SEC Petition Evaluation Report

Petition SEC-00200

Report Rev #: Addendum Report Submittal Date: January 14, 2014

Subject Expert(s): Monica Harrison-Maples

Site Expert(s): N/A

Petition Administrative Summary

Petition Under Evaluation

Petition # Petition 

Type

Petition

Receipt Date

Qualification 

Date

DOE/AWE Facility Name

SEC-00200 83.13 March 15, 2012 May 10, 2012 Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply 

Company

Petitioner-Requested Class Definition 

All employees who worked in any area of the Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company in Fort

Wayne, Indiana, from 1944 through 1952.

Class Evaluated by NIOSH

All employees who worked in any area of the Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company in Fort

Wayne, Indiana, from March 1, 1943 through December 31, 1952.

NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC

All Atomic Weapons Employees who worked in any buildings/area owned by the Joslyn Manufacturing 

and Supply Co. in Fort Wayne, Indiana, from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, for a number of 

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

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

employees included in the Special Exposure Cohort. 

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

SEC Petition Evaluation Report, SEC-00200, Rev. 0

SEC Petition Evaluation Report, SEC-00200, Rev. 1

Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company

Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company

ORAU Lead Technical Evaluator:

Monica Harrison-Maples

ORAU Peer Review Completed By:

Daniel Stempfley

Peer Review Completed By: [Signature on File] 1/14/2014

Sam Glover Date

[Signature on File] 1/14/2014 SEC Petition Evaluation Reviewed By:

J. W. Neton Date

[Signature on File] 1/14/2014 SEC Evaluation Approved By:

Stuart L. Hinnefeld Date
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 2 of 19

Addendum to Joslyn Manufacturing (SEC-00200)

Special Exposure Cohort Evaluation Report

NIOSH presented a Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) evaluation report (NIOSH, 2012) regarding the 

Joslyn Manufacturing Company (Joslyn) to the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 

(Advisory Board) in December 2012. In its report, NIOSH evaluated the feasibility of reconstructing 

radiation doses of all workers who worked in any area at Joslyn during the time period of March 1, 

1943 through December 31, 1952. Based on its research at that time, NIOSH defined a single class of 

employees for which it could not estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy from March 1, 

1943 through December 31, 1947.

Further consideration of uranium-rolling operations at Joslyn during their high-production period 

through the end of July 1948 has led NIOSH to conclude that: (1) the conditions that initially led 

NIOSH to determine it could not perform dose reconstruction prior to 1948 continued on through July 

1948; and (2) there is significantly more uncertainty regarding worker exposures in early 1948 than 

initially believed. The oversight and standards associated with uranium rolling were rapidly evolving 

from 1943 to 1948, and documentation of the assumption of responsibility for the program by the 

AEC is not specific on when certain protective standards and procedures were implemented. NIOSH 

has concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support correlating Joslyn operational conditions 

through July 1948 with other AEC facilities, a premise upon which the use of Battelle-TBD-6000 

methods is based. The comparison of data gathered at similar AEC metal-working sites, is part of the 

foundation for the Battelle-TBD-6000 approach being used to assess Joslyn personnel dose. This 

evaluation report addendum provides NIOSH’s re-evaluation of the Joslyn uranium-rolling period 

from January 1, 1948 through July 31, 1948, which was previously assessed in the SEC-00200 

Evaluation Report and its associated revision.

NOTE: This Evaluation Report Addendum only addresses those sections in the Joslyn 

Manufacturing Evaluation Report that require discussion/revision; therefore, the section 

numbering is not contiguous. For context, some of the original surrounding text may be included 

with the revised text. The sections requiring additional discussion begin below.

Petition Evaluation Report Addendum Summary

Class Evaluated by NIOSH (in this Addendum)

In its initial SEC-00200 Petition Evaluation Report, NIOSH concluded that internal dose 

reconstruction at Joslyn was feasible for the time period from January 1, 1948 through December 31, 

1952 by using the methodologies described in Battelle-TBD-6000. In that initial evaluation report, 

NIOSH presented air monitoring data from Joslyn from 1951 and 1952 and compared those data to air 

concentrations given in Battelle-TBD-6000 for similar operations.

NIOSH later concluded that the uncertainties regarding health and safety oversight and controls at the 

Joslyn facility during the 1948 uranium-rolling operations merited reconsideration. Standards and 

oversight of health and safety at uranium manufacturing facilities were rapidly evolving from 1943 to 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 3 of 19

1948. Given the limited information and lack of monitoring data for the Joslyn site, NIOSH 

determined that there was not enough information to adequately compare the 1952 survey data to the 

period of high-volume uranium rolling in 1948. NIOSH has determined that the uranium-rolling 

operations over this seven-month campaign were conducted during a transitional period of oversight 

when there was a significant throughput of uranium but a lack of clarity regarding the exposure 

potential from prevailing operational practices. 

The uranium operations at Joslyn following the 1948 campaign were primarily in support of small 

AEC research programs, or in support of relatively small-scale programs. These activities were 

conducted in a few rolling days per year and were more consistent with the operations at the time of 

the 1952 time-weighted average air study at Joslyn. In this addendum, NIOSH addresses the 

feasibility of bounding doses from uranium exposures potentially received between January and the 

end of July 1948, in the context of the increased exposure potential during that period of relativelyhigh production. Subsequent uranium operations were significantly reduced and more consistent with 

the level of operations for which there are available air sample data from Joslyn. 

NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC

Based on its continued research and consideration of the uranium-rolling operations conducted 

between January and the end of July 1948, NIOSH does not consider the methods described in 

Battelle-TBD-6000 to be sufficiently accurate for dose reconstruction at Joslyn during these months. 

NIOSH has therefore expanded the class of employees for which NIOSH recommends inclusion in the 

SEC. The NIOSH-proposed class now extends to all Atomic Weapons Employees who worked in any 

buildings/area owned by the Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co. in Fort Wayne, Indiana, from 

March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, 

occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the 

parameters established for one or more other classes of employees included in the Special Exposure 

Cohort.

The NIOSH-proposed class does not comprise the entire evaluated class because NIOSH finds it is 

feasible to perform sufficiently accurate dose reconstruction from August 1, 1948 through the end of 

the covered period of radiological operations on December 31, 1952, using the methods described in 

Section 7.2 of the SEC-00200 Evaluation Report and further described within Battelle-TBD-6000.

Feasibility of Dose Reconstruction

NIOSH finds that it is not feasible to estimate internal exposures with sufficient accuracy for all 

workers at the site from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948. The limited air sampling conducted in 

1943 and 1944 were based on mass samples collected by electrostatic precipitation. NIOSH does not 

have adequate information regarding the accuracy and uncertainties of this methodology and is not 

fully aware of the limitations and biases associated with this sample collection method. NIOSH has 

acquired very limited air sampling data from Joslyn. These data are only available for the years 1943, 

1944, 1951, and 1952. Air sample data for similar operations at Simonds Saw and Steel are available

(Site Visit, Oct1948; Site Visit, Dec1948) and are supporting results used in the development of 

Battelle-TBD-6000; however, the lack of specific documentation on the health and safety oversight 

and conditions at Joslyn during the 1948 uranium-rolling campaign raises questions about whether the
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 4 of 19

Simonds data are representative of Joslyn conditions through July 1948. In addition, Joslyn made 

unsuccessful attempts to reduce airborne contamination during grinding operations through the use of 

tenting structures. These efforts introduce uncertainty into the 1943-1944 monitoring data (e.g., due 

to possible perturbations in airflow and air exchange). 

Ultimately, there are no air monitoring data that NIOSH considers adequately representative of Joslyn 

uranium operations from 1943 through July 1948 that can be used to support a bounding dose estimate 

that is sufficiently accurate. There have been no personnel monitoring data located that could be used 

to support the limited air monitoring results. NIOSH is not able to establish confidence in the ability 

to perform sufficiently accurate dose reconstruction based on the available data associated with the 

uranium operations at Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co. beginning in March 1943 through July 

1948. 

The data upon which Battelle-TBD-6000 bases its methods and conclusions are applicable to rolling 

and machining operations and can be sufficiently equated to the uranium operations conducted at 

Joslyn when rolling became limited in volume after the 1948 rolling campaign, and thus more 

comparable to conditions at the time of the 1952 Joslyn monitoring data. The TBD data were 

collected starting in 1948 with the studies at Simonds Saw and Steel (Simonds, 1948-1949, pdf pp. 

249-254; Site Visit, Oct1948; Site Visit, Dec1948). These data were used to establish dose estimation 

procedures found in Battelle-TBD-6000, which NIOSH believes are sufficient to bound the potential 

exposures associated with work at Joslyn from August 1948 through December 1952 with sufficient 

accuracy. With the exception of the class defined for March 1943 through July 1948, per EEOICPA

and 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1), NIOSH concludes that it 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 more precisely than an estimate of maximum dose. 

Information available from Battelle-TBD-6000 and additional resources are 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 from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 

1952.

The NIOSH dose reconstruction feasibility findings are based on the following:

• NIOSH finds that it is likely feasible to reconstruct occupational medical dose for Joslyn 

Manufacturing and Supply Company workers with sufficient accuracy.

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

uranium and uranium oxides released into the work environment during the production and 

shaping of uranium metal rods. The modes of exposure were inhalation and ingestion during the 

processing of these metals.

• In addition, there was potential for internal exposure to airborne thorium released on two days as a 

result of experimental centerless grinding of thorium rods in 1946 and early 1947.
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 5 of 19

• Based on insufficient information regarding operations and air monitoring during the years of 

process development (1943-1947), NIOSH originally concluded that sufficiently accurate internal 

dose reconstruction for the period from March 1, 1943 through December 31, 1947, is not feasible. 

• Uncertainties regarding health and safety oversight and controls at the Joslyn facility during the 

1948 uranium-rolling operation merited further consideration by NIOSH. Joslyn was initially 

under control and oversight of the MED. The MED operated facilities under different health and 

safety standards than those applied later by the AEC at other uranium metal-working sites (e.g., 

Simonds Saw and Steel). The sites with AEC oversight have air monitoring data available for 

comparison. 

• Between January and the end of July 1948, Joslyn operated under a heavy rolling schedule. 

Indications are that the three Joslyn mills rolled multiple uranium rods in a fairly simultaneous 

manner (Site Visit, Mar1948). The three mills were in close physical proximity. All this suggests 

an exposure environment during these months that is not readily comparable to other sites or 

operations. NIOSH has no air monitoring data that it considers adequately representative of this 

rolling campaign to verify the exposure environment. The reduced rates of uranium rolling after 

July 1948 are less likely to have required simultaneous rollings on the closely-located rolling 

mills. 

• The lack of site air monitoring data during Joslyn’s period of high uranium throughput through 

July 1948, in combination with NIOSH’s inability to reconcile site-specific differences between 

Joslyn data collected under MED oversight and the data supporting Battelle-TBD-6000 intake 

models collected at sites under AEC oversight, lead NIOSH to conclude that sufficiently accurate 

internal dose reconstruction for the period from January 1, 1948 through July 31, 1948 is also not 

feasible. However, NIOSH has identified sufficient information and air monitoring data that can 

be assessed using existing dose reconstruction methods defined in Battelle-TBD-6000 to support 

bounding internal dose for the period from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952.

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

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

and thorium metals during machining operations. The modes of exposure were direct radiation, 

submersion in potentially-contaminated air, and exposure to contaminated surfaces. 

• NIOSH has determined that reconstruction of external doses for Joslyn workers is feasible using 

the assumptions and approaches presented in Battelle-TBD-6000. 

• Pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1), NIOSH determined that there is insufficient information to 

either: (1) 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 (2) estimate the radiation doses of members of the class more precisely 

than a maximum dose estimate for the period at Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co. from March 

1, 1943 through July 31, 1948.
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 6 of 19

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

proposed class, NIOSH intends to use any internal and external monitoring data that may become 

available for an individual claim and that can be interpreted using existing NIOSH dose 

reconstruction processes or procedures. Therefore, dose reconstructions for individuals employed 

at Joslyn Manufacturing during the period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, but who do 

not qualify for inclusion in the SEC, may be performed using these data as appropriate.

• NIOSH concludes pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 83.13(c)(1), that there is sufficient information to 

either: (1) 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 (2) estimate the radiation doses of members of the class more precisely 

than a maximum dose estimate for the period at Joslyn from August 1, 1948 through December 

31, 1952.

Health Endangerment Determination

NIOSH did not identify any evidence supplied by the petitioners or from other resources that would 

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

involved exceptionally high-level exposures. However, evidence indicates that some workers in the 

proposed class may have accumulated substantial chronic exposures through episodic intakes of 

radionuclides, combined with external exposures to beta and gamma radiation. Consequently, NIOSH 

has determined that health was endangered for those workers covered by this evaluation who worked 

from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, and were employed for at least 250 aggregated work days 

either solely under their employment or in combination with work days within the parameters 

established for other SEC classes.

For the period August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952, 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.

3.2 Class Evaluated by NIOSH

During the initial evaluation of the operations at Joslyn, NIOSH evaluated all employees who worked 

in any area of the Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company in Fort Wayne, Indiana, from March 1, 

1943 through December 31, 1952 and found a class of employees who worked at the facility between 

March 1, 1943 and December 31, 1947 for which NIOSH could not estimate radiation doses with 

sufficient accuracy. NIOSH believed it was feasible to perform sufficiently accurate dose 

reconstruction from January 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952, when radiological operations had 

ceased. 

Further consideration of uranium-rolling operations at Joslyn during their high-production period 

through July 1948 has led NIOSH to conclude that there is significantly more uncertainty regarding 

worker exposures than initially believed. Standards and oversight of health and safety at uranium 

manufacturing facilities rapidly evolved from 1943 to 1948. Since its initial evaluation, NIOSH has 

determined that the 1952 Joslyn survey data and the air concentrations for similar operations given in 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 7 of 19

Battelle-TBD-6000 may not be representative of the conditions prevailing during Joslyn’s highvolume uranium rolling campaign in 1948. NIOSH has determined that the uranium-rolling 

operations over this seven-month campaign (through July 1948) were conducted during a transitional 

period of oversight when there was a considerable throughput of uranium but a lack of clarity 

regarding the exposure potential from prevailing operational practices.

The uranium operations following this 1948 campaign were primarily in support of small AEC 

research programs or in support of relatively small-scale programs. These activities were conducted in 

a few rolling days per year and were more consistent with the operations at the time of the 1952 timeweighted average air study at Joslyn. In this addendum, NIOSH addresses the feasibility of bounding 

doses from uranium exposures potentially received between January and the end of July 1948, in the 

context of the increased exposure potential during that period of relatively-high production. 

Subsequent uranium operations were significantly reduced and more consistent with the level of 

operations for which there are available air sample data from Joslyn.

3.3 NIOSH-Proposed Class to be Added to the SEC

Based on its research of the class under evaluation, NIOSH has defined a single class of employees for 

which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy. The NIOSH-proposed class 

to be added to the SEC includes all Atomic Weapons Employees who worked in any buildings/area 

owned by the Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co. in Fort Wayne, Indiana, from March 1, 1943 

through July 31, 1948, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either 

solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for 

one or more other classes of employees included in the Special Exposure Cohort.

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.

Although Joslyn Manufacturing had a significant part in the development of rolling techniques early 

in the Manhattan Engineer Project’s (MED) work, it was a small part of the overall project. No Site 

Profile has been developed for Joslyn. However, Battelle-TBD-6000 includes information and 

assumptions used to provide generic historic background information and guidance to assist the 

preparation of dose reconstructions for this category of sites. Specifically, Battelle-TBD-6000 relies 

on the experience and air dust studies from other AEC controlled sites, including Simonds Saw and 

Steel, which also rolled and worked natural uranium beginning in February 1948, following very 

similar processes used at Joslyn. Using information from sites within the uranium metal-working 

complex, Battelle-TBD-6000 provides an exposure matrix for workers at AWE facilities that 

performed metal-working operations with uranium metal, and includes general discussions of 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 8 of 19

operations and exposure conditions at uranium metal-working facilities. Therefore, as part of 

NIOSH’s evaluation detailed herein, it examined the following TBDs for insights into Joslyn

Manufacturing operations or related topics/operations at other sites:

• Site Profile for Simonds Saw and Steel; ORAUT-TKBS-0032, Rev.01; April 18, 2011; SRDB Ref 

ID: 94105

• Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Worked Uranium Metals, Battelle-TBD-6000, 

Rev.01; Division of Compensation Analysis and Support; June 17, 2011; SRDB Ref ID: 101251

• Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Worked Uranium Metals and Thorium MetalsAppendix BB, General Steel Industries, Battelle-TBD-6000, Rev.00; Office of Compensation 

Analysis and Support (now Division of Compensation Analysis and Support); June 25, 2007; 

SRDB Ref ID: 47713

5.1 Joslyn Manufacturing Plant and Process Descriptions

Considerable early work at Joslyn Manufacturing was for the purpose of determining the best 

procedures for rolling and machining natural uranium rods, which made it necessary that the 

procedures changed over time; however, the basic process remained fairly consistent. Natural 

uranium billets were received by rail at Joslyn Manufacturing, unloaded by an overhead crane onto 

carts, and stored in a storage area. The billets were taken, as needed, from the storage area to the 

tempering area, pre-heated in one of eight small natural-gas-atmosphere electric furnaces to a 

specified temperature, and moved to the rolling mills (an 18-inch roughing stand, 12-inch intermediate 

mill, and a 9-inch finishing mill were used) where passes occurred (Army Corps, 2005, pdf pp. 6-7). 

These rolling mills were located in close proximity in one large area, approximately 25 feet from the 

furnaces. Time was allowed for the rolls to cool between passes in order to prevent the metal from 

exceeding a specified temperature.

5.2 Radiological Exposure Sources from Joslyn Operations

5.2.1 Internal Radiological Exposure Sources from Joslyn Operations

5.2.1.1 Natural Uranium

The principal sources of internal exposure to the natural uranium processed at Joslyn were from the 

inhalation of dust, oxide scale, or fumes generated during various machining operations including 

straightening, rolling, cutting and centerless grinding. These activities occurred in Buildings 6, 7, 8, 

and 9. 

Rolling operations were capable of releasing large quantities of uranium dust into the atmosphere. 

Uranium readily oxidizes when exposed to air at temperatures above 600° F. The oxide scale formed 

on the surface spontaneously flakes off at elevated temperatures and is easily disturbed upon handling. 

The oxide formation and flaking produces high air concentrations and dust collection on the 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 9 of 19

workplace floor and other surfaces. Any worker movement on a dusty floor will re-suspend dust into 

the air, thus creating elevated air concentrations after the rolling has stopped (Battelle-TBD-6000). 

Documentation states: “The bearings (bronze inserts) on the rolls are water cooled and packed with an 

exceptionally heavy “Roll Neck” grease” (Site Visit, Mar1948, pdf p. 4). The use of water on 

uranium at temperatures on the order of 1100o F were necessary during the rolling process and would 

generate significant steam and suspend uranium into the air around the rolling operations (Site Visit, 

1944). This same document describes a ‘haze or smoke’ high in the room and a varying amount of 

dust and steam is produced.

After rolling, machining processes were used to reduce the rods to the required diameter and to finish 

the surface. These machining processes included lathe operations, centerless grinding, cutting, and 

threading. Because the metal is typically near room temperature for machining, surface oxides are not 

formed or loosened during machining to the extent that they are during rolling. The biggest generator 

of uranium dust associated with machining was probably the ignition of small chips and turnings that 

were generated during machine operations (Battelle-TBD-6000, pdf p. 16). At Joslyn, due to the 

pyrophoric nature of the uranium, a heavy flow of coolant was used over the cutting/grinding surfaces 

to minimize sparking. These measures would likely have also reduced the airborne concentrations to 

some degree. While the rolling operations were generally open in the mill buildings, the grinding and 

cutting operations were to be ventilated through the use of a small shed enclosure within the larger 

building. The grinder had an overhead hood connected to a fan and discharge was into the inside of 

the larger shed. During MED/AEC surveys the air concentrations around the centerless grinder were 

still found to be unacceptable and apparently this ventilation was not sufficient to meet the standards 

in effect at the time.

As billets and rods were moved between the operational areas any dragging or dropping of the hot 

metal could have resulted in airborne radioactivity and the potential for intakes.

Operations and the clean-up of accumulated dust and fragments resulted in an accumulation of waste 

uranium metal that had to be accounted for. For accountability purposes, efforts were made to collect 

the residual cuttings and dust using steel pans to collect shavings and trimmings and by brushing the 

steel floor plates before, during, and after cutting work. The practice at Joslyn was to burn the waste 

material so that it would be in the less combustible oxide form for shipment back to the AEC. NIOSH 

is aware that former workers report that burning operations were performed outdoors by one 

individual (Personal Communication, 2012). These former workers reporting on burn operations had 

work history at the site beginning in 1948 through covered operations. The 1950 Kehoe report 

describes dry burning as the most expeditious and least expensive method for disposal of uranium 

scraps by conversion to oxide and states for a quantity not exceeding 5 pounds, the scrap may be 

spread out on a steel plate in an open area and burned to oxide by the flame of an oxy-acetylene torch

(Kehoe, 1950). Burning uranium metal fines and shavings outdoors creates environmental problems, 

but would have tended to reduce the airborne concentrations versus burning in a confined area, such 

as a building.

Since Joslyn only performed work for MED/AEC through 1952, there was no potential for recycled 

uranium processing (Battelle-TBD-6000, pdf p. 14).
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 10 of 19

6.1 Available Joslyn Internal Monitoring Data

NOTE: Section 6.1 spans six pages. Only the following tables are addressed in this addendum, to 

correct values/units.

Table 6-1: Available Uranium Air Sample Results for the Joslyn Operational Period

(This table spans two pages)

Date Description of Activity Location Value (pCi/m3) Reference

12/7/1943 Uranium - Centerless 

Grinding

GA – in path of fumes Range = 215 – 6,156

Avg = 3,186

11036

GA - outside of grinding 

shed

616 11036

GA - outside of grinding 

shed, after grinding stopped

68 11036

5/8/1944 Uranium - Rolling GA – furnace area 802 5890

GA – at rolling machine 1,499 5890

GA – general room air 1,197 5890

10/24/1951 Uranium - Centerless 

Grinding/Cutting

GA – general area Range = 14 – 23

avg = 20

11036

BZ – operator Range = 14-811

avg = 486

11036

1/8/1952 Uranium Rolling GA – production areas Range = 3.5 – 1,744

Avg = 355

GM = 107

GSD = 6.45

95th %ile = 2302

9664

BZ – production areas Range = 6.5 – 17,672

Avg = 2,052

GM = 350

GSD = 7.84

95th %ile = 10,355

9664

Centerless Grinding GA – production areas Range = 5.3 - 60

Avg = 29

GM = 23

GSD = 2.31

95th %ile = 90

9664

BZ – production areas Range = 1.9 - 277

Avg = 42

GM = 19

GSD = 3.27

95th %ile = 134

9664

Cutting GA – production areas Range = 4.4 - 246

Avg = 82

GM = 30

GSD = 5.58

95th %ile = 503

9664

BZ – production areas Range = 25 - 258

Avg = 107

GM = 88

GSD = 1.99

95th %ile = 273

9664
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 11 of 19

Table 6-1: Available Uranium Air Sample Results for the Joslyn Operational Period

(This table spans two pages)

Date Description of Activity Location Value (pCi/m3) Reference

Lathe Operations GA – production areas Range = 0.38 – 3.1 

Avg = 1.6

GM = 1.2

GSD = 2.63

95th %ile = 5.8

9664

BZ – production areas Range = 1.7 – 74 

Avg = 20

GM = 8.3

GSD = 4.20 

95th %ile = 88

9664

Table 6-2: Results of a 1952 Time-Weighted Average Exposure Study

Work Area / Job Description Time Weighted Average Exposure

(dpm/m3) (pCi/m3)

18" rough roll east 3322 1496

18" rough roll west 375 169

Roller Forman 725 327

Asst Roller (Ass't Foreman) 725 327

Furnace Heaters 16 7

Recorder 16 7

12" rough Roll East 605 273

12" rough Roll West 570 257

Drag Down (Billet) 310 140

9" finishing roll east 16542 7451

9" finishing roll west 5791 2609

Quench Tank 155 70

Draggers 831 374

Rod Stamper 242 109

Rod Bundler 128 58

Lathe Operation 12 5

Centerless Grinder 100 45

Grinder (portable) 277 125

Cutomatic 191 86
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 12 of 19

7.1 Pedigree of Joslyn Data

7.1.1 Internal Monitoring Data Pedigree Review

In this evaluation, NIOSH has determined that it lacks sufficient data relating to worker internal doses 

from AEC-related work performed at Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co. during part of the 

operational period; from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948. Therefore, a complete internal data 

sufficiency and pedigree evaluation is not possible for the period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 

1948.

Data for AEC-related uranium work, for the period from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952,

consist of work place air monitoring survey reports and information regarding work practices 

consistent with other rolling operations. These sources are copies of original reports and are therefore 

considered primary data sources. Data collection performed by AEC representatives would have been 

in accordance with standard practices using state-of-the-art methods during that time period. 

7.2 Evaluation of Bounding Internal Radiation Doses at Joslyn

7.2.1 Evaluation of Bounding Process-Related Internal Doses

7.2.1.1 Uranium Airborne Levels

During the operational period, air samples were taken on at least four occasions during uranium work 

(see Section 6.1). The air samples were not consistently taken in the same areas; furthermore, 

information is generally lacking on the relationship of the sample locations to the areas occupied by 

workers with the exception of samples labeled “BZ” (i.e., breathing zone). Some of the air 

concentrations were quite high compared to the desired limit or “tolerance” values in use during the 

early part of the operational period (150 μgm uranium) (Fuqua, 1944). Comparison of air samples 

across the operational period is problematic because the tolerance levels changed, the sampling 

methods changed, uranium dust control practices changed, and practices changed in order to 

incorporate experience gained both at Joslyn and other facilities for the purposes of improving health 

conditions, reducing the potential for fire, and to better meet the specifications for the products. Early 

air samples were collected (Chipman, 1943), but the reports do not provide details on the collection 

medium or the efficiency of the counting methods. The reports did mention that throughout the 

operations the engineering controls were not effective in controlling the airborne contamination 

(Klevin, 1952).

Under close scrutiny, the limited and intermittent air sample results collected in 1943 and 1944 do not 

meet the criteria for being sufficient to support establishing a bounding dose estimate for uranium 

internal exposures. The samples during this period are in the nature of a snapshot of the conditions 

during a time of testing and evaluation. NIOSH does not have the supporting documentation to 

establish confidence in the sampling methods or to account for uncertainties possibly introduced by 

the sampling methodologies and by the introduction of the tenting structures over the grinding 

operations. NIOSH cannot justify considering these samples to be either representative of the 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 13 of 19

machining activities of the period or indicative of the highest exposure conditions to which Joslyn 

workers were potentially subjected.

When the monitoring data available for a site are sparse, NIOSH can rely on information, techniques, 

and data provided by the AEC’s Health and Safety Laboratory (HASL). In 1948, HASL was being 

formed as a small central laboratory facility for assisting contractors who could not adequately 

perform the necessary industrial hygiene and industrial functions. HASL began monitoring AEC 

programs and began recommending mitigation plans for uranium metal-working industrial facilities. 

The procedural monitoring methods developed and used by HASL were eventually detailed in HASL300, EML Procedures Manual (originally issued in 1957, now in its 28th edition) (HASL-300). HASL 

descriptions of methods and background on air monitoring and exposure assessment provide a 

foundation for a historical understanding of the types of samples taken, how they were taken, how 

they were analyzed, and how the results were interpreted. This information allows NIOSH to interpret 

what such results represent as well as the uncertainties associated with the collected samples. NIOSH 

has confidence in the HASL sampling procedures and protocols as well as an understanding of the 

uncertainty associated with the air sampling methods implemented by HASL and the data resulting 

from HASL methods.

In 1948, Joslyn began the largest production-scale uranium-rolling campaign of its operations, 

conducted under the supervision of Hanford, with no known changes to protocols. Because there are

no site-specific data for Joslyn from 1948 until the 1951-1952 timeframe, NIOSH uses HASL data for 

similar sites to put an upper boundary on potential dose at Joslyn during the limited uranium-rolling 

operations between August 1948 and December 1952. However, between January and the end of July 

1948 the heavy rolling schedule and proximity of the three Joslyn mills, all operating in a fairly 

simultaneous manner (Site Visit, Mar1948), suggests an exposure environment during these months 

that is not readily comparable to other sites or operations in the absence of monitoring data for 

verification.

After the completion of the 1948 heavy-rolling campaign, Joslyn uranium operations were reduced to 

a level comparable to the operations performed in 1952. NIOSH has compared the 1952 air data to 

Battelle-TBD-6000 to verify the bounding nature of the TBD approach for determining Joslyn worker 

exposures. The lower level of production after July 1948 makes it possible to reasonably and 

appropriately compare the Joslyn data collected using HASL techniques with Battelle-TBD-6000 

results for metal-working operations conducted at similar sites.

During the steel rolling operations (non-MED/AEC work), Joslyn workers could have potentially been 

exposed to re-suspended uranium from incompletely-decontaminated surfaces. Though respirators 

were recommended for workers directly involved in MED/AEC work (Fuqua, 1944; Cantril, 1944), 

there are indications of poor compliance with respirator use (Site Visit, 1944). Respirator use was 

unlikely to have been required during non-MED/AEC work when re-suspension could have produced 

exposures. In any case, NIOSH does not consider the protection that may have been provided by 

respirator use during dose reconstructions.
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 14 of 19

7.2.3 Methods for Bounding Operational Period Internal Dose at Joslyn

Internal dose estimates for the operational period from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952,

can be based on the inhalation and ingestion intakes in Battelle-TBD-6000. Process information as 

well as the comparison of Joslyn data from 1952 with Battelle-TBD-6000 data from other sites

support the premise that the TBD data are bounding for Joslyn exposures from August 1948 through 

1952. The TBD provides an exposure matrix for workers at AWE facilities that performed metalworking operations with uranium metal. For some sites, an appendix was developed which contains 

site-specific information that can be used for dose reconstruction. For sites like Joslyn, information 

that can be used to perform dose reconstructions is provided in the main body of Battelle-TBD-6000.

Table 7-1: Comparison of 1952 Time-weighted Average (TWA) Study with Battelle-TBD-6000

Joslyn Work Area/Job 

Description

TWA

(pCi/m3)

Battelle-TBD-6000

Equivalent Description

GM

(pCi/m3)

95%

(pCi/m3)

AM

(pCi/m3)

18" rough roll east 1496 Rolling Operator 1606 22675 5864

18" rough roll west 169 Rolling Operator 1606 22675 5864

Roller Forman 327 Rolling Supervisor 148 2090 540

Asst Roller (Ass't Foreman) 327 Rolling Supervisor 148 2090 540

Furnace Heaters 7 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

Recorder 7 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

12" rough Roll East 273 Rolling Operator 1606 22675 5864

12" rough Roll West 257 Rolling Operator 1606 22675 5864

Drag Down (Billet) 140 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

9" finishing roll east 7451 Rolling Operator 1606 22675 5864

9" finishing roll west 2609 Rolling Operator 1606 22675 5864

Quench Tank 70 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

Draggers 374 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

Rod Stamper 109 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

Rod Bundler 58 Rolling General Labor 296 4179 1081

Lathe Operation 5 Machining Operator 2491 35171 9096

Centerless Grinder 45 Machining Operator 2491 35171 9096

Grinder (portable) 125 Machining Operator 2491 35171 9096

Cutomatic 86 Machining Operator 2491 35171 9096

Table 7-2: Comparison of 1951 Air Concentrations to Battelle-TBD-6000

Joslyn Work Area/Job 

Description

Average

(pCi/m3)

Maximum

(pCi/m3)

Battelle-TBD-6000

Equivalent Description

GM

(pCi/m3)

95%

(pCi/m3)

AM

(pCi/m3)

Centerless grinding 1951

general area 20 23

Machining Operator

1/1/1951 to 12/31/55 2491 35171 9096

Centerless grinding 1951

operator 486 811

Machining Operator

1/1/1951 to 12/31/55 2491 35171 9096

NOTE: Section 7.2.3 goes on to detail the method for four pages.
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 15 of 19

7.2.4 Internal Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion

NIOSH concludes it is not feasible to reconstruct uranium internal radiation doses with sufficient 

accuracy for the period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948 at Joslyn.

NIOSH concludes that there are site specific data and existing dose reconstruction methods available 

in Battelle-TBD-6000 to support reconstructing internal radiation doses with sufficient accuracy for 

the period from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952. 

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

period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, NIOSH intends to use any internal monitoring data 

that may become available for an individual claim (and that can be interpreted using existing NIOSH 

dose reconstruction processes or procedures). Therefore, dose reconstructions for individuals 

employed at Joslyn during the period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, but who do not 

qualify for inclusion in the SEC, may be performed using these data as appropriate.

7.3 Evaluation of Bounding External Radiation Doses at Joslyn

7.3.5 External Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Conclusion

There are methods available to NIOSH to support bounding external uranium and thorium dose for the 

operational period at Joslyn. NIOSH has identified sufficient information or data to support the 

bounding conclusion. 

For the operational period, NIOSH was unable to determine a worker’s actual work locations or 

whether a worker was restricted to one location. Workers may have been able to move about freely; 

therefore, all workers’ exposures will be treated similarly. 

The uranium and thorium activities at Joslyn were consistently routine over time and therefore the 

exposures to workers can be extrapolated from a snapshot in time. Therefore, NIOSH has determined 

that reconstruction of external doses for Joslyn workers with sufficient accuracy, including 

occupational medical dose, is feasible for the operational period from March 1, 1943 through 

December 31, 1952.

7.4 Evaluation of Petition Basis for SEC-00200

7.4.1 Unmonitored Radiation Exposures

SEC-00200: (F.1) Radiation exposures and radiation doses potentially incurred by members of the 

proposed class were not monitored either through personal monitoring or through area monitoring.

NIOSH determined that it has access to only a limited number of air sample and source term 

information for Joslyn during the time period under evaluation. Medical records, bioassay data, and 

external monitoring results are not available. NIOSH has concluded that the available information is 

insufficient to bound the internal dose for Joslyn early operations from March 1, 1943 through July 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 16 of 19

31, 1948; however, the internal dose from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952 can be bound

using the approaches described in Battelle-TBD-6000, as discussed within this evaluation report.

7.5 Summary of Feasibility Findings for Petition SEC-00200

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

Manufacturing and Supply Co. from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948. NIOSH found that the 

available monitoring records, process descriptions, and source term data available are not sufficient to 

complete dose reconstructions for the entire evaluated class of employees.

Table 7-4 summarizes the results of the feasibility findings at Joslyn for each exposure source during 

the time period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948 and from August 1, 1948 through 

December 31, 1952.

Table 7-4: Summary of Feasibility Findings for SEC-00200

March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948;

August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952

Source of Exposure

March 1, 1943

through July 31, 1948

August. 1, 1948

through December 31, 1952

Reconstruction 

Feasible

Reconstruction 

Not Feasible

Reconstruction 

Feasible

Reconstruction 

Not Feasible

Internal1 X X

 - Uranium X X

 - Thorium X N/A

External X X

 - Gamma X X

 - Beta X X

 - Neutron N/A N/A N/A N/A

 - Occupational Medical X-ray X X

1 Internal includes an evaluation of airborne dust data

As of December 13, 2013, a total of 70 claims have been submitted to NIOSH for individuals who 

worked at Joslyn during the period under evaluation in this report. Thirteen of these claims have been 

pulled from further consideration because they fall within the parameters of the SEC, thus leaving 57 

claims. Dose reconstructions have been completed for 56 of these individuals (~98%).

Although NIOSH found that it is not possible to completely reconstruct radiation doses for the 

proposed class, NIOSH intends to use any internal and external monitoring data that may become 

available for an individual claim (and that can be interpreted using existing NIOSH dose 

reconstruction processes or procedures). Therefore, dose reconstructions for individuals employed at 

Joslyn during the period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, but who do not qualify for 

inclusion in the SEC, may be performed using these data as appropriate.
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 17 of 19

8.0 Evaluation of Health Endangerment for Petition SEC-00200

Based on the sum of information available from available resources, NIOSH’s evaluation determined 

that it is not feasible to estimate radiation dose with sufficient accuracy for members of the NIOSHevaluated class for the time period from March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948. Therefore, the 

resulting NIOSH-proposed SEC class must include a minimum required employment period as a basis 

for specifying that health was endangered for this time period. NIOSH further determined that it is 

feasible to estimate radiation dose with sufficient accuracy for members of the NIOSH-evaluated class 

for the time period from August 1, 1948 through December 31, 1952. Therefore, a health 

endangerment determination is not required for this time period.

9.0 Class Conclusion for Petition SEC-00200

Based on its full research of the class under evaluation, NIOSH has defined a single class of 

employees for which NIOSH cannot estimate radiation doses with sufficient accuracy. The NIOSHproposed class to be added to the SEC includes all Atomic Weapons Employees who worked in any 

buildings/area owned by the Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co. in Fort Wayne, Indiana, from 

March 1, 1943 through July 31, 1948, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, 

occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the 

parameters established for one or more other classes of employees included in the Special Exposure 

Cohort. 
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 18 of 19

10.0 References

Army Corps, 2005, Preliminary Assessment Joslyn Manufacturing Site Fort Wayne Indiana; U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers Buffalo District; August 23, 2005; SRDB Ref ID: 112928

Battelle-TBD-6000, Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Worked Uranium Metals, 

Rev.01; Division of Compensation Analysis and Support; June 17, 2011; SRDB Ref ID: 101251

Battelle-TBD-6000, Appendix BB, Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Worked 

Uranium Metals and Thorium Metals-Appendix BB, General Steel Industries, Rev.00; Office of

Compensation Analysis and Support (now Division of Compensation Analysis and Support); June 25, 

2007; SRDB Ref ID: 47713

Cantril, 1944, Air Samples at Joslyn Manufacturing Company, correspondence to G. E. Daniels; S. T. 

Cantril; May 15, 1944; SRDB Ref ID: 5890, pdf p. 9

Chipman, 1943, Rolling of Billets Supplied by Union Carbide and Carbon Company, correspondence 

to R. L. Doan; J. Chipman, Joslyn Manufacturing Company; June 30, 1945: SRDB Ref ID: 11036

Fuqua, 1944, Inspection of Joslyn MFG. & Supply Co. Fort Wayne Indiana, correspondence; P. A. 

Fuqua; May 30, 1944; SRDB Ref ID: 5890, pdf pp. 3-4

HASL-300, EML Procedures Manual, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Health & Safety Laboratory; 

editions starting in 1957 to the present; SRDB Ref ID: publicly available

Kehoe, 1950, Fire Protection Precautions for Handling Uranium Turnings, Chips, Borings, Sawdust, 

and Powder, E. J. Kehoe, F. L. Brannigan, and M. Eisenbud; U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, New 

York Operations Office; March 1, 1950; SRDB Ref ID: 90891

Klevin, 1952, Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company Occupational Exposure to Radioactive 

Dust; Paul B. Klevin; March 25, 1952; SRDB Ref ID: 9664

NIOSH, 2012, SEC Petition SEC-00200 Evaluation Report for Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply 

Company, Oak Ridge Associated Universities; December 3, 2012; SRDB Ref ID: 129298

ORAUT-OTIB-0006, Dose Reconstruction from Occupationally Related Diagnostic X-Ray 

Procedures, Rev. 04; ORAU Team Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH; June 20, 2011; SRDB 

Ref ID: 98147

ORAUT-TKBS-0032, Site Profile for Simonds Saw and Steel, Rev.01; Oak Ridge Associated 

Universities; April 18, 2011; SRDB Ref ID: 94105

Personal Communication, 2012, Documented Communication with [redacted] Operators and 

[redacted] Operator; SEC Outreach Meeting/face-to face group interview; July 25, 2012; SRDB Ref 

ID: 118494
SEC-00200 01-14-14 Joslyn Manufacturing

Page 19 of 19

Simonds, 1948-1949, Simonds Saw & Steel Co., Summary Report of Three Surveys (Oct. 27, 1948 –

Feb. 15, 1949); U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, New York Operations Office, Medical Division; 

undated; SRDB Ref ID: 11996, pdf pp. 249-254

Site Visit, 1944, Visit to the Joslyn Manufacturing Company on May 9, 1944, correspondence; J. J. 

Nickson; May 10, 1944; SRDB Ref ID: 118163

Site Visit, Mar1948, Trip to Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company Fort Wayne, Indiana, W. A. 

Blanton (GE-HAPO); HW-9553; April 20, 1948; SRDB Ref ID: 118161

Site Visit, Oct1948, Simonds Saw and Steel Co. Occupational Exposure to Radioactive Dust: Visit of 

October 27, 1948, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, New York Operations Office, Medical Division; 

undated, but after October 27, 1948; SRDB Ref ID: 10883

Site Visit, Dec1948, Simonds Saw and Steel Co. Occupational Exposure to Radioactive Dust: Visit of 

December 1, 1948, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, New York Operations Office, Medical 

Division; undated, but after December 1, 1948; SRDB Ref ID: 12442