I stand to be corrected if any of the following information is in error. Early in 1993 the US Congress commissioned an investigation into low frequency noise complaints in and around the town of Taos New Mexico. On April 12 1993 a team of scientists and engineers from national laboratories and universities was assembled. On August 23 1993 an Informal Report was published by the University of New Mexico. On March 16 1994 the second phase of the Taos Hum Investigation began. On August 3 1994 a survey of Hum sufferers was completed. On November 11 1994 Mullins and Poteet published a short paper in the Acoustical Society of America.. On November 22 1995 a paper by Mullins and Kelly was published by the University of New Mexico Only the August 1993 paper makes reference to measurements made on the Taos area electric power grid, but no actual figures were given. The Taos Hum Investigation appears to be a series of published papers in which a large part is missing, there is nothing that one could call a Final Report.
In contrast, in 1992 the UK government commissioned an investigation into Unsolved cases of Low Frequency Sound. At the end of the investigation, October 1994, a Final Report was prepared and published in hard copy, it gave complete details of the investigation and was available to the public through HM Stationary Office. On Apr 19, 3:16 am, Steve K <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, scanned for what I could use. Infrasound paper copied, will > look at when I am awake. I would like to have found something on the > interefernce of infrasound sources underwater to dolphins. Here's the > reason. In 2003-04 and recent expansion in 2008 a pipeline was > installed from Missippi to Tampa FL, in the GULF. In the last couple > years the internet HUMMERS have increased complaints from Tampa and > the FL east cost where this line goes. Considering how bad the HUM is > here, and what it did to our coyotes and my pet, it is very plausible > that the line running thru the gulf is radiating ILFN and screwing up > the dolphins for all these recent beachings along that coast. > > BTW, pipelines run/in most of the counties where the caves are for > bats in the the NE USA. The original caves where the bat die off > started 3-4 years ago have two large lines within 1.5 miles. And both > of them are now causing HUM in CT and MA and HUM measureable for at > least 25 miles away from them. . > > On Apr 17, 2:40 am, dboots <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Steve Would appreciate it. I would think that Sandia's > > "Electromagnetic Test Report" > > perhaps we might gleam some additional info from it But I am also > > still wondering if anyone took time to FOIA the report that first > > report that this thread indicates was released by Sandia in it's > > entirety > > cause you would of thought it would of come up at the top of a search > > engine but instead it did not. > > > The > > first, the "Electromagnetic Test Report, Electromagnetic > > Investigation of the > > Taos Hum, Test Report, dated September 27, 1994," was released in > > its entirety. > > > On Apr 12, 5:48 pm, Steve K <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'll try to use a bit of networking to get to this. > > > > On Apr 10, 8:46 pm, dboots <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > John Thanks for posting these reference links It would seem that > > > > the group doesn't have a file category on the home page so unsure if > > > > link exists > > > > Any link(s) to that one report "Electromagnetic Investigation of > > > > the Taos Hum" that was released by Sandia in it's entirety???? Didn't > > > > anyone acquire that report by an FOIA???? I tried a google search > > > > but nothing > > > > seemed to pop up of a link to a pdf of the report I even tried > > > > Sandia's Electromagnetic page but ended up with a server error when I > > > > tried to search on that site > > > > > Albuquerque Operations reported to Mr. Long on June 29, 1995 that > > > > Sandia National Laboratory had provided one responsive record for each > > > > category. The first, the "Electromagnetic Test Report, Electromagnetic > > > > Investigation of the Taos Hum, Test Report, dated September 27, 1994," > > > > was released in its entirety. > > > > > On Apr 7, 11:09 pm, John Dawes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Here is the U.S. Department of Energy web page referring to the FOI > > > > > application of Greg Longhttp://www.oha.doe.gov/cases/foia/vfa0060.htm > > > > > > I have also found a letter dated November 22 1995 written by Sherry > > > > > Robinson, Public Affairs Department University of New Mexico which > > > > > states that a report by Taos Hum investigators Joe Mullins and Jim > > > > > Kelly will be published in the Acoustical Society Newsletter, however, > > > > > I have been unable to find this > > > > > > On Apr 6, 12:05 pm, John Dawes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I am sorry there is little that I can add to this. Some time ago I > > > > > > asked some American friends if they could find the results of part > > > > > > two > > > > > > of the Taos Investigation, They contacted the University of New > > > > > > Mexico > > > > > > and were informed that no information on the final investigation was > > > > > > available, funding had been withdrawn and the investigation was now > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > I also contacted the UK government pointing out the similarity > > > > > > between > > > > > > Hum sufferers in the USA and the UK asking if it would be possible > > > > > > for > > > > > > an exchange of information, I received no answer to this. > > > > > > I believe something important was discovered during the > > > > > > investigation > > > > > > but it will be difficult to find out exactly what this was. > > > > > > > On Apr 6, 10:27 am, dboots <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Is their any place on the web we can find this document that is > > > > > > > copied and pasted here??? Did Greg Long give up after these > > > > > > > denial's back in 1995? Has anyone else attempted to get the > > > > > > > document > > > > > > > released using FOIA??? > > > > > > > > Not all FOIA's appeal's go to this length in explaining > > > > > > > exactly > > > > > > > what the denial reasoning behind it is based on Thanks for > > > > > > > posting > > > > > > > this, but is their a web link > > > > > > > to this document ??? > > > > > > > > On Apr 5, 1:37 am, John Dawes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Greg Long, Case No. VFA-0060, August 15, 1995 > > > > > > > > > Case No. VFA-0060, 25 DOE ¶ 80,129 > > > > > > > > August 15, 1995 > > > > > > > > DECISION AND ORDER > > > > > > > > OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY > > > > > > > > Appeal > > > > > > > > Name of Petitioner:Greg Long > > > > > > > > Date of Filing:July 14, 1995 > > > > > > > > Case Number: VFA-0060 > > > > > > > > On July 14, 1995, Greg Long of Philomath, Oregon filed an > > > > > > > > Appeal > > > > > > > > from a > > > > > > > > determination issued on June 29, 1995 by the Albuquerque > > > > > > > > Operations > > > > > > > > Office > > > > > > > > (Albuquerque Operations) of the Department of Energy (DOE). > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > determination > > > > > > > > denied in part Mr. Long's request for information submitted > > > > > > > > pursuant > > > > > > > > to the > > > > > > > > Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, as > > > > > > > > implemented by > > > > > > > > the DOE > > > > > > > > in 10 C.F.R. Part 1004. This Appeal, if granted, would > > > > > > > > require the > > > > > > > > DOE to > > > > > > > > release the withheld information. > > > > > > > > The FOIA requires that agency records which are held by > > > > > > > > federal > > > > > > > > agencies, and > > > > > > > > which have not been made public in an authorized fashion by a > > > > > > > > covered branch > > > > > > > > of the federal government, generally be released to the > > > > > > > > public upon > > > > > > > > request. 5 > > > > > > > > U.S.C. § 552(a)(3). In addition to this requirement, the FOIA > > > > > > > > lists > > > > > > > > nine > > > > > > > > exemptions that set forth the types of information which may > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > withheld at > > > > > > > > the discretion of the agency. 5 U.S.C. § 5552(b)(1)-(b)(9). > > > > > > > > See also > > > > > > > > 10 C.F.R. > > > > > > > > § 1004. 10(b)(1)-(b)(9). The DOE regulations further provide > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > documents > > > > > > > > which may be exempt from mandatory disclosure will > > > > > > > > nonetheless be > > > > > > > > released to > > > > > > > > the public if the DOE determines that disclosure is not > > > > > > > > contrary to > > > > > > > > federal > > > > > > > > law and is in the public interest. 10 C.F.R. § 1004.1. > > > > > > > > I. Background > > > > > > > > In a letter dated March 23, 1995, Mr. Long filed a FOIA > > > > > > > > request > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > Albuquerque Operations seeking two related categories of > > > > > > > > information. The > > > > > > > > first category concerns the investigation of a mysterious and > > > > > > > > unexplained > > > > > > > > "hum" reported by many people in and around Taos, New Mexico. > > > > > > > > In > > > > > > > > particular, > > > > > > > > Mr. Long noted that Sandia National Laboratory had been > > > > > > > > involved in > > > > > > > > exploring > > > > > > > > this phenomenon starting in > > > > > > > > 1991. The second category asks for documents in which Sandia > > > > > > > > personnel > > > > > > > > explored similar "hums" elsewhere in New Mexico. > > > > > > > > Albuquerque Operations reported to Mr. Long on June 29, 1995 > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > Sandia > > > > > > > > National Laboratory had provided one responsive record for > > > > > > > > each > > > > > > > > category. The > > > > > > > > first, the "Electromagnetic Test Report, Electromagnetic > > > > > > > > Investigation of the > > > > > > > > Taos Hum, Test Report, dated September 27, 1994," was > > > > > > > > released in > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > entirety. The second document, a draft report on "other > > > > > > > > possible > > > > > > > > sources of > > > > > > > > the Taos 'Hum.'" was withheld in its entirety. Albuquerque > > > > > > > > Operations > > > > > > > > explained that the report was never finalized because funding > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > the project > > > > > > > > had been terminated. Accordingly, Albuquerque Operations > > > > > > > > withheld > > > > > > > > the document > > > > > > > > under the deliberative process privilege of Exemption 5 of > > > > > > > > the FOIA > > > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > grounds that the document contained preliminary opinions and > > > > > > > > findings which > > > > > > > > were never finalized. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5); 10 C.F.R. § > > > > > > > > 1004.10(b) > > > > > > > > (5). > > > > > > > > Albuquerque Operations did provide Mr. Long with findings > > > > > > > > done by a > > > > > > > > team at > > > > > > > > the University of New Mexico who were working in conjunction > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > the Sandia > > > > > > > > National Laboratory team. Mr. Long has appealed the > > > > > > > > withholding of > > > > > > > > the draft > > > > > > > > report. > > > > > > > > II. Analysis > > > > > > > > Exemption 5 of the FOIA exempts from mandatory disclosure > > > > > > > > documents > > > > > > > > which are > > > > > > > > "[i]nter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > not be > > > > > > > > available by law to a party other than an agency in > > > > > > > > litigation with > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > agency." 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5); 10 C.F.R. § 1004.10(b)(5). The > > > > > > > > Supreme Court > > > > > > > > has held > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hum Sufferers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hum-sufferers?hl=en.
