Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This alleged fraud included a study about “uranium in the environment” and included ISL samples (In situ leach uranium), “uranium environmental task force” and much more. It is unclear if the ISL research was for proposed ISL uranium mining or for historic or both. One specific study mentioned was “assessment of uranium in the environment in and around Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona for possible groundwater restoration“.
Grand Canyon NPS
Anyone who has followed this blog for awhile has learned, if they never knew it before, that you can’t trust the US government, nor its agencies. Some within them may be honest, but once there is so much dishonesty you can’t trust any of them anymore.

Thus, there could be several things going on with this alleged fraud. Firstly, it may be true. In this case it appears to be. Secondly, the lab person(s) could be honest and the government accused them of lying because they didn’t want to lie for the government (or corporate buddies). Thirdly, the person(s) involved could be lazy and/or incompetent.

The answer appears to be found in this LA Times article. Palos Verdes EPA project is mentioned on p. 13 as a project in which the allegedly fraudulent lab was involved. Low and behold, an environmental “miracle” probably due to the lab fraud: “Toxic waste seems to naturally vanish from Palos Verdes Shelf Tests suggest DDT, PCB levels are naturally lowering along Palos Verdes Shelf, which could save EPA millions of dollars on cleanup. November 17, 2013, By Tony Barboza
In response to the discovery, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has suspended its planned cleanup efforts” Read the entire article here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160102222857/http://articles.latimes.com/2013/nov/17/local/la-me-palos-verdes-shelf-20131118http://nwql.usgs.gov/about-den.shtml

In this case it saved the US EPA money. But, in other cases it could save the private sector money.

But, why is it called “SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY”, when it’s lack of scientific integrity? This even impacts a Danish university. There were two incidents that lasted a total of 18 or 20 years! They haven’t even notified everyone! And, the list of studies impacted is unclear.

Lab location: The Denver Center is in Lakewood: http://nwql.usgs.gov/about-den.shtml

This is most, but not all pages. Emphasis added. The entire document is found here: https://www.doioig.gov/sites/doioig.gov/files/2016EAU010Public.pdf
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY  cover june 2016
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY  cover letter
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , summary
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 3
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY  p 4
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 5
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 6
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 7
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 8
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 9
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 11
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 13
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 14
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT  USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY , p. 15
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY INCIDENT AT USGS ENERGY GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY

This study appears to be involved: “Health Effects of Energy Resources
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2009/3096/pdf/fs2009-3096.pdf

This appears to be a study which may have used the lab’s services. The author is mentioned above:
In-situ recovery uranium mining in the United States: Overview of production and remediation issues J.K. Otton, S. Hall  U.S. Geological Survey, Lakewood, Colorado, USA
In-situ recovery uranium mining in the United States: Overview of production and remediation issues” J.K. Otton, S. Hall U.S. Geological Survey, Lakewood, Colorado, United States of America
http://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1513/ML15132A456.pdf

Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona” Edited by Andrea E. Alpine http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5025/ and “Assessment of Potential Migration of Radionuclides and Trace Elements from the White Mesa Uranium Mill to the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern Utah Prepared in cooperation with the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region 8)http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2011/5231/pdf/sir20115231.pdf use USGS labs. One is at the same location but upon further examination this seems to be a different lab. Other USGS programs sometimes used the lab accused of fraud, however, so it’s difficult to be certain. Regardless, the handling of the data where they threw out the data from Northern Arizona University appears suspect, especially as NAU generally gave higher values. Northern Arizona Uni researcher appears honest here: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/slides/2011/20110527/ketterer-ureport-20110527.pdf The White Mesa research findings appear strange, too: “all ground-water samples collected at down-gradient sample sites during this study had dissolved-uranium concentrations in the range expected for naturally-occurring uranium“. White Mesa pollution is currently a subject of litigation: http://upr.org/post/ute-mountain-utes-cite-continuing-violations-white-mesa-uranium-mill If one USGS lab is reported by the US government to have cheated, and we’ve heard that another non-USGS US government lab had cheated on water-sediment testing, then these other results could also be fraudulent. Thus, we are leaving them in this post for consideration.
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, cover
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, p. 150
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, p. 151
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, p. 153
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, p. 156
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, p. 158
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona, p. 222
Hydrological, Geological, and Biological Site Characterization of Breccia Pipe Uranium Deposits in Northern Arizona
Assessment of Potential Migration of Radionuclides and Trace Elements from the White Mesa Uranium Mill to the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern Utah  cover
Assessment of Potential Migration of Radionuclides and Trace Elements from the White Mesa Uranium Mill to the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern Utah , abstract
Assessment of Potential Migration of Radionuclides and Trace Elements from the White Mesa Uranium Mill to the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern Utah , p. 7 methodology
Assessment of Potential Migration of Radionuclides and Trace Elements from the White Mesa Uranium Mill to the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern Utah