Want A Missile "Defense" Base In Maine, NY, Ohio Or Michigan? None Of The Above!

Rangeley, Maine

I am re-blogging my friend Bruce Gagnon's excellent piece on behalf of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. I told him I am tempted to send yet another public comment myself: The grassroots resistance to this proposal in either Maine or upstate NY will be so fierce and unrelenting that you will be sorry you ever thought of attacking our environment in this way. (I can't speak knowledgeably abut Ohio or Michigan, but I expect it would be similar.)

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED MISSILE DEFENSE BASE IN RANGELEY, MAINE

Comments to Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Continental United States Interceptor Site

TO: Missile Defense Agency MDA.CIS.EIS@BV.com

Our organization is opposed to any of the four proposed interceptor sites in Maine, Ohio, Michigan or New York.

First reason is because of enormous cost, especially at the time of severe economic hardship for people across the nation.

Secondly, the proposed GMD program is severely underperforming in its testing phase and has long suffered from corruption.

Thirdly, development of the interceptor base at any of these proposed sites would have severe environmental consequences.

In particular I want to address the proposal for Rangeley, Maine since I live and work in this state.

Culture: The proposal to put the base in Rangeley would have enormous negative impact on the local culture by essentially doubling the size of the existing community.  Local schools and other human resources would be overwhelmed by the influx of personnel estimated to work at the proposed base.  There would be an obvious detrimental impact on tourist haven Rangeley area and against Maine's life giving tourist industry.

Environment:  The ridiculous notion of driving interceptor silos and missiles on already bad Maine roads would further destroy these roads that the state already cannot keep in good condition.  The idea of widening these roads in some places to make it possible to transport silos and missiles would have severe negative impact on the environment.  The state would not be able to maintain even wider roads since they can’t already handles their existing road network.  Blasting mountain areas to place the silos underground would also have severe impact on wildlife, native vegetation and water quality would be impacted.  It is my understanding that Poland Springs has a 1,000 acre water well near this area that would certainly be negatively impacted. Where's the enormous amount of gravel needed for this project going to be mined?

Liquid rocket fuels:  The toxic liquid fuels to be used in the interceptor missiles would have to be transported, stored, and then placed inside missiles.  This process would allow many opportunities for toxic spills in the area contaminating local water sources.  Liquid Hydrazines are most commonly known for their use in rocket fuels. They are highly toxic, colorless, flammable liquids with an ammonia-like odor. There are several types of hydrazines, including hydrazine, monomethylhydrazine (MMH) and 1,1-dimethyl-hydrazine, also known as unsymmetrical dimeth-ylhydrazine (UDMH). Hydrazine is unstable and is usually handled as an aqueous solution for safety reasons. Exposure to hydrazines can cause central nervous system effects as well as kidney and liver damage. Hydrazine and UDMH are listed as probable human carcinogens and classified under Group B2 by the U.S. EPA.

Solid rocket fuels: An analysis of data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control indicates that a toxic chemical in solid rocket fuel has severely contaminated the nation's food and water supply - read the Environmental Working Group study http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_3250.cfm.  Scientists warn that the chemical, known as perchlorate, could cause thyroid deficiency in more than 2.2 million women of childbearing age. This thyroid deficiency could damage the fetus of pregnant women, if left untreated. Perchlorate, the explosive ingredient in solid rocket fuel, has leaked from military bases and defense and aerospace contractors' plants in at least 22 states, contaminating drinking water for millions of Americans. Despite massive complaints, defense contractors have done little or nothing to clean up the pollution. Perchlorate has also been widely detected in milk, lettuce, produce and other foods. In an alarming study, the CDC found perchlorate in the urine of every person tested. The Organic Consumers Association has mobilized thousands of consumers to pressure the EPA and government officials to begin a massive clean up of perchlorate. The Environmental Working Groups report is an analysis of data originally released in 2005, when the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) released its long anticipated report on the human health effects of perchlorates. Perchlorates have been found in 93% of lettuce and milk.... 97% of breast milk samples taken randomly from around the U.S. have tested positive for perchlorates. The government funded NAS report reveals that perchlorates are roughly ten times more toxic to humans than the Department of Defense has been claiming. Perchlorates can inhibit thyroid function, cause birth defects and lower IQs, and are considered particularly dangerous to children. The NAS report recommends human exposure at no more than .0007 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. The EPA has responded to the report by recommending a water standard reference dose of 24.5 ppb for perchlorate. This is bad news for military sites and rocket fuel plants around the country, including Henderson, Nevada, where EPA well monitoring has found perchlorates at a level 30,000 times higher than that. There are over 12,000 military sites in the U.S. that are used for training with live explosives.

GMD Program:  The Ground-based Midcourse missile defense system has been riddled with failure and corruption since its inception. In early 2000, the GAO received a request from former Rep. Howard Berman of California to review certain allegations of fraud in the missile defense program. Dr. Nira Schwartz, an Israeli-born scientist made the allegations while working at TRW - a defense contractor based in Los Angeles. TRW was a subcontractor to the defense behemoth Boeing Company. She was promptly fired from her job after she made the allegations. She alleged that a key component in the missile defense system – software to process signals collected by an infrared sensor - did not perform as advertised by TRW and Boeing.  She was intimately involved in the development of the software, which was used in a crucial test of the missile defense program in 1997 at a cost of $100 million. The contractors Boeing and TRW falsely claimed it was a total success. Many of the so-called “successful” tests over the years have been what scientists call “strap down rabbit” tests as they placed a beacon on the dummy missiles so that the interceptors could identify them in deep space at 15,000 mph.  For all these reasons and more this program should not be building any permanent deployment installations anywhere.  It is a huge waste of taxpayers dollars.

Public Hearings: I attended one of the two “public meetings” that were held in Rangeley and spoke to others who attended them in Farmington.  In every case people who attended complained to me that the nature of the meetings had nothing to do with “public”.  The poster sessions, where people were swarmed with MDA and contractor personnel, were not very informative.  Many of my questions were not answered by those staffing the event.  (Such as what is the weight displacement on a road of a truck hauling silos or interceptor missiles.  I was told I’d be informed but I never heard from anyone with an answer.  This is why I’ve waited until the last minute to send in my comments.)  In most real public hearings there is a formal time when testimony can be taken from the public and citizens can listen and learn from one another.  The average citizen is not able to go into such a “hearing” like these and understand the many technical variables involved.  A real public hearing would allow citizens to learn from one another.  That is how true democracy works.  It was clear to me, and others that I spoke with who attended these events, that the MDA and its contractors intentionally and effectively limited the public participation process.  For that reason alone this public comment period should be extended and the hearings should be redone in a proper way.

No Decision: Our organization thus opposes the selection of any of the four sites and proposes that no selection be made.

September 13, 2014

Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space

- Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth. - Henry David Thoreau

Do You Want A Toxic Missile "Defense" Site in Maine?

Photo from our drive home from the "public meeting"

I don't want a toxic missile "defense" site anywhere, including my state, where the Appalachian Trail reaches its northern limit in the western mountains, and waterways abound. Rangeley is in my backyard, so my husband and I went to what turned out to be a fake public meeting about a proposed missile site which was held at the Univ. of Maine in nearby Farmington this evening.

(I would have liked to be in Ferguson, Missouri -- but instead watched the I Am Mike Brown livestream. Huge peaceful crowds, mad honking in support, and when police begin driving through crowds running their sirens the whole crowd turns toward them, raising both hands to protest racist police brutality.)

Now the Pentagon, at my expense and yours, brings around a lame presentation with scores of highly paid men, some government employees but even more Pentagon contractors. As you enter the room you are pounced on by salesmen who try to steer you through a series of stations with exciting videos of missiles flying through the air and charts of how well the interceptor missiles perform in perfectly flat deserts.

There is a lot of emphasis on "you getting your questions answered."

Mark and I were sharing flyers that offered six basic objections to a missile site in Rangeley (thanks Bruce Gagnon):

1)  Ground-based mid-course missile defense systems have not proven themselves to work effectively thus deployment is way premature assuming one could make a case they were even needed.

2)  Huge waste of tax payer dollars. To which I added: bringourwardollarshome.org

3)  Missile defense systems are destabilizing and fuel new arms race – particularly with Russia & China.

4)  Pentagon often says these systems are needed to protect against Iran & North Korea but neither have nuclear weapons delivery systems capable of reaching continental US (Iran does not even have a nuclear weapon).  In reality these systems are aimed at Russia & China.

5)  Missile defense systems are key elements in US first-strike attack planning – they are the ‘shield’ to be used after a US first-strike attack is launched.  The US Space Command has been war gaming such attacks for years.

6) The environmental degradation to the mountains east of Rangeley, and the impacts on wildlife, are totally unacceptable. The idea of driving 55-foot long interceptor missiles from Bangor to the Rangeley area on country roads is ludicrous.

   

We shared them with the press that was there, and together gave an interview to WCSH Channel 6 t.v. out of Portland.

Because we had done our own research, we weren't really there to gather information from the military on its own project. That would have been like relying on a car salesman to get all you needed to know before buying a car.

For example, though the missiles supposedly are to defend the U.S. from threats from Iran and North Korea, none of the guys in dress uniforms could tell my husband how far it is from Rangeley to Iran.


The event had the feel of a recruiting opportunity, but all the young people were missing (UMF is still on summer break).

If you wanted to leave comments they had a court reporter hired to record you and then transcribe them. You could also write them out on paper.

One of the sales guys steered me toward talking to Sen. Angus King's regional representative, who said he could express no opinions but was there to listen and bring my comments back. After I spoke he gave me his card and asked me to "articulate my views" in an email, which he would forward.

I went downstairs toward the sound of laughter to see if I could hand out some more flyers. Found some custodians who were glad to talk about the missiles and each wanted a flyer. One said she remembered the big public hearing a couple of years ago about the environmental impact of low-flying Mass. Air National Guard planes training over our area. You won that one, she noted.

I'm pretty sure that's why the missile boys hired a PR firm to create an event called a public meeting but designed instead as a trade show. The meeting part meant "us meeting you and telling you what we want you to know."

Almost no one we spoke to on the street in Farmington later knew anything about the proposed missile site. Everyone seemed glad to get a flyer.

If you want to send a message explaining why missile sites are bad for the environment, bad for the national soul, and bad for the prospects for world peace, you can submit a comment to the "Missile Defense Agency" at MDA.CIS.EIS@BV.com.

Ridgely Fuller of CODEPINK sharing a flyer for Maine's Peace Walk coming up Oct 11.