appreciate 

4 the comment. Okay. As far as the radium 

5 source goes, Dr. Melius eluded to the fact 

6 that John Ramspott and Dr. McKeel had 

7 provided us newspaper articles that 

8 substantiated that a source had indeed been 

9 lost, or reported missing at the GSI 

10 facility in October of '53.

11 There were three newspaper 

12 accounts. One in the Edwardsville 

13 Intelligencer that stated, and I quote, 

14 "They believe the plumb bob was misplaced 

15 and not stolen."

16 I emphasize they believe it was 

17 misplaced. They didn't say it was lost in 

18 the plant, but they were looking frantically 

19 at the plant, not frantically, that's 

20 probably not a good word. They were looking 

21 for it with Geiger counters lets put it that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 way.

2 And the other two articles were 

3 in the Granite City Press. The first one 

4 basically reported the same thing as the 

5 Edwardsville Intelligencer, the plumb bob 

6 was missing at the plant and search 

7 continued with Geiger counters at the site.

8 So they were looking at, you 

9 know, around the site, Geiger counters 

10 plural, for the source. And the last piece 

11 was the one that was missing at our last 

12 meeting, which reported that the missing --

13 the Granite City Press reported the missing 

14 source was recovered from outside the plant.

15 So those are the three pieces of 

16 information we have from the press. The 

17 other information we have is from comments 

18 by workers, either at a worker outreach 

19 meeting or via an interview by SC&A.

20 In an August 2006 worker outreach 

21 meeting and an August 2007 worker outreach 

22 meeting, the same worker spoke about this 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

103

1 missing source.

2 And one of the meetings actually 

3 had verbatim transcripts and he was pretty 

4 specific about what he believed happened. 

5 I'll just, paraphrasing here, but they went 

6 all over the plant with the Geiger counters, 

7 first thought it was ground up in the sand 

8 mill, ended up scattered throughout the 

9 plant.

10 But because there was some 

11 zirconium sands there that had natural 

12 radioactive material they realized that was 

13 not the case. Then he goes on to talk about 

14 an airplane search with a Geiger counter and 

15 says "the source was easily found in the 

16 Brooklyn Lovejoy area," I'm not sure what 

17 that is.

18 And he further states "some 

19 worker thought it was a fishing cork," which 

20 doesn't really make sense, probably thinking 

21 of fishing sinker possibly. "He was a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 laborer in Plant 6 and took it home with 

2 him." So that's the statement of one 

3 worker.

4 And then in a subsequent 

5 interview SC&A had with another worker, he 

6 basically independently mentioned that there 

7 was a lost source and they searched all over 

8 Granite City with a Geiger counter.

9 So two more pieces of 

10 information, which are not really 

11 inconsistent with the newspaper accounts 

12 that the source was lost offsite.

13 So the worker sources are 

14 consistent, the source was removed from 

15 site, the plant was searched with Geiger 

16 counters. It was a strong source, about a 

17 500 millicurie source, so it was fairly 

18 strong source as we talked at the Working 

19 Group meeting, it was about 400 mR per hour 

20 at a meter.

21 So this source would easily be 

22 detected by Geiger counters. I did a --
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

105

1 MEMBER FIELD: Hey, Jim?

2 DR. NETON: Yes, sir?

3 MEMBER FIELD: This is Bill on 

4 the phone.

5 DR. NETON: Yes, who?

6 MEMBER FIELD: Would it be 

7 possible to stand closer to the microphone 

8 we can hardly hear you on the line.

9 DR. NETON: I can do that, sorry.

10 MEMBER FIELD: Okay, that helps. 

11 Thanks.

12 DR. NETON: Yes. This 500 

13 millicurie source would've had source 

14 strength of about 400 mR per hour at a 

15 meter. Based on the technology and what I 

16 know about Geiger counters, I think it would 

17 easily detected at about 100 feet.

18 It would probably be 40 times the 

19 background line of sight from 100 feet. So 

20 if you're going through the plant with 

21 Geiger counters it would be kind of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 implausible to me that you would miss it if 

2 it was lost in the plant. That's one other 

3 piece of information we have.

4 The fourth is concerns raised 

5 that, you know, these sources are often lost 

6 and they result in over exposures. I went 

7 back and pulled out a Public Health Service 

8 Report from 1968 that actually categorized 

9 sources that were radium incidents going 

10 back to 1911.

11 Between 1951 and '60 they 

12 identified 69 type such incidents. No 

13 indication whether the Granite City was in 

14 there or not, but nonetheless, based on all 

15 those incidents they stated that none of the 

16 missing sources involved over exposure of 

17 the workers.

18 Remember, our upper limit of 

19 assignment of dose to workers at GSI is 15 

20 rem during that period. Lets see. So at 

21 this point in time we don't think that 

22 there's sufficient evidence to indicate that 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

107

1 the workers were really, sufficient evidence 

2 to include an incident in 1953 based on the 

3 radium source.

4 By all accounts are it was taken 

5 offsite and returned to the site. We're 

6 certainly open to, if there's additional 

7 information that comes our way that we will 

8 modify the Site Profile accordingly, but at 

9 this point we don't see any reason to do 

10 that. Thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

12 you, Paul and Jim. Any questions from Board 

13 Members? Dave Kotelchuck?

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: The report 

15 that was gotten from the worker from the 

16 meetings with workers --

17 DR. NETON: Right.

18 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Did that 

19 person give a name of the person who 

20 apparently had it, the --

21 DR. NETON: I don't believe so.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Could that 

2 person have been asked or can that person be 

3 asked?

4 DR. NETON: Oh, the person, I --

5 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: The person 

6 who reported that there was, that it was in 

7 somebody's home.

8 DR. NETON: Ask for the name of 

9 the person?

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

11 DR. NETON: I don't know. I mean 

12 he could be asked I assume.

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Because if, I 

14 mean if, as suggested that the person died 

15 of the radiation --

16 DR. NETON: Yes.

17 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: -- and it was 

18 presumably acute and that may have resulted 

19 either in a work -- if we knew the name of 

20 the person either in a workers' compensation 

21 case or in a lawsuit and that could be 

22 fairly easily checked by name, but if we 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

109

1 don't know the name of the person then it's 

2 very hard.

3 DR. NETON: Yes, going back 60 

4 years is pretty difficult.

5 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

6 DR. NETON: I understand what 

7 you're saying and certainly could look into 

8 in more detail. I will point out that if 

9 the source was lost offsite, was taken 

10 offsite and there was exposure to the worker 

11 it would not be covered under this program, 

12 because only exposures at that facility are 

13 covered under EEOICPA.

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I was 

15 thinking about the state workers' 

16 compensation --

17 DR. NETON: No, I understand. I 

18 understand.

19 MEMBER ZIEMER: This is Ziemer. 

20 I don't believe the name of that person is 

21 known. I believe if it were certainly Dr. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 McKeel or Mr. Ramspott would've identified 

2 it.

3 I think they've made efforts to 

4 actually track this further. They have 

5 continued to look for additional information 

6 on this and, you know, have done a good job 

7 of identifying these initial new sources.

8 So I'm sure that if there was 

9 anything out there they certainly would be 

10 able to, you know, or would've tried to get 

11 it.

12 I think they did try to identify 

13 it further, but I'm not aware that there is 

14 any confirming name associated with that.

15 DR. NETON: Right.

16 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Thank you for 

17 that.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Anybody else 

19 with questions? Anybody? Any of our Board 

20 Members on the phone have questions other 

21 than --

22 MEMBER FIELD: This is Bill.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

111

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. Hi, Bill.

2 MEMBER FIELD: I don't have any 

3 questions, but we really had a hard time 

4 hearing Jim. I think we missed about two5 thirds of it.

6 MEMBER ROESSLER: Yes, I'm in on 

7 that, too. I think the sound in the hotel 

8 is very variable. I could hear Chris 

9 Crawford perfectly clear.

10 When Paul was speaking at the 

11 podium I assume, he came through very 

12 clearly, but Jim Neton doesn't come through 

13 at all. I think maybe you should check the 

14 mike.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think it's 

16 the -- he was using a different microphone.

17 MEMBER ROESSLER: Yes. It's 

18 almost impossible to participate by phone 

19 because the sound comes and goes and I'm 

20 glad to hear Bill verified what I'm hearing 

21 here, too, which is almost nothing at times.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Well 

2 we'll do the best we can.

3 MEMBER ROESSLER: Thanks, Jim.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other Board 

5 Member questions? If not, I, I guess --

6 what happens next, Paul?

7 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well my 

8 understanding is that NIOSH has information 

9 that they need to proceed with a revision of 

10 Appendix BB.

11 Of course once that revision is 

12 done we will need to review it and SC&A will 

13 help us with that. I don't think anybody's 

14 talked to me about timetable, but I believe 

15 that's the next step. Maybe Jim can confirm 

16 that?

17 DR. NETON: Yes. The next step 

18 will be for us to provide a Revision 1 to 

19 Appendix BB and include all of the doses 

20 that we've agreed to during the Working 

21 Group meeting.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And I would 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

113

1 just, as a final comment, seems to me that 

2 this issue of the missing source has been 

3 pursued appropriately and I don't really see 

4 anymore action that's needed at this point.

5 You know, borrowing new 

6 information that may appear. I think it's, 

7 you've taken into account appropriately in 

8 the current approach to dose reconstruction.

9 MEMBER ZIEMER: And let me also 

10 just mention to the Board, and I assume 

11 you're aware of this, but I know the co12 petitioner and the site expert have ongoing 

13 concerns about some of these issues.

14 I believe they've, all of their 

15 concerns have been distributed and I believe 

16 Dr. McKeel and perhaps John will make 

17 additional comments during the public 

18 comment period on this, so I don't want to 

19 overlook the fact that there are still 

20 concerns that they have and if additional 

21 information came to light, such as Jim 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 mentioned on the source, that could always 

2 be taken into consideration.

3 But I do think it's important 

4 that we get underway with revising Appendix 

5 BB, which I believe, compared to the 

6 original dose calculations will be, appear 

7 to be, will be favorable to additional 

8 individuals.

9 I can't say that for sure, of 

10 course, but certainly this is a pretty 

11 substantial change in dose reconstruction at 

12 that site.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

14 you. So I believe that wraps up our 

15 discussions for this session. We now have 

16 scheduled a lunch break.

17 I will remind the Board that we 

18 come back at 1:30. We have Joslyn 

19 Manufacturing SEC Petition, essentially an 

20 update of something we've previously worked 

21 on with an extended period.

22 So we'll have that and that will 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

115

1 be followed by a Board Work Session. Part 

2 of that Board Work Session is a set of 

3 public comments from October, people need to 

4 review and be ready to comment on their 

5 disposition and so forth.

6 We will have Work Group reports 

7 and then there's some issues with scheduling 

8 some future meetings, and so people need to 

9 be ready with their calendars and do the 

10 best we can with that and so we can get some 

11 additional meetings and that'll take us up 

12 to a break.

13 And then after that break, again, 

14 starting around 4:15 we'll be talking about 

15 the Kansas City Plant SEC report. So let's 

16 break now, we'll reconvene at 1:30 p.m. back 

17 in this room and do Joslyn.

18 So, good. Thanks everybody.

19 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

20 matter went off the record at 11:34 a.m. and 

21 resumed at 1:37 p.m.)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, why don't 

2 we get started again? I think we have the 

3 computer working, got our Board Members. 

4 Ted, you've been doing housekeeping?

5 MR. KATZ: I just want to check 

6 and see first of all which Board Members we 

7 have on the line.

8 MEMBER FIELD: Bill Field is on.

9 MEMBER ROESSLER: Gen Roessler.

10 MEMBER VALERIO: Loretta Valerio.

11 MR. KATZ: And then I'm just 

12 checking, David Richardson, do we have you 

13 on the line?

14 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes, I'm 

15 here.

16 MR. KATZ: Oh, great. Thank you. 

17 And how about Dick Lemen, Richard? Okay. 

18 Very good and then just let me ask, remind 

19 people who are on the line, too, to mute 

20 your phones except when you are speaking.

21 It's star six if you don't have a 

22 mute button. Thanks.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

117

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. We've 

2 heard everybody mute. Okay, we will start 

3 with Joslyn Manufacturing and Jim Neton will 

4 present and then we'll have some follow-up 

5 comments from Paul Ziemer, so Jim.

6 DR. NETON: Thank you, Dr. 

7 Melius. First of all I'd like to make sure 

8 that the Board Members on the phone can hear 

9 me. Gen, Bill Field, can you guys hear me 

10 all right?

11 Apparently. They must be on 

12 mute. Okay, I'd like to talk today about 

13 the Joslyn Manufacturing & Supply Company. 

14 This is a Special Exposure Cohort Evaluation 

15 Report addendum.

16 The original SEC Evaluation 

17 Report was presented to the Board December 

18 2012, I believe at the Knoxville, Tennessee 

19 meeting. We've reconsidered our position, 

20 at least for a portion of the covered 

21 period, and that's what I'm here to talk 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 about.

2 But before I -- I'd like to 

3 mention a little bit about Joslyn, refresh 

4 your memories as to what the site is about. 

5 We've packaged this one a little 

6 differently, rather than adding a little 

7 addendum, a period onto the SEC we've 

8 essentially just amended the SEC evaluation 

9 designation to cover the whole period 

10 including the extra time period that I'm 

11 going to talk about today.

12 So just to refresh your memory 

13 since it's been a little over a year we 

14 talked about Joslyn. It's an Atomic Weapons 

15 Employer site that covers a period from 

16 March '43 to 1952.

17 Originally the covered period 

18 started in 1944, but NIOSH found some 

19 documentation that indicated it probably 

20 should've started earlier, probably March 

21 1943.

22 We communicated that to the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

119

1 Department of Labor and they agreed with us 

2 and extended the covered period to start in 

3 1943. As almost all these AWEs, they were 

4 heavily involved --

5 MEMBER FIELD: Is it possible --

6 DR. NETON: Hello?

7 MEMBER FIELD: -- if you speak 

8 into the mike?

9 DR. NETON: Okay. Hello? That's 

10 better. Yes, I got to really get close to 

11 these microphones apparently.

12 MEMBER ROESSLER: Nothing's 

13 coming through on the telephone.

14 DR. NETON: Okay. How about now?

15 MEMBER ROESSLER: Sort of.

16 DR. NETON: Sort of.

17 MEMBER ROESSLER: Very vague.

18 DR. NETON: Well, we'll have to 

19 scream in this microphone.

20 DR. NETON: Do you think it's the 

21 presenter?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER ROESSLER: No.

2 (Off the record comments)

3 DR. NETON: Okay, as I was 

4 saying, Joslyn was an Atomic Weapons 

5 Employer from March '43 to '52. Like most 

6 Atomic Weapons Employers they were heavily 

7 involved in the machining and rolling of 

8 uranium rods.

9 They did a little bit of thorium 

10 work on a couple of occasions prior to July 

11 of, December of 1948, but they were very 

12 limited in scope, numbering I think five to 

13 ten rods per rolling.

14 This was one of the earliest AWEs 

15 to work with uranium. In fact they were 

16 primarily, in the early years, involved in 

17 developing the techniques and technology 

18 that would be used at other sites in later 

19 years.

20 For instance, you know, the 

21 rolling speed, the temperatures, how to 

22 grind, and what types of machinery would be 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

121

1 efficient at grinding, that sort of thing.

2 Okay. The pre-1948 work was 

3 unlike the AWEs that were later involved, 

4 and this is the activities, the pre-1948 

5 work was directly involved with production 

6 for the Hanford operations and it was 

7 overseen by Hanford operations, which 

8 created a little bit different oversight 

9 than we're used to when we see the AEC 

10 activities from the East Coast with HASL 

11 being involved.

12 HASL did not get involved in this 

13 site until later in their operation. I 

14 mentioned they were developing procedures 

15 for rolling uranium metals and testing.

16 They did a little bit of work for 

17 other agencies outside -- well, they did 

18 work for the AEC, but they also did work in 

19 cooperation with the AEC for Chalk River in 

20 Canada and some work for the British, Great 

21 Britain. A very small amount of work. I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 think they rolled about 30 tons for them.

2 There were three rolling mills at 

3 Joslyn that were very close in proximity to 

4 each other, unlike a lot of the other sites 

5 that we've dealt with.

6 I don't know that you can make 

7 this out really well from this slide, but on 

8 the far right, there is an 18-inch mill, in 

9 the middle there's a 12-inch rolling mill, 

10 and on the far left there's a 9-inch rolling 

11 mill.

12 And as we'll talk about a little 

13 later, when production was really under a 

14 crunch they would process and roll uranium 

15 simultaneously at all of these three mills, 

16 which adds a little bit of complexity to the 

17 picture, unlike what we've seen at some of 

18 the other sites.

19 Okay, getting back to the 

20 petition evaluation, the petition was 

21 originally received in March of 2012. It 

22 was qualified, and as I mentioned, the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

123

1 petitioner originally asked for the Class to 

2 cover 1944 to '52 and NIOSH, through 

3 evaluation, capture of data evaluations and 

4 reports, determined that March of '43 would 

5 be a better start date.

6 And, in fact, DOL concurred with 

7 that and established the Class through that, 

8 from '43 to '52, so that's what we actually 

9 evaluated.

10 Okay. The summary of what the 

11 Board's action has been so far, as I 

12 mentioned December 2012 at the Knoxville 

13 Board meeting, the Board concurred with 

14 NIOSH's recommendation that a Class should 

15 be added for all employees, that should say 

16 March 1943 through December 1947, the end of 

17 1947.

18 We proposed that dose 

19 reconstructions after, or starting in 

20 January of '48 could be reconstructed using 

21 a TBD-6000 approach, which we've done at a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 lot of sites where we have no monitoring 

2 data, and that was our feeling at the time 

3 that we presented the report.

4 In December the Board also tasked 

5 SC&A at that time, though, with reviewing 

6 the period where we recommended that the SEC 

7 not be added, and that's the 1948 to '52 

8 period.

9 SC&A did their review and in 

10 December of 2013 SC&A submitted a report 

11 that had 11, they've identified 11 issues 

12 associated with that time period.

13 On January 16th, just recently, 

14 the addendum of the issues matrix were 

15 provided to the Work Group, and I think Dr. 

16 Ziemer's going to provide a summary of the 

17 status of where they are with their review 

18 of the addendum and the matrix issues.

19 Okay. As far as NIOSH's actions 

20 are concerned, since the original ER was 

21 written, we have conducted numerous 

22 interviews. I think we interviewed five 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

125

1 additional people, did some additional data 

2 captures, and actually had an additional 

3 site visit at Joslyn to try to flesh out 

4 some more of the details associated with the 

5 activities at the site.

6 In particular, we were concerned 

7 about the activities associated with the 

8 rolling operations that involved water as a 

9 coolant. This apparently generated a lot of 

10 steam and concomitantly particulate that is 

11 unlike what we had experienced at other 

12 sites.

13 And also there were some issues 

14 associated with the burning of uranium, 

15 fires at the plant and that sort of thing, 

16 wanted to make sure that the TBD-6000 

17 methodology would actually capture or bound 

18 those types of exposures.

19 After reconsidering all of these 

20 factors, we ended up deciding that we wanted 

21 to recommend a Class that would include an 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 additional 6-month period, and that would be 

2 from January 1, 1948, to July 31, 1948, due 

3 to our inability to reconstruct internal 

4 doses, which we're going to talk about in a 

5 little bit.

6 Okay. First I'll just go through 

7 some of the exposure sources, inhalation, 

8 ingestion of uranium is expected here with 

9 natural uranium oxide from the rolling and 

10 the production and shaping activities.

11 These were hand-operated shops 

12 under experimental conditions. They 

13 occasionally would use tenting to try to 

14 control it, which definitely made air 

15 currents a little bit unpredictable.

16 As I mentioned, there was these 

17 three co-located rolling mills, the 18, 12, 

18 and 9-inch mills where rolling operations 

19 were conducted simultaneously. I also 

20 talked about the water, water-cooled 

21 bearings previously.

22 Joslyn was responsible, like most 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

127

1 AWEs, for packaging, handling and loading. 

2 They did all of that on their own. The MED 

3 kept strict controls of the records, and 

4 Joslyn also did a lot of cleanup and 

5 material accountability control activities.

6 The Medical Surveillance Program 

7 was there for Joslyn and we do recommend 

8 that medical exposures be covered and added. 

9 I did mention briefly earlier there were two 

10 recorded thorium processing periods prior to 

11 '48, and these were prior to the 6-month 

12 period that we're recommending now.

13 In June of '46 they did some 

14 grinding of thorium rods. In January of '47 

15 there was some grinding of some thorium 

16 rods. There was some concern in the 

17 findings that SC&A found that we weren't 

18 very explicit in how we were going to 

19 reconstruct thorium.

20 We've since added that to a White 

21 Paper that's being written, and it's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 essentially a source-term model like we 

2 would do for uranium.

3 You could do some Monte Carlo 

4 simulations based on the, you know, activity 

5 present and the shape of the material that 

6 they've been working with.

7 This slide is pretty relevant to 

8 what we're talking about today. If you look 

9 at the production pattern over time, 

10 starting in '43, '44, '45, there were some 

11 rollings, I think the total package here, 

12 they ran a little over one million pounds of 

13 uranium through the facility.

14 But if you look at 1948, the 

15 first half of '48, which is what we're 

16 proposing to add, more than half of that 

17 million pounds was run through the plant in 

18 that time period.

19 They ran almost 600,000 pounds of 

20 uranium in a very short period of time, and 

21 this is the period that we're recommending 

22 be added to the SEC.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

129

1 If you look to the right of that 

2 600,000 pound rolling you can see that 

3 there's only three or four, maybe five, 

4 much, much smaller rollings that were 

5 conducted on a limited experimental basis 

6 after that time period, and we believe that 

7 at this point we can reconstruct those 

8 exposures after the first half of 1948.

9 Okay. External, as with many of 

10 these AWE sites, there's no evidence of any 

11 routine monitoring program, very few 

12 measurements. The Health and Safety 

13 Laboratory later on in '49 did come in and 

14 do a few measurements.

15 Internal monitoring, we have no 

16 routine air monitoring or bioassay program. 

17 There were limited air samples conducted in 

18 '43, '44, and '51. The early ones were 

19 limited in scope, mostly GA samples.

20 And probably, most importantly, 

21 these were taken with, unbeknownst to me 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 before we ran across this, with an 

2 electrostatic precipitation technique, which 

3 turned out to be abandoned later on as not 

4 being a very quantitative procedure.

5 I think they had high 

6 expectations that they could precipitate the 

7 uranium out with some charge and that really 

8 didn't work out to be the case.

9 So those things, those types of 

10 measurements are very unreliable and we're 

11 nowhere close to what you could, the 

12 reproducibility you could get with a HASL, 

13 you know, Whatman-41 type high volume air 

14 sample program.

15 A substantial study was performed 

16 by HASL in '58 where they did a very good, 

17 typical HASL time-weighted average study of 

18 the various production operations and we 

19 believe that that's a very good 

20 characterization for the later years after 

21 the SEC period that we've added.

22 Okay. The rationale for the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

131

1 Class addition, the 6-month period that I 

2 mentioned, again, we previously thought we 

3 could use the TBD-6000 approach, but we also 

4 felt that we needed to validate that.

5 It turns out that the practices 

6 that were used at the site continued on 

7 through that first half of 1948. They had 

8 the same oversight, the Hanford oversight, 

9 not the HASL involvement.

10 And so, you know, these 

11 electrostatic precipitation measurements, 

12 the concomitant rolling at three different 

13 rolling mills, it just gave us the pause 

14 that we could actually do anything with 

15 sufficient accuracy and ended up with the 

16 conclusion that TBD-6000 would not be 

17 appropriate for this time period.

18 Here we go over the three co19 located rolling mills. Interestingly, the 

20 1952 study was done at one station at a 

21 time, and the rollings that were conducted 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 after that rolling in 1948, that 600,000 

2 pound rolling, were done at one rolling mill 

3 at a time, specifically the 18-inch rolling 

4 mill, which in the HASL '52 study show that 

5 that was the lowest of the three rolling 

6 mills as they operated.

7 So we're fairly comfortable 

8 saying that the '52 measurements at HASL 

9 will be bounding of the rolling mill 

10 operations. Okay. Again, talking about the 

11 1949-'50 rollings, they were very low-volume 

12 rollings.

13 These ones in 1949 and '50 were 

14 in support of the Chalk River reactor in 

15 Canada. These were done to try to get the 

16 temperature control down.

17 It was very important when you 

18 rolled uranium to keep the temperature at a 

19 specific value to make sure that the uranium 

20 maintained a certain degree of integrity in 

21 the lattice structure.

22 So these were almost experimental 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

133

1 type rollings. And, again, I mentioned that 

2 they were only done on the 18-inch rolling, 

3 which was demonstrated by HASL in '52 to be 

4 the lowest of the rolling mills.

5 So, you know, again, suitable DR 

6 method does not exist and the differences in 

7 operational characteristics from other 

8 medical working operations, we didn't feel 

9 that there's any particular surrogate that 

10 could be used here.

11 Okay. This is our typical slide, 

12 why is everyone covered? Well we just have 

13 no idea of the control in the facility of 

14 who went where and when, you know, movement 

15 was not prohibited throughout the site.

16 So we just feel that this has to 

17 apply to everyone that was onsite during 

18 that time period. And I had mentioned 

19 already why we want to stop in July '48.

20 We believe that TBD-6000 is 

21 appropriate after July of '48. It can bound 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 the rolling operations, but also there were 

2 some grinding operations that were done that 

3 we don't have air samples for, but we 

4 believe the TBD-6000 can be used to bound 

5 those grinding operations in those later 

6 years.

7 Okay. For those who were not 

8 included in the SEC as usual, we'll use any 

9 internal monitoring data that we may end up 

10 finding in a person's individual case file. 

11 We'll perform dose reconstructions during 

12 that time period to the best extent we can.

13 The external dose reconstructions 

14 we believe we can reconstruct using source15 term models and Monte Carlo modeling from 

16 '43 to '52, the same as with medical x-rays 

17 from '43 to '52.

18 And the internal, of course, 

19 we're going to stop the SEC at, we're 

20 recommending stopping it at July 31st. For 

21 the rest of that year we believe we can 

22 reconstruct it again using the TBD-6000 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

135

1 approach.

2 And external dose, we talked 

3 about that. There was some onsite storage 

4 here that was not typical at many of the 

5 other AWEs, and so we had to account for 

6 that.

7 So for the rolling days, when 

8 people are exposed to billets at one foot, 

9 or a billet at a foot per rolling day, we're 

10 going to give 7mR per day; in the storage 

11 we're going to get about a seventh of that.

12 Ten hours’ exposure to a long 

13 billet at one meter will give about 1mR per 

14 day and that's our recommended approach for 

15 that period.

16 Again, the evidence reviewed 

17 indicates some workers may have accumulated 

18 chronic exposures. Consequently, we believe 

19 that health may have been endangered and so 

20 the workers who were covered by this 

21 evaluation were employed for a number of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 work days aggregating at least 250 days.

2 And this is our summary slide of 

3 feasibility. It's a little bit busy because 

4 of the way we've broken this out, but we 

5 believe that reconstruction is feasible from 

6 August 1st '48 through 1952 for uranium.

7 For the thorium, between August 

8 1st '48 and '52 there was no thorium 

9 processed so that's not applicable. 

10 External exposures, we believe we can do all 

11 years and medical all years.

12 What's not feasible now is March 

13 1st '43 through July 31, 1948, that adds 

14 that 6-month period and it's the same for 

15 the thorium, the thorium period is March 1, 

16 1943 through 12/31/1947, because there was 

17 no thorium after that.

18 With that, I'll answer any 

19 questions that there might be.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Questions for 

21 Jim or do you want to wait till we hear from 

22 Paul? Why don't hear from Paul and then --
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

137

1 MEMBER ZIEMER: This report, 

2 again, comes from the TBD-6000 Work Group 

3 and was part of our deliberations earlier 

4 this month. Again, I'll remind you of who 

5 the Work Group members were. I serve as 

6 Chair. It's Josie Beach, John Poston and 

7 Wanda Munn.

8 Dr. Neton mentioned the idea of 

9 extending the SEC Class period by six 

10 months, it's actually seven months. The 

11 proposed extension is January 1st through 

12 July 31st of '48.

13 And by unanimous vote, the Work 

14 Group agreed with NIOSH that dose cannot be 

15 reconstructed for the period January 1, ‘48, 

16 through July 31, ‘48, and thus recommends 

17 that this time period should be included in 

18 the SEC Class Definition previously approved 

19 by the Board.

20 So that is a recommendation from 

21 the Work Group for this Board. And then a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 related recommendation, and we voted on this 

2 separately, by unanimous vote, the Work 

3 Group agrees with NIOSH that dose can be 

4 reconstructed for the remainder of the 

5 covered period, that is, beginning August 1, 

6 1948, and that SEC Class status should not 

7 be recommended for work during that time 

8 period.

9 So those will be our two formal 

10 recommendations, Mr. Chairman, when we're 

11 finished and you'll also hear from the 

12 petitioner. We would consider this to be 

13 two motions which you may wish to combine 

14 into one, but you understand the thrust of 

15 them.

16 And then to elaborate here 

17 further -- okay, I need to go backwards, so 

18 --

19 Okay. A brief summary of the 

20 matrix issues and I might add that many of 

21 these matrix issues were rather minor in 

22 nature.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

139

1 For example, the Table 6-1, the 

2 first issue had some incorrect units in it 

3 and NIOSH agreed that those were incorrect 

4 and we closed that issue.

5 Likewise, in Table 6-2 there were 

6 incorrect units there and NIOSH agreed and 

7 we closed that issue. The third issue was 

8 asking that NIOSH document the 1948 as a 

9 start date for site surveys.

10 Well that was really resolved by 

11 the establishing of a new start date for the 

12 period that we are talking about here, the 

13 new start date August 1, 1948, and it was 

14 agreed that surveys, it was clear that 

15 surveys were done, certainly beginning in 

16 that time period, so that issue was closed.

17 Also, in the SEC report, they ask 

18 that NIOSH correct Table 7-1 to assure that 

19 comparable units and correct working hours 

20 were used, and NIOSH agreed with that and 

21 that was closed.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Likewise, there were 

2 typographical and calculational errors in 

3 Table 7-2, and NIOSH agreed and we closed 

4 that issue. Issue 6, SC&A felt there was an 

5 inadequate description of how TBD dose 

6 reconstruction methods were to be applied.

7 And actually NIOSH is to prepare 

8 a White Paper on this so this issue remains 

9 open, or in progress, I think, is going to 

10 be the correct designation there.

11 I went the wrong way here. In 

12 Issue 7, SC&A asked NIOSH to address 

13 uncertainty as to whether the air

14 concentration rates are dependent on 

15 production rates.

16 This was an issue that had to do 

17 with the early '48 period and it now would 

18 become a moot issue since the first seven 

19 months of '48 will included in the proposed 

20 addition to the SEC Class.

21 SC&A had asked NIOSH to evaluate 

22 the degree to which pit burning of uranium 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

141

1 renders TBD-6000 approaches incomplete as 

2 being a proper surrogate, and actually this 

3 issue had been addressed earlier.

4 We did not address it at this 

5 last meeting because it had already been 

6 addressed and closed and SC&A concurred with 

7 NIOSH's White Paper on that issue, so that 

8 had been previously closed.

9 SC&A asked NIOSH to document the 

10 basis for 90 percent coverage of uranium as 

11 a source term and that was agreed to and 

12 closed. The last two items are open.

13 Well, first the need for 

14 external, or to revise the external exposure 

15 assumptions, this is a finding that's very 

16 closely associated with the previous item 

17 that I said was still open, Item 6. So the 

18 White Paper that NIOSH is preparing should 

19 be addressing this issue as well, so that 

20 remains open or in progress.

21 And then, finally, that NIOSH 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 document sources of information on the 

2 relative hazards of thorium and NIOSH has 

3 agreed to provide details on this, and that 

4 remains open or in progress.

5 And that completes the report of 

6 the Work Group, Mr. Chairman.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

8 you. I just -- well, you know, I do agree 

9 with NIOSH, so I think, you know, a 6-month 

10 estimate is sufficiently accurate for the 7-

11 month --

12 MEMBER ZIEMER: Plus or minus a 

13 month, is that what you're saying?

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. We're 

15 close enough. I'm not sure that counsel 

16 will agree with us, but -- do that. Board 

17 Members with questions, Dave?

18 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes, for Jim 

19 Neton. How do you propose to handle people 

20 who began work during the SEC period, but 

21 did not complete 250 days until they -- but 

22 worked continuously and did not complete the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

143

1 250 days till later into the assessment 

2 period where they're not under SEC?

3 DR. NETON: Yes. We'd only be 

4 able to reconstruct those doses that we can, 

5 so if -- for the periods they worked in the 

6 SEC, we would not be able to reconstruct the 

7 internal exposures.

8 We would reconstruct their 

9 external and medical exposures and then 

10 once, for the period they're outside of the 

11 SEC, we would do a full reconstruction.

12 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: But if you 

13 can't reconstruct -- but then the period in 

14 which they are in the SEC does not count?

15 DR. NETON: The only exposure 

16 that we will reconstruct is what we can.

17 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Oh, to be 

18 sure.

19 DR. NETON: But the internal 

20 exposure that we can't reconstruct, we can't 

21 do it. So, yes, it would not be added to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 their dose.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Can I interject 

3 here?

4 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Please.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We wrestled 

6 with this issue some years ago when we first 

7 passed the -- approved the SEC and reviewed 

8 the SEC regulations and there's no good way 

9 around this.

10 To be qualified for the SEC you 

11 have to have worked for 250 days and if you 

12 --

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Right.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- don't then 

15 you are relying on what's available for 

16 dose, you know, individual dose 

17 reconstruction and that, you know, 

18 throughout your work time.

19 And if some of your work time is 

20 when some of your dose cannot be 

21 reconstructed it just doesn't count. 

22 There's no way. The way the, really the law 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

145

1 and the regulations that, you know, follow 

2 that law is set up is you have to be able to 

3 qualify for the SEC or you don't.

4 There's no, you can't half 

5 qualify and get half credit, or, you know, 

6 partially qualify and get partial credit in 

7 terms of the amount of time that you work. 

8 You either meet the threshold or you don't.

9 You can meet the threshold based 

10 on multiple sites of, you know, work, where 

11 you've worked where there’s multiple, you 

12 know, SECs at multiple sites, but there's 

13 just no way of, you know, if you can't 

14 reconstruct that dose, you just can't 

15 reconstruct it and so that just doesn't 

16 count.

17 Now it may not seem always fair 

18 to someone, but we really can't sort of say 

19 that we can or, either we can or we can't, 

20 you know, do individual dose reconstruction 

21 based on a particular exposure.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Right. So 

2 basically you're saying that the close 

3 reading of the law, that's what was required 

4 even though it will, it could adversely 

5 affect some people?

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Correct.

7 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Who don't 

8 work 250 days in the SEC period?

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Correct. 

10 That's how you qualify for the SEC is 

11 working the 250 days.

12 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes. Thanks.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, Jim?

14 DR. NETON: While I'm up here I 

15 just want to add one more point of 

16 information to Dr. Ziemer's presentation and 

17 that is there are three open issues that 

18 were identified, but it was agreed by the 

19 Board, SC&A and NIOSH that none of those 

20 three issues were SEC issues.

21 They were Site Profile 

22 implementation issues, that is, you know, 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

147

1 how we would actually apply TBD-6000 to 

2 those cases.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. I --

4 don't go away, Jim. I actually have 

5 questions for both you and Paul here. This 

6 concerns not the, sort of the SEC period, 

7 but the post-SEC period.

8 I did not see in your 

9 presentation or in the updated report any 

10 sort of demonstration on how you would be 

11 utilizing surrogate data and did that meet 

12 the criteria that both you have set and as 

13 well as the Board had set for review of the 

14 use of surrogate date and how that would 

15 then be applied in individual dose 

16 reconstruction?

17 Now maybe I missed it from an 

18 earlier presentation or it's hidden away in 

19 a White Paper someplace or something. But 

20 I'm a little concerned that, sort of asking 

21 the Board to, you know, approve something 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 and we really aren't being presented with 

2 that particular information.

3 DR. NETON: Right.

4 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well --

5 DR. NETON: Right. Well that 

6 might have been implied in the addendum, but 

7 we believe that TBD-6000 is applicable after 

8 '48.

9 TBD-6000 was put together at 

10 sites starting in 1948 and covered certain 

11 operations such as grinding and shaping and 

12 those type of activities, and that's the 

13 type of surrogate data that we're talking 

14 about here.

15 What we didn't believe was 

16 covered in that 6-month period, though, was 

17 this concomitant rolling of three mills and 

18 such. After 1948, the middle of '48, HASL 

19 took over and started doing measurements.

20 And we believe the nature of 

21 those rolling activities are captured by the 

22 HASL evaluations.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

149

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, but -- I 

2 know what you believe, but I want you to be 

3 able to demonstrate to me that you, you 

4 know, went through those criteria.

5 I thought that was how we agreed 

6 to approach surrogate data --

7 DR. NETON: Well --

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- as well as 

9 individual dose reconstruction. And I 

10 brought this up before and you seemed to be, 

11 you know, not do, stopped doing that 

12 recently and it applies to the Kansas City 

13 facility also.

14 And, again, with surrogate data, 

15 there are a number of Board Members that 

16 have serious concerns about the use of it.

17 There are disagreements on the 

18 Board and I really think it's important that 

19 we have that information available or 

20 present it to the Board if you're going to 

21 ask us to approve the use of surrogate data. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And it's a lot easier to do if we can 

2 actually see the application and see it 

3 applied.

4 Now, again, now maybe this is, 

5 you know, is going on for some time, maybe 

6 it's a better way, maybe the Work Group has, 

7 you know, done that, but I'm a little 

8 uncomfortable dealing with that part of 

9 this, your recommendation and the Work 

10 Group's recommendation without seeing that 

11 demonstration or understanding that it's 

12 been done.

13 DR. NETON: Well --

14 MR. THURBER: This is Bill 

15 Thurber from SC&A. I would mention that in 

16 our review of the Petition Evaluation 

17 Report, we did address the criteria.

18 And so one of the sections in our 

19 report did address the surrogate data 

20 criteria.

21 MEMBER ZIEMER: This is Ziemer. 

22 Bill is quite right and, in particular, I 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

151

1 think they went back particularly to the 

2 Simonds Saw data and did validate the fact 

3 that the highest data from Simonds Saw, 

4 which was verified as being part of the TBD5 6000 supporting material, was a good 

6 representation here that this type of data 

7 met the criteria.

8 I don't think the Work Group 

9 formally asked the question of SC&A as I --

10 or we didn't formally take action to say we 

11 agree with SC&A that it meets the criteria, 

12 and perhaps you're asking for that.

13 We were dealing with the matrix 

14 issue and I think we were operating under 

15 the assumption and SC&A seemed to believe it 

16 did meet the criteria, but we did not 

17 actually, I don't recall discussing that.

18 And maybe Josie or Wanda can help 

19 me, but I think you're quite right. I don't 

20 think we specifically discussed it in the 

21 Work Group.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER BEACH: For my mind, I 

2 remember thinking about the criteria, and I 

3 don't remember the specifics of what was 

4 discussed that I was okay and comfortable 

5 with that criteria being met, and that might 

6 have been what was in the report.

7 MR. KATZ: This is Ted just to 

8 remind you, so, yes, Bill did discuss it in 

9 Work Group Meeting, but you didn't actually, 

10 you know, take any action on that 

11 specifically, but Bill did present and 

12 discuss just what he sort of reiterated very 

13 briefly just now on the phone.

14 MR. THURBER: Well there's really 

15 (telephonic interference.)

16 MR. KATZ: Bill, we couldn't 

17 understand you there. There's something 

18 wrong with the audio and your voice was 

19 really garbled. Can you repeat what you 

20 were saying?

21 MR. THURBER: Yes. What I said 

22 was that we had included a section in our 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

153

1 review of the Petition Evaluation Report 

2 where we addressed the five surrogate data 

3 criteria and as Paul said, which is 

4 consistent with my recollection, that it was 

5 not discussed, it was included as part of 

6 the report.

7 Did you hear that all right, Ted?

8 MR. KATZ: Yes, Bill, we heard 

9 you. Thanks.

10 MR. THURBER: Okay. There's some 

11 other terrible noise in the background 

12 incidentally.

13 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: I have a 

14 question for Jim. I mean you talk about, in 

15 the data about when they were running all 

16 three mills how incredibly filthy it got 

17 there loading the -- my concern is that I 

18 can't see where they did a real good cleanup 

19 at the, you know, starting in August of '48.

20 So I'm a little concerned about 

21 the resuspension factor unless there's some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 documentation that shows -- I mean if we had 

2 that much loading in the atmosphere then, 

3 you know, what do we have far as 

4 resuspension in a mill that probably wasn't 

5 cleaned up in '48?

6 DR. NETON: Yes, that's a good 

7 question. Sam Glover was on the phone. He 

8 might be able to answer that, in a better 

9 position to answer than I. Sam, are you on 

10 the phone? Sam Glover?

11 DR. GLOVER: Can you hear me?

12 DR. NETON: Yes.

13 DR. GLOVER: Sorry about that. 

14 My speaker didn't work on my headphone. So 

15 I wanted to address a couple things and 

16 hopefully help clarify this.

17 We did, I think, very carefully, 

18 go through the Board and NIOSH's criteria. 

19 And I want to make sure that we very 

20 carefully looked at the area of 1952 to go 

21 backwards and then we could really all say 

22 okay, now we have a process that matches or 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

155

1 bounds this.

2 For residual contamination 

3 specifically what we're doing is using the 

4 TBD-6000 30 straight days of 24-hour 

5 operations at 100 MAC, air, and we are 

6 leaving that contaminated that level from 

7 day one through 1952 using the updated 10 to 

8 the minus 5 resuspension factor.

9 And so we were very heavily 

10 contaminated again, assuming that it's 

11 highly contaminated from the very beginning 

12 and it stays that way.

13 And we are going to use that even 

14 in the period of the SEC to do external dose 

15 or use that for the residual period, the 

16 post-SEC period, and there were a couple 

17 contamination reports in 1949 and then, of 

18 course, HASL was onsite in 1952.

19 As Jim pointed out the nature of 

20 the rolling after this heavy rolling period, 

21 after that span, 1949, it becomes one rod 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 going through a very temperature controlled 

2 in that one mill, the 18-inch mill, which 

3 was shown to be the lowest of the mills that 

4 were operated.

5 So we're using the 1952 data as 

6 one day where they rolled everything. They 

7 used all the different mills, they used all 

8 the processes so they could understand the 

9 contamination at Joslyn.

10 And when they went through the 

11 threading operations, the grinding 

12 operation, we have data for all of those 

13 operations. So we feel that, knowing 

14 exactly what they did post-July of '48, that 

15 we have very carefully examined the criteria 

16 and have data that supports that we are 

17 bounded by TBD-6000. I hope that helps.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any additional 

19 Board comments or questions? Okay --

20 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes. This is 

21 David Richardson.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, go ahead, 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

157

1 Dave.

2 MEMBER RICHARDSON: I had a 

3 question that I guess is directed to Dr. 

4 Ziemer, which was in the matrix of issues, 

5 Item Number 7 was address uncertainty as to 

6 whether air concentration rates are 

7 dependent on production rates.

8 And that issue was sort of set 

9 aside as moot and I was wondering if you 

10 could comment on, I had wondered about this 

11 issue I guess, even that the HASL data comes 

12 from 1952, looking at the histogram that Dr. 

13 Neton had, but the production rates are 

14 very, very low in that year.

15 They're not, they appear to be 

16 zero in the second half of ‘52, but real 

17 close to zero in the first half of '52 when 

18 the air sampling was done.

19 And so, again, extrapolating back 

20 to let’s say the first half of 1949 and the 

21 second half of 1950 then the quantities 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 being processed would be much higher. If 

2 you issued a new report, it would just make 

3 it that the evidence that is bounding the 

4 1952 implies it's bounding in 1949.

5 MEMBER ZIEMER: David, I don't 

6 think I know the answer to that. The part 

7 that I was pointing out as being moot was 

8 that we were originally concerned about that 

9 large production area, or production rate in 

10 1948, and since that moved into the proposed 

11 addition of the SEC that's why that issue 

12 became moot to us because that was what the 

13 -- or that was the item that raised the 

14 issue in the first place.

15 But looking forward, for example, 

16 into '52, I would need help on that, maybe 

17 Sam can help on that. I don't think I know 

18 the answer to that.

19 DR. NETON: Yes, I think Sam 

20 basically touched on that in his last 

21 discussion, but also I don't think we're 

22 just using the rolling operations, we're 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

159

1 also doing some TBD-6000 for grinding 

2 operations.

3 Sam, could you talk about that?

4 DR. GLOVER: Yes, sir. We are 

5 absolutely including both sets. The rolling 

6 operations are not actually the bounding --

7 DR. NETON: Right.

8 DR. GLOVER: -- TBD-6000 

9 exposure. It's actually the machining 

10 operations. And so we are still going to 

11 use the TBD-6000 machining operations as we 

12 look at these cases.

13 And so even though -- I talked 

14 briefly that the data from '52 were done for 

15 short periods of time, just like the Simonds 

16 Saw & Steel with basic HASL when the product 

17 was going through the mill, they made the 

18 measurement, so they, you know, and then 

19 they broke it up for later analysis.

20 Beginning in the second half of 

21 '48 forward, August 1st, that's the kind of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 rolling that Joslyn did, and even still the 

2 data in '52 are on this mill called the 9-

3 inch mill, which from 1944 on, they 

4 recognized was very high.

5 But they didn't do those kind of 

6 rollings except for one day. And what 

7 doesn’t come out, is that's why you see 

8 those little blips there, those are three or 

9 four days of rolling per year.

10 They're not a continuous effort. 

11 These are like, we come in, they crank it 

12 out in two 8-hour shifts, 16 hours a day, 

13 and they get them done. So there's not a 

14 long, continued presence at this site.

15 Did I miss anything in there, 

16 Jim, that I still need to cover?

17 DR. NETON: No, I think you got 

18 that, Sam. But I guess is it true that the 

19 machining operations will be bounding over 

20 all those years or is it just in certain 

21 time periods?

22 DR. GLOVER: It was bounding for 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

161

1 all years.

2 DR. NETON: Right. So what I'm 

3 saying is that, you know, we're confident 

4 that the HASL values are representative of 

5 the early years, but those are not the 

6 bounding values that are going to be used in 

7 the dose reconstructions.

8 The machining operations out of 

9 TBD-6000 are the ones that will bound the 

10 exposures.

11 DR. GLOVER: Yes, and they bound 

12 all sorts of the machining operations that 

13 were measured and all air monitoring data 

14 from the rolling operations.

15 DR. NETON: And correct me if I'm 

16 wrong, but I think that even though there 

17 were only three or four days of rolling per 

18 campaign, the machining operations we're 

19 going to assign continue on much longer than 

20 that? Is that not correct?

21 DR. GLOVER: The operation days 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 we have include the operation days for the 

2 machining operations that came in. They 

3 rolled a machine and the material. We will 

4 still include the onsite storage of product.

5 DR. NETON: Right.

6 DR. GLOVER: You know, post, in 

7 the SEC, but we know from the Hanford 

8 reports and the operation, you know, when 

9 the Chalk River was onsite. We have very 

10 detailed records of the number of rolling 

11 days, or operational days.

12 DR. NETON: That's right. I had 

13 forgotten that they actually were trying to 

14 get this all accomplished in a very limited 

15 period of time, so the rolling and machining 

16 occurred concomitantly, right?

17 DR. GLOVER: That's correct.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: This is Jim 

19 Melius again. This is maybe a comment or a 

20 question. When I look at the SC&A report, 

21 which is from March of last year, I think it 

22 refers to the surrogate data use for the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

163

1 entire '48 to '52 time period.

2 So I think it predates this 

3 decision to add the six months. Now, yes, 

4 and again, I'm not trying to be, you know --

5 DR. NETON: Well --

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- picky, but 

7 they're sort of saying surrogate data was 

8 adequate for use for the six months that you 

9 just added data.

10 DR. NETON: Well, right, but you 

11 need to look at the six months, it's the 

12 600,000 pounds that were rolled. I mean I'm 

13 not sure what --

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Well --

15 DR. NETON: Yes.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: My question 

17 really is, is has this surrogate data issue 

18 been adequately evaluated?

19 DR. NETON: Well, we believe it 

20 has, but I mean if you're not comfortable 

21 with it that's --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And I question 

2 both whether SC&A -- and I don't think the 

3 Work Group has taken this up. And, again, 

4 it may very well be valid, I'm not, you 

5 know, saying it's not appropriate to do, but 

6 I think there's sort of a due diligence 

7 issue that we need to --

8 MR. THURBER: This is Bill 

9 Thurber again. In our review -- and you're 

10 correct, Dr. Melius, in the time phasing 

11 that you just commented on.

12 But in our review of the 

13 surrogate data before this decision was made 

14 to add the six months, if you go back and 

15 look through our report this was one of the 

16 concerns that we raised and was tied in with 

17 several of our findings that we didn't see 

18 how you could average the whole of, the 

19 period from January 1 of ‘48, through '52, 

20 and we didn't feel that was right.

21 And in our review of the temporal 

22 considerations we again raised this question 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

165

1 and said to NIOSH, you need to explain why 

2 the data source, which is a document by 

3 Harris and Kingsley, who were part of the 

4 HASL team, you need to explain clearly how 

5 that data covers the period from the 

6 beginning of 1948 because that particular 

7 document, which is the source document for -

8 - for much of the data in TBD-6000, didn't 

9 have any dates in it.

10 And, subsequent to that, and Sam 

11 Glover kind of alluded to it, NIOSH did some 

12 additional work and determined by comparing 

13 some of the data in TBD-6000 to, I believe, 

14 the data from Simonds Steel & Saw that they 

15 could pinpoint when the coverage in Harris 

16 and Kingsley began.

17 So this is a long, kind of winded 

18 thing, but we did raise the question at the 

19 time about the temporal considerations and 

20 based on the additional work that was -- the 

21 research that was done and the change in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 finding, that concern I think has been 

2 addressed, at least that's my personal 

3 opinion.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thanks, 

5 Bill. Any other questions or comments? I 

6 would like to hear the petitioner, I believe 

7 has some short comments?

8 MR. KATZ: Okay, right. One 

9 second, I just need to pull it up. Okay, 

10 thanks, and I'm reading because the 

11 petitioner, Betty Keller, asked that we just 

12 read this into the record for her.

13 Our family wishes to extend our 

14 appreciation to everyone who has been 

15 working with the Joslyn Manufacturing & 

16 Supply SEC. We are disappointed that the 

17 SEC is not covering the entire period that 

18 Joslyn was declared an atomic weapons site, 

19 that is through December 31, 1952.

20 We are pleased for those fellow 

21 workers who have benefitted from the SEC. 

22 We submitted our claim in July 2010 and 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

167

1 remain confident that our husband, father, 

2 grandfather, Ernest, Ernie Keller, qualifies 

3 for compensation under EEOICPA.

4 Therefore, we will be thankful 

5 for any consideration that can be given to 

6 us. And that's signed Betty Keller and 

7 William and Kristi Keller.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

9 you, Ted. We have a motion from the Work 

10 Group to approve the, I guess the modified 

11 SEC as NIOSH has included in their addendum 

12 report and then to, secondarily to also 

13 approve the fact that the subsequent period, 

14 mid-'48 through '52 not be added to the SEC.

15 I don't know if those are one or 

16 two separate motions that we want to --

17 MEMBER ZIEMER: I'm going to 

18 propose that you make them separate motions 

19 for the following reason. It seems to me 

20 that there's no reason not to go ahead with 

21 the SEC portion today.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 If the Board is not comfortable 

2 on the issue of the surrogate data for the 

3 remainder of the period, the Work Group can 

4 certainly go back and specifically look at 

5 that and we could delay action on the second 

6 part of the recommendation till next time if 

7 the Board so wishes.

8 But I think it's important to get 

9 this additional part of the SEC added as 

10 soon as possible.

11 MEMBER CLAWSON: Second it.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

13 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well that wasn't 

14 a motion. I was suggesting it be two 

15 motions.

16 (Laughter.)

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So we have two 

18 motions. So the first motion is to approve 

19 the SEC addition as stated in the NIOSH 

20 report, the addendum report, and what's been 

21 presented here and what our Work Group has 

22 agreed to, that.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

169

1 So any further comments or 

2 questions on that? If not, Ted, do you want 

3 to do a roll call?

4 MR. KATZ: Yes, thank you. So 

5 I'll just do this alphabetically, Anderson?

6 MEMBER ANDERSON: Yes.

7 MR. KATZ: Beach?

8 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

9 MR. KATZ: Clawson?

10 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes.

11 MR. KATZ: Field?

12 MEMBER FIELD: Yes.

13 MR. KATZ: Griffon?

14 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes.

15 MR. KATZ: Kotelchuck?

16 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

17 MR. KATZ: Dr. Lemen is absent. 

18 Lockey?

19 MEMBER LOCKEY: Yes.

20 MR. KATZ: Melius?

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MR. KATZ: Munn?

2 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

3 MR. KATZ: Poston?

4 MEMBER POSTON: Yes.

5 MR. KATZ: Richardson?

6 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes.

7 MR. KATZ: Roessler?

8 MEMBER ROESSLER: Yes.

9 MR. KATZ: Schofield?

10 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Yes.

11 MR. KATZ: Valerio? Loretta, are 

12 you on the line? Loretta Valerio, maybe you 

13 are on mute?

14 MEMBER VALERIO: Can you hear me 

15 now?

16 MR. KATZ: Yes, perfectly. Thank 

17 you.

18 MEMBER VALERIO: Yes.

19 MR. KATZ: Next, and Ziemer?

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes.

21 MR. KATZ: So the motion is 

22 unanimous. We have one outstanding vote to 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

171

1 collect, but the motion passes.

2 So I'll just run through the 

3 second vote then if that's clear to 

4 everybody. Is that correct? Yes?

5 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Repeat the 

6 motion, please.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think the 

8 second motion from the Work Group is to 

9 essentially concur that dose reconstruction 

10 can be done with sufficient accuracy for the 

11 time period from mid-1948 post, I guess, 

12 August 1, 1948, through the end of 1952, 

13 which is the period involved with the, the 

14 range of this SEC petition.

15 So it would be for that time 

16 period.

17 MR. KATZ: Exactly. Okay, let's 

18 do this again.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Well first, we 

20 have that as a motion. Paul also mentioned 

21 that we can, if people wish, we can postpone 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 this and get further information.

2 I don't want to make this overly 

3 formal or, I guess, so I'm looking is there 

4 a second or comments from the Board Members?

5 MEMBER MUNN: Let's take the 

6 vote.

7 MEMBER ZIEMER: In terms of 

8 procedure, I believe if individuals wish to 

9 delay this or postpone it, you can either 

10 table it and then ask the Work Group to do 

11 something or you can make a motion to defer.

12 MEMBER ZIEMER: Either of those 

13 motions supersedes the motion to approve.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We have the, 

15 the mover is also our in-house 

16 parliamentarian.

17 (Laughter.)

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So either I 

19 need a second or I need a, to the initial 

20 motion, or I need someone to make another 

21 motion, whatever people wish.

22 MEMBER CLAWSON: Well let's 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

173

1 clarify on what your motion was because now 

2 I'm kind of confused on what --

3 MR. KATZ: Can I just say, I'll 

4 explain. So the motion on the table is the 

5 motion that came from the Work Group which 

6 is to concur with NIOSH that it's feasible 

7 to do the dose reconstruction for the rest 

8 of the period that's under consideration, 

9 the rest of the period covered by the 

10 petition.

11 But, alternatively, if you don't 

12 want to deal with that motion right now, you 

13 can table it or defer it and that requires a 

14 motion and a second.

15 MEMBER CLAWSON: I'd like to 

16 table it because I don't think it's been 

17 demonstrated quite yet.

18 I'd say table it right now 

19 because there's still some outstanding 

20 questions.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We have a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 motion to table it, do we have a second to 

2 that?

3 MALE PARTICIPANT: Second.

4 MALE PARTICIPANT: Second.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. So I 

6 think that's an immediate vote if I recall 

7 correctly.

8 MR. KATZ: Exactly.

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, no 

10 discussion. So, Ted, go ahead.

11 MR. KATZ: Correct, thank you. 

12 So second motion, so it's to table it. 

13 Anderson?

14 MEMBER ANDERSON: Table.

15 MR. KATZ: Beach?

16 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

17 MR. KATZ: Clawson?

18 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes.

19 MR. KATZ: Field?

20 MEMBER FIELD: Yes.

21 MR. KATZ: Griffon?

22 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

175

1 MR. KATZ: Kotelchuck?

2 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

3 MR. KATZ: Lockey?

4 MEMBER LOCKEY: Yes.

5 MR. KATZ: Melius?

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

7 MR. KATZ: Munn?

8 MEMBER MUNN: No.

9 MR. KATZ: Poston?

10 MEMBER POSTON: No.

11 MR. KATZ: Richardson?

12 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Sure, yes.

13 MR. KATZ: Roessler?

14 MEMBER ROESSLER: No.

15 MR. KATZ: Schofield?

16 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Yes.

17 MR. KATZ: Valerio?

18 MEMBER VALERIO: Yes.

19 MR. KATZ: And Ziemer?

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well the 

21 workload's going to fall on me, but I'll 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 vote yes. I'm okay with it.

2 (Laughter.)

3 MR. KATZ: Okay. No, that's 

4 good. The motion passes with one absent 

5 vote and three no votes, but the motion 

6 passes.

7 So it is tabled and deferred.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So it's tabled, 

9 no it's tabled --

10 MALE PARTICIPANT: Tabled.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- and tabled 

12 means we take it up at our next meeting --

13 MR. KATZ: Ah.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- which would 

15 be at the -- well, it depends on which --

16 MEMBER ZIEMER: Whenever somebody 

17 draws it off the table.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, yes, yes, 

19 yes. Yes, we have to have a vote at the 

20 next -- yes, and that.

21 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, there you go.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So I think what 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

177

1 we're asking then is for the Work Group to 

2 meet and just confirm on the issue on the 

3 use of surrogate data.

4 And I'll leave it to the Work 

5 Group to decide whether you want or you need 

6 SC&A to update their initial review that 

7 we've discussed this afternoon or whether 

8 that information's adequate based on your 

9 further deliberations.

10 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well, I'm 

11 wondering if we couldn't just ask SC&A to 

12 look at their report and advise us as to 

13 whether their recommendation changes with 

14 this new date change. Is that appropriate?

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

16 I actually have a letter prepared 

17 on the first motion. The paragraph in red 

18 is from --

19 MEMBER ROESSLER: Jim, could you 

20 turn up the volume again?

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- our new 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 counsel. She's chosen red as her color of 

2 ink, yes.

3 (Off the record comments)

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. I will 

5 read this fairly quickly. Advisory Board on 

6 Radiation and Worker Health, the Board, has 

7 evaluated a Special Exposure Cohort, SEC 

8 Petition 00200 concerning workers at the 

9 Joslyn Manufacturing & Supply Company in 

10 Fort Wayne, Indiana, under the statutory 

11 requirements established by the Energy 

12 Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

13 Program Act of 2000 incorporated into 42 CFR 

14 83.13.

15 The Board respectfully recommends 

16 that SEC status be accorded to, quotation, 

17 all Atomic Weapons Employees who worked for 

18 Joslyn Manufacturing & Supply Company at the 

19 covered facility in Fort Wayne, Indiana, 

20 from March 1, 1943, through July 31, 1948, 

21 for a number of work days aggregating at 

22 least 250 work days occurring either solely 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

179

1 under this employment or in combination with 

2 work days within the parameters established 

3 for one or more other Classes of employees 

4 included in the Special Exposure Cohort.

5 This recommendation to extend the 

6 SEC Class added for individuals employed at 

7 the Joslyn Manufacturing & Supply Company 

8 from the previous end date of December 31, 

9 1947 to July 31, 1948.

10 This recommendation is based on 

11 the following factors. Individuals employed 

12 at the Joslyn Manufacturing & Supply Company 

13 worked on a number of projects related to 

14 the manufacture and development of nuclear 

15 weapons. Two, the National Institute for 

16 Occupational Safety Health, NIOSH, review of 

17 available monitoring data as well as 

18 available process and source term 

19 information for this facility found that 

20 NIOSH lacked the information necessary to 

21 complete individual dose reconstructions 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 with sufficient accuracy for internal 

2 radiological exposures from thorium and/or 

3 uranium and their progeny to which these 

4 workers may have been subjected during the 

5 time period in question.

6 The Board concurs with this 

7 determination. NIOSH determined that health 

8 may have been endangered for these Joslyn 

9 Manufacturing & Supply Company employees 

10 during the time period in question. The 

11 Board also concurs with this determination.

12 Based on these considerations and 

13 the discussions at the January 28, 2014, 

14 Board meeting held in Kansas City, Missouri, 

15 the Board recommends that this Class be 

16 added to the SEC.

17 Enclosed is the documentation of 

18 the Board meeting where this SEC Class was 

19 discussed. Documentation includes copies of 

20 the petition and NIOSH review thereof and 

21 related materials. If any of these items 

22 are unavailable at this time, they will 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

181

1 follow shortly.

2 The third bullet there's a 

3 misspelling of employees, a P left out, but 

4 any comments, if they are grammatical, if 

5 people would let me know.

6 Okay. Board work time, not that 

7 we haven't been working.

8 So if you will all turn to your 

9 October public comments, and really to the 

10 spreadsheet, and I will go through these 

11 relatively quickly, but sort of grouping by 

12 site from our discussions.

13 And we have a -- the first eight 

14 comments, number of people related to Rocky 

15 Flats, this was, again, the public comment 

16 period after we had approved the SEC for 

17 that, so the number of these regarding the, 

18 I think they're relatively straightforward, 

19 either thanking us for doing the SEC or 

20 thanking NIOSH or people wanting, finding 

21 additional information related to further 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 work or further follow-up at the Rocky 

2 Flats.

3 If nobody has questions, I will 

4 move on. Then next we have three comments 

5 from -- it's actually the petitioner at 

6 Hanford. On that, really wanting an update 

7 on the Hanford, there's actually been 

8 follow-up from that.

9 There seems to be one mistake in 

10 the follow-up column here where it refers to 

11 Hanford, but she is referred to talk to 

12 LaVon and Mark Griffon; wrong Work Group.

13 Unless that's just somehow 

14 mislabeled there, I don't know. So, again, 

15 I don't think it -- there has been follow-up 

16 actually with the petitioner and there will 

17 be more regarding the Hanford site, so I 

18 think it's sort of moot.

19 And then we have a comment from 

20 the petitioner at the Mound facility 

21 regarding some of her concerns about the SEC 

22 and the implementation of the SEC at that 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

183

1 site, which as you all you know has been 

2 complicated.

3 And some, a few comments there. 

4 I think, it appears that the follow-up is 

5 appropriate and I can say that the Work 

6 Group has actually met by phone and actually 

7 addressed these issues and clarified them.

8 So I think actually it's been 

9 taken care of. There's some additional 

10 Rocky Flats, starting with Number 16 here, 

11 on there. Additional comments from Rocky 

12 Flats. Again, I think either they were just 

13 comments or they were asking for additional 

14 information which has been referred on, 

15 straightforward.

16 The next comment is a set of 

17 comments from Dan McKeel regarding the 

18 General Steel Industries, and those have 

19 been referred back and followed up on by 

20 DCAS staff, it appears.

21 And comments, questions from the, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I guess sort of procedural questions on 

2 Fernald and Pantex regarding timing of some 

3 of the letters and the follow-up on Fernald 

4 and Pantex and then also a question 

5 regarding, sort of a procedural question on 

6 coverage for employees at Sandia and 

7 Lawrence Livermore and how those would be, 

8 sort of under what site people were sort of, 

9 that were housed at Lawrence Livermore, but 

10 were Sandia Livermore employees, would they 

11 be covered by the Livermore SEC, and that 

12 has been responded to, do that, done on a 

13 case-by-case basis.

14 And I'm not sure why this one is 

15 here, there's a comment from the July 

16 meeting from [identifying information 

17 redacted] regarding the, that the Board Work 

18 Group should examine the pages withheld from 

19 the FOI request that was put in.

20 I actually, I think the 

21 responses, I don't think the Board's in 

22 position to review a Freedom of Information 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

185

1 request, a withheld Freedom of Information 

2 request for emails and so forth because the 

3 Board doesn't really have access to them any 

4 more than the general public does. I think 

5 that's fair to say.

6 Okay. Though I will add that the 

7 Board, I think, has followed up on the 

8 general issue, this is related to the Mound 

9 site and the FOI and the Board has followed 

10 up on those and I think the earlier response 

11 to the Mound petitioner addressed at least 

12 the concerns about, that that petitioner had 

13 about the Mound SEC implementation.

14 And so in that sense it's been 

15 addressed, but we as a Board don't really 

16 have access to FOIs, email or anything that 

17 the general public doesn't have in that 

18 sense anyway.

19 So any comments or questions on 

20 those? If not, I believe we need a motion 

21 to just accept our review and follow up that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 we've completed this. Is that --

2 MR. KATZ: You don't need to --

3 MEMBER BEACH: Jim, I'll make 

4 that motion.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I guess we 

6 don't. Ted tells me we don't.

7 MR. KATZ: It's in the minutes.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: It's in the 

9 minutes, okay. It's documented. Why don't 

10 we, while we have everyone's attention here, 

11 let’s jump to meetings and then we'll do 

12 Work Group reports.

13 MR. KATZ: So it's a scheduling 

14 meetings issue. And when we have, which we 

15 don't need to answer right away, but we 

16 should answer pretty soon, is a location.

17 We have scheduled the July 29-30 

18 meeting. We haven't talked about a location 

19 for that. And, Andy, beside me says 

20 Amchitka would be a nice place to go.

21 (Laughter.)

22 MR. KATZ: So you may want to 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

187

1 think about sites we haven't been to in a 

2 while that are still on the Board's plate in 

3 terms of SECs.

4 MEMBER BEACH: Do we know what's 

5 going to be ready for that time period? I'm 

6 trying to think back to LaVon's 

7 presentation. It was four --

8 MEMBER ROESSLER: Would whoever's 

9 talking please try to make it a little bit 

10 louder.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. Can, 

12 again, I remind the Board Members that we 

13 need to speak closer to mike, including 

14 myself.

15 MEMBER ROESSLER: Yes, especially 

16 yourself, don't forget.

17 (Laughter.)

18 MEMBER ROESSLER: I didn't hear 

19 much of the discussion on the public 

20 comments.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 apologize, Gen.

2 MR. RUTHERFORD: Ted, are we 

3 talking about the August or --

4 MR. KATZ: We are talking about, 

5 not August, but July.

6 MR. RUTHERFORD: July.

7 MR. KATZ: July 29th through 

8 30th.

9 MR. RUTHERFORD: Well, it's 

10 really going to depend on if ORNL gets 

11 pushed a little bit because of the data 

12 capture from down there.

13 I mean right now it's on the cusp 

14 of making it, but I would really suspect 

15 ORNL's going to slip. So Oak Ridge National 

16 Lab, we could be possibly ready for that 

17 one.

18 I doubt that Hanford's going to 

19 be ready. There's a lot of work that, or a 

20 lot of issues they're working through there. 

21 The, let me pull my presentation up and I 

22 can tell you.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

189

1 Los Alamos National Lab, we're 

2 clearly not going to be ready there because 

3 we're waiting for information back from 

4 them. At least I wouldn't suspect that we 

5 would get that information and be ready to 

6 close that one out.

7 Savannah River Site, we're 

8 already talking about. Nuclear Metals is an 

9 AWE, we will be ready for that one in April. 

10 Joslyn, again, is discussed here. Rocky 

11 Flats, we could possibly be ready at Rocky 

12 Flats again. You know, there's five 

13 remaining issues of Rocky Flats.

14 Right now I think our biggest, 

15 our longest pole in the tent is probably the 

16 data falsification and the neptunium because 

17 we're waiting on information from Los Alamos 

18 National Lab, but, you know, realistically I 

19 think that we could be done with that as 

20 well.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: My suggestion 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 is that we wait till, let's bring this issue 

2 up again at our next Board call and say that 

3 -- I don't think we have to make the 

4 decision now, and there's enough uncertainty 

5 that --

6 MR. KATZ: Okay.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, that -- we 

8 could go back and visit Brad, but --

9 MEMBER CLAWSON: I was going say 

10 Idaho is only nice in July.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: It is only nice 

12 in July.

13 MEMBER CLAWSON: The temperatures 

14 are back in the 30s and 40s.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Is it.

16 (Laughter.)

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think Gen has 

18 the same in Minnesota, but with a negative, 

19 a minus in front of it. Okay, so why don't 

20 we --

21 MR. KATZ: We can wait till the, 

22 probably till the teleconference, and if we 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

191

1 can't wait that long then I'll poll you all 

2 in between.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

4 MR. KATZ: So the next --

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: It just takes a 

6 long time for them to approve it, not to --

7 MR. KATZ: Yes, it does. Indeed, 

8 that's the whole issue is getting it 

9 cleared.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. Okay.

11 MR. KATZ: So then next is just 

12 scheduling further out another 

13 teleconference following that meeting in 

14 July and the right ballpark is the week of 

15 September 14th through 21st.

16 MEMBER MUNN: Teleconference, 

17 right?

18 MR. KATZ: So this is just a 

19 teleconference.

20 MEMBER MUNN: Did you say 

21 October?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MR. KATZ: September we're 

2 talking, September 14th through 21st. That 

3 week is just about the right timing of it. 

4 It's not essential, but it'd be on one of 

5 those weeks.

6 MEMBER MUNN: So Tuesday the 

7 16th?

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I'm fine that 

9 week.

10 MR. KATZ: Yes. So Wanda 

11 suggested for folks on the line the 16th of 

12 September?

13 MEMBER MUNN: Yes.

14 MEMBER ROESSLER: Sounds good.

15 MR. KATZ: Gen, that's good for 

16 you. David?

17 MEMBER RICHARDSON: It's actually 

18 not too good for me, but --

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Is another day 

20 that week better for you, Dave?

21 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes, later.

22 MR. KATZ: How about the 17th?
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

193

1 MEMBER RICHARDSON: That's 

2 possible.

3 MR. KATZ: Okay, the 17th, how's 

4 that? Everyone in the room okay with the 

5 17th?

6 MEMBER MUNN: Fine.

7 MR. KATZ: Okay, so let’s say 

8 that. Bill Field, is that okay with you, 

9 too?

10 MEMBER FIELD: Looks good.

11 MR. KATZ: Okay. And Loretta?

12 MEMBER VALERIO: Works for me.

13 MR. KATZ: I'm sorry, September 

14 17th for a teleconference. So it's just --

15 MEMBER VALERIO: It works for me.

16 MR. KATZ: Okay, super.

17 Eleven a.m. Eastern time, unless 

18 that's a problem. Okay, and then the next 

19 meeting subsequent to that, the right timing 

20 is October 27th, the week of that, October 

21 27th or November 3rd, or November 10th, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 those weeks. That's the ballpark.

2 MEMBER MUNN: So why not choose 

3 Tuesday, I mean Wednesday, the 28th or 29th, 

4 no?

5 MR. KATZ: So Wanda is suggesting 

6 October 28th and 29th.

7 MEMBER BEACH: Ted, none of those 

8 dates work for me.

9 MR. KATZ: Okay. So what about 

10 moving on to the week of 11/3, so 11/4, 5, 

11 6.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: The week of 

13 11/3 is problematic for me. It's Election 

14 Day and then another meeting.

15 MR. KATZ: Okay. All right, 

16 that's Election Day, 11/10, that week?

17 MEMBER BEACH: Not good for me. 

18 I'm only good from the 17th, after the 14th, 

19 so you may have to schedule without me, 

20 November.

21 MEMBER MUNN: What about the week 

22 of October 21st, the preceding week?
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

195

1 MR. KATZ: Well that's getting to 

2 be pretty short time from the preceding 

3 Board meeting.

4 MEMBER MUNN: Five weeks?

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: It's hard for -

6 -

7 MR. KATZ: Josie, when are you 

8 gone?

9 MEMBER BEACH: I'm actually gone 

10 the 15th through the 14th, so I may just 

11 have to miss this one.

12 MR. KATZ: Okay.

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I'm fine. I 

14 made a mistake in the --

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Can you speak 

16 into your mike, please, Dave?

17 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Surely. I 

18 think I made a mistake on the 27th. I'm 

19 available that week if I was one of those 

20 holding us up.

21 MEMBER MUNN: You were the one 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 holding us up.

2 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay. Well 

3 then that's --

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: No, I was also 

5 holding you up.

6 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Well, that's 

7 all right, okay.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Oh, were you?

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

10 MEMBER MUNN: You're very quietly 

11 holding.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Well I didn't 

13 need to hold up because Dave was holding up.

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Right.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Is the whole week 

16 bad for you --

17 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Or November -

18 -

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And if I had 

20 stayed quiet Henry would've held up.

21 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: And then 

22 November 3rd, how about that week now?
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

197

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, that's --

2 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Oh, that's 

3 election week.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Election Day. 

5 Yes, election week.

6 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: How about 

7 after Election Day? That is Wednesday --

8 MR. KATZ: Yes, November --

9 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: -- Wednesday, 

10 Thursday, Friday of the week of the third?

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I can do 

12 Thursday, Friday, or -- the problem the 

13 following week, there's Veteran's Day. It's 

14 on the 11th, which is Tuesday.

15 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

16 MR. KATZ: How about for folks on 

17 the phone, 11/6 and 7, November 6 and 7?

18 MEMBER VALERIO: Sounds okay.

19 MEMBER FIELD: That works okay 

20 with me.

21 MEMBER RICHARDSON: That seems 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 okay.

2 MEMBER ROESSLER: That works for 

3 me.

4 MR. KATZ: Okay, sold.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, and given 

6 our usual record here we, our meetings last 

7 usually about a day and a half at most, so I 

8 think people would be able to get home on 

9 Friday.

10 MR. KATZ: Oh, for sure, yes.

11 So 11/6 and 7, we're going to 

12 hold those. If it's only a 1-day meeting it 

13 will just be the sixth.

14 MEMBER MUNN: November --

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

16 MEMBER ZIEMER: So, Mr. Chairman, 

17 it occurs to me that that November meeting, 

18 if I've counted right is meeting number 100, 

19 is that correct?

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: No.

21 MEMBER ZIEMER: When is 100?

22 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: This was 96 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

199

1 today.

2 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes. And I'm 

3 counting the others --

4 MR. KATZ: That's correct.

5 MEMBER ZIEMER: So, well, we've 

6 talked off and on about having a meeting in 

7 Washington, D.C., and I'm wondering if it 

8 might be appropriate to do that on meeting 

9 100 --

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- where our, 

12 some, you know, we don't have our workers 

13 there, but we have other constituent groups 

14 there. Just an idea that popped into my 

15 mind.

16 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: It's a nice 

17 idea, but I believe that's 99, yes? Today 

18 is 96, we have two more scheduled, this is 

19 the third one scheduled so --

20 MEMBER BEACH: Ninety-nine is the 

21 call.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Ninety-nine is 

2 the -- we have calls and the calls count.

3 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Calls count?

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

5 MEMBER MUNN: Yes, of course they 

6 do.

7 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Oh, okay. 

8 Then that would be the 100th. Let's do 

9 Washington.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Our new Board 

11 Member catches on to our tricks.

12 You've been feeling so bad for us 

13 all this time, now you know.

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Who's 

15 counting?

16 MR. KATZ: I think we'll just, we 

17 can leave open the location at this point.

18 MEMBER MUNN: We are suggesting 

19 them.

20 MEMBER ANDERSON: Are these dates 

21 set?

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

201

1 MEMBER ANDERSON: Okay.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Work 

3 Group and Subcommittee Report update. 

4 Brookhaven?

5 MEMBER BEACH: I have no report 

6 at this time.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Fernald?

8 MEMBER CLAWSON: I have. At this 

9 time we're still waiting for NIOSH and to 

10 set up a time to go over the Site Profile 

11 issues and with the restraints and stuff 

12 they said it can be sometime this year.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Hanford, 

14 we're actually waiting on a little bit more 

15 data information. We've got an updated 

16 matrix and if we just, probably we'll do a 

17 conference call in the next couple months of 

18 the Work Group to sort of at least update 

19 everybody on where we are and where we see 

20 this going.

21 There's been a little bit of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 delay in terms of getting some of the 

2 information, but I think we'll be back on 

3 track now. Okay. Idaho, Bill?

4 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: We've got a 

5 Work Group Meeting scheduled March 5th -- I 

6 got to look at my calendar here, I'm sorry. 

7 My mind's whipping around.

8 MEMBER BEACH: Twenty-fifth.

9 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Twenty-fifth, 

10 okay. March 25th, and hopefully all the 

11 White Papers will be done by then.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Lawrence 

13 Berkeley?

14 MEMBER ZIEMER: Yes, actually 

15 we're in the process of trying to find a 

16 date. I think it's going to be at the, it's 

17 going to be early March is what we're 

18 looking at.

19 Ted has actually solicited dates 

20 from the Work Group members. We have all of 

21 the information now from Dr. Hughes and 

22 NIOSH to proceed with that meeting, so we're 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

203

1 basically ready to go.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Kansas City?

3 MEMBER BEACH: I've just got a 

4 real brief update. I understand we'll be 

5 talking about it later.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

7 MEMBER BEACH: Let’s see, we'll 

8 be needing to task SC&A with ER review and 

9 matrix development during our tasking 

10 portion. We are also in the process of 

11 working on scheduling a classified document 

12 review in Germantown for, I'm hoping, the 

13 end of February, mid-March.

14 All Work Group members are 

15 looking at their calendars. And we hope to 

16 schedule a Work Group meeting in the future, 

17 but I can't give you any dates at this time 

18 until we come out with the report.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, okay. 

20 LANL?

21 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes, a very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 brief update. NIOSH is continuing to work 

2 with LANL on some questions on the later 

3 years with regard to compliance with 10 CFR 

4 835, and we haven't set our Work Group 

5 meeting up yet, but as soon as they make 

6 some progress on that, we'll probably set a 

7 Work Group meeting up.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Mound?

9 MEMBER BEACH: Yes. I want to 

10 give just a brief final update on the Mound 

11 log book questions. Mound petitioners had 

12 raised concerns at the last Board meeting.

13 The concerns were reliance on 

14 tritium log books to generate lists of 

15 workers whose recorded tritium bioassays 

16 would make them eligible for inclusion in 

17 the SEC Class, questions on whether the 

18 records were complete and accurate.

19 And, secondly, NIOSH's decision 

20 not to make use of the tritium bioassay 

21 entries in the MESH electronic database. 

22 The Mound Work Group held a teleconference 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

205

1 on November 26, 2013, with NIOSH and with 

2 the petitioners on the line to discuss these 

3 concerns.

4 NIOSH discussed the MESH database 

5 and how tritium bioassay entries were 

6 handled, and it was noted that the tritium 

7 log books represented the primary record of 

8 who would have been given the bioassays, 

9 that NIOSH has had no experience with any 

10 claimants having a recorded MESH bioassay 

11 entry without one in the log books.

12 You remember an 83.14 was granted 

13 for those time periods where the log books 

14 were missing. NIOSH also discussed what it 

15 had done from a quality control standpoint 

16 to ensure that the DOL list of tritium 

17 bioassay workers was adequately and 

18 accurately transcribed.

19 The multiple QC steps included 

20 line by line reviews by a second reviewer, 

21 re-scanning of illegible entries, and final 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 analysis by senior QC reviewer.

2 Only one name could be positively 

3 identified and that name was later confirmed 

4 to be a visitor from another DOE site. The 

5 petitioner was satisfied with this 

6 explanation as was the Work Group.

7 So at this time, I'm considering 

8 those issues closed. However, the Work 

9 Group is still awaiting Site Profile review 

10 from NIOSH, and I don't know if we have a 

11 date for that at this time.

12 I would know, but I don't have my 

13 computer so I can't pull it up real quick.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

15 MEMBER BEACH: Thank you.

16 MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes, we're 

17 expecting May of this year.

18 MR. RUTHERFORD: The last 

19 excerpt, the last TBD revision is the 

20 external TBD revision, and that is the 

21 longest one and it's May of 2014.

22 MEMBER BEACH: Thanks. I had 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

207

1 reviewed that and forgotten the date, so I 

2 appreciate your looking that up quickly.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Be ready there, 

4 LaVon. Yes, and I would just like to thank 

5 the Work Group and NIOSH for following up. 

6 I think, you know, as a result of the FOI 

7 for emails, I think there's a lot of 

8 concerns and appropriately on the part of 

9 the petitioner, and I'm glad that we were 

10 able to, you know, take actions that would 

11 address their concerns and be able to, you 

12 know, at least keep moving along on this 

13 site.

14 MEMBER BEACH: Yes.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So thank you, 

16 everybody. Nevada Test Site, Brad?

17 MEMBER CLAWSON: That's in the 

18 same, we've got the matrix from SC&A and 

19 everybody's had a chance to look at those. 

20 We're just trying to get a date to be able 

21 to sit down and set up a Work Group for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. A Work 

3 Group meeting, you have a Work Group.

4 MEMBER CLAWSON: Yes, Work Group 

5 meeting, excuse me.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And you've got 

7 a computer, too.

8 (Laughter.)

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: No excuses. 

10 Oak Ridge National Lab, Gen?

11 MEMBER ROESSLER: This is Gen. 

12 Can you hear me?

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, we can.

14 MEMBER ROESSLER: Oh, good. It's 

15 kind of one-sided, but anyway, LaVon wanted 

16 Newburg NIOSH to have their presentations at 

17 the next full meeting, but as you've heard 

18 from LaVon this morning, there is still some 

19 delay waiting for data to be evaluated.

20 We're waiting for data from ORNL, 

21 so April's in question. But that would 

22 leave it for probably the next Board meeting 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

209

1 in July and I was not able to hear what 

2 LaVon said a little bit ago.

3 LaVon, maybe you can comment, 

4 does that sound like July would be feasible?

5 MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes, Gen, can 

6 you hear me?

7 MEMBER ROESSLER: I can hear you, 

8 yes.

9 MR. RUTHERFORD: Okay. Yes, we 

10 should have all of the information ready for 

11 the July Board meeting. I would suspect it 

12 would be shortly after the April Board 

13 meeting, but again that's dependent on the 

14 site's response on our search requests that 

15 we had, that last search request.

16 MEMBER ROESSLER: Okay, thank 

17 you.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, and I know 

19 that DOE is following up on that also. 

20 Pantex?

21 MEMBER CLAWSON: We have nothing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 at this time.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: What might you 

3 have in the future?

4 (Laughter.)

5 MEMBER CLAWSON: In the future, 

6 when NIOSH has time we still have some Site 

7 Profile issues to bring to an end.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. I knew 

9 the answer, but it's on the record. 

10 Pinellas?

11 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Okay. They've 

12 done some more interviews on the tritium 

13 issues and monitoring. They've also 

14 requested a large number of boxes of data to 

15 go through.

16 One of the holdups is they're 

17 looking at the tritium smear analysis and 

18 assessing its impact on unmonitored dose and 

19 that's where we stand with Pinellas.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. If I 

21 understood the SC&A report, that there's 

22 some concern that methods you have used in 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

211

1 the past for dealing with these issues won't 

2 work or something?

3 DR. NETON: Yes, actually that's 

4 correct. I'm not sure whether SC&A 

5 identified it or we did, but --

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Well I read 

7 their report and I --

8 DR. NETON: Oh, you read the 

9 report, okay.

10 The issue is that we're going to 

11 apply the method that was used at Mound, 

12 which was the surveys for tritium to bound 

13 the potential tritide exposure.

14 It turns out at least in one 

15 procedure it appears that the material was 

16 dissolved and filtered before it was 

17 measured, which would filter out any 

18 tritides.

19 So we're trying to get to the 

20 bottom of that. It doesn't seem intuitive 

21 that they would do that and that's why we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 conducted the interviews. I guess those 

2 didn't really prove to be very fruitful.

3 And so now that we've identified 

4 this cash of records, tritium records that 

5 we want to go through to see if we can 

6 validate what actually happened with those 

7 tritium smears.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I would just 

9 add, I mean thanks for the update and I 

10 think we understand. I'll just add that's 

11 sort of a long standing site, and a hard, 

12 difficult one.

13 DR. NETON: And the fact that 

14 it's the only remaining issue that I'm aware 

15 of.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

17 DR. NETON: So we do need to put 

18 this bed. It was ready to be closed until 

19 we realized that the method that we were 

20 using wasn't valid.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: You know the 

22 plan was always to -- let’s close Mound --
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

213

1 DR. NETON: Yes.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- deal with it 

3 on Mound and then we'll be set. So best 

4 laid plans, but anyway, thank you, Jim. 

5 Phil, Fort Smith, Paducah, K-25?

6 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: The only 

7 outstanding issue is how we're going to deal 

8 with some of the tritium and then we'll be 

9 able to do a conference call I think to 

10 finish that out.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Mark, 

12 Rocky?

13 MR. RUTHERFORD: Can I correct 

14 that one little bit? It's actually dealing 

15 with the high-enriched uranium, the neutron 

16 exposure; it's not the tritium.

17 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: Oh, yes, on 

18 site.

19 MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes. And this 

20 is tied up with the USEC that, getting the 

21 information from USEC that we're waiting on.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER GRIFFON: I'm Rocky Flats.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

3 MEMBER GRIFFON: And I think Stu 

4 kind of, I mean LaVon kind of answered this 

5 earlier, but they are continuing to work on 

6 the data validity questions, the neptunium 

7 question, and also I think they've got some 

8 more leads on this Tiger Team-like report, 

9 the multiple volume report.

10 I think they're trying to still 

11 run that down, but have some leads on it is 

12 what I understand. So, no scheduled 

13 meeting, but they're continuing to work on 

14 those issues.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, great. 

16 Sandia? Dick Lemen isn't here. I don't 

17 know if anybody knows what's --

18 MR. RUTHERFORD: Yes. We're 

19 looking at the post-1994 period. We are 

20 working on scheduling a site visit, too. We 

21 want to do some additional interviews also, 

22 some data capture to look at the post-'94 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

215

1 period.

2 However, it's kind of pushed out 

3 a little bit because of priorities and some 

4 of the funding. So I'm thinking April 

5 timeframe we'll be doing that. It would be 

6 later in the year before we would have any 

7 updates on that.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

9 you. Santa Susana?

10 MEMBER SCHOFIELD: They've 

11 actually spent most of last year working on 

12 some files. They had about 14,000 files 

13 they had to extract. They data-mined by 

14 hand.

15 That's been done in both the 

16 internal and external, data has been 

17 reviewed and put in for coworker models and 

18 that's undergoing internal review right now 

19 at NIOSH.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Mark, 

21 Savannah River?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER GRIFFON: Savannah River, 

2 we have a meeting scheduled for next work, 

3 Work Group meeting, and recently NIOSH 

4 provided, I think it was last week or two 

5 weeks ago, NIOSH provided SC&A with White 

6 Papers on remaining thorium and neptunium 

7 issues for Savannah River.

8 I think there are still some 

9 questions on this, a sampling plan for this 

10 subcontractor database question, and I don't 

11 know if NIOSH is going to come forward with 

12 that yet.

13 But the notion of whether the 

14 issues of the subcontractors’ data being 

15 available on these databases came up in 

16 prior reviews and there's a question about, 

17 they want to, I think, sample the database.

18 Yes, go ahead, Jim, if you want 

19 to comment on this.

20 DR. NETON: Well I'm not sure 

21 that we've decided we want to sample the 

22 database.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

217

1 MEMBER GRIFFON: Oh.

2 DR. NETON: Yes, I thought that 

3 was maybe going to be discussed at the Work 

4 Group meeting whether it was --

5 MEMBER GRIFFON: All right.

6 DR. NETON: -- worth going after 

7 that database.

8 MEMBER GRIFFON: Okay.

9 DR. NETON: Because we had some 

10 additional -- and we re-interviewed the 

11 person who made some of those early remarks 

12 and there's additional information to 

13 discuss.

14 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes. Okay. It 

15 will certainly be a topic of discussion 

16 anyway.

17 DR. NETON: Yes. And then after 

18 that Work Group meeting, we'll make a 

19 decision as to how to proceed.

20 MEMBER GRIFFON: Okay.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, my 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 understanding from, I think some of the 

2 discussions at our prior meeting was that it 

3 was a question of, I think it's a question 

4 of validation, right?

5 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And to validate 

7 into the database is going to be a large, 

8 very large task, and so I think the Work 

9 Group needs to focus on, you know, is there 

10 an alternative to that or not, I think. I'm 

11 not going to judge that, but --

12 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- that seems 

14 to be the issue because --

15 MEMBER GRIFFON: Right.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And it's hard 

17 to think how you, you know, if there's 

18 questions then they almost, yes, push 

19 buttons having to validate them. It's 

20 tricky.

21 DR. NETON: Yes.

22 MEMBER GRIFFON: Yes.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

219

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. But 

2 you'll have the answer for us next week?

3 MEMBER GRIFFON: Answer the next 

4 time, the next meeting, yes.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Dave 

6 Richardson, Scientific Issues? Dave, are 

7 you on the line?

8 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Yes, I am.

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: All right, we 

10 can hear you.

11 MEMBER RICHARDSON: We didn't 

12 have a (telephonic interference.)

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Hold on, Dave. 

14 We're having trouble.

15 (Off the record comments)

16 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Can you hear 

17 me?

18 MR. KATZ: Yes, that's much 

19 better.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, it's 

21 better now. Yes, go again.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER RICHARDSON: Okay. I had 

2 hoped that we were going to, I was going to 

3 be able to schedule the meeting before this 

4 one, but we haven't met since then. I have 

5 nothing to report except that it's high on 

6 the intention list.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, fair 

8 enough. Thanks, Dave. SEC Cohort Issues 

9 Group, I think we've already reported. It's 

10 the 250-day issue, so we're moving along.

11 Dave Kotelchuck, Subcommittee on 

12 Dose Reconstruction?

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes. We last 

14 met on November 20th. Our next scheduled 

15 meeting is this coming Thursday, February 

16 6th at 10:00 a.m. For better and worse 

17 we're continuing to do our work by 

18 conference calls.

19 In terms of the blind reviews, 

20 first Grady at the last meeting reported 

21 that they had done nine blind reviews of 

22 ORAU data, that is internally, and they had 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

221

1 agreement on the decisions in all the cases.

2 For Set 17, the six blind reviews 

3 that SC&A is doing, the first three have 

4 already been long reported. The next two, 

5 four and five, are almost done, they're 

6 being done in internal review and we should 

7 get a report from that soon, and that leaves 

8 one to go.

9 So we don't have a final result 

10 on any of the last three, but two-thirds of 

11 them will be done soon. In our dose 

12 reconstruction, we still have one case from 

13 Set 9, from Huntington, it's a TBD issue, 

14 and hopefully that will get resolved 

15 sometime soon.

16 On Sets 10 through 13, which 

17 we've been working on for a long time, it's 

18 almost done. We have Rocky Flats, LANL --

19 we've finished Rocky Flats, LANL, Paducah, 

20 Portsmouth, Hanford has one remaining, and 

21 we chose cases for Set 18 now.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 At our next meeting we expect to 

2 go over the five remaining, Oak Ridge 

3 National Laboratory, and we have twelve 

4 other ones scattered in seven plants and I 

5 don't know how many of those we'll get to go 

6 through or how many will be done by the time 

7 of next meeting.

8 So that, I think that completes 

9 our report.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

11 you. I just had two things, one is that, 

12 you know, there are some concerns about the 

13 delays because of the government issue, you 

14 know, budget issues, in terms of awarding 

15 contracts and so forth.

16 So, Dave, if you can keep in 

17 touch with Ted and we'll be in touch with 

18 SC&A. We’ve had a little juggling and 

19 trying to figure out what's appropriate, how 

20 to keep this process moving.

21 But there may be some, you know, 

22 delays or, just simply because of the 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

223

1 contract process.

2 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Right. We 

3 will keep track.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

5 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: And stay in 

6 touch.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Secondly, I 

8 believe during this last set of, where the 

9 Board Members were reviewing, I believe it 

10 was Wanda brought up an issue where she was 

11 very concerned about an error that was, 

12 appeared to have been made in a dose 

13 reconstruction, and I think actually 

14 somebody else pointed out another error if I 

15 recall correctly.

16 It was sort of a question on a, 

17 you know, procedurally what happens in that 

18 case and I think what we've said in that 

19 case was to bring it to the attention of, 

20 you know, DCAS, you know, leadership and get 

21 it addressed at least so they know and can 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 follow up rather than waiting for it to go 

2 through the whole resolution process.

3 My recollection going back a 

4 number of years, early on, is that we had a 

5 similar issue arise and that was the 

6 procedure the Board had approved and so 

7 forth.

8 So for any other Board Members 

9 and for SC&A, when that does occur and, you 

10 know, let’s, you know, move on it and get it 

11 addressed so we don't have to wait for the 

12 whole process to do that.

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes, okay.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

15 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Also, in case 

16 there was -- I may have used the phrase next 

17 Thursday, it is, the next meeting of the 

18 Subcommittee is February 6th. I think I 

19 said that, but I may have also referred to 

20 it later as next Thursday and it is Thursday 

21 a week.

22 MR. KATZ: This is Ted just 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

225

1 adding on to what Dr. Melius just explained. 

2 I have advised SC&A also, in addition to all 

3 of what he just said, but for when they come 

4 across these types of cases where they have 

5 concern that the decision might change, even 

6 before they have even necessarily managed to 

7 bring it to, you know, present it to the two 

8 Board Members that review each of these 

9 cases, but to notify me up front and try to 

10 get this addressed sooner just for the sake 

11 of timeliness.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. No, 

13 again, these are very rare instances. I was 

14 not, and obviously because we didn't all 

15 recall the old procedure we had discussed, 

16 you know, probably seven or eight years ago 

17 or something.

18 I think it's some sign that it's 

19 not something that happens commonly, but 

20 when it does, let’s move and get it 

21 addressed, so we'll do that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And probably by the time it 

2 happens again we'll have forgotten again, 

3 but what can you do? Wanda, Subcommittee on 

4 Procedures?

5 MEMBER MUNN: We have not met 

6 since our last Board teleconference and 

7 therefore I have nothing new to report. 

8 We're due to meet on February 13th for our 

9 next meeting.

10 The prior one on which I reported 

11 before was November 7th. Very quickly, 

12 broad brush, against what I have already 

13 spoken to you about, we are focusing much 

14 more currently on PERs than we have before.

15 At the time of our last meeting 

16 there were 46 total PERs out there and 23 of 

17 them had been assigned. We're covering 

18 quite a bit of material with those PERs.

19 Y-12's TBD revision is attached 

20 to PER 31 and there are currently some --

21 there's a thorium issue involved there 

22 that's still active.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

227

1 PER 30 was a Savannah River Site 

2 TBD, and that's now done; it's completed. 

3 We have PER 14, that's the construction 

4 trade workers issue, still has several open 

5 items that we're dealing with.

6 We have, both our Subcommittee 

7 and the Dose Reconstruction Subcommittee has 

8 had occasion to address issues with respect 

9 to skin exposure and particulate deposition. 

10 You are going to see, I think, White Papers 

11 that will clear that up.

12 There was to be a technical call 

13 about that issue last month, I believe, but 

14 that didn't come to fruition simply because 

15 the parties had discussed this and it's my 

16 understanding that there is agreement on 

17 several items that were of concern.

18 So we may have something new for 

19 you after our meeting on the 13th. PER 20, 

20 which was the Blockson TBD review has now 

21 been resolved and should be closed by the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 time our next meeting comes around.

2 There were a couple of responses 

3 that were still needed for, or two issues, 

4 we'll see how those go next time. K-25 TBD 

5 and TIB revisions are covered by PER 11 and 

6 we have several responses, I think, are 

7 going to resolve three of those, or two of 

8 those issues next time.

9 The stratified coworker data sets 

10 issue out of Report 53 has been referred to 

11 the SEC Work Group and it's our 

12 understanding that there will be a report on 

13 that next time.

14 So, I could go on individually, 

15 but I don't think it really gets us 

16 anywhere. We have OTIB-83 which we'll be 

17 addressing next time and 34 which is 

18 internal dosimetry coworker data sets for X19 10 that are coming up next time.

20 And we have, I hope, had the 

21 advantage of having a new look at SC&A's 

22 report for their coordination activities in 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

229

1 recent months.

2 If you've seen that, then you've 

3 seen the total report from where we are and 

4 what we've done. We've addressed more than 

5 600 individual findings and over 80 percent 

6 of those are now complete.

7 So we're doing well, depending 

8 upon what the next set of PERs bring for us 

9 and how thorny the few remaining issues are 

10 that we have. Thanks.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you, 

12 Wanda. Both Paul and I, who are on the SEC 

13 Review Group, appreciate some clarification 

14 later about what you referred to us.

15 MEMBER MUNN: Okay.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Because we're 

17 confused.

18 MEMBER MUNN: All right.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Do that, but in 

20 the interest of time, let’s move along. 

21 Next, TBD-6000?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER ZIEMER: Well we now have 

2 additional work for TBD-6000 based on the 

3 Board's action earlier today so we will be 

4 scheduling a meeting to deal with the Joslyn 

5 issues.

6 The other thing we have on our 

7 agenda is Simonds Saw & Steel. We last 

8 dealt with them in the summer of last year 

9 during one of our meetings in June.

10 In the subsequent months, there 

11 have been some materials being prepared by 

12 NIOSH in response to the SC&A issues and 

13 questions.

14 The last item we were awaiting 

15 was on Issue 7 from, I don't remember what 

16 it was exactly, but it's Issue 7 from NIOSH, 

17 and I believe that now has been completed.

18 I'm trying to recall whether or 

19 not NIOSH has, or whether SC&A has received 

20 that. Jim is shaking his head no. I 

21 thought I got a report from Tom Tomes 

22 earlier that they were done or about done 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

231

1 with Issue 7.

2 DR. NETON: Tom Tomes has 

3 finished his review of the response, but 

4 it's an internal review.

5 MEMBER ZIEMER: Oh, it's an 

6 internal viewing going on, okay.

7 DR. NETON: It should be out 

8 shortly though.

9 MEMBER ZIEMER: Right.

10 DR. NETON: Very shortly.

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: So that will be 

12 going to SC&A very soon and once they are 

13 done with their review plus the review of 

14 the Joslyn issue, why, we'll schedule a 

15 meeting on those two items we need to deal 

16 with.

17 Actually there's some other 

18 issues at Simonds Saw & Steel. I think 

19 Issues 2 through 5 are basically agreed to 

20 already between SC&A and NIOSH and we'll be 

21 able to close.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 We still need to deal with I 

2 think Issues 6 and 7. In SC&A's Board 

3 Coordination Document, which I think was 

4 just referred to a moment ago by Wanda, 

5 there is a more detailed description of some 

6 of these things including the Simonds Saw & 

7 Steel.

8 So I appreciate SC&A, your work 

9 on that document because it helps us, too, 

10 on the Work Groups.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I appreciate 

12 the SC&A document also, and by submitting it 

13 late, I get it just as I'm leaving the 

14 office to go to the airport, so I had to 

15 print out and, you know, read it. That was 

16 good timing. I was forced to pay attention 

17 to it.

18 I had actually missed it. I 

19 emailed Ted the night before, I think, to 

20 ask him where it was because I hadn't seen 

21 it, but anyway thank you. It is helpful to 

22 have that and the effort involved. Son of 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

233

1 TBD-6000?

2 (Laughter.)

3 MEMBER ANDERSON: We are 

4 currently in abeyance. So where we have 

5 completed most of our active reviews, I 

6 think we're waiting for some information at 

7 new sites to come to us, but Site Profiles 

8 have been reviewed and we're basically 

9 waiting to close those out when the 

10 revisions are written and in place.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Thank 

12 you. Surrogate data is, so maybe it's in 

13 abeyance?

14 MEMBER ANDERSON: Yes.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And Weldon 

16 Spring I believe the same, want to do that?

17 MEMBER ANDERSON: Yes.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Worker 

19 outreach?

20 MEMBER BEACH: I actually have a 

21 report this time.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

2 MEMBER BEACH: So last year, SC&A 

3 completed their review of Objective 3 for 

4 LANL. That review was completed by NIOSH

5 and the report given to the Work Group on 

6 the 7th of January.

7 So we just received that. SC&A 

8 should have their review completed mid-March 

9 and back to the Work Group. There may be a 

10 technical call if needed to discuss any 

11 clarification issues there.

12 That has not been scheduled, but 

13 should be done within SC&A and NIOSH if 

14 that's needed. When that is complete, then 

15 we will look for a, either Work Group call 

16 and/or meeting.

17 Also, moving forward, the Work 

18 Group needs to think about and decide what 

19 this Work Group's mission's going to be 

20 moving forward, whether we're going to take 

21 the two reviews that are completed now, 

22 remember Rocky and LANL, and look at those 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

235

1 two reviews and decide what we learned to 

2 give us a path forward potentially, maybe a 

3 third site or to focus on something else.

4 We did have some 10-year review 

5 items that we haven't addressed and I'm not 

6 sure really what the path forward on those 

7 will be.

8 And then the Worker Outreach 

9 meetings, you know, how involved we want to 

10 be in reviewing those. So we have some 

11 questions and some things to work out in the 

12 future here.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think if you 

14 could prepare either a short document or 

15 maybe even a short PowerPoint to, for our 

16 next meeting where we could just, so we 

17 could talk about what makes sense to do in 

18 terms of follow-up.

19 I mean something to work off of 

20 so people can think about it rather than --

21 MEMBER BEACH: Yes, and I --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 these are just, I have just been thinking 

2 out loud on these. I don't know if that 

3 PowerPoint will come after we finish the 

4 review and the Work Group discusses the LANL 

5 report, but, yes, I agree that's a good 

6 idea. Thank you.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, whenever 

8 you think it's appropriate, that's all.

9 MEMBER BEACH: Okay.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I just don't

11 want to leave it to sort of -- so it's --

12 MEMBER BEACH: No, I won't do 

13 that.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- be left 

15 undone, yes.

16 MEMBER BEACH: It will really be 

17 done.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, that's all 

19 so we can -- yes. No, I know you will do 

20 it. I just was -- I think do it, you know, 

21 sooner, but when you think it's ready and we 

22 can keep active.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

237

1 MEMBER BEACH: Okay.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: It's an 

3 important Work Group, but it is tricky in 

4 terms of its charge --

5 MEMBER BEACH: I agree.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- and what to 

7 do and so forth, okay.

8 MEMBER BEACH: Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Good. Dave, 

10 you had your hand --

11 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes. I was 

12 just wondering. We, the Dose Reconstruction 

13 Subcommittee sent a Huntington case, our 

14 last case in Set 9, sent it in a while ago.

15 I wondered where it is. I didn't 

16 hear it mentioned in the TBD Reports. I do 

17 not remember what the details of it were in 

18 terms of what was the issue.

19 It's been sitting around for a 

20 long time, months. Does anybody have, do 

21 the TBD people know that we sent in? I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 think Mark was still Chair when we sent it 

2 in if I'm not mistaken.

3 MEMBER MUNN: Well we had a PER 

4 on Huntington, 25 I think, but there was 

5 others.

6 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Ah. There's 

7 a PER on Huntington.

8 MEMBER MUNN: Twenty-five and 33.

9 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay. Is 

10 that completed?

11 MEMBER MUNN: It's completed and 

12 I believe there were no findings.

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Oh.

14 MEMBER MUNN: I mean I'd have to 

15 double check to make absolutely sure there 

16 are.

17 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: And we would 

18 follow up, too. Thank you.

19 MEMBER MUNN: You bet.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, John?

21 MR. STIVER: Can everybody hear 

22 me? Yes, this is John Stiver. I just 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

239

1 wanted to get an elaborate on this 

2 Huntington issue. I think there are two 

3 different things.

4 There was one finding left in Set 

5 9 for Huntington that still hasn't been 

6 closed out yet. There's also a PER, 25 and 

7 33 combined, which are delivered.

8 We've got the Sub Task 4 Review 

9 completed for 25, which has been delivered

10 in December, and also for 33, that was 

11 delivered in January.

12 And there was also, kind of 

13 concurrent with the discussion in DRSC, we 

14 had a matrix of our Huntington Pilot Plant 

15 Site Profile update review, which were 

16 addressed within that particular venue.

17 So there's sort of three 

18 different aspects of the Huntington that 

19 came to play in this. That's all I have to 

20 say.

21 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Good.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 FEMALE PARTICIPANT: Thank you, 

2 John.

3 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Thanks.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, Paul?

5 MEMBER ZIEMER: As long as, and 

6 Dave, you're still sort of on the hot seat 

7 there, Dave Kotelchuck --

8 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Surely.

9 MEMBER ZIEMER: -- I'm going to 

10 ask you a question, or maybe Mark can help 

11 answer it.

12 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Okay.

13 MEMBER ZIEMER: About when is the 

14 last time that we have reported to the 

15 Secretary of Health and Human Services on 

16 the findings of our dose reconstruction 

17 audits?

18 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I'm glad you 

19 asked that question because I forgot to 

20 address it in my report. First, it was a 

21 long time ago and I --

22 MEMBER ZIEMER: That's what I 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

241

1 thought.

2 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: But we are 

3 preparing to send in a report and at the 

4 last meeting we agreed that we would start 

5 working on the, reviewing the last report 

6 and get set to put out a report from our 

7 committee, subcommittee.

8 I don't have a sense of date on 

9 that, we're just starting that now, but we 

10 definitely have begun.

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: Okay. All right, 

12 thank you very much.

13 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

14 MEMBER ZIEMER: One of the 

15 primary responsibilities of this Board in 

16 addition to handling the SECs, for example, 

17 and the other things we do is informing the 

18 Secretary as to whether or not the dose 

19 reconstructions are, I forget the exact 

20 phrase, but basically scientifically sound 

21 is what the words I'll use. I don't think 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that's the exact words from the legislature, 

2 or legislation.

3 But in any event, it seemed to me 

4 it's been a long time and wouldn't it be 

5 appropriate, and it sounds like you're 

6 getting there, that when we reach Meeting 

7 100 that we're ready to give a status report 

8 on that question because that's one of our 

9 prime responsibilities.

10 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Well that 

11 sets us a good, a timeframe for trying to 

12 get it done. I'm sure we'll make.

13 MEMBER ZIEMER: That's just my

14 opinion, but --

15 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: No, no, but -

16 -

17 MEMBER ZIEMER: The Chairman may 

18 have a different idea. He may want it 

19 sooner than that.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: No. My comment 

21 was going to be that we probably should 

22 start, one is I agree we need to do that 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

243

1 report. One is we probably should start 

2 sooner rather thank later because the Board 

3 has taken awhile to wordsmith and figure out 

4 the wording and reach an agreement on how 

5 the information should be reported and 

6 portrayed.

7 And it's not just simple 

8 wordsmithing, so it's --

9 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think it's 

11 more, you know, sort of half full, half 

12 empty glass issues, you know, and I think 

13 it's important.

14 Now maybe it'll be easier now 

15 that we've done more. It's harder at first 

16 because the sample was smaller, but it's not 

17 an easy report to do because this whole 

18 program is so interconnected between dose 

19 reconstruction, Site Profile, SECs, it's 

20 that.

21 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Good.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So anyway, Jim, 

2 talk to Mark, and he's here today --

3 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes, and good 

4 advice. And I've never been a participant 

5 in developing one of these reports, or 

6 participating in it, so I have not a clear 

7 sense of deadline or --

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Well you --

9 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: But this is 

10 helpful and we will move along.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. I will 

12 tell you, compiling the data is the easy 

13 part.

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: But then again 

16 maybe you'll bring a new perspective and who 

17 knows. But just in case --

18 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And, again, I'm 

20 not faulting anybody on the Board or 

21 anything for that, it is a difficult, trying 

22 to, you know, summarize the program and a 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

245

1 lot of work in a relatively short and 

2 straightforward, you know, letter --

3 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Right. And I 

4 will be leaning on Mark who was the Chair 

5 most of the period in which the report will 

6 cover.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. And that 

8 concludes our Work Group Reports unless I 

9 skipped somebody. I hope I didn't. And any 

10 other Board business we need to do?

11 MEMBER BEACH: Jim, what about 

12 tasking? Can we do that now or do we need 

13 to wait on that?

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Tasking what?

15 MEMBER BEACH: For Kansas City, 

16 for --

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We do that 

18 after it, I think.

19 MEMBER BEACH: After the, okay.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, yes. 

21 That's the only one we have.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MEMBER BEACH: Okay, thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I think it's 

3 more appropriate until we could do it now. 

4 Okay. So it's a quarter of four, why don't

5 we take a break. We're scheduled to start 

6 with presentations on the Kansas City SEC at 

7 4:15, and so we will reconvene, you know, 

8 sharply at 4:15 and do that.

9 That's what we're scheduling, and 

10 some people are here all ready, more I 

11 suspect will be coming in, so let’s go from 

12 there. Thank you.

13 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

14 matter went off the record at 3:46 p.m. and 

15 resumed at 4:13 p.m.)

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Good afternoon, 

17 everybody. My name is Jim Melius. I am the 

18 Chair of the Advisory Board on Radiation and 

19 Worker Health.

20 A couple of sort of housekeeping 

21 items and so forth. We will do a series of 

22 presentations here, first a presentation 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

247

1 from NIOSH on their review of the Special 

2 Exposure Cohort petition related to the 

3 Kansas City facility. We'll hear from them. 

4 The Board Members will then ask questions of 

5 them about the report and so forth.

6 Then we will hear from the 

7 petitioners about that. Then we will take 

8 any time for, the Board Members may have 

9 questions for the petitioners.

10 Board Members may have comments. 

11 They may want to take some action, I suspect 

12 in terms of referring the report for further 

13 evaluation.

14 That'll be up to the Board Member 

15 but that's our usual practice so I don't 

16 think we'll be reaching any final judgments 

17 on the report or the recommendation from 

18 NIOSH at this meeting.

19 Then we will go into what we call 

20 the public comment period and we'll go into 

21 that directly. We're not going to wait till 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 5:30. I think there are a significant 

2 number of people here and it doesn't make 

3 sense to take a break or split up that.

4 So it is important, helpful I 

5 should say, though not absolutely necessary, 

6 that if you do wish to make public comments 

7 that you do sign up at the front desk there.

8 Again, it helps us. I use the 

9 list just to call people in order and so 

10 forth, you know, which order of people 

11 comment. Gives us something to work off of.

12 But if you didn't get a chance to 

13 sign up, there'll be time, you know, at the 

14 end to make those. If you do sign up, 

15 decide you don't wish to make public 

16 comments, you're welcome not to speak.

17 So as, you know, we go through 

18 this process and as you understand the 

19 process, there will be additional time for 

20 public input into this process and into our 

21 decision, what we recommend.

22 So I don't think you need to, you 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

249

1 know, be concerned this is the only 

2 opportunity. You may want to think about 

3 it. You may have other information that you 

4 know and can come back with at a later point 

5 in time or wish to contact people about so 

6 go from there.

7 So we will start with the 

8 presentation from NIOSH and Grady Calhoun 

9 from NIOSH will be presenting the NIOSH 

10 Evaluation Report.

11 I believe copies of that report, 

12 a full report, are over on the table there. 

13 You can get them now or that's also 

14 available on the website.

15 I think, as you may or may not 

16 know, all the information on what we do as a 

17 Board, including our Work Groups and all our 

18 Evaluation Reports and so forth, are 

19 publicly available.

20 So they will be available through 

21 the NIOSH website and the people at the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 front desk, other people here can help you 

2 if you're not aware of how to access this 

3 with that.

4 So go ahead, Grady.

5 MR. CALHOUN: All right. I guess 

6 do I sound okay?

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

8 MR. CALHOUN: All right, I'll try 

9 to stay close to this.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And just also 

11 for people that, excuse me, Grady, but, you 

12 know, we do have some Board Members that 

13 couldn't be here today but are on the phone 

14 so you'll hear people on the phone asking 

15 questions at some point or commenting, so.

16 MR. CALHOUN: All right. Okay, 

17 as far as an overview goes, we received the 

18 petition on March 12th, 2013.

19 The requested Class Definition 

20 was all Bannister Federal Complex employees 

21 who worked at the site from 1949 to present.

22 We qualified the petition for 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

251

1 review July 1st, 2013, based on radiation 

2 exposures and doses potentially incurred by 

3 members of the proposed Class were not 

4 monitored either through personal or area 

5 monitoring.

6 Okay, we started the Evaluation 

7 Report evaluation period consistent with the 

8 start of AEC operations.

9 Then we looked back at 160 claims 

10 with employment of 1994 or later and that 

11 coincides with implementation of 10 CFR 835 

12 to determine a potential end date for the 

13 evaluation.

14 We found no apparent or 

15 potentially inadequately monitored exposures 

16 after 1993.

17 So the Class that was ultimately 

18 evaluated was all employees who worked in 

19 any area of the Kansas City Plant in Kansas 

20 City, Missouri, from January 1st, 1949 

21 through December 31st, 1993.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Okay, as far as some background 

2 goes, there's a Main Manufacturing Building. 

3 It's the main structure. Has about 2.7 

4 million square feet of space and it houses 

5 the primary KCP manufacturing operations.

6 From the beginning, the principal 

7 operation at the plant was to make non8 nuclear components of nuclear weapons. That 

9 involved machining and fabrication of metals 

10 and plastics, plating, microelectronics and 

11 electrical and mechanical assembly.

12 They currently make about 85 

13 percent of the non-nuclear components for 

14 the U.S. atomic stockpile.

15 As far as the work with 

16 radioactive material goes, they did work 

17 with natural uranium. They machined some 

18 uranium slugs and handled billets from 

19 February '51 to December 1952. This work 

20 was performed in the Main Manufacturing 

21 Building.

22 A total of just a little bit more 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

253

1 than 313,000 pounds of natural uranium was 

2 machined into slugs and they had the 

3 capacity to produce 1,000 slugs a day.

4 In addition to the machining, 

5 they also inspected and assembled uranium 

6 components from May 1950 to February 1955, 

7 also in the Main Manufacturing Building, 

8 Department 3A.

9 As far as depleted uranium work 

10 goes, that took place from 1958 to about 

11 1971. They machined and inspected DU 

12 products in Department 20.

13 And that's the primary source of 

14 radiological exposure, was associated with 

15 machining these items that contained DU 

16 oxide. The program using the depleted 

17 uranium oxide ended in 1972.

18 Also did some magnesium-thorium 

19 alloy work. It was supplied by Dow. It was 

20 HK-31 alloy, which is approximately three 

21 percent thorium.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 This work went on from May 1st, 

2 1957 to April 5th, 1979. They machined and 

3 fabricated classified items that contained 

4 the magnesium-thorium alloy in two areas of 

5 the Main Manufacturing Building, Department 

6 20 and the Model Shop.

7 They did have operational 

8 controls in place that we found in documents 

9 to prevent and control airborne generation.

10 Thorium oxide powder work, we 

11 found a document that said that there was 

12 some work with thorium oxide powder and so 

13 we looked into that a little bit further to 

14 find out what that was and it was very small 

15 quantities.

16 After we looked into it more, 

17 turns out that they had about 100 grams on 

18 site and they would make solutions as needed 

19 throughout one year and they used about 20 

20 grams of the material.

21 Okay, we have a couple incidents 

22 of note that occurred at the site. The 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

255

1 first one that I'll go through is the erbium 

2 tritide. That happened in September 30th, 

3 1987.

4 A worker removed the cover of a 

5 W80 Data Analyzer and noticed that the 

6 interior was not decontaminated as required 

7 and he replaced the cover.

8 They surveyed the analyzer and 

9 the work area and the contamination was only 

10 detected inside of the unit, not on the 

11 outside of the unit, and it was 986 dpm per 

12 100 square centimeters tritium.

13 The analyzer was returned to 

14 Sandia National Laboratory for 

15 decontamination.

16 Urinalysis was performed for that 

17 worker who removed the cover and the results 

18 indicated no detectable activity for tritium 

19 as erbium tritide, solubility Class M if 

20 anyone's interested. This was an isolated, 

21 one-time incident.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Okay, the other one is 

2 promethium-147. This was at least started 

3 in February 10th, 1989. It's 100 percent 

4 beta-emitting radionuclide, 224 keV max.

5 Basically it was a failure of a 

6 source integrity and it spread 

7 contaminations to multiple locations inside 

8 and outside of the facility.

9 There was quite an extensive 

10 investigation into this incident. They 

11 ended up monitoring 97 individuals 

12 internally to find out if there was any 

13 intakes. No intakes were discovered.

14 They also inspected several 

15 workers' homes. In one actually they found 

16 contamination that needed to be 

17 decontaminated.

18 Okay, sources of available 

19 information are the Site Profile TBD-6000 

20 used to model internal doses for natural 

21 uranium during machining operations. We 

22 have the KCP Site Profile used to describe 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

257

1 DU internal doses and external doses.

2 We reviewed approximately 1,645 

3 Research Database documents, conducted 19 

4 interviews with people, on site for the most 

5 part, and we did our normal cadre of 

6 standard data searches.

7 Okay, as far as the dose 

8 reconstructions that we've done at this 

9 site, we have 672 cases were submitted for 

10 dose reconstruction. Six hundred and sixty11 five of those were in the period that we're 

12 evaluating for the SEC.

13 Six hundred and eight of those 

14 have been completed, sent on to Department 

15 of Labor. Thirty-five of those had internal 

16 dosimetry records supplied with the case and 

17 103 of those had external dosimetry records 

18 supplied with the case.

19 Okay, as far as personal 

20 monitoring data that we have, as far as 

21 internal monitoring data, routine bioassay 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 data, which was urinalysis, was available 

2 for the DU work. It started in 1959 until 

3 1971.

4 We have air sample data, one dust 

5 sample analysis in 1952 and then we get into

6 routine, fixed-air gross alpha counts 

7 monitoring from 1958 to 1971 in the Main 

8 Manufacturing Building.

9 Okay, also we have air sampling 

10 data for the magnesium-thorium operations. 

11 The gross alpha was being done throughout 

12 the Main Building as I said earlier.

13 But in 1970 they did an 

14 evaluation of all the magnesium-thorium 

15 machining operations in the model shop and 

16 this was more of a breathing zone type 

17 approach.

18 And basically what they found is 

19 that the long-lived contaminants in the air 

20 that they were finding, which would be the 

21 thorium, was at background levels and the 

22 short-lived activity was less than E minus 9 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

259

1 microcuries per mil air and that's generally 

2 attributed to radon/thoron.

3 As far as external monitoring 

4 data goes, we have accessed a little bit 

5 fewer than 14,000 records that include 

6 monitoring data for deep dose, shallow dose, 

7 extremity dose and neutron dose and that's 

8 from 1950 to 1993.

9 KCP participated in the DOELAP 

10 performance testing using Landauer-provided 

11 services beginning in October of 1992.

12 Okay, we've recently obtained 

13 copies of routine contamination surveys from 

14 1959 to 1969 and 1990 to 1993. There's some 

15 radiation surveys in there as well.

16 We also have contamination survey 

17 and some volumetric sampling data from the 

18 '84 to '86 decontamination activities.

19 Okay, as far as sources of 

20 exposure at the site, we could have 

21 inhalation and ingestion of uranium and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 thorium by workers. We have residual 

2 airborne radioactive contaminants that may 

3 have been present after operations ceased.

4 External sources include 

5 photon/beta exposure from uranium and 

6 thorium and small amounts of surface 

7 contaminations that was present after 

8 operations ceased as well.

9 We also have neutron radiation 

10 sources there. It's a pulsed-neutron 

11 generator that we have, and we also have 

12 some plutonium-beryllium sources there and 

13 that started after 1965.

14 Additional external sources 

15 include just isotopic sources that they used 

16 for a variety of different things. They 

17 used for manufacturing quality control, like

18 measuring thickness. And they also have 

19 some radiography-type devices, x-rays and 

20 electron generators. Accelerators I mean, 

21 sorry.

22 Okay, from all this information 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

261

1 we believe that the available monitoring 

2 records, process descriptions and source3 term data are adequate to complete dose 

4 reconstructions with sufficient accuracy for 

5 the evaluated worker Class.

6 And the approach is going to be 

7 that for the natural uranium operations 

8 we're going to use TBD-6000 to estimate the 

9 KCP internal exposures when dosimetry is not 

10 available.

11 After the natural uranium 

12 operations but before the actual DU internal 

13 monitoring started, which is the period 

14 March 1st, '55 through August 11th, 1959, 

15 we're going to use the maximum measured 

16 gross alpha air sample during the post17 operation period that was done when handling 

18 uranium.

19 And TBD-6000 methodology will be 

20 used to bound air concentrations for workers 

21 with less exposure potential than the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 machine operators.

2 As far as the magnesium-thorium 

3 operations, we have a couple different 

4 control levels that were instituted at the 

5 site.

6 At the beginning of operations in 

7 '57, we had a control level of 9E to the 

8 minus 11 microcuries per ml. In October of 

9 1959, they lowered that limit to 3E to the 

10 negative 11 microcuries per ml.

11 Gross alpha fixed air monitoring 

12 was done in the Main Manufacturing Building 

13 during the first 13 years of this operation 

14 and they maintained operations at 2.85E to 

15 the negative 12 microcuries per ml on 

16 average and less than 8.55 10 to the 

17 negative 11 microcuries per ml maximum over 

18 that time frame.

19 Okay, just as a little note here, 

20 the limit of 9E to the negative 11 would 

21 equate to about 27 milligrams per meter 

22 cubed of total dust in air and that's not a 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

263

1 very well-tolerated concentration of dust 

2 for a full shift.

3 In 1970 they actually performed a 

4 work site, breathing-zone air sampling. It 

5 was also gross alpha and validated that 

6 their process doesn't generate, I'd say 

7 significant airborne radioactivity than 

8 none.

9 This validation was performed 

10 prior to the cessation of fixed air 

11 monitoring in 1971.

12 Okay, during the mag-thorium 

13 operations, to bound the internal exposures 

14 for machine operators, we'll use their 

15 initial engineering limit of 9E minus 11 and 

16 apply it as a constant for 5-1-57 through 

17 10-31-1959.

18 We'll use the lower engineered 

19 limit, 3E to the minus 11 microcuries per 

20 ml, and apply it as a constant distribution 

21 from 11-1-59 through 4-30-1979.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Any ingestion doses we'll assume 

2 and calculate those through our OCAS-TIB3 009, and we'll also be assigning thoron 

4 doses and those we're going to use the 

5 highest 1970 short-lived sample that we've 

6 got, which is 5.1 working level months per 

7 year.

8 TBD-6000 methodology will be used 

9 to bound air concentrations for Classes of 

10 workers with less exposure potential or that 

11 spent less time in the machining areas than 

12 the machine operators.

13 Okay, after magnesium-thorium 

14 operations ceased but before the facility 

15 D&D, we'll assume that the air concentration 

16 at the end of the operation was the lower 

17 limit, the 3E to the negative 11.

18 And then we'll use the 

19 deposition, resuspension and depletion 

20 models to assign intakes after that point, 

21 and then we'll still assign ingestion doses 

22 derived using our OCAS-TIB-009.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

265

1 The thoron dose basis for this 

2 period will start at the 5.1 working level 

3 months, which was our maximum per year, and 

4 we'll use the same depletion rate as we 

5 depleted the thorium to determine exposure 

6 for each year of this period.

7 And, again, TBD-6000 will be used 

8 to bound air concentrations for Classes of 

9 workers with less exposure than that of the 

10 machine operators.

11 Okay, bounding uranium intakes 

12 after the magnesium-thorium operation 

13 ceased, what we'll do is we'll use the 

14 maximum measured surface contamination 

15 survey taken during DU, which is depleted 

16 uranium, machining operations and it's going 

17 to be used to model a starting point air 

18 concentration for the post-operational 

19 period.

20 We'll apply a resuspension factor 

21 of 1E neg 5 and that yields a concentration 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 of 0.27 picocuries per meter cubed for the 

2 end of the post-operation period May 31st, 

3 1984.

4 Depletion rate will be applied to 

5 the initial air concentration to determine 

6 the remaining activity available for 

7 inhalation and ingestion for machine 

8 operators during each year of this post9 operation period.

10 Bounding uranium intakes -- Okay, 

11 I got that still. Okay, TBD-6000 

12 methodology will be used to bound air 

13 concentrations for Classes of workers, as 

14 with the other ones, with less exposure 

15 potential than those of the machine 

16 operators.

17 Okay, there were D&D activities 

18 took place June 1st, 1984 through September 

19 3rd, 1986.

20 Rockwell employees were 

21 monitored. Barriers were set up around the 

22 work areas and continuous air monitoring was 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

267

1 performed outside the perimeter so we will 

2 use the dosimetry for those individuals.

3 They monitored uranium-238 at 1E 

4 minus 12 microcurie per ml control level, 

5 and we will assume that the Kansas City 

6 Plant employees were exposed at the 

7 perimeter air concentrations during the 

8 decontamination period.

9 So the summary is that from 

10 January 1st, '49 through December 31st, 

11 1993, we determined that the external dose 

12 reconstruction is feasible and the internal 

13 dose reconstruction is feasible, and that's 

14 all I have.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank 

16 you. Board Members with questions. Paul.

17 MEMBER ZIEMER: Grady, just for 

18 the record, you didn't mention medical x19 rays or annual chest x-rays or whatever.

20 MR. CALHOUN: Right, but we do 

21 have those and we will include those in the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 dose reconstruction.

2 MEMBER ZIEMER: Thank you.

3 MR. CALHOUN: I'm sorry about 

4 that. Those will be included.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Josie, then 

6 Brad.

7 MEMBER BEACH: I just had a 

8 question on your personal monitoring data. 

9 You said KCP participated in DOELAP starting 

10 in '92, and it's always been my 

11 understanding that when sites were in that 

12 program it's because they were forced to 

13 based on lack of, they weren't monitoring --

14 MR. CALHOUN: No, it wasn't 

15 because of lack of performance. All sites 

16 had to come into compliance with DOELAP 

17 standards according to -- I think the DOE 

18 RadCon Manual then 10 CFR 835 were the 

19 drivers behind that. It was everybody had 

20 to that was in a DOE complex unless you got 

21 a waiver.

22 MEMBER ZIEMER: Can I also 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

269

1 respond to that? You're exactly correct 

2 because that was right after the Tiger Teams 

3 visited virtually all of the sites and the 

4 RadCon Manual went into effect as did Part 

5 835 of the Code of Federal Regulations which 

6 required this of all the DOE sites.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, Brad.

8 MEMBER CLAWSON: You were 

9 speaking earlier of, I believe it was 

10 '51/'52, the machining of the uranium and so 

11 forth. How are you going to handle the fire 

12 that they had?

13 MR. CALHOUN: I don't know that 

14 off the top of my head. I don't have that 

15 detail.

16 MEMBER CLAWSON: Okay, because 

17 it's in the Site Profile there and there was 

18 fire in that and it was fairly well 

19 documented. I guess we'll address that down 

20 the road but we need to keep that in mind 

21 then.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MR. CALHOUN: Sure, sure.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, Henry.

3 MEMBER ANDERSON: Yes, I noticed 

4 at the start that there were quite a number 

5 of claims that have been already processed 

6 but most of them had no dosimetry records. 

7 What methodology was used for those earlier 

8 cases to do dose reconstruction?

9 MR. CALHOUN: When we had 

10 dosimetry, we used it. When we didn't have 

11 dosimetry, we assigned some degree of 

12 ambient as well as x-rays, medical x-rays.

13 MEMBER ANDERSON: Okay.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, it's Jim 

15 Melius. Just to follow up on that, I'm 

16 trying to understand some of the same 

17 issues, and in a couple places here you 

18 refer to using TBD-6000 methodology for the 

19 non-machine operators, people that were not 

20 machine operators.

21 I'm trying to understand exactly 

22 what you mean by TBD-6000 methodology, where 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

271

1 that data would be coming from and, second, 

2 the rationale for, you know, distinguishing, 

3 you know, people didn't operate machines 

4 from people that did in terms of sources of 

5 data and why that differential is justified.

6 MR. CALHOUN: Right. The 

7 methodology's outlined in the ER and it's 

8 like a scaling factor that's done for the 

9 people who have a lower potential of being 

10 exposed.

11 And we would determine that by 

12 looking at job category, looking at plant 

13 history and we may even be able to get our 

14 hands on some of the access control logs.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: So that's how 

16 you would determine who fell into the 

17 categories, correct?

18 MR. CALHOUN: Yes.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And my question 

20 was what was the methodology? So it would 

21 be based on using Kansas City data or based 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 --

2 MR. CALHOUN: And individual data 

3 as well from the CATIs.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. Okay, no, 

5 no. I'm talking about the actual dose 

6 reconstruction methodology, not how you 

7 placed people into those categories.

8 MR. CALHOUN: What we do is we 

9 end up using the airborne that we would use 

10 for the machine operators and it's scaled 

11 down to the others.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. That's 

13 the clarification I was looking for, okay. 

14 Anybody else with questions at this point? 

15 On the phone, any of our Board Members on 

16 the phone have questions?

17 MEMBER FIELD: This is Bill.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: What did he 

19 say?

20 MALE PARTICIPANT: This is Bill.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: I know it's 

22 Bill. Bill, did you have questions or, I 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

273

1 had trouble hearing you then.

2 MEMBER FIELD: Yes, I said no 

3 questions.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Oh, okay. I'm 

5 sorry, I couldn't hear that. Okay, do that. 

6 Okay, we'll move on and I'd like to hear 

7 from our petitioners now, Mr. Copeland. 

8 Whoever wants to go first can go first, Mr. 

9 Copeland or Mr. Knox.

10 MR. COPELAND: Yes, I'm Maurice 

11 Copeland. One thing, I'd like to start, you 

12 know, where the iron is hot. He just 

13 mentioned access control. This is a way of 

14 judging the exposures of people around the 

15 materials.

16 Everyone should know that access 

17 control, I think the committee should know, 

18 they did the investigation, that we did not 

19 have access control in that plant for 

20 decades.

21 The access control did not start 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 until the late '90s or mid '90s, so when 

2 they're basing this information to judge 

3 whether the exposures on the people were 

4 proper, you're only going for a few years 

5 there. We're not going back to 1949.

6 Nowhere in that plant did I have 

7 to sign anything but an x-ray to get into 

8 when I was in the apprenticeship program and 

9 I was apprentice for six years as a tool and 

10 die maker. I'd like to find out how they're 

11 going to do the dose reconstruction on the 

12 model of me, a tool and die maker.

13 Now, let me first tell you why 

14 I'm here. I'm here to put a face, a human, 

15 flesh and bones person that worked in that 

16 plant, in front of you, to let you know that 

17 I am no fool.

18 And, no, I do not think that as 

19 our petition says that they can't do dose 

20 reconstruction or even can do dose 

21 reconstruction on all personnel. I don't 

22 believe that what I asked for is possible.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

275

1 But I also do not believe that 

2 what they're saying, that they can do dose 

3 reconstruction on all personnel. They can't 

4 do it. It's impossible.

5 They do not know what went on in 

6 that plant. That plant went from 2,000 

7 people to 8,000 or 9,000 people overnight. 

8 You got 100 machines for 100 machinists and 

9 you got 300 machinists walking around. What 

10 are you going to do with these people?

11 Now, the government always finds 

12 something for people to do. I'm a Vietnam 

13 veteran, okay? And before I went to 

14 Vietnam, my MOS was a personnel management 

15 specialist. I went to the best school so I 

16 know how to burn papers too and know how to 

17 lose documents. I went to Fort Benjamin 

18 Harrison and I got the best, okay?

19 Now, when we deal with what went 

20 on at that plant, I'm a machinist. I'm a 

21 tool and die maker. You're going to judge 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 my exposures. You don't know what I did. 

2 There's no way possible. The only way you 

3 know is I tell you and I've done it many 

4 times in sworn testimony and I've been on 

5 reviews also.

6 When I was in Vietnam, you will 

7 see Maurice Copeland personnel management 

8 specialist and you're going to judge my 

9 movement by my MOS.

10 I was not a personnel management 

11 specialist in Vietnam, okay? So my 

12 exposures or whatever happened to me in 

13 Vietnam is not what you're going to get on 

14 that paper, just like the documents that 

15 you've got.

16 The work I did at that plant, and 

17 I want you all to understand it. When you 

18 judge what I'm saying, you judge everybody 

19 else.

20 When we went from 3,000 to 9,000 

21 people, we loaned people out to every 

22 section of that plant and every section of 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

277

1 that facility, of that facility.

2 We had people that were 

3 machinists for five years and never ran a 

4 machine while they were out there. They 

5 might have been out at the barrel lot, on 

6 the skid wash or out somewhere on the 

7 buildings and grounds.

8 The classifications that you're 

9 dealing with, that you're classing and that 

10 you're dealing with people, some of the 

11 classifications you don't even have. We had 

12 a buildings and grounds when we first went 

13 there and those people handled the buildings 

14 and grounds.

15 Just to show you the scope of 

16 what I'm saying about the exposures, we 

17 dealt with Agent Orange at that complex 

18 every day. Do you have that? When we're 

19 able to talk about that, are you going to 

20 deal with the Agent Orange that people dealt 

21 with that weren't trained to handle this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 stuff that took care of the buildings and 

2 grounds?

3 Okay, so these things that I'm 

4 going to mention to you, I'm going to put a 

5 human face and let you know what went on in 

6 that plant.

7 I see a lot of Department 20 and 

8 the Model Shop. Back in 2001, the 

9 Department of Labor came here and we had a 

10 town hall at Bartle Hall. Some people may 

11 remember that. In that town hall, they were 

12 laying out the program of the EEOICPA.

13 In that town hall, one of the 

14 people got up and says, hey, my name is 

15 [identifying information redacted] and I 

16 worked in the Model Shop.

17 The man on the podium said hold 

18 it. Don't say another word. You people are 

19 special, the Model Shop, and I know they're 

20 special because I was a model maker. I was 

21 a model maker supervisor.

22 And he took those people off to 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

279

1 the side after the meeting was over with and 

2 he talked to them. I said can I talk to 

3 you? And he just looked at me. Well, he 

4 didn't know I was their supervisor but he 

5 would not let me have that conversation.

6 I would like to know with your 

7 investigation and what you do to tell the 

8 people in the Model Shop, tell the people in 

9 the tool room, tell the people in TEM, tell 

10 the people in Department 20, which I worked. 

11 I ran those billets. I ran every machine 

12 that those billets were run on.

13 Not only did I run them, during 

14 the time period that you state here they 

15 were doing remediation, when did that 

16 happen? I was in that department first, 

17 second and third shift and if he was doing 

18 it, fine. Remediating a machine while I'm 

19 on it, Maurice Copeland should have had a 

20 dosimeter badge on at some point.

21 And you say that you was doing 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 medical evaluation from x-rays. All those 

2 years we took physicals every two to five 

3 years. We came in the plant on being hired 

4 taking a physical. We came in in a certain 

5 condition so we were fit to work.

6 Throughout the process of those 

7 two- to five-year physicals, I think 

8 something was changing them folks and what 

9 we would hear on these changes was stop 

10 eating so much bacon.

11 It wasn't take care of yourself 

12 around the beryllium. Watch your benzene 

13 intake. It wasn't none of that stuff. It 

14 wasn't do you work in Department 20 or the 

15 Model Shop?

16 I think that the scrutiny that 

17 you're going on to measure or to do a real 

18 dose reconstruction is not on what actually 

19 happened.

20 This is the cold war and cold war 

21 means one thing like any other war. It 

22 means casualties. That's what war is.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

281

1 And it's funny that the United 

2 States government has never mentioned the 

3 casualties of the cold war and the only 

4 reason I can suspect that that wasn't done 

5 is because the casualties of the cold war 

6 were in-house. The production of nuclear 

7 weapons is not pretty.

8 In the last year, in the last few 

9 months, you may even, I can get someone, 

10 [identifying information redacted] to say it 

11 today, that the nuclear weapons industry and 

12 what went on at Honeywell is no different 

13 than what goes on in any other manufacturing 

14 company.

15 Tell me, tell me, if it's no 

16 different than what goes on at any other 

17 manufacturing company, I think the federal 

18 government ought to start going and 

19 scrutinizing these other places too.

20 Now, we might as well be truthful 

21 about this thing flat out and just put it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 out on, we cannot do a dose reconstruction 

2 on all classifications at that plant. It's 

3 no way possible. It's no way possible 

4 because you don't know the footsteps.

5 It's no way possible for 

6 Honeywell to give you this information and 

7 expect for you to really believe it when our

8 footsteps went outside of that plant all 

9 over Kansas City.

10 It went to GSA. We had garage 

11 sales at GSA where we sold equipment, 

12 machinery, no spark tooling, all types of --

13 we advertised all across Missouri for people 

14 to come in. They would sit out in that 

15 parking lot and have tailgate parties.

16 This is back in the '60s. We 

17 advertised all over the country, all over 

18 the state of Missouri. We had people come 

19 in from St. Louis, Springfield to buy that 

20 equipment.

21 Not only that, you're going to 

22 measure dose reconstruction, measure my 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

283

1 wife. The plant ordered us, ordered us, to 

2 take our equipment home that we had worked 

3 with for 30 years, all the residue and 

4 anything else that we have been exposed to.

5 And like I said, I worked in the 

6 Model Shop. I was a Model Shop supervisor. 

7 I worked in Department 20. I ran those 

8 billets in that three-sided room with those 

9 big rubber, two-inch-thick flaps. I ran it.

10 Did you know that? How you going 

11 to do a dose reconstruction on Maurice 

12 Copeland? How are you going to do a dose 

13 reconstruction on anybody that I worked with 

14 doing that job?

15 Here, here is a good question to 

16 shut the whole thing down. Why hasn't the 

17 plant done an inspection like they did at 

18 GSA? That was very carefully done.

19 The IG, CDC, EPA all did 

20 investigations. Did a dose cluster, I mean, 

21 a cluster for illnesses over here at GSA and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 did not go to the source of the 

2 contamination.

3 And the only reason that they did 

4 not go to the source of the contamination, 

5 things smell around here, is because they 

6 said DOE did not invite them in. Invite 

7 them in? GSA owned the plant, own the 

8 facility and we got to be invited in? Why 

9 would they duck that?

10 Why not go up and get the cluster 

11 investigation done to find out all of the 

12 pancreatic cancers and all the cancers that 

13 came out of Bendix, out of the side?

14 We need that. In order for you 

15 to do the proper dose reconstruction, I 

16 think you ought to look for the cancer 

17 clusters, the brain cancers that came out of 

18 that plant. And people that are suffering 

19 from them right now, right now.

20 You even had consultants that 

21 were hired in that plant in 2001. 2001, the 

22 company contracted with ex-employees to do a 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

285

1 site analysis of that plant. I think you 

2 ought to go back and look at what those 

3 people wrote about that plant.

4 And when you look at what they 

5 wrote, note the names of the people that 

6 wrote it and then go back to NIOSH and see 

7 how many of them filed a claim after writing 

8 what the company wanted about how clean the 

9 place was but they filed claims for how 

10 dirty it caused them, the illnesses that it 

11 caused them.

12 We might as well look at this for 

13 what it really is. You know for a fact that 

14 you cannot do a credible dose reconstruction 

15 on everybody in that plant. There are 

16 certain classifications, it's no way, no way 

17 you can do a credible dose reconstruction.

18 Like I said, you can pull it up 

19 in any record from Bendix, from that place. 

20 I'm the one that was running those billets 

21 in Department 20. I am one of them.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I ran the same equipment and if 

2 they were remediating that equipment they 

3 were remediating it while I was running it 

4 and never told me. They should have gave me 

5 a dosimeter badge.

6 Not only that, get your President 

7 Christian Tilly, who I have given you many 

8 names, many names, to talk to, get your 

9 President Christian Tilly to see why dose 

10 reconstruction wasn't done on Maurice 

11 Copeland when I took a box that I had 

12 received to him and had him open the box and 

13 inside the box was a unit.

14 Under all of the popcorn and the 

15 packing was a sticker that says radioactive 

16 material inside. Well, wait a minute. I 

17 think that should have been on the outside 

18 of the box instead of the inside of the box.

19 And I gave it to the S&H Director 

20 Christian Tilly personally, personally, and 

21 they never said a word to me about it. I 

22 think that that is very irresponsible and 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

287

1 I'm still walking around waiting for the 

2 answer as to what was in that box. Did I 

3 get contaminated?

4 Also, understand, dose 

5 reconstruction, I worked in the Model Shop. 

6 It's a lot of things in national security 

7 that we can't say, will never say. Even 

8 people that hate this process, they're loyal 

9 to this country and loyal to what they say, 

10 just like me.

11 I'm a fourth-generation veteran, 

12 fourth generation, and I want you to see the 

13 human side of this. I'm a Vietnam veteran. 

14 My brother was a Vietnam veteran. My 

15 brother suffered from three cancers. VA 

16 never gave him a shot, never gave him the 

17 consideration of his time in Vietnam and in 

18 Cambodia because we weren't there.

19 My father was a veteran. He came 

20 out disabled and they did not pay him a 

21 benefit until 1999 when I found out that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 they cut his benefit off in 1959. So for, 

2 what, 40-some years they cut him off and I 

3 got it started back up at 100 percent.

4 So this is what we're dealing 

5 with. We're dealing with a government and a 

6 situation and a process that seems like it's 

7 meant to deny, deny, deny until we die.

8 I want to put a human face on 

9 this but I wanted to give you the plain, 

10 simple facts. It's no way that this company 

11 can have engineering controls on how to 

12 handle material in that plant.

13 And every last one of these 

14 engineering process controls on this paper 

15 were never, never followed, never. I never 

16 took a shower out there. I wore the same 

17 clothes to work that I wore home. I used 

18 the air hose. Everybody did.

19 The movements and what actually 

20 goes on out there in the war, out there on 

21 the field, is not what's done on that paper. 

22 This is human, baby.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

289

1 (Applause)

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you very 

3 much, Mr. Copeland. Hello again. Welcome.

4 MR. KNOX: Hi, how are you doing?

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Good.

6 MR. KNOX: Good to see you again. 

7 Good to see you again, Dr. Poston. And, Dr. 

8 Ziemer, the last time I was here you let me 

9 sit up there, remember? Can I come back up 

10 there?

11 (Off microphone discussion)

12 MR. KNOX: Before Rachel Leiton 

13 find out about it, I want to do a quick 

14 demonstration to answer your question how 

15 did they account for unmonitored exposures 

16 at the Kansas City Plant?

17 Now, bear in mind the Kansas City 

18 Plant was a non-nuclear plant. It didn't 

19 have any radioactive materials.

20 These guys machined, polished and 

21 grind uranium, but that uranium was actually 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 recycled uranium containing plutonium. They 

2 received a tremendous amount of exposures as 

3 they held this stuff close to their body, 

4 machined it. In fact, that depleted uranium 

5 was actually recycled depleted uranium 

6 because it contained U-236.

7 I talked to Stu about it and Stu 

8 agreed with me that it, indeed, was 

9 recycled, recycled now, depleted uranium 

10 which contained plutonium.

11 And that uranium was found in the 

12 urine samples of all Classes of workers, 

13 including administrative types. The 

14 material was found even outside of the 

15 facility.

16 So they received a tremendous 

17 amount of radiation exposures that was 

18 unaccounted for based upon processing this 

19 uranium.

20 Now, the question someone asked 

21 is, well, how did they monitor the 

22 unmonitored exposures? Well, what they did 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

291

1 was to, and I have this cup. It's a Fiesta 

2 cup. It contains uranium.

3 And Rachel Leiton now has banned

4 me from going to any hearings demonstrating 

5 this because she consider this to represent 

6 a public safety menace so please don't tell 

7 her I'm doing this because she'll come after 

8 me again, put me in jail.

9 But, anyway, this is what they 

10 did at the Kansas City Plant. But, first of 

11 all, keep in mind they had no health 

12 physicists at this plant. They didn't have 

13 the training.

14 Even the industrial hygienist 

15 that was responsible for this didn't even 

16 know they were processing uranium. They 

17 didn't know they had all of these 

18 radioactive materials, and we have one 

19 gentleman here that was an industrial 

20 hygienist and he'll tell you he didn't know.

21 But getting back to the question 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 you asked, how did they do it and keep in 

2 mind they have evaluated 600 cases, denied 

3 95 percent of them based upon their 

4 bounding, if you will, of the radiation 

5 exposure of the workers while they processed 

6 this uranium.

7 This is how they did it. 

8 Everybody got a instrument, radiation 

9 detector. You hold radiation detector close 

10 to you. You get high radiation doses the 

11 closer you get to it, right? What they did 

12 was to use a control dosimeter and put it 

13 outside of it and say that --

14 (Off microphone discussion)

15 MR. KNOX: Okay, pressed it. Why 

16 don't I just close it?

17 (Laughter)

18 MR. KNOX: Anyway, the bottom 

19 line is that's how they got away denying all 

20 of these people their right to medical care 

21 and compensation for their cancers, simply 

22 by using the results of a control dosimeter.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

293

1 I tried to explain to the NIOSH 

2 surrogate what a control dosimeter was 

3 because he was not a health physicist. 

4 NIOSH refuses to allow me to talk to a 

5 health physicist.

6 They have a surrogate there that 

7 I have to explain things to him or her and 

8 they won't even tell me their names and they 

9 claim to go to a NIOSH health physicist and 

10 express my concerns and get back to me. 

11 When they do that, nothing changes because 

12 they don't even know what a control 

13 dosimeter is.

14 The bottom line to the question 

15 you asked is how did they record unmonitored 

16 doses? What did they use and determine the 

17 Probability of Causation? It was that 

18 control dosimeter and it was not the dose 

19 rates coming from the work they were doing.

20 Dr. Poston, good seeing you 

21 again. Dr. Ziemer, same to you. Let me, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 one of the basic problems we had with this 

2 plant was that it was designed, it was 

3 defined as a non-nuclear facility. And we 

4 actually don't have any definitions of a 

5 non-nuclear facility.

6 But you look at what they were 

7 doing. They had hundreds of different x-ray 

8 machines. They had PuBe sources that they 

9 were using without shielding, without proper 

10 shielding.

11 They actually were developing and 

12 testing nuclear power reactors at that 

13 facility. I provided that information in 

14 the petition.

15 In the petition it was provided, 

16 including the testimony of Ferguson who was 

17 the president of Bendix. During those 1993 

18 hearings we had, he admitted that they were 

19 developing and testing commercial nuclear 

20 power reactors there.

21 I'm a nerd. Dr. Poston, you know 

22 me. Okay, I'm a nerd. I traced it all back 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

295

1 down. They got the fuel down from 

2 Mallinckrodt. I got the shipping records. 

3 I'm filling in the package. I put 

4 Ferguson's testimony that that's what they 

5 were doing in the package.

6 But all of this is ignored by 

7 NIOSH because they don't think developing 

8 and testing nuclear reactors in the basement 

9 over there was nothing. I mean, it was 

10 nothing. No big deal. All of the material 

11 that would have been released from that 

12 testing would have blanketed that whole 

13 site.

14 And keep in mind they did not 

15 have the instrumentation to detect it. If 

16 you look at some of the instruments, they 

17 had one of this and one of that.

18 And you said, well, what happens 

19 when you send the instrument back to a 

20 calibration? What happens if you get an 

21 instrument crapped up and you can't use it? 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 It was an absurd health physics program to 

2 have testing reactor.

3 And I look around a little more. 

4 They have the material there, and keep in 

5 mind this is in Kansas City. This is not 

6 out on a desert. They have the material 

7 there to build two different types of atomic 

8 bombs.

9 They had U-233 and all you know 

10 we used that in Teapot. That was our 

11 thorium cycle bomb. They had it there and 

12 that U-233 would start building up high 

13 gamma emitters but that wasn't even 

14 considered in this report.

15 They had the PuBe sources there 

16 and I was talking to one guy and he said, 

17 well, that's no big deal because plutonium 

18 is an alpha emitter and big deal, anything 

19 will stop an alpha. They ignore the fact 

20 that a PuBe source produces neutrons and you 

21 need hydrogenous materials in order to 

22 shield.
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

297

1 You read through these reports 

2 and it is incredible that people are still 

3 alive today because of the fact that, number 

4 one, the facility was not designed or 

5 staffed or documented to handle radioactive 

6 material because it was a non-nuclear 

7 facility. It was not. They had a daycare 

8 center there.

9 You had people that worked for 

10 GSA that would actually go into the spaces. 

11 A lot of the ventilation systems were on the 

12 roof. They would go up there. GSA people

13 would monitor the HVAC system and they would 

14 do all of the repairs on it.

15 They could walk into the 

16 facility, make these repairs with their 

17 instruments and equipment and walk right 

18 back out to the other side without any 

19 release surveys. These were crapped-up 

20 filters. How did they do this, is amazing 

21 to me.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I know I have a limited amount of 

2 time here but we had some discussion of this 

3 promethium-147 spill. I read all of the 

4 reports. It's nothing like was reported by 

5 NIOSH.

6 Based upon the reports now, you 

7 had contamination spread to Mound, to Oak 

8 Ridge, even to Amersham, England, based upon 

9 the reports.

10 And yet and still DOL and NIOSH 

11 said we didn't have any personnel, they said 

12 we had no personnel contamination. They 

13 said we had no environmental contamination.

14 The spill lasted for over 12 

15 years and they're going to tell me there was 

16 no personnel contamination? It was only 

17 found because someone at Sandia in New 

18 Mexico found it. They didn't have the 

19 capability to analyze anything.

20 So you have all of this spill. 

21 You had not just one person. I've 

22 interviewed this lady, a little old lady, 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

299

1 nice little lady. Went into her house and 

2 talked about what happened.

3 She was a janitress. She spread 

4 the stuff all over the facility, other 

5 people, for 12 years undetected because they 

6 did not have the training, the 

7 instrumentation to detect anything.

8 Additionally there were more, 

9 based upon the reports, there were more 

10 leaking sources found. I provided all of 

11 this to NIOSH in my petition. All of this 

12 is ignored. I thought that was critical.

13 The reactor development, and they 

14 got all, they had 100 engineers. I'm sure 

15 you remember the old airplane reactor deal. 

16 Dr. Poston, you remember out of Dalton, 

17 Georgia, right up there. Yes. They got 

18 those airplane reactor engineers.

19 Again, Ferguson, in his 

20 testimony, said they got about 100 of them 

21 to come up to Kansas City and work on that. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I'm not so sure that those airplane reactor 

2 guys were that great. I'm not trying to 

3 insult anything but they crapped up a lot.

4 The people here, that is the 

5 Bendix and the Honeywells, I'm going to call 

6 names, crapped up these facilities because 

7 they were held harmless, indemnified, by the 

8 Atomic Energy Commission. They could 

9 develop commercial nuclear power reactor 

10 under the cloak of national security for 

11 corporate interests.

12 Now, I supported the development 

13 of the atomic bomb. Yes, we should have 

14 done it and I don't think people would have 

15 enjoyed the world we live in today had we 

16 not.

17 I supported the development of 

18 commercial nuclear power in our national 

19 interests. But things got a little skewed 

20 when corporate interests dominated the 

21 scene.

22 It was not national security. It 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

301

1 was not national interest but corporate 

2 interest dominated the scene, where the 

3 corporations saw where they could develop 

4 all of this technology with a disposable 

5 source of people. We could kill them.

6 It doesn't make any difference 

7 because we want to make money, we want to 

8 develop commercial nuclear power, we want to 

9 develop all of the technology associated 

10 with nuclear materials but we don't want to 

11 pay the price for it.

12 Congress even said it. Congress 

13 said, in this act, it stated clearly that 

14 the corporations exposed all of these 

15 people. One of the reasons was they did not 

16 want to provide hazardous duty pay.

17 That is a hell of a reason for 

18 exposing all of these people and causing 

19 death and illness and the contamination of 

20 all of these facilities. I did not wish to 

21 provide hazardous duty pay. Thank you. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I'll let you go. I know I ran over a little 

2 bit.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: You're fine. 

4 Thank you.

5 (Applause)

6 MR. JACKSON: I did sign the 

7 list.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Give us a 

9 second. We will get to you, okay?

10 MR. JACKSON: Okay.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We will go 

12 through the list. We just need to wrap up a 

13 little bit of our business here about this 

14 and then we'll start with the list and 

15 someone needs to get me the list also. Yes, 

16 do that, okay. Do that. Any comments or 

17 questions for the petitioners right now?

18 MR. KNOX: Well, how do we define 

19 a non-nuclear facility?

20 MEMBER ZIEMER: I don’t have the 

21 answer to that but I think the Board 

22 recognizes that there were radioactive 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

303

1 sources here so I think it's not an issue 

2 for us.

3 But would you clarify for me, I 

4 hadn't heard the issue of there being 

5 testing of reactors here at this site. Was 

6 it your understanding that they also had 

7 enriched uranium here of some sort, which is 

8 normally what is used, low-enrichment 

9 uranium for reactors?

10 MR. KNOX: Yes, they got --

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: You'll need to 

12 use the mic, Wayne, if you would.

13 MR. KNOX: They got the material 

14 from Mallinckrodt in St. Louis and that's in 

15 Ferguson's testimony before Congress. And, 

16 again, I went through the records and I 

17 found the shipping papers where the material 

18 was shipped from St. Louis up to here too.

19 MEMBER ZIEMER: And is it your 

20 understanding they had critical masses of 

21 such material?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I could understand the 

2 possibility of them doing something with 

3 PuBe sources and looking at neutron 

4 multiplication with subcritical masses in 

5 order to provide some sort of neutronics 

6 data, which is not quite the same as 

7 building a nuclear power reactor. I'm 

8 trying to understand what you were telling 

9 us on the reactor issue.

10 MR. KNOX: Yes, the reactor and, 

11 again, I traced it down as best I could. 

12 They built the reactor here downstairs, not 

13 here of course.

14 But then they transported it, one 

15 of them. I don't know how many they built 

16 but one of them was transported over to the 

17 University of Kansas City and installed in 

18 Burt Hall over there. That one I was able 

19 to trace down.

20 But they also had some 

21 interesting materials. If you go through 

22 the material list there, they had that stuff 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

305

1 we used to coat the reactor with, coat fuel 

2 with. They had yellowcake here. They were 

3 trying to make fuel looks like.

4 I don't know what all they were 

5 doing but it was one big experimental pool 

6 that was done under the cover of national 

7 security.

8 And, again, the gentleman here 

9 that's an industrial hygienist, he'll tell 

10 you he didn't know. They didn't tell him.

11 MEMBER ZIEMER: Thank you.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Any other 

13 questions or comments? Okay. I think we 

14 need a recommendation for follow-up here. 

15 Josie, do you want to --

16 MEMBER BEACH: Yes. I'd like to 

17 make the recommendation that we task SC&A 

18 with Evaluation Report review and putting 

19 together a matrix. I know that follows 

20 hand-in-hand, but.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, we have a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Work Group and yes. Yes, Wayne, you had --

2 MR. KNOX: May I make one other 

3 little comment?

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, sure.

5 MEMBER ZIEMER: Use the 

6 microphone.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, as long as 

8 you use the mic. That's --

9 MR. KNOX: This sort of reminds 

10 me of the good old days because I used to 

11 argue a lot with Dr. Morgan. You know, I 

12 did my graduate work under the father of 

13 health physics and we had a lot of different 

14 interesting arguments.

15 But I submit that we really 

16 cannot do the internal doses for an 

17 individual because everything is based upon 

18 standard man, right? There is no standard 

19 man if you look at -- and, in fact, EPA has 

20 said that in a letter, there ain't no 

21 standard man.

22 So all of your internal dosimetry 
This transcript of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, Board Meeting, has been 

reviewed for concerns under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) and personally identifiable 

information has been redacted as necessary. The transcript, however, has not been reviewed 

and certified by the Chair of the Advisory Board for accuracy at this time. The reader should be 

cautioned that this transcript is for information only and is subject to change. 

307

1 is based upon standard man and it's based 

2 upon the fact that this man lives in a 

3 climate between 40 and 60 degrees. He's 

4 five feet, seven. Okay, okay, I meet that 

5 criteria.

6 He's of Northern European 

7 ancestry. He's a white guy. And we know 

8 that there are physiological differences 

9 between the two, right? There are because 

10 when I was in the military I got extra 

11 credit because I was a black guy as far as 

12 pulmonary functions.

13 All of this difference. So the 

14 argument is if you compare any one of these 

15 people in here to standard man, it doesn't 

16 matter.

17 Now, the question I have is this 

18 regulation, this whole program of dose 

19 reconstruction is based upon sufficient --

20 is it sufficient accuracy? So you're saying 

21 that's a white man right there? No, it's 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 not. Is it sufficiently accurate to say 

2 that that is a white man right there? No.

3 All of these people have 

4 physiological differences so you cannot just 

5 use this data and come up with three decimal 

6 place accuracy.

7 (Applause)

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, we do 

9 have a Work Group. Okay, we can do that. 

10 So let me explain then. Oh, Dave, yes.

11 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: I wanted to 

12 ask one more question of the speaker who 

13 just spoke. As far as you know, about when 

14 did this commercial reactor work begin and 

15 about how long do you think it took place, 

16 over what period of time did it take place 

17 as far as you know?

18 MR. KNOX: Well, Ferguson made 

19 the testimony in 1953, so it started before 

20 1953 because he spoke in there. And, again, 

21 I provided all of this information to NIOSH.

22 Before 1953 they had started 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 testing and building reactors. They shipped 

2 the reactor over to Burt Hall in 1965. No, 

3 no, no, it was taken out in 1965.

4 So I haven't been able to get 

5 all of the information because you guys want 

6 to charge so damn much for it. If I could 

7 get information under the Freedom of 

8 Information Act, I would have been able to 

9 give you a more detailed picture.

10 The question I have, can someone 

11 help me get information under the Freedom of 

12 Information Act cheap? Did I answer your 

13 question, sir?

14 MEMBER KOTELCHUCK: Yes, thank 

15 you.

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. I think 

17 the government could get the information. 

18 Whether they can share it with you and how 

19 they can and without expense, we can't 

20 influence so, but we understand the concern.

21 (Off microphone discussion)

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, before we 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 get going with that. So I need a second on 

2 that.

3 MEMBER ANDERSON: Second.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. And all 

5 in favor just say aye.

6 (Multiple aye)

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Opposed?

8 (No response)

9 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Let me 

10 just explain a little bit before we start 

11 the public comment period what we're doing 

12 here.

13 What the EEOICPA Act charges us 

14 to do, this Advisory Board to do, is to do 

15 an independent evaluation of NIOSH's 

16 recommendation on the Special Exposure 

17 Cohort.

18 So we've been doing this. Many 

19 of us have served on this Board for a long 

20 time, close to ten years. We're approaching 

21 our 100th meeting here to go over this so it 

22 takes a while. It's been a while and that.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 What we do and we have, we'll do 

2 our own review. We have a Work Group that's 

3 set up that has, usually have four to five 

4 Members from the Board that focus on this 

5 particular site and this particular 

6 evaluation.

7 We have a independent contractor 

8 that works for us, reports to the Board. 

9 That's SC&A and Joe Fitzgerald, John Stiver 

10 are here in the room from SC&A, okay, and 

11 they will conduct an independent evaluation.

12 Our charge is to make a 

13 recommendation to the Secretary of Health 

14 and Human Services whether or not we support 

15 the NIOSH recommendation on the Special 

16 Exposure Cohort.

17 Now, we can't do that just on 

18 the basis of whether we believe it or not or 

19 what our feelings are.

20 If we're going to agree or 

21 disagree with the NIOSH report, we have to 

22 state, you know, the reasons for that, the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 technical reasons why we believe a dose 

2 cannot be reconstructed with sufficient 

3 accuracy. So that's the sort of technical 

4 issues there.

5 There's very practical issues, 

6 some of which you've raised. You know, can 

7 we place where people worked, what type of 

8 work they did and that, is there adequate 

9 descriptions, adequate information to do 

10 that? And so that takes a little while.

11 I can tell you our track record 

12 is pretty good. Recommendations we make to 

13 the Secretary, the Secretary has followed so 

14 far, all of them.

15 And we have, you know, disagreed 

16 with NIOSH's recommendation many times. I 

17 don't know the numbers and so forth, so I 

18 think it's fair to say we do our best to 

19 make an independent judgment.

20 And to do that, we need your 

21 help in terms of gathering information on 

22 that and information that helps us to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 evaluate that recommendation from NIOSH, the

2 information from NIOSH.

3 I can tell you we've had 

4 situations where as we've gone through this 

5 process where NIOSH has changed its mind and 

6 said, well, gee, we weren't aware of that 

7 information. When we look at it in more 

8 detail, it doesn't hold up and so forth.

9 So there's some back and forth 

10 to this but we will go through a process. 

11 That process, the Work Group process, 

12 everything we do, the documents that are 

13 produced are all public record.

14 We don't do this behind closed 

15 doors. We won't do every meeting here but 

16 we will do it. It's available on phone for 

17 people.

18 We keep the petitioners fully 

19 informed. If other people want to be 

20 informed, you know, let us know or let NIOSH 

21 know. We'll, you know, keep you up to date 

22 on what goes on.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 But what really is important is 

2 to get information from you. We may not 

3 even know what information we need now it 

4 may become as we go through this process. 

5 So knowing who has information, we may ask 

6 the petitioners, we may ask other people, do 

7 that.

8 We understand that there are 

9 some, you know, classified information 

10 that's involved in this process. We have 

11 people that have Q clearance from our 

12 contractor, on our Board.

13 We can do classified interviews. 

14 We get good cooperation from Department of 

15 Energy for being able to do that and for 

16 getting, you know, classified information 

17 that can be, you know, utilized to 

18 confirm/not confirm information.

19 But, again, what I would really 

20 emphasize to you is, you know, you can 

21 really be a big help to us by providing 

22 information. I'm not going to fool you, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that we know all about this facility from 

2 reading a few reports.

3 You people worked in it or you 

4 had relatives that worked in it and can help 

5 us, you know, understand what went on there, 

6 provide information and that's usually what 

7 will let us, you know, agree or disagree 

8 with the decision in this report but it is 

9 something that you can really be helpful on 

10 as we go through that process.

11 So what we will do now, we'll 

12 open it up for -- yes, Wayne. Go ahead.

13 MR. KNOX: I just have one other 

14 quick thing.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Sure.

16 MR. KNOX: Use the mic?

17 MEMBER ZIEMER: Use the mic.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Use the mic. 

19 That's all.

20 MR. KNOX: I have been on the 

21 outside pissing into this tent all this time 

22 now, over, how long it started, 1997 when I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 first made that presentation to the CDC. I 

2 don't know if you were there, Dr. Poston.

3 But we got into the argument as 

4 to whether NIOSH could accurately 

5 reconstruct these doses and I proved that 

6 they could not accurately do it so they 

7 changed it to sufficiently accurate.

8 But what I'm trying to say is 

9 that I can do it. I can provide the 

10 information to support you. I'm a dirty 

11 hands guy, dirty hands. I worked directly 

12 under Wally Howe, which was the father of 

13 operational health physics and I can support 

14 them.

15 In addition to that, as far as 

16 clearances are concerned, I maintain the 

17 highest levels of security clearances in 

18 DOE, Nuclear Regulatory Commission and, what 

19 else, Department of Defense.

20 I was actually a top secret 

21 control officer. I had all of those special 

22 access authorizations. And I've been clean 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 all this time. I swear. Could you get me 

2 reinstated? I haven't done anything, much.

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Well, I want 

4 to ask about that part but --

5 (Laughter)

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: -- all I can 

7 say is we can look into it. I don't know 

8 the criteria for that and so forth.

9 But, again, yes, we do work 

10 closely with the petitioners and people 

11 involved and, you know, involve you in the 

12 process to the extent that we can.

13 (Off microphone discussion)

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, and do 

15 that. Ted has a few words to say about the 

16 rules for public comment.

17 MR. KATZ: Yes, it's really just 

18 to advise you what to expect in terms of 

19 when you comment to the Board.

20 We have a court reporter there 

21 so all of our discussions are transcribed 

22 and reported verbatim. They end up on the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 NIOSH website in a report that includes 

2 every word of everything that was said 

3 unless something has to be redacted.

4 I mean, and as far as you folks 

5 are concerned, when you get up here and 

6 speak for yourself, everything you say for 

7 yourself will be recorded and reported. So 

8 if there's anything you don't want to say 

9 about yourself, that you don't want to end 

10 up in public domain, don't say it.

11 But if you do talk about other 

12 people, what you say about other people will 

13 be looked at to consider their privacy 

14 concerns and there will be redactions if 

15 necessary to protect their privacy.

16 So whatever you say in your 

17 statement about other people, we'll look at 

18 that and possibly take out information 

19 that's necessary to take out to keep their 

20 privacy.

21 That's sort of the basic nuts 

22 and bolts of the rules of how that works. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 There's a much longer explanation of it 

2 that's on the NIOSH website. It should be 

3 somewhere up there on the table too called 

4 the Redaction Policy.

5 But I've told you everything 

6 that you probably need to know, and that 

7 takes care of that.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. And I 

9 would just add to that again that if you 

10 would prefer not to make public comments or 

11 you make public comments and have some 

12 additional information you want to provide 

13 or we may ask you for that, we may refer you 

14 to give us some information, talk to either 

15 one of the NIOSH people here or the SC&A 

16 people.

17 Yes, and for the people on the 

18 telephone who are either listening in or 

19 participating, can you please mute your 

20 phones? If you don't have a mute button on 

21 your phone, please just *6. I guess that's 

22 their answer, but -- okay, there we go.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MALE PARTICIPANT: Mute on.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: That worked. 

3 Okay. We try to make these open by phone so 

4 we have this problem every time, but thanks 

5 for that.

6 And, sir, you've been waiting 

7 patiently. I think I said you could be --

8 yes, you wanted to make public comments. Go 

9 ahead and then I'll start going through the 

10 list.

11 And when you get up to make 

12 public comment, please identify yourself. 

13 That's all we ask.

14 MR. JACKSON: My name is Willie 

15 Jackson. I want to thank the Board for 

16 allowing me to make this comment. I'm not a 

17 nuclear scientist. I'm not a physicist or 

18 engineer.

19 I was hired in at Bendix in 1977 

20 as a mechanical inspection supervisor and 

21 the reason I want to make comment, because 

22 I'm concerned about this reconstruction 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 exposure to radiation.

2 My first assignment was given to 

3 me. I had several departments out there to 

4 supervise them, mechanical inspection 

5 supervisor. I had people working with me as 

6 employees.

7 X-ray was one of my departments 

8 as well as the Paint Shop. I worked in x9 ray because I had employees working in 

10 there. Their job was to examine material, 

11 x-ray it, find out the thickness, et cetera, 

12 et cetera.

13 Of course, I have to talk to 

14 them and train them and monitor them so I 

15 was exposed to whatever is going on in there 

16 as well.

17 This dosimetry meter they 

18 talking about here, I was given one six 

19 months after I was employed there in 

20 radiation, in x-ray.

21 So I'm just kind of concerned. 

22 How could they, you know, reconstruct that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 when I wasn't even given a dosimeter until 

2 six months after I was there? So how they 

3 going to know what I was exposed to and how 

4 much? It's impossible.

5 So I'm not angry but I did file 

6 several claims. I retired in, well, 

7 actually I was let go in 1993, sort of 

8 retirement, after about 17 years.

9 So I filed a claim in 2007 after 

10 I was diagnosed by a pulmonology specialist, 

11 a doctor who determined that I had 

12 occupational asthma. So through Wayne 

13 recommending him, he talked to me and I 

14 filed a claim with DOE, the DOL, Department 

15 of Labor.

16 And the response I got 

17 immediately was, well, you can't really file 

18 a claim with us because you retired in 1993. 

19 Now, it's 2007. It's too late.

20 That kind of threw me for a 

21 loop. You know, I didn't even know I had 

22 asthma until I was diagnosed by a trained 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 physician known as a pulmonologist. Yet 

2 they say, well, you can't file a suit or 

3 even consider it because I reported the 

4 asthma in 2007.

5 Anyway, so go on. Since I have 

6 been diagnosed with occupational asthma 

7 (telephonic interference) care for 

8 occupational asthma.

9 The Department of Labor, 

10 Department of Energy, whoever been 

11 communicating with me, have not offered me 

12 anything but denial, denial, denial. They 

13 said there is no relationship --

14 MALE PARTICIPANT: Hello.

15 MR. JACKSON: -- between me 

16 having occupational asthma and what I was 

17 exposed to out there, all these chemicals in 

18 the Paint Shop and in particular x-ray, that 

19 nothing exposed me to that so, therefore, 

20 I'm not qualified for any compensation or 

21 any medical card or anything.

22 I don't know what other evidence 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 they want. My doctor has sent them 

2 everything he can as a professional 

3 pulmonologist and my regular medical doctor, 

4 that I have asthma, that it either 

5 contributed to it, either caused it or 

6 irritated. It's not hereditary.

7 But yet they deny me, deny me, 

8 deny me, deny. I have been to court. I've 

9 been to three hearings. They denied my 

10 hearing. They denied my three or four 

11 claims.

12 And even beryllium, my people I 

13 had in Department 20, I had inspectors all 

14 over that place. They inspected the 

15 machine, stuff that came out of Department 

16 20. They were machining beryllium.

17 My people had to inspect it. I 

18 was exposed to that as well. Yet they say 

19 you were not exposed to beryllium enough to 

20 cause any problem so, therefore, you're 

21 denied.

22 So, anyway, I just want the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Board to know that I'm not angry, I'm not 

2 upset, but I'm still in this fight. I'm 

3 here petitioning for this SEC and I want to 

4 help others as well as myself.

5 And I think the Department of 

6 Labor owe me something. Somebody owe me 

7 something. Now, whether it's Honeywell, it 

8 wasn't Honeywell when I left. It was 

9 AlliedSignal, Bendix AlliedSignal when I 

10 left there. Of course, I was laid off with 

11 5,000 other people who were the engineers 

12 and, you know, given the red paper the 

13 doctors said.

14 But this dose reconstruction, it 

15 seem to me it's impossible them to do that, 

16 particularly my case when I wasn't even 

17 given a dosimetry meter till six months 

18 after I was employed there in x-ray.

19 And I was never given any x20 rays, never called in for examination, 

21 although I tried. Petition, say, listen, I 

22 want to be x-rayed after I left. I never 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 got a chance to get an x-ray. They wasn't 

2 even contacting me, although I tried.

3 But I'm still here but I talked 

4 to the NIOSH representative about two weeks 

5 ago when you all was in town, the Department 

6 of Labor as well.

7 And the Department of Labor 

8 approved my, get this now, they accepted my 

9 occupational asthma after about four or five 

10 different communications and all the 

11 document my doctor sent. They said, well, 

12 we accept the occupational asthma.

13 And then I got another letter a 

14 month later from Department of Labor, said, 

15 no, we rejecting it. You're denied again. 

16 So I just can't quite get my mind around 

17 that. Maybe someone else can.

18 But I want the Board to know 

19 that, that as a former employee for about 17 

20 years there I did have all those areas, the 

21 x-ray, the beryllium machine. I had people 

22 doing deeper -- all kind of areas I was 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 exposed to.

2 So in that plant out there, many 

3 time, they would hang these big blue sheets, 

4 big blue sheets up to try to cover up the 

5 asbestos and everything else that's being 

6 exposed.

7 And, boy, they would fall down 

8 so we'd walk around the hall, yes, we 

9 walking around exposed to everything. And I 

10 had the Paint Shop too --

11 FEMALE PARTICIPANT: Are you 

12 going to get me in?

13 MALE PARTICIPANT: Can't hear a 

14 thing.

15 MR. JACKSON: -- chemicals used 

16 in there, for example trichloroethylene and 

17 many others, and we would go in to our 

18 supervisor --

19 MALE PARTICIPANT: I can't hear 

20 anything.

21 MR. JACKSON: -- to supervise my 

22 people, we were getting little masks you can 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 buy at the dollar store, the little --

2 MALE PARTICIPANT: I just sent 

3 an email to Ted Katz.

4 MR. JACKSON: And they don't 

5 protect anything, didn't protect. They had 

6 us put those on. That's all we had. And 

7 they said, well, you worked in the Paint 

8 Shop. You wasn't exposed to --

9 (Simultaneous speaking.)

10 MR. KATZ: Excuse me. Excuse 

11 me, Mr. Jackson. Let me interrupt a second. 

12 There are people on the phone who are 

13 carrying on conversations who are not muted 

14 and you're really disrupting everybody. 

15 It's disrespectful to Mr. Jackson. Can you 

16 please mute your phones, people on the line?

17 MR. JACKSON: I don't have a 

18 phone.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: No, not you.

20 MR. KATZ: I'm speaking to the 

21 people on the phone.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: And I think 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 they're having trouble hearing --

2 (Simultaneous speaking.)

3 MR. KATZ: Folks on the phone, 

4 can you press *6 to mute your phone?

5 (Simultaneous speaking.)

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, yes, I 

7 apologize, Mr. Jackson. Little technical 

8 problems here, but why don't you go ahead.

9 MR. JACKSON: Okay, I only got 

10 one more thing to say and then I'm going to 

11 sit down anyway.

12 But on this dose reconstruction 

13 on the radiation, that cannot happen. 

14 There's no way they can do that and they 

15 keep saying they can.

16 It's impossible because, like I 

17 said, they couldn't do it on me and I wasn't 

18 even given a dosimetry meter till six months 

19 after I was in the x-ray department 

20 supervising and moving product out of there 

21 and my people inspecting the product. They 

22 was exposed as well and so was I.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And so when they did give me a 

2 dosimetry meter, they would take it. We'd 

3 never see the results. Never see the meter 

4 again or anything.

5 Then I was given another one 

6 three or four months later. Meanwhile, I'm 

7 still supervising people in the x-ray 

8 department.

9 So this dose reconstructions, I 

10 just can't buy it. The feasibility in 

11 certain area is impossible. Like I said, 

12 I'm not a scientist but I'm not an idiot 

13 either. Thank you very much.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, thank 

15 you.

16 (Applause)

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: The first 

18 person I have listed is Gayla Burton. You 

19 can use this mic if you like or you can use 

20 the podium, either one.

21 MS. BURTON: I will. Thank you. 

22 My name is Gayla Burton. I know there are a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 lot of people here that are probably in my 

2 same situation so I'm going to try to be as 

3 brief as possible.

4 My mother's Betty Burton who is 

5 deceased as of December 5th, 2013, which is 

6 last year, December 5th.

7 My mother was in the top secret 

8 Kansas City Plant. She was told what she 

9 did was top secret and not to talk about it 

10 to anybody, even after she left there and 

11 continued on with her life. She was there 

12 from 1956, my dad will correct me if I'm 

13 wrong here, to 1961.

14 She had two miscarriages before 

15 she had my brother. She had one miscarriage 

16 before she had me. She was pregnant with me 

17 at the time she left -- after she had me, 

18 she went back to work at the plant. My 

19 father convinced her to leave the plant.

20 Her cancer started out as 

21 leukemia. She then got colon cancer. I 

22 have to count because I forget if I don't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 count how many cancers she had.

2 She started out with leukemia, 

3 colon cancer, ovary, bladder, adrenal gland 

4 to kidney, kidney and breast. She went from 

5 a grape to a raisin. If you've seen that, I 

6 feel for you.

7 This dose reconstruction that 

8 they're talking about here today, her dose 

9 reconstruction was 6.2 percent.

10 She got her medication and her 

11 mileage paid for, at least that's what we 

12 know of as of this point, which was in the 

13 area of $7,000 a month in addition to 

14 mileage. To this day we have not seen any 

15 monetary, other than the medication and the 

16 mileage.

17 It's unfortunate that she was 

18 asked to do an impairment rating. However, 

19 she wasn't physically able to do that so she 

20 didn't follow through with that which cuts -

21 - of course, no amount of money will bring 

22 my mother back, give me another day with my 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 mother. Excuse me.

2 She wasn't physically able to do 

3 the impairment rating and decided not to do 

4 the impairment rating because of her dose 

5 reconstruction.

6 She never saw any monetary 

7 value. She saw no monetary or financial 

8 responsibility on the part of the Kansas 

9 City Plant, Bendix, Allied Signal, 

10 Honeywell, whoever you want to call it.

11 We were not notified of this 

12 meeting as some of you were. We were at the 

13 town hall meeting on the 14th and thank God 

14 for Denise Brock who made us aware that this 

15 meeting was going on. We've been here since 

16 9:00 this morning in order to speak.

17 A lot of people we've 

18 encountered in the month and a half since my 

19 mother has been deceased, six people that 

20 worked at the plant in Kansas City that 

21 don't know anything about any of these 

22 claims that have cancer.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 There are also descendants of 

2 people that worked at the Kansas City Plant 

3 that have cancer. I'm one of those people. 

4 There are about 30,000 of them if I am 

5 accurate.

6 I don't know, you know, how much 

7 accuracy there is in that, whether it be 

8 descendants or people who handled their 

9 clothing, did their laundry or any of those 

10 kind of things.

11 I guess it would be unfair to 

12 ask if any of the Board Members have family 

13 members, or they probably wouldn't be on the 

14 Board I guess if they had family members 

15 because that would prejudice you to your 

16 vote as far as the dose reconstruction.

17 My mother never spoke of anyone 

18 she worked with that I'm aware of. Now, my 

19 father may say different. He's here as well 

20 today.

21 The thing that I find 

22 unfortunate in this situation is after 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 talking with Denise and Amanda and Kim if, 

2 God forbid, something would happen to my 

3 father who's 80 years old I could not 

4 continue on with this claim. It would be 

5 done.

6 So there is kind of a sense of 

7 urgency for me because that doesn't leave me 

8 as the survivor. My father is the survivor 

9 and the surviving spouse, even though I have 

10 two brothers and myself that survived my 

11 mother.

12 So I hope that the words that 

13 are being said here today are going to help 

14 with this procedure and that's the reason 

15 that I came here.

16 I don't know if my father wants 

17 to say anything or not. I just know that I 

18 feel that it's sad that some of these people 

19 don't even know about it as of yet.

20 And what are we doing to get 

21 those communications out there, to let 

22 people know that, hey, if there's a problem, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 if you've had a health problem -- one of the 

2 people that I encountered also has some 

3 health problems and she's a descendant of 

4 and her mother was pregnant with her when 

5 she worked there as well.

6 So I appreciate the time. I 

7 appreciate. I'm not a nerd. I don't know 

8 all of those fancy things. I know it's been 

9 a long day for everybody. I appreciate your 

10 patience with the people here.

11 I know the emotions are high 

12 because of the feelings involved in the 

13 situation. It's a difficult situation.

14 There is no way in my mind that 

15 the dose reconstruction is accurate. To me, 

16 it is a stall tactic, a stall tactic and in 

17 her case it stalled long enough for her to 

18 die and that's unfortunate.

19 But, to me, it seems that 

20 there's somebody needs to be held 

21 accountable and responsible for the 

22 suffering that she went through.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 She would have said let it go, 

2 but I'm unable to do that at this point. 

3 She gave her life for her country, just like 

4 a vet. With no disrespect to any vets here, 

5 she gave her life for God and country by 

6 working at that plant so somebody needs to 

7 be held accountable and responsible for 

8 that.

9 And I appreciate, again, all the 

10 help that I've gotten from the people here 

11 and I hope that something or anything that I 

12 said may help someone else as well as help 

13 with the decisions on the petition. Thank 

14 you.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

16 Mr. Burton, do you want to make comments or 

17 --

18 (No response)

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Again, 

20 we appreciate both of you coming here and 

21 sure, we understand it's got to be hard 

22 given how recent -- yes. Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 (Off microphone discussion)

2 MS. BROCK: I'm Denise Brock and 

3 I just wanted to mention that the 

4 survivorship eligibility, in case there's 

5 some confusion, that you're referring to is 

6 under Subpart E.

7 So under B the survivorship 

8 eligibility is different just for those of 

9 the audience that aren't familiar with that. 

10 The law is split into two sections and if 

11 you're confused about that I can explain it 

12 so I don't use anybody else's time.

13 But under E the survivorship 

14 eligibility is completely different than B. 

15 It's the living worker, the surviving spouse 

16 and then if there's children they had to 

17 have been a minor dependent upon that worker 

18 at the time of death and that's what they 

19 were referring to. Thanks.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes. Thank 

21 you. Okay, Sharon Long.

22 MS. LONG: Hi. My name is 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Sharon Long and I'm kind of a different case 

2 actually. My husband was Donald Long who 

3 worked there at Bendix, Allied, whatever you 

4 want to call it. He started there when he 

5 was 20 years old, 1981, and he just recently 

6 passed away November 3rd of 2013.

7 A lot of you may have known him 

8 but I can't introduce him but I would like 

9 to bring up a picture of him to show that he 

10 was a very handsome, young man at the age of 

11 52. This is my husband. I hope you guys 

12 all can see just by my face and by my youth 

13 here I'm very young to be a widow.

14 And my husband passed away from 

15 liver cancer and he was a non-drinker, he 

16 was a non-smoker, he was a wonderful man, 

17 great husband, great dad, was a very 

18 dedicated man.

19 And I just want to let you know 

20 that I cry still every day. My life is just 

21 totally upside down. My husband wanted to 

22 live to May 10th of 2014 to watch his son 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 graduate college but he didn't make it.

2 And I just want to let you know 

3 that my world is totally upside down and I 

4 didn't work there. I don't know. I just 

5 hear the stories. I retired from UPS just 

6 recently so I could take care of my husband.

7 And I just want to kind of let 

8 you know the effect on my life as being a 

9 young, older woman. Our son wants to go to 

10 law school after he graduates.

11 Well, because my husband passed 

12 away before his retirement age, my income 

13 from his retirement was 50 percent. So 

14 basically I'm entitled to $750 a month for 

15 the rest of my life to take.

16 And you let me know how that 

17 works to pay for law school. If you can 

18 figure that out, let me know the budget and 

19 I'll work with it.

20 But not only that, my son and I 

21 lost our healthcare because he was 52 years 

22 old when he passed away so we lost our 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 healthcare and obviously lost a lot of 

2 income coming in to the home. So just 

3 wanted to let you know how it's affected my 

4 life and my family.

5 But he did have a claim, 

6 employee claim filled out and on November 

7 30th you guys denied it and the denial form 

8 came in on November 2nd and I had already 

9 made funeral arrangements. I was told to by 

10 hospice.

11 And I could not tell my husband 

12 who had hours left to live that his claim 

13 was denied and, I don't know, he went to his 

14 grave not knowing. I didn't have the heart 

15 to tell him that his claim was denied. I'm 

16 sorry. It was just I gave it to Joe.

17 But so, anyway, there was I'm 

18 sure more things that I wanted to say about 

19 my husband because he was a great man. You 

20 know, like, 52 is very young and when people 

21 ask my marital status, for me to say widow, 

22 it just tears me up.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 But I don't know what else I can 

2 say but from listening to the people out 

3 there and to be here in front of all of you, 

4 you know, I don't know if I should beg on my 

5 knees or what you have to do to get 

6 something passed but it doesn't sound like 

7 from what I'm hearing from both sides and 

8 seeing, it just seems like it's a tug of 

9 war.

10 But I just wanted to let you 

11 know that I'm a very young lady here that's 

12 lost her husband, my son's lost his dad and 

13 I have law school to pay for.

14 So but I do know there is 

15 chemicals from out there that I know he was 

16 exposed to just from my own research.

17 I went to the meeting on the 

18 14th and I do know that the young lady out 

19 there gave me the website of the chemicals 

20 that was on the website. We did get those 

21 pulled up.

22 And then just for my own 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 curiosity I did go ahead and research toxic 

2 hepatitis due to chemical exposures and I 

3 just kind of highlighted, went back and 

4 forth.

5 And 90 percent of the ones that 

6 do cause liver cancer are on this list and I 

7 just want to let you know there's no liver 

8 cancer in my husband's family.

9 His 85-year-old dad is still 

10 alive and buried his 52-year-old son. His 

11 56-year-old brother is still alive. His 76-

12 year-old mother passed away from heart 

13 disease. And I have his death certificate 

14 with me. If you would like to see it, I 

15 have.

16 I don't know. I'm just letting 

17 you know that I just think that there's 

18 common sense somewhere and I just don't see 

19 where playing tug of war is going to be 

20 common sense because people's lives are 

21 affected.

22 And believe me and everybody can 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 tell you mine is affected and my kids call 

2 me and worry about me all the time because I 

3 just cry all the time. I miss him so 

4 terribly bad and there's no bringing him 

5 back.

6 But I do want to let you know I 

7 do have to carry on. I do have to live and 

8 I do have a son that wants to be a lawyer, 

9 of all people, but I do have to financially 

10 take care of myself, my son.

11 And losing health insurance, you 

12 know how that is today but my son is in 

13 college with no health insurance.

14 So, anyway, but my name is 

15 Sharon Long and I wanted to stand up and say 

16 something for my husband. So, anyway, thank 

17 you for your time.

18 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

19 Thank you. I just want to clarify one thing 

20 that may be actually helpful here also. 

21 There are two parts to this program for 

22 cancer.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I think as you may have known 

2 from the public meeting, there's a part 

3 under, Subpart E it's called under the 

4 Department of Labor that takes into account 

5 radiation exposures and chemical exposures 

6 also.

7 And then there's the Subpart B, 

8 which is the one we're involved in which is 

9 the dose reconstruction and the Special 

10 Exposure Cohorts.

11 And all we can look at by law is 

12 the radiation exposure. That's our focus. 

13 I think it's clear from this facility that, 

14 you know, both are possibilities and you can 

15 apply for both.

16 So it's not that one leaves out 

17 the other but the chemical part of it is 

18 part of the Department of Labor's program. 

19 And we refer people back and forth and so 

20 forth. I mean we'll work together, but.

21 The next person I have listed is 

22 Maggie Watts. Maggie Watts here? Okay. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Welcome and --

2 MS. WATTS: Yes, my name is 

3 Maggie Watts and I worked --

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, can you 

5 pull that microphone down or --

6 MS. WATTS: Oh, down.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you, 

8 sir.

9 MS. WATTS: Yes, my name is 

10 Maggie Watts and I worked at Allied Signal 

11 for several years and I worked in different 

12 departments. I was a solderer. I soldered 

13 all night. I worked night shift.

14 And then the first year, I tell 

15 you, I didn't know what was going on. I had 

16 to be rushed to the nurse's office and I got 

17 sick many nights, just working in different 

18 chemicals because we worked in so many 

19 chemicals.

20 I had to work in acetone, 

21 cleaning parts and then, you know, opening 

22 boxes where dust was and also I worked in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 the department where they were doing the 

2 ceiling, you know, where asbestos and things 

3 were falling.

4 And like I said, they had to 

5 walk me to the nurse office many times. And 

6 one time I had to take a sick leave. I 

7 didn't know what was going on. I just got 

8 so weak and, you know, confused.

9 And I know right now I have that 

10 asthma real bad and I really can't just 

11 sleep at night, you know, breathing. I have 

12 to use my little inhaler.

13 And I just want to let you know 

14 the clothes that we worked in, I had to wear 

15 them home and that's many, many chemicals 

16 and things, you know, what we worked in.

17 My family got exposed to those 

18 things and my husband and kids never 

19 suffered with asthma and, you know, chronic 

20 illness but they do have it. It's from the 

21 chemicals that I took home. And we had to 

22 wear our shoes. Didn't have no covering for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 our shoes where we went in different 

2 departments.

3 And I just really do believe 

4 that the Department of Labor do owe some 

5 compensation to me and my family, that's all 

6 I want to say, because I worked in many, 

7 many departments and got very ill. Like I 

8 said, had to go to the nurse's office really 

9 just about every night.

10 I didn't know what was going on 

11 until I went to, you know, a specialist, 

12 like the lung specialist and things, and 

13 they did say I have asthma and I can't 

14 hardly breathe. I just want to say that.

15 MALE PARTICIPANT: Okay, thank 

16 you.

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you very 

18 much. Next person I have is Sasteh Mosley. 

19 Oh there, okay. There you are.

20 MR. MOSLEY: Hello. My name is 

21 Sasteh Mosley. I'm with a group called 

22 EMWOT, or East Meets West of Troost, here in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Kansas City and I've been working with the 

2 Peace Planters movement and I'm glad we're 

3 at this point where we're dealing with the 

4 Special Exposure Cohort.

5 I worked at the plant '83/'84 

6 during the time that they were doing the D&D 

7 work and I was exposed to the beryllium and 

8 I have my, ready to file my claim under E 

9 for the aggravating so I'm going to limit my 

10 comment to the radiation component, okay?

11 Specifically I looked this 

12 morning at the history of the Special 

13 Exposure Cohort program, all the claims 

14 you've processed and so forth and looked at 

15 the large amount that's involved with 

16 approving this thing here in Kansas City and 

17 that's really why I wanted to make my 

18 comments.

19 I am a electrical engineer. I 

20 was a engineering intern when I worked at 

21 the plant and they try to expose you to as 

22 much as they can, literally.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And I went on from there and 

2 joined the U.S. Navy, became a nuclear 

3 reactor operator on the USS James K. Polk.

4 From there, when I got out of 

5 the Navy, I worked in the nuclear program at 

6 Point Beach Power Plant and worked doing as 

7 built, doing redesign engineering.

8 And I was responsible for 

9 sending men and women into the actual 

10 reactor to do maintenance work in accordance 

11 with this Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

12 correction they had to do to make sure all 

13 the drawings matched what was actually at 

14 the plant.

15 So I've done lots of dose 

16 predictions, reconstructions and so forth 

17 and so on relation to my job as a nuclear 

18 engineer.

19 I do want to say to everyone 

20 here, I know you said you had some people 

21 that do have Q clearance. I had my top 

22 secret clearance for about 15 years so if 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 anybody, if I start talking about anything 

2 that's top secret just wave at me and I'll 

3 go a different direction. I don't need to 

4 be redacted today, okay?

5 So I said that I'm just going to 

6 talk about the ability to do a dose 

7 reconstruction from the position of not a 

8 nuclear engineer but electrical engineer, 

9 nuclear reactor operator because after I 

10 left Bendix I went into the tight quality 

11 control that you have on a U.S. submarine, 

12 okay?

13 Our controls were dosimetry. We 

14 took as few chemicals as possible on the 

15 ship as one of the control mechanisms.

16 This Exposure Matrix that you 

17 have at Bendix and not being able to take 

18 into effect the fact that these things 

19 multiply themselves and the additional 

20 effect of these things with radiation, my 

21 brain kind of stops right there.

22 It would be no way I could 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 calculate or send anybody into this place 

2 based on any calculation I could do, okay? 

3 So it's basically a nightmare calculation.

4 But the controls, limiting the 

5 chemicals that we use, actually having 

6 dosimeter for all personnel, having actual 

7 testing, regular physical requirements, 

8 testing for all our personnel, that's the 

9 type of program that should be in place for 

10 anybody around these nuclear materials, that 

11 I was surprised that they did have an actual 

12 radiation Exposure Matrix at the plant.

13 By it being non-nuclear, for 

14 them to actual have these levels where they 

15 say, you know, this much radiation is in the 

16 air, this much dust is in the air, I'm 

17 really shocked that I was exposed to that 

18 when I worked at the plant, okay?

19 Remember, I came from a 

20 engineering college when I got to the plant 

21 and I specifically asked the management, the 

22 people that recruited me.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I knew what a nuclear reactor 

2 was. We have one sitting down the 

3 University of Missouri-Rolla, and I 

4 specifically asked about my radiation 

5 exposure.

6 And I was reassured by the 

7 management and the people at the plant that, 

8 oh, you don't have to worry about that and 

9 to my chagrin these years later to actually 

10 once I get involved find out that from '84 

11 to '86 they were actually doing work for a 

12 cleanup during the time I was there.

13 As a worker asking other 

14 professionals -- I had a top secret 

15 clearance and I asked my fellow workers, my 

16 managers, the people that sent me in to 

17 work.

18 So this is why doing a 

19 reconstruction, it's going to be really 

20 difficult to have an expectation that you're 

21 going to be told the truth because I can 

22 tell you that my coworkers lied to me 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 because I know I asked.

2 The second piece I want to talk 

3 about from this reconstruction is when I 

4 worked in the nuclear engineering 

5 department, we had certain points that we 

6 had to verify.

7 You couldn't just say, you know, 

8 wires go in here. We had to actually go 

9 into the reactor and if somebody got a 

10 certain amount of exposure they were no 

11 longer able to work the rest of the year in 

12 the exposed environment, okay?

13 And you had intermediary cleanup 

14 areas between the reactor and you documented 

15 all of this, okay? You know, and I was 

16 responsible for setting up workloads and 

17 actually sending people in.

18 If you try to do a dose 

19 reconstruction with this, trusting these 

20 management that you have at Bendix and they 

21 are sending their people in under these 

22 circumstances, I would say the integrity of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 your program with listening to the 

2 management report what they did, okay, I 

3 have to redact myself sometimes, okay?

4 But as a engineer, as a actual 

5 nuclear worker around radiation, as this 

6 process goes along, okay, because right now 

7 my focus went from I call them Schedule E 

8 people who were influenced or whose 

9 condition was aggravated to actually --

10 Maurice and Wayne and I actually worked for 

11 years to make sure the people that were 

12 dying got their first shot and that's what 

13 we focused our time on.

14 Now that we're looking at trying 

15 to get this Special Exposure Cohort done so 

16 that more people aren't going to die while 

17 we're trying to figure out this mess, okay? 

18 That was our next focus.

19 There's going to be come a day 

20 after this is all done and said when we 

21 drill down and we get these final records, 

22 you're going to find more and more people 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that are going to come out and are going to 

2 add more of these little carets to the 

3 Exposure Matrix, you know.

4 People that don't even know yet 

5 that they were ever exposed, they're still 

6 out there. We're still meeting these people 

7 today.

8 And when you start adding these 

9 testimonies like, oh, by golly, we did make 

10 a nuclear reactor, yes we forgot that, and 

11 we did have a fire, oh yes and we did dump 

12 that stuff out back, when you start putting 

13 these nuclear pieces in -- now is the time 

14 to, you know, I appreciate the work that, 

15 you know, that NIOSH has done saying that, 

16 yes, I can do it because I'm telling you 

17 when I worked as a engineer I would have 

18 given it my best shot and said this is to 

19 the best of my ability, like the pledge I 

20 took as a naval officer, to the best of my 

21 ability.

22 Yes, they have to do their job. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 But I'm telling you from reviewing the 

2 testimonies of some people who are dead now 

3 that you are not going to be able to come up 

4 with a reliable dose construction at this 

5 plant and that's my professional opinion. 

6 Thank you very much.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. I 

8 am having a little trouble reading this 

9 handwriting so I apologize. It's either 

10 Marlon or Marlor?

11 MR. SMITH: Right here.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay.

13 MR. SMITH: Marlon Smith.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Smith?

15 MR. SMITH: Yes. Yes, I was a 

16 union roofer for a subcontractor, okay?

17 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Can you 

18 talk directly into the mic so we can --

19 MR. SMITH: I was a union 

20 contractor. My name's Marlon Smith. I 

21 worked in 2005. They say that it's an 

22 amount of exposure? No. I was there six 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 month and I come up with beryllium, you 

2 know, positive, quite.

3 And the conditions, vents, the 

4 dust and everything. It says capsulated. 

5 You could wet it down. When you take that 

6 roof down to the concrete from when the 

7 original roof was put on in 1949, what do 

8 you think was soaked into that roof? All 

9 kinds of chemicals, radiation, I don't know 

10 what all I got exposed to. I was up 

11 underneath units, soaked from head to toe.

12 I mean, you could go through all 

13 kinds of precautions for people but it's 

14 like this, if you know it's that toxic, that 

15 place, why don't you take the proper 

16 precautions and suit them out and put them 

17 in a mask and everything? You know, it's 

18 simple.

19 I mean, but you're wasting an 

20 hour of somebody's time putting them in a 

21 suit, then to have them come and change 

22 again. There's a hour for $46 an hour. You 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 calculate like that by about 40 people, what 

2 are you losing in six months? It's all 

3 about profit, you know?

4 You know, I don't feel good, you 

5 know? I accepted what they exposed me to. 

6 Ain't no big deal. I mean, what they 

7 exposed me to is killing me. That's fine.

8 But why don't they step up and 

9 take the responsibility for exposing me to 

10 this stuff? Every vent was blowing out 

11 dust. They say that it's capsulated, the 

12 asbestos. It's not a problem.

13 Any time you hit asbestos with 

14 an axe or cut it with a saw, no matter if 

15 you do wet it down, what happens when it 

16 dries out? It's in the air for hours and

17 hours.

18 I was there six months. So it 

19 ain't about not even how many years you're 

20 there. Where was this stuff going on top of 

21 this roof? If I caught it in six months on 

22 top of the roof, what about the people on 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 the inside and the dust that was traveling 

2 from that place?

3 You know, I just don't agree 

4 with what they're doing, you know, but I'll 

5 accept any responsibility I got on anything, 

6 you know, because I pay for that.

7 They need to step up and take 

8 responsibility for what they exposed 

9 everybody to. You know, that's the bottom 

10 line on everything.

11 You know, I been through 

12 National Jewish. Did a biopsy. Okay, but 

13 that facility, I just ain't comfortable with 

14 it for the simple fact first time I went I 

15 was on medications, everything. They did 

16 the biopsy on me. Flew me out the next day.

17 I got home. My leg swelled up. 

18 I had a blood clot in my leg, okay? You 

19 know, I think they should have proper 

20 monitoring when they do biopsies on people 

21 and have them in a hospital monitoring them 

22 before they send them home on flight and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 stuff.

2 They don't tell you nothing 

3 until after the fact that you're having a 

4 problem. And, you know, that's pretty much 

5 all I got to say.

6 And, you know, it ain't a matter 

7 of years or anything. I was there six 

8 months so what's that tell you? Okay, thank 

9 you.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you, Mr. 

11 Smith. James Reed, yes.

12 MR. REED: Good, evening. I'd 

13 like to thank everybody for being here to 

14 this evening and especially all the workers 

15 because you all helped win the cold war.

16 I do have a handout that I'd 

17 like to hand everybody here. This is going 

18 to be a set of questions and observations.

19 FEMALE PARTICIPANT: You can 

20 just drop them and we'll pass them on if you 

21 like.

22 MR. REED: This is a set of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 questions and observations. The goal is to 

2 show that there are, at minimum, a specific 

3 part of the petitioned work Class that the 

4 dose reconstruction process is not feasible 

5 for.

6 And so the reason I'm here 

7 today, of course, my parents both worked at 

8 the plant in the late '60s.

9 I just want to go through. I 

10 can kind of skip through the questions real 

11 quick because I know, you know, we're 

12 running short on time and really this is 

13 more kind of for the Work Group in the end.

14 But I would really like to make 

15 sure to, at minimum, voice some of the 

16 concerns that my mother had put on here as 

17 basically she ended up with renal cell 

18 carcinoma and had a coconut-sized cancer 

19 taken out of her.

20 And the questions, starting from 

21 the beginning, "Was there a real effort in 

22 the dose reconstruction process to contact 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 people who worked with me? If so, who was 

2 found and what happened to my coworkers?"

3 Is the coworker model just a 

4 math, is just math based or based on 

5 actually people I worked with? And then 

6 truly the question is how many of these 

7 people are dead and from what and was she a 

8 part of a disease cluster?

9 "What was the dust on my clothes 

10 I took home most days? Where did it come 

11 from and what types of particles did it 

12 contain?

13 "If the dose reconstruction 

14 staff was aware of depleted uranium being 

15 present, why did I have to bring it up and 

16 have it listed as other?

17 "Why does the interview ask so 

18 many specific questions which I have no way 

19 of answering due to the secrecy of the plant 

20 and the lack of hazard communication by my 

21 employer?"

22 And, "If I was kept in the dark 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 regarding depleted uranium/beryllium as a 

2 technical writer of the plant, what else was 

3 I not told of or what I was exposed to?"

4 And so just kind of skipping 

5 ahead, what I've made sure to do is look at 

6 the Class of all employees in the years of 

7 1968 and 1969 because if you really look at 

8 the Petition Evaluation and look at the data 

9 that's available for those years there's 

10 basically a significant lack of data for 

11 those years.

12 And then specifically I wanted 

13 to bring up the position of technical 

14 writers, which was the position my mother 

15 was in.

16 What your technical writer, 

17 generally their job description was 

18 interfacing with engineers and production 

19 staff, observing specific production 

20 processes in the plant while they were 

21 operating, producing documents according to 

22 DOE and Bendix standards.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And so in order to really track 

2 where she went in the plant, it seems that 

3 it would require knowing what document she 

4 was creating. What was she writing about? 

5 That would have actually guided her path 

6 through the plant during her work history. 

7 And so there is a serious potential for her 

8 to be misaligned as a Class.

9 And so just because there's 

10 occupational codes and then there's 

11 estimated locations of where somebody worked 

12 in the plant has nothing to do with where 

13 she would have been as a technical writer or 

14 anybody on the technical writing staff.

15 And then also the limitations of 

16 the secrecy of the work due to, you know, 

17 what were they writing about? There's no 

18 way to know exactly who wrote what document. 

19 Where was she going? What was she touching? 

20 What was she observing?

21 You know, these are all unknowns 

22 and there's uncertainty that's not accounted 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 for in the dose reconstruction process, 

2 specifically for technical writers.

3 And then so basically they lack 

4 the ability for sufficient accuracy due to 

5 the inability to estimate where the work 

6 locations were, inappropriate application of 

7 the coworker model because as her coworker 

8 model, if she was interfacing with 

9 engineers, production people and anybody in 

10 the plant related to her technical writing, 

11 how is the coworker model applied to that 

12 job set?

13 And so potentially this Class is 

14 misaligned and the dose reconstruction 

15 process cannot be directly applied. 

16 Actually, everybody, here you can pass these 

17 out. I made plenty of copies.

18 (Off microphone discussion)

19 MR. REED: Oh, please. And 

20 please make sure the guys from SC&A, that's 

21 who I want to make sure you get them too.

22 Going on to the last three pages 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 looking specifically at the SEC petition, 

2 the Evaluation Report, SEC-00210, regarding 

3 the internal doses of depleted uranium, 

4 basically from my understanding -- and all 

5 this information is taken directly from the 

6 report. It's all cited on there, you know, 

7 according to, you know, the information.

8 Basically we're looking at under 

9 700 people were requesting help through the 

10 dose reconstruction process.

11 The number where the internal 

12 exposure records were available was I guess, 

13 according to Table 4.1, less than six 

14 percent.

15 Okay, and so is that a 

16 sufficient amount of information in order to 

17 recreate those doses for the overall Class, 

18 much less when you look at the low 

19 percentage of workers found just by -- then 

20 basically in the report it basically says 

21 that, you know, generally everybody was 

22 given urinalysis samples and bioassay data 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 was recorded either on their film badge, I 

2 mean, basically it says broadly, hey, we can 

3 find all this information, but yet there was 

4 only six percent of the data found for the 

5 dose reconstruction workers.

6 Now, specifically related to the 

7 years 1959 to 1971, there's a total of 13 

8 reported years. An average number of 

9 workers reported per year was 143 workers, 

10 yet in 1968 and 1969 there was basically 11 

11 or ten or less workers reported.

12 And so statistically for those 

13 specific years, 1968 and 1969, the dose 

14 reconstruction process has significant flaws 

15 in its lack of data and potential lack of 

16 accuracy.

17 And so the idea that bounding 

18 this or, and I'm not sure about all the 

19 statistical portion of it but bounding that 

20 and especially for people, for example my 

21 mother worked there during only those three 

22 years, '68, '69 and '70, and so taking data 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 from other years does not apply to her at 

2 all.

3 And so also the other fact that 

4 seemed interesting and I didn't understand 

5 quite was basically when you look at the 

6 depleted uranium in the workplace air, Table 

7 6.2, basically the highest measured years 

8 were in 1968, 1965 and 1969 when you're 

9 looking at the highest measurements.

10 And so if there was only ten or 

11 11 people tested or their records are found 

12 but yet they're the highest years of 

13 depleted uranium in the air, where did that 

14 depleted uranium come from?

15 What is the potential event or 

16 probable causation? Or I think there's a 

17 specific term for that that I would have to 

18 look up.

19 What would be the plausible 

20 circumstance for such a high level of 

21 depleted uranium in the air, yet only ten or 

22 11 workers were they able to find urinalysis 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 for?

2 Moving on to external doses of 

3 radiation, basically related to the external 

4 doses of radiation. This would mainly apply 

5 to the dosimetry.

6 I believe there was less than 16 

7 percent of the records found for this, you 

8 know, less than 700 workers. Again, is this 

9 a sufficient amount of information for the 

10 overall Class, the low percentage? I mean, 

11 it's really about the same thing.

12 But this actually, there's even 

13 a greater issue here when we look at 1969 

14 which basically all records of the doses 

15 were written in as zero from my 

16 understanding in the data, you know, the 

17 report.

18 And then this is my 

19 understanding in trying to read through the 

20 dose reconstruction processes. Once they 

21 found all records, or here let me, I guess I 

22 should, "All 1969 recorded doses equal zero. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 However, NIOSH can bound these doses using 

2 Section 2.1.2 of," you know, it's noted 

3 here, which basically the method they used 

4 was to take half of the, what, LOD, the 

5 limit of the --

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Limit of 

7 detection.

8 MR. REED: The limit of 

9 detection. So basically they took the 

10 maximum the badge could find and cut it in 

11 half and that's what they used for the whole 

12 year.

13 And so, first off, is a whole 

14 year being noted as zero a plausible 

15 circumstance? And how can that be utilized 

16 as justification for a dose reconstruction 

17 process specifically for anybody who was 

18 there for 250 days in 1969? That's 

19 basically what I have to say and so --

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you.

21 MR. REED: Thank you.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: You know, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 thank you. I think you're doing our job for 

2 us here. Those are all the right questions 

3 to focus on and the same types of things 

4 that we look for in the report and follow up 

5 on.

6 I think what's also very helpful 

7 to us is knowing different groups of people 

8 in the plant. Technical writers, what did 

9 they do? Where were they? Where did they 

10 move around in the facility?

11 The part about their temporary 

12 offices being put in an area that, you know, 

13 that might not be readily available from the 

14 records we look at so that kind of 

15 information can be very helpful to us and we 

16 appreciate your effort and we will keep 

17 looking for that.

18 The next person I have listed is 

19 Belinda Gollowsky I believe. There's a 

20 Belinda and a Mae. I may be mispronouncing 

21 names here. I apologize. Gollowsky?

22 (Off microphone discussion)
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: See, I knew I 

2 --

3 MS. GOOLSBY: They had us sign 

4 the wrong thing. We didn't sign the sheet.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Oh, okay. 

6 That's fine then. You don't have to.

7 (Off microphone discussion)

8 MS. WASHAM: Well as my sister 

9 said, we signed the wrong paper but good 

10 afternoon and good afternoon to everyone.

11 My name is Norma Washam and our 

12 father's name and my mother's husband's name 

13 was Mr. Goolsby and he worked at Bendix from 

14 1968 to 1991.

15 And he had a blood disease 

16 that's not on your paper. No one ever could 

17 figure out why he -- it was called 

18 thrombocytopenia. He just kept having a low 

19 platelet count. He would bleed and so forth 

20 and so on.

21 And he ended up with a cancer. 

22 He had renal cell carcinoma also. No one in 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 his family ever had that.

2 But my question was about the 

3 dose reconstruction. I had typed up 

4 something but I can't find what I typed up 

5 but, to me, I don't understand it because 

6 there's no tissue sample, there's no blood 

7 sample.

8 I mean, how can you really, it's 

9 kind of like a formulation that you 

10 formulated to figure out how a person's dose 

11 could be dosed.

12 And then if a person's deceased 

13 like our father, you can't do a dose on him 

14 because he's deceased. I mean, you know, 

15 doesn't make any sense to me.

16 But I'm glad that you do have a 

17 program for the people who are still alive 

18 that work so that they can be tested and see 

19 if they're exposed.

20 But it still leaves a unanswered 

21 question for us because our father also said 

22 everything was a secret. He couldn't tell 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 us anything.

2 Until he got sick we didn't even 

3 know, actually after he passed away, we 

4 didn't even know this program even existed 

5 so we never had him tested for anything so 

6 we have a lot of unanswered questions.

7 I hope that you guys consider 

8 this information that people have brought to 

9 you because it's very hard to watch someone 

10 dwindle away, a strong man just waste away 

11 to nothing.

12 And then you don't know what 

13 happened to him and then you find out about 

14 this and you're wondering, well, did this 

15 have anything to do with it?

16 So the dose reconstruction 

17 thing, to me, I wish you guys would look at 

18 it a little bit more because it makes no 

19 sense to me.

20 You don't have any -- I'm a 

21 nurse so I look at stuff like blood, tissue. 

22 I mean, how are you determining a person 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 who's passed away what percentage of dose 

2 they have in them when you really can't, you 

3 know, do it without any tissue or anything 

4 like that?

5 So I don't know if that makes 

6 any sense to you but I thank you for letting 

7 me speak. I hope I said whatever my mother 

8 had on her heart.

9 Again, my father just, and I'm 

10 sure some of your loved ones just suffered 

11 and it was very hard to watch the suffering 

12 that he went through and I can only imagine 

13 what your loved ones have gone through.

14 So I pray that you guys 

15 reconsider or think about what's being said 

16 here and find a solution or help those of us 

17 who have unanswered questions to find an 

18 answer. Thank you.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

20 Donna Murphy. Is Donna here?

21 MS. MURPHY: Good afternoon to 

22 the ladies and gentlemen of the Board. My 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 name is Donna Murphy. I'm a United States 

2 Air Force disabled veteran.

3 I had the opportunity to work at 

4 the Bannister Federal Complex. The job that 

5 I held in the United States Air Force was a 

6 emergency room shift leader.

7 And the reason I felt it was

8 necessary for me to speak, in the area where 

9 I worked we had active duty Marines, we had 

10 Army individuals.

11 And we were on the 

12 administrative side of the house, bean 

13 counters. The office that we were moved 

14 into had formerly stored beryllium, but no 

15 one told us.

16 And I think my dismay is sitting 

17 in a office with active duty military and 

18 I'm a vet myself, knowing that I was trained 

19 to evaluate individuals with illnesses, be 

20 able to see it, document it and relay it to 

21 the MOD of the day, which was the medic of 

22 the day.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And so to be in a area where 

2 you're doing accounting and you see your 

3 colleagues and coworkers literally dying 

4 around you, anything from breast cancer to 

5 brain cancer to eye cancer to skin cancer, 

6 ladies in their late 50s and 60s coming to 

7 work complaining about they felt they had 

8 adult acne but it wasn't adult acne. These 

9 were polyps and some of the women were 

10 diagnosed with rosacea.

11 There was a problem with the 

12 female coworkers holding their urine. At a 

13 certain point in time when the weather would 

14 heat up, our entire area would have the 

15 stench of urine. The women were having 

16 issues with their kidneys or bladders.

17 Or you'd hear a group of ladies 

18 discussing their miscarriages in the ladies' 

19 room or going bald. But we're on the bean 

20 side of the house. We're their accountants, 

21 accounting technicians.

22 And even when we had our 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 customers come in from 8th and I, Marine 

2 Corps headquarters, those were my customers, 

3 and one particular incidence the guys came 

4 to town. They were working on the roof.

5 The entire directorate became 

6 ill, nauseous smells. When you see a group 

7 of hard-core marines holding their hair and 

8 upchucking, you know something's not right. 

9 These are Devil Dogs.

10 And so I just ask think about 

11 all of us. We love our country. We served 

12 our country. We've loved America, but 

13 sometimes I think maybe America hasn't loved 

14 us.

15 We were not derelict. We were 

16 not callous with our work. Individuals came 

17 to work every day, every day, thinking and 

18 feeling they were doing something that was 

19 significant.

20 I'm not 60 but I've had so many 

21 cancer scares, polyps, biopsies done. I 

22 eventually told my doctors I feel like a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 walking, talking guinea pig. How many times 

2 can they slice and dice on me? It's 

3 unbelievable.

4 All I ask is that you all see us 

5 as humans. We're not a tick on a letter. 

6 We're not a column. We're not a category.

7 I lost my mother to pancreatic 

8 cancer, to see your parent wither away and 

9 die. Her paranoia was she didn't want 

10 anyone else helping her. She was scared

11 someone would hurt her. So we turned her 

12 dining room into a hospital room and let her 

13 die where she wanted to die.

14 And I've told my sons the same 

15 thing. I've prepared them. If you come in 

16 in the morning and I don't respond, you all 

17 do what you need to do.

18 Now, that's something, that you 

19 tell your children if I don't wake up in the 

20 morning, do what you need to do. No human 

21 being should have to live with that every 

22 day.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 And that's all I ask. Please, 

2 please, if you have a conscience, we're not 

3 a number. The majority of the people out 

4 there worked. They were veterans, trying to 

5 continue on that type of work ethic. Well, 

6 I have military service and I'll just go 

7 right into a federal government job.

8 Our community has economically 

9 been devastated. It's like a bomb went off. 

10 Why? Because the majority of the people 

11 within the community, family oriented, 

12 they're gone. The homes are empty. They're 

13 derelict. They're boarded up because the 

14 people that worked for the federal 

15 government, they have died off.

16 Please, please help us. We did 

17 not collectively get together with a, 

18 everybody in here, I don't know many of 

19 these people, but we did not collectively 

20 get together and come up with a scheme to 

21 defraud the government. We did not do that.

22 And if you're sitting at home 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 and you've been off your job for ten years 

2 or 14 years, not because you got laid off or 

3 retired but because of illnesses, we want to 

4 work. You can't work. You're too ill to 

5 work.

6 House need a roof. Can't get 

7 it. Need extra groceries. What do you do? 

8 Do you have enough gas money to even get 

9 down here to this meeting? It's that dire. 

10 It is that dire.

11 What do you tell a claimant when 

12 they say I've got three kids, Donna, and I 

13 don't have money to get groceries? What do 

14 you do? You share. Share what I got. I 

15 don't have a lot but I share.

16 Please help us. No one should 

17 be left out. No one. No one. And that's 

18 all I have to say. Thank you very much for 

19 your time.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

21 The next person I have listed is Montano 

22 Shaw.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MS. SHAW: My name is Montano 

2 Shaw and I was just diagnosed with a 

3 autoimmune disease and they told me it was 

4 lupus.

5 And I worked in Building 41 and 

6 I'm here to represent how far out this 

7 contamination has reached and so I don't 

8 know what else to say except I'm here to 

9 represent the people over there who got sick 

10 as well.

11 You know, we have miscarriages. 

12 As you can see, I got friends, other friends 

13 with lupus. I have other friends with the 

14 illnesses that they have. We are just 

15 discussing now body welts. I have rashes 

16 all over my body.

17 And I don't even know where to 

18 start, listening to everybody else. My 

19 mother, her name is Cynthia Kelly. She just 

20 died in April from cancer. She had 

21 lymphoma, lymphoma, cancer.

22 Me and my mother got sick around 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 the same time. When I say that, I mean that 

2 she had other illnesses as well but she 

3 really started going downhill.

4 We got sick in November of 2007, 

5 where we both went into the hospital and we 

6 both became very, very ill and that's when I 

7 got diagnosed with the lupus and my body 

8 locked up and I couldn't move or anything.

9 I don't know, I guess with this 

10 dose reconstruction, however it's going to 

11 reach out to us, over to us I don't know but 

12 I'm going to say that it is not an effective 

13 tool to use to determine how and who should 

14 get compensated for the illnesses that we 

15 are experiencing.

16 I'm a stay-at-home mother and I 

17 did not look like this, I'm going to say two 

18 years ago. I'm 44 years old and it's 

19 devastating.

20 I got two babies. I have a 8-

21 year-old and 11-year-old that I have to 

22 worry about now because I planned on going 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 back to work when they got in school and, 

2 you know, start moving on and now I can't 

3 even do that because I'm sick and I got so 

4 many things going on.

5 And things are developing in me 

6 that, you know, if you determine me today 

7 that, no, I'm not sick enough, well, in a 

8 few minutes I will be. That's what they're 

9 telling me. It's coming and it's coming 

10 because of the things that I was exposed to.

11 Let me see, those were a couple 

12 of the points I wanted to make. So I think 

13 that if you reduce us to all this testing 

14 that is not appropriate or effective or, you 

15 know, accurate, it's not giving you what you 

16 need for the people who are real going 

17 through these things, really going through.

18 So we appreciate you, again, 

19 allowing us a chance to come forward and you 

20 see our faces and you hear our voices. 

21 That's pretty much what I want to say. 

22 Thank you so much.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

2 The next person I have listed is Elizabeth 

3 Cody. Is there an Elizabeth Cody here that 

4 wishes to speak? Okay. Can't see through 

5 the pillar, okay.

6 MS. CODY: Hi, I'm, whoa. 

7 Sorry. I'm Elizabeth Cody. My mom was Mary 

8 Cohen. She worked at Bendix, Allied Signal, 

9 Honeywell from 1977 to '82 and then from 

10 about 1983 to 2008.

11 The '82 to '83 was because she 

12 had me and decided not to be around what she 

13 was exposed to while she had a baby in her, 

14 but then she came back.

15 I have, I can pass around. This 

16 was her before she was sick. This was her 

17 three days before she died. She died August 

18 13th, 2011.

19 (Off microphone discussion)

20 MS. CODY: So anyways, I won't 

21 keep much of your time. I know you've gone 

22 past the time you wanted this meeting. I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 just wanted to tell you about one incident 

2 that I know she talked about.

3 When she got diagnosed in 

4 January 2011 with Stage 4 lung cancer, it 

5 was too late for her really to do anything.

6 She did do some research. Filed 

7 a claim for both Part B and E. 

8 Unfortunately, because it took too long, 

9 neither one was really done much before she 

10 died in August.

11 They did at one point ask her if 

12 they could get a sample from her lungs. By 

13 that point she had had radiation and it was 

14 too late to get a sample, which is another 

15 thing to take into consideration for 

16 reconstruction. If these people have had 

17 treatment, you can't get anything which I'm 

18 sure you guys are smart and you know that.

19 But anyways, the story that she 

20 told was one time she was having to clean up 

21 a room, document everything in that room on 

22 paperwork and she was having to document.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 The next time she saw the 

2 documentation that she wrote it was by a 

3 person behind glass wearing a hazmat suit. 

4 So what she was documenting was highly 

5 contaminated, so much the paperwork she 

6 wrote on got contaminated.

7 Did she have a badge? No, 

8 because she was an engineer. She wasn't a 

9 worker on the line. So, you know, she was 

10 engineer but there is a prime example of 

11 just one day and I know there was other days 

12 that she had documented.

13 I haven't gone through a lot of 

14 her paperwork because since she passed away 

15 I've gotten married. I have a 6-month-old 

16 daughter that turned 6 months today she 

17 never got to see.

18 But I just wanted you to know 

19 that at least that one incident that I know 

20 of for sure. I am sure there's plenty of 

21 other days like that. Thank you.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you very 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 much. The next person I have signed up is 

2 East Meets West. I'm not sure who the --

3 their email is the address.

4 MALE PARTICIPANT: She's gone.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: What?

6 MALE PARTICIPANT: She's gone.

7 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Oh, is she? 

8 Okay. She didn't put down her name, just 

9 the organization so. Okay, there's a, I 

10 believe it's Johnny, it's either Hegins or -

11 -

12 MR. FIGGOUS: Figgous.

13 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Ferguson, 

14 okay. Welcome.

15 MR. FIGGOUS: Good evening. My 

16 name is Johnny Figgous and I was employed at 

17 Allied Signal from 1977 to 1985.

18 I worked at ground zero so to 

19 speak, Department 48, where we did the 

20 experimental department for those who're not 

21 familiar with it.

22 It was an experimental 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 department and these were the departments 

2 that most the beryllium was machined into 

3 powder form, beryllium along with other 

4 toxic, boron, things like that, all that. 

5 It was all machined in that particular 

6 department.

7 And throughout that time we 

8 worked in the machining, I would take that 

9 air hose, from the time we run the machine, 

10 time we get in there. It would cling, cling 

11 to the air hose.

12 I'll explain how dust got on the 

13 roof. We had 30-foot-high ceilings in there 

14 and when we blow that air hose, the clouds 

15 just go up. When it comes down, we sweep 

16 it.

17 Well, we scoop whatever we got 

18 up because the janitor no longer worked 

19 there. They pulled him out of there. He 

20 since has died.

21 Some of the other people that 

22 worked in the laser room with me, they've 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 died, E.L. Miller, Ella Tolliver. They all 

2 passed. They all worked in that laser room. 

3 Inside the laser room, we've got doors open. 

4 We weren't properly equipped.

5 Even the supervisors didn't have 

6 the ability to even know what we were doing 

7 in there when it came to them ordering the 

8 parts or measuring.

9 Had no idea what their equipment 

10 was, the test equipment, the gauges, had no 

11 idea many of them. Many of them were what 

12 you might say were production planners that 

13 they made supervisors in order to get this 

14 job done.

15 So from my point of view, with 

16 all this beryllium be going on in there in 

17 my particular department, I can't speak for 

18 all the rest of them because I only worked 

19 in 95 with it again, when I worked in 

20 Department 95, but I'm sure that stuff, it 

21 went through the floors and it's probably 

22 over there in that Blue River because it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 runs along there.

2 The floor stayed packed with the 

3 stuff. The hotel vacuum system didn't work 

4 half the time, and on top of that we had to 

5 eat at our work station sometimes.

6 See, nobody's mentioned that we 

7 had a cafeteria, that many of us have went 

8 down to the cafeteria, some with washed 

9 hands, some without washed hands. They'd go 

10 in that cafeteria and touch food and then 

11 pass that stuff throughout the building.

12 But to say where the beryllium 

13 goes, when we blew the beryllium, it went 

14 all on the fixtures, then left out of 

15 storage, went to some other part of the 

16 plant.

17 Many times it sit in the hallway 

18 with the same substance on there. Sit on 

19 the dock, sit in the hallway so just about 

20 everybody's exposed to it.

21 I'm asking that you not consider 

22 the process you're using to deal with these 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 people. I was at ground zero. I know what 

2 it's like there and I'm probably the only 

3 living employee out of Department 48.

4 As for the showers, this man 

5 painted a picture that he never took a 

6 shower. Well, I did. I took a shower in 

7 Department 26. You know what they did after 

8 I took a shower? They took it out of there.

9 They made me go all the way to 

10 the front end to where the security guards 

11 took showers, which is about 800 or 900 feet 

12 from our work station. This is the kind of 

13 thing that went on out there at Bendix.

14 So for them to say they had 

15 showers, for them to say they had protective 

16 clothing, that didn't happen. I am probably 

17 the only living witness as to what went on 

18 in Department 48.

19 And I'm going to thank you guys 

20 for your time and I hope you consider what 

21 these people had to say to you because you 

22 can consider me as a hostile witness but I'm 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 going to tell you how it is and I got 

2 everything to prove what I have to say to 

3 you today and thank you.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. Is 

5 there anybody else here that didn't sign up 

6 that wishes to make comments? Okay. You, 

7 sir.

8 MR. TAYLOR: Yes, my name is 

9 John Taylor. How are you all doing?

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Good.

11 MR. TAYLOR: I was a 

12 subcontractor and I worked out there for, it 

13 was several days and I was a broom man. We 

14 laid asphalt and no one ever told me to mask 

15 up. So on the back side of the plant, we 

16 put that road in and so I'm the one that 

17 sweep it.

18 And now I have asbestosis and I 

19 have chest pains and I don't sleep too good 

20 and shortness of breath and I can't run from 

21 here to that wall without running completely 

22 out of air.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 So but they have denied me twice 

2 but I never had asbestosis until I worked at 

3 Bendix. Thanks.

4 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you, 

5 sir. Anybody else that, I think you wanted 

6 to make comments, sir?

7 MALE PARTICIPANT: I do.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We'll get to 

9 people on the phone in a second, so.

10 JUDGE CHAMBERS: I'd like to 

11 speak from here because I have some 

12 documents to pass to the Board because some 

13 things that I'm about to say may be a little 

14 bit controversial.

15 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, can you 

16 just introduce yourself first so we have it 

17 for the record?

18 JUDGE CHAMBERS: Sure. I'm 

19 Judge Reed A. Chambers the Second and for 

20 credibility purposes I'm passing to the 

21 Board now documents that are my certificates 

22 of having been nominated to be county 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 executive of Jackson County, Missouri and 

2 twice to be state senator.

3 I'm the adopted son of

4 [identifying information redacted] and he 

5 used to play keyboard jazz before World War 

6 II and his stage name was [identifying 

7 information redacted] so everybody knew 

8 [identifying information redacted].

9 He was a machinist at Bendix. 

10 He filed a claim under EEOICPA and 

11 encountered federal inertia where nothing 

12 happens for a long period of time and then 

13 they make demands of senior citizens to 

14 remember specifics that happened decades 

15 ago.

16 And then we encountered, as the 

17 booklet here that was passed out, the 2012 

18 Annual Report to Congress from the 

19 Ombudsman’s Office.

20 Just as an example, on Page 49, 

21 yes, under C, "As noted above, under Part B 

22 the statute outlines specific criteria for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 diagnosing both pre 1993 and post 1993 

2 chronic beryllium disease.

3 "With respect to diagnosing CBD 

4 under Part E, the statute does not set forth 

5 similar specific criteria.

6 "In 2011, DEEOIC informed the 

7 Office that a positive or abnormal BeLPT 

8 test was now necessary in order to prevent a 

9 claim for CBD under Part B. This 

10 determination by DEEOIC continues to 

11 generate comments."

12 One of the comments, "Claimants 

13 question DEEOIC's authority to impose new 

14 specific criteria for CBD under Part E, 

15 especially since Congress did not set forth 

16 any specific criteria in the statute."

17 By show of hands, I'd like to 

18 see the Board. Did each of you take an oath 

19 to support and defend the Constitution of 

20 the United States and to well and faithfully 

21 execute the office you're about to enter 

22 when you began service on this Board? Raise 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 your hands if you did.

2 I asked the Board if they took 

3 an oath to support and defend the 

4 Constitution and to well and faithfully 

5 execute the office you're about to enter.

6 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

7 JUDGE CHAMBERS: Okay. The 

8 importance of that is that the United States 

9 Constitution specifically forbids Congress 

10 to having any power whatsoever to impinge on 

11 the law of contracts.

12 And yet the reason that we're 

13 all here today, because of the subcontractor 

14 contract between the Department of Labor and 

15 private business corporations that purports 

16 to indemnify and to hold harmless these 

17 corporations for acts.

18 One of the five elements of a 

19 contract is lawful purpose, and yet as a 

20 direct result of this contract, over 400 of 

21 my dad's coworkers have died.

22 And why did they die? I just am 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 a latecomer to all this, but it seems to me 

2 as though the corporate contractors were 

3 engaged in conduct that would otherwise be 

4 called negligent homicide.

5 Now, in addition to the 

6 compensation law that we're all here today 

7 for, I want to tell everybody here that you 

8 have to exhaust your administrative remedies 

9 before you could sue but that's only in 

10 respect to the EEOICPA.

11 If you have a cause other than 

12 that, such as conspiracy to deprive an 

13 American citizen of their civil rights which 

14 arises, in my view, when administrative 

15 agency deprives you of due process of law 

16 rights by taking beyond its limits of the 

17 statute and starting to say you have to do 

18 this and have to do that in order to comply 

19 to get your compensation.

20 Worse, if there are three 

21 instances that can be proved of any number 

22 of specific criminal acts, including 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 negligent homicide, you might have a case 

2 for RICO, racketeering, for which you get 

3 triple damages and your attorneys' fees 

4 paid.

5 Now, has everybody seen the 

6 movie, Al Pacino's movie Scent of a Woman? 

7 In that he made a speech before a college 

8 ethics board and he was a blind combat 

9 marine colonel and he said to his board if I 

10 was half the man I used to be I'd take a 

11 flamethrower to this place. Well, I'm not 

12 here to infer any sort of threat like that, 

13 but to associate myself with his anger.

14 My father has cancer. He's had 

15 over 100 cancer operations to remove tumors. 

16 The question before this body is about this 

17 Special Exposure Cohort that NIOSH, who 

18 can't find its butt with both hands, has 

19 determined that there is not enough evidence 

20 to determine that there was an inability to 

21 measure exposures.

22 Well, one of the things I 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 noticed on my dad's medical report, that for 

2 one whole year there was a missing 

3 reconstruction of exposures.

4 Well, in Missouri we have 

5 something called badges of fraud. Was that 

6 missing records because they were shredded, 

7 or what?

8 Now, in the documents that were 

9 just passed out a minute ago, years all 

10 recorded doses equaling zero is 1969.

11 And measured depleted uranium in 

12 the workplace air 1958 to 1970, Table 6.2, 

13 the highest measured years, highest to 

14 lowest, 1968, 1965 and the missing year 

15 1969.

16 You can infer that to be a badge 

17 of fraud that the records are missing and 

18 I'd so argue that before a jury.

19 Now, NIOSH claims that it can 

20 make a dosage reconstruction for everybody. 

21 We got the average man rule and yet one 

22 roofer after six months, not even the 250 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 days' exposure, comes down with all kinds of 

2 problems.

3 My dad was a machinist and he 

4 worked on that roof. He worked in all areas 

5 of the plant. He was a specialist on 

6 repairing the pumps that the grinding 

7 machines had, the wet grinders for the 

8 beryllium, okay?

9 I have seen my father waste. 

10 He's losing weight. He's lost his appetite. 

11 He's going blind. He's got cancer. He's 

12 got lung scarring in his lungs proven by x13 rays, shortness of breath, lots of health 

14 problems.

15 I'm given to understand that 

16 more Americans have died as nuclear weapon 

17 workers than all the Japanese who died in 

18 both Hiroshima and Nagasaki added together.

19 I believe that the corporate 

20 interest put profit over safety. Yes, they 

21 were making nuclear reactors in Kansas City.

22 I personally saw on the Internet 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 a newspaper article about the transport of 

2 the nuclear reactor that went to the 

3 University. It's there.

4 They weren't licensed to 

5 manufacture nuclear reactors. I believe 

6 these reactors were, in fact, unlicensed, 

7 rogue construction projects to enhance the 

8 pockets of the corporate interests, nothing 

9 to do with national security.

10 Speaking of national security, 

11 it was President Clinton that gave the 

12 nuclear reactor to North Korea saying that 

13 it's only going to be used for peaceful 

14 purposes. They'll never make an atomic 

15 bomb. Oh, yes.

16 And yet when our people, and I 

17 associate myself with the claimants, want to 

18 have information to assist them in their 

19 claims, it's national security reasons that 

20 they seal the records and don't share them 

21 with you, that they freely gave to the North 

22 Koreans. Absurd.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I see footsteps leading to 

2 conspiracies, civil and criminal. Yes, we 

3 do have a heartfelt recommendation that the 

4 Special Exposure Cohort be included for the 

5 Kansas City people.

6 We have histories of floods in 

7 Kansas City. The Bannister Plant was 

8 flooded. They've got markers on the 

9 entrance of the gates showing the high water 

10 marks. During the flooding, nuclear 

11 materials were buttered across the universe 

12 in all departments.

13 I understand from the nuclear 

14 physicist we have here, Wayne Knox, that the 

15 depleted uranium is actually plutonium. 

16 Yes, they lost plutonium in Kansas City.

17 So how could NIOSH under oath 

18 affirm that they have ways to measure the 

19 radiation exposure for everybody, given the 

20 fact that they lost plutonium and everything 

21 was scattered throughout the plant?

22 I urge the Board to not be 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 puppets of a conspiracy to deprive American 

2 citizens of their civil rights, just so they 

3 can't get their measly compensation. 

4 $100,000 to trade for a life is not a lot of 

5 money.

6 And yet the inertia that we see 

7 in the bureaucracy leads one to believe that 

8 one of the intents is to delay granting or 

9 making a decision until the claimant dies. 

10 Justice delayed is justice denied.

11 So the Special Exposure Cohort 

12 Petition Evaluation Report Petition SEC13 00210 states, "NIOSH found no part of the 

14 Class under evaluation for which it cannot 

15 estimate radiation doses with sufficient 

16 accuracy."

17 I direct the Board to take 

18 notice of the missing words that should 

19 appear at the beginning of this statement. 

20 The missing words are once upon a time.

21 Let me tell you a little bit 

22 about federal inertia.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Could you 

2 please wrap up shortly?

3 JUDGE CHAMBERS: I will. This 

4 is my last comment.

5 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay, fine. 

6 Thank you, sir.

7 JUDGE CHAMBERS: [Identifying 

8 information redacted] , World War II Army, 

9 landed at Utah Beach. He was wounded by 

10 Nazi artillery fire in the Battle of 

11 Northern France, fought under General Patton 

12 in the Battle of the Bulge.

13 His U.S. Army unit was the first 

14 military unit of the United States Army to 

15 penetrate and invade Germany. Everyone in 

16 front of him was a German soldier. Everyone 

17 behind him was an American, but they were 

18 the first to stand on German soil.

19 He was awarded for heroism a 

20 Bronze Star Medal and a Purple Heart for 

21 being combat wounded.

22 On February 22nd, 2010, a long 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 time after his 1945 discharge date, the 

2 Congressional Record shows that he was 

3 finally awarded his second Bronze Star by 

4 order of the Secretary of the Army.

5 I don't think that these people 

6 can wait as long for the recognition of 

7 their claims for just compensation.

8 And I'm going to conclude my 

9 remarks right now by saying in a court of 

10 law people address the judge as Your Honor. 

11 Well, I'm going to amend that for the 

12 purpose of this hearing and appeal your 

13 conscience. Thank you very much.

14 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

15 Now, does anybody else here in the audience 

16 wish to make public comments before I turn 

17 to the telephone?

18 MR. COPELAND: Excuse me. I was 

19 on the list for public comment.

20 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. I'm 

21 sorry. I thought you just --

22 MR. COPELAND: Yes, and I just 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 want to hit on a couple --

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: That's fine. 

3 That's fine, go ahead.

4 MR. COPELAND: I'm not going to 

5 take long at all. I just want to hit on a 

6 couple of things that I want the Board and 

7 the President to understand since the 

8 President is going to be making his State of 

9 the Union tonight and that is our direct 

10 appeal according to the Act. According to

11 the Act, our direct appeal is to the 

12 President of the United States of America.

13 Like some people have related 

14 and are related, this was a cold war, no 

15 doubt about it. It was declared a cold war. 

16 We are veterans. These people are veterans.

17 Any war, no matter how you cut 

18 it, has casualties. For some reason, the 

19 United States of America does not want to 

20 count the casualties of the Cold War, 

21 because it is us. We, the people.

22 In order to reach this plateau 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that we are the most powerful nation in the 

2 world, you all have been considered an 

3 acceptable risk and you will lie in between 

4 the pages of the Cold War as an acceptable 

5 risk and not a casualty.

6 Now I am, like I said, a fourth7 generation veteran, combat veteran from 

8 Vietnam. My brother was a combat veteran.

9 Many people that went to work 

10 with me at Bendix in 1968 were veterans, 

11 Purple Heart winners. They couldn't come 

12 here tonight, and the reason they couldn't 

13 come here tonight is because of their 

14 illnesses.

15 But I want you all to understand 

16 and I want the President to understand that 

17 when he speaks tonight to this nation, what 

18 you're going to get out of it, with the 

19 problems that we have in society, there has 

20 to be more personal accountability. People 

21 have to do things right that problems don't 

22 turn on their self.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 The government, all we ask for 

2 is for the personal responsibility. You 

3 know, we know what we did. We know exactly, 

4 and Honeywell knows it. You did not protect 

5 the people, plain and simple.

6 I worked in Department 20. And 

7 I was a manager, a supervisor. I was on the 

8 ethics committee at Honeywell. I was the 

9 human rights committeeperson in my union.

10 I found out in 2013, 2013, that 

11 I was running the equipment that was being 

12 remediated in Department 20. I had no idea 

13 from all the way up to 1968. Is that 

14 responsible?

15 Is it responsible not to inform 

16 these people, to inform these people that 

17 you had a lady at Honeywell that stepped in 

18 promethium, took it home, found it on her 

19 carpet, on her drapes, on her pillow and, 

20 ladies, this went on for years, and they 

21 found it on her toilet stool.

22 Is it not responsible for this 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 company to know that they've filed and 

2 they've had many settlements in court, 

3 settlements over the years in court from 

4 people that were contaminated and they 

5 turned around and filed lawsuits which were 

6 settled in court and they settled them. And 

7 you knew, they knew that they made people 

8 sick and they did not tell them.

9 [Identifying information 

10 redacted] has bone cancer, okay? And a lot 

11 of other people are sitting in the same 

12 situation.

13 Had two ladies, two, that their 

14 children at the same age had brain cancer, 

15 brain cancer, one died, in the same 

16 department working with the same chemicals 

17 related to that brain cancer. They knew 

18 that, and they also know all of the other 

19 cases out there.

20 Why don't we do a study to find 

21 out about the clusters out there at Bendix? 

22 You did it on GSA side and once you found 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 those pancreatic cancers on GSA side in the 

2 same area, six cancers, then the government 

3 throws in the whole population of the whole 

4 complex on the GSA side.

5 It's wrong. It's wrong what you 

6 did to the Vietnam veteran and what you're 

7 doing to the nuclear war veterans is doubly 

8 wrong because we know for a fact.

9 Bring someone from Honeywell, 

10 from DOE to stand in front of me and tell me 

11 to my face that I protected my people in the 

12 Model Shop as a supervisor. It'll never 

13 happen. They'll never do it.

14 Why haven't they had one, just 

15 one? Think about this. They may have 

16 talked to you in a back room, but they've 

17 never done it in public.

18 Not only that, I want to say 

19 this. I understand that Councilman Cleaver, 

20 Representative Cleaver, McCaskill and Blunt 

21 have representation here that have been in 

22 the crowd. I understand that. And I want 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 them also to do their job.

2 Councilman Cleaver, 

3 Representative Cleaver was also an employee 

4 at Honeywell, Bendix, and I want him to do 

5 his job. McCaskill called for an 

6 investigation that we've never had from the 

7 floor, that we've never had. Have that 

8 investigation, make the wrong decision and 

9 it's going to look very bad to some people.

10 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you very 

11 much.

12 If you can be -- I am holding up 

13 people on the phone. That's all I'm --

14 MR. KNOX: I would like to 

15 highlight a couple of things. My position 

16 on the recycled uranium was that it 

17 contained plutonium.

18 Based upon our national 

19 security, we will not tell you how much 

20 plutonium was in that because that recycled 

21 uranium was readily available to other 

22 people that could perhaps get that recycled 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 plutonium and get the plutonium out of it.

2 The other quick one is that I 

3 did analysis on the promethium-147 spill. 

4 They just screwed it up.

5 That promethium-147 would have 

6 had promethium-146. It would have also, I 

7 agree, in small amounts, it would have had 

8 samarium, 146 and 147. Those are alpha 

9 emitters, alpha emitters. I did the 

10 analysis here. They found a flea.

11 I did the cleanup, at least 

12 responsible for the cleanup of Building 125 

13 at Hanford where we had a large promethium14 147 spill. I know the analysis of it.

15 I know about nuclear fleas. We 

16 probably coined that because you could clean 

17 up that stuff one day and come back the next 

18 day and it's there again.

19 So them cleaning up this lady's 

20 house in 45 minutes after a 12-year spill, 

21 contamination is incredible.

22 Now, also there's one other 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 quick point. No one has talked about the 

2 injection pathway which is prominent.

3 These people were machining 

4 that. They have cuts all over their hand so 

5 you had actually since it was uranium 

6 containing plutonium, you had the

7 possibility of plutonium being injected into 

8 the skin.

9 That's one of the reasons why 

10 Judge Reed's [identifying information 

11 redacted] has so many cancers on his body, 

12 because of those injection wounds.

13 The other point is, and I'll 

14 shut up, the synergistic effect. If you 

15 have all of these, they had 900 different 

16 types of chemicals. They had beryllium.

17 If you have that in your lungs, 

18 you can take that model that we use and 

19 throw it out the window because if you have 

20 any kind of radioactive deposits in your 

21 lungs, the residency times have changed and 

22 you cannot reconstruct that. I'll shut up. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you. 

3 Okay, well, I will point out that President 

4 Obama when he was Senator Obama actually did 

5 come to one of our Advisory Board meetings 

6 and asked for, I think, fair and rapid 

7 follow-up on a Special Exposure Cohort that 

8 had been brought to his attention of that so 

9 he's aware of this program and has been 

10 involved, so.

11 We have some people on the 

12 phone. We do allow people to call in if 

13 they wish to make public comments. I have 

14 one person signed up and I believe there's 

15 maybe another person. I'm not sure if 

16 people are still there but, go ahead.

17 MR. BLACK: My name is Thomas. 

18 May I speak now?

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes, you may.

20 MR. BLACK: My name is Thomas 

21 Dan Black. My father (telephonic 

22 interference) died January of 2013 of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 cancer. He had cancer in his pancreas that 

2 had spread to his liver and his colon. It 

3 was a painful and ugly death.

4 Dad worked at the Kansas City 

5 Plant from 1981 to 1997 as a maintenance 

6 electrician. He serviced and cleaned the 

7 exit lights, light fixtures, he conducted 

8 maintenance on exhaust fans, electric 

9 motors, he changed batteries in forklifts 

10 that went all over the plant, he maintained 

11 and troubleshooted various machines all 

12 across the plant.

13 Dad had a wide range of skills 

14 and when there was a need, he was asked to 

15 work outside his assigned area but there was 

16 no record of that.

17 It is really impossible for 

18 NIOSH to do a dose reconstruction because 

19 there's no records of places he went in the 

20 plant.

21 During the mid to late 1980s, 

22 Dad was involved in an accident. I don't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 know exactly what happened but I do know 

2 there was a dangerous light bulb that was 

3 broken in the incident.

4 I also know that that day he 

5 came home without his clothes. He was 

6 wearing white coveralls. He had no shoes. 

7 They had taken them for testing. He was 

8 wearing medical shoe covers to cover his 

9 feet. He didn't have shoes on.

10 They had taken a urine test. 

11 They gave him a chest x-ray and he was 

12 taking some kind of medicine. I don't know 

13 what it was.

14 But there's no records of any of 

15 these things that I mentioned. Dad told me 

16 that people were afraid for their jobs, that 

17 the incident was probably going to 

18 disappear.

19 There was a time when he wore a 

20 dosimeter badge and once it was taken for 

21 testing for possible exposure. There's no 

22 record that he ever wore a dosimeter badge.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 I just don't understand how they 

2 can do a dose reconstruction with such poor 

3 records or missing records.

4 Dad's case is still at NIOSH. 

5 It seems obvious what the result's going to 

6 be. Without the approval of the Special 

7 Exposure Cohort, the claim for survivor 

8 benefits will probably be denied.

9 I pray that you guys will 

10 approve the Special Exposure Cohort. Thank 

11 you very much.

12 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you, 

13 sir.

14 MR. KATZ: Sir, were you reading 

15 from something just then?

16 MR. BLACK: I made a few notes.

17 MR. KATZ: Just wondering, you 

18 were difficult to hear. I wonder if you 

19 wouldn't mind sending it in actually.

20 MR. BLACK: I could email it. 

21 Where do I send it to?

22 MR. KATZ: Go ahead and send it 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 to me. I'll give you my email address right 

2 now if you want to write it down.

3 MR. BLACK: I will. I'll write 

4 it down.

5 MR. KATZ: Are you ready?

6 MR. BLACK: Yes.

7 MR. KATZ: Okay. T as in Ted, M 

8 as in Michael, K --

9 MR. BLACK: Okay, I'm sorry. I 

10 --

11 MR. KATZ: I'll try again.

12 MR. BLACK: Start over, please.

13 MR. KATZ: Sorry. T --

14 MR. BLACK: T.

15 MR. KATZ: -- as in Ted, M as in 

16 Michael, K --

17 MR. BLACK: K as in kite?

18 MR. KATZ: Yes, 1.

19 MR. BLACK: 1?

20 MR. KATZ: Yes, at cdc.gov.

21 MR. BLACK: cdc.gov.

22 MR. KATZ: Thanks. If you'd 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 email me, that would be great. I appreciate 

2 it.

3 MR. BLACK: TMK1@cdc.gov.

4 MR. KATZ: You got it.

5 MR. BLACK: I'll do it. I'll 

6 send it in.

7 MR. KATZ: Thank you.

8 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you very 

9 much, sir.

10 MR. BLACK: You bet. Bye.

11 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Anybody else? 

12 I believe Dan McKeel is on the phone. Maybe 

13 not.

14 DR. MCKEEL: Yes, Dr. Melius. 

15 Can you hear me?

16 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Okay. Yes, 

17 now I can, yes. Go ahead, Dan.

18 DR. MCKEEL: Okay. There is 

19 some very loud noise on the telephone right 

20 now that's feeding back and it makes it very 

21 hard to hear and talk.

22 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: We understand 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 and we apologize. It's just at this hour, 

2 we've been doing our best but it's --

3 DR. MCKEEL: I understand. I'll 

4 go ahead then and speak up. Anyway, good 

5 evening to the Board. I'm Dan McKeel. I'm 

6 the SEC-105 co-petitioner who has addressed 

7 General Steel Industries dose reconstruction 

8 and SEC matters with this Board since 2005.

9 This evening I want to comment 

10 on several specific slides and matters from 

11 today's Board meeting.

12 This ABRWH meeting is especially 

13 important in the GSI saga because the TBD14 6000 Work Group now has settled all major 

15 issues. However, NIOSH has proceeded to 

16 issue Appendix BB, Revision 1.

17 This development comes to 

18 fruition after seven plus years of the TBD19 6000 Work Group negotiating with NIOSH and 

20 SC&A on the first revision of the June 2007 

21 GSI Appendix BB to fulfill TBD-6000.

22 My first point is I want to talk 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 about Slide 11 which was shown by NIOSH and 

2 Director Stuart Hinnefeld this morning 

3 showing that four SEC Administrative Reviews 

4 are under way at HHS.

5 The GSI AR for SEC-105, Slide 

6 44, has specific errors. It was submitted 

7 to HHS on 4-17-13 and was qualified on May 

8 17th, 2013 to be reviewed by three 

9 independent HHS review panel members who 

10 were to be appointed by the HHS Secretary's 

11 designee Assistant Secretary of Health, 

12 Howard Koh. The SEC AR policy cloaks all 

13 review panel deliberations in utmost 

14 secrecy.

15 For example, I am prevented to 

16 know the review panel members' identities or 

17 their professional credentials. I cannot 

18 know how many times they have met or exactly 

19 what GSI material they were provided to 

20 review.

21 I am not allowed to share with 

22 them any of the 17 GSI White Papers and 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

1 additional errors I have identified since 

2 last May 17th. They cannot review any new 

3 material. How could such a secretive 

4 process possibly be claimant-favorable?

5 To promote more transparency in 

6 the AR review process, I have posted on the 

7 DCAS website under Docket 140, 1-4-0, the 

8 complete 185-page GSI SEC-105 AR application 

9 and an addendum to it that lists more of the 

10 post-May 17th errors, the total 92 to date.

11 Until this meeting today, I was 

12 under the mistaken impression that the GSI 

13 SEC-105 AR had been under deliberation by 

14 the HHS panel for eight months and 11 days.

15 During his presentation earlier 

16 today, coincident with the slide I mentioned 

17 and thereafter, Stuart Hinnefeld replied to 

18 a Board Member question that the GSI SEC AR 

19 was started being processed, in his words, 

20 very recently.

21 Hearing that, I asked Mr. 

22 Hinnefeld by email during the first break 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 today to please correct the record.

2 Stuart explained that NIOSH had 

3 taken until sometime in December of 2013 to 

4 deliver all the requisite GSI records 

5 including, as he put it, many meetings to 

6 HHS.

7 I believe openness and 

8 transparency dictates I should have been

9 informed of this month-long delay.

10 This frightening and highly 

11 disturbing revelation suggests that NIOSH 

12 Director Howard and HHS Secretary Sebelius 

13 could not have had all the necessary GSI 

14 records they needed to decide to deny SEC15 105 as the Secretary announced in her March 

16 6, 2013, SE-105 denial letter.

17 I was permitted only 30 days to 

18 submit my 185-page administrative review 

19 application along with a CD-ROM containing 

20 the transcript of every TBD-6000 Work Group 

21 transcript that has occurred to date. And I 

22 assembled all that work myself.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 NIOSH, according to Mr. 

2 Hinnefeld today, allowed itself over eight 

3 months to accomplish the same task.

4 So based on this, I will have to 

5 move immediately to notify the HHS Secretary 

6 of my concerns directly about this matter.

7 A second point I'd like to make 

8 is that I have a comment that I'd like to 

9 make of several Dr. Ziemer's GSI Site 

10 Profile review slides from his presentation 

11 earlier this morning.

12 I made some of these points 

13 yesterday in an email to Dr. Ziemer and had 

14 them circulated by Ted Katz, the DFO, to the 

15 full Board.

16 Dr. Ziemer's Slide 3 titled 

17 Activities Since the Last Board meeting, the 

18 Jim Neton memo regarding negotiations DCAS 

19 Director Hinnefeld had with Landauer VP 

20 Craig Yoder about GSI control film badge 

21 procedures was also discussed at the January 

22 16th, 2014, TBD-6000 Work Group meeting.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 NIOSH has decided to abandon use 

2 of GSI Landauer film badge data as you all 

3 heard just today.

4 The need for the full Board to 

5 review this rationale, including the co6 petitioner's point of view, is underscored.

7 Dr. Ziemer's Slide 4 titled 

8 Status of Appendix BB Issues Matrix omits 

9 the co-petitioner's strong objections to 

10 closing many of the original and transferred 

11 SEC issues that occurred on January 16th.

12 For example, all GSI sources 

13 have not been bounded by NIOSH with 

14 sufficient accuracy. Also, some of the 

15 closed issues involved the very film badge 

16 data that NIOSH has now decided to abandon.

17 It is scientifically 

18 unacceptable for NIOSH to simply say, as 

19 they did on the 16th, we agree to use SC&A's 

20 data that does not rely on film badges.

21 These issues closures by the 

22 TBD-6000 Work Group on January the 16th were 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 premature in my opinion.

2 The badges factor into why SC&A 

3 in 2012 modeled a higher external dose for 

4 layout personnel than for betatron 

5 radiographers, while the reverse was true in 

6 2008.

7 Dr. Ziemer's Slide 5 omits the 

8 co-petitioner's objection and Dr. Ziemer's 

9 shared concern and NIOSH's agreement to 

10 prove it can bound the different betatron 

11 work practices in the extended 1952 order 

12 for GSI operational period.

13 This has not been done to date. 

14 This omission is misleading to the full 

15 Board, which again needs to view the January 

16 16th TBD-6000 Work Group transcript.

17 Dr. Ziemer's Slide 6 shows Issue 

18 8, work hours, was closed. This should be 

19 in abeyance. They are going to be placed in 

20 Rev 1 of Appendix BB.

21 Work practices, Issue 9, to 

22 include the 1952 extended period. Dose 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 rates from uranium, Issue 10, ignore more 

2 recent testimony and cite expert and co3 petitioner documentation on uranium NDT 

4 betatron practices during 1952-66 that 

5 differ from the values NIOSH uses.

6 And finally, Dr. Ziemer's last 

7 Slide 7 that was titled Lost Radium Source 

8 Issue. Bullet Point 3 mentions an ongoing 

9 search and this sentence should add the 

10 words within the plant.

11 No one knows how many of the 

12 nine days the radium source was on or off 

13 site at GSI.

14 We do know as being inaccurate 

15 SC&A's assertion that a part-time GSI 

16 radiographer tested at the October the 9th, 

17 '07, GSI worker outreach meeting that an 

18 airplane radiologic survey had led to 

19 recovery of the removed GSI radium source. 

20 We believe that refers to a different 

21 incident than the one in 1953.

22 In Bullet Point 4 the site 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 expert believes that GSI timekeeper made 

2 these observations and, well, that's the 

3 point about the person dying as a result of 

4 radiation sickness.

5 And my statement is that no one, 

6 the co-petitioner, myself, the timekeeper or 

7 the site expert, ever said, quote, died as a 

8 result of radiation sickness, end quote.

9 This statement, reiterated by 

10 Dr. Ziemer again today, is a quote by me of 

11 a worker needs to be retracted and the 

12 record set free.

13 I never mentioned radiation 

14 sickness. That would be pure speculation. 

15 And I am a pathologist and a physician and I 

16 know very well what radiation sickness of 

17 the acute variety would involve.

18 Bullet Point Number 5, the 

19 reason for the stated NIOSH response that 

20 Dr. Ziemer gives, that the news account of 

21 the finding of the source was not available, 

22 is not accurate.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 Dr. Neton did not believe that 

2 any harm from the source had been proven. 

3 That was the reason he indicated on January 

4 16th that NIOSH was unwilling to do any more 

5 about this matter.

6 The co-petitioner had, in fact, 

7 distributed to the TBD-6000 Work Group and 

8 the Board the missing news story and it's 

9 finding in a April 5th, 2013, GSI White 

10 Paper a full nine months previously.

11 And also it placed this material 

12 in his data field to the site expert January 

13 2014 email on the subject to Dr. Neton and 

14 the full Board. Bounding this radium 

15 incident remains as a viable issue for GSI.

16 So my summary of Dr. Ziemer's 

17 seven slides and Dr. Neton's brief 128 dose 

18 summary is that before NIOSH proceeds to 

19 revise Appendix BB, the full Board needs to 

20 see an updated single GSI dose table in 

21 writing that displays all external and 

22 internal photon, beta and neutron doses for 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 all three classes of workers, the 

2 radiographers, the layout and the 

3 administrative, from October the 1st, 1952 

4 through the end of 1973.

5 My question is, if NIOSH 

6 abandons GSI Landauer film badge data and 

7 substitutes instead SC&A methods and data, 

8 then who oversees the scientific validity of 

9 SC&A's work? Does the Board review SC&A's 

10 work?

11 My final comment pertains to 

12 Slide 9 by NIOSH and, again, this was a

13 Stuart Hinnefeld slide and it states that 21 

14 of 151 dosimetry records requests are 

15 greater than 60 days overdue.

16 I represent for film badge 

17 matters only a well-known to this Board 

18 part-time GSI radiographer who is seeking 

19 his own personal weekly GSI Landauer program 

20 208 for film badge data through the Privacy 

21 Act and FOIA mechanism.

22 This person's initial request to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 the CDC/ATSDR FOIA PA Office was on June the 

2 19th, 2013. Today he still lacks any record 

3 for the GSI operational period years 1964 

4 and 1966.

5 CDC has agreed it possesses 

6 these records, yet it will not release them 

7 and will not state the exact reason.

8 I deeply appreciate you letting 

9 me address you and I thank you for hearing 

10 my concerns.

11 MR. KATZ: Thank you, Dr. 

12 McKeel. Would you mind also because of 

13 audibility issues just to be safe, if you 

14 would email me your statement if you have it 

15 written.

16 DR. MCKEEL: I sure will. I'll 

17 send it to you tonight.

18 MR. KATZ: Thank you, sir.

19 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you.

20 DR. MCKEEL: Yes.

21 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Anybody else 

22 on the phone wish to make public comments?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 MS. HAND: Yes. This is Donna 

2 Hand. Can you hear me?

3 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Yes.

4 MS. HAND: Okay, I will make 

5 this short because it is running very late. 

6 I just want to point out that the Evaluation 

7 Report has stated in the very first pages on 

8 the Kansas City that the NIOSH operations 

9 monitoring data was not found complete.

10 It also stated that NIOSH 

11 determined internal monitoring records are 

12 not complete for all time periods or for all 

13 radionuclides.

14 And it is strange that only 35 

15 internal monitoring results were found out 

16 of the 608 and then they never mention what 

17 year that the 35 was at.

18 It also is in on the Technical 

19 Basis Document, Page 19, there's a document 

20 0031, no definitive statement of detection 

21 limit achieved by KCP was found, was not 

22 found, so they don't know what was the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 detection limit for Kansas City workers.

2 The frequency of bioassay 

3 analysis for KCP with depleted uranium 

4 powders is not known.

5 So, again, there's documentation 

6 that is not there. And according to 42 CFR 

7 83, if the data is not there, then you must 

8 give it, even though you may get the data 

9 later on.

10 Right now do you have that 

11 information? If you don't, then the 

12 regulations require you to go ahead and 

13 issue a Special Exposure Cohort.

14 It also should be noted that on 

15 Page 21, Table 13, it lists a number of 

16 recorded bioassay measurements and even 

17 managers and administrators were having 

18 bioassay, sheet metal workers bioassay, 

19 production workers bioassay.

20 So to limit it to just the 

21 machinists is being more restrictive than 

22 the regulation and the statute require and 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 that you cannot do, otherwise you're 

2 violating the Administrative Procedure Act 

3 as well as constitutional rights.

4 In essence, I will be informing, 

5 you know, writing up a little summary of the 

6 discrepancies between the Technical Basis 

7 Document and the evaluation and as well as 

8 to remind you that you have to have access 

9 to sufficient information to estimate the 

10 maximum radiation dose for every type of 

11 cancer, not every type of job category. It 

12 says every type of cancer or to estimate 

13 dose of members, such as the workers, more 

14 precisely than the estimate of maximum dose.

15 And if you do do the dose, it 

16 must be scientific valid. And right now, 

17 with the information that you have, you do 

18 not have the proper scientific valid 

19 information to do the dose reconstruction as 

20 required by the statute and the regulation 

21 and the guideline as it stands right now 

22 today. Thank you very much.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

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

1 CHAIRMAN MELIUS: Thank you, 

2 Donna. Anybody else? I think we're running 

3 late here and I think we will close the 

4 public comment period unless somebody else 

5 here in the audience wishes to say anything.

6 If not, we thank you all, those 

7 of you who are left, for your patience and 

8 we'll be following up and if you have 

9 questions please contact us or the people 

10 involved in doing this evaluation. Thank 

11 you.

12 MR. KATZ: All right, thank you 

13 everyone on the phone call, too.

14 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

15 matter went off the record at 7:41 p.m.)

16

17

18

19

20

21

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

1

2

3

4

5

6