To answer questions about the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act of 2000 (EEOICPA), OCAS has developed a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).
The FAQs covered on this page are arranged by topic for quick reference. The FAQ topics are listed on the "Find It!" navigation box, under "On this page..." Choose the topic you are interested in by clicking its link.
Advisory Board
| Q: |
I can remember reading something about an Advisory Board? What is it? |
| A: |
The Advisory Board (formal title, the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health) has been appointed by the President to advise the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on HHS' activities under EEOICPA. The Advisory Board includes a balance of perspectives from scientists, physicians, and workers. |
|
| Q: |
Has the Advisory Board been appointed yet? |
| A: |
Yes. |
|
| Q: |
Who was appointed to the Advisory Board? |
| A: |
The Board has been appointed by the President. Below is a roster of the members:
- Chair
-
Paul L. Ziemer, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
School of Health Sciences
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana
Dr. Paul Ziemer is Professor Emeritus and former Head of the School of Health Sciences at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. From 1990 to 1993, Dr. Ziemer served as the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety, and Health during the Bush Administration. From 1995-2001, Dr. Ziemer was a consultant for the Advanced Technologies and Laboratories, Inc., and served as Chairman of the Board from 1999-2001. He earlier served as a health physicist at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, a Radiological Physics Fellow at Vanderbilt University, and a physicist at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. He is a Certified Health Physicist and has been President of the Health Physics Society and of the American Academy of Health Physics. Dr. Ziemer recently completed a term as a member of the American Board of Health Physics.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
 PDF 10 KB (1 page)
- Executive Secretary
-
Christine Branche
Principal Associate Director
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
Washington, DC
- Membership
-
Josie Beach
Nuclear Chemical Operator
Lead Hazardous Waste Trainer
Lead Respiratory Trainer
Ch2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc.
Hanford
Richland, Washington
Ms. Josie Beach is a Nuclear Chemical Operator with 20 years of experience at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. She started her Hanford career in 1987, at the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) as an active participant in the plants final plutonium production campaign. In 1994, Ms. Beach became involved in the worker trainer worker program instructing and developing Health and Safety classes. Ms. Beach currently works for CH2M Hill in the Tank Farms waste operations group and is a member of the United Steel Workers Union Local 12-369.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 11 KB (1 page)
-
Bradley P. Clawson
Senior Operator Nuclear Fuel Handling
CMH2H-WG
Idaho National Laboratory
Idaho Falls, Idaho
Mr. Clawson has been a Senior Operator in the Spent Nuclear fuels program at the Idaho National Laboratory since 1989. He has been involved in the shipping and receiving of the Nuclear Naval fuels, the recovery and storage of the Three Mile Island fuel, and received and stored Foreign Research Reactor fuels, as well as numerous other types of nuclear fuels. He also serves as the Nuclear Material Custodian. Mr. Clawson is involved in the troubleshooting and problem solving of daily problems and resolution of fuel handling as well as the design and fabrication of tools for the ongoing inventory of the fuels. He is a member as well as holding several offices in the United Steelworkers Union Local 8-652. Mr. Clawson was the former Secretary-Treasurer of the Atomic Energy Workers Council.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
-
Michael H. Gibson
Retired Journeyman Electrician, Babcock & Wilcox
of Ohio,
E.G. & G., Mound Applied Technologies and
Monsanto Research Corporation at the DOE
Mound Facility
Past President, Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical
and
Energy International Union, Local 5-4200
Miamisburg, Ohio
Mr. Gibson, now retired, served as a Journeyman Electrician
at Babcock & Wilcox of Ohio, E.G. & G., Mound
Applied Technologies and Monsanto Research Corporation
at the DOE Mound Facility since 1981. He was
responsible for installation, maintenance, demolition,
and decontamination of radiological laboratories throughout
the site.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
-
Mark Griffon
President, Health Physicist
Creative Pollution Solutions, Inc.
Salem, New Hampshire
On March 18, 2002, the White House announced that the President intends to appoint Mark Griffon to be a member of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health. Mr. Griffon has served as the President of Creative Pollution Solutions in New Hampshire since 1992 where he performs consulting services in the radiation and hazardous waste fields. He also recently served as a Member of the Advisory Committee for U.S. Transuranium and Uranium Registries.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 11 KB (1 page)
-
James E. Lockey, M.D., M.S.
University of Cincinnati College of Medicine
Professor of Environmental Health and Internal Medicine
Cincinnati, Ohio
Dr. Lockey served as the Director of the Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Department of Environmental Health at the University of Cincinnati from 1986 to 2005. Current appointments and activities of Dr. Lockey include Professor of Medicine (Pulmonary Medicine) and Professor Environmental Health (Occupational and Environmental Medicine) University of Cincinnati; Member of the Expert Panel of Fernald II Worker Settlement Fund; Member of United Auto Workers - GM and United Auto Workers - Delphi Occupational Health Advisory Boards.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
-
James Malcolm Melius, M.D., Dr. P.H.
Director
New York State Laborers' Health and Safety Trust Fund
Albany, New York
Dr. Melius has served as Director for the New York
State Laborers' Health and Safety Trust Fund in Albany,
New York since 1996. Other current appointments and
activities of Dr. Melius include: Director, New York
State Laborers' Employers Cooperation and Education
Trust Fund since 1997; Research Director, Laborers'
Health and Safety Fund of North America since 1995;
and Lecturer, Department of Community and Preventive
Medicine, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine since 1997.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
-
Wanda I. Munn
Senior Nuclear Engineer (Retired)
Richland, Washington
Ms. Munn is retired from the Advanced Reactor Development Division of Westinghouse Hanford Company in Richland, Washington. She has 20 years of experience in nuclear engineering disciplines, design, construction, acceptance testing, startup, nuclear safety, and operation of the Fast Flux Test Facility.
Ms. Munn has served on the Richland City Council, is a member of her local Health Physics chapter, a life member of the American Nuclear Society, and a Fellow of the Society of Women Engineers.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
-
John W. Poston, Sr.
Professor and Graduate Coordinator
Department of Nuclear Engineering
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
Dr. Poston has served on the faculty of Texas A&M University in the
Department of Nuclear Engineering for 21 years, including 10 years as Head of the Department. His
service on various advisory committees and activities also include the Radiation Advisory Committee,
Science Advisory Board, Environmental Protection Agency; the National Academies Committee on
Transportation of Nuclear Waste to Yucca Mountain; and the National Academies Committee on
Controlling International Radiological Terrorism. He is a Fellow of the Health Physics Society, the
American Nuclear Society, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and is an
Honorary Member of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Dr. Poston is also
an Associate Editor of the Health Physics Journal.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 11 KB (1 page)
-
Robert W. Presley
Manufacturing Engineer
Pro2Serve
Professional Project Services, Inc.
Nuclear Weapons Engineer (retired)
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Robert W. Presley has been employed by Pro2Serve, Professional Project Services, Inc., of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, as a Manufacturing Engineer since February 2003. He serves as a Derivative Classifier and Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information Reviewing Official at BWXT Y-12. His fields of responsibility are modernization, infrastructure reduction, and general nuclear weapons production activities associated with the Y-12 National Security Complex. Prior to his current employment, Mr. Presley had 36 years of work experience at the Y-12 Plant, hiring in as an Animal Handler for the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Biology Division in 1966. His experience includes working in the Dispatching Department as a Parts Dispatcher and Procedure Writer; Senior Engineering Assistant in the Product Engineering Department, working in the Livermore Special Projects Pre-Production Group; Engineering Technologist in the Product Engineering and Scheduling Division, working with the Los Alamos Special Projects Group; Staff Engineer/Engineer II in the Product Engineering Department, Los Alamos Special Projects and Nuclear Device Group; Group Leader, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Weapons Dismantlement and Nuclear Device Group, Program Management Department. Mr. Presley served as the Protocol Officer, managing activities associated with special visits and tours for the Y-12 Complex, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, East Tennessee Technology Park, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems Executive Offices, National Nuclear Security Agency's Y-12 Operations Office, DOE-Oak Ridge Operations Offices, and DOE-Headquarters Offices in Washington, D.C. Special assignments included working with the Advanced Strategic Computer Initiative Team, the Department of Energy and the Department of Justice as a Subject Matter Expert. Mr. Presley retired from BWXT Y-12, L.L.C. on December 31, 2002.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
-
Genevieve S. Roessler, Ph.D.
Radiation Consultant
Professor Emeritus
University of Florida
Elysian, Minnesota
Dr. Roessler was on the faculty, Department of Nuclear Engineering, University of Florida for 22 years as Head of Health Physics and Medical Physics. Various advisory committees include the Radiation Advisory Committee, Science Advisory Board, Environmental Protection Agency, 1997-2004; Technical Steering Panel, Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project, 1988-1996; and Bi-national Advisory Group, Chernobyl Health Effects Study, National Cancer Institute, 2001-present. Dr. Roessler is also the Editor-in-Chief of the Health Physics Society's Newsletter and Web Site.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 9 KB (1 page)
-
Phillip Schofield
Bosque Farm, New Mexico
Mr. Schofield worked for Los Alamos National Laboratory for twenty one
years. He has extensive experience in handling and processing of
plutonium and americium. Some of the areas of actinide chemistry and
processing include: 1) making fuel and fuel pins for the FFTF program
using plutonium, uranium, and thorium, 2) hydrogen fluoride reduction
of Pu O2, direct oxide reduction, americium extraction, and recovery
of Pu metal. Mr. Schofield spent the last five years as an Operations
Center Specialist , running and monitoring all systems at the (TA-55)
plutonium facility. He has been on medical disability since 1996. He
has since worked as a volunteer with the Los Alamos Project on Worker
Safety.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
PDF 10 KB (1 page)
|
|
| Q: |
Can I attend Advisory Board Meetings? |
| A: |
Yes. Portions of the meetings are
open to the public. The date, time, location, and
the proposed agenda for upcoming meetings can be found
on our Web site on either the Advisory
Board or Public Meetings
pages. If you do not have access to the Internet,
you can contact OCAS at 1-800-232-4636 (1-800-CDC-INFO)
or directly at 513-533-6800. |
Top of Page |
Claim Concerns
| Q: |
How can I get information on the current status of my claim? |
| A: |
While your case is with NIOSH OCAS
for dose reconstruction, you can obtain the current
status of your claim in one of the following ways:
1. Place a request through the Status of Your Dose Reconstruction on our Web site
2. Send us an email request at ocas@cdc.gov
3. Contact NIOSH OCAS directly at 513-533-6800
4. Contact us toll-free at: 1-800-232-4636 (1-800-CDC-INFO)
|
|
| Q: |
How did you determine my tracking number? |
| A: |
NIOSH OCAS assigned the Tracking Number for the sole purpose of tracking your claim. Claims are given the tracking number based on the order in which we received them from the Department of Labor (DOL). For example, if your tracking number is 63, your claim was the sixty-third case we received from DOL. |
|
| Q: |
Does my Tracking Number indicate the order in which you will do dose reconstructions? |
| A: |
No. NIOSH OCAS assigned the Tracking Number for the sole purpose of tracking your claim. |
|
| Q: |
Is there anything I need to send to NIOSH to help with the dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
At the appropriate time, NIOSH OCAS will contact you to set up a convenient date and time for a phone interview. The interview is an opportunity for you to provide us with any additional information you may feel is necessary and for us to ask you for information we might need. Prior to the phone interview, if we need any additional information from you, we will contact you. |
|
| Q: |
How long does it take to complete a dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
When done for research purposes, dose reconstruction may take months to years to complete.
In compensation programs, a balance between efficiency and precision is needed. Before
NIOSH OCAS could start dose reconstructions under The Act, we had to issue regulations and develop
technical guidelines and procedures. NIOSH OCAS also awarded a contract for support in data
collection, claimant interviews, and dose reconstruction. We are working with the contractor to
make sure the backlog of claims awaiting dose reconstruction is handled promptly, consistently,
and fairly. Once a portion of the backlogged claims have been completed, NIOSH OCAS will be able
to develop estimates of the time needed to complete a dose reconstruction. |
|
| Q: |
How can I get the authorization to represent or speak on behalf of a claimant? |
| A: |
DOL, the agency responsible for making the final decision on all claims under EEOICPA, permits a claimant to appoint, in writing, one individual to represent his or her interests under EEOICPA. DOL regulations specify that there can be only one representative at any one time. Therefore, after one representative has been properly appointed, DOL will not recognize another individual as a representative until the claimant withdraws the authorization of the first individual. DOL can be contacted at 1-866-888-3322 for further information. |
|
| Q: |
I need to add employment information to my file. I forgot to include this information when I originally filed the claim. |
| A: |
You will need to notify DOL. Once a claim has been sent to NIOSH OCAS for dose reconstruction, employment has already been verified. Any additional employment to be added to your file will need to be verified by DOL before we can consider it for part of the dose reconstruction process. |
|
| Q: |
I now have additional medical records that I feel are relevant to my claim. Should I send them to you? |
| A: |
You can send them to us if you would like. We will include them with our records. However, it is recommended that you keep them until the time of the phone interview.
Please note: If these additional records are related to a new disease not covered in your original claim, you should contact DOL. |
|
| Q: |
DOL already has my medical records. Why do you need to request information from the Department of Energy (DOE)? |
| A: |
The information NIOSH OCAS is requesting from DOE is for your personal radiation monitoring information. In order to conduct the dose reconstruction for your claim, we need to identify the levels of radiation to which you were exposed. We may review your medical records while conducting the dose reconstruction; however, your monitoring records will provide us with the exposure information we need to conduct our dose reconstruction. |
|
| Q: |
When I filed my claim, I included a copy of my exposure monitoring information. Why do you still need to request it from DOE if I already gave it to you? |
| A: |
It is part of our formal process and mandate. NIOSH OCAS needs to make every effort to acquire all relevant exposure monitoring information on each claim. If you have a copy of your exposure monitoring information, it is recommended that you have it with you during your phone interview.
One of the purposes of the phone interview is that it allows you the opportunity to hear what information we have received from DOE. Therefore, you can compare the records you obtained
with what was sent to us. Any discrepancies between the two can be noted and straightened out. |
|
| Q: |
What is the purpose of the phone interview? |
| A: |
In some cases, we know that the energy employee may have experienced additional situations that might have contributed to his/her radiation exposure that are not described in the radiation exposure information we receive. The phone interview is an opportunity for you to provide NIOSH OCAS with additional information on your work activities which may have contributed to your radiation exposures. |
|
| Q: |
Will I have a phone interview? |
| A: |
Yes. Every claimant will have the opportunity to participate in a phone interview. While we encourage all claimants to participate in the interview process, participation is voluntary. Even though some claimants may not be able to answer all of the questions during the interview or have limited answers to the questions, any information provided during the interview may be useful in the dose reconstruction process. |
|
| Q: |
There are extenuating circumstances that make it impossible for me to have a telephone interview. How do you handle such cases? |
| A: |
We are aware that some individuals may have extenuating circumstances that will make the phone interview impossible. We will deal with those circumstances when it comes closer to the time of the interview. Please keep in mind that no matter what the circumstance, we will provide each claimant with the opportunity to participate. |
|
| Q: |
I've already had an interview but I just received a letter/phone call stating that I need to have a closing interview. What is a closing interview? |
| A: |
The closing interview occurs after you have been sent your draft dose reconstruction report and OCAS-1 form. The purpose of the closing interview is to review the dose reconstruction results and the basis on which the results were calculated. This will be the final opportunity during the dose reconstruction process for you to provide additional relevant information that may affect the dose reconstruction or indicate that you are in the process of obtaining such information. |
|
| Q: |
I've heard about some people getting their compensation award already. Is that true? |
| A: |
Yes, some individuals have received their compensation award. NIOSH OCAS has completed dose reconstructions for cases and returned the cases to DOL for a final decision.
There are also members of the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) that may have already received their compensation. In addition, the Silicosis and Chronic Beryllium Disease cases covered under The Act may have received their compensation award. |
|
| Q: |
Have any dose reconstructions been sent back to DOL? |
| A: |
Yes. |
|
| Q: |
How many workers with cancer will receive compensation? |
| A: |
Right now, we don't know. It will depend on the types of cancers workers have developed and the levels and types of radiation doses they have received in their workplace. However, we will work with DOL to ensure the public and claimants have access to information on the compensation program as it develops and becomes available. |
|
| Q: |
When can claimants expect to have decisions on their claims? |
| A: |
Before NIOSH OCAS could start dose reconstructions under The Act, we had to issue regulations and develop technical guidelines and procedures. NIOSH OCAS also awarded a contract for support in data collection, claimant interviews, and dose reconstruction. We are working with the contractor to make sure the backlog of claims awaiting dose reconstruction is handled promptly, consistently, and fairly. Once a portion of the backlogged claims have been completed, NIOSH OCAS will be able to develop estimates of the time needed to complete a dose reconstruction. |
|
| Q: |
How confident are you and can the public be in the fairness of your methods of dose reconstruction and for identifying cancers that were caused by radiation? |
| A: |
The Act recognizes that we will be dealing with uncertainties and limited data. We have used the best that science has to offer to develop the methods and guidelines for dose reconstruction and probability of causation. We are confident these methods and guidelines are very fair to workers. To the extent that the science and data involve uncertainties, these uncertainties are handled to the advantage rather than to the disadvantage of the claims. To help ensure that the methods and guidelines are as sound as possible, we will also provide opportunity for full review and comment on our work from the public and from the independent Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health. |
|
| Q: |
If the EEOICPA became a law in 2000, why didn't NIOSH start processing claims or have the first claimant telephone interview until 2001? |
| A: |
The Executive Order was passed in December 2000. This delegated responsibilities to HHS and NIOSH, DOL, and DOE. DOL could begin accepting claim applications as early as July 31, 2001. HHS/NIOSH, however, was required to conduct rulemaking to determine the methods for dose reconstruction and the guidelines for determining the probability of causation, which were not approved until May 2, 2002. HHS/NIOSH had to complete both of these rulemaking processes before finalizing any dose reconstructions. During this rulemaking process, HHS/NIOSH also had to establish its office and hire staff.
The first telephone interview was not conducted until 2001 because the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requires that Federal government agencies acquire prior approval to administer a questionnaire. The Office of Management and Budget approved HHS' request for "emergency" clearance under the PRA on October 31, 2001 for HHS/NIOSH's Computer Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) questions. Therefore, telephone interviews could not occur until after that time. |
|
| Q: |
This program seems to work like a lottery. I worked at a covered facility for 40 years and was denied compensation. I know of another employee who worked at the same facility for only 10 years and received compensation. Is it just the luck of the draw? |
| A: |
This program is not a lottery. Cancer risk models and the amount of radiation dose an energy employee was exposed to are the main determinants of Probability of Causation--the likelihood that the cancer was "at least as likely as not" due to exposure to ionizing radiation during employment at a covered facility. The cancer risk models are based on the best science available and the radiation dose levels are based mostly on very generous dose reconstruction methods.
The assumptions used in conducting dose reconstructions are designed to err in the favor of the claimant whenever estimated radiation dose levels are used. |
|
| Q: |
I no longer want to have my claim filed for this compensation program. Can I remove my claim from this program? |
| A: |
Our office does not have the authority to administratively close a case. You will need to contact DOL at 1-866-888-3322. |
|
|
Top of Page |
Dose Reconstruction
| Q: |
How will Dose Reconstruction be done for my claim? What does it mean? |
| A: |
The purpose of dose reconstruction is to characterize the occupational radiation environment to which you were exposed.
We start by collecting an initial set of records from DOE and other sources that provides us with information on your radiation exposures. These records will include personal monitoring of your radiation doses. In addition, the records might also include area monitoring of radiation levels and process descriptions that help characterize the possible levels of radiation exposures, the use of radiation protection measures, and the occurrence of incidents involving unexpected radiation exposures.
The next step is to speak with you to try to identify information that may not be found in the records we have collected. After we have collected all of the information needed, we will perform analysis that allows us to estimate the range of radiation dose you may have been exposed to in your workplace. This range will include the least radiation you might have received and the most--the "worst case." We will report the estimates of your dose with ranges that include the worst case to DOL.
Before we report these estimates, however, we will send a copy of the dose reconstruction draft report to you. We will review the report with you, explaining in detail what records, information, and criteria were used to produce the estimates found in your dose reconstruction. This review will enable you to help us ensure that we have taken into account all you and others know about your exposures. In addition, the review will also inform you of exactly how we have done our work, so you can consider whether we have fully addressed any concerns you might have. |
|
| Q: |
How will I know when my claim is ready for dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
Once our contractor has received enough information to conduct the dose reconstruction for your claim, your case will be assigned to a Health Physicist. The Health Physicist is responsible for conducing the dose reconstruction. Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU) will send you a letter to let you know that the case is ready for dose reconstruction and will provide you with the name of the assigned Health Physicist. |
|
| Q: |
How will a worker or survivor request an individual dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
Anyone wishing to file a claim will need to complete either Form EE-1 or EE-2 along with Form EE-3 (see the DOL Web site for copies of forms) and send them to DOL. DOL will verify the eligibility of the claim based on employment and health qualifications and submit eligible claims to NIOSH OCAS for dose reconstruction. The forms needed to file a claim can also be obtained from the Resource Centers established by DOL and DOE. |
|
| Q: |
Does my Tracking Number indicate the order in which you will do dose reconstructions? |
| A: |
No. NIOSH OCAS assigned the Tracking Number for the sole purpose of tracking your claim. Claims are given the tracking number based on the order in which we received them from DOL. For example, if your tracking number is 63, your claim was the sixty-third case we received from DOL. |
|
| Q: |
Is there anything I need to send to NIOSH to help with the dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
At the appropriate time, NIOSH OCAS will contact you to set up a convenient date and time for a phone interview. The interview is an opportunity for you to provide us with any additional information you may feel is necessary and for us to ask you for information we might need. Prior to the phone interview, if we need any additional information from you, we will contact you. |
|
| Q: |
How long does it take to complete a dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
When done for research purposes, dose reconstruction may take months to years to complete.
In compensation programs, a balance between efficiency and precision is needed. Before
NIOSH OCAS could start dose reconstructions under The Act, we had to issue regulations and develop
technical guidelines and procedures. NIOSH OCAS also awarded a contract for support in data
collection, claimant interviews, and dose reconstruction. We are working with the contractor to
make sure the backlog of claims awaiting dose reconstruction is handled promptly, consistently,
and fairly. Once a portion of the backlogged claims have been completed, NIOSH OCAS will be able
to develop estimates of the time needed to complete a dose reconstruction. |
|
| Q: |
What if claimants disagree with the findings of the dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
Once DOL has produced a recommended final decision, every claimant will have the opportunity to request a review of their NIOSH OCAS dose reconstruction through DOL. If DOL determines that NIOSH OCAS should reconsider the dose reconstruction, DOL will send the claim back to NIOSH OCAS for rework. When NIOSH OCAS completes the rework, a new draft dose reconstruction report and OCAS-1 form will be sent to the claimant and to DOL. At that time, DOL will issue a new recommended decision. The claimant then will have the opportunity to request a review of that decision under DOL's regulations.
We have worked hard to address the concerns of claimants that might lead to disagreement. The way NIOSH OCAS will be going about dose reconstructions will fully involve the claimant. NIOSH OCAS will make use of relevant information the claimant and others can bring to bear, and directly address the concerns we know claimants have. In addition, the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, an independent federal advisory committee representing scientific, medical, and worker perspectives, will be reviewing a sample of NIOSH OCAS dose reconstructions to help ensure the quality of the program. |
|
| Q: |
Have any dose reconstructions been sent back to DOL? |
| A: |
Yes. |
|
| Q: |
This program seems to work like a lottery. I worked at a covered facility for 40 years and was denied compensation. I know of another employee who worked at the same facility for only 10 years and received compensation. Is it just the luck of the draw?
|
| A: |
This program is not a lottery. Cancer risk models and the amount of radiation dose an energy employee was exposed to are the main determinants of Probability of Causation--the likelihood that the cancer was "at least as likely as not" due to exposure to ionizing radiation during employment at a covered facility. The cancer risk models are based on the best science available and the radiation dose levels are based mostly on very generous dose reconstruction methods.
The assumptions used in conducting dose reconstructions are designed to err in the favor of the claimant whenever estimated radiation dose levels are used.
|
|
| Q: |
How will NIOSH complete a dose reconstruction for a case when there is little or no monitoring information available? |
| A: |
If an individual's radiation doses were not monitored or there is uncertainty about the monitoring methods used, dose reconstruction could require extensive data gathering and analysis. This may include:
Determining specific characteristics of the monitoring procedures
Identifying events that were unmonitored
Identifying the types and quantities of radioactive materials involved
Evaluating production processes and safety procedures
Identifying the locations and activities of exposed persons
Identifying comparable exposure circumstances for which data is available to make assumptions
Conducting a variety of complex analyses to understand the data compiled or estimated
Cancer risk models and the amount of radiation dose an energy employee was exposed to are the main determinants of Probability of Causation--the likelihood that the cancer was "at least as likely as not" due to exposure to ionizing radiation during employment at a covered facility. The cancer risk models are based on the best science available and the radiation dose levels are based mostly on very generous dose reconstruction methods.
The assumptions used in conducting dose reconstructions are designed to err in the favor of the claimant whenever estimated radiation dose levels are used. |
|
| Q: |
I've heard that Site Profiles were being completed for numerous covered facilities to assist in dose reconstruction. What is a Site Profile? |
| A: |
Site Profiles are currently being developed for covered facilities. The Site Profiles contain information that is used to understand the activities and radiation protection practices of a facility. The person assigned to work on a dose reconstruction report uses the Site Profile to evaluate the personal and site specific data for each case.
Site Profiles for larger DOE facilities are made of six sections called Technical Basis Documents. The sections are usually approved for use one at a time. This is beneficial to claimants because for some cases, information from only certain sections of the Site Profile may be needed for the dose reconstruction. This allows the dose reconstruction to start for some cases before the entire Site Profile has been approved. Please note that some cases will require that the entire Site Profile be approved before the dose reconstruction can start.
The larger Site Profiles are broken up into the following sections:
(1) Introduction
(2) Site Description
(3) Occupational Medical Dose
(4) Occupational Environmental Dose
(5) Internal Dosimetry
(6) External Dosimetry
Please note: Site Profiles are living documents and are approved for use in dose reconstruction; they are not finalized. If changed or updated, previous non-compensable dose reconstructions will be reviewed to see if the change affects the outcome. |
|
| Q: |
How long does it take to complete a Site Profile? |
| A: |
The length of time it takes to complete a Site Profile varies from site to site. It is dependent upon the quality and complexity of the data acquired. |
|
| Q: |
Can a dose reconstruction be performed before a Site Profile is completed? |
| A: |
Yes. If there is adequate information to perform a dose reconstruction and the case is clearly compensable, it can be started before the Site Profile is approved for use. |
|
| Q: |
When would a Site Profile be necessary for a dose reconstruction? |
| A: |
A Site Profile is necessary when the information that is received from DOE is not adequate enough to perform a dose reconstruction. |
|
| Q: |
Once a Site Profile is completed for a facility, will the dose reconstructions for that facility immediately begin? |
| A: |
Not always. The dose reconstruction cannot be started until a Health Physicist is available and the case has all available exposure information. If we are waiting on exposure information from DOE or other sources, the dose reconstruction will not be started until the information is received. |
|
| Q: |
I've heard that NIOSH has been working with a contractor, ORAU. How are they affiliated with NIOSH and the dose reconstruction process? |
| A: |
On September 11, 2002, NIOSH OCAS awarded a five-year contract to ORAU to support NIOSH's responsibilities under EEOICPA. ORAU will work directly with OCAS to provide services in database management, data collection related to claims and petitions, dose reconstruction research, claimant interviews, dose estimation and reporting, and technical and program management support. To learn more about ORAU, you can visit their Web site at http://www.oraucoc.org. |
|
|
Top of Page |
Formal Rulemaking
Probability of Causation
| Q: |
How does the probability of causation work? What does it mean to me? |
| A: |
Probability of causation is a calculation used to determine how likely it is that your cancer was caused by your exposure to radiation during nuclear weapons production. The calculation is based on cancer risk models developed from cancer experiences seen in Japanese atomic bomb survivors, and adapted to reflect the type of exposures that occur in work environments. DOL will use the results from your dose reconstruction to determine the probability that your cancer was "at least as likely as not" due to your exposure to ionizing radiation during your employment at a covered facility. |
|
| Q: |
How much time will DOL need to determine probability of causation and make decisions, once NIOSH provides DOL with completed dose reconstructions? |
| A: |
We expect DOL will determine the probability of causation and make decisions very efficiently. The proposed probability of causation guidelines and the computer software we have developed to implement them will enable DOL to determine causation for a claim very quickly. |
Top of Page |
The Act
| Q: |
What is the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act (EEOICPA) of 2000?
|
| A: |
The Act established a compensation program for individuals who, over the past 50 years, have performed duties uniquely related to the nuclear weapons production and testing programs at DOE and its predecessor agencies. |
|
| Q: |
What role do DOL, DOE, and HHS have under this Act?
|
| A: |
Under Subtitle B of the EEOICPA, DOL is responsible for the receipt and overall management of claims. DOL determines the eligibility for compensation and medical expenses.
Under Subtitle B, DOE provides worker information to DOL and provides worker exposure information to HHS.
Under Subtitle D, DOE helps DOE contractor and subcontractor workers file State workers' compensation claims for conditions due to toxic exposures at work.
Under Subtitle B, HHS establishes procedures for estimating radiation doses, develops guidelines to determine the probability that a cancer was caused by the exposure to radiation, estimates radiation doses (dose reconstruction), and determines additions to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC). |
|
| Q: |
The Act states that the Secretary of HHS shall carry out its responsibilities of the compensation program with assistance from NIOSH. What is the connection between HHS, NIOSH, and OCAS? |
| A: |
NIOSH is part of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under HHS. NIOSH is the Federal agency responsible for conducting research and making recommendations for the prevention of work-related disease and injury. In order for NIOSH to effectively conduct activities to assist claimants and support the role of the Secretary of HHS under the compensation program, NIOSH established the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS). |
|
| Q: |
What is NIOSH's special expertise in this area? |
| A: |
NIOSH is the Federal agency under HHS' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) responsible for studying occupational health hazards for all workers, including nuclear workers. As part of this research, radiation dose reconstructions are conducted and the relationship between radiation exposures and cancers are assessed. NIOSH has conducted epidemiological research at several DOE sites and can use some of the records from those research efforts in the radiation dose reconstructions. These are precisely the areas of expertise underlying the two rules that have been issued by HHS under the EEOICPA. |
|
| Q: |
What are OCAS' responsibilities?
|
| A: |
NIOSH established OCAS to assist with implementing the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) of 2000.
OCAS is responsible for conducting occupational radiation dose reconstructions for certain workers with cancer who filed claims for compensation under the EEOICPA, Subtitle B.
OCAS will also provide staff support for the independent Advisory Board on Worker Health that will advise on the methods, guidelines, and the program mentioned above, and make recommendations to HHS on petitions by classes of workers to be designated as members of the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC).
Furthermore, OCAS is responsible for appointing members of Physician Panels to be established and administered by DOE that will review claims by nuclear workers applying for State workers' compensation for illnesses from work-related exposures to toxic substances under Subtitle D of The Act. |
|
| Q: |
What is the difference between Subtitle B and Subtitle D of the EEOICPA? |
| A: |
The program has two parts: a Federal component for certain diseases under Subtitle B, and, for all others, an assistance program for the filing of State workers' compensation claims under Subtitle D. NIOSH OCAS does not process claims for Subtitle D.
Subtitle B:
Under Subtitle B of the EEOICPA, DOE nuclear weapons production and testing program workers (including certain contractors, subcontractors, and atomic weapons employers) or their survivors can file claims. DOL provides compensation of $150,000 plus future medical coverage to workers who may have developed certain work-related illnesses.
DOL will verify the eligibility of the claims received and will submit eligible claims to the NIOSH Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS) for dose reconstruction. Once OCAS has completed a dose reconstruction for a claim, the results are sent to DOL. At that time, DOL will use guidelines for assessing the probability of causation to determine whether an individual's cancer is "at least as likely as not," to have been caused by occupational exposure to ionizing radiation during employment at a covered facility. This will permit DOL to decide whether to award compensation to individuals seeking Federal compensation under The Act.
For Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) claims, which are comprised of employees with specific cancers, who worked at three specific DOE facilities or participated in certain nuclear weapons tests, and who meet other additional requirements as outlined in The Act, cancers are presumed to be radiation-related for compensation purposes under The Act and do not need to go through the dose reconstruction process.
Subtitle D:
Subtitle D is an assistance program under the EEOICPA for the filing of State workers' compensation claims and is administered by DOE. It became effective in September 2002, when the federal rule governing operation of independent Physician Panels was finalized. DOE provides assistance to nuclear weapons workers and their families who worked at DOE facilities and developed work-related illnesses as a result of exposure to toxic substances. NIOSH OCAS does not process claims under Subtitle D.
DOE assists contractor employees in filing a claim under the appropriate State workers' compensation program. DOE aids workers and their survivors by providing access to panels of occupational medicine physicians who can help document the cause of the workers' illness, in particular, whether the illness is work-related. If, after a determination by the Physicians' Panel that an applicant's disease arose out of and in the course of employment at a DOE facility, DOE will assist the applicant in filing for compensation with the appropriate State workers' compensation program. This does not guarantee a positive outcome in a filing of a State claim. However, DOE will follow up with the worker's former contractor employer, wherever DOE is legally able, and instruct them not to contest the claim.
DOE does not represent the workers' claim to the State nor do they pay EEOICPA Subtitle D claims. Workers must seek State workers' compensation benefits on their own. State agencies are responsible for reviewing and processing the claims and claims processes may vary from state to state. |
Top of Page |
Residual Contamination Study
| Q: |
What was the purpose of the Residual Contamination Study? |
| A: |
In response to an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2002, NIOSH OCAS initiated a study to evaluate the potential for residual radioactive and beryllium contamination at facilities that processed these materials in support of nuclear weapons production. The study focused on determining whether or not the potential for residual contamination existed outside of the periods when DOE had determined work was being performed in support of the weapons production program. |
|
| Q: |
What sort of contamination did the study look for? |
| A: |
The study looked for residual beryllium and radioactive contamination that may have existed after operations supporting weapons production had ceased. |
|
|
Top of Page
|
Page last updated: April 24, 2007
Page last reviewed: May 30, 2008
Content Source: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
|
Search NIOSH
.gif){kind=spacer}
