Fairborn commencement
Badin graduation
Division I regional track finals
Complicated claims process often ends in rejections
Former Mound worker denied help despite lung, leg and breast cancers, amputation
Monday, November 13, 2006
GERMANTOWN — Sherrie Neff was just out of high school in 1967 when she landed a job at Miamisburg's Mound Laboratory.
"I was proud of working out there," said Neff, 58. "I trusted the government. I thought they were not going to jeopardize our health over there.
Extras
"I guess that was stupid of me."
She found her first cancer in 1983. She felt the lump in her left breast as she was nursing one of her children. Neff had a mastectomy on June 8, 1983. When she recovered, she went back to work at the Mound.
Neff, a former Germantown councilwoman, worked there until June 2004. Since then, she's had four major cancer surgeries. In April, doctors amputated her right leg near the hip because of a rare soft-tissue cancer. On Oct. 11, they removed her right lung to extract a tumor the size of a melon.
How much compensation has she received from the government she served?
"Nothing."
If Neff had worked at Piketon's Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, she would've received as much as $400,000 in cash plus medical benefits. But since she worked at Mound, she has received only stacks of claim forms to fill out — followed by denials.
And bills. Neff's lifetime $250,000 in medical insurance is exhausted. She has paid $46,000 out of pocket so far. She can't afford a prosthetic leg.
Sick workers from most federal nuclear installations, including Mound, have an uphill battle in proving their cancers were caused by on-the-job radioactive exposures so they can qualify for federal compensation.
A Labor Department program automatically compensates atomic workers at Piketon and 10 other U.S. plants if they have any of 22 cancers that can be caused by radiation exposures, including breast and lung cancer. Workers at other nuclear plants, including Mound, must go through a complicated claims process that overwhelmingly results in denials.
Neff and other Mound workers want to petition the government to allow Mound to have the same "special exposure cohort" status as Piketon under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act of 2000. But a memo that was leaked earlier this year raised concerns that the Bush administration wants to prevent plants such as Mound from getting the special status — not for scientific reasons, but to control program costs.
It's "a very well thought out agenda to squelch any new cohorts," said Richard Miller of the Government Accountability Project, a watchdog group. Miller, who helped to develop the program, called the memo "a devastating blow to the entire program because it undermines its credibility."
The memo suggested that administration officials should have veto rights over admissions to the special cohort. Officials of the White House budget office, the Labor Department and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health repudiated the memo, but some congressmen remain concerned. A House Judiciary subcommittee plans hearings for Wednesday and Thursday on the matter.
Because they don't have special status, workers at places such as Mound and the Feed Materials Production Center in Fernald must submit to a paperwork process called dose reconstruction. The process compares medical and work histories to known plant hazards to determine if there's at least a 50 percent chance the cancers are workplace related.
When Congress enacted the compensation program, Piketon and the two other U.S. uranium enrichment plants — at Paducah, Ky., and Oak Ridge, Tenn. — were among those getting special status because it was felt their workers faced unusual hazards and plant records were too sketchy to determine whether workers got sufficient toxic exposures to make them sick. But Roberta Mosier, deputy director of the program for the Labor Department, acknowledged there were "also probably some political concerns" in granting the status, because congressmen near the enrichment plants pushed hard for it.
The special status has helped many Piketon workers get compensation: 28 percent of cases involving Piketon workers have been paid to date, versus 15 percent for Fernald and less than 12 percent for Mound workers.
Only 133 of 1,109 claims involving 679 Mound workers have been paid so far.
Workers at Fernald and at the pre-Mound Monsanto Chemical Co. Dayton Project of 1943-49 have already petitioned for the special status and are awaiting rulings.
Mound was a top-secret government defense research and production facility where workers processed radioactive polonium and plutonium, produced nuclear detonators and developed a thorium reactor.
Neff said Mound deserves special status because "there were no records kept years ago" in some areas and "a lot of the books and records and files got thrown away" when the plant closed. Also, documentation "was only as good as the person keeping the records — and I just don't have faith in that anymore."
She said she had many different jobs at the Mound over the years. "I worked with a lot of radionuclides, chemicals, gases, metals," Neff said. "I had so much knowledge. They called it 'cradle to grave.'
"The only real protection I had was steel-toed shoes and safety glasses."
Neff first filed for compensation for her 1983 breast cancer in December 2001, shortly after the federal program began.
While she was waiting for a ruling, in September 2004, doctors removed a cancerous tumor from her left leg. She reapplied, seeking compensation for the breast and leg cancers.
In November 2004, the Labor Department turned down Neff's original claim relating to the breast cancer only. A dose reconstruction estimated her career exposure to radiation at 16 rem, documents show. Officials called that an "overestimate."
Rem is a unit of measurement that relates the absorbed dose in human tissue to the biological damage of the radiation. Not all radiation has the same effect, even if the dose is the same. A single chest X-ray gives about two one-hundredths of a rem.
Just six months after Neff's first dose reconstruction, the same three officials of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health who signed it sent her a second reconstruction for both the breast and leg cancers. This time, her breast exposure was listed at just 2.5 rem while the leg was 8.3 rem, for a total dose of 10.8 rem.
In other words, NIOSH estimated Neff's dose for two cancers far lower in the second reconstruction than it did earlier for only one cancer.
NIOSH found a 43.76 percent probability — below the required 50 percent — that Neff's breast and leg cancers were workplace-related, and she was again denied compensation.
Her husband, Bob, said he thinks program officials manipulate the numbers to keep workers from reaching the 50 percent probability mark. "That's what I believe — they do their own testing and they make the rules up as they go along."
Stuart Hinnefeld, a health physicist with NIOSH, said the institute uses overestimates to clear cases when scientists feel certain the cases won't meet the dose requirement for compensation. Upon further examination, the doses can come back lower, he said, but all reconstructions are designed to err in the claimant's favor.
Critics say it's often impossible to accurately reconstruct exposures that occurred decades ago.
Two months after Neff's second denial, in August 2005, doctors found cancer in her right lung. She had the lower lobe removed and underwent 96 hours of chemotherapy and 38 radiation treatments.
The cancer in her leg returned a few months later, resulting in the amputation on April 10. A checkup revealed a recurrence of the lung cancer, leading to the removal of the lung last month.
Early this year, federal officials revealed to Neff for the first time that an X-ray from her 1983 physical exam at Mound showed scarring that could indicate she has beryllium disease from exposure to the toxic metal. Neff filed a beryllium claim, which was rejected earlier this month.
She still has a pending claim that she may have been sickened by Mound exposures to chemical hazards.
As part of the claims process, the Labor Department asked her for a list of all the toxins she recalls encountering at Mound. When Neff asked the Energy Department to provide her with that information, she was told it would cost her $35,000 in fees for staff time and copying.
"It's like I've got a vicious Catch-22 here," she said. "I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall, and I'm just one individual."
Neff said the latest surgery has left her deeply fatigued. She has been on morphine since the amputation in April. In addition to pain from her surgeries, she still experiences an amputee's "phantom pain" — the sensation of being stabbed in her missing heel.
"I have never smoked a day in my life, never drank, never did recreational drugs," Neff said. "I just worked at a bad place."
Comments
By M.J.Kraft
November 20, 2006 06:28 PM | Link to this
I hired on at Mound 1980 entry level ,{labor gang].Assignments ranging from ,office moves,,assisting skilled trades in and out of contaminated areas, yards and grounds,and digging lots of holes.In 1986 I moved up to Firefighter classification. Fire prevention was top priority.For the 13 years myself, and 8 other firefighters perforfmed ispections over every inch of every building. Hot or cold. In 1990 I was diagnosed with COPD,1994Moderate Emphysema,Lung Cancer 2006.Do yourself A favor
By Trish Quinn
November 20, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Very well reported article. I work on a similar program as the WHHP but its for the construction and building trades workers that worked at Mound, Fernald and other various DOE sites. We offer an in-depth work history questionnaire and a free medical screening exam. If you worked construction at a DOE site, please call us at 1-888-464-0009. Or check us out on-line at www.btmed.org.
By Mary M.
November 19, 2006 08:27 PM | Link to this
I’ve just reread the entire series. Why does it begin with Mound in 1948? What happened at Bonebrake and the Runnymede Playhouse long before 1948 was even more dangerous and secretive.
By Mary M.
November 19, 2006 08:14 PM | Link to this
Investigative reporting at it finest (and most expensive) so it isn’t often seen in daily newspapers. I am a Mound widow and also a Mound survivor as I worked on the “cool” side. At age 81 I consider myself very, very lucky.
By nukeboy
November 16, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Thanks for reporting a story which has been reported about a zillion times already. This is old news.
By Paige Gibson
November 16, 2006 08:24 AM | Link to this
I also wanted to thank DDN for continually keeping this story in the news. Good article. As part of Mound/WHPP we are starting a database to help people with their claims. Because of the cloak of secrecy we worked under and records that are missing we rely on workers for their stories and information. Anything that you can offer may help a fellow Mound worker and thanks to everyone who has already contributed. We have information that spans the decades!!!
By Paige Gibson
November 16, 2006 08:19 AM | Link to this
I worked at Mound as did my father. I became aware of the occpational exposure and got involved. I now work for Mound Workers Health Protection Program. We offer Mound workers a free medical screening. Since July we have diagnosed 6 people with lung cancer or asbestosis. We are also helping people with their claims. What a mess! So Mound people if you have questions or comments call us at 937-866-6802.
By Paige Gibson
November 16, 2006 08:12 AM | Link to this
I worked at Mound as did my father. I became aware of the occupational exposures and got involved. i am now one of three people who work at Mound Workers Health Protection Program. We offer free medical screenings to people who worked at Mound. We are also helping people with the ridiculous amount of paperwork in the compensation program.Since we started in July 6 people have been diagnosed with lung cancer& asbestosis.Questions call 937-866-6802
By Carolyn
November 14, 2006 09:39 PM | Link to this
Excellent series. Your series and others in papers near other sites where atomic workers worked and became ill should be circulated in each community so readers know the situation in the local plant was repeated over and over all over the country.
These plants, not to mention the bombs they helped create, were the American weapons of mass destruction of several generations of workers.
By WALT
November 14, 2006 09:15 PM | Link to this
I WORKED AT MOUND FOR 36 YEARS IN SOME OF THE MOST HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. I AM NOW PAYING THE PRICE WITH CHRONIC INCURABLE LUNG DISEASE. I AM TRYING TO WORK MY WAY THRU THE PAPER WORKMILL WHICH STARTED OVER 2 YEARS AGO.
By Sam Elliott
November 14, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this
I worked at this site in 1982 and this is the first of heard of any type of health risk. Who do I contact?????
Sicerely,
Sam Elliott
By Carrie
November 14, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
The Dayton Daily News(paper) just did a huge 3-part story on this, Ohio’s Nuclear Legacy. Very good. Dates Nov. 12, 13, 14. Check it out online at www.daytondailynews.com
By Bill
November 14, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
I worked at the infamous “bomb” plant for 31 years and am still healthy except for an unrelated heart problem. Don’t blame the plant for the bad stuff that happened and ignore the fact that most people never have had a health problem from working there. Help the ones that have!
By Bill
November 14, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
Having worked at the Piketon plant from 1967 until 1998, I believe I know a little about the conditions of the plant. Many mistakes were made by plant workers and management. Many ex-workers have died because of working at the plant. I’m fortunate to be healthy except for a unrelated heart problem. Don’t condemn the plant because times were different then, help those today that need help!
By Bill Bankes
November 14, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
I worked at Mound and my Grandfather worked at Fernald, Waverly, and GE Evendale. He died in 1963 of Cancer caused by exposure.
His claim was denied because they would not accept his time at GE and a site to be included although there were large amounts of radioactive materials there.
By Deb
November 14, 2006 07:40 AM | Link to this
Thank you for publishing this extremely important and well written series. People need to know what is and was happening in Ohio’s nuclear industry as well as the problems people struggle with trying navigate the complicated EEOICPA compensation program.
By Jodi Hingtgen
November 13, 2006 09:48 PM | Link to this
Is anyone keeping a central repository or database of people who worked at the Mound and have since died of unnatural causes? Anyone other than the government? My mother (Doris Hill) worked there between 1956 and 1963 and died of various cancers when she was only 42 and I was 16. NIOSH has so far denied my claims. Any information on people who worked there in the late 50’s and early 60’s would be be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, Jodi
By Charles Driver
November 13, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this
Just a note to say thanks for publishing the articles concerning the conditions of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. I have corresponded with Vina Colley for years and can verify, as a former worker in the Paduch Gaseous Diffusion plant and a victim of Heavy Metals Poisoning resulting in total disability, that all her information is correct and accurate. We were told the same lies in different plants for years, resulting in hard to diagnose illnesses that have destroyed our health.
By J
November 13, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this
My dad worked at Y-12 in Oakridge. I say was because he contracted lung cancer and died. His work/medical records say he was exposed to uranium and radiation. It has been 4 years on the claim. It got to the final adjudication and the person in charge told my siblings and me that he was going to approve the claim. Five days later we received notice that it was going back to NIOSH reconstruction when the govt had already said that dose reconstruction could not be done. Go figure!
By Nelson
November 13, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
Having worked at the plant for over 40 years, I believe while there were problems, chain smoking and failure to use provided safety equipment caused many problems.
By Cindy
November 13, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
…and We The People pay for all of this.
By Terri Robson
November 13, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
The Piketon Site sounds like where The cartoon show the Simpsons got their idea from. As long as the American Government does not recognize the degree which it has poisoned not only the planet but, it’s own citizens and as long as the world leaders do not push for an accounting and retribution of these CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY as that is the only way to describe the actions nothing will ever get done or be resolved.
By Katelyn
November 13, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
As an EnvironmentalHealthNews.org regular, I read this excellent article right after this Washington Post piece on the legacy of Agent Orange in Vietnam: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/12/AR2006111201065.html.
It impresses me how we have caused great environmental (and thus HUMAN HEALTH) destruction at home and abroad, indiscriminately.
How can my generation ensure America stops repeating these mistakes?
By Greg
November 13, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
A very well reported story. It underlines the need for safe energy alternatives - most notably solar energy. Another interesting question would be - how is Utah or Nevada better managed? and what is the long term disposal plan? store it forever until it decays?
By Stephanie
November 13, 2006 07:37 AM | Link to this
Thank you for bringing these important issues to light!