NOTICE: The U.S. Department of Energy is hosting a webinar to discuss the DOE Former Worker Medical Screening Program.

The Former Worker Medical Screening Program (FWP) provides ongoing medical screening examinations, at no cost, to all former DOE Federal, contractor, and subcontractor workers who may be at risk for occupational diseases. The FWP is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS) and reflects our commitment to the health and safety of all DOE workers - past and present - who have served the Nation in its National security and other missions.

The FWP uses independent occupational health experts from universities, labor unions, and commercial organizations to administer the medical screening program. To ensure objective and credible medical examinations, the exams are offered by third-party providers. Screenings are provided at clinics in communities near DOE sites, as well as through a large network of health clinics nationwide to allow for services to be provided in close proximity to most workers' residences. 

Former Worker Medical Screening Program Topical Areas

Program Overview

The FWP was mandated by the U.S. Congress as part of Section 3162 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1993 (Public Law 102-484) which called for DOE to:

 “… establish and carry out a program for the identification and on-going medical evaluation of its… former employees who are subject to significant health risks as a result of the exposure of such employees to hazardous or radioactive substances during such employment.”

The program’s activities began in 1996, and medical screening exams began in 1997.

The FWP provides medical screening exams at no cost to all interested and eligible former DOE Federal, contractor, and subcontractor workers who may have been exposed to toxic substances and hazardous conditions while working at a DOE or a covered DOE-related contractor site.  The FWP medical screening exams check for potential adverse health effects caused by exposures to radiation, beryllium, asbestos, silica, welding fumes, lead, cadmium, chromium, solvents, noise, and other toxic substances and hazardous conditions.  The program also serves former workers from DOE’s predecessor Agencies, i.e., the Manhattan Engineer District, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Energy Research and Development Administration. 

The FWP is overseen by the DOE Office of Health and Safety within the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS) and implemented by third-party independent occupational health providers, referred to as FWP Projects, managed by medical experts known as Principal Investigators (PI) and sometimes co-PIs, from universities, labor unions, and commercial organizations.  Use of the FWP Projects ensures that the FWP medical evaluation services are objective and credible.  The high-quality services, professionalism, and dedication of the FWP Projects to DOE former workers over the past 25 years has resulted in a high level of satisfaction by participants as expressed in outpatient surveys (97.9 percent in FY 2021). 

All FWP Projects use multiple outreach methods to notify eligible former DOE workers about the availability of FWP services.  The primary method of outreach is direct mailings to former workers inviting them to participate in the program.  The FWP Projects also conduct outreach events, e.g., public meetings, health fairs, etc., at DOE sites or in the communities near DOE facilities. 

The FWP Projects provide for medical screening exams at clinics in communities near DOE sites, and through a nationwide network of health clinics.  This network of clinics allows the FWP Projects to provide medical screening exams close to most workers’ residences.  Medical screening exams have been conducted in all 50 States and several international locations (see Figure 1). The States which the program screen and where DOE sites are located are shaded blue.

When medical screening exam results identify adverse medical conditions, FWP Projects provide participants information that can be used for follow-up medical care with personal physicians or specialists. When appropriate, the FWP Projects will refer participants to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) for potential compensation through the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program (EEOICP).

The FWP directly benefits former DOE workers by: (1) identifying signs or symptoms of work-related health conditions at an early more treatable stage; and (2) improving workers’ understanding of health risks they may face due to potential exposures during their employment with DOE. 

 

Figure 1.  FWP Participants by State of Residence (1997 – September 2021) *USA state map

FWP Participants by State of Residence (1997 – September 2021) USA state map
FWP Participants by State of Residence (1997 – September 2021) USA state map

Program Implemenation

Program implementation focuses primarily on four specific activities: outreach, medical screening exams, communications, and protection of participants’ privacy:

1. Outreach: Identify the potential pool of former DOE workers and notify them of FWP services

Woman talking at an outreach meeting

Since the inception of the FWP, DOE realized there would be challenges in locating workers to participate in the program as there is no centralized database of former DOE workers.  When employee rosters, are available from employers or DOE, EHSS works closely with DOE Headquarters program offices to obtain these rosters from site contractors and field/site offices.

Many subcontractors employed workers intermittently, and these companies typically did not leave a copy of employee records with the prime contractor.  Thus, the availability of a list of names of former workers (employee roster) varies greatly by site. 

The FWP Projects send invitations to individuals using the last known address.  When addresses are outdated or inaccurate, the FWP Projects use address-update services to obtain current contact information.  The FWP Projects also periodically check the list of workers’ names against the National Death Index to ensure they do not send letters of invitation to decease individuals.

All FWP Projects use multiple outreach methods to notify eligible former DOE workers about the availability of FWP services.  The primary method of outreach is direct mailings to former workers inviting them to participate in the program.  The FWP Projects also conduct outreach events, e.g., public meetings, health fairs, etc., at DOE sites or in the communities near DOE facilities.  All in-person outreach events took place before the onset of COVID-19; afterwards FWP Projects conducted virtual outreach events.  In FY 2021, the FWP Projects participated in 211 outreach events and assisted the DOL with 26 of its outreach events.  Workers also receive exit packets with program information and the hyperlinks to retiree/DOE site webpages when separating from a DOE or DOE-related site.

To locate workers, the FWP Projects continued to conduct outreach efforts in FY 2021.  Those former workers who are interested and eligible have either completed their medical screening exams, or the FWP Projects will schedule an exam once deemed safe to screen after COVID-19 rates decrease in their area.  Despite the outreach efforts, there are many reasons why former workers may not wish to participate in the FWP, including that they believe they are in good health, they are simply not interested in screening, they may harbor a mistrust of a government program or they prefer to wait until COVID-19 is under better control. 

Additional information regarding outreach is on the FWP Website.

2. Medical Screening: Provide medical screening exams designed to check for adverse health conditions related to occupational exposures in former workers who choose to participate in the program, including re-screen medical exams every 3 years.

Stethoscope on light blue backgroun

A. Conventional Medical Screening Exam Program

The FWP offers conventional medical screening exams that evaluate a former employee’s health as it relates to the individual’s potential occupational exposure to toxic substances and hazardous conditions.  The initial medical screening exam includes a physical examination and may consist of the following based on the individual’s occupational exposure history:

  • Chest x-ray with B reading (interpretation for occupational lung disease),
  • Spirometry / Pulmonary Function Test (breathing test),
  • Beryllium Lymphocyte Proliferation Test (to detect beryllium sensitization),
  • Blood chemistry test,
  • Urinalysis, and/or
  • Audiometry (hearing test)

A team of independent physicians, specializing in occupational medicine, helped develop the FWP medical screening exam program.  This protocol is periodically updated as necessary or at least every 2 years based on new research findings within the scientific/medical community.  The most current update, in FY 2021, included language regarding COVID-19 related testing to the FWP examination protocol.  The health conditions targeted in the medical screening exams include chronic lung diseases, lung cancer, beryllium-related disorders, hearing loss, and damage to other selected major organs that may be associated with occupational exposures.  A list of exposures and medical examinations offered through the FWP is available in the medical protocol posted on the FWP Website.

Medical screening exams can identify diseases or precursor conditions at an early stage of development, often before signs and symptoms occur.  Clinics can refer individuals with suspicious findings to their personal physician or a specialist for further testing, diagnosis, and treatment.  The FWP is not a substitute for routine medical exams received through an individual’s personal physician; however, the program provides some general health screening services that are beneficial to workers. 

Before participating in the medical screening exam program, former workers must complete a medical history questionnaire and an occupational history questionnaire, either on their own or via an interviewer-conducted session.  In many cases, the interviewers are former workers with knowledge of DOE sites and the type of exposures at the sites. 

Participation in the FWP is voluntary, and participants can refuse any portion of the medical screening examination. 

Due to the latency period (the time between the onset of exposure and the diagnosis of the disease) of occupational-related diseases, the FWP offers re-screen medical exams every 3 years after the initial medical screening exam.  Rescreening medical exams improve the detection of occupational diseases, so it is essential that rescreening resume as soon as it is safe to do so.  Certain medical exams may be recommended only during the initial screening exam and excluded from the re-screen exam. 

In addition to identifying conditions that may have been related to workplace exposures, the FWP also provides some general health screening services.  Screenings include some common non-occupational health conditions, such as diabetes (blood sugar), coronary artery disease (cholesterol), cardiovascular disease/hypertension (blood pressure), obesity, and chronic kidney dysfunction (serum creatinine levels). 

The results of general health screening tests, and findings during examinations can be of great benefit to the participants.  The participant’s personal physician can treat many of the conditions that fall into this category, significantly improving longevity and quality of life. 

In FY 2021, the FWP conducted 1,301 initial and 2,632 re-screening medical exams.  Since 1997, the FWP has conducted a total of 158,061 medical screening exams, comprised of 95,632 initial and 62,429 re-screening medical exams.  Figure 2 provides a breakdown of the number of initial and re-screening exams conducted through FWP Projects for the past several years.  As expected, due to the shut down in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FWP did not conduct as many medical screening exams in FY 2021 as in previous years.  It is also expected that the number of medical screening exams to be down in FY 2022 due to the continuous spread of the virus at the end of FY 2021. 

Figure 2. Conventional Medical Screening Exams Conducted

Figure 2. Conventional Medical Screening Exams Conducted Bar Chart

B. Early Lung Cancer Detection Program (ELCD):

A radiology technologist  preparing to perform a CT scan on patient

In 2000, the FWP initiated the ELCD program to detect lung cancers at an earlier, more treatable stage using low-dose CT scans.  Low-dose CT scans have proven to be better than conventional chest x-ray for the early detection of cancers when treatment is more likely to be effective at preventing death.

DOE made low-dose CT scans available to many former workers who may be at risk for occupational lung cancer because of their work for DOE.  Occupational hazards, such as exposure to asbestos, ionizing radiation, silica, beryllium, and diesel exhaust, may cause or contribute to the disease.  Low-dose CT scans detect abnormal cells before they can develop into cancer and find cancer at its earliest stages before it has spread. 

ELCD participants are offered initial/baseline, follow-up, and annual low-dose CT scans. 

If an individual’s initial/baseline scan shows one or more nodules that are not highly suspicious for cancer, they were offered a follow-up scan at 3 or 6 months to determine if there have been any changes.  If a nodule is suspicious for lung cancer, the participant is referred to a specialist for diagnostic evaluation. 

Ongoing annual low-dose CT scans are offered if an individual’s initial/baseline scan is normal.  This is to determine if new nodules are present or if there are changes in previously detected nodules, which may indicate that lung cancer is present.  The ELCD program is making every effort to maintain to this timeline of screening, however due to the pandemic, some screening may be delayed.

The FWP Projects currently participating in the ELCD program include WHPP, BTMed, and the University of Iowa.  Other FWP Projects are exploring how to incorporate low-dose CT scans into their current protocols.

The FWP Projects continued low-dose CT scans during the pandemic because lung cancer is easiest to treat at its earliest stages.  It was even more important to continue the follow-up low-dose CT scans because they are performed in response to the identification of a suspicious nodule or some other medical finding that necessitates a follow-up appointment.  In FY 2021, 2,375 FWP participants received at least one low-dose CT scan.  Some individuals had multiple low-dose CT scans during FY 2021 because they required a follow-up low-dose CT scan.  The FWP performed a total of 2,448 low-dose CT scans in FY 2021, including 55 scans among newly enrolled program participants (baseline scans) and 2,400 annual or follow-up low-dose CT scans.  Since 2000, the ELCD program has screened 15,651 eligible participants and provided 64,241 low-dose CT scans.  As of the end of FY 2021, this vital component of the FWP has detected 238 lung cancers.

3. Communicate Results: Provide medical screening exam results to participants, as well as information concerning any conditions that may require follow-up medical care with their personal physicians or specialists and offer information regarding possible compensation for work-related illnesses.

Female doctor communicating results to elderly patient

Occupational medicine physicians review the results from the FWP medical screening exams, along with the completed medical and occupational exposure history questionnaires, to determine whether any abnormal findings exist and whether the findings may be work-related. 

Participants requiring urgent medical attention for an abnormal test result are contacted immediately by phone, informed of the finding, and provided recommendations for further evaluation and treatment by their personal physicians or a specialist.  Urgent findings are also documented in a letter to the participant that is sent by overnight mail. 

All participants are provided with a summary of findings, both occupational and non-occupational related, in a results letter several weeks after their examination, along with any necessary follow-up recommendations.  The results letter also includes general health advice for workers, such as recommendations to quit smoking.  While the FWP Projects offer medical screening exams, follow-up medical evaluation and treatment are not within the scope of the FWP. 

When appropriate, the FWP Program physicians who review the medical screening exam results, include language in the results letters regarding the possibility that an identified condition may be work-related especially if the condition is known to be a potential occupational disease.  The inclusion of this language, known as “causation” language, can be helpful for participants considering whether to file a claim under the EEOICPA administered by DOL.  In addition, the FWP Programs provide participants with contact information in the results letters for DOL EEOICPA Resource Centers, as well as other State and Federal workers’ compensation programs when appropriate.

While participation in the DOE FWP is not required for filing an EEOICPA compensation claim, the medical results may be useful in supporting a claim by offering former DOE workers with detailed information about the possible relationship between their condition and their occupational exposure at a DOE or DOE-related site.  FWP project staff, many of whom are former DOE workers, can also assist participants by providing useful site and exposure information to include in their claim packages

4. Protect Personally Identifiable Information and Protected Health Information: Protect the confidentiality and privacy of participants.  

The confidentiality and privacy rights of former workers are not only a legal requirement, they are also crucial to establishing and maintaining credibility with the DOE former worker community.  All medical information collected as part of the FWP is confidential and used only as allowed by the Privacy Act of 1974 and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).  The FWP conducts all activities with the approval of the Institutional Review Boards, or Human Subjects Committees, of DOE and involved organizations.  All individuals sign an informed consent and HIPAA authorization before participating.  In addition, all program staff take annual privacy awareness training, and all FWP Projects have security procedures in place for the safe transmittal and storage of protected information.

PROGRAM PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS

The FWP infrastructure consists of four designated regional projects located near major DOE sites, as well as two nationwide projects. Click on the links below to find program descriptions and program staff biographies. 

The regional projects include:

The two nationwide projects include:

  • The National Supplemental Screening Program, conducted by Oak Ridge Associated Universities in conjunction with National Jewish Health, Comprehensive Health Services, Axion Health, and the University of Colorado Denver
  • The Building Trades National Medical Screening Program, conducted by CPWR - The Center for Construction Research and Training in conjunction with the University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Duke University Medical Center, and Zenith American Solutions, Inc.

WORKER TESTIMONIALS

During my medical screening, everything was professional, easy and the staff members were excellent. 

Ames Laboratory former worker

This is a well-run program.  I value getting to participate and finding out if I have any issues from the tests provided.

Ames Laboratory former worker

I’m thankful for this program and hope it continues.  It’s a wonderful program that helps with health issues, and I’m so glad it is being done. 

Burlington AEC Plant former worker

[the medical clinic] took all the proper COVID-19 precautions. I felt very comfortable.

ORNL Participant

I know you have a lot of catching up to do from COVID but my experience was exemplary.

NTS Participant

I strongly encourage all current and former DOE facility workers to understand the program, the benefits, and participate.  It’s your health and your life.  Never take either for granted.

Ken Armstrong, former K-25 worker

I would like to thank the WHPP program for giving me the comfort of having someone look after my health through your physicals and CT scans.  I worked at two different DOE facilities (Fernald for 14 years and Piketon for 11 years), where there were many harmful chemicals, toxins and radiation.  Thank you again for seeing after myself and my co-workers. I hope this program continues for many years to come.

Lee Clark, Former Fernald and Portsmouth GDP worker

In reference to his cancer diagnosis, Mr. Campbell states, “As you can imagine, I fully credit your organization for saving my life.

R. Bruce Campbell Amarillo, Texas

Having this health screening every three years is reassuring that my physical health is being monitored by professionals.  I have been involved with this voluntary program since 2007.  I have found that staff have been consistently patient oriented, knowledgeable, and willing to explain the diagnostic tests in terms that I can understand.  I have and will continue to recommend this program to all former workers.

Larry King Amarillo, Texas

Appreciation for continuous availability of Program staff to answer requests for information, assistance with EEOICPA paperwork & DOL requests, and general information.

Anonymous

MEDICAL SCREENING EXAM FINDINGS

A cumulative summary of FWP conventional medical screening exam findings from FY 1997-2021 is provided in Tables 1-8.  Only new abnormal findings on re-screen exams are reported (i.e., abnormal results found on initial medical screening exams are not counted again in the re-screen results).  Suspected work-related findings have been primarily lung-related conditions (e.g., asbestosis and/or silicosis, beryllium sensitization, and lung cancer) and hearing loss.  A cumulative summary of ELCD program low-dose CT scans findings from 2000 through September 2021 is provided in Tables 9 and 10. 

Table 1.  Medical Screening Exams Conducted by Site 
(1997 through September 2021)

State

Sites[1]

Initial Screenings

Re-screens

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

1,451

870

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

515

323

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

2,352

1,845

CA

Sandia NL, CA

194

133

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

1,048

798

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

4,463

2,014

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

801

318

IA

Ames Laboratory

2,208

2,328

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

1,433

1,975

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

1,397

664

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

5,463

5,273

IL

Argonne NL

834

274

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

205

36

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

1,145

732

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

3,628

3,716

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

900

449

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

2,911

950

NM

Los Alamos NL

3,516

702

NM

Sandia NL, NM

455

62

NV

Nevada National Security Site

6,001

4,100

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

625

362

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

603

181

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

2,443

2,077

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

1,399

1,395

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

482

275

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

1,715

1,766

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

1,295

889

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

3,944

4,411

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

5,526

3,017

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

6,449

770

TN

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

4,925

5,937

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

2,518

2,924

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[2] - Construction Workers

3,972

2,359

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

4,579

5,257

TX

Pantex Plant

1,804

864

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

4,682

2,371

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

6,420

1,371

 

Other Sites[3] - Construction Workers

1,606

793

 

Other Sites[4] - Production Workers

477

58

 

Grand Total

96,384

64,642

[1]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[2] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[3] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[4] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NSSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

More in-depth information regarding the exam components offered through the program can be found on the FWP Website.  Medical findings by the DOE site/worker population are provided below.

Table 2.  Initial Chest X-Ray Exam Findings by State/Site 
(1997 through September 2021)

State Sites[5] Exams Conducted Asbestos-related Lung Disease Cases Detected Silicosis Cases Detected Other Dust-related Diseases Cases Detected Lung Nodules, Nodes, or Lesions Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

1,134

162

14.3%

1

1%

0

0.0%

62

5.5%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

480

2

0.4%

0

0.0%

3

0.6%

8

1.7%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

2,271

63

2.8%

1

1.6%

9

0.4%

43

1.9%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

188

2

1.1%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

2

1.1%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

938

255

27.2%

7

2.7%

15

1.6%

36

3.8%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

3,996

853

21.3%

4

0.1%

72

1.8%

121

3.0%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

780

72

9.2%

6

8.3%

25

3.2%

32

4.1%

IA

Ames Laboratory

2,123

84

4.0%

1

1.2%

64

3.0%

61

2.9%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

1,324

126

9.5%

0

0.0%

69

5.2%

34

2.6%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

1,175

128

10.9%

0

0.0%

2

0.2%

33

2.8%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

5,381

404

7.5%

1

0.2%

25

0.5%

162

3.0%

IL

Argonne NL

756

87

11.5%

1

1.1%

31

4.1%

26

3.4%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

188

21

11.2%

0

0.0%

7

3.7%

5

2.7%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

1,049

164

15.6%

7

4.3%

12

1.1%

59

5.6%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

3,592

236

6.6%

8

3.4%

20

0.6%

129

3.6%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

808

105

13.0%

0

0.0%

1

0.1%

35

4.3%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

2,851

329

11.5%

2

0.6%

74

2.7%

103

3.6%

NM

Los Alamos NL

3,269

217

6.6%

0

0.0%

99

3.0%

1

0.0%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

439

23

5.2%

1

4.3%

15

3.4%

3

0.7%

NV

Nevada National Security Site

5,737

363

6.3%

22

6.1%

56

1.0%

162

2.8%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

505

91

18.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

9

1.8%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

553

35

6.3%

1

2.9%

5

0.9%

23

4.2%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

2,170

236

10.9%

5

2.1%

0

0.0%

34

1.6%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

1,343

60

4.5%

0

0.0%

14

1.0%

55

4.1%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

396

71

17.9%

0

0.0%

3

0.8%

7

1.8%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

1,675

108

6.4%

2

1.9%

1

0.1%

63

3.8%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

1,148

202

17.6%

3

1.5%

3

0.3%

50

4.4%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

3,912

255

6.5%

5

2.0%

16

0.4%

119

3.0%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

4,923

451

9.2%

4

0.9%

3

0.1%

189

3.8%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

4,756

1,159

0.2%

60

1.3%

404

8.5%

67

1.4%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

4,835

325

6.7%

5

1.5%

12

0.2%

102

2.1%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

2,457

123

5.0%

1

0.8%

2

0.1%

86

3.5%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[5] - Construction Workers

3,404

534

15.7%

6

1.1%

6

0.2%

136

4.0%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

4,489

250

5.6%

4

1.6%

14

0.3%

177

3.9%

TX

Pantex Plant

1,767

90

5.1%

1

1.1%

17

1.0%

58

3.3%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

3,960

893

22.6%

3

0.3%

3

0.1%

194

4.9%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

5,849

1,150

19.0%

4

0.1%

148

2.5%

277

4.7%

 

Other Sites[6] - Construction Workers

1,328

193

14.5%

5

2.6%

0

0.0%

30

2.3%

 

Other Sites[7] - Production Workers

 450

54

12.0%

3

5.6%

27

6.0%

13

2.9%

 

Grand Total

88,399

9,976

11.3%

174

0.2%

1,285

1.5%

2,806

3.2%

[5] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[6] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[7] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 3.  Re-screening Chest X-ray Findings by State/Site 
(1997 through September 2021)

State Sites[8] Exams Conducted Asbestos-related Lung Disease Cases Detected Silicosis Cases Detected Other Dust-related Diseases Cases Detected Lung Nodules, Nodes, or Lesions Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

478

42

8.8%

2

0.4%

0

0.0%

26

5.4%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

116

4

3.4%

0

0.0%

1

0.9%

4

3.4%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

753

20

2.7%

1

0.1%

5

0.7%

16

2.1%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

55

2

3.6%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

4

7.3%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

402

24

6.0%

0

0.0%

2

0.5%

11

2.7%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

1,479

324

21.9%

5

0.3%

56

3.8%

42

2.8%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

228

41

18.0%

1

0.4%

20

8.8%

1

0.4%

IA

Ames Laboratory

1,102

63

5.7%

3

0.3%

88

8.0%

23

2.1%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

568

48

8.5%

0

0.0%

67

11.8%

17

3.0%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

399

40

10.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

14

3.5%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

2,221

139

6.3%

0

0.0%

6

0.3%

62

2.8%

IL

Argonne NL

215

27

12.6%

2

0.9%

21

9.8%

2

0.9%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

31

2

6.5%

0

0.0%

4

12.9%

0

0.0%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

425

41

9.6%

0

0.0%

1

0.2%

29

6.8%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

1,888

89

4.7%

2

0.1%

1

0.1%

100

5.3%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

273

22

8.1%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

8

2.9%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

774

108

14.0%

1

0.1%

63

8.1%

16

2.1%

NM

Los Alamos NL

613

74

12.1%

0

0.0%

23

3.8%

2

0.3%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

53

12

22.6%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

NV

Nevada National Security Site

1,915

139

7.3%

3

0.2%

9

0.5%

134

7.0%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

228

19

8.3%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

4

1.8%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

116

5

4.3%

0

0.0%

1

0.9%

2

1.7%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

1,088

95

8.7%

2

0.2%

0

0.0%

7

0.6%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

633

19

3.0%

0

0.0%

6

0.9%

30

4.7%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

157

19

12.1%

0

0.0%

1

0.6%

2

1.3%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

799

30

3.8%

0

0.0%

3

0.4%

43

5.4%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

517

79

15.3%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

9

1.7%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

1,991

128

6.4%

1

0.1%

5

0.3%

130

6.5%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

1,787

168

9.4%

1

0.1%

2

0.1%

81

4.5%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

650

105

16.2%

1

0.2%

41

6.3%

13

2.0%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

2,586

146

5.6%

2

0.1%

5

0.2%

127

4.9%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

1,452

50

3.4%

0

0.0%

6

0.4%

70

4.8%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[9] - Construction Workers

1,445

150

10.4%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

61

4.2%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

2,578

118

4.6%

2

0.1%

6

0.2%

142

5.5%

TX

Pantex Plant

524

13

2.5%

0

0.0%

1

0.2%

17

3.2%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

1,443

146

10.1%

0

0.0%

1

0.1%

68

4.7%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

1,144

154

13.5%

1

0.1%

59

5.2%

41

3.6%

 

Other Sites[10] - Construction Workers

494

28

5.7%

1

0.2%

0

0.0%

10

2.0%

 

Other Sites[11] - Production Workers

49

7

14.3%

0

0.0%

1

2.0%

1

2.0%

 

Grand Total

33,659

2,740

8.1%

31

0.1%

505

1.5%

1,369

4.1%

[8]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[9] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[10] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[11] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 4.  Initial Spirometry Screening Findings by State/Site 
(1997 through September 2021)

State Sites[12] Exams Conducted Obstructive Airways Dysfunction Cases Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

1,130

177

15.7%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

498

50

10.0%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

2,251

264

11.7%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

188

16

8.5%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

925

223

24.1%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

4,316

932

21.6%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

767

188

24.5%

IA

Ames Laboratory

2,161

231

10.7%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

1,358

272

20.0%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

1,153

248

21.5%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

5,384

643

11.9%

IL

Argonne NL

769

73

9.5%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

183

13

7.1%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

1,031

243

23.6%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

3,573

374

10.5%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

793

161

20.3%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

2,804

587

20.9%

NM

Los Alamos NL

2374

144

6.1%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

396

31

7.8%

NV

Nevada National Security Site

5,723

967

16.9%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

527

69

13.1%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

596

35

5.9%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

2,103

400

19.0%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

1,340

152

11.3%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

392

84

21.4%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

1,641

219

13.3%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

1,135

257

22.6%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

3,903

501

12.8%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

4,819

792

16.4%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

4,087

441

10.8%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

4,784

643

13.4%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

2,453

252

10.3%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[13] - Construction Workers

3,356

609

18.1%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

4,473

535

12.0%

TX

Pantex Plant

1,738

544

31.3%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

3,926

895

22.8%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

6,113

1,054

17.2%

 

Other Sites[14] - Construction Workers

1,315

235

17.9%

 

Other Sites[15] - Production Workers

451

75

16.6%

 

Grand Total

86,929

13,629        

15.7%

[12]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[13] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[14] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[15] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 5.  Re-screening Spirometry Findings by State/Site  
(1997 through September 2021)

State

Sites[16]

Exams Conducted

Obstructive Airways Dysfunction Cases Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

467

42

9.0%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

124

14

11.3%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

755

63

8.3%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

60

5

8.3%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

404

17

4.2%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

1,462

176

12.0%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

231

38

16.5%

IA

Ames Laboratory

1,111

141

12.7%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

527

240

45.5%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

388

20

5.2%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

2,357

337

14.3%

IL

Argonne NL

216

9

4.2%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

27

2

7.4%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

414

22

5.3%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

1,881

177

9.4%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

265

9

3.4%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

754

64

8.5%

NM

Los Alamos NL

530

32

6.0%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

49

1

2.0%

NV

Nevada National Security Site

2,074

326

15.7%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

236

4

1.7%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

128

8

6.3%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

1,027

47

4.6%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

630

50

7.9%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

149

4

2.7%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

868

75

8.6%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

498

34

6.8%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

1,993

266

13.3%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

1,734

91

5.2%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

636

52

8.2%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP- Production Workers

2,636

273

10.4%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

1,474

125

8.5%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[17] - Construction Workers

1,422

117

8.2%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

2,622

308

11.7%

TX

Pantex Plant

484

44

9.1%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

1,396

103

7.4%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

1,114

155

13.9%

 

Other Sites[18] - Construction Workers

492

27

5.5%

 

Other Sites[19] - Production Workers

43

5

11.6%

 

Grand Total

33,678

3,523

10.5%

[16]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[17] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[18] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[19] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 6.  Initial Beryllium Lymphocyte Proliferation Tests (BeLPT) Results by State/Site  
(1997 through September 2021)

State

Sites[20]

Tests Conducted

1 Abnormal Result Detected

2 Abnormal

Results Detected

1 Abnormal and

1+ Borderline Results Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

108

2

1.9%

1

0.9%

1

0.9%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

215

2

0.9%

10

4.7%

0

0.0%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

1,531

14

0.9%

29

1.9%

8

0.5%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

123

1

0.8%

3

2.4%

1

0.8%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

940

6

0.6%

4

0.4%

0

0.0%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

3,008

26

0.9%

15

0.5%

14

0.5%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

771

12

1.6%

24

3.1%

3

0.4%

IA

Ames Laboratory

2,147

29

1.4%

23

1.1%

6

0.3%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

1,426

19

1.3%

12

0.8%

8

0.6%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

1,147

14

1.2%

7

0.6%

7

0.6%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

5,000

36

0.7%

32

0.6%

14

0.3%

IL

Argonne NL

396

7

1.8%

2

0.5%

2

0.5%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

134

2

1.5%

2

1.5%

0

0.0%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

1,047

16

1.5%

8

0.8%

1

0.1%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

3,101

37

1.2%

19

0.6%

7

0.2%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

797

8

1.0%

12

1.5%

3

0.4%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

2,792

41

1.5%

24

0.9%

10

0.4%

NM

Los Alamos NL

3238

41

1.3%

34

1.1%

22

0.7%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

431

13

3.0%

4

0.9%

3

0.7%

 NV

Nevada National Security Site

3,476

27

0.8%

31

0.9%

11

0.3%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

514

5

1.0%

24

4.7%

0

0.0%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

589

5

0.8%

23

3.9%

7

1.2%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

2,142

8

0.4%

13

0.6%

4

0.2%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

1,185

7

0.6%

6

0.5%

2

0.2%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

394

0

0.0%

2

0.5%

0

0.0%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

1,647

21

1.3%

15

0.9%

5

0.3%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

1,141

16

1.4%

3

0.3%

1

0.1%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

3,497

21

0.6%

11

0.3%

4

0.1%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

4,913

34

0.7%

42

0.9%

15

0.3%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

3,705

72

1.9%

27

0.7%

11

0.3%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP- Production Workers

4,833

90

1.9%

90

1.9%

24

0.5%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

2,444

22

0.9%

32

1.3%

14

0.6%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[21] - Construction Workers

3,684

27

0.7%

25

0.7%

12

0.3%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

4,503

60

1.3%

70

1.6%

14

0.3%

TX

Pantex Plant

1,745

16

0.9%

7

0.4%

1

0.1%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

3,965

45

1.1%

37

0.9%

10

0.3%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

5,619

115

2.0%

43

0.8%

19

0.3%

 

Other Sites[22] - Construction Workers

909

3

0.3%

3

0.3%

1

0.1%

 

Other Sites[23] - Production Workers

286

3

1.0%

3

1.0%

0

0.0%

 

Grand Total

79,543

923

1.2%

772

1.0%

265

0.3%

[20]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[21] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[22] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[23] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 7.  Re-screening Beryllium Lymphocyte Proliferation Tests (BeLPT) Results by State/Site 
(1997 through September 2021)

State Sites[24] Tests Conducted 1 Abnormal Result Detected

2 Abnormal Results Detected

1 Abnormal and 1+ Borderline Results Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

23

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

44

0

0.0%

1

2.3%

1

2.3%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

589

5

0.8%

4

0.7%

1

0.2%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

42

2

4.8%

0

0.0%

1

2.4%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

225

1

0.4%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

1,200

5

0.4%

2

0.2%

1

0.1%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

219

2

0.9%

1

0.5%

3

1.4%

IA

Ames Laboratory

977

8

0.8%

4

0.4%

1

0.1%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant

792

12

1.5%

4

0.5%

4

0.5%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

238

2

0.8%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

1,830

10

0.5%

16

0.9%

12

0.7%

IL

Argonne NL

134

2

1.5%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

30

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

295

0

0.0%

2

0.7%

0

0.0%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

1,634

12

0.7%

6

0.4%

12

0.7%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

262

8

3.1%

1

0.4%

1

0.4%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

759

1

0.1%

6

0.8%

1

0.1%

NM

Los Alamos NL

564

8

1.4%

1

0.2%

0

0.0%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

49

2

4.1%

0

0.0%

1

2.0%

NV

Nevada National Security Site

1,444

23

1.6%

13

0.9%

11

0.8%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

221

9

4.1%

2

0.9%

1

0.5%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

115

0

0.0%

2

1.7%

0

0.0%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

588

5

0.9%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

488

1

0.2%

5

1.0%

2

0.4%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

92

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

594

1

0.2%

11

1.9%

7

1.2%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

361

1

0.3%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

1,810

8

0.4%

9

0.5%

7

0.4%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

1,217

16

1.3%

4

0.3%

3

0.2%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

638

2

0.3%

3

0.5%

2

0.3%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

2,304

29

1.3%

38

1.6%

22

1.0%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

1,039

6

0.6%

29

2.8%

8

0.8%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[25] - Construction Workers

1,397

14

1.0%

8

0.6%

3

0.2%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

1,880

17

0.9%

40

2.1%

19

1.0%

TX

Pantex Plant[26]

237

2

0.8%

5

2.1%

0

0.0%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

865

10

1.2%

4

0.5%

0

0.0%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

1,055

12

1.1%

1

0.1%

3

0.3%

 

Other Sites[27] - Construction Workers

200

2

1.0%

1

0.5%

1

0.5%

 

Other Sites[28] - Production Workers

37

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

 

Grand Total

26,488

238

0.9%

223

0.8%

128

0.5%

[24]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[25] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[26] Repeat BeLPTs are provided by the NSSP.

[27] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[28] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 8.  Initial Audiometry Screening Findings by State/Site 
(1997 through September 2021)

State Sites[29]

Exams Conducted

Noise Induced Hearing Loss Cases Detected

AK

Amchitka Island Test Site

1,161

776

0.7%

CA

Lawrence Berkeley NL

295

104

35.3%

CA

Lawrence Livermore NL

1,389

575

41.4%

CA

Sandia NL, CA

101

46

45.5%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Construction Workers

919

608

66.2%

CO

Rocky Flats Plant - Production Workers

4,251

2,475

58.2%

FL

Pinellas Plant - Production Workers

770

298

38.7%

IA

Ames Laboratory[30]

215

64

29.8%

IA

Iowa Army Ammunition Plant40

108

89

82.4%

ID

Idaho NL - Construction Workers

1,107

735

66.4%

ID

Idaho NL - Production Workers

5,183

2,274

43.9

IL

Argonne NL

799

280

35.0%

IL

Fermi National Accelerator Lab

197

79

40.1%

KY

Paducah GDP - Construction Workers

992

765

77.1%

KY

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

3,527

1,450

41.1%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Construction Workers

774

461

59.6%

MO

Kansas City NSC - Production Workers

2808

1,312

46.7%

NM

Los Alamos NL

2,996

1,745

58.2%

NM

Sandia NL, NM

381

218

57.2%

NV

Nevada National Security Site

5,259

2,936

55.8%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Construction Workers

538

350

65.1%

NY

Brookhaven NL - Production Workers

587

293

49.9%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

2,144

1,104

51.5%

OH

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

1,341

329

24.5%

OH

Mound Plant - Construction Workers

381

242

63.5%

OH

Mound Plant - Production Workers

1,633

665

40.7%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Construction Workers

1,188

855

72.0%

OH

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

3,814

1,528

40.1%

SC

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

5,074

3,057

60.2%

SC

Savannah River Site - Production Workers

4,113

2,286

55.6%

TN

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

4,441

2,253

50.7%

TN

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

2,451

1,172

47.8%

TN

Oak Ridge Reservation[31] - Construction Workers

3,337

2,335

70.0%

TN

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

4,455

2,489

55.9%

TX

Pantex Plant[32]

127

55

43.3%

WA

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

3,180

2,225

70.0%

WA

Hanford Site - Production Workers

5,309

2,638

49.7%

 

Other Sites[33] - Construction Workers

1,103

700

63.5%

 

Other Sites[34] - Production Workers

451

223

49.4%

 

Grand Total

78,899

42,089

53.3%

[29]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[30] Audiograms are provided by the NSSP.

[31] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

[32] Audiograms are provided by the NSSP.

[33] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the BTMed to date is less than 100.

[34] Sites where the number of individuals screened by the NNSP or the WHPP to date is less than 100.

Table 9.  Lung Cancers Detected via ELCD Program by DOE Site[35] 
(2000 through September 30, 2021)

DOE Site[36]

Participants Screened

Lung Cancers

Early Cancers Detected[37] (Carcinoma In Situ, Stage I or II Non-Small Cell, or Limited Small Cell)

Detected Staged

Fernald FMPC - Construction Workers

209

4

4

5 (80.0%)

Fernald FMPC - Production Workers

463

5

5

5 (100.0%)

Hanford Site - Construction Workers

363

8

8

8 (100.0%)

Idaho NL - Production Workers

718

10

8

9 (88.9%)

Mound Plant - Production Workers

619

7

5

6 (83.3%)

Nevada National Security Site

746

9

7

8 (87.5%)

Oak Ridge GDP - Production Workers

2,887

43

38

41 (92.7%)

Oak Ridge NL - Production Workers

1,290

19

17

19 (89.5%)

Oak Ridge Reservation[38] - Construction Workers

530

18

16

18 (88.9%)

Miscellaneous Sites

350

8

7

8 (87.5%)

Paducah GDP - Production Workers

2,034

30

28

29 (96.5%)

Portsmouth GDP - Production Workers

2,277

30

24

29 (82.8%)

Rocky Flats - Production Workers

98

1

1

1 (100.0%)

Savannah River Site - Construction Workers

294

6

5

6 (83.3%)

Y-12 NSC - Production Workers

2,773

48

43

46 (93.5%)

Grand Total

15,651

252

216

238 (90.8%)

[35] Findings include results from baseline, follow-up, and annual scans from WHPP, BTMed, and NSSP FWP Projects.

[36]  FMPC = Feed Materials Production Center, GDP = Gaseous Diffusion Plant; Lab = Laboratory; NSC =National Security Complex/Campus; NL = National Laboratory.

[37] The classification system describes the stage of lung cancer defined by the American Joint Committee of Cancer, Cancer Staging Manual. 7th Edition, 2010) and is based on the extent of the tumor, the extent of spread to the lymph nodes, and the presence of metastasis.  Staging is based on pathology status, or clinical status if pathology status is not available.

[38] Includes Oak Ridge GDP, Oak Ridge NL, and Y-12 NSC.

Table 10.  Other Diseases Found on CT Scan ELCD Program
(2000 through September 30, 2021)

Condition

Number Detected

Appendiceal cancer

3

Breast cancer

1

Kidney cancer

15

Liver cancer

5

Lymphoma

10

Thyroid cancer

5

Aortic aneurysm

97

Heart aneurysm

8

Hemangiopericytoma

1

Splenic aneurysm

6

Solitary plasmocytoma

1

Pneumonia

135

Thymoma

12

Mesothelioma

4

Metastatic cancer (primary site other than lung)

8

Metastatic Cancer (primary site unknown)

8

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lokie Harmond