Hanford Site

Special Exposure Cohort

Samuel E. Glover, Ph.D.

NIOSH

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

March 2015 

Richland, WA 
Research Efforts

 Hanford is a complex site with diverse facilities, changing 

missions, and numerous operating contractors during their 

operational history

 Research challenges due to the nature of this site involved 

the review of large numbers of classified and unclassified 

documents as well as numerous interviews 

 NIOSH has worked to review this complex facility to address 

many different SEC issues that change over the life of the 

Hanford facility

 SEC-00057 comprised most of the work because of the very 

long time period evaluated (1943 thru 1990)
SEC Evaluation History at Hanford

 October 1, 1943 through August 31, 1946, for selected areas 

of Hanford (Petition 57 part 1)

 September 1, 1946 through December 31, 1968, for selected 

areas of Hanford (Petition 57 part 2)

 October 1, 1943 through June 30, 1972, for all areas of 

Hanford (this class subsumed previous two classes; Petition 

152)

 July 1, 1972 through December 31, 1983, for all areas of 

Hanford (Petition 201)

 One class was not added to the SEC because NIOSH found no 

evidence of falsification of radiological records during the 

time period for that petition (SEC-00155)
Research with Work Group

 SEC-0057 remains open before the Advisory Board and an issues matrix 

continues to be addressed

 During review of these issues NIOSH and the Work Group agreed to 

address specific group of workers during the period 1984 - 1990 

 Documents and correspondence detailed employees were not routinely 

bioassay monitored

 NIOSH conducted detailed follow-up including review of monitoring 

records and worker interviews

 NIOSH recommends that a class be added to the SEC so workers’ claims 

are processed while the remaining 1984-90 Hanford issues are addressed 

with the Advisory Board

 The latest Hanford Petition (SEC-00226) was qualified for evaluation 

March 13, 2015 as an 83.14 
Worker Class Findings

 DOE operated Hanford using a number of prime 

contractors who have many sub-contractors

 Each of these prime contractors were responsible for 

implementing a radiological control program including 

determining if and how individuals should be 

monitored

 Construction support services was conducted under a 

separate prime contractor
Construction Services Prime 

Contractors

 JA Jones Construction Services

• Prime contractor for construction services 1953 

through February 28, 1987

• Maintained its own radiological control program

 Kaiser Engineers Hanford

• Beginning in December 1986, KEH transitioned to be 

the prime contactor for construction services

• Full transfer March 1, 1987

• Maintained its own radiological control program
Construction Trade Workers

 Supported broad range of Hanford activities including 

research, fuel handling, plutonium processing, 

decontamination and decommissioning, and reactor outages

 Included high contamination and high airborne-radioactivity 

work

 Worked in areas such as the 100-N reactor, PUREX fuel 

reprocessing facilities, research facilities, and plutonium 

finishing facilities as well as vaults

 Review of JAJ and KEH operating procedures found detailed 

external dosimetry practices

 Bioassay programs to support these operations not 

addressed
Construction Trade Workers

 Work and fundamental radiological control practices 

very different than the work conducted by the other 

prime contractors

 Monitoring data for internal dose are available from 

other primes contractors

 JAJ and KEH had a small group of permanent workers

 JA Jones and KEH hired workers to complete 

construction services jobs on as needed basis
Construction Trade Workers

 Sub-contractors were difficult for the Department of Energy to 

determine if they worked in the capacity of construction trades 

and most importantly which company is responsible for worker 

dosimetry 

 NIOSH, in consultation with DOL and DOE, found that we cannot 

limit a class to JA Jones and Kaiser Engineers Hanford, and their 

sub-contractors

 DOE has identified that they have excellent employment records 

for the non-construction prime contractors

 Westinghouse Hanford Company subsumed many of the prime 

contractors in 1987, but it was not until 1993 when they absorbed 

the functions for construction services work

Bases for NIOSH Findings

 NIOSH found a virtual absence of monitoring of JA Jones employees for 

internal dose during the period 1/1/1984 through 2/28/1987

 KEH recognized the bioassay problem for construction trades and issued a 

memo to PNL in February 1988 that they were looking to substantially 

increase the monitoring for their workers

 However for budget reasons the implementation of the program was 

delayed (May 1988)

 NIOSH reviewed the data for both JAJ and KEH during these time periods to 

evaluate the frequency of routine bioassay, reason codes (routine or prejob), and specific types of bioassay (chest counting, plutonium urinalysis) to 

assess when the program had reached similar levels with the rest of the 

Hanford prime contractors

 NIOSH reached the determination that by the end of 1990 KEH had 

implemented a program that allows dose reconstruction using personal 

dosimetry data or coworker data for construction trades workers
Monitoring 

Availalble Monitoring Data from REX for 

JA Jones, Kaiser Engineers and Subcontractors

year

198219841986198819901992

monitored individuals

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Year vs JAJ.In Vitro 

Year vs JAJ.In Vivo 

Year vs JAJ.External 

Year vs KE.In Vitro 

Year vs KE.In Vivo 

Year vs KE.External 

transition year from

 JA Jones to Kaiser
Monitoring 

Comparison of Kaiser Engineers Hanford Monitoring Practices

 to Other Prime Contractors and All Monitored Hanford Employees

for In Vitro Bioassay

year

198619871988198919901991

percent of persons with external monitoring

receiving in vitro bioassay

0

20

40

60

80

100

Year vs Kaiser 

Year vs Westinghouse, UNC, Rockwell

Year vs all monitored

transition year from

 JA Jones to Kaiser
Contractors

 JAJ, KEH employees and all sub-contractors are included in 

the recommended class

 NIOSH will use any internal dose data that may be available 

for individual claims

 NIOSH will use external and medical dose to complete 

partial dose reconstruction 

 NIOSH will continue to perform full dose reconstructions for 

DOE employees and all the specifically identified prime 

contractors excluded from the class during this period

 NIOSH and the Advisory Board will continue to evaluate the 

remaining issues at Hanford during the 1984 through 1990 

time period.
DR Feasibility 

Table 7-1: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00226

January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1990

Source of 

Exposure

Reconstruction Feasible

(January 1, 1984 through 

June 28, 1987)

Reconstruction Feasible

(June 29, 1987 through 

December 31, 1990)

Reconstruction 

Not Feasible

(January 1, 1984 

through December 31, 

1990)

Internal Employees of:

- Department of Energy

- Battelle Memorial Institute

- Westinghouse Hanford 

Company

- Hanford Environmental 

Health Foundation

- Rockwell Hanford 

Operations

- Boeing Computer Services 

Richland

- UNC Nuclear Industries

Employees of:

- Department of Energy

- Battelle Memorial 

Institute

- Westinghouse Hanford 

Company

- Hanford Environmental 

Health Foundation

ALL OTHER employees of 

the Department of 

Energy contractors and 

subcontractors
DR Feasibility 

Table 7-1: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00226

January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1990

Reconstruction Feasible

(January 1, 1984 through June 

28, 1987)

Reconstruction Feasible

(June 29, 1987 through 

December 31, 1990)

Partial Reconstruction 

Feasible 

External Employees of:

- Department of Energy

- Battelle Memorial Institute

- Westinghouse Hanford 

Company

- Hanford Environmental 

Health Foundation

- Rockwell Hanford Operations

- Boeing Computer Services 

Richland

- UNC Nuclear Industries

Employees of:

- Department of Energy

- Battelle Memorial Institute

- Westinghouse Hanford 

Company

- Hanford Environmental 

Health Foundation

ALL OTHER employees of 

the Department of Energy 

contractors and 

subcontractors

 - Gamma X X X

 - Beta X X X

 - Neutron X X X

 - Occupational

 Medical X-ray X X X
Effects on Claims

Table 5-1: No. of Hanford Claims Submitted Under the Dose Reconstruction Rule

Description Totals

Total number of claims submitted for dose reconstruction 5,384

Total number of claims submitted for energy employees who worked during the period under evaluation (January 1, 1984 through December 

31, 1990) 2,175

Number of dose reconstructions completed for energy employees who worked during the period under evaluation (January 1, 1984 through 

December 31, 1990) (i.e., the number of such claims completed by NIOSH and submitted to the Department of Labor for final approval)

 

1,801

Number of claims for which internal dosimetry records were obtained for energy employees who worked during the period under evaluation 

(January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1990) 1,532

Number of claims for which external dosimetry records were obtained for energy employees who worked during the period under evaluation 

(January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1990) 2,125

 Review of cases that have and SEC cancer by NIOSH indicates 

that there are 723 cases that have a dose reconstruction with 

a POC <50% and that there are also 29 cases at NIOSH 

awaiting a dose reconstruction that may need further 

evaluation

 Department of Energy has indicated that they have substantial 

new information on employment of sub-contractors that may 

also have additional impact
Class Definition

All employees of Department of Energy contractors and subcontractors 

(excluding employees of the following Hanford prime contractors during the 

specified time periods: Battelle Memorial Institute, January 1, 1984 through 

December 31, 1990; Rockwell Hanford Operations, January 1, 1984 through 

June 28, 1987; Boeing Computer Services Richland, January 1, 1984 through 

June 28, 1987; UNC Nuclear Industries, January 1, 1984 through June 28, 1987; 

Westinghouse Hanford Company, January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1990; 

and Hanford Environmental Health Foundation, January 1, 1984 through 

December 31, 1990) who worked at the Hanford site in Richland, Washington, 

during the period from January 1, 1984 through December 31, 1990, for a 

number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either 

solely under this employment, or in combination with work days within the 

parameters established for one or more other classes of employees included 

in the Special Exposure Cohort.