Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} The Utter Waste Years - 2011 - 2017 by Cyrene V Jacob The Utter Waste Years - 2011 - 2017 by Cyrene V Jacob. Completing the CAPTCHA proves you are a human and gives you temporary access to the web property. What can I do to prevent this in the future? If you are on a personal connection, like at home, you can run an anti-virus scan on your device to make sure it is not infected with malware. If you are at an office or shared network, you can ask the network administrator to run a scan across the network looking for misconfigured or infected devices. Another way to prevent getting this page in the future is to use Privacy Pass. You may need to download version 2.0 now from the Chrome Web Store. Cloudflare Ray ID: 658cfddc1d85c442 • Your IP : 188.246.226.140 • Performance & security by Cloudflare. W. P. Carey info session 6/3. There's still time to apply and start your MBA or master's degree this August. I want to learn about: Apply. I'm going back to school for: Welcome to the W. P. Carey School of Business. Solutions for the planet mean developing problem-solvers from around the globe. From thousands of outstanding students who join us every year from around the world to our world-renowned faculty representing six continents, the W. P. Carey School welcomes diversity and encourages global thinking. Explore our programs. We measure success not by who we exclude, but who we include, with one vision in mind: To create leaders who rethink the nature of business, engage the world, and create a better future. Check out our news and research website to learn more about our community’s success. Universal Waste, Inc. - Ruling 2, October 7, 2004. Pursuant to section 375-1.9 of Title 6 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York ("6 NYCRR"), Universal Waste, Inc. and Clearview Acres, Ltd. petitioned the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("Department") to delete an inactive hazardous waste site, Universal Waste, Inc., located at Leland and Wurz Avenue, Utica, New York 13503 (the "Site") from the New York State Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (the "Registry"). In the alternative, Universal Waste, Inc. and Clearview Acres, Ltd. (collectively referred to herein as "Petitioners") sought reclassification of the Site from Class 2 to Class 3. 1. Sections 375-1.9(a) and (b) of 6 NYCRR provide that a responsible party at a site may petition for the site's removal from the Registry. Within 45 days of receipt of a complete petition, the Department must either summarily grant or deny the petition, and provide "a statement of reasons therefor" or convene an adjudicatory hearing if the petition cannot be summarily determined. 6 NYCRR § 375-1.9(d)(1), (2). Section 375-1.9(d) (1)(i) states that "a petition will be summarily denied if the factual allegations made therein, even if accepted as true by the department, would be insufficient to support the grant of the relief sought or any other proper relief." A petition cannot be summarily determined and, accordingly, a hearing would be convened, if the factual allegations in the petition, "if accepted as true by the department, would be sufficient to support the grant of the relief sought or any other proper relief, but the department does not accept such allegations as true." 6 NYCRR § 375-1.9(d)(2). The property where the Site is located was listed in the Registry as a Class 2 site until approximately 1999, when the property was subdivided, at Petitioners' request, into the Utica Alloys and Universal Waste sites, respectively. The Utica Alloys parcel remained as a Class 2 site, and the Universal Waste parcel was reclassified 2a, until Petitioners undertook a Preliminary Site Assessment ("PSA") pursuant to a May 2000 Order on Consent. 2 Following the submission of the PSA, Department staff notified Petitioners by letter dated July 24, 2002 of the Universal Waste parcel's reclassification as a Class 2 site. The petition by Universal Waste, Inc. and Clearview Acres, Ltd. was originally dated January 8, 2003. The corrected version is dated June 23, 2003. Petitioners contended that the contamination at the Site, specifically, the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls ("PCBs"), does not present a significant threat to the environment, and that delisting or reclassification is therefore warranted. Petitioners asserted that Department Staff made no showing that PCBs had migrated from the Site to a sewer outfall channel connecting to the Upper Mohawk River, or that the PCBs in the outfall channel are causing or materially contributing to a significant environmental effect or that it was reasonably foreseeable that those contaminants would do so. As a result, Petitioners argued that the Department could not conclude that the Site constitutes a significant environmental threat, warranting the Site's listing as Class 2 on the Registry. Department Staff denied the petition by letter dated July 8, 2003. By letter dated July 17, 2003, Petitioners requested that the Office of Hearings and Mediation Services "reconvene the adjudicatory hearing" concerning the status of the Site. The matter was assigned to ALJ Maria E. Villa. In support of their request, Petitioners cited to the Commissioner's Decision and Order in Utica Alloys, Inc., 1987 WL 55369 (Jan. 16, 1987). In Utica Alloys, Commissioner Henry Williams adopted Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Robert O'Connor's findings and conclusions with respect to Petitioners' property before it was subdivided into two separate sites. Id. ¶ 4. ALJ O'Connor's report, in a motion for summary order, stated that the issue whether the site as then constituted posed a significant threat to the environment should be adjudicated. Id. at p. 4; *7-8. According to Petitioners, in light of this determination, a hearing should be held. Department Staff opposed the request. By letter dated September 5, 2003, Department Staff reiterated its summary denial, stating that "[t]he Department has determined that the factual allegations made within the delisting petition, even if accepted as true by the Department, are insufficient to support the Department's either deleting the site from the Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites or reclassifying the site as a 'Class 3' site." The letter went on to state that even if the Site did not pose a significant threat based upon the criteria in Section 375-1.4(a)(1), "the provisions of Section 375-1.4(a)(2) require the Department to find that the contamination of soils, sediments and groundwaters by PCBs related to the site, when evaluated in accordance with the factors set forth in Section 375-1.4(b), presents a significant threat to the environment." In a ruling dated November 2, 2003, the ALJ denied the request for a hearing. See Matter of Universal Waste Hazardous Waste Site, ALJ Ruling at 3-4, 2003 WL 22668212, *3. The ALJ noted that Department Staff accepted the factual allegations in the petition as true, but concluded that the facts alleged by Petitioners were insufficient to establish Petitioners' entitlement to the relief sought. Id. According to the ALJ, because Department Staff summarily denied the petition, no hearing was provided for under the regulations, and, as a result, no administrative adjudicatory forum was available to review Petitioners' contentions concerning the insufficiency of Department Staff's "statement of reasons" for the summary denial or the merits of the delisting petition. Id. Petitioners sought judicial review, pursuant to article 78 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules, of the Department's summary denial. In a decision dated May 26, 2004, and entered June 3, 2004, Supreme Court, Oneida County, vacated the Department's summary denial, and ordered that an administrative hearing be held, "consistent with 6 NYCRR §375-1.9 and 6 NYCRR §624.1 et seq." 3 (see Matter of Universal Waste, Inc. v. New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation, Julian, J., Index No. CA-2003-002781, at 10). Notice of the hearing was published on July 21, 2004 in the Department's electronic Environmental Notice Bulletin, and in the July 27, 2004 edition of the Utica Observer Dispatch. On August 31, 2004, the legislative hearing was held at the State Office Building in Utica, New York. The City of Utica's Mayor, Timothy Julian, submitted a letter urging collaboration among Department Staff, Universal Waste, the City of Utica, the Utica Brownfield Revitalization Corporation, and other property owners in the area in an attempt to achieve a timely and cost-effective remediation and restoration of the City's waterfront. According to Mayor Julian, Department Staff's efforts to determine the Site's classification and to determine each property's individual contribution is a less effective approach than combining resources to focus on solutions, rather than expending resources on litigation. Hans Arnold, Executive Director of the Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Authority was the only speaker at the legislative hearing. Mr. Arnold stated that, in his opinion, a copy of the full file with respect to this matter should have been made available in Utica, as well as in the Department's Central Office in Albany. Mr. Arnold went on to express his concerns, as an adjacent landowner, with respect to possible contaminant migration from the Site. According to Mr. Arnold, the entire area should be assessed to determine whether one particular site poses a significant threat to the environment. No other public comments, either written or oral, were received. On September 22, 2004, the issues conference was held at the same location. The hearing notice set a deadline of September 17, 2004 for receipt of filings for party status. No petitions for party status were received. Pursuant to 6 NYCRR Section 624.5(a), Department Staff and Petitioners are mandatory parties to this proceeding. Department Staff and Petitioners agreed that the issue to be adjudicated is whether the Site presents a significant threat to the environment, such that listing on the Registry is warranted. DISCUSSION AND RULING. Although the parties do not dispute that the issue to be adjudicated is whether the Universal Waste Site poses a significant environmental threat and therefore should be listed on the Registry, Department Staff raised concerns with respect to the scope of discovery sought by Petitioners pursuant to the New York State Freedom of Information Law ("FOIL") (Public Officers Law §§ 84-90). Petitioners' FOIL requests sought, among other things, information concerning possible off-Site sources of PCBs, including the Utica City Dump, the Niagara Mohawk Harbor Point Property, Bossert Manufacturing Corp., Burn-Rite Coal, Madden Property, Bendix Fluid Power Division, Erie Canal (Town of Frankfort Section), and Chicago Pneumatic Tool Company. According to Department Staff, the contribution, if any, of these sites to the PCB contamination attributable to the Universal Waste Site is irrelevant and beyond the scope of the adjudicatory hearing. During a conference call on October 1, 2004, Department Staff advised that all documents responsive to the FOIL request had been provided to Petitioners for their review, but reiterated its objections to the introduction of information concerning other sites as irrelevant to this proceeding. Petitioners argued that off-site contaminant contribution must be considered in determining whether the PCBs in the Mohawk River are attributable to the Universal Waste Site. Section 624.8(b)(1)(i) provides that an administrative law judge has the power to "rule upon all motions and requests, including those that decide the ultimate merits of the case." Section 3101 of the CPLR mandates full disclosure of all evidence "material and necessary" in the prosecution or defense of an action. In Matter of Saratoga County, the ALJ interpreted this provision to require discovery as to all evidence relevant to the issues identified for hearing, and as to all information reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. ALJ Ruling at 1, 1995 WL 1780809, *1 (Oct. 27, 1995) (citing D. Siegel, New York Practice, §344, at 422 [1978]); see Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publishing Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406 (1968)(test is one of usefulness and reason). Given the standard articulated in Matter of Saratoga County, it is premature to exclude evidence concerning the potential contribution of other sites to the contamination at issue, or to limit Petitioners' discovery solely to information about the Site. Pursuant to Section 375-1.9(d)(2)(iii), Petitioners bear the burden of proof to show that the Site does not pose a significant threat. Essentially, Petitioners must prove a negative. In light of this, it is not appropriate in this case to limit Petitioners' access to information reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Any challenge by Department Staff to the use of information concerning off-site sources may be raised in a motion to exclude portions of Petitioners' prefiled testimony, or advanced during Department Staff's cross-examination of Petitioners' witnesses. FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. As agreed during the October 1, 2004 conference call, prefiled testimony is to be submitted by Tuesday, October 19, 2004. Service by electronic mail is authorized, with hard copy to follow by overnight mail. A conference call has been scheduled for 3:00 p.m. on Friday, October 22, 2004. The Office of Hearings will initiate the call. The adjudicatory hearing will commence at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 26, 2004, in Room 919 at DEC's Central Office, 625 Broadway, Albany, New York. The hearing will continue on Wednesday, October 27, and Thursday, October 28. Further hearing days will be scheduled as necessary. /s/ Maria E. Villa Administrative Law Judge. October 7, 2004 Albany, New York. TO: Michael B. Gerrard, Esq. Arnold & Porter COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS 399 Park Avenue New York, New York 10022-4690. Dolores A. Tuohy, Esq. Associate Attorney Division of Environmental Enforcement New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 625 Broadway Albany, New York 12233-5500. 1 The site classifications are set forth in 6 NYCRR Section 375-1.8 as follows: (a)(2) In so maintaining the Registry, to the extent possible with available information, the department will classify sites according to the following criteria: . . . (ii) A class "2" site is a site at which hazardous waste constitutes a significant threat to the environment, as described in section 375-1.4 of this Subpart. . . . (iii) A class "3" site is a site at which hazardous waste does not presently constitute a significant threat to the environment, as described in section 375-1.4 of this Subpart. Section 375-1.4 enumerates a number of environmental and public health concerns that would permit the Commissioner to find that hazardous waste disposed of at a particular site constitutes a significant threat to the environment, after a review of the available evidence and consideration of the site-specific factors set forth in Section 375-1.4(b) that the Commissioner deems relevant. 2 According to the Order on Consent, Class "2a" is "a temporary classification which indicates that further investigation is required to determine whether conditions at the Site constitute a significant threat to the public health or the environment." Issues Conference Exhibit 3-4, Paragraph 3. 3 Section 375-1.9(d)(2)(ii) states that "the procedures of Part 624 of this Title may be used for adjudicatory hearings other than permit matters, and such procedures shall be utilized in any hearing held pursuant to this section except to the extent that any provision of such Part is contrary to the statute implemented by this section, in which event the statutory provision controls . . .." The Utter Waste Years - 2011 - 2017 by Cyrene V. Jacob (2018, Trade Paperback) С самой низкой ценой, совершенно новый, неиспользованный, неоткрытый, неповрежденный товар в оригинальной упаковке (если товар поставляется в упаковке). Упаковка должна быть такой же, как упаковка этого товара в розничных магазинах, за исключением тех случаев, когда товар является изделием ручной работы или был упакован производителем в упаковку не для розничной продажи, например в коробку без маркировки или в пластиковый пакет. См. подробные сведения с дополнительным описанием товара. Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - 1945. After the Interim Committee decided to drop the bomb, the Target Committee determined the locations to be hit, and President Truman issued the Potsdam Proclamation as Japan’s final warning, the world soon learned the meaning of “complete and utter destruction.” The first two atomic bombs ever used were dropped on Japan in early August, 1945. For a detailed timeline of the bombings, please see Hiroshima and Nagasaki Bombing Timeline. Hiroshima. On August 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. The bomb was known as "Little Boy", a uranium gun- type bomb that exploded with about thirteen kilotons of force. At the time of the bombing, Hiroshima was home to 280,000-290,000 civilians as well as 43,000 soldiers. Between 90,000 and 166,000 people are believed to have died from the bomb in the four-month period following the explosion. The U.S. Department of Energy has estimated that after five years there were perhaps 200,000 or more fatalities as a result of the bombing, while the city of Hiroshima has estimated that 237,000 people were killed directly or indirectly by the bomb's effects, including burns, radiation sickness, and cancer. The bombing of Hiroshima, codenamed Operation Centerboard I, was approved by Curtis LeMay on August 4, 1945. The B-29 plane that carried Little Boy from Tinian Island in the western Pacific to Hiroshima was known as the Enola Gay, after pilot Paul Tibbets' mother. Along with Tibbets, copilot Robert Lewis, bombardier Tom Ferebee, navigator Theodore Van Kirk, and tail gunner Robert Caron were among the others on board the Enola Gay. Below are their eyewitness accounts of the first atomic bomb dropped on Japan. Pilot Paul Tibbets: "We turned back to look at Hiroshima. The city was hidden by that awful cloud. boiling up, mushrooming, terrible and incredibly tall. No one spoke for a moment; then everyone was talking. I remember (copilot Robert) Lewis pounding my shoulder, saying 'Look at that! Look at that! Look at that!' (Bombardier) Tom Ferebee wondered about whether radioactivity would make us all sterile. Lewis said he could taste atomic fission. He said it tasted like lead." Navigator Theodore Van Kirk recalls the shockwaves from the explosion: "(It was) very much as if you've ever sat on an ash can and had somebody hit it with a baseball bat. The plane bounced, it jumped and there was a noise like a piece of sheet metal snapping. Those of us who had flown quite a bit over Europe thought that it was anti-aircraft fire that had exploded very close to the plane." On viewing the atomic fireball: "I don't believe anyone ever expected to look at a sight quite like that. Where we had seen a clear city two minutes before, we could now no longer see the city. We could see smoke and fires creeping up the sides of the mountains." Tail gunner Robert Caron: "The mushroom itself was a spectacular sight, a bubbling mass of purple-gray smoke and you could see it had a red core in it and everything was burning inside. As we got farther away, we could see the base of the mushroom and below we could see what looked like a few-hundred-foot layer of debris and smoke and what have you. I saw fires springing up in different places, like flames shooting up on a bed of coals." Six miles below the crew of the Enola Gay, the people of Hiroshima were waking up and preparing for their daily routines. It was 8:16 A.M. Up to that point, the city had been largely spared by the rain of conventional air bombing that had ravaged many other Japanese cities. Rumors abounded as to why this was so, from the fact that many Hiroshima residents had emigrated to the U.S. to the supposed presence of President Truman's mother in the area. Still, many citizens, including schoolchildren, were recruited to prepare for future bombings by tearing down houses to create fire lanes, and it was at this task that many were laboring or preparing to labor on the morning of August 6. Just an hour before, air raid sirens had sounded as a single B-29, the weather plane for the Little Boy mission, approached Hiroshima. A radio broadcast announced the sighting of the Enola Gay soon after 8 A.M. The city of Hiroshima was annihilated by the explosion. 70,000 of 76,000 buildings were damaged or destroyed, and 48,000 of those were entirely razed. Survivors recalled the indescribable and incredible experience of seeing that the city had ceased to exist. A college history professor: "I climbed Hikiyama Hill and looked down. I saw that Hiroshima had disappeared. I was shocked by the sight. What I felt then and still feel now I just can't explain with words. Of course I saw many dreadful scenes after that—but that experience, looking down and finding nothing left of Hiroshima—was so shocking that I simply can't express what I felt. Hiroshima didn't exist—that was mainly what I saw— Hiroshima just didn't exist." Medical doctor Michihiko Hachiya: "Nothing remained except a few buildings of reinforced concrete. For acres and acres the city was like a desert except for scattered piles of brick and roof tile. I had to revise my meaning of the word destruction or choose some other word to describe what I saw. Devastation may be a better word, but really, I know of no word or words to describe the view." Writer Yoko Ota: "I reached a bridge and saw that the Hiroshima Castle had been completely leveled to the ground, and my heart shook like a great wave. the grief of stepping over the corpses of history pressed upon my heart." Those who were close to the epicenter of the explosion were simply vaporized by the intensity of the heat. One man left only a dark shadow on the steps of a bank as he sat. The mother of Miyoko Osugi, a 13-year-old schoolgirl working on the fire lanes, never found her body, but she did find her geta sandal. The area covered by Miyoko's foot remained light, while the rest of it was darkened by the blast. Many others in Hiroshima, farther from the Little Boy epicenter, survived the initial explosion but were severely wounded, including injuries from and burns across much of their body. Among these people, panic and chaos were rampant as they struggled to find food and water, medical assistance, friends and relatives and to flee the firestorms that engulfed many residential areas. Having no point of reference for the bomb's absolute devastation, some survivors believed themselves to have been transported to a hellish version of the afterlife. The worlds of the living and the dead seemed to converge. A Protestant minister: "The feeling I had was that everyone was dead. The whole city was destroyed. I thought this was the end of Hiroshima—of Japan—of humankind. This was God's judgment on man." A six-year-old boy: "Near the bridge there were a whole lot of dead people. Sometimes there were ones who came to us asking for a drink of water. They were bleeding from their faces and from their mouths and they had glass sticking in their bodies. And the bridge itself was burning furiously. The details and the scenes were just like Hell." A sociologist: "My immediate thought was that this was like the hell I had always read about. I had never seen anything which resembled it before, but I thought that should there be a hell, this was it—the Buddhist hell, where we were thought that people who could not attain salvation always went. And I imagined that all of these people I was seeing were in the hell I had read about." A boy in fifth grade: "I had the feeling that all the human beings on the face of the earth had been killed off, and only the five of us (his family) were left behind in an uncanny world of the dead." A grocer: "The appearance of people was. well, they all had skin blackened by burns. They had no hair because their hair was burned, and at a glance you couldn't tell whether you were looking at them from in front or in back. Many of them died along the road—I can still picture them in my mind—like walking ghosts. They didn't look like people of this world." Many people traveled to central places such as hospitals, parks, and riverbeds in an attempt to find relief from their pain and misery. However, these locations soon became scenes of agony and despair as many injured and dying people arrived and were unable to receive proper care. A sixth-grade girl: "Bloated corpses were drifting in those seven formerly beautiful rivers; smashing cruelly into bits the childish pleasure of the little girl, the peculiar odor of burning human flesh rose everywhere in the Delta City, which had changed to a waste of scorched earth." A fourteen-year-old boy: "Night came and I could hear many voices crying and groaning with pain and begging for water. Someone cried, 'Damn it! War tortures so many people who are innocent!' Another said, 'I hurt! Give me water!' This person was so burned that we couldn't tell if it was a man or a woman. The sky was red with flames. It was burning as if scorching heaven." For more testimonials from survivors, visit Voices from Japan. Nagasaki. Three days after the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki on August 9 – a 21-kiloton plutonium device known as "Fat Man.” On the day of the bombing, an estimated 263,000 were in Nagasaki, including 240,000 Japanese residents, 9,000 Japanese soldiers, and 400 prisoners of war. Prior to August 9, Nagasaki had been the target of small scale bombing by the United States. Though the damage from these bombings was relatively small, it created considerable concern in Nagasaki and many people were evacuated to rural areas for safety, thus reducing the population in the city at the time of the nuclear attack. It is estimated that between 40,000 and 75,000 people died immediately following the atomic explosion, while another 60,000 people suffered severe injuries. Total deaths by the end of 1945 may have reached 80,000. The decision to use the second bomb was made on August 7, 1945 on Guam. Its use was calculated to indicate that the United States had an endless supply of the new weapon for use against Japan and that the United States would continue to drop atomic bombs on Japan until the country surrendered unconditionally. The city of Nagasaki, however, was not the primary target for the second atomic bomb. Instead, officials had selected the city of Kokura, where Japan had one of its largest munitions plants. The B-29 "Bockscar", piloted Major Charles Sweeney, was assigned to deliver the "Fat Man" to the city of Kokura on the morning of August 9, 1945. Accompanying Sweeney on the mission were copilots Charles Donald Albury and Fred J. Olivi, weaponeer Frederick Ashworth, and bombadier Kermit Beahan. At 3:49am, "Bockscar" and five other B-29s departed the island of Tinian and headed towards Kokura. When the plane arrived over the city nearly seven hours later, thick clouds and drifting smoke from fires started by a major firebombing raid on nearby Yawata the previous day covered most of the area over Kokura, obscuring the aiming point. Pilot Charles Sweeney made three bomb runs over the next fifty minutes, but bombardier Beahan was unable to drop the bomb because he could not see the target visually. By the time of the third bomb run, Japanese antiaircraft fire was getting close, and Second Lieutenant Jacob Beser, who was monitoring Japanese communications, reported activity on the Japanese fighter direction radio bands. Running low on fuel, the crew aboard Bockscar decided to head for the secondary target, Nagasaki. When the B-29 arrived over the city twenty minutes later, the downtown area was also covered by dense clouds. Frederick Ashworth, the plane's weaponeer proposed bombing Nagasaki using radar. At that moment, a small opening in the clouds at the end of the three-minute bomb run permitted bombardier Kermit Beahan to identify target features. At 10:58 AM local time, Bockscar visually dropped Fat Man. It exploded 43 seconds later with a blast yield equivalent to 21 kilotons of TNT at an altitude of 1,650 feet, about 1.5 miles northwest of the intended aiming point. The radius of total destruction from the atomic blast was about one mile, followed by fires across the northern portion of the city to two miles south of where the bomb had been dropped. In contrast to many modern aspects of Hiroshima, almost all of the buildings in Nagasaki were of old- fashioned Japanese construction, consisting of wood or wood-frame buildings with wood walls and tile roofs. Many of the smaller industries and business establishments were also situated in buildings of wood or other materials not designed to withstand explosions. As a result, the atomic explosion over Nagasaki leveled nearly every structure in the blast radius. The failure to drop Fat Man at the precise bomb aim point caused the atomic blast to be confined to the Urakami Valley. As a consequence, a major portion of the city was protected from the explosion. The Fat Man was dropped over the city's industrial valley midway between the Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works in the south and the Mitsubishi-Urakami Ordnance Works in the north. The resulting explosion had a blast yield equivalent to 21 kilotons of TNT, roughly the same as the Trinity blast. Nearly half of the city was completely destroyed. Bockscar's copilot Fred J. Olivi published a detailed account of the effects of the atomic explosion over Nagasaki. Here are some of his reactions: Olivi: "Suddenly, the light of a thousand suns illuminated the cockpit. Even with my dark welder's goggles, I winced and shut my eyes for a couple of seconds. I guessed we were about seven miles from "ground zero" and headed directly away from the target, yet the light blinded me for an instant. I had never experienced such an intense bluish light, maybe three or four times brighter than the sun shining above us." "I've never seen anything like it! Biggest explosion I've ever seen. This plume of smoke I'm seeing is hard to explain. A great white mass of flame is seething within the white mushroom shaped cloud. It has a pinkish, salmon color. The base is black and is breaking a little way down from the mushroom." "The Mushroom cloud was coming right at us. I immediately looked up and could see that he was right, the cloud was getting close to Bockscar. We had been told not to fly through the atomic cloud because it was extremely dangerous to the crew and aircraft. Knowing this, Sweeney put Bockscar into a steep dive to the right, away from the cloud, throttles wide open. For a few moments we could not tell if we were out-running the ominous cloud or if it was gaining on us, but gradually we pulled away from the dangerous radioactive cloud before it engulfed us, much to everyone's relief." Tatsuichiro Akizuki: "All the buildings I could see were on fire. Electricity poles were wrapped in flame like so many pieces of kindling. It seemed as if the earth itself emitted fire and smoke, flames that writhed up and erupted from underground. The sky was dark, the ground was scarlet, and in between hung clouds of yellowish smoke. Three kinds of color—black, yellow, and scarlet—loomed ominously over the people, who ran about like so many ants seeking to escape. It seemed like the end of the world." For more testimonials from survivors, visit Voices from Japan. Aftermath. On August 14, Japan surrendered. Journalist George Weller was the "first into Nagasaki" and described the mysterious "atomic illness" (the onset of radiation sickness) that was killing patients who outwardly appeared to have escaped the bomb's impact. Controversial at the time and for years later, Weller's articles were not allowed to be released until 2006. Controversy. The debate over the bomb – whether there should have been a test demonstration, whether the Nagasaki bomb was necessary, and more – continues to this day.