SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY
2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

Online supplement
The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident:
Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a
Nuclear Explosion
Appendices A, B, and C
Lars-Erik De Geer1 and Christopher M. Wright2

1

Retired from FOI, Swedish Defence Research Agency, and the Preparatory Commission for
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organisation, Flädervägen 51, 194 64
Upplands Väsby, Sweden, ledg1945@gmail.com

2

School of Physical, Environmental and Mathematical Sciences, Research Group on Science& Security, UNSW Canberra, The Australian Defence Force Academy, PO Box 7916
Canberra BC, Australia, c.wright@adfa.edu.au

1

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Introduction
Appendices A, B and C accompany the 2017 article, “The 22 September 1979 Vela
Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear Explosion, ”The 22
September Vela Incident,” published in Science & Global Security.1
The article offers a new analysis of radionuclide and hydroacoustic data to support a
low-yield nuclear weapon test as a plausible explanation for the still contentious 22
September 1979 Vela Incident, in which U.S. satellite Vela 6911 detected an opticalsignal characteristic of an atmospheric nuclear explosion over the Southern Indian orAtlantic Ocean. Based on documents not previously widely available, as well as
recently declassified papers and letters, this article concludes that iodine-131 found in
the thyroids of some Australian sheep would be consistent with them having grazed in
the path of a potential radioactive fallout plume from a 22 September low-yield
nuclear test in the Southern Indian Ocean. Further, several declassified letters andreports which describe aspects of still classified hydroacoustic reports and data favor
the test scenario. The radionuclide and hydroacoustic data taken together with theanalysis of the double-flash optical signal picked up by Vela 6911 that was describedin a companion 2017 article, “The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: The Detected
Double-Flash,” can be traced back to sources with similar spatial and temporal origins
and serve as a strong indicator for a nuclear explosion.2

2

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Appendix A: A search for alternative sources of the 1979
October/November iodine-131 detections
The presence of iodine-131 in southeast Australian sheep thyroids from OctoberNovember 1979 has been demonstrated. Likewise, a meteorological analysis has
shown a connection between southeast Australia and the site of the suspectedclandestine low-yield nuclear test near Marion Island on 22 September 1979.
The detected concentration of iodine-131 at the low concentration of 1.9 ± 0.6 pCi/g

makes it necessary to identify other potential sources of iodine-131 in
VanMiddlesworth’s Australian thyroid surveillance. The presence of iodine-131
would be traceable to nuclear fission from a nuclear explosion or a civilian facility
producing or using iodine-131, or the presence of iodine-131 in the waste treatment
cycle (all sourced from a nuclear reactor).
Before the 1979 October/November detection, it was highly unusual, but not
unprecedented, for low levels of iodine-131 unrelated to the French, U.S. or U.K.
Pacific atmospheric nuclear tests to be detected in Australian sheep thyroids.3 Between
1966 and 1972, 4,692 sheep thyroids from the Melbourne abattoir were tested,(approximately 470 samples). Iodine-131 levels between 0.5–1.5 pCi/g were detectedin six cases.4 Similarly, among hundreds of samples between 1958 and 1965, only
about 16 had an iodine-131 activity in concentrations in the same range.5 More thanhalf of the combined total of 22 cases occurred within one to two months of a Chinese
atmospheric nuclear test in the northern hemisphere, France (in Algeria), or theSoviet Union. In some cases, a connection was suggested between these northernhemisphere tests and Australian and/or New Zealand livestock iodine-131 detections.
Currently available information suggests this is unlikely given the relatively low yieldof some of the tests, consequent weak injection into the troposphere of fission
products, and/or an expected delay from stratospheric injections. In a few cases thedetections were dismissed as erroneous. While uncertainty remains, it is likely thatthese detections were not confirmed through spectroscopy, but instead relied solely
on the single channel pulse height analyzer (SCA) counting technique within theenergy bin of 0.3–0.4 MeV.6 There is also a risk that the detections were due to Pb214, with its 351.9 keV line that had leaked into the detector cavity in the form of its
radon-222 precursor.
In summary, out of several thousand thyroid glands from southeast Australian sheep
tested up to 1972, the 1979 October/November detections of pCi levels of iodine-131
are the only ones, outside of known atmospheric nuclear tests in the southernhemisphere, that can be associated with an extraordinary event. VanMiddlesworth’s
available annual reports show that this includes 1973 through February 1974, andApril 1979 through May 1980.

3

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Iodine-131 emission from the civil nuclear fuel cycle.
The closest operating nuclear reactor in Australia in 1979 was the High Flux
Australian Reactor (HIFAR) facility at Lucas Heights near Sydney. In the third andfourth quarters of 1979, approximately 3.52 GBq (0.095 Ci) of iodine-131 was released
into the air from various radiochemical buildings.7 Precise dates are not provided, nor
whether they were many small or a few large releases, therefore there is insufficient
data to inform atmospheric transport modeling. But, Further, the amount of iodine131 released over six months is equivalent to one radiotherapy treatment for
hyperthyroidism or thyroid cancer.8
Also, iodine-131 was not detected in milk at levels less than 1 mBq/g (0.027 pCi/g) in
the vicinity of the reactor in 1979.9 While sheep thyroids concentrate iodine morethan 10,000 times more efficiently than cow’s milk,10 the proximity of the sampledcows to the release point(s) at a distance of only a few kilometers, suggests that spatial
dispersion of potential releases over an area of tens or even hundreds of thousands ofsquare kilometers would render iodine-131 undetectable in the thyroids of grazing
animals. Further, sheep near Lucas Heights would not be slaughtered at a Melbourne
abattoir, but rather one much closer to Sydney.11 Therefore, Lucas Heights is ruled out
as a source for the October/November 1979 iodine-131 detections in southeast
Australian sheep.
Iodine-131 effluents from medical treatments
Medical treatment and diagnostics using iodine-131 could be an environmental
source of iodine-131.12 It is an isotope commonly used in nuclear medicine to treat
overactive thyroid glands (hyperthyroidism) and thyroid cancer. Iodine-131 iseliminated from the body principally through urine. In some medical practices theurine is discharged directly into the local wastewater system and not treated as
biomedical waste. Under these conditions, iodine-131 could be released into thebiosphere, e.g. ocean, lakes, rivers, and even into recycled wastewater used for
irrigation depending on the treatment method and timing.
Although not impossible, ingestion of grass irrigated with iodine-131 contaminatedwater by sheep is unlikely. Documentation on the precise region from which the sheep
were sourced has not been found. Thus, we cannot be certain whether releases from a
medical facility or a municipal sewage treatment plant could have been the origin of
the iodine-131. Having said that, we note that most likely the sheep were from rural
areas, far removed from a major city or even a large town (which probably would nothave an iodine-131 medical treatment capability). The Naval Research Laboratory was
assured (presumably by VanMiddlesworth and/or Melick) that “sheep delivered to the
Melbourne slaughterhouse usually come from regions in Victoria, Tasmania, South
Australia and New South Wales that were subject to rain on 26 September 1979.”13
The probability that all three thyroid samples originating from sheep slaughtered on
three different dates came from the same area is very small. As seen in Figure 1 in themain text, “The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic
Evidence for a Nuclear Explosion,” all thyroids show evidence for the presence of
iodine-131, therefore suggesting the iodine-131 was instead quite widespread.14
4

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Even so, we look in some detail at the sewage treatment plant as a possible source
since grazing livestock on pastoral lands collocated with sewage treatment plants has
been a reasonably common practice in Australia.15 One of the largest of these plants is
the Western Treatment Plant (WTP), situated 35 km southwest of Melbourne, where
the sheep were slaughtered. The WTP complex includes a cattle and sheep farm thatsells livestock for human consumption to reduce operating costs of the facility. In
1979 the pastures were either directly used in the treatment process, or irrigated withtreated (recycled) water. Sheep and cattle have grazed on this land for over a century.
Assuming the slaughtered sheep were from this area, one might consider this as apotential source of the ingested iodine-131. This is, however, unlikely for several
reasons.
The WTP has used several different waste treatment methods, sometimes
concurrently. Since the 1930’s, the primary method utilized large treatment ponds orlagoons. Since 1979, more than half of the treatment volume was pumped into theselagoons. As treatment proceeds, waste is transferred from lagoon to lagoon in a series.
Several ranges of retention times have been reported, including 30–35 days, 40–90
days, 50–80 days or 60–70 days, depending on the information source.16 This implies
that the wastewater was retained for a minimum of four and a maximum of 11 halflives of iodine-131, and is likely to be closer to 11 during the 1970's. Therefore,
significant radioactive decay occurs before the treated water is either discharged to theocean or used to irrigate crops or pastures. Perhaps evaporation from the lagoon
system was a pathway for iodine-131 release during the hottest months of January andFebruary, but unlikely in October. On balance, wastewater as the source of iodine-131
ingestion by VanMiddlesworth's sheep appears highly improbable 131.
Another treatment method used by the WTP was the land filtration process, which
had been used by the WTP from its inception in the late 19th century and at least up
until the early 21st century. Operating October through April but peaking in thesummer months of January and February, land filtration only accounted for 20% orless of the annual treated volume during the 1970s. Raw sewage was flooded onto
paddocks to a depth of up to 10 cm for 1–2 days, purifying the wastewater as it seeped
through the soil. The ground was then allowed to dry for around a week, followed by a
2-week livestock grazing period to remove the pasture, which had grown rapidly due
to the high nutrient level. Despite a retention time of around one iodine-131 half-life,
almost inevitably this livestock would ingest (an indeterminate quantity of) iodine131, which had been flushed into the wastewater system after medical treatment
and/or diagnostic procedures.
Nevertheless, it is highly unlikely this is the source of the October/November 1979
iodine-131 detections. Firstly, the detections occurred at the start of the land filtration'season' at WTP, whereas sheep were purchased in the southern spring and summer,
fattened up over several months, and then sold to market at the end of the season insouthern autumn. 17 An inconsistency thus exists between the times at which
VanMiddlesworth's sheep showed iodine-131 and when WTP sheep would be taken
to the abattoir. Secondly, by law the livestock had to be fed for a period 'off-farm' tokill off any parasites or pathogens. 18 Presumably this would take several weeks,sufficient time for any iodine-131 to decay by a few to several half-lives.
5

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

The third sewage treatment process practiced at WTP during the 1970's was grass
filtration. That is not considered relevant here as only cattle have been mentioned in
the literature in relation to grazing on pasture following grass filtration.19
The medical iodine-131 scenario has several other problems. One should notpresuppose that VanMiddlesworth and his colleagues, after a quarter century ofanalyzing such data, their considerable experience, and being endocrinologists, would
not be vigilant against the possibility of contamination of their experiments. Also, if
this were the case then elevated iodine-131 would be a more common finding in theirsamples. But this was demonstrably not the case.
Finally, having ruled out potential alternatives, the likely source of the iodine-131
detections is the suspected nuclear explosion on 22 September.

6

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

APPENDIX B. A search for corroborative fission productdetections in the southern hemisphere
Given that a candidate location for a nuclear test was near the Prince Edward andMarion Islands, at a latitude of around 50 degrees south, it might be expected thatsome fallout could be detected at similarly southern latitudes, such as Australia, New
Zealand, Chile, Argentina, and perhaps even in Antarctica. Fallout monitoring
systems were in place in these territories, motivated by France’s nuclear testing
program in the southern hemisphere at the Pacific Ocean Mururoa and Fangataufa
atolls.20
On 13 November 1979 the Institute of Nuclear Sciences (INS) at Lower Hutt New
Zealand claimed they had observed the short-lived fission products barium-140 (halflife = t1/2 = 12.75 d), praseodymium-143 (t1/2 = 13.6 d) and yttrium-91 (t1/2 = 58.5d) in rainwater samples taken between 1 August and 28 October.21 But only two weeks
later that claim was retracted, inter alia, because the analysis could not be replicatedeither by the INS or the New Zealand National Radiation Laboratory (NZNRL).22 The
initial analysis was based on fitting decay curves to a beta radiation spectrum, amethod that is suboptimal for detecting small bomb debris signals. Eventually INS
and NZNRL concluded jointly that the original samples had been contaminated withnatural and long-lived radionuclides, probably arising from sludge in the collection
pot.23Subsequent analysis by NZNRL used four filters exposed during September andOctober, equivalent to 26,000 m3 of air sampled after 22 September, as well as
rainwater from October from the region with highest rainfall. No indication of fresh
fission products was found. A further search for barium-140 and strontium-89 using
selected rainwater samples was also unsuccessful.24
One of the authors, De Geer, had a personal communication with the Officer in
Charge of Monitoring Operations at the NZNRL in Christchurch New Zealand, Dr.
Lloyd Gregory, in November 1979. During the communication, he learned that nofresh fission products had been noted either in rain or in air from its network ofmonitoring stations during 1979.
In New Zealand, the routine air samples were only analyzed for total beta activity. On
the other hand, the Australian Laboratory maintained, since 1975 and beyond 1979, a
six-station network for detection of fresh fission products.25 The same results werereported in a personal communication between De Geer and Dr. John Moroney at theAustralian Radiation Laboratory in Melbourne. In November 1979 for the Australian
networks as received from New Zealand; there were no detections of bomb debris.26 A
detection limit of 30 µBq/m3 was claimed for iodine-131 in this system.27 As shown inAppendix C, the non-detection of fission products in air or precipitation in 1979 wasconsistent with this limit.
In the further search around the southern hemisphere for corroborating detections of
nuclear bomb debris in the atmosphere, in precipitation, snow and ice, only nuclides
with half-lives between 0.78 years and several tens of years were found.28 Whilst in
7

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

some cases the concentrations peaked at a time suggestive of a correlation with Alert
747, these were likely to be artifacts of earlier nuclear tests. Past fallout was integrated
into snow and ice at Antarctica and the atmospheric detections were examples ofincreased lower stratosphere to troposphere transfer, typically in the spring, from thestratospheric reservoir. The residence time in the stratosphere can be several years,
depending on injection height and latitude, thus much longer than in the troposphere,
where primarily precipitation quite rapidly deposits the debris on the ground. The
Hadley cell circulation in the troposphere inhibits aerosols from crossing the equator.
One should therefore not expect to detect radionuclides injected into the troposphereof the northern hemisphere in the southern hemisphere. Due to eddy diffusion,
injections of debris into the lower stratosphere of one hemisphere can sometimes be
detected at much reduced levels in the other hemisphere, but this is a process thattypically takes months or years, which practically precludes detection of short-lived
radionuclides.29
In summary, no corroborative radionuclide evidence that could be unambiguously
attributed to a nuclear test on 22 September 1979 was found in air, precipitation or
layers of snow and/or ice. But the words of the Ruina panel provide some perspective:“Positive results from the debris effort would provide conclusive
evidence of a nuclear explosion. However, the negative results actuallyobtained do not provide conclusive evidence that no nuclear explosion
occurred.”8

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

APPENDIX C. Iodine-131 detected in sheep thyroids, but notin airPrevious experience (LVM-1) 30 had shown that the sheep thyroid iodine
concentrations peak some 10–20 days after deposition on the grasslands and, as
shown in Figure 3 of the main text, the potential deposition of a 22 September cloud
occurred on 26 September in south-eastern Australia, which is 27 days before thesample was collected on 22 October. The previous sample was collected on 24
September, before there was any possible deposition in Australia from a potential
nuclear test on 22 September near Marion Island. The 22 October sample was thus thefirst where any “Vela-iodine” could have been detected.
Sheep thyroid surveillance is the most sensitive method to detect man-maderadioactive iodine contaminations in rural areas as there is around 10,000 times
greater concentration in their glands than in their diet (LVM-1).31 The United States
Air Force Technical Applications Center (AFTAC), made a large effort to collectsamples in the cloud. There were no less than 25 sorties of the U.S. atmosphericcollection aircraft, WC 135B, flown from 25 September to 17 October, but nothing
was found.32 The total flight time was 230 hours, i.e. nine hours per flight. No flights
crossed the low-pressure system that took the potential debris towards Australia,
perhaps because of the vast estimated source area of the flash in the first week, andlikely because of difficulties in locating suitable bases in such remote areas. A 1982
AFTAC report stated that Alert 747 “brought to light AFTAC’s meager resources in
the Southern Hemisphere.”33 Also the sensitivity of the airborne system was likely
insufficient to detect any debris as the explosion would have drawn a huge amount ofwater into the cloud. When the water in the cloud fell back into the ocean, a large
fraction of the radioactive debris would have been scrubbed from the cloud.
An interesting question is whether the thyroid data can be used to estimate thecorresponding ground level iodine-131 concentrations in air. In the early 1960’s Dr.
Joseph Soldat studied the relationships between iodine-131 concentrations fromglobal fallout in environmental samples such as ground level air, grass, milk and cattle
thyroids in the vicinity of the Hanford Laboratories.34 Applying the global averagefactors for iodine-131 concentrations in 1961 and 1962 growing season data from
Hanford, Soldat determined that sheep thyroids contained about five times moreiodine per gram than cattle thyroids and that the ratio of sheep thyroid concentration
in pCi/g was 1.7 times the iodine-131 air concentration in µBq/m3. Using thisestimated ratio, the iodine-131 detected in the sheep thyroids on 22 October, about 26
days after the cloud passed, implies air concentrations of around (0.14/1.7) ×e"#$∙$&/(.*$+ = 0.8 µBq/m3, which is well below the stated detection limit of 30 µBq/m3
in the Australian network.

9

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

The air-to-thyroid concentration ratio is sensitive to precipitation. Higher
precipitation, due to higher effective rainout, corresponds to lower air-to-thyroid
ratios. Dry conditions correspond to higher ratios. To illustrate this, the monthly airto-thyroid concentration ratios were calculated from the monthly Hanford data andco-plotted with the monthly precipitation averages in Figure 1.35 The lower factors areassociated with higher precipitation, though with some delay as time needs to be
allotted for pasturing before slaughter. The lowest factors, fitting the 1979 situation inAustralia, are in the range of 0.4 to 3.0. The high factors in February through March of
1962 and 1963 are understood if the cattle were fed aged forage during the wintermonths. The conclusion here is that an Australian air sampling station with adetection limit of 30 µBq/m3 would almost certainly not have detected any iodine-131
compatible with the sheep thyroid concentrations in October 1979.

Figure 1. The ratio of iodine-131 concentrations in air to the ones in sheep thyroids
during 20 months in the early 1960s near Hanford WA, USA. The grey histogram withthe scale on the right shows the average daily total precipitation each month.

10

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Endnotes and References
1 Christopher M. Wright and Lars-Erik De Geer, “The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident:
Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear Explosion,” Science & Global
Security 26 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1080/08929882.2018.1451050.
2

Christopher M. Wright and Lars-Erik De Geer, “The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: The
Detected Double-Flash,” Science & Global Security 25 (2016): 95–124,
https://doi.org/10.1080/08929882.2017.1394047.

3

R. Melick and L. VanMiddlesworth, “Radioiodine fallout in Australian sheep,” The Medical
Journal of Australia (12 Nov. 1966):930–932; R. Melick and L. Van Middlesworth,“Radioiodine in animal thyroid glands from 1966–1972,” The Medical Journal of Australia(2 Mar. 1974): 298–301.

4

R. Melick and L. Van Middlesworth, “Radioiodine in animal thyroid glands from 1966–
1972.”

5

R. Melick and L. Van Middlesworth, “Radioiodine fallout in Australian sheep.”6

Only this technique was described in the respective, and early, papers.

7

M.S. Giles, A. Dudaitis, Environmental Survey at the AAEC Research Establishment, Lucas
Heights: Results for 1979. Lucas Heights [N.S.W.] (Australian Atomic Energy Commission
Research Establishment, 1980).

8

I.L. Larsen, E.A. Stetar, B.G. Giles, and B. Garrison. "Concentrations of iodine-131 released
from a hospital into a municipal sewer" Radiation Protection Management 17, 3 (2000):
35–37.

9

M.S. Giles, A. Dudaitis, Environmental survey at the AAEC research establishment Lucas
Heights–Results for 1979.

10

L. Van Middlesworth, 'Environmental radioiodine in thyroids of grazing animals,”
Environmental Monitoring, Restoration and Assessment: What have we learned? Twentyeighth Hanford Symposium on Health and the Environment; Gray, R. H., Ed.; PacificNorthwest Laboratory: Richland, (1990): 15–24.

11

Given the large areas of Victoria and New South Wales (NSW), those sheep from NSW
slaughtered in Melbourne would almost certainly have been from pastures situated closer
to Melbourne than Sydney.

12

J.V. Carolan, C.E. Hughes, and E.L. Hoffmann. "Dose assessment for marine biota andhumans from discharge of 131 I to the marine environment and uptake by algae in Sydney,
Australia." Journal of environmental radioactivity 102, no. 10 (2011): 953–963; C. Andres,
R. Barquero, R. Tortosa, C. Nunez, A. del Castillo, H.R. Vega-Carrillo, and D. Alonso. "131I
activity in urine to the sewer system due to thyroidal treatments." Health Physics 101,
(2011): S110–S115; Larsen et al., "Concentrations of iodine-131 released from a hospital
into a municipal sewer.

13

Alan Berman, ”Re: Evidence of possible detection of fission products related to VELA eventof 22 September 1979,” Naval Research Laboratory, letter from Director of Research Alan
Berman to John Marcum, Office of Science & Technology Policy, 3 November 1980,

11

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

declassified but redacted letter, National Security Archive, South Africa, Document No.
01104.
14

Christopher M. Wright and Lars-Erik De Geer, “The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident:
Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear Explosion;” A recently released
intelligence memorandum to Zbigniew Brzezinski, dated 1 December 1980, notes that the
U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency would also enquire into possible “industrial or
pharmaceutical causes,” but there is no information on their conclusions (Electronic
Briefing Book 570, National Security Archive, 08 Dec 2016, Document #41).

15

B.L. Seabrook, “Land application of wastewater systems in Australia: A report of foreign
trip,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 1974.

16

http://www.melbournewater.com.au; F. Barker, R. Faggian, and A.J. Hamilton. "A history of
wastewater irrigation in Melbourne, Australia," Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011):
31–50; N.E. Doran, “Manipulation of Zooplankton Communities in Waste Stabilization
Lagoons, with a view to Optimizing Production for Potential Harvest,” PhD thesis, Schoolof Zoology, University of Tasmania, May 1999; P. Chuen-chi Lai, “An ecological study ofwaste stabilization ponds in Werribee, Australia, with special reference to nutrient andplankton dynamics,” MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Management, Victoria
University of Technology, July 1994; B.L. Seabrook, Land application of wastewater
systems in Australia: A report of foreign trip.”

17

P. Chuen-chi Lai, “An ecological study of waste stabilization ponds in Werribee, Australia,
with special reference to nutrient and plankton dynamics.”

18

N.E. Doran, “Manipulation of Zooplankton Communities in Waste Stabilization Lagoons,with a view to Optimizing Production for Potential Harvest.”

19

Ibid

20

The last atmospheric test in this area was in 1974 but underground testing continued untillate January 1996.

21“Fallout studied to confirm blast near S. Africa,” Washington Post, 14 November 1979.

22“Scientists back at square one on evidence of A-bomb test,” Washington Post, 27 November
1979; Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,
Lower Hutt, New Zealand, Annual Report INS-R—286 January–December 1979 (1981).

23

United Nations Secretary General, “Policies of apartheid of the government of South Africa:
Inquiry into the reports concerning a nuclear explosion by South Africa,” Report of theSecretary General, United Nations General Assembly, thirty-fourth session, 26 November
1979, letter dated 23 November 1979 from the Permanent Representative of New Zealandto the United Nations addressed to the Secretary General, A/34/674/Add.1.

24

Dr. Murray Matthews, former Head of NRLNZ environmental monitoring, who with Mr.
Lloyd Gregory (then Head of NRLNZ Monitoring) spent a day or two (18–19 November1979) at INS, working with scientists there to determine the significance of INS findings.
Personal communication May 2016; “Environmental Radioactivity Annual Report 1979,”
National Radiation Laboratory, Christchurch, New Zealand, 1980, NRL-F/59; United

12

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Nations Secretary General, “Policies of apartheid of the government of South Africa:
Inquiry into the reports concerning a nuclear explosion by South Africa.”
25

Australian Ionising Radiation Advisory Council, “AIRAC Report 1981,” AIRAC No. 8,
Australian Government Publishing Service, ISBN O 644 01705 8 (1982).

26

Interestingly, in 1979 ARL did not issue their standard annual report and when Dr.
Moroney in November 1979 gave a talk in Tokyo entitled “Radioactive Fallout in theSouthern Hemisphere from Nuclear Weapons Tests,” there was no mention about theotherwise widely discussed Vela incident and whether any debris was seen or not seen in
the Australian network, J. Moroney, ”Radioactive Fallout in The Southern Hemispherefrom Nuclear Weapons Tests,” Australian Radiation Laboratory report ARL/TR013,(November 1979).

27

World Health Organization, ”Data on Environmental Radioactivity, 1st Quarter 1980,”
World Health Organization’s International Reference Center for Radioactivity Report no.
36 (1981).

28“Re: Evidence of possible detection of fission products related to VELA event of 22
September 1979,” Naval Research Laboratory, letter from Director of Research Alan
Berman to John Marcum, Office of Science & Technology Policy, 3 November 1980
(redacted), National Security Archive, South Africa, Document No. 01104. It is
documented in Ronald Walters, South Africa and the bomb: responsibility and deterrence(Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books, 1987) 50, that the U.S. Department of Energy statedthat the Santiago October 1979 gross gamma count suffered from a typographical error ofa misplaced decimal point, and so the reading was in fact consistent with normal levels. It
was one of 288 entries in the table supplied in the Berman letter, making it an unfortunate
coincidence that the only error occurred for an entry that would suggest consistency with
Alert 747. Quintana Eduardo, “Assessment of the radiological impact in Argentina of thenuclear tests after decades,” poster T1.5-P3 presented at the CTBT Science & Technology
2015 conference, available at www.ctbto.org/specials /snt2015/poster-presentations/; H.E.
Ciallella, J.A. Fernandez, E.C. Lewis, E.E. Y Quintana, “Niveles ambientales de Sr 90 y Cs
137 provenientes del fall-out en la Republica Argentina,” presented at VII Congreso
Argentino de Proteccion Radiologica y Seguridad Nuclear, Buenos Aires, Argentina 30–31
October 2003; K. Kazuhisa, T. Torii, M. Yamamoto, and M. Sakanoue. "Natural andartificial radionuclides in environmental samples collected from the McMurdo Soundregion in South Victoria Land, Antarctica." Memoirs of National Institute of Polar
Research, Special issue 33 (1984): 224–236.

29

United Nations, Ionizing Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects, Report to the General
Assembly, with Annexes (New York, NY: UN, 1982), 213.

30

LVM-1, “World-Wide 131I Fallout in Animal Thyroids, 1954–1987,” available from the
Nuclear Testing Archive in Las Vegas with accession number 350399.

31

LVM-1, “World-Wide 131I Fallout in Animal Thyroids, 1954–1987.”

32

G. Mauth, “Alert 747,” Sandia National Laboratories, Report RS 1243/80/12 (1 May 1980),
declassified, but redacted, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 190(2006); L. Ruhnke, “Preliminary Results and Recommendations on Project Search,” Naval

13

SCIENCE & GLOBAL SECURITY

2018, VOL. 26, NO. 1

The 22 September 1979 Vela Incident: Radionuclide and Hydroacoustic Evidence for a Nuclear
Explosion, Appendices A, B & C:

Research Laboratory Internal Memorandum to Alan Berman (9 June 1980). Downloaded
from the National Security Archive summer 2016.
33

G. Wright, Air Force Technical Applications Center, History of the Air Force TechnicalApplications Center, 1 January 1979–31 December 1980, Volume I, Narrative (excerpt)(17 May 1982) (redacted), National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 190(2006).

34

J. Soldat, ”The relationship between 131I concentrations in various environmental samples,”Health Physics 9, (1963): 1167–1171.

35

Weather data can be downloaded at http://weathersource.com/past-weather/weatherhistory-reports/.

14