Cold War Survivors's topics - tribe.net

The Return of the Doomsday Machine?

AArtVark — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 09:06:14 GMT

This should remind everyone that the Cold War might have "ended" but never bothered to really demobilize...

The Return of the Doomsday Machine?
Please don't count on me to save the world again.
By Ron Rosenbaum
Posted Friday, Aug. 31, 2007, at 3:52 PM ET

"The nuclear doomsday machine." It's a Cold War term that has long seemed obsolete.

And even back then, the "doomsday machine" was regarded as a scary conjectural fiction. Not impossible to create—the physics and mechanics of it were first spelled out by U.S. nuclear scientist Leo Szilard—but never actually created, having a real existence only in such apocalyptic nightmares as Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove.

In Strangelove, the doomsday machine was a Soviet system that automatically detonated some 50 cobalt-jacketed hydrogen bombs pre-positioned around the planet if the doomsday system's sensors detected a nuclear attack on Russian soil. Thus, even an accidental or (as in Strangelove) an unauthorized U.S. nuclear bomb could set off the doomsday machine bombs, releasing enough deadly cobalt fallout to make the Earth uninhabitable for the human species for 93 years. No human hand could stop the fully automated apocalypse.

An extreme fantasy, yes. But according to a new book called Doomsday Men and several papers on the subject by U.S. analysts, it may not have been merely a fantasy. According to these accounts, the Soviets built and activated a variation of a doomsday machine in the mid-'80s. And there is no evidence Putin's Russia has deactivated the system.

Read it at Slate.com
Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2173108/

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

short film: APT + Kontrabrand - The Litany

thephatconductor — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:18:33 GMT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBsep4Xosk8

this is a short film i made in san francisco with spoken word/performance artist Chris Sia and Eugene Steele. It started out with Chris reading a list of all of these wartorn places in his van at Burning Man last year, and then he asked me to help him make a video, so we dug out a ton of samples and went to town.

our crew is A.P.T. (armageddon prevention team) and Kontrabrand is top secret, but suffice to say, you'll hear about it in the near future if you follow what i do at all.

enjoy!

dylan

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Salazar blocks nominee until Flats workers get aid

richardfash — Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:29:43 GMT

http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_4828626

Salazar blocks nominee until Flats workers get aid
12/12/2006

U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar is blocking the confirmation of a Labor
Department
nominee because of what he called the administration's "foot dragging"
on helping
ill Rocky Flats workers.

Salazar said he wants to see action by the Bush administration before
he will
allow confirmation of Leon Sequeira for Department of Labor assistant
secretary for policy. Under Senate rules, one senator can block action
on a
confirmation.

"I harbor no ill will toward Mr. Sequeira," Salazar said Tuesday. "But
I am
furious with the foot dragging, the obstruction, and the neglect that
have
characterized the administration's approach toward American citizens
who took real
risks for our country during the Cold War, who are suffering now, and
who
need and deserve help."

Many who worked at the former nuclear-weapons facility near Golden were
exposed to radiation and other hazards and now have cancer and other
serious
illnesses, said Salazar spokesman Drew Nannis. Those workers and their
survivors
filed a petition 17 months ago asking for financial compensation.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 1 reply

JOIN THIS TRIBE!

DVDBurner — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 08:15:47 GMT

http://tribes.tribe.net/politicsreligionothers

Just want a beyond heated intelligent political and otherwise debate.

this tribe is not for the meek.
So if you know you are not going to be able to handle it, DONT JOIN!

Ok folks, thanks and let the games begin.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 2 replies

Fallout link to thyroid cancer gets boost

richardfash — Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:20:33 GMT

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650215537,00.html

Fallout link to thyroid cancer gets boost

If cancer victim lived in '50s, Nevada tests could be to blame

By Joe Bauman
Deseret Morning News
Almost anyone diagnosed with thyroid cancer who was a child in
the
United States during open-air nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site,
and drank
fresh milk from stores or farms, could make a case that development of
the
disease likely was influenced by radioactive fallout.
That's the belief of F. Owen Hoffman, one of the authors of a new
report summarizing impacts of fallout on thyroid cancer. The report is
"Thyroid
Doses and Risk of Thyroid Cancer from Exposure to I-131 from the Nevada
Test
Site," prepared by SENES Oak Ridge Inc., consultants based in Oak Ridge, Tenn.
It calculates risks, breaking out several areas throughout the
country
and analyzing the danger of thyroid cancer to people born in certain
years.
Federal fallout compensation is available only to people who
lived in
selected counties. But as documented years ago, fallout from open-air
nuclear
blasts at the test site fell throughout the country.
The National Institutes of Health has set up a fallout risk
calculator
on the Internet, which is useful for figuring exposure and risk. The
program
asks those using it for facts such as age, gender and residency.
SENES' study makes some of the same calculations for several
groups of
citizens, with birth year, gender and location playing important roles.
It
calculates risks based on these factors and shows estimates about
exposure.
The new report's risk calculator is updated in a way that is
similar to
an improvement the NIH plans for its online site, according to the
study.
"Virtually all 160 million Americans who lived in the continental
U.S.
during the nuclear testing period were exposed to I-131," the report
says.
Radioactive Iodine 131 would churn into the air with a blast's
fireball. It would travel in clouds and drop as fallout. Cattle eating
contaminated
grass would pass along I-131 in their milk, and the material tended to
accumulate in thyroid glands of people who drank milk.
The federal government has laws governing compensation to atomic
workers who were exposed to radiation and developed cancer.
For compensation, there must be at least a 1 percent chance that
the
baseline risk of thyroid cancer has doubled for the atomic worker,
Hoffman,
president and director of SENES, said when contacted by the Deseret
Morning News.
The baseline represents the risk to unexposed people of the same age,
gender
and other attributes.
Almost anyone in the United States who was "unfortunate enough to
have
been diagnosed with thyroid cancer, a fairly rare disease, would
qualify (for
compensation) regardless of location of residence throughout the 3,090
counties of the USA," Hoffman said in an e-mail response.
That is, they would qualify only if:
â€¢ The laws for exposed workers were to apply to members of the
public
exposed off-site, which they don't.
â€¢ Fallout exposures mostly occurred when the person was a
child.
â€¢ And "during the time of atmospheric weapons testing, the
individual
consumed fresh sources of store-bought or farm-produced milk."
"The look-up tables (in the report) contain estimates of doses
and
risks for eight representative birth cohorts and 67 locations in eight
regions
around the continental United States," the new publication says.
The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 (amended in 2002)
does
not cover many millions of Americans exposed to fallout during the
period of
open-air nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site. It provides money for
some
specialized workers such as uranium mine ore haulers, plus affected
civilians
who lived in 10 counties of southern and other parts of Nevada and
Arizona.
But the report makes clear that the radioactive Iodine 131 from
atomic
tests was carried in fallout that hit throughout the country, making
its way
into milk sold commercially. Usually fallout happened during rainfall,
but
sometimes it hit without precipitation.
Some of the hardest-hit areas were both southern and northern
Utah, and
parts of Montana, Kansas, Colorado, Vermont, South Dakota, Idaho, Iowa
and
other areas.
For a woman born in Salt Lake City in 1952 who has lived in the
area to
the present, who has consumed retail commercial milk and who has never
had
thyroid cancer, the chance of coming down with that disease is about
6.6 out of
1,000. (That is a mean, with the lowest figure 1.2 and the highest 28.)
If she had lived in an area that was not peppered by fallout, her
chance of coming down with thyroid cancer would be 1.8 per 1,000.
Fallout in Salt Lake City increased the risk of thyroid cancer
for a
woman born that year by 3.7 times, compared with the risk from natural
sources.
Men's chances of exposure were lower because male babies are not as
susceptible to ill effects of the radioactive iodine that worked its
way into milk
during the era of open-air testing.
Of groups whose risks were calculated, the highest mean estimate
was
for women born in Gunnison, Colo., in 1952. Risk of such a woman
developing
thyroid cancer was calculated at a mean of 18 out of 1,000, or 10 times
as likely
to develop the rare disease as someone not exposed who was born that
year.
However, it would be hard to find an American born during the
period of
open-air testing at the National Test Site â€” early 1951 through the
middle of
1962 â€” who wasn't exposed as a baby.
Radiation doses to the thyroid gland and the risk of developing
thyroid
cancer depended on age at the time of each nuclear test, location and
type
and amount of milk consumed. Milk from goats posed a greater danger,
which could
have implications for Navajos who drank goat's milk.
Breast milk was safer than cow's milk available commercially, the
report adds.
Support for the SENES project came in the form of a grant from
the
Citizens' Monitoring and Technical Assessment Fund, according to the
report's
cover. Its authors are Ann G. Moore, A. Iulian Apostoaei, Brian A.
Thomas and
Hoffman.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Mobile phones: Not so useful

richardfash — Sun, 29 May 2005 23:31:48 GMT

Amrita Chaudhry

http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=131564
Mobile phones: Not so useful

Ludhiana, May 29: Memory loss, Parkinson’s disease, impaired immunity, renal retardation and congenital defects are just some ill-effects caused by use of, now indispensable gizmo - mobile phone.

A study conducted by the Consumer Association of Penang (CAP), Malaysia, in association with the World Health Organisation (WHO) has found that mobile phones emit microwave radiations which can actually fry the brain. Children who are taking to mobile phones like fish to water are at a greater risk for, radiations from mobile phones penetrate skull and brain far deeper in children than adults, the study points out.

Advertisement
Citibank
This document, published by CAP, is based on studies carried in various counteries like Britain, Sweden, Russia, the USA, Australia, Austria et al. The major findings of the study include that people using mobile phones are two-and-a-half times more prone to brain tumour, digital phone users have been known to develop non-Hodgkin’s disease in the lymph glands in neck, damage immune system and the DNA system of the body, raise blood pressures, cause Alzhmeimer, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease, decrease sex drive, headaches, diziness and concentration lapses are some of the other diseases to which mobile phone users, even with mediocre usage, are prone to.

The study says that mobile phones emit a low-level microwave radiation. More startling is the fact that even if one is within 200 metre of a mobile phone tower, it can be associated with an increased risk of a range of cancers and miscarriage, and also a higher risk of sleep disturbances and chronic fatigue which may lead to difficulties in learning.

Children are especially more vulnerable because of their developing nervous system.

The study suggests that it is the duty of the government to regulate the ill-effects caused by the increasing use of mobile phones. It also suggests formation of a task force to monitor the situation. It should be the responsibility of the government to see that children are not allowed to use mobile phones and that cell sites should be thoroughly checked while the towers are being erected, the report states. The report has a made a strong recommedation that cell sites should not be erected in residnetial areas or anywhere close to schools.

The report states that there would be 1.6 billion mobile phone users worldwide by 2005. Keeping in mind the ill-effects of the use of mobile phones, the WHO has initiated studies in 10 nations.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 1 reply

Alpha particles have devastating effect on human tissue

richardfash — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:32:36 GMT

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1962345,00.html

Ian Sample, science correspondent
December 2, 2006
The Guardian

Experts said last night it was very unlikely that Mario Scaramella was
contaminated with polonium-210 through social contact with the former
Russian spy
Alexander Litvinenko.

Investigators cannot rule out the possibility that he was poisoned
sometime
after Mr Litvinenko. But they believe the most likely scenario is that
Mr
Scaramella was poisoned at the same time as Mr Litvinenko when they met
in a sushi
bar on November 1.

Although Mr Litvinenko is known to have received an enormous dose of
polonium, Mr Scaramella is believed to have ingested a lower dose.

This suggests that he may have eaten or drunk something contaminated
with the
poison. He could not have picked it up from shaking Mr Litvenenko's
hand, or
from conversation across the table.

Tests conducted on all staff at the restaurant have found no traces of
polonium-210.

If he was poisoned on November 1 - the day he met Mr Litvinenko - the
polonium-210 would still be in his system. Due to its radioactivity
polonium-210
emits alpha particles when it decays and it has a relatively short
half-life of
138 days.

Experts said last night the substance has different effects on
different
people, and it is possible that Mr Scaramella is more resistant to the
poison than
his friend. Sources close to the investigation confirmed the amount of
polonium-210 in Mr Scaramella's body was substantial, and it had been
detected in
his urine.

Hospital tests will check his white blood cell count for signs of
radiation
sickness. Polonium poisoning would initially affect bone marrow,
killing off
white blood cells. Mr Scaramella may not have felt ill as a result,
although he
may have felt slightly fatigued.

Officials expect Mr Scaramella's bone marrow to recover from the dose,
but
while it is impaired, he will be susceptible to infections and he is
expected to
be moved from the hospital as soon as he is cleared to avoid picking up
an
infection.

Dr Mark Little, an expert in epidemiology and public health at Imperial
College, said: "It is possible it could have been a separate incident
and have
nothing to do with Mr Litvinenko but the fact that he was at a
restaurant on
November 1 when Mr Litvinenko was possibly poisoned, it just seems to
me that it
possibly happened then.

"If you are sitting opposite someone and this is being sprayed on their
food,
it is likely you are going to get some. Some people would die from this
but
it would take you a much longer time - possibly three months."

This is what happened to survivors of the 1945 atomic bomb on
Hiroshima. At
first they appeared fine but "within two months their bone marrow
collapsed and
they died from infections and other things", said Dr Little.

Mr Scaramella is the first person to test positive since Mr
Litvinenko's
death sparked a radiation alert.

Experts from the Health Protection Agency have been advising University
College Hospital, where Mr Scaramella was admitted last night, on the
dose that the
Italian received.

Although relatively unusual, polonium occurs naturally and is present
in the
environment at very low levels.

It has many isotopes, all of which are radioactive, but polonium-210 is
the
most widely available.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Polonium is costly, undetectable, trillion times more toxic than cyanide

richardfash — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:31:18 GMT

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061202.SPYSIDE02/TPStory/

ESTANISLAO OZIEWICZ

The bizarre assassination of spy-turned-whistleblower Alexander
Litvinenko
has drawn attention to a mysterious radioactive element, polonium.

Ingested or inhaled, it is extraordinarily lethal, even in microscopic
doses.
It's no new-age ingredient --polonium was discovered in 1898 by Marie
and
Pierre Curie, who named it after their Polish homeland. What's new is
that Mr.
Litvinenko appears to be the first person who has ever been
deliberately
poisoned with the it.

Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Peter Zimmerman, a physicist at
King's
College London, described the choice of polonium-210, the isotope that
killed
Mr. Litvinenko, as the result of "perverse genius."

That's because polonium is 5,000 times as radioactive per gram as
radium and,
according to one science writer, a trillion times more toxic than
cyanide.
Prof. Zimmerman says Mr. Litvinenko must have suffered horribly because
"it was
as if his internal organs received a severe sunburn and peeled."

Print Edition - Section Front
Enlarge Image

The Health Physics Society says that three millicuries of polonium is
enough
to kill. (A millicurie is the amount of radiation given off by
one-thousandth
of a gram of radium).

"Because polonium's radioactivity is so high," says Prof. Zimmerman,
"one
millicurie of polonium would weigh only 0.2 millionths of a gram."

United Nuclear Scientific Supplies distributes radio-isotopes over the
Internet, including polonium-210. But in a recent statement posted on
its website,
United Nuclear said the only isotopes it sells are an "exempt quantity"
amount,
meaning the quantities are so small (and they are electroplated on the
inside
eye of a needle) that they are not considered hazardous by the U.S.
Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.

United Nuclear does not carry any stock, and any orders it receives are
sent
to the NRC-licensed reactor in Oak Ridge, Tenn.

It says that one would need about 15,000 of its polonium-210 needles,
at a
cost of about $1-million U.S., to have a toxic amount.

"If you really wanted to poison someone, you would of course have to
come up
with a way to remove the invisible amount of material from the exempt
sources,
which is about physically impossible, and combine them together."

Perhaps that is one reason why news reports speculate that British
investigators are looking to nuclear facilities in Russia as the source
of the polonium
that killed Mr. Litvinenko.

Sergei Kiriyneko, head of Russia's state atomic energy agency Rosatom,
told
the government daily Rossiiskaya Gazeta yesterday that Russia produces
about
eight grams of polonium a month but that it is strictly controlled.

Polonium-210 does not stick around for very long. It has a half-life of
138
days, which means its radioactivity will be reduced by 50 per cent in
that
time. According to one environmental radiochemist, that suggests the
dose that
killed Mr. Litvinenko was produced recently.

One advantage of polonium to assassins is that, properly stored in a
vial, it
is undetectable.

"You could carry it around in a box, and no one would know you had any
by the
radiation," Yale University geophysics professor Karl Turekian told The
National Interest online.

"It would get warm if you had a lot of it, but no one could detect it
if you
had a vial surrounded by sawdust."

However, once it is released, as in Mr. Litvinenko's body, its captured
properties can give clues to investigators about where it was
manufactured.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Ex-Flats workers with cancer hit brick wall in seeking aid

richardfash — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:19:14 GMT

Subject: Ex-Flats workers with cancer hit brick wall in seeking aid.
RE: The "defendant caretkakers" redundant and defiant, abusive,
discriminatory, and illegal acts

================

Hi!

FYI -- Again, more findings of fact have emerged that provides evidence
that the EEOICP process is failed and is discriminatory, and abusive.
The attached media report discloses more of the same defiant and
abusive "defendant caretakers" harm done. See Item 1 of 2. The US Congress'
department delegates refuse to adhere to strict compliance with the
Rule of Law. The delegates violate their own "interim regulations."
These conflicting marauders are not qualified adjudicators. They are
assigned government personnel who have been oriented to believe they are
authorized practicioners. Actually, the department personnel are not
licensed and/or qualified to practice law or medical evaluations that
involves diagnosis or prognosis. The 109th USHouse Judiciary subcommittee is
investigating and holding EEOICPA hearings since about February 2006.
The sworn witness testimony that were aired during the November 15,
2006, hearing (Part IV) does offer much incite regarding why/how the
scandalous EEOICP affair evolved for the past six years and actually for
decades. Observation and tracking of the agents' performance affirms their
abuse of discretion acts, poor judgement, poor reasoning, poor
principles and poor practices.

For comparison value, I offer a very brief overview of the status of my
EEOICP claims that I have once again discovered. Apparently, the
"defendant caretakers" have not saw fit to have any contact with me for
several years. Suddenly the USDOL Ombudsperson's representatives, a
Seattle District Office representative, and the newly assigned case examiner,
Tom Melancon, contacted me Thursday and Friday. Hummm! It seems that
the well-documented fraud activity continues to adversely affect the
active status of my Subtitle B claim. Of course, I am challenged to
clarify this mess. I am instructed by the unaware USDOL representatives to
contact newly identified case examiner Melancon at my expense and
effort for the purpose of "explaining and proving" whatever the agents claim
to expect. I have not received any valid documentation that dismisses
my Subtitle B or E claims. There have been formal threats issued by
the "defendant caretakers." The claimants establish that WE are weary of
stressful routines imposed by the "defendant caretakers." I was made
aware that my records have been "locked up" in the agents' "dead file"
since 2003 (witnessed and documented). A USDOL Seattle District Office
supervisor, Christi Long, chose to document her fraud regarding the
status of "my RECA" claim--yes, I said "RECA" claim. My claims have been
filed since the first week of August 2001. Long distributed two
official letters to my Congressional representatives that reflects her
official signature. The representatives were conducting an investigation of
my case. When I confronted Long during a 2005 hearing held in
Richland, her excuse was that her clerk had written the letters. Long admitted
she errored when she "blind-signed" the letters. Long said, "That you
are clearly an EEOICP claimant and not a RECA claimant, and I will take
care of it." Long definitely seemed to believe she had exhonerated
herself from any responsibility and assumed she was forgiven. More time
elapsed; and I was not informed of any corrective action. So, I
confronted Long again during another EEOICP status hearing held in Pasco, WA.
Long had not notified the Congressional representatives of her abuse of
discretion behavior. Senator Cantwell's, Senator Murray's, and House
Represenative Hasting's aides attended the hearing and were informed of
the problem. Christi Long's letters state that I was not eligible to
receive compensation because I did not qualify as a "RECA claimant."
Consequently, it appears that for many years the USDOL employees thought
my Subtitle B claim had been "administratively dismissed." Case
examiner Melancon left a message on my answering machine that indicates "that
you believe you claim was closed inappropriately." Wrong! Christi
Long inappropriately dismissed what she thought was a RECA claim. I was
instructed to return Melancon's call. On many occasions, I have
notified the respondents of my declared pro se status. In accordance with the
expected protocol, complainant and respondent should communicate in a
more formal manner and in writing. Observance of my due process rights
and the Rule of Law by the "defendant caretakers" is mandated. Long
distance verbal communication is simply not acceptable at this point in
time. You would think that by now a USDOL and USHHS solicitor would have
oriented the agency employees regarding the legal definition of
"default," "fraud," and the many other legal definitions that
apply--especially since the members of Congress have formally and officially oriented
the US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales regarding their legal
interpretations and ramifications.

In 2002 and 2003, USHHS-OCAS director Larry Elliott, censored my
"Special Exposure Cohort" petition that I structured and distributed to the
appropriate agents in good faith. The petitions respresent about 7,600
petitioners. Elliot's conflicts of interests was one of the topics for
discussion by the witnesses during the USHouse Judiciary subcommittee
hearing November 15, 2006. Elliott's conflicts of interest was the
reason why he was removed from his executive secretary position on the
current US President's Advisory Board on Radiation and Workers Health. I
must assume that the "SEC" petition is hidden away in Elliott's "dead"
and/or "secret" files. Did Elliott destroy the petition? I plan to
reintroduce the petition. Many are aware that the President's Advisory
Board members agree to destroy public record accountability which the
agents' documented and then attempted to censor. But, I haven't quite
decided what I will do about this current boondogal that has come to my
attention. By Friday, the USDOL employees were trying to provoke me into
"explaining" my claim issues over the telephone. The agents definitely
affirmed that they are wholly unaware. So, back to the old
documentation routines that are necessary during any legal process. Records,
records, records and more records compile. I am very interested in filing
a litigation claim, soon. But, I will likely remain in the EEOICP
process for awhile longer. I have also attached the communication that was
sent to me by an acting Ombudsperson Eileen McCarthy. See Item 2 of 2.
McCarthy's and a clerk's novice ideals are expected and routine by now.

The claimants should consider writing to your members of Congress for
the purpose of witnessing and objecting to the "defendant caretakers"
routines that have trended to cause the denial of tens of thousands of
meritorious claims/cases. The claimants don't have to be invited to the
elected Officials' investigative hearings to be able to testify. The
elected Officials work for their constituents which was clearly
re-inforced after the November 7, 2006, election outcome. As WE all know, the
EEOICP process was originally intended to assist the sick nuclear
workers and their families. It is alarming when the Officials still believe
the USHHS-NIOSH and cohorts are capable of reconstructing dose. This
claim is ludicrous. The outspoken USHHS health physicists seem to
believe they are brilliant and expert. When in fact, they document
incredible errors. Consequently, tens of thousands of meritorious claims/cases
are denied. During the past 21 years, I have never observed any health
physicists that were subpoenaed to appear as an "expert witness" during
any legitimate court hearing.

The government Officials are aware of the fact that atomic weapons'
plant workers range in age is about 75 to 95. The Officials are aware that
since 1986, the sick and dying second and third generation of "nuclear
waste cleanup workers" range in age is about 18 to 75. And, what about
the effects of the migrating toxic exposures to our families which is
disclosed and affirmed by the USHHS-CDC-NIOSH.

Gai Oglesbee, Independent National Advocate
EEOICP Claimant | Downwinder
National Nuclear Victims for Justice
http://www.nnvj-goglesbee-eeoicp-abuse.com

------------

ITEM 1 OF 2:

Rocky Mountain News: Ex-Flats workers with cancer hit brick wall in
seeking aid

By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News

November 16, 2006

Former Rocky Flats workers with cancer are being stymied in their
attempt to win compensation because a federal official is
blocking an inquiry into whether their radiation records are
missing or falsified, Congress was told Wednesday.

Contract auditor SC&A said it could not finish its work because
the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is
limiting its access to workers' claims.

A NIOSH official responded that he restricted the auditor's
access to enforce the Privacy Act.

But a watchdog group says it's an attempt to limit compensation
to the sick workers for budget reasons.

Since 2000, officials have rejected 70 percent of the claims for
aid filed by tens of thousands of sick nuclear weapons workers,
said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas. Workers must prove their
cancer and other illnesses were caused by radiation and toxic
chemical exposure on the job to collect $150,000 in compensation
plus medical care.

Former workers at the Rocky Flats atom bomb plant outside Denver
say they can't prove their cases because radiation records are
missing or wrong. On these grounds, they've petitioned for all
former Rocky Flats workers with cancer to be grandfathered into
the aid program.

Their petition has been in front of a federal advisory board all
year, while more workers die without help.

The board, which is to rule on the petition, asked its
contractor, SC&A, to figure out if the workers are correct about
the missing and incorrect records.

SC&A pulled about a dozen random workers' claim records for
Rocky Flats, and "they found enormous gaps in data," some years
long, said Richard Miller of the Government Accountability
Project in an interview.

Miller said NIOSH, which is doing radiation dose calculations
for the workers' claims, then yanked SC&A's access to the
records.

In testimony before the House Subcommittee on Immigration,
Border Security and Claims on Wednesday, SC&A's John Mauro said
he could no longer do his job investigating the Rocky Flats
claims of "significant gaps, falsifications and deliberate
destruction of records" if he didn't have access to the records.

Larry Elliott, head of that section of NIOSH, said in an
interview that he is merely following the Privacy Act, ensuring
that SC&A sees only specified claims.

"They can't just look at any claim they want while they are
there," he said.

Elliott denied allegations made in the hearing that his
department is setting up the Rocky Flats petition for denial as
a cost-saving measure.

Jackson Lee called the Rocky Flats allegation "one of the
harshest" she heard in a variety of complaints about the aid
program Wednesday. "A fact-finder can't be a fact-finder without
access to documents," she said.

The Privacy Act specifically allows for government contractors
like SC&A to be treated as government employees with authority
to review private records as part of their work.

Miller said SC&A staff members have signed Privacy Act
agreements not to reveal patient-specific information to the
public.

Miller suggested to the committee that Congress order full
access to the records.

He said this could be done in a rider to an appropriations bill
before January.

| | 2006 ? The E.W. Scripps Co.

==================

ITEM 2 OF 2:

From "McCarthy, Eileen - SOL" <Mccarthy.Eileen@dol.gov>
Date 2006/11/17 Fri PM 04:33:56 CST
To goglesbee@verizon.net
Subject RE: DaytonDaily News Media coverage re. EEOICP sick worker
issues

Dear Ms. Oglesbee,

Thank you for contacting the Office of the Ombudsman for Part E of the
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act (EEOICPA). As
you may know, the Ombudsman's role is to provide information to
claimants, potential claimants, and other interested parties about EEOICPA Part
E benefits and how to obtain those benefits; in addition, the Ombudsman
issues a report to Congress concerning complaints, grievances and
requests for assistance received during the year. Our most recent report is
on our website, at

http://www.dol.gov/eeombd/2005annualreport/index.htm, and our next
report will be filed in February 2007 (covering calendar year 2006).

As you may have heard from other claimants, Don Shalhoub has resigned
as Ombudsman to become a Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration. This is a great loss to us, but
obviously a great gain for OSHA. We are expecting the appointment of a new
Ombudsman very soon.

In the meantime, I and the other staff of the Ombudsman's office are
available to assist you and other claimants with your claims. As I
indicated initially, the Office of the Ombudsman is assigned certain
responsibilities under Part E of EEOICPA. Do you have a claim pending
with DOL? If you could give me a little more background about your
case, that would be helpful.

Eileen McCarthy
Office of the Ombudsman for Part E of EEOICPA

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Energy Department fines Hanford contractor $82,500

richardfash — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:16:28 GMT

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
November 17, 2006
http://seattlepi. nwsource. com/local/ 6420AP_WST_ Hanford_Fine. html

By SHANNON DININNY
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

YAKIMA, Wash. -- CH2M Hill Hanford Group, a contractor hired to help
clean up the highly contaminated Hanford nuclear reservation, will be
fined $82,500 for violating nuclear safety requirements, the
Department of Energy announced Friday.

CH2M Hill is the primary contractor responsible for retrieving
hazardous and radioactive waste from 177 underground tanks at the
site. The toxic stew was left from decades of plutonium production
for the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal.

The preliminary notice of violation issued Friday cited a series of
violations associated with two separate events, during which
employees were contaminated with radioactivity.

On Sept. 21, 2005, when workers were removing equipment used to
retrieve waste from one of the tanks, they were contaminated with
highly radioactive waste while disconnecting a pressurized hose that
was contaminated inside. Workers again were contaminated on March 6,
while removing a camera from a radioactively contaminated catch tank.

None of the contaminated employees exceeded regulatory exposure
limits, the Energy Department said in a statement.

"The proposed civil penalty of $82,500 is based on the overall
significance of the violations and reflects mitigation granted by the
department for prompt, corrective actions taken by (CH2M Hill) to
prevent recurrence," the statement said.

The company must respond to the notice within 30 days.

CH2M Hill voluntarily reported the events and took corrective action,
leading the Energy Department to reduce the proposed penalty by 50
percent, said Mark Spears, company president and chief executive
officer.

Among the corrective actions: CH2M Hill improved work processes,
added new training for managers and support personnel and improved
emergency response planning.

"Our goal is to maintain the highest standards of safety performance.
The events cited in the enforcement action clearly fell below the
mark," Spears said. "We partnered with our work force to improve our
processes and the dramatic improvement in our safety and compliance
performance over the past year is testament to the effectiveness of
these actions and the quality of our workers."

The federal government created Hanford in the 1940s as part of the
top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. The site
produced the plutonium for the Fat Man bomb that was dropped on
Nagasaki, Japan, effectively ending World War II, and continued to
produce plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal through
the Cold War.

Today, it is the nation's most contaminated nuclear site. Focus has
shifted to cleanup, which is expected to top $50 billion and continue
through 2035.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

UK Admits Israel Has Nuclear Weapons

richardfash — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:12:54 GMT

http://www.alalam.ir/English/en-newspage.asp?newsid=029030120061120184059"
target=_blank
>http://www.alalam.ir/English/en-newspage.asp?newsid=029030120061120184059

UK Admits Israel Has Nuclear Weapons

LONDON, Nov. 20--Former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has become
the
first member of the British cabinet to go on public record and formally
admit
that the Zionist regime has an arsenal of nuclear weapons.

"I don't think it is a secret. I have never pretended that they haven't
got
nuclear weapons, certainly they have got a nuclear arsenal and it is a
working
assumption," said Straw.

The House of Commons leader made the admission after he was challenged
about
the government's failure to acknowledge let alone deal with Tel Aviv's
nuclear
weapons in an interview with the Muslim News, to be published Friday.

When he was foreign secretary, Straw insisted that he had talked about
Israel's illegal capability, which Britain helped to create nearly 50
years ago, in
the same breath as India and Pakistan.

"If you want a nuclear free Middle East, which I do, you don't get
proliferation, you stop proliferation, and then you ultimately deal
with the fact that
Israel has nuclear weapons, and I'm on record about that a lot," he
said.

In his interview, the House of Commons leader also said that he
accepted that
there was a continuing blaring injustice over Israel's 50-year
occupation of
Palestine.

"I have always thought, the glaring injustice of the Middle East crisis
--
Israel and Palestine -- has caused a great anger among Muslims," he
said.

"Resolving the Israel-Palestine situation is one of the most urgent
priorities of all," Straw said, but like Prime Minister Tony Blair, he
denied that
Britain's foreign policy had increased the threat of terrorism in the
UK.

He admitted that the situation in Iraq following the joint US-UK
invasion was
dire, but insisted that it cannot be the motivation for Bin Ladin and
his
group because they were going before that.

The former foreign secretary, who was replaced in May, also
acknowledged that
with the benefit of hindsight there are plenty of things one could have
done
better in Iraq.

"The preparations for the post war situation in Iraq were not nearly as
good
as they should have been," he said adding that there was time lost in
the very
crucial three months between the fall of Saddam.

"It was partly lost because in the United States a decision was made
that the
lead over reconstruction of the country should be given to the
Department of
Defense rather than to the State Department, and that was a great
error,"
Straw said.

This, he suggested, was one of the things which the British government
would
have done differently in Iraq, but said that the UK had only limited
influence
over that rather than a huge influence.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Valves installed backwards on two Naval Reactor Power Plants

richardfash — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:11:56 GMT

[ This is the kind of nonsense that goes on when an organization has no oversight by either the DOE or the NRC. First they perform an incredibly stupid act, and than they lie about it to the public, and no one in the Government gives a damn.]
John Shannon Nuclear Engineer/Nuclear Physicist [Retired]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Daily Gazette November 16, 2006
Opinion Dept
2345 Maxon Road Extension
Schenectady, N.Y. 12301-1090

Your November 7 article, Valve problems shut down reactors, reported that both reactors at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory Kesselring Site have been shut down for an extended period of time after the discovery that some valves were installed incorrectly. This admission is accompanied with the usual boilerplate disclaimer of any risk to the workers at the site or to the general public.

To characterize the latest problem in plain English, the valves were installed backwards. At the very least, this shocking error can cause a significant reduction in flow and cooling to vital plant components. At worst, certain valve types when installed backwards will completely block normal flow. Such incompetence at any commercial nuclear reactor in the U.S. would lead to an immediate shutdown order by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that would not be lifted until all plant procedures and personnel were thoroughly purged.

Not so with Naval Reactors, a self-regulating organization that provides their own oversight, a ploy that for more than 50 years has allowed them to expound false propaganda about their unprecedented excellence. A most disturbing aspect of this situation is that this is not the first time the Kesselring Site has installed valves backwards. It has happened before. Clearly, the real risk arises because of human error by personnel entrusted with safe operation of this nuclear facility.

Robert G. Stater (Nuclear Engineer)
105 Pashley Road
Scotia, NY, 12302
(518) 399-1072

The Writer is a retired KAPL Nuclear Engineer

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Workers contend contractors defrauded government in cleanup

richardfash — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:09:05 GMT

http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/news/state/16054285.htm"
target=_blank
>http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/news/state/16054285.htm

Nov. 19, 2006
Workers contend contractors defrauded government in cleanup
Associated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio - A four-year-old lawsuit unsealed last month contends
contractors cleaning up a Cold War uranium-enrichment plant in southern
Ohio were
paid millions of dollars for shoddy work or work that was not done.

The lawsuit, filed by four workers, accuses Bechtel-Jacobs Co. and
Safety and
Ecology Corp. of falsifying work records, taking shortcuts and failing
to
protect the health of workers and neighbors of the Portsmouth Gaseous
Diffusion
Plant. The facility, near Piketon, about 60 miles south of Columbus,
produced
enriched uranium for 50 years and closed in 2001.

The workers - Philip Borris, Michael Eversole, Rodney Gossett and
Thomas
McDermott - filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court using a Civil
War-era law
designed to nab suppliers cheating the government. The case was kept
secret while
the Department of Justice investigated. It recently decided not to join
in.

"The Department of Justice lawyers have made it clear to us they have
found
plenty wrong, but they are having a hard time getting the support of
the
Department of Energy to make their case," said Charles Fitzpatrick, an
attorney for
the workers.

The U.S. attorney's office found no criminal intent to deceive the
government, said spokesman Fred Alverson in Columbus. "That doesn't
mean one way or
another that contractual obligations were kept or not kept, whether
overpayments
were made or not made."

Borris, a radiation-control worker, said the four sued on behalf of the
government because the Energy Department would not listen to their
complaints.

An Energy Department spokeswoman disagreed. "We take every employee
complaint
seriously," said Megan Barnett, a spokeswoman in Washington.

The contractors have not been served with the lawsuit and would not
comment,
their spokesmen said. The companies are no longer at the plant.

The workers estimate overpayments total tens of millions of dollars.

The four say contractors labeled large amounts of non-radioactive
fencing
shipped offsite as scrap metal contaminated with radiation to collect a
performance payment, charged for unnecessary work or work not
performed, billed the
government for nongovernment work and ignored health and safety
regulations.

Based on the False Claims Act, the lawsuit asks for three times the
amount of
actual loss to the government. If the workers win, they would receive
25
percent to 30 percent of the award. The suit also seeks a civil penalty
of $5,000
to $10,000 per violation plus damages and attorney fees.

Gossett, a health and safety worker, and others in the business say
problems
slip because the Energy Department has fewer people monitoring
contractors
than before.

Fitzpatrick said for the Energy Department to recoup money, the agency
would
have to admit that it failed to watch the companies.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Video available on U.S. House Judiciary subcommittee EEOICP 11-15-06 hearing

richardfash — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 19:08:02 GMT

Hi!

First of all, the members of Congress must "get-over" this 22 cancer
"SEC" qualification that was their intent. None have successfully
explained why this dictate was approved. The controversy continues;
but at
one point in time "All CANCERS WERE QUALIFIED!" The question is who
gets to or has dictated which cancers|relevant disease are work
related
or which cancers|relavent disease are caused by environmental
pollution?
So far, the "defendant caretakers" have been allowed to make that
determination based on their guesstimate IREP theories.

The U.S. House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the EEOICPA is now
available for review. Chair Hostettler indicates the "promise made to
the
COLD WAR veterans. . ." is broken. Chair Hostettler will not be
returning in January when the 110th Congress takes over which is
controlled
by the democrats.

Since so many violations of the Rule of Law and citizen's due process
rights are vacated by the libelous "defendant caretakers" for this
EEOICP purpose, it appears the 110th Congress will have no choice but
to
seek possible remedies. How would it be possible to reform the
EEOICPA?
The listing of the many abuse of discretion acts is very long by now.
For instance, will the 109th Congress recognize that discrimination is
rampant.

You will note during your review of the video that much discussion
takes place regarding significant amounts of taxpayer funding that has
been
squandered on administrative costs and on the the government
oppressors' ways and means to reduce and/or "save" the funding that was
appropriated to compensate the sick and dying workers or their spouse
survivors.
Also, the presence of the current U.S. Advisory Board on Radiation and
Workers Health is attacked by the witnesses. Certain "defendant
caretakers" are identified as well as their abusive behavior during the
hearing. Once again the suppressed claimants have a window of
opportunity
to identify many more government employee offenders. Simply offer
written testimony regarding the horrors you have suffered and
distribute to
your Congressional representatives. For instance, you can help by
identify and affirming that USHHS-NIOSH director of OCAS Larry Elliott
has
been an abusive and controlling dictator regarding his and his
supervisors' reasons for seeing to it that tens of thousands of
meritorious
claimants are denied their entitlements according to the EEOICPA
provisions. Elliott is my perception of a well-paid oppressor.
Elliott was
removed from the current U.S. President's Advisory Board on Radiation
and
Workers Health and Safety because of his proven conflicts of interest.
Current President George W. Bush reinstated Wanda Munn who was removed
from the Advisory Board because she had no administrative value or any
particular expertise having to do with with the mission of the Advisory
Board. Munn is also a member of the Hanford Advisory Board. She
protested her removal from the ABoRWH and was reassigned by order of
President Bush. What does that finally tell us about Munn's mission.
Since
she began to make her appearance on these boards, she has always been a
very controversial figure. Munn always seems to manage to promulgate
and/or promote the wrong message. She is a retired Hanford engineer.

Gai Oglesbee, Independent National Advocate
EEOICP Claimant | Downwinder
National Nuclear Victims for Justice
http://www.nnvj-goglesbee-eeoicp-abuse.com" target=_blank
>http://www.nnvj-goglesbee-eeoicp-abuse.com

--------------

URL internet loaction:
http://www.house.judiciary.gov" target=_blank
>http://www.house.judiciary.gov

Click on legislative. . .
then. . .

Click on Energy Employees hearing

then. . .
Select the "video" telecast indicator and wait for it to boot up. The
video is over an hour long.

The November 16, 2006, hearing was postponed until further notice. It
was announced that there is substantial interest by key members of
Congress.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

International Traffic: US to export 15Kg of highly enriched uranium..

richardfash — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:26:42 GMT

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/10/fr102706.html

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Inspection of a nuc site re. four high power nuc plants by Jack Shannon

richardfash — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:23:20 GMT

http://www.mindspring.com/~kapl/jpsasbestos01.html

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Radioactive iodine linked to thyroid disease

richardfash — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:19:40 GMT

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:45 PM GMT

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - The long-term risk of developing a tumor in the thyroid gland or autoimmune thyroiditis, a progressive inflammatory disease of the thyroid, is increased after exposure to radioactive iodine in childhood, according to a re-analysis of data from children exposed to radiation from a nuclear test site in Nevada.

Since 1965, researchers have been studying children exposed to radioactive iodine from nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site from 1951 through 1962.

In 1993, Dr. Joseph L. Lyon, of the University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, and colleagues, reported that among the 2,497 subjects examined, there was an association between radiation exposure from the Nevada Test Site and thyroid tumors.

The researchers have now used newly corrected dose estimates and disease outcomes to reassess the association. The new results are published in the current issue of the journal Epidemiology.

In children who received the highest radiation dose, the risk of thyroid tumors rose from 3.4-fold in the earlier evaluation to 7.5-fold. For thyroiditis, the risk increased from 1.1- to 2.7-fold, with a 4.9-fold excess risk for exposure to each Gy unit (gray = absorbed dose of radiation). The risk could not be estimated for malignant thyroid tumors.

"This is the first report of such a relationship in a U.S. population; hence, we believe that this (study group) represents a unique opportunity to provide further assessment of a range of exposures and disease end points among U.S. citizens," Dr. Lyon's team writes. "Further follow-up of this (study group may increase our understanding of the long-term health consequences of exposure to radioactive iodine regardless of its origin in reactors, accidents, or nuclear detonations."

SOURCE: Epidemiology, November 2006.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Cleanup Of Piketon Uranium Plant May Top $4.5 Billion

richardfash — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:17:36 GMT

http://wcpo.com/news/2006/local/11/12/uranium.html

PIKETON, Ohio (AP) -- The cost of cleaning up radioactive and hazardous
waste
at a former uranium-processing plant in southern Ohio could top $4.5
billion.

There's also evidence that contamination has migrated off the site.

That's according to the Dayton Daily News.

The newspaper says the government has spent one billion dollars on
clean-up
so far.

Officials with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency say the Piketon
plant's environmental record has improved.

But in recent years the US Energy Department has found small amounts of
radioactive contamination outside the plant.

The department told the newspaper that none of the amounts are large
enough
to pose a health threat.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

Expanded A.P. Story, Updated: 11/12/2006 5:51:53 PM

PIKETON, Ohio (AP) -- Cleaning up radioactive and hazardous waste at a
former
uranium-processing plant may top $4.5 billion, and there is evidence
that
contamination has migrated off the 3,714-acre site, the Dayton Daily
News
reported Sunday.

The Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, which once enriched uranium for
weapons and nuclear fuel, closed in 2001.

The newspaper said the government has spent $1 billion so far digging
up
soil, emptying ponds, capping unlined toxic landfills, treating
groundwater and
hauling contaminants away -- more than 43,000 containers of hazardous,
radioactive and other waste and 8,400 tons of radioactive scrap metal.

Officials with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency say the worst
of the
plant's contamination is confined to the federal land, in part because
thick
bedrock slows the spread of groundwater.

They also say the plant's environmental record improved in recent years
as
plant operators adopted modern waste-handling practices and began
following
rules governing discharges to air and waterways.

Still, there is evidence of offsite contamination. According to its
most
recent environmental reports, the U.S. Energy Department in 2003 and
2004 found
small amounts of radioactive contamination outside the southern Ohio
plant.

Tests on two area deer killed by cars showed traces of uranium isotopes
in
the livers of both and in the muscle of one.

Traces of uranium were also found in milk and egg samples from area
farms,
and in three vegetables taken from the gardens of plant neighbors.

Air, water and sediment tests also revealed small amounts of
radioactive
uranium, plutonium or technetium, and three fish from area waterways
had traces of
uranium or plutonium.

The U.S. Department of Energy told the newspaper that none of the
amounts are
large enough to pose a health threat.

Messages seeking comment were left for the Energy Department by The
Associated Press.

The cleanup hasn't ended disputes between the Energy Department and the
Ohio
EPA.

Most recently, the Energy Department pushed for a reduced groundwater
cleanup
standard, arguing that the lesser standard is appropriate because no
one
drinks the water underneath the plant site, according to memos obtained
by the
Daily News.

"We represent the taxpayers. Our goal here is to make sure we are doing
cost-effective, smart cleanup," William Murphie, manager of the Energy
Department
office overseeing cleanup, told the newspaper.

Some of the most dangerous cleanup work is being done inside three
massive
enrichment buildings, where workers are removing uranium deposits that
cling to
surfaces inside equipment and 600 miles of piping.

They must use extreme care because mishandling the radioactive deposits
could
cause a small nuclear reaction a "criticality" that could kill workers
and
spread radiation through the area.

Murphie said nothing like that has happened.

"We've never had a criticality event, and I have no reason to believe
that we
ever will have a criticality event," he said.

In 2000, the Energy Department launched an investigation that
identified
hundreds of accidental releases of uranium gas or toxic fluorine at the
plant
since the 1950s and concluded there was a failure to properly monitor
emissions or
workers' exposure to radiation.

"We take a lot of lumps for the past processes and, face it, mistakes
that
were made," Murphie said. "We've learned from the past. We're all
smarter than
we were in the past."

Murphie said the department remains committed to the cleanup and trying
new
solutions if those now in place don't work.

"DOE is very proud of the cleanup program here," he said. "We believe
we have
accomplished a lot."

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Radioactive Long Island

richardfash — Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:16:44 GMT

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/opinion/nyregionopinions/12LI-

By KELLY MCMASTERS
> Published: November 12, 2006
> AT the geographic center of Long Island, just
> before the fish tail splits, three plumes of
> radioactive tritium snake through the earth. These
> plumes extend from soil beneath Brookhaven
> National Laboratory, where they originated during
> experiments involving one of the lab's nuclear
> reactors in the late 1990s, and travel by
> groundwater east and south.
>
> The United States Department of Energy, which owns
> the Brookhaven lab, recently posted a legal notice
> in local newspapers requesting public comment on
> some options for cleanup. The department offered
> five plans for the public to consider, from simply
> monitoring the plumes to digging up the
> contaminated soil and shipping it to an
> undisclosed location. The department recommends
> monitoring to be sure the plumes shrink over the
> next decade as predicted. And if they don't?
> "Additional actions will be evaluated."
>
> The department's notice directed readers to a Web
> site. Two maps there are particularly educational.
> The first is called Operable Units and Areas of
> Concern. It highlights 30 sites on the lab's
> campus, including Graphite Research Reactor spill
> sites, a Building 830 pipe leak and a Particle
> Beam Dump. There is also the 123-acre stand of
> pines and oaks known as the Gamma Forest, which
> was irradiated with cesium-137 between 1961 and
> 1979 in order to research the effects of radiation
> on plants.
>
> In other words, the map charts decades of
> accidental leaks and spills and intentional
> releases of radiation, most of which issued from
> the site's two decommissioned reactors. (Two other
> reactors remain operational.)
>
> The second map outlines groundwater flow from the
> lab; two bright blue arrows point east toward the
> Hamptons, and six point south directly at Shirley,
> a mostly blue-collar community to the south that
> shares the Hamptons' beautiful coastline but none
> of their social cachet.
>
> I grew up in Shirley. As a child there in the
> 1980s, I was fascinated by the lab, partly because
> the neighborhood fathers who worked there - most
> of them in support and service positions - traded
> jokes about glowing in the dark. Today, the jokes
> have turned sour.
>
> A class action lawsuit has been filed against the
> Brookhaven lab, and most of the plaintiffs are
> from the Shirley area. The complaints range from
> depressed real estate values as a result of living
> in a contaminated area to the claim that cancers
> and other illnesses have resulted from the
> laboratory's pollution. A children's cancer
> cluster - by 2000 there were 19 children in the
> area afflicted by a rare soft-tissue cancer -
> rings the lab like a necklace.
>
> The plaintiffs' lawyer is Richard J. Lippes, who
> fought and won the Love Canal case near Buffalo in
> the 1970s. The Shirley case has been going on for
> more than a decade already. During that time, the
> lab has managed to clean up almost all of the
> nuclear and chemical pollution flowing east toward
> the Hamptons while largely ignoring Shirley.
>
> When Brookhaven was constructed in 1947, Shirley
> didn't exist; most of the East End of Long Island
> was covered in potato farms and brush. It was this
> isolation - the thick cover of pines and distance
> from large populations - that made the site
> attractive to scientists engaged in such
> inherently dangerous research.
>
> Sixty years later, the laboratory is still hidden
> away in the middle of the Pine Barrens, but
> beneath it lies an aquifer that is one of the
> nation's largest single sources of drinking water,
> serving nearly three million people.
>
> I understand that the lab is worthy of
> celebration - six Nobel Prizes have been won by
> scientists associated with Brookhaven. I also unde
> rstand that much of the work the lab conducts,
> including medical research into addiction and
> cancer, is vitally important. But over the six
> decades the lab has been on Long Island, a dense
> population has crowded around it.
>
> Meanwhile, the lab released radioactive tritium,
> cesium, europium, radium, strontium, plutonium and
> several known carcinogens into the environment.
> Cancer rates on Long Island have soared without
> explanation. For many of these cancers, including
> breast cancer, the only proven cause, aside from
> genetic predisposition, is exposure to radiation.
>
> With all that in mind, I would like to suggest my
> own plan for Brookhaven's cleanup. Let's call it
> Option 6: Close the remaining two nuclear reactors
> on the Brookhaven National Laboratory property. It
> is time.
>
> Nuclear reactors made sense in the 1940s when most
> of Long Island was brush and pines. But it makes
> no sense to house them in a dense residential area
> where so many lives are at risk and mistakes -
> radioactive, potentially cancer-causing mistakes -
> continue to be made. Shut them down.
>
> Kelly McMasters, who teaches creative writing at
> Columbia, is writing a book about the hamlet of
> Shirley.
>

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies

Another Downwinders Life Shattered (MINE)

richardfash — Sun, 15 May 2005 05:27:25 GMT

My father worked at Hanford from 1951 to 1973, sixteen years in
Reactor Operations.Job titles as follows. (Radiation Monitoring,
Supervisor, Radiation Monitoring, Supervisor, Supplemental Crews,
Reactor Specialist, and Supervisor 105-109, 100N Area.)

After which he worked as Office Equipment Manager, and Manager of
Printing and Duplicating.

He was in charge of classified files for the Atomic Energy Commission.

My father had a Q clearance, that's the highest.

My father also worked for Bendix and U.N.C. Geotech in Grand Junction, Colorado.

With almost thirty years of employment for the Department of Energy he
died in 1988 at age 62, of Multiple Myeloma a rare type of cancer
having Statistically Significants linking it to Nuclear workers.

Brief history of my father: From March,1944 to Nov.1946 Military
Service, Held rank of Sargent in Army Air Force as Remote Control
Gunner. His position was Ball and Turret gunner B-17 Bomber Combat
Crew. My father spent time in France,Austria,and Germany.

Education: Mesa Jr. College from Dec.1946 to June,1949 after which he
attended the University of Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania.My father took
courses in Pre-Dental,including chemistry,bacteriology,
physics,zoology,anatomy,and mathematics. Company sponsored courses in
the field of employee and union relations.

Summary of qualification: Held administrative position for nine years,
for Bendix, and Geotech U.N.C.,(DOE) as Supervisor of Printing
Department.

Held administrative positions for 19 of 23 years employed at the
Hanford Project. Responsibilities included directing the activities of
union, non-union and supervisory employees.

Appraisals by management asserted his performance was proficient and
emphasized his ability to handle personnel relations effectively,as
well as getting the job done.

Responsibilities in Arrow Lite and Paint and Arrow Trophies, Inc.,
included outside selling.

While he was manager of Arrow Trophies,Inc., he traveled western
Colorado selling trophies,awards,and component parts wholesale and
retail.

The gross sales tripled in the three years he managed the corporation.

He was Branch Manager and only sales person while employed by Rocky
Mountain Hose Co.

Hired on with General Electric 4-18-51 to March 1955 as H.I.Inspector
B, later job title changed to Radiation Monitor.

Duties: Responsible for radiation protection and contamination control
in a single reactor building under the supervision of a radiation
monitoring supervisor Duties included routine and
non-routine,radiation surveys,air sampling and accurate record
keeping.

March 1955 to October 1959 Supervisor,Radiation Monitoring Reactor
Operations.Duties: Supervised a crew of 8 to 16 radiation
monitors,providing monitoring service for 4 to 8 production reactors
during one 8-hour shift. Maintain a sustained radiation protection
training program for all reactor personnel on the shift;i.e.,
radiation monitors, reactor operators and maintenance craftsman.
Assume responsibility for all radiation problems and incidents with in
the assigned reactors on the shift.

Oct. 1959 to June 1961 Supervisor, Radiation Monitoring Reactor
Operations.Duties: Same as June 1964 to June 1967. June 1961 to April
1963- Reactor Specialist- Reactor Operations.Duties: In training for
first 18 months. As Reactor Specialist, responsible for the efficient
and safe operation of nuclear production reactor during 8-hour shift.
Provide functional guidance to reactor operating crew.

April 1963 to June 1964- Supervisor, 100-N Reactor Operation.Duties:
Supervise a shift crew of 10 to 12 reactor operators and 2 radiation
monitors in work not directly affecting the process control for a dual
purpose reactor during the initial operating period following
construction. Much of the work involved high temperature - high
pressure water, and steam. Work included non-irradiated and irradiated
solid, gas, and liquid materials arrangement, handling, storage and
shipping; decontamination activities and radiation protection clothing
control.

June 1964 to June 1967- Supervisor, Supplemental Crews- Reactor
Operations.Duties: Supervise a crew of 6 to 8 reactor operators and 2
to 4 radiation monitors during one eight- hour shift. This crew is
concerned primarily with supplying supplemental manpower during
shutdown periods of the eight Hanford plutonium production reactors.

From April 1951 to 1967- General Electric Company, Richland, Washington.

June 1967 to June 1969- Specialist - Office Equipment
Management.Duties: Coordinated procedures and controls to insure
availability, suitability, maximum utilization, and economical
retirement of all office machines, furniture, and other related items
of controlled equipment utilized at the October Project by the Atomic
Energy Commission and it's cost-type contractors. Conducted tests and
made studies off all types of office equipment such as typewriters,
electronic calculators, and economical and dependable equipment to be
purchased as replacement and additions to stock.

June 1969 to Oct. 1973- Manager of Printing and Duplicating.Duties:
Responsible for management of printing plant, duplicating service,
from design service, engineering reproduction service and classified
files for the Atomic Energy Commission and it's cost-type contractors
at the Hanford Project. Held accountable for planning, organizing and
directing activities of 40 employees.

From June 1967 to Oct. 1973- ITT Federal Support Services, Inc., and
Atlantic Richfield Hanford Co., Richland, Washington.

Dec. 1973 to Jan. 1977- Arrow Trophies, Inc., Grand Junction,
Colorado.Duties: Manager and part owner of retail outlet supplying
trophies and awards.

Jan. 1977 to Sept. 1978- Arrow Lite and Paint, Grand Junction,
Colorado.Duties: Manager and part owner of retail and wholesale store.
Products included paints, wall-coverings, framed mirrors, medicine
chest, fireplace doors and related items.

Sept. 1978 to Sept. 1979- Rocky Mountain Hose Co., Grand Junction, Co.
Duties: Branch Manager and outside sales.

Oct.1979 to March 1988- (DOE)- Geotech U.N.C., and Bendix Field
Engineering Corporation, Printing Manager

Accomplishments: Authored several systems acceptance test procedures
and detailed operating procedures for startup of the new reactor.

Promoted from Radiation Monitor to Radiation Monitoring Supervisor
with less time as a monitor that anyone promoted before him.

Also was youngest Monitoring Supervisor.

Established highest charging rate for a 12 month period, while a
Supplemental Crews Supervisor.

Personnel working for him never suffered a major injury.

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory,(PNNL) operated by Battelle for
the U.S. Department of Energy in charge of radiological exposure
records claims he received 22.008 rems of whole body effective dose
equivalent, and 27.010 rems skin dose equivalent, and 27.730 rems
extremity dose extremity dose equivalent, and no eye dose equivalent.

PNNL claims he received no internal dose.

My father told his doctors shortly before he died that he had received
45 rems of whole body effective dose equivalent.

I have documentation from the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona
stating that he had received 45 rems while employed at Hanford, and
also documentation from a his doctor at Saint Marys Hospital in Grand
Junction, Colorado stating diagnosis of multiple myeloma is
potentially pertinent in that he has a history of irradiation exposure
in his prior occupation associated with accelerators and reactors.

Battells explanation for the discrepancy in dose was possibly my
father was calculating his penetrating exposure with his skin exposure
which is not a meaningful number.

If that was the case it would have added up to be forty nine.

I contend that taking into consideration with respect to my fathers
education, monitoring experience, and record keeping skills that this
is a false conclusion.

Whether it is 22rems or 45 rems most of the scientific community
believes that any number over 20 can cause, and or increase your risk
associated with cancer.

Recently my only living first degree relative my brother, was told by
a supervisor at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health.(NIOSH) In charge of dose reconstruction that it does not look
like my fathers cancer was 50 percent as likely as not caused from his
employment for the Department of Energy. With all due respect,I must
disagree.

Evidence:

1.My father had a Q clearance.

2.My father spent most of his time in the 100 area, but also spent
time in the 200 and 300 areas.

3.Department of Energy, General Electric worker records from 1951 to
1955 are not documented on job locations, to fully understand what
types of exposures may have occurred between those years.

4.My father started working in 1951 his work involved exposure to
neutrons and it was not until the late 1950's that the neutrons were
properly monitored.

5.My father worked in Reactor Operations, Production,and Manufacturing.
Manufacturing Process, Reactor Operations main radiation hazards were
from inhalation of fission products, activation products, external
whole body ionizing radiation.

6.Production workers were exposed to natural uranium through about
1958. Reactor workers,they do not know how they were monitored for
activation products until 1960 except air sampling.

7.My father was involved in at least three laps of radiation control
incidents,and one skin contamination incident.

8.One of the incidents personnel who may have received uncontrolled
exposures are not known for certain.

9.Incidents were classified as severity 11 and severity 16.

10.At Hanford, urine samples were used as one way to monitor radiation exposure.
But for decades those tests showed only the activity level in the
urine, not whether radiation was from isotopes being quickly excreted
or insoluble.

11.My father was monitored by biological radiation monitoring programs
urine, and
in-vivo/whole body count for Plutonium, and Fission Products,also for Isotopes.

12.Samples for bioassay were also picked up from my fathers door step.

13.For years my father traveled to where ever he was needed all around
the Hanford Reservation when working as day relief radiation monitor,
and as supplemental crews.

14.In the early 1950's Hanford had a severe problem with hot particles
from the stacks and he was exposed to radioactive dust,and fall-out.

15.My father reported to the Hanford doctor for particles in his eyes,
and also for some deep cuts and continued to work in radiation zones.

16.Which means he most likely received internal radiation exposure
from these circumstances through inhalation and absorption that were
never calculated.

17.For sixteen years my father was exposed to radiation, chemicals,
and heavy metals.

18.On some of the earlier dosimetry records on the bottom of the
dosimetry card it states that you must not exceed 50 mrems daily
without special permission.

19.He reached 50 mrems at least 50 times, and over 50 mrems a least 30 times.

20.My Father was withdrawn, restricted from certain Job sites because
of over-exposure at least 10 times.

21.Dosimetry records that I received from Battelle (DOE) were poor
quality, and around one fourth were illegible, so the number of
radiation limits and with drawn from job sites are most likely much
higher.

22.My father told his doctors from the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale
shortly before he died that he had received 45 rems of whole body
effective dose equivalent, and one of his doctors in Grand Junction,
Colorado states that the multiple myeloma is potentially pertinent in
that he has a history of irradiation exposure in his prior occupation
(meaning Hanford) with accelerators and reactors.

23.I have documentation from the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona,
stating exposed to 45 rems while employed at Hanford, and Saint Marys
Hospital in Grand Junction, Colorado stating diagnosis of Multiple
Myeloma is pertinent do to his previous work with radiation and
accelerators.

24.My father had supervisor evaluations states that strengths were in
Radiation Monitoring and was qualified in all aspects, as well as
being quite qualified in Reactor Operations.

25.Meaning that he was an expert in Radiation Monitoring, and
calculating Dosimetry,and record keeping, and was very knowable in
Reactor Operations.

26.My fathers job required that he have X-rays almost on a yearly
bases, he had at least fourteen chest X-rays while at Hanford.

27.My father was exposed to radiation while working with accelerators.

28.The IREP computer program designed to calculate probability of
causation, which is so instrumental to the out come of the program
does not take into account for accelerator produced particles which
under estimates his exposure.

29.With all the factors involved with my father's work the synergistic
effect is incomprehensible.

30.Radiation is known to effect the immune system adding to the
possibility of contracting cancer.

31.There are a number of accredited studies around fifty with
statistically significant findings linking radiation workers to
multiple myeloma.

32.Most of these case studies were exposed to far less radiation
exposure than my father was.

33."Statistical significance" is the likelihood that the results found
could not have occurred by chance alone. The association of disease
risk with radiation exposure in a study is said to be statistically
significant if the association is so strong that it is unlikely to
have occurred simply by chance.Statistically significant means that
chance is operating less than 5 percent of the time.

34.My father had no history of any kind of cancer in his family.

35.Multiple Myeloma is a rare type of cancer.

36.Blacks are twice as likely to contract and die from multiple
myeloma as whites.

37.The Department of Energy has known from as early as 1977 that
Nuclear workers at Hanford were dyeing from Multiple Myeloma.

38.The Program Director Mr. Peter M. Turcic made the statement
quote.(This is a claimant friendly process workers don't have to prove
any exposure at all in dose reconstructions,only that they are ill and
worked in the area where there was a 99 percent confidence level that
they were exposed.)

Conclusion:

My Father while employed as Printing and duplicating supervisor at the
Hanford Project was in charge of classified files for the Atomic
Energy Commission.
The responsibility involved with this job means he was thought as a
very respected, competent, and trustworthy employee and knew exactly
what he was doing.

I believe Congress enacted the (EEOICP) for families like mine who
have suffered from the loss of a loved one.

With all do respect, I believe that the over abundance of evidence of
my fathers claim shows that an approval is in order.

I am still awaiting a decision. I have been waiting for over four years.
I truly believe that the biggest
problem with the porgram is that the IREP computer program is flawed.

A good question would be to ask DOL how many claims for Luekemia,
Thyroid Cancer, and Multiple Myeloma have been approved?

I have asked but they claim that they do not know.

The money is not the most importance
factor it would not begin to pay for lost wages, medical and burial expences.

I get a little paranoid at what our
government is capable of doing.
In a society as open as are's is, the
only way that they can admister
certain policies is to lie, deni or
be secretive,which are all the same to me.
I only wish that DOL,DOE,HHS,NIOSH,OCAS,ORAU,
would follow the path that congress intend
for the Energy Employees Occupational Compensation Program.
It was not designed for NIOSH to make up the
rules as they see fit. Yes, my family has
suffered the consequences of Hanford, and the cold war.
My father dieing in my arms at age 62 of Multiple Myeloma, my mother as healthy
as a horse one day, and dead the next of Acute Myeloid Leukimia and my
brother wasting away in front of my face with Colon Cancer and dieing at age 42.
All the while ripping a piece of my heart out
with each of their death's. I am so scorn that
life will never be the same.Nor will I.

Richard

posted in Cold War Survivors - 3 replies

History of French Nuclear Tests in the Pacific

richardfash — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 20:44:30 GMT

http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?no=325785&rel_no=1

Part I ] 1966-1974: Atmospheric tests

For the first time in almost half a century, French scientists are confronting their government with solid scientific evidence showing that the nuclear tests conducted in the Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls have caused an increase in thyroid cancers among the populations inhabiting the neighboring islands.

This four-part story retraces the history of the French nuclear testing program in the Pacific and summarizes the conclusions of several surveys regarding the radiological situation of these atolls as well as the potential health consequences on the local populations.
PART I 1966-1974. THE ATMOSPHERIC TESTS

PART II 1974-1992. THE UNDERGROUND TESTS

PART III 1995-1996. CHIRAC RESUMES FRENCH NUCLEAR TESTS

PART IV THE AFTERMATH: THE RADIOLOGICAL SITUATION
<Editor's Note>

PART I 1966-1974. THE ATMOSPHERIC TESTS

French scientists have played a major role in the early development of nuclear physics. Becquerel discovered the natural radioactivity of uranium salts in 1886. Two years later, Marie and Pierre Curie isolated a new element, the radium, and investigated its properties. The three French scientists shared the 1903 Noble Prize for Physics.

TODAY'S TOP STORIES

Republicans Give New Meaning to 'Base'

Lula Expects 'Responsible Opposition'

Fears of Coup in Fiji

The Double Life of Israel

Israeli Soldiers Break the Silence

FROM THE SECTION

Battery Recall Just the Latest in Sony Woes

The Battle for the Airwaves

Global Warming Must Be Tackled

History of French Nuclear Tests in the Pacific

Electronics Companies Come Under Greenpeace Scrutiny

In 1934, Irene and Frederic Joliot-Curie, the daughter and son-in-law of Pierre and Marie Curie, produced the first artificial radioactive element. For this discovery, they won the 1935 Noble Prize of Chemistry.

In 1938, Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann discovered the process by which a neutron splits a heavy nucleus in two lighter ones. In January 1939, Lise Meitner explained this reaction and called it nuclear fission. In the spring of the same year, F. Joliot and his collaborators -- Lew Kowarski, Hans Halban and Francis Perrin -- demonstrated the possibility of a chain reaction.

From then on, nuclear reactions could be used to produce energy or to make powerful weapons. On May 1939, Joliot deposited three patents: the first two concerned the production of energy while the third one dealt with the military applications.

During the occupation of France by the Germans which began in June 1940, research in nuclear science no longer progressed. However in the U.S., American and British nuclear scientists were advancing rapidly with the Manhattan project.

As French nuclear scientists were well aware of the potential military application of nuclear energy, General de Gaulle had been well informed of the progress made in the U.S. toward the fabrication of the first nuclear weapons. On Oct. 18, 1945, de Gaulle created the Atomic Energy Commissariat (AEC). The Atomic Energy Authority is the first such Agency ever established worldwide. On the same day, he appointed Joliot as the High Commissioner and Dautry as the General Administrator.

In the years following the end of WWII, France was plagued by a weak political power and tremendous economical difficulties. As a result, French nuclear research made little progress and fell well behind that of the new superpowers. Reliance on U.S. economical help, through the Marshall plan, may equally have prevented France to consider the nuclear military option, as the U.S. government was eager to keep its nuclear monopole.

France merely attempted to keep alive a small-scale research program. On Dec. 15, 1948, France started its first nuclear reactor: ZOE. The following year, a plutonium research facility was set up at Le Bouchet by the AEC.

Another factor that held back the development of a French nuclear weapon was the strong influence of the French Communist Party. On March 19, 1950, F. Joliot, himself a communist, signed the "Stockholm Appeal." The Declaration called for an absolute ban on nuclear weapons. As the Government of Georges Bidault could not longer tolerate his opinions, Joliot was dismissed and replaced by F. Perrin in April 1950.

In 1952, Felix Gaillard, the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy in the Pinay Government (March 1952 to January 1953), drafted a modest five-year plan for the development of atomic energy. His plan concentrated on civilian applications of nuclear energy as a remedy for the country limited resource of fossil energy. In July 1952, the Communist Party drafted a project of law banning all research activities related to military applications of nuclear energy. The Bill was overwhelmingly defeated by the National Assembly (518 to 100).

While the vote merely left the door opened to the development of nuclear weapons, the re-armament of Germany convinced the French Military Authorities that France needed these weapons. And thus, on Dec. 26, 1954, Prime Minister Pierre Mendes gave the authorization for a nuclear weapon program. The Bureau of General Studies was immediately created to manage this program.

Meanwhile, the Fourth Republic was facing major troubles with its colonies. In 1954, Algerian nationalists began a war for independence. The next year, France had to abandon Indochina after a decade of fighting.

Yet, it is probably the 1956 Suez operation that best revealed to the French and British the new status of the world. Moscow threatened to launch missiles on London and Paris in response to their intervention while Washington showed no solidarity for their cause. The incident showed that a common vision of defense did not imply automatically a convergence of interests on matters of foreign policy.

In France, the feeling of dependence on Americans was no longer bearable. To put an end to this situation, the French Parliament affirmed the need to possess the nuclear bomb. Slowly, and with much hesitation, the French Nuclear Doctrine was taking shape.

On Oct. 5, 1956, a program concerning vehicles of delivery of nuclear weapons was established. On Nov. 30 the AEC and the Defense Minister signed a memorandum concerning the testing of nuclear weapons.

On Dec. 5 a Committee for the Military Applications of Atomic Energy was created. This committee provided for a secret co-operation between the Atomic Energy Commissariat and senior military officials. On Dec. 19 a strategic nuclear bomb program was outlined.

In May 1958, rebel army officers seized control of Algiers. In Paris, a coup seemed imminent. A weak and inexperienced government had lost control over all matters. In this critical situation, General de Gaulle made his come back on the political scene.

On May 31, 1958, de Gaulle became President of the Council of Ministers. In June, the National Assembly voted him full powers for a period of six months. Moreover, he was asked to draft the constitution of the Fifth Republic which he submitted in September to a popular referendum. The new Constitution was approved by a wide margin.

On Dec. 21, de Gaulle became President of France. In the autumn of 1958, Algeria was General de Gaulle's most urging problem. He quickly dismissed a military solution, foreseeing that the independence was unavoidable.

The return of General de Gaulle also marked the end of French hesitations concerning nuclear matters. De Gaulle intended to distance himself from Washington in order to raise France's international prestige and to restore its independence in Foreign Affairs. But in order to reduce the French dependence on the American nuclear umbrella, he felt the urgent need to develop a nuclear force. His view was widely shared by top French military officials.

"Western defense centered around the nuclear weapon is becoming wholly dependent on American wishes... The only possible correction is the formation by the European nations of a nuclear arsenal to allow them to intervene in the new warfare with their own means; it would give them the possibility of resuming a leading role in directing the coalition," wrote General Valluy, the French representative in the NATO Standing Group.

As "French defense must be French," the General created the "Strike Force", a nuclear force independent of NATO. He soon afterwards decided on the date of the first test which he would announce on June 17, 1958, during a meeting with his Defense Council.

In 1959 he ordered the closing of all U.S. Air Force bases in France. A point of no return had been reached. France would become a nuclear power. There is some irony in the undisputable fact that the French took their decision not so much out of fear of their enemies but because of a lack of confidence in their allies.

Becoming a nuclear power meant, among other things, that France needed a test site. On June 17, 1958, de Gaulle chose the Sahara for this purpose.

Despite the fact that the British, Soviet, and American had previously agreed -- in 1963 -- to ban testing in the atmosphere, under water, and in space, the French government decided to carry out atmospheric testing. This would eventually lead the Soviet Union to withdraw from the moratorium.

Seventeen tests were performed: four in the atmosphere (from Feb. 13, 1960, to April 25, 1961) and 13 underground from November 1961 to February 1966.

In 1960, de Gaulle opened peace negotiations with the Algerian rebels. These negotiations lead to an agreement granting independence to Algeria. As a result, the Sahara test sites -- Reganne and In Ecker -- had to be abandoned and new locations had to be found. And by then, the French Empire had dwindled to a few islands.

French Polynesia, a territory roughly the size of Europe, is made up of about hundred islands. These Islands, most of which are coral atolls, belong to five different groups: Marquises Islands, Austral Islands, Iles Gambier, Society Islands and Tuamotu Archipelago.

The Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls, located in the southeast corner of the Tuamotu Archipelago are located 20,000 km away from the metropolis. Nevertheless, they are part of France. These atolls were chosen for their "ideal location." They were uninhabited, easily accessible, and located far away from populated islands.

The closest inhabited atoll is Tureia (140 persons) at a distance of 120 km to the north. Only 5,000 persons lived within 1,000 km of the test site. A larger population (184,000 persons in 1974) is located 1,200 km to the northwest, at Tahiti.

Moreover, French technicians deemed the meteorological conditions perfectly suited to atmospheric nuclear tests. They also concluded that the basaltic nature of the underground was particularly well suited for underground testing.

The fringes of the atolls are at most a few hundred meters wide and enclose a lagoon. They rise just a few meters above sea level. Moruroa covers an area of 155 km square while Fangataufa, located 40 km south, covers an area of 45 km square.

On March 29, 1963, the legislation establishing the two atolls as test sites was signed. A few weeks later, French Troops and civilian workers arrived at once.

Immediately, the local parliament, known as the Territorial Assembly, objected the tests for environmental and radiological concerns. The French governor -- the so called high Commissioner -- simply reminded them of their colonial status. As such, all questions relating to defense matters were outside their competence.

French officials brushed aside all concerns about nuclear fallout by stating that the nukes would be exploded only when the wind was blowing in the south direction, where no other islands are located.

On July 2, 1966, the French tried out their new atomic test site at the Moruroa atoll. The first bomb, a plutonium fission device named Aldebaran, was placed on a barge floating over the lagoon and was detonated, at 5:34 local time.

Following the blast, unpredicted winds spread the radioactive fallout over the Gambiers Islands. As the radioactivity levels raised to 0.6 millisievert (The International System of Units for radiation dose and effective dose equivalent -- 1 millisievert = 100 millirem) per hour, no one notified the local populations. Levels of radioactivity in drinking water were 50 times above normal.

On July 19, 1966, the French dropped the next bomb from an airplane flying 15,000 meters above the empty ocean, 40 km south of the atoll.

After these two tests, radiation at five times the permitted annual dose was measured at the Gambier Islands. In Apia, Western Samoa, the concentration of fission products in rain water was 135,000 pico-curies per liter. For comparison, the maximum allowed amount of radioactivity contained in products imported in the European Union is about 10 times smaller than this value.

Part 2 of this series will be published later this week.

posted in Cold War Survivors - 0 replies