Comments for NDCA http://clusteralliance.org National Disease Clusters Alliance Thu, 09 Jun 2011 00:48:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 Comment on Clusters by Do You Live in a Disease Cluster? | Trevor's Trek Foundation http://clusteralliance.org/clusters/comment-page-1/#comment-412 Do You Live in a Disease Cluster? | Trevor's Trek Foundation Thu, 09 Jun 2011 00:48:32 +0000 http://clusteralliance.org/?page_id=432#comment-412 [...] The NRDC and the NDCA plan to identify additional disease clusters investigated or confirmed since 1976. In the meantime, to see if you’re living in an area at risk, see the disease cluster report, or the NDCA’s disease cluster and hotspot map. [...] [...] The NRDC and the NDCA plan to identify additional disease clusters investigated or confirmed since 1976. In the meantime, to see if you’re living in an area at risk, see the disease cluster report, or the NDCA’s disease cluster and hotspot map. [...]

]]> Comment on PAVE PAWS draft EIS draws two comments by Bernard J. Young http://clusteralliance.org/2008/07/19/pave-paws-draft-eis-draws-two-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-277 Bernard J. Young Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:05:53 +0000 http://clusteralliance.org/2008/07/19/pave-paws-draft-eis-draws-two-comments/#comment-277 Reporter Brennan understates my objections to the Draft Supplemental EIS. Of the 292 individual measurements of the radar power flux density, 143 are derived from the maximum specified output of a microwave preamplifier between the measurement antenna and the power meter. The result is a clipped measurement; the true values are unknown, but greater than reported. It's like driving down the highway with your speedometer pegged; You know you going at least as fast as it will report, but you really don't know just how fast you're going. The "measured" values of power flux density were tabulated, but never plotted. They were never compared with the specifications of the the radar, a simple one term calculation. When you perform the calculations, you find the reported values exceeded the exposure we should receive at ten of the 50 sites. At Scargo Tower, a popular scenic attraction in my town of Dennis, 18.5 miles from the radar transmitter, the reported measurement was 46 times the specified value. Two cases in the Cape Cod Ewing's sarcoma cluster occurred in Dennis. There are more troubling issues which are raised in my written response to the EIS. I will try to post them in their entirety. Bernard J. Young, P.E. Reporter Brennan understates my objections to the Draft Supplemental EIS. Of the 292 individual measurements of the radar power flux density, 143 are derived from the maximum specified output of a microwave preamplifier between the measurement antenna and the power meter. The result is a clipped measurement; the true values are unknown, but greater than reported. It’s like driving down the highway with your speedometer pegged; You know you going at least as fast as it will report, but you really don’t know just how fast you’re going.

The “measured” values of power flux density were tabulated, but never plotted. They were never compared with the specifications of the the radar, a simple one term calculation. When you perform the calculations, you find the reported values exceeded the exposure we should receive at ten of the 50 sites.

At Scargo Tower, a popular scenic attraction in my town of Dennis, 18.5 miles from the radar transmitter, the reported measurement was 46 times the specified value. Two cases in the Cape Cod Ewing’s sarcoma cluster occurred in Dennis.

There are more troubling issues which are raised in my written response to the EIS. I will try to post them in their entirety.

Bernard J. Young, P.E.

]]>