Draft Report 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR 

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH 

ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH 

A PRE-EVALUATION OF DCAS-PER-041, DCAS-PER-042, 

DCAS-PER-043, DCAS-PER-044, AND DCAS-PER-045 

FOR A FORMAL AUDIT BY SC&A

Contract No. 211-2014-58081

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Prepared by 

U. Hans Behling, PhD 

SC&A, Inc. 

1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 

Vienna, VA 22182 

April 2014 

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:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

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. 

SC&A, Inc.: 

Technical Support for the Advisory Board on 

Radiation and Worker Health Review of NIOSH 

Dose Reconstruction Program

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Effective Date:

Draft – April 10, 2014

Revision No:

0 – Draft

A Pre-evaluation of DCAS-PER-041, DCASPER-042, DCAS-PER-043, DCAS-PER-044, and 

DCAS-PER-045 for a Formal Audit by SC&A

Supersedes:

N/A

Task Manager:

_____________________ Date: ____________

U. Hans Behling, PhD

Reviewers:

 John Stiver

 

Project Manager:

_____________________ Date: ____________

John Stiver, MS, CHP

Record of Revisions

Revision 

Number Effective Date Description of Revision

0 (Draft) 04/10/2014 Initial issue.
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

3 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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................4

1.1 Pre-evaluation of DCAS-PER-041: OTIB-0006 Revision .....................................4

1.2 Pre-evaluation of DCAS-PER-042: Linde Ceramics Plant TBD Revision ............5

1.3 Pre-evaluation of DCAS-PER-043: Internal Dosimetry Organ, External 

Dosimetry Organ, and IREP Model Selection by ICD-9 Code Revision................5

1.4 Pre-evaluation of DCAS-PER-044: Metallurgical Laboratory...............................6

1.5 Pre-evaluation of DCAS-PER-045: Aliquippa Forge TBD Revision.....................6

2.0 Discussion and Summary Conclusions................................................................................7

3.0 References............................................................................................................................8
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

4 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.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

When new information becomes available or existing information/data are revised that may 

increase the dose of previously completed dose reconstructions (DRs), NIOSH is committed to 

issue a Program Evaluation Report (PER) and rework all claims that meet stated selection 

criteria.

In brief, PERs are an essential part of a quality assurance program inasmuch as they evaluate the 

effect(s) of newly acquired data on previously completed DRs. This includes a qualitative and 

quantitative assessment of potential impacts, which may vary from only modest to profound 

changes that include the compensation of previously denied claims.

Depending on a host of variables that define and characterize a given PER, the need for an 

independent audit is also variable and for select PERs may not be justified. Salient variables that 

may be considered in prioritizing whether an audit is necessary include the following:

 The complexity of new information/data that prompted the PER

 Scope and level-of-effort needed to revise dose estimates of affected claims

 The number of revised DRs with POCs less than 50% and the minimum number of DRs 

required for audit under Subtask 4

 The magnitude of change(s) to revised dose estimates

 The quality and completeness of guidance provided in the PER (and supporting 

documents) to the dose reconstructor(s) that assure consistent interpretation and 

compliance with the PER

1.1 PRE-EVALUATION OF DCAS-PER-041: OTIB-0006 REVISION

Revision 4 of ORAUT-OTIB-0006 (Dose Reconstruction from Occupational Medical X-ray 

Procedures) introduced several changes to dose estimates, some of which reduced doses, while 

others increased doses. Increased doses include the following:

 Doses from LAT lumbar spine x-rays for all years for stomach, bone surfaces, liver, gall 

bladder, spleen, and remainder organs.

 Dose to the ovaries from pelvic x-rays up to the end of 1970. (Note: pelvic x-rays were 

used to monitor workers with potential exposure to fluoride to detect bone changes due to 

fluorosis.)

A comparison of doses cited in Tables 7-10 and A-8 of Rev. 03 versus Rev. 04 of ORAUTOTIB-0006 for the above-cited organs show only modest increases, as presented in Table 1 

below.
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

5 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.

Table 1. Comparison of Organ Doses Cited in Rev. 03 and Rev. 04 of ORAUT-OTIB-0006

Organ

Dose (mrem)

OTIB-0006, Rev. 03 OTIB-0006, Rev. 04

Pre-1970 Post-1970

Ovary 294 650 —

Stomach 100 117 164

Bone Surface 100 117 164

Liver/Gall Bladder/Spleen 100 117 164

Remainder 100 117 164

Number of Claims Affected. Site Profiles that reference the use of OTIB-0006 include Harshaw

(ORAUT-TKBS-0022), Brookhaven National Laboratory (ORAUT-TKBS-0048), Extrusion 

Plant (ORAUT-TKBS-0056), and Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORAUT-TKBS-0019). 

Although a total of 235 claims met the initial screening criteria, only 3 cases were shown to be 

potentially impacted by Rev. 04 of OTIB-0006 and none of the reworked doses resulted in 

probability of causation (POC) values above 50%.

1.2 PRE-EVALUATION OF DCAS-PER-042: LINDE CERAMICS PLANT TBD 

REVISION

PER-042 addresses changes introduced in the current Rev. 03 of ORAUT-TKBS-0025 and 

previous revisions, Rev. 02 and Rev. 01. While some changes decreased, other changes 

increased the dose. With the designation of three Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) classes, some 

sources of internal exposures were deemed insufficiently accurate for DR and eliminated. Their 

elimination will, therefore, reduce doses.

Potential increases in dose include changes to exposure scenarios in utility tunnels and the 

distribution of internal doses applied to the reconstruction of trade workers.

Number of Claims Affected. Given the number of changes that either increased or decreased 

estimated dose, nearly all previously completed DRs with POCs less than 50% were potentially 

affected. However, the potential number of claims requiring reworking was greatly reduced by 

the three SEC classes that covered the period October 1, 1942, through December 31, 1969.

Based on selection criteria, NIOSH identified 78 claims for a revised DR. Of the 78 reworked 

DRs, 4 cases exceeded the POC value of 50%; the remaining 74 cases all yielded POC values 

below 45% and represent the total pool of revised DRs from which a sample may be selected for 

audit.

1.3 PRE-EVALUATION OF DCAS-PER-043: INTERNAL DOSIMETRY ORGAN, 

EXTERNAL DOSIMETRY ORGAN, AND IREP MODEL SELECTION BY ICD-9 

CODE REVISION

Since November 3, 2003, when Rev. 00 of ORAUT-OTIB-0005 was issued, OTIB-0005 was

revised nine times ending with Rev. 05 on December 20, 2012. Changes introduced by these 

revisions involved (1) assignment of different internal and or external organ(s) for select ICD-9 
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

6 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.

codes, (2) addition of new codes that had previously not been modeled, and (3) addition of new 

target organs.

Number of Claims Affected. Although several hundred DRs met the initial screening criteria for 

further evaluation, all but 36 claims were shown not to be impacted by any of the revisions

introduced in OTIB-0005. Of the 36 claims requiring a rework of estimated doses, 2 claims 

resulted in revised POC values greater than 50%. Thus, the total number of revised DRs from 

which a sample set may be selected for audit is 34.

1.4 PRE-EVALUATION OF DCAS-PER-044: METALLURGICAL LABORATORY

The Metallurgical Laboratory in Chicago, Illinois, played a key role in supporting the Manhattan 

Engineering District in the development of the atomic bomb during World War II. However, no 

Technical Basis Document (TBD) has been developed that would support the DR for 

Metallurgical Laboratory claims. Correspondingly, NIOSH concluded that there was insufficient 

data to estimate internal and external doses for the entire covered period of operation from 

August 13, 1942, through June 30, 1946. A class of employees was added to the SEC on 

February 15, 2009.

In addition to the designation of the SEC class, the following changes have been identified that 

could affect non-presumptive cancer claims:

 Dates of operational and residual period for the Metallurgical Laboratory

 Changes to ORAUT-OTIB-0070, Dose Reconstruction During Residual Radioactivity 

Periods at Atomic Weapons Employer Facilities, that have been referenced in claims not 

covered by the SEC Class

Number of Claims Affected. A review of previously completed Metallurgical Laboratory claims 

identified a single claim that had been completed with (1) a POC value of less than 50%, and 

(2) employment beyond June 30, 1946. A rework of this claim in behalf of PER-044 yielded a 

POC that remained below 50%. Thus, the total number of claims eligible for audit by SC&A is 

limited to one.

1.5 PRE-EVALUATION OF DCAS-PER-045: ALIQUIPPA FORGE TBD REVISION

Rev. 01 of Aliquippa Forge TBD (ORAUT-TKBS-0021) was issued April 26, 2012, with revised 

dates associated with two residual periods representing March 1, 1950, through December 31, 

1987, and from January 1, 1989, through December 31, 1992. Revisions to these residual 

periods affect both internal and external dose as a result of changes introduced in Rev. 01of 

ORAUT-OTIB-0070, which was issued on March 5, 2012.

Number of Claims Affected. Based on workers’ employment periods that included the residual 

period(s) and completion dates of the original DRs, NIOSH identified a total of 21 claims for 

rework. All 21 reworked claims yielded POC values of less than 45% and represent the pool of 

claims from which a sample may be audited.
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

7 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.

2.0 DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

SC&A pre-evaluated each of the five PERs and their supporting documents against the five

aforementioned criteria. It must be cautioned, however, that our pre-evaluation is based on a 

limited review of these data and is further compromised by the variability with which a given 

PER will impact affected DRs that require revision. For example, the impacts of a PER that 

potentially affect both internal and external doses by either raising or lowering doses will vary 

significantly among impacted DRs and can, therefore, not be assessed as part of this preevaluation.

Table 2 provides a semi-quantitative pre-evaluation, which ranks PERs for each of the five

criteria as high, medium, or low. Highlighted as part of our assessment, SC&A recommends

auditing PER-042, PER-043, and PER-045.

The limited benefit of conducting an audit for PER-041 is principally due to the highly 

prescriptive/incontrovertible substitution of revised organ dose estimates of medical doses that 

furthermore involve only limited increases in assigned doses. For PER-044, the absence of a 

facility site profile and personnel monitoring provide a limited basis for a DR that is further 

limited to a single claim and a non-presumptive cancer.

Table 2. Pre-evaluation Scoring of PERs

PER ID

Complexity of 

Revision/Data that 

Prompted PER

Scope and Levelof-Effort Needed 

for Revision of 

Impacted Claims

Minimum DR 

Sample Size 

Required for 

Audit

Potential 

Magnitude of 

Changes to 

Revised Doses

Quality and

Completeness 

of Guidance for 

Dose Revision

PER-041 Low Low Medium Low Medium

PER-042 High High High Medium Low

PER-043 High High High High Medium

PER-044 Medium Low Low Uncertain Low

PER-045 Medium Medium Medium/High Medium Medium
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

8 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.

3.0 REFERENCES

DCAS 2012a. Program Evaluation Report: OTIB-6 Revision, Rev. 0, DCAS-PER041. Division of Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. July 12, 2012.

DCAS 2012b. Linde Ceramics Plant TBD Revision, Rev. 0, DCAS-PER-042. Division of 

Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. November 16, 2012.

DCAS 2013a. Aliquippa Forge TBD Revision, Rev. 0, DCAS-PER-045. Division of 

Compensation Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. May 13, 2013.

DCAS 2013b. Metallurgical Laboratory, Rev. 0, DCAS-PER-044. Division of Compensation 

Analysis and Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. May 16, 2013.

DCAS 2013c. Internal Dosimetry Organ, External Dosimetry Organ, and IREP Model Selection 

by ICD-9 Code Revision, Rev. 0, DCAS-PER-043. Division of Compensation Analysis and 

Support, Cincinnati, Ohio. June 7, 2013.

ORAUT 2005. Dose Reconstruction from Occupational Medical X-ray Procedures, Rev. 3, 

ORAUT-OTIB-0006. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. August 2, 

2005.

ORAUT 2006. Technical Basis Document for the Brookhaven National Laboratory, ORAUTTKBS-0048, Rev. 00, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. August 30, 2006.

ORAUT 2007. Summary of Extrusion Plant Site Information for Dose Reconstruction, Rev. 00, 

ORAUT-TKBS-0056. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. April 26, 

2007. 

ORAUT 2008a. Dose Reconstruction During Residual Radioactivity Periods at Atomic 

Weapons Employer Facilities, Rev. 00, ORAUT-OTIB-0070. Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. March 10, 2008.

ORAUT 2008b. An Exposure Matrix for Linde Ceramics Plant (Inclusing Tonawanda 

Laboratory), Rev. 01, ORAUT-TKBS-0025. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. November 4, 2008.

ORAUT 2009. An Exposure Matrix for the Harshaw Chemical Company, Cleveland, Ohio, Rev. 

01, ORAUT-TKBS-0022. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. June 6, 

2009.

ORAUT 2010. Technical Basis Document for the Brookhaven National Laboratory, ORAUTTKBS-0048, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. April 26, 2010.
Effective Date:

April 10, 2014

Revision No.

0 - Draft

Document No.

SCA-TR-PR2014-0003

Page No.

9 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.

ORAUT 2011a. Dose Reconstruction from Occupational Medical X-ray Procedures, Rev. 4, 

ORAUT-OTIB-0006. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. June 20, 

2011.

ORAUT 2011b. An Exposure Matrix for Linde Ceramics Plant (Inclusing Tonawanda 

Laboratory), Rev. 02, ORAUT-TKBS-0025. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. July 15, 2011.

ORAUT 2012a. Dose Reconstruction During Residual Radioactivity Periods at Atomic 

Weapons Employer Facilities, Rev. 01, ORAUT-OTIB-0070. Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. March 5, 2012.

ORAUT 2012b. Basis for the Development of an Exposure Matrix for Aliquippa Forge, 

Pennsylvania, Period of Operation: January 1, 1947 through February 28, 1950, Rev. 01, 

ORAUT-TKBS-0021. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. April 26, 

2012.

ORAUT 2012c. An Exposure Matrix for Linde Ceramics Plant (Inclusing Tonawanda 

Laboratory), Rev. 03, ORAUT-TKBS-0025. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. July 26, 2012.

ORAUT 2012d. Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant – Occupational Medical Dose, Rev. 03, 

ORAUT-TKBS-0019-3. Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. August 

23, 2012.

ORAUT 2012e. Internal Dosimetry Organ, External Dosimetry Organ, and IREP Model 

Selection by ICD-9 Code, Rev. 5, ORAUT-OTIB-0005. Oak Ridge Associated Universities 

Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. December 20, 2012.

ORAUT 2013. Technical Basis Document for the Brookhaven National Laboratory, ORAUTTKBS-0048, Rev. 02, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Cincinnati, Ohio. February 7, 2013.