PRIVACY ACT MATERIAL REM DYED These mines were producing uranium ore at the time, although they also had complex ores which contained lead, zinc, etc. He continued working in this capacity through 1957. Although he also worked in a uranium mine in 1958, his exposure while in the employ of the United Mining and Leasing Company was the exposure at issue in the claim. He continued working for various mining and construction companies unti] 1964. He began smoking cigarettes at age 21 and smoked about a pack a day. A report from the medical director of an Occupational Health Field Station of the U.S. Public Health Service stated that they had no information on radon daughter levels in the Carroll and 2 Sisters Mines, “... but because of the ore we have estimated that the radiation levels were probably quite low”. He estimated that decedent’s cumulative exposure to radon daughter products in his mining career was about 260 Working Level Months. ' Type of Injury. Lung Cancer. Medical Evidence: The autopsy report indicated that the carcinoma was of an undifferentiated oat cell type. The medical director of the U.S. Public Health Service offered the following optnion as to causation: Colorado Decision: The case.was denied by the Referee and by the Industrial Commission of Colorado on the ground that the case was ba rred by the statute of limitations in effect between 1954 and 1956, the years of decedent’s last injurlous exposure. The case was appealed to the District Court and before the appeal wasfinally disposed of the case wasset tled. The cell type of his cancer, his age and the time period from start of uranium mining to development of cancer are consistent with a radiation-induced lesion. The only problems here are our low estimate of cumulative exposure and his cigarette smoking. My estimate of lung cancer risk at his age from cigarette smoking is approximately the same as my estimate of his lung cancer risk from 260 Working Level Months of exposure. However, the fact that the cell type of cancer, his age and the time period from start of uranium mining to development of cancer are all consistent with a radiation-induced lesion Date of Decision: 1971. Claimant's Allegation: That her husband died _ caused by his; experiences in uranium mining. as the result Oe of | ane ORB cancer Facts: The decendent, who had been in mining and construction work for about 40 years, first complained of symptoms referr able to the gail bladder or bile ducts in November 1964. In December of that year he first showed signs of bile duct obstruction. Diagnostic procedures revealed a tumor in the lun would tend to tip the scales in the direction of occupational cancer. A lead?'° analysis on bone would be of great help in determining the which had already metastasized widely and had caused the bile duct obstruction. He died on January 4, 1965. His widow filed a claim on April 19 1965 alleging that his death was due to lung cancer and silicosis. Before the possible error in the above Working Level Month estimate. It appears that no lead?! analysis was ever made on any ofthe decedent’s case was set for hearing the attorney representing hada heart attack and ultimately withdrew from the case. She sought new counsel and shortly before the three-year statute of limitations for filing claims had run, as set forth in the 1961 amendment of the Color ado Occupational Disease Act her then counsel filed a motion on January 2, 1968, (0 make 27 employers parties ° the action, alleging in the motion that there was not time to file separate ‘ms an an shortest way would be to make them all parties and work out Carcinoma such as this can be related to occupational exposure if the ore mined and the dusts are radioactive. Uranium miners are particularly prone to this type of malignancy. If. ‘had indeed been exposed over many years to radioactive ore such as uranium, then his death was proximately related to the environment of his employment. I have noted that the silicosis found was moderate in degree. Silicosis, as such, is not considered a causative agent in the genesis of lung cancer. oo The case ultimately came on for hearing before a Referee of the | ii Commission on September 5, 1968. At the hearing there was considerable evidence concerning the decedent's work history . Evidence showed that the deceased began his mining career in 1923 as a coal miner and worked in this capacity until 1938. From 1938 to 1954 he worked in several hard rock mines These mines contained complex ores of lead, zinc and silver. In May 1954 he began work as 4 uranium miner in two mines, the Carroll and the 2 Sisters Mines operated by the defendant United Mining and Leasing Corporation. tissues. A specialist in thoracic surgery reported as follows: In my opinion, if no radioactive ores or dust were present, then occupational exposure was not the proximate cause of ' death. In these cases, prolonged excessive exposure to cigarette smoke is the usual cause of the cancer. -— os ea ——. eat eee el Ne ~~ ho CASE NO. 54 v. Humphries Engineering Company Federal Insurance €‘OMIPUNY, United Mining and Leasing Corporation, et al Claim No. WC {-910-247; SF 170374 Colorado Findings: At the conclusion of the hearing, counsel for the Humphries Engineering Company filed a motion to dismiss and the State 170 I7t PRIVACY ACT MATERIAL REMOVED