Deputy Fire Chief's Cancer Claim Denied Despite Presumption Law

Monday, November 12, 2018 | 0

New Hampshire this year became one of 35 states to adopt a cancer-presumption law for firefighters. But like their counterparts in other parts of the country, firefighters in the Granite State are already finding it complicated to win benefits to cover the disease.

The Firehouse news site reported Friday that a deputy chief in Seabrook had his testicular cancer claim denied, despite the fact he had been on the job for more than 20 years and his doctor believes the tumor was not tobacco-related.

Workers' compensation administrators concluded that Lawrence "Koko" Perkins had smoked 12 years ago, and was hired before a more rigorous physical exam was required for new hires.

Senate Bill 541, signed by the governor in July, creates the presumption that cancer is compensable for firefighters with at least 10 years of experience and who work for a fire department that follows the medical examination as outlined by the National Fire Protection Association standard known as 1582. The type of cancer must be a type caused by exposure to heat, radiation or a known carcinogen, as defined by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. 

If the department does not follow the exam standard, the firefighter must guarantee that he or she never used tobacco and submit after-action reports demonstrating exposure to known carcinogens, “but shall not have the benefit of the prima facie presumption.”

Perkins said he had the standard exam, but after he was hired.

A fire union official told the news site that the law's lifetime tobacco prohibition is too restrictive, and he hopes lawmakers can revise it next year.

Perkins said he plans to appeal the denial of his claim.

New Hampshire was one of the first states to adopt a presumption law, back in 1989.  But one year later, the state's Supreme Court held that the funding mechanism for it was unconstitutional.

After several attempts in recent years, the New Hampshire legislature passed SB 541, although the bill did not address funding for municipalities that will have to pay for the improved benefits.