Dear Dr. Michaels:

The Hanford Beryllium Awareness Group would like to take this opportunity to commend you and the Secretary for the efforts you have made on behalf of beryllium affected workers across the DOE complex.  The announcement made by the Secretary regarding his compensation initiative was a positive step toward recognizing the very real sacrifices made by civilians who have worked, and continue to work, in DOE facilities 
supporting various government missions.

Prior to the Secretary’s April 12, 2000, announcement, we had reviewed the various House and Senate Resolutions related to the Energy Employees’ Beryllium Compensation Act.  In general, we found them to contain many worthwhile ideas.  In particular H.R. 3495, while not addressing beryllium workers does contain the types of protections and provisions we would like to see in a beryllium specific bill. 

Some proposals contained provisions that we found objectionable. Additionally, there were things we thought should have been addressed but were not. We would like to take this opportunity to share our perspective on what has been proposed in order that you may consider our views as you draft the new legislation.

We agree with the statement you made while you were here at Hanford; that state compensation systems are generally well equipped to deal with occupational injuries.  They are poorly equipped to deal with occupational disease.  So it is with some dismay we note that “A Bill” as posted on the DOE Web Site, relies heavily on the Federal Employee Compensation Act that, like state compensation systems, has a straight-forward formula to address occupational injuries that does not translate well to occupational disease.

Whether we like it or not, there is currently no model that could be easily modified to address the health issues that arise from beryllium exposure.  It is our collective position, that a new model is called for and that the DOE is in the best position to actively support the development of the legislation, implement the legislative requirements, administer the program, and directly interface with affected workers perhaps through strategically located satellite offices.  As you and others work through these complex issues, we would like to offer our assistance in any way possible. 

Seemingly simple definitions such as “time of injury” become complex when we talk about beryllium.  When did exposure occur?  Some sites have little to no exposure monitoring data relative to beryllium.  Process information can be almost impossible to reconstruct and tends to come directly from workers as opposed to hard data or documentation.  From our perspective, “time of injury” is irrelevant when talking about beryllium affected workers. 

The definition of “disability” also needs to be reconsidered and redefined for individuals with Beryllium Disease.  It is our position that we should not be forced to wait until we are physically impaired, carrying oxygen tanks in a backpack, or unable to perform normal activities of daily living before we are declared “disabled” and allowed to leave the worksite. 

When a beryllium affected worker separates from the workplace as a result of disease or disability, we strongly believe that forcing that worker to accept a reduction in income is neither fair nor reasonable.  We believe an equitable and just approach would be to assure that the worker's income would remain intact after separation, not apportioned as a percentage of the total at the time of separation. We further believe that this income should keep pace with inflation through annual Cost of Living Adjustments.

Very little is currently understood about beryllium sensitization and beryllium disease. For that reason we believe 100% medical coverage for all medical conditions, regardless of our ability to directly link that condition to beryllium disease, is necessary to adequately protect workers and their families from undue financial burden.  We also believe that this medical benefit should not be offered in lieu of other benefits.

We believe that provisions must be made that provide access to life insurance.  It has been our experience that once the diagnosis of beryllium disease is made, obtaining life insurance is very difficult if not impossible.  In fact, workers have had life insurance policies canceled after receiving a diagnosis of beryllium disease.

In draft legislation we have seen lump sum compensation offered in lieu of other benefits.  We believe very strongly that lump sum compensation is an equitable approach and should NOT be subject to reduction or elimination based on other monetary benefits that might be awarded beryllium affected workers.

We have serious objection to previous draft legislation’s focus on the protection of vendors, rather than workers.  This focus is inconsistent with the Secretary’s intent as stated in his April 12, 2000 announcement that, “We are moving forward to do the right thing by these workers.”  Forcing workers to choose between the compensation provided by proposed federal legislation or existent state programs or the right to litigate, is once again, requiring the workforce to sacrifice itself for the past mistakes of the federal government.  Some of us have already sacrificed our health.  Now you expect us to sacrifice the financial integrity of ourselves and families?   We do not believe that forcing workers into an either/or position constitutes just or fair treatment and it certainly does not facilitate the “…process of healing by admitting the government’s mistakes…” as discussed by Vice President Al Gore.

In conclusion we again commend you and the Secretary for your forthrightness and efforts to make amends for past mistakes.  We do not seek unreasonable remedies but request fair and just compensation for our afflictions.  We urge you to continue working with Congress and the Administration to quickly pass legislation that addresses the very real and ongoing suffering of not only beryllium-affected workers, but also all former and current DOE workers whose health has been impacted by their jobs. 

Finally, if there is anything we can to do assist you in this process, please do not hesitate to contact us at (509) 376-6005.
 
 

Sincerely,
Terrance F. Cherney
Chairman
Hanford’s Beryllium Awareness Group