Savannah River Site (SRS)

(Site Profile/Docket Number 012)

Location: Aiken, South Carolina

Special Exposure Cohort Petition Information

The Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) is a unique category of employees established by the Act (42 CFR Part 83). Claims compensated under the SEC do not have to go through the dose reconstruction process. To qualify for compensation under the SEC, a covered employee must meet specific requirements (e.g., must have at least one of 22 “specified cancers,” and have worked for a specified time period at one of the SEC sites). Classes of employees and work sites can be considered for addition to the SEC through a NIOSH petition process. More information about the Special Exposure Cohort can be found on our Frequently Asked Questions page.

Open/Active SEC Petitions

There are currently no open/active SEC petitions from Savannah River Site (SRS).

Class(es) Added to the SEC

  • January 1, 1953 through September 30, 1972: All employees of the Department of Energy, its predecessor agencies, and their contractors and subcontractors who worked at the Savannah River Site from January 1, 1953, through September 30, 1972, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees included in the Special Exposure Cohort.

    Note: This class was established from Petition 103.

  • October 1, 1972, through December 31, 1990, with exclusions: All construction trade employees of Department of Energy subcontractors [excluding employees of the following prime contractors who worked at the Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina, during the specified time periods: E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, October 1, 1972, through March 31, 1989; and Westinghouse Savannah River Company, April 1, 1989, through December 31, 1990], who worked at the Savannah River Site from October 1, 1972, through December 31, 1990, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either solely under this employment or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees included in the Special Exposure Cohort.

    Note: This class was established from Petition 103.

Petitions Qualified for Evaluation

Below is a list of the petitions that qualified for evaluation. Select a petition on the list to view the table for that particular petition.

SEC Petitions Not Qualifying for Evaluation

In addition to the petitions listed above, three petitions were received but did not qualify for evaluation because they did not meet the minimum petition requirements.

Worker Outreach Activities

Based on a recommendation from the Advisory Board to provide workers and site experts with opportunities to participate in developing the technical documents used in dose reconstruction, NIOSH established a Worker Outreach Program. At Worker Outreach Meetings, current and former DOE and AWE employees have opportunities to obtain information about Site Profiles, Technical Basis Documents, and Technical Information Bulletins, and to provide information for consideration and possible use in dose reconstruction. This process is valuable to ensure that the technical documents used in dose reconstruction contain correct and useful information. Worker Outreach Activities for the Savannah River Site (SRS):

Advisory Board Work Group on Savannah River Site (SRS)

This Work Group is responsible for reviewing the Savannah River Site (SRS) Site Profile, the SEC petition from Savannah River Site (SRS) petitioners, the NIOSH Evaluation Report of the petition, the SC&A Review of the Savannah River Site (SRS) Site Profile, considering issues raised by the Board’s contractor (SC&A) concerning the Site Profile and the petition Evaluation Report, and for assisting NIOSH and SC&A in the resolution of such issues. The Work Group may recommend to the Board, changes in the Site Profile as appropriate. The Work Group should strive to develop a recommendation to the Board on whether a class should be added to the SEC.

Work Group Members:

  • Bradley P. Clawson (Chair)

  • James E. Lockey, M.D.

  • David Pompa

  • Paul L. Ziemer, Ph.D.

Meeting Information:

Pre-Decisional Document Policy

Please note that as part of the procedures and processes of the Advisory Board’s Work Groups, several kinds of pre-decisional documents may be developed. These pre-decisional documents, such as white papers, matrices, working drafts, etc., are distributed among Work Group members as research and background tools to facilitate discussion and deliberation. Although discussion during a public meeting may cover pre-decisional documents, these documents often are not further revised or finalized, and thus do not reflect the final determination or evaluation of the Advisory Board and its Work Groups. Additionally, some pre-decisional documents not otherwise posted on the website may contain sensitive information, which would require an interested party to obtain such documents by filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the CDC/ATSDR FOIA office at

Technical Documents

If the energy employee’s personal radiation information is incomplete, NIOSH will use other sources to estimate the radiation dose. This may involve using technical documents called Site Profiles, Technical Basis Documents, and Technical Information Bulletins.

Technical Basis Documents

  • Technical Basis Document for the Savannah River Site to be Used for EEOICPA Dose Reconstructions [4 MB (248 pages)]

    Revised: April 5, 2005

    Revision Includes: Adds Section 3.1.3 and Attachment C.3 to include ingestion of foodstuffs.

    • Occupational Medical Dose Section [581 KB (23 pages)]

      Revised: November 30, 2009

      Revision Includes: This revision is updated with newly acquired captured information. Includes Attributions and Annotations section. Specific changes are as follows: Added specific technique factors for PA and LAT projections for Type I machines and for LAT projections for Types II through IV machines in Table 3-3. Added Table 3-4. Rearranged the various sections and changed section headings: Section 3.3.1 changed from X-ray Apparatus to Photofluorography; Section 3.3.2 from Collimation to Radiography; Moved the existing section 3.4.2 on Collimation to Section 3.4. Added Section 3.3.3. Replaced the text in the existing Section 3.5 that contained example calculations of doses for the various projection types with two paragraphs of new text describing how doses were assigned. The original Table B.2 is now Table 3.9. All organ doses for the period 1950-1970 for Type I X-ray equipment have decreased; also doses for the male lungs and female bone marrow have been added. Entrance air kerma and skin doses for the PA and LAT projections have been deleted from Table 3-9. Table 3-10 and Table 3-11 have been added. The discussion regarding the four potential sources of uncertainty has been deleted except for the final statement to assume a +30% uncertainty at the 99% confidence level as stated in OTIB- 0006. Changed reported range on technique factors for the Picker machine. Values added to Table 3-3; The calculated entrance and exit skin doses were compared to the measured entrance and exit skin doses of Cooley (Cooley, 1967) made on the mobile Picker machine for the PA chest for the 1950-1970 time period. The comparison is shown in Table 3-7. The 21% uncertainty derived from the Cooley measurements is substituted into the root mean square calculation for combined uncertainty instead of the 10% value initially reported from this source of uncertainty in ORAUT-OTIB 0006 (2005). As a result of this substitution, the resulting combined, standard uncertainty is 34%, and rounded up to 35%. Skin doses were put into a different table format to more closely match the skin dose tools. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Constitutes a total rewrite of the document.

Technical Information Bulletins (TIBs)

Advisory Board and NIOSH Discussions on Savannah River Site (SRS)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) discussion papers listed below are working documents prepared by NIOSH or its contractor for use in discussions with the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health or its Working Groups or Subcommittees. Draft, preliminary, interim, and white paper documents are not final NIOSH or Advisory Board (or their technical support and review contractors) positions unless specifically marked as such. These documents represent preliminary positions taken on technical issues prepared by NIOSH or its contractor. The discussion papers have been reviewed to identify and redact any information that is protected by the Privacy Act 5 USC §552a and have been cleared for distribution.

Program Evaluation Plans (PEPs) and Program Evaluation Reports (PERs)

NIOSH is committed to applying the best available science in dose reconstructions. In keeping with this commitment, completed cases with probabilities of causation less than 50% are reviewed as relevant new information becomes available. The results of these reviews are described in a Program Evaluation Report (PER). The PER details the effect, if any, of the new information on the completed dose reconstruction. If it appears that the new information may result in an increase in dose for a completed dose reconstruction with a probability of causation of less than 50%, NIOSH is committed to working with the Department of Labor to reopen and rework the dose reconstruction, as appropriate. A Program Evaluation Plan (PEP) describes plans for evaluating specific program details or issues.

  • OCAS-PER-0001 Rev-00: Misinterpreted Dosimetry Records Resulting in an Underestimate of Missed Dose in Savannah River Site Dose Reconstructions [958 KB (4 pages)]
    September 8, 2003

    About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of the misinterpreted dosimetry records resulting in an underestimate of the missed dose for Savannah River Site dose reconstructions.

    Summary: While the underestimated missed dose resulted in a non-claimant favorable estimate of missed dose, the overestimated onsite ambient dose offset this underestimate. As a result, no further evaluation is necessary because the offset still resulted in a slight claimant favorable bias in the dose estimate and resulting probability of causation.

  • OCAS-PER-0002 Rev-00: Error in Surrogate Organ Assignment Resulting in an Underestimate of X-ray Dose in Savannah River Site Dose Reconstructions [482 KB (4 pages)]
    December 15, 2003

    About this Document: Describes the evaluation of the programmatic effect of an error in surrogate organ assignment resulting in a potential underestimate of the X-ray dose for certain Savannah River Site dose reconstructions.

    Summary: An error in surrogate organ assignment for the liver, gall bladder and spleen (ovaries was assigned instead of lung) resulted in the underestimation of X-ray organ doses in three completed dose reconstructions. The impact on the probability of causation in these three cases has been evaluated and found to be minimal (<0.5%), and the probable compensability status of these claims was unaffected. No revision of any completed dose reconstructions is warranted; however, to preclude future occurrences of this error, revisions of several Technical Basis Documents has been initiated.

  • OCAS-PER-0019 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: The Effect of Additional Neutron Dose Data from the Savannah River Site [20 KB (2 pages)]
    May 18, 2007

    About this Document: New document to report the impact of additional neutron dose data received from the Savannah River Site.

    Summary: Dosimetry records are requested from the Savannah River Site for each claim received from the Department of Labor with Savannah River employment. This data is used in reconstructing the individuals’ radiation dose. The Savannah River site notified NIOSH that additional data pertaining to neutron dosimetry was not sent for several claims. The additional data has since been received and added to the original dosimetry data. Previously completed claims were re-evaluated to determine the affect of this new data on the individual claims. This Program Evaluation Report (PER) was prepared to report the results of that evaluation.

  • OCAS-PER-0030 Rev-00: Program Evaluation Report: Savannah River Site TBD Revisions [31 KB (3 pages)]
    December 18, 2007

    About this Document: Document to determine which previously completed claims require evaluation for the effect of revising the Savannah River Site< TBD.

    Summary: There were 54 Savannah River Site claims completed prior to August 21, 2003, (issue date of revision 1) with a probability of Causation below 50%. The dose reconstruction methodology of each will be reviewed to determine if a new dose reconstruction is necessary to determine if the revisions increase the dose estimate. NIOSH will review these dose reconstructions to determine if they meet any of the criteria listed in this PER. NIOSH will provide DOL with the list of 54 claims as well as a determination on each claim as to whether a new dose estimate is required. Documentation for each claim not requiring a new dose reconstruction will provide the basis for that determination.

Public Comments on Savannah River Site (SRS) Documents

How to Submit Comments

Comments on Savannah River Site (SRS) Documents can be submitted to the NIOSH Docket Officer electronically by email at or printed comments can be mailed to: NIOSH Docket Office Robert A. Taft Laboratories, MS-C34 1090 Tusculum Avenue Cincinnati, OH 45226 Please include the Site Profile/Docket Number (012) on all comments.

Comments Received

None received at this time.

Document Archive for Savannah River Site (SRS)

Technical Information Bulletins (TIBs):


Technical Basis Documents (TBDs):

  • Technical Basis Document for the Savannah River Site to be Used for EEOICPA Dose Reconstructions

    • ORAUT-TKBS-0003 Rev-02: Revised October 29, 2004 [4 MB (242 pages)]

      Revision Includes: Allows use of Table C-17, Maximum site-wide annual intakes and geometric standard deviations, for all environmental dose reconstruction and clarifies periods of applicability. Modified instructions for determination of undetected dose from in vitro bioassay results (except tritium) below detection threshold. Clarified instructions for missed dose determination from whole body count results below the detection threshold. Corrected Ce-144 table 4.3-5. Pages changed are 24, 57, 58, 62, 72, 80, 81, 84, 85, 86, 89, 156, and 183. The Uncertainty Section (4.4.2) was deleted because it is not specific to SRS and because this avoids inconsistencies that might result from dose reconstruction programmatic changes. Incorporated medical x-ray changes and addition of section on photofluorography, addition of references, and information on TNX and CMX. Changed all dates referring to photofluorograph to 1951-1957. Removed reference to 1967.

    • ORAUT-TKBS-0003 Rev-01: Revised August 21, 2003 [4 MB (233 pages)]

      Revision Includes: Incorporated changes to Section 2.2, 3.2.2, Table A-23, Tables B-1, C-17, and C-19; addition of last paragraph in “in vitro fission product analysis” in Section 4.1.2 and Section 5.3.5; additions of Dose Reconstructor instructions: Sections 2.5, 2.5.1, 2.5.2; 3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2; 4.5, 4.5.1, 4.5.2, 4.5.3, 4.5.4; 5.7, 5.7.1, 5.7.2, and Tables D-11 through D-29. Additions were also made to Sections 4.4.3 and 4.4.4. Corrected several terms and definitions in the glossary, Sections 1.3, and 2.2. Revised Section 2.2 for clarity. Reassigned the thyroid to Groups 2 in Section 2.5.2. In Section 4.1.2, revised MDS/Reporting level in Tables 4.1.1-1 and 4.1.1-2, clarified 10 year old 12% Pu mix as claimant favorable, added text to the Note re: fission product Sr-90 sample/whole body in Section 2.4.1 discussing record forms for whole body counts and meaning of terms thereon. Corrected 4.4.3-x corrected to 4.4.3-9 in first sentence of Note:, page 79. Corrected tables 4.4.3-1 and 4.4.3-3 Type S and M values respectively and corrected units. Added bullets under Note: in Section 4.4.3 “Chronic Intakes for other radionuclide.” Clarified tritium equilibrium and corrected calculation in Section 4.4.3, corrected solubility types in tables 4.4.3-7, and 4.4.3-8. Added text to sections 4.5 and 4.5.1 and deleted sections related to “Best Estimate Approaches” and renumbered sections. Deleted footnote in Section Added works to clarify use of annual intakes for dose reconstruction. Corrected Table D-5 Absorption Type.

    • ORAUT-TKBS-0003 Rev-00: Approved July 15, 2003 [2.2 MB (188 pages)]