{"id":651218,"date":"2018-12-03T07:00:01","date_gmt":"2018-12-03T14:00:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/?p=651218"},"modified":"2018-12-04T08:14:52","modified_gmt":"2018-12-04T15:14:52","slug":"ill-nuclear-workers-benefits-petitions-have-to-be-reviewed-within-6-months-some-have-languished-about-a-decade","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2018\/12\/ill-nuclear-workers-benefits-petitions-have-to-be-reviewed-within-6-months-some-have-languished-about-a-decade\/","title":{"rendered":"Ill nuclear workers\u2019 benefits petitions have to be reviewed within 6 months. Some have languished about a decade."},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Los<\/a>

Larry Lamsa \/ Creative Commons<\/p>

Los Alamos National Laboratory.<\/p><\/div>\n

Ten years ago, a security guard at Los Alamos National Laboratory submitted a petition<\/a> to the federal government seeking compensation and benefits for his fellow lab workers who were sick with cancer and believed that radiation at the lab was to blame.<\/p>\n

Andrew Evaskovich\u2019s petition took advantage of a process put in place by Congress<\/a> in 2000 that allowed groups of workers to secure benefits if they could show that they worked at a nuclear facility, that they had a cancer linked to radiation and that lab managers failed to accurately keep track of their exposures over time.<\/p>\n

Under the law, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a federal agency that makes recommendations on work-related injuries and illnesses, had six months to review Evaskovich\u2019s petition and recommend whether it should be approved or denied.<\/p>\n

A decade later, Evaskovich and his colleagues are still waiting for a final answer.<\/p>\n

In 2009 and again last year, NIOSH recommended that Evaskovich\u2019s petition be denied. Both times, however, outside reviewers found major flaws in its analysis, and a federal advisory board told NIOSH to keep working.<\/p>\n