The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (EEOICPA) established a federal program to compensate workers of the Cold War-era nuclear weapons production and testing industry for work-related cancers. The statute and subsequent Executive Order (EO) 13,179 designated the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), among other agencies, to carry out certain technical activities that support the administration of the program by the U.S. Department of Labor.

In doing so, NIOSH conducts site profiles and dose reconstruction for program claimants, to estimate the types and levels of radiation to which workers were exposed on the job. The U.S. Department of Labor uses dose reconstructions to determine if it was at least as likely as not that workers' cancers were work-related. These results are part of the body of information that the Department of Labor uses in making determinations on the compensability of claims. Information about NIOSH's technical support activities under EEOICPA, which are conducted by NIOSH's Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS), may be found at www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/.

With the benefit of experience that NIOSH and its stakeholders have gained since the enactment of EEOICPA ten years ago, NIOSH is undertaking a review of its Radiation Dose Reconstruction Program. This review reflects NIOSH's commitment to: 1) using rigorous, high-quality science in its programs, 2) applying and working to advance the latest scientific methodologies and practices, 3) addressing the needs and concerns of stakeholders, and 4) evaluating NIOSH's on-going programs to ensure that they remain effective, relevant, and responsive.

Specifically, in the program review, NIOSH will address the following aspects of the Radiation Dose Reconstruction Program:

• The quality of science practiced in the program at the current time as well as throughout the evolution of the program. For example, when reconstructing employee radiation exposures where records may be incomplete or missing, has NIOSH relied on the type of data that provides the most accurate estimate of a worker's exposure? Where no monitoring data exist for given employees, has NIOSH relied on scientifically valid surrogate data (such as dose measurements for other workers who were employed in the same work location or in similar work processes) to calculate exposure estimates? Has NIOSH appropriately accounted for the possibility that instruments used to measure employee exposures in given instances may not have been sufficiently sensitive to detect low levels of radiation?
  
  
• The timing of the accomplishment of NIOSH's program tasks. For example, have dose reconstructions been completed in as timely a manner as possible? Have completed dose reconstructions been timely reported to the U.S. Department of Labor?
  
  
• The appropriateness and the consistency of decisions regarding petitions to add groups of claimants to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) established under the statute. Claimants who are in the SEC are not required by law to go through the process of individual dose reconstruction to receive compensation. Has NIOSH uniformly evaluated SEC petitions to determine whether they meet the qualifications described in the statute and regulations? Have the bases for decisions on petitions been consistent and uniform?
  
  
• The appropriateness and the consistency of decisions on individual dose reconstructions. For example, has NIOSH uniformly used scientific techniques available at the time that account for whether exposures may have been under-estimated or over-estimated? Has NIOSH been consistent in its assumptions for developing "best-estimate" dose reconstructions where data for making estimates were incomplete or missing? When NIOSH revisits completed dose reconstructions (as it does for the benefit of claimants, when new information becomes available in cases where the completed dose reconstruction suggested low probability that a cancer was work-related), does it do so in a consistent fashion?
  
  
• The quality and timing of service provided to claimants and petitioners, and their representatives. For example, does NIOSH respond to the questions of claimants, petitioners, and their representatives in as timely a manner as possible? Does NIOSH provide information about its technical processes and products in terms easily understood by claimants and petitioners?
  
  

Please note: This review is not designed to address questions or comments about individual claims or dose reconstructions. Comments or questions pertaining to such matters should continue to be addressed to the NIOSH Office of Compensation Analysis and Support at ocas@cdc.gov.

Public Comment Period

NIOSH is seeking written comments on this program review. Comments will be accepted through June 4, 2010, in accordance with the instructions below. All material submitted to NIOSH should reference Docket Number NIOSH-194. All electronic comments should be formatted in Microsoft Word. Comments submitted to the docket will be available to the public. As the review progresses, NIOSH will prepare draft reports or white papers incorporating information, including public comments, generated or obtained during the review, NIOSH will also invite public comments on those draft reports once they are prepared.

Comments will be accepted until 5:00 p.m. EDT on June 4, 2010

To submit comments, please use one of these options:

1. Send NIOSH comments using this online form
   
   
2. Send comments by email.
   
   
3. Fax comments to the NIOSH Docket Office: 513-533-8285
   
   
4. Send by Mail to:
   NIOSH Mailstop: C-34
   Robert A. Taft Lab.
   4676 Columbia Parkway
   Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

NIOSH Draft Documents for Public Review