Grassroots Actions for Peace

Depleted Uranium

Contents Page

• Nuclear Metals Inc, in Concord MA: A Toxic Waste Site in Thoreau Country
• Problems Compounding the NMI Superfund Cleanup
• Depleted Uranium Weapons in War
• DU Manufacturers Today
• Health Effects of Depleted Uranium Weapons
• Treatment for DU Exposure
• National and State Legislation Responding to the DU Threat
• National Legislation
• State Legislation
• 'Best Practice' Testing
• Attempts by the NRC to Deregulate DU Waste: DU in your Frying Pan?
• Moving DU Secretly
• U.S. Allies and Networks in the Fight to Ban DU Weapons
• Organizations or Communities that have official statements/positions about DU
• The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW)
• Resources on DU: articles, booklets, papers, books, technical books, videos & websites

Nuclear Metals Inc/Starmet Corp., in Concord MA: a Toxic Waste Site in Thoreau Country

Airphoto of Nuclear Metals Plant in Concord, MA Caption: NMI and Holding Basin shown from the air in relation to the Assabet River

The courageous leadership of these women led to the involvement of other people in Concord and the formation of Citizens Research and Environmental Watch (CREW). CREW hired technical experts to review NMI reports and mailed newsletters to educate townspeople about the contamination at Nuclear Metals. CREW and Grassroots worked together and Nuclear Metals (renamed Starmet) was designated a Superfund site in June 2001.

CREW is working with the Environmental Protection Agency to achieve a clean-up of the site to residential levels, and to find a new use for the site which will benefit the town and the surrounding areas. Jim West of Concord, is the technical assistance coordinator of CREW, and generously volunteers his time in this effort. See possible actions to help at CREW's Help Now Page.

Problems Compounding the NMI Superfund Cleanup

About 400 drums were removed before NMI/Starmet sought bankruptcy protection in 2002 and then refused to spend additional money on the removal. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts took legal action against the U.S. Army to remove all the material on the grounds that it was the supplier of the depleted uranium and purchaser of the uranium penetrators. In 2005 the U.S Army consented to furnish the funds for the removal and provided over $8 M for the purpose. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has contracted with Envirocare Inc. of Salt Lake City, Utah, to remove the 3400 remaining drums to a disposal site in Clive, Utah. The shipments will start in September 2005 and continue to March 2006

When the drums have been removed, on a completely separate program, an assessment of the contamination of the factory buildings will be conducted as part of the Remedial Investigation of the entire property under the auspices of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Was it legal for Nuclear Metals to transport the materials to Concord? Was there oversight of the process? In any case, we can take note that now, through necessary Army funding, citizen taxpayer will pick up the tab for the enormous cost of the dishonest practices of a private company.

Nuclear Metals Ad in Concord Journal, April 1991

Note statement "Water beneath the Basin is of drinking water quality." (See section 1. Fig 1C)  In fact in 1998, after the removal of 8000 cubic yards of contaminated waste from the Holding Basin, the groundwater nearby still showed uranium concentrations of up to 3000 times safe drinking water standards.   See Fig 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, 3C

Depleted Uranium Weapons in War

Since the Gulf War, the United States and the United Kingdom have used DU munitions in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro) during the mid and late 1990's. DU munitions were used again in the Iraq War of 2003 where they were used in urban areas. The Department of Defense puts use of DU shells in the Iraq War as "significantly" less than the 320 tons used in the 1991 Gulf War while outside observers estimate usage as under 150 tons; see Depleted Uranium in Gulf II, Collateral Risks, other sources say more. We conjecture that DU continues to be used in Iraq.

DU Manufacturers Today

M1A1 Abrams Firing

The 140,000 pound Abrams Main Battle Tank, a primary dispenser of radioactive, poisonous uranium gas and dust in Iraq, fires its big gun at a spectacular 2,100 MPH or three times the speed of sound (MACH III.) The three foot long solid uranium projectiles then vaporize and burn at temperatures ranging from an estimated 3,000 to 10,000 degrees as they penetrate their target. (Photo credit WikiPedia)

Health Effects of Depleted Uranium Weapons

A number of Gulf War veterans believe that symptoms of Gulf War Illness such as chronic fatigue, headaches, joint pain and respiratory problems are linked to DU exposure. Five National Guardsmen who served in Iraq in 2003 and who tested positive for DU exposure through a German laboratory, share a number of these symptoms. Kenneth Duncan, a Scottish veteran of the First Gulf War suffers from joint pain and breathlessness; he had worked in the vicinity of destroyed Iraqi tanks during the war. In addition to his having been ill since the 1991 Gulf War, his children were born with deformed toes. In February 2004 he received compensation from the British Ministry of Defense based largely on tests showing dicentric and centric chromosomal aberrations in his peripheral lymphocytes indicating exposure to ionizing radiation.

DU oxide dust is created at extremely high temperatures when a DU shell hits a hard target. Traveling at very high speeds, the shell bursts into flames as it hits the tank. Dr. Keith Baverstock, formerly of the World Health Organization says of the micron-sized particles of DU dust that result from the impact, that "This material has no natural analogue and does not arise in the normal refining and processing of uranium for nuclear fuel. There is, therefore no prior experience than its use in Iraq in 1991". (ICBUW Conference, Brussels, June 23, 2005). This is yet another nail in the coffin of research comparing the experience of uranium miners to soldiers exposed to DU dust.

Many experts believe that exposure to DU oxide dust may increase cancer risk and cause damage to the kidneys due to its high chemical toxicity while downplaying the role of its radioactive component in causing these problems. However before the Gulf War, the Army's Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command stated in a report that DU had been "linked to cancer when exposures are internal". (See Collateral) article) Increases in cancers, childhood leukemias and birth defects in southern Iraq have been noted since 1991 by Iraqi doctors and scientists who have linked them to DU exposure. No human epidemiological studies have been done that would corroborate these claims.

Over the past dozen years or so there has been a debate among people interested in or concerned about depleted uranium. Some representatives of the anti-DU movement claim that DU is harmful and is causing genocide in areas like Iraq. Their point of view is substantiated by the fact that the half-life of DU is 4.5 billion years. Some scientists, especially physicists, believe that DU causes harm due to its chemical toxicity but that its radiation component does little harm. This is due partly to the lack of experts in the biological sciences, including physicians, who are well versed in the field of low level radiation. Radiobiology is a young field.

Researchers at the Armed Forces Radiobiological Research Institute (AFRRI) have shown that DU crosses the placenta and lodges in the fetus and also crosses the blood-brain barrier. Human cellular studies done by AFRRI have demonstrated that DU, a heavy metal like nickel, is carcinogenic due to its high chemical toxicity. DU uranyl choloride transformed human cells into neoplastic malignant cells which when injected into nude mice with weakened immune systems caused tumors within a month (AFRRI 1 (1998). Both soluble and insoluble DU compounds (DU oxide dust is mostly insoluble) transformed human cells into a malignant type (AFRRI 2 (2002). Another AFRRI study showed that the radiological component of DU could change human cells to neoplastic malignant cells and that DU caused dicentric chromosomal aberrations that occur when cells are exposed to radiation. (AFRRI 3 (Rad. Prot. 2002).

Although DU gives off beta and gamma radiation, it is chiefly an alpha emitter, a form of radiation which is dangerous inside the human body. DU's chemical toxicity and radioactivity may work synergistically in causing cellular damage. Cellular and animal studies show that DU may cause harm, but there are almost no good human studies. It is known however that the few cells hit by DU alpha particles within the deep lung are not the only ones to show damage; adjacent cells also react as though they had been targeted. This effect, known as the bystander effect, has not been taken into account by those setting safe radiation standards. DU's radiation effect has been controversial because it is 60 percent as radioactive as pure concentrated uranium metal. DU oxide dust has a far higher concentration of uranium, more than 100,000 times that of natural uranium in soil and rocks. Uranium exists at very low levels in nature.

In July 2005, the National Academy of Sciences published the BEIR VII Report (IEER Press Release) reconfirming what some experts have known to be true, that all levels of radiation, including low level radiation can cause cancer. DU falls into this category. The report also states that relatively high levels of radiation can cause heart disease. It takes note of the bystander effect and recommends further research of this phenomenon.

A large study of nuclear workers in 15 countries (British Medical Journal, 29 June 2005 (E. Cardis et al., 'Risk of cancer after low doses of ionising radiation: retrospective cohort studies in 15 countries', British Medical Journal 10, 11361, June 29, 2005), found that there was a small excess risk of cancer at low doses of radiation. The radiation studied in this scientific report was low level external radiation, not low level internal radiation as with DU.

Existing radiation standards which have been reduced over the years, were developed from studies of the atomic bomb survivors in Japan, which were begun five years after the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many of the ill, the weak, the very young and the elderly died between 1945 and 1950 and were not included in the studies. These studies focused on the effect of a single blast that gave off a high dose of external radiation. This led radiation experts to extrapolate low dose radiation from high dose radiation, indicating that low dose radiation did little or no harm.

The standards developed through the A-Bomb Survivor Studies may not apply to the radiation sustained by those exposed to the low level, internal, often chronic radiation caused by DU particles. In general, the very young, the elderly and even women are more sensitive to radiation than the adult male. In southern Iraq, where fighting was fierce, all age groups in the population were potentially exposed to DU dust. The Iraqi population had been weakened, especially the young, by malnutrition and economic sanctions. The A-bomb survivor population in the latter half of the 1950's was very different from the Iraqi population in the 1990's and early 2000's.

Treatment for DU exposure

National and State Legislation Responding to the DU Threat

National Legislation:

State Legislation

"Best Practice" Testing

Several laboratories in the United Kingdom, one run by Dr. Randall Parrish, as well as a laboratory in Germany run by Dr. Axel Gerdes of the University of Frankfurt, have sophisticated equipment which can accurately distinguish between DU and natural uranium in urine samples "with as little as 0.1 nanograms (a nanogram is one billionth of a gram) of total uranium per liter" (link to The Best Test Daily Press article by Bob Evans). Parrish's lab uses a multicollector ICP mass spectrometer and their analysis has a very low margin of error, of under one percent.

US laboratories use a quadruple ICP mass spectrometer machine which is a less sensitive analyzer. Testing by the US military uses the minimum of 3 or more nanograms of total uranium per liter, which is "30 times more than the minimum for the new British test". The margin of error is also considerably greater.

The US government may test for the presence of DU in the urine only if a test for total urinary uranium is as high or higher than total urinary uranium levels in a population that has not been exposed to DU.

The problem is that there is often no relationship between the amount of total uranium and the amount of DU in the urine. DU that is inhaled and lodges in the deep lung, or the lymph nodes is largely insoluble so that it stays there. It slowly solubilizes and then travels to the kidneys and is excreted in the urine. Therefore a small amount of DU in the urine does not indicate how much DU is in the body and it may not influence the level of total uranium in the urine to any extent. To decide against testing for DU exposure on the level of total uranium in the urine may miss a potential exposure.

Attempts by the NRC to Deregulate DU Waste: Want DU in your Frying Pan?.

A depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) storage cylinder with external corrosion (rust) and a patch used to repair a breach, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth, Ohio. More than 16,000 DUF6 cylinders (approx. 195,000 metric tons) are currently stored at the Portsmouth plant. An additional 36,000 cylinders are stored at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Paducah, Kentucky, and nearly 5,000 more at the Oak Ridge site in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. (Photo credit IEER)

In 1986 and again in 1990, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tried to deregulate DU waste, which would have allowed DU and other low level radioactive waste to go to unlicensed facilities such as garbage dumps, landfills and incinerators as well as into recycling streams permitting the recycling of DU metal into consumer products. (The regulation of DU requires that DU be stored in radioactive waste disposal facilities that are licensed and designed for storage of radioactive materials). The efforts of the NRC to deregulate DU waste were termed "Below Regulatory Concern" as if such radioactive waste was harmless.

In the late 1980's and early 1990's 15 state legislatures passed laws and resolutions opposing the NRC's "Below Regulatory Concern" (BRC) policies. In Massachusetts 25 cities and towns voted in resolutions and ordinances countering these policies. The cities and towns that enacted these resolutions were Buckland, Chatham, Chicopee, Clarksburg, Concord, Duxbury, Fairhaven, Fall River, Freetown, Harwich, Haverhill, Kingston, Lincoln, Ludlow, Mattapoisett, New Bedford, North Brookfield, Plainville, Plymouth, Rochester, Scituate, Saugus, South Hadley, Sutton and Williamstown. Some of these municipalities also initiated "Good Neighbor Agreements" with landfill operators.

In 1992 as a result of public outcry, Congress passed the Energy Policy Act revoking the NRC's Below Regulatory Concern policies.

In 2002 the NRC Commissioners instructed the NRC Staff to prepare a new regulation similar to their "Below Regulatory Concern" policies which would once again allow DU and other low level radioactive waste to go into unlicensed facilities and ultimately into consumer products like zippers, chairs etc.

The new rule-making proposal was sent to the NRC Commissioners in March 2005. In early June, the NRC Commissioners voted 5-0 to reject the deregulation proposal. How did they come to this decision? Environmental groups had protested the deregulation of radioactive waste. Also, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service says that the NRC wants to keep a "clean image" that the nuclear industry has worked to maintain. Public outcry about deregulation and the releasing of DU and other radioactive wastes into recycling streams and consumer products would tarnish this image. (see "US: NRC rejects waste deregulation for now", page 6 in NIRS newsletter from the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons")   This comes at a time when the Bush administration wants to build more nuclear reactors.

At the time of the decision against deregulation, one of the NRC Commissioners said that they might want to deregulate DU waste in 2, 5, or 10 years. Some of the Commissioners want to deregulate DU and other radioactive waste as soon as new nuclear reactors are licensed. Additional nuclear reactors will of course add to the already enormous quantities of DU waste in storage facilities.

Actions! Bring this situation to the attention of your local and state officials, and recycling personnel, landfill operators and trash haulers as well as the general public.

Moving DU Secretly

DU in transit has an explosive propellant making shipment potentially dangerous and irresponsible without the labeling "Explosive" and "Radioactive". In case of fire or accident in which the driver is incapacitated and unable to tell anyone about the nature of the cargo, first responders like firemen or police would be at risk not knowing that they were dealing with a volatile radioactive material.

DOT declared in May 2005 that it had received more than 200 comments opposing the renewal of the exemption from national and local government officials and first responder organization members as well as individuals and interest groups. Organizations who had been involved in an 18-month campaign to discontinue the exemption included Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action, Poulsbo, WA, Traprock Peace Center, Deerfield, MA, the Military Toxics Project Lewiston, ME and Nukewatch, Luck,WI.

In June 2005 the Department of Transportation made public plans to phase out Exemption DOT-E 9649 over the next two years, meaning that DU shipments would have to have placards saying "Radioactive", "Explosive". DOT will also phase out the exemption for new radioactive munitions over the coming year.  See Transport of DU Memo, May 2005, 461 KB

The Department of Transportation showed courage in making this decision, and a letter would be appreciated. Write Mr. Delmar Billings, DHM-31, Director, Office of Hazardous Materials, Exemptions and Approvals, Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590 commending him on phasing out Exemption DOT-E 9649. Also, you should ask that the exemption be discontinued immediately. Copies of your letter to Mr. Billings should go to your Senators and Congresspeople and where possible to local officials.

U.S. Allies and Networks in the Fight to Ban DU Weapons.

Organizations or Communities that have official statements/positions about DU.

The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons
Website: www.bandepleteduranium.org

The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW) was formed in October 2003 at a conference held in Berlaar, Representatives of 17 grassroots organizations from 6 countries created the Coalition. Grassroots Actions for Peace was one of its founding members. Today ICBUW is made up of about 90 members from 24 countries.

ICBUW encourages and supports direct action, campaigns and the formation of national coalitions to inform and educate the public about DU weapons and their impact on human health and the environment and to work towards a worldwide ban of DU weapons. ICBUW’s mission statement can be found on the ICBUW website.
ICBUW’s first campaign was an international petition drive demanding an end to the production, use, export, stockpiling and transport of DU weapons as well as compensation to the victims including medical treatment and the cleaning up of the environment. This campaign which is on-going now has over 230,000 signatures.

ICBUW’s Website has a list of member organizations, as well as articles and research, breaking news, summary of a Draft Convention banning DU weapons which will go to the UN General Assembly, FAQs on DU, and the international petition banning uranium weapons which can be downloaded. The website supports different languages including French, German and Italian.

Recent Activities:
Belgium: In March 2007 the Belgian Parliament voted to ban uranium weapons. The Belgian Coalition Stop Uranium Weapons, and Friends of the Earth, both ICBUW members, had lobbied hard for this.
Lobbying by both these groups was a factor leading to a vote in the European Parliament for a moratorium on DU weapons, three years in a row but in 2007 they stated that the moratorium included working towards a ban on DU weapons.
Starting in the fall of 2003, four Belgian organizations including Friends of the Earth worked on a campaign, “My Money, Clear Conscience?”, through research, lobbying and direct action. The campaign was directed towards the five largest Belgian banks. It demanded that the banks stop investing in companies that manufactured or otherwise invested in DU weapons. Three of the banks agreed to stop such investing but so far only one, KBC, has actually done so.
In May 2007 Belgian ICBUW members, in particular Friends of the Earth, in conjunction with the European Greens/EFA (European Free Alliance, also a Green Party) held a three-day exhibition of photos taken by the wellknown Japanese photographer, Naomi Toyoda. The photos are of Iraqi children and adults with birth defects or cancers that may have been linked to DU exposure directly or through their parents. The exhibition, “The Human Cost of Depleted Uranium” was held at the European Parliament. ICBUW also had a half-day conference at the European Parliament during the exhibition where scientists, members of the European Parliament, veterans and Euromil, a European military union, gave presentations.
The United Kingdom: In February 2007, CADU (Campaign Against Depleted Uranium), an ICBUW member, met with members of Parliament in London, giving CADU supporters the opportunity to lobby their MPs. CADU members met with MPs and members of the press. At the end of the day, there was a public meeting where experts and activists gave talks.
Italy: Peacelink, an ICBUW member, continues to work with veterans, supporting their compensation claims and helping them with legal problems.

The International Day of Action
ICBUW has designated November 6 as its International Day of Action. November 6 is the day the United Nations has termed the International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflicts. Each year ICBUW has written a report to the United Nations urging the UN to consider a ban on uranium (DU) weapons.
Many ICBUW member groups have petition drives on the International Day of Action. Copies of petition signatures have been presented to a Ministry of Defense (Belgium, 2004)), an Under Secretary-General of Disarmament at the UN in New York (2005) and the Director of the Hiroshima Office for Asia and the Pacific of the UN Institute for Training and Research (2006). Events on the International Day of Action on November 6, 2006 included:
In Belgium a delegation from the Belgian Coalition visited the Ministry of Defense, (which attracted considerable press) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs where they discussed the need for a ban on DU weapons.
In Japan activities included a jazz charity concert for Iraqi children ill with cancer accompanied by a video on DU, in one city, street action and petition-signing in Osaka, a talk on DU weapons given by Mrs. Haruko Moritaki of NO DU Hiroshima Project to students at Kanazawa University along with a photo exhibit on the dangers of DU weapons in the university’s student union. In Tokyo a public meeting with speakers on different issues connected with DU was organized by the Citizens’ Network for a Ban on DU Weapons.
In the United States members of Grassroots Actions for Peace collected over 200 petition signatures in 5 cities and towns, including Cambridge. The Christian Peacemakers Team of Northern Indiana held public vigils with local supporters including “a major action” in front of Aerojet Ordnance in Jonesboro, Tenn. where DU weapons are manufactured. The vigils were held at opening and closing times at the plant.
These are just some of the events that took place on November 6, 2006.

Draft Convention
Manfred Mohr, a lawyer with IALANA (International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, Germany) and A. Samsel of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Germany (IPPNW-Germany) have drawn up a Draft Convention. The Convention prohibits “the development, production, stockpiling, transfer and use of uranium weapons and their destruction”. The Draft Convention also forbids civilian use of DU. ICBUW hopes to bring the Draft Convention to the UN General Assembly within the next year or so.

Annual Conventions and Workshops ICBUW has held annual conventions, several in Belgium in 2004 and 2005. In 2005, this included a conference held at the European Parliament. In 2006, the annual convention took place in Hiroshima, Japan where hundreds of people attended from 40 countries. ICBUW plans to hold a smaller, twoday convention at the UN Church Center in New York City in October 2007. ICBUW has had several DU workshops at the UN in New York; one in Finland and two in Geneva. ICBUW members were able to meet with government officials and politicians in all three countries.
Other Activities: In spring 2007, ICBUW representatives had a series of high-level talks with the government of Costa Rica, in Central America. They met with President Arias and other government officials and politicians.
ICBUW members also visited 10 UN Missions and WHO in Geneva in May of 2007, garnering support for a draft resolution banning uranium weapons.
Research Projects supported by ICBUW:
These are:

• The Basra Epidemiological Study, where Iraqi doctors will study cancer incidence rates in relation to DU contaminated areas and
  
• The Iraqi Children’s Tooth Project which will document levels of DU in primary teeth of children living in DU-contaminated areas as compared to uranium levels in primary teeth of children living in North America

Depleted Uranium Radioactive Contamination In Iraq: An Overview