Address

City, State, Zip

 

Dear

 

I am writing regarding your claim for benefits under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA).

 

The Department of Health and Human Service’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has added a period of residual radiation at a facility at which our records indicate you were employed.  Your case has been reviewed and a new dose reconstruction performed to ascertain whether this change affects your claim for benefits under the EEOICPA.

 

Based upon this new dose reconstruction, it appears you may now have a compensable claim.  In order to begin this process, I must first vacate our previous decision(s) and reopen your case.  The attached Director’s Order explains the reason why the prior decision(s) is being vacated and your case reopened.  Please read this Order very carefully.  If any of the basic information has changed since your final decision was issued (such as medical condition(s) or employment dates), please contact this office immediately and ask for your assigned claims examiner.  Your information will be incorporated into your case file and considered in our decision.  Once the dose reconstruction has been completed, a new recommended decision will be issued concerning your eligibility under the EEOICPA.

 

If you have any questions about the Director’s Order, please feel free to call my office, toll free, at:  (xxx) xxx-xxxx.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

{Name of District Director}

District Director

 

 


 

 

EMPLOYEE:                         [Employee Name]

 

CLAIMANT:                         [Claimant(s) Name]

 

FILE NUMBER:                      [Last 4 Digits of File Number]

 

DOCKET NUMBER:                    [Insert Docket Number]

 

 

DIRECTOR’S ORDER

 

On {date} you were issued a final decision denying your claim for benefits under [Part B/E] of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA or Act).  A final decision may be reopened at any time on motion of the Director of the Division of Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC).  Because of new developments described in this Director’s Order, the {date} Final Decision under Part B [unless there is employment at other covered facilities, in which case those may add a Part E component] of the EEOICPA is hereby vacated and your case reopened under this provision.

 

BACKGROUND

 

{Provide a concise and accurate synopsis of the claim’s history.  Some sample paragraphs are provided here, though these should be altered to tailor-fit the specifics of the case.}

 

The evidence of record shows that {claimant name} filed Form [EE-1 or 2] (Claim for [Survivor] Benefits under the EEOICPA) under Part B [and/or E, as appropriate] on {date}.  It was asserted that the employee {employee name} developed {cancer type} as a result of employment at the {site/facility}.  Medical documentation established the claimed condition. 

 

Under the Act, most cancer cases must be referred to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a division of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in order to receive a dose reconstruction. A dose reconstruction allows the Department of Labor to run a program that provides a number called the probability of causation (PoC).  Under Part B of the Act, a cancer is “at least as likely as not” related to employment at a covered facility if the PoC is 50% or greater.  In your case, the dose reconstruction performed on {date} returned a value of {previous dose number}.  As a result, on {date}, you were issued a final decision denying the claim under Part B of the Act because the PoC was less than 50%.

 

However, the PoC can change if the employment used to calculate the POC changes.  In your case, the most recent NIOSH residual report added the period {choose 1 of the following: July 1, 1960 through December 31, 1962 at Blockson Chemicals, January 1, 1955 through December 31, 1959 at Revere Copper & Brass, or October 1, 1955 through December 31, 1956 at Texas City Chemicals, Inc.}.  Because you worked at (name of facility) during this period, your case was reviewed to determine whether a new dose reconstruction was needed. 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Based on the most recent NIOSH report entitled, “Report on Residual Radioactive and Beryllium Contamination at Atomic Weapons Employer Facilities and Beryllium Vendor Facilities,” you have additional covered employment.  This additional employment was reviewed and determined to have a material effect your case.  Because of this change, your previous final decision issued {date} must be vacated. 

 

CONCLUSION   (Note:  This paragraph is particularly important)

 

The {date} final decision is vacated and a new recommended decision will be issued to you shortly.  If you disagree with the recommended decision, you will have the opportunity to file an objection and request an oral hearing or review of the written record.

 

{City of district office}

 

 

 

                                {Name of District Director}

                                 District Director

 

 


 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 

I hereby certify that on                                                  a copy of the Director’s Order was sent by regular mail to the following:

 

Addressee

Address

City, State, Zip

 

                              {Name of District Director}

                                District Director