HHS Special Exposure Cohort Designation:

Baker Brothers, Toledo, Ohio

 

HHS Designation of Additional Members of the 

Special Exposure Cohort 

under the 

Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 

Designating a Class of Employees 

Baker Brothers

Toledo, Ohio
HHS Special Exposure Cohort Designation:

Baker Brothers, Toledo, Ohio

Page 2

I. Designation 

I, Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), designate 

the class of employees defined in Section II of this report for addition to the Special Exposure Cohort 

(SEC), as authorized under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act 

of 2000 (EEOICPA), 42 U.S.C. § 7384q. 

[Signature on File] March 6, 2013

 _____________________________ _________________ 

 Kathleen Sebelius Date

II. Employee Class Definition

All Atomic Weapons Employees who worked at the Baker Brothers site in Toledo, Ohio, 

during the period from June 1, 1943, through December 31, 1944, for a number of work days 

aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment, or in 

combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes 

of employees included in the Special Exposure Cohort. 

III. Designation Criteria and Recommendations

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7384q, for the class defined in Section II of this report, the Secretary has 

determined, and the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (Board) has recommended, that 

(1) it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy the radiation dose that the class received; 

and 

(2) there is a reasonable likelihood that such radiation dose may have endangered the health of 

members of the class.

The SEC final rule states in 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1) that it is feasible in two situations to estimate the 

radiation dose that the class received with sufficient accuracy. First, the rule states that radiation 

doses may be estimated with sufficient accuracy if NIOSH has established that it has access to 

sufficient information to estimate the maximum radiation dose, for every type of cancer for which 

radiation doses are reconstructed, that could have been incurred under plausible circumstances by any 

member of the class. Alternatively, radiation doses may be estimated with sufficient accuracy if 

NIOSH has established that it has access to sufficient information to estimate the radiation doses of 

members of the class more precisely than a maximum dose estimate.

NIOSH determined that there is insufficient information to estimate the radiation doses that the class 

received with sufficient accuracy under the two abovementioned situations. The Board, pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 7384q, advised the Secretary to designate the class as an addition to the SEC in a letter 

received by the Secretary on February 4, 2013. 
HHS Special Exposure Cohort Designation:

Baker Brothers, Toledo, Ohio

Page 3

IV. Designation Findings 

Infeasibility of Estimating Radiation Doses with Sufficient Accuracy

The Secretary designates the class of employees covered by this report based upon the findings 

summarized below. 

• Principal sources of internal radiation for members of the proposed class included exposures to 

natural uranium metals. Baker Brothers received uranium rods from the Manhattan Engineer 

District and machined them into slugs. The modes of exposure were inhalation and ingestion 

during the processing of these metals.

• NIOSH has not obtained any personal bioassay monitoring data, and very limited air monitoring 

results for work performed during the AWE operational period. Consequently, NIOSH found that 

it is infeasible to bound internal doses received from uranium machining at Baker Brothers from 

June 1, 1943, through December 31, 1944. 

• The principal source of external radiation doses for members of the evaluated class was exposure 

to gamma and beta radiation associated with handling and working in proximity to uranium while 

involved in the machining of materials during the AWE operations period. 

• Although no external personnel monitoring data are available for Baker Brothers workers during 

the AWE operational period 1943–1944, existing NIOSH procedures can be used to bound the 

AWE operational period photon dose using provided dose rates at the surface, one foot, and one 

meter from various assumed uranium shapes. Consequently, NIOSH concluded it is feasible to 

reconstruct external radiation doses for the AWE operational period from June 1, 1943, through 

December 31, 1944, at Baker Brothers. 

• NIOSH concluded that it is not applicable to reconstruct occupational medical dose for Baker 

Brothers workers because medical x-ray procedures were performed at an off-site, nonEEOICPA-covered facility.

• Although NIOSH found that it is not possible to completely reconstruct internal radiation doses 

for the AWE operational period from June 1, 1943, through December 31, 1944, NIOSH intends 

to use any internal monitoring data that may become available for an individual claim (and that 

can be interpreted using existing NIOSH dose reconstruction processes or procedures). Dose 

reconstructions for individuals employed at Baker Brothers during the period from June 1, 1943, 

through December 31, 1944, but who do not qualify for inclusion in the SEC, may be performed 

using these data as appropriate.

• The Board concurred with the NIOSH evaluation and recommended the proposed class for 

addition to the SEC. 

Health Endangerment 

The Secretary established the health endangerment determination for the class of employees covered 

by this report based upon the findings summarized below. 

(1) Pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3), NIOSH established that there is a reasonable likelihood 

that such radiation doses may have endangered the health of members of the class. Pursuant to 
HHS Special Exposure Cohort Designation:

Baker Brothers, Toledo, Ohio

Page 4

42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3)(ii), NIOSH specified a minimum duration of employment to satisfy 

this health endangerment criterion as “having been employed for a number of work days 

aggregating at least 250 work days within the parameters established for this class or in 

combination with work days within the parameters (excluding aggregate work day 

requirements) established for one or more other classes of employees in the Cohort.” 

(2) NIOSH did not identify any evidence from the petitioners or from other resources that would 

establish that the class was exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have 

involved exceptionally high-level exposures, such as a nuclear criticality incident, as defined 

under 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3)(i). 

(3) The Board concurred with NIOSH’s finding that the health of the class may have been 

endangered and defined the class according to the 250 work day requirement specified under 

42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3)(ii). 

V. Effect and Effective Date of Designation

The Secretary submits this report on the designation of one additional class to the SEC for review by 

Congress, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 7384l(14)(C)(ii) and 7384q(c)(2)(A), as amended by the Ronald 

W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, Pub. L. No. 108-375 (codified 

as amended in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.). Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7384l(14)(C)(ii), as amended 

by the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, Pub. L. No. 108-

375 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 42 U.S.C.), the designation in this report will 

become effective 30 days after the date of this report’s submission to Congress “unless Congress 

otherwise provides.” 

VI. Administrative Review of Designation

The health endangerment determination of the designation provided in this report may be subject to 

an administrative review within HHS, pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 83.18(a). On the basis of such a 

review, if the Secretary decides to expand the class of employees covered by this designation, the 

Secretary would transmit a supplementary report to Congress providing the expanded employee class 

definition and the criteria and findings on which the decision was based.