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

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

“You Don’t Need to Know”

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016
By Ground Zero

The Navy is suing Kitsap County, Washington to try to stop it from releasing Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor emergency plans. The country’s third-largest Naval base is home to a nuclear shipyard, a strategic nuclear weapons facility, and eight nuclear-armed Trident ballistic missile-firing submarines. US District Court in Tacoma issued a temporary restraining order halting Kitsap county’s release of the records. In January 2015, Ground Zero’s Glen Milner asked county emergency management staff for records regarding potential consequences of a radiological accident at the base and its planned emergency response. The Navy denied the request and said it will inform residents how to respond if a catastrophic incident occurs.

The Navy is threatening to bring Glen Milner to court for receiving disaster emergency response plans that impact a wide, popuated area around Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor, 16 miles west of Seattle, Washington. Graphic from the US Navy.

Last June, the US attorney’s office in Seattle, representing the Navy, threatened to sue deputy Kitsap county prosecuting attorneys Alexis Foster and Shelley Kneip. The Navy contends some of the documents have national security implications and should be protected.

The Bangor disaster “response plans are in place, and nobody knows anything about them, so they don’t really do anybody any good,” Milner said. “They’ve gone to the trouble of creating the plans, but they don’t want to tell anybody about them.”

The county and US attorney’s office continue to release information to Milner as it’s processed, though their relationship is chafed by different disclosure laws — the Washington Public Records Act and the federal Freedom of Information Act.

Because the emergency response plans were created by the county and are held by the county, state law applies. Normally the county would process Milner’s request and if the feds disagreed, they could seek an injunction. Instead, the feds are making redactions and withholding records based on federal law. The county then reviews the actions to ensure they conform to state law.

Michele Earl-Hubbard, with Allied Law Group, said Milner’s request is a county responsibility and covered by state law. The US attorney’s office should stay out of it unless it wants to file for an injunction. Milner’s request hasn’t transpired that way, however, and at this point, for timeliness, records should go straight to him without county review, which can be performed later.

“The local agency has to provide the ‘fullest assistance’ and ‘most timely response,’ and they’re not giving that when they sit on a request for nine months,” she said.  “People need to know where to evacuate, not just the bureaucrats.”

Ground Zero compiled reports from the Associated Press and the Kitsap Sun for this article.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Great Lakes Rad’ Waste Dump Plan Stalled by Environment Minister

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016

Canada’s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, the Honorable Catherine McKenna, has issued a stinging critique of the federal Joint Review Panel’s “Assessment Report” which last year recommended that she approve the so-called “Deep Geologic Repository” proposed by the Canadian nuclear giant Ontario Power Generation (OPG) for the shore of Lake Huron.

Sent from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency in Ottawa, Minster McKenna’s Feb. 18 letter declares that “further information and studies are required” before she can complete her formal Decision Statement regarding the proposed near-lake radioactive waste dump. Her decision had previously been due March 1, 2016, but will now be delayed indefinitely.

Elated by the postponement and by Minister McKenna’s critical demands, Michael Keegan, Chair of the Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes in Monroe, Michigan wrote, “Ding dong the DUD is dead, almost!”—referring to what critics have dubbed the “Deep Underground Dump.” The Minister’s notice could be a major setback for OPG’s plan.

In what’s been called the most counter-intuitive and irrational radioactive waste disposal scheme ever proposed, OPG wants the government to allow burial of every sort of radioactive waste short of highly radioactive waste fuel, a mere 1.2 kilometers from the shore of Lake Huron. The waste materials would be from OPG’s eight-reactor Bruce Nuclear Generating Station, on Bruce Peninsula northwest of Toronto. With five operating reactors and 3,800 employees, OPG’s Bruce complex is the world’s largest nuclear site. Japan’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa complex is bigger, but has been closed since the 2011 Fukushima catastrophe.

The dump proposal has so shocked and angered local residents, environmentalists, US neighbors and even some of their Congressional representatives, that opposition has become international in scope. Some observers speculate that Justin Trudeau, newly elected as Prime Minister in October 2015, may have played a part in the Ministry’s distinctly cautionary announcement.

As many as 40 million people rely on the Great Lakes for drinking water, and in 70 years of nuclear waste generation no government has ever considered, much less permitted, the disposal of it so close to one of the Great Lakes. OPG’s “geologic” rationale for the near-lake dump has been condemned as a subterfuge for cost-cutting, since its proposed location—right next to the company’s 2,300-acre site—would save the firm the enormous expense of high-tech packaging, high-tech transportation, and highly-engineered waste management elsewhere, either monitored above ground, or underground at a less risky, less populated location.

Minister Wants New Studies of Alternative Sites,
Potential Pollution, and Clean-up Plans

The first demand Minister McKenna made in her Feb. 18 notice to OPG was that the company conduct a study of alternative locations for the DUD that are “technically and economically feasible.” McKenna explicitly directed OPG to suggest “actual locations” that would meet required feasibility specifications, and to detail the costs and risks of “additional off-site transportation of the nuclear waste.”

Minister McKenna further demanded an “updated analysis of the cumulative environmental effects of the project”—a study that could take a considerable amount of time. Thirdly, the Minister instructed OPG to produce a new “list of mitigation commitments for each identified adverse effect.”

The Minister’s Feb. 18 notice indicated some skepticism toward OPG’s previously submitted technical documents. McKenna demanded that, “OPG shall identify outdated or redundant commitments that were previously brought forward.” Ms. McKenna gave OPG until April 18, 2016 to provide her with its timeline for submitting the additional studies and information.

Dozens of communities, environmental groups and politicians on both sides of the Canada-US border have declared their opposition to the DUD, including Toronto, Chicago, and Duluth. A petition by Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump had gathered 93,352 signatures by Feb. 24.

“Company” towns close to the massive reactor complex, like Huron-Kinloss, tend to endorse the plan. Its Mayor Mitch Twolan supports the idea even though he is Chair of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, a 100-mayor group that has formally resolved against it.

Anne Eadie, Mayor of Kincardine, Ontario, the site of lengthy public hearings on the proposal, told the Owen Sound Sun Times she thinks OPG’s information is good. “We’re satisfied that the science is there,” she said.

Jutta Splettstoesser, a Kincardine resident, community organizer and vigorous critic of OPG isn’t surprised that mayors of towns in the sway of the area’s biggest employer endorse the dumping scheme. “They’re inside the bribery zone,” she says.

—JL 

 

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Who’s Pounding on the Door?

Through the Prism of Nonviolence 
Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016
By John Heid

 

…you only leave home
when home won’t let you stay.
no one leaves home unless home chases you
fire under your feet
hot blood in your belly
it’s not something you ever thought of doing
until the blade burnt threats into your neck…
—Excerpted from “Home” by Warsan Shire

The sign beside our front door reads in black and white: “US Border Patrol: Do Not Enter Without A Lawful Search Warrant.” Who knows how effective it really is? After all, the majority of house raids are carried out by Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) and most raids happen in the dark of night by its armed, aggressive agents who jackboot their way into homes forcibly removing mothers and children alike in handcuffs. The sign presents a minor legal hurdle, if that. Still, I dusted it off on Christmas morning.

The night before, the White House had announced that raids to deport Central American women and children would begin in January. A few days later, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced: “Our borders are not open to illegal immigration. If you come here illegally, we will send you back consistent with our laws and values.”

Laws and values? Who’s values and what laws sanction nighttime raids on families? The policy and strategy of house raids runs roughshod over the rule of law, let alone ethics. Not since “Operation Return to Sender” in 2006, has such a tidal wave of shock washed over immigrant communities in the US. Around the country, day-laborers vanished from worker centers before New Year’s. English-as-a-second-language classrooms witnessed an abrupt drop in attendance. Grocery stores and streets in Latino/a neighborhoods became ghostly quiet.

Within a week, over 100 people—families and children—were rounded up in Georgia, Texas and North Carolina, and 77 were summarily deported. The Deportation Defense Hotline [1-844-363-1423] of United We Dream received 316 calls reporting ICE activity by mid-January.

On January 4, the Dallas Morning Star reported, “ICE focuses its enforcement resources on individuals who pose a threat to national security, public safety and border security.” Yes, at-risk mothers and their children in the southeastern US are now deemed a threat to national security.

Who are these people that pose such a formidable risk? And why are they fleeing their ancestral lands in the first place? The poet Warsan Shire writes: “No one leaves home unless home is the mouth of a shark.” Why then are these families not recognized as refugees seeking asylum?

Thich Nhat Hahn, the Buddhist monk, poet and refugee, says that we must call things by their true names. It is critical to recognize the circumstances that people are fleeing for what they really are: torture, rape, kidnapping and murder—systemic violence. Only then can we understand the circumstances, if not the root causes, of the forced dislocation the world has witnessed in the last two years. International observers report levels of violence in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador not seen since the 1980s.

The Obama Administration, which has deported more than two million people in seven years, says its deportation strategy prioritizes those who have come to the US since May of 2014, and have exhausted all formal avenues for legal status here. It is noteworthy that nearly 80 percent of the targeted families do not have attorneys. Most families coming into the US seeking asylum have a limited understanding of their legal obligations, let alone the complicated immigration process. Many have been pressured by government officials into signing documents without access to counsel. The court process that people are hustled through is nicknamed “the rocket docket” because it is so rapid that there is little time for people to find legal assistance and to compile the evidence required to substantiate their asylum request. It is frontier justice on crack.

Casa Mariposa, our community near downtown Tucson, has seen hundreds of women and children come through the front door over the past couple years (see the Fall 2014 Quarterly). The stories we have heard are as painful as they are consistent. People are fleeing direct, personal violence. These families are seeking safety, refuge, asylum. They grieve the loss of their loved ones and their homeland.

The house raids must stop. Entirely. Their use is a stab to the heart of civil society. The tactic reawakens the ghosts of not-so-distant atrocities that still scar the face of humanity. We cannot be silent. Nor can we wait for our government to find its moral compass. While we employ the avenues of education, petition, vigil and legislation, we must also pursue more immediate measures to address the acute severity of this humanitarian crisis. The raids are happening now.

United We Dream is among the humanitarian organizations on the front line in this crisis. Managing Director Cristina Jimenez reports: “We are exposing where Obama’s immigration agents are, what they are doing and we are ensuring that our community knows what to do. The days when immigration agents can conduct their raids in anonymity are over. Everywhere they go they will find a child with a camera and everywhere they go they will find a mother who knows her rights.” This struggle will be a long one. People will not abide injustice lying down.

Old, familiar allies are rising as well. Pastor Allison Harrington of Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson, where the 1980s Sanctuary movement gained traction, said in response to the raids: “We feel as we are once again living through a nightmare all too familiar to us.” Harrington’s church and other faith communities have resurrected the Sanctuary Movement. Today over 300 churches in more than 30 states are considering sanctuary. These efforts rekindle the memory of a banner that hung in a church sanctuary in the 1980s. It read: “When they come for the innocent without walking over your body, cursed be your life and your religion.” ICE agents will have to walk over some bodies because communities are taking their backs away from the wall and putting them in front of the church doors. At Southside Presbyterian, there’s no need for a sign like the one that hangs on our front porch.

How far would any of us walk to find safety for our children? Where will we stand as our government raids the homes of immigrant families and deports them back to what poet Warsan Shire calls the “mouth of a shark?”

—John Heid lives and works at the Casa Mariposa Community in Tucson, Arizona.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Through the Prism of Nonviolence, Uncategorized

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

McClatchy: US Workers Died from Weapons Work

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016

Editor’s note: After a year-long investigation, a book-length Special Report by McClatchy* finds that at least 33,480 US nuclear weapons factory workers died of illnesses caused by radiation exposures received on the job. Following is McClatchy’s summary of its December 11, 2015 report.**

Irradiated: 33,480 Americans Dead After 70 Years of Atomic Weaponry
Will modernization of nation’s old nuclear weapons overlook past risks?
US hopes to save money by cutting medical benefits for nuclear workers

The US government has compensated over 52,000 nuclear workers for illnesses related to radiation exposure, but the process is complicated. Deaths resulting from exposure while working at the factories and the compensation process for survivors begs the question: How much is a life worth? As the death toll mounts, nuclear weapons workers must decide whether their jobs are worth it.

“Irradiated,” a December 11, 2015 special report published by McClatchy, offers an unprecedented look at the costs of war and the risks of a strong defense. Set in 10 states, the report uses federal records to chronicle the deaths of at least 33,480 nuclear workers….

Oak Ridge Memorial Park cemetery was established in 1955 by radiologist Robert Ball, “to accommodate the large population that had come to the area for the Manhattan Project.” McClatchy reports that, “The plants with the highest number of deaths are the [Oak Ridge] Y-12 National Security Complex with 3,741, and the Hanford Site in Washington State, with 3,461.”
The number of deaths has never been disclosed by federal officials. It looms large as the nation prepares for its second nuclear age, with a $1 trillion plan to modernize its nuclear weapons over the next 30 years.

McClatchy determined the count after analyzing more than 70 million records in a database obtained from the US Department of Labor under the Freedom of Information Act. It includes all workers who are dead after they or their survivors received compensation under a special fund created in 2001 to help those who got sick in the construction of America’s nuclear arsenal.

A total of 107,394 workers have been diagnosed with cancers and other diseases after building the nation’s nuclear stockpile over the last seven decades. The project includes an interactive database that offers details on all 107,394 workers.

McClatchy’s year-long investigation puts readers in the living rooms of sick workers in South Carolina, on a picket line in Texas, and at a cemetery in Tennessee. It includes interviews with more than 100 workers, government officials, experts and activists across the country.

[Part of just one victim’s story: “After working 17 years at the Savannah River nuclear weapons plant, just across the Georgia state line in South Carolina, Smitty found out on Sept. 11, 2008, 10 years after he retired, that he had multiple myeloma, a cancer. Just like 54,005 other workers who have tried to get help from the federal government after getting sick at a nuclear weapons plant, Smitty never got a penny.”]
Among the Special Report’s findings
  • McClatchy can report for the first time that the great push to win the Cold War has left a legacy of death on American soil: At least 33,480 former nuclear workers who received compensation are dead. The death toll is more than four times the number of American casualties in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
  • Federal officials greatly underestimated how sick the US nuclear workforce would become. At first, the government predicted the program would serve only 3,000 people at an annual cost of $120 million. Fourteen years later, taxpayers have spent sevenfold that estimate, $12 billion, on payouts and medical expenses for more than 53,000 workers.
  • Even with the ballooning costs, fewer than half of those who’ve applied have received any money. Workers complain that they’re often left in bureaucratic limbo, flummoxed by who gets payments, frustrated by long wait times and overwhelmed by paperwork.
  • Despite the cancers and other illnesses among nuclear workers, the government wants to save money by slashing current employees’ health plans, retirement benefits and sick leave.
  • Stronger safety standards have not stopped accidents or day-to-day radiation exposure. More than 186,000 workers have been exposed since 2001, all but ensuring a new generation of claimants. And to date, the government has paid $11 million to 118 workers who began working at nuclear weapons facilities after 2001.

McClatchy reported the project in partnership with The Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute, a nonprofit media center based in New York City. Three journalists from McClatchy’s Washington Bureau—Rob Hotakainen, Lindsay Wise and Samantha Ehlinger—reported the project, along with Frank Matt from The Investigative Fund. Other reporters contributing included Mike Fitzgerald of the Belleville News-Democrat in Illinois, Rocky Barker of the Idaho Statesman, Sammy Fretwell of The State of Columbia, SC, Yamil Berard of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Scott Canon of the Kansas City Star, and Annette Cary of the Tri-City Herald in Washington state. McClatchy Washington Bureau Chief James Asher edited the project.

*The McClatchy Company, having purchased Knight-Ridder in 2006, owns 29 daily newspapers and is the third largest newspaper publisher in the United States.

**A link to the full report “Irradiated”

—JL 

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Concepcion Picciotto Kept Country’s Longest Peace Vigil

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016

Nuclear weapons have long inspired monumental objections. In what is still considered the biggest political march in US history, at least one million people traipsed through New York City in June 1982, condemning the 17,000-warhead nuclear weapons build-up inspired by the Reagan Administration.

In a more personalized feat, the longest political protest in US history has been the 32-year-long anti-nuclear vigil kept in Lafayette Park behind the White House by Concepcion Picciotto, who died January 25, 2016. Friends believed she was 80.

Since 1984, Concepcion, as she was known around the world, held fast to her denunciation of nuclear weapons and war. One of her vigil/encampment signs read, “Live by the Bomb, Die by the Bomb.”

Among her many admirers were Public Citizen founder Ralph Nader, filmmaker Michael Moore, and Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting Member of Congress representing Washington, DC.

—JL 

Filed Under: Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 177
  • 178
  • 179
  • 180
  • 181
  • …
  • 223
  • 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