Judiciary Committee to US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.On March 10, 2005, during another USDOL-NIOSH Towne Hall orientation meeting at 6:00 pm in Richland, Washington, NIOSH health physicist Grady Calhoun designated:
“NIOSH only dealt with radiation dose until the members of Congress approved Reform Amendment of 2004 which replaces the abolished Subtitle D with Subtitle E provision that shall compensate workers injured by their exposure to toxic substances and/or chemicals. Calhoun attempted to explain to knowledgeable workers that the “0s” that are reflected on the NIOSH agents’ dose reconstruction reports don’t actually mean “zero dose.”According to health physicist Calhoun, NIOSH takes the highest reading from the worker’s dose report (if available). Then, the NIOSH agents calculate the dose using the highest reading the claimant received and the years worked at the same job (accumulative). So, dose readings taken every day would likely yield a high dose. It is noted that Calhoun didn’t elaborate on how the NIOSH agents calculate dose when dose records are unavailable. For instance, if a worker performed the same job day after day for approximately 10 years, it is probable that the accumulative dose reading would be very high. However, it must be taken into account, that sometimes TLDs are faulty which would cause an inaccurate reading or no reading at
all. Then, it is possible that a cohort worker whose badge didn’t read could have worked right next to a co-worker (1) whose badge was/is reading; (2) who performed the same job for the day; and (3) who used the same equipment. Then, the right thing that should have/should be done is to record each workers’ reading to match the highest reading. In my presence, claimant after claimant has testified to the following. During the USDOL and USHHS Towne Hall meeting, the representatives were informed that dose was not always recorded by the USDOE / contractor employees. If a worker dares to complain about the anomaly dose they were/are receiving, disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment is either implied or implemented.
COMMENT: I want to thank VillageVoice.com for publishing this impressive expose’. Well done! The following excerpts are very important to review because each item references the details that are relative to the actual status of the EEOICP. Then, my intent was to select excerpts that condense and enlighten any observer in the main body of my brief. Senator Hillary Clinton’s advisor Dr. Jim Melius was present and questioned the USHHS employees’ intent when USHHS NIOSH-OCAS deputy manager David Sundin (direct report to Larry Elliott) abruptly interrupted. As always,
