SEC Petition Evaluation Report

Petition SEC-00141 

Report Rev #: 0 Report Submittal Date: May 3, 2010 

Subject Expert(s): Tim Adler, Joe Guido

Site Expert(s): N/A

Petition Administrative Summary

Petition Under Evaluation 

Petition # Petition 

Type

Petition

Receipt Date

Qualification 

Date

DOE/AWE Facility Name

SEC-00141 83.13 March 6, 2009 October 16, 2009 Hooker Electrochemical

Petitioner Class Definition 

All employees who worked in any location at the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational 

period from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1948, and residual period from January 1, 1949 to December 

31, 1976. 

Class Evaluated by NIOSH 

All employees who worked in any location at the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational 

period from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1948, and during the residual period from January 1, 1949 to 

December 31, 1976. 

NIOSH-Proposed Class(es) to be Added to the SEC

None 

Related Petition Summary Information 

SEC Petition Tracking #(s) Petition Type DOE/AWE Facility Name Petition Status

N/A N/A N/A N/A

Related Evaluation Report Information 

Report Title DOE/AWE Facility 

Name

N/A N/A

ORAU Lead Technical Evaluator: Tim Adler ORAU Peer Review Completed By: Daniel Stempfley

Peer Review Completed By: [Signature on file] 5/3/2010 

Dave Allen Date

[Signature on file] 5/3/2010 SEC Petition Evaluation Reviewed By: 

J. W. Neton Date

[Signature on file] 5/3/2010 SEC Evaluation Approved By:

Stuart L. Hinnefeld Date
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

2 of 51 

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

3 of 51 

Evaluation Report Summary: SEC-00141, Hooker Electrochemical

This evaluation report by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

addresses a class of employees proposed for addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) per the 

Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7384 et seq. (EEOICPA) and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees as 

Members of the Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act of 2000. 

Petitioner-Requested Class Definition

The petitioner initially requested that the class be limited to all laborer/furnace processors. On 

September 26, 2009 NIOSH received a letter from the petitioner requesting that the petitionerrequested class include “all employees, all locations” instead of limiting the class to all 

laborers/furnace operators. NIOSH has decided to modify the original petition to incorporate this 

class change in lieu of requesting the petitioner to initiate an entirely new petition. 

Petition SEC-00141 was received on March 6, 2009, and qualified on October 16, 2009. The 

petitioner requested that NIOSH consider the following class: All employees who worked in any 

location at the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational period from January 1, 

1943 through December 31, 1948, and residual period from January 1, 1949 to December 31, 1976.

Class Evaluated by NIOSH

Based on its preliminary research, NIOSH accepted the petitioner-requested class. NIOSH evaluated 

the following class: All employees who worked in any location at the Hooker Electrochemical 

Corporation during the operational period from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1948, and 

during the residual period from January 1, 1949 to December 31, 1976. 

NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC

Based on its full research of the class under evaluation, NIOSH has obtained applicable monitoring 

data from other sites that performed similar work. Based on its analysis of these available resources, 

NIOSH found no part of the class under evaluation for which it cannot estimate radiation doses with 

sufficient accuracy.

Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction

Per EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1), NIOSH has established that it has access to sufficient 

information to: (1) estimate the maximum radiation dose, for every type of cancer for which radiation 

doses are reconstructed, that could have been incurred in plausible circumstances by any member of 

the class; or (2) estimate radiation doses of members of the class more precisely than an estimate of 

maximum dose. Information available from the site profile and additional resources is sufficient to 

document or estimate the maximum internal and external potential exposure to members of the 

evaluated class under plausible circumstances during the specified period. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

4 of 51 

Health Endangerment Determination

Per EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3), a health endangerment determination is not required 

because NIOSH has determined that it has sufficient information to estimate dose for the members of 

the evaluated class.
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

5 of 51 

Table of Contents

1.0 Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................................... 7

2.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 7

3.0 SEC-00141, Hooker Electrochemical Class Definitions ................................................................ 8

3.1 Petitioner-Requested Class Definition and Basis .................................................................. 8

3.2 Class Evaluated by NIOSH ................................................................................................... 9

3.3 NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC .................................................................. 9

4.0 Data Sources Reviewed by NIOSH to Evaluate the Class ............................................................. 9

4.1 Site Profile Technical Basis Documents (TBDs) ................................................................ 10

4.2 Technical Information Bulletins (TIBs) .............................................................................. 10

4.3 Facility Employees and Experts .......................................................................................... 11

4.4 Previous Dose Reconstructions ........................................................................................... 11

4.5 NIOSH Site Research Database .......................................................................................... 12

4.6 Documentation and/or Affidavits Provided by Petitioners ................................................. 12

5.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Class Evaluated by NIOSH ......................................... 12

5.1 Hooker Electrochemical Plant and Process Descriptions .................................................... 13

5.2 Radiological Exposure Sources from Hooker Electrochemical Operations ........................ 15

5.2.1 Internal Radiological Exposure Sources from Hooker Electrochemical 

Operations ................................................................................................................ 15

5.2.1.1 Uranium .................................................................................................... 15

5.2.2 External Radiological Exposure Sources from Hooker Electrochemical 

Operations ................................................................................................................ 16

5.2.2.1 Photon ....................................................................................................... 16

5.2.2.2 Beta ........................................................................................................... 16

5.2.2.3 Neutron ..................................................................................................... 16

5.2.3 Incidents .................................................................................................................. 16

6.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Class Evaluated by NIOSH ............................. 17

6.1 Available Hooker Electrochemical Internal Monitoring Data ............................................ 18

6.2 Available Hooker Electrochemical External Monitoring Data ........................................... 21

7.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Class Evaluated by NIOSH ...................................... 22

7.1 Pedigree of Hooker Electrochemical Data .......................................................................... 23

7.1.1 Internal Monitoring Data Pedigree Review ............................................................. 23

7.1.2 External Monitoring Data Pedigree Review ............................................................ 24

7.2 Evaluation of Bounding Internal Radiation Doses at Hooker Electrochemical .................. 24

7.2.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related Internal Dose Data at Hooker 

Electrochemical ....................................................................................................... 24

7.2.2 Evaluation of Bounding Residual Period Internal Doses ........................................ 25

7.2.3 Methods for Bounding Process-Related and Residual Internal Dose at Hooker 

Electrochemical ....................................................................................................... 26

7.2.4 Internal Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion ............................................. 26
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

6 of 51 

7.3 Evaluation of Bounding External Radiation Doses at Hooker Electrochemical ................. 26

7.3.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related External Dose Data at Hooker 

Electrochemical ....................................................................................................... 26

7.3.2 Evaluation of Bounding Residual Period External Doses ....................................... 27

7.3.3 Hooker Electrochemical Occupational X-Ray Examinations ................................. 27

7.3.4 Methods for Bounding External Dose at Hooker Electrochemical ......................... 27

7.3.4.1 Methods for Bounding Operational Period External Dose ....................... 28

7.3.4.2 Methods for Bounding Residual Period External Doses .......................... 28

7.3.5 External Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion ............................................ 29

7.4 Evaluation of Petition Basis for SEC-00141 ....................................................................... 29

7.4.1 Air Quality, Monitoring, Protection, and Medical Assistance for Furnace Room 

Workers ................................................................................................................... 29

7.4.2 Internal and External Monitoring ............................................................................ 29

7.5 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00141 .................................................. 30

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00141 ...................................................... 30

9.0 Class Conclusion for Petition SEC-00141 ................................................................................... 31

10.0 References .................................................................................................................................... 33

Attachment One: Data Capture Synopsis .............................................................................................. 39

Tables 

Table 4-1: No. of Hooker Electrochemical Claims Submitted Under the Dose Reconstruction Rule .. 11

Table 6-1: Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from Electro-Metallurgical Corporation ............................ 18

Table 6-2: Summary of Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from the Mallinckrodt Facility ...................... 19

Table 6-3: Summary of Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from Fernald .................................................. 19

Table 7-1: Summary of Air Monitoring Data from Related Sites ......................................................... 25

Table 7-2: External Monitoring Data from Related Sites ..................................................................... 27

Table 7-3: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00141 ............................................................... 30
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

7 of 51 

SEC Petition Evaluation Report for SEC-00141

1.0 Purpose and Scope

This report evaluates the feasibility of reconstructing doses for all employees who worked in any 

location at the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational period from January 1, 

1943 through December 31, 1948, and during the residual period from January 1, 1949 to December 

31, 1976. It provides information and analyses germane to considering a petition for adding a class of 

employees to the congressionally-created SEC. 

This report does not make any determinations concerning the feasibility of dose reconstruction that 

necessarily apply to any individual energy employee who might require a dose reconstruction from 

NIOSH. This report also does not contain the final determination as to whether the proposed class 

will be added to the SEC (see Section 2.0). 

This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the requirements of EEOICPA, 42 C.F.R. pt. 83, 

and the guidance contained in the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support’s (OCAS) Internal 

Procedures for the Evaluation of Special Exposure Cohort Petitions, OCAS-PR-004. 

2.0 Introduction 

Both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 require NIOSH to evaluate qualified petitions requesting that the 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) add a class of employees to the SEC. The 

evaluation is intended to provide a fair, science-based determination of whether it is feasible to 

estimate with sufficient accuracy the radiation doses of the class of employees through NIOSH dose 

reconstructions.1 

42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1) states: Radiation doses can 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 in 

plausible circumstances by any member of the class, or if NIOSH has established that it has access to 

sufficient information to estimate the radiation doses of members of the class more precisely than an 

estimate of the maximum radiation dose.

 

Under 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3), if it is not feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy radiation doses 

for members of the class, then NIOSH must determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that such 

radiation doses may have endangered the health of members of the class The regulation requires 

NIOSH to assume that any duration of unprotected exposure may have endangered the health of 

members of a class when it has been established that the class may have been exposed to radiation 

during a discrete incident likely to have involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring 

during nuclear criticality incidents. If the occurrence of such an exceptionally high-level exposure has 

not been established, then NIOSH is required to specify that health was endangered for those workers 

who were employed for at least 250 aggregated work days within the parameters established for the 

 

1 NIOSH dose reconstructions under EEOICPA are performed using the methods promulgated under 42 C.F.R. pt. 82 and 

the detailed implementation guidelines available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas.
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

8 of 51 

class or in combination with work days within the parameters established for other SEC classes 

(excluding aggregate work day requirements). 

NIOSH is required to document its evaluation in a report, and to do so, relies upon both its own dose 

reconstruction expertise as well as technical support from its contractor, Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities (ORAU). Once completed, NIOSH provides the report to both the petitioner(s) and to the 

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (Board). The Board will consider the NIOSH 

evaluation report, together with the petition, petitioner(s) comments, and other information the Board 

considers appropriate, in order to make recommendations to the Secretary of HHS on whether or not 

to add one or more classes of employees to the SEC. Once NIOSH has received and considered the 

advice of the Board, the Director of NIOSH will propose a decision on behalf of HHS. The Secretary 

of HHS will make the final decision, taking into account the NIOSH evaluation, the advice of the 

Board, and the proposed decision issued by NIOSH. As part of this decision process, petitioners may 

seek a review of certain types of final decisions issued by the Secretary of HHS.

2

 

3.0 SEC-00141, Hooker Electrochemical Class Definitions 

The following subsections address the evolution of the class definition for SEC-00141, Hooker 

Electrochemical. When a petition is submitted, the requested class definition is reviewed as 

submitted. Based on its review of the available site information and data, NIOSH will make a 

determination whether to qualify for full evaluation all, some, or no part of the petitioner-requested

class. If some portion of the petitioner-requested class is qualified, NIOSH will specify that class 

along with a justification for any modification of petitioner’s class. After a full evaluation of the 

qualified class, NIOSH will determine whether to propose a class for addition to the SEC and will 

specify that proposed class definition. 

3.1 Petitioner-Requested Class Definition and Basis

The petitioner initially requested that the class be limited to all laborer/furnace processors. On 

September 26, 2009 NIOSH received a letter from the petitioner requesting that the petitionerrequested class include “all employees, all locations” instead of limiting the class to all 

laborers/furnace operators (Name1, 2009d). NIOSH has decided to modify the original petition to 

incorporate this class change in lieu of requesting the petitioner to initiate an entirely new petition. 

Petition SEC-00141 was received on March 6, 2009, and qualified on October 16, 2009. The 

petitioner requested that NIOSH consider the following class: All employees who worked in any 

location at the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational period from January 1, 

1943 through December 31, 1948, and residual period from January 1, 1949 to December 31, 1976.

The petitioner provided information and affidavit statements in support of the petitioner’s belief that 

accurate dose reconstruction over time is impossible for the Hooker Electrochemical workers in 

question. NIOSH deemed the following affidavit statement sufficient to qualify SEC-00141 for 

evaluation: 

 

2 See 42 C.F.R. pt. 83 for a full description of the procedures summarized here. Additional internal procedures are 

available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas.
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

9 of 51 

To the best of my knowledge, there is no internal or external monitoring for Hooker 

Electrochemical Corp.

Based on its Hooker Electrochemical research and data capture efforts, NIOSH determined that it does 

not have access to any site-specific internal, external, or area monitoring for Hooker Electrochemical

workers that were involved with radiological work or potentially exposed to residual radiation during 

the time period under evaluation. NIOSH concluded that there is sufficient documentation to support 

the petition basis that internal and external radiation exposures and radiation doses were not monitored 

at Hooker Electrochemical, either through personal monitoring or area monitoring. The information 

and statements provided by the petitioner qualified the petition for further consideration by NIOSH, 

the Board, and HHS. The details of the petition basis are addressed in Section 7.4. 

3.2 Class Evaluated by NIOSH

Based on its preliminary research, NIOSH accepted the petitioner-requested class. Therefore, NIOSH 

defined the following class for further evaluation: All employees who worked in any location at the 

Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational period from January 1, 1943 through 

December 31, 1948, and during the residual period from January 1, 1949 to December 31, 1976. 

3.3 NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC

Based on its research, NIOSH has obtained applicable monitoring data from other sites that performed 

similar work. Based on its analysis of these available resources, NIOSH found no part of the class 

under evaluation for which it cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy.

4.0 Data Sources Reviewed by NIOSH to Evaluate the Class

As a standard practice, NIOSH completed an extensive database and Internet search for information 

regarding Hooker Electrochemical. The database search included the DOE Legacy Management 

Considered Sites database, the DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) database, 

the Energy Citations database, the Atomic Energy Technical Report database, and the Hanford 

Declassified Document Retrieval System. In addition to general Internet searches, the NIOSH 

Internet search included OSTI OpenNet Advanced searches, OSTI Information Bridge Fielded 

searches, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Agency-wide Documents Access and Management 

(ADAMS) web searches, the DOE Office of Human Radiation Experiments website, and the DOENational Nuclear Security Administration-Nevada Site Office-search. Attachment One contains a 

summary of Hooker Electrochemical documents. The summary specifically identifies data capture 

details and general descriptions of the documents retrieved. 

In addition to the database and Internet searches listed above, NIOSH identified and reviewed 

numerous data sources to determine information relevant to determining the feasibility of dose 

reconstruction for the class of employees under evaluation. This included determining the availability 

of information on personal monitoring, area monitoring, industrial processes, and radiation source 

materials. The following subsections summarize the data sources identified and reviewed by NIOSH. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

10 of 51 

4.1 Site Profile Technical Basis Documents (TBDs) 

A Site Profile provides specific information concerning the documentation of historical practices at 

the specified site. Dose reconstructors can use the Site Profile to evaluate internal and external 

dosimetry data for monitored and unmonitored workers, and to supplement, or substitute for, 

individual monitoring data. A Site Profile consists of an Introduction and five Technical Basis 

Documents (TBDs) that provide process history information, information on personal and area 

monitoring, radiation source descriptions, and references to primary documents relevant to the 

radiological operations at the site. The Site Profile for a small site may consist of a single document. 

As part of NIOSH’s evaluation detailed herein, it examined the following TBDs for insights into 

Hooker Electrochemical operations or related topics/operations at other sites: 

• Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium and Thorium, Battelle-TBD6001; Rev. F0; December 13, 2006; SRDB Ref ID: 30673 

• Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium and Thorium-Appendix AAHooker Electrochemical Company, Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA; Rev. 0; June 15, 2007; 

SRDB Ref ID: 74577 

• Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium and Thorium-Appendix CElectro Metallurgical Company, Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix C; Rev. 0; December 21, 2007; 

SRDB Ref ID: 41362 

• Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium and Thorium-Appendix BDuPont Deepwater Works, Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix B; Rev. 1; January 3, 2008; SRDB Ref 

ID: 41363 

• Basis for Development of an Exposure Matrix for the Mallinckrodt Chemical Company St. Louis 

Downtown Site and the St. Louis Airport Site, St. Louis, Missouri, ORAUT-TKBS-0005; Rev. 02 

PC-1; May 25, 2009; SRDB Ref ID: 67979 

4.2 Technical Information Bulletins (TIBs) 

A Technical Information Bulletin (TIB) is a general working document that provides guidance for 

preparing dose reconstructions at particular sites or categories of sites. NIOSH reviewed the 

following TIBs as part of its evaluation:

• TIB: Estimation of Neutron Dose Rates from Alpha-Neutron Reactions in Uranium and Thorium 

Compounds, ORAUT-OTIB-0024; Rev. 00; April 7, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 19445

• TIB: Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray Procedures, ORAUTOTIB-0006; Rev. 03 PC-1; December 21, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 20220

• TIB: Dose Reconstruction During Residual Radioactivity Periods at Atomic Weapons Employer 

Facilities, ORAUT-OTIB-0070; Rev. 00; March 10, 2008; SRDB Ref ID: 41603
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

11 of 51 

• TIB: Estimation of Ingestion Intakes, OCAS-TIB-009; Rev. 0; April 13, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 

22397

4.3 Facility Employees and Experts

To obtain additional information, NIOSH interviewed three former Hooker Electrochemical

employees regarding their knowledge about Hooker workplace radiation fields, radionuclide intakes, 

and potential exposures during the time period being evaluated in this report. 

• Personal Communication, 2009a, Personal Communication with Former Hooker Electrochemical 

“Yard Gang” Employee; Telephone Interview by ORAU Team; December 12, 2009, 10:30 AM 

EST; SRDB Ref ID: 77828 

• Personal Communication, 2009b, Personal Communication with Former Hooker Electrochemical 

Chemical Engineer/Operator; Telephone Interview by ORAU Team; December 12, 2009, 11:15 

AM; SRDB Ref ID: 77827

• Personal Communication, 2009c, Personal Communication with Former Hooker Electrochemical 

Chemical Operator; Telephone Interview by ORAU Team; December 19, 2009, 11:00 AM EST; 

SRDB Ref ID: 77826

4.4 Previous Dose Reconstructions

NIOSH reviewed its NIOSH OCAS Claims Tracking System (NOCTS) to locate EEOICPA-related 

dose reconstructions that might provide information relevant to the petition evaluation. Table 4-1 

summarizes the results of this review. (NOCTS data available as of December 28, 2009.) 

Table 4-1: No. of Hooker Electrochemical Claims Submitted Under the Dose Reconstruction Rule

Description Totals

Total number of claims submitted for dose reconstruction 110

Total number of claims submitted for energy employees who meet the definition criteria for the class 

under evaluation (January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1976) 

110

Number of dose reconstructions completed for energy employees who meet the definition criteria for 

the class under evaluation (i.e., the number of such claims completed by NIOSH and submitted to the 

Department of Labor for final approval).

93

Number of claims for which internal dosimetry records were obtained for the identified years in the 

evaluated class definition

0 

Number of claims for which external dosimetry records were obtained for the identified years in the 

evaluated class definition

0 

NIOSH reviewed each claim to determine whether internal and/or external personal monitoring 

records could be obtained for the employee. Based on its review of the dose reconstructions 

completed for employees at Hooker Electrochemical and the available documentation for the site, 

NIOSH has identified no personnel or area monitoring data for the Hooker Electrochemical 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

12 of 51 

Corporation site. NIOSH’s detailed review and assessment of the available records/documentation, 

process information, and air monitoring data (from other sites performing similar work), is provided 

in Sections 6.0 and 7.0 of this report. 

4.5 NIOSH Site Research Database

NIOSH also examined its Site Research Database (SRDB) to locate documents supporting the 

assessment of the evaluated class. One hundred eighty-three documents in this database were 

identified as pertaining to the Hooker Electrochemical site. These documents were evaluated for their 

relevance to this petition. The documents include historical background on the site’s Manhattan 

Engineer District activities, including process descriptions and radioactive source materials.

4.6 Documentation and/or Affidavits Provided by Petitioners

In qualifying and evaluating the petition, NIOSH reviewed the following documents submitted by the 

petitioners:

• Petition Form B with Affidavit; Received March 6, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 108367 (Form B, 2009)

• SEC-00141 Consult Call Response; April 22, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 108663 (Name1, 2009a)

• Petitioner’s Response to the Proposed Finding Letter; June 12, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 109045 

(Name1, 2009b)

• Petitioner’s Request for Administrative Review of the NIOSH Proposed Finding; September 10, 

2009; OSA Ref ID: 109775 (Name1, 2009c)

• Email from Survivor Requesting Change in Proposed Class; September 26, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 

109856 (Name1, 2009d)

• Affidavit from Survivor, no internal or external monitoring; September 28, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 

109892 (Affidavit, 2009)

5.0 Radiological Operations Relevant to the Class Evaluated by 

NIOSH

The following subsections summarize both radiological operations at the Hooker Electrochemical site

from January 1943 through December 1976 and the information available to NIOSH to characterize 

particular processes and radioactive source materials. From sites that performed work similar to the 

work that was performed at the Hooker Electrochemical site, NIOSH has gathered process and source 

descriptions, information regarding the identity and quantities of each radionuclide of concern, and

information describing processes through which radiation exposures may have occurred and the 

physical environment in which they may have occurred. The information included within this 

evaluation report is intended only to be a summary of the available information. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

13 of 51 

5.1 Hooker Electrochemical Plant and Process Descriptions 

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 5.1 was completed by Tim Adler, Oak Ridge 

Associated Universities (ORAU). The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained in 

the associated text.

Hooker Electrochemical Company was located in Niagara Falls, New York. From January 1943 until 

June 1948, Hooker Electrochemical manufactured various organic chemicals including xylene 

hexafluoride (P-45), xylene hexachloride, and Miller’s Fluoro Lubricant (MFL) while under Contract 

No. W-7405 eng-28 with the Manhattan Engineer District (MED). Although these processes in 

themselves did not involve radioactive materials, during part of this period hydrochloric acid (a 

byproduct of the P-45 process) was used to concentrate uranium-bearing C-2 slag that was sent from 

the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation to the Hooker Electrochemical site (ORNL, unknown date). 

The portion of the Hooker Electrochemical site used under the MED program was the “D” Area, 5.5 

acres located on the north bank of the Niagara River in Niagara Falls, New York, about two miles east 

of the falls. Five buildings on this site, D-5, D-6, D-7, D-8 and D-9 were used under the contract with 

MED from 1943 through 1948 for organic chemical processing work; apparently none of these 

buildings were used for the uranium recovery operation (Olotka, 1979). As described below, evidence 

exists that a single (un-named) building was built near this area for the purpose of housing a portion of 

the uranium recovery operations. 

The C-2 slag material was primarily from reduction bomb (dolomite) liners with an approximate 

composition of 90% magnesium fluoride and 10% calcium oxide. (The term bomb, as used here, 

refers to a device used to contain a particular chemical process.) The slag reportedly contained 

approximately one pound of uranium per 500 pounds of slag (Howland, 1944, pp. 29-30). Process 

descriptions indicate the C-2 slag uranium concentration process was sufficient to take care of the 

excess hydrochloric acid from the Hooker P-45 process. Slag was received in barrels containing 

approximately 500 pounds of material. The barrels were opened and the material was dumped 

through a sizing screen onto a conveyor belt that carried the slag into one of three digest tanks. Forty 

barrels of slag were added to each tank. Waste hydrochloric acid from the P-45 Plant was passed into 

the digest tank and the pH was adjusted to 4.0 (via the addition of water). After the tank was filled, 

the contents were agitated for 20 hours. About once in two days a tank was emptied, which was 

sufficient to take care of the waste hydrochloric acid. At the completion of the digest, the slurry was 

neutralized by dumping 100-pound bags of lime into the tanks from an overhead platform, pumped 

into a plate and frame press, and filtered. The filtrate was passed off into the sewer. The precipitate 

was washed several times and re-barreled. Slag was concentrated from about one pound of uranium 

to 5 or 10 pounds of uranium by weight (Howland, 1944, pp. 29-30).

Information from various site-related documents and interviews conducted during this evaluation 

indicates that the uranium concentration/recovery operation occurred partially indoors and partially 

outdoors. Some documents imply that the operation occurred entirely outdoors. However, during an 

interview with a former Hooker Electrochemical employee who was involved with the initial 

processing of the slag, NIOSH was told that raw material (presumably C-2 slag, based on the 

description, work area, and work dates) was initially delivered in whiskey-type barrels, opened, sorted 

for size, and then dumped onto a conveyor inside a block building that was apparently built for this 

specific activity (Personal Communication, 2009a). This interviewed employee noted that he worked 

with three other men. He also described how barrels of material (presumably C-2 slag) were delivered 

at night, as they were always waiting in the building when he and his co-workers arrived at work each 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

14 of 51 

morning. They would open the barrels, get the material through a sizing screen and onto a conveyor 

which exited the building, carrying the sorted material outside to a location unknown to him. This 

employee also remembered that initially he and three other men received and processed approximately 

25 barrels/shipment (approximately 5 tons). The work later increased to approximately 40 

barrels/shipment (approximately 10 tons). Another former Hooker Electrochemical employee who 

worked nearby on the (non-radioactive) P-45 process noted that although he had no knowledge of 

where the C-2 slag material was initially dropped off and sorted, he remembered that the acid 

concentration and subsequent processes were all performed outside (Personal Communication, 

2009b). Documentation further describing the outdoor activities includes the MED Process Hazard 

evaluation, which lists ventilation as “outdoors” (Howland, 1944, p. 29), and 1944 notes from a MED 

Industrial Hygienist which made reference to potential worker exposure during uranium operations 

due to the wind direction (Ferry, 1944).

Documentation further describing the amount of C-2 processed includes the aforementioned MED 

Process Hazard evaluation, in which the MED document states that the “actual quantity or monthly 

rate” was 10 tons per month (Howland, 1944, p. 29). A War Department memo dated March 8, 1946, 

indicates that a total of 152 tons of slag were processed through this system and that the slag-treatment 

process operated from July 1944 through January 15, 1946 (Mears, 1946). At 10 tons per month, this 

timeframe would equal 180 tons, which appears to be consistent with the former employee who 

indicated that the process rate started slower, but then increased. Taken together, these sources 

indicate that the barrels were emptied approximately one day per month. These sources also imply 

that after approximately every two days, only the liquid contents were decanted off and replaced with 

additional hydrochloric acid. 

As mentioned above and established by a War Department memo dated March 8, 1946, the period of 

operational radiation exposure work at the Hooker Electrochemical site was from July 1944 through 

January 15, 1946; the P-45 process ended on January 15, 1946 (Mears, 1946). It is possible that the 

slag-processing occurred for an even shorter period since some start-up time would be expected. For 

the purposes assessing the ability to bound dose for the evaluated class, this evaluation assumes a 

period of residual radioactivity exposure from January 16, 1946 to October 11, 1976, the date when 

measurements for radiation and radioactivity onsite were made, and it was concluded that there were 

no elevated levels of radioactivity on the Hooker Electrochemical site (DOE, 1977, p. 11). Because no 

additional radioactive material was brought to the site in the final quarter of 1976, conclusions 

regarding the feasibility of dose reconstruction for the assumed residual period stated above can be 

applied through December 31, 1976, as requested in the SEC-00141 petition. 

Subsequent to the shutdown of the Hooker facility, Electro-Metallurgical Corporation continued to 

operate, sending the waste slag material to the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works site (Unknown, 1949, p. 

192). The material at Lake Ontario Ordnance Works was eventually shipped to the Y-12 site for 

uranium recovery (Keller, 1958). However, some amount of the material remained on the ground 

surface at Lake Ontario Ordnance Works (Anderson, 1981a, p. 72; Unknown, 1971, p. 61).
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

15 of 51 

5.2 Radiological Exposure Sources from Hooker Electrochemical Operations

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 5.2 and its related subsections were completed by Joe 

Guido, MJW Corporation. The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained in the 

associated text.

The following subsections provide an overview of the internal and external exposure sources for the 

Hooker Electrochemical class under evaluation.

5.2.1 Internal Radiological Exposure Sources from Hooker Electrochemical Operations

Considering that the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation sent uranium-bearing C-2 slag to the Hooker 

site, the primary source of internal radiological exposure resulting from Hooker Electrochemical

operations was inhalation and/or ingestion of uranium metal present in magnesium-fluoride residues 

obtained from the uranium-tetrafluoride reduction process utilized at the Electro-Metallurgical 

Corporation. The radiological hazard presented by uranium metal or compounds results primarily 

from alpha particles emitted by uranium-238 (4.15 MeV and 4.20 MeV) and its isotopes uranium-235 

(4.37 MeV, 4.40 MeV, and 4.58 MeV) and uranium-234 (4.72 MeV and 4.77 MeV). Naturally 

occurring uranium is 0.71% (w/w) uranium-235 and 0.0055% (w/w) uranium-234. NIOSH assumes 

that uranium tetrafluoride received at the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation was derived solely from 

naturally occurring ores. This assumption is based on the knowledge that the uranium produced at the 

Electro-Metallurgical Corporation was fabricated into fuel for use in the production reactors at 

Hanford, which only used uranium of natural enrichments. On an activity basis (i.e., dpm/gram) 

uranium-235 will be present in negligible amounts at these enrichment levels, but the uranium-234 

activity will be at a level that is essentially equal to uranium-238, due to its much shorter half-life 

(2.46E05 years for uranium-234 and 4.47E09 years for uranium-238, respectively). 

It is known that some facilities were involved in processing uranium recovered from spent nuclear 

fuel. This material contained trace amounts of transuranic radionuclides, which could have been 

concentrated during the refining process, thereby presenting an internal dose hazard. However, the 

use of recycled uranium did not commence until 1952, which is well into the final standby period at 

the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation. For this reason, it can be assumed that recycled uranium was 

not processed at the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation site, and hence not present at the Hooker 

Electrochemical site.

5.2.1.1 Uranium

The work performed at Hooker Electrochemical involved concentrating C-2 slag material (received 

from the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation) using hydrochloric acid. The uranium concentration in 

the C-2 slag was below what was normally considered economically feasible for recovery. As 

deduced from a MED Industrial Hazard Rating Data Sheet, the slag contained about one pound of 

uranium in a 500 pound barrel, or about 0.2% uranium by mass and was concentrated to a level 

between 5 and 10 pounds per 500 pound barrel (1 – 2% uranium by mass) (Howland, 1944, p. 29). 

Given that the same process was used at both the Mallinckrodt and Electro-Metallurgical facilities, a

similar material was produced at the Uranium Metal Plant operated by Mallinckrodt in St. Louis, 

Missouri (NYOO, 1949, p. 128). A 1945 document termed the dolomite liner material as C-2 

(Simons, 1945) and a 1965 document describing waste from the period 1946 to 1953, termed the 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

16 of 51 

material as C-liner (Unknown, 1959). Prior to 1946, the material was shipped to the DuPont 

Deepwater Works facility (Simons, 1945), and later it was shipped to the St. Louis Airport Storage 

site where it was deposited on the ground (Unknown, 1959). This material was still present during a 

1965 survey of the St. Louis Airport Storage site (Miller, 1965). This same report indicates that as of 

1965, half the material had been shipped to the Fernald plant for uranium recovery. The material 

appears to have been subsequently moved off the St. Louis Airport Storage site with the other 

raffinate materials that ended up at the St. Louis Latty Avenue site (Sapirie, 1966). The Mallinckrodt 

material is described as having a uranium content of <2% (Unknown, 1959). Based on inventory data 

from the St. Louis Airport Storage site (49 tons uranium in a 4,000 ton pile), the uranium content can 

be calculated as 1.2% (Miller, 1965). The only definitive account of the uranium content of the 

Mallinckrodt material is contained in a 1949 memo, in which it is listed as having a uranium content 

of 0.3% (Lynch, 1949). 

5.2.2 External Radiological Exposure Sources from Hooker Electrochemical Operations

Based on information and documentation available to NIOSH, the potential for external radiation 

doses from uranium and uranium decay products existed at the Hooker Electrochemical site. The 

uranium was solely derived from naturally occurring ores, and thus exhibited a natural isotopic 

abundance. The following subsections provide an overview of the external exposure sources. 

5.2.2.1 Photon

Uranium-bearing materials were handled by Hooker Electrochemical employees. External exposures 

to photon radiation would have resulted from the immediate daughter radionuclides in the uranium 

decay chain. The uranium progeny that result in the most significant photon exposures include 

thorium-234 and protactinium-234m (Radiological Health Handbook, 1970). Note that these isotopes 

have relatively short half-lives and can be assumed to be in equilibrium with the parent uranium-238. 

Because of their short half-lives, the exposure potential from these isotopes would travel with the 

parent and will not be considered separately. 

5.2.2.2 Beta

Exposure to beta sources for Hooker Electrochemical employees would have resulted principally from 

uranium decay products. In the uranium-series decay scheme, beginning with uranium-238, the shortlived isotope protactinium-234m emits the most energetic beta particle (2.28 MeV). It is this beta 

particle that accounts for the shallow-dose hazard associated with handling uranium. 

5.2.2.3 Neutron

Due to the low concentration of uranium in both the feed and output materials, there is no credible 

source of neutron radiation exposure for Hooker Electrochemical employees. Therefore, further 

discussion or assessment of potential personnel exposures to neutrons at Hooker Electrochemical is 

not included in this report. 

5.2.3 Incidents

NIOSH did not identify any documented accidents at the Hooker Electrochemical site that resulted in 

exceptionally high personnel exposure levels (such as a criticality event). Therefore, further 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

17 of 51 

discussion or assessment of potential personnel exposures associated with incidents at Hooker 

Electrochemical is not included in this report.

6.0 Summary of Available Monitoring Data for the Class Evaluated 

by NIOSH

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 6.0 and its related subsections were completed by Joe 

Guido, MJW Corporation. The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained in the 

associated text.

NIOSH did not locate any data relating to the occupational internal or external doses received during 

AEC work at Hooker Electrochemical. The origin of the slag material processed at Hooker 

Electrochemcial was from the Electro-Metallurgical Corporation, with uranium concentration in the 

C-2 slag below what was normally considered economically feasible for recovery (about 0.2% 

uranium by mass). 

No monitoring or source data are available directly from the Hooker uranium concentration work. 

Nevertheless, data from similar processes occurring at other facilities are available. Another Uranium 

Metal Production facility in operation during the Hooker MED operational timeframe was Plant 4 

(and later 6E) at Mallinckrodt, Destrehan Street. Electro-Metallurgical Corporation and Mallinckrodt 

used identical processes in the production of uranium metal (Gates, 1945, p. 21), with the exception 

that in the later years (post 1954), Mallinckrodt converted from using dolomite material as the 

refractory lining to using recycled MgF (Unknown, 1959). This change was consistent with general 

practices within the Uranium Metal Production facilities for this time period (Christofano, 1960). 

Electro-Metallurgical Corporation and Mallinckrodt generated scrap dolomite material (sometimes 

referenced as C-liner, C-2, and C-2 slag) (Unknown, 1959; Simons, 1945, p. 8), while the St. Louis 

Airport Storage site stored slag material. Facilities that handled and/or processed dolomite material 

are a potential source of radiological monitoring data. In summary: 

• SLAG MATERIAL FROM ELECTRO-METALLURGICAL CORPORATION: After the 

Hooker Electrochemical site shut down, slag material from Electro-Metallurgical Corporation was 

sent to the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works site (Walter, 1947; Unknown, 1967, p. 9), where the 

slag material was disposed of on the ground and where the material remained until the mid 1950s, 

at which time it is reported to have been shipped to the Y-12 plant for uranium recovery (Sapirie, 

1957; Unknown, 1967, p. 9).

• SLAG MATERIAL FROM MALLINCKRODT: Slag material from Mallinckrodt was sent to the

Scrap Recovery Plant at the DuPont Deepwater Works site (Simons, 1945, p. 8). Other 

documentation indicates that the slag material from Mallinckrodt was also sent to the St. Louis 

Airport Storage site beginning March 10, 1946 until “early in 1953” (Unknown, 1959).

• SLAG MATERIAL STORED AT THE ST. LOUIS AIRPORT STORAGE SITE: The slag 

material stored at the St. Louis Airport Storage Site was reported to be sent to the Fernald Plant for 

scrap recovery in 1959 (Unknown, 1959).
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

18 of 51 

Based on the relationships outlined above, Sections 6.1 and 6.2 include internal and external 

monitoring data, as relevant to the Hooker Electrochemical class under evaluation, from the following 

sites: Lake Ontario Ordnance Works, Electro-Metallurgical Corporation, Mallinckrodt, St. Louis 

Airport Storage, and Fernald in sections 6.1 and 6.2, below. 

6.1 Available Hooker Electrochemical Internal Monitoring Data

As indicated in Section 6.0, internal monitoring data for the Hooker Electrochemical site has not been 

located. Relevant data from sites that processed the same material are presented in this section.

Electro-Metallurgical Corporation Data

The Electro-Metallurgical Corporation was the source of the C-2 material that was processed at the 

Hooker Electrochemical site. A study of dust hazards at the Electro-Metallurgical facility was 

conducted during the period of December 1947 through May 1948 (Various, 1947-1948), and again in 

1949 (Brealia, 1949). Two Electro-Metallurgical job descriptions, one in each of the two reports, 

would include activities similar to those activities performed at the Hooker Electrochemical site. 

Table 6-1 presents a summary of the data from the two dust hazard reports. 

Table 6-1: Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from Electro-Metallurgical Corporation

Date Description Measurement Reference

December 24, 1947

March 30, 1948

May 14, 1948

Bomb Room, Barrel Slag 

and weigh

456 dpm/m3 

(average of unknown

samples)

SRDB Ref ID: 8917, p7

August 17-19, 1949 Shovels slag into lean and 

rich drums

398 dpm/m3 

(average of 3 samples) SRDB Ref ID: 8930, p19

Mallinckrodt Data

Prior to 1953, Mallinckrodt employed the same process as Electro-Metallurgical Corporation for the 

production of uranium metal, thus, generating the same slag materials (Gates, 1945, p. 21). After

1953, Mallinckrodt switched from the use of dolomite as the refractory material to recycled MgF slag. 

This change from dolomite is evident in the 1954 HASL air dust study which describes in detail the 

operations in a newly constructed Slag Processing facility (HASL, 1954). Air monitoring studies 

conducted at the Mallinckrodt facility were reviewed with attention given to activities and materials 

similar to those at Hooker Electrochemical. Note that monitoring data from the post-1953 period is 

presented for consideration, owing to the fact that the uranium concentration in the MgF material is 

higher because it is recycled.

Starting in 1948 and extending through 1956, air sampling data are available for operations involving 

slag material at Mallinckrodt. These data are summarized in Table 6-2. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

19 of 51 

Table 6-2: Summary of Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from the Mallinckrodt Facility

Date Description Measurement Reference

1948 

(Plant 4)

Slag Man

(DWA)

2.2 (times tolerance)

(154 dpm/m3

) SRDB Ref ID: 9340, p. 4

1949

(Plant 4)

Slag Man

(grinding C-Special)

80 dpm/m3

(average of 3, high 100, low 70) SRDB Ref ID: 9340, p. 50

1949

Air concentration posted 

on building layout—cited 

as “slag dumpster”

200 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 11553

1949 Slag Grinding

245 dpm/m3 average

194 dpm/m3 min

288 dpm/m3 max

SRDB Ref ID: 11553

1949 DWE

(slag handling)

1.6 x MAC-AEC Study (112 dpm/m3) 

2.2 x MAC-Mallinckrodt Study (154 dpm/m3) SRDB Ref ID: 11553

1950

(Plant 4)

Slag Man

(DWA)

1.1 (times tolerance)

(77 dpm/m3

) SRDB Ref ID: 9341, p. 5

1951

(Plant 6E)

Unloaders

(removing C-Special drum)

149 dpm/m3

(average of 2, high 237, low 60.8) SRDB Ref ID: 9443, p. 19

1952 Changing C-oxide and 

slag-liner drums 27 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 20657

1953 Changing C-oxide and 

slag-liner drums 81 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 20657

1953 Changing C-oxide and 

slag-liner drums 57 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 20657

Fernald Data

Available records indicate that sometime prior to 1965, C-2 material deposited at the St. Louis Airport 

Storage site between 1946 and 1953 was sent to Fernald for uranium recovery (Unknown, 1959). It is 

further indicated that half of the material that had been shipped to the St. Louis Airport Storage site 

had been shipped to Fernald sometime prior to 1965 (Unknown, 1959). Air sample datasheets related 

to the receipt and processing of this material have been located. These data are summarized in Table 

6-3. 

Table 6-3: Summary of Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from Fernald

Table 6-3 spans three pages.

Date Description Measurement Reference

1956 BZ-dumping can of C-liner 

into dumping station 

(respirator worn)

247 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 34544

1956 BZ-dumping can of C-liner 

into dumping station 

(respirator worn)

191 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 34544

1956 BZ-dumping can of C-liner 

into dumping station 

(respirator worn)

255 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 34544

1956 BZ-dumping can of C-liner 

into dumping station 

(respirator worn)

206 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 34544

1956 Dumping C-liner at 2nd floor 

dumping station, dry area

3.21 x MAC 

(224 dpm/m3

) 

(average of 4, above)

SRDB Ref ID: 41025
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

20 of 51 

Table 6-3: Summary of Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from Fernald

Table 6-3 spans three pages.

Date Description Measurement Reference

1958 BZ-operator chipping 

magnesium from C-liner 

and uranium at the outside 

William Mill 

(no respirator worn)

Note: 3 samples total -

samples may run high and 

low due to the wind change 

(this was an outside 

operation)

262 dpm/m3

 

659 dpm/m3

 

519 dpm/m3

SRDB Ref ID: 42627

1958 BZ-operator dumping drum 

of C-liner from the 2nd floor 

drum dumper

Note: 3 samples total

793 dpm/m3 

829 dpm/m3 

424 dpm/m3 SRDB Ref ID: 42627

1959 Evaluation of emptying 

gondola loaded with C-liner 

from Mallinckrodt (material 

removed from gondola and 

dropped onto pad)

-equipment used: crane with 

clam

-material was moist and 

damp

Note: 29 samples total, all 

sample results are GA 

samples downwind of 

operation

13 dpm/m3 (average) 

3 dpm/m3 (min)

38 dpm/m3 (max)

SRDB Ref ID: 42628

1959 Phase III of airport scrap 

evaluation (cleaning out 

loose material with push 

broom)

-material was dry and very 

dusty

Note: 12 samples total, all 

sample results are BZ 

samples

309 dpm/m3 (average) 

195 dpm/m3 (min)

627 dpm/m3 (max)

SRDB Ref ID: 42628
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

21 of 51 

Table 6-3: Summary of Pertinent Air Monitoring Data from Fernald

Table 6-3 spans three pages.

Date Description Measurement Reference

1959 Part of evaluation of C-liner 

in gondola at rail line at east 

end of Plant 8 (car emptied 

by crane)

Laborer cleaned at angles 

and bends where the crane 

could not reach

-material was partially moist 

and dry. In some places, the 

material was very hard

Note: 25 samples total, all 

sample results are BZ 

samples

63 dpm/m3 (average) 

15 dpm/m3 (min)

181 dpm/m3 (max)

SRDB Ref ID: 42628

1959 Evaluation of handling 

Mallinckrodt airport scrap

(BZ hand shoveling airport 

scrap into 30 gallon drums) 

-material was damp and 

cakey with no visible dust 

(no respirator worn)

Note: 11 samples total, all 

sample results are BZ 

samples

59 dpm/m3 (average) 

19 dpm/m3 (min)

108 dpm/m3 (max)

SRDB Ref ID: 42628

1959 BZ Operator dumping drum 

of slag liner into outside 

crusher dumping station

(No respirator worn)

Ventilation was said to 

appear very effective

Note: 4 samples total, all 

sample results are BZ 

samples

78 dpm/m3 (average) 

32 dpm/m3 (min)

110 dpm/m3 (max)

SRDB Ref ID: 42628

6.2 Available Hooker Electrochemical External Monitoring Data

As indicated in Section 6.0, external monitoring data for the Hooker Electrochemical site has not been 

located. Relevant data from sites that processed the same material are presented in this section.

Lake Ontario Ordnance Works Data

After Hooker Electrochemical quit processing C-2 material, C-2 material was shipped to the Lake 

Ontario Ordnance Works site and was deposited on the ground south of Building 409 in the Water 

Treatment Plant Area (Unknown, 1967, p. 9). Although this material was reportedly shipped to the Y12 site sometime during the 1950s (Unknown, 1967, p. 9), some of the material was still present 

during the 1981 Lake Ontario Ordnance Works site characterization study (Anderson, 1981a, p. 72). 

As indicated in this study, “contamination includes broken crucibles, saw blades, and other 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

22 of 51 

metallurgical scrap left from 1950 storage on the surface.” Surface (1 cm) beta/gamma dose rates 

ranged from 0.1 to 0.65 mR/hr (Anderson, 1981a, p. 72; Anderson, 1981b, p. 776), and gamma dose 

rates at 1 meter ranged 0.25 to 1 mR/hr (Anderson, 1981b, p. 777).

St. Louis Airport Storage Site Data

Between 1946 and 1953, C-liner materials from uranium production at Mallinckrodt were deposited in 

a pile at the St. Louis Airport Storage site (Unknown, 1959). In 1948, Mallinckrodt conducted a 

radiological survey of the St. Louis Airport Storage site’s Waste Storage Area. This survey reported 

the dose rate as 1.6 mrep/hr gamma and 11.5 mrep/hr beta on “top of pile at waste height” (Caplan, 

1949).

The C-liner material was still present during a 1965 survey of the St. Louis Airport Storage site 

(Miller, 1965). A total of three borings were collected in and around the C-liner pile (Miller, 1965, p. 

21). Surface and subsurface radiation measurements were collected at each of the survey locations. 

The surface results (measured at 1 meter) were reported as ranging from 1000 cpm to 1500 cpm, with 

the added notation that 4,000 cpm is equivalent to 1 mR/hr. This corresponds to a dose rate ranging 

from 0.25 to 0.375 mR/hr. 

7.0 Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction for the Class Evaluated by 

NIOSH

The feasibility determination for the class of employees under evaluation in this report is governed by 

both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1). Under that Act and rule, NIOSH must establish whether 

or not it has access to sufficient information either 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, or to estimate the radiation doses to members of 

the class more precisely than a maximum dose estimate. If NIOSH has access to sufficient 

information for either case, NIOSH would then determine that it would be feasible to conduct dose 

reconstructions. 

In determining feasibility, NIOSH begins by evaluating whether current or completed NIOSH dose 

reconstructions demonstrate the feasibility of estimating with sufficient accuracy the potential 

radiation exposures of the class. If the conclusion is one of infeasibility, NIOSH systematically 

evaluates the sufficiency of different types of monitoring data, process and source or source term data, 

which together or individually might assure that NIOSH can estimate either the maximum doses that 

members of the class might have incurred, or more precise quantities that reflect the variability of 

exposures experienced by groups or individual members of the class. This approach is discussed in 

OCAS’s SEC Petition Evaluation Internal Procedures which are available at 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas. The next four major subsections of this Evaluation Report examine:

• The sufficiency and reliability of the available data. (Section 7.1) 

• The feasibility of reconstructing internal radiation doses. (Section 7.2) 

• The feasibility of reconstructing external radiation doses. (Section 7.3) 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

23 of 51 

• The bases for petition SEC-00141 as submitted by the petitioner. (Section 7.4) 

7.1 Pedigree of Hooker Electrochemical Data

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 7.1 and its related subsections were completed by Tim 

Adler, Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU). The rationales for all conclusions in this 

document are explained in the associated text.

This subsection answers questions that need to be asked before performing a feasibility evaluation. 

Data Pedigree addresses the background, history, and origin of the data. It requires looking at site 

methodologies that may have changed over time; primary versus secondary data sources and whether 

they match; and whether data are internally consistent. All these issues form the bedrock of the 

researcher’s confidence and later conclusions about the data’s quality, credibility, reliability, 

representativeness, and sufficiency for determining the feasibility of dose reconstruction. The 

feasibility evaluation presupposes that data pedigree issues have been settled. 

As described in Section 6.0, NIOSH was unable to locate any data directly from the Hooker 

Electrochemical uranium concentration work. Nevertheless, data from similar processes occurring at 

other facilities are available and have been used in this evaluation; these data include air sampling data 

from Electro-Metallurgical Corporation, Mallinckrodt, and Fernald, as well as external radiation 

measurements for source materials present at the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works and St. Louis Airport 

Storage site.

The relationships between materials and work performed at Hooker Electrochemical and other sites 

have been detailed in Section 6. Specific applications of the data from other sites have been 

determined to be appropriate for the purposes of bounding Hooker Electrochemical radiation 

exposures. Similarly the data pedigree (i.e., the background, history, origin, etc.) of the various data 

sources used for this evaluation have been determined to be adequate to support the assessment of the 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA methodology as a bounding dose reconstruction approach for the class 

evaluated in this report. Data pedigree parameter details for the aforementioned sites (i.e. ElectroMetallurgical Corporation, Mallinckrodt, Fernald, Lake Ontario Ordnance Works, and St. Louis 

Airport Storage), are already available in site-specific documents written by NIOSH (Site Profiles, 

Technical Basis Documents, Evaluation Reports, etc.) and/or in documents captured by NIOSH and 

maintained in the SRDB. As such, only brief summaries of the sources used are provided below.

7.1.1 Internal Monitoring Data Pedigree Review

Internal monitoring data used in this evaluation came from Electro-Metallurgical, Mallinckrodt 

Chemical Works, and Fernald. As noted in the Pedigree section of SEC Petition Evaluation Report 

for Petition SEC-00136, Electro-Metallurgical Corporation, the air sampling analyses obtained from 

the Electro-Metallurgical site were performed by AEC’s Health and Safety Laboratory (NIOSH, 

2009). NIOSH’s previous evaluation of the data determined that the collection and analytical 

techniques used made it suitable for bounding doses. The data were obtained from within periodspecific dust hazard reports eliminating the possibility for transcription errors over time.

Data obtained from Mallinckrodt Chemical Works and Fernald also have pedigree characteristics 

previously judged acceptable by NIOSH. Both of these sites had extensive, well documented air 

monitoring programs; details of which are available from period-specific documentation stored in the 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

24 of 51 

SRDB, described in TBDs assembled for each site (ORAUT-TKBS-0005 for Mallinckrodt; ORAUTTKBS-0017-5 for Fernald), and available in respective evaluation reports. 

Considering the limited scope of work performed at Hooker Electrochemical and the applicability and 

pedigree of information available from other sites performing similar activities, NIOSH considers the data 

utilized in this evaluation report of sufficient quality and quantity to support the Battelle-TBD-6001 

Appendix AA methodology as a bounding dose reconstruction approach for Hooker Electrochemical 

internal doses. 

7.1.2 External Monitoring Data Pedigree Review

External monitoring data utilized in this evaluation came from measurements made of C-2 slag 

material stored at Lake Ontario Ordnance Works and the St. Louis Airport Storage site. 

Measurements from the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works site were taken in 1981 and documented in 

detail in a site characterization report that was written immediately following the measurements being 

taken (Anderson, 1981a, p. 72; Anderson, 1981b, pp. 776-777). Based on the techniques and 

equipment used to take the measurements, there is no reason to suspect the readings reported for Lake 

Ontario Ordnance Works were inaccurate. Measurements made on slag material present at the St. 

Louis Airport Storage site in 1948 (Caplan, 1949) and from borings in and around this material in 

1965 (Miller, 1965, p. 21) are also well documented. Similar to the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works 

measurements, the documents containing the data were produced immediately after the measurements 

were made, and based on knowledge of the equipment in use at the time, there is no reason to suspect 

the resultant data are inaccurate. 

Considering the limited scope of work performed at the Hooker Electrochemical site and the applicability 

and pedigree of information available from other sites performing similar activities, NIOSH considers the 

data utilized in this evaluation report of sufficient quality and quantity to support the Battelle-TBD-6001 

Appendix AA methodology as a bounding dose reconstruction approach for Hooker Electrochemical 

external doses. 

7.2 Evaluation of Bounding Internal Radiation Doses at Hooker 

Electrochemical

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 7.2 and its related subsections were completed by Joe 

Guido, MJW Corporation. The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained in the 

associated text.

The principal source of internal radiation doses for members of the class under evaluation was 

inhalation of uranium-bearing dust that was generated during the processing of uranium-bearing slag 

material (C-2 and C-2 concentrate). As received, the slag material has uranium content between 0.2 

and 0.3 percent by weight, and between 1 and 2 percent by weight after processing. The following 

subsections address the ability to bound internal doses, methods for bounding doses, and the 

feasibility of internal dose reconstruction. 

7.2.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related Internal Dose Data at Hooker Electrochemical

As discussed in Section 6.1, there are no available internal monitoring data from the Hooker 

Electrochemical site. However, pertinent air monitoring data (during the handling of C-2 slag 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

25 of 51 

material) are available from the Electro-Metallurgical, Mallinckrodt, and Fernald sites. The data are

summarized in Table 7-1, with the data grouped by activity. Average values are shown in this table as 

an indicator of the central tendency of the data, but it should be noted that the data contain both 

individual measurements and average values, and as such an accurate average could not be calculated.

Table 7-1: Summary of Air Monitoring Data from Related Sites

Site Activity

Range, Airborne Alpha Activity 

(dpm/m3) 

Min. Max. Average

ElectroMetallurgicala

Slag handling/barreling and weighing N/A N/A 456

Slag handling/shoveling into drums N/A N/A 398

Mallinckrodt Slag handling (DWE values) 70 288 128

Slag handling (specific operations) 27 237 122

Fernald

Slag drum unloading/slag handling in plant 78 829 390

Gondola unloading (outdoors) 3 38 13

Slag handling (outdoors) 15 181 62

Notes:

a No min./max. values are available.

The primary source of airborne activity in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA is associated with slag 

barrel unloading. Airborne activity values for slag handling at the Electro-Metallurgical site is similar 

to the Fernald site and higher than the values observed at the Mallinckrodt plant. By comparison, the 

actual operational experience at these three sites indicates a lower airborne activity concentration than 

the value of 822 dpm/m3 upon which the internal dose assignment from slag barrel unloading in 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA is based. Based on the 0.2 percent uranium concentration in the 

material at Hooker Electrochemical, the associated airborne dust concentration of 294 mg/m3 would 

constitute a value that is not likely to be tolerated under continuous occupancy conditions. 

Considering this information, NIOSH concludes that the Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA values 

represent a maximum exposure scenario which will support a bounding analysis of internal exposures 

for the class evaluated in this report. The remaining operations at Hooker Electrochemical involving 

high moisture content material produce lower airborne activity and are accounted for in Battelle-TBD6001 Appendix AA. 

The intake quantities presented above would apply to individuals directly involved in handling 

operations. If necessary, this intake quantity could be scaled to account for other exposure conditions 

using the methodology presented in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA. 

7.2.2 Evaluation of Bounding Residual Period Internal Doses 

There are no available data for contamination levels or source term quantities left at the Hooker 

Electrochemical facility after the cessation of operations. The levels in the environment were 

determined to be at background levels at the time of an environmental survey in 1976 (DOE, 1977). 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA presents an assessment of internal exposures during the residual 

period based on the deposition of airborne contamination during one year of operations and the 

subsequent resuspension of this material, resulting in an inhalation intake estimate of 1 pCi/d. 

Ingestion intakes could be calculated by applying the methodology present in Estimation of Ingestion 

Intakes, OCAS-TIB-009. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

26 of 51 

7.2.3 Methods for Bounding Process-Related and Residual Internal Dose at Hooker 

Electrochemical

NIOSH reviewed and assessed the available airborne radioactivity and source term data against the 

methodology provided in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA. Considering the intake scenarios 

established in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, the calculated airborne uranium concentrations from 

these intakes was compared to actual data and was found to be bounding in each case (based on the 

assessment of the dose using the appropriate dose reconstruction approaches and methodologies). For 

this reason, NIOSH believes that internal dose during both the operational and residual periods can be 

bounded using the methodology defined in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA.

7.2.4 Internal Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion 

After reviewing extensive information relating to Hooker Electrochemical through its review of 

related sites, NIOSH has found a significant amount of air sampling data relevant to the materials and 

processes used at the Hooker Electrochemical site. In addition, the method proposed for establishing 

a bounding dose for the operational periods in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, has been compared 

to available air monitoring data from related sites and has been found to be bounding in each case 

(based on the assessment of the dose using the appropriate dose reconstruction approaches and 

methodologies). 

Based on this information and the assessment presented in Section 7.2 of this report, NIOSH has 

concluded that it is feasible to bound the internal dose (reconstruct dose with sufficient accuracy) for 

the class evaluated in this report. However, as is the case with all dose reconstructions, NIOSH may 

choose to review and apply more refined dose reconstruction approaches and methods, evaluated on a 

case-by-case basis for specific individual dose reconstructions. 

7.3 Evaluation of Bounding External Radiation Doses at Hooker 

Electrochemical

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 7.3 and its related subsections were completed by Joe 

Guido, MJW Corporation. The rationales for all conclusions in this document are explained in the 

associated text.

The principal source of external exposure for members of the evaluated class was gamma, and beta 

radiations associated with handling and working in proximity to uranium-bearing slag material (C-2 

and C-2 concentrate). 

The following subsections address the ability to bound external doses, methods for bounding doses, 

and the feasibility of external dose reconstruction. 

7.3.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related External Dose Data at Hooker Electrochemical

As discussed in Section 6.2, there are no available external monitoring data from the Hooker 

Electrochemical site. However, pertinent external dose monitoring data (during the storage of C-2 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

27 of 51 

slag material) are available from the Lake Ontario Ordinance Works and Saint Louis Airport Storage 

sites. These data are summarized in Table 7-2. 

Table 7-2: External Monitoring Data from Related Sites

Data Source Shallow Deep

Lake Ontario Ordnance Works (1981) - 0.1 - 0.65 mR/hr (contact)

0.25 – 1.0 mR/hr (1 meter)

St. Louis Airport Storage Site (1948) 11.5 mrep/hr 1.6 mrep/hr

St. Louis Airport Storage Site (1965) - 0.25 – 0.375 mR/hr

Notes:

- Indicates no data.

The exposure rate listed for the Saint Louis Airport Storage site in 1948 is cited as being on top of the 

slag storage pile. Although the size of this pile is not known, based on the generation rate cited in 

1945 (80,000 – 90,000 pounds every month to six weeks) (Simons, 1945), it would easily exceed any 

quantity of material that would be handled or stored at the Hooker Electrochemical site. Based on 

these data, a bounding deep and shallow dose can be based on the values measured in 1948 (11.5 

mrep/hr beta and 1.6 mrep/hr gamma). 

7.3.2 Evaluation of Bounding Residual Period External Doses

There are no available data on contamination levels or source term quantities left at the Hooker 

Electrochemical facility after the cessation of operations. A bounding assessment of external dose is 

presented in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, based on the assignment of dose from surface 

contamination present during scrap recovery operations, with no adjustment for cessation of 

processing activities. That is, the dose assigned is the same as would be from exposure to surface 

contamination at an operating scrap recovery facility. 

7.3.3 Hooker Electrochemical Occupational X-Ray Examinations 

A memo reviewing the medical program at Hooker Electrochemical was written by the MED in 1943 

(Warren, 1943). The memo recommended pre-employment and annual X-rays. Although it predates 

the radiological work at the site, there is no reason to believe that this regiment was not in place 

during C-2 slag processing. Additionally, a 1946 memorandum summarizing the medical monitoring 

program at the site (Mears, 1946) lists a pre-employment X-ray as one of the components of the 

medical examination program. 

Although no specific information regarding occupational medical dose have been identified specific to 

Hooker Electrochemical, the dose associated with medical X-ray exams, if required as a condition of 

employment, can be assessed using the methodology defined in ORAUT-OTIB-0006. NIOSH 

believes that this methodology supports its ability to bound the occupational medical X-ray doses for 

the Hooker Electrochemical evaluated class.

7.3.4 Methods for Bounding External Dose at Hooker Electrochemical

There is an established protocol for assessing external exposure when performing dose reconstructions 

(these protocol steps are discussed in the following subsections): 

• Photon Dose 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

28 of 51 

• Beta Dose

• Neutron Dose (not applicable for the Hooker Electrochemical site)

• Medical X-ray Dose

7.3.4.1 Methods for Bounding Operational Period External Dose

Photon Dose

Photon dose during the operational period can be bound using 1948 exposure rate measurements from

the St. Louis Airport Storage site. A dose rate of 1.6 mrep/hr would be considered bounding for any 

exposure that could have resulted from site activities. The methodologies in Battelle-TBD-6001 

Appendix AA can be used to prorate this exposure based on the activities conducted. Based on 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, waste handling activities would constitute one day each month or a 

total of 96 hours per year. Other adjustments based on the work categories present in Battelle-TBD6001 Appendix AA may be applied as appropriate. 

Beta Dose

Beta dose during the operational period can be bound using 1948 exposure rates measured at the St. 

Louis Airport Storage site. A dose rate of 11.5 mrep/hr would be considered bounding for any 

exposure that could result from site activities. The methodologies in Battelle TBD-6001 Appendix 

AA can be used to prorate this exposure based on the activities conducted. Based on Battelle TBD6001 Appendix AA, waste handling activities would constitute one day each month, or a total of 120 

hours per year. Other adjustments based on work categories presented in the Battelle-TBD-6001 

Appendix AA may be applied as appropriate.

Medical X-ray Dose

With the exception of a memo recommending pre-employment X-rays (Warren, 1943), NIOSH has 

not found any information regarding occupational medical dose. However, the dose associated with 

X-ray exams can be assessed using the methodology defined in ORAUT-OTIB-0006. NIOSH 

believes that this methodology supports its ability to bound the occupational medical X-ray doses for 

the evaluated class.

7.3.4.2 Methods for Bounding Residual Period External Doses

NIOSH reviewed and assessed the available source term and external monitoring data against the 

methodology provided in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA. Considering the scenarios established in

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, NIOSH has determined that the calculated external dose assigned 

in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA can be used to bound exposures at the Hooker Electrochemical 

site during the residual period. With the removal of the source material at the onset of the residual 

contamination period, the likely exposure scenario during the post-operations period would be 

consistent with the scenario evaluated in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA. The likelihood that the 

material at the Hooker facility had a much lower uranium content than in typical scrap-recovery 

operations supports this conclusion. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

29 of 51 

7.3.5 External Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion 

Guidance outlined in Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, is sufficient to bound external photon and 

beta doses for the evaluated class. Using ORAUT-OTIB-0006, external occupational X-ray dose can 

be bound for members of the evaluated class. However, as is the case with all dose reconstructions, 

NIOSH may choose to review and apply more refined dose reconstruction approaches and methods, 

evaluated on a case-by-case basis, for specific individual dose reconstructions. 

7.4 Evaluation of Petition Basis for SEC-00141 

ATTRIBUTION AND ANNOTATION: Section 7.4 and its related subsections were completed by Tim 

Adler, Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU). The rationales for all conclusions in this 

document are explained in the associated text.

The following subsections evaluate the assertions made on behalf of petition SEC-00141 for the

Hooker Electrochemical site. 

7.4.1 Air Quality, Monitoring, Protection, and Medical Assistance for Furnace Room Workers

ISSUE: The petitioner is concerned about the air quality in the furnace room. The petitioner stated 

that her husband had experienced extreme conditions innumerable times when the air quality was so 

bad in the furnace room that her husband and fellow employees would gag, choke, and have to run to 

a window for air. In fact, they had to stand on a bench to reach the window. Her husband said that

the room would fill with so much “gas” that they could hardly breathe. 

ISSUE: The petitioner is concerned that besides a total lack of monitoring in the furnace room, the air 

quality incidents in the furnace room were not recorded. In addition, no medical assistance was 

provided to the petitioner’s husband or others. 

ISSUE: The petitioner is concerned that there were no warning devices installed to give employees a 

chance to escape the furnace room. There was also no protective gear, including a mask with or 

without oxygen.

RESPONSE: While documentation corroborating these statements exists, the work being referenced 

was associated with the P-45 manufacturing work area. The work that took place in this area is not 

addressed in this evaluation because that work did not involve radiological sources.

7.4.2 Internal and External Monitoring 

ISSUE: Additionally, the petitioner noted in a separate affidavit that to the best of the petitioner’s 

knowledge, there is no internal or external monitoring data for Hooker Electrochemical Corporation.

RESPONSE: NIOSH found that monitoring records were not available for the entire evaluated class 

period. However, as presented and evaluated in the preceding sections of this evaluation, sufficient 

results have been found for other sites performing similar work to support bounding the dose 

(reconstructing internal and external doses with sufficient accuracy) for the class evaluated in this 

report.
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

30 of 51 

7.5 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00141

This report evaluates the feasibility for completing dose reconstructions for employees at the Hooker 

Electrochemical site from January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1976. NIOSH found that the 

available monitoring records, process descriptions and source term data available are sufficient to 

complete dose reconstructions for the evaluated class of employees.

Table 7-3 summarizes the results of the feasibility findings at Hooker Electrochemical for each 

exposure source during the time period January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1976. 

Table 7-3: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00141

January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1976

Source of Exposure Reconstruction Feasible Reconstruction Not Feasible

Internal1 X 

 - Uranium X 

External X 

 - Gamma X 

 - Beta X 

 - Neutron X 

 - Occupational Medical X-ray X 1 Internal includes an evaluation of urinalysis (in vitro), airborne dust, and lung (in vivo) data, as applicable.

As of December 28, 2009, a total of 110 claims have been submitted to NIOSH for individuals who 

worked at the Hooker Electrochemical site and are covered by the class definition evaluated in this 

report. Dose reconstructions have been completed for 93 individuals (~84%). 

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00141

The health endangerment determination for the class of employees covered by this evaluation report is 

governed by both EEOICPA and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(3). Under these requirements, if it is not 

feasible to estimate with sufficient accuracy radiation doses for members of the class, NIOSH must 

also determine that there is a reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered the 

health of members of the class. Section 83.13 requires NIOSH to assume that any duration of 

unprotected exposure may have endangered the health of members of a class when it has been 

established that the class may have been exposed to radiation during a discrete incident likely to have 

involved levels of exposure similarly high to those occurring during nuclear criticality incidents. If 

the occurrence of such an exceptionally high-level exposure has not been established, then NIOSH is 

required to specify that health was endangered for those workers who were employed for a number of 

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

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

employees in the SEC. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

31 of 51 

NIOSH has determined that although no monitoring data are available specifically from the Hooker 

Electrochemical Corporation for the evaluated class, applicable data are available from other sites 

performing similar operations. Thus, NIOSH’s evaluation determined that it is feasible to estimate 

radiation dose for members of the NIOSH-evaluated class with sufficient accuracy based on the sum 

of information available from available resources. Modification of the class definition regarding 

health endangerment and minimum required employment periods, therefore, is not required. 

9.0 Class Conclusion for Petition SEC-00141

Based on its full research of the class under evaluation, NIOSH found no part of said class for which it 

cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy. This class includes all employees who 

worked in any location at the Hooker Electrochemical Corporation during the operational period from 

January 1, 1943 through December 31, 1948, and during the residual period from January 1, 1949 to 

December 31, 1976. 

NIOSH has carefully reviewed all material sent in by the petitioner, including the specific assertions 

stated in the petition, and has responded herein (see Section 7.4). NIOSH has also reviewed available 

technical resources and many other references, including the Site Research Database (SRDB), for 

information relevant to SEC-00141. In addition, NIOSH reviewed its NOCTS dose reconstruction 

database to identify EEOICPA-related dose reconstructions that might provide information relevant to 

the petition evaluation. 

These actions are based on existing, approved NIOSH processes used in dose reconstruction for 

claims under EEOICPA. NIOSH’s guiding principle in conducting these dose reconstructions is to 

ensure that the assumptions used are fair, consistent, and well-grounded in the best available science. 

Simultaneously, uncertainties in the science and data must be handled to the advantage, rather than to 

the detriment, of the petitioners. When adequate personal dose monitoring information is not 

available, or is very limited, NIOSH may use the highest reasonably possible radiation dose, based on 

reliable science, documented experience, and relevant data to determine the feasibility of 

reconstructing the dose of an SEC petition class. NIOSH contends that it has complied with these 

standards of performance in determining the feasibility or infeasibility of reconstructing dose for the 

class under evaluation. 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

32 of 51 

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

33 of 51 

10.0 References 

42 C.F.R. pt. 81, Guidelines for Determining the Probability of Causation Under the Energy 

Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule, Federal 

Register/Vol. 67, No. 85/Thursday, p 22,296; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 19391 

42 C.F.R. pt. 82, Methods for Radiation Dose Reconstruction Under the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000; Final Rule; May 2, 2002; SRDB Ref ID: 

19392 

42 C.F.R. pt. 83, Procedures for Designating Classes of Employees as Members of the Special 

Exposure Cohort Under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 

2000; Final Rule; May 28, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 22001 

42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385 [EEOICPA], Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program Act of 2000, as amended

Affidavit, 2009, Affidavit from Survivor, no internal or external monitoring; September 28, 2009; OSA 

Ref ID: 109892 

Anderson, 1981a, Final Report on A Comprehensive Characterization and Hazard Assessment of the 

DOE-Niagara Falls Storage Site; T. L. Anderson, J. F. Dettorre, D. R. Jackson, and B. S. Ausmus; 

June 1981; SRDB Ref ID: 4249 

Anderson, 1981b, Final Report on A Comprehensive Characterization and Hazard Assessment of the 

DOE-Niagara Falls Storage Site-Volume II and III (Appendix A-J); T. L. Anderson, J. F. Dettorre, D. 

R. Jackson, and B. S. Ausmus; June 1981; SRDB Ref ID: 60339

Battelle-TBD-6001, Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium and Thorium, 

Rev. F0; Battelle Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; December 13, 2006; SRDB Ref ID: 

30673 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix AA, Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium 

and Thorium-Appendix AA-Hooker Electrochemical Company, Rev. 0; Battelle Team Dose 

Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; June 15, 2007; SRDB Ref ID: 74577 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix B, Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium 

and Thorium-Appendix B-DuPont Deepwater Works, Rev. 1; Battelle Team Dose Reconstruction 

Project for NIOSH; January 3, 2008; SRDB Ref ID: 41363 

Battelle-TBD-6001 Appendix C, Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Refined Uranium 

and Thorium-Appendix C-Electro Metallurgical Company, Rev. 0; Battelle Team Dose 

Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; December 21, 2007; SRDB Ref ID: 41362 

Brealia, 1949, Electro Metallurgical Co. Occupational Exposure to Radioactive Dust August 17-19, 

1949; A. J. Brealia; November 10, 1949; SRDB Ref ID: 8930 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

34 of 51 

Caplan, 1949, Health Problems at the Airport Properties, correspondence to H. E. Thayer; K. J. 

Caplan; August 11, 1949; SRDB Ref ID: 11193 

Christofano, 1960, The Industrial Hygiene of Uranium Refining; Emil Christofano and William B. 

Harris; November 1960; SRDB Ref ID: 15774 

DOE, 1977, Formerly Utilized MED/AEC Sites Remedial Action Program-Radiological Survey of the 

Hooker Chemical Company Niagara Falls, New York, Final Report; U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE); January 1977; SRDB Ref ID: 10797 

Ferry, 1944, Respirators Found Most Efficient, correspondence to Joseph Tardiff; John L. Ferry; July 

29, 1944; SRDB Ref ID: 30756, p. 57 

Form B, 2009, Petition Form B with Affidavit; Received March 6, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 108367 

Gates, 1945, Description of Uranium Producing Processes, correspondence to The Area Engineer, 

Madison Square Area, New York, New York; M. E. Gates; October 17, 1945; SRDB Ref ID: 9442, 

pp. 16-22 

HASL, 1954, Mallinckrodt Chemical Works Plant 6E Occupational Exposure to Airborne 

Contaminants, HASL-MCW-20; Health and Safety Laboratory (HASL); 1954; SRDB Ref ID: 20639 

Howland, 1944, Review of MFL Process at Hooker Electrochemical Co., correspondence to Colonel 

Stafford L. Warren with attached Data Sheets for Industrial Hazard Rating; Joe W. Howland; 

December 5, 1944; SRDB Ref ID: 16323 

Keller, 1958, Transfer of Niagara Falls Slag to Y-12, correspondence to J. P. Murray; Charles A. 

Keller; June 24, 1958; SRDB Ref ID: 64932 

Lynch, 1949, Waste Disposal, Mallinckrodt Plants, memo to file; D. E. Lynch; February 9, 1949; 

SRDB Ref ID: 11173, p. 2 

Mears, 1946, Medical Clearance on Terminated Madison Square Area Contracts, correspondence to 

The District Engineer, Manhattan District, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; B. J. Mears; March 8, 1946; SRDB 

Ref ID: 17125, pp. 29-30 

Miller, 1965, Committee Report on Disposition of St. Louis Airport Storage Site; R. H. Miller, E. B. 

Kiser, W. T. Thornton, E. E. Green, and D. L. Oakley; November 5, 1965; SRDB Ref ID: 74542 

Name1, 2009a, SEC-00141 Consult Call Response, correspondence to Larry Elliott of the Office of 

Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS); [Name1 Redacted]; April 22, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 

108663 

Name1, 2009b, Petitioner’s Response to the Proposed Finding Letter, correspondence to Larry Elliott 

of the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS); [Name1 Redacted]; June 12, 2009; 

OSA Ref ID: 109045 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

35 of 51 

Name1, 2009c, Petitioner’s Request for Administrative Review of the NIOSH Proposed Finding, 

correspondence to Larry Elliott of the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS); 

[Name1 Redacted]; September 10, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 109775 

Name1, 2009d, Request for Change in the Proposed Class, email correspondence to LaVon 

Rutherford of the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS); [Name1 Redacted]; 

September 26, 2009; OSA Ref ID: 109856 

NIOSH, 2009, SEC Petition Evaluation Report for Petition SEC-00136, Electro-Metallurgical 

Corporation; National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); July 21, 2009; SRDB 

Ref ID: 77690 

NYOO, 1949, Health Hazards in NYOO Facilities Producing and Processing Uranium (A Status 

Report-April 1, 1949); New York Operations Office (NYOO) Medical Division; April 18, 1949; 

SRDB Ref ID: 3931

OCAS-PR-004, Internal Procedures for the Evaluation of Special Exposure Cohort Petitions, Rev. 0; 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); Cincinnati, Ohio; September 23, 

2004; SRDB Ref ID: 32022 

OCAS-TIB-009, Estimation of Ingestion Intakes, Rev. 0; Office of Compensation Analysis and 

Support (OCAS) [part of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)]; 

Cincinnati, Ohio; April 13, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 22397 

Olotka, 1979, Review and Comments Relating to March 1979 Letter regarding Hooker 

Electrochemical, correspondence to William E. Mott; F. T. Olotka; SRDB Ref ID: 11002, pp. 39-41 

ORAUT-OTIB-0006, OTIB: Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray 

Procedures, Rev. 03 PC-1; Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team (ORAUT) Dose Reconstruction 

Project for NIOSH; December 21, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 20220

ORAUT-OTIB-0024, OTIB: Estimation of Neutron Dose Rates from Alpha-Neutron Reactions in 

Uranium and Thorium Compounds, Rev. 00; Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team (ORAUT) 

Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; April 7, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 19445

ORAUT-OTIB-0070, OTIB: Dose Reconstruction During Residual Radioactivity Periods at Atomic 

Weapons Employer Facilities, Rev. 00; Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team (ORAUT) Dose 

Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; March 10, 2008; SRDB Ref ID: 41603

ORAUT-TKBS-0005, Basis for Development of an Exposure Matrix for the Mallinckrodt Chemical 

Company St. Louis Downtown Site and the St. Louis Airport Site, St. Louis, Missouri, Rev. 02 PC-1; 

Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team (ORAUT) Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; May 

25, 2009; SRDB Ref ID: 67979 

ORAUT-TKBS-0017-5, Technical Basis Document for Fernald Environmental Management Project 

(FEMP)—Occupational Internal Dose, Rev. 00; Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team (ORAUT) 

Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; May 28, 2004; SRDB Ref ID: 19485 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

36 of 51 

ORNL, unknown date, Elimination Report; Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL); Unknown date; 

SRDB Ref ID: 11002, pp. 58-61 

Personal Communication, 2009a, Personal Communication with Former Hooker Electrochemical 

“Yard Gang” Employee; Telephone Interview by ORAU Team; December 12, 2009, 10:30 AM EST; 

SRDB Ref ID: 77828 

Personal Communication, 2009b, Personal Communication with Former Hooker Electrochemical 

Chemical Engineer/Operator; Telephone Interview by ORAU Team; December 12, 2009, 11:15 AM; 

SRDB Ref ID: 77827 

Personal Communication, 2009c, Personal Communication with Former Hooker Electrochemical 

Chemical Operator; Telephone Interview by ORAU Team; December 19, 2009, 11:00 AM EST; 

SRDB Ref ID: 77826 

Radiological Health Handbook, 1970, Radiological Health Handbook; U.S. Department of Health, 

Education, and Welfare, compiled and edited by the Bureau of Radiological Health and the Training 

Institute, Environmental Control Administration; January 1970; SRDB Ref ID: publicly available 

Sapirie, 1957, Low Grade Uranium Residues Stored at the Niagara Falls Site, New York, 

correspondence to D. F. Musser; S. R. Sapirie; May 29, 1957; SRDB Ref ID: 6341 

Sapirie, 1966, Delegation of Authority to Sell C-Slag, correspondence with attached Bill of Sale; S. R. 

Sapirie; September 16, 1966; SRDB Ref ID: 74543 

Simons, 1945, Shipment Security Survey at Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, correspondence that 

includes summary of shipments; F. W. Simons; February 15, 1945; SRDB Ref ID: 9161 

Unknown, 1949, SF Material Accounting Procedure Manual for the Tonawanda Sub-Office of the 

New York Operations Office U.S. Atomic Energy Commission; Unknown author; July 15, 1949; 

SRDB Ref ID: 61025, pp. 189-200 

Unknown, 1959, General Information for the St. Louis Airport Site; Unknown author; April 11, 1959; 

SRDB Ref ID: 10300 

Unknown, 1967, Interim Report for Niagara Falls Site Task Force; Unknown author; November 30, 

1970; SRDB Ref ID: 61060, pp. 2-24 

Unknown, 1971, Lake Ontario Ordnance Works Niagara Falls Site; Unknown author; January 15, 

1971; SRDB Ref ID: 61060, pp. 57-71 

Various, 1947-1948, Reports on Dust Hazards at Electrometallurgical Company; various authors; 

dates from December 1947 through May 1948; SRDB Ref ID: 8917 

Walter, 1947, By-Product Scrap and Sludges; K. A. Walter; January 1, 1947; SRDB Ref ID: 61025, 

pp. 71-73 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

37 of 51 

Warren, 1943, Recommendations of Medical Section for Manufacturing Process at Hooker, 

correspondence to The Area Engineer, Madison Square Area, New York; Stafford L. Warren; 

September 27, 1943; SRDB Ref ID: 16365, pp. 4-5 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

38 of 51 

This page intentionally left blank 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

39 of 51 

Attachment One: Data Capture Synopsis

Table A1-1: Data Capture Synopsis for Hooker Electrochemical

Data Capture Information General Description of Documents Captured Date Completed Uploaded into 

SRDB

Primary Site/Company Name: Hooker Electrochemical

AWE 1943-1948; Residual Radiation 1949-1976 

Other Site Names: 

Hooker Chemical Co.

Occidental Chemical Corp. Marc J. Kennedy (Attorney) 

(972) 404-4982

Occidental Chemical Corp., Specialty Chemical Div. 

Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp. 

No relevant data identified. 05/16/2008 0 

State Contacted: John Mitchell (518) 402-8573 Transportation and storage of uranium turnings. 12/21/2009 1 

Cincinnati Library Radiological survey. 01/19/2004 1 

Department of Labor/Paragon Air sampling and repair work, Boron Metal Plant (BMP) Project, K65 inventory, burning of wastes, contract documentation for Hooker 

Electrochemical, contract supplemental agreement, operating manual, 

memorandum of understanding between AEC, Air Force, and 

Department of the Navy, radiological surveys, relocation of 

contaminated materials, waste disposal and storage, sewage plant and 

railroad facilities, and weekly reports.

01/14/2009 74

DOE Legacy Management - Grand Junction Office Radiological survey at selected locations in Niagara Falls, New York, 

accountability procedures, contract AT-(30-1)-1524, collection of 

historical maps and site photos, contaminated scrap metal transfer, 

elimination reports, litigation documents, site surveys, soil sampling, 

radiological clearance documentation, and a summary report.

07/08/2009 51

DOE Legacy Management - MoundView (Fernald 

Holdings, includes Fernald Legal Database)

Report on hazardous waste disposal In Erie and Niagara Counties and 

a report accusing the U.S. of waste dumping.

03/08/2007 3 

EML Library Site visits 1953-1954, annual report 1953, thorium sampling and 

storage, and a 1953 symposium on aerosols.

03/08/2005 1 

Internet - DOE Comprehensive Epidemiologic Data 

Resource (CEDR)

No relevant data identified. 10/23/2009 0 

Internet - DOE Hanford Declassified Document Retrieval 

System (DDRS)

No relevant data identified. 10/22/2009 0 

Internet - DOE OpenNet Manhattan District History, Book I - General, Volume 7 - Medical 

Program

10/22/2009 1 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

40 of 51 

Table A1-1: Data Capture Synopsis for Hooker Electrochemical

Data Capture Information General Description of Documents Captured Date Completed Uploaded into 

SRDB

Internet - DOE OSTI Energy Citations Hot semiworks redox studies. 10/22/2009 1 

Internet - DOE OSTI Information Bridge No relevant data identified. 10/22/2009 0 

Internet - FUSRAP Considered Sites Database Contract No. W-7405 eng-28 supplemental agreement No. 3, July 26, 

1944.

07/08/2005 1 

Internet - Google Contract supplements, report on the development of the Atomic 

Bomb under the auspices of the United States Government, 

environmental cost of victory in WWII and the Cold War, inspection 

report of former licensee's activities, and information on the poisoned 

workers and poisoned places regarding the bomb that fell on Niagara.

11/22/2009 9 

Internet - National Academies Press (NAP) No relevant data identified. 10/23/2009 0 

Internet - National Nuclear Security Administration 

(NNSA) - Nevada Site Office

No relevant data identified. 10/23/2009 0 

Internet - NRC Agencywide Document Access and 

Management (ADAMS)

No relevant data identified. 10/22/2009 0 

Internet - Washington State University (U.S. Transuranium 

and Uranium Registries)

No relevant data identified. 10/23/2009 0 

NARA Atlanta Disposition of KAPL wastes and bioassay results, dust, air and breath 

samples, Madison Square area monthly accountability reports, 

manufacturing process at Hooker, monthly progress reports, neutron 

source information, semi-monthly reports, weekly reports, and work 

reports of Richard Tybout.

06/07/2008 15

NARA Kansas City Facility decontamination history, historical information, health and 

safety meeting, radiological survey, U.S. military involvement in the 

toxic contamination of Love Canal and the Niagara Frontier region, 

and weekly reports.

08/14/2008 7 

ORAU Team Visit with Berwyn Robinson (Director of Uranium Development), email on chemical processing of uranium contaminated slag, and site 

profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that refined uranium and 

thorium.

10/20/2009 3 

ORO Vault Work reports, dosimetry, and hazardous area information. 10/26/2005 2 

Unknown Unloading K-65, medical requirements and work reports, data 

analysis results, declassification, decommission and decontamination 

of Hooker Electrochemical, health and safety precautions, and 

quarterly film badge data.

04/19/2004 13

TOTAL 183
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

41 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

DOE CEDR

http://cedr.lbl.gov/

COMPLETED 10/23/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." or "Occidental Chemical Corp." or "Hooker 

Chemical and Plastics Corp." or "OxyChem"

0 0 

DOE Hanford DDRS

http://www2.hanford.gov/declass/

COMPLETED 10/22/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." or "Occidental Chemical Corp." or "Hooker 

Chemical and Plastics Corp." or "OxyChem"

0 0 

DOE OpenNet

http://www.osti.gov/opennet/advancedsearch.jsp

COMPLETED 10/22/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." or "Occidental Chemical Corp." or "Hooker 

Chemical and Plastics Corp." or "OxyChem"

0 1 

DOE OSTI Energy Citations

http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/

COMPLETED 10/22/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." or "Occidental Chemical Corp." or "Hooker 

Chemical and Plastics Corp." or "OxyChem"

63 1 

DOE OSTI Information Bridge

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/advancedsearch.jsp

COMPLETED 10/22/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co."

"Occidental Chemical Corp."

"Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp."

"OxyChem"

29 0 

Google

http://www.google.com

COMPLETED 11/22/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." americium, OR Am241, OR Am-241, OR "AM 

241", OR 241Am, OR 241-Am, OR "241 Am"

"Hooker Chemical" ionium, OR Th230, OR Th-230, OR "Th 230", OR 

230Th, OR 230-Th, OR "230 Th"

"Hooker Chemical" neptunium, OR Np237, OR Np-237, OR "Np 237", 

OR 237Np, OR 237-Np, OR "237 Np"

"Hooker Chemical" polonium, OR Po210, OR Po-210, OR "Po 210", 

OR 210Po, OR 210-Po, OR "210 Po"

"Hooker Chemical" thorium, OR Th232, OR Th-232, OR "Th 232", OR 

232Th, OR 232-Th, OR "232 Th", OR "Z metal", OR myrnalloy, OR 

"chemical 10-66", OR "chemical 10-12"

"Hooker Chemical" ionium, OR UX1, OR UX2, OR Th-230, OR 

Th230, OR "Th 230", OR 230-Th, OR "230 Th", OR 230Th, OR Th234, OR Th234, OR "Th 234", OR 234-Th, OR 234Th, OR "234 Th"

444,537 9 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

42 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Hooker Chemical" tritium, H3, H-3, mint, HTO

"Hooker Chemical" uranium, OR U233, OR U-233, OR "U 233", OR 

233U, OR 233-U, OR "233 U", OR U234, OR "U 234", OR U-234, OR 

234U, OR 234-U, OR "234 U"

"Hooker Chemical" U235, OR "U 235", OR U-235, OR 235-U, OR 

235U, OR "235 U", OR U238, OR "U 238", OR U-238, OR 238-U, OR 

238U, OR "238 U"

"Hooker Chemical" U308, OR "U 308", OR U-308, OR 308-U, OR 

308U, OR "308 U", OR "uranium extraction", OR "black oxide", OR 

"brown oxide"

"Hooker Chemical" green salt, OR "orange oxide", OR "yellow cake", 

OR UO2, OR UO3, OR UF4, OR UF6, OR C-216, OR C-616, OR C65, OR C-211, OR U3O8

"Hooker Chemical" plutonium, OR Pu-238, OR Pu238, OR "Pu 238", 

OR 238Pu, OR 238-Pu, OR "238 Pu", OR Pu-239, OR Pu239, OR "Pu 

239", OR 239Pu, OR 239-Pu, OR "239 Pu" 

"Hooker Chemical" Pu-240, OR Pu240, OR "Pu 240", OR 240Pu, OR 

240-Pu, OR "240 Pu", OR Pu-241, OR Pu241, OR "Pu 241", OR 

241Pu, OR 241-Pu, OR "241 Pu"

"Hooker Chemical" radium, OR Ra-226, OR Ra226, OR "Ra 226", OR 

226-Ra, OR 226Ra, OR 226-Ra, OR Ra-228, OR Ra228, OR "Ra 228", 

OR 228Ra, OR 228-Ra, OR "228 Ra"

"Hooker Chemical" radon, OR Rn-222, OR Rn222, OR "Rn 222", OR 

222Rn, OR 222-Rn, OR "222 Rn"

"Hooker Chemical" thoron, OR Rn-220, OR Rn220, OR "Rn 220", OR 

220Rn, OR 220-Rn, OR "220 Rn"
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

43 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Hooker Chemical" protactinium, OR Pa-234m, OR Pa234m, OR "Pa 

234m", OR 234mPa, OR 234m-Pa, OR "234m Pa"

"Hooker Chemical" strontium, OR Sr-90, OR Sr90, OR "Sr 90", OR 90-

Sr, OR 90Sr, OR "90 Sr"

"Hooker Chemical" oralloy, OR postum, OR tuballoy, OR "uranyl 

nitrate hexahydrate", OR UNH, OR K-65, OR "sump cake"

"Hooker Chemical" uranium dioxide, OR "uranium tetrafluoride", OR 

"uranium trioxide"

"Hooker Chemical" uranium hexafluoride, OR accident, OR "air count"

"Hooker Chemical" air dust, OR "air filter", OR "airborne test"

"Hooker Chemical" alpha, OR "belgian congo ore", OR bioassay, OR 

bio-assay

"Hooker Chemical" breath, OR "breathing zone", OR BZ, OR 

calibration, OR columnation

"Hooker Chemical" contamination, OR curie, OR denitration, OR 

"denitration pot" 

"Hooker Chemical" derby, OR regulus, OR dose, OR dosimeter

"Hooker Chemical" dosimetric, OR dosimetry, OR electron, OR 

environment
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

44 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Hooker Chemical" Ether-Water Project, OR exposure, OR "exposure 

investigation", OR "radiation exposure"

"Hooker Chemical" external, OR "F machine", OR fecal, OR "feed 

material", OR femptocurie, OR film, OR fission, OR fluoroscopy

"Hooker Chemical" Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, 

OR FUSRAP, OR gamma-ray, OR "gas proportional", OR "gaseous 

diffusion"

"Hooker Chemical" health, OR "health instrument", OR "health 

physics", OR "H.I.", OR HI, OR HP, OR "highly enriched uranium", 

OR HEU

"Hooker Chemical" hydrofluorination, OR "in vitro", OR "in vivo", OR 

incident, OR ingestion, OR inhalation, OR internal

"Hooker Chemical" investigation, OR isotope, OR isotopic, OR 

"isotopic enrichment", OR "JS Project", OR Landauer, OR "liquid 

scintillation"

"Hooker Chemical" log, OR "log sheet", OR "log book", OR "low 

enriched uranium", OR LEU

"Hooker Chemical" maximum permissible concentration, OR MPC, OR 

metallurgy, OR microcurie, OR millicurie

"Hooker Chemical" mixed fission product, OR MFP, OR monitor, OR 

"air monitoring", OR nanocurie, OR "nasal wipe", OR neutron, OR 

"nose wipe"

"Hooker Chemical" nuclear, OR Chicago-Nuclear, OR "nuclear fuels", 

OR "nuclear track emulsion", OR "type A" 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

45 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Hooker Chemical" NTA, OR "occupational radiation exposure", OR 

occurrence, OR "ore concentrate", OR "PC Project"

"Hooker Chemical" permit, OR "radiation work permit", OR "safe work 

permit", OR "special work permit", OR RWP, OR SWP

"Hooker Chemical" phosphate research, OR photon, OR picocurie, OR 

pitchblende, OR "pocket ion chamber", OR PIC, OR problem, OR 

procedure

"Hooker Chemical" radeco, OR radiation, OR radioactive, OR 

radioactivity, OR radiograph, OR radiological

"Hooker Chemical" Radiological Survey Data Sheet, OR RSDS, OR 

radionuclide, OR raffinate, OR reactor

"Hooker Chemical" respiratory, OR "retention schedules", OR roentgen

"Hooker Chemical" sample, OR "air sample", OR "dust sample", OR 

"general area air sample"

"Hooker Chemical" solvent extraction, OR source, OR "sealed source", 

OR spectra, OR spectrograph, OR spectroscopy, OR spectrum, OR 

standard, OR "operating standard", OR "processing standard"

"Hooker Chemical" survey, OR "building survey", OR "routine survey", 

OR "special survey", OR "technical basis"

"Hooker Chemical" thermal diffusion, OR "thermoluminescent 

dosimeter", OR TLD, OR "Tiger Team"

"Hooker Chemical" tolerance dose, OR urinalysis, OR urine, OR 

"whole body count", OR WBC, OR "working level", OR WL, OR Xray, OR "X ray", OR Xray

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem americium, OR Am241, OR Am-241, 

OR "AM 241", OR 241Am, OR 241-Am, OR "241 Am"
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

46 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem ionium, OR Th230, OR Th-230, OR 

"Th 230", OR 230Th, OR 230-Th, OR "230 Th"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem neptunium, OR Np237, OR Np-237, 

OR "Np 237", OR 237Np, OR 237-Np, OR "237 Np"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem polonium, OR Po210, OR Po-210, 

OR "Po 210", OR 210Po, OR 210-Po, OR "210 Po" 

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem thorium, OR Th232, OR Th-232, OR 

"Th 232", OR 232Th, OR 232-Th, OR "232 Th", OR "Z metal", OR 

myrnalloy, OR "chemical 10-66", OR "chemical 10-12"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem ionium, OR UX1, OR UX2, OR Th230, OR Th230, OR "Th 230", OR 230-Th, OR "230 Th", OR 230Th, 

OR Th-234, OR Th234, OR "Th 234", OR 234-Th, OR 234Th, OR 

"234 Th"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem tritium, H3, H-3, mint, HTO

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem uranium, OR U233, OR U-233, OR 

"U 233", OR 233U, OR 233-U, OR "233 U", OR U234, OR "U 234", 

OR U-234, OR 234U, OR 234-U, OR "234 U"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem U235, OR "U 235", OR U-235, OR 

235-U, OR 235U, OR "235 U", OR U238, OR "U 238", OR U-238, OR 

238-U, OR 238U, OR "238 U"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem U308, OR "U 308", OR U-308, OR 

308-U, OR 308U, OR "308 U", OR "uranium extraction", OR "black 

oxide", OR "brown oxide"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem green salt, OR "orange oxide", OR 

"yellow cake", OR UO2, OR UO3, OR UF4, OR UF6, OR C-216, OR 

C-616, OR C-65, OR C-211, OR U3O8
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

47 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem plutonium, OR Pu-238, OR Pu238, 

OR "Pu 238", OR 238Pu, OR 238-Pu, OR "238 Pu", OR Pu-239, OR 

Pu239, OR "Pu 239", OR 239Pu, OR 239-Pu, OR "239 Pu"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem Pu-240, OR Pu240, OR "Pu 240", 

OR 240Pu, OR 240-Pu, OR "240 Pu", OR Pu-241, OR Pu241, OR "Pu 

241", OR 241Pu, OR 241-Pu, OR "241 Pu"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem radium, OR Ra-226, OR Ra226, OR 

"Ra 226", OR 226-Ra, OR 226Ra, OR 226-Ra, OR Ra-228, OR Ra228, 

OR "Ra 228", OR 228Ra, OR 228-Ra, OR "228 Ra"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem radon, OR Rn-222, OR Rn222, OR 

"Rn 222", OR 222Rn, OR 222-Rn, OR "222 Rn"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem thoron, OR Rn-220, OR Rn220, OR 

"Rn 220", OR 220Rn, OR 220-Rn, OR "220 Rn"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem protactinium, OR Pa-234m, OR 

Pa234m, OR "Pa 234m", OR 234mPa, OR 234m-Pa, OR "234m Pa"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem strontium, OR Sr-90, OR Sr90, OR 

"Sr 90", OR 90-Sr, OR 90Sr, OR "90 Sr"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem oralloy, OR postum, OR tuballoy, 

OR "uranyl nitrate hexahydrate", OR UNH, OR K-65, OR "sump cake"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem uranium dioxide, OR "uranium 

tetrafluoride", OR "uranium trioxide"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem uranium hexafluoride, OR accident, 

OR "air count"
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

48 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem air dust, OR "air filter", OR "airborne 

test"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem alpha, OR "belgian congo ore", OR 

bioassay, OR bio-assay

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem breath, OR "breathing zone", OR BZ, 

OR calibration, OR columnation

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem contamination, OR curie, OR 

denitration, OR "denitration pot"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem derby, OR regulus, OR dose, OR 

dosimeter

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem dosimetric, OR dosimetry, OR 

electron, OR environment

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem log, OR "log sheet", OR "log book", 

OR "low enriched uranium", OR LEU

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem maximum permissible concentration, 

OR MPC, OR metallurgy, OR microcurie, OR millicurie

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem Ether-Water Project, OR exposure, 

OR "exposure investigation", OR "radiation exposure"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem external, OR "F machine", OR fecal, 

OR "feed material", OR femptocurie, OR film, OR fission, OR 

fluoroscopy

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial 

Action Program, OR FUSRAP, OR gamma-ray, OR "gas proportional", 

OR "gaseous diffusion"
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

49 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem health, OR "health instrument", OR 

"health physics", OR "H.I.", OR HI, OR HP, OR "highly enriched 

uranium", OR HEU

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem hydrofluorination, OR "in vitro", OR 

"in vivo", OR incident, OR ingestion, OR inhalation, OR internal

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem investigation, OR isotope, OR 

isotopic, OR "isotopic enrichment", OR "JS Project", OR Landauer, OR 

"liquid scintillation"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem mixed fission product, OR MFP, OR 

monitor, OR "air monitoring", OR nanocurie, OR "nasal wipe", OR 

neutron, OR "nose wipe"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem nuclear, OR Chicago-Nuclear, OR 

"nuclear fuels", OR "nuclear track emulsion", OR "type A" 

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem NTA, OR "occupational radiation 

exposure", OR occurrence, OR "ore concentrate", OR "PC Project"

"Occidental Chemical"OxyChem permit, OR "radiation work permit", 

OR "safe work permit", OR "special work permit", OR RWP, OR SWP

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem phosphate research, OR photon, OR 

picocurie, OR pitchblende, OR "pocket ion chamber", OR PIC, OR 

problem, OR procedure

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem radeco, OR radiation, OR 

radioactive, OR radioactivity, OR radiograph, OR radiological

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem Radiological Survey Data Sheet, OR 

RSDS, OR radionuclide, OR raffinate, OR reactor

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem respiratory, OR "retention 

schedules", OR roentgen
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

50 of 51 

Table A1-2: Database Searches for Hooker Electrochemical

Database/Source Keywords / Phrases Hits Uploaded

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem sample, OR "air sample", OR "dust 

sample", OR "general area air sample"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem solvent extraction, OR source, OR 

"sealed source", OR spectra, OR spectrograph, OR spectroscopy, OR 

spectrum, OR standard, OR "operating standard", OR "processing 

standard"

"Occidental Chemical"OxyChem survey, OR "building survey", OR 

"routine survey", OR "special survey", OR "technical basis"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem thermal diffusion, OR 

"thermoluminescent dosimeter", OR TLD, OR "Tiger Team"

"Occidental Chemical" OxyChem tolerance dose, OR urinalysis, OR 

urine, OR "whole body count", OR WBC, OR "working level", OR 

WL, OR X-ray, OR "X ray", OR Xray

National Academies Press

http://www.nap.edu/

COMPLETED 10/23/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." 

"Occidental Chemical Corp."

"Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp."

"OxyChem"

427 0 

NNSA - Nevada Site Office

www.nv.doe.gov/main/search.htm

COMPLETED 10/23/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co."

"Occidental Chemical Corp."

"Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp."

"OxyChem"

12 0 

NRC ADAMS Reading Room

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html

COMPLETED 10/22/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." or "Occidental Chemical Corp." 

"Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp." or "OxyChem"

20 0 

U.S. Transuranium & Uranium Registries 

http://www.ustur.wsu.edu/

COMPLETED 10/23/2009

"Hooker Chemical Co." or "Occidental Chemical Corp." or "Hooker 

Chemical and Plastics Corp." or "OxyChem"

0 0 
SEC-00141 05-03-10 Rev.0 FINAL Hooker Electrochemical

51 of 51 

Table A1-3: OSTI Documents Requested for Hooker Electrochemical

Document Number Document Title Requested Received

No documents ordered. N/A N/A N/A