Suchergebnisse

It is estimated that of the four million chemical compounds which have been synthesized or isolated from natural materials, more than 55,000 are produced commercially. Approximately 1,000 new compounds are introduced annually; pesticide formulations alone contain about 1,500 active chemical ingredients. Diagnostic x-rays are used extensively in medicine and dentistry. Over 2,000 chemicals are suspected carcinogens in laboratory animals--epidemiologic evidence suggests that 26 of these chemicals and/or industrial processes are carcinogenic in humans. More than 20 agents are known to be associated with birth defects in humans; 47 atmospheric contaminants have been identified in animal studies as recognized carcinogens and 128 as mutagens; and, of the 765 contaminants identified in drinking water, 12 were recognized carcinogens, 31 suspected carcinogens, and 59 mutagens. Radiation has known carcinogenic and genetic effects at significant levels of exposure. Problems with toxic agents and radiation sources occur not only in industry, but also in medical and dental care (x-rays and drugs), agriculture (pesticides and herbicides), Government activities (biological and chemical agents), consumer products (incorrect use of consumer products which contain toxic substances), and natural sources (fungal products).

This publication of the AMS contains all the lectures that were presented at the AMS Workshop on Meteorology and Environmental Assessment held in Boston, MA on September 29-October 3, 1975. Topics include: The dispersion of materials in the atmospheric boundary layer, atmospheric dispersion models for environmental pollution applications, plume rise predictions, turbulent diffusion and pollutant transport in shoreline environments, urban diffusion problems, atmospheric transformations of pollutants, observational systems and techniques in air pollution meteorology, and federal government requirements for environmental impact assessment

This report describes the activities of DoD personnel, both military and civilian, in Shot HOOD, the sixth nuclear test in the PLUMBBOB atmospheric weapons testing series. The test was conducted on 5 July 1957 and involved participants from Exercise Desert Rock VII, AFSWP, AFSWC, and AEC test groups. This volume also describes the radiological safety criteria and procedures in effect at Shot HOOD. ; "DNA 6002F." ; United States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel Review." ; Cover title. ; Includes bibliographical references (pages 89-93). ; Reference list. pp. 81. ; Chapter 4. Radiation protection at Shot HOOD. pp. 67. ; Chapter 3. Nevada Test Organization operations at Shot HOOD. pp. 43. ; Chapter 2. Exercise Desert Rock VII operations at Shot HOOD. pp. 20. ; Chapter 1. Introduction. pp. 11. ; Preface. pp. 1. ; This report describes the activities of DoD personnel, both military and civilian, in Shot HOOD, the sixth nuclear test in the PLUMBBOB atmospheric weapons testing series. The test was conducted on 5 July 1957 and involved participants from Exercise Desert Rock VII, AFSWP, AFSWC, and AEC test groups. This volume also describes the radiological safety criteria and procedures in effect at Shot HOOD. ; Mode of access: Internet.

International law in general — Sources — Customary law — State practice — Evolution of a new rule of customary international law — Whether such a rule had evolved in respect of atmospheric nuclear tests — Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, 1963States as international persons — In general — Conduct of foreign relations — Statements by Head of State and members of Government — Whether capable of binding State in international lawState territory — In general — Nature of territorial sovereignty — Atmospheric nuclear tests causing deposit of radio-active fall-out on territory of other States — Whether an infringement of territorial sovereigntyJurisdiction — High seas — Conception of the high seas and freedom of the sea — Atmospheric nuclear tests causing deposit of radio-active fall-out on the high seas — Establishment of prohibited and dangerous zones — Whether an unlawful infringement of the freedom of the high seas — Whether any one State has locus standi to claim in respect of such infringementState responsibility — Nature and kinds of — In general — Absolute responsibility — Atmospheric nuclear tests leading to deposit of radio-active fall-out on territory of other States and on high seas — Whether such tests unlawful — Whether absolute responsibility for any damage causedTreaties — In general — Form of international agreements — Unilateral oral declaration — Whether capable of amounting to assumption of legal obligation — Whether international law imposes any formal requirements — French declarations that atmospheric nuclear tests would cease — Whether amounting to a binding promiseTreaties — Conclusion and operation — Effect on third parties — Treaty allegedly giving rise to rule of customary international law — Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, 1963 — Whether giving rise to rule of customary law prohibiting atmospheric nuclear testsTreaties — Termination — By operation of law — Desuetude — Whether a separate means of termination — Whether distinguishable from rebus sic stantibus — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, 1928 — Whether remaining in force after dissolution of League of Nations — Effect of subsequent agreementsTreaties — Termination — By act of party — Mutual consent — Implied consent — Whether earlier treaty amended or superseded by later treaty dealing with similar subject — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, 1928 — Whether amended or superseded as between Australia and France by Optional Clause declarationsTreaties — Termination — By act of party — Result of non-performance by one party — Whether Australia debarred from invoking General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, 1928, by alleged breach in 1939Disputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Procedure — Refusal of respondent State to appear Application of Article 53 of Statute — Preservation of equality between parties — Rules of natural justice — Propriety of Court considering fresh evidence proprio motu — Whether necessary for Court to consult parties — Application — Inherent jurisdiction of Court to decide real nature of claim — Court requested to adjudge and declare atmospheric nuclear tests unlawful and to order France to cease conducting tests — Whether a separate claim for a declaratory judgmentDisputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Procedure — Indication of interim measures of protectionDisputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Procedure — Application for permission to intervene — Procedure to be followed — Whether necessary to establish jurisdictional link between intervening State and respondent StateDisputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Competence — Indication of interim measures of protection — Need to establish prima facie jurisdiction before indicating interim measures — Degree of examination requiredJurisdiction of the Court — Questions of jurisdiction and admissibility — Distinction — Judicial function of Court — Need for a legal dispute — Claimant State's objectives achieved — Whether claim without object — Inherent jurisdiction of Court to examine such questions proprio motu — Whether a reformulation of Applicant's claimJurisdiction — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, 1928 — Whether a treaty in force — Whether providing a basis for jurisdiction of the Court — Whether amended or superseded by subsequent declaration under Article 36 (2) of the Statute of the Court — Effect of reservations to declaration under Article 36(2)Self — judging reservationsJurisdiction — Locus standi — Whether actio populans exists in international lawProcedure — Refusal of Respondent State to appear before Court Consequences — Article 53 of the Statute of the Court — Application — Relation to Article 41 and indication of interim measures of protection — Preservation of equality between parties — Rules of natural justice349Procedure — Propriety of Court examining new evidence proprio motu — Whether necessary to consult partiesProcedure — Application — Court requested to declare atmospheric nuclear tests unlawful and order France to cease conducting them — Whether request for declaration a separate claim or merely reason advanced for grant of orderProcedure — Application to intervene — Whether necessary to establish jurisdictional link between intervening State and respondent StateTreaties — In general — Form of international agreements — Unilateral declaration — Whether capable of amounting to assumption of legal obligation — French declaration that atmospheric nuclear tests would ceaseTreaties — Termination — By operation of law — Desuetude — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, 1928 — Whether remaining in force after dissolution of the League of NationsTreaties — Termination and amendment — By mutual consentWhether General Act amended or superseded as between Australia and France by declarations of both States under Article 36(2) of the Statute of the International Court of JusticeTreaties — Termination — Whether Australia debarred from invoking General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, 1928, by alleged breach in 1939Treaties — Effect on third parties — Treaty allegedly giving rise to rule of customary international law — Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, 1963State responsibility — In general — Atmospheric nuclear tests leading to deposit of radio-active fall-out on territory of other States and on high seas — Whether tests lawful — Whether absolute responsibility for damage caused350State territory — Nature of territorial sovereignty — Atmospheric nuclear tests causing deposit of radio-active fall-out on territory of other States — Whether an infringement of territorial sovereigntyJurisdiction — High seas — Atmospheric nuclear tests causing deposit of radio-active fall-out on high seas — Prohibited zones set up on high seas — Whether lawful — Whether any one State having locus standi to claim

This report describes the activities of DOD military and civilian personnel in Operation BUSTER-JANGLE, the second series of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted at the Nevada Proving Ground from 22 October through 29 November 1951. The BUSTER-JANGLE series consisted of seven events. DOD personnel participated in Excerises Desert Rock I, II, III and in scientific projects conducted by the test units. Radiological safety criteria and procedures were established and implemented during Operation BUSTER-JANGLE to minimize participants' exposure to ionizing radiation ; United States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel Review." ; "JRB Associates"--Report documentation page ; Cover title ; Includes bibliographical references (pages 155-169) ; Bibliography. pp. 153 ; Chapter 6. Dosimetry for Department of Defense personnel at Operation BUSTER-JANGLE. pp. 129 ; Chapter 5. Radiation protection at Operation BUSTER-JANGLE. pp. 115 ; Chapter 4. Department of Defense participation in test organization programs at Operation BUSTER-JANGLE. pp. 59 ; Chapter 3. Exercise Desert Rock programs at Operation BUSTER-JANGLE. pp. 46 ; Chapter 2. Functions of the administrative organizations during Operation BUSTER-JANGLE. pp. 29 ; Chapter 1. Introduction. pp. 19 ; List of abbreviations and acronyms. pp. 18 ; List of tables. pp. 16 ; List of illustrations. pp. 15 ; Preface. pp. 9 ; Fact sheet. pp. 1 ; This report describes the activities of DOD military and civilian personnel in Operation BUSTER-JANGLE, the second series of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted at the Nevada Proving Ground from 22 October through 29 November 1951. The BUSTER-JANGLE series consisted of seven events. DOD personnel participated in Excerises Desert Rock I, II, III and in scientific projects conducted by the test units. Radiological safety criteria and procedures were established and implemented during Operation BUSTER-JANGLE to minimize participants' exposure to ionizing radiation ; Mode of access: Internet.