Draft 

ADVISORY BOARD ON 

RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 

Review of the Linde Ceramics Plant 

Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petition 00107 

And the NIOSH SEC Petition Evaluation Report 

Addendum 

Contract No. 200-2009-28555 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Prepared by 

S. Cohen & Associates 

1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 

Vienna, VA 22182 

Saliant, Inc. 

5579 Catholic Church Road 

Jefferson, Maryland 21755 

September 2009 

Disclaimer

This document is made available in accordance with the unanimous desire of the Advisory Board on 

Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH) to maintain all possible openness in its deliberations. However, 

the ABRWH and its contractor, SC&A, caution the reader that at the time of its release, this report is predecisional and has not been reviewed by the Board for factual accuracy or applicability within the 

requirements of 42 CFR 82. This implies that once reviewed by the ABRWH, the Board’s position may 

differ from the report’s conclusions. Thus, the reader should be cautioned that this report is for 

information only and that premature interpretations regarding its conclusions are unwarranted. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No. 

 0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No. 

 2 of 9 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

DISCUSSION 

At its September 2, 2009, meeting in Cincinnati, the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health (the Board or ABRWH) Linde Work Group (WG) discussed SC&A’s report, Review of 

the Linde Ceramics Plant Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petition 00107 and the NIOSH SEC 

Petition Evaluation Report, June 18, 2009 (SC&A 2009), and requested that SC&A assess in a 

supplemental report (this report) whether SC&A 2009 addressed all petitioner representative 

concerns. 

Table 2 of SC&A 2009 summarizes the nine issues that SC&A identified in SEC Petition 00107, 

and also summarizes SC&A’s assessment of how NIOSH’s SEC Evaluation Report (NIOSH 

2008a) addresses each of the petitioner issues (SEC 00107 2008). Table 1 summarizes the 11 

findings of SC&A 2009. The correspondence between the nine petitioner issues and the 11 

SC&A findings may not be immediately apparent; however, Attachment 1 to this report 

correlates, in a sense, the two tables. It should be noted that the information presented in this 

report is not “new,” as it is derived from SC&A 2009, and that the reader should refer to the 

latter report for a more complete understanding of the issues. 

The first two columns of Attachment 1 reproduce Table 2 of SC&A 2009: namely, SC&A’s 

summary of the nine issues and concerns of the SEC petition (SEC 00107 2008) and 

corresponding NIOSH responses to these issues (NIOSH 2008a). The last column of the 

attachment takes portions of SC&A 2009 and “maps” them against the nine petition issues and 

notes whether each issue has been addressed. As seen, SC&A believes that SC&A 2009 

addresses all the petitioner issues that it identified. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No. 

 0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No. 

 3 of 9 

 This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker 

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 

NOTICE:

REFERENCES 

Bechtel 1982. Preliminary Engineering Evaluation of Remedial Action Alternatives; Bechtel 

National Inc. (Bechtel); November 1982; SRDB Ref ID: 14704. 

Heatherton, R.C. 1950. Decontamination and Survey of Uranium Refinery Plant, NYO-1536; 

December 14, 1950; SRDB Ref ID: 29822. 

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) 2008a. SEC Petition Evaluation 

Report, Petition SEC-00107: Linde Ceramics Plant, Submittal Date: November 3, 2008. 

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) 2008b. An Exposure Matrix for 

Linde Ceramics Plant (including Tonawanda Laboratory), ORAUT-TKBS-0025, Rev. 01, 

November 4, 2008. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team) 2005, Technical Information Bulletin: 

Estimation of Radium-226 Activity in the Body from Breath Radon-222 Measurements, NIOSH 

Dose Reconstruction Project, ORAUT-OTIB-0025, Rev. 00, April 5. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team) 2008. Dose Reconstruction During 

Residual Radioactivity Periods at Atomic Weapons Employer Facilities. ORAUT-OTIB-0070, 

Rev. 0, March 10, 2008. 

SC&A 2009. Review of the Linde Ceramics Plant Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Petition 

00107 and the NIOSH SEC Petition Evaluation Report, SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006, Rev. 0, draft, 

June 18, 2009. 

SEC 00107 2008. Linde Ceramics SEC Petitions: SEC00106, November 1, 1947 through 

December 31, 1953; SEC00107, January 1, 1954 through July 31, 2006 – Linde Ceramics 

Facility, Tonawanda, New York, March 19, 2008. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No.  0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No.  4 of 9 

Attachment 1. Linde SEC Petition 00107 Issues Matrix(a)

Petition Issue NIOSH SEC Evaluation Report 

SC&A Findings and Comm

SEC Petition 00107 and t

Report (SC

1. Inability to evaluate the precise grade 

levels of the pitchblende African ore processed at Linde during its operational period from 1942–1953. 

Table 5-2. Types of Material used in the Operation of the Linde Ceramics Plant (pg. 15). 

Section 2.0 “Overview of the 

the NIOSH Evaluation Repor

“Appendix B contains a memto SC&A from a Linde SEC 

four memoranda from 1944, contrary to NIOSH’s assump8%–12% U3O8 content for A

feedstock, ‘65% Belgian ConLinde during the operational examining how NIOSH recoresidual period, SC&A observalidity of the petitioner’s aslevels in the residual period ameasurements, not on calculafeedstock concentrations, andconcentration issue does not the SEC evaluation issues anfurther in this report. This isif NIOSH decides to use indicomposition or data from othradon measurement issues raPETITION ISSUE ADDRE

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Work

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No.  0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No.  5 of 9 

Attachment 1. Linde SEC Petition 00107 Issues Matrix(a)

Petition Issue NIOSH SEC Evaluation Report 

SC&A Findings and Comm

SEC Petition 00107 and t

Report (SC

2. The deficient, unreliable, and 

incomplete dosimetry data available to NIOSH for Linde residual radiation workers. 

“No personnel bioassay monitoring data has been identified for Linde Ceramics workers during the residual 

period; however, NIOSH does have access to survey data, including air monitoring data for both the decontamination activities at Linde (conducted just prior to the start of the residual radiation period) and several distinct, major investigations during the residual radiation period. The residual period surveys include soil characterizations, building surveys, and air sampling results” (pg. 19). 

SC&A 2009 does not explicipetition issue; however, seve

express concerns about the dPETITION ISSUE ADDRE

3. The destruction of Linde documents 

described in an affidavit. 

Not specifically addressed by NIOSH in the ER. Section 2.0 “Overview of the 

the NIOSH Evaluation Repor

“The investigation of this issmay delay consideration of th

technical issues analyzed in tof a timely initiation of the presolution, we are submitting issues, while continuing to pudocument destruction, startinwith petitioners.” PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

4. Internal exposure to uranium dust 

during renovation/construction activities. 

“It is reasonable to assume that this renovation work could have resulted in elevated airborne radioactivity; 

however, specific assessment of the potential dose associated with this work has not been included in ORAUT-TKBS-0025 [ORAUT 2005]. For the purposes of this evaluation and assessing the ability to bound radiological exposures for members of the proposed worker class, the renovation work will be compared to the operational period D&D work, which is included and 

Section 3.2.2.3 “Exposure Du

Renovation” 

Finding 7. “The process sele

decontamination dust level dclaimant favorable, based on (Heatherton 1950).” Finding 8. “The assumed deis based on pre- and post-decin different areas. Examinati

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Work

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No.  0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No.  6 of 9 

Attachment 1. Linde SEC Petition 00107 Issues Matrix(a)

Petition Issue NIOSH SEC Evaluation Report 

SC&A Findings and Comm

SEC Petition 00107 and t

Report (SC

assessed in ORAUT-TKBS-0025” (pg. 22). “Heatherton (1950) documents the results of air dust samples collected during six different kinds of D&D operations conducted in Building 30” (pg. 23). 

suggests that the differences exposures between the early 

activities may be negligibly sFinding 9. “It is not clear thused in the SEC-00107 Petitimore claimant favorable than 6001.” Finding 10. “The mix of alpin the airborne dust needs to renovation activities, taking iraffinates might have been prSection 3.2.3 “Application of 

Finding 11. “NIOSH needs 

exposures should be apportioexposure scenarios.” PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

5. Internal dose exposure estimates that 

rely on air concentration data for the residual radiation period are unreliable, due to a tendency to underestimate internal dose exposure. 

“Based on available Linde D&D survey data and residual 

radiation surveys conducted in association with FUSRAP activities, NIOSH has the necessary data to support bounding internal exposures for uranium, uranium progeny, and radon during the residual period. Radioactive operations terminated at the end of the operational period and source term materials were removed from the site. The application of this survey data will result in overestimates of exposures and doses during the general activities and will result in conservative [sic] estimates of exposure during the highest-risk activities at Linde Ceramics during the period evaluated in this report” (pg. 24). 

Section 3.2.2.1 “Exposure Du

Occupancy” 

Finding 6. “NIOSH’s use of 

concentration, rather than an concentration, is not claimanconsistent with the guidance [ORAUT 2008]. Back extraptechnically justified by examspecific changes in residual cPETITION ISSUE ADDRE

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Work

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No.  0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No.  7 of 9 

Attachment 1. Linde SEC Petition 00107 Issues Matrix(a)

Petition Issue NIOSH SEC Evaluation Report 

SC&A Findings and Comm

SEC Petition 00107 and t

Report (SC

6. Raffinate-related exposures were not 

evaluated in the site profile. 

“Waste materials (raffinates) were transported offsite (to Lake Ontario Ordnance Works and/or Ashland) prior to 

the end of operations. Therefore, workers outside the operational period would have had minimal exposure potential to these materials in their concentrated form. To determine the exposure potential from residual surface contamination on the site, a review of available isotopic data was conducted. Isotopic data from soils and sediments on site are summarized in Attachment One of this evaluation report and can be used to determine exposure from uranium progeny” (pg. 23). 

Section 3.2.2.1 “Exposure Du

Occupancy” 

Finding 4. “The NIOSH asssample taken in the 1970s ca

plausible internal exposures tRa-226 for over 50 years begquestionable.” PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

7. Exposure from contaminated burlap 

bags in the storage area of Building 30. (Includes possible exposure from radium and radon gas, and proactinium, actinium, and thorium from the African ore stored in those bags.) 

This issue is not specifically addressed by NIOSH in the ER, but it has been addressed by NIOSH and the Board in 

Work Group meetings and discussed in Attachment E of Revision 1 of the Linde Site Profile (NIOSH 2008b). 

Section 3.3 “External Exposu

“This issue, popularly referre‘burlap bag issue’ and includ

petition under Issue 9, was exanalyzed and modeled by botSC&A during the Linde Site and resolution process. Both determined that, if this scenaaddressed in future dose recoinvolving Linde site workersbounding external exposures individuals could be estimateburlap bag issue was closed. Appendix E of the latest verssite profile (NIOSH 2008b) dlength the evolution of the buSC&A concludes that this issIn addition, if it is determined that external exposure to burlplausible during the residual scientifically valid external dcan be used to place a plausib

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Work

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No.  0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No.  8 of 9 

Attachment 1. Linde SEC Petition 00107 Issues Matrix(a)

Petition Issue NIOSH SEC Evaluation Report 

SC&A Findings and Comm

SEC Petition 00107 and t

Report (SC

on such exposures.” PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

8. Air concentration data used are based 

on results of random air samples in general area and breathing zones, but not in continuous area sampling in high-risk or high-dose areas. 

“Based on available Linde D&D survey data and residual 

radiation surveys conducted in association with FUSRAP activities, NIOSH has the necessary data to support bounding internal exposures for uranium, uranium progeny, and radon during the residual period. Radioactive operations terminated at the end of the operational period and source term materials were removed from the site. The application of this survey data will result in overestimates of exposures and doses during the general activities and will result in conservative estimates of exposure during the highest-risk activities at Linde Ceramics during the period evaluated in this report (January 1, 1954 through July 31, 2006)” (pg. 24). 

Section 3.2.1 “Bounding Rad

Finding 1. “The observation 

decontamination of Building before decontamination calls of the radon measurements. by a statement made by the athat the radon data from Buil‘unconfirmed,’ again indicatiquality.” Finding 2. “Use of the geomthan the 95th percentile as the 

metric needs to be justified focalculation, particularly since 1976 are used to characterize beginning in 1954. Use of 19period needs to be justified bequivalent (or less contaminaconditions.” Finding 3. “Use of measure

characterize radon exposures not be bounding. Use of such technically justified.” PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Work

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. 
Effective Date: 

 September 21, 2009 

Revision No.  0 – DRAFT 

Document No. 

SCA-SEC-TASK5-0006 Addendum 

Page No.  9 of 9 

Attachment 1. Linde SEC Petition 00107 Issues Matrix(a)

Petition Issue NIOSH SEC Evaluation Report 

SC&A Findings and Comm

SEC Petition 00107 and t

Report (SC

9. Failure to account for vanadium 

tailings from concentrated sludge in 15%–20% black uranium oxide, yellow cake concentrated sludge containing 10%–15% U3O8, and 

incineration of burlap and paper bags. 

See issues 6 and 7. See issues 6 and 7. 

PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

Issue to note: Redesignation of the Linde site (Buildings 30, 31, 37, and 38) as a DOE facility. “Consequently, the NIOSHdefined residual radiation time period for Linde workers employed in these buildings is now eliminated from compensation coverage under Part B of EEOICPA. Any Linde worker who began working at the Linde facility in one of these buildings after 1953 is no longer eligible for compensation.” 

Not specifically addressed by NIOSH in the ER. As was discussed during the 

Group meeting, this issue fal

the Department of Labor. PETITION ISSUE ADDRE

Notes: 

(a) The first two columns of this table reproduce Table 2 of SC&A 2009. 

NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. 

However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Work

Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82.