Category Archives: Justice Department Investigations

Rocky Flats Lawsuit Settlement

Posted on by

A friend loaned me a pamphlet he received about the settlement, which had been sent from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The proposed $375 million dollar settlement involves people who owned property near the Rocky Flats Plant on June 7, 1989 or are heirs to someone who did. A rough area of the settlement area begins from the plant and extends to slightly below 120th on the north, a bit beyond Wadsworth but not to Highway 36 on the east, and more or less to 72nd on the south in a sort of circular outline. There is a website that allows you to enter an address to see whether it is included in the area.

Simple-Rocky-Flats-Class-Map_sm

The class action lawsuit was originally filed January 30, 1990 under the Price-Anderson Act and under the Colorado state nuisance and trespass law. The jury found for the plaintiffs, but the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the judgment in 2010. “The Tenth Circuit held that the Price-Anderson Act required Plaintiffs to prove additional and more severe harm than would be required under Colorado state nuisance law.” My interpretation of the ruling was that Price-Anderson required actual damages to have occurred and that perceived damages were inadequate to justify an award. It was also ruled that jury instructions were correct for some aspects but incorrect in others.

The complicated legal tussles continued with the plaintiffs asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Tenth Circuit’s action. I thought the Court had decided not to hear the case, but the pamphlet states that the settlement was reached “…before the Supreme Court issued a ruling on the petitions… The plaintiffs asked the Tenth Circuit to consider an award under the Colorado nuisance law, and the Court agreed, ruling “…that Plaintiff’s nuisance claims were not preempted by the Price-Anderson Act.” Continue reading →

The Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant Plea Bargain

Posted on by

I’ve received comments from knowledgeable people that questioned some of the things I wrote in my book titled “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats, Urban Myths Debunked.” It has been interesting to do additional research in an attempt to better understand the issues questioned. I mentioned in the book I do not consider myself to be a Rocky Flats expert; the plant was far too large and complex for anyone to claim to be an expert. The comments verify that observation.

For those unfamiliar with the story, the government raided the plant in June of 1989 with dozens of federal agents after delivering a search warrant alleging sensational environmental crimes. I was the Manager of Environmental Management, and was frightened because I thought something really terrible must have been happening to justify such a large and highly publicized raid. It wasn’t long before I realized the agents knew very little about Rocky Flats, and they didn’t seem to be on the trail of anything specific. I would later verify they quickly learned they had been duped by tips from uninformed people who disagreed with the mission of the plant. The investigators also had misinterpreted physical evidence that they believed proved some of the allegations. The eventual guilty plea by Rockwell International, the operator of the plant at the time of the raid, was based on trumped-up charges that had nothing to do with the search warrant. The government insistence on a plea bargain was driven, in my opinion, by officials unwilling to admit they had made an embarrassing mistake.

Comments from a former Rocky Flats contractor who is familiar with how corporations balance legal and business risks and a person who was a senior DOE manager both disagree with what I wrote answering why Rockwell agreed to plead guilty. I speculated they agreed to the plea bargain and to pay an 18.5 million dollar fine to save the reputations of Rockwell managers being threatened with indictment. Both of the commenters say it was a business decision. Rockwell had already accumulated significant legal costs, and those costs were continuing to increase by about a million dollars a month. Trials that could have lasted two or three years would not have been good for the corporate reputation regardless of outcome, and the media circus that would have been created would have been a distraction from other business matters.

There is disagreement on one issue. One person thought the government decided to force a plea bargain on Rockwell after they “went nuts” when there were indications the Grand Jury was considering indicting one or more Department of Energy Officials along with several Rockwell people. The DOE official says that isn’t true, because the threat of indictments from the Grand Jury came a year or two after the plea bargain, and that the government “…did not care about the indictment of federal employees.” That person believes the government’s motivation to settle was that they did not want trials “…to disclose the trumped up nature of their search warrant.”   I’m inclined to believe the opinion offered by the DOE official.

Changing subjects to one of the “crimes” included in the guilty plea, the DOE official disagreed with what I wrote regarding Rockwell agreeing to pay $2,000,000 in fines for failure to file a permit application for a waste storage area. Rockwell wrote in the report they provided to the court about the guilty plea that they had delivered the permit application to the DOE office, and had “…no knowledge of what happened thereafter until the application was filed by DOE, apparently six months later.” (United States District Court (Defendants) March 26, 1992, pages 54-55) The DOE official wrote the application submittal was delayed because what Rockwell gave to DOE was “woefully inadequate.” I’ve had several back and forth messages with several people to try to sort this out, and I now believe the commenter was referring to a different permit application that the one that resulted in the fine. What I’ve learned from this is confirmation that the permit application process was complicated and filled with opportunities for disagreement between Rockwell, DOE, and the federal agencies that would make it difficult to prepare a permit application and submit it on schedule.

What I haven’t found is why Rockwell was forced to pay a two million dollar fine for failure to submit the application when, according to the statement submitted by Rockwell to the court, it was DOE that failed to submit the application. The DOE official wrote that both Rockwell and DOE were responsible for filling the application. However, that wouldn’t explain why only Rockwell was held accountable for failure to meet the application submital schedule. I concede I don’t know whether the application was submitted late because what Rockwell provided was inadequate. Who did what or who was most at blame might continue to be in dispute, but it is a fact that this was a paperwork problem and not an environmental problem. No one has yet questioned my continued belief that the plea bargain was too absurd to stand up to any kind of scrutiny. John F. Seymour wrote in an article titled “U.S. v. Rockwell:  GOCO Assessed Criminal Fines for Violations at Rocky Flats,” in the summer 1992 Federal Facilities Environmental Journal, that “…the plea bargain involves relatively mundane and commonplace…violations.” The DOE official said it well, “One of the crazy aspects of our legal system these days is the assignment of felonies to what should be civil matters.”  I think a final comment from that person is a good closing. “I have told people that RFP (Rocky Flats Plant) was never as good or as bad as it was alleged.”

Now Enjoy “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats” as Kindle e-Book

Posted on by

RockyFlatsFacts.com is pleased to announce that “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats: Urban Myths Debunked” is now available in an e-book (electronic book) version from the Amazon.com Kindle Store. The e-book version includes dozens of new color and b&w photos to enhance your reading experience, especially for those readers who have never visited the inside of a DOE nuclear facility. Once purchased the e-book can be promptly downloaded and enjoyed on your Kindle Reader. [Please note that Amazon’s hand-held Kindle Reader displays e-book images in black & white (4-bit grayscale), so e-book photos will currently display in grayscale on this device. Free PC and Mac reader apps (see below) will however display color images/photos. There are pictures of gloveboxes, plutonium, burning plutonium, damage from the 1969 fire, decontamination workers, and a couple dozen others.

Don’t have a hand-held Kindle Reader? No problem: a totally free Kindle e-book reader application is available for download here for both Windows PC and Mac platforms. Kindle reader app for your Apple iPad is also available here, as are reader apps for iPhone, Blackberry, and Android phones and mobile devices. With the free app download you also receive a few free e-books: Aesop’s Fables, Pride & Prejudice, and Treasure Island.

I had help with the pictures and e-book. The person who provided the know-how is my friend and colleague, Keith Motyl, and he can be reached at kpmotyl@comcast.net if you are interested in the process of e-book publishing.

Please let us know how you like the newly illustrated e-book.

Paperback Version of “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats”

Posted on by

Requests for a “book that can be held” in addition to the online and downloadable e-book (PDF) versions currently available on this website, have prompted me to produce a print version that I am happy to announce is now available through both Amazon and CreateSpace. You can read a short description of the book at those links.  Amazon offers free shipping for orders over $25, if you want to combine an order with other books you’ve been wanting. 

First and foremost, and to disprove that I have become a greedy Capitalist, electronic forms of the book will continue to be free to any and all who want to read it online or download it. I encourage you to scan the content to decide whether you want to own the paperback. I also encourage you to watch this blog over the next couple of weeks to see important information provided by people who wanted to share some valuable insights.

I’m pleased that a printed hardcopy book is now available and I intend to buy copies to give to family. To those who might want an autographed copy, I would also be happy to sign purchased copies, although you will have to hand or send me the book. Your choice will be whether you want my “business signature, Farrel D. Hobbs,” or my “personal signature, Farrel.”

Getting that out of the way, who should buy this book? I recommend it to former Rocky Flats workers who are conflicted about whether Rocky Flats delivered an overall positive or negative benefit to our nation. I recommend it to people who are interested in sorting out the factual history of Rocky Flats from the inaccurate and sensationalized urban myths.

I am pleased that an ardent critic of Rocky Flats has commented, “… his narrative is very even tempered …” and, “[h]is engaging account will be of interest to any who cares about the legacy of Rocky Flats … including peace and environmental critics.” I am also pleased that a DOE official who had some connection with Rocky Flats has referred to the “…valuable website,” which includes a link to electronic forms of this book.

The paperback version of the book is currently available at both Amazon.com and CreateSpace.com at the links given above for $9.95 + S&H.

Which President Authorized Wiretaps?

Posted on by

George W. Bush faced a storm of criticism and threats of impeachment because he authorized the National Security Agency to use warrantless wiretaps on foreign enemies, but those enemies were communicating with U.S. citizens. Regardless of your position on his actions, his name isn’t the only possible correct answer. The question posed in the title is a trick, because it should say “Which President didn’t authorize wiretaps?” The Time Magazine archives contain several articles on the matter. An article dated May 10, 1976 says there had been six Presidents beginning with FDR who had taken the liberty to authorize wiretaps on suspected “subversives.” I think they missed one, because Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon are mentioned. I’ve found references that Eisenhower was receiving reports from the FBI providing him intelligence collected on his critics. Perhaps he just left authorization from Truman in place. Ford authorized warrantless wiretaps,  so that makes it seven of seven for the time period covered.

Roosevelt’s Attorney General and J.Edgar Hoover had resisted doing wiretaps, but the President overcame their objections with a memo he sent to Attorney General Jackson on May 21, 1940. The book “Roosevelt’s Secret War” says the memo acknowledged the Supreme Court had ruled against the legality of wiretaps. FDR then writes, “I am convinced the Supreme Court never intended any dictum in the particular case which it decided to apply to grave matters involving the defense of the nation.” He then proceeded to authorize wiretaps “of persons suspected of subversive activities.” He did implore that the wiretaps be limited to “…to a minimum and to limit them insofar as possible to aliens”

Not all of the wiretapping was done under the guise of national security. “A squad of FBI men used informants, undercover agents, and bugging to let Lyndon Johnson know what was happening behind the scenes at the 1964 Democratic convention in Atlantic City.” The Nixon administration “…was installing illegal wiretaps and using the Internal Revenue Service to hound its domestic ‘enemies’…”

I haven’t found a President since FDR that didn’t authorize or accept results of warrantless wiretaps “under certain conditions.” President Obama even took the position to maintain the secrecy of the wiretapping authorized by George W. Bush. The thorny issue of how far a President should or can go in infringing on individual rights in the name of national security undoubtedly is not resolved. I’m confident that the Presidents were doing what they thought was necessary to protect the country (except for maybe Johnson and Nixon). However they weren’t listening to Benjamin Franklin’s warning when he said, as listed in Wikiquotes, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”  We’ll have to guess what his ghost would say about the actions of many Presidents.

The Classified Documents in the Pants Mystery

Posted on by

The mystery of how the Justice Department operates becomes more baffling the more I read. “Scooter” Libby was found guilty of failing to remember events correctly, or failing to correctly tell investigators what he knew. He was sentenced to 30-37 months in jail followed by two years of probation and fined $250,000. Sandy Berger stole classified documents from the National Archives, and was sentenced to two years of probation and fined $50,000 after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor.  Berger was supposed to be finding information that would be important to the 9/11 Commission. I speculate that he instead took the opportunity to remove documents that might be embarrassing to him or perhaps the Clinton legacy. One would think that stealing documents from the National Archives would be a serious crime, and that the crime would be even more serious if the purpose was to obstruct the work of the 9/11 Commission.  It apparently was a mere misdemeanor.

Clinton had asked Berger, who had been his National Security Advisor, to testify to the Commission. Berger was allowed access to classified documents in a secure reading room during four visits to the National Archives to prepare for his testimony. He was caught in the act of stealing documents. The incident was reported to the Justice Department by Paul Brachfield, the Inspector General of the National Archives. Brachfield became concerned about a lack of action from DOJ, and arranged a meeting with a DOJ trial attorney to emphasize he was concerned Berger was obstructing the Commission’s investigation. An article sent to me by my Sister-in-law observed that DOJ began to investigate after Brachfield persisted.

There is no way of knowing how many classified documents Berger cleaned out of the National Archives during the visits before he was caught. DOJ apparently wasn’t curious about what he removed, because they decided there was no need for the lie detector test that was a condition of Berger’s plea bargain.  They conducted a multi-million dollar investigation about “who outed Valerie Plame” (even after they learned whodunit early in the investigation and didn’t prosecute that person), but apparently weren’t curious about what Berger was up to.  It’s a mystery. I’d be interested if there is a reader who can explain this to me and/or can set me straight.