Joslyn Manufacturing and Supp

Special Exposure Cohort

Petition Evaluation Report

SEC‐00200

Samuel Glover, PhD

Research Health Scientist

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

December 2012

Knoxville, TN
Brief Site Description

 Joslyn is listed as an Atomic Weapons Emp

for the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) fr

March 1943 to 1952

 Principal operations included the machinin

rolling of uranium rods with limited thoriu

machining operations

 Joslyn was the primary commercial rolling

facility for the AEC prior to Simonds Saw a

Steel
Petition Overview

 Petition SEC‐00200 received March 15, 201

was qualified May 10, 2012

 Petitioner proposed class definition:

• All employees who worked in any area of the J

Manufacturing and Supply Company in Fort W

Indiana, from 1944 through 1952

 Class Evaluated by NIOSH

• All employees who worked in any area of the J

Manufacturing and Supply Company in Fort W

Indiana, from March 1, 1943 through Decembe

1952
Status of Claims

(as of December 3, 2012)

 Total number of claims submitted: 

 Total number of claims who worked during

proposed (SEC): 

 Total number with a DR (at DOL): 

 Total number claims with internal or externa

records: 

 Total number claims greater than 50%: 
Background

 Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company is lo

Fort Wayne, IN with a long history of producingstainless steel

 Joslyn participated in a number of radiological

operations for the Manhattan Engineer District and later the AEC including hot rolling, quenchistraightening, cooling, grinding, waste burning, 

abrasive cutting of natural uranium billets into 

rods
Background—cont.

 Much of the early work at Joslyn (pre‐1948) wa

to production of uranium for the Hanford site

 Also used for numerous experiments to develop

procedures for rolling uranium metal for use in 

reactors

 Performed rolling operations associated with te

uranium metal rods at the Chalk River reactor i

 Prepared uranium metal for the British governm
Background—cont.
Sources of Exposure

 Principal source for workers included the inhalation 

ingestion of natural uranium oxide from the produc

shaping of uranium metal rods

 Joslyn was a hand operated shop, rods were manua

reinserted into the mill the required number of tim

then dragged to the next process

 Joslyn operated three rolling mills (18 inch, 12 inch, 

inch) which were co‐located and used for various o

simultaneously

 Rolling of uranium was conducted on rollers which 

water cooled bearings which produced steam and h

of contamination
Sources of Exposure—cont.

 Additional machining and preparation steps (i.e. ce

grinding, cutting, heat treating and quenching, and

threading) were carried out on uranium metal prep

Joslyn as well as from other facilities

 Billets were stored onsite for relatively long periods 

in a storage area

 Uranium waste was noted to be collected and burn

outside

• Worker interviews supported the burning of waste

• Document reviewed describes an offsite explosion of a dr

uranium metal from Joslyn which had not been properly t
Sources of Exposure—cont.

 Grinding operations described as being conduct

inside of a shed inside the larger building

• Grinder had an overhead hood which discharged ins

larger building

 Machining operations were noted to be conduc

a heavy flow of coolant fluid over the cutting/g

surfaces to reduce sparking

 Tenting of area to prevent contamination of

surrounding areas discussed
Sources of Exposure—cont.

 For all operations, Joslyn was responsible fo

packaging, handling, and loading

 The Manhattan Engineer District (MED)/AEC 

strict records of metals and sought to regain 

much of the material as possible

• Joslyn was responsible for cleanup and accounti

materials

 Documents describe a required medical surv

program for Joslyn workers including x‐rays 

blood work
Approximate Quantities of Uran

Processed at Joslyn
Sources of Exposure—cont.

 Joslyn has two recorded thorium related pro

period

• June 21, 1946: Straightening and centerless grin

six thorium rods

• January 21, 1947: Centerless grinding of five ext

thorium rods
External Monitoring Programs 

Data Availability

 No evidence that a routine monitoring prog

existed

 Extremely few measurements are available, 

term basis needed

 Survey by Health and Safety Laboratory (HA

1949 reported contamination levels and dos

in several areas
Internal Dose Monitoring Progr

and Data Availability

 No routine air monitoring or bioassay program

 Limited air samples taken on three different occasio

(December 1943, May 1944, October 1951)

• Very limited in scope

• Mostly General Area (GA) samples

• Early data taken using equipment (electrostatic precipitat

would not be comparable to HASL equipment

• Much more substantial study performed January 8, 

HASL conducted a time weighted average study of v

production operations at Joslyn
Approach to Bounding Dose

January 1, 1948‐December 31, 

 Beginning with January 1, 1948 NIOSH prop

use the data from TBD‐6000 and known roll

to determine internal and external dose

 Standard approach to medical X‐ray dose us

OTIB‐0006
Post 1947 Internal Dose

 TBD‐6000 tabulated data converted from pe

calendar day to per rolling day exposures fo

ingestion and inhalation (assuming 250 wor

per year)
Lognormal Fit of All 1952 Ai

Concentration Data
1952 Air Concentration

Exposure Information
External Dose Post 1947

 External dose rate factors for rolling days an

contaminated surfaces will be applied

 Billets were stored onsite for an extended a

of time

 For the purposes of the example dose

reconstructions external dose determined

• Rolling day: 10 hour exposure to a long billet at 

rolling day (7.03 mR/day)

• Billet storage: 10 hour exposure to a long billet a

per non‐rolling day (1.08 mR/day)
Summary of Monitoring Gap

 External

• No film badge results

• Source term and operational information req
Summary of Monitoring Gap

 Internal

• No bioassay

• Very limited air monitoring for single operatio

• Early air data not representative of the varied

operations and was obtained using non‐stand

equipment

• Back extrapolation of 1952 air sample data to 

operation exposure prior to 1948 not approp

—Accounts for experience gained and undocumente

in procedures and oversight

—Change in maximum allowable limits (MED to AEC 
Proposed Class

All Atomic Weapons Employees who work

any buildings/area owned by the Joslyn

Manufacturing and Supply Co. (or a subseq

owner) in Fort Wayne, Indiana, from Marc

1943 through December 31, 1947, for a nuof work days aggregating at least 250 work 

occurring either solely under this employm

in combination with work days within the

parameters established for one or more ot

classes of employees included in the Speci

Exposure Cohort
Joslyn SEC Petition 200

 Why the class?

• Workers were potentially exposed to uranium a

thorium who were not monitored nor does a su

dose reconstruction method exist prior to 1948 a

• Decision was based on lack of adequate biologic

monitoring data, sufficient air monitoring inform

and differences in operational characteristics fro

metal working facilities which were monitored a

(no appropriate surrogate data exists)
Joslyn SEC Petition 200—cont.

 Why everyone?

• Based on reports by the AEC and facility layout, 

process areas were broadly distributed and cont

preventing movement in these areas was not en
Joslyn SEC Petition 200—cont.

 What about employees not included in the S

• NIOSH intends to use any internal monitoring da

may become available for an individual claim (ancan be interpreted using existing dose reconstru

processes or procedures). Therefore, dose

reconstructions for individuals employed at the 

site during the period from March 1, 1943 throu

December 31, 1947, but who do not qualify for iin the Special Exposure Cohort, may be perform

these data as appropriate.
Joslyn SEC Petition 200—cont.

• NIOSH may be able to reconstruct external dose 

March 1, 1943 through December 31, 1947, usin

known rolling days and TBD‐6000 approaches (s

the post 1947 external dose)

• Furthermore, NIOSH intends to estimate doses f

medical x‐rays using information from employee 

records and claimant favorable medical dose

reconstruction assumptions and methods.
Joslyn SEC Petition 200—cont.

 Why stop in 1948?

• NIOSH feels that the surrogate data from TBD‐60

coupled with the known operational data and so

term information provides support that a realist

can be determined.
Health Endangerment

 The evidence reviewed in this evaluation indic

that some workers in the class may have

accumulated chronic radiation exposures throintakes of radionuclides and direct exposure t

radioactive materials.

 Consequently, NIOSH is specifying that health 

have been endangered for those workers cove

this evaluation who were employed for a num

work days aggregating at least 250 work days 

the parameters established for this class or in

combination with work days within the param

established for one or more other classes of

employees in the SEC.
Summary

Feasibility Findings for Joslyn Petition SEC-200 

March 1, 1943 – December 31, 1952 

Source of Exposure Reconstruction Feasible Reconstructio

Feasibl

Internal 

- Uranium 1/1/1948-

12/31/1952 

3/1/1943

12/31/194

-Thorium N/A 3/1/1943

12/31/194

External 

- Gamma/Photon All years 

- Beta All years - Neutron N/A - Occ. Medical X-ray All years