Editing Area 51 (section)

==Legal status==
===U.S. government's positions on Area 51===
[[File:Usaf on area51.png|right|thumb|upright|A 1998 letter from the USAF replying to a query about Area 51]]
[[File:CIA BYE2369-67 page17.gif|right|thumb|upright|CIA document from 1967 referring to Area 51]]
The United States government has provided minimal information regarding Area 51. The area surrounding the lake is permanently off-limits to both civilian and normal military air traffic. Security clearances are checked regularly; cameras and weaponry are not allowed.<ref name="lacitis20100327">{{cite web |last=Lacitis |first=Erik |url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011461015_area51vets28m.html |title=Area 51 vets break silence: Sorry, but no space aliens or UFOs |publisher=Seattle Times Newspaper |date=27 March 2010 |access-date=10 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120620003544/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011461015_area51vets28m.html |archive-date=20 June 2012 |url-status=live}}</ref> Even military pilots training in the [[Nevada Test and Training Range|NAFR]] risk disciplinary action if they stray into the exclusionary "box" surrounding Groom's airspace.<ref name="lacitis20100327"/> Surveillance is supplemented using buried motion sensors.<ref name="poulsen">{{cite web |author=Kevin Poulsen |author-link=Kevin Poulsen |date=25 May 2004 |title=Area 51 hackers dig up trouble |url=http://www.securityfocus.com/news/8768 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121130074024/http://www.securityfocus.com/news/8768 |archive-date=30 November 2012 |access-date=10 June 2013 |publisher=Securityfocus.com}}</ref> Area 51 is a common destination for [[Janet (airline)|Janet]], a small fleet of passenger aircraft operated on behalf of the Air Force to transport military personnel, primarily from [[Harry Reid International Airport]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.dreamlandresort.com/info/janet.html |title=Janet Airline / EG&G / JT3 |website=dreamlandresort.com |date=5 November 2020 |access-date=8 January 2021}}</ref>

The [[United States Geological Survey]] (USGS) topographic map for the area only shows the long-disused [[Groom Mine]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.topoquest.com/map.asp?lat=37.34583&lon=-115.76583&datum=nad27&u=4&layer=DRG25&size=l |title=Groom Mine, NV – N37.34583° W115.76583° |publisher=Topoquest.com |access-date=10 June 2013}}</ref> but USGS aerial photographs of the site in 1959 and 1968 were publicly available.{{r|day20230123}} A civil aviation chart published by the [[Nevada Department of Transportation]] shows a large restricted area, defined as part of the Nellis restricted airspace.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nevadadot.com/uploadedFiles/NDOT/Traveler_Info/Maps/Nevada%20Aviaton%202013-2014%20Front.pdf |title=State of Nevada Aeronautical Chart 2013-2014 |access-date=11 June 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130425161328/http://www.nevadadot.com/uploadedFiles/NDOT/Traveler_Info/Maps/Nevada%20Aviaton%202013-2014%20Front.pdf |archive-date=25 April 2013}}</ref> The [[National Atlas]] shows the area as lying within the Nellis Air Force Base.<ref name="NationalAtlasFederalLands">{{cite web |url=http://www.nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/fedlands/NV.pdf |title=Map of Federal lands in Nevada |publisher=US Department of the Interior |access-date=10 June 2013 |author=nationalatlas.gov |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130910211437/http://nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/fedlands/NV.pdf |archive-date=10 September 2013}}</ref> There are higher resolution and newer images available from other satellite imagery providers, including Russian providers and the [[IKONOS]].<ref name="FASOverhead"/> These show the runway markings, base facilities, aircraft, and vehicles.<ref name="FASOverhead"/>

In 1998 USAF officially acknowledged the site's existence.<ref name="day20230123">{{Cite web |last=Day |first=Dwayne Allen |date=2023-01-23 |title=Not-so ancient astronauts and Area 51: the Skylab Incident |url=https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4518/1 |access-date=2023-01-24 |website=The Space Review}}</ref> On 25 June 2013, the CIA released an official history of the U-2 and OXCART projects which acknowledged that the U-2 was tested at Area 51, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request submitted in 2005 by Jeffrey T. Richelson of [[George Washington University]]'s [[National Security Archive]]. It contains numerous references to Area 51 and Groom Lake, along with a map of the area.<ref name="cia1992" /> Media reports stated that releasing the CIA history was the first governmental acknowledgement of Area 51's existence;<ref>{{Cite news |last=Gorman |first=Steve |date=August 16, 2013 |title=CIA acknowledges its mysterious Area 51 test site for first time |url=http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-area51-cia-idUSBRE97G01120130817 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307052859/http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-area51-cia-idUSBRE97G01120130817 |archive-date=March 7, 2016 |work=[[Reuters]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Koran |first=Laura |date=August 16, 2013 |title=Area 51 officially acknowledged, mapped in newly released documents |url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/15/us/area-51-documents/index.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130817025040/http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/15/us/area-51-documents/index.html |archive-date=17 August 2013 |access-date=17 August 2013 |work=CNN}}</ref><ref name="LeibyWaPo" /> rather, it was the first official acknowledgement of specific activity at the site.{{r|day20230123}}

===Environmental lawsuit===

In 1994, five unnamed civilian contractors and the widows of contractors Walter Kasza and Robert Frost sued the Air Force and the [[United States Environmental Protection Agency]]. They alleged that they had been present when large quantities of unknown chemicals had been burned in open pits and trenches at Groom. [[Rutgers University]] biochemists analyzed biopsies from the complainants and found high levels of [[Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins|dioxin]], [[dibenzofuran]], and [[trichloroethylene]] in their body fat. The complainants alleged that they had sustained skin, liver, and respiratory injuries due to their work at Groom and that this had contributed to the deaths of Frost and Kasza.

The suit sought compensation for the injuries, claiming that the Air Force had illegally handled toxic materials and that the EPA had failed in its duty to enforce the [[Resource Conservation and Recovery Act]] which governs the handling of dangerous materials. They also sought detailed information about the chemicals, hoping that this would facilitate the medical treatment of survivors.<ref name="Lawsuit" /> Congressman [[Lee Hamilton]], former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told ''[[60 Minutes]]'' reporter [[Lesley Stahl]], "The Air Force is classifying all information about Area 51 in order to protect themselves from a lawsuit."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ufomind.com/area51/articles/1996/60min_960317.html |title=60 Minutes Transcript an Area 51 |website=ufomind.com |date=17 March 1996 |access-date=31 December 2020}}</ref>
[[File:65 F.R. 52823 1995 Presidential Determination on Classified Information Concerning the Air Force's Operating Location Near Groom Lake, Nevada.png|thumb|The 1995 [[presidential determination]] by [[Bill Clinton]] preventing discovery from being able to continue in the lawsuit from former Area 51 employees.]]
The government invoked the [[state secrets privilege]] and petitioned U.S. District Judge Philip Pro to disallow disclosure of classified documents or examination of secret witnesses, claiming that it would threaten national security.<ref name="lvrj_jun2002">{{cite news |url=http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jun-04-Tue-2002/news/18894771.html |title=Federal judges to hear case involving Area 51 |first=Keith |last=Rogers |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100214093647/http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jun-04-Tue-2002/news/18894771.html |archive-date=14 February 2010 |newspaper=Las Vegas Review-Journal |date=4 June 2002 |access-date=10 June 2013}}</ref> Judge Pro rejected the government's argument. In response President [[Bill Clinton]] issued a [[presidential determination]] exempting what it called "the Air Force's operating location near Groom Lake, Nevada" from environmental disclosure laws.<ref>[https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1995-10-10/pdf/95-25244.pdf Presidential Determination No. 95–45], 60 F.R. 528823 (September 29, 1995). [https://web.archive.org/web/20200923110100/https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1995-10-10/pdf/95-25244.pdf Archived] from the original on September 23, 2020.</ref> Consequently, the judge dismissed the suit due to lack of evidence.

[[Jonathan Turley]], the attorney for the plaintiffs, appealed to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]] on the grounds that the government was abusing its power to classify material. Air Force Secretary [[Sheila Widnall|Sheila E. Widnall]] filed a brief which stated that disclosures of the materials present in the air and water near Groom "can reveal military operational capabilities or the nature and scope of classified operations." The Ninth Circuit rejected the appeal<ref>''[https://web.archive.org/web/20120314151234/http://archive.ca9.uscourts.gov/coa/newopinions.nsf/77F9FB6C3552927E88256D05007AE266/$file/0016378.pdf?openelement Kasza v. Browner]'', 133 F.3d 1159 (1998). Archived from the original on March 14, 2012.</ref> and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear it, putting an end to the complainants' case.<ref name="Lawsuit">{{cite web |date=16 November 1998 |title=High court won't review "state secrets" privilege in 'Area 51' case |url=https://www.rcfp.org/high-court-wont-review-state-secrets-privilege-area-51-case/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190718001455/https://www.rcfp.org/high-court-wont-review-state-secrets-privilege-area-51-case/ |archive-date=18 July 2019 |access-date=31 December 2020 |website=Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press}}</ref>

The President annually issues a determination continuing the Groom exception<ref>{{cite web |url=http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_cfr_3v1&docid=3CFRSep19 |title=2000 Presidential Determination |access-date=10 June 2010 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120604211107/http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_cfr_3v1&docid=3CFRSep19 |archive-date=4 June 2012 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020918-9.html |title=2002 Presidential Determination |publisher=Georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov |date=18 September 2002 |access-date=10 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110615103519/http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020918-9.html |archive-date=15 June 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030916-4.html |title=2003 Presidential Determination |publisher=Georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov |date=16 September 2003 |access-date=10 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100510015728/http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030916-4.html |archive-date=10 May 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref> which is the only formal recognition that the government has ever given that Groom Lake is more than simply another part of the Nellis complex. An unclassified memo on the safe handling of [[F-117 Nighthawk]] material was posted on an Air Force web site in 2005. This discussed the same materials for which the complainants had requested information, which the government had claimed was classified. The memo was removed shortly after journalists became aware of it.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/May-21-Sun-2006/news/7488359.html |url-status=dead |title=Warnings for emergency responders kept from Area 51 workers |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100214093550/http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/May-21-Sun-2006/news/7488359.html |archive-date=14 February 2010 |newspaper=Las Vegas Review-Journal |date=21 May 2006 |access-date=10 June 2013}}</ref>