Tag Archives: Department of the Army

Will Missouri Legislators Finally Decide to Pay Attention to Radioactive Waste Issues Outside of Saint Louis County?

Several national news media outlets, including CBS Evening News and the The Los Angeles Times, have reported recently about the inherent dangers of radioactive waste in the St. Louis County neighborhoods along Coldwater Creek colliding with an underground fire at the nearby Westlake Landfill, but none have reported the exclusive story I published for the first time Jan. 23, 2012, and, again, only nine months ago. It’s about radioactive waste impacting the lives of citizens in neighboring St. Charles County Mo., and about a state agency report due to be published in January 2016.

Click on image above to read the story I published Jan. 23, 2012, about radioactive waste issues in Missouri..

Click on image above to read the story I published Jan. 23, 2012, and, again, nine months ago, about radioactive waste issues outside of St. Louis County, Mo., and about a state agency report due to be published in January 2016.

I won’t repeat the story referenced above, since you can click this link to read it. Instead, I will republish two related stories that, for reasons beyond my control, went offline a little more than one year ago.

The first article was published March 26, 2012, under the headline, Missouri State Legislators Not Inclined to Place High Priority on 2011 Weldon Spring Cancer Report. The text of the article, which put me at loggerheads with my state legislators, appears below with only minor modifications for clarity and most, but not all, of the original links:

March has been a miserable month for me when it comes to dealing with Republican Party officials in my own backyard.

While most of my interaction about “things Republican” has revolved around the 2012 St. Charles County (Mo.) Republican Presidential Caucus, other interactions have involved GOP members of the Missouri House of Representatives.

During the first week of March, I made multiple attempts to contact several of those representatives with questions I had regarding the “2011 Weldon Spring Cancer Inquiry Report,” a four-page document published by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services that was the subject of an exclusive article I broke Jan. 23.

The Weldon Spring Site in St. Charles County, Mo., was contaminated during the production of 2, 4, 6 – trinitrotoluene (TNT) and 2, 4 and 2,6 Dinitrotoluene (DNT) by the U.S. Department of Army from 1941 to 1945 and from enrichment of uranium ore and thorium processing by the Atomic Energy Commission from 1958 to 1966, according to an earlier MDHSS document, the 2005 Weldon Spring Cancer Report.

Those initial contact attempts, made between March 2 and March 6, involved sending three separate Facebook messages to five state representatives – Kurt Bahr of O’Fallon, Kathie Conway of St. Charles, Chuck Gatschenberger of Lake Saint Louis, Mark Parkinson of St. Peters and Anne Zerr of St. Charles.  My goal was to find out what each is doing, or planning to do, to obtain answers for their constituents about the controversial report.

To their credit, Representatives Bahr and Conway replied soon after being contacted.  Both admitted they were not extremely familiar with the topic, both explained they were very busy with legislative matters in Jefferson City, and both gave me the initial impression that the matter isn’t likely to become a “front-burner issue” anytime soon.

Sadly, three of the state representatives – Gatschenberger, Parkinson and Zerr — chose not to reply, leading me to come up with several possible reasons for their failures to respond:

• They place a low priority on the health and well-being of their constituents who live in the shadow of the Weldon Spring Site 30 miles west of St. Louis;

• They haven’t been asked often enough by their constituents to look into the matter;

• They place a low priority on inquiries from non-mainstream media reporters like me;

• They don’t want to have their names attached to such a potentially-volatile political “hot potato” during an election year;

• They believe ignorance is bliss; or

• Last but not least, it’s possible they don’t check their Facebook messages very often.

On March 7, I decided to give them the benefit of the doubt regarding the Facebook possibility and send the same basic inquiry to all five state representatives via their official state email addresses.  Interestingly, the same two representatives who had replied to my Facebook messages replied to the email, and the same three representatives who had not replied to my Facebook messages did not reply to the email.

On the positive side, Representative Conway‘s reply came the same day and seemed to display genuine interest in the issue.

Not so positively, Representative Bahr‘s reply came the following day, was copied to all four of his colleagues, and didn’t leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling.

After he labeled me “the expert” on the matter at hand, Representative Bahr demanded I offer a solution before he would devote time to the matter.  In a “Reply to All” message, I refused the expert label and went on to share my beliefs that elected and unelected state officials must be responsive and that the issues raised in the report are not the kind to be solved quickly.  I closed by explaining what, at a minimum, officials at the state health agency should be required to do.

My short to-do list included requiring MDHSS officials to explain how they reached the conclusions they had reached in the report, to answer why they’ve refused to answer any questions from reporters — including Blythe Bernhard at the Post-Dispatch and me — about the report, and to respond to criticism of the report, such as that offered by Washington University Professor Robert Criss in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, Report on cancer risk from Weldon Spring site assailed.  It was published Feb. 20, four weeks after my initial article.

Interestingly, I ran into Representative Parkinson Saturday at the aforementioned caucus (a.k.a., “St. Patrick’s Day Massacre”), a topic about which I’ve written and published nine posts to date (not including this one).  He was manning the first chair at a long table of GOP officials processing caucus registrations.

When my turn to register came, I asked Representative Parkinson why he had not responded to any of my messages about Weldon Spring.  He said he had not seen them and acted like he didn’t know what I was talking about.

The conversation continued, and Representative Parkinson asked me to provide details about the issue.  I told him it was Weldon Spring, that he should read his email from me and — cognizant of the fact that 300 people were waiting behind me in the long caucus registration line — that “now” wasn’t the time or the place to discuss the matter.

As I started to walk away, Representative Parkinson asked if I, as “the expert” on the Weldon Spring matter, would like to discuss it over coffee.  I replied by telling him I would prefer to handle the matter more expediently, without wasting more time, via his response to my email message.

Later, while waiting for the caucus to begin inside the larger of two gymnasiums at Francis Howell North High School in St. Peters, Representative Parkinson approached me and again assured me that he had not seen any of my messages.  In response, I told him I found it odd that he had referred to me earlier as “the expert” – in much the same way Representative Bahr had in his aforementioned email — even though he said he had not seen any of the messages related to me.  The conversation ended there, and I went back to my seat in the bleachers.

A few hours after the caucus ended, Representative Parkinson sent me the Facebook message below, shown verbatim:

Bob…after an exhaustive search of my inbox (mark.parkinson@house.mo.gov) I can not find any correspondence from you on this issue. I don’t check facebook mail often (or at all). Please direct any official correspondence to the above email address.

We can discuss this issue when we sit down to discuss the other.

Mark

My response — “Mark – Perhaps you should look more closely. See screenshot of the message to you from my email “SENT” folder. – Bob” — was accompanied by a screenshot (taken March 18 and shown below) as evidence that Representative Parkinson had received the same message that all of his colleagues received.

Email-Message-Screenshot-to-Parkinson

Is it possible that Representative Parkinson is just computer illiterate?  Sure, it’s possible.  But I think that’s a stretch.

Instead, I believe he received my message but chose to ignore it.  My belief is augmented by the fact that my email message sent to the five state representatives did not produce any bounce-back messages like those I received on a handful of occasions in the past after I had used incorrect email addresses when trying to communicate with Missouri legislators.  [FYI:  As of this publication, I have still not received any email response from Representative Parkinson.]

Finally, it’s certainly worth noting that I ran into Representative Conway at the caucus, too.

During two brief discussions, she (1) seemed to express genuine interest in the matter, (2) told me she had read the materials to which I had provided links, and (3) gave me the feeling she would follow up on the matter.  Then, lo and behold, she contacted me via Facebook message to let me know she had contacted MDHSS and had more questions.  So much for that “initial impression” I mentioned early in this piece.

Sadly, the other state representatives’ responses and failures to respond raise more questions then they answer.

That in mind, I would like to offer a suggestion to readers (1) who live in one of the zip codes (63301, 63303, 63304, 63366 and 63376) covered by the cancer report, (2) who live in a zip code near the Weldon Spring Site or (3) who simply think these state legislators should be interested in this matter.  Use the information below to contact them in Jefferson City and let them know:

Rep. Kurt Bahr — 573-751-9768 or Kurt.Bahr@house.mo.gov;

Rep. Kathie Conway — 573-751-2250 or Kathie.Conway@house.mo.gov;

Rep. Chuck Gatschenberger — [Note: He’s no longer in office.]

Rep. Mark Parkinson — 573-751-2949 or Mark.Parkinson@house.mo.gov; and

Rep. Anne Zerr — 573-751-3717 or Anne.Zerr@house.mo.gov.

On March 29, 2012, I published another article — this one under the headline, Missouri Legislators Pass ‘Birther,’ Jumping Jacks and Butterfly Bills While Ignoring Cancer Report — in which I criticized Missouri legislators for what they were doing in lieu of investigating serious public health issues. The text of the first half-dozen or so paragraphs of that article appears below with only minor modifications for clarity and most, but not all, of the original links [Note: I opted to cut out paragraphs at the end of the article that simply rehashed details already shared in the aforementioned exclusive story]:

On Wednesday, the 46th day of the 2012 Regular Session, Missouri state legislators tackled at least one important bill which, I predict, will never be signed by liberal Democrat Gov. Jay Nixon.  That bill, HB1046, “requires proof of identity and status as a United States natural born citizen for the office of President and Vice President to be submitted with other required certification documents to the Secretary of State.”

In addition to the so-called “Birther Bill” which I support, legislators could have done so much more.  Before looking at what could have been, let’s look at what was addressed yesterday.

The house passed several bills that might eventually receive the governor’s signature.  Among them are seven specialty license plate-related measures, eight bills designating portions of several Missouri highways as memorial roadways to honor individuals who had served their country in law enforcement, the military and government and two bills designating days each year to honor veterans — March 26 as “Veterans of Operation Iraqi/Enduring Freedom Day” and March 30 as “Vietnam Veterans Day.”

Other bills that might get reach the governor and get his nod are bills advocating recognition for organ donation, Pallister-Killian Syndrome, fibromyaligia, lupus, spinal cord injuries and pancreatic cancer.

While I’m not specifically against any of the measures above, I simply think there are more pressing issues with which legislators should be spending their time.

Conversely, the ridiculous measures listed below were also pushed forward by legislators:

• “Jumping Jacks” as the official state exercise (HB1063);

• State Highway 5 between the cities of Ava and Mansfield as the “Missouri Fox Trotting Highway” (HB1107);

The Regal Fritillary (Speyeria idalia) as the official state butterfly (HB1266); and

The month of December as “Pet Breeders Appreciation Month (HB1404).”

Sadly, several of the same legislators who spent the day dealing with these “vital” pieces of legislation are the same ones who’ve been “too busy” and seem to have an avoid-at-all-cost attitude when it comes to answering questions about the 2011 Weldon Spring Cancer Report.

That report, issued by Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services officials, has remained largely under wraps since it was released to me Dec. 29.  Why?

For starters, because it reveals troubling findings about leukemia and leukemia death rates among people living in five zip codes near the Weldon Spring Site in St. Charles County, Mo.  In addition, they must realize the report’s findings could turn into a “hot potato” political issue far too dangerous for ambitious politicians to tackle during an election year.

I ended that story by encouraging readers to learn more about the matter and to contact their state legislators. Today, I suspect state legislators might be more willing to listen to citizens concerns about this “hot potato” issue. No guarantees though, so keep your fingers crossed.

UPDATE 10/21/2015 at 10:48 a.m. Central:  A few minutes ago, I sent the media query below to Ryan Hobart, MDHSS director of public information:

Dear Ryan;

Five years ago, I communicated with your predecessors, Jaqueline Lapine and Gena Terlizzi, regarding the Weldon Spring Site where radioactive waste is stored in St. Charles County, Mo.

Because I had read in your agency’s 2005 Weldon Spring Cancer Report that the authors recommended “the Cancer Inquiry Program should continue to monitor the cancer incidence and mortality rates in Weldon Spring and its surrounding areas,” I asked for — and eventually obtained — a copy of the 2011 Weldon Spring Cancer Inquiry Report.

Today, I’m repeating the process in hopes of obtaining an update about your agency’s forthcoming release of a 2016 Weldon Spring Cancer Report.

With several national news media outlets, including CBS Evening News and the The Los Angeles Times, reporting recently about the inherent dangers of radioactive waste in the St. Louis County neighborhoods along Coldwater Creek colliding with an underground fire at the nearby Westlake Landfill, it’s imperative that your agency be transparent when it comes to testing and monitoring at the Weldon Spring Site.

At your earliest opportunity, I would like you to provide answers to the following questions:

1. When do officials at the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services expect to release another five-year follow-up report (a.k.a., “2016 Weldon Spring Cancer Report”)? and

2. Who, within the agency, is in charge of producing the five-year follow-up report?

Please let me know ASAP if you have questions or anticipate any delay beyond 48 hours in responding to my questions. Thanks in advance for your prompt reply.

Sincerely,

Bob McCarty

FYI: I’ll let you know how he responds — or not — as soon as possible.

UPDATE 10-26-15 at 8:27 a.m. Central:  After waiting five days for Hobart to reply via email, I called him this morning and left a phone message for him. As the third public information officer in five years at the agency, I suspect he might have been caught unaware on the subject. Then again, he might be an obedient lackey, willing to do whatever he can to keep the subject under wraps. Stay tuned to see if he responds.

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Attorneys Who Win Small Battles Might Win Legal War

An elite Army Ranger and attack helicopter pilot at Fort Campbell, Ky., Maj. Christian “Kit” Martin, 47, has flown some 1,000 combat flying hours. Nothing, however, could have prepared him for the battle he’s fighting now as he tries to avoid becoming a victim of the Pentagon’s sexual assault witch hunt that could send him to prison for 58 years* for something he did not do. Below, I share the opinions of two attorneys (who shall remain nameless) about Major Martin’s case — which involves false sexual assault allegations as well as Army prosecutors and commanders under political pressure to win a conviction at all cost — and about how the attorneys who win the small battles might win the legal war.

My cat, Butters, tries to predict the future by looking into his porcelain bowl.

This photo shows my cat, Butters, looking into his porcelain bowl in an effort to predict the future. Unfortunately, he’s about as reliable in predicting the future as the military justice system is in determining innocence and guilt.

ATTORNEY #1

“I’d like to pick your brain for just a moment,” I wrote in an email two days ago to a former top legal officer for one branch of the U.S. military. “I’m working on a story involving an Army major accused of sexual assault by a woman soon after he asked her for a divorce. I don’t describe her as the major’s wife, because she is now facing bigamy charges in Kentucky.”

I went on to explain that Major Martin had learned — after asking her for a divorce — that she had never divorced her first husband before marrying him. And then I asked my question:

“If the woman is found guilty or pleads guilty to bigamy, can the Department of the Army or Department of Defense sue her or prosecute her for anything, such as obtaining goods and services under false pretenses?”

I thanked him in advance for his thoughts on the matter and, as expected, received his reply early Monday afternoon:

“The short answer is that the Army or DoD would have to request the Department of Justice pursue any sort of recovery. The DoJ would likely send it to the local U.S. Attorney wherever he resides and do an analysis of the merits and the cost/benefit to pursue it. My guess (and it is just a guess) is that the U.S. Attorney would not pursue it.”

ATTORNEY #2

While some might say the attorney’s reply doesn’t bode well for Major Martin, another attorney sees reason for optimism in the major’s camp. He works in the criminal division of a U.S. Attorney’s office in a major U.S. city, and he offered a different view of the same situation.

He said an Army prosecutor with knowledge of a person’s breaking the law — for instance, obtaining goods and services (i.e., healthcare services and the benefits of discounted shopping at the post commissary and exchange facilities) under false pretenses (i.e., pretending to be a military spouse when one is not legally married to a member of the military) from the federal government — not only “has the authority (to initiate prosecution), (but) he has the obligation.” Further, he said the military prosecutor would be committing “a felony on his part” if he fails to act while having such knowledge.

Do the Army prosecutors have knowledge of wrongdoing by Major Martin’s accuser? I believe they do.

They are aware Katherine (Garber) Foster, assistant prosecutor in Christian County, Ky., conducted a thorough investigation that led to a bigamy charge based upon what she believes is rock-solid evidence she can use to prove Major Martin’s accuser committed bigamy.

In addition, they are aware Christian County Family Court Judge Jason Shea Fleming voided the marriage between Major Martin and his female accuser based upon evidence she never obtained a divorce from her first husband, the father of her two youngest children.

Will the prosecutors in Major Martin’s case — Maj. Jacob D. Bashore and Capt. James P. Garrett — use their authority and fulfill their obligation to report the woman’s apparent crime (i.e., impersonation of a military spouse and, in turn, the theft of goods and services from the U.S. Government) to the U.S. Attorney in Kentucky? I certainly hope so, because doing otherwise would not be very becoming of Army officers and gentlemen.

‘CHESS PIECES’ IN PLAY

Then again, there are a lot of “chess pieces” in play right now.

For instance, if local prosecutor Foster offers Major Martin’s accuser some sort of pre-trial diversion linked to a sentence of one year or longer, she would not serve any jail time unless or until she committed another crime, such as perjury, during the term of her diversion.

As I reported yesterday, Hopkinsville, Ky., civilian defense attorney Brandi Jones is not only attempting to prevent local prosecutor Foster from prosecuting the case against her client, Major Martin’s accuser, in civilian court, but she’s hoping Christian County Judge Andrew Self will agree to her request and push back her client’s trial date until after Major Martin’s military trial, expected to run Dec. 1 to 4.

Jones knows that, if she’s successful in both preventing Foster from testifying and in delaying her client’s trial, it’s highly unlikely Judge (Col.) Andrew Glass will allow any reference to bigamy and/or perjury allegations against the woman to be aired in his military courtroom during Major Martin’s military trial. And that would not bode well for the major. If, however, Judge Self refuses to delay Jones’ client’s trial, then Major Martin might have a chance of seeing his accuser explaining herself on the witness stand during his military trial. Of course, there are no guarantees, and he’s seen his witness requests denied before.

Stay tuned for updates!

For a recap of what took place during a recent one-month period in Major Martin’s life, read “Thirty Days of Hell in the Life of an Accused Army Officer.”

For all other articles about Major Martin’s case, click here.

Thanks in advance for reading and sharing this article and those to follow. Meanwhile, Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here.

UPDATE 10/14/2015 at 2:17 p.m. Central: Less than two hours after publishing the article above, I received word that Major Martin’s accuser entered a guilty plea to a bigamy charge. Sentencing is set for Feb. 17. I hope the Army prosecutors are paying attention as she is now a convicted felon.

*UPDATE: After publishing this article, I learned Army prosecutors agreed to limit any possible punishment in this case to 10 years. A sign they have a weak case?”

UPDATE 12/7/2015 at 8:23 a.m. Central: A military judge continued the military trial date for Army Maj. Christian “Kit” Martin to sometime in March 2016, though no specific date has been set.

UPDATE 12/10/2015 at 11:12 a.m. Central: I’ve learned that Major Martin’s military trial date is set for March 14-18, 2016.

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.