Re[2]: Radiation Records Being Investigated

[Vincent.King@DOEGJPO.COM (Vincent King)]

     Actually, in the version of the House Bill forwarded by Bob Cherry 
     on 3/10/00, the eligibility requirement is stated: 
     
        "...was or should have been monitored through use of dosimetry   
        badges for exposure of the employee's body to radiation at the   
        facility..."
     
     If this wording didn't change in the version that passed, actual 
     exposures to beryllium or plutonium apparently have nothing to do 
     with determining eligibility.  The only radiological criterion 
     listed is having a dosimeter badge, which as someone pointed out, 
     was true for virtually EVERYONE working at most DOE sites in the 
     past (yes, even accountants and secretaries who never entered a 
     radiological area).
     
     Vincent King
     vincent.king@doegjpo.com

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Radiation Records Being Investigated
Author:  "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@earthlink.net> at Internet
Date:    3/24/00 12:38 PM


> it would seem appropriate as it will compensate those who are
> most likely to have been injured.

I believe that the current House Bill, as provided to us by Bob 
Cherry recently, states that no proof of exposure need be provided. 
If that is true, there is no "most likely" probability to be proved 
either. The text appears to state that if the individual was working 
in a DOE facility (all named - even though Weldon Springs was put in 
the wrong state), and they were exposed to occupational radiation, 
and they have a disease (the assumption is that the cause was 
     radiation) and no other proof need be provided to be compensated. 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html