The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. In the headlines this Monday, at least 1,200 people died in a poisonous gas disaster in the West African nation of Cameroon. Frontier Airlines neared bankruptcy. A Soviet employee of the United Nations was held in New York on spy charges. And Anatoly Shcharanskyl was reunited with his family in Vienna. We will have the details in our news summary in a moment. Charlayne Hunter-Gault is in New York tonight. Charlayne?

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: After the summary of the day's events, the News Hour looks like this: we'll get the latest on the tragic gas leak in Cameroon from the U.S. official who announced emergency aid for that nation. Then we'll get the final word on Chernobyl and what caused the world's worst nuclear accident. We'll hear about the hard times that has Frontier Airlines grounded and get a report about a trade war between the U.S. and one of its closest allies.News Summary

LEHRER: A most unusual natural disaster hit the Western African nation of Cameroon today. The country's president, Paul Biya, told reporters at least 1,200 people were dead from a poisonous gas that exploded from a volcanic lake and then was blown by the wind through nearby villages. He said between 200 and 300 others were hurt and that more dead and injured may still be found. The deadly gas was identified differently by various authorities as hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. In Washington, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development said it was more likely to have been cyanide. Peter McPherson spoke at a State Department briefing. He described the disaster as Ripley's Believe It or Not event.

M. PETER McPHERSON, administrator, Agency for International Development: What we think may have happened is as follows: there was a small earthquake. The earthquake created a landslide on one side of the lake. The ground fell down into the bottom of the lake, creating a stirring of a sediment there. That sediment, in connection with the lake water, created a chemical reaction. And that chemical reaction, in turn, created the gas that spurted up from the bottom of the lake, almost like a releasing of a cork from a champagne bottle. The gas that came up may -- and I underline may -- have been cyanide. And so anyone in contact with that gas would have died instantly.

LEHRER: McPherson said the United States was sending emergency aid and a team of specialists to help Cameroon cope with the disaster. Charlayne?

HUNTER-GAULT: Frontier Airlines appeared late today to be still trying to avoid bankruptcy, although talks between its pilots and United Airlines have recessed indefinitely. United has offered to buy Frontier from People Express, but at the outside the company does not want to pay Frontier pilots as much as it pays United pilots. Although no negotiations were in progress, United said it was keeping its lines of communications open with the Airline Pilots Association. Roger Hall, chairman of the union's United Airlines pilots group, said the union was trying to save jobs.

ROGER HALL, Airline Pilots Association: The major stumbling point was United's total unwillingness to accommodate the concerns that we had over establishing a long term merging pay scale for the Frontier pilots coming over here. United just was completely unwilling to address our concerns.

HUNTER-GAULT: With 4,700 jobs at stake, why wouldn't you bend?

Mr. HALL: We did, as a matter of fact. We placed three proposals before United last night in an effort to try and come to some kind of accommodation. We've been working at this for four weeks now very hard, trying to come to some -- some accommodation that would protect those jobs. We're very concerned about those people.

HUNTER-GAULT: In another labor-management dispute, Deere and Company, the farm equipment manufacturer, halted production at all of its 13 plants because members of the United Auto Workers went on strike against three of them. The issues at those three plants are job security and pension inprovements. The stoppage has put 13,000 employees out of work.

LEHRER: Five hundred of the world's leading experts on nuclear power met in Vienna today to talk about the Chernobyl disaster. The focus of their attention is a 382 page Soviet report on the nuclear accident. The experts were drawn from 50 nations and will meet for five days under the auspices of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency. Those attending include a 28 member Soviet delegation headed by the deputy director of the leading nuclear power authority in that county. Sessions are closed to the public, but some of the contents of the Soviet disaster report have been made public. A later conference is to deal with the question of mutual assistance in nuclear accidents.

HUNTER-GAULT: In New York, a Soviet employee of the United Nations was held without bail on a charge of spying on the United States. When Gennady Zakharov appeared in federal court, prosecutors said he is believed to be a member of the KGB, and would be likely to leave the country if he was arrested. Zakharov is accused of buying classified information about air force jet engines. If convicted, he faces a maximum sentence of life in prison. Zakharov does not have diplomatic immunity from prosecution, because he is an employee of the United Nations and is not a member of the Soviet mission staff.

LEHRER: The Scharansky family is together again. The mother, brother, and three other relatives of Soviet dissident Anatoly Scharansky were reunited with him today in Vienna. They all then flew on to Israel, where they will live. Anatoly Scharansky was released from prison by the Soviets last February. He was allowed to go to Israel as part of an East-West prisoner exchange. The family reunion today was private, but they greeted reporters with waves and smiles when they boarded the plane for Tel Aviv. The mother said she had been permitted to visit her son in prison only six times. She told reporters she never thought this day would come, but she felt good now that she had seen her son, Anatoly, again.

In troubled Pakistan today, the political opposition called for nationwide acts of civil disobedience next month in an attempt to remove the current government. The disobedience would include stopping traffic, courting arrest and demonstrating. Pakistani Prime Minister Mohammad Kahn Junejo refused the opposition demand for new elections and for negotiations with them.

HUNTER-GAULT: A French doctor said many insects in Central Africa are infected with the virus associated with AIDS, or Acquired Immune Deficciency Syndrome. The doctor, who is a researcher at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, said the insects may be able to transmit AIDS to humans in parts of Africa. But the doctor said there is no evidence that insects to transmit AIDS in Europe and North America.

And in Kocomo, Indiana, a 14 year old AIDS victim went back to school today after the parents of other youngsters dropped their legal effort to exclude him. We have a report from Leslie Olsen of station WISH-TV in Indianapolis.

LESLIE OLSEN [voice-over]: Early this morning, Ryan White left his house with his sister and headed for the bus stop. Ryan, who is in the eighth grade this year, will be attending classes for the first time in the high school building, rather than the middle school. Officials say precautions, such as separate eating utensils and bathrooms, have been arranged, but students still have mixed reactions to his presence.

LINDY RATCLIFF, student: Because you're standing in the hallways, and there's going to be more fights and everything, because everybody's want to kid -- everybody's wanting to fight him.

OLSEN: Fight him? Why?

Ms. RATCLIFF: Because they don't like him.

LINDA BEVINGTON, student: Well, everyone wants to treat him really nice and hope that he gets along okay.

OLSEN: It doesn't scare you any longer?

Ms. BEVINGTON: No. I think that there's no threat, so --

OLSEN [voice-over]: There were no protesters outside the school today, as there had been last year. But one parent still opposed to the AIDS victim going to school said she will try to continue her battle in the next general assembly.

HUNTER-GAULT: That completes our news summary. Still ahead on the News Hour, the tragic gas leak in the West African nation of Cameroon. What went wrong at Chernobyl. The financial plight of Frontier Airlines. And a bitter trade battle between the United States and Canada. Disaster in Africa

LEHRER: The Cameroon disaster is first up tonight. The president of that Western African country says 1,200 people are known dead, another 200 to 300 have been injured, but more victims may still be found. The cause? Well, a poisonous gas that exploded up from a volcanic lake in the northwest part of Cameroon, a nation of 9 million people and of economic prosperity and political stability. Peter McPherson, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, held a State Department briefing this afternoon on the unusual disaster. He is here to hold one for us now.

Mr. McPherson, later today the government described what happened as a geological explosion. Is that what you understand it to be as well?

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, we think there's a couple possibilities, and perhaps even more. One is that there might have been a volcano in the bottom of the lake causing this explosion -- this gas coming up. That's what the president of the country referred to. Another option -- one that I suggested as a possibility today at the noon press conference -- was that there was an earthquake and then a landslide down in the lake, causing a turning up of the sediment in the bottom of the lake, and a chemical reaction then causing the explosion of gas. We don't know for sure. What we're doing to follow up on this is that we have a team of both people that are specialists in volcanoes, as well as other -- a number of other specialties, going to the area that will try to discover exactly what it was. There was a problem a couple years ago that we think was similar.

LEHRER: In that area, right?

Mr. McPHERSON: In that area.

LEHRER: Explain that. What happened?

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, in 1984 there were some 34 people that died as a result. We sent a team in there to look at it, but the people were buried before we got there. So one, we couldn't tell exactly why they died, and it wasn't absolutely clear that it was this business I was describing a moment ago. Incidentally, the gas may be -- well, is a major set of problems.

LEHRER: Well, but what happened in 1984? Was it a similar thing -- a lake and gas came out of the bottom of the lake?

Mr. McPHERSON: Yes.

LEHRER: And -- but it was never determined as to what caused it?

Mr. McPHERSON: No. Not presicely. We think that what caused it was what I have just suggested here.

LEHRER: I see.

Mr. McPHERSON: The earthquake, the sediment, and then the gas. And the gas would be cyanide. At least, that's a possibility. If it's cyanide, the people that are exposed to it would die instantly.

LEHRER: And you think that's probably what happened this time.

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, that's what our -- that's what the AID scientific people are saying, and it makes sense. But frankly, we're not going to know 'til, one, we get our pathologist there -- and that team is leaving too to do the autopsies to find out as best we can what the gas was -- and two, when we get on the spot and take another look at this. This is a very unique situation -- perhaps the first of its type in anyplace in the world -- in this area, anyway.

LEHRER: Is it the kind of thing, Mr. McPherson, that, based on say the 1984 incident, that some kind of precaution could be taken, or is this just rolling the dice of living over in that particular area?

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, we don't know of any other place, as I was suggesting, in the world where this has occurred. One of the reasons we want to get our technicians there to find out exactly what did happen is so that we can -- we can take what precautions might be. If we find, for example, that this may be something that will occur in other lakes in the region, then certainly the people in the region will want to know that.

LEHRER: But there's no information that would suggest that as of now.

Mr. McPHERSON: No. I mean, there's no definitive information. What we need to od is we need to, as I say, one, find out what the gas was, two, get a look at the lake itself and the environment and see if we can find out whether there was an earthquake, whether there was a volcano.I would think we should be able to make some determinations on that.

LEHRER: The -- you say -- you mentioned cyanide. The other experts have said carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide or hydrogen sulfide. Are those other three consistent with instant death, as cyanide is?

Mr. McPHERSON: I think the cyanide is instant, and I think that the others -- carbon dioxide, for example -- I think would take longer.

LEHRER: Yeah. Is there any word on whether that gas --

Mr. McPHERSON: It's a suffocating thing, carbon dioxide.

LEHRER: Sure. Is there any word on whether that gas is still spewing from that lake? Is it stopped?

Mr. McPHERSON: We don't -- we don't believe that the gas continues to spew up. But that -- that information isn't complete. One of the problems that we have here, of course, is this lake is a fairly remote area. There have been people going in there with helicopters, people who will be -- our team will be using gas masks to be certain that they're safe. But the information isn't full.

LEHRER: Do you have any information on the area itself? Where did these -- who were these 1,200 people?

Mr. McPHERSON: They were people that lived right there.

LEHRER: Right on the bank of the lake?

Mr. McPHERSON: Or very nearby. This occurred late of night -- the information we have. And there are now someplace between 1,200 and 1,500 people who have died, a couple hundred people who are being cared for.

LEHRER: Are they -- do these people live in small villages or in, at least what we would call, small towns or cities, or do you know?

Mr. McPHERSON: My understanding is it's a small town, rural sort of environment.

LEHRER: Now, you have already described the teams that the United States are sending there. It's volcanic experts, pathologists, and who else?

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, and people -- the people who are experts in ocean water, to determine what kind of chemical reaction might have occurred. There are really basically two teams. One, the pathologists, who are strictly looking at the medical side of things -- doing the autopsies, making recommendations as to how those still alive can be treated. The other team, team two, is a team that's looking at it in terms of the natural aspects of it -- the volcano, the water, etc.

LEHRER: Finally, you also announced today that the United States had authorized the U.S. ambassador in Cmeroon to take $25,000 and give it to the -- that doesn't sound like an awful lot of money. What is that designed to do?

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, we're waiting for the government there of Cameroon to ask us whatever help they need. Twenty-five thousand dollars may buy things like some gas masks to go in the area, maybe some medical help for the people. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they want more help. But typically what we do in a disaster is to provide the ambassador a blanket authority for $25,000 and then respond as --

LEHRER: And that's done without any request or anything from the government. You just do that.

Mr. McPHERSON: We just do that, and the ambassador's got the authority to spend the money on the spot. It's an expeditious way to handling it.

LEHRER: And if Cameroon needs anything more from the United States, you'll wait --

Mr. McPHERSON: It asked for these two teams, and we're working with them. We're prepared to respond to these people as much as we can.

LEHRER: Finally -- I said finally. I've got one final question. Is this the kind of thing, based on what you know now, and I realize it's limited, that we -- that is the kind of thing we will eventually get an answer, you think, this time -- a definitive answer as to what happened?

Mr. McPHERSON: Perhaps not definitive, but I think a decent chance that we'll get some kind of answer. Is it --

LEHRER: Quickly?

Mr. McPHERSON: Well, probably a few weeks. The scientific community is quite interested, because it appears to be a fairly unique natural phenomenon.

LEHRER: I see. Mr. McPherson, thank you very much. Report on Chernobyl

HUNTER-GAULT: It's been four months since the Soviet Union's Chernobyl nuclear reactor exploded in the worst atomic power disaster in history. The death toll now stands at 31, with 203 people still suffering from radiation sickness. Another 135,000 people were evacuated and face increased risk of developing cancer in years to come. Today for the first time, Soviet officials came face to face with Western scientists in Vienna to explain the errors that led to the disaster. In a 382 page report, the Soviets cited human error as the primary cause of the accident. Basically, this is what they revealed about how it went.

At 1:00 a.m. on April 25, operators of Chernobyl's number four reactor began an experiment to test energy output in the event of a plant shutdown. Over the next 24 hours, they committed six critical errors, overriding automatic safety systems. The worst violation occurred at 2:00 p.m., when workers deliberately turned off the reactor's emergency cooling system. Almost 12 hours later, at 1:22 a.m. on April 26, workers noticed a dangerous increase in power output, but failed to shut down the plant as required.Workers next tried to insert control rods to stop the chain reaction from racing out of control. Twenty seconds later, there was a loud bang, two explosions, and a fireball that blew off the top of the reactor building.

At that point, radiation and hot gases spewed more than 3,000 feet into the air, where the wind dispersed the toxic cloud for hundreds of miles into Northern and Eastern Europe. Today Soviet officials answered questions from members of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Earlier today, I spoke with two participants in the meeting. The director general of that agency is Hans Blix, and one of the 500 scientists attending the Vienna meeting is Richard Wilson, a physicist who in 1983 headed a government study of the possible impact of a nuclear accident in the United States.

Dr. Wilson, from what you've read and heard now in your stay at Vienna, what is the most surprising or the most revealing thing that the Soviet report has turned out?

RICHARD WILSON, Harvard University: I don't think there were any major surprises we've had, because we've had a lot of little trickles in the last three months. But the most important thing that has been omitted from what we've heard is the details of the radiation whhich were in the areas around Chernobyl and Kiev.

HUNTER-GAULT: And why is that important?

Mr. WILSON: Well, we had a suspicion they were quite large, because otherwise how could you have large radiations in Sweden and not get an even larger in Kiev? And we now know they were very large -- large enough, certainly, to justify evacuation. And perhaps the evacuation should have been a little earlier.

HUNTER-GAULT: And what about the causes that they have laid out -- human error principally.

Mr. WILSON: Well, the human error is certainly a major cause. And there were six items of human error which they mentioned, any one of which, if that had not occurred, would have reduced the accident. And five of them would have stopped it, and the other would have reduced the consequences.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, why -- was there any clear explanation of why the workers and technicians ignored those safety procedures?

Mr. WILSON: Well, the suggestion made was that they were -- wanted to get that experiment done, and they had to do it when the reactor was shutting down, which doesn't happen very often. So that if they didn't get the experiment finished this day, then they would have to wait a year to do the experiment.

HUNTER-GAULT: And how important -- how important was the experiment?

Mr. WILSON: Well, everyone's impatient to get his experiment finished. The experiment probably wasn't that important. That was the unfortunate detail.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, the Soviets said in their news conference that the plans for testing the generator were not prepared in a proper way and that the quality of the program was low.

Mr. WILSON: Well, that's certainly true. They had violated several of their own safety rules. They didn't go to the safety committee in preparing -- in planning the program. So the program wasn't a good program to start with. And they didn't even follow that program, because they ran into certain problems and then created themselves their difficulties by trying to persist to do the experiment, in spite of the fact that it was not possible to continue with the original program.

HUNTER-GAULT: In other words, it was -- are you saying that there was no awareness on their part that if they ignored these safety regulations there would be the kind of disaster that eventually happened?

Mr. WILSON: Yeah, that seems to be so. But of course, you can't tell in detail. There was one very chilling moment during the meeting this afternoon when there was this detail being told of what this chart means and what happened at 1:23 and 20 seconds, and about five minutes later he told what happened at 1:23 and 30 seconds. And then the chilling moment came, and the operators told us, "Just before they died, this is what they thought." And of course, we can't go back and ask them.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Now, we talked about six mistakes that if they had -- that had been committed. If any one of those six mistakes had not been committed, could the disaster have been averted?

Mr. WILSON: That's correct. That was the -- each one of those six, by itself, would have averted the disaster. One of them would not have stopped an accident, but would have stopped the consequences. The emergency core cooling was switched off. And that would not have stopped an accident, but it would have made the consequences very much less.

HUNTER-GAULT: Are you satisfied that the Soviets have told the whole story now?

Mr. WILSON: Oh, I think they've been extremely open. I think it's tremendously impressive how open they've been. The report they've given is good.I mean, it's got some errors in it. There are some inconsistencies which we're going to try and understand with them.

HUNTER-GAULT: Like give me an example.

Mr. WILSON: Oh, they give the amount of -- you try and calculate from one of their tables the amount of radioactive cesium in the core at the time, and you get slightly different numbers from different tables and different pages of the document, which were written by different people, obviously. And so, you know, you have the slight problems that come when you write a report in a hurry. But I would have been proud to have been one of the writers of that report. It's a good document.

HUNTER-GAULT: Dr. Blix, let me just bring you in on this. Are you as confident as Dr. Wilson that the Soviets have told the whole story here?

HANS BLIX, International Atomic Energy Agency: Well, I'm not a technical man, so I can not check the discrepancies which Dr. Wilson has discovered. But my impression is that the Russians have tried to be very open from the outset. When we were in Moscow in May, we had the impression that they told us at the time what they knew. And the documents they have presented now are, indeed, very impressive. Of course, they have for a long time cooperated very well in the International Atomic Energy Agency, and they are enthusiastic supporters about the practice we have of governments and operators learning from each other, including the errors and the incidents that they have.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well now, your country, you being from Sweden, was one of the ones most affected by the fallout. How much of the concern does there continue to be about human health consequences and so on in all of the nations over which there was this cloud -- the fallout cloud.

Mr. BLIX: It's rather heterogeneous, you know. In Europe, in a country like mine -- Sweden -- there is a good deal of concern. In the Federal Republic of Germany, the same is true. In Switzerland as well. But if you go to the French speaking countries -- to France and to Belgium -- there is relatively little concern. Now, much of this is due to what kind of effect did the fallout have. And in my country they were worried about the agriculture in June. Right now they are worried about their reindeer, which have been grazing over large areas. I think people have come to the conclusion that, for the health of people, there is very little to be worried about. But, of course, the economic consequences of the inability to make use of the reindeers during one season or part of the reindeers, this will give a lot of publicity and will worry people.

HUNTER-GAULT: How about the confidence in nuclear power generally? Does the accident and then this report have any impact on that?

Mr. BLIX: There have been a number of polls undertaken. And, from those that I have seen, the accident has negatively affected public confidence in nuclear power generally. In my own country, Sweden, I saw, however, that in an area of nuclear power stations, the confidence in that particular station's ability to handle itself increased. But all over, it's clear that the accident has had a negative effect on public confidence. The reports which the Russians are submitting here and the discussions and the openness, I think, on the other hand, will probably help to improve confidence. And in particular, all the measures that are taken now to improve safety or to have a positive effect.

HUNTER-GAULT: So Dr. Wilson, let me just go back to you.In terms of the future, I heard you saying just before we were able to establish communications here that you hoped that this meeting would not be the end of that. Is that because you feel that there are some lessons here that this report can help with in the future?

Mr. WILSON: Oh, yes. I think the important thing about safety is you must be open about things. One thing is clear -- that the people who were operating and doing this experiment in the Ukraine did not understand the philosophy and the reasons for the safety rules which had been established. And that's because there is much too little discussion about safety in the Soviet Union.It's a very compartmentalized society. They don't discuss any of their safety procedures. They don't give automobile accident statistics in the newspapers. So if one's more open about safety, people will find out what other people are thinking, and you then start getting one to one exchanges, rather than only going through the official channels. I think it's very important we get one to one exchanges, and not just these official meetings.

HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. Blix, what's your sense of that? Is there likelihood that that is going to happen?

Mr. BLIX: Yes. I think the Russians have become increasingly open vis-a-vis the agency in their nuclear affairs. This is certainly the greatest accident that has been reported, but they have reported earlier incidents too in a system which we have set up and under which governments exchange experience to learn.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, how hopeful are you in that this report particularly can be useful to your agency in preventing a similar accident of this kind in the future?

Mr. BLIX: Well, there are such problems as the interface between man and machine, which is a generalized one. There are also the questions of emergency, preparedness, evacuation, decontamination, which are items of interest to the rest of the world. There are, of course, a lot of lessons which are very specific for this particular type of reactor, which only exists in the Soviet Union. And those lessons will not be of any direct interest to the rest of the world.

HUNTER-GAULT: Dr. Wilson, do you see any lessons for the United States and its nuclear power industry in any of this?

Mr. WILSON: Oh, I think that we have to look at again, as we have already looked, in the question of human error. And, as Dr. Blix pointed out, the human errors will be different in the United States, because the reactors are different. If, for example, it's one thing to take the hands off the handlebars on a -- when you're riding a bicycle -- if you're careful, you don't crash -- but if you take your hands off your handlebars when you're in a hang glider, you're in real problems.

HUNTER-GAULT: Do you -- you said that the United States is different, but do you think that this -- how they have laid out this, the openness with which they've spelled out the human error -- will that in any way help in this country?

Mr. WILSON: Oh, I think it can -- it just emphasizes things we were already trying to do.

HUNTER-GAULT: Things that are already in -- things that are already in place here?

Mr. WILSON: Well, they're partially in place. And I think to a very large extent it just emphasizes that's the vogue we've got to continue to do.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Well, Dr. Wilson and Mr. Blix, thank you very much for being with us from Vienna.

Mr. BLIX: Thank you very much.

Mr. WILSON: It's been a pleasure being here.

LEHRER: That interview was recorded earlier this evening. We go now to a look at the medical implications of the Soviet report and to an analysis of them by Dr. Jacob Fabrikant. He is a professor of radiology at the University of California at Berkeley, and he helped investigate the Three Mile Island nuclear accident. He joins us tonight from public station KQED, San Francisco.

Doctor, you've read the report. What do the long term health effects add up to for this disaster?

Dr. JACOB FABRIKANT, radiation scientist: Well, there are going to be a sizable number of delayed health effects. We categorize those into cancers and genetic consequences or genetically related ill health. The numbers that come out in this report are not astonishing. What we did not know was the exact dosimetry -- where the radiation was precisely and how it affected the population in the Soviet Union. The estimate to the largest number of the population of where the radioactivity and the radiation impacted was about 75 million people. And so in 75 million people, with the doses that could be determined, it becomes painfully evident that the numbers of excess cancers and potential genetically related ill health will be increased. But if one works with these numbers and works with the hypotheses and the models that the Soviet scientists have used, then it appears that they're using the exact same models that we use -- primarily from the International Commission in Radiological Protection and their own protection boards and their own models and scientific work. And so the numbers are not extremely large when one considers the size of the population and the amount of radiation that has been released.

LEHRER: What, in fact, are those numbers?

Dr. FABRIKANT: Well, they segmented the areas up according to population distribution, where they removed people, where they evacuated them out, and where the plume and the radiation had distributed itself over a number of days and weeks. And then estimate that over years out to 50 years or 70 years, depending upon what type of mathematical formulae they wish to use. Within the Chernobyl principal area, they had evacuated 114,000 people. Given the amount of radiation, which they had measured quite precisely right in the middle of the city -- they could do it street by street, as a matter of fact -- it turns out that they would estimate, based on certain models -- so-called linear hypothesis -- approximately 280 excess cancers among that population. But you should understand what that means. Normally in that population, according to the Soviet statistics, there would be 14,000 -- 14,000 cancers that would occur spontaneously in the absence of radiation. And so with an increased incidence of less than 2%, they would get an increase of about 280, or roughly 160 to 280. Let me give you the number that comes from.We estimate that there will be one excess cancer if we use a particular number of the dose. We call that a collective dose. We multiply the number of people in the population by the amount of radiation, and we call that the population dose or the collective dose. If we use 10,000 person rem, that will give one excess cancer. So now you can see how these numbers are put together.

LEHRER: And you buy that, right? You buy that formula?

Dr. FABRIKANT: Oh, yes. These come out of our own National Academy of Sciences reports. It's exactly what we did, in fact, at Three Mile Island when we estimated the doses and when we estimated the potential health effects.

LEHRER: But in other areas, are they anticipating long term effects as well?

Dr. FABRIKANT: Oh, yes. They have now measured out to some -- at least 1,000 kilometers, and possibly more. What they were interested in was the population distribution, or the demography.

LEHRER: But what was the end result of that? I mean, are they talking in terms of thousands of people who will eventually be impacted on the long run by what happened at Chernobyl?

Dr. FABRIKANT: Out of 75 million people that have been exposed, they estimate about 4,750 excess cancers, which represents only about 0.05% increase or excess. And now you --

LEHRER: Is that --

Dr. FABRIKANT: Go ahead.

LEHRER: No, no. I was just going to say, based on what information was known before the Chernobyl accident, does that figure and the way the Russians figured it out, based on all that you know now, having read the report, does that add up to what you thought would have been the effect?

Dr. FABRIKANT: Yes. Very close. Very, very close to it. The number, in fact, is only a small increase in percentage over the nine and a half million cancers that would be expected in 75 million people over their lifetime.

LEHRER: That brings in --

Dr. FABRIKANT: That comes out to be 4,750 right on.

LEHRER: Generally speaking, then, what do you have -- nothing new has been learned that that is startling from a health standpoint as a result of Chernobyl? It's merely a confirmation of what you all already expected based on --

Dr. FABRIKANT: I would answer in two regards. One is, something new has come about with regard to the acute injuries that occurred. With regard to prediction into the future of the Soviet scientists, the mathematicians use the exact same methods that we do, so there is, in fact, nothing new.

LEHRER: Okay. In the acute thing, it was worse or not as bad as you expected?

Dr. FABRIKANT: It's exactly what we did expect from the information that we did have available. Particularly, Dr. Robert Gale had information available.Some of the Soviet scientists had already indicated what the circumstances were. And the Soviets were quite open in the number of people who had been injured. We had anticipated that there would be roughly 200 people with the acute radiation syndrome. Almost all of those, if not all of them, were workers, including the firemen. So these numbers come right on. There's just no difficulty working with those numbers.

LEHRER: All right. Doctor, thank you very much for being with us tonight.

Dr. FABRIKANT: Thank you.

HUNTER-GAULT: Still ahead on the News Hour, hard times for Frontier Airlines, trade war between the U.S. and its neighbor to the north, and some hometown thoughts about the nation's capital. Closed Frontier

LEHRER: The Frontier Airlines story is next. Today the Denver-based airline neared bankruptcy. It did so because its owners, People Express, said it could no longer pick up Frontier's losses. The action was triggered specifically by the failure to reach a key agreement on the sale of Frontier to United Airlines. That unmade agreement was with the United pilots union on a way to absorb the Frontier pilots into the operation. We have a report from correspondent Tom Bearden.

TOM BEARDEN [voice-over]: The once crowded ticket counters are deserted.Empty aircraft parked at empty gates. The once proud and profitable Denver-based airline is shut down, leaving nearly 5,000 employees wondering where their next paycheck will come from.

LORRAINE LOFLIN, Flight Attendants Union: We're hanging in there, and we're optomistic.

BEARDEN [voice-over]: There is a lot of activity at the tiny Flight Attendants Union office. They've maintained a vigil here since the airline ceased operations on Sunday morning, hoping Frontier wouldn't file for bankruptcy. Worried union members, confused by conflicting media reports, call seeking information. There isn't much the leadership can tell them. Molly Jurinsky and her two year old daughter Danielle are among the thousands of people in limbo. They've been expecting this for months. They've seen the results of the airline industry shakeout before. Their neighbors once worked for Continental Airlines. That airline went bankrupt two years ago.

MOLLY JURINSKY, flight attendant: It's a very helpless feeling. Your mind is going 5,000 miles an hour. A lot of us are not sleeping at night right now, because you are trying to think of, "Okay, what if I have to do this?" and "Okay, my finances are this right now, and I've got this in savings, and --" well, it's -- you're just -- you're going around in a whir right now.

BEARDEN [voice-over]: Jurinsky says it's tougher for flight attendants now, because they aren't all single anymore.

Ms. JURINSKY: We have children now. We get married. We settle down. We have roots. And it's not like it used to be when we used to have to quit at a certain age.

BEARDEN [voice-over]: She says there are a lot of families where both wage earners work for Frontier.

Ms. JURINSKY: It seems like I have a lot of friends that have two paychecks. You know, you sit there, and it will be like flight attendants married to ramp agents or pilots and flight attendants married and people in management married to -- it's -- we're really kind of a big family. It's been very nice over the years. And we're trying to stick together right now -- give each other support.

BEARDEN [voice-over]: Flight attendants are still hoping the proposed purchase of Frontier by United Airlines can be completed. But that deal was contingent on United reaching agreement with all of Frontier's unions. Those talks broke down when the Airline Pilots Association balked at United's time frame for bringing Frontier pilots up to wage parity with their pilots. Lorraine Loflin is the spokesman for the local union. She says the flight attendants aren't blaming the pilots for not giving in.

Ms. LOFLIN: This is a labor issue, and they understand the negotiations that have to take place. They understand the labor issues. We've made the issues clear from the beginning. The duel pay issue was something that we fought in 1984. We are optimistic that those issues will be resolved.

HUNTER-GAULT: Frontier's troubles are being closely followed by airline industry watchers.One of the leading watchers is Robert Joedicke, a senior vice president with Shearson-Lehman Brothers, a major Wall Street investment firm.

Mr. Joedicke, first, is there any chance that Frontier can escape bankruptcy at this point?

ROBERT JOEDICKE, airline industry analyst: Well, there's always a chance, but the longer the airline stays down on the ground, the harder it is to get it back again.

HUNTER-GAULT: What's your sense of how long it might stay down?

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, if there's a filing of bankruptcy, it depends whether the owner, People Express, files Chapter 11, which asks for protection of the courts to continue to operate, or Chapter 7, which is a filing for liquidation. But in view of the losses that have been draining the working capital of People Express, it would be kind of hard to carry it on for too long a time.

HUNTER-GAULT: What -- why have there been such losses? What is it, about $10 million a month or something like that?

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, the operating loss in the second quarter was about 10 million a month. But you have to appreciate that we're in deregulation, which, in essence, is free competition. And of all of the areas, Denver has probably been the most competitive. And you have three major operators in that area: United, Continental and Frontier. Really, the market is probably not strong enough to support three of that size, so you get into fare wars, and the question is, who has enough cash resources to withstand over time the draining that you're getting. And obviously Frontier, as the smallest, is the one that's been hurt particularly.

HUNTER-GAULT: Donald Burr, who's the head of People, said he may have made a mistake when he tried to make Frontier into a low budget carrier -- that a lot of those businessmen whom they were trying to attract didn't appreciate having to pay for their drinks and their snacks. How much do you think there is to that -- that there was just a rebellion.

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, I think that certainly characterized it. Under deregulation and free competition, it's marketing that's the key. And if you have a fuzzy marketing image in the sense that you were a full service airline then became one that was a specialized type of carrier charging for checking the baggage and everything else and then switch back again, the travelling public gets a little bit confused as to what you're actually providing in the way of service.

HUNTER-GAULT: You know, Continental, as I understand it, went bankrupt and continued to fly. Could Frontier continue to fly if they went into bankruptcy?

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, as you may remember, Continental, when they filed for bankruptcy, they had 55 million in cash, which was sufficient funds to start the airline up a couple of days later and keep it running. So you have to have the working assets to return to service.

HUNTER-GAULT: And Frontier just doesn't have it. What does all this mean for People Express?

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, obviously it's one of the subsidiaries of People Express. They have two other subsidiaries beside their parent company, People Express -- namely, Provincetown Boston Airways, which was bankrupt when they took them over earlier this year, and Brit Airways, which is a regional in the Chicago area. So that it's the individual pieces now. Obviously, Frontier's been a very heavy drain. But nevertheless, Frontier aside, People Express itself is having problems in the sense of growth factor and making an operating profit for that division, in addition to the losses in Frontier.

HUNTER-GAULT: Do -- isn't it -- I saw some news reports or heard about some news reports that they were having to scale back some of their areas that they fly to.

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, it's sort of mixed signals.They have stated they are going to become a full service airline and provide first class and actually probably two types of coach -- premium coach and regular coach -- and provide all the amenities, such as check baggage, advance seat selection and food service.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, that's interesting, because, I mean, a lot of newspaper reports are talking about the possibility of People going bankrupt.

Mr. JOEDICKE: Well, that's true, but you have to at least decide what your thrust is going to be. But at the same time, they're paring down service to selected cities that have not been profitable. The middle of September, they will shut down service to five cities, and three more that they have been serving will be substituted with service by Provincetown Boston Airways. So they're cutting back on the areas they serve, but hopefully increasing the level of service where they remain.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Well, I guess we'll just have to watch that one as it develops. Thank you very much, Mr. Joedicke, for being with us.

Mr. JOEDICKE: Thank you. Splintered Relations

LEHRER: The nations of Canada and the United States are neighbors, and they are friends, but that does not mean war is impossible -- trade war, at least. One rages now over Canadian sheer stakes and shingles used for the roofing and siding in 10% of U.S. homes. Two months ago, President Reagan put a 35% duty on those stakes and shingles. Canada fired back with duties on several U.S. products. And the hope for a new free trade agreement between the two friends and neighbors went by the boards for now. Our report from the trade war front is by Victoria Fung of public station KCTS, Seattle.

VICTORIA FUNG [voice-over]: At American mills throughout the Pacific Northwest, the 35% tariff on Canadian shakes and shingles has triggered a boom. Business is suddenly so good that many U.S. mills are hiring more workers and looking forward to their first profit in years. Miller Shingle is one of more than 240 Northwest shake and shingle mills that pushed hard for the tariff. Owner Bruce Miller, Jr., says the move was a last ditch effort. It was that or lose out to the flood of Canadian imports.

BRUCE MILLER, Jr., mill owner: We were -- had our backs to the wall. There was really not much way for us to compete if something wasn't done. We have cut where we could cut in wages and benefits. We've increased sales efforts, done everything we could, including manufacturing efficiencies also, and there just wasn't any room left for us.

FUNG [voice-over]: Eighty percent of the cedar shakes and shingles used in the U.S. comes across the border from Canada. Canadian imports have doubled in the past decade, putting a squeeze on American producers. They say more than 2,000 U.S. jobs have been lost, and 40% of the Northwest's shake and shingle mills have been forced out of business.

[on camera] American companies blame much of their hard luck on what they say is an unfair Canadian advantage. Canadian mills buy timber on public lands from the government at a fraction of the market value. U.S. lumber companies say that amounts to a government subsidy they can't compete with.

Mr. MILLER: The trucks roll down the freeway from Canada right on by the mill, and we don't get phone calls. Because no matter what price level we're at, they can undercut it.

FUNG [voice-over]: American producers say the tariff makes the industry more competitive. But that's not how the Canadians see it. The shake and shingle tariff caught Canada by surprise. The first response was a heated protest at the border between Washington State and British Columbia.Canadian wood workers say they plan to pressure their government to save their industry.

Protester: We are not interested in unemployment insurance. We're not interested in welfare. We're interested in this industry, and we're interested in jobs. And that has to be our message to all levels of government.

FUNG [voice-over]: Many Canadian mills, including the major ones, have shut down indefinitely.That's been devastating to small mill towns like Mission here in Southwest British Columbia. It's home base for Green River, a company which laid off 600 workers when the U.S. tariff was announced. Green River is one of the biggest shake and shingle producers in Canada. Today the mill is silent and empty. Operations came to a grinding halt as soon as the U.S. tariff took effect in early June.

SCOTT CLARKE, mill owner: We certainly didn't expect it, let alone a 35% tariff. I mean, that's one of the largest tariff's ever put on a product in the Canada and United States history. I mean --

FUNG [voice-over]: Mill owner Scott Clarke says the tariff puts his company's survival on the line.

Mr. CLARKE: The big concern that I have is the long term future of the industry. We've raised product prices.As a result, we've seen more jobs go to alternative roofing products. And eventually that's going to take its toll.

FUNG [voice-over]: In recent years, housing contractors have been turning to less expensive roofing materials, such as asphalt and composites. The tariff is likely to speed up that trend by driving up shake and shingle prices. And that could eventually cost jobs in a declining industry.

Mr. CLARKE: We've lost over 3,000 jobs up here in the shake and shingle industry. We've been hard hit up here. I mean, our industry's basically been in the worst recession in its history for the last five years. It's tough. Really tough.

FUNG [voice-over]: Canadian business leaders say their puzzled by President Reagan's decision to single out a relatively small industry that last year did a mere $182 million worth of business with the U.S.

MIKE APSEY, Forest Industries Council: It is a small amount of trade in relationship to the $120 billion of two way trade between the two countries. But it's very difficult to tell that to a group of 4,000 employees in this province. To them, it's their whole livelihood. But because of the protectionist atmosphere in Washington, that decision contrary to the rest of the case was made. And now we have an industry in this country suffering badly because of that.

FUNG [voice-over]: Industry representatives in America deny that politics or protectionism played a roll in Mr. Reagan's decision. Gus Kuehne was a prime mover behind the tariff. Kuehne is executive director of the Northwest Independent Forest Manufacturers.

GUS KUEHNE, Forest Industries Association: It isn't a protectionist measure if, in fact, it's addressed at an unfair practice. The protectionism is in Canada today. Canada protects its industry by, in fact, giving their timber away at far, far below what the timber's really worth. And that's the unfair trade practice, and that's where the protectionism is.

Mr. APSEY: That's not so. That's clearly not so.

FUNG [voice-over]: Mike Apsey points out that the U.S. International Trade Commission has ruled that Canadian lumber exports do not violate fair trade agreements.

Mr. APSEY: We've been through a number of U.S. tribunals since the early 1980s, and each and every one has found us to be fair traders. The protectionists' thought process in Washington is very, very strong. And so when we see this kind of a move made for political rea sons, it makes us very nervous about the -- what might happen in soft wood lumber.

FUNG [voice-over]: Canadians worry that the shake and shingle trade dispute could spread to soft wood lumber. Soft wood is the term for most wood used in housing construction. It's a major Canadian export, totalling $3.4 billion worth to the U.S. last year. The Reagan administration is investigating claims that Canada is also unfairly subsidizing its soft wood lumber industry. If those claims are substantiated, soft wood imports would be subject to countervailing duties of up to 27%, and Canada is expected to retaliate.

Mr. APSEY: If Canada or the United States are going to be throwing tariffs back and forth, really that's absolutely the wrong thing to do. We've got to get to that table, put everything on that table, and come out with a trade agreement as soon as possible.

FUNG [voice-over]: Whatever happens, government officials on both sides say the lumber dispute must be resolved, or there will be no free trade agreement. Invented City?

HUNTER-GAULT: Finally tonight, an essay about Washington D.C. -- not the one we normally talk about on this and other news programs, but the very personal Washington of someone who sees the place mostly as just her hometown. That someone is novelist Susan Shreve.

SUSAN SHREVE [voice-over]: In summer, the heat rolls into Washington and hangs heavy just above the trees. On these thick, airless days, tourists on holiday arrive full force, line up at the Washington Monument, around the White House, for tour buses between the capital and the Arlington Cemetery, the Vietnam Memorial and the Air and Space Museum. The federal city carved out of Maryland and Virginia by the fathers of the Constitution as a center for government belongs to the visitors. Along Constitution and Independence Avenues -- wide, tree-lined streets with imposing buildings -- there is no hint that an ordinary life exists here where people go to supermarkets and mow their front lawns and barbecue on the weekend. It must seem to a casual observer to be a city invented according the Preamble -- by and for the American people.

[on camera] When I was growing up here, Washington was a small, sleepy, southern town in the summer -- very sleepy in the days before air conditioning. When Congress recessed, people returned to Wisconsin and Minnesota and Vermont. Very few considered Washington home. In the last 30 years, however, people have sunk roots in this swamp city, and there is now a large population which calls Washington their hometown.

[voice-over] My parents moved to Cleveland Park because it looked like Urbana, Ohio, where they had grown up. There are large frame and stucco houses too close together, a sense of a village where people know each other's children. Half of the families on the block where I lived still remain -- a rare occurrence in this transient town.There is a town center with shops which have passed down from father to son, like the University Pastry Shop with the best ice cream around and the Modern Shoe Shop now owned in trust by 13 year old Dino Mancurry, since his father Tony, with whom I grew up, died. Most of us shop at the Giant, where Teddy Mondale, the Vice President's son, used to bag groceries. My friend and I used to get lollipops from G. C. Murphy's and plant them in the crawl space beneath the house where Senator Songus of Massachusetts later lived when he was in Congress. We told the children in the neighborhood that we had grown the lollipops from seeds, and they believed us and thought we were magic.

Our children go to the Mall in the evenings, sit by the reflecting pool with their picnics from the salad bar at Giant Food. They do their term papers at the Library of Congress. The Cathedral of St. Peter and St. Paul was built -- is still in the process of being built -- at the highest point of Washington. It is the national cathedral, ecumenical in spirit, where occasions of state are celebrated.

The cathedral was my theatre when I was a child. I went to every performance with my friend Tommy, who was daring and knew the secret places to hide for the best view of whatever was going on.

[voice-over] When the Queen of England came to Washington, he said we'd have to dress up for the occasion. "We're related," he said. Tommy was related to every important figure in the world. We hid behind a pillar at the exit by the Bethlehem Chapel, and when she walked down the corridor, Tommy jumped out, gave a deep bow, and said with great assurance, "Your Highness, I'm very glad to meet you, because you may not know it, but we're related." I was sorry to still be hiding behind the pillar without the courage to claim my kinship to the queen. "Of course," she said with great kindness. "We are all related in America."

And so we are. Up the hill from the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue, leading, like everyone else, our ordinary lives.

LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Monday. At least 1,200 people have died in an unusual natural disasster in the Western African nation of Cameroon. A poisonous gas exploded up from the bottom of a volcanic lake. And the Frontier Airlines neared bankruptcy tonight. Good night, Charlayne.

HUNTER-GAULT: Good night, Jim. That's our News Hour for tonight. We'll be back tomorrow. I'm Charlayne Hunter-Gault. Good night.