——. ee oe PRIVACY ACT MATERIAL REMO ED in the Matter of and Department of Interior, Geological Survey the aircraft was ‘‘on the order of ten times the normal level of such contamination”; that this alerted the members of the crew who were responsible for maintaining, operating and monitoring the testing and recording equipment installed in the aircraft that the skin of the airplane had been contaminated by the radioactive rain water which had fallen upon it during the flight; that the scintillometer on the plane, which charted and recorded the radioactive fallout within the conical area below the plane, would not have accurately recorded the radioactive level of the rain water falling upon the plane; that after landing, the skin of the airplane was washed twice because when the radioactive level of the plane's skin following the first washing was measured it was found to bestill contaminated to an unacceptable extent; that appeliant remained with the plane to supervise its maintenance including 21 ECAB 290 Type ofInjury: Cancer of the Parotid Gland. ECAB’s Decision: BEC’s Decision Denying Compensation Set Aside and the Case Remanded for Further Development of the Record. Date of Decision: 1970. Appellant's Allegation: That cancer of the parotid gland and other conditions me; were causally related to exposure to atomic radiation during the course of his employment on May 29, 1957. — ae ee ee CASE NO. 49 A supervisor of the team during the flight reported that following the rain storms encountered on the flight the radioactive contamination on the skin of Facts: In April 1967 the Bureau denied appeilant’s claim for compensation. Appellant requested reconsideration of the Bureau's decision . In February 1968 the Bureau denied modification ofits original order rejecting the claim. several washings to remove the radioactivity; that appellant continued to wear his wet clothing during this period and for several hours thereafter. Further testimony indicated that the clothing worn by appellant during the flight was contaminated; that the needle of the Geiger counter used to measure the radioactivity of his clothing held steady at a high level several times that of the normal background but that the values measured by the hand counter were not recorded and could not be recovered, that appellant was directed to take a hot shower and scrub his body with soap in an effort to remove any radioactive material on his body, which appellant did; that shortly thereafter appellant became weak, feverish, and generally ill and was unable to perform his duties Appellant again requested modification of BEC’s denial. In March 1969 the Bureau again denied modification of its Original decision . Appellant filed an appeal. with the team. Circumstances of the flight and information with respect to appellant's exposure to radiation incidental thereto, were also furnished by the Chief, Airborne Operations Section, Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, in a statement dated June 5, 1964. He was appellant’s supervisor at the time of the flight and stated the records relating to that flight showed that 24 hours earlier. It appears that the flight was made in cooperation with the the aircraft was contaminated by the fallout and that it passed through three rain showers, that the plane passed briefly through the edge of the first rain shower, the second lasted approximately 6 minutes, and the aircraft was in the third shower area for approximately 3 minutes. With respect to the extent of the radioactivity encountered, his report said: agency with respect to an atomic test detonation on May 28, 1957. The program under which the flight on May 29, 1957 occurred was carried out in cooperation with the Civil Effects Group of the Atomic Energy Commission. The Geological Survey was reimbursed by the AEC, which made use ofthe radioactivity measurements obtained. The aircraft, a DC-3, was equipped with The aircraft contamination of gamma radiation as measured by the Geological Survey airborne equipment was 10,000 counts per second (c.p.s.). This measurement resulted from contamination on the aircraft skin below the scintillation crystal array. Comparative measurement using a hand counter showed the vicinity of the engines to be much in the windshield of the plane on appeliant’s side, and rain water entered the cockpit through it and drenched appellant’s clothing, earphones, face, neck and hands, anid he swallowed a small portion of the water, The radiation counter s appears that the aircraft contamination resulted from nuclear fallout Appellant was employed as an airplane pilot. On May 29, 1957, he was copilot of an aircraft flown in pursuit of the fallout pattern which followed the explosion of a 12-kiloton atomic device at the Nevada Test Site approxi mately Atomic Energy Commission to obtain radioactivity and other data for that instruments to measure the radioactivity encountered. Members of the crew did not wear individual dosimeters. While pursuing the fallout cloud to delineate its pattern, the aircraft passed through 3 rain storms. There was a leak in the aircraft indicated that the rain water was contaminated with radioactive material. After the aircraft landed upon completion of the mission, the background radiation count was higher than normal. 152 higher. Normal radioactigty background as measured on the ground at the Las Vegas, Nevada, Airport ramp was 820 counts per second. During the period of the first rain shower radiation levels ranging from 200,000-500,000 c.p.s. were measured, 220,000-420,000 c.p.s. during the second shower, and 10,000-12,000 c.p.s. during the third shower. It products in the rain showers. He pointed out in his report that with the U.S. Geological Survey equipment, 70,000 c.p.s. are equal to one milliroentgen per hour (mr/hr.) and PRIVACY AGT MATERIAL REMOVED 153