[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 20 (Thursday, February 4, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1259-S1265]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Daschle):
  S. 367. A bill to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to 
provide for partial restitution to individuals who worked in uranium 
mines, mills, or transport which provided uranium for the use and 
benefit of the United States Government, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.


          the radiation exposure compensation improvement act

 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, 
Senator Daschle, to introduce the Radiation Exposure Compensation 
Improvement Act of 1999.
  Mr. President, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or RECA, was 
originally enacted in 1990 as a means of compensating the individuals 
who suffered from exposure to radiation as a result of the U.S. 
government's nuclear testing program and federal uranium mining 
activities. While the government can never fully compensate for the 
loss of a life or a reduction in the quality of life, RECA serves as a 
cornerstone for the national apology Congress extended to those 
adversely affected by the various radiation tragedies. In keeping with 
the spirit of that apology, the legislation I introduce today will 
further correct existing injustices and provide compassionate 
compensation for those whose lives and health were sacrificed as part 
of our nation's effort to win the cold war.
  During the period of 1947 to 1961, the Federal Government controlled 
all aspects of the production of nuclear fuel. One such aspect was the 
mining of uranium in New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, and Utah. Even 
though the Federal Government had adequate knowledge of the hazards 
involved in uranium mining, these miners, many of whom were Native 
Americans, were sent into inadequately ventilated mines with virtually 
no instruction regarding the dangers of ionizing radiation. These 
miners had no idea of those dangers. Consequently, they inhaled radon 
particles that eventually yielded high doses of ionizing radiation. As 
a result, these miners have a substantially elevated cancer rate and 
incidence of incapacitating respiratory disease. The health effects of 
uranium mining in the fifties and sixties remain the single greatest 
concern of many former uranium miners and millers and their families 
and friends.
  In 1990, I was pleased to co-sponsor the original RECA legislation 
here in the Senate to provide compassionate compensation to uranium 
miners. I was very optimistic that after years of waiting, some degree 
of redress would be given to the thousands of miners in my state of New 
Mexico. Subsequently, I chaired the Senate oversight hearing on this 
issue in Shiprock, N.M. for the Senate Labor and Human Resources 
Committee in 1993 and began to learn that while our efforts in 1990 
were well intentioned they were not proving to be as effective as 
hoped. I additionally heard from many of my constituents that the 
program was not working as intended and that changes were necessary. To 
that end, I worked to facilitate changes in the regulatory and 
administrative areas.
  Unfortunately, I have continued to hear from many of my constituents 
that the program still does not work as intended. I have received 
compelling letters of need from constituents telling of the many 
barriers in the current statute that lead to denial of compensation. 
Letters come from widows unable to access the current compensation. 
Miners tied to oxygen tanks, in respiratory distress or dying from 
cancer write to tell me how they have been denied compensation under 
the current act. Additionally, family members write of the pain of 
fathers who worked in uranium processing mills. They recount how their 
fathers came home covered in the ``yellow cake'' or uranium oxide that 
was floating in the air of the mills. The story of their fathers' 
cancers and painful breathing are vivid in these letters but the 
current act does not address their needs.
  Their points are backed by others as well. In fact, my legislation 
incorporates findings by the Committee on the Biological Effects of 
Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) which has, since 1990, enlarged scientific 
evidence about radiogenic cancers and the health effects of radiation 
exposure. In other words, because of their good work, we know more now 
than we did in 1990 and we need to make sure the compensation we 
provide keeps pace with our medical knowledge. The government has the 
responsibility to compensate all those adversely affected and who have 
suffered health problems because they were not adequately informed of 
the risks they faced while mining, milling, and transporting uranium 
ore.

  Mr. President, the legislation I am introducing today is a starting 
point for amending the current Act designed with specific elements to 
better serve the individuals who apply for compensation under the Act. 
The legislation is designed to simplify RECA and broaden the scope of 
individuals who are eligible for compensation.
  Mr. President, I would like to cite several of the key provisions in 
the Radiation Exposure Compensation Improvement Act of 1999. Currently 
RECA covers those exposed to radiation released in underground uranium 
mines that were providing uranium for the primary use and benefit of 
the nuclear weapons program of the U.S. government. The legislation 
would make all uranium workers eligible for compensation including 
above ground miners, millers, and transport workers. I am very 
concerned about the need to expand compensation to the categories of 
workers not covered by the current

[[Page S1260]]

law, specifically those in above ground, open pit mines, mill workers, 
and those employed to transport uranium ore. There is overwhelming 
evidence that these workers have developed cancer and other diseases as 
a result of their exposure to uranium. While attempts have been made to 
get the scientific data necessary to substantiate the link between 
their work situation and their health problems, barriers have been 
encountered and I am told that data will not be readily available. I 
believe that it is necessary to move forward in this area and not deny 
further compensation awaiting study results that in the end may not be 
deemed to be statistically valid because of the difficulty in obtaining 
access to records and the millers themselves.
  RECA currently covers individuals termed ``downwinders'' who were in 
the areas of Nevada, Utah, and Arizona affected by atmospheric nuclear 
testing in the 1950's. This bill expands the geographical area eligible 
for compensation to include the Navajo Reservation because, based on a 
recent report of the National Cancer Institute, Navajo children during 
the 1950's received extremely high Iodine-131 thyroid doses during the 
period of heaviest fallout from the Nevada Test site. In addition, the 
bill expands the compensable diseases for the downwind population by 
adding salivary gland, urinary bladder, brain, colon, and ovarian 
cancers.
  Currently, the law has disproportionately high levels of radiation 
exposure requirements for miners to qualify for compensation as 
compared to the ``downwinders.'' My legislation would set a standard of 
proof for uranium workers that is more realistic given the availability 
of mining and mill data. The bill also removes the provision that only 
permits a claim for respiratory disease if the uranium mining occurred 
on a reservation. Thus, the bill will allow for further filing of a 
claim by those miners, millers, and transport workers who did not have 
a work history on a reservation. In addition, the bill would change the 
current law so that requirements for written medical documentation is 
updated to allow for use of high resolution CAT scans and allow for 
written diagnoses by physicians in either the Department of Veterans 
Affairs or the Indian Health Service to be considered conclusive.
  In 1990, we joined together in a bipartisan, bicameral effort and 
assured passage of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA). Now 
we put forward this comprehensive amendment to RECA to correct 
omission, make RECA consistent with current medical knowledge, and to 
address what have become administrative borrow stories for the 
claimants. I look forward to the debate in the Senate on this issue and 
hope that we can move to amend the current statute to ensure our 
original intent--fair and rapid compensation to those who served their 
country so well.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the 
Radiation Improvement Compensation Act printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 367

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Improvement Act of 1999.''.
       (b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The intent of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), enacted in 1990, was to apologize to 
     victims of the weapons program of the Federal Government, but 
     uranium workers who have applied for compensation under the 
     Act have faced a disturbing number of challenges.
       (2) The congressional oversight hearing conducted by the 
     Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate has 
     shown that since passage of the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act, former uranium workers and their families 
     have not received prompt and efficient compensation.
       (3) There is no plausible justification for the Federal 
     Government's failure to warn and protect the lives and health 
     of uranium workers.
       (4) Progress on implementing the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act has been impeded by criteria for 
     compensation that is far more stringent than for other groups 
     for which compensation is provided.
       (5) The President's Advisory Committee on Human Radiation 
     Experiments recommended that amendments to the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation should be made.
       (6) Uranium millers, aboveground miners, and individuals 
     who transported uranium ore should be provided compensation 
     that is similar to that provided for underground uranium 
     miners in cases in which those individuals suffered disease 
     or resultant death as a result of the failure of the Federal 
     Government to warn of health hazards.

     SEC. 2. TRUST FUND.

       Section 3(d) of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 
     U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended by striking ``of this Act'' and 
     inserting ``of the Radiation Exposure Compensation 
     Improvement Act of 1999.''.

     SEC. 3. AFFECTED AREA; CLAIMS RELATING TO SPECIFIED DISEASES.

       (a) Affected Area.--Section 4(b)(1) of the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) those parts of Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico 
     comprising the Navajo Nation Reservation that were subjected 
     to fallout from nuclear weapons testing conducted in Nevada; 
     and''.
       (b) Claims Relating to Specified Diseases.--Section 4(b)(2) 
     of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 
     note) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``the onset of the disease was between 2 
     and 30 years of first exposure,'' and inserting ``the onset 
     of the disease was at least 2 years after first exposure, 
     lung cancer (other than in situ lung cancer that is 
     discovered during or after a post-mortem exam),'';
       (2) by striking ``(provided initial exposure occurred by 
     the age of 20)'' after ``thyroid'';
       (3) by inserting ``male or'' before ``female breast'';
       (4) by striking ``(provided initial exposure occurred prior 
     to age 40)'' after ``female breast'';
       (5) by striking ``(provided low alcohol consumption and not 
     a heavy smoker)'' after ``esophagus'';
       (6) by striking ``(provided initial exposure occurred 
     before age 30)'' after ``stomach'';
       (7) by striking ``(provided not a heavy smoker)'' after 
     ``pharynx'';
       (8) by striking ``(provided not a heavy smoker and low 
     coffee consumption)'' after ``pancreas'';
       (9) by inserting ``salivary gland, urinary bladder, brain, 
     colon, ovary,'' after ``gall bladder,''; and
       (10) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia''.

     SEC. 4. URANIUM MINING AND MILLING AND TRANSPORT.

       (a) Amendment to Heading.--Section 5 of the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended by 
     striking the section heading and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 5. CLAIMS RELATING TO URANIUM MINING OR MILLING OR 
                   TRANSPORT.''.

       (b) Milling.--Section 5(a) of the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Any'' and inserting ``Any individual who 
     was employed to transport or handle uranium ore or any''; and
       (2) by inserting ``or in any other State in which uranium 
     was mined, milled, or transported'' after ``Utah''.
       (c) Mines.--Section 5(a) of the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), as amended by 
     subsection (a) of this section, is amended by striking ``a 
     uranium mine'' and inserting ``a uranium mine (including a 
     mine located aboveground or an open pit mine in which uranium 
     miners worked, or a uranium mill)''.
       (d) Dates.--Section 5(a) of the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), as amended by 
     subsections (b) and (c) of this section, is amended by 
     striking ``January 1, 1947, and ending on December 31, 1971'' 
     and inserting ``January 1, 1942, and ending on December 31, 
     1990''.
       (e) Amendment of Period of Exposure; Expansion of Coverage; 
     Increase in Compensation Awards; and Removal of Smoking 
     Distinction.--Section 5(a) of the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), as amended by 
     subsections (b) through (d) of this section, is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1) and all that follows through 
     the end of the subsection and inserting the following:
       ``(2) Compensation.--Any individual shall receive $200,000 
     for a claim made under this Act if--
       ``(A) that individual--
       ``(i) was exposed to 40 or more working level months of 
     radiation and submits written medical documentation that the 
     individual, after exposure developed--

       ``(I) lung cancer,
       ``(II) a nonmalignant respiratory disease, or
       ``(III) any other medical condition associated with uranium 
     mining or milling, or

       ``(ii) worked in uranium mining, milling, or transport for 
     a period of at least 1 year and submits written medical 
     documentation that the individual, after exposure, 
     developed--

       ``(I) lung cancer,
       ``(II) a nonmalignant respiratory disease, or
       ``(III) any other medical condition associated with uranium 
     mining, milling, or transport,

       ``(B) the claim for that payment is filed with the Attorney 
     General by or on behalf of that individual, and

[[Page S1261]]

       ``(C) the Attorney General determines, in accordance with 
     section 6, that the claim meets the requirements of this 
     Act.''.
       (2) by striking ``(a) Eligibility of Individuals.--Any'' 
     and inserting the following: ``(a) Eligibility.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any''; and
       (3) in paragraph (1), as so designated, by striking the 
     dash at the end and inserting a period.
       (f) Claims Related to Human Radiation Experimentation and 
     Death Resulting From Cause Other Than Radiation.--Section 5 
     of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 
     note) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (d); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
       ``(b) Claims Relating to Human Use Research and Death 
     Resulting From Nonradiological Causes.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Payment.--Any individual described in subparagraph 
     (B) shall receive $50,000 if--
       ``(i) a claim for that payment is filed with the Attorney 
     General by or on behalf of that individual; and
       ``(ii) the Attorney General determines, in accordance with 
     section 6, that the claim meets the requirements of this Act.
       ``(B) Description of individuals.--An individual described 
     in this subparagraph is an individual who--
       ``(i) was employed in a uranium mining, milling, or 
     transport within any State referred to in subsection (a) at 
     any time during the period referred to in that subsection, 
     and
       ``(ii)(I) in the course of that employment, without the 
     individual's knowledge or informed consent, was intentionally 
     exposed to radiation for purposes of testing, research, 
     study, or experimentation by the Federal Government 
     (including any agency of the Federal Government) to determine 
     the effects of that exposure on the human body; or
       ``(II) in the course of or arising out of the individual's 
     employment, suffered death, that, because the individual or 
     the estate of the individual was barred from pursuing 
     recovery under a worker's compensation system or civil action 
     available to similarly situated employees of mines or mills 
     that are not uranium mines or mills, is not otherwise--

       ``(aa) compensable under subsection (a); or
       ``(bb) redressable.

       ``(2) Payments.--Payments under this subsection may be made 
     only in accordance with section 6.''.
       (g) Other Injury or Disability.--Section 5 of the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), as amended 
     by subsection (f) of this section, is amended by adding after 
     subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) Other Injury or Disability.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Payment.--Any individual described in subparagraph 
     (B) shall receive $20,000 if--
       ``(i) a claim for that payment is filed with the Attorney 
     General by or on behalf of that individual; and
       ``(ii) the Attorney General determines, in accordance with 
     section 6, that the claim meets the requirements of this Act.
       ``(B) Description of individuals.--An individual described 
     in this subparagraph is an individual who--
       ``(i) was employed in a uranium mine or mill or transported 
     uranium ore within any State referred to in subsection (a) at 
     any time during the period referred to in that subsection; 
     and
       ``(ii) submits written medical documentation that 
     individual suffered injury or disability, arising out of or 
     in the course of the individual's employment that, because 
     the individual or the estate of the individual was barred 
     from pursuing recovery under a worker's compensation system 
     or civil action available to similarly situated employees of 
     mines or mills that are not uranium mines or mills, is not 
     otherwise--

       ``(I) compensable under subsection (a); or
       ``(II) redressable.

       ``(2) Payments.--Payments under this subsection may be made 
     only in accordance with section 6.''.
       (h) Definitions.--Subsection (d) of section 5 of the 
     Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), as 
     redesignated by subsection (f) of this section, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``radiation exposure'' and inserting 
     ``exposure to radon and radon progeny''; and
       (B) by inserting ``based on a 6-day workweek,'' after 
     ``every work day for a month,'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) the term `affected Indian tribe' means any Indian 
     tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group or 
     community, that is recognized as eligible for special 
     programs and services provided by the United States to Indian 
     tribes because of their status as Native Americans, whose 
     people engaged in uranium mining or milling or were employed 
     where uranium mining or milling was conducted;'';
       (3) by striking paragraphs (3) and (4); and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) the term `course of employment' means--
       ``(A) any period of employment in a uranium mine or uranium 
     mill before or after December 31, 1971, or
       ``(B) the cumulative period of employment in both a uranium 
     mine and uranium mill in any case in which an individual was 
     employed in both a uranium mine and a uranium mill;
       ``(4) the term `lung cancer' means any physiological 
     condition of the lung, trachea, and bronchus that is 
     recognized under that name or nomenclature by the National 
     Cancer Institute, including any in situ cancer;
       ``(5) the term `nonmalignant respiratory disease' means 
     fibrosis of the lung, pulmonary fibrosis, corpulmonale 
     related to pulmonary fibrosis, or moderate or severe 
     silicosis or pneumoconiosis;
       ``(6) the term `other medical condition associated with 
     uranium mining, milling, or uranium transport' means any 
     medical condition associated with exposure to radiation, 
     heavy metals, chemicals, or other toxic substances to which 
     miners and millers are exposed in the mining and milling of 
     uranium;
       ``(7) the term `uranium mill' includes milling operations 
     involving the processing of uranium ore or vanadium-uranium 
     ore, including carbonate and acid leach plants;
       ``(8) the term `uranium transport' means human physical 
     contact involved in moving uranium ore from 1 site to 
     another, including mechanical conveyance, physical shoveling, 
     or driving a vehicle;
       ``(9) the term `uranium mine' means any underground 
     excavation, including dog holes, open pit, strip, rim, 
     surface, or other aboveground mines, where uranium ore or 
     vanadium-uranium ore was mined or otherwise extracted;
       ``(10) the term `working level' means the concentration of 
     the short half-life daughters (known as `progeny') of radon 
     that will release (1.3 x 105) million electron 
     volts of alpha energy per liter of air; and
       ``(11) the term `written medical documentation' for 
     purposes of proving a nonmalignant respiratory disease means, 
     in any case in which the claimant is living--
       ``(A) a chest x-ray administered in accordance with 
     standard techniques and the interpretive reports thereof by 2 
     certified `B' readers classifying the existence of the 
     nonmalignant respiratory disease of category 1/0 or higher 
     according to a 1989 report of the International Labour Office 
     (known as the `ILO'), or subsequent revisions;
       ``(B) a high resolution computed tomography scan (commonly 
     known as an `HCRT scan') and any interpretive report for that 
     scan;
       ``(C) a pathology report of a tissue biopsy;
       ``(D) a pulmonary function test indicating restrictive lung 
     function (as defined by the American Thoracic Society); or
       ``(E) an arterial blood gas study.''.

     SEC. 5. DETERMINATION AND PAYMENT OF CLAIMS.

       (a) Determination and Payment of Claims, Generally.--
     Section 6 of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 
     U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``All reasonable doubt with regard to whether a claim meets 
     the requirements of this Act shall be resolved in favor of 
     the claimant.'';
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (5); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) Evidence.--In support of a claim for compensation 
     under section 5, the Attorney General shall permit the 
     introduction of, and a claimant may use and rely upon, 
     affidavits and other documentary evidence, including medical 
     evidence, to the same extent as permitted by the Federal 
     Rules of Evidence.
       ``(3) Interpretation of chest x-rays.--For purposes of this 
     Act, a chest x-ray and the accompanying interpretive report 
     required in support of a claim under section 5(a), shall--
       ``(A) be considered to be conclusive, and
       ``(B) be subject to a fair and random audit procedure 
     established by the Attorney General.
       ``(4) Certain written diagnoses.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of this Act, in any case in 
     which a written diagnosis is made by a physician described in 
     subparagraph (B) of a nonmalignant pulmonary disease or lung 
     cancer of a claimant that is accompanied by written medical 
     documentation that meets the definition of that term under 
     subsection (b)(11), that written diagnosis shall be 
     considered to be conclusive evidence of that disease.
       ``(B) Description of physicians.--A physician described in 
     this subparagraph is a physician who--
       ``(i) is employed by--

       ``(I) the Indian Health Service of the Department of Health 
     and Human Services, or

       ``(II) the Department of Veterans Affairs, and

       ``(ii) is responsible for examining or treating the 
     claimant involved.'';
       (2) in subsection (c)(2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ``in a uranium 
     mine'' and inserting ``in uranium mining, milling, or 
     transport''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ``by the Federal 
     Government'' and inserting ``through the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs'';
       (3) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by striking ``(d) Action on Claims.--The Attorney 
     General'' and inserting the following:
       ``(d) Action on Claims.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Attorney General''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Determination of period.--For purposes of determining 
     the tolling of the 12-month period under paragraph (1), a 
     claim under this Act shall be considered to have

[[Page S1262]]

     been filed as of the date of the receipt of that claim by the 
     Attorney General.
       ``(3) Administrative review.--If the Attorney General 
     denies a claim referred to in paragraph (1), the claimant 
     shall be permitted a reasonable period of time in which to 
     seek administrative review of the denial by the Attorney 
     General.
       ``(4) Final determination.--The Attorney General shall make 
     a final determination with respect to any administrative 
     review conducted under paragraph (3) not later than 90 days 
     after the receipt of the claimant's request for that review.
       ``(5) Effect of failure to render a determination.--If the 
     Attorney General fails to render a determination during the 
     12-month period under paragraph (1), the claim shall be 
     deemed awarded as a matter of law and paid.'';
       (4) in subsection (e), by striking ``in a uranium mine'' 
     and inserting ``uranium mining, milling, or transport'';
       (5) in subsection (k), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``With respect to any amendment made to this Act after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall 
     issue revised regulations, guidelines, and procedures to 
     carry out that amendment not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of that amendment.''; and
       (6) in subsection (l)--
       (A) by striking ``(l) Judicial Review.--An individual'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(l) Judicial Review.--
       ``(1) In general.--An individual''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Attorney's fees.--If the court that conducts a review 
     under paragraph (1) sets aside a denial of a claim under this 
     Act as unlawful, the court shall award claimant reasonable 
     attorney's fees and costs incurred with respect to the 
     court's review.
       ``(3) Interest.--If, after a claimant is denied a claim 
     under this Act, the claimant subsequently prevails upon 
     remand of that claim, the claimant shall be awarded interest 
     on the claim at a rate equal to 8 percent, calculated from 
     the date of the initial denial of the claim.
       ``(4) Treatment of attorney's fees, costs, and interest.--
     Any attorney's fees, costs, and interest awarded under this 
     section shall--
       ``(A) be considered to be costs incurred by the Attorney 
     General, and
       ``(B) not be paid from the Fund, or set off against, or 
     otherwise deducted from, any payment to a claimant under this 
     section.''.
       (b) Furtherance of Special Trust Responsibility to Affected 
     Indian Tribes; Self-Determination Program Election.--In 
     furtherance of, and consistent with, the trust responsibility 
     of the United States to Native American uranium workers 
     recognized by Congress in enacting the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), section 6 of that 
     Act, as amended by subsection (a) of this section, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``In establishing any such procedure, the Attorney General 
     shall take into consideration and incorporate, to the fullest 
     extent feasible, Native American law, tradition, and custom 
     with respect to the submission and processing of claims by 
     Native Americans.'';
       (2) in subsection (b), by inserting after paragraph (3) the 
     following:
       ``(4) Pulmonary function standards.--In determining the 
     pulmonary impairment of a claimant, the Attorney General 
     shall evaluate the degree of impairment based on ethnic-
     specific pulmonary function standards.'';
       (3) in subsection (b)(5)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
       ``(D) in consultation with any affected Indian tribe, 
     establish guidelines for the determination of claims filed by 
     Native American uranium miners, millers, and transport 
     workers pursuant to section 5.'';
       (4) in subsection (b), by adding after paragraph (5) the 
     following:
       ``(6) Self-determination program election.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Attorney General on the request of 
     any affected Indian tribe by tribal resolution, may enter 
     into 1 or more self-determination contracts with a tribal 
     organization of that Indian tribe pursuant to the Indian 
     Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450 et seq.) to plan, conduct, and administer the disposition 
     and award of claims under this Act to the extent that members 
     of the affected Indian tribe are concerned.
       ``(B) Approval.--(i) On the request of an affected Indian 
     tribe to enter into a self-determination contract referred to 
     in subparagraph (A), the Attorney General shall approve or 
     reject the request in a manner consistent with section 102 of 
     the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 450f).
       ``(ii) The Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.) shall apply to the 
     approval and subsequent implementation of a self-
     determination contract entered into under clause (i) or any 
     rejection of such a contract, if that contract is rejected.
       ``(C) Use of funds.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, funds authorized for use by the Attorney General to 
     carry out the functions of the Attorney General under 
     subsection (i) may be used for the planning, training, 
     implementation, and administration of any self-determination 
     contract that the Attorney General enters into with an 
     affected Indian tribe under this section.''; and
       (5) in subsection (c)(4), by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(D) Application of native american law.--In determining 
     the eligibility of individuals to receive compensation under 
     this Act by reason of marriage, relationship, or 
     survivorship, the Attorney General shall take into 
     consideration and give effect to established law, tradition, 
     and custom of affected Indian tribes.''.

     SEC. 6. CHOICE OF REMEDIES.

       Section 7(b) of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 
     U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Choice of Remedies.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (1), the 
     payment of an award under any provision of this Act does not 
     preclude the payment of an award under any other provision of 
     this Act.
       ``(2) Limitation.--No individual may receive more than 1 
     award payment for any compensable cancer or other compensable 
     disease.''.

     SEC. 7. LIMITATION ON CLAIMS; RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF 
                   AMENDMENTS.

       Section 8 of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 
     U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 8. LIMITATION ON CLAIMS.

       ``(a) Bar.--After the date that is 20 years after the date 
     of enactment of the Radiation Exposure Compensation 
     Improvement Act no claim may be filed under this Act.
       ``(b) Applicability of Amendments.--The amendments made to 
     this Act by the Radiation Exposure Compensation Improvement 
     Act shall apply to any claim under this Act that is pending 
     or commenced on or after October 5, 1990, without regard to 
     whether payment for that claim could have been awarded before 
     the date of enactment of the Radiation Exposure Compensation 
     Improvement Act as the result of previous filing and prior 
     payment under this Act.''.

     SEC. 8. REPORT.

       Section 12 of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 
     U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 12. REPORTS.'';

     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Uranium Mill and Mine Report.--Not later than January 
     1, 2001, the Secretary of Health and Human Services in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Energy shall prepare and 
     submit to Congress a report that--
       ``(1) summarizes medical knowledge concerning adverse 
     health effects sustained by residents of communities who 
     reside adjacent to--
       ``(A) uranium mills or mill tailings,
       ``(B) aboveground uranium mines, or
       ``(C) open pit uranium mines; and
       ``(2) summarizes available information concerning the 
     availability and accessibility of medical care that 
     incorporates the best available standards of practice for 
     individuals with malignancies and other compensable diseases 
     relating to exposure to uranium as a result of uranium mining 
     and milling activities;
       ``(3) summarizes the reclamation efforts with respect to 
     uranium mines, mills, and mill tailings in Colorado, New 
     Mexico, Arizona, Wyoming, and Utah; and
       ``(4) makes recommendations for further actions to ensure 
     health and safety relating to the efforts referred to in 
     paragraph (3).''.

 Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, 9 years ago Congress took the 
landmark step of extending benefits through the Radiation Exposure 
Compensation Act of 1990 (RECA) to thousands of American victims of the 
Cold War who were unknowingly and wrongly exposed to life-threatening 
levels of radiation and other harmful materials as part of our nation's 
nuclear weapons program.
  This law was long overdue, and was an important step by Congress to 
acknowledge the federal government's responsibility for its failure to 
warn or take adequate steps to protect victims of radioactive fallout 
from weapons testing and underground uranium miners who breathed 
harmful levels of radon as they worked to supply our nuclear weapons 
program. The law makes individuals who have developed cancer or other 
health problems as a result of their exposure to radiation eligible for 
up to $100,000 in compensation from the government.
  In the 9 years since the passage of that bill, we have had time to 
reflect upon its strengths and its shortcomings. During that time, it 
has become overwhelmingly clear that we have not fully met our 
obligation to victims of our nuclear program. Most seriously, we have 
arbitrarily and unfairly limited compensation for underground miners to 
those in only 5 states, despite the fact that underground miners in 
other states such as South Dakota faced exactly the same risk to their 
health. This fact alone requires us to amend RECA so that we can right 
this wrong.

[[Page S1263]]

  However, we have also excluded other groups of workers, and their 
surviving families, from compensation for serious health problems and, 
in some cases, deaths, that have resulted from their work to help 
defend our nation. Many of those who worked in uranium mills, for 
example, have developed serious respiratory problems as a result of 
exposure to uranium dusts and silica. Concerns have been raised about 
above-ground miners and uranium transportation workers as well.
  It is the obligation of the 106th Congress to continue the work of 
the 101st. Not only is it incumbent upon us to extend the law to 
compensate underground miners unfairly left out of the original 
legislation, we need to extend the law to cover new groups of workers 
who face similar risks to their health. It is for that reason that I am 
joining with Senator Bingaman today to sponsor the Radiation Exposure 
Compensation Improvement Act of 1999. This legislation will expand RECA 
to cover underground miners in all states, as well as surface miners, 
transportation workers and uranium mill workers who have had health 
problems as a result of their work with uranium. I hope my colleagues 
will join us to pass this legislation quickly.
  I also feel an obligation to correct the historical record. During my 
review of the scientific literature on the uranium industry and of 
testimony before Congress, I was concerned to see that South Dakota's 
former uranium industry has gone virtually unnoticed by the rest of the 
nation despite the fact that South Dakotans who worked in the industry 
appear to be suffering exactly the same long-term health consequences 
as residents of other states. For that reason, I would like to take a 
moment to outline the history of uranium mining and processing in my 
state.
  Uranium was first discovered in South Dakota in the summer of 1951, 
along the fringe of the Black Hills where grasslands uplift into pine 
forest. As you know, 1951 was a difficult time in American history. The 
Cold War with the Soviet Union was deepening, and the United States was 
rapidly expanding its arsenal of nuclear weapons. To supply this new 
weapons program, the United States adopted a program of government 
price supports to create a domestic uranium industry under the 
jurisdiction of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
  Almost immediately, South Dakota became one of the AEC's suppliers. 
After uranium was discovered in South Dakota, the AEC established an 
office in Hot Springs to conduct airborne radiometric surveys, and 
small-scale prospecting began. South Dakota's first uranium ore was 
shipped by rail to Colorado for processing, until an ore-buying station 
was established by the AEC in the town of Edgemont in December of 1952. 
A uranium mill was constructed in Edgemont shortly afterwards.
  Uranium mining and milling continued for nearly two decades in my 
state. According to the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 
there were over 100 uranium mines in the vicinity of Edgemont, of which 
at least 22 were underground. In their 20 years of operation between 
1953 and 1973, these mines produced nearly 1 million short tons of ore 
and just over 3 million pounds of processed uranium.
  Ore from South Dakota's mines was processed at the mill in Edgemont. 
According to a document provided to me by the Tennessee Valley 
Authority, which later acquired the mill and the responsibility for its 
cleanup, ``From 1956 through 1972 (when the uranium circuit was shut 
down and the mill stopped producing uranium concentrates), 
approximately 2,500,000 tons of mill tailings were produced onsite. Of 
this total, approximately 2,050,000 tons--82 percent--were produced 
under contract with the AEC for defense purposes. In fact, all of the 
uranium concentrates produced through December 31, 1966, and a portion 
of those produced until 1968 were sold to the AEC. The remaining 
450,000 tons of mill tailings--18 percent--were produced under 
contracts for commercial sales.''
  Mr. President, much of this information was difficult to come by, and 
to ensure that all those who need it in the future have full access to 
it.
  As these records make clear, for over 20 years South Dakota played a 
significant role in supplying uranium for our nation's nuclear weapons 
program. Yet rarely will you find South Dakota mentioned in any of the 
debate over the long-term consequences of that program. I am determined 
to change that fact, and to ensure that all South Dakotans, and other 
individuals across the country, who are suffering from poor health, or 
who are surviving relatives of uranium workers who have died as a 
result of their work, are fairly compensated by the federal government 
for their losses.
  As my colleagues know, in RECA Congress officially recognized that 
``the lives and health of uranium miners and of individuals who were 
exposed to radiation were subjected to increased risk of injury and 
disease to serve the national security interests of the United 
States.'' However, the law only makes this determination for fallout 
victims and for underground uranium miners in 5 states. I believe it 
must be broadened to include underground uranium miners in all states. 
This is a matter of simple fairness. I can find no reasonable 
explanation for the failure of the law to include South Dakota and 
other states that had underground uranium mines whose workers would 
have been exposed to unsafe levels of radon. In addition, the law 
should be broadened to include uranium mill workers, surface miners and 
transportation workers to ensure that all those who may be suffering 
from health problems as a result of exposure to uranium dust or other 
harmful materials are compensated fairly. While there are strong 
grounds on which to expand the act to include all of these groups of 
workers, it is helpful to examine closely the evidence supporting the 
inclusion of one of these groups--mill workers--to better understand 
our reasons for seeking this change.
  The grounds for expanding the act to include mill workers are largely 
the same as those which led Congress to pass RECA 9 years ago. The 
United States government, which created the domestic uranium industry 
through price supports in order to supply its nuclear weapons program, 
failed to adequately warn mill workers of potential risks to their 
health, to take reasonable measures to create a safe working 
environment, or to act on initial warnings and conduct long-term 
studies of mill workers to determine whether their health was being 
affected by their work.
  The federal government recognized the potential risks of uranium 
production from the onset of our nuclear program, and in 1949 the 
Public Health Service (PHS) initiated a study of both underground 
miners and millers to determine whether they were suffering from any 
adverse health effects. Troublingly, a decision was also made by the 
federal government not to inform workers that their health could be at 
risk. As Senior District Judge Copple noted in his decision in Begay v. 
United States, ``In order to proceed with the epidemiological study, it 
was necessary to obtain the consent and voluntary cooperation of all 
mine operators. To do this, it was decided by PHS under the Surgeon 
General that the individual miners would not be told of possible 
potential hazards from radiation in the mines for fear that many miners 
would quit and others would be difficult to secure because of fear of 
cancer. This would seriously interrupt badly needed production of 
uranium.'' While the court's decision does not make clear whether that 
same decision applied to uranium millers, subsequent research has shown 
that over 80 percent of former mill workers felt they were not informed 
about the hazards of radiation during their employment.
  The early results of this study, as described in a May 1952 report 
entitled, ``An Interim Report of a Health Study of the Uranium Mines 
and Mills,'' are disturbing. It notes that, ``In 1950, 13.8 percent of 
the white miners and 26.5 percent of the white millers showed more than 
the usual pulmonary fibrosis, as compared to 7.5 percent in a control 
group. In the same year, 20 percent of the Indian millers and 13.2 
percent of the Indian miners showed more than the usual pulmonary 
fibrosis, as against none in the controls. Such a finding would 
indicate a tendency on the part of these individuals to develop 
silicosis from their exposure.'' Given these and other findings, the 
study notes the ``need for repeating the medical studies at frequent 
intervals.''
  It is inexplicable to me that these critical follow-up studies which 
were so

[[Page S1264]]

strongly recommended by the Public Health Service took place only for 
underground uranium miners. No long-term, follow-up studies of uranium 
millers were conducted. This decision was made despite the fact that it 
was well established that uranium millers were being exposed to uranium 
dusts and silica, which increase the risk of non-malignant lung 
disease.
  One of the reasons the health problems of mill workers appear to have 
been so neglected is that most officials assumed that risks could be 
controlled by adopting standards to prevent workers from breathing or 
swallowing dust produced by yellowcake or uranium ore. As the 1952 PHS 
study states, ``In general, it may be said that there are no health 
hazards in the mills which cannot be controlled by accepted industrial 
hygiene methods.'' Noting poor dust control in the mills, the PHS study 
concluded, ``Until adequate dust control has been established at this 
operation, the workers should be required to wear approved dust 
respirators. Daily baths and frequent changes of clothing by the 
workers in this area are also indicated.''
  These recommendations appear to have been largely ignored. Recent 
studies of former uranium mill workers by Gary Madsen, Susan Dawson and 
Bryan Spykerman of the University of Utah paint a devastating picture 
of workplace conditions in uranium mills prior to the enforcement of 
stringent safety standards in the 1970's. Eighty percent of former mill 
workers interviewed by the researchers for one study said they were 
never informed about possible effects of radiation. Of workers who 
reported working in dusty conditions, 35 percent did not wear 
respirators, and 20 percent wore them infrequently or said they were 
not always available. Sixty-eight percent reported moderate to heavy 
amounts of dust on their clothing at work, and virtually all workers 
reported bringing their dust-covered clothes home to be washed. One 
respondent noted, ``We washed the clothes once a week. It was messy. We 
were expecting our first child. I had to shake my clothes outside. 
There was yellow sand left at the bottom of the washer. All of the 
clothes were washed together. Nobody told us the uranium was 
dangerous--a problem. My wife would get yellowcake on her. I would 
remove my coveralls in the kitchen. Put them in with the rest of the 
[family's] laundry.'' Others reported regularly seeing workers outside 
the mills with yellowcake under their fingernails or in their ears.
  Mr. President, the dangerous conditions revealed by these studies 
show an inexcusable failure on the part of the federal government to 
ensure safe working conditions in an industry it created and 
controlled. And despite failing to enforce these standards or to even 
inform workers of the risk to their health, the government nonetheless 
decided to end long-term studies monitoring the health of mill workers. 
As a result, only a few studies have been conducted of the health 
impacts that uranium milling has had on workers. Dr. Larry Fine, 
Director of the Division of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations and Field 
Studies of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 
summarized the results of these studies in recent testimony before 
Congress:
  ``Health concerns for uranium millers center on their exposures to 
uranium dusts and silica. Exposure to silica and relatively insoluble 
uranium compounds may increase the millers' risk of non-malignant 
respiratory disease, while exposure to relatively soluble forms of 
uranium may increase their risk of kidney disease. The two mortality 
studies of uranium millers have not had adequate population size or 
adequate time since exposure to detect even a moderate risk of lung 
cancer if present; neither study reported an elevated risk of lung 
cancer. One of the two completed mortality studies of millers found an 
increased risk for cancer of the lymphatic and hematopoietic organs 
(excluding leukemia), and the other found an increased risk for non-
malignant respiratory disease and accidents. A non-significant excess 
in deaths from chronic kidney disease was also observed in the second 
study. There have been two medical studies of uranium millers, one of 
which found evidence for pulmonary fibrosis (possibly due to previous 
mining) and the other of which found evidence for kidney damage.''
  I am deeply concerned by our failure to study uranium mill workers 
more thoroughly and by the indications given by the evidence we do have 
that these workers are suffering long-term health consequences as a 
result of their work on behalf of our country. Unfortunately, it may 
now be too late to gather more conclusive evidence. These workers are 
growing older and some are now dying. Their numbers have grown so small 
that it may no longer be possible to conduct the type of conclusive 
study that should have been done years ago. We owe these mill workers 
the benefit of the doubt and should make them or their surviving 
families eligible for the same compensation that underground miners 
receive.
  Indeed, I have heard from many South Dakotans who have waited long 
enough for compensation. They tell me of former miners and mill workers 
who have died of cancer or who suffer from respiratory disease they 
believe is directly related to their exposure to harmful materials in 
their workplace.
  One of the most tragic stories I have heard was written to me in a 
letter from Sharon Kane, a widow in Sturgis, South Dakota. After 
working for 11 years in Edgemont's uranium mill, her husband, Joe, 
developed severe respiratory problems and was forced to leave his work 
at the mill. Unfortunately, his health problems continued. Joe died of 
bone cancer in 1987.
  It is difficult for me to understand why or how our country let this 
happen. However, it is now up to us to ensure that all those who have 
suffered as a result of our nation's actions are fairly compensated. We 
must expand RECA to include uranium mill workers and other groups of 
workers who are suffering as a result of their exposure to uranium dust 
or other materials. We also must ensure the law is expanded to include 
underground uranium miners in all states. By doing so we can make good 
on our debt to workers who have sacrificed their health--and sometimes 
their lives--during the height of the Cold War in order to protect 
their country.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in the effort to meet these goals.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a document entitled, 
``Brief History of Uranium Mining in South Dakota, 1951-1973,'' 
produced by the Mine Safety and Health Administration and a letter from 
Sharon Kane be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the items were ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

       Brief History of Uranium Mining in South Dakota, 1951-1973

       Carnotite deposits were discovered in 1951 near Edgemont, 
     South Dakota, in the Lakota member of the Dakota sandstone 
     formation. Under the Atomic Energy Commission Raw Materials 
     Program, all phases of exploration, development, metallurgy, 
     and research were extended on an accelerated basis in 1952. 
     Airborne and ground exploration disclosed several new uranium 
     ore deposits east and west of the original Craven Canyon 
     discovery in South Dakota. In addition, Northwest of Edgemont 
     in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming, the Geological Survey 
     located several small but high-grade deposits. Intensive 
     exploration efforts were also conducted by private interests, 
     including Homestead Mining Company in the Black Hills and 
     adjacent area in Wyoming.
       In 1953 administration contracts for defense minerals 
     exploration were awarded to Mining Research Corp., C. G. 
     Ortmayer, and Oxide Metals Corp. in Fall River County. 
     Contracts were also given to Vroua Company and C. E. Weir for 
     exploring in Custer County,
       Homestake Mining Company began mining uranium ore near 
     Carlile, Crook County, Wyoming in January 1953. This mining 
     product was trucked to Edgemont, South Dakota, where the 
     Atomic Energy Commission had a buying station.
       During 1955 the Office of Defense Mobilization issued a 
     Certificate of Necessity for an uranium-ore processing plant 
     project to Mines Development Company, Inc. This plant was in 
     Edgemont, South Dakota. Although appreciable quantities of 
     uranium were recognized in South Dakota lignites, only a 
     small amount was mined. This was due to the lack of 
     acceptable uranium-recovery processes for uranium extraction 
     from coal bearing materials.
       Uranium Research and Development Company was granted a 
     contract in 1956 in Fall River County by the Defense Minerals 
     Exploration Administration.
       Mines Development, Inc. had their uranium mill in operation 
     by 1956. The initial capacity was rated as 300 tons of ore 
     per day.
       Two groups, Anderson, Wesley, and Others in Harding County 
     and McAlester Fuel Co. in

[[Page S1265]]

     Fall River County were given contracts involving uranium in 
     1957. South Dakota produced 69,632 tons of ore, valued at 
     $804,946. The average grade percent in terms of 
     U3O8 was 0.17 which was the lowest of 
     any uranium producing state. The average grade percent 
     increased to 0.20 in 1958. The rating of the Edgemont Plant 
     was increased to 400 tons of ore per day.
       Uranium-ore production in the United States reached a new 
     high in 1959 with South Dakota being the ninth producing 
     state and in 1960 became eighth state producer. The Atomic 
     Energy Commission negotiated for new mills for the South 
     Dakota lignite area but interested firms couldn't reach an 
     agreement.
       In 1960, the Atomic Energy Commission revised its 
     regulations for the protection of employees in atomic energy 
     industries and the general public against hazards arising 
     from the possession or use of AEC-licensed radioactive 
     materials. The revisions are embodied in amendments to Title 
     10, Chapter 1, Part 20, of the Code of Federal Regulations 
     entitled ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation''. The 
     amendments became effective on January 1, 1961.
       The highest year for production of uranium ore for the 
     United States was in 1961 but the total production dropped by 
     1962. Based on the amount of ore shipped, South Dakota became 
     the seventh state producer. The state maintained this rating 
     in 1963 but was the sixth state producer for 1964 and 1965.
       Around 1967, mining of uraniferous lignite in Harding 
     County, South Dakota, ceased as the operation was no longer 
     profitable. Mining of sandstone ores also declined, and Mines 
     Development, Inc., a subsidiary of Susquehanna Corp., 
     conducted extensive exploration in the Dakotas and Wyoming in 
     an effort to find additional ore for their mill.
       The uranium mine and mill production for South Dakota in 
     1968 and 1969 placed the state as the seventh largest 
     producing state. The year 1971 was the first full year that 
     the U3O8 market was entirely private. 
     The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) terminated its 
     U3O8 purchasing program at year end 
     1970 after acquiring U3O8 valued at 
     nearly $3 billion since the program's inception in 1948, 
     including a large stock pile.
       By 1973, the mining of uranium in South Dakota ceased to be 
     profitable and production stopped.
                                  ____

                                                September 8, 1998.
     Senator Tom Daschle,
     Rapid City, SD.
       Dear Sir: This letter is to urge you to vote in favor of 
     the ``Radiation Workers Justice Act of 1998'', HR 3539.
       My story is very likely similar to many others recited in 
     order to initiate this bill and R.E.C.A. of 1990, however, to 
     me the issues are deeply personal and intimate.
       My late husband Kasper Jerome Kane (known to friends and 
     family as Joe), was employed at the uranium milling operation 
     at Edgemont, S.D. from 1959 to 1970. After several years in 
     the mill, Joe began experiencing upper respiratory problems, 
     especially while on duty at the mill. A detailed medical 
     examination revealed pulmonary changes and enlargement of the 
     heart due to the stress of the pulmonary condition. Our 
     physician advised Joe to find a new line of work and to leave 
     the mill as soon as possible, which he did. When Joe left his 
     job, he cited his health as the reason. Administration of the 
     mill at that time did not receive this information favorably 
     (of course) and denied any accountability.
       Joe chose to work at the mill out of his sense of 
     responsibility to provide for a wife and two children in the 
     best manner he could. His tenacity for life alone allowed him 
     to leave the mill and begin his own business. Joe was active 
     in his community and well loved by his neighbors and friends.
       Even though his quality of life may have been compromised 
     by his respiratory problems, Joe remained active in the lives 
     of his teenage children and his community at large, until he 
     was diagnosed with multiple myeloma (cancer of the bone 
     marrow) in 1987. There is no way to prepare a family for the 
     heart wrenching events about to face my children, their 
     father and me.
       Over the next three years, we lost our business, our home, 
     ranch, and finally my best friend, my husband. Economic loss 
     can be measured and sometimes compensated.
       When Joe finally succumbed to cancer in 1990 at age 53, 
     after rituals of chemotherapy and radiation, his valiant 
     battle was over.
       I have moved on with life, but there is not a day that I do 
     not miss him and each time I hug a grandchild, I know what 
     they have missed. Joe Kane was a fighter and a family man. 
     Dependable and lived the values he preached.
       I hope the bill presented will offer solace to those 
     affected by radiogenic conditions and hope to those yet to 
     need it.
       Thank you for listening to my story.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Sharon D. Kane,
                                              Sturgis, SD.
                                 ______