Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon News

"Miami is a banana republic"
The stench of rotten fruit lingers heavily over City Hall.
By Daryl Lindsey
[05/05/00]

Stalking the wild Frankensalmon
Foes of genetically altered foods say the Clinton administration's new regulations don't go far enough.
By Bruce Shapiro
[05/05/00]

Geezer hoops
NBA basketball is suddenly an old, cold victim of its own marketing strategy. Plus: What was baseball's Elián protest really about?
By Allen Barra
[05/05/00]

"I don't think we need a big show"
The Senate GOP's No. 2 backs away from prickly hearings on Janet Reno.
By Daryl Lindsey
[05/04/00]

The last supper
Recounting the negotiators' shocking final hours before the Elián González raid.
By Myra MacPherson
[05/04/00]

Complete archives for News

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

The DOE relies on contractors to perform about 90 percent of its work, including the day-to-day operation of its nuclear plants, and to guarantee a safe working environment. But the agency has perpetuated its disturbing record by blocking any outside regulation of worker safety. No other federal entity engaged in hazardous activities has been permitted to maintain such sweeping self-policing powers, without outside accountability. As a result, the DOE still does not have a meaningful worker safety regulatory regime in place.

And until 1988, DOE contractors were shielded from any criminal and legal liability for the extraordinary dangers of nuclear production, with the U.S. government picking up the tab for any lawsuits brought against them, even for criminal acts of willful negligence. Legal protections afforded to contractors were used to block compensation of sick workers in workplace-exposure lawsuits.

In the not-so-distant past, the DOE even went to illegal extremes to shield itself from worker suits. In the early 1980s, it was discovered that the state of Nevada had had a secret agreement with the DOE and its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, dating back to the 1950s that allowed the agencies to determine radiation compensation claims filed by Nevada test site workers or their survivors. In 1984, a federal appeals court ruled that the program was illegal. This aggressive policy to avoid legal liability for worker compensation at all costs persists, despite the best efforts by a succession of energy secretaries to change it.

For instance, on May 14, 1997, an explosion occurred at Hanford, exposing 11 workers to dangerous materials. They suffered blistering, hearing loss, coughing fits and headaches minutes after being marched outside under the toxic explosion's plume. Mandatory equipment to test for radiological exposure, such as nasal swabs and urine-testing equipment, suddenly disappeared when it was most needed. The workers were told to drive themselves to the hospital, but after consulting with Hanford officials, physicians refused to perform blood and urine testing. The workers were then sent home in their contaminated clothing. Today, many are still sick and can't return to work.

Only after direct intervention that year by then-Energy Secretary Federico Peña did the DOE and its Washington contractor grudgingly agree, after lengthy delays, to fund limited independent medical tests. But after Peña's departure from the department, the Hanford victims were effectively ignored, their case buried in bureaucratic mire. The only public acknowledgment of negligence the victims received was an indirect apology on television by the contractor's president -- after a scathing report by the state was released.

Next page | A steady decline in worker safety