Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

December 20, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear-Powered Submarine Wrecks: Routine, Deadly, Toxic

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2021-2022

USS Connecticut Smashes into Undersea Mountain

US Navy officials report that its nuclear-powered, fast-attack submarine USS Connecticut struck an underwater mountain in the South China Sea on October 2, echoing the disastrous crash of the USS San Francisco in 2005 south of Guam. US military officials told CBS News that two Connecticut crew members suffered “moderate” injuries and several sustained minor bumps and bruises. The Navy said the sub’s nuclear reactor was not damaged.

A month after the crash, Connecticut’s three top officers were fired “due to loss of confidence.” As we go to press, the Pentagon had not yet explained why the 23-year-old Connecticut struck an underwater mountain, or revealed the extent of damage to the vessel. China’s government has accused the US of a “lack of transparency and responsibility” regarding the accident. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said November 2, “We once again urge the US to give a detailed account of the accident,” the AP reported.

Some 52 US conventional diesel-powered Navy submarines were lost at sea during WWII, according to The Lost 52 Project. Beginning with the USS Nautilus in 1951, the submariners’ risk-taking with their own lives and with the ocean’s biological integrity was compounded by the switch to nuclear reactors for propulsion.

300-Year Oceanic Hazard

The Aug. 25, 2000 New York Times report about long-lived radioactive materials leaking from sunken nuclear reactors (then onboard the Russian sub Kursk), noted a fact that applies to all the lost reactors: “The two of most concern — strontium-90 and cesium-137 — have half-lives of about 30 years, and will take about 300 years to decay away.”

USS Thresher

USS Thresher was a nuclear-powered attack submarine that sank on April 10, 1963 during deep-diving tests, killing all 129 crew and shipyard workers onboard. Thresher was the third of four submarines that would sink with more than 100 people aboard.

USS Scorpion

The nuclear-powered submarine Scorpion sank with all hands on May 22, 1968. The Scorpion was one of four submarine disappearances that year, the others being Israel’s sub Dakar, France’s sub Minerve, and the Soviet sub K-129.“Neither vessels’ reactors [on the Thresher and Scorpion], nor the nuclear weapons on board the Scorpion, have ever been recovered,” the Australian Broadcasting Corp. reported Sept. 17, 2021.

Komsomolets

Forty-two crew members died when the experimental Soviet sub Komsomolets sank 5,577 feet to the bottom of the Norwegian Sea following a five-hour-long onboard fire April 7, 1989. While part of the crew abandoned ship in rubber rafts, some of the crew stayed on fighting the fire and shutting down the sub’s nuclear reactors. Researchers said July 10, 2019, that the sub is still emitting radiation, Reuters reported.

Kursk

In August 2000, after explosions destroyed forward parts of the sub, Russia’s nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed Kursk sank in the Barents Sea, only 354 feet down. All 118 crew members died after the failure of repeated rescue attempts.

HMS Tireless

On May 12, 2000, the British fast-attack submarine Tireless suffered reactor accident, spilled radioactive coolant into the Mediterranean, and conducted a lengthy, risky, experimental, and unlawful repair operation in the densely populated area of Gibraltar. News reports at the time said Tireless came within “a few minutes” of a reactor meltdown when high-pressure coolant began gushing out of the system. Docking the damaged, contaminated sub at Gibraltar for six months of repair work violated Royal Navy regulations, and reactor failure resulted in the recall of all 12 of Britain’s Trafalgar Class subs.

K-159

Nine crew members died when the Russian submarine K-159 sank in 2003 while being towed through a violent storm in the Barents Sea. Environmentalists said that the danger of radioactive contamination from the sub’s two propulsion reactors was “much higher than official statements suggested.”

USS San Francisco

On Jan. 8, 2005, the nuclear-powered fast-attack submarine San Francisco, running at top speed, smashed into an undersea mountain 500 feet down, killing one sailor and leaving 98 battered and bloodied after being hurled through the air by the crash. Several were knocked unconscious and many were bleeding from head wounds. After the crash, “blood was everywhere,” one account read. “There was so much blood on the instruments and on the control room floor,” Chief Petty Officer Danny Hager said, “that the place looked like a slaughterhouse.”

HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant

On the night of Feb. 3, 2009, France’s Le Triomphant, and Britain’s HMS Vanguard, both carrying nuclear weapons, collided while submerged in the Atlantic. Both vessels were damaged although the 250 crew members aboard were uninjured, the New York Times reported. All nuclear-armed subs are shrouded in extreme secrecy, so very little is known about the extent of the damage, but Kate Hudson, chairwoman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said then the collision “could have released vast amounts of radiation and scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed.”

Losharik

On July 1, 2019, fourteen Russian sailors were killed by toxic fumes when a fire broke out aboard the nuclear-powered research submarine Losharik which was operating in the Arctic. —JL

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

December 20, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Staggering Military Suicide Rates

Nukewatch Quarterly 2021-2022

A September Pentagon report shows a 41% increase in suicides among active-duty troops from 2015 to 2020, and suicides among US Army’s active-duty forces jumped 46% in the second quarter of 2021, compared to the same period last year. On the heels of this news, a military inspector general’s report released November 12 found that US troops are not regularly screened for suicide risk as they leave active-duty. “Furthermore, the [military] may not arrange for continuing mental health care for thousands of transitioning service members with existing mental health conditions,” the IG said.

30,000 since 9/11, four times total combat deaths

The grim active-duty suicide reports only hint at the overall suicide rate including veterans. The larger picture was presented June 21 in a report by the Costs of War Project at Brown University. The study, “High Suicide Rates among United States Service Members and Veterans of the Post-9/11 Wars,” found a staggering 30,177 active-duty personnel and veterans who served in the military since 9/11 have died by suicide — four times the 7,057 killed in military occupations and warzones over the same period. Yet, even this jaw-dropping number is a fraction of the whole.

“In total, there were 89,100 confirmed US veteran suicides between 2005 [when the Pentagon began tracking suicide rates] and 2018, including veterans of the Global War on Terror and also previous wars such as the Vietnam War,” wrote author Thomas Suitt.

Suitt found that “continued access to guns” as well as “the rise of improvised explosive devices, the attendant rise in traumatic brain injuries, the war’s protracted length, advances in medical treatment that keep service members in the military longer, and the American public’s disinterest in the post-9/11 wars, have greatly contributed to increased suicide rates.”

“Even the very conservative estimate that I came up with, it’s horrifying,” said Suitt in an interview with NPR. Every suicide among military service members should stand as a criminal indictment of a government that sends its men and women into endless, undeclared, unwinnable wars around the world.

— If you or someone you know may be considering suicide, contact the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255 (En Español: 1-888-628-9454; Deaf and Hard of Hearing: 1-800-799-4889) or the Crisis Text Line by texting HOME to 741741.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter

December 20, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

US Senators Join Fight for Palomares Vets’ Compensaton

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2021-2022

Editor’s note: Four US senators have urged Secretary of Veterans Affairs Denis McDonough to withdraw the VA’s appeal of a federal court order granting class action status to veterans contaminated with plutonium in Palomares, Spain, after a 1966 nuclear weapons crash. The senators’ October 12, 2021 letter, lightly edited, follows.

Dear Mr. Secretary,

We write to respectfully request you withdraw your appeal in Skaar v. McDonough now before the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, concerning the claims of approximately 1,400 veterans exposed to dangerous radiation during the 1966 nuclear clean-up operation in Palomares, Spain. Instead of pursuing your appeal, which will only serve to further delay relief for these veterans, we urge you to use your rulemaking authority to finally provide long-overdue care and assistance to Palomares veterans by including Palomares in the list of [service related] “radiation-risk activities” under 38 CFR 3.309. Events with lower levels of radiation exposure are already on that list, and civilian workers who buried sealed barrels filled with Palomares soil — a similar, but even less risky task than that performed by the Palomares veterans — receive presumptive benefits…

By way of background, in 1966, approximately 1,400 US service members were exposed to dangerous levels of ionizing radiation when they were deployed to clean up the crash site of a B-52 bomber which was carrying nuclear warheads. These service members worked, slept, and ate at the crash site, shoveling radioactive plutonium dust into barrels for weeks without proper protective equipment. In the decades since, many of those veterans have developed radiation-related illnesses that require medical treatment and numerous veterans have already died from these conditions, leaving the survivors to continue to fight for recognition and benefits. The US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) recently ordered the VA to reexamine the methodology by which it adjudicates disability benefits claims for veterans of the 1966 Palomares nuclear disaster. This decision came one year after the CAVC had permitted veteran Victor Skaar to proceed with this challenge on behalf of a class of Palomares veterans. [emphasis added]

At its heart, Mr. Skaar’s legal challenge is about the failure to recognize the radiation exposure of the Palomares veterans. The VA does not include Palomares in its list of radiation exposure events … and it has relied on an unsound method to calculate individual exposures instead…. The merits of this argument have not yet been resolved. Rather, the CAVC ordered only that the Board of Veterans’ Appeals is required to review Mr. Skaar’s evidence and adequately adjudicate his legal challenge. Yet, the VA has chosen to appeal even this interim ruling.

… The Court’s orders in Skaar, from which you now appeal, are long-awaited, critical steps towards securing benefits and health care for these veterans. Tragically, many of them have died during their decades-long fight for recognition, and the very youngest among them are now in their seventies. We urge you not to further prolong justice for these now aging and ill veterans by pursing an unnecessary appeal of the Court’s class certification and remand orders, before the merits of the Palomares veterans’ claims have fully been heard. This case truly embodies the legal maxim that justice delayed is justice denied. The VA’s decision to appeal the Court’s class certification and remand orders before the merits have been fully reached, will add potentially years of delay to resolution of this case, when the affected service members simply do not have that time to spare. To put it bluntly, more Palomares veterans will die during the pendency of this litigation if the VA continues with this appeal. You have the authority to act to their benefit, and we strongly urge you to do so expeditiously by withdrawing your appeal.

Sincerely, Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Dianne Feinstein, D-California, Christopher Coons, D-Delaware,

Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut.

~~~~~

Note from the Lead Plaintiff

On November 8, Victor Skaar emailed Nukewatch with this update: “I obtained the ‘official’ urinalyses of myself and of each of the other ‘high 26’ [who were] selected by USAF medical scientists to submit follow-up specimens to the Radiological Health Lab, six, twelve, and eighteen months after departure [from Spain]. Those were the only data evaluated by the USAF Surgeon General’s contracted bio-environmental engineering team — Labat-Anderson…. [This team] did not consider any specimen results collected and submitted while we were on the [Palomares] site, working with constant exposure to plutonium and other radioactive materials. Obviously, that stupid, arbitrary, non-scientific decision resulted in the ‘desired’ mathematical result of our exposure of 4.6 rems — slightly less than the [allowed maximum] of 5.0 rems — therefore, we were ‘not exposed.’

“To me John, this is evidence of the AF/SG Staff knowingly, and purposely, falsifying the official data to demonstrate our ‘non-exposure.’”— Victor Skaar

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure

December 20, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Bill to Cancel US Space Force

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2021-2022

The “No Militarization of Space Act” was introduced in September 2021 by Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif. The bill would abolish the new “Space Force,” established in 2019 as a new military branch. “Since its creation … the Space Force has threatened longstanding peace and flagrantly wasted billions of taxpayer dollars,” said Rep. Huffman. According to former astronaut and Democratic junior Senator from Arizona Mark Kelly, any threats in space are already taken care of in the US Air Force,” and it “doesn’t make sense to build a whole other level of bureaucracy in an incredibly bureaucratic [Pentagon].” However, the redundant Space Force currently has Republican and Democrat supporters — based on the voting numbers that established the branch — leading Taxpayers for Common Sense, the National Taxpayers Union, Peace Action, R Street Institute, Demand Progress and others to endorse the bill. “The Space Force has quickly become a taxpayer boondoggle,” said Andrew Lautz of the TPU. The Biden administration endorsed Space Force with in a statement in February 2021, but Rep. Huffman encourages a return to earth: “Our mission must be to support the American people, not spend billions on the militarization of space.”

— Govtrackinsider.com, Sep. 30, 2021; American Military News, Sep. 24; Huffman.hour.gov, Sep. 22,2021, The Hill, Aug. 9, 2018

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter

December 20, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

US Nuclear Arsenal Size Reportedly Made Public

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2021-2022

In October 2021 the Biden White House is said to have declassified the number of nuclear weapons in the US arsenal. The Trump White House had kept the information secret for the last three years. The military has a total of 3,750 nuclear warheads, with about 2,000 more retired and awaiting disposal, although the actual number may still be declassified. The number indicates an increase in the stockpile. The number of nuclear weapons increased by 20 warheads between 2018 and 2019. While the increase is unexplained, there are a few theories. Production of the new W76-2 warhead, which began in 2019, might account for the difference. Another reason might be the “return from reserve” of a few warheads, as the government has about 2,050 usable warheads it holds in reserve. The increase is the first ever reported since the end of the Cold War in 1990.

— Slate, Feb. 18, 2020; Federation of American Scientists, Oct. 6, 2021; The Warzone, Oct. 7, 2021; Bulletin of Atomic the Scientists, Nuclear Notebook, Jan. 1, 2020; “Obama Backs Biggest Nuclear Arms Buildup Since Cold War,” Forbes, Dec. 15, 2015; “U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in Nuclear Arms,” New York Times, Sep. 21, 2014

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • …
  • 266
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch