Depleted Uranium - The Toxic Killer
By: Mick Youther
Department of Physiology
Southern Illinois University - Carbondale, Illinois

The Bush Administration knows about the health and the environmental consequences of using depleted uranium but it doesn't care.

When I first heard the term “depleted uranium”, I thought it must be uranium after the radioactivity was gone. I was wrong.

• “Depleted uranium (DU) is the highly toxic and radioactive byproduct of the uranium enrichment process.... Depleted uranium is roughly 60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium, and has a half life of 4.5 billion years. As a result of 50 years of enriching uranium for use in nuclear weapons and reactors, the U.S. has in excess of 1.1 billion pounds of DU waste material.”-- Dan Fahey, “Metal of Dishonor” (1997)

• “More ordinance was rained down on Iraq during the six weeks of the Gulf War than during the whole of the Second World War. Unknown to the public or the Allied troops at the time, much of it was coated with depleted uranium (DU)”-- Felicity Arbuthnot, New Internationalist, September 1999

• “The Pentagon and the United Nations estimate that the U.S. and Britain used 1,100 to 2,200 tons of armor-piercing shells made of depleted uranium during attacks on Iraq in March and April [2003]--far more than the 375 tons used in the 1991 Gulf War.”-- Seattle Post Intelligencer, 8/4/03

• “Since the U.S. military's widespread use of DU in the Gulf became known in 1991, the Pentagon has struggled to suppress mounting evidence that DU munitions are simply too toxic to use. It has cashiered or attempted to discredit its own experts, ignored their advice, impeded scientific research into DU's health effects and assembled a disinformation campaign to confuse the issue.”-- Environmental Magazine, May/Jun 2003

• “When I spoke out within the military about how bad [depleted uranium] was, my life ended, my career ended. I received threats, warnings, sent to the reserve from full active duty."-- Dr. Doug Rokke, former Army Major, who was in charge of the military's environmental clean-up following the first Gulf War, ABC News, 5/5/03 (Thirty members of Rokke’s cleanup team have already died, and he has 5,000 times the acceptable level of radiation in his body, resulting in damage to his lungs and kidneys, brain lesions, skin pustules, chronic fatigue, continual wheezing and painful fibromyalgia. After the Gulf War, Rokke was assigned to make a training video to teach soldiers how to handle depleted uranium. It was a never shown to the troops.)

• “...General Calvin Waller told NBC's ‘Dateline’ that neither he nor General Norman Schwartzkopf were ever told about the health hazards of DU.”-- Military Toxics Project's Depleted Uranium Citizens' Network, 1/16/96

• ”Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.”-- Henry Kissinger, quoted by Bob Woodward in “The Final Days” (1976)

• “Our studies indicate that more than forty percent of the population around Basra will get cancer. We are living through another Hiroshima”-- Dr. Jawad Al-Ali, an oncologist and member England's Royal Society of Physicians, quoted by islamonline.net, 5/15/03

• “The leukemia rate in Sarajevo, pummeled by American bombs in 1996, has tripled in the last five years. But it's not just the Serbs who are ill and dying. NATO and UN peacekeepers in the region are also coming down with cancer.”-- Baltimore Chronicle, 12/5/01

• “Drought-stricken Afghanistan's underground water supply is now contaminated by these nuclear weapons. Experts with the Uranium Medical Research Center report that urine samples of Afghanis show the highest level of uranium ever recorded in a civilian population.”-- Amy Worthington, Idaho Observer, April 2003

• ”By now, half of all the 697,000 U.S. soldiers involved in the 1991 war have reported serious illnesses. According to the American Gulf War Veterans Association, more than 30 percent of these soldiers are chronically ill and are receiving disability benefits from the Veterans Administration.”-- Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto, Swans Commentary, 2/2/04

• “Gulf War Syndrome not only killed, maimed, and made soldiers sick, they brought it home. In a study of 251 Gulf War veterans' families in Mississippi, 67 percent of their children were born without eyes, ears or a brain, had fused fingers, blood infections, respiratory problems or thyroid and other organ malformations.”-- Leuren Moret, environmental geologist, San Francisco Bay View, 11/7/01

• “In America, war means money - lots of it - and to the corporations which profit from war, our soldiers are nothing more than an expendable item. The Pentagon and the military corporations clearly consider contamination of their own soldiers as an acceptable cost.”-- S.R. Shearer, The End Times Network, 5/10/99

How can we do this to our soldiers, their families and the other victims of war? How can anyone think this is a good idea?

Mick Youther is an Instructor in the Department of Physiology at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, IL.
You can email your comments to:
Mick@interventionmag.com

Depleted Uranium - The Planet Killer
Depleted Uranium Kills!

by mAd rEpoSteR Monday April 04, 2005 at 09:30 PM

Depleted Uranium has been linked to "Gulf War Syndrome".

US 'Depleted' Uranium Death Toll From Iraq Now 11,000

Nationwide Media Blackout Keeps US Public Ignorant About This Important Story

By James P. Tucker Jr.
American Free Press.net
4-4-5

The death toll from the highly toxic weapons component known as depleted uranium (DU) has reached 11,000 soldiers and the growing scandal may be the reason behind Anthony Principi's departure as secretary of the Veterans Affairs Department.

This view was expressed by Arthur Bernklau, executive director of Veterans for Constitutional Law in New York, writing in Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter.

"The real reason for Mr. Principi's departure was really never given," Bernklau said. "However, a special report published by eminent scientist Leuren Moret naming depleted uranium as the definitive cause of 'Gulf War Syndrome' has fed a growing scandal about the continued use of uranium munitions by the U.S. military."

The "malady [from DU] that thousands of our military have suffered and died from has finally been identified as the cause of this sickness, eliminating the guessing. . . . The terrible truth is now being revealed," Bernklau said.

Of the 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are now dead, he said. By the year 2000, there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. More than a decade later, more than half (56 percent) who served in Gulf War I have permanent medical problems. The disability rate for veterans of the world wars of the last century was 5 percent, rising to 10 percent in Vietnam.

"The VA secretary was aware of this fact as far back as 2000," Bernklau said. "He and the Bush administration have been hiding these facts, but now, thanks to Moret's report, it is far too big to hide or to cover up."

Terry Johnson, public affairs specialist at the VA, recently reported that veterans of both Persian Gulf wars now on disability total 518,739, Bernklau said.

"The long-term effect of DU is a virtual death sentence," Bernklau said. "Marion Fulk, a nuclear chemist, who retired from the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, and was also involved in the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in the soldiers [from the second war] as 'spectacular' - and a matter of concern."

While this important story appeared in a Washington newspaper and the wire services, it did not receive national exposure"a compelling sign that the American public is being kept in the dark about the terrible effects of this toxic weapon.

(Veterans for Constitutional Law can be reached at (516) 474-4261.)



Article from: The Las Vegas Indymedia Center
The Las Vegas Indymedia Center is a non-commercial, democratic collective of Las Vegas independent media makers and media outlets, and serves as the local organizing unit of the global Indymedia Network.

Nuke Dump Gets Closer to Reality

Thursday, February 24, 2005, Skull Valley:

According to a press release recently issued from the Shundahai Network , the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board which is an independent arm of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), issued a decision in favor of the Private Fuel Storage (PFS) facility.

PFS is a consortium of eight electric utilities/commercial power companies/nuclear power plants that claim to have partnered with the Skull Valley Band of the Goshute Native American Tribe. The PFS consortium is interested in storing some 40,000 metric tons of high level radioactive waste in an above ground "temporary" storage repository right in the middle of Utah, in Skull Valley.

The PFS consortium is claiming that it's temporary because they're waiting for the Yucca Mountain Project to be finalized and for the waste to eventually be moved there. This decision empowers the NRC five-member board to make the final licensing decision regarding PFS.

Read and sign onto the letter opposing PFS HERE

SPECIAL REPORT - Depleted Uranium

Depleted Uranium
http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/shisetsu_us_e/

Facilities related to radioactive depleted uranium weapons are scattered over virtually the entire United States. The total number of facilities for R&D, manufacture, test firing, storage, and disposal of DU, including those that have been shut down due to radioactive contamination, is upwards of 50. They are far smaller in size and number than the nuclear weapons facilities spread across the country, but like the testing ranges and disposal sites for the latter, they end up in sparsely populated areas, where they contaminate the environment and threaten the health of local residents.

The map shows the locations of DU munitions facilities on a list compiled by the Army Environmental Policy Institute (AEPI) in 1995. I will report on contamination issues related to these facilities, particularly the firing ranges.

Pyramid Lake lies downwind of the Sierra Army Depot, where vast amounts of weapons have been destroyed for many years. It is feared that depleted uranium and chemical substances contaminate the Paiute Tribe’s treasured fishing ground. (Paiute Reservation, Pyramid Lake, Nevada)

The main purpose of DU shells is to destroy tanks made of heavy metals. Test firing of DU shells from tanks requires a large firing range; aerial bombing practice from airplanes requires huge desert bases.

Changing perceptions of the government
The Nellis Air Force Base appears to surround the Nevada Nuclear Testing Site. It is the only DU munitions firing site in current use by the Air Force. The base covers 1.25 million hectares (about 4,830 sq. miles). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) permits DU rounds to be used on the southeast, or the Las Vegas side, of the base. Here, 7,900 rounds of 30mm shells are tested each year.

Unfortunately, the permissible area happens to lie entirely within a national desert wildlife preserve. DU rounds have been test-fired here since the early 1970s, because radioactivity and heavy metal pollution were not considered serious problems until the mid 1980s. However, a US Congress decision required the Air Force to find 44,500 hectares (about 170 sq. miles) for a wildlife preserve in another part of the state to compensate for the land it contaminated in this area.

Grace Potorti (45), executive director of the NGO Rural Alliance for Military Accountability based in Reno, Nevada, explains the change in attitude of the state residents and state government as follows.

"Nevada cooperated with atmospheric nuclear tests at the Nevada Nuclear Testing Site since the beginning of the 1950s. Until the mid-1980s, it welcomed every expansion of military presence. Then things changed. Though the military presence was doing wonders for the economy, the people and the state government began to realize that the damage to the eco-system and the health of the residents from the use of DU and other munitions surpassed the benefits.

1.5 million unexploded shells
Through the Internet, the Alliance exchanges information with grassroots groups located near military bases all around the country. According to Potorti, the great majority of DU firing ranges are located in sparsely populated areas and are embroiled in controversy regarding radioactive contamination.

One of these is the Army's Jefferson Proving Ground (JPG) in southeast Indiana. To demonstrate the power and accuracy of DU rounds, test firings were repeatedly carried out over 22,300 hectares (about 85 sq. miles) between the mid-80s to 1994. The legacy is about 70 tons of DU, shell fragments, and contaminated storage buildings.

Since 1941, JPG has been test-firing various other kinds of weaponry as well-about 1.5 million unexploded rounds were simply abandoned there.

Tremendous clean-up costs
The Department of Defense has decided to close JPG, but closing and returning the base to the state of Indiana requires decontamination. An environmental report on JPG by researchers at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (New Mexico) in 1996 estimated that a total of $7.8 billion would be needed to clean up the DU alone.

Faced with such a mind-boggling figure, the cleanup has bogged down. Until it takes place, wild deer and other animals living in the vicinity of the radiation-contaminated base will absorb depleted uranium through the air and food.

Area residents have long hunted deer for food and pleasure. People who eat that venison will absorb depleted uranium concentrated by the food chain. They can buy safe drinking water, but they cannot escape the dangers of raising cattle, other livestock and crops on contaminated water.

Though the Department of Defense assures the residents that contamination on the base will not affect their health, Potorti says, "People around here are very worried."

Moreover, as seen in communities living near the firing range of the Energetic Materials Research Test Center attached to the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro, New Mexico, and the Sierra Army Depot in Herlong, California, the historic homes of native American tribes are being contaminated, and health problems are emerging.

- End of above Report -

AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION TO RE-EVALUATE RADIOACTIVE WASTE POLICY
http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/reevaluateindcom0697.htm

More than 120 environmental groups, three-dozen federal legislators, governors, and numerous others have endorsed establishment of an independent Presidential Commission to completely review and re-evaluate our nation’s radioactive waste policy. Sen. Richard Bryan has introduced legislation that would establish such a commission.

Background
The current national nuclear waste policy was established in law in the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987. It calls for a permanent high-level radioactive waste dump to be in place at Yucca Mountain, Nevada by 1998. According to nuclear industry promoters, the federal Department of Energy--in other words, the taxpayer--is supposed to take title to this lethal waste and liability for all leaks or accidents. Yucca Mountain has so far cost billions and will not accept waste in 1998. New scientific information increasingly indicates that this site will not provide safe, permanent waste isolation.

Technical problems also plague a new generation of proposed “low-level” radioactive waste dumps. A dozen or so were supposed to be in place, according to federal law, by December 31, 1992. In fact, none were, and as of June 1997, none are. The problem of “disposing” of a billion pounds of “depleted uranium” from uranium enrichment activities remains vexing and unsolved, as does the problem of storage for extremely hazardous radioactive waste created over the past 50 years by our nation’s nuclear weapons complex.

Nonetheless, while federal government production of new atomic waste has slowed (although clean-up of weapons plants may actually create waste), commercial nuclear reactors and associated facilities continue to generate hazardous material, with no permanent solution for its storage in sight.

The Nuclear Industry’s “Solution”
Some nuclear industry proponents regard irradiated fuel as a valuable commodity--something which should be reprocessed or recycled whenever possible. Because this is neither economically nor socially feasible, the industry is now promoting “interim” offsite storage. The nation’s commercial nuclear utilities have engaged in a massive, high priced advertising campaign aimed at creating the appearance of a major crisis. Ads have run in communities where the waste is located with the intent of motivating residents and forcing the Congress to pass legislation that would move irradiated fuel from their reactor sites. Claiming that “interim” offsite storage is the solution to an environmental problem, the real message from the industry was “move it anywhere but get it off our property.”

Legislation currently pending in Congress would place the “interim” storage facility in Nevada on Western Shoshone Lands because of the dubious Yucca Mountain connection. There have been and continue to be schemes targeting other Native American lands. But “interim” storage has run into substantial criticism since it fails to cope with the central issue: what our nation should do with the waste on a more permanent basis, or whether we should generate radioactive materials in the absence of a permanent solution for their storage. In the meantime, radioactive waste for the most part is being stored on-site at nuclear reactors.

Although the nuclear power industry has tried to portray new “low-level” radioactive waste dumps as essential to ensure continued use of nuclear medicine, the vast majority of medical radioactive waste is both small in its amount of radioactivity and is short-lived, making effective storage quite reasonable. Nuclear reactor waste, on the other hand, is both long-lived and is far more dangerous, in some cases lethal. In addition, unlike medical waste, nuclear reactor waste includes such hazardous elements as Plutonium-239, which has a hazardous life of 240,000 years, far beyond the 100-year control period proposed for “low-level” radioactive waste dumps. This raises substantial questions as to whether the current classification scheme for radioactive waste holds scientific credibility, or whether it is merely a convenience to the nuclear industry.

“Interim” storage of high-level waste, and establishment of national or regional “low-level” nuclear waste treatment centers and dumps also raises the specter of widespread transportation of deadly atomic garbage. In January 1995, the State of Nevada and 102 grassroots environmental groups released a study indicating likely transportation routes for high-level waste: these rail and highway routes would affect thousands of communities in 43 states and pass within ½ mile of 52 million people--all to move the waste to an uncertain future at a temporary dumpsite, with the distinct possibility that the waste may have to move again. “Interim” storage is not a solution for a sound radioactive waste management policy it is simply a stop-gap measure aimed at removing the waste from where it now rests--with the nuclear utilities--in order to give utilities room to make still more nuclear waste--and to transfer the liability for accidents to taxpayers.

An Independent Commission
For these reasons--the lack of a policy that will lead to safe waste isolation and the bankruptcy of current radioactive waste proposals--a groundswell of public opinion is developing in favor of a different approach. It is time to re-examine our nation’s radioactive waste issues and to think about new ways to address this seemingly insoluble problem. One thing is clear: a sound scientific basis, greater technical justification and greater public acceptance are prerequisites for developing a meaningful radioactive waste storage policy. This cannot be achieved by stop-gap measures endorsed only by nuclear utilities. Legislation that would create an independent Presidential Commission to re-evaluate our nation’s atomic waste policies and to make recommendations that would point the way toward a more sensible and safer means of handling these unwanted byproducts of the nuclear age.

The Commission would consist of recognized scientists; of representatives from state government agencies charged with addressing this problem; of members of affected and potentially-affected communities; of Native American tribes; and, in recognition of the essential role played by ordinary citizens, ordinary citizens. In short, the Commission would resemble our nation itself. It would grapple with this most difficult of issues, and attempt to reach a defensible consensus. During the two-year charter of the Commission, no federal licenses could be issued for radioactive waste storage, except for temporary on-site storage (most “low-level” radioactive waste dumps are licensed by the states).

The concept of an independent Presidential Commission is gaining increasing momentum as the only sound way to address the fundamental flaws in our current radioactive waste policies. We have learned over the years that it is not possible to simply force radioactive waste dumps on people who don’t want them, and that it is unsound to develop radioactive waste policy that is neither publicly acceptable nor scientifically defensible. An independent commission could go a long way toward restoring public confidence in our governmental institutions and in promulgating radioactive waste policies that make sense for our nation.

For more information, contact the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), 1424 16th Street NW, #404, Washington, DC 20036, 202-328-0002; fax: 202-462-2183; e-mail: nirsnet@nirs.org

- End of above Report -

Waste disposal
http://www.uic.com.au/wast.htm

Final disposal of high-level waste is delayed to allow its radioactivity to decay. Forty years after removal from the reactor less than one thousandth of its initial radioactivity remains, and it is much easier to handle. Hence canisters of vitrified waste, or spent fuel assemblies, are stored under water in special ponds, or in dry concrete structures or casks for at least this length of time.

The ultimate disposal of vitrified wastes, or of spent fuel assemblies without reprocessing, requires their isolation from the environment for long periods. The most favored method is burial in dry, stable geological formations some 500 meters deep. Several countries are investigating sites that would be technically and publicly acceptable. The USA is pushing ahead with a repository site in Nevada for all the nation¹s spent fuel.

One purpose-built deep geological repository for long-lived nuclear waste is in operation in New Mexico, though this only takes defense wastes.

After being buried for about 1,000 years most of the radioactivity will have decayed. The amount of radioactivity then remaining would be similar to that of the naturally occurring uranium ore from which the fuel originated, though it would be more concentrated.

Layers of protection
Thus, to ensure that no significant environmental releases occur over periods of tens of thousands of years after disposal, a 'multiple barrier' disposal concept is used to immobilize the radioactive elements in high-level (and some intermediate-level) wastes and to isolate them from the biosphere.

The principal barriers are:
Immobilize waste in an insoluble matrix, e.g. borosilicate glass, Synroc (or leave them as uranium oxide fuel pellets - a ceramic)
Seal inside a corrosion-resistant container, e.g. stainless steel
In wet rock: surround containers with bentonite clay to inhibit groundwater movement
Locate deep underground in a stable rock structure
Site the repository in a remote location.

For any of the radioactivity to reach human populations or the environment, all of these barriers would need to be breached before the radioactivity decayed.

What happens in USA?
In USA high-level civil wastes all remain as spent fuel stored at the reactor sites. It is planned to encapsulate these fuel assemblies and dispose of them in an underground engineered repository about 2010, at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. This is the program that has been funded by electricity consumers to US$ 18 billion (i.e. @ 0.1 cent per kWh), of which about US$ 6 billion has been spent.

Depleted uranium has few uses, though with a high density (specific gravity of 18.7) it has found uses in the keels of yachts, aircraft control surface counterweights, anti-tank ammunition and radiation shielding. It is also a potential energy source for particular (fast neutron) reactors.

- End of above Report -

Bibliography: Military Use of Depleted Uranium (DU)
(Last updated 6 Aug 2005)

http://www.wise-uranium.org/dlit.html << Go here for further in-depth details pertaining to the issues listed.

Contents:
Press Articles
General · DU Missile Proving Grounds
1991 Gulf War · 1994/5 Bosnia War · 1999 Kosovo War
See also:
Uranium Toxicity
Bibliography: Radiation Monitoring
Bibliography: Cleanup of Radiation Sites

Press Articles
Eric Hoskins: Making the Desert Glow - U.S. uranium shells used in the gulf war may be killing Iraqi children.
The New York Times , OP-ED, January 21, 1993, page A19
William Arkin: The desert glows - with propaganda

.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May 1993
Naima Lefkir-Laffitte, Roland Laffitte: Armes radioactives contre l'« ennemi irakien »

.
Le Monde diplomatique, avril 1995, page 22
Gary Cohen: Radioactive Warfare - Radioactive Ammo Lays Them to Waste

.Multinational Monitor, Jan/Feb 1996, Vol.17, Nos.1+2
Bill Mesler: The Pentagon's Radioactive Bullet - An investigative report

.
The Nation, October 21, 1996
Bill Mesler: Pentagon Poison: The Great Radioactive Ammo Cover-Up

.
The Nation, May 26, 1997
Bill Mesler: The Gulf War's New Casualties - Tales of sickness from the Pentagon's own weaponry, made of depleted uranium

.
The Nation, July 14, 1997

General
Depleted Uranium in Urine of Soldiers - WISE Uranium Project FAQ (370k PDF)
The Emergence and Decline of the Debate Over Depleted Uranium Munitions 1991-2004 , by Dan Fahey, 20 June 2004 (132k PDF - posted with permission)
Depleted Uranium: Scientific Basis for Assessing Risk

,
The Nuclear Policy Research Institute (NPRI), July 2003 (549k PDF )
Journal of Environmental Radioactivity

,
Special Issue on Depleted Uranium: Volume 64, Issues 2-3, Pages 87-259 (2003)
SCIENCE OR SCIENCE FICTION? Facts, Myths and Propaganda In the Debate Over Depleted Uranium Weapons , by Dan Fahey, (253k PDF , March 12, 2003, posted with permission)
Fact Sheet: Hazards from depleted uranium produced from reprocessed uranium
(290k PDF , revised March 26, 2003)
Infoblatt: Gefahren von abgereichertem Uran aus Wiederaufarbeitungsuran
(290k PDF - in German , revised March 26, 2003)
Composition of the U.S. DOE Depleted Uranium Inventory (70k PDF )
Uranium Toxicity
The health hazards of depleted uranium munitions, Part I/II

,
The Royal Society, London, May 2001 / March 2002
Depleted Uranium: Sources, Exposure and Health Effects

,
World Health Organization, Geneva, April 2001
Informationen über Uran-Munition (Uran-Geschosse, DU-Munition)


(in German ), Heinz Helmers, Hans-J. Pade, Arbeitsgruppe Physikalische Umweltanalytik, Univ. Oldenburg
Depleted Uranium, Background Information on a Current Topic / Depleted Uranium (abgereichertes Uran) (in German )
by W. Arnold, AC-Laboratorium Spiez , Switzerland, January 2000
Alpha-Strahlung: Strahlenbiologie und Risikobeurteilung by Prof. Horst Kuni (350k PDF , in German )
Review of Radioactivity, Military Use, and Health Effects of Depleted Uranium , by Vladimir S. Zajic, July 1999
Health and Environmental Consequences of Depleted Uranium Use in the U.S.Army: Technical Report. Army Environmental Policy Institute , Atlanta, Georgia 1995, 200+ p.
The Military Toxics Project's Depleted Uranium Citizens' Network: Radioactive Battlefields of the 1990's , The United States Army's Use of Depleted Uranium and its Consequences for Human Health and the Environment, Jan.16, 1996, 8 p.
Hantel, L. W. ; Hopson, J. W. ; Sandstrom, D. J.: Evaluation of depleted-uranium alloys for use in armor-piercing projectiles, Los Alamos National Laboratory, June 1973 (declassified 1995), LA-5238, AFATL-TR-73-61, 78 p.
Elder,J C; Tinkle,M C: Oxidation of depleted uranium penetrators and aerosol dispersal at high temperatures, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory 1980, LA-8610-MS, 53 p.
Mishima,J; Parkhurst,M A; Scherpelz,R I : Potential Behavior of Depleted Uranium Penetrators under Shipping and Bulk Storage Accident Conditions. U.S. DOE (Ed.), PNL-5415, Washington, D.C. 1985, 138 p.
Guidelines for Safe Response to Handling, Storage, and Transportation Accidents Involving Army Tank Munitions or Armor Which Contain Depleted Uranium. (ARMY PUBS.), 28 Sep 1990, 56p, NTIS Order number: TB 9-1300-278ING.
Layton,David W; Armstrong,Anthony Q: Methodological Considerations for Determining Cleanup Limits for Uranium in Treated and Untreated Soils. In: Journal of Soil Contamination, Vol.3 (1994) No.4, p.319-348
Erikson,R L; Hostetler,C J; Divine,J R; Price,K R: Review of the environmental behavior of uranium derived from depleted uranium alloy penetrators. U.S. DOE (Ed.), PNL-7213, 1990, 26 p.
Depleted Uranium - A study of its Uses in the UK and Disposal Issues, R&D Technical Report P3-088/TR, UK Environment Agency , Bristol, ISBN: 1 85705 5241, November 2001

DU Missile Proving Grounds
Report on Environmental Effects at Yuma Proving Ground from Continued Testing of Projectiles Containing Beryllium and Depleted Uranium. U.S. DOE (Ed.), UCID- 21277, Washington, D.C. 1988
Shinn,J H : Environmental Analysis of Metal Particle Dispersion from an Explosive Test at Tonopah Test Range. U.S. DOE (Ed.), UCID-21355, Washington, D.C. 1988, 21 p. Camins,I; Shinn,J H: Analysis of Beryllium and Depleted Uranium: An Overview of Detection Methods in Aerosols and Soils, U.S. DOE (Ed.), UCID-21400, Washington, D.C., 1988, 40 p., Download (4.3 MB)

(PDF format)
Wichner,R P; Khan,A A; Hoegler,J M : Separation of Depleted Uranium Fragments from Gun Test Catchments: Phase 1, Catchments System Evaluation and Separations Methods. U.S. DOE (Ed.), ORNL/TM-11141, Washington, D.C. 1989, 128 p.
Ebinger,M H; Essington,E H; Gladney,E S; Newman,B D; Reynolds,C L: Long-term fate of depleted uranium at Aberdeen and Yuma Proving Grounds. Final report, Phase 1: Geochemical transport and modeling. Progress report. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA-11790-MS, Washington, D.C. 1990, 37 p.
Ikenberry,T A: Evaluation of the depleted uranium hazard from SRAM II missile testing.; California Coastal Commission meeting (CCC), Santa Barbara, CA (USA), 8-9 Apr 1991. U.S. DOE (Ed.), PNL-SA-19325; CONF-91042571, Washington, D.C. 1991, 28 p. Bernhardt,D E: Depleted Uranium Cleanup Criteria and Associated Risk.
In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Health Physics Society, Columbus, OH, June 21-25, 1992, CONF-920617, 1992, 13 p.
Environmental assessment for the depleted uranium testing program at the Nevada Test Site by the United States Army Ballistics Research Laboratory. U.S. DOE Nevada Field Office (Ed.), DOE/EA-0398, Las Vegas, NV 1992, 60 p.
Wenstrand,T K; Greene,J: Decontamination of Soils Containing Depleted Uranium Using a Combination of Gravity Separation and Chemical-Extraction Techniques. In: Abstracts of Papers of the American Chemical Society 205 (1993) MAR, p.134-IEC Lloyd,D B; Wichner,R P; Jermyn,H W: Separation of Depleted Uranium Fragments from Gun Test Catchments. Volume 1. Summary and Recommendations. Final report. Sep 88-Dec 92.; Oak Ridge National Lab., TN. (Ed.), ORNL/TM-11141-VOL.1, 1993, 63 p.
Wichner,R P; Khan,A A; Hoegler,J M: Separation of Depleted Uranium Fragments from Gun Test Catchments. Volume 2. Catchments System and Separations Methods. Final report. Sep 88-Dec 92.; Oak Ridge National Lab., TN. (Ed.), ORNL/TM-11141-VOL.2, 1993, 139 p.
Wichner,R P; Bradshaw,W M: Separation of Depleted Uranium Fragments from Gun Test Catchments. Volume 3. Economic Comparison of Depleted Uranium Disposal Options for Elgin AFB Gun Test Facility. Final report. Sep 88-Dec 92.; Oak Ridge National Lab., TN. (Ed.), ORNL/TM-11141-VOL.3, 1993, 80 p.
Khan,A A: Separation of Depleted Uranium Fragments from Gun Test Catchments. Volume 4. Bench-Scale Tests of Separating Depleted Uranium from Sand. Final report. Sep 88-Dec 92. Oak Ridge National Lab., TN. (Ed.), ORNL/TM-11141-VOL.4, 1993, 50 p.
Binger H; Myers,O B; Kennedy,P L; Clements,W H: Depleted uranium risk assessment at Aberdeen Proving Ground; American Defense Preparedness Associates symposium on the environment, Albuquerque, NM (United States), 23-25 Mar 1993. . U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/UR/93-484; CONF-93031121, Washington, D.C. 1993, 10 p.
Clements,W H; Kennedy,P L; Myers,O B: Ecological risk assessment of depleted uranium in the environment at Aberdeen Proving Ground. Annual report, 1991. Progress report. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/SUB-93-76, Washington, D.C. 1993, 32 p.
Becker, N M: Influence of hydraulic and geomorphologic components of a semi-arid watershed on depleted uranium transport, U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA-UR-93-2165, Washington, D.C. 1991, 239 p.
Ebinger,M H; Hansen,W R: Environmental radiation monitoring plan for depleted uranium and beryllium areas, Yuma Proving Ground. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/UR/94-1838, Washington, D.C. 1994, 87 p.
Ward,T J; Stevens,K A: Modeling erosion and transport of depleted uranium, Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona

.
U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/SUB/94-167; WRRI286, Washington, D.C. 1994, 86 p.
Ebinger,M H; Hansen,W R: Depleted uranium human health risk assessment, Jefferson Proving Ground, Indiana. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/UR/94-1809, Washington, D.C. 1994, 77 p. Mason,C F V; Allander,K S; Bounds,J A; Garner,S E; Walter,K J: Use of the long-range alpha detector (LRAD) for alpha emission surveys at active and inactive firing sites; Waste management '94, Tucson, AZ (United States), 27 Feb - 3 Mar 1994. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/UR/94-400; CONF-94022547, Washington, D.C. 1994, 10 p.
Van Etten,D M; Purtymun,W D: Depleted uranium investigation at missile impact sites in White Sands Missile Range. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/12675/MS, Washington, D.C. 1994, 49 p.
Vandel,D S; Medina,S M; Weidner,J R: Remediation application strategies for depleted uranium contaminated soils at the US Army Yuma Proving Ground. U.S. DOE (Ed.), EGG-CEE-10883, Washington, D.C. 1994, 221 p.
U.S. NRC: Decommissioning of the Depleted Uranium Impact Area of the Jefferson Proving Ground, Madison, IN. Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and To Conduct a Scoping Process.
In: Federal Register 60 (1995) (April 10), p.18155-18159
Kennedy,P L; Clements,W H; Myers,O B; Bestgen,H T; Jenkins,D G: Evaluation of depleted uranium in the environment at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland and Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona. Final report. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/SUB/94-173, Washington, D.C. 1995, 211 p.
Becker,N M; Vanta,E B: Hydrologic transport of depleted uranium associated with open air dynamic range testing at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, and Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Major Range and Test Facility Base environmental workshop (5th), Alexandria, VA (United States), 23-25 May 1995. U.S. DOE (Ed.), LA/UR/95-1213, Washington, D.C. 1995, 18 p.
Ebinger,M H; Beckman,R J; Myers,O B; et al.: Long- term fate of depleted uranium at Aberdeen and Yuma Proving Grounds, Phase II: Human health and ecological risk assessments. U.S. DOE, LA-13156-MS, Washington D.C., Sep 1996, 218 p.
Ebinger,M H; Hansen,W R: Depleted uranium risk assessment for Jefferson Proving Ground using data from environmental monitoring and site characterization. Final report. Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States), LA- UR-96-3852, Oct 1996, 79p. Ebinger,M H: Depleted uranium risk assessment for Jefferson Proving Ground: updated risk estimates for human health and ecosystem receptors. Los Alamos National Laboratory, LA-UR-98-5053, Nov 1998, 22 p.
Miller,Mark; Galloway,Robert B.; VanDerpoel,Glenn et al.: Cost-Effective Remediation of Depleted Uranium (DU) at Environmental Restoration Sites, Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), Albuquerque, NM, and Livermore, SAND99-2843J, 1999, 5 p.

DU in the 1991 Gulf War
Unresolved Issues Regarding Depleted Uranium And the Health of U.S. Veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom , by Dan Fahey, 24 March 2004 (241k PDF - posted with permission)

Dan Fahey: Don't Look, Don't Find. Gulf War Veterans, the U.S. Government and Depleted Uranium 1990 - 2000 , The Military Toxics Project, March 30, 2000
Steve Fetter and Frank von Hippel, "The Hazard Posed by Depleted-uranium Munitions," Science and Global Security, Vol. 8, No. 2 (1999), pp. 125-161 > Download full text: (161k PDF)
· (161k PDF - alternate URL) · (209k Word 97)
Steve Fetter and Frank von Hippel, "When the Dust Settles," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 55, No. 6 (November/December 1999) pp. 42-45
> Download full text:
(26k PDF) · (46k Word 97) DOD Analysis II, by Dan Fahey, June 29, 1999, 22 p. [An Analysis of the RAND report on Depleted Uranium, see below] > Download full text
(419k PDF ) Fahey, Dan: Case Narrative - Depleted Uranium (DU) Exposures, Swords to Plowshares, Inc., National Gulf War Resource Center, Inc., Military Toxics Project, Inc., 3rd edition, September 20, 1998 > Download full text: "GWVR" (RTF format) · MTP

(PDF format)
Fahey, Dan: The Stone Unturned - A Report on Exposures of Persian Gulf War Veterans and Others to Depleted Uranium Contamination, March, 1997
> View full text (80k, RAMA) · Download full text (WordPerfect)
Bukowski,Grace; Lopez,Damacio A: Uranium Battlefields Home & Abroad. Depleted Uranium Use by the U.S. Department of Defense. Citizen Alert & Rural Alliance for Military Accountability (Ed.), Reno / Carson City, Nevada 1993, 166 p.
> Download PDF
Cortenraad, René : Depleted Uranium - "Agent Orange" of the 1990s?, The use of depleted uranium in armor and armor-piercing projectiles. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven , Faculteit Technische Natuurkunde 1995, 48 p.
Dietz, Leonard A. : Contamination of Persian Gulf War Veterans and Others by Depleted Uranium , Niskayuna 1996
Dan Fahey: Collateral Damage: How U.S. Troops Were Exposed to Depleted Uranium During the Persian Gulf War, Sept.20, 1996 (second edition), 20 p.
(can be obtained from Military Toxics Project )
Warren,David R; Solis,William M; Schladt,Beverly C; Maurer,David C; Herman,Robert W; Musallam,Yasmina T: Operation Desert Storm: Army Not Adequately Prepared to Deal With Depleted Uranium Contamination. U.S. General Accounting Office (Ed.), GAO/NSIAD-93-90, Washington, D.C. 1993, 42 p.
> Download full report (PDF)
Daxon,E G; Musk,J H: Assessment of the Risks from Embedded Fragments of Depleted Uranium. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Inst. (Ed.), AFRRI/TR-93-1, Bethesda, MD 1993, 20 p. Daxon,E G: Protocol for Monitoring Gulf War Veterans with Embedded Fragments of Depleted Uranium. Technical report. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Inst. (Ed.), AFRRI/TR-93-2, Bethesda, MD 1993, 24 p.
Ember,Lois: Joint Effort to Test Ailing Persian Gulf War Veterans to Begin Soon.
In: Chemical & Engineering News 72 (1994) 21 (May), p.31-32
Bou-Rabee, Firyal: Estimating the Concentration of Uranium in Some Environmental Samples in Kuwait After the 1991 Gulf War. In: Applied Radiation and Isotopes Vol.46 (1995) No.4, p.217-220
Livengood,D R: Health effects of embedded depleted uranium fragments. Special Publication. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Inst.
(Ed.), AFRRI/SP-98-3, Bethesda, MD, June 1998, 56 p.
Environmental Exposure Report: Depleted Uranium in the Gulf U.S. Department of Defense, July 1998 N. Harley, E. Foulkes, L. Hilborne et al.: A Review of the Scientific Literature As It Pertains to Gulf War Illnesses: Vol.7, Depleted Uranium , MR-1018/7-OSD, RAND, 1999 (alternate source ) Gulf War Illnesses: Understanding of Health Effects From Depleted Uranium Evolving but Safety Training Needed, GAO/NSIAD-00-70, United States General Accounting Office, Report to Congressional Requesters, March 2000, 41 p. > Download full report (363k PDF ) Gulf War and Health: Volume 1. Depleted Uranium, Sarin, Pyridostigmine Bromide, and Vaccines , Committee on Health Effects Associated with Exposures During the Gulf War, Division of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, 416 pp., ISBN 0-309-07178-X, National Academy Press, Sep 2000 > view online Environmental Exposure Report - Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II) , Office of the Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense for Gulf War Illnesses, December 13, 2000 Depleted Uranium - Human Exposure Assessment and Health Risk Characterization In Support of the Environmental Exposure Report "Depleted Uranium in the Gulf" of the Office of the Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Gulf War Illnesses, Medical Readiness and Military Deployments (OSAGWI), OSAGWI LEVELS I, II AND III SCENARIOS, U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (USACHPPM), 15 September 2000

DU in the 1994/1995 Bosnia War
Depleted Uranium in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment, UNEP, March 2003 (PDF ) Report of the Portuguese Scientific Mission to Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina for assessment of radioactive contamination and of the radiological risk due to the use of depleted uranium ammunitions (April 17, 2001)

DU in the 1999 Kosovo War
Untersuchungen zur Gesundheitsgefährdung durch Munition mit abgereichertem Uran (DU), U.Oeh, P.Roth, U.Gerstmann, W.Schimmack, W.Szymczak, V.Höllriegl, W.Li, P.Schramel, H.G. Paretzke, GSF-Forschungszentrum für Umwelt und Gesundheit , Institut für Strahlenschutz, GSF-Bericht 03/05, Neuherberg, Juli 2005, 137 S. > View details Depleted Uranium Environmental and Medical Surveillance in the Balkans , Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) for Gulf War Illnesses, Medical Readiness, and Military Deployments, U.S. Department of Defense, 2001 Depleted Uranium: Environmental and Health Effects in the Gulf War, Bosnia and Kosovo, European Parliament, Directorate-General for Research, Working Paper, Scientific and Technological Options Assessment Series, STOA 100 EN, May 2001, 53 p. > Download full text (497k PDF ) UNEP Final Report: Depleted Uranium in Kosovo - Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment, 2001 (PDF ) Report of the Swiss Members of UNEP-Team, 20 March 2001 (95k PDF ) · German Version UNEP Final Report: Depleted Uranium in Serbia and Montenegro - Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, UNEP 2002 (PDF ) Opinion of the Group of Experts Established According to Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty - Depleted Uranium, 6th March, 2001 (140k PDF ) Report of the Portuguese Scientific Mission to Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina for assessment of radioactive contamination and of the radiological risk due to the use of depleted uranium ammunitions (April 17, 2001) Report of the World Health Organization Depleted Uranium Mission to Kosovo, 22 to 31 January 2001 (12 March 2001, 123k PDF ) A study of uranium excreted in urine An assessment of protective measures taken by the German Army KFOR Contingent Research report prepared by P. Roth, E. Werner, H.G. Paretzke for the Federal Ministry of Defense GSF - National Research Center for Environment and Health, Institute of Radiation Protection, Neuherberg, January 2001, GSF Report 3/01, 36 p. > download full text (English) (300k PDF ) P. Roth, E. Werner, H. G. Paretzke: Untersuchungen zur Uranausscheidung im Urin Überprüfung von Schutzmaßnahmen beim Deutschen Heereskontingent KFOR Forschungsbericht im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums der Verteidigung GSF - Forschungszentrum für Umwelt und Gesundheit, Institut für Strahlenschutz, Neuherberg, January 2001, GSF-Bericht 3/01, 31 S. > download full text (486k PDF in German ) Theodore E. Liolios: Assessing The Risk from the Depleted Uranium Weapons Used in Operation Allied Force, Science & Global Security, Vol. 8 No. 2 (1999), pp.163-181 > download full text (686k PDF ) UNEP/UNCHS Balkans Task Force (BTF): The potential effects on human health and the environment arising from possible use of depleted uranium during the 1999 Kosovo conflict. A preliminary assessment. 76 p., Geneva, October 1999 > Download full text (589k, PDF format) · alternate source

- End of above Report -

OVERVIEW
This brief report is only a minor overview of a very deadly scenario being played out by the U.S. Govt. the U.S. Military and the Corporate-Industrial Complex. As usual, with radioactive waste of any kind, there is no safe haven. As these afore groups attempt to patronize the intelligence of American and Native American citizens in regards to safe passage (transportation) and storage, the facts well prove the deceit that falls under the guise of Homeland Security.

Many sites on the internet that pertain to the issue of DU (Depleted Uranium) and which expose the truth are being blocked and ultimately redirected to worthless sites in an effort to cover up these truths. The primary purpose of compiling this report is to show how the U.S.G. still targets Native American people and their lands in their ongoing efforts of genocide - no matter how much they choose to deny it.

Recent discoveries have uncovered other DU storage facilities throughout the United States in populated areas that should set off alarms to the citizens that they too have been targeted for over forty years by these storage dumps and/or facilities without their knowledge whatsoever as to what was in these yards. Perhaps this targeting was unintentional, none-the-less, once these groups became aware of how deadly these materials were they should have halted their storage in such close proximity of human populations. Maybe this is why they have chosen areas such as Nevada…and on Native American lands.

Wells Band of Western Shoshone Research Department
Te Moak / Newe Sogobia / 2-2006