U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

56–559PDF 2010

OVERSIGHT ON THE COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION WITH

THE REPUBLIC OF THE MARSHALL ISLANDS (RMI): MEDICAL

TREATMENT OF THE MARSHALLESE PEOPLE, U.S. NUCLEAR

TESTS, NUCLEAR CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, FORCED RESETTLEMENT,

USE OF KWAJALEIN ATOLL FOR MISSILE PROGRAMS AND

LAND USE DEVELOPMENT

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA, THE PACIFIC AND 

THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MAY 20, 2010

Serial No. 111–119

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California, Chairman 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BILL DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

MICHAEL E. MCMAHON, New York 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

LYNN WOOLSEY, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

BARBARA LEE, California 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

JIM COSTA, California 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona 

RON KLEIN, Florida 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

RON PAUL, Texas 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

BOB INGLIS, South Carolina 

GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Staff Director 

YLEEM POBLETE, Republican Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA, THE PACIFIC AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa, Chairman 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

BOB INGLIS, South Carolina 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Ms. Frankie A. Reed, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian 

and Pacific Affairs, U.S. Department of State ................................................... 16

Mr. Nikolao Pula, Director, Office of Insular Affairs, U.S. Department of 

the Interior ........................................................................................................... 20

Steven Messervy, Ph.D., Deputy to the Commanding General for Research, 

Development, and Acquisition, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, U.S. Department of Defense .................................................................... 30

Mr. Glenn S. Podonsky, Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer, Office 

of Health, Safety and Security, U.S. Department of Energy ............................ 36

Neal A. Palafox, M.D., M.P.H., Professor and Chair, Department of Family 

Medicine and Community Health, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii .................................................................................................. 62

Mr. Jonathan M. Weisgall, Legal Counsel for the People of the Bikini Atoll .... 75

Mr. Don Miller, Esq., Independent Attorney-at-Law ............................................ 91

Mr. Robert Alvarez, Senior Scholar, Institute for Policy Studies ........................ 104

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, a Representative in Congress from 

American Samoa, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and 

the Global Environment: Prepared statement ................................................... 6

The Honorable Gary L. Ackerman, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of New York, and Chairman, Subcommittee on the Middle East 

and South Asia: Prepared statement ................................................................. 12

Ms. Frankie A. Reed: Prepared statement ............................................................ 18

Mr. Nikolao Pula: Prepared statement .................................................................. 22

Steven Messervy, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ....................................................... 32

Mr. Glenn S. Podonsky: Prepared statement ........................................................ 38

Neal A. Palafox, M.D., M.P.H.: Prepared statement ............................................ 65

Mr. Jonathan M. Weisgall: Prepared statement ................................................... 77

Mr. Don Miller, Esq.: Prepared statement ............................................................ 93

Mr. Robert Alvarez: Prepared statement ............................................................... 106

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 140

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 142

The Honorable Diane E. Watson, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California: Prepared statement ............................................................ 143

The Honorable Eni F.H. Faleomavaega: Material submitted for the record ...... 144

(1)

OVERSIGHT ON THE COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION WITH THE REPUBLIC OF THE 

MARSHALL ISLANDS (RMI): MEDICAL 

TREATMENT OF THE MARSHALLESE PEOPLE, U.S. NUCLEAR TESTS, NUCLEAR 

CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, FORCED RESETTLEMENT, USE OF KWAJALEIN ATOLL FOR MISSILE PROGRAMS AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT 

THURSDAY, MAY 20, 2010

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA, THE PACIFIC

AND THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:10 p.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Today’s subcommittee hearing will come to 

order. This is a meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment. 

The hearing involves oversight on the Compact of Free Association with the Republic of the Marshall Islands, issues referencing 

the medical treatment of the Marshallese people due to our nuclear 

testing program, the activities of the Nuclear Claims Tribunal, 

greater understanding of the forced resettlement to some of these 

islands and the current use of Kwajalein Atoll and land use development—all these issues put together. 

I deeply appreciate the presence of our distinguished witnesses 

representing the various agencies of the Federal Government. 

My good friend and ranking member of this subcommittee, the 

gentleman from Illinois, will be here later so I will go ahead and 

begin our hearing this afternoon with my opening statement. 

From 1946 to 1958—that is, for some 12 years—the United 

States conducted 67 nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands in the atmosphere, on the surface and even below the surface to further our 

national security interests. Those tests destroyed the homes and 

the lives of hundreds of Marshallese people whose islands remained part of the U.S.-administered Trust Territory of the Pacific 

Islands. 

2

Following World War II, the United States unilaterally declared 

these islands of Micronesia to be a strategic trust. Whether or not 

the United Nations liked it, we grabbed the islands and said they 

were ours. Today, more than half a century later, the people of the 

Republic of the Marshall Islands still await adequate redress from 

the United States for the harm they suffered. 

The United States accepted responsibility for the problems 

caused by the tests in 1986 when the Republic of the Marshall Islands entered into a Compact of Free Association with the United 

States. Of particular interest to me is the provision of section 177 

of the Compact of Free Association, which makes it very clear that 

the United States recognizes its responsibility, and I quote, ‘‘To address past, present and future consequences of the nuclear testing 

program, including the resolution of the resultant claims.’’

Afterwards, the United States authorized $150 million under section 177 and additional ex gratia assistance under sections 103, 

105 and 224 of the compact to settle claims as determined by the 

Nuclear Claims Tribunal. Under the compact, the Republic of the 

Marshall Islands could also seek additional compensation if 

changed circumstances rendered the settlement manifestly inadequate. 

The Nuclear Claims Tribunal determined a settlement amounting to about $2.2 billion. Yet, because the fund created to cover the 

Nuclear Claims Tribunal recommendation proved grossly inadequate, less than $4 million has actually been awarded. 

When the Republic of the Marshall Islands filed a change-of-circumstances petition to gain appropriate compensation from Congress, the previous administrations either never bothered to address the problem or simply opposed the petition based on their 

contention that the settlement provided in the compact was full 

and final. 

No further action was taken on the petition. And just last month, 

in response to a suit for just compensation filed by the people of 

Bikini and Enewetak in the U.S. Court of Claims, the Supreme 

Court declined to review the case, upholding the lower court’s dismissal of the suit. 

In my opinion, this lack of action by the United States became 

especially salient when earlier this month the President’s cancer 

panel concluded,

‘‘The United States has not met its obligation to provide for ongoing health needs of the people of the Republic of the Marshall Islands resulting from radiation exposure they received 

during U.S. nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific from 1946 

to 1958.’’

The panel went on to recommend to President Obama,

‘‘The United States Government should honor and make payments according to the judgment of the Marshall Islands Tribunal.’’

Unless that recommendation is followed, options may be limited to 

a congressional reference case, which we will discuss today, though 

I hope this hearing also helps to spur other good ideas. 

3

Another key issue we will discuss today is a recent rush to move 

the people of Rongelap back to their atoll before it is fully safe to 

return, in the shadow of a shameful history of previous attempts 

to resettle the Marshallese people on their contaminated islands. 

As detailed in a series of important articles by Thomas Maier in 

Newsday last year, the people of Rongelap were resettled on their 

land in 1957, until they fled in 1985, because the doctors from 

Brookhaven National Labs who treated them allowed their primary 

responsibility of addressing medical concerns of the Marshallese to 

be trumped by the goal of studying the effects of nuclear radiation 

on the human body. 

In other words, these doctors, these so-called experts from 

Brookhaven Lab, spent more time studying the effects of nuclear 

exposure and contamination on the Marshallese people than actually giving them proper medical treatment. This is absolutely 

shameful and without justification. How could these doctors abandon their most consequential responsibility? 

I believe that in 1956, a statement made by Mr. Merrill 

Eisenbud, a senior Atomic Energy Commission official, regarding 

information that might be gleaned in resettling the Marshallese 

people is revealing:

‘‘Now, data of this type has never been available, and while it 

is true that these people do not live the way that Westerners 

do, civilized people, it is nonetheless also true that they are 

more like us than the mice.’’

This is M–I–C–E, mice. 

The United States has obviously made dramatic progress in reducing such blatant racism over the past half century, but when it 

comes to the people of the Marshall Islands, in my humble opinion, 

our failure to treat them justly, to honor their sacrifices and now 

to push them to return to contaminated lands harkens to an uglier 

period in our history. 

The United States continues to ignore and, with indifference, 

allow the squalid and horrible living conditions of some 12,000 

Marshallese men, women and children who currently live on this 

tiny island called Ebeye. Only 66 acres of land are currently inhabited by these 12,000 people in order to allow the U.S. Government 

to operate its missile testing facility on the nearby island of Kwajalein. 

I just wanted to give an idea to our friends of what it means for 

12,000 people to live on 66 acres of land. We made a little comparative view. Guttenberg, New Jersey, is part of the New York City 

Metropolitan Area with a population density of 56,012 people per 

square mile. It is the most densely populated incorporated place in 

the United States and has over twice the density of New York City, 

which has some 26,403 people per square mile. 

This means that the 12,000 people living on 66 acres of this little 

tiny island, Ebeye, is equivalent to a population density of approximately 116,364 people per square mile. This is more than twice the 

density of Guttenberg, the most densely populated city in the 

United States. 

The United States regards the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile 

Defense Test Site on Kwajalein Island as vital to our national secuVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:40 Nov 17, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\APGE\052010\56559 HFA PsN: SHIRL
4

rity. Yet our Government did not meet the most basic needs of the 

displaced Marshallese people as we built the facilities. We need to 

do better for the people of Kwajalein, just as we need to do better 

for the Marshallese people harmed as a result of our nuclear testing program. 

I hope that today’s hearing and briefing moves us toward meeting our obligations and keeping our promises. We have a new administration in office, one that is committed to reducing the threat 

posed by nuclear weapons and addressing their broadest impacts. 

I think it is particularly appropriate, then, that we convene this 

morning just after the Obama administration’s ‘‘nuclear spring,’’ 

and while the Review Conference of the Nonproliferation Nuclear 

Treaty proceeds. 

To his credit, President Obama has done more in the past 2 

months to advance the goal of a nuclear weapons-free world than 

his predecessors did over the previous 30 years. President Obama’s 

important accomplishments—devising a new U.S. Nuclear strategy, 

completing a nuclear arms control agreement with Russia, convening the nuclear security summit agreement and supporting the 

South Pacific Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Treaty—deserve our support and appreciation. But if we are to address the full range of 

problems posed by nuclear weapons, we must also deal with the 

tragic legacy of our nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands. 

Towards that end, I commend Chairman Bingaman of the Senate 

Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and the senior ranking 

member, Senator Lisa Murkowski, for their interest and leadership 

in working to assist the Republic of the Marshall Islands through 

legislation that would provide supplemental compensation for the 

impacts of nuclear testing. 

They introduced Senate bill 2941, which would create a health 

care program at affected atolls, require periodic surveys of radiological conditions on Runit Island as well as a National Academy 

of Science assessment of the health impacts of the testing program. 

It would also mandate that the Republic of the Marshall Islands’ 

citizens receive the same treatment as U.S. citizens working in our 

nuclear weapons programs. These are all important matters that 

should be pursued. 

It is my understanding that at yesterday’s Senate hearing, the 

Department of the Interior indicated it did not support the $2 million authorization in the proposed Senate bill. Perhaps our friends 

from the Office of Insular Affairs of the Department of the Interior 

will care to elaborate further on this issue. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the people of the Marshall Islands have 

literally sacrificed their lives, their properties, their islands. And 

even more critically profound, as a result of our Government’s nuclear testing program, we caused tremendous suffering among 

Marshallese men, women, and children due to severe exposure to 

nuclear radioactive fallout. Women gave birth to monstrous looking 

babies with no legs, no arms, one eye and high incidences of leukemia and thyroid cancer. It goes on and on. They still have not 

been given proper treatment. 

It is my humble opinion that our Nation owes these people much 

better treatment than we have given them. This isn’t about money. 

It is about the character of the American people and their leaders 

5

and the will to do the right thing. It is about equity and fairness 

for the sacrifices the Marshallese people made for the success of 

our country’s nuclear testing program. That was very important 

and critical for our national defense at that time against the nuclear capabilities of the former Soviet Union. 

So, with that said, ladies and gentlemen, I purposely wore this 

tie to this meeting. It has a lot of meaning. It was given to me by 

my dear friend, a member of the Oneida Nation of the American 

Indian Tribe. I am an adopted member of the Bear Clan. That is 

why I have the claw of the bear. Hopefully, I am not going to claw 

anybody here this afternoon. 

This is not an adversarial proceeding. I am looking forward to 

the statements and also the testimony that will be given today. We 

have a long list of witnesses to testify at our hearing this afternoon 

and I want to say again how deeply I appreciate your willingness 

to take the time to come and be with us to make this hearing a 

successful one. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Faleomavaega follows:]

6


56559r-1.eps
7


56559r-2.eps
8


56559r-3.eps
9

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. For our first panel this afternoon, we are 

very pleased to have with us Ms. Frankie Reed, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs of the 

Department of State. 

I have known Ms. Reed for a number of years. She formerly 

served as a Charge ́s d’Affaires for the State Department to the 

Independent State of Samoa years ago. Now she is the newly-appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary to the Pacific. 

Secretary Reed is very familiar with the Pacific region. She 

served as a diplomat in residence at the University of California at 

Berkeley, where she lectured and was also responsible for outreach 

programs at the University of the Pacific Northwest. Ms. Reed was 

also counsel general and deputy U.S. observer to the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, 

France. She served as deputy chief of mission in Conakry, Guinea, 

and as deputy chief of mission in Apia, Samoa. Ms. Reed also 

served as a Pearson fellow, formerly on the staff of the current 

chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Chairman Howard 

Berman. 

Ms. Reed is a member of the California Bar Association. She received her juris doctorate degree from the University of California 

at Berkeley and a bachelor’s in journalism from Howard University. She has a very impressive background and experience, I might 

say. I want to thank Ms. Reed for being with us this afternoon. 

Also with us as a member of the panel is Mr. Nikolao Pula. Mr. 

Pula is the first Pacific Islander of Samoan ancestry ever to serve 

as the director of the Office of Insular Affairs and, in that position, 

Mr. Pula advises the Secretary of the Interior on operational and 

administrative matters involving Federal policies in insular affairs. 

Before coming to the Department of the Interior, Mr. Pula 

worked for 11 years on Capitol Hill for Senator Daniel Inouye, 

former Congressman Fofo Sunia and also served as a staff member 

on the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation. A 

graduate of Marist School in American Samoa, he also studied at 

Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah, and at George Mason 

University. I am very happy to welcome Mr. Pula. 

With us also as a member of the panel is Dr. Steven Messervy, 

deputy to the commander for research, development and acquisition at the Department of Defense. 

Dr. Messervy is deputy to the commanding general for research 

at the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, Armed 

Forces Strategic Command, located at Redstone Arsenal in Alabama. That is quite a distance from the Kwajalein missile base, but 

I assume that you have a good relationship with the Kwajalein 

missile base. 

He has more than 30 years of experience in the research, development and acquisition business. His doctorate is in systems engineering and operations research. He is a graduate of the Defense 

Systems Management College program of the U.S. Army Command 

and General Staff College. He is also recipient of many awards, including the decorations—my gosh, there are so many, I don’t have 

enough time to read them. 

I want to welcome Dr. Messervy today. 

10

Also with us is Glenn Podonsky with the Department of Energy. 

Mr. Podonsky is the chief health, safety, and security officer. He reports directly to the Office of the Secretary of Energy and manages 

the major staff organizations responsible for health, safety and security policy development. He is also responsible for independent 

oversight of the environmental safety and health safeguard security. I am glad you are here, Mr. Podonsky. I have a lot of questions to ask you on this. 

Mr. Podonsky, we welcome you and look forward to hearing your 

testimony. 

Also with us this afternoon is my distinguished colleague and 

chairman of our Subcommittee of Foreign Affairs on the Middle 

East and South Asia, my good friend, the gentleman from New 

York, Mr. Ackerman. I would like to give him time for his opening 

statement, if he has one. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is good 

to be with you. 

Today’s hearing addresses a set of issues that are marked by 

both clear absolutes and awkward ambiguity. The detonation of a 

hydrogen bomb is as absolute an act as can be imagined. American 

nuclear tests literally vaporized entire islands in the Pacific, and 

the reason for these tests were obvious. The Soviet Union posed a 

clear and present danger to the United States and the world. Nuclear arms were thought to be the key to peace following the unprecedented blood-letting of World War II. We not only thought we 

were in the right, but we felt compelled by duty to provide for the 

defense of ourselves and for others. But behind the absolutes were 

shades of gray and sometimes the darkness of unaccountable and 

unfeeling government agents rationalizing what they knew to be 

wrong, or should have known. 

The United States made promises to the people of the Marshall 

Islands on the basis of science it didn’t understand and medical 

judgments that were, at best, poorly educated guesses. Contracts 

and agreements and commitments and promises rife with certainty 

and conviction collapsed and failed in the aftermath of radioactive 

fallout and contamination. 

On an island far away where I was born and have lived all my 

life, doctors from the Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island, working under contract for the United States, assured 250 

people that it was safe to return home to Rongelap. What the doctors didn’t mention was that the island was still highly radioactive. 

In the midst of the Cold War it was easy to rationalize. We were 

in danger. We needed to know what these new weapons of unprecedented power could do. We had to know how to survive exposure 

to radiation in the event of a nuclear attack. But in the end, government officials employed to work for the public good, and medical 

doctors who took an oath to do no harm, sent innocent people to 

live in the cancer incubation ward of a radioactive danger zone. 

The people of the Marshall Islands were treated with contempt, 

like guinea pigs. There is no denying the responsibility of the 

United States for this treatment. We tested those nuclear weapons. 

We irradiated those islands. And, in the end, we bear the responsibility for providing for the people who were displaced or injured by 

our actions. 

11

The people of Rongelap suffered a 9 percent increase in the cancer rate. That is over 530 cancer victims that can be linked to U.S. 

nuclear tests. Their suffering and ill health were bad enough, but 

were astonishingly compounded by a bureaucratic and medical indifference that would make Franz Kafka weep. 

Consider the medical treatment the Marshallese received. All 

250 of them were given identification numbers and pictures were 

taken, many of them naked, to be kept on record for the effects of 

radiation. Exams were d1 yearly, each time with more pictures and 

more samples of blood and urine. But never were the 250 people 

whose lives and health were in jeopardy told how severe was their 

risk as we cooked them in a nuclear soup that we tested every 

year. 

In 2007, the Marshall Islands Nuclear Claims Tribunal, established by the United States until 1988, ruled that the residents of 

the island will were owed $1 billion in damage awards because of 

the radioactive fallout that contaminated the island and sickened 

the residents. The Bush White House refused to pay the claim. The 

U.S. courts have washed their hands of the matter. What will the 

Obama administration do? What will we do? Are we absolved? 

On the one hand, the United States has provided medical care 

and spent some $500 million on construction and clearing projects. 

On the other hand, the responsibility for the loss, all the pain, all 

the illness caused by the nuclear tests, lies with the United States. 

And in the end, trying isn’t enough. In the end, apologizing isn’t 

enough. There may be no justice in a case like this one. But it does 

not preclude the United States accepting responsibility for what it 

did and carrying that responsibility through until the last legitimate claim is satisfied. 

We do not hesitate to shame those who delay compensation to 

victims of Nazi atrocities until they die off or their ranks thin 

down. Here in this case, without question, there is great shame on 

us. We took the weak and powerless and made them sick and helpless. And, in the end—if that is the end—it is not a story about 

them, it is more a story about us. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ackerman follows:]

12


56559s-1.eps
13


56559s-2.eps
14

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I thank the gentleman for his most eloquent 

and profound statement concerning what we are talking about this 

afternoon. 

As I stated earlier, this is not about money. This is really a challenge to the character of our Nation, of the American people and 

of our leaders to do what is right and to correct the mistakes that 

we have made in the past and make whole our promises to the people of the Marshall Islands. 

I just wanted to share a little bit. I will get to my good friend 

from Arizona, but this is in reference to the first hydrogen bomb 

that was exploded in 1954, the first ever in the history of the 

world. The sad part about it is as I read from the records—and 

that was indicated and verified—was the fact that, as they were 

planning for the explosion of this hydrogen bomb, the winds had 

shifted. The administrators, the scientists and the people responsible for that project knew that the winds had shifted, and yet they 

went ahead and exploded the bomb. 

The explosion of this hydrogen bomb was, according to reports, 

1,300 times more powerful than the bombs that we exploded at Nagasaki and Hiroshima against Japan during World War II. I just 

want to share personal experiences, and I have here a book that 

is probably one of the best written books, I think. It is called ‘‘Day 

of Two Suns’’ by Jane Dibblin. She went and recorded the personal 

testimonies of some of the victims exposed to this explosion in 

1954. 

It says that one of these people who was there said that he was 

14 years old at the time, his sister was 12.

‘‘The teacher asked us—my sister and I and our two cousins—to cook some rice for the other children. We got ready to 

do it. Then we saw a bright light and heard a sound. Boom. 

We were really scared. 

‘‘At that time, we had no idea what it was. After noon, something powdery fell from the sky. Only later we were told it was 

fallout. Hiroko and several cousins went to our village at the 

end of Rongelap Island to gather some sprouted coconuts. Our 

cousin climbed a coconut tree and got something in her eyes. 

So we we sent another one up. The same thing happened to 

her. When we got home, ours was the main village on 

Rongelap, it was raining. We saw something on the leaves, 

something yellow. Our parents asked, What happened to your 

hair? It looked like we rubbed soap powder all over it. That 

night we couldn’t sleep. Our skin itched so much and on our 

own feet burned, as if it was hot water. Our hair fell out and 

we would look at each other and laugh: You are bald, you look 

like an old man. But really we were frightened and sad.’’

I could go on and on, but I just wanted to share and give a little 

sense of human experience as to what happened on that dreadful 

day when the hydrogen bomb exploded. 

I might also mention to my good friends and colleagues that the 

reason why we decided not to continue our nuclear testing program 

in the Marshall Islands was because of the nuclear fallout. Fifty 

thousand square miles—this is how far these nuclear clouds traveled. Some of them came right across the United States and fell. 

15

Strontium-90 was found in the milk products of the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota. 

So they said, oh boy, we better do something else. That is what 

motivated us to say we better change the place where we are going 

to have our nuclear testing. So we ended up going to Nevada and 

tested about 1,000 more nuclear bombs, this time underground, but 

still very deadly. 

I am very happy to have my good friends and colleagues joining 

us. 

I recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Flake, for his opening statement, if he has one. 

Mr. FLAKE. I have no prepared opening statement. I thank the 

chairman for having this hearing. I am anxious to hear the witnesses. I want to thank the Marshallese delegation that is here. I 

met with them yesterday in my office. 

I have developed a soft spot for the Marshall Islands. As many 

of you know, I spent 1 week there last August on a little island in 

the Kwajalein atoll and enjoyed my experience immeasurably 

there. I was treated very well by the Marshallese people, both coming and going. 

So I want to thank the chairman for holding this hearing, and 

look forward to the witnesses. Thank you. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I want to note for the record that my colleague from Arizona wanted to experience what it means to live on 

a lonely island by himself, so he decided to go to the Marshall Islands. It is a miracle he came back alive. He wanted to be out there 

by himself, nobody else, no telephones, no washing machines, nothing. He lived about 1 week, I believe, by himself, catching fish and 

eating coconuts, just like a native. Congratulations to my good 

friend from Arizona. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, for his opening 

statement. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me note after Mr. Flake had that experience of eating coconuts and living there on that island, he still remained a Republican. 

It is my honor to be here today and I am very happy that our 

schedules happened to mesh, because it is a very busy day. But we 

should not be too busy for the people of the Marshall Islands. They 

are a small group of people, but they represent something vitally 

important to the United States. They represent whether or not the 

United States takes its commitments seriously, whether or not the 

United States can be a trusted friend, whether the United States 

will keep its word. 

The Marshall Islands were more than good friends to us. They 

were incredibly generous to the people of the United States at a 

time when we really needed it. What I am talking about is the time 

during the Cold War when the outcome of the Cold War was totally 

in question and the Russians had detonated nuclear weapons and 

they were ahead of us in terms of advanced rocketry. 

The people of the Marshall Islands not only permitted us, but 

joined with us and became partners with us in the development of 

those weapons systems during the Cold War, which I believe deterred a nuclear conflagration between the great powers, which 

would have resulted in an historic setback for all of humanity. One 

16

can only imagine if indeed we did not develop those weapons which 

deterred that war and we would have slipped into some kind of a 

conflagration, what it would have done to the future of the human 

race. 

The small group of people that permitted us that knowledge and 

that ability to develop those technologies were the people of the 

Marshall Islands. And if we go even today to the Marshall Islands, 

you will find that even to this day, those people are hosting an 

American effort to develop our antimissile defense systems, and 

have been for the last 10 to 20 years. 

That is of incalculable value to us. If we have, Mr. Chairman, an 

antimissile system, that if some lunatic from North Korea someday 

launches a rocket toward Hawaii or even toward the West Coast 

of the United States, if we are able to knock it down, the first people we should thank are the people of the Marshall Islands who 

permitted us to test our systems there and permitted us the ability 

to develop such technologies. So we have a lot to thank them for. 

There is, of course, more than a debt of gratitude. There is a debt 

of making sure that those people who suffered from these tests in 

the past are dealt with fairly and we keep our word. I certainly am 

anxious to work with you, Mr. Chairman, to make sure that those 

people understand our gratitude and we do what is right. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I thank the gentleman from California for 

his most eloquent statement, and thank both of our friends on the 

Republican side for their attendance and their interest in this 

issue. 

We will now have our friends here, the witnesses, testify. Secretary Reed. 

STATEMENT OF MS. FRANKIE A. REED, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY, BUREAU OF EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Ms. REED. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. I am honored to appear before you today as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs. The United 

States and the Marshall Islands have a close and special relationship dating back to shortly after the end of the Second World War 

when the Marshall Islands became part of the U.N. Trust Territory 

of the Pacific Islands under the administration of the United 

States. 

In 1986, the Republic of the Marshall Islands gained full independence and entered into a Compact of Free Association with the 

United States. The compact, which was amended in 2003, provides 

the framework for much of our bilateral relations, and its provisions ensure the security of the Marshall Islands and contribute to 

the security of the United States. 

Since achieving independence, the Marshall Islands has developed its own style of democracy and has proved itself a steadfast 

friend and supporter of the United States. Its government has an 

excellent voting affinity with the United States in the United Nations, and shares our position on other important international 

issues. 

17

Many Marshallese citizens are bravely in American military 

units conducting operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. In 

December 2008, U.S. Army Staff Sergeant Solomon T. Sam, a 

young Marshallese serving in Mosul, Iraq, was killed by wounds 

sustained from an improvised explosive device. We salute all of 

these Marshallese members and their families’ heroism and sacrifice for the cause of building a more secure world. 

The Marshall Islands is host to some 2,000 Americans who work 

along with about 900 Marshallese at the strategically important 

U.S. Army Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense test site at 

Kwajalein Atoll. Known as USAKA, the base is the second largest 

employer in the Marshall Islands, after the Republic of the Marshall Islands Government. 

The combination of payroll taxes paid by Marshallese American 

contract employees and other workers account for about 25 percent 

of the Marshall Islands’ total revenue collections each year. 

USAKA also engages in regular humanitarian and development 

projects on Kwajalein Atoll. 

The United States and the Marshall Islands also has an important economic relationship. The United States is the Marshall Islands’ largest trading partner. Under the compact, as amended, the 

United States provides over $60 million in aid to the Marshall Islands annually. 

U.S. Federal agencies operate 22 different government programs 

in the Marshall Islands. We at the Department of State work closely with all of these agencies, but we have a special working relationship with our colleagues at the Department of the Interior Office of Insular Affairs, which has primary responsibility for implementing the compact’s economic provisions to ensure that assistance efforts are appropriately coordinated and implemented with 

transparency and accountability. 

The amended compact includes a trust fund mechanism that will 

serve as a resource base to the Marshall Islands after annual grant 

assistance expires in 2023. One of our greatest challenges in our 

relationship is to promote economic development that will contribute to the long-term financial self-sufficiency of the Marshall Islands. 

We enjoy a unique and positive relationship with the Marshall 

Islands, and we are working to see that the interests of the U.S. 

Government are advanced, while working in concert with the expressed interests of the Marshallese Government and its people. 

Additionally, I believe that coordination between the U.S. executive 

and legislative branches is important to this endeavor, and I am 

grateful for this opportunity to speak with you today. 

I would be glad to respond to any questions you may have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Reed follows:]

18


56559a-1.eps
19


56559a-2.eps
20

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Secretary. 

Mr. Nick Pula from the Office of Insular Affairs. 

STATEMENT OF MR. NIKOLAO PULA, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF 

INSULAR AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. PULA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the United 

States’ relationship with the Republic of the Marshall Islands. 

The United States entered into a Compact of Free Association in 

1986. In 2003, the amended compact provided a total of $1.5 billion 

in mandatory assistance from 2004 through 2023. Under the 

amended compact, U.S. Grant funding generally decreases annually, paired with increasing contributions to a trust fund established for the RMI. Earnings from the trust fund are intended to 

provide a source of revenue for the Government of the RMI when 

grants expire in 2023. 

The amended compact requires the RMI to target funding to six 

development sectors—education, health, the environment, public 

sector capacity building, private sector development and infrastructure, with priority given to education, health and infrastructure. 

The compact and its subsidiary agreement on fiscal procedures 

require the U.S.-RMI Joint Economic Management and Joint Financial Accountability Committee, known as JEMFAC, to, one, 

meet at least once annually to evaluate the progress of the RMI in 

achieving the objectives specified in the development plans; two, 

approve grant allocations; three, review required annual reports; 

four, identify problems; and, five, recommend ways to increase the 

effectiveness of compact grant assistance. 

With regard to public sector infrastructure, JEMFAC has allocated approximately $77 million for the public sector infrastructure 

since 2004. The use of these funds by the RMI has been well 

planned, professionally managed, and targeted on the priority sectors of health and education. Sixty percent of the 13,000 students 

are now enjoying new facilities. 

Regarding education, it must be said that despite the significant 

amount of resources provided for support of the education sector, 

performance results have been less than satisfactory. According to 

the compact, emphasis should be placed on advancing a quality 

basic education system. For the most part, the education sector 

funds cover salaries and operations. 

Affecting the sustainability of education systems are politically 

popular efforts to implement school meal programs and provide 

transportation to and from school. Food and ground transportation 

are increasingly expensive, and, if continued with compact funding, 

these services will take increasing amounts of money away from 

basic classroom teaching. 

Regarding health, the need to strengthen preventive and primary 

care and shift emphasis away from secondary and tertiary care has 

been been recognized by the RMI and health leaders. But due to 

high incidences of chronic disease, notably diabetes, the RMI’s population requires a higher level of sick care than the typical patient 

population. 

21

As the amended compact moves into its 7th year, annual 

decrements or decreases in funding mean that funds available to 

the health sector will diminish. 

An important element of the U.S. financial assistance is the trust 

fund established to contribute a source of revenue to the RMI when 

annual sector grants cease after 2023. As of March 31, 2010, the 

market value of total assets of the trust fund for the people of the 

Republic of the Marshall Islands was $108 million. The trust fund 

sustained losses in 2008. Since then, most of the losses have been 

recovered. 

The RMI is in a tight fiscal position. Some of the issues include 

doubled government payrolls since 2000, growing level of subsidies 

and capital transfers to the state-owned enterprises, and difficulty 

in serving debt payments. Fiscal reform is imperative. 

To its credit, the RMI has created two commissions and committees to propose public sector reform. These are steps in the right 

direction. The Office of Insular Affairs is fully prepared to provide 

support to restructuring efforts. 

With regard to Rongelap, the Office of Insular Affairs carries out 

a congressionally mandated role in exercising its necessary right of 

veto over the use by the Rongelap Atoll local government, or 

RALGov, of its resettlement trust fund. This past March 30th, the 

mayor of RALGov council members adopted resolutions committing 

themselves to the following: One, moving from Mejatto Island by 

October 1, 2011; two, using approximately $7 million to resettle 

Rongelap Island; and, three, leaving $10 million in the trust fund’s 

corpus to maintain RALGov’s operations after October 1, 2011. 

Once all those who choose to go home have done so, the resettlement trust fund can be used to carry out resettlement and to assure the resettlement succeeds. 

Regarding Enewetak, the United States and RMI settled all 

claims—past, present and future—of the government and citizens 

of the Marshall Islands, which are in a way related to the U.S. nuclear weapons testing program. Nevertheless, Runit Dome remains 

a point of friction. 

Upon request, the Department of Energy staff have from time to 

time performed limited environmental sampling at Runit Island 

around Runit Dome. However, the Congress has never assigned the 

Department of Energy or any other Federal agency or department 

the responsibility to maintain surveillance of the radiological conditions on Runit Island. 

Despite issues of concern that arise for both the Government of 

the Marshall Islands and the Government of the United States, we 

anticipate a continuation of relatively good relations between the 

two nations. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pula follows:]

22


56559b-1.eps
23


56559b-2.eps
24


56559b-3.eps
25


56559b-4.eps
26


56559b-5.eps
27


56559b-6.eps
28


56559b-7.eps
29


56559b-8.eps
30

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you. 

Dr. Messervy. 

STATEMENT OF STEVEN MESSERVY, PH.D., DEPUTY TO THE 

COMMANDING GENERAL FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, 

AND ACQUISITION, U.S. ARMY SPACE AND MISSILE DEFENSE 

COMMAND, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Mr. MESSERVY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, 

members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this panel. 

Along with the other panel members, my role here today is to 

provide some insight and answer your questions regarding the missions of the United States Army Kwajalein Atoll and Ronald 

Reagan Ballistic Missile Test Site, commonly referred to in the 

Army as USAKA/RTS. The USAKA/RTS installation and test range 

falls under the operational control of the United States Army Space 

and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command 

(U.S. Army SMDC/ARSTRAT). 

I serve as the deputy to the commander for research, development, and acquisition at the U.S. Army SMDC/ARSTRAT. In this 

role, my primary duties and responsibilities include overseeing the 

basic and applied technology development efforts in the Army 

Space and Missile Defense Initiatives. Within my assigned responsibilities, management and operation of USAKA/RTS is also under 

my purview. My appearance before you today is primary to outline 

the operational missions performed by USAKA/RTS on Kwajalein 

Atoll in the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). 

As you are aware, Kwajalein is the world’s largest coral atoll, 

surrounded by the world’s largest lagoon. Eleven of the approximately 100 islands comprising the atoll are designated as defense 

sites and are provided to the U.S. Government to use for defense 

purposes by an international executive agreement known, of 

course, as the Compact of Free Association. 

Sophisticated instrumentation and launch equipment are located 

on eight of these islands and provide mission support and reliable 

data for ballistic missile and missile interceptor testing, space 

launch and operations support. Its isolated location uniquely qualifies the Reagan Test Site for supporting rigorous and realistic tests 

of all missile classes and intercept scenarios, as well as space operations. 

Installation capabilities support the range’s test and development 

operations with essential services normally found in a community 

of about 1,700 people. USAKA employs about 1,000 Marshallese 

local nationals who make important contributions to the success of 

Reagan Test Site operations. 

Officially established as a test site in October 1960, the range 

was transferred to U.S. Army control in July 1964. When the RMI 

was granted independence in 1986, Kwajalein remained an American military enclave. 

USAKA/RTS is approaching half a century of successfully supporting ballistic missile testing and has more than 20 years’ experience of space operations. USAKA and RTS support three mission 

areas that are vital to the success of the U.S. ballistic missile defense and space programs. 

31

The first is space operations. RTS supports the U.S. Army’s space 

mission, the U.S. Air Force, National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA), space transportation system operations and 

experiments in both Department of Defense (DoD) and non-DoD 

satellite launches. 

As part of USAKA/RSTRAT’s support to the U.S. Strategic Command, RTS conducts space object identification and provides critical coverage on new foreign launches coming from Asia. Its radars 

support deep space surveillance and contribute near-Earth satellite 

observations for the space surveillance network. 

Given the increasing problem with what is termed as space junk, 

or fragments of objects destroyed in space which have remained in 

orbit, the range’s tracking capability has been key in predicting 

possible collisions with U.S. orbiting satellites. 

The second area is missile testing. RTS has supported the Missile Defense Agency’s long-range, ground-based, mid-course defense 

program, as well as various theater missile defense systems. RTS 

has also supported U.S. Air Force intercontinental ballistic missile 

testing. 

RTS supports lagoon impacts, where the reentry vehicles and 

test articles needed to be recovered, and impacts into the deep 

ocean area. Air Force hypersonic technology testing and air crew 

training missions are planned to begin at RTS in the near future. 

The third area is space launch. From its position at 9 degrees 

latitude above the Equator, the Reagan Test Site is a prime geographical launch site for both low Earth and geosynchronous orbits. 

Since 2000, RTS has supported space launches by Orbital Sciences 

and Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, known as SpaceEx. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, SMDC/ARSTRAT 

recognizes the role USAKA/RTS has performed in the defense of 

our Nation. Its missions of space operations, missile testing, and 

launch operations have provided the U.S. with valuable information and advancements, and we foresee it continuing to play a key 

role for the Army, the Department of Defense, and other government agencies and our Nation. 

I appreciate the opportunity to speak on these matters, and request that my written statement be submitted for the record. I look 

forward to addressing any questions you might have concerning the 

mission aspects of the Reagan Test Site. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Messervy follows:]

32


56559c-1.eps
33


56559c-2.eps
34


56559c-3.eps
35


56559c-4.eps
36

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you. 

Mr. Podonsky. 

STATEMENT OF MR. GLENN S. PODONSKY, CHIEF HEALTH, 

SAFETY AND SECURITY OFFICER, OFFICE OF HEALTH, SAFETY AND SECURITY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Mr. PODONSKY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

subcommittee. I want to tell you I appreciate being invited here 

today to discuss the status of the U.S. Department of Energy’s special medical care program in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. 

The responsibility for the day-to-day management and operations 

of the congressionally mandated DOE Marshall Islands Special 

Medical Care Program rests within the Department of Energy’s Office of Health, Safety and Security. 

I am here to reaffirm the DOE’s unwavering commitment to the 

successful execution of the program’s mandates as established by 

the Congress. All of us who are involved in managing the Republic 

of the Marshall Islands program are mindful of our enormous 

moral and humanitarian responsibility that this demands. 

My office assumed operational responsibility for the program 4 

years ago to ensure that your mandates are carried out with the 

professionalism and the compassion they rightfully deserve. 

It is a unique program that is responsible for the well-being of 

Marshallese through delivering high-quality patient care while coordinating logistics, transportation, and environmental monitoring 

which provides scientific data to support informed decisions regarding resettlements. 

Our focus is to provide a program that is responsive to the needs 

of the beneficiaries and is sustainable over their lifetime. Our medical program is carried out through nationally recognized medical 

organizations with access to a large network of clinics and physicians that staff the Marshall Islands’ clinics and manage the annual examinations conducted throughout the year. 

Cancer treatment is provided for all patients needing such treatment, including those living in Hawaii and in the continental 

United States, with care provided close to their residence. 

We are pleased that all of the eligible patients in 2009 that wanted to participate in the program have received their annual comprehensive examinations. Their average age is 65 years, and they 

reside in 10 atolls, several islands, and seven States within the 

continental United States and Hawaii. 

The program has safe clinic spaces with modern examination 

equipment and communications on Kwajalein Island and Majuro. 

The clinics are an important factor in improving day-to-day lives of 

the Republic of Marshall Islands citizens. They are over 3,000 clinical contacts a year where people call or visit with a problem, to 

get a test, prescription, or to consult with medical staff. A third of 

the contacts are by people outside of our program. 

Licensed Marshallese physicians and nurses staff the clinics and 

provide culturally sensitive patient care. We also ask the 

Marshallese doctors to schedule and donate time to the hospital 

when they are not seeing DOE patients. 

37

Marshallese-operated whole-body counters are strategically located for additional screenings. This data provides physicians with 

important information on patient exposure. 

Important work is also taking place under the environmental 

monitoring program that directly benefits the quality of life. These 

activities are closely coupled to the medical care program. They 

provide scientifically credible, objective, and peer-reviewed data 

that the Government of the Marshall Islands can confidently factor 

into its environmental remediation and resettlement decisions. 

The logistics and transportation component of the program has 

effectively served its programmatic mission and also plays a critical 

role in fulfilling humanitarian missions. Recently, during the severe drought in Utrok, we went to extraordinary means to obtain 

transportation for our patients to Majuro and Kwajalein for their 

annual examinations. We also used our chartered boat to transport 

a medical vaccination team, deliver water and food, and return 

some patients that were stranded in Majuro back to Utrok. 

To ensure integration of program activities, we instituted a 

transparent system of managing the program. For example, we 

made sure that the review and selection of a new contractor was 

performed in a process involving the Minister of Health, the Senator from Utrok Atoll, along with the Mayor of Rongelap and internationally recognized experts on health care and logistics. All bid 

packages were provided to panel participants to review and comment. 

The terms and conditions of the cooperative agreement we have 

clearly documented and communicated. We hold formal biannual 

program reviews. There is significant hands-on DOE management 

and oversight of day-to-day operations. The DOE program manager 

has substantial involvement and authority and program direction 

to ensure congressional mandates are effectively met. 

My respective management team and I have embarked on a more 

aggressive outreach to local communities in partnership with the 

Republic of Marshall Islands Governments. Our DOE Marshall Islands program manager holds community events and outreach in 

every community within the continental United States and Hawaii 

and all locations where we have Marshallese patients to inform 

them of any changes to the program and to get feedback directly 

from them in areas where they think improvements are still needed. 

Our medical team has also increased the number of community 

visits within the Marshall Islands. The purpose of these visits is 

to provide follow-up medical examinations as needed and to discuss 

questions and issues raised by individuals or the community at 

large. We promptly communicate the feedback received from the 

community to our partners within the Government of the Marshall 

Islands. 

The annual program meeting with the Government of the Marshall Islands also provides another forum for us to collaboratively 

discuss and develop strategies and actions to improve the delivery 

of services to our patient population. 

DOE’s commitment to fulfill its mandates established by the 

Congress for the Marshall Islands Special Medical Care Program 

is solid. We view our commitments to the Marshall Islands not only 

38

as a programmatic responsibility but it is a moral obligation for a 

better future for the Marshallese. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Podonsky follows:]


56559d-1.eps
39


56559d-2.eps
40


56559d-3.eps
41


56559d-4.eps
42


56559d-5.eps
43


56559d-6.eps
44


56559d-7.eps
45


56559d-8.eps
46


56559d-9.eps
47

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I thank our witnesses for their testimony. 

Without objection, all the statements of our witnesses from this 

panel will be made part of the record; and if they have any additional miscellaneous materials they want to add on to their statements, they will be more than welcome to do so. 

The gentleman from New York for his questions. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you very much, and I thank the panel. 

Thank you for the rundown of what we have and have been and 

continue to be providing. 

Madam Secretary, let me start with you, if I may. Could you give 

us the state of play of what the outstanding claims are? 

Ms. REED. I am sorry. The state of play of the outstanding 

claims? You mean a figure? I am sorry. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. The Nuclear Tribunal’s claim. I think after 

their work they wanted to give $2.2 billion in claims for the loss 

of property for all the damage that we caused to the Marshallese 

people. I think that is the starting point of the question here. What 

is the status? 

I think, as a result of that, we basically rejected the $2.2 billion 

that the Tribunal had stated in their records as compensation owed 

to the Marshallese people, right? 

Ms. REED. Yes, I believe that sums it. In terms of an exact figure, I would have to get back to you, but we agree with the position 

I believe that was stated by the Department of Interior. 

[The information referred to follows:]

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM MS. FRANKIE A. REED TO QUESTION ASKED

DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE GARY L. ACKERMAN

There is no authoritative source that provides a single dollar figure for outstanding claims before the Claims Tribunal established by the Marshall Islands. 

However, in estimation the total balance owed on property damage awards at 

$2,284,108,436, plus interest due from the dates of the respective awards, for 

Enewetak, Bikini, Utrik, and Rongelap atolls. 

Citing Article IX of the Section 177 Settlement Agreement, the Republic of the 

Marshall Islands (RMI) submitted a ‘‘Changed Circumstances’’ request to the United 

States Congress in September 2000, asserting, and seeking additional compensation 

and remedies for, injuries and losses to the people of the Marshall Islands arising 

from the U.S. nuclear testing program at Enewatak and Bikini atolls from 1946 to 

1958. In its request, the RMI sought over $3 billion in additional compensation and 

assistance for Tribunal awards for personal injury claims, for loss of land use and 

hardship, and for atoll rehabilitation, exceeding the amounts provided in the Section 

177 Settlement Agreement, occupational safety, nuclear stewardship, and nuclear 

education. 

At the request of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the Executive Branch evaluated the RMI’s request under the Changed Circumstances provision, the Department of State on behalf of the Executive Branch submitted a report 

to Congress in January 2005 concluding that the issues raised by the RMI did not 

qualify as changed circumstances within the meaning of Article IX of the Section 

177 Settlement Agreement. We do not consider the $3 billion request an outstanding 

claim.

Mr. ACKERMAN. And what is that position that we agree with? 

Ms. REED. That we rejected the claims, and that this is a full settlement, has already been negotiated. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. So what is it now? Remind me. What do we owe 

the people of the Marshall Islands? 

Mr. PULA. I think the 1986 agreement, that was $150 million 

that was paid at the time. Legally, that is the stand of the United 

States regarding this. I don’t think I can put a value on the claim. 

48

Mr. ACKERMAN. What do the people and entities in the Marshall 

Islands think we owe? 

Mr. PULA. Based on the petition that they provided, it was over $2 billion. 

Ms. REED. If I can add, I understand that this is a very sensitive 

and contentious point in terms of I believe what the Congressman, 

if I can summarize a bit, is asking, can we place a value on this 

in terms of the U.S. Government response? And I believe that leads 

to quite a different issue. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Well, I think that is the issue. If somebody says we owe them $2.2 billion and our point of view is we can’t place 

a value on what we owe you, what is it we think we owe them? 

Do we owe them anything besides, hey, good luck guys? 

Ms. REED. Not at all——

Mr. ACKERMAN. Sorry about the cancer and all the bombs and 

all? 

Ms. REED. I would believe that simply the presentations with my 

colleagues here that we have made today certainly affirm, in conjunction with the numerous programs that have been in place for 

many, many years in the Marshall Islands. Initially, 10 years ago, 

I worked with my colleagues in the interagency group as we put 

together an office for the negotiations; and some 10 years later I 

find myself returning and looking at a vast array of measures that 

have been put in place. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. So the status of play is they claim that we owe 

them a couple of billion dollars; and our response is, huh? 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. ACKERMAN. I will yield to anybody. I don’t seem to be getting 

any responses. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I think the point here is that Congress had 

to go back and establish a Nuclear Claims Tribunal. 

These are non-Marshallese, by the way, that served as members 

of the Tribunal. They worked their butts off for years taking in the 

claims. All of that was put together, and the best recommendation 

from the Tribunal was that our Government owes these people for 

their loss of property—loss of islands, for that matter—approximately $2.2 billion. 

Then we came back and said, that is outrageous. It is too much. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I find it astonishing that you and 

I are having a hearing, and there is nobody out there. I mean, the 

lack of even an attempt to really respond to the question, when I 

think you all out there—I think I see some people out there. I 

heard all their testimony. We have it in front of us—is that they 

have these blank looks like they don’t know what we are talking 

about. There seems to be an unbelievable—arrogance isn’t even the 

right word, that, hey, we don’t even want to play. There is no state of play. You claim you owe us $2.2 billion, and 

so what? We are going to just wait for these people to die, right, 

that we have given cancer to, that we have taken away their property. We tell them they can reinhabit their island. They have to put 

down fertilizer before they grow food or scrape the topsoil away. 

You have no answers for us? Why are you here? 

Mr. PULA. Well, if I may, Congressman, the issue, as mentioned 

by the Deputy Assistant Secretary from State, is, of course, everyVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:40 Nov 17, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\APGE\052010\56559 HFA PsN: SHIRL
49

body knows. There has been a long history of this. I mean, we can 

always go back to the time that the Department of Defense, in 

terms of they did the tests, I mean, the Department of State handling diplomatic relations, the Department of the Interior taking 

care of the implementation of the Compact, as I testified, and the 

Department of Energy. 

The four of us who are appearing before you today are here 

based on all the information that has come from the past. In response, not for us to look like we don’t have any answers, in your 

opening statements, I think we all feel the importance that this is 

not about money. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. It is about dignity. You got it right. 

Mr. PULA. Absolutely. And when you ask the question, what is 

the value? We responded we can’t put a value on these. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Well, they have put a value on it. And it seems 

to me that if we know that this is about dignity then there has to 

be something besides, good luck, fellows, with whatever few years 

you might have left. 

And what they are asking, to come up with a real answer. They 

put a value on it. Of course, that doesn’t fix the problem. You can’t 

unscrew them is the point. But we do compensate people for 

wrongs that we have committed. And to tell them they can go to 

the doctor, we are picking up the tab, isn’t really the answer. 

It is about dignity. That is what it is. It seems to me those people 

have dignity, and we lack it by pretending that they are not even 

there anymore. I know we are doing some stuff, and I know we 

spent half a billion bucks pretending to do the right thing, but they 

deserve to be compensated, not a trial lawyer’s thing. I mean, it is 

a real case here. I mean, what we did was inhumane and unconscionable. We know it, don’t we? Or do we? 

My time is up, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I thank the gentleman from New York. 

I just want to note for the record that Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990. In that act, the U.S. 

Government approved compensation claims of approximately $1.5 

billion for claimants who were on site at the Nevada nuclear test 

sites, those downwind from the testing, uranium mill workers, uranium ore transporters and others working in the radioactive mines 

in Nevada. 

And I am quoting this from my good friend’s testimony, Mr. Jon 

Weisgall. We look forward to his testimony. 

The other problem here is what my good friend from New York 

is saying. We compensated people who were exposed to nuclear radiation in our own country. In Hanover, Washington, the people 

were compensated $5 billion. So I think the question was quite relevant and very simple: How much should we pay? 

The Nuclear Claims Tribunal worked arduously for years to 

bring about some sense of fairness to their recommendation of $2.2 

billion. 

Former Attorney General Thornburgh made an observation that 

the character and the caliber of those who participated in the Nuclear Claims Tribunal was just and unbiased. It was fair and it was 

not inflated. Their judgments were made in terms of their hearVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:40 Nov 17, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\APGE\052010\56559 HFA PsN: SHIRL
50

ings—countless hearings and meetings that were held with the 

claimants and the people of the Marshall Islands. 

So I just want to note to my good friend from New York, who 

raised the issue, that we will continue to raise this issue. 

The gentleman from Arizona. 

Mr. FLAKE. I thank the chairman. 

Can you tell me how many survivors who were there for the actual last blast—my understanding is there are a few hundred who 

are still living at this time? Can somebody answer that? 

Mr. PODONSKY. Congressman, Glenn Podonsky from the Department of Energy. We are responsible for providing medical care for 

what started out as 253 Marshallese, and it is down to 153 from 

the original, from the atolls that we were responsible for, as spelled 

out in the legislation. 

Mr. FLAKE. As far as medical care, I know there was an issue 

just a while ago in Hawaii, the Marshallese who are living in Hawaii and had received care in Hawaii under their system. There 

were some cutbacks in Hawaii, and there was a fear at least—and 

this may or may not be related to any of the claims or the payments that we are making. Has that issue been settled at all, do 

you know? There was concern for a while that their treatment 

wouldn’t be coming. 

Mr. PODONSKY. For the population that DOE is responsible for, 

we have had no cutbacks. We have not faltered from our commitments on the population that we are responsible for. 

Mr. FLAKE. In terms of resettlement then, someone was mentioning some timetable in terms of some of the resettlement that 

is going to be happening soon. When is the next movement going 

to happen in that regard, Mr. Pula? 

Mr. PULA. Basically, that we were supporting the wishes of the 

Mayor, Matayoshi of Rongelap, and the council. The date that has 

been set or suggested has been I think October 2011 based on the 

fiscal year. 

Mr. FLAKE. October 2011. And approximately how many families 

would that involve? 

Mr. PULA. I think we have to deal with the information that we 

get from the—we can provide that for you. 

In the last several years, there has been some concern of the 

money being depleted in the trust fund, but we wanted to go back 

over 10 years and look at the funds or the trust fund and make 

sure that the intent of it, as was passed by law, that they provide 

to go back to Rongelap, provided it is safe. And we have had some 

meetings—I have been there about 4 years ago, 5 years ago—with 

some of the folks in Rongelap. 

Mr. FLAKE. On the Kwajalein Atoll, when I was there last time, 

you have Kwajalein and then you have Ebeye and then a few 

smaller islands going forward from there. There has been a breezeway built along that was surveyed by the Corps of Engineers. We 

were in charge of that process. There is some concern of environmental damage that is being done because you don’t have the natural flow of water over the reef into the lagoon. Is that being addressed in any fashion? I am told that there may not have been 

sufficient attention paid environmentally to the consequences of 

having this breezeway built. Does anybody want to address that? 

51

Mr. PULA. I can look into it and get back to you with a response 

on that. 

Mr. FLAKE. I just want to echo what has been said in terms of 

the importance of the Marshall Islands to the United States in 

terms of our missile testing and what we get out of this relationship, and it is substantial. Ms. Reed mentioned those who are serving in our military. There are a number. And the commitment and 

number of casualties taken and everything I think is disproportionate to the population of the United States, what has been inflicted and the sacrifices that have been made by the Marshallese 

in our own military. I know that that is appreciated by everyone 

here. 

And the geography there, everything that we have, the largest 

lagoon in the world, as was mentioned, the ability to use, with the 

agreement with the RMI, those islands to do missile testing is invaluable to the U.S. And I hope that we proceed in a way forward 

that recognizes what a wonderful partnership this is from our side 

and that we make sure that we fulfill all of our commitments to 

the Marshallese Government and to the people and to make sure 

that not just the medical claims, relocation, but everything else is 

done as we would treat someone who has been a very good friend 

to us, as they have. 

So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I thank the gentleman from Arizona. 

It is nothing to boast about, but I am probably the only Member 

of Congress who has personally visited the sites where we conducted our nuclear testing in the Marshalls. And I also visited the 

island of Mururoa where the French detonated some 220 nuclear 

bombs in the atmosphere, on the surface, and below the surface in 

French Polynesia. 

A couple of years ago, I was invited by the President of 

Kazakhstan to visit ground zero where the Soviet Union exploded 

its first nuclear bomb in 1949. And guess what? That place is still 

contaminated to this day. The Soviet Union conducted 450 nuclear 

explosions in Kazakhstan and, as a result, 1.5 million Kazakhs 

were exposed to nuclear fallout and nuclear contamination. The 

horrible sites that I have personally witnessed have deformed children with genetic abnormalities as a result of the nuclear explosions. 

Secretary Reed, at that time there was no question that the Marshall Islands were critically important to our overall strategic, military and national security. And for that very reason, rather than 

exploding bombs in the continental United States, we decided to go 

to where the population was sparse. These little islands were 

sparsely populated and far away from our own people here in the 

continental United States. So a decision was made. Let’s go to the 

Marshall Islands. 

In the aftermath of completing our nuclear testing program in 

the Marshalls and as a matter of our continuing foreign policy relationship with the Marshall Islands, Madam Secretary, do you still 

consider the Marshall Islands as a very critical and important political relationship with this country? 

Ms. REED. In response to the chairman’s question, the Marshall 

Islands, do we still consider it critical in terms of its relationship 

52

to this country? Very much so. Secretary Clinton, in her meeting 

with the President of the Marshall Islands just the day before yesterday, reiterated this and the U.S. commitment to the Marshall 

Islands, noting the strategic importance and expressing her goodwill in terms of recognizing the many contributions, including that 

to which Congressman Flake referred in support of U.S. policies, 

and also noted the support the U.S. receives in the U.N. It is a 

broad umbrella in terms of the relationship, not only the strategic 

commitment, in terms of the defense relationship. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I will come back to you, Madam Secretary. 

Mr. Pula, what are the total yearly funds that we give to the 

Government of the Marshall Islands as part of the Compact of Free 

Association agreement? 

Mr. PULA. The question is total amount? 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Yes. How much do we give the Marshalls to 

help operate their government? 

Mr. PULA. It is around $60 million. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. And how long will this stream of funding 

continue? 

Mr. PULA. The amended Compact goes through 2023. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. And then after 2023 they are on their own? 

Mr. PULA. There is a trust fund, as I had mentioned. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. How much is the trust fund? 

Mr. PULA. Right now, the last quarter is about $108 million. And 

there is a decrement of about $500,000 from the operation. It goes 

into the trust fund as it is being invested throughout. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. So the hope is that, after 2023, the trust 

funds will be collected and go into their operations? 

Mr. PULA. Help them with the operations, yes 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. And what is the guesstimate when we look 

at projecting how much will be in that trust fund come 2023, when 

we say we no longer have any more financial obligations to the Republic of the Marshall Islands? 

Mr. PULA. Congressman, that is a very tough question. Because 

if we have years like 2008, because it is invested, they lost about 

$11 million to $12 million. So at the end of 2023, it depends on——

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Do they invest in Wall Street or is there 

some other source of banking? With all due respect to my friend 

from New York. 

Mr. PULA. Well, they have financial advisors and the folks that 

invest the money for the trust fund. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. In your best judgment at this point in time, 

in terms of their overall development, will the Marshall Islands be 

able to be self-sufficient by the year 2023 in view of the stream of 

funding that we give them every year to help their government a 

little? 

Mr. PULA. I sure hope so. But, like I said, it is based on how the 

investment goes. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. So what happens if the investment goes 

down hill and this $108 million they are going to be depending on 

every year to draw from disappears? 

Mr. PULA. I think that is something that when comes year 2023 

we will have to revisit. 

53

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Messervy, I was very impressed with 

our missile testing program in Alabama and your connection to our 

Kwajalein missile base. But I noted with interest not once did you 

mention Ebeye Island, from which that little island that serves 

some 1,000 Marshallese people that come and work in Kwajalein 

every day. Has your Department of Defense ever taken into consideration the plight of the Marshallese people living on Ebeye Island 

or is this something for which the Department of the Interior is responsible? I am trying to figure out who should be there to help 

these people, the Marshallese. Twelve thousand Marshallese men, 

women and children live on 66 acres. I have been there and it is 

almost just like what my friend from New York says: Tough luck, 

you are on your own. 

Who should be responsible to help these 12,000 Marshallese people who live literally in squalor? It is worse than the ghetto. No 

water, except what amount of rain that comes to this island. 

Mr. MESSERVY. Sir, I can address a couple of things. 

I know there have been several projects that the DoD has been 

involved in that are assistance projects for quality of life both in 

water and in power where DoD has really arranged and helped 

many of the people on Ebeye; and we still provide services to them 

in case of emergencies, et cetera. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. My understanding—and I didn’t mean to interrupt you—electricity goes on at Kwajalein Atoll 7 days a week, 

24 hours a day. But if you go to Ebeye Island, there are constant 

outages, immense logistical and structural difficulties. 

As I have said, these people really, really are in dire conditions. 

Is there any way the Department of Defense can give assistance to 

these people, or is it not your responsibility? 

Mr. MESSERVY. I think on a humanitarian—that is my point—

is we are providing some of that support. But it is not our responsibility directly to do that. But, as representatives and as good neighbors, we do many of those things. In fact, last year we provided 

some spare parts and technicians to go up and help restore power 

on several occasions at Ebeye. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. You know, when I visited Kwajalein, at 4 

o’clock every one of these Marshallese people working at Kwajalein 

needs to be on that boat back to Ebeye. Do you know how that 

makes me feel? I feel like a criminal, like I am some person not 

to be trusted because of all the highly classified research and programs in Kwajalein. Are these people terrorists? 

How many people live on Kwajalein? 

Mr. MESSERVY. Now there is a little less than 2,000. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. 2,000. Do you think that perhaps they can 

take in some people from Ebeye? 

Mr. MESSERVY. I am not prepared to answer that. 

[Additional information follows:]

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM STEVEN MESSERVY, PH.D. TO QUESTION ASKED

DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA

Primarily due to the classified research and test programs that are conducted at 

the locations’ 11 defense sites, US Army Kwajalein Atoll/Reagan Test Site is a military installation with extremely limited access. In addition to the operational requirement to severely limit access, the government and contractor workforce occupy 

all available housing on the islands of Kwajalein and Roi-Namur.

54

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Pula. 

Mr. PULA. If I may, Mr. Chairman, the Compact provides about 

$3.1 million, with inflation adjustment annually, as Ebeye’s special 

needs grant, the funding to improve the infrastructure and delivery 

of services over there at Ebeye. There is also, within the Kwajalein 

Atoll, this amount increases to about $5.1 million, plus inflation, 

annually in 2014. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Kwajalein Atoll? But the Marshallese don’t 

live on Kwajalein. These are all Americans and contractors. 

Mr. PULA. Yes, I know. But I am saying the impact of that, with 

the $3.1 million that goes into Ebeye to help them with their deliveries. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. You mean the wages, the salaries that are 

paid to these 1,000 Marshallese? 

Mr. PULA. No, no, no. This money goes to Ebeye itself. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Which raises another question: How much 

do we pay the Marshallese people working on Kwajalein? How 

many dollars an hour are we paying the Marshallese workers there 

at Kwajalein? Could you provide that for the record? I am very curious. 

Mr. MESSERVY. Mr. Chairman, we can provide that for the 

record. 

[The information referred to follows:]

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM STEVEN MESSERVY, PH.D. TO QUESTION ASKED

DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA

In regards to the Chairman’s inquiry regarding the salaries of the Marshallese 

workforce that supports USAKA/RTS, the overall hourly average of the workforce 

is $7.57. The salaries paid by USAKA support contractors range from a high of 

$28.74 an hour for highly skilled positions (such as pilots, hospital technicians, and 

managers) to a low of $3.00 an hour for entry-level unskilled manual labor positions. 

For reference, per Section number 403 of RMI Public Law, the established minimum 

wage in the RMI is $2.00 an hour.

Mr. PULA. I also want to note that the Compact provides about 

$1.9 million as Kwajalein impact funding to be used for purposes 

of affordable housing of the folks for both Ebeye and the 

Marshallese communities in the Kwajalein Atoll. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. This is what the Republic of the Marshall 

Islands agreed to with our Government in a Compact, $1.9 million? 

Mr. PULA. Yes. It is a bilateral agreement that we agreed upon. 

Also, using this funding, we provide generators, recently purchased, and reverse osmosis machinery were repaired in Ebeye, enabling the island to have a little bit more reliable electricity, and 

also potable water. 

USAID is pre-positioning emergency supplies on Kwajalein to improve response time and efficiency in the event the U.S. Ambassador declares a disaster on Ebeye. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. We didn’t have a USAID presence in the Pacific until maybe 3 or 4 weeks ago, after years and years of my 

complaining and criticizing our foreign policy toward the Pacific, no 

USAID presence until only a matter of 1 month ago, I believe. 

Ms. REED. Right. This is an AID Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, a representative that sits in the embassy. I am speaking 

of the Marshall Islands now, Majuro. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Please, I didn’t mean to interrupt you. 

55

Mr. Podonsky, you mentioned that your activities in giving medical treatment to the Marshallese people are under the mandate of 

the Congress. What is the total amount of appropriations that Congress gives the Department of Energy for addressing the medical 

needs of the Marshallese? 

Mr. PODONSKY. $6.3 million. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Do you think that is adequate? 

Mr. PODONSKY. We have made it as adequate as we can. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. You made it as adequate as you can. How 

many doctors does the Department of Energy specifically assign to 

give help to Marshallese people with medical problems? 

Mr. PODONSKY. I am sorry, sir. Could you repeat that? How 

many doctors do we have? 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Yes. How many doctors do you have going 

out there and making these assignments and checking the health 

status of our Marshallese people? 

Mr. PODONSKY. I will have to get back to you on how many we 

have. 

[The information referred to follows:]

56

Mr. PODONSKY. But I will tell you this, Congressman, that we 

have taken our responsibility for the numbers of people that we 

have, which I mentioned in my testimony. By an Act of Congress, 

we only have the original 253, which is now down to 153. And my 


56559t-1.eps 56559t-2.eps
57

director of the program, who sits behind me, Dr. Worthington, and 

my program manager are with me here. 

I want to answer your question by saying this. We firmly agree 

with what the Department of Energy’s slice is of responsibility, but 

we have done more than we are legislatively mandated to do. We 

have asked our doctors, as well as our arrangements with the 

Marshallese doctors, to see other patients, not just the DOE patients that we have identified. 

We also have on Runit Island taken on responsibility where it 

used to be a DoD responsibility for the environmental monitoring; 

and we have our health physicist from Livermore National Laboratory volunteering his time to do that. 

We have four agencies represented——

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Podonsky, I didn’t mean to interrupt 

you but, in your best judgment, do you think Congress is doing its 

job by giving you sufficient funds to carry out your responsibilities 

and giving the best medical treatment possible to these people? 

Mr. PODONSKY. For the population that I am responsible for, yes. 

But are we doing our job both in the executive branch and legislative branch? No, sir. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. All right, good. I appreciate that. 

For the record, I note that our so-called ‘‘experts’’ during that 

time seem to have focused primarily on the four atolls, and I am 

not—maybe Dr. Messervy can help us—saying the amount of radioactive intake of the Marshallese people seems to have been focused 

on the four atolls. We declassified some of these documents from 

the Atomic Energy Commission, and found out years later that the 

entire Marshall Islands Archipelago had a tremendous amount of 

radioactive exposure. It wasn’t just these four atolls. And I am definitely going to pursue this issue; we need to clarify this. 

I am going to yield to the gentleman from New York for his second round of questions. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to go back to Mr. Pula for a moment, if I might. 

You brought up the trust fund, which expires in 2023, or is 

scheduled to. Who is the trustee of the trust fund? 

Mr. PULA. We have two trust funds. I want to make sure that 

I get the right—for the Marshall Islands, I think it is the First Hawaiian Bank. At the moment, we are going through a 5-year review 

where the members of the trust fund committee are looking to 

change the financial advisors as well as the trustee, the banks. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Who appoints the trustees? 

Mr. PULA. We have three members from the United States and 

two members from the Marshall Islands. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. So we are basically in control of the trust fund. 

Mr. PULA. The trust fund committee, yes. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. So this is American responsibility. 

Mr. PULA. Bilaterally, yes. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. You mentioned the fund not doing well in 2008. 

I don’t know how well it did in 2009, but my suspicion and gut is 

that the fund has suffered severe losses, has tremendously underperformed its expectations, and I don’t know if it has met its hurdle as far as what it is supposed to be producing in order to be adequate. 

58

I don’t know what those numbers are, nor do I pretend to. I don’t 

know if you have that information, but the response to the chairman that we will have to wait until 2023 is not a very good response for those who are supposed to be the trustees of this fund 

to take care of the needs of those people. By then, it is all over. 

There is no more trust, and there is no more time to fix it if we 

wait until the funds run out. And we have to know, as policymakers, as to whether or not there should be adjustments or 

beefing up of the fund or a replacement of the trustees. And I 

would like to request, Mr. Chairman, if that is okay with you, that 

we get a full report on the performance of the fund. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Without objection. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. And we need your recommendations. You are 

performing your congressional mandate, your legislative mandate. 

That is fine, and we need that. But you are a lot closer to the 

ground here on this than we are. With all the issues that we are 

facing, we are embarrassingly not paying enough attention to this 

very small place with a small number of people, and it really cries 

out for attention because of all of the other justice issues that are 

involved here. 

I don’t know that we are doing a good enough job. The larger 

issues that I spoke to in my opening statement and in my first 

round of questions are nothing personal to this panel, which I am 

sure, I know, is made up of good and diligent people struggling to 

do the right thing under the mandates and restraints that you 

have. But my frustration initially is based on the history and the 

need for us, as a people, to make right a wrong that we are totally 

responsible for, where we are the victimizers and they are the victims, that we have negotiated the number of doctors and what we 

are doing, we have evidently negotiated this bilateral agreement 

with a thoroughly limited, weaker partner that had no leverage 

whatsoever in the negotiations and can’t necessarily speak with 

great authority as to what their needs are. 

I think, Mr. Chairman, if you and the committee that you chair 

that I am privileged to sit on would try to come up with recommendations as to the adequacy of what is being provided for the 

Marshall Islands, that I and others on the committee would stand 

full square behind you to try to marshal—if I could use that word—

the resources——

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. If the gentleman would yield, I gladly thank 

my good friend from New York for his interest in this issue. 

As you rightly say, it is not exactly high on our priority list as 

far as the national interest and the commitments that our country 

has. But this should not be an excuse for us in our responsibilities 

to these people and I believe that the contributions they made to 

our country’s overall strategic interests and military interests 

should not be overlooked. I deeply appreciate the gentleman’s interest in this matter and I definitely will pursue this. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, it is not just for the strategic 

value of this place, which is enormous for us, it is very, very important, but for our own self-respect to be able to fix the problems to 

whatever limited ability that we can. To know that we have put all 

the resources behind remedying the things that we have caused to 

59

go wrong is an obligation that should be a priority, besides any 

other priority that we might have. 

I thank the chairman for calling the hearing and putting this 

matter before the Congress so that we might remedy this and fix 

the problems that we have caused and do justice, which is what the 

people on this panel I know would like to see. But you all have to 

help us to tell us what is needed so that we might work that out 

with you and provide that. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I thank the gentleman for his statement 

and observations on the issue and we look forward to working with 

him as we pursue this matter. 

I have just one or two more questions to our panel, and I deeply 

appreciate your patience. 

Mr. Pula, I indicated earlier the position of the Department of 

the Interior on yesterday’s Senate hearing that your Department 

does not support the bill’s proposal to provide an additional $2 million in funding and authorization in funding, as ex gratia payment, 

to assist with some of the issues and problems that we have discussed this morning. Maybe you could elaborate on that. If that is 

the correct way that the hearing was held yesterday, I would appreciate your comment. 

Mr. PULA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We did not support that section of the Senate bill, I think, 2941. 

However, I would like to mention that in the last 2 or 3 years, in 

the context of appropriation, there is about $1 million that the Office of Insular Affairs received, and we have utilized that money for 

the four atolls and their health in collaboration with the Marshall 

Islands. 

I think the administration proposed a permanent allocation. 

However, on an annual basis, we do get about $1 million that is 

provided for the four atolls in the health issue. So I want to clarify 

that. 

And I also mentioned at the last part of my statement that we 

were looking forward to working with the Senate committee on any 

amendments to the legislation that they we had testified yesterday. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Given the years of experience that you have 

had in working in this administration as well as with past administrations, do you sense that the perception among some of our national leaders is that perhaps we have given too much money to the 

Marshallese people? 

Mr. PULA. Well, I don’t venture to respond on my opinion on 

that. However, as the administration, we execute the laws that are 

passed by Congress. A lot of times we want to do more, but because 

of the constraints upon us based on the laws and the amounts of 

money that are in there, for example, the changed circumstances—

that we were all shocked in the beginning when Congressman Ackerman asked the question about the value. I mean, that issue is so 

sensitive, and we know that none of us, I think, were there in 1986 

when the United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands 

in the Compact settled all nuclear claims for $150 million. And I 

know that the Marshall Islands came back I think maybe in the 

year 2000 with a changed circumstances to Congress. 

60

In January 2005, the Department of State transmitted to the 

Congress the executive branch evaluation at the time, that the executive branch concluded there was no legal basis for considering 

additional payments under section 177. 

And the hearing today——

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Pula, if I might interrupt you. When 

you say that there was no legal basis, can we consider perhaps a 

matter of not legal, but moral, basis above any legalese things that 

these lawyers con up? 

Here is my concern. I think one of the circumstances that was 

claimed by the Marshall Islands Government, the change of circumstance, was the fact that they found out, after declassifying a 

lot of these documents on our nuclear testing program, that it 

wasn’t just the four atolls. It seems that that was the emphasis of 

the Atomic Energy Commission and the whole national government; that these are the four atolls that we need to focus on because they are the ones that were exposed. And yet when we declassified the documents, we found out it wasn’t just the four atolls. 

The whole of the Marshall Islands was seriously exposed to nuclear 

radiation. That was a change of circumstance. And you are saying 

that our Government refuses to accept that as a change of circumstance. 

Mr. PULA. I think that was the 2005 conclusion that that administration had reached. 

You have mentioned the changes, where we got into documents. 

I think we also appreciate you holding hearings regarding this 

issue. And I would say that, as Congressman Ackerman said, it is 

something that both the Congress and this administration——

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. You know, I just wanted to say please don’t 

take it wrong if sometimes I get a little emotional about this issue, 

as my good friend John Weisgall and I have been involved with 

these issues since 1975. I am an old man already. And the bottom 

line, I am not disparaging any of you personally, but I just honestly 

believe that the policies that our Government has enunciated—

from all previous administrations—have jerked these people 

around too long with inconsistencies and contradictions. All kinds 

of excuses we come up with, more than anything, just to say these 

people don’t deserve the money that they should get for the losses 

of their islands, their property and even their lives. And we are 

saying that it is too much. 

But we can pay other people, our fellow constituents and citizens, 

exposed to nuclear radiation in Nevada over $1 billion; and probably even more in the Hanover situation in Washington, in the billions. 

So I am not saying that this money is not very important, nor 

that it is too high, by the estimates of some of our so-called ‘‘experts.’’ And, as you said earlier Mr. Pula, you can never put any 

value of money on a person’s life. I believe these people have suffered enough, have sacrificed more than their share for the 12-year 

period that we conducted these tests. They deserve better. That is 

all I am trying to say. Please help us. 

And I am saying the blame is just as much on Congress, as Mr. 

Ackerman said, for lack of attention. I remember the chiefs of 

American Samoa who had treaties of session proposing that we 

61

have a compact relationship with the United States. It took us 29 

years to finally ratify these treaties of session with the Congress 

of the United States. So I think we all have a sense of appreciation. 

Dr. Messervy, Mr. Podonsky, Mr. Pula, Secretary Reed, thank 

you so much for coming. I still have a good amount of people here 

who need to testify. And this is not at all to be disrespectful to our 

good leaders and to those who will be testifying from the Republic 

of the Marshall Islands, but it is just that a briefing takes on an 

entirely different procedure. 

So we have come to our second panel. Thank you very much for 

coming. We look forward to working with you and your respective 

agencies and departments. 

For our second panel, we have Dr. Neal Palafox, Jonathan 

Weisgall—Jonathan, you are still around; I can’t believe this—Mr. 

Don Miller and Mr. Robert Alvarez. 

Dr. Palafox is presently professor and chair of the Department 

of Family Medicine and Community Health at the John A. Burns 

School of Medicine at the University of Hawaii. He completed his 

residency in family medicine at UCLA Medical School, obtained a 

master’s in public health at Johns Hopkins in Maryland and he 

went to the Marshall Islands in 1983 as a National Health Service 

Corps physician, where he became co-medical director of the U.S.-

funded program to care for the radiation-affected people of the 

Marshall Islands in 1985. He completed his 9-year tenure in the 

Marshall Islands as their medical director for preventive health 

services and public health. 

Dr. Palafox has been working on Pacific health care disparities 

and developing cancer health care systems in the Marshall Islands 

and other U.S. Pacific countries, including the Territories of Guam, 

American Samoa, CNMI, FSM and the Republic of Palau. And between 1997 and 2009, Dr. Palafox was the principal investigator for 

a congressionally-mandated program to provide medical care for 

Marshall Islanders who were exposed to fallout from the Bravo hydrogen detonation in the Marshall Islands. Dr. Palafox has been integrally involved in the health issues of the Compact negotiations. 

Another witness today is my good friend, Jonathan Weisgall, who 

has served as legal counsel for the people of Bikini since 1975. He 

is the author of ‘‘Operation Crossroads: The Atomic Tests at Bikini 

Atoll’’ and executive producer of Radio Bikini, which was nominated for a 1988 Academy Award for best documentary. 

He is an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University. He 

is a graduate of Columbia University and Stanford Law School. 

This gentleman has expended tremendous effort to help the people 

of the Marshall Islands. 

Mr. Don Miller is a solo practitioner attorney from Colorado, specializing in Federal Indian law. Before starting his own firm in 

2001, he was a staff attorney with the Native American Rights 

Fund in Boulder and Washington, DC, for 27 years. 

He has represented tribal clients before the United States Supreme Court, Federal appellate courts and district courts. He has 

quite a bit of legal experience representing the various Indian 

tribes before State as well as Federal courts. He graduated from 

the University of Colorado with a bachelor’s degree and a law degree. 

62

Mr. Robert Alvarez is a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy 

Studies in Washington, DC, specializing in energy, environment 

and national security issues. And for 6 years, until 1999, Mr. Alvarez served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for National Security and 

Environmental Policy and senior policy advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Energy. 

He also served on the majority staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs under the leadership of Senator 

John Glenn from the State of Ohio. Mr. Alvarez’s work has appeared in Science, Ambio, Science and Global Security, Technology 

Review, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, the Washington Post, the 

Nation and several other publications. 

Gentlemen, thank you for taking the time to be with us this 

afternoon. We would like to have you give your testimony. 

Dr. Palafox. 

STATEMENT OF NEAL A. PALAFOX, M.D., M.P.H., PROFESSOR 

AND CHAIR, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY MEDICINE AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, JOHN A. BURNS SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, 

UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII 

Dr. PALAFOX. Honorable——

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Just call me Eni. 

Dr. PALAFOX. Honorable Eni, I have been requested by this committee to provide a personal assessment of the medical achievements of the Marshallese people affected by U.S. nuclear testing. 

As you mentioned, I draw my testimony from my experience with 

the many nuclear programs in the Marshall Islands. 

My testimony will discuss three related medical themes. The first 

is the health impact of the U.S. nuclear testing program in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The second is the U.S. medical care 

response to the health impacts of nuclear testing. And third, what 

I think should be the recommended medical response and health 

care responsibility of the U.S. Government under the current situation. 

The first part. Illnesses caused by the U.S. nuclear testing program were the result of three things: One is high-dose radiation exposure; the second thing is long-term exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation; and, thirdly, it is destruction of ancestral lands, 

culture disruption, and dislocation of Marshallese communities. 

The health effects of high-dose exposure. Marshall Islanders, as 

you noted, Honorable Eni, is they experienced severe nausea, intractable vomiting, severe burns, hair loss, hypothyroidism because 

of the hot, sudden, high-dose radiation of 1954. Shortly after that, 

thyroid cancers began to appear. 

The health effects from long-term, low-dose radiation. Long-term, 

low-dose radiation exposure can result in 24 types of cancer, including leukemia, breast, lung, intestine, stomach, bone, liver and 

brain cancers, to mention a few. An individual who is exposed to 

low doses may develop radiation-related cancer 40 years or more 

after the exposure. 

Cancers will occur in the Marshallese throughout all of the atolls 

of the Marshall Islands because of the long-term effects of highand low-dose radiation. These doses come from environmental particles that may be eaten, breathed, and digested in the food and enVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:40 Nov 17, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\APGE\052010\56559 HFA PsN: SHIRL
63

vironment. Ionizing radiation is also showing other illnesses that 

are other than cancer. They include hereditary defects, heart disease, strokes, digestive, respiratory and blood disorders. 

What are the health effects associated with the destruction of ancestral lands and social disruption? Destruction of land and critical 

natural resources through radioactive contamination or forced evacuation leads to forced changes in dietary patterns and lifestyle 

which can prematurely cause heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. 

Posttraumatic stress disorder results from trauma of forced 

change, cultural disruption, and illness. Posttraumatic stress disorder has never been addressed in the Marshall Islands. 

The U.S. medical response. Because of nuclear testing, U.S. medical teams have three functions: One is to provide health care; secondly, is to perform medical monitoring regarding health trends; 

and, thirdly, research to gain information about the human response to ionizing radiation. 

Provision of health care monitoring or research services by U.S. 

Medical teams was dependent on the U.S. Government priority at 

the time. Medical health care for illnesses generated by high-dose 

and low-dose radiation and the illnesses from destruction of lands 

and cultural living should have been provided by the U.S. medical 

teams. There is very little that was done or that is being done to 

adequately address, A, the long-term effects of radiation; or B, 

health effects from the destruction of Marshallese culture and 

lands. 

It is my opinion that the major emphasis during and in the postnuclear testing era was not the provision of medical care. Medical 

care was provided in an acute, as-needed function, without much 

forethought to developing a systematic health system to meet the 

ongoing health needs of the affected populations. 

There are two medical programs that were put forth to meet 

medical needs. One program worked with Rongelap and Utrok communities affected by the Bravo detonation. Neither the Atomic Energy Commission and then the Department of Energy have the expertise or background to develop or implement the necessary 

health care systems needed to address the health impact of the nuclear testing program. 

The current 177 health program for the four atolls was designed 

to be a comprehensive health care program and had an appropriate 

design. The 177 health care program for the four atolls has been 

crippled because of funding restraints. 

This severely underfunded program sends a message from the 

U.S. Government that a comprehensive health care system response to the legacy of nuclear exposure in the Republic of the 

Marshall Islands is not a priority. The emphasis of the U.S. medical response to this day, in spite of the evidence of harm to the 

Marshall Islanders, is piecemeal, poorly contrived, poorly funded, 

and does not address the known health care needs of the affected 

population. It is not apparent that the U.S. agencies which provide 

health care to the Marshallese people have the health of the 

Marshallese people as a primary and central concern. 

The recommended response. After 60 years of U.S. oversight, 

knowing there are latent cancers caused by U.S. Nuclear testing, 

the fact that a Marshallese person living in the Marshall Islands 

64

does not have access to routine cancer screening or there is not systematic mammography screening for breast cancer or that cancer 

treatment is not readily available is a travesty. 

The appropriate approach to health care should advocate to protect and care for potential victims of nuclear testing at a U.S. 

standard of health care. Withholding health care for known consequences of nuclear radiation testing is a true social injustice, 

and, I agree with you, is racism. The Marshallese are developing 

and dying from treatable illnesses caused by the U.S.-Marshall Islands thermonuclear weapons testing programs. 

I recommend the following actions. One, that the standards for 

health care screening and treatment for the people affected by ionizing radiation from the Nevada test site in Hanover be applied to 

the people of RMI. 

Two, that the U.S. policymakers review the operational definitions regarding the extent and consequence of the nuclear testing 

program and support an expanded definition coinciding with current scientific evidence. 

Three, that a preventive, precautionary, patient-centered approach to potential health issues be utilized instead of a reactionary approach. 

Four, that a comprehensive cancer health care program, including prevention, screening, diagnosis and treatment, be systematically provided in the Marshall Islands at U.S. standards. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Palafox follows:]

65


56559e-1.eps
66


56559e-2.eps
67


56559e-3.eps
68


56559e-4.eps
69


56559e-5.eps
70


56559e-6.eps
71


56559e-7.eps
72


56559e-8.eps
73


56559e-9.eps
74


56559e-10.eps
75

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Dr. Palafox. 

Mr. Weisgall. 

STATEMENT OF MR. JONATHAN M. WEISGALL, LEGAL 

COUNSEL FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE BIKINI ATOLL 

Mr. WEISGALL. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I am legal 

counsel for the people of Bikini, but today I have been asked to testify on behalf of Bikini, Enewetak, Rongelap, and Utrok, the atolls 

most directly affected by the U.S. nuclear testing program. They 

are here today, Mr. Chairman, to tell you one story, and that is to 

review a 64-year shell game that the United States has played with 

their constitutional rights. 

I am going to go over some of the issues that you covered with 

the first panel, but maybe from some different angles. So I am 

going to jump around a little bit in my statement. 

Let’s begin back in 1947 with the U.N. When the United States 

pledged to the United Nations in that agreement to protect the inhabitants against the loss of their lands and resources, that did not 

happen. The people of Bikini and Enewetak left their homelands 

and relied on the government’s promise to return them safely. That 

has yet to happen. Bikini is still radioactive. No one lives there. 

The Enewetak people cannot return to their northern islands because of the high radiation levels there. 

Let me give you an interesting statistic about that Bravo shot. 

The people of Rongelap, 125 miles away from Bikini, received radiation doses similar to people 2 miles from ground zero in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That was the strength of the Bravo shot. 

That Compact of Free Association—those solemn words by the 

United States, ‘‘We accept the responsibility for compensation 

owing to the citizens of the Marshall Islands for loss or damage to 

property and person resulting from the nuclear testing program.’’ 

I have got that memorized. 

On the other hand, the United States acknowledged its obligation but forced the Marshallese to seek the compensation in this 

newly established Nuclear Claims Tribunal. The atolls argued at 

the time that the funding was inadequate to protect their rights, 

and the U.S. courts ruled that they have to exhaust their remedies 

under the tribunal first before they come back. We will get back 

to that question. 

Nineteen years go by with litigation before the tribunal. As you 

said, awards of $2.2 billion and payments of $3.9 million. If Mr. 

Ackerman were here, I would tell him the exact finances of that 

$150 million trust fund which had to pay out $18 million per year 

for 15 years. You do the math. It had to earn 12 percent per year. 

And, by the way, the first year of the trust fund was the 1987 

crash, so you know what happened to that trust fund. 

The Marshallese patiently pursued every possible remedy afforded by our legal system. They trusted the system to make them 

whole. The U.S. paid them nothing. And when they came back to 

the U.S. courts to seek to enforce the awards, the U.S. said, ‘‘Sorry, 

the doors are closed.’’

Let me give you one sentence as to what happened. The United 

States legislated itself out of its obligation to provide just comVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:40 Nov 17, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\APGE\052010\56559 HFA PsN: SHIRL
76

pensation to these islanders, forced their claims into an alternative 

forum, and then failed to provide adequate funds for that forum. 

My written statement covers the 30 years of litigation before the 

U.S. courts and the tribunal, but let me stress two key points here, 

because it is going to lead to my conclusion on this reference case. 

Number one, in the 1980s, the U.S. Government wed language 

in its legal briefs that would have led any reasonable judge to conclude that there would be adequate and sustained funding. I want 

to read you some highlights from their briefs back in the eighties 

when this system was set up and they said go to the tribunal. 

They called the 177 Agreement, that trust fund—I am quoting—

‘‘a permanent alternative remedy, with substantial and regenerating funding, for compensating all claims, in perpetuity.’’

Let me quote from some other lines. I am reading from the U.S. 

Government’s briefs: ‘‘Permanent funding mechanism.’’ ‘‘Comprehensive long-term compensation plan.’’ ‘‘Provides continuous 

funding.’’ ‘‘Structured and financed to operate ‘in perpetuity.’ ’’ And, 

in response to us, ‘‘There is no basis to presume that the Agreement will fail to provide a just and adequate settlement.’’

The second point I want to make, the courts. There is a level of 

sympathy there, and the courts, even in the eighties, said if the tribunal doesn’t function correctly—the U.S. Government said if the 

tribunal doesn’t function correctly, ‘‘Congress would need to consider possible additional funding.’’ And in their briefs, they refer to 

that trust fund as a base amount. 

And when you read the written opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, two separate times it 

refers to that trust fund as an ‘‘initial sum,’’ an ‘‘initial amount.’’ 

And then 20 years later, last year, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals recognized that the funding is simply outside of judicial remedy. 

There is a role for Congress, that is my point, especially after the 

Supreme Court denied cert. 

What should this committee do? Develop legislation under your 

congressional reference authority to refer these cases to the Court 

of Federal Claims; direct that court to make findings sufficient to 

inform Congress whether this is legal or equitable—that is an issue 

we have talked about today—legal or moral; and to determine the 

amount of damages. That court does that every day. They determine damages on land claims. And let them come back with a recommendation. 

The American people—and you have heard it from your colleagues up there—the American people have a legal and moral obligation to compensate the people of the Marshall Islands. And I 

would say to those who have said that the book is closed on this 

issue because of the passage of the compact and because of the establishment of that trust fund, I would say that one chapter is 

missing in that book, and that book cannot be closed until the 

lands of the islanders are restored and they receive full compensation for their claims against the United States, and the United 

States cannot and should not play a shell game with the constitutional rights of the Marshall Islanders. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Weisgall follows:]

77


56559f-1.eps
78


56559f-2.eps
79


56559f-3.eps
80


56559f-4.eps
81


56559f-5.eps
82


56559f-6.eps
83


56559f-7.eps
84


56559f-8.eps
85


56559f-9.eps
86


56559f-10.eps
87


56559f-11.eps
88


56559f-12.eps
89


56559f-13.eps
90


56559f-14.eps
91

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. As always, I am very happy to see you, Mr. 

Weisgall, not just as someone who has institutional memory, but 

also because we have been together on this issue with the Marshall 

Islands for so long. I deeply appreciate your statement. 

Mr. WEISGALL. I do know you from the Eni Hunkin days when 

Mr. Burton chaired the committee a long time ago. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Miller. 

STATEMENT OF MR. DON MILLER, ESQ., INDEPENDENT 

ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, it is an honor to appear before you 

today. I have been asked to provide the committee my assessment 

of the congressional reference process and its suitability for furthering the nuclear claims case of the Marshallese people. I have 

prepared and submitted written testimony and my comments will 

generally summarize what I have prepared and submitted. 

For the last 261⁄2 years, I have represented the AlabamaCoushatta Tribe of Texas in Congressional Reference Number 3–

83. I think that that case and the experience of that tribe in pursuing it may be instructive to the committee, so I would like to review it just very briefly. 

In 1970, the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe filed a 9-million-acre land 

claim against the United States. After a trial, the court ruled that 

they couldn’t pursue it; that the courthouse door was closed. The 

tribe could not bring it because of the statute of limitations. So the 

tribe sought a congressional reference. It took six Congresses to get 

it through. 

In 1983, Congress referred the claim to the claims court. We litigated—I drafted and filed the complaint in that case—and we litigated that case for 17 years against the United States Department 

of Justice. It is the most contentious litigation process I have ever 

been involved in. 

In the year 2000, the court finished the liability phase of the case 

and ruled that the United States would be liable for damages on 

2.5 million acres of that 9-million-acre claim. At that point in time, 

the Justice Department and the Tribe and all the lawyers looked 

at each other and said, ‘‘Wow, we are tired; let’s see if we can’t settle this.’’

So for 2 years we worked toward settlement. We hired experts. 

And in 2002 we stipulated that, under that opinion, the United 

States should pay the Tribe $270.6 million. It was approved. That 

recommendation was returned to Congress in 2002, and Congress 

has yet to take action on it. We are still working on it. 

The congressional reference process is a process that is available 

to you here to seek an advisory opinion from the Court of Federal 

Claims. It is used in complex cases where Congress doesn’t feel like 

it has the fact-finding and legal expertise, so you can refer a private claims bill to the court of claims for—it is now the United 

States Court of Federal Claims—for an advisory opinion. 

Once the case goes over there, it is a fully adversarial proceeding. And if the court finds in favor of the claimant, it will return a recommendation to Congress and then it will be up to Congress to take action. 

92

I certainly am not an expert on the Marshall Islands, but from 

what I have heard and read over the last few weeks preparing for 

this testimony, it appears to me that the congressional reference 

process would be ideally suited to address the circumstances that 

you have before you now. 

The United States has undertaken and breached a number of solemn fiduciary and contractual obligations. The United States has 

given assurances upon which the Marshallese relied in good faith, 

and they apparently have done so to their extreme detriment. The 

courts have considered these claims and have ruled with finality 

that the courthouse doors are now closed, and that is precisely the 

kind of circumstance that the congressional reference procedure is 

designed to address. 

I would note that the Marshall Islanders have been through decades of litigation, and if you utilize this process, you are probably 

consigning them to decades more of litigation. But if that is the 

only route that is available to the Congress—and I am not sure it 

is—I think perhaps you could do the right thing and go ahead and 

pay it. But that may not be feasible, and if it is not, then certainly 

the congressional reference procedure is appropriate in these circumstances. 

I might urge the committee, though, that if you do send them to 

the Court of Federal Claims, you might want to consider making 

provision—in light of the role that the United States has played in 

prolonging their litigation woes, if you will—you might want to consider providing a fund that could allow them to retain expert witnesses and assist them in that litigation process. I think that that 

is well within your purview to do. Congress has done that before 

for American Indian Tribes in the Indian Claims Commission Act, 

so the committee might want to consider doing that. 

I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you for the opportunity. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]

93


56559g-1.eps
94


56559g-2.eps
95


56559g-3.eps
96


56559g-4.eps
97


56559g-5.eps
98


56559g-6.eps
99


56559g-7.eps
100


56559g-8.eps
101


56559g-9.eps
102


56559g-10.eps
103


56559g-11.eps
104

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you. 

Mr. Alvarez. 

STATEMENT OF MR. ROBERT ALVAREZ, SENIOR SCHOLAR, 

INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES 

Mr. ALVAREZ. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to testify before you. 

The radiological legacy of the U.S. nuclear weapons testing in the 

Marshall Islands remains to this day and will persist for many 

years to come. The amount of radioactivity released from the weapons tests in the Marshall Islands is staggering. The six largest 

tests conducted in 1954 released on the order of 50 times more radioactive iodine than the Chernobyl accident, for example. 

The most severe impacts were visited upon the people of 

Rongelap in 1954, following a large thermonuclear shot which deposited life-threatening quantities of radioactive fallout on their 

homeland. 

The Rongelap people were exposed to more than three times the 

estimated external dose than the most heavily exposed people living near the Chernobyl accident in 1986. It took more than 2 days 

before the people of Rongelap were evacuated after the explosion. 

Many, as you have heard, have suffered from tissue-destructive effects of radiation and, subsequently, from latent radiation-induced 

diseases. 

In 1958, they were returned to their homeland, even though officials and scientists working for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission determined that radiation doses would significantly exceed 

those allowed for citizens of the United States. That desire to study 

humans living in a radiation-contaminated environment appeared 

to be a major element of this decision. 

By 1985, the people of Rongelap fled their atoll after determining 

that the levels of contamination were comparable to the Bikini 

Atoll, where people were resettled in 1969 and evacuated in the 

mid-1970s after radiation exposures were found to be excessive. 

A few years before the evacuation of the Rongelap people in 

1981, a policy was secretly established by the Energy Department 

during the closing phase of the negotiations of the Compact of Free 

Association to eliminate radiation protection standards so as not to 

interfere with the potential resumption of weapons testing in the 

Pacific. 

These circumstances were subsequently uncovered in 1991 by the 

U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, which I was involved in investigating. As a result of this investigation, the Environment Safety and Health program of the Marshall Islands was 

moved out of the DOE weapons program. Congress terminated 

what was called the ‘‘Safeguard Sea’’ program that was to be a 

readiness program to resume nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific. And in 1992, the U.S. Departments of Interior and Energy entered into an agreement with the Republic of the Marshall Islands 

and the local Rongelap Government that reestablished radiation 

protection standards as the major element for the resettlement of 

Rongelap. This agreement was reviewed by the National Academy 

of Sciences in 1994 and found to be viable. 

One of the key aspects of this, according to the Academy:

105

‘‘A crucial provision is that resettlement will occur if no person 

returning to Rongelap and subsisting on native foods only will 

receive a calculated annual whole-body radiation dose equivalent to more than 100 millirem above background.’’

In 2006, a radiological expert for the people of the Rongelap Atoll 

reported that the 100 millirem limit would be exceeded based on 

a local-food-only diet and if potassium fertilizer was not repeatedly 

applied. Apparently this was not done for the southern islands, the 

atoll where local food is obtained. Despite this warning, the Departments of Energy and Interior did not take steps to ensure this 

would be done in accordance with the 1992 agreement. 

Given the long and unfortunate legacy of nuclear testing, it appears that this critical element of safety was lost in the shuffle. 

Until the U.S. Government can assure that steps to mitigate doses 

below 100 millirem are demonstrated by applying potassium fertilizer, efforts to pressure the Rongelap people back to their home 

is unjustified and unfairly places the burden of protection on them. 

It appears that DOE and Interior have quietly crept away from 

this 1992 agreement without verifying that its terms and conditions to allow for safe habitability will be met. 

I also would like to say that I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. 

Palafox. The United States Congress has enacted legislation for 

U.S. citizens, people who were exposed to weapons testing from the 

Nevada test site, people who worked in uranium mines, and people 

that worked at Energy Department facilities making nuclear weapons, which provide a far greater benefit of the doubt than is provided to the people of the Marshall Islands. 

In particular, the Energy Employment Illness Compensation Program Act, which I was involved with while in the Energy Department, has a very interesting concept which I think needs to be applied to the Marshall Islands. It essentially provides for compensation for workers where it is not feasible to perform dose reconstruction and the burden of proof shifts to the government. 

At the Hanford site in Washington State, the Los Alamos site in 

New Mexico, for example, and the Nevada test site, it has now 

been determined it is not feasible to reconstruct the exposures to 

these workers, even though they wore individual film badges, were 

routinely monitored for internal exposures and the like. And I 

think that this is a clear example of what we need to follow, and 

I wholeheartedly support that proposal. 

Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity, and will be 

willing to answer any questions you may entertain. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Alvarez follows:]

106


56559h-1.eps
107


56559h-2.eps
108


56559h-3.eps
109


56559h-4.eps
110


56559h-5.eps
111


56559h-6.eps
112


56559h-7.eps
113


56559h-8.eps
114


56559h-9.eps
115


56559h-10.eps
116


56559h-11.eps
117


56559h-12.eps
118


56559h-13.eps
119


56559h-14.eps
120


56559h-15.eps
121


56559h-16.eps
122


56559h-17.eps
123


56559h-18.eps
124


56559h-19.eps
125


56559h-20.eps
126


56559h-21.eps
127


56559h-22.eps
128


56559h-23.eps
129


56559h-24.eps
130


56559h-25.eps
131


56559h-26.eps
132


56559h-27.eps
133

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. I want to thank you gentlemen for your 

most eloquent statements. Certainly this is an issue that I sincerely hope this subcommittee will continue to pursue while working closely with the appropriate Federal agencies and our colleagues here in the Congress. 

I just want to get a sense from each one of you. There seems to 

be a consensus that we are reaching here. As I have said earlier, 

the people of the Marshall Islands have been jerked around for the 

past 64 years by our Government, in not giving them proper compensation for the loss of their islands, the loss of their lives, severe 

exposure to nuclear fallout and all that was done. I am saddened 

by this, but we are going to pursue this. 

I am very glad that my good friend from Arizona is also here 

with us. 

Dr. Palafox, I want to commend you and thank you for taking 

the time, at your own expense, to come all the way from Hawaii 

to join us in this hearing. It is so important. You have played a 

very critical role in trying to give medical attention to the people 

of the Marshall Islands in range of our nuclear testing program 

conducted during that 12-year period. 

I want to note with interest that you seem to agree that the 

whole basis of our treatment of the Marshallese people in the beginning was never really to treat them, but to monitor and to survey and to find out what were the effects of nuclear fallout, especially on those who were exposed as a result of our nuclear testing 

program. 

In other words, it seems that we really were not focused on giving proper medical treatment to these people; instead, they were 

guinea pigs, specimens. That is all we cared about. We didn’t care 

about whether or not this child or this mother or this woman was 

severely exposed or giving birth to a deformed baby as a result of 

this. 

Please, your response. 

Dr. PALAFOX. In your opening statement, Honorable Eni, you 

mentioned that one of the doctors regarded Marshallese close to 

mice, not quite mice, but close to mice. So I think when I think 

back on the whole history, it is very clear that even the basic 

premise that you can test atomic weapons in someone else’s home 

is extremely arrogant. But I think it carried into the science at that 

time. 

So when the doctors were caring for people, their primary concern wasn’t the people. It wasn’t patient-centered. It was what was 

the interest in the time. I don’t think as individuals that these doctors were trying to be mean or negative to the patients. But I think 

what consumed them was the thinking process, the arrogance, 

what was important, and it wasn’t patient care. 

What really worries me today is that shouldn’t carry on today, 

and it is carrying on right now. And that to me is the bigger problem. That should have been transcended a long time ago, and it is 

continuing to this day. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Weisgall, I went through your statement with tremendous interest. I am always happy to have you 

testify and to give us insight based on your personal experience. 

134

How much money did we give to those exposed in Hanover in 

Washington? As I recall——

Mr. WEISGALL. That is an extraordinary example to use. We have 

not put a shovel in the ground yet at Hanford to clean it up. Total 

funding is on the order of magnitude now of $49 billion. These 

claims—the $2.2 billion, obviously, that is a significant amount of 

money. We do spend a lot of money as a country to clean up, and 

that is one site. 

We have got Hanford, Rocky Flats, we have Savannah. There are 

a lot of other places. But we do spend a lot of money to deal with 

the legacy of that program, because we recognize that it is something that is a responsibility of our country. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. As I recall, it would take us over $100 billion to clean up the nuclear waste that we are currently producing 

here in the United States. I don’t know if I am correct on that. 

Mr. Alvarez? 

Mr. ALVAREZ. Well, according to the most recent baseline budget 

estimate of the Energy Department to clean up Department of Energy nuclear weapons sites, this will cost approximately $300 billion and will take perhaps 50 to 70 years to accomplish. In addition 

to that, approximately $5 billion has been paid out as an entitlement to workers and their survivors who were involved in producing nuclear weapons, and approximately $1.5, perhaps $2 billion, has been paid out to residents living near the Nevada test site 

and to uranium miners who toiled in the mines in Arizona, Utah, 

and the Western States. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. We are very happy to have with us a little 

delegation of some of our distinguished students, who currently attend Brigham Young University in Hawaii. I hope they are learning something about congressional hearings. The chair would like 

to personally welcome them here to observe what it is like here. 

I say this with tremendous pride, because I am an alumnus of 

Brigham Young University, Hawaii campus. I am very happy to 

have our young people come and observe the workings of Congress. 

I don’t know if it will be to their benefit or detriment. I would like 

to yield to the gentleman from Arizona for his questions. 

Mr. FLAKE. I thank the chairman, and I apologize for having to 

go vote. I wasn’t able to read the testimony either before. So if this 

has been answered or talked about, forgive me. 

I also wanted to welcome the students from BYU-Hawaii. I also 

spent a semester there, the best semester of my life, because that 

is where I met my wife. Anyway, many found memories of school 

there, and welcome here. 

Mr. Weisgall, you mentioned—I have just been glancing through 

your testimony, let me try to get the chronology right here. There 

are some 4,000 inhabitants of the Bikini Atoll. Was that prior to 

the Bravo test or is that——

Mr. WEISGALL. No, 167 were moved back in 1946. The population 

today, those who actually receive, for example, USDA food or other 

benefits, it has now grown to a little bit under 4,000. 

Mr. FLAKE. All right. And how many were moved back in the sixties only to be moved again? 

Mr. WEISGALL. By the sixties, the population had grown quite a 

bit by then, and my best recollection is you were dealing with a 

135

couple of hundred folks who moved back. I want to say somewhere 

between 200 and 300. Not the entire population. In fact, there was 

a debate in the community about moving back. Some were still concerned about radiation. But a large number did. In fact, the mayor 

of Bikini, who is going to follow me, was there as a little boy, 

moved back as a little boy, and then as a 10-year-old was moved 

off in 1979. 

Mr. FLAKE. For those moved back and then were relocated again, 

they were relocated because they were told they had ingested levels 

of radiation far in excess of what we thought were there. What, if 

any, ill effects have we detected from that period? 

Mr. WEISGALL. From an epidemiological point of view, with a 

small number of people like that, it has been hard to see any major 

statistical differences. There have been cancers. There have been 

radiation-related ones. But nothing as dramatic as you see in the 

statistics from Rongelap, where you had exposure similar to Hiroshima or Nagasaki, or much greater than Chernobyl. 

So with Bikini, while they had ingested the largest amount of radiation of any known population through the food chain, that also 

went through their systems pretty quickly once they were evacuated. 

Mr. FLAKE. Ingested. Then it was in the soil, therefore in coconuts? 

Mr. WEISGALL. Coconuts, pandanus, breadfruit. It all came up 

through the soil simply because the cesium acts a little bit like potassium; but the cesium, strontium, americium were absorbed in 

the food. This is something that, again, was discovered by scientists 

once the folks were back there. The scientists did not realize in advance what that level of absorption would be in the food products. 

Mr. FLAKE. Here we are 60-some years later. Are there any—I 

know some are willing to move back now just because the relocation is finally happening. But what concerns are there now still on 

any of the islands in the Marshall Islands in terms of radiation 

still existing? 

Mr. WEISGALL. To speak very quickly for Bikini, it still needs a 

radiological clean-up. You could scrape that soil. You could apply 

potassium-rich fertilizer and block the uptake of the cesium and 

some americium, strontium and plutonium. But there is not funding. Right now, there are no Bikinians living back on their atoll 64 

years later. 

In Enewetak, the northern islands are still too radioactive, and 

the radiation concerns at Rongelap and Utrok are similar. 

Mr. FLAKE. There is some tourism, mostly ecotourism, happening 

near Bikini, is there not; and where are those individuals living or 

staying? 

Mr. WEISGALL. There was a dive program that the Bikinians 

started because the first test in 46 sank a number of Navy ships, 

including the Saratoga. You can actually walk end to end on that 

flight deck. That started in 1996. It was terminated several years 

ago simply because the logistics of the airline couldn’t support it. 

To be up at Bikini for a couple of days or for 3 or 4 days is not 

an issue, especially when you are eating imported food. So it is not 

a medical or scientific concern because, number one, it is a short 

136

duration, and number two, very little if any local food is consumed—was consumed. 

Mr. FLAKE. But if somebody were to relocate there without soil 

scraping or anything else, there are still levels of radiation? 

Mr. WEISGALL. You would expect pretty much a repeat of the experience from 1968 to 1979, with the half-life of the cesium being 

obviously somewhat reduced. But even the folks, the very good scientists at Lawrence Livermore who have been helpful in coming up 

with these remediation measures, came up with them because not 

having the remediation measures is a problem. In other words, the 

lack of the remediation measures leaves you the radiation levels in 

excess of acceptable standards. 

Mr. FLAKE. So there are no full-time residents of Bikini Atoll at 

all right now? 

Mr. WEISGALL. Correct. 

Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Alvarez? 

Mr. ALVAREZ. Yes. In 2005, the National Cancer Institute reported to the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, that among the 14,000 inhabitants who live in the Marshall Islands, an estimated 500 cancers would result from radioactive fallout. The risk of contracting cancer for those exposed to 

fallout was greater than 1 in 3. 

So, it is not simply just the people who were the most heavily 

exposed. It is the entire archipelago that we need to be concerned 

about. 

Mr. FLAKE. So not just the ones who were downwind of Rongelap 

or elsewhere? 

Mr. ALVAREZ. I guess it is important to understand there were 

66 nuclear shots there, and in many cases the radiation monitoring, given the time and circumstances, left much to be desired. 

So it is very similar to the United States when we exploded bombs 

in the Nevada test site. We weren’t monitoring a lot of stuff. We 

released a lot of radiation, and there is still a lot of unknowns. But 

there was a lot of radiation released and a lot of people have been 

exposed. 

Mr. FLAKE. Any other comments on that? 

Mr. ALVAREZ. No. 

Mr. FLAKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Dr. Palafox, you mentioned the word ‘‘arrogance’’ about why we shifted our whole testing program. I don’t 

know if it was really arrogance to say, ‘‘Rather than testing in 

America, in the continental US, let’s take our atomic bombs to the 

Marshall Islands. It is more feasible. A few people, little islands, 

who cares?’’

I am reminded of what former Secretary of State Kissinger said 

when he was talking about negotiations with the Micronesians. Do 

you know what he said? ‘‘There are only 90,000 of them. Who gives 

a damn?’’ That was the attitude. That was the attitude that our administrators, those national policymakers, had toward these people. 

I was saddened by that fact as I traveled to visit Mururoa Island 

where the French conducted their nuclear testing program. Certainly nobody in France would like to have nuclear bombs dropped 

all over the place in France, so they decided to come to the Pacific 

and conduct their nuclear tests. 

137

As for the Soviet Union, nobody wanted to explode bombs in Russia; they decided to go to Kazakhstan, then a province, and detonated 450 nuclear devices. 

By the way, when we exploded the Bravo shot in 1954, it was 

1,300 times more powerful than the bomb we dropped in Hiroshima 

and Nagasaki. The hydrogen bomb that the Russians built was 50 

megatons, 3,000 times more powerful than the bombs we dropped 

in Hiroshima, which still to this day is classified and not much is 

known about it. 

I don’t know. In our national interest we decided to do this, and 

I think that all we are trying to do here is give better treatment 

to the Marshallese people for the sacrifices they have had to endure for that 60-year period. They are still waiting for justice and 

fairness and we should give them what they are due. 

I sincerely hope that my colleagues, Mr. Flake, Congressman 

Ackerman and others, will be supportive of this effort. I am not 

going to wait. This is just the beginning. We are building a record, 

hopefully, and in such a way that we can develop legislation that 

is going to address some of these serious issues affecting the good 

people of the Marshall Islands. 

Mr. Miller, thank you for your visit. As you notice, I am wearing 

a mai kai. It was from my dear friend, a member of the Oneida Nation of New York. I am an adopted member of the Bear Clan. Hopefully I will have the mana and the power of the bear, not to kill 

anybody, but just to hopefully be helpful in such a way that we will 

produce better results in helping the people of the Marshall Islands. 

Mr. Weisgall? 

Mr. WEISGALL. Two very quick points. Number one, going back 

to your quotation at your opening statement about the mice, that 

was a transcript of a meeting. I think it is very interesting to see 

a sanitized view of this issue. 

The annual report, the 1957 annual report from Dr. Canard who 

headed up the AEC team—the Brookhaven team—listen to this 

language. This concerns putting people back on Rongelap and 

Utrok:

‘‘The habitation of these people on the island will afford the opportunity for most valuable ecological data on human beings. 

The various radio isotopes present on the island can be traced 

from the soil through the food chain and into the human 

beings.’’

It is a very kind of sanitized, very scientific view of well, we can 

learn a lot by doing this, as opposed to what one would say privately at a meeting. It is an extraordinary statement in an annual 

report from Brookhaven. 

My second point for Mr. Flake, you know, this is a bipartisan 

issue. It is a bipartisan concern, as you have pointed out, and Mr. 

Rohrabacher. It is interesting to me there is now a bill pending 

both in the House, H.R. 5119, and in the Senate, S. 3224, to expand even more the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. That 

is H.R. 5119 and S. 3224. 

I am also pleased that the sponsors over on the Senate side include a range of Senators, that include for instance, Mr. Risch from 

138

Idaho, a number of Republicans that are as concerned as Democrats about this issue, obviously for their constituents down-winders and the like in the continental United States. But as we have 

heard today, the same issues should apply to the Marshalls. 

Mr. ALVAREZ. On page 1 of my testimony, I have the verbatim 

quote taken from the transcript of the meeting of the Advisory 

Committee for Biology and Medicine in 1956, discussing whether or 

not the people of Rongelap should return. What it says is the following. It says,

‘‘The northern atolls is by far the most contaminated place in 

the world. It would be very interesting to go back and get good 

environmental data.’’

On and on he goes.

‘‘Now, this type of data has never been available. While it is 

true these people do not live, I would say, the way Westerners 

do, civilized people that is, nevertheless they are more like us 

than the mice.’’

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Gentlemen, thank you for your time and for 

your most eloquent statements. 

Dr. Palafox, again, thank you for traveling such a long distance 

to come and provide this most valuable testimony to the committee. 

Hopefully, we will continue to be in touch with all of you. Thank 

you very, very much. 

[Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(139)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

140


56559n-1.eps
141


56559n-2.eps
142


56559m.eps
143


56559u.eps
144


56559i-1.eps
145


56559i-2.eps
146


56559i-3.eps
147


56559i-4.eps
148


56559i-5.eps
149


56559i-6.eps
150


56559i-7.eps
151


56559i-8.eps
152


56559i-9.eps
153


56559i-10.eps
154


56559j-1.eps
155


56559j-2.eps
156


56559j-3.eps
157


56559j-4.eps
158


56559j-5.eps
159


56559j-6.eps
160


56559j-7.eps
161


56559k-1.eps
162


56559k-2.eps
163


56559k-3.eps
164


56559k-4.eps
165


56559k-5.eps
166


56559k-6.eps
167


56559l-1.eps
168


56559l-2.eps
169


56559l-3.eps
170


56559l-4.eps
171


56559l-5.eps
172


56559l-6.eps
173


56559l-7.eps
174


56559l-8.eps
175


56559l-9.eps
176


56559o-1.eps
177


56559o-2.eps
178


56559o-3.eps
179


56559o-4.eps
180


56559o-5.eps
181


56559o-6.eps
182


56559o-7.eps
183


56559o-8.eps
184


56559o-9.eps
185


56559p.eps
186


56559q.eps
187


56559v-1.eps
188


56559v-2.eps
189


56559v-3.eps
190


56559v-4.eps
191


56559v-5.eps
192


56559v-6.eps
193


56559v-7.eps
194


56559v-8.eps
195


56559v-9.eps
196


56559v-10.eps
197


56559v-11.eps
198


56559v-12.eps
199


56559v-13.eps
200


56559v-14.eps
201


56559w-1.eps
202


56559w-2.eps
203


56559w-3.eps
204


56559w-4.eps
205

[NOTE: Additional material submitted with the preceding statement is not reprinted 

here but is available in committee records.]


56559w-5.eps
206

Æ


56559x.eps