Rocky Flats and the Downwinders

As predicted, large numbers of people are lining up to demand more money from the government after DOE agreed to a $375 million settlement of a lawsuit by people near the plant. People in the metropolitan area of Denver not included in the settlement area now want some money for themselves. A recent Denver Post article describes a meeting to describe preliminary results of a survey by the Metropolitan State University of Denver in which “. .  . respondents reported unexpectedly large numbers of cases of thyroid cancer and rare cancers.” The nurse presenting the information probably disappointed a large audience by saying “There is no way currently to determine whether those cancers identified occurred at higher rates in people who lived near Rocky Flats than they do in the general population.”

I became suspicious about the reports of thyroid cancers when I saw a television report of the meeting showing Kristen Iversen addressing the crowd. She published an autobiography of her experiences growing up near Rocky Flats. Her popular but technically flawed book mentions that many of her relatives and neighbors had thyroid problems. The book inferred that Rocky Flats was similar to the Chernobyl disaster, which resulted in numerous children developing thyroid cancer from the emissions of radioactive iodine. To the best of my knowledge, exposure to radioactive iodine is the primary cause of thyroid cancer, although there are undoubtedly some who develop it simply because it is in their DNA. Rocky Flats never had a criticality accident and didn’t process radioactive iodine.

A limited search found numerous articles describing thyroid cancer and the causes. One article had some very interesting observations. “People younger than 15 at the time of aboveground testing (between 1945 and 1963) who drank milk, and who lived in the Mountain West, Midwestern, Eastern, and Northeastern United States, probably have a higher thyroid cancer risk from exposure to I-131 in fallout than people who lived in other parts of the United States, who were over the age of 15 in the 1940s, or who did not drink milk.”

It would be interesting to learn how many of the respondents to the survey claiming thyroid problems and were younger than 15 while aboveground testing was proceeding and drank milk. I’m cynically skeptical that question won’t be asked, since the objective of the study is to blame Rocky Flats for any and all health problems. The reality is that the Colorado nuisance law apparently doesn’t even require actual health effects. All that is required is to prove the mere presence of the Rocky Flats Plant created some sort of concern, irritation, or anxiety. Perhaps doing health surveys and studying the results isn’t need to collect money.

Colorado Fracking Update

Opponents of hydraulic fracturing (cleverly called “fracking” by its opponents because it sounds “dirty”) tried to get measures on the Colorado ballet to severely restrict the practice, but failed to get the required number of signatures. The measures would have given more power to local governments to restrict the process and would have prohibited new oil and gas facilities within 2,500 feet of homes. The industry successfully campaigned against people signing the petitions. They probably correctly judged that the measures would be difficult to defeat if they made it onto the ballot because of previous results in several local referendums. Those opposing to fracking were given hope when Governor Hickenlooper announced, “Maybe they didn’t get enough signatures, but tens of thousands of people signed those indicatives, and want local voice—and I listen to that.”

A Denver Post editorial brings a voice of reason to the discussion. It references a series of reports by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. One conclusion of the reports is that banning fracking in the U.S. “…would set off an economic downturn the equivalent of the financial crisis, the housing bust, and the resulting Great recession combined.” The Post has been in favor of measures to move away from burning hydrocarbons. However, they warn about impacts of ending the energy renaissance created by hydraulic fracturing. My guess is that those ardently opposed to fracking and burning hydrocarbons won’t be influenced unless they win, energy generation is impeded, and the energy shortage prevents them from recharging their smart phones and turning on their computers in cold homes.

Election Commentary

I expect everyone is overdosed on election analysis, so I hope to keep this short and to the point. I went into the election disgusted with the choices for President, and I’m not celebrating the outcome. I didn’t want either of them to be elected, but I guess one of them had to be. One thing I can celebrate is that many commentators are saying the mainstream media are in shock over the results. They were convinced Clinton would win. They began to believe everyone had to have been influenced by their onslaught of negative Trump reports. The results indicate many average Americans in flyover country dismissed the “superior intellect” of the so-called elite.

One statistic that gives me hope is that Clinton gathered several million fewer votes than Obama’s totals. That indicates many Democrats who were supposed to blindly accept the candidate put forward by the party made a statement by voting for someone else. Americans are still thinking even if the major parties aren’t.

Third Party Presidential Candidates

Ed Asner recently moderated a debate by three third party candidates at Colorado University on the Boulder Campus, and I commend the Free and Equal Election Foundation for arranging that debate. The participants were Rogue De La Fuente representing the Reform Party, Darrell Castle of the Constitution Party, and Gloria LaRiva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

I’ve been reading some admonitions that a vote for a third party candidate is wasted, and I disagree. I’ve stopped watching the 24 hour news cycle, because they can’t get enough of Clinton and Trump. I became disgusted with the news shows when it was obvious they were being used by the master self-promoter Donald Trump to get free media coverage. The few times I’ve watched any news shows now makes it obvious the media is making its money talking about how disgusting Trump is and ignoring all of the information being released by Wikileaks et al confirming that Clinton has no regard for either laws or ethics.

I believe the two major political parties have proven they have abandoned any pretense that they are looking for decent people to nominate for national political positions. I eagerly tell people I’ve never been prouder to be an Independent. I won’t advise anyone who they should vote for, but I will say that I don’t think either of the two major parties deserve the loyalty many are still willing to give. Perhaps enough third party votes would be a message to them that they should begin to try to better.

Objectivity of Rocky Flats Reporting

A recent Denver Post article by Bruce Finley has some interesting information about plans for opening twenty miles of hiking, cycling, and horseback riding and a visitor center on the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge in 2018. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is holding public meeting to solicit public input. They undoubtedly will have the usual activists show up to warn of the supposed dangers. Dave Lucas, The refuge manager mentions in the article, “Downwind of the plant there’s residual contamination. Plutonium is one of the contaminants, but it is at levels that were determined to be acceptable.” As I understand the plans, the trails being considered are on the dominantly upwind side of the plant where plutonium concentrations are about the same as fallout levels all throughout Colorado.

One paragraph in the article discusses “…the apparent end of litigation with surrounding suburbs over roadways has the cleared the way for work on relatively undisturbed wildlife habitat that extends into the mountain foothills.” I was unaware that the litigation had ended, but that is good news.

There are some inflammatory comments scattered through the article. For example, it says the “…feds…hope to tell the Rocky Flats story of evolution from American Indian hunting grounds through the Cold War military activities that ruined the environment and workers’ health to the current open oasis amid dust-churning monster house development.” Another short sentence proclaims, “Plutonium-tainted and other radioactive waste was buried at Rocky Flats causing an environmental disaster.” It’s no wonder why some people might avoid going to the refuge when it opens to take a beautiful and safe hike.

Rocky Flats Lawsuit Settlement

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