CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 18 of 21

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-055, Rev. 0: TBD-6000 Revision #% [87 KB (3 pages)]

(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/dc-pers5-ro.pdf
September 12, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to
changes in methods and covered employment period.

Summary: NIOSH will request the return of two claims that would now result in a
probability of causation greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ DCAS-PER-056, Rev. 0: BWXT Virginia #9 [13 KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-
pers6-ro.pdf,

September 12, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to
changes in methods used in BWXT claims.

Summary: No claim had a probability of causation of greater than or equal to 50% as a
result of this reanalysis. One claim, however, had probability of causation between 45%
and 50%. For that daim, the IREP program was run 30 times at 10,000 iterations in
accordance with NIOSH procedures. The probability of causation remained below 50%.
NIOSH provided the Department of Labor with the list of all the claims evaluated under
this PER. Since all claims were below 50%, NIOSH did not request the return of any of the
claims. .

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ DCAS-PER-058: Dow Chemical Co.--Madison Site i [20 KB 2 pages
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per58-ro.pdf)
November 21, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to a
revision to the Dow Chemical Appendix.

Summary: None of the claims resulted in a POC greater than 50%. NIOSH will provide
the Department of Labor with the list of all the claims evaluated under this PER.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

Program Evaluation Plans

Do you know the number of the PEP you are looking for? If you do, click on the number below
to go to the section of the page where the PEP is located.

Program Evaluation Plan Index
08 (#pep8) 09 (#pep9) 12(#pepi2) 19(#pep13) 14(#pepi4) 17(#pep17)

* OCAS-PEP-008 Rev-00: Modification of NIOSH-IREP Lung Cancer Risk Model: Impact
of "Combined" Lung Model on Non-Compensable Lung Cancer Claims #4 [132 KB (5
pages) (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/peps/oc-pep8-ro.pdf)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 12 of 21

Approved: December 18, 2007

About this Document: Document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Y-12 Plant TBD.

Summary: There were 693 Y-12 claims completed prior to January 12, 2006, with a
probability of causation below 50%. The dose reconstruction methodology of each will be
reviewed to determine if a new dose reconstruction is necessary to determine if the
revisions increase the dose estimate. NIOSH will review these dose reconstructions to
determine if they meet the criterion listed in this PER. NIOSH will provide DOL with the
list of 693 claims as well as a determination on each claim as to whether a new dose
estimate is required. Documentation for each claim not requiring a new dose
reconstruction will provide the basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* OCAS-PER-00322 Rev-oo: Program Evaluation Report: Nevada Test Site TBD

Revisions : [17 KB (2 pages)| (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per32-ro.pdi
December 18, 2007

About this Document: Document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Nevada Test Site TBD.

Summary: There were 481 Nevada Test Site claims completed prior to July 30, 2007,
(issue date of revision 1) with a probability of Causation below 50% that meet the criteria
above. The dose reconstruction methodology of each will be reviewed to determine if a
new dose reconstruction is necessary to determine if the revisions increase the dose
estimate. NIOSH will review these dose reconstructions to determine if they meet any of
the criteria listed in this PER. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 481 claims as well
as a determination on each claim as to whether a new dose estimate is required.
Documentation for each claim not requiring a new dose reconstruction will provide the
basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ DCAS-PER-033 Rev-o: Reduction Pilot Plant TBD Revision %§ [112 KB (3 pages)]
niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per-33-ro.pd:
December 9, 2611

About this Document: Determines affect of revising the Reduction Pilot Plant TBD on
previously completed claims.

Summary: Several changes in the Dose Reconstruction methodology occurred in the
revision to the TBD. Most changes reflect a decrease in the estimated dose. However, the
estimate of internal dose increased from 1956 through 1963 and for 1978 and 1979. The
inhalation estimate for operators went from approximately 3.83 pCi/day (1400 pCi/yr) to
44 pCi/day. The original intake was the geometric mean of a lognormal distribution with a
geometric standard deviation of 4.3. The new estimate is a single bounding value.

While the internal dose estimate increased, other exposure pathways decreased. Due to
the nature of some of the changes, the magnitude of the effect on individual dose estimates
will vary from claim to claim.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 3 of 21

Summary: An error in interpretation and application of the bias factor information in
the Hanford External Dose Reconstruction Technical Basis Document (1) resulted in an
underestimate of the external dose for certain Hanford claims. Claims that were
potentially affected by this error were identified and those that had not already been
submitted to the Department of Labor were returned to the ORAU team for rework. The
cases that had been submitted to DOL were reevaluated by removing the bias factor, thus
developing a revised external dose. The probability of causation for each of the affected
claims was recalculated. This evaluation found that although this error appeared upon
discovery to be rather significant, there was no impact on compensation decisions made by
the Department of Labor.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0006 Rev-00: External Dosimetry Target Organ for Prostate Cancer € [42
KB (3 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-006-ro.pdf)
September 15, 2006

About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect to change
external dosimetry target organ for prostate cancer from testes to bladder.

Summary: Changes the external dosimetry target organ for prostate cancer from testes
to urinary bladder. This change will result in lower organ doses and consequently, lower
probability of causation values. Therefore, this change will not result in an increase in
probability value for any completed claims, and no cases need to be re-evaluated.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0007 Rev-00: Evaluation of the Effect of Revision 2 of the Site Profile on
Previously Completed Bethlehem Steel Cases ®& [42 KB (7 pages)]|

(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-007-r0.pdf)
November 9, 2006

About this Document: New document to evaluate the effect of revision 2 of the Site
Profile on previously completed dose reconstructions from Bethlehem Steel.

Summary: The Bethlehem Steel Technical Basis Document was revised on July 27, 2006.
The revision changed the estimated quantity of uranium inhaled and ingested as well as
external dose to the skin. As a result of revisions to the Bethlehem Steel Technical Basis
Document, three claims that were previously determined to have a PC of less than 50%
will now have a PC greater than 50%. Eight cases that previously had a PC greater than
50% now have a PC less than 50%. This report, along with detailed information on the
specific cases and calculations, has been provided to DOL for determination of further
action.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0008 Rev-00: Modification of NIOSH-IREP Lung Cancer Risk Model: Effect
of “Combined” Lung Model on Non-compensable Lung Cancer Claims % [143 KB (4
pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per8-ro.pdf)

April 12, 2007

About this Document: New document to report the impact of the NIOSH-IREP lung
cancer model on non-compensable cases completed before February 28, 2006.

Summary: The "combined" lung cancer risk model was introduced on 02/28/06 via the
release of NIOSH-IREP Version 5.5, followed by v5.5.1 on 05/16/06. The combined lung

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.htm] 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 19 of 21

December 7, 2006

About this Document: New document to evaluate the modification of the NIOSH-IREP
lung cancer model on previously competed cases.

Select a Different PEP (#peps)
OCAS-PEP-009 Rev-oo: Evaluation of the Change in Target Organs for Dose
Reconstruction Involving Lymphoma 5 [62 KB (3 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/peps/oc-pepo-

ro.pdf)
December 8, 2006

About this Document: This document provides a plan to evaluate the change in target
organ selection for previously completed dose reconstruction involving lymphomas.

Select a Different PEP (#peps)
OCAS-PEP-012 Rev-00: Evaluation of Highly Insoluble Plutonium Compounds ® [101

KB (6 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/peps/oc-pep12-ro.pdf)
March 29, 2007

About this Document: In the first version of the Rocky Flats Plant (RFP) Internal TBD
(Jan 2004), it was noted that highly insoluble forms of plutonium were generated during
the Rocky Flats fires. In response to the need to assess claims with potential exposure to
this material, ORAUT-OTIB-0049 was developed. ORAUT OTIB-0049 delineates the
methods for assessing potential exposure to highly insoluble forms of plutonium, not only
from the RFP fires, but at other sites in the complex that may have worked with this
material.

Select a Different PEP (#peps)

« OCAS-PEP-0013 Rev-oo: Evaluation of the I of nges to the Isotopic Ratios in for
the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant %& [20 KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/peps/oc-pep-
013-ro.pdf

March 21, 2007

About this Document: October 25, 2006, Revision 01 of ORAUT-TKBS-0019-5,
Occupational Internal Dose was issued as part of the biennial review process. During the
biennial revision of this TBD section, the information provided in existing document was
evaluated to ensure that the published isotopic ratios for transuranic (TRU) radionuclides
meet the criteria of providing either an accurate or maximum dose estimate. The results of
the evaluation indicated that the current ratios did not meet that goal. Information
provided in existing references (particularly PACE and the University of Utah, 2000; BJC,
2000), as well as that found in a new reference was assessed with the result that new TRU
isotopic ratios were developed and are included in the TBD as Tables 5-2 and 5-2a in the
revised document.

On November 7, 2006 Revision 01 of ORAUT-TKBS-0019-4, Occupational Environmental
Dose was issued. A revaluation of the source data for ORAUT-TKBS-0019-5 led toa
revision to the TRU isotopic ratios (relative to uranium) for estimating dose from these
radionuclides. In addition, the authors have been able to categorize these ratios according
to specific processes and periods as described below in conjunction with ORAUT-TKBS-
0019-5.

Select a Different PEP (#peps)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 21 of 21

« Program Evaluation Reports

° Draft: A Review of NIOSH's Progra e] ICAS-PER-o
Construction Trades Workers %& [228 KB (: Ere pages I
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/scarpts/sca-per14-ro.pdf)
Contract No. 200-2009-28555
SCA-TR--PR2012-0014, Rev. 0
March 2012

e Draft: A Preliminary Review of NIOSH's Evaluation Report OCAS-PER-009, Target
Organs for Lymphoma *j [809 KB (44 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/scarpts/sca-
ocper9-r3.pdf :
Contract No. 200-2004-03805
Task Order No. 3
SCA-TR-TASK3-0008
June 2008

Page ‘last reviewec : September 26, 2014
Page last updated: November 25, 2014
Content source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “1600 Clifton. Road Atlanta, GA

30329-4027, USA
800-CDC-INFO@ (800-232-4636@) TTY: (888) 232- 6348@ - Contact CDC USA.c0v.( g

INFO

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 16 of 21

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to
revisions to ORAUT-OTIB-0005: Internal Dosimetry Organ, External Dosimetry Organ,
and IREP Model Selection by ICD-9 Code

Summary: Thirty-six claims were re-evaluated to determine the effect of revisions to
OTIB-5. Two claims resulted in a new probability of causation greater than 50%, both as a
result of changing the internal dose target organ from gallbladder to liver for code 155.1.
None of the remaining thirty four claims exceeded a probability of causation of 45%.
NIOSH will provide the Department of Labor with the list of the thirty-six claims
evaluated under this PER. NIOSH will also request from the Department of Labor that the
two claims now greater than 50% be returned to NIOSH for a new dose reconstruction.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-044 Rev-o: Program Evaluation Report: Metallurgical Laboratory & [42 KB
1 page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/dce-per44-ro.pdi
May 16, 2013

About this Document: New document to determine the effect on previously completed
claims due to changes to Metallurgical Laboratory dose reconstructions.

Summary: With only one claim potentially affected by previous changes, the dose was
recalculated for that claim using all currently approved methods. As a result of this
recalculation, the probability of causation remained below 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-045 Rev-o: Program Evaluation Report: Aliquippa Forge TBD Revision %& [15
KB r ifs/pers/de-per45-ro.pdi
May 13, 2013

About this Document: Evaluates all claims with employment in the residual period and
a probability of causation less than 50% to determine the affect of the Aliquippa Forge
TBD Revision 1.

Summary: Twenty six claims with a Probability of causation less than 50% were
previously completed. Five of those had no employment in the residual period and were
eliminated from further review. The dose was estimated for the remaining twenty one
claims using the Revision 1 of the TBD. All twenty one remaining claims resulted in a
probability of causation below 45%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ DCAS-PER-047 Rev-0: NIOSH/DCAS Program Evaluation Report: Grand Junction
Operations Office #¢ 2 pages)] (/nio: rs/de-per47-ro.pdi

March 26, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to
changes to Grand Junction Operations Office dose reconstructions.

Summary: Potentially effected Grand Junction Operations Office claims were reviewed
based upon additional information discovered while evaluating an SEC petition. NIOSH
will notify DOL of all results and request a return of the one claim that would now result in
a probability of causation greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 8 of 21

NIOSH has determined that 300 claims meet the criteria for further review. The
remaining cases with a probability of causation less than 50% (1 cldim) were completed
using revision 1 of the TBD. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 300 claims as well as
a determination on each claim as to whether a new Dose Estimate is required.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ OCAS-PER-0019 Rev-o0: Program Evaluation Report: The Effect of Additional Neutron
Dose Data from the Savannah River Site" [20 KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-

perig9-ro.pdf
May 18, 2007

About this Document: New document to report the impact of additional neutron dose
data received from the Savannah River Site.

Summary: Dosimetry records are requested from the Savannah River Site for each claim

received from the Department of Labor with Savannah River employment. This data is

used in reconstructing the individuals’ radiation dose. The Savannah River site notified

NIOSH that additional data pertaining to neutron dosimetry was not sent for several

dlaims. The additional data has since been received and added to the original dosimetry
ata.

Previously completed claims were re-evaluated to determine the affect of this new data on
the individual claims. This Program Evaluation Report (PER) was prepared to report the
results of that evaluation.

Select a Different PER (#pers

* OCAS-PER-0020 Rev-o0: Program Evaluation Report: Blockson TBD Revision #§ [14 KB
(1 page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per20-ro.pdf)
July 31, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Blockson TBD.

Summary: It is not possible to determine the magnitude of the change to dose without a
new dose estimate. Since (as of issuance of this PER) no Blockson Chemical Company
claims have yet been completed with the newest revision to the TBD, NIOSH is requesting
that all Blockson Chemical Company claims with a Probability of Causation less than 50%
be returned for a new estimate. A list of the entire population of the ninety-one otentially
affected claims is attached. A new dose reconstruction will be completed for each of the
claims using the latest revision to the Blockson TBD.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* OCAS-PER-0021 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Rocky Flats Plant Dose
Reconstruction Method Modifications § [14 KB (1 page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per21-

ro.pdf)
September 20, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising Rocky Flats Plant TBDs and TIBs.

Summary: The Department of Labor indicated they will return all claims to NIOSH that
letermine:

were not to be a member of the SEC. Therefore, no evaluation of the
modifications to dose reconstruction methodology is necessary. NIOSH will complete a

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 5 of 21

Summary: There were 432 claims completed by NIOSH between 11/24/2004 and
8/31/2006 that resulted in a POC less than 50%. This does not include claims that may
have been submitted in that time frame but subsequently returned to NIOSH for any
reason. All these claims will be reviewed by NIOSH to determine if external co-worker
data was used. NIOSH will request that DOL return those claims completed before

5f 21/2005 determined to have been completed using external co-worker data. NIOSH will
also request the return of those claims completed with external co-worker data between
5/21/2005 and 8/31/2006 if they are deemed a Construction Trades worker. DOL will be
provided with documentation for the remaining claims indicating the claim did not meet
these criteria.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0012 Rev-oo: Program Evaluation Report: Evaluation of Highly Insoluble
Plutonium Compounds * [45 KB (6 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per12-ro.pdf)
August 6, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which Previously completed claims
require evaluation for the affect of OTIB-0049, Highly Insoluble Plutonium Compounds.

Summary: DOL will be provided a list of the entire population of potentially affected
claims (4,865 claims). NIOSH has determined that 1,757 of these claims required a new
dose estimate to determine the affect of this change. NIOSH is requesting that DOL return
these claims to NIOSH for a new Dose Reconstruction. NIOSH will review the remaining
3,108 claims to determine if any other changes also affect the claim. For each of these
claims, NIOSH will either request the claim be returned for a new Dose Reconstruction, or
provide DOL with documentation indicating why the changes will not cause the
Probability of Causation to increase above 45%.

e SC&A Draft: OCAS-PER-012, Subtask 4, Review of Nine Advisory Board Selected

Cases Reworked for the Evaluation of Highly Insoluble Plutonium Compounds
232 KB JaZeS niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/scarpts/sca-ocper12-ro.

Contract No. 200-2009-28555

SCA-TR-PR2012-0012, Revision 0

July 20, 2012

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0013 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Evaluation of the Impact of
Changes to the Isotopic Ratios in for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant ¥; [23 KB (3
pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per13-ro.pdf)

August 13, 2007

About this Document: This document provides a list of previously completed claims
that are potentially affected by a revision to the Paducah isotopic ratios.

Summary: An initial selection of claims was based on the following search criteria:

1. Probability of Causation (POC) less than 50%
2. Dose Reconstructions completed prior to November 7, 2006.

These criteria were used to produce alist of 734 potentially affected claims. NIOSH will
provide this list to DOL and request these claims be returned for a new dose
reconstruction. The new dose reconstruction will be completed using all the current
methodology which will account for any other changes affecting these claims.

http://www.cde.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 4 of 21

model is programmed with two different lung cancer risk models: the NIOSH-IREP
model, plus an alternative risk model created by the National Cancer Institute for use in
NIH-IREP, another version of IREP (referred to hereafter as the "NIH" model). For each
cancer of the lung, trachea, or bronchus, NIOSH-IREP now calculates separately the
robability of causation (PC) produced by each of the two risk models and reports the
higher PC at the upper 99th percentile credibility limit as the PC value of record for the
claim. NIOSH-IREP v5.5 and v5.5.1 also incorporate a bias correction factor for random
errors in dosimetry for "never smokers" exposed to radon. Due to a programming
oversight, this correction had been omitted for "never smokers” and was applied only to
smokers in earlier versions of NIOSH-IREP. NIOSH-IREP v5.5 corrected this error.

This "combined" lung cancer risk model was endorsed by the Advisory Board on Radiation
and Worker Health, and can result in no lower PC value for the same set of claim inputs
than hed been calculated under previous versions of NIOSH-IREP (versions 5.4 an
earlier).

For a more detailed description of the new combined model, including the background of
and rationale for the modification, please refer to OCAS-PEP-008, dated 12/07/06.

Select a Different PER (#pers)
OCAS-PER-009 Rev-oo: Target Organs for Lymphoma %§ [17 KB (2 pages)

/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-perg-ro.pdf
March 8, 2007

About this Document: New document to change target organs for lymphoma.

Summary: In February, 2006, OCAS determined that the internal and external
dosimetry target organs used for several forms of lymphoma should be changed. The
detailed rationale for this decision is described in OCAS-TIB-012. The change resulted
from a detailed investigation by OCAS of the etiology of lymphoma.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0010 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: The Effect of Rocky Flats Neutron
Dose Reconstruction Project Data #3 [21 KB (2 pages)| (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per10-
‘0.

ro. od:
April 13, 2007

About this Document: New document to report the impact of data received from the
Rocky Flats Plant Neutron Dose Reconstruction Project.

Summary: Neutron doses at Rocky Flats were re-evaluated as part of the Rocky Flats
Neutron Dose Reconstruction Project (NDRP). These records were provided to OCAS as
part of the individual dosimetry records. The application of the NDRP data to dose
reconstructions is described in ORAUT-OTIB-0050, Rev. oo.

Select a Different PER (#pers)
OCAS-PER-0011 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: K-25 TBD and TIB Revisions i

17 KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per1i-ro.pdf)
September 26, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require a new dose reconstruction as a result of changes to the K-25 dose reconstruction
methods.

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 17 of 21

¢ DCAS-PER-048 Rev-o: Wah Chang; [29 KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per45-

ro.pdf)
September 27, 2013

About this Document: Reviews claims that may have been affected by: changes in the
dates of the operational and residual period, a Special Exposure Cohort designation, and a
revision of ORAUT-OTIB-0070: Dose Reconstruction During Residual Radioactivit
Periods at Atomic Weapons Employer Facilities (/niosh/ocas/tibsnum.html#tib7o) which was
used in some previous dose reconstructions.

Summary: The dose for affected claims was recalculated using all currently approved
methods and information and resulted in a probability of causation below 45%.

Select a Different PER (#pers'

+ DCAS-PER-050 Rev-o: Bliss and Laughlin Appendix % [27 KB (2 pages)]
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/dce-per50-r0.pdf)
March 13, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to the
approval of the Bliss and Laughlin Appendix.

Summary: Claims were reviewed with a probability of causation less than 50% and dose
reconstructions completed prior to 9/11/12, the date the appendix was approved. Dose for
the each of these claims was recalculated using all current dose reconstruction methods.
The probability of causation remained below 45% for all claims.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-052 Rev-o: Westinghouse Nuclear Fuels Division @& [35 KB (2 pages
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per52-ro.pdf)
March 25, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to
new information found for the Westinghouse Nuclear Fuels Division site.

Summary: Additional air samples were discovered. As a result of analyzing the
additional samples, the calculated intakes increased significantly. NIOSH will request the
return of the claims that would now result in a probability of causation greater than 50%.
NIOSH will provide the Department of Labor with the list of all the claims evaluated under
this PER.

Select a Different PER (#pers)
* DCAS-PER-054, Rev. 0: Carborundum Company 9%) [13 KB (2 pages

(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per§4-ro.pdf)
September 12, 2014

About this Document: Determines the effect on previously completed claims due to
issuing revision 1 of Battelle-TBD-6000

Summary: One case resulted in a new POC greater than 50%. NIOSH will provide the
Department of Labor with the list of all the claims evaluated under this PER. Further,
NIOSH will request the return of the case that would now result in a probability of
causation greater than 50%.

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers. htm] 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 7 of 21

September 11, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require revisions as a result of new dosimetry data at INL, ANL-E, and ANL-W.

Summary: Additional requests were sent in August/September 2006. By April of 2007 a
response was received for each of the request. These requests resulted in receiving internal
dose data for 83 claims, 62 from INL, 14 from ANL-W, 6 from ANL-E and one with
additional records from both INL and ANL-W.

Some of these claims have already been returned to NIOSH for new dose reconstruction

for various reasons. The new dose reconstructions will consider the new data received.

NIOSH is requesting the remaining claims be returned for a new dose reconstruction. This

consists of 68 individual claims. A list of these claims will be forwarded to the Department

of Labor. A new dose reconstruction will be completed for each of the claims using the new
lata.

e SC&A Draft: A Review of NIOSH'S "Program Ev: i : Ev: i
Incomplete Internal Dosimetry Records from Idaho, Argonne - East and Argonne -
West National Laboratories" [436 KB (49 pages
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/scarpts/sca-anlper17-ro.pdf)

Contract No. 200-2009-28555
SCA-TR-PR2012-0017, Rev. 0
(May 15, 2012)

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ OCAS-PER-0018 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Los Alamos National Laboratory

TBD Revision *% [18 KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per18-ro.pdf
July 31, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the LANL TBD.

Summary: It is not possible to precisely determine the effect of the change to LAMPF
dose estimates on Probability of Causation without a new Dose Estimate. However, it is
possible to determine if the LAMPF energy distribution was used in the original dose
estimate. It is also possible to determine if an individual was assigned unmonitored
neutron dose based on neutron to photon ratios and whether the ratio used will increase
or decrease under the new revision to the TBD.

In order to determine the effect of these factors, the individual cases must be re-examined.
Since the unmonitored neutron dose has the potential of affecting every claim, all claims
completed prior to May 30, 2007 from Los ‘Alamos National Laboratory with a Probability
of Causation less than 50% will require a review. NIOSH will request claims be returned in
which the LAMPF energy distributions were originally assigned using Revision 0 for a new
dose estimate. NIOSH will also request the return of claims in which the original dose
estimate utilized a neutron to photon ratio that has now increased. For all other claims,
NIOSH will review the claim against any other revisions to other technical documents that
may affect the claim. DOL will be provided with a statement for each claim indicating what
changes the claim was reviewed against and why the change did not affect the particular
dose estimate or the Probability of Causation calculation. For any claims where it is not
possible to provide this statement without a new Dose Estimate, NIOSH will request that
DOL return the claim for a new Dose Estimate.

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


1.

Dragon, Karen E. (CDC/NIOSHIEID)

From: John ramspott -

Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 10:15 PM

To: Ziemer, Paul (CDC/NIOSH/DCAS)

Ce: Danie! McKeel; Katz, Ted (CDC/NIOSH/OD); melius: _» Houlihan, Bill (Durbin);
‘NIOSH Docket Office (CDC)

Subject: My .... GSI PER "now" remark Feb Sth. Meeting .

Dr. Ziemer :

Here is the Source and justification for my comments at the Feb. Sth. GSI, TBD-6000 Work Group Meeting.

I was sharing it not as a “definition of a PER”, as you said, but as “a statement of fact, and justification” of why I firmly
believe NIOSH should have already issued a GSI PER . This NIOSH document does not say release a PER “when every single
conclusive Site fact is known”. It says : “as relevant new information becomes available”.

I believe everyone knows the definition of a PER. My primary point of reading NIOSH’s document into the record, is because
1 do not believe the policy or guideline is being followed. The new Appendix BB Rev 1 clearly is relevant new
information. .

This is NIOSH’s_ published definition and guideline, Front Page, First Paragraph” , (Source below):

"NOSH is committed to applying the best available science in dose
reconstructions. In keeping with this commitment, completed cases with
probabilities of causation less than 50%_are reviewed as relevant new
information becomes available. The results of these reviews are described
in a Program Evaluation Report (PER). The PER details the effect, if any, of the
new information on the completed dose reconstruction. If it appears that the
new information may result.in an increase in dose for a completed dose
reconstruction with a probability of causation of less than 50%, NIOSH is
committed to working with the Department of Labor to reopen and rework the
dose reconstruction, as appropriate. A Program Evaluation Plan (PEP)

describes plans for evaluating specific program details or issues”.
Source:

Program Evaluation Reports (PERs) - Centers for Disease ..."CLICK"
www.cdc.gov/.../oc...

United States Centers for Disease Control and Preve...
Program Evaluation Reports (PERs) and Program Evaluation Plans (PEPs) ... The results of these reviews are
described in a Program Evaluation Report (PER) .

It cannot be more evident that the “new” Appendix BB Rev 1 clearly contains relevant new
information, and it is available now, and is currently being used for “new” GSI Dose
Reconstructions. (Examples have been provided.)

The results have been dramatic.

lalso heard Dave Allen tell Dr. Mckeel the drastic jump, in the claim in question, that Dr. McKeel
asked him about, during the Feb Sth. WG Meeting , was a result in all of the new material now
contained in Appendix BB Rev 1. (Transcript will confirm Dave Allen’s remarks).



CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 10 of 21

ORAUT-OTIB-0004. Since the new document describes a higher dose for some of the dose
estimate, it is necessary to revise these dose estimates to determine the effect. NIOSH is
requesting that these claims be returned for a new dose estimate. A new dose
reconstruction will be completed for each of the claims using the latest revision to the
General Steel Industries TBD.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ OCAS-PER-0025 Rev-o0: Program Evaluation Report: Huntington Pilot Plant TBD
Revision *% [14 KB (1 page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per25-ro.pdf
September 28, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Huntington Pilot Plant TBD.

Summary: There was one Huntington Pilot Plant claims completed for the above target
organs with a probability of causation below 50% prior to 1/16/2004. NIOSH is requesting
that this claim be returned for a new dose estimate. A new dose reconstruction will be
completed using the latest revision to the Huntington Pilot Plant TBD.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* OCAS-PER-026 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Pantex TBD Revision - ORAUT-
TKBS-0013 *% [16 KB (2 pages) (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-026-ro.pdf)
October 31, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Pantex TBD.

Summary: There were 50 Pantex claims meeting the employment dates and target organ
criteria above that were completed with a probability of causation below 50% prior to
February 1, 2007. NIOSH will review the records of each claim to determine if the dose
assigned in the revised TBD is higher than that assigned in the dose reconstruction.
NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 50 claims as well as a determination on each
claim as to whether a new Dose Estimate is required. Documentation for each claim not
requiring a new dose reconstruction will provide the basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-027 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Clarksville and Medina Site Profile -
ORAU TBKS-0039 *% [15 KB (1 page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-027-ro.pdf)
October 30, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of issuing a revision to the Clarksville TBD.

Summary: Prior to November 4, 2006, there were 65 Clarksville and Medina claims
completed which had a probability of causation below 50%. NIOSH will review these dose
reconstructions to determine if the dose assigned in consistent or higher than the issued
TBD. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 65 claims as well as a determination on each
claim as to whether a new Dose Estimate is required. Documentation for each claim not
requiring a new dose reconstruction will provide the basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 9 of 21

new dose reconstruction for all claims returned by DOL using the current methodology. It
should be noted that some of these claims will be unaffected by these modifications and
some dose reconstructions may decrease as a result of removing dose associated with the
SEC basis.

The last document to be revised to incorporate changes as a result of the SEC deliberation
and designation was the external dose section of the Rocky Flats Technical Basis
Document. This document was revised on August 17, 2007. Therefore, the returned claims
should consist only of those approved prior to that date. This totals 590 claims, some of
which NIOSH previously requested a return based on other PERs.

Select a Different PER (#pers)
+ OCAS-PER-0022 Rev-oo: Chapman Valve TBD Revision * [15 KB (1 page)
nio: ers/oc-per22-ro.pdf

September 20, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Chapman Valve TBD.

Summary: There were 31 Chapman Valve claims completed with a probability of
causation below 50% prior to the revision to the TBD. Twenty one of these were completed
using TIB 4. Because that document describes a higher dose estimate than the revision to
the Chapman Valve TBD, no further evaluation is necessary for those claims. The
remaining 10 Chapman Valve claims were completed using revision 0 of the Technical
Basis Document. NIOSH is requesting that these claims be returned for a new dose
estimate. A new dose reconstruction will be completed for each of the claims using the
latest revision to the Chapman Valve TBD.

Select a Different PER (#pers:

+ OCAS-PER-0023 Rev-00: ional Lab-West ision % [15 KB (1 page)
niosh/ocas/pdfs, -per23-ro.pd:

September 20, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the ANL-W TBD.

Summary: There were 22 ANL-W completed with a probability of causation below 50%
prior to the change in default frequency. NIOSH will review the records of each claim to

letermine if an x-ray frequency less than annually was used to complete the dose
reconstruction for claims in which no medical records were received from DOE. NIOSH
will provide DOL with the list of 22 claims as well as a determination on each claim as to
whether a new dose estimate is required.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* OCAS-PER-0024 Rev-oo: Program Evaluation Report: General Steel Industries TBD
Approval *€ [14 KB (1 page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per24-ro.pdf)
September 25, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of approving a GSI TBD.

Summary: There were 4 General Steel Industries claims completed with a probability of
causation below 50% prior to the approval of the TBD. These were completed using

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.htm] 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 6 of 21

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ OCAS-PER-0014 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Construction Trades Workers 78
[74 KB (7 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per14-ro.pdf)
November 27, 2007

About this Document: This document determines which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of TIB 52 on the completed dose reconstruction.

Summary: A search of the claims was conducted to determine which claims may be those
of Construction Trades Workers. Only those claims with a probability of causation (PC)
less than 50%, that are currently at the Department of Labor, and whose dose
reconstruction was Approved prior to August 31, 2007, were included. The search resulted.
in 977 potentially affected claims being selected. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of
977 claims, as well as a determination on each claim as to whether a new dose estimate is
required. Documentation, that includes a dispositive statement which explains the basis as
to why each claim was or was not determined to require a new dose reconstruction, will be
provided to DOL and included in each case file.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ OCAS-PER-0015 Rev-oo: Program Evaluation Report: Mallinckrodt TBD Revision *& [16
KB (2 pages)] (/niosh/ocas, ers/Oc-per15-ro..
July 31, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Mallinckrodt TBD.

Summary: It is not possible to determine the magnitude of the change to dose without a
new dose estimate. Since (as of issuance of this PER) no Mallinckrodt claims have yet been
completed with the newest revision to the TBD, NIOSH is requesting that all Mallinckrodt
claims with a dose reconstruction performed using Revision 1 of ORAUT-TKBS-0005 that
have a Probability of Causation less than 50% be returned for a new estimate. A list of the
population of 16 potentially affected claims is attached. A new dose reconstruction will be
completed for each of the claims using the latest revision to the Mallinckrodt TBD.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* OCAS-PER-0016 Rev-oo: Program Evaluation Report: Implementation of IREP

Procedure for Claims near 50% Probability of Causation %— [132 KB (4 pages
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per16-ro.pdf)

September 25, 2007

About this Document: New document to evaluate the effect of implementing a new
IREP procedure on previously completed claims.

Summary: A total of 109 previously non-compensable claims with PC values of 45% or
greater were evaluated. The average PC value remained below the 50% compensation
threshold for each of the 109 claims. An itemized list of claims was provided to DOL
containing the final evaluation result for each of the 109 claims.

Select a Different PER (#pers

* OCAS-PER-017 Rev-o0: Program Evaluation Report: Evaluation of Incomplete Internal
Dosimetry Records from Idaho, Argonne - East and Argonne - West National

Laboratories *& [21 KB (3 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-017-ro.pdf

http://www.cde.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


. CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... . Page 20 of 21

* OCAS-PEP-0014 Rev-o0: Evaluation of the Impact of OTIB-0052.
Workers i
March 29, 2007

Construction Trade
fa

About this Document: In 2004, it was noted that some Construction Trades Workers
(CTW) at various sites were unmonitored during the early years of the complex. It was
believed that these workers may have been exposed to external radiation and/or internal
contamination above ambient and environmental levels without adequate monitoring. To
address this issue, ORAUT-OTIB-0052 (Technical Information Bulletin: Parameters to
Consider When Processing Claims for Construction Trade Workers) was developed to
Provide guidance on assessing CTWs with inadequate monitoring (either internal or
external).

Select a Different PEP (#peps)

OCAS-PEP-0017 Rev-00: Evaluation of Incomplete Internal Dosimetry Records from

Idaho, Argonne - East and Argonne - West National Laboratories *& [17 KB (3 pages)]
‘niosh/ocas/pdfs/peps/oc-pep-017-r0..

March 21, 2007

About this Document: In April/May 2006, while reviewing dose reconstructions (DR)
for an Idaho National Laboratory (INL) case and an Argonne National Laboratory - East
(ANL-E) case, a particular notation ("no recordable dose") in the INL dosimetry response,
as well as a similar notation ("no internal dose") in the ANL-E dosimetry response, was
questioned. Both the INL and ANL-E points of contact (POC) were contacted and asked if

is notation meant that the energy employee (EE) was not monitored. The INL POC
responded that this notation meant that this particular EE may have been monitored but
no internal dose was assigned. The ANL-E POC provided information that the EE had
internal dose records for most years of his employment. [Although Argonne National
Laboratory - West (ANL-W) requests are sent thru the Chicago Operations Office, the
dosimetry records are provided by INL.]

In May/June 2006, it was determined that INL/ANL-W/ANL-E did not consistently
include internal dose data in all of their individual dosimetry responses and that
additional requests were needed for submitted cases with a POC less than 50%. For a
articular EE, INL/ANL-W/ANL-E either provided all or none of the EE's internal
Bosimetry records. A good indicator that there may be internal dosimetry data is that the
OCAS-INT-004 (check box form) may have a hand-written note next to the internal
dosimetry status section that says - "no internal dose" or "no recordable dose."

Select a Different PEP (#peps)

Comments on Program Evaluation Reports and Plans

How to Submit Comments Comments on Ames Laboratory documents can be submitted to
the NIOSH Docket Officer electronically by e-mail at nioshdocket@cdc.gov
(mailto:nioshdocket@cdec.gov) or printed comments can be mailed to:

NIOSH Docket Office,

Robert A. Taft Laboratories, MS-C34,
1090 Tusculum Avenue,

Cincinnati, OH 45226.

Comments Received

http://www.cde.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html =~ 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 2 of 21

+ OCAS-PER-0002 Rev-oo: Error in Surrogate Organ Assignment Resulting in an :
Underestimate of X-ray Dose in Savannah River Site Dose Reconstructions i [482 KB (4
pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-002-ro.pdf)

December 15, 2003

About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of an error
in surrogate organ assignment resulting in a potential underestimate of the X-ray dose for
certain Savannah River Site dose reconstructions.

Summary: An error in surrogate organ assignment for the liver, gall bladder and spleen
(ovaries was assigned instead of Tung) resulted in the underestimation of X-ray organ
doses in three completed dose reconstructions. The impact on the probability of causation
in these three cases has been evaluated and found to be minimal (<0.5%), and the
probable compensability status of these claims was unaffected. No revision of any
completed dose reconstructions is warranted; however, to preclude future occurrences of
this error, revisions of several Technical Basis Documents has been initiated.

Select a Different PER (#pers)
+ OCAS-PER-0003 Rev-00: Evaluation of the Effect of Adding Ingestion Intakes to

Bethlehem Steel Cases #§ [31 KB (3 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-003-ro.pdf)
January 28, 2005

About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of the effect
of adding ingestion intakes to Bethlehem Steel cases.

Summary: As a result of adding ingestion intakes, the probability of causation of none of
the previously completed Bethlehem Steel claims would increase to greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ OCAS-PER-0004 Rev-00: Application of Photofluorography at the Pinellas Plant ®& [373
KB (3 pages) (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-004-ro.pdf)
February 15, 2005

About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of the
discovery of photofluorographic examinations on dose reconstructions for employees of
the Pinellas Plant.

Summary: Evidence of photofluorography as discovered in a claimant's medical records
from the Pinellas Plant. As a result, photofluorography use at Pinellas Plant is now
assumed through 1959. This assumption will not change the likely compensability of any
completed dose reconstruction. The relevant ORAU procedure will be modified, and
photofluorography use will be assumed in the Pinellas Plant Site Profile.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

nford Dose Reconstructions Fi

ro.pdf)
June 9, 2006

About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of the
misinterpreted application of the bias factor for Hanford Dose Reconstructions.

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 13 of 21

+ DCAS-PER-034 Rev-o: Harshaw Chemical Company TBD Revision %& [15 KB (2 pages)
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per-34-ro.pdf}
December 9, 2011

About this Document: Determines affect of revising the Harshaw TBD on previously
completed claims.

Approved: December 9, 2011

Summary: Several editorial changes and clarifications were included in the revision
however these changes do not affect the estimated dose. Some changes may have
decreased the dose but the only significant increase in the dose estimate is caused by an
increase in the estimated intake rate for type S uranium from 12/1/1949 to 12/31/1953.
The values are listed in Table 5-6 of both revisions.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* DCAS-PER- Re
Document Revisions
October 31, 2013

awrence Livermore National Laboratory Technical Basis
niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per35-ro.pd:

About this Document: Determines the effect of the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory Technical Basis Document Revisions on previously completed claims

Summary: Fourteen out of 373 claims that were potentially affected by the revisions had
a probability of causation (POC) greater than 50%. NIOSH will notify DOL of all the
results and request a return of the 14 claims that would now result in a POC greater than
50%.

DCAS-PER-036 Rev-o: Program Evaluation Report: Blockson TBD Revision % [20 KB (3
pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdts/pers/deas-per-036-ro.pdf)
April 5, 2012

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the affect of revising the Blockson TBD.

Summary: Revision 3 of the Blockson Chemical Company Technical Basis Document
(DCAS-TKBS-0002) was issued on 12/20/2010. The previous version (revision 2) was
issued on 11/21/2007. PER-020, issued on 7/31/2007, evaluated the effect of all changes
that were made to the Blockson Chemical Company Technical Basis Document (TBD)
prior to that date. This resulted in a request to DOL for the return of all previously
completed Blockson claims that had a probability of causation of less than 50%. Once
returned, a new dose reconstruction was completed for each using the version of the TBD
current at that time. Revision 1 of the TBD was current when PER-020 was issued.
However, revision 2 was issued a short time later on 11/21/2007 prior to any claims being
completed using revision 1. Therefore, this PER only considered the changes that were
made between revision 2 and revision 3. This information is summarized below:

Revision 0 all claims completed using revision 0 were requested returned (PER-020).
Revision 1 No claims were completed using this revision

° Revision 2 The subject of this PER
e Revision 3 The current version of the TBD

Select a Different PER (#pers

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 15 of 21

« DCAS-PER-040 Rev-o: Mallinckrodt TBD (ORAUT-TKBS-0005) Revision *& [88 KB (3

pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per4o-ro.pdf)
September 10, 2013

About this Document: Considers the effect of Revision 3 on claims that were completed
using revision 2 or Revision 2 PC-1.

Summary: For the ninety-one claims requiring further evaluation, dose was recalculated
using all current dose reconstruction methods, including those in the current version of
the TBD. From that recalculated dose, a new probability of causation was determined. The
probability of causation remained below 45% for 86 of the 91 claims. For three of the
remaining five claims, the probability of causation fell between 45% and 50%. In
accordance with NIOSH procedures, IREP was run 30 times with 10,000 iterations for
each run. The final probability of causation remained below 50% for all three claims. The
final two resulted in a probability of causation greater than 50%. In both cases, this
resulted primarily from the inclusion of monitored external dose between 1942 and 1948
that had not previously been included. NIOSH will notify DOL of all these results and
request a return of the two claims that would now be greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-041 Rev-o: Revisi -! = Dose Reconstruction from
Occupational Medical X-ray Procedures 5 KB (4 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per-

41-ro.pdf)
July 12, 2012

About this Document: New document to determine the effect on previously completed.
claims due to revision ORAUT-OTIB-0006, Dose Reconstruction from Occupational
Medical X-ray Procedures.

Summary: The revision to ORAUT-OTIB-0006 did not result in probability of causation
of any previously completed claims rising to greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-042 Rev-o: Program Evaluation Report: Linde Ceramics Plant Technical Basis
Document Revision *% [33 KB (4 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per-42-ro.pdf

November 16, 2012

About this Document: Determines which previously completed claims require
evaluation for the affect of revising the Linde Ceramics Plant TBD.

Summary: The selection criteria resulted in 78 claims requiring further evaluation. For
those claims, the dose was recalculated using all current dose reconstruction methods
including the current version of the TBD. From that recalculated dose, a new probability of
causation was determined. The probability of causation remained below 45% for 74 of the
78 claims. None of the cases resulted in a probability of causation between 45% and 50%.
The four remaining cases had a probability of causation greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

DCAS-PER-043 Rev-o: Program Evaluation Report: Internal Dosimetry Organ, External

Dosimetry Organ, and IREP Model Selection by JCD-9 Code Revision (June 7, 2013) &
2 KB iosh, dfs/pers/de-per43-ro.

June 7, 2013

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.htm1 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation Rep... Page 1 of 21

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CDC 24/7: Saving Lives. Protecting People.TM

Program Evaluation Reports (PERs) and Program

with this commitment, completed cases with probabilities of causation less than 50% are
reviewed as relevant new information becomes available. The results of these reviews are
described in a Program Evaluation Report (PER). The PER details the effect, if any, of the new
information on the completed dose reconstruction. If it appears that the new information may
result in an increase in dose for a completed dose reconstruction with a probability of
causation of less than 50%, NIOSH is committed to working with the Department of Labor to
reopen and rework the dose reconstruction, as appropriate. A Program Evaluation Plan (PEP)
describes plans for evaluating specific program details or issues.

Program Evaluation Reports

Do you know the number of the PER you are looking for? If you do, click on the number below
to go to the section of the page where the PER is located.

Program Evaluation Report Index

Oi(#per1) O2(#per2) O3(#per3) O4(#per4) O5(#pers) O6(#per6) O7(#per7)
08 (#per8) OO(#pero) 10(#perio) 11(#perii) 12(#peri2) 13(#perig) 14
#peri4) 15(#peri5) 16(#peri6) 17(#peri7) 18(#peri8) 19(#peri9) 20 (#per20)
21(#per21) 22(#per22) 23(#per23) 24(#per24) 25(#per25) 26(#per26) 27
(#per27) 28(#per28) 20(#per2o) 30(#per30) 31(#pergi) 32(#per32) 33
(#perg3) 34 (#perg4) 35 (#per35) 36 (#per36) 37(#per37) 38(#per38) 39
#per39 40 (#per4o. 41 (#per41. 42 (#perg2 43 (#per43 44 (#per44 45
(#per45) 47(#per47) 48 (#per48) 50(#per50) 452(#pers2) 455 (#pers5) 56

(#per56) 58 (#per58)

+ OCAS-PER-0001 Rev-00: Misinterpreted Dosimetry Records Resulting in an
Underestimate of Missed Dose in Savannah River Site Dose Reconstructions ¥ [958 KB

4 pages) ] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-001-ro.pdf.

September 8, 2003

About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of the
misinterpreted dosimetry records resulting in an underestimate of the missed dose for
Savannah River Site dose reconstructions.

Summary: While the underestimated missed dose resulted in a non-claimant favorable
estimate of missed dose, the overestimated onsite ambient dose offset this underestimate.
Asa result, no further evaluation is necessary because the offset still resulted in a slight
claimant favorable bias in the dose estimate and resulting probability of causation.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.htm1 2/10/2015


ee

I took Dave Allen’s comment as a very positive remark, considering all of the work that has gone
into this “GSI fact finding” by all of us. I believe Dave stated the facts well, and confirmed my point
as well.

I personally believe NIOSH’s confirmed use of this “new” GSI Appendix BB Rev

1 information, for new GSI claims, yet denying earlier GSI claimants the same right to this
new material, is completely unfair and unjust, etc. , etc. .

The “denied” GSI Claimants deserve to see some of this “commitment” now. They have
waited long enough.

As I stated, some of these GSI Claimants have died while waiting, that truly bothers me.

If you feel I have misunderstood any of this, please let me know. I am always open to listening to another opinion.
No one corrected me at the Feb 5th. Work Group Meeting, so | took it as being a valid point.
In retrospect, J should have made perfectly clear that this was my understanding of facts.

| totally appreciate the opportunity of beiig able to participate in the WG Meetings. This is meant as a clarification, not

a criticism.

I also appreciate your attempt to schedule the next WG Meeting soon. Hopefully NIOSH will get back with you quickly so you
can schedule the next meeting.

I appreciate you asking NIOSH to get back to you as soon as possible.

Ted:

Please share this with the court reporter, it may help him with my meeting statement.. | really appreciate his efforts at a tough
task.

Please distribute this to the entire Board , NIOSH, and SC&A, and others listening in to the meeting.

: Dear NIOSH Docket Officer:
Please accept my recent GSI/ TBD 6000 Work Group information and email plus the attached PDF file:
Program Evaluation Reports (PERs) - Centers for Disease ...”CLICK"
www.cde.gow/.../oc...

United States Centers for Disease Control and Preve...

Program Evaluation Reports (PERs) and Program Evaluation Plans (PEPs) ... The results of these reviews are
described in a Program Evaluation Report (PER) . for consideration for posting on the DCAS website under Docket
* 140 (GSI).

lalso did request that DFO circulate this email and comments to the full Board and the TBD-6000 WG including
DCAS, and SC&A members. My email includes my personal comments for the Feb. 5th. , 2015 meeting that
centered around Appendix BB Rev 1 and the PER-057 topic.

Thank you ,

John Ramspott
. On behalf of General Steel industries claimants.


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R... Page 11 of 21

* OCAS-PER-028 Rev-o0: Program Evaluation Report: Pinellas TBD Revision © [14 KB (1
page)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per-028-ro.pdf)
October 30, 2007

About this Document: New document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Pinellas Plant TBD.

Summary: There were 24 Pinellas Plant dose reconstructions completed with a
probability of causation below 50% between August 3, 2006, and November 8, 2006.
NIOSH will review these dose reconstructions to determine if missed photon dose was
included when appropriate. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 24 claims as well as a
determination on each claim as to whether a new Dose Estimate is required. .
Documentation for each claim not requiring a new dose reconstruction will provide the
basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

* OCAS-PER-0029 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Hanford TBD Revisions %§ [30 KB
as niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per29-ro.pdi
December 18, 2007

About this Document: Document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Hanford TBD.

Sum : There were 1190 Hanford or PNNL claims completed prior to June 22, 2007,
with a probability of Causation below 50%. The dose reconstruction methodology of each
will be reviewed to determine if a new dose reconstruction is necessary to determine if the
revisions increase the dose estimate. NIOSH will review these dose reconstructions to
determine if they meet any of the criteria listed in the PER. NIOSH will provide DOL with
the list of 1190 claims as well as a determination on each claim as to whether a new dose
estimate is required. Documentation for each claim not requiring a new dose
reconstruction will provide the basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0030 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Savannah River Site TBD
Revisions # [31 KB (3 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per30-ro.pdf)

December 18, 2007

.

About this Document: Document to determine which previously completed claims
require evaluation for the effect of revising the Savannah River Site TBD.

Summary: There were 54 Savannah River Site claims completed prior to August 21,
2003, (issue date of revision 1) with a probability of Causation below 50%. The dose
reconstruction methodology of each will be reviewed to determine if a new dose
reconstruction is necessary to determine if the revisions increase the dose estimate.
NIOSH will review these dose reconstructions to determine if they meet any of the criteria
listed in this PER. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 54 claims as well as a
determination on each claim as to whether a new dose estimate is required.
Documentation for each claim not requiring a new dose reconstruction will provide the
basis for that determination.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

OCAS-PER-0031 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Y-12 TBD Revisions *& [17 KB (2
pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/oc-per31-ro.pdf)

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015


CDC - NIOSH - Radiation Dose Reconstruction - Program Evaluation R.. Page 14 of 21

« DCAS-PER-037 Rev-0: Program Evaluation Report: Revision 3 of the Ames Laboratory
Technical Basis Document (ORAU-TKBS-0055) #4 [21 KB (3 pages
(/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per-37-ro.pdf)

July 17, 2012

About this Document: Revision 3 of the Ames Laboratory Technical Basis Document
(ORAU-TKBS-0055) was issued on 1/3/2012. The previous version (revision 2) was issued
on 1/14/2011. Revision 1 was issued 12/18/2009 and Revision o PC-1 was issued
8/20/2008. This PER considered the changes that were made between the current
revision (revision 3) and all previous versions of the TBD.

Summary: For the 16 claims requiring further evaluation, dose was recalculated using all
current dose reconstruction methods including the current version of the TBD. Only one
claim resulted in a probability of causation greater than 50%. NIOSH will notify DOL of
these results and request a return of the one case that would now be greater than 50%.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ DCAS-PER-038 Rev-o: Program Evaluation Report: Hooker Electrochemical TBD
Revisions /: [177 KB (5 pages)] (/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/dc-per-38-ro.pdf)
July 24, 2012

About this Document: site specific appendix to Battelle-TBD-6001 (Appendix AA) was
issued 6/15/2007. This was superseded by a stand-alone Technical Basis Document (TBD)
on 4/4/2011 (DCAS-TKBS-0009 rev. 0). On 6/16/2011, revision 1 was issued to that
document to correct an error. The changes made in revision 1 of the TBD caused external
doses to operators to decrease during the operational period. No increase in any doses
occurred in revision 1. Revision 0 however, did result in some increased dose when
compared to Appendix AA. Therefore, Appendix AA is compared to Revision 1 in this PER
in order to itemize the increased dose.

Summary: As a result of this review, the revisions to the Hooker Electrochemical TBD
did not result in the probability of causation of any previously completed claims rising to

reater than 50%. A listing of those claims evaluated and their final disposition will be
orwarded to the Department of Labor.

Select a Different PER (#pers)

+ DCAS-PER-039 Rev-o: Baker Perkins TBD Revision #§ [15 KB (G page)]

/niosh/ocas/pdfs/pers/de-per39-ro.pdf
January 7, 2013

About this Document: Several changes in the methods used to reconstruct doses at
Baker-Perkins resulted in both inhalation and external doses being higher for some job
categories when compared to previous methods. Since only 8 claims have been completed
for this site, each with a probability of causation below 50%, all 8 were reevaluated using
revision 1 of the TBD.

Summary: As a result of this review, the revision to DCAS-TKBS-0005 did not result in
the probability of causation of any previously completed claims rising to greater than 50%.

A listing of those claims evaluated and their final disposition will be forwarded to the
Department of Labor.

Select a Different PER (#pers

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/ocaspers.html 2/10/2015