From: R.A. Matthews

Date: 27 Nov., 2005

To: Colorado Department of Labor, Industrial Claim Appeals Office,

POB 18291, Denver, Colo 80218-0291

RE: Ruth Matthews, Claimant- Unemployment Insurance Claim

The Hearing Officer's Decision in this case was fair and thorough. The employers's appeal is not based on any evidence not already considered or documented. Responses (paragraph by paragraph) to their brief are as follows:

1) Dr. Lynda Walters (misidentified in the employer's brief) possesses credentials clearly substantiated both in testimony and submitted documents. She is a licensed medical physician in the State of Colorado, and now (ironically) writes medical opinions for disability claims for the Grand Junction Courts. She herself developed hypersensitivity to electromagnetic fields in a previous work place and, after consultation with Mr. Duncan, left that position.

The employer did not on any occasion request me to provide a physical exam. No medical test exits for determination of EMF Hypersensitivy to date. The four hour interview with Dr. Walters, culminating in her recommendation for removal was a much more thorough 'exam' than I've ever had in a physician's office. Past medical records have no bearing in this case. Both Mr. Duncan and myself informed Linda Minter that we would comply with her request for examination by a physician of her choosing, which she never scheduled. Dr. Walters indicated cases from medical annals of life-threatening consequences stemming from sleep deprivation on the order of what I was experiencing. Again, the hearing officer obviously considered all of these facts, which are contained in the case transcript and submitted documents.

2) Dr. Erica Elliot, MD (New Mexico AMA) (author of Prescription for a Healthy House...now the "bible" for professional non-toxic building) is a well known certified, practicing physician and authority in the diagnosis and treatment of environmental illness. Dr. Bill Leva, MD of Montrose has evaluated her credentials as "impeccable". Her book, as quoted in the submitted documents, was written in conjunction with Paula Baker, a respected member of the American Institute of Architects (AIA). Again, this information was contained in hearing documents and transcripts ... all competently scrutinized by the Hearing Officer.

3) Lisa Quint (Hearing Officer) questioned Mr. Duncan extensively about his credentials. As stated in the transcript, no certification exists for environmental illness practitioners. Mr. Duncan is a widely recognized authority and lecturer on environmental illness in South Western Colorado, having worked with hundreds of similar cases in the past 9 years. His services are provided free of charge to those needing them through the Smart Shelter Network. Ironically, in spite of the employer's suppositions, he has never read any books on these subjects. His education and training have come through field work with trained EMF specialists and Medical Doctors. The Employer's Supervisor verified that she was aware of and recognized his knowledge and diagnostic equipment when she brought him in for testing of the office work area. Again, every one of these facts are thoroughly detailed in the submitted documents.

Mr. Duncan is a professional builder of 33 years experience and did not at any time diagnose, charge or offer medical prescription, services or opinion. He practices "En Terra" Science in which he delivers relevant education regarding case experiences, devises simple personal testing of the building and designs self-testing experiments which I was encouraged to try for myself ending in 18 consecutive removals from high field workplace environments followed by 18 undoubtable restorations of my sleep function within 2-3 days. Medical pharmaceuticals are consistently approved by the FDA on a 15% effectiveness basis. Seldom if ever do they produce 100% cures, but this did. All this information is included in the hearing documents.

4) Mr. Duncan spent thousands of dollars in Smart Shelter Network time, gas, and energy to assist me with sleep deprivation and deepening exhaustion. He himself suffers from environmental illness and risked his own health to do so. Linda Minter has been aware of my desperate situation, which continues. Had it not been for Mr. Duncan's support, this situation would have certainly worsened to levels even more severe.

5) Our request to the State Electrical Inspector for review of obvious code violations at the work place was not covered at this hearing (but is included in document submissions). It does indicate unsafe workplace conditions. The complaint is still in process. Overloaded circuits, thrown breakers, exposed wiring, measured net current and "octopus" equipment outlets at the work station are obvious reasons for concern, proven electrical field sources, definite code violations and documented in our submissions.

6) To the Supervisor's supposition that menopause or anemia were the causes of my exhaustion we would indicate (also obvious to the Hearing Officer) that the employer is not a certified, licensed physician in the State of Colorado or trained or educated in these issues.

The evidence to support the Hearing Officer's decision in this case is clear and overwhelming. I never had (in three years employment with the Wiesbaden) any intention or desire to leave. The decision to go was difficult, health threatening, expensive and continues to be disturbing. I became exhausted and physically unable to do the duties required by the job, as stated and verified by the owner of the Wiesbaden herself. The workplace was hazardous to my health, as verified and documented in the submitted evidence. All reasonable medical diagnosis and assistance was procured (especially in the light of this emergent and relatively unknown medical problem...currently supported by the World Health Organization ...see submitted bibliography).

The Hearing Officer's thoroughness and attention to document and research detail were exceptional and notably professional. In addition, the employer's lack of evidence and relevant argument would indicate a motivation of harassement and delay ... which we request be stopped, especially in light of my continued severe circumstances and impaired resources.

The claimant wishes to file a formal complaint regarding the employer's being allowed to file 2 briefs, one granted after the deadline had clearly passed, as a violation of the stated procedures. Please exclude the second brief from admission.

Ruth A. Matthews.