Litigation
Examining defense experts in the Project Rulison litigation
As part of the action for a permanent injunction following his initial success in obtaining a TRO and preliminary injunctive relief prohibiting the full flaring of all the tritiated natural gas in the cavern created by the Project Rulison nuclear blast, depositions of certain A.E.C. employees were taken during December, 1969.
Unlike more conventional litigation, depositions of industry or government experts in environmental litigation involving radiation and other environmental toxicants requires that the witness to be treated as if they had just been called by the Plaintiff on their case in chief following the openings.
In litigation concerning the release of radionuclides, radioactive materials and other sources of ionizing radiation to the Environment, since the nuclear power industry, the medical radiology community, and academic scientists are the primary source of potential witnesses with “expert” knowledge about radionuclides and ionizing radiation, The only way to challenge the opinions of those “experts” is to place their opinions in a larger context — environmental science.
That process begins by calling these Defense witnesses immediately after the opening of the Plaintiff’s Case and embedding their “science” into a scientific framework of which they are unaware or which they choose to ignore in order for the Plaintiffs’ experts to present scientific evidence of greater relevance which was not considered.
The following examples from the Project Rulison Litigation demonstrate this technique.
Historically, these/ examinations clearly indicate the circular nature of the AEC bureaucracy and the mission oriented short-sighted view of “protecting public health” adopted by the AEC.
Director, AEC Division of Peaceful Explosives
Manager of AEC Nevada Operations Office (NVO)