All Things Whistleblower: A GAP Blog

Keeping An Open Mind While Workers get Sick

On July 27^th of this year, a spill involving nuclear waste occurred at the Hanford nuclear facility. Reports pegged it as the worst spill in years.

Over the past weekend, seven Hanford workers have reported medical symptoms that they believe are linked to the accident.

The CH2M Hill Hanford Group, the contractor in charge of the waste spill (and of the workers) has told the press that (according to reports) “based on its knowledge of the spill and the chemicals involved, it would not have expected workers to be exposed to enough chemicals to be harmed.” Nevermind that the symptoms, which include upper respiratory problems, blurred vision, and headaches, are quite similar to symptoms reported by Hanford workers in 2003 and 2004 that feared vapor inhalation.

Regardless of that, though, Thomas Anderson, CH2M Hill director of environmental health, was quoted in the Tri-City Herald as stating that “we’re keeping an open mind on this.”

More to come. 

GAP Letter to DOE Urges Review of Contractor

On August 21, 2007, GAP sent a letter to the new Manager of Department of Energy’s Richland Field Office requesting a review of the actions of Washington Closure Hanford (WCH), a government contractor company performing duties associated with the clean-up efforts at the Hanford nuclear facility in Southwest Washington state. GAP’s letter highlights WCH’s record of repeated safety violations, environmental violations, retaliatory work environments, and failures in proper management of its subcontractors, and requests consideration of suspending and/or debarring WCH from government contracting.

The U.N. and the UNDP

A U.N. official has found evidence that the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) retaliated against an employee who exposed wrongdoing involving the agency’s programs in North Korea. Unfortunately, the UNDP has refused a request from the U.N. ethics chief to submit to a formal investigation.

The General Assembly resolution that led to the formation of the UN Ethics Office – Resolution 60/1, paragraph 161 (d) – stressed that a “system-wide code of ethics” should be adopted for the organization and that an ethics office should be created “with independent status” to enforce it. Nevertheless, the UNDP appears to feel justified in rejecting orders from the Ethics Office. The Ethics Office is in charge of administering the whistleblower protection policy and should have jurisdiction over this case.

Christopher Burnham, the former U.N. under-secretary for management of the United Nations, has stated that the whistleblower policy applied to UNDP staff members. "I wrote the whistleblower law, I know the whistleblower law, and Artjon Shkurtaj is a whistleblower," Burnham told the AP.

GAP also helped write this whistleblower rule, and we too believe that it was intended to apply to all the U.N. Funds and Programmes. Why else would it say “The Secretary-General, for the purpose of ensuring that the Organization functions in an open, transparent and fair manner, with the objective of enhancing protection for individuals who report misconduct or cooperate with duly authorized audits or investigations, and in accordance with paragraph 161 (d) of General Assembly resolution 60/1, promulgates the following…”

GAP put out a statement on the front page of its Web site here.

It appears that this mindset may be contagious, as now the UNOPS (Office of Project Services) is claiming exemption from some of the ethics guidelines.

 

NIH Whistleblowers Being Targeted?

Employees within the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (part of the NIH) have recently been asked to report all contacts with Congressional members and agencies to superiors. This is to be done on a standard form. Senator Charles Grassley, a champion of whistleblower rights, is upset at this for very good reason. The distribution of this form was made in the midst of his investigation into charges of wrongdoing at NIEHS by employees.

Grassley is pondering whether this form is whistleblower intimidation.

Vitrification Plant Construction to be Resumed

The DOE has announced that construction of the Hanford vitrification plant will recommence within 30 days. Work has been halted for the past two years as a result of drastically increased costs and seismic concerns. The seismic safety of the design has been increased so that the structure will be capable of withstanding a worst-case-scenario earthquake, but the estimated cost of the project has risen from $4.3 billion to over $12 billion. This facility has been chalk full of problems that GAP has previously exposed.

Court Decides Against Downwinders

The Tri-City Herald has reported that a federal court of appeals has overturned rulings in favor of four "downwinders" who believe that their health problems developed as a result of radioactive emissions from Hanford. The court agreed that contractors may be liable for injuries to those who lived downwind of Hanford when it was manufacturing weapons-grade plutonium. However, hundreds of plaintiffs' cases may have been irreparably damaged by the appeals court's decision that a plaintiff who files suit more than three years after being diagnosed has exceeded the statute of limitations and is therefore ineligible for compensation.

The Bank and Climate Change

For the third time in the last fifteen years, environment officials at the World Bank are attempting to require that the Bank take into consideration the effects of its projects on climate change. Historically, the Bank has deliberately ignored climate science in its plans.

Among the many misdeeds discovered by GAP about former Bank President Paul Wolfowitz was his suppression of climate concern within the Bank. In 2006, Wolfowitz’ office ordered the removal of references to climate change in Bank reports. Perhaps his successor, Robert Zoellick, will bring about change.

Safeway to no longer Sell Artifically Red Meat

Consumers everywhere achieved a victory a few weeks ago when Safeway announced that it would pull carbon monoxide (CO) treated meat from its shelves. GAP Food & Drug Safety Officer Jacqueline Ostfeld wrote an op-ed about the victory that appeared in several outlets nationwide.

The use of CO in prepackaged meat is a deceptive practice which keeps meat looking red and fresh long after it spoils. In July, responding to relentless pressure from food safety advocates, including GAP, and a request made by two powerful Michigan Democratic Representatives (John Dingell and Bart Stupak), Safeway decided to bar sales of the gassed meat.

Cargill, Tyson and Hormel, among others, have been injecting meat with CO in order to recoup the $1 billion annually (10 percent of earnings) lost when consumers refuse to buy meat that has begun to brown and spoil. A poll by the Consumer Federation of America shows that 78 percent of Americans think this technology is deceptive. The meat industry attempts to justify its use of the gas by claiming that the sell-by date is the most important indicator of freshness. However, if meat is exposed to temperatures above 40°, it may begin to spoil before the sell-by date. Most people judge meat’s freshness by its color – it is only after consumers think their meat is starting to look a little funky that they call on their sense of smell to be the final arbiter of freshness. Besides, the very consumers who are less likely to be able to read the often tiny print of the sell-by date are the same as those who may have trouble smelling the meat – senior citizens and people with disabilities.

Despite media coverage and relentless pressure from consumer groups and Congress, the federal food agencies (FDA and USDA) themselves have failed to act. On April 28, 2004, the USDA's food safety division recommended the prohibition of CO in meat packaging due to concern that the gas would mask spoilage and delude consumers. Over the next month, the agency met twice with industry officials, leading to the decision to sanction the technology for case-ready meat. GAP is investigating how and why this reversal took place. The evidence points to fast-tracking: using only industry data that did not include meat samples, pictures, or studies of meat, and that lacked studies of consumer behavior. This kind of unbalanced, closed process poses a serious threat to food safety.

Columbia River Making People Sick

The Oregonian reported this week that Columbia Riverkeeper, an Oregon-based advocacy group, is testing the Columbia River for dangerous bacteria, algae, viruses, and toxins - beginning with E.coli - in hopes of figuring out what is causing windsurfers and other water-sport enthusiasts to fall ill with flu-like symptoms after spending time in the water. This has been occurring for more than 20 years, but is becoming more and more frequent, with more reports this year than ever before. The river, which passes through the Hanford nuclear facility, receives runoff from sewers, factories, and mills.

Though there is a host of factors which may be causing the illness, GAP conducted a study in 2005 which revealed that there is plutonium contaminating the river near Hanford. So there's that.

The Raw (Milk) Story

According to the New York Times, the market for unpasteurized milk is on a steep incline. The demand for raw milk - illegal in 15 states - has led to multi-million dollar farms and a booming black market. Despite warnings from the FDA, food scientists, and public health groups, many Americans are willing to pay high prices and travel long distances for milk that has a richer flavor and more proteins and enzymes - along with a much higher likelihood of E.coli and salmonella.