NB: Roger was not allowed to present the actual slideshow
to the Hearing but he was allowed to read the script which was recorded
into the taped record. Here is the script:
(a) Nanoose test ranges are used primarily by the U-S- NavyThe closest part to the Sunshine Coast is about eleven miles, except for an acoustic-testing area near Egmont. The headquarters, Nanoose Bay, is twenty miles from us.
Radiation is the hazard we are discussing. Prevailing winds are from the southeast. These might keep us relatively safe from fallout from an accident right at Nanoose: Campbell River, and maybe Powell River, might get it. But if an accident happens on the lower range, or on a ship sailing to or from the ranges, we can be in a direct line.
What kind of accident? Say, a shipboard fire. There are lots of those.
(b) A study I have says the burning of just one of the nuclear weapons on a vessel would make a radioactive cloud containing Plutonium239 in concentration up to i@ 080 times the U.S- Federal limits. Radiation exposure from inhaling it would exceed U.S. Federal limits by up to 100 000 times. Contamination would extend 50 or more kilometres.
When I say lots of fires, I mean the U.S. Navy calls the fire department
for fires just on ships in @ ports 350
times a year, or about once a day.
(c) Testing is done on anti-submarine weapons. The top curve I
think is an ASROC--short for Anti-Submarine
Rocket. The ASROCs were the most accident-prone of the nuclearcapable
weapons. They were old, large,
heavy, and awkward at sea, but they are now being phased out.
Weapons accidents and incidents reported by the U.S. Navy averaged one every eleven days from 1945 to 1976--including the sinking of USS Scorpion and loss of all the crew.
(d) Ships usually arrive in pairs--often a surface ship with a subSurface ships are usually diesel-powered like this one, though some are driven by reactors-
Their hazard relates to the nuclear-capable weapons they all carry.
(e) U.S. policy is 'neither to conf irm nor deny' the presence of actual nuclear warheads on board. Canadian policy is not to ask. It is almost impossible to exaggerate the secrecy around some facets of the base. However, since it's known the weapons have been deployed we can assume they are aboard almost all the vessels.
(f) It's not so likely a nuclear weapon would 'go off' in a nuclear explosion, although that is possible. But they also contain conventional high explosives. These are more likely to go off by accident, which could vaporize the radioactive core of the weapon, thus releasing its plutonium as we showed on the map.
In 1988 there were 27 vessels at Nanoose for a total of 55 ship-days. We have had four nuclear ships here since last January.
<g) The subs carry nuclear-capable weapons and are propelled by nuclear
reactors- Thus a weapons
accident could involve the reactor, or vice versa.
Most accidents on subs go unreported, but one study found they have a reported problem every three months. Over a quarter of these involve the nuclear power plant.
But let's start with the heqt reactor accident: the mistaken release of radioactive water used to cool the reactor core. Apparently the least serious, it is by far the most common incident reported. Some of the vessels which come here have been discovered releasing coolant in other harbours.
(h) A retired sub commander says they used to discharge it regularly, and not tell local authorities- The American doctor who treated Chernobyl victims says the subs are leaking radioactivity all the time-
That's the ho-zt kind of accident. We're not sure what the worst kind could be:
(i) They can have core meltdowns--a Soviet icebreaker did. We
know this could cause a secondary
hydrogen steam explosion. But we don't know if the reactor itself
could explode like a nuclear bomb.
In a land reactor it wouldn't, but the sub reactor fuel is 319 times
more concentrated.
About meltdowns--a Navy study says it could go right down through the
ship, spilling hot
radioactive material to the bottom of the harbour, and absolutely nothing
could be done about it-
Medium-serious accidents are like the one in April, 1989--a Soviet
sub sank off Norway from an
electrical problem--or one in Scotland the year before where a cooling-system
fault took them within minutes of
what an expert witness calls "a mini-Three Mile Island or Chernobyl
which could have contaminated 2080
square miles."
That was the same type of reactor as those that come here. The
emergency was covered up for three
weeks and denied by the British Government.
(k) How do accidents happen?
Human slip-ups account for 50-70% of all failures of major weapons. Five thousand people a year are removed from the U.S. nuclear weapons program because of drug or alcohol abuse, negligence, or aberrant behaviour.
(1) Especially in submarines, stress, isolation. and boredom lead to problems. A typical tour is 75 days, submerged most of the time, maintaining radio silence.
(m) Accident risk is higher manoeuvering in harbours and enclosed spaces-
And it is high while they are out in simulated war conditions, shooting
torpedoes and being shot at, out off Halfmoon Bay.
Then there are collisions. I find this funny in a sinister way. U.S. nuclear subs have collided with cargo ships, harbour tugs, barges, merchant ships, an aircraft carrier, a destroyer, a minesweeper, nuclear waste barrels, a target ship (during target practice) and a whale. They have had groundings and struck bottom- They have even collided with each other. We are assured, however, that absolutely no such incidents take place in Canadian waters.
(n) This sketch was intended to show the--
- frequency of naval accidents, the
- secrecy surrounding them, the
- seriousness of even low-level leakage, and the
- vulnerability of people around the Gulf of Georgia, which is after
all an inland sea.
Thank you for your attention. I have here some resource materials
giving further information for those
who wish to examine them.