42 U.S.C. § 7384q
Designation of additional members of special exposure cohort
The Secretary of Energy shall provide, in accordance with law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the members and staff of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health access to relevant information on worker exposures, including access to Restricted Data (as defined in section 2014(y) of this title.1
2004—Subsecs. (c), (d). Pub. L. 108–375 added subsec. (c) and redesignated former subsec. (c) as (d).
2001—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–107 inserted “, or at an atomic weapons employer facility,” after “Department of Energy facility” in introductory provisions.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2009–2021 · leading case: Harger v. Dep't of Labor, 569 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2009).
Harger v. Dep't of Labor, 569 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2009). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b); see Exec. Order 13,179, 65 Fed.”
Opal Harger v. Dep't of Labor, 560 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2009). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b); see Exec. Order 13,179, 65 Fed.”
Young v. United States Dep't of Labor (D.D.C. 2020). “The second track—the fast track—is inclusion in the SEC by having one of 22 cancers and being part of a class of workers that HHS designates to the SEC under 42 U.S.C. § 7384q. 5 FACTUAL BACKGROUND5 Plaintiffs’ father Arnold Young (“Mr.”
Young v. United States Dep't of Labor (D.D.C. 2018). “5 Plaintiffs contend that this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction because they are challenging HHS’s decision to apply the standard for determining a SEC—“a finding that it is not ‘feasible’ to perform a dose estimate with ‘sufficient accuracy’”—to individuals who do not…”
Young v. United States Dep't of Labor (D.D.C. 2021). “The second track—the fast track—is inclusion in the SEC by having one of twenty-two cancers and being part of a class of workers that HHS or Congress has designated to the SEC under 42 U.S.C. § 7384q or 42 U.S.C. § 7384l(14), respectively.”
Todd v. U.S. Dep't of Labor, 187 F. Supp. 3d 824 (W.D. Ky. 2016). “”’ 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(a)(l). Inclusion in the group exempts members from demonstrating causation of cancer from radiation through a radiation dose reconstruction.”
Opal Harger v. Dep't of Labor (9th Cir. 2009). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b); see Exec. Order 13,179, 65 Fed.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(a)(l) — 1 case
Todd v. U.S. Dep't of Labor, 187 F. Supp. 3d 824 (W.D. Ky. 2016). “”’ 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(a)(l). Inclusion in the group exempts members from demonstrating causation of cancer from radiation through a radiation dose reconstruction.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b) — 4 cases
Harger v. Dep't of Labor, 569 F.3d 898 (9th Cir. 2009). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b); see Exec. Order 13,179, 65 Fed.”
Opal Harger v. Dep't of Labor, 560 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2009). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b); see Exec. Order 13,179, 65 Fed.”
Young v. United States Dep't of Labor (D.D.C. 2020). “The second track—the fast track—is inclusion in the SEC by having one of 22 cancers and being part of a class of workers that HHS designates to the SEC under 42 U.S.C. § 7384q. 5 FACTUAL BACKGROUND5 Plaintiffs’ father Arnold Young (“Mr.”
Opal Harger v. Dep't of Labor (9th Cir. 2009). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7384q(b); see Exec. Order 13,179, 65 Fed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.