The Bureau's Medical Director concurred in the hospital’s opinion and in a report dated April 16, 1970 he said: In this case I feel that the decrease in white count, particularly the neutrophiles, represented a biological monitor and was the result of the long term radiation exposure. With removal from radiation sources the white count is improving. I have no further recommendation except CASE NO. 40 those provided by [the hospital], that is, removal from radiation pending return to normal of the white count, with periodic blood checks. Type of Injury: Epidermoid Carcinoma, Dorsum of the Right Hand. BEC’s Decision: Claim Approved. No compensation; Nofost time; No medical On May 6, 1970 the claimant’s white blood count was 5,600 and he was The Bureau has determined that [claimant’s] disease is related to his 124 ~— ee —*-@ Oe Se —Oq —4q,--Oe co ~ a— ep exposure as an X-ray technician since 1948. ee BEC's Decision: In allowing the claim the Bureausaid: expense, No permanent disability, and No residual of the injury. ee eet reassigned to his previous position in the X-ray department of the hospital. In a statement dated October 1970, the Bureau’s Medical Director noted claimant’s blood count had returned to normal. He also pointed to the possibility of latent effects reappearing after further X-ray exposure and he said “claimantis protected by his claim should he in years develop a myeloproliferation disorder”. Date of Decision: 1971. Claimant’s Allegation: tn March 1970 claimant filed “information” concerning his injury with the BEC “as a matter of interest to BEC and others interested in the incidence, prevalence and natural history of those exposed to ionizing radiation”. Facts: Claimant was a physiologist and assistant to the radiologist at a Government hospital. In April 1969 he noticed a lesion on the dorsum ofhis right hand. It was removed and diagnosed as a well differentiated epidermoid carcinoma. He continued to work as there was neither residual recurrence nor dissemination of the lesion. On March 4, 1970 he retired on disability for cardiac insufficiency, Since he had accrued an excess of 3,000 hours of sick leave he went on sick leave, and on the same dayhefiled “information” with the Bureau concerning the lesion in question. The information was treated by the Bureau as a claim. Evidence showed that between 1946 and 1959 claimant had performed “hundreds” (between 15 and 20 a day) of fluoroscopic and X-ray examinations on mentally ill patients in the T.B. unit of the hospital as part of gastro-intestinal tract studies. He used no film badge and wore no protective gloves. Since all the patients examined were mentally ill their behavior or inability to cooperate in positioning for the examinations made it necessary for his protective gloves to be removed. Claimant alleged that he had had no significant exposure to fonizing radiation prior to 1946. The old vertical fluoroscope was later condemned and all the X-ray equipment claimant worked with was disposed of. However, the fluoroscopic unit with which the claimant had done most of the pneumothorax and pneumoperitoneum examinations was described by a radiation physicist as “hazardous”. In a Protection Survey report of 1958 on the fludroscope in “Room 1010, Radiography and Fluoroscopy, Medical Surgical Building” the machine was described in pertinent part as follows: This room contains a Keleket 300 ma multicron with a Keleket type C table adjustable from trendelenberg to upright. The room is used principally for fluoroscopy with some general radiography. Fluoroscopy is carried out at 65-95 Kvp, 4 - 5 ma and there is a 3mm A!filter in the ASS 125