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