out.

I volunteered in 1995 fora lung scan to serve as a data point for female upper body detection
parameters. I was acceptable as a candidate because I had not had a KNOWN radiation exposure.
Because of several outliers in the data (mine was the only high one, others were consider too low)
the data was reconfigured to bring everyone into a more normal range. I understand that this is often
acceptable. Still, with my history, I am suspicious. My reading was still higher after the re-analysis.
Thave a copy of this report should you want it.

1994-02

I am concerned about the breast cancer; however, I believe [ have reason to be more
concerned about the continuing development of a chronic breathing problem (under control for the
moment with daily Singulaire, Pulmicort, and Albuterol). The cause has never been specifically
diagnosed. However, upon chelation, beryllium was found in both my blood and urine. I have had
the LPT test done once. The results were negative; however, I understand that it may take several
tests anda lung lavage to determine sensitivity, especially if one’s immune system has been impacted
as has mine. I was shown to have the CD4/CD8 ratio reverse to that in AIDS. Apparently, the cause
is now deemed to be radiogenic (as is breast cancer in general).Tons of beryllium (be) had been
stored for many years in the reactor building along with the fuel salts. Much of that Be tumed up
missing during a recent inventory.

I will seek testing at the new beryllium testing facility in Oak Ridge when it is completed
unless you can suggest a method for my obtaining multiple tests sooner.

Dose Reconstruction

Not incidentally, I cannot believe that it is possible to reconstruct my dose(s) or other ORHL
employees, for that matter. It has only been within the last couple of weeks that the AAAHC has
finally found that ORNL Medical Division could pass its accreditation. Previous to this recent notice,
they were strongly criticized for inadequate documentation, particularly in the area of exposures. I
also have known that there have been problems for years with the dosimetry (as related to me by
professionals).
1999-02 ae

In 1999 I instituted a lawsuit against DOE based on evidence gathered in the MSRE
document, claiming negligence on their part for never having performed either SARs or SERs for
the MSRE during those years (1969 to 1994). The lawsuit was dismissed in 2001 on grounds of the
court’s lack of jurisdiction. lam, however, continuing to research several regulatory issues regarding
DOE responsibilities and authority toward safety and health.

Thanking you for your attention,

Phone No:

to D. J. Helsing, DOE, Division of Energy Employees Compensation, February 14, 2002 P2o0f3


Miller, Diane M.

From:

Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 11:39 AM

To: NIOCINDOCKET@CDC.GOV

Subject: Dose Reconstruction Comments
DOL.drft2.wpd

To: the Department of Health and Human Services,

I very much appreciate your re-opening for comments on the methods for
cancer radiation dose reconstruction under the EEOIC. | have grave doubts
about such an effort. Please see page 3 of the attachment for my comments
specifically on dose reconstruction. The attachment is a letter | recently
sent to Mr. Helsig of the Department of Labor in response to his request for
an employment history.

I worked 24 years at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and had offices in many
different areas of ORNL. The DOL are addressing my breast cancer of 1979. I
added a new concern in that letter; i.e., 1 believe | have been exposed to
beryllium. | have asked for further information from them about testing to
discover a possible sensitivity. Apparently a new facility for such is to

open soon in Oak Ridge. The letter also discusses the reasons for my belief
and requests help in obtaining further testing.

Sincerely,



D. J. Helsing, Claims Examiner

U.S. Department of Labor

Employment Standards Administration

Division of Energy Employees’ Compensation

214 N Hogan St., Suite 910, Jacksonville, FL 32202
February 14, 2002

Dear Mr. Helsing,

Iam responding to your recent letter of 01/16/02 requesting confirmation of my employment
history. The dates you have quoted are correct. In error, I listed 1973 (my re-employment date) at
the Oak Ridge office. My employers had kindly lumped all my years of employment together
in order that I would receive eligible benefits for my entire work time. 1973 was then the effective
start time. I have detailed my work history below to the best of my ability. It seems to me very
complicated. I apologize for the length but I believe this is necessary.

Work History 1960-64

My employment in the 60s (during which I was perfectly healthy) was in a laboratory in a
former Y-12 processing Building (9207). I used tritium to study the life cycles of microscopic
organisms. I kept a lab going and did the necessary photography for the research. I also participated
in experiments isolating salamander chromosomes and breaking them with X-rays.

1964-85

From 1964 until returning to work at ORNL in 1976, I had been a housewife. I went back
to work first as consultant, then as a part-time employee until going full-time again in 1985. From
1976 until 1985, I was an office worker doing database searches, keywording and indexing, writing
abstracts and environmentally-related articles. In those years, I first worked in a trailer behind Bldg.
2001, in various offices converted from Environmental Sciences laboratories in Bldg. 2001, in Bldg.
1505, returning later to Bldg. 2001.

1980-88

I developed arthritis of the knees, hands, wrist, shoulders, neck, back, and legs as well as
recurrent whole body aches and pains, carpal tunnel and tendonitis surgeries, and neuroma surgery
of the foot. I also had recurring staph infections. This was termed “a mild case of Job’s
syndrome.”

1988-94

I moved into the MSRE Bldg. (7503) in to write technical reports
concerning the surveys conducted by the Measurement Applications and Development Group
(MAD). I soon developed daily, serious, unexplained and unrelenting headaches that left me feeling
very nauseous, dizzy, and with a distinct “brain fog” (the pain would lessen to some extent only as
the day wore on). I am eternally grateful to my supervisors overlooking my errors and slowness
during those years. A dozen or so other occupants of the building shared the same symptoms I
suffered.

D. J. Helsing, DOE, Division of Energy Employees Compensation, February 14, 2002 P20f3


I was there full-time for six years. The first office that I occupied shared an east wall with the
high-bay and was the location of the highest radiation levels in anyone’s office at the time (about 45
microR/h I believe). I soon moved across the hall into an office with a west wall of windows, which
I occasionally opened. Around the corner outside was the radioactive charcoal bed in which they
discovered the plug of U-233 that formed the basis of concem for the potential criticality which
precipitated our lockout. There had also been (unknown until the lockout and further analyis) a fuel
leak directly under one of the shield plugs in the high bay area frequented by office workers.
Hydrogen fluoride releases undoubtedly occurred. (The U® fuel had “bred” itself and, over the
years, flowed out of its fuel tanks into the piping outside and beneath the building.)

After working full-time in Building 7503 for three years, I developed severe chronic fatigue,
diffuse muscle pain, immuno-deficiency with anergy and positive Rai cell immune complexes. My
RA and ANA tests were repeatedly negative. Also, I had sporadic episodes of glucose intolerance
and leukocytosis, high autoimmune complexes, and toxic encephalopathy of unknown causation.

During those years, I also traveled with the MAD group and assisted at times in the survey
work. I did some of this for the surface characterization of the Y-12 site, the Elza Gate Oak Ridge
area, at the Naveodtechcen in Waldorf, Maryland, and homes in Cannonsburg, Pennsylvania
(outdoors only). I traveled to Grand Junction, Colorado to assist for a week at a time (5 or more
times)with their documentation.

1992-93

In 1992, [had my silicone implants removed, believing it possible that they were causing my
problems. There was no noticeable change. I was hospitalized with an intractable diarrhea and high
white blood cell count (cause never diagnosed) that resolved only after weeks of experimentation
(on my own) with probiotics. Previous to the diarrhea and hospitalization, I had also experienced a
week-long episode of tremendous whole body pain and high fever such that I could not move from
my bed (none of this latter incident is documented because I was in Canada.)

In 1993, I received 100% Oxygen for over an hour to begin recovery at Methodist Medical
Center. Blood samples showed extremely toxic amounts of methoxyhemoglobin. after a toxic
exposure in my workplace. The toxic agent was not identified. However, immediately previous to
that, I had been nowhere but my office and my first stop was at the house next door to mine because
an R.N. lived there. The nurse immediately observed many clinical symptoms of illness and I was
aware of having great difficulty breathing, staying upright, and driving. I was barely able to function.
This (and the migraines) had been a recurring problem for me since 1990 although this is the only
time I sought immediate help.

1995

Tand a fellow employee gathered a large amount of information on the history of the MSRE
and the escape of the highly radioactive fuel leading up to the lockout. The document (ORNL/54-58,
Parts I and II) was published by the Division’s directorship in 1995 and is available in the Director’s

files at ORNL. You might be interested in consulting it. It appears that requested re-furbishing funds
to upgrade the reactor and install a fluorine monitor along with many other upgrades were
continually denied to the SFMP division over all the many years since the reactor had been
“mothballed” in 1969.

We found, for instance, that prior to the lockout, several contamination events had occurred
but the occupants were not notified. Alarms were tumed off by office employees. They were told by
the operators that the alarms were too sensitive; thus, they suggested the occupants do so themselves.
In other words, checks to determine the reason for the alarms repeatedly sounding were not carried

to D. J. Helsing, DOE, Division of Energy Employees Compensation, February 14, 2002 P20f3