Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hou2g.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!hou2g!devils1
From: devils1@hou2g.UUCP (D.DARBY)
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: Re: Deadly green canister?
Message-ID: <795@hou2g.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 1-Feb-86 17:36:22 EST
Article-I.D.: hou2g.795
Posted: Sat Feb  1 17:36:22 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Feb-86 01:23:25 EST
References: <8632@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 32

>
>Recent news reports about the search for debris from the Challenger
>tragedy have included warnings from NASA that private beachcombers
>should not handle material from the shuttle because it might contain
>toxic materials.  To quote a portion of an article in the January 30
>Los Angeles Times (p. 10, col. 3):
>
	>"There were several things aboard the Challenger that
	>potentially could be deadly," one member of the search
	>team said.  "We're especially concerned about a small
	>green canister," a Coast Guard chief petty officer
	>added.  "You'd be dead in two seconds if you touched it."
>
>What kinds of toxic substances are involved here?  Specifically, what's
>in the aforementioned green canister, and why was it on the shuttle?
>-- 
>Rich Wales // UCLA Computer Science Department // +1 213-825-5683
	>3531 Boelter Hall // Los Angeles, California 90024 // USA
	>ARPA:   wales@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU  -or-  wales@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA
	>UUCP:   ...!(ucbvax,ihnp4)!ucla-cs!wales

A few thoughts have been bugging me ever since I first heard of this
"small green canister": 1) the obvious, why is it so deadly, and 2)
if so deadly, then isn't it also safe to assume that it would be
contaminating a very large part of the ocean?

(My disclaimer has been claimed by my compay)

				      Dave Darby
				      AT&T Bell Labs
				      Holmdel, NJ