I was so sorry to read the news article "Villagers suspect a problem of nuclear proportions buried near Point Hope." I am the researcher who, 20-odd years ago, found documents describing the burial of small amounts of nuclear waste at Ogotoruk Creek in connection with Project Chariot -- the subject of my book, "The Firecracker Boys."
At that time, I shared the documents with some people from Point Hope and with people who tracked military toxics in Alaska. One of them went to the media, and the media came to me. I advised the reporters that the burial of these very small quantities under 4 feet of dirt, 30 miles from the nearest dwelling, and decayed for 30 years, did not present to any risk to human health.
I told them I thought the burial had been done in an insensitive, secretive and illegal way, and that I would address that in my book. (I did.) But I emphasized that the stuff wasn't going to hurt anybody and was not a proper subject for a splashy news story suggestive of evil intent and lurking danger. My biggest concern was that, presented in this way, the story might propagate completely unnecessary fear and worry among the people of Point Hope, particularly the old people.
Nevertheless, that's exactly what happened.
Starting in 1993, the government spent many millions of dollars cleaning up the tiny bit of contamination at Ogotoruk Creek. And I think that's fine: The government made the mess; the people didn't believe them any more; the government ought to haul it out of there so the Point Hopers could relax.
New attention to unfounded allegations
But a few people, most notably Jack Schaefer, have pressed allegations that are mind-bogglingly implausible and that continue to spread fear and anger among the people. It is Schaefer's beyond-far-fetched allegations published in Alaska Dispatch that prompt me to write.
In the article, Schaefer claims that the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission didn't just plan and then cancel Project Chariot, a scheme to blast a harbor with nuclear bombs. But instead, he declares that the AEC flew the bombs out to Cape Thompson, drilled the holes for their emplacement, put the bombs in the holes, backfilled, and walked away leaving five nuclear bombs in the ground for decades.
He makes these allegations in fuller detail, center stage, in the film referenced in the article.
Large holes for bombs, not small
What's wrong with this picture? Approximately everything. The drilled holes that Schaefer refers to are small diameter holes, a few inches across. But nuclear explosives of that era were large, so the boreholes needed to bury them were large, often several feet across. I've seen pictures and films of these drilling operations being done at Nevada Test Site. The drill rigs they used were very large, and workers even assembled temporary buildings over the holes -- these were huge towers, many stories tall.
Inside these towers, workers erected a long assembly of canisters bolted together and containing the explosive as well as a large array of diagnostic electronics. All this was attached to an enormous bundle of cables traveling from the canisters, up the holes, and out along the ground to buildings where diagnostics were preformed. I have included photos of these things taken at Nevada Test Site.
Such an operation would be highly visible. So how would it be possible for five of these holes to be drilled adjacent to the Ogotoruk Creek camp, the huge canisters assembled and lowered, with their bundle of cables protruding, and all without any of the camp residents even noticing?
Many of the University of Alaska personnel at the camp were staunch opponents of Chariot, and they were paying attention. In my seven years of research for the book, and in all the interviews I conducted with people who were there, including many people from Point Hope who were around then, not one person ever mentioned seeing or hearing about any such operation. Not one.
Alignment
Look for yourself at the aerial photo included here (PDF, automatic download, Page 29) that shows the locations of the five holes Schaefer is referring to. You'll see they are not aligned in a row and look nothing like the in-line configuration that the AEC always depicted in its schematics showing bomb placement. They're scattered all over the place. Hole "Able" is at the mouth of the creek; "Baker" is inland and east of the creek; "Charlie" is down near the beach west of the mouth, a mile away from "Dog" and "X1," which are east of the creek.
This fact supports the notion that the holes were drilled at assorted locations to study assorted soil conditions. And it discredits Schaefer's claim that they were drilled for emplacing bombs to excavate a harbor.
Moreover, the cables that Schaefer refers to coming out of the holes have been identified as thermistor strings, which are commonly used to measure soil temperature at various depths, not to analyze nuclear explosions.
Security
Consider the security measures that would have been in force if nuclear bombs were taken to Ogotoruk Creek. Even the small "tracer experiment," which involved a few shovels-full of radioactive dirt, required an armed guard to escort the dirt on the flight up from Nevada. At Ogotoruk, the guard stood over the experimenters with a rifle, lest the Soviets steal the dirt and analyze our bomb's characteristics.
Can you imagine the security if actual nuclear bombs were flown in and readied for burying? It would have affected everyone involved with the researches, everyone who traveled in the area. Yet, so far as I have ever heard, not a single person observed this.
Declassified document
The film mentioned in the article makes a lot of Jack Schaefer's interpretation of a declassified document dealing with the anticipated shipping to Ogotoruk of some "devices" whose identification is redacted. I am prepared to believe that the materials referenced in the document are indeed the bombs.
But the document is only a timeline listing events that would happen once the shot was approved. It does not say that anything was transported, it says that things would be transported (which of course is no surprise). It says that the AEC "can use" certain aircraft for the airlift, and that a health chemist "will ride up" to Alaska and then "become" a member of the assembly team "on arrival."
All of which clearly indicates that the document refers to events that would happen if the shot were approved, which it never was. Besides, if the document was an after-the-fact summary of what had taken place already, why wouldn't the writer simply say which plane was in fact used, rather than which planes might be used? And why not say what the chemist already did do, rather than what he "will" do?
Sad story
I will forever be sorry that my discovery of a small quantity of buried radionuclides precipitated so much fear and sadness and anger. Unfortunately, Mr. Schaefer's crusade keeps this impulse alive, nudges it a little farther down the road, on into the next generation.
As my book documents, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission did many things in connection with Project Chariot -- and elsewhere -- that were dishonest and contemptible. History should hand that agency a very harsh judgment. But it should be based upon facts that emerge from careful research, not on shoot-from-the-hip, implausible, and completely unsubstantiated allegations.
Dan O'Neill is the author of three books, including "The Firecracker Boys," for which he was named Alaska Historian of the Year by the Alaska Historical Society.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, e-mail commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com.