Wikipedia - Benutzerbeiträge [de]

The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986

2019-02-08T04:48:26Z

Modulus12: Removed unnecessary references

[[File:Watts.png|thumb|right|250px|Product information insert for plastic plumbing fixture, which includes at bottom a Proposition 65 warning notice.]]
'''Proposition 65''' (formally titled '''The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986''') is a [[California]] law passed by direct voter initiative in 1986 by a 63%–37% vote. Its goals are to protect drinking water sources from toxic substances that may cause [[cancer]] and [[birth defect]]s and to reduce or eliminate exposures to those chemicals generally, for example in consumer products, by requiring warnings in advance of those exposures.

==Introduction==

Proposition 65 is administered by Cal/EPA's [[California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment]] (OEHHA).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html |title=California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment |publisher=Oehha.ca.gov |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> Proposition 65 regulates substances officially listed by California as having a 1 in 100,000 chance of causing cancer over a 70-year period or birth defects or other reproductive harm in two ways. The first statutory requirement of Proposition 65 prohibits businesses from knowingly discharging listed substances into drinking water sources, or onto land where the substances can pass into drinking water sources. The second prohibits businesses from knowingly exposing individuals to listed substances without providing a clear and reasonable warning.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/general-info/proposition-65-plain-language |title=Proposition 65 in Plain Language |date=February 1, 2013 |website=[[California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment]]}}</ref>

An official list of substances covered by Proposition 65 is maintained and made publicly available. Chemicals are added to or removed from the official list based on California's analysis of current scientific information. All substances listed show their known risk factors, a unique [[Chemical Abstracts Service|CAS]] [[CAS registry number|chemical classification number]], the date they were listed, and, if so, whether they have been delisted.<ref>OEHHA list of substances as of January, 2015 {{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single012315.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2015-02-16 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150216193447/http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single012315.pdf |archivedate=2015-02-16 |df= }}</ref>

[[File:Wod-o-Pics-3 0065 - Kodalux Processing Services NOV. 89 P - Bradley for Gov campaign whistle-stop - mobbed by Ag supporters against clean water prop that passed in 1986 (9504533288).jpg|thumb|1986 Protest against Proposition 65]]
Proposition 65 remains politically controversial even after more than 30 years, in large part because, in effect, it puts the burden of proof on business instead of government to make a key scientific determination about safety levels for specific cancer- and birth defect-causing chemicals that the businesses are knowingly exposing members of the public to.<ref>If a "no significant effect" level has been established for a cancer-causing chemical listed under Prop. 65, then no warning is required as long as the actual exposure is below that level. But it is up to the business causing the exposure to know what that level is, and to do the scientific analysis if government has not already done so.</ref> According to the [[California Environmental Protection Agency]], "Proposition 65 has... increased public awareness about the adverse effects of exposures to listed chemicals.... [and] provided an incentive for manufacturers to remove listed chemicals from their products.... Although Proposition 65 has benefited Californians, it has come at a cost for companies doing business in the state."<ref>[http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/p65plain.html Proposition 65 FAQ] ''[[California Environmental Protection Agency]]'' Accessed 25 October 2012</ref> The law has also been criticized for the proliferation of "bounty hunter" lawsuits. Attorneys have collected more than two-thirds of the money paid by businesses to settle Proposition 65 lawsuits since 2000.<ref>[http://www.ocregister.com/articles/businesses-681758-prop-state.html] ''[[Orange County Register]]'' Accessed 15 September 2015</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ocregister.com/articles/businesses-681758-prop-state.html|title=Prop. 65 a burden on small businesses, bonanza for lawyers|author=|date=10 September 2015|website=ocregister.com|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref>

Proposition 65's effectiveness also remains controversial despite its documented accomplishments, with some pointing out the lack of any studies suggesting a decrease in cancer rates in the state.<ref>{{cite web|title=Caution: This Warning May Be Useless|url=https://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303848104579308393984123358|accessdate=3 March 2014}}</ref>

== Rationale and enumerated rights ==
{{ElectionsCA}}
In addition to amending the [[California Health and Safety Code]], Proposition 65 contained the following language in the 1986 ballot initiative:<ref>Prop. 65 [http://repository.uchastings.edu/ca_ballot_pamphlets/index.html ballot pamphlet full text] from [http://repository.uchastings.edu/ca_ballot_pamphlets/index.html Hastings' California Ballot Measures Databases]</ref>
<blockquote>
SECTION 1. The people of California find that hazardous chemicals pose a serious potential threat to their health and well-being, that state government agencies have failed to provide them with adequate protection, and that these failures have been serious enough to lead to investigations by federal agencies of the administration of California's toxic protection programs. The people therefore declare their rights:
 
(a) To protect themselves and the water they drink against chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
 
(b) To be informed about exposures to chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
 
(c) To secure strict enforcement of the laws controlling hazardous chemicals and deter actions that threaten public health and safety.
 
(d) To shift the cost of hazardous waste cleanups more onto offenders and less onto law-abiding citizens.
 
The people hereby enact the provisions of this initiative in furtherance of their rights.</blockquote>

The Legislature's 2003 amendments to Proposition 65 contained the statement that the changes "further the purposes of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_1751-1800/ab_1756_bill_20030811_chaptered.pdf |title=AB 1756 of 2003 |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref>

== Enforcement ==
Enforcement is carried out through [[Lawsuit|civil lawsuits]] against Proposition 65 violators. These lawsuits may be brought by the [[California Attorney General]], any [[district attorney]], or certain [[city attorney]]s (those in cities with a population exceeding 750,000). Lawsuits may also be brought by private parties "acting in the public interest," but only after providing notice of the alleged violation to the Attorney General, the appropriate district attorney and city attorney, and the business accused of the violation.

A Proposition 65 Notice of Violation must provide adequate information to allow the recipient to assess the nature of the alleged violation. A notice must comply with the information and procedural requirements specified in regulations. A private party may not pursue an enforcement action directly under Proposition 65 if one of the government officials noted above initiates an action within sixty days of the notice. After 2003, private enforcers must also serve a certificate of merit (statement of expert consultation(s) supporting belief of reasonable and meritorious private action) as a means of preventing frivolous enforcement actions.

A business found to be in violation of Proposition 65 is subject to civil penalties of up to $2,500 per day for each violation. In addition, the business may be ordered by a court of law to stop committing the violation.<ref>{{cite web|title=Proposition 65|url=http://www.calcleaners.com/govtprop65.html|publisher=California Cleaners Association|accessdate=10 January 2014}}</ref> Other penalties may apply, including unfair business practices violations as limited under [[California Proposition 64 (2004)]].

Businesses can become compliant by learning upfront whether or not their products contain chemicals that match the current Proposition 65 list of 910 chemicals. Users can do this by searching in a [[Microsoft Excel]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/010711linkedlist.xlsx |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2011-02-03 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110119004706/http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/010711linkedlist.xlsx |archivedate=2011-01-19 |df= }}</ref> chemical list or a website offering the search by chemical name or [[CAS Number]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caslab.com/Proposition-65-List/ |title=PROPOSITION 65 LIST |publisher=Caslab.com |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> Product manufacturers may also learn if a chemical in their products has been removed from the Proposition 65 list, such as [[saccharin]], removed December 2010.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caslab.com/News/saccharin-removed.html |title=Saccharin Removed from EPA’s Hazardous Substance List |publisher=Caslab.com |date=2010-12-15 |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> Alternatively, they can post generic Prop 65 warnings just in case their products contain any listed chemicals.

==Accomplishments==
Proposition 65 has caused large numbers of consumer products to be reformulated to remove toxic ingredients, as documented in settlements of enforcement actions.<ref>Rechtschaffen, "How to Reduce Lead Exposures with One Simple Statute: the Experience of Proposition 65," 29 ''Environmental Law Reporter'' 10581 (October 1999); Rechtschaffen and Williams, The Continued Success of Proposition 65 in Reducin Toxic Exposures," 35 ''Environmental Law Reporter'' 10850 (December 2005).</ref> The law's author has noted that many more product reformulations have taken place "invisibly," because of Proposition 65's incentive to reduce toxic exposures in advance of enforcement, and that product reformulations have benefitted consumers nationwide, not just in California.<ref>Roe, "Little Labs Lost: An Invisible Success Story," 15 ''Green Bag 2nd'' 275 (Spring 2012).</ref>

In the law's first 10 years of operation, emissions of its listed chemicals into the air were reduced much more in California (~85%) than in the rest of the U.S.(~50%), as tracked by the U.S. Toxics Release Inventory.<ref>Roe, ''id.'',"Real-World Effects," at 281-282.</ref> California's air emissions during the same period of other toxic chemicals, also tracked by TRI but not on the Proposition 65 list, declined by only the national average,<ref>Id.</ref> strongly indicating that Proposition 65 was the cause of the difference.

Proposition 65 has also caused government and industry to cooperate on scientific issues of chemical risk, resulting in risk-based standards for 282 toxic chemicals in the law's first few years of operation, an accomplishment described by a Governor's Task Force as "100 years of progress [by federal standards] in the areas of hazard identification, risk assessment, and exposure assessment." <ref>California Environmental Protection Agency, Proposition 65 Five-Year Review Panel, "Accomplishments" [p. 1] [unpublished]</ref>The existence of clear numerical standards has significantly assisted efforts to comply with the law, and to enforce it in situations of non-compliance.

Notably, nearly all of the reductions in toxic exposures caused by Proposition 65 have occurred in areas also subject to federal laws and regulations intended to control toxic chemicals, reductions which those federal controls had failed to achieve.<ref>See Roe, ''supra'', "Federal Contrast," at 283-285.</ref>

== Warning label ==
[[File:Lead or Cadmium - California Proposition 65 Warning.jpg|thumb|California Proposition 65 Warning]]
The following [[Precautionary statement|warning language]] is standard on products sold in California if they contain chemicals on the Proposition 65 list and the amount of exposure caused by the product is not within defined safety limits.

<blockquote>WARNING: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause [[cancer]] and [[congenital disorder|birth defect]]s or other reproductive harm.</blockquote>

The wording can be changed as necessary, so long as it communicates that the chemical in question is known to the state to cause cancer, or birth defects or other reproductive harm. For exposures from other sources, such as car exhaust in a parking garage, a standard sign might read: "This area contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, or birth defects or other reproductive harm".<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.compliancesigns.com/ChemBioCAPROP65.shtml
| title = CA Proposition 65 Signs
| author = ComplianceSigns.com
| accessdate = 2008-07-22
| publisher = InfoTag, Inc.}}</ref>

==Abuse==
[[File:Disneyland Prop 65 Warning crop.jpg|thumb|A vague Prop 65 warning sign at [[Disneyland Resort]].]]
Some businesses in the state post similar notices on their premises, even when they have not evaluated the actual level of risk from a listed chemical they know is present.<ref name="urlMade Simple">{{cite web
|url=http://prop65news.com/Home/Prop65MadeSimple.aspx
|title=Prop 65 Made Simple
|year=2005
|publisher=Prop 65 News
|quote=When a warning is given by a business, it means one of two things: (1) the business has evaluated the exposure and has concluded that it exceeds the no significant risk level; or (2) the business has chosen to provide a warning simply based on its knowledge about the presence of a listed chemical, without attempting to evaluate the exposure. In these cases, exposure could be below the Proposition 65 level of concern, or could even be zero.
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> Warning signs are often posted at gas stations,<ref name=House/> hardware suppliers,<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.watts.com/prop65.asp
| title = California Proposition 65
| author = Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
}}</ref> grocery stores, drug stores, medical facilities, and many other businesses.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.kaweahdelta.org/guide/edevices.asp
|title=Electronic Devices
|author=Kaweah Delta Health Care District
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071029192419/http://www.kaweahdelta.org/guide/edevices.asp
|archivedate=2007-10-29
|df=
}}</ref><ref name=CHLA>{{cite press release
|title=California Hotel & Lodging Association Helps Lodging Guests Understand Proposition 65; Court Approval Obtained for Comprehensive Compliance Procedure
|publisher=California Hotel & Lodging Association
|date=2004-07-07
|url=http://timesharebeat.com/2004/july/0707-04t.htm
|accessdate=2008-07-22
|quote="Unfortunately, the 'safe harbor' warning-sign language specified under Proposition 65 is designed to be so all-encompassing that it is vague and typically doesn't provide much useful information," said Jim Abrams, president and CEO of CH&LA. "People see Prop. 65 warning signs nearly every place they go -- grocery and hardware stores, restaurants, commercial buildings, car show rooms, hotels and inns, pretty much everywhere...
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20050824073814/http://www.timesharebeat.com/2004/july/0707-04t.htm
|archivedate=2005-08-24
|df=
}}</ref> Government agencies,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65Facts.html
|title=Comparison of the Warning Requirement and the Government Employee Disclosure Requirement
|author=Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
|publisher=California Environmental Protection Agency
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071020165954/http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65Facts.html
|archivedate=2007-10-20
|df=
}}</ref> parking garages, hotels,<ref name=CHLA/> apartment complexes,<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65ten.html
| title = Proposition 65 Fact Sheet for Tenants
| author = Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
| publisher = California Environmental Protection Agency
}}</ref> retail stores,<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.target.com/California-Proposition-65/b?ie=UTF8&node=1041180
| title = California Proposition 65
| author = Target.com
}}</ref> banks, and restaurants<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/05/25/MNGD2CU9RA1.DTL&type=printable
| title = Cancer label for foods is considered
| first = Greg | last = Lucas
| date = 2005-05-25
| publisher = San Francisco Chronicle
}}</ref> also post warning signs because of the possibility of hazardous chemicals being present in everyday items or the nearby environment. Some large businesses, such as utility companies, mail a Prop 65 notice to all customers each year to warn them of dangerous substances like natural gas<ref name="urlPacific Gas and Electric Company">{{cite web
|url=http://www.pge.com/customer_service/bill_inserts/#proposition--publicwarning
|title=July 2008 bill inserts
|publisher=Pacific Gas and Electric Company
|quote= Pacific Gas and Electric Company uses chemicals in its operations that are "known to the State of California" to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. For example, Pacific Gas and Electric Company uses natural gas and petroleum products in its operations. Pacific Gas and Electric Company also delivers natural gas to its customers. Petroleum products, natural gas, and their combustion by-products contain chemicals "known to the State of California" to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> or the sand used in sandblasting.<ref>{{cite web|title=Proposition 65 – Public Warning|url=http://www.pge.com/docs/pdfs/customer_service/bill_inserts/2004/200404_bus.pdf|publisher=Pacific Gas and Electric Company|accessdate=10 January 2014|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070316220114/http://www.pge.com/docs/pdfs/customer_service/bill_inserts/2004/200404_bus.pdf|archivedate=16 March 2007|page=4|format=pdf|date=April 2004}}</ref>

There is no penalty for posting an unnecessary warning sign.<ref name="Proposition 65 Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986">{{cite web
|url=http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/P65law72003.html
|title=Proposition 65 Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986
|year=1986
|publisher=[[State of California]]
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> Because of the overuse of the vague warning, the ubiquitous signs ultimately communicate very little information to the end user.<ref name=House/><ref name=Sills2>{{cite court
|litigants = Consumer Defense Group v. Rental Housing Industry Members
|vol = 40
|reporter = Cal Rptr 3d
|opinion = 832
|court = Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. Div. 3
|date = 2006-03-24
|quote=Given the ease with which it was brought, and the absolute lack of any real public benefit from telling people that things like dried paint may be slowly emitting lead molecules or that parking lots are places where there might be auto exhaust, instead of $540,000, this legal work merited an award closer to a dollar ninety-eight.
|url=http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/pdfs/G035101.pdf }}</ref> This problem has been recognized by California courts,<ref name=Sills>{{cite court
|litigants = Consumer Defense Group v. Rental Housing Industry Members
|vol = 40
|reporter = Cal Rptr 3d
|opinion = 832
|court = Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. Div. 3
|date = 2006-03-24
|quote=As the Attorney General pointed out in oral argument, it does not serve the public interest to have the almost the entirety of
the state of California "swamped in a sea [of] generic warning signs."
|url=http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/pdfs/G035101.pdf }}</ref><ref name="urlLaw.com - Calif. Judge Blasts Firm in Toxic-Warnings Case">{{cite web
|url=http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1144672792347
|title=Calif. Judge Blasts Firm in Toxic-Warnings Case
|author=Pamela A. MacLean
|date=2006-04-13
|publisher=The National Law Journal
|quote=
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> advocates,<ref name=House>Written Testimony of Jeffrey B. Margulies. ''Proposition 65’s Effect on Small Businesses.'' In the United States House of Representatives, Committee on Small Business. October 28, 1999. "''Implications for consumers.'' While the intent of Prop 65 was to "inform" consumers, the impact of warnings under the Act has been a proliferation of meaningless warnings. Virtually every business has some sort of Prop 65 warning sign posted, and innumerable products are labeled with the warning. From gas stations to hotels, from grocery stores to hardware stores, consumers are deluged with warnings that they are being exposed to unnamed carcinogens and reproductive toxins. They are not told either the degree of exposure or the likelihood that they may actually be impacted by it. Moreover, because the risks to business of not providing a warning, many provide a warning even though they don’t actually know whether an exposure is occurring, or even if the exposure is trivial, further diluting the meaning of warnings to consumers.</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ehib.org/emf/pdf/AppendixD-EJ.PDF
|title=Equity and Environmental Justice Considerations in Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Policy
|author=Indira Nair and Detlof von Winterfeldt
|date=
|quote=This is to be contrasted with Prop. 65 warning experience where the public received meaningless warnings filled with disclaimers, information that trivializes risk, and fails to put it into context.
|accessdate=2008-07-22
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726020259/http://www.ehib.org/emf/pdf/AppendixD-EJ.PDF
|archivedate=2011-07-26
|df=
}}</ref> and businesses.<ref name=CHLA/>

Political controversy over the law, including industry attempts to have it [[Federal preemption|preempted by federal law]], have died down, although preemption bills continue to be introduced in the U.S. Congress, most recently H.R. 6022 <ref>[https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6022/text?r=4]</ref> (introduced June 6, 2018). However, enforcement actions remain controversial. Most of the Proposition 65 complaints are filed on behalf of [[straw man (law)|straw man]] plaintiffs by private attorneys, some of whose businesses are built entirely on filing Proposition 65 lawsuits.<ref name=Sills/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.docstoc.com/docs/282270/Defending-the-Proposition-65-Bounty-Hunter-Case |title=Defending the Proposition 65 Bounty Hunter Case |publisher=Docstoc.com |date=2007-12-29 |accessdate=2014-01-06 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140106095718/http://www.docstoc.com/docs/282270/Defending-the-Proposition-65-Bounty-Hunter-Case |archivedate=2014-01-06 |df= }}</ref><ref name="urlToxic Avengers - Forbes.com">{{cite web
|url=https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2001/1015/080.html
|title=Toxic Avengers - Forbes.com
|author=Dorothy Pomerantz
|date=2001-10-15
|publisher=Forbes
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref>

Proposition 65 has also been criticized because the majority of settlement money collected from businesses has been used to pay plaintiffs' attorney fees.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wlf.org/upload/07-27-07halko.pdf |title=CALIFORNIA’S ATTORNEY GENERAL ACKNOWLEDGES PROP 65 ABUSE |date=2007-07-27 |accessdate=2015-05-13}}</ref> Businesses paid over $14.58 million in attorney fees and costs in 2012, 71% of all settlement money paid.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://oag.ca.gov/prop65|title=Proposition 65 Enforcement Reporting|author=|date=12 January 2012|website=ca.gov|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref>

Labeling requirements conceded the reality that listing and classifying substances did not help the consumer if the contents of a purchase were unknown. At the same time, there were no other labeling requirements to support the proposition. Industry critics and corporate defense lawyers charge that Proposition 65 is "a clever and irritating mechanism used by litigious [[Non-governmental organization|NGO]]s and others to publicly spank politically incorrect opponents ranging from the American gun industry to seafood retailers, etc."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fisheries.ifcnr.com/article.cfm?NewsID=495 |title=NGO Strategies for 2004 and Beyond |publisher=Fisheries.ifcnr.com |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref>

In addition, because the law allows private citizens to sue and collect damages from any business violating the law, there have been cases of lawyers and law firms using Proposition 65 to force monetary settlements out of California businesses.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1207 |title=Cal. Attorney General news alert, paragraph 10 |publisher=Ag.ca.gov |date=2005-08-26 |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> The Attorney General's office has cited several instances of settlements where plaintiff attorneys received significant awards without providing for environmental benefit to the people of California, resulting in the requirement of the Attorney General's approval of pre-trial Proposition 65 settlements.<ref>Chapter 3 - Settlement Guidelines, Cal. Attorney General's Proposition 65 regulations</ref> The Attorney General also objected to efforts in [[Settlement (litigation)|settlements]] between private parties to pre-empt the Attorney General's right and duty to protect the [[public interest]] against future violations.<ref name=Sills />

== Recent reform efforts ==
In the [[California State Legislature, 2013–14 session|2013-14 session]] of the [[California State Assembly]], a consensus bill, AB 227, introduced by Assemblyman [[Mike Gatto]] (D-Los Angeles), effectively offered to protect certain small companies in specified circumstances from the threat of citizen enforcement lawsuits, by providing them with a streamlined compliance procedure. The bill was passed unanimously and was enacted on October 10, 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB227 |title=Bill Text - AB-227 Proposition 65: enforcement |publisher=Leginfo.legislature.ca.gov |date=2002-01-01 |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref>

Following the success of AB 227, Gov. [[Jerry Brown]] announced on May 7, 2013 that his office plans to introduce a proposal to reform Proposition 65.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://prop65news.com/StoryDetails/tabid/101/ArticleID/7482/Gov-Brown-Announces-Proposition-65-Reform-Proposal.aspx |title=Gov. Brown Announces Proposition 65 Reform Proposal |publisher=Prop65news.com |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131103024603/http://prop65news.com/StoryDetails/tabid/101/ArticleID/7482/Gov-Brown-Announces-Proposition-65-Reform-Proposal.aspx# |archive-date=2013-11-03 |dead-url=yes |df= }}</ref> Since Brown's initial announcement, his office has held meetings with Proposition 65 stakeholders, but has been tight-lipped about what was accomplished by the meetings. According to [[California Environmental Protection Agency]] Secretary Matthew Rodriquez, the Governor's office plans to release a white paper after concluding its stakeholder meetings. The white paper may form the basis of a legislative proposal by the Governor.

Assembly Bill 1252, introduced by Assemblyman [[Brian Jones (politician)|Brian Jones]] (R-Santee) during the [[California State Legislature, 2015–16 session|2015-2016 legislative session]], proposed giving small businesses two weeks to fix violations before a lawsuit can be filed. The legislation died in committee.

== Reformulation of consumer goods ==

Over the years, Prop 65 has led to consent agreements for a variety of consumer products, such as bibs, bicycles, products containing brass, cookware, cosmetics, exercise mats, ceramic ware and glassware, clothing, fake leather upholstery, headphone cables, jewelry, lunchboxes, poker chips, luggage, and accessories.

In early 2011, a number of new Prop 65<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html|title=Proposition 65|first=OEHHA|last=Admin|date=26 November 2014|website=ca.gov|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref> consent agreements were reported, covering vinyl inflatable structures, vinyl lounge chairs, inspection lights with clamp handles, brass door handles, cadmium in jewelry and a revised judgment for fashion accessories.

In the latter part of 2011, further consent agreements were reported. These included reformulation of up to 1000 ppm [[Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate|DEHP]] for book covers and jackets. Further reformulations for lead content also concluded. For fashion jackets and belts with components that can be handled, touched or mouthed, two tests are necessary for compliance: less than 1.0 µg lead using method NIOSH 9100 and less than 100 ppm lead using EPA 3050B.

More recently, since December 2011 and during the first half of 2012, a further number of consent settlements for Prop 65 have been concluded, enforcing reformulation of a range of additional products by specifying the limits of heavy metals and organic chemicals.

=== Summary of settlements ===
In externally decorated glassware the cadmium and lead content are limited, with lower concentrations permitted for the lip or rim region. Lead content is also restricted in ceramic ware with exterior decorations, booster cables, and safety pins in varying concentrations. Various specific phthalates are also restricted in varying concentrations in notepads with vinyl coverings, purses, slippers, flip flops with rhinestones and similar plastic footwear, ear buds and headsets, and exercise/fitness mats. Restriction on [[volatile organic compound]]s (VOCs) is defined for smoothing solution products, and in this case a specific warning is mandatory in the material safety data sheets if the product releases detectable amounts of formaldehyde.

== List of chemicals ==
{{main|California Proposition 65 list of chemicals}}
Proposition 65 requires that the governor revise and republish at least once per year the list of chemicals known to the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/proposition-65-list|title=California Proposition 65 list of chemicals|author=|date=|website=ca.gov|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref>

== See also ==
* [[California ballot proposition]]
* [[Environmentalism]]
* [[Pollution]]
* [[Toxicity]]

== References ==
{{reflist|30em}}

== External links ==
*[http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html Official Proposition 65 website]
*[http://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/proposition-65-list Official Proposition 65 list of substances]
*[http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/regs.php California Attorney General - Proposition 65 regulations]
*[https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2001/1015/080.html Forbes.com -Toxic Avengers, Morse Mehrban gets rich from Proposition 65]

{{HealthIssuesOfPlastics}}

[[Category:1986 in the environment]]
[[Category:1986 California ballot propositions|65]]
[[Category:Environment of California]]
[[Category:United States state environmental legislation]]
[[Category:Initiatives in the United States]]
[[Category:Regulation of chemicals]]

The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986

2019-02-08T04:43:51Z

Modulus12: Undid revision 881223696 by 2600:387:1:811:0:0:0:1B (talk)

[[File:Watts.png|thumb|right|250px|Product information insert for plastic plumbing fixture, which includes at bottom a Proposition 65 warning notice.]]
'''Proposition 65''' (formally titled '''The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986''') is a [[California]] law passed by direct voter initiative in 1986 by a 63%–37% vote. Its goals are to protect drinking water sources from toxic substances that may cause [[cancer]] and [[birth defect]]s and to reduce or eliminate exposures to those chemicals generally, for example in consumer products, by requiring warnings in advance of those exposures.

==Introduction==

Proposition 65 is administered by Cal/EPA's [[California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment]] (OEHHA).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html |title=California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment |publisher=Oehha.ca.gov |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> Proposition 65 regulates substances officially listed by California as having a 1 in 100,000 chance of causing cancer over a 70-year period or birth defects or other reproductive harm in two ways. The first statutory requirement of Proposition 65 prohibits businesses from knowingly discharging listed substances into drinking water sources, or onto land where the substances can pass into drinking water sources. The second prohibits businesses from knowingly exposing individuals to listed substances without providing a clear and reasonable warning. See OEHHA, "Proposition 65 in Plain Language."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/general-info/proposition-65-plain-language</ref>

An official list of substances covered by Proposition 65 is maintained and made publicly available. Chemicals are added to or removed from the official list based on California's analysis of current scientific information. All substances listed show their known risk factors, a unique [[Chemical Abstracts Service|CAS]] [[CAS registry number|chemical classification number]], the date they were listed, and, if so, whether they have been delisted.<ref>OEHHA list of substances as of January, 2015 {{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single012315.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2015-02-16 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150216193447/http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single012315.pdf |archivedate=2015-02-16 |df= }}</ref>

[[File:Wod-o-Pics-3 0065 - Kodalux Processing Services NOV. 89 P - Bradley for Gov campaign whistle-stop - mobbed by Ag supporters against clean water prop that passed in 1986 (9504533288).jpg|thumb|1986 Protest against Proposition 65]]
Proposition 65 remains politically controversial even after more than 30 years, in large part because, in effect, it puts the burden of proof on business instead of government to make a key scientific determination about safety levels for specific cancer- and birth defect-causing chemicals that the businesses are knowingly exposing members of the public to.<ref>If a "no significant effect" level has been established for a cancer-causing chemical listed under Prop. 65, then no warning is required as long as the actual exposure is below that level. But it is up to the business causing the exposure to know what that level is, and to do the scientific analysis if government has not already done so.</ref> According to the [[California Environmental Protection Agency]], "Proposition 65 has... increased public awareness about the adverse effects of exposures to listed chemicals.... [and] provided an incentive for manufacturers to remove listed chemicals from their products.... Although Proposition 65 has benefited Californians, it has come at a cost for companies doing business in the state."<ref>[http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/p65plain.html Proposition 65 FAQ] ''[[California Environmental Protection Agency]]'' Accessed 25 October 2012</ref> The law has also been criticized for the proliferation of "bounty hunter" lawsuits. Attorneys have collected more than two-thirds of the money paid by businesses to settle Proposition 65 lawsuits since 2000.<ref>[http://www.ocregister.com/articles/businesses-681758-prop-state.html] ''[[Orange County Register]]'' Accessed 15 September 2015</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ocregister.com/articles/businesses-681758-prop-state.html|title=Prop. 65 a burden on small businesses, bonanza for lawyers|author=|date=10 September 2015|website=ocregister.com|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref>

Proposition 65's effectiveness also remains controversial despite its documented accomplishments (see '''Accomplishments''' below), with some pointing out the lack of any studies suggesting a decrease in cancer rates in the state.<ref>{{cite web|title=Caution: This Warning May Be Useless|url=https://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303848104579308393984123358|accessdate=3 March 2014}}</ref>

== Rationale and enumerated rights ==
{{ElectionsCA}}
In addition to amending the [[California Health and Safety Code]], Proposition 65 contained the following language in the 1986 ballot initiative:<ref>Prop. 65 [http://repository.uchastings.edu/ca_ballot_pamphlets/index.html ballot pamphlet full text] from [http://repository.uchastings.edu/ca_ballot_pamphlets/index.html Hastings' California Ballot Measures Databases]</ref>
<blockquote>
SECTION 1. The people of California find that hazardous chemicals pose a serious potential threat to their health and well-being, that state government agencies have failed to provide them with adequate protection, and that these failures have been serious enough to lead to investigations by federal agencies of the administration of California's toxic protection programs. The people therefore declare their rights:
 
(a) To protect themselves and the water they drink against chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
 
(b) To be informed about exposures to chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
 
(c) To secure strict enforcement of the laws controlling hazardous chemicals and deter actions that threaten public health and safety.
 
(d) To shift the cost of hazardous waste cleanups more onto offenders and less onto law-abiding citizens.
 
The people hereby enact the provisions of this initiative in furtherance of their rights.</blockquote>

The Legislature's 2003 amendments to Proposition 65 contained the statement that the changes "further the purposes of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_1751-1800/ab_1756_bill_20030811_chaptered.pdf |title=AB 1756 of 2003 |format=PDF |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref>

== Enforcement ==
Enforcement is carried out through [[Lawsuit|civil lawsuits]] against Proposition 65 violators. These lawsuits may be brought by the [[California Attorney General]], any [[district attorney]], or certain [[city attorney]]s (those in cities with a population exceeding 750,000). Lawsuits may also be brought by private parties "acting in the public interest," but only after providing notice of the alleged violation to the Attorney General, the appropriate district attorney and city attorney, and the business accused of the violation.

A Proposition 65 Notice of Violation must provide adequate information to allow the recipient to assess the nature of the alleged violation. A notice must comply with the information and procedural requirements specified in regulations. A private party may not pursue an enforcement action directly under Proposition 65 if one of the government officials noted above initiates an action within sixty days of the notice. After 2003, private enforcers must also serve a certificate of merit (statement of expert consultation(s) supporting belief of reasonable and meritorious private action) as a means of preventing frivolous enforcement actions.

A business found to be in violation of Proposition 65 is subject to civil penalties of up to $2,500 per day for each violation. In addition, the business may be ordered by a court of law to stop committing the violation.<ref>{{cite web|title=Proposition 65|url=http://www.calcleaners.com/govtprop65.html|publisher=California Cleaners Association|accessdate=10 January 2014}}</ref> Other penalties may apply, including unfair business practices violations as limited under [[California Proposition 64 (2004)]].

Businesses can become compliant by learning upfront whether or not their products contain chemicals that match the current Proposition 65 list of 910 chemicals. Users can do this by searching in a [[Microsoft Excel]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/010711linkedlist.xlsx |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2011-02-03 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110119004706/http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/010711linkedlist.xlsx |archivedate=2011-01-19 |df= }}</ref> chemical list or a website offering the search by chemical name or [[CAS Number]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caslab.com/Proposition-65-List/ |title=PROPOSITION 65 LIST |publisher=Caslab.com |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> Product manufacturers may also learn if a chemical in their products has been removed from the Proposition 65 list, such as [[saccharin]], removed December 2010.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.caslab.com/News/saccharin-removed.html |title=Saccharin Removed from EPA’s Hazardous Substance List |publisher=Caslab.com |date=2010-12-15 |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> Alternatively, they can post generic Prop 65 warnings just in case their products contain any listed chemicals.

==Accomplishments==
Proposition 65 has caused large numbers of consumer products to be reformulated to remove toxic ingredients, as documented in settlements of enforcement actions.<ref>Rechtschaffen, "How to Reduce Lead Exposures with One Simple Statute: the Experience of Proposition 65," 29 ''Environmental Law Reporter'' 10581 (October 1999); Rechtschaffen and Williams, The Continued Success of Proposition 65 in Reducin Toxic Exposures," 35 ''Environmental Law Reporter'' 10850 (December 2005).</ref> The law's author has noted that many more product reformulations have taken place "invisibly," because of Proposition 65's incentive to reduce toxic exposures in advance of enforcement, and that product reformulations have benefitted consumers nationwide, not just in California.<ref>Roe, "Little Labs Lost: An Invisible Success Story," 15 ''Green Bag 2nd'' 275 (Spring 2012).</ref>

In the law's first 10 years of operation, emissions of its listed chemicals into the air were reduced much more in California (~85%) than in the rest of the U.S.(~50%), as tracked by the U.S. Toxics Release Inventory.<ref>Roe, ''id.'',"Real-World Effects," at 281-282.</ref> California's air emissions during the same period of other toxic chemicals, also tracked by TRI but not on the Proposition 65 list, declined by only the national average,<ref>Id.</ref> strongly indicating that Proposition 65 was the cause of the difference.

Proposition 65 has also caused government and industry to cooperate on scientific issues of chemical risk, resulting in risk-based standards for 282 toxic chemicals in the law's first few years of operation, an accomplishment described by a Governor's Task Force as "100 years of progress [by federal standards] in the areas of hazard identification, risk assessment, and exposure assessment." <ref>California Environmental Protection Agency, Proposition 65 Five-Year Review Panel, "Accomplishments" [p. 1] [unpublished]</ref>The existence of clear numerical standards has significantly assisted efforts to comply with the law, and to enforce it in situations of non-compliance.

Notably, nearly all of the reductions in toxic exposures caused by Proposition 65 have occurred in areas also subject to federal laws and regulations intended to control toxic chemicals, reductions which those federal controls had failed to achieve.<ref>See Roe, ''supra'', "Federal Contrast," at 283-285.</ref>

== Warning label ==
[[File:Lead or Cadmium - California Proposition 65 Warning.jpg|thumb|California Proposition 65 Warning]]
The following [[Precautionary statement|warning language]] is standard on products sold in California if they contain chemicals on the Proposition 65 list and the amount of exposure caused by the product is not within defined safety limits.

<blockquote>WARNING: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause [[cancer]] and [[congenital disorder|birth defect]]s or other reproductive harm.</blockquote>

The wording can be changed as necessary, so long as it communicates that the chemical in question is known to the state to cause cancer, or birth defects or other reproductive harm. For exposures from other sources, such as car exhaust in a parking garage, a standard sign might read: "This area contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, or birth defects or other reproductive harm".<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.compliancesigns.com/ChemBioCAPROP65.shtml
| title = CA Proposition 65 Signs
| author = ComplianceSigns.com
| accessdate = 2008-07-22
| publisher = InfoTag, Inc.}}</ref>

==Abuse==
[[File:Disneyland Prop 65 Warning crop.jpg|thumb|A vague Prop 65 warning sign at [[Disneyland Resort]].]]
Some businesses in the state post similar notices on their premises, even when they have not evaluated the actual level of risk from a listed chemical they know is present.<ref name="urlMade Simple">{{cite web
|url=http://prop65news.com/Home/Prop65MadeSimple.aspx
|title=Prop 65 Made Simple
|year=2005
|publisher=Prop 65 News
|quote=When a warning is given by a business, it means one of two things: (1) the business has evaluated the exposure and has concluded that it exceeds the no significant risk level; or (2) the business has chosen to provide a warning simply based on its knowledge about the presence of a listed chemical, without attempting to evaluate the exposure. In these cases, exposure could be below the Proposition 65 level of concern, or could even be zero.
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> Warning signs are often posted at gas stations,<ref name=House/> hardware suppliers,<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.watts.com/prop65.asp
| title = California Proposition 65
| author = Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
}}</ref> grocery stores, drug stores, medical facilities, and many other businesses.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.kaweahdelta.org/guide/edevices.asp
|title=Electronic Devices
|author=Kaweah Delta Health Care District
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071029192419/http://www.kaweahdelta.org/guide/edevices.asp
|archivedate=2007-10-29
|df=
}}</ref><ref name=CHLA>{{cite press release
|title=California Hotel & Lodging Association Helps Lodging Guests Understand Proposition 65; Court Approval Obtained for Comprehensive Compliance Procedure
|publisher=California Hotel & Lodging Association
|date=2004-07-07
|url=http://timesharebeat.com/2004/july/0707-04t.htm
|accessdate=2008-07-22
|quote="Unfortunately, the 'safe harbor' warning-sign language specified under Proposition 65 is designed to be so all-encompassing that it is vague and typically doesn't provide much useful information," said Jim Abrams, president and CEO of CH&LA. "People see Prop. 65 warning signs nearly every place they go -- grocery and hardware stores, restaurants, commercial buildings, car show rooms, hotels and inns, pretty much everywhere...
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20050824073814/http://www.timesharebeat.com/2004/july/0707-04t.htm
|archivedate=2005-08-24
|df=
}}</ref> Government agencies,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65Facts.html
|title=Comparison of the Warning Requirement and the Government Employee Disclosure Requirement
|author=Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
|publisher=California Environmental Protection Agency
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071020165954/http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65Facts.html
|archivedate=2007-10-20
|df=
}}</ref> parking garages, hotels,<ref name=CHLA/> apartment complexes,<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/P65ten.html
| title = Proposition 65 Fact Sheet for Tenants
| author = Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
| publisher = California Environmental Protection Agency
}}</ref> retail stores,<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.target.com/California-Proposition-65/b?ie=UTF8&node=1041180
| title = California Proposition 65
| author = Target.com
}}</ref> banks, and restaurants<ref>{{cite web
| url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/05/25/MNGD2CU9RA1.DTL&type=printable
| title = Cancer label for foods is considered
| first = Greg | last = Lucas
| date = 2005-05-25
| publisher = San Francisco Chronicle
}}</ref> also post warning signs because of the possibility of hazardous chemicals being present in everyday items or the nearby environment. Some large businesses, such as utility companies, mail a Prop 65 notice to all customers each year to warn them of dangerous substances like natural gas<ref name="urlPacific Gas and Electric Company">{{cite web
|url=http://www.pge.com/customer_service/bill_inserts/#proposition--publicwarning
|title=July 2008 bill inserts
|publisher=Pacific Gas and Electric Company
|quote= Pacific Gas and Electric Company uses chemicals in its operations that are "known to the State of California" to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. For example, Pacific Gas and Electric Company uses natural gas and petroleum products in its operations. Pacific Gas and Electric Company also delivers natural gas to its customers. Petroleum products, natural gas, and their combustion by-products contain chemicals "known to the State of California" to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> or the sand used in sandblasting.<ref>{{cite web|title=Proposition 65 – Public Warning|url=http://www.pge.com/docs/pdfs/customer_service/bill_inserts/2004/200404_bus.pdf|publisher=Pacific Gas and Electric Company|accessdate=10 January 2014|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070316220114/http://www.pge.com/docs/pdfs/customer_service/bill_inserts/2004/200404_bus.pdf|archivedate=16 March 2007|page=4|format=pdf|date=April 2004}}</ref>

There is no penalty for posting an unnecessary warning sign.<ref name="Proposition 65 Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986">{{cite web
|url=http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/P65law72003.html
|title=Proposition 65 Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986
|year=1986
|publisher=[[State of California]]
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> Because of the overuse of the vague warning, the ubiquitous signs ultimately communicate very little information to the end user.<ref name=House/><ref name=Sills2>{{cite court
|litigants = Consumer Defense Group v. Rental Housing Industry Members
|vol = 40
|reporter = Cal Rptr 3d
|opinion = 832
|court = Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. Div. 3
|date = 2006-03-24
|quote=Given the ease with which it was brought, and the absolute lack of any real public benefit from telling people that things like dried paint may be slowly emitting lead molecules or that parking lots are places where there might be auto exhaust, instead of $540,000, this legal work merited an award closer to a dollar ninety-eight.
|url=http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/pdfs/G035101.pdf }}</ref> This problem has been recognized by California courts,<ref name=Sills>{{cite court
|litigants = Consumer Defense Group v. Rental Housing Industry Members
|vol = 40
|reporter = Cal Rptr 3d
|opinion = 832
|court = Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. Div. 3
|date = 2006-03-24
|quote=As the Attorney General pointed out in oral argument, it does not serve the public interest to have the almost the entirety of
the state of California "swamped in a sea [of] generic warning signs."
|url=http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/pdfs/G035101.pdf }}</ref><ref name="urlLaw.com - Calif. Judge Blasts Firm in Toxic-Warnings Case">{{cite web
|url=http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1144672792347
|title=Calif. Judge Blasts Firm in Toxic-Warnings Case
|author=Pamela A. MacLean
|date=2006-04-13
|publisher=The National Law Journal
|quote=
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref> advocates,<ref name=House>Written Testimony of Jeffrey B. Margulies. ''Proposition 65’s Effect on Small Businesses.'' In the United States House of Representatives, Committee on Small Business. October 28, 1999. "''Implications for consumers.'' While the intent of Prop 65 was to "inform" consumers, the impact of warnings under the Act has been a proliferation of meaningless warnings. Virtually every business has some sort of Prop 65 warning sign posted, and innumerable products are labeled with the warning. From gas stations to hotels, from grocery stores to hardware stores, consumers are deluged with warnings that they are being exposed to unnamed carcinogens and reproductive toxins. They are not told either the degree of exposure or the likelihood that they may actually be impacted by it. Moreover, because the risks to business of not providing a warning, many provide a warning even though they don’t actually know whether an exposure is occurring, or even if the exposure is trivial, further diluting the meaning of warnings to consumers.</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ehib.org/emf/pdf/AppendixD-EJ.PDF
|title=Equity and Environmental Justice Considerations in Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Policy
|author=Indira Nair and Detlof von Winterfeldt
|date=
|quote=This is to be contrasted with Prop. 65 warning experience where the public received meaningless warnings filled with disclaimers, information that trivializes risk, and fails to put it into context.
|accessdate=2008-07-22
|deadurl=yes
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726020259/http://www.ehib.org/emf/pdf/AppendixD-EJ.PDF
|archivedate=2011-07-26
|df=
}}</ref> and businesses.<ref name=CHLA/>

Political controversy over the law, including industry attempts to have it [[Federal preemption|preempted by federal law]], have died down, although preemption bills continue to be introduced in the U.S. Congress, most recently H.R. 6022 <ref>[https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6022/text?r=4]</ref> (introduced June 6, 2018). However, enforcement actions remain controversial. Most of the Proposition 65 complaints are filed on behalf of [[straw man (law)|straw man]] plaintiffs by private attorneys, some of whose businesses are built entirely on filing Proposition 65 lawsuits.<ref name=Sills/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.docstoc.com/docs/282270/Defending-the-Proposition-65-Bounty-Hunter-Case |title=Defending the Proposition 65 Bounty Hunter Case |publisher=Docstoc.com |date=2007-12-29 |accessdate=2014-01-06 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140106095718/http://www.docstoc.com/docs/282270/Defending-the-Proposition-65-Bounty-Hunter-Case |archivedate=2014-01-06 |df= }}</ref><ref name="urlToxic Avengers - Forbes.com">{{cite web
|url=https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2001/1015/080.html
|title=Toxic Avengers - Forbes.com
|author=Dorothy Pomerantz
|date=2001-10-15
|publisher=Forbes
|accessdate=2008-07-22
}}</ref>

Proposition 65 has also been criticized because the majority of settlement money collected from businesses has been used to pay plaintiffs' attorney fees.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wlf.org/upload/07-27-07halko.pdf |title=CALIFORNIA’S ATTORNEY GENERAL ACKNOWLEDGES PROP 65 ABUSE |date=2007-07-27 |accessdate=2015-05-13}}</ref> Businesses paid over $14.58 million in attorney fees and costs in 2012, 71% of all settlement money paid.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://oag.ca.gov/prop65|title=Proposition 65 Enforcement Reporting|author=|date=12 January 2012|website=ca.gov|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref>

Labeling requirements conceded the reality that listing and classifying substances did not help the consumer if the contents of a purchase were unknown. At the same time, there were no other labeling requirements to support the proposition. Industry critics and corporate defense lawyers charge that Proposition 65 is "a clever and irritating mechanism used by litigious [[Non-governmental organization|NGO]]s and others to publicly spank politically incorrect opponents ranging from the American gun industry to seafood retailers, etc."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fisheries.ifcnr.com/article.cfm?NewsID=495 |title=NGO Strategies for 2004 and Beyond |publisher=Fisheries.ifcnr.com |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref>

In addition, because the law allows private citizens to sue and collect damages from any business violating the law, there have been cases of lawyers and law firms using Proposition 65 to force monetary settlements out of California businesses.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1207 |title=Cal. Attorney General news alert, paragraph 10 |publisher=Ag.ca.gov |date=2005-08-26 |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref> The Attorney General's office has cited several instances of settlements where plaintiff attorneys received significant awards without providing for environmental benefit to the people of California, resulting in the requirement of the Attorney General's approval of pre-trial Proposition 65 settlements.<ref>Chapter 3 - Settlement Guidelines, Cal. Attorney General's Proposition 65 regulations</ref> The Attorney General also objected to efforts in [[Settlement (litigation)|settlements]] between private parties to pre-empt the Attorney General's right and duty to protect the [[public interest]] against future violations.<ref name=Sills />

== Recent reform efforts ==
In the [[California State Legislature, 2013–14 session|2013-14 session]] of the [[California State Assembly]], a consensus bill, AB 227, introduced by Assemblyman [[Mike Gatto]] (D-Los Angeles), effectively offered to protect certain small companies in specified circumstances from the threat of citizen enforcement lawsuits, by providing them with a streamlined compliance procedure. The bill was passed unanimously and was enacted on October 10, 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB227 |title=Bill Text - AB-227 Proposition 65: enforcement |publisher=Leginfo.legislature.ca.gov |date=2002-01-01 |accessdate=2014-01-06}}</ref>

Following the success of AB 227, Gov. [[Jerry Brown]] announced on May 7, 2013 that his office plans to introduce a proposal to reform Proposition 65.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://prop65news.com/StoryDetails/tabid/101/ArticleID/7482/Gov-Brown-Announces-Proposition-65-Reform-Proposal.aspx |title=Gov. Brown Announces Proposition 65 Reform Proposal |publisher=Prop65news.com |date= |accessdate=2014-01-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131103024603/http://prop65news.com/StoryDetails/tabid/101/ArticleID/7482/Gov-Brown-Announces-Proposition-65-Reform-Proposal.aspx# |archive-date=2013-11-03 |dead-url=yes |df= }}</ref> Since Brown's initial announcement, his office has held meetings with Proposition 65 stakeholders, but has been tight-lipped about what was accomplished by the meetings. According to [[California Environmental Protection Agency]] Secretary Matthew Rodriquez, the Governor's office plans to release a white paper after concluding its stakeholder meetings. The white paper may form the basis of a legislative proposal by the Governor.

Assembly Bill 1252, introduced by Assemblyman [[Brian Jones (politician)|Brian Jones]] (R-Santee) during the [[California State Legislature, 2015–16 session|2015-2016 legislative session]], proposed giving small businesses two weeks to fix violations before a lawsuit can be filed. The legislation died in committee.

== Reformulation of consumer goods ==

Over the years, Prop 65 has led to consent agreements for a variety of consumer products, such as bibs, bicycles, products containing brass, cookware, cosmetics, exercise mats, ceramic ware and glassware, clothing, fake leather upholstery, headphone cables, jewelry, lunchboxes, poker chips, luggage, and accessories.

In early 2011, a number of new Prop 65<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html|title=Proposition 65|first=OEHHA|last=Admin|date=26 November 2014|website=ca.gov|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref> consent agreements were reported, covering vinyl inflatable structures, vinyl lounge chairs, inspection lights with clamp handles, brass door handles, cadmium in jewelry and a revised judgment for fashion accessories.

In the latter part of 2011, further consent agreements were reported. These included reformulation of up to 1000 ppm [[Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate|DEHP]] for book covers and jackets. Further reformulations for lead content also concluded. For fashion jackets and belts with components that can be handled, touched or mouthed, two tests are necessary for compliance: less than 1.0 µg lead using method NIOSH 9100 and less than 100 ppm lead using EPA 3050B.

More recently, since December 2011 and during the first half of 2012, a further number of consent settlements for Prop 65 have been concluded, enforcing reformulation of a range of additional products by specifying the limits of heavy metals and organic chemicals.

=== Summary of settlements ===
In externally decorated glassware the cadmium and lead content are limited, with lower concentrations permitted for the lip or rim region. Lead content is also restricted in ceramic ware with exterior decorations, booster cables, and safety pins in varying concentrations. Various specific phthalates are also restricted in varying concentrations in notepads with vinyl coverings, purses, slippers, flip flops with rhinestones and similar plastic footwear, ear buds and headsets, and exercise/fitness mats. Restriction on [[volatile organic compound]]s (VOCs) is defined for smoothing solution products, and in this case a specific warning is mandatory in the material safety data sheets if the product releases detectable amounts of formaldehyde.

== List of chemicals ==
{{main|California Proposition 65 list of chemicals}}
Proposition 65 requires that the governor revise and republish at least once per year the list of chemicals known to the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/proposition-65-list|title=California Proposition 65 list of chemicals|author=|date=|website=ca.gov|accessdate=31 March 2018}}</ref>

== See also ==
* [[California ballot proposition]]
* [[Environmentalism]]
* [[Pollution]]
* [[Toxicity]]

== References ==
{{reflist|30em}}

== External links ==
*[http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65.html Official Proposition 65 website]
*[http://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/proposition-65-list Official Proposition 65 list of substances]
*[http://ag.ca.gov/prop65/regs.php California Attorney General - Proposition 65 regulations]
*[https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2001/1015/080.html Forbes.com -Toxic Avengers, Morse Mehrban gets rich from Proposition 65]

{{HealthIssuesOfPlastics}}

[[Category:1986 in the environment]]
[[Category:1986 California ballot propositions|65]]
[[Category:Environment of California]]
[[Category:United States state environmental legislation]]
[[Category:Initiatives in the United States]]
[[Category:Regulation of chemicals]]

Malta-Konvois

2019-01-18T01:04:35Z

Modulus12: Fixed template, italics

{{Distinguish|Battle of the Malta Convoy (1800)}}
{{Infobox operational plan
| name = Malta convoys
| partof = The Battle of the Mediterranean
| image = File:Relief Map of Mediterranean Sea.png
|image_size = 250px
| caption = Relief map of the Mediterranean Sea
| scope = Supply operations
| type =
| location = Malta
| coordinates = {{coord|35|53|42|N|14|31|14|E|source:Geohack|display=title}}
| planned_by = [[Mediterranean Fleet]] [[RAF Middle East Command|RAF Middle East]] (RAF Middle East Command from 29 December 1941) [[Merchant Navy (United Kingdom)|Merchant Navy]] Allies
| commanded_by = Admiral [[Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope|Sir Andrew Cunningham]], 1 June 1939 – March 1942 Admiral [[Henry Harwood|Sir Henry Harwood]], 22 April 1942 – February 1943
| objective = Relief of the [[Siege of Malta (World War II)|Siege of Malta]]
| target =
| date = 27 June 1940 – 31 December 1943
| time =
| time-begin =
| time-end =
| timezone =
| executed_by =
| outcome = Allied victory
| casualties = 1,600 civilians on Malta 5,700 service personnel on land, sea and in the air Aircraft: 707 Merchant Navy ships: 31 sunk [[Royal Navy]]: 1 battleship 2 aircraft carriers 4 cruisers 1 minelayer 20 destroyers/minesweepers 40 submarines unknown number of smaller vessels
| campaignbox =
{{Campaignbox Mediterranean Campaign}}
}}

The '''Malta convoys''' were [[Allies of World War II|Allied]] supply [[convoy]]s of the [[World War II|Second World War]]. The convoys took place during the [[Siege of Malta (World War II)|Siege of Malta]] in the [[Mediterranean, Middle East and African theatres of World War II|Mediterranean Theatre]]. Malta was a base from which British sea and air forces could attack ships carrying supplies from Europe to [[Italian Libya]]. Britain fought the [[Western Desert Campaign]] against [[Axis powers|Axis]] armies in North Africa to keep the [[Suez Canal]] and to control Middle Eastern oil. The strategic value of Malta was so great the British risked many merchant vessels and warships to supply the island and the Axis made determined efforts to neutralise the island as an offensive base.

The civilian population and the garrison required imports of food, medical supplies, fuel and equipment; the military forces on the island needed reinforcements, ammunition and spare parts. British convoys were escorted to Malta by ships of the [[Mediterranean Fleet]], [[Force H]] and aircraft of the [[Fleet Air Arm]] and [[Royal Air Force]], during the [[Battle of the Mediterranean]] (1940–1943). British and Allied ships were attacked by the [[Kingdom of Italy (1861-1946)|Italian]] ''[[Regia Aeronautica]]'' (Royal Air Force) and ''[[Regia Marina]]'' (Royal Navy) in 1940 and from 1941, by the ''[[Luftwaffe]]'' (German Air Force) and ''[[Kriegsmarine]]'' (German Navy).

In 1942, the British assembled large flotillas of warships to escort Malta convoys, sent fast warships to make solo runs to the island and organised [[Magic Carpet (Battle of the Mediterranean)|Magic Carpet]] supply runs by submarine. [[Hawker Hurricane]] and then [[Supermarine Spitfire]] fighters were flown to Malta from aircraft carriers on [[Club Run]]s from Gibraltar towards Malta. In mid-1942, Axis air attacks on the island and on supply convoys neutralised Malta as an offensive base and an Axis invasion, [[Operation Herkules|''Unternehmen Herkules'']] (Operation Hercules), was set for mid-July 1942.

The siege of Malta eased after the Allied victory at the [[Second Battle of El Alamein]] (23 October – 11 November 1942). The Axis retreat from Egypt and Cyrenaica brought more of the seas around Malta into range of Allied land-based aircraft. In [[Operation Stoneage]], which began after [[Operation Torch]] (8–16 November), round the clock air cover was possible and all the merchant ships reached Malta. Mediterranean convoys were resumed to supply the advancing British forces, from which ships for Malta were detached and escorted to and from the island.
{{TOC limit}}

==Background==

===Malta, 1940–1941===

[[File:EU-Malta.svg|thumb|Malta]]
[[Malta]], a Mediterranean island of {{convert|122|sqmi|sqkm|abbr=on}} had been a British colony since 1814. By the 1940s, the island had a population of 275,000 but local farmers could feed only one-third of the population, the deficit being made up by imports. Malta was a staging post on the British [[Suez Canal]] sea route to [[India]], East Africa, the oilfields of [[Kingdom of Iraq|Iraq]] and [[Iran]], India and the Far East. The island was also close to the [[Strait of Sicily|Sicilian Channel]] between [[Sicily]] and [[Tunis]].{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=293–294}} Malta was also a base for air, sea and submarine operations against Axis supply convoys by the [[Royal Air Force]] (RAF) and [[Fleet Air Arm]] (FAA).{{sfn|Richards|Saunders|1975|pp=169–170}}

===Central Mediterranean, 1942===
Military operations from Malta and using the island as a staging post, led to Axis air campaigns against the island in 1941 and 1942. By late July, the {{nowrap|80 fighters}} on the island averaged wastage of {{nowrap|17 per week}} and the remaining aviation fuel was only sufficient for the fighters, making it impractical to send more bombers and torpedo-bombers for offensive operations.{{sfn|Playfair|2004|pp=324–325}}Resources available to sustain Malta were reduced when [[Japan]] declared war in December 1941, and conducted the [[Indian Ocean raid]] in April 1942.{{sfn|Potter|Nimitz|1960|pp=654–661}} Malta was neutralised as an offensive base against Italian convoys by the attacks of the ''Regia Aeronautica'' and the ''Luftwaffe'' in early 1942. Several warships were sunk in Valletta harbour and others were withdrawn to Gibraltar and Egypt. Food and medicines for the Maltese population and the British garrison dwindled along with fuel, ammunition and spare parts with the success of Axis attacks on Malta convoys. The Italian [[Operation C3]] and the Axis {{lang|de|Unternehmen Herkules}} (Operation Hercules) invasion plans against Malta were prepared but then cancelled on 16 June 1942.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=324}}{{sfn|Greene|Massignani|2002|p=225}}

===Battle of the Mediterranean===

[[File:General map of Malta.svg|thumb|{{centre|General map of Malta}}]]
The [[Allies of World War II|Allies]] waged the [[Western Desert Campaign]] (1940–43) in North Africa, against the [[Axis Powers|Axis]] forces of [[Kingdom of Italy (1861–1946)|Italy]] aided by [[Nazi Germany|Germany]], which sent the [[Afrika Korps|''Deutsches Afrika Korps'']] and substantial ''[[Luftwaffe]]'' detachments to the Mediterranean in late 1940. Up to the end of the year, {{nowrap|21 ships}} with {{convert|160000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of cargo reached Malta without loss and a reserve of seven months' supplies had been accumulated. Three [[Battle of the Mediterranean#1941|convoy operations]] to Malta in 1941 lost only one merchant ship. From January 1941 to August 1942, {{nowrap|46}} ships delivered {{convert|320000|LT|t|abbr=on}} but {{nowrap|25 ships}} were sunk and modern, efficient, merchant ships, naval and air forces had been diverted from other routes for long periods; thirty-one supply runs by submarines were also conducted.{{sfn|Playfair|2004|p=324}} [[Siege of Malta (World War II)#Allied reinforcement|Reinforcements for Malta]], included {{nowrap|19 costly}} and dangerous aircraft carrier ferry operations to deliver fighters.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=298}} From August 1940 to the end of August 1942, {{nowrap|670 [[Hawker Hurricane]]}} and [[Supermarine Spitfire]] fighters were flown off aircraft carriers in the western Mediterranean.{{sfn|Playfair|2004|p=325}} Many other aircraft used Malta as a staging post for North Africa and the [[Desert Air Force]].{{sfn|Hooton|2010|p=134}}

==Prelude==

When Italy declared war on Britain and France on 10 June 1940, the Taranto Naval Squadron did not sail to occupy Malta as suggested by Admiral [[Carlo Bergamini (admiral)|Carlo Bergamini]].{{sfn|Bartimeus|1944|pp=42–47}} With Italian bases in Sicily, British control of Malta was made more difficult from its bases in [[Gibraltar]] to the west and [[Cyprus]], [[Egypt]] and [[Mandatory Palestine|Palestine]] to the east, which were much further away. Two weeks later, the [[Second Armistice at Compiègne]] ended British access to [[Mediterranean Sea]] bases in France and passage to Mediterranean colonies. The British [[attack on Mers-el-Kébir]] on 3 July 1940 against French naval ships, began an informal war between [[Vichy France|Vichy France]] and Britain. Axis support for General [[Francisco Franco]] in the [[Spanish Civil War]] also caused British to be apprehensive about the [[Spain in World War II|security]] of the British base at Gibraltar. It was soon clear that unlike the Atlantic, where the war was fought by U-boats and surface and air escorts, operations in the Mediterranean would depend on air power and the possession of land bases to operate the aircraft.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=293}}

Events on land in Greece, Crete, Libya and the rest of the south shore of the Mediterranean would have great influence on the security of sea communications by both sides. An Italian conquest of Egypt could link [[Ethiopia|Abyssinia]], [[Italian Somaliland]] and [[Eritrea]]. The [[Italian invasion of Egypt]] in September 1940, was followed by [[Operation Compass]], a British counter-offensive in December, which led to the destruction of the Italian [[Tenth Army (Italy)|10th Army]] and the conquest of [[Cyrenaica]] in January 1941. Hitler transferred the [[10th Air Corps (Germany)|''Fliegerkorps X'']] to Sicily in {{lang|de|Unternehmen Mittelmeer}} (Operation Mediterranean) to protect the Axis supply routes past Malta, and sent the ''Afrika Korps'' to Libya in [[Operation Sonnenblume|''Unternehmen Sonnenblume'']] (Operation Sunflower) which, with Italian reinforcements, recaptured Cyrenaica.{{sfn|Potter|Nimitz|1960|pp=521–527}} ''Fliegerkorps X'' was transferred to [[Greece]] in April 1941 and the [[23rd U-boat Flotilla]] was based at [[Salamis Naval Base|Salamis]], near [[Athens]], in September.{{sfn|Helgason|2012|nopp=y}}

==1940==

===July===

[[File:Map of Malta 2.png|thumb|{{centre|Map of Malta}}]]
In the [[Battle of Calabria]] (''Battaglia di Punta Stilo''), ''Regia Marina'' escorts (two battleships, 14 cruisers and 32 destroyers) of an Italian convoy engaged the battleships {{HMS|Warspite|03|6}}, {{HMS|Malaya||2}} and {{HMS|Royal Sovereign|05|2}} and the aircraft carrier {{HMS|Eagle|1918|6}}.{{sfn|Greene|Massignani|2002|pp=63–81}} The British cruisers and destroyers covered two convoys heading from Malta to Alexandria. The first, Malta Fast 1 (MF 1)/Malta East 1 (ME 1), was composed of the ''El Nil'', ''Knight of Malta'' and ''Rodi''; the second, Malta Slow 1 (MS 1)/ME 1 was composed of the ''Kirkland'', ''Masirah'', ''Novasli'', ''Tweed'' and ''Zeeland''.{{sfn|Greene|Massignani|2002|pp=63–81}}

===August===

====Operation Hurry====

{{main|Operation Hurry}}

Using an aircraft carrier to ferry land based aircraft to Malta had been discussed by the Admiralty in July and once Italy had declared war, the reinforcement of Malta could be delayed no longer. The training aircraft carrier {{HMS|Argus|I49|6}} was used to despatch twelve Hurricanes to Malta from a position to the south-west of Sardinia. Hurry was the first Club Run to reinforce the air defence of the island, despite the British Chiefs of Staff decision two months earlier that nothing could be done to reinforce Malta.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=298}} Club Runs continued until it was possible to fly the aircraft direct from Gibraltar.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=58, 61}}

===September===

====Operation Hats====
[[File:Prelucrare 3D pentru La Valletta Harbour.jpg|thumb|{{centre|La Valletta Harbour}}]]
The Mediterranean Fleet escorted fast convoy MF 2 of three transports (carrying {{convert|40000|ST|t|lk=on|abbr=on}} of supplies, including reinforcements and ammunition for the island's anti-aircraft defences) from Alexandria and collected another convoy from Gibraltar.{{sfn|Hague|2000|pp=192–193}} En route, Italian airbases were raided; the ''Regia Marina'' had superior forces at sea but missed the opportunity to exploit their advantage.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=61–62, 64, 73–74}}

===October===

====Operation MB 6====
Four ships of convoy MF 3 reached Malta safely from Alexandria and three ships returned to Alexandria as convoy MF 4.{{sfn|Hague|2000|pp=192–193}} The convoys were part of Operation MB 6 and the escort included four battleships and two aircraft carriers. An Italian attempt against the returning escort by destroyers and torpedo boats ended in the [[Battle of Cape Passero (1940)|Battle of Cape Passero]], a British success.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=78–80}}

===November===

====Operation Judgement====

{{main|Battle of Taranto}}

[[File:Balearic Sea map.png|thumb|{{centre|western Mediterranean and Gibraltar, venue for Club Runs to Malta}}]]
The five ship convoy MW 3 from Alexandria and four ship return convoy ME 3 arrived safely, coinciding with a troop convoy from Gibraltar and the air attack on the Italian battle fleet at the Battle of Taranto.{{sfn|Hague|2000|pp=192–193}}{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=82, 86–87}}

====Operation White====

{{main|Operation White}}

In Operation White, twelve Hurricanes were flown off ''Argus'' to reinforce Malta but the threat of the Italian fleet lurking south of Sardinia prompted a premature fly-off from ''Argus'' and its return to Gibraltar. Eight Hurricanes ran out of fuel and ditched at sea, with seven pilots lost.{{sfn|Greene|Massignani|2002|p=115}} An enquiry found that the Hurricane pilots had been insufficiently trained about the range and endurance of their aircraft.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=298}}

====Operation Collar====

{{main|Operation Collar (convoy)}}

Operation Collar was intended to combine the passage of a battleship, heavy cruiser and light cruiser with mechanical defects from Alexandria to Gibraltar, with a four-ship convoy MW 4 to Malta and the sailing of ME 4 from Malta comprising ''Cornwall'' and the four empty ships from convoy MW 3, escorted by a cruiser and three destroyers. Attacks on Italian airfields in the Aegean and North Africa were to be made at the same time. Three ships at Gibraltar, two bound for Malta and one for Alexandria were to be escorted by the cruisers {{HMS|Manchester|15|6}} and {{HMS|Southampton|C83|6}}. Operation MB 9 from Alexandria began on 23 November, when convoy MW 4 with four ships sailed with eight destroyer escorts, covered by Force E of three cruisers. Force D comprising a battleship and two cruisers sailed on 24 November and next day, two more battleships, an aircraft carrier, two cruisers and four destroyers of Force C departed Alexandria. MW 4 reached Malta without incident; ME 4 had sailed on 26 November, two destroyers returned to Malta; the cruiser and one destroyer saw the freighters into Alexandria and Port Said on 30 November.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=95–97}}

Force F from Gibraltar was to pass 1,400 soldiers and RAF personnel from Gibraltar to Alexandria in the two cruisers, slip two supply ships into Malta and one to Crete. The other warships destined for the reinforcement of the fleet at Alexandria were to be sent on, the cruisers being accompanied by two destroyers and four corvettes. Force B provided the covering force with the battlecruiser ''Renown'', the aircraft carrier ''Ark Royal'', the cruisers ''Sheffield'' and ''Despatch'', and nine destroyers. The destroyers and corvettes left Alexandria on the night of 23/24 November to rendezvous with the merchant ships and their destroyer escorts from Britain. The cruisers embarked the troops and RAF personnel, leaving Gibraltar on 25 November. The British were unaware Italian reconnaissance aircraft had spotted the sorties from both ends of the Mediterranean and set up submarine ambushes. Two Italian battleships, three cruisers and two destroyer flotillas had left harbour, more cruisers, destroyers and torpedo boats following. Force D was attacked on the night of 26/27 November but the attack was so ineffectual that the British did not notice. On 27 November, aircraft from Force F spotted the Italian battle fleet, the force headed for Force D and prepared to defend the merchant ships, in what became a confused and inconclusive engagement. Two Italian submarines attacked three cruisers in the Sicilian Narrows as they waited for the eastbound convoy on the night of 27/28 November to no effect and the two ships for Malta arrived on 29 November, as Force H returned to Gibraltar and the through convoy and naval ships reached Alexandria.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=97–105}}

===December===

Convoy MW 5A with ''Lanarkshire'' and ''Waiwera'' carrying supplies and munitions and convoy MW 5B of ''Volo'', ''Rodi'' and ''Devis'', the tanker ''Pontfield'', ''Hoegh Hood'' and ''Ulster Prince'' from Alexandria with a covering force of a battleship, two cruisers, destroyers and corvettes reached Malta on 20 December and convoy ME 5 with the empty ''Breconshire'', ''Memnon'', ''Clan Macaulay'' and ''Clan Ferguson'' were collected by the covering force and returned to Alexandria.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=106–108}} Convoy MG 1 with ''Clan Forbes'' and ''Clan Fraser'' reached Gibraltar from Malta escorted by the battleship and four destroyers.{{sfn|Hague|2000|pp=192–193}}{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=107}}

==1941==

===January===

====Operation Excess====

{{main|Operation Excess}}

[[File:SM 79 attacking Malta convoy MIWM FLM 003795.jpg|thumb|{{centre|An Italian [[Savoia-Marchetti SM.79]] during an attack}}]]
Operation Excess delivered one ship from Gibraltar to Malta and three to [[Piraeus]]. The operation was coordinated with Operation MC 4, consisting of convoy MW {{frac|5|1|2}} with ''Breconshire'' and ''Clan Macaulay'' from Alexandria to Malta, ME 6, a return journey of ME {{frac|5|1|2}} with ''Lanarkshire'' and ''Waiwera'' and ME 6, with ''Volo'', ''Rodi'', ''Pontfield'', ''Devis'', ''Hoegh Hood'', ''Trocas'' and {{RFAux|Plumleaf|1917|6}}. The convoys arrived safely with {{convert|10000|ST|t|0|abbr=on}} of supplies. The cruiser {{HMS|Southampton|83|6}} was sunk, the cruiser {{HMS|Gloucester|62|6}} and aircraft carrier {{HMS|Illustrious|87|6}} were badly damaged and a destroyer was damaged beyond repair.{{sfn|Thomas|1999|p=65}} Excess was the first occasion that the ''Luftwaffe'' participated in an anti-convoy operation; the Italian torpedo boat [[Italian torpedo boat Vega|''Vega'']] was sunk during the operations.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=110–111, 113–114, 125–126}}

===February===

====Operation MC 8====

Operation MC 8, executed 19–21 February, delivered troops, vehicles, and stores to Malta in the cruisers ''Orion'', ''Ajax'' and ''Gloucester'' and [[Tribal-class destroyer (1936)|Tribal-class]] destroyers ''Nubian'' and ''Mohawk'', covered by ''Barham'', ''Valiant'', ''Eagle'', ''Coventry'', ''Decoy'', ''Hotspur'', ''Havock'', ''Hereward'', ''Hero'', ''Hasty'', ''Ilex'', ''Jervis'', ''Janus'' and ''Jaguar''.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=131}}

===March===

====Operation MC 9====

Operation MC 9 covered convoy MW 6 consisting of ''Perthshire'', ''Clan Ferguson'', ''City of Manchester'' and ''City of Lincoln'', which sailed from Alexandria on 19 March, the escorts sailing a day later, covered by the Mediterranean Fleet until the night of 22/23 March. The ships sailed by indirect routes and bad weather enabled the convoy to evade Axis air reconnaissance. The ships arrived at Malta, but two were bombed at their berths.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=133–134}}{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=423}}

===April===

====Operation Winch and convoy ME 7====

Hurricanes delivered to Gibraltar on ''Argus'' were put on board ''Ark Royal'', which sailed on 2 April, escorted by the battleship ''Renown'' a cruiser and five destroyers. The Hurricanes were flown off on 3 April and all arrived, Force H returning safely to Gibraltar on 4 April. Stores and ammunition were run to Malta in Operations MC 8 and MC 9. On 18 April, the Mediterranean Fleet sailed from Alexandria to Suda Bay in Crete with ''Breconshire'' carrying oil and aviation fuel for Malta. Late on 19 April, the Malta Strike Force destroyers sailed with convoy ME 7 of four empty cargo ships. ''Breconshire'' made a run into Malta and the destroyers returned after joining in a shore bombardment by the main fleet. The cruiser ''Gloucester'', which had a long range, joining the force.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=156–157, 160, 162–163}}

====Operation Dunlop====
{{see also|Battle of the Tarigo Convoy}}

In Operation Dunlop, {{HMS|Ark Royal|91|6}} sailed from Gibraltar on 24 April and flew off 24 Hurricanes at dawn on 27 April. [[Bristol Blenheim]]s and [[Bristol Beaufighter|Beaufighter]]s were also flown direct from Gibraltar. Three battleships and an aircraft carrier covered the fast transport ''Breconshire'' (now commissioned into the RN) from Alexandria to Malta. The operation was coordinated with the four-ship convoy ME 7 from Malta to Alexandria.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=164–166, 250}} On 16 April, the value of Malta for offensive operations was shown when four destroyers of the 14th Flotilla (the Malta Striking Force), recently based in the island, sank a five-ship Axis convoy of {{convert|14000|LT|t|abbr=on}} and its escorts in the Battle of the Tarigo Convoy.{{sfn|Greene|Massignani|2002|pp=162–164}}{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=431}}{{efn|An ''Afrika Korps'' convoy (the Tarigo convoy) of the German ships ''Aegina'', ''Arta'', ''Adana'' and ''Iserlhon'', with 3,000 troop reinforcements on board, the Italian ''Sabaudia'' loaded with ammunition and three Italian destroyer escorts was sunk by the destroyers ''Jervis'', ''Janus'', ''Nubian'' and ''Mohawk'', near the [[Kerkennah Islands]] off [[Tunisia]]; ''Mohawk'' was also sunk but the success showed the value of Malta as an offensive base. Churchill ordered that the Italian supply route to Tripoli be cut off and even suggested using the battleship ''Barham'' to block the harbour.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=158–159}}}}

====Operation Temple====
During Operation Temple, the freighter ''Parracombe'' sailed for Malta from Gibraltar on the night of 28/29 April, disguised as a Spanish merchantman and later as the Vichy steamer ''Oued-Kroum''. She was mined on 2 May, which blew off her bows, and sank with 21 Hurricanes, equipment, ammunition and military freight aboard.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=165–167}}

===May===

====Operations Tiger and Splice====
[[File:Strait of Sicily map.png|thumb|{{centre|Strait of Sicily}}]]
In Operation Tiger, convoy WS 8 sailed from Gibraltar to Alexandria, combined with a supply run to Malta by six destroyers of Force H. Five {{convert|15|kn|mph km/h|abbr=on}} merchant ships passed Gibraltar on 6 May accompanied by Force H, along with a battleship and two cruisers en route to Alexandria. The destroyers from Force H participated in the convoy operation as far as Malta. The task force bombarded Benghazi and rendezvoused with the convoy {{convert|50|nmi|mi km|abbr=on}} south of Malta late on 9 May.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=437}}

In Operation Splice, a Club Run from 19 to 22 May, 48 more Hurricanes were flown off ''Ark Royal'' and {{HMS|Furious|47|2}} on 21 May and all reached Malta. Slow convoy MW 7B with two tankers sailed from Egypt for Malta with {{convert|24000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of fuel oil, followed by fast convoy MW 7A with six freighters escorted by five cruisers, three destroyers and two corvettes. ''Abdiel'' and ''Breconshire'' sailed with the main fleet and all the ships reached Grand Harbour on 9 May preceded by a minesweeper, which detonated about twelve mines.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=172–173}} In May, the ''Luftwaffe'' transferred ''Fliegerkorps'' X from Sicily to the Balkans, relieving pressure on Malta and the British convoys until December.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=519}}

===June===

====Operation Rocket====

A Club Run from 5 to 7 June delivered 35 Hurricanes to Malta, guided by eight Blenheims from Gibraltar.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=177}}

====Operation Tracer====
In June, the new carrier {{HMS|Victorious|R38|6}} replaced ''Furious'' on Club Runs. On 13 June, Operation Tracer began, with ''Ark Royal'' and ''Victorious'', escorted by Force H, departed Gibralter. On 14 June, 47 Hurricanes, guided by four Hudsons from Gibraltar, were flown off; 43 Hurricanes reached Malta.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=177}}{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=423, 518}}

====Operations Railway I and II====

On 26 June ''Ark Royal'' and ''Furious'' sailed again with 22 Hurricanes, which were guided to Malta by Blenheims from Gibraltar; all arrived at Malta in bad weather, though one Hurricane crashed on landing. Force H reached port on 28 June, Crated aircraft were assembled aboard ''Furious'' as she joined Force H for Operation Railway II; on 30 June, 26 Hurricanes took off from ''Ark Royal''. The second fighter skidded on take off from ''Furious'' and a [[drop tank]] came loose and caught fire as the Hurricane went overboard, killing nine men and injuring four more before the fire was extinguished; it was early afternoon before the 35 remaining Hurricanes arrived at Malta, again guided by six Blenheims. During the month 142 aircraft reached Malta, some  of which were ferried to Egypt.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=177}}{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=423, 518}}
{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=423, 518}}

===July===

====Operation Substance====

{{main|Operation Substance}}

Operation Substance sent convoy GM 1 (six ships transporting 5,000 soldiers, escorted by six destroyers), covered by the battleship {{HMS|Nelson|28|2}} and three cruisers from the Home Fleet and Force H (''Ark Royal'', {{HMS|Renown|1916|2}}, and several cruisers and destroyers). GM 1 reached Gibraltar from Britain on 19 July and sailed for Malta on 21 July, minus troopship {{RMS|Leinster||6}} (carrying 1,000 troops and RAF ground crews) which ran aground and had to return to Gibraltar . The Eastern Fleet sortied from Alexandria as a diversion and eight submarines watched Italian ports and patrolled the routes an Italian sortie was expected to use. Force H was to return to Gibraltar upon reaching the Sicilian Narrows, while the close escort of three cruisers, ''Manxman'', and ten destroyers would continue to Malta. During the convoy operation, ''Breconshire'' and six other empty ships at Malta were independently to return to Gibraltar in Operation MG 1. On 23 July, south of Sardinia, Italian air attacks began; one cruiser was hit and had to return to Gibraltar, and a destroyer was so badly damaged it was scuttled, but air cover from ''Ark Royal'' enabled the convoy to reach the Skerki Channel by late afternoon. The covering force turned for Gibraltar and the rest of the convoy pressed on, facing more ''Regia Aeronautica'' attacks; these forced another damaged destroyer to drop out and return to Gibraltar. Turning north, the convoy evaded Italian aircraft, but on the night of 23/24 July, the {{nowrap|12,000 GRT}} steamer {{SS|Sydney Star||2}} was torpedoed by an [[MAS (boat)|MAS boat]] and crippled; the Australian destroyer {{HMAS|Nestor|G02|6}} assisted her safe arrival to harbour and she was seaworthy again by September. The cruisers sailed ahead to disembark troops and equipment; the convoy and its destroyer escort arrived later on 24 July. A raid on 26 July by Italian midget submarines, MAS boats, and aircraft on the transports in [[Grand Harbour]] failed, with the attacking force almost destroyed. {{convert|65000|ST|t|abbr=on}} of supplies were landed.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=184–185, 206–208, 212–213, 218}} On 31 July, three cruisers and two destroyers sailed from Gibraltar with the troops and stores left behind in ''Leinster'', reaching Malta 2 August.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=521–523}}
===September===

====Operations Status I and II, Operation Propeller====

[[File:HMS Birmingham convoy.jpg|thumb|Three British cruisers during Operation Halberd]]
''Ark Royal'' and ''Furious'' flew off over over 50 Hurricanes to Malta in Operations Status I and Status II, forty-nine arriving; several Blenheims flew direct from Gibraltar at the same time, to build up the Malta striking force to use the munitions delivered in Operation Substance.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=524}} The merchantman {{ship|SS|Empire Guillemot}} reached Malta from Gibraltar in Operation Propeller and another ship completed the trip independently.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=218–219}}

====Operation Halberd====

{{main|Operation Halberd}}
In Operation Halberd, the eastbound convoy GM 2 with nine {{convert|15|kn|mph km/h|abbr=on}} merchant ships, carrying {{convert|81000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of supplies and 2,600 troops from Gibraltar, was accompanied by the battleships ''Nelson'', {{HMS|Rodney|29|2}}, {{HMS|Prince of Wales|53|2}} (all detached from the Home Fleet), ''Ark Royal'', five cruisers, and eighteen destroyers. The British staged diversions in the eastern Mediterranean and submarines and aircraft watched Italian naval and air bases. Attacks on the convoy by the ''Regia Aeronautica'' began on 27 September, demonstrating more skill and determination than earlier encounters. An Italian torpedo bomber hit ''Nelson'' with an [[aerial torpedo]] and reduced her speed. Later air attacks were deterred by the anti-aircraft fire of the British destroyer screen. British reconnaissance aircraft reported the Italian Fleet had left harbour and was on an interception course and the British covering force, less ''Nelson'', was sent to engage. ''Ark Royal'' launched her torpedo bombers but the Italian turned back, and the aircraft failed to make contact; at about {{nowrap|7:00 p.m.}}, GM 2 reached the Narrows.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=529–530}}

The five cruisers and nine of the destroyers continued for Malta as the covering force changed course. The British made course for Sicily, which enabled them to skirt minefields laid by the Italians in the channel between Sicily and the North African coast. During the night the moon was bright and Italian torpedo bombers managed to hit the {{nowrap|10,000 GRT}} transport {{SS|Imperial Star||2}} with an aerial torpedo. Attempts to tow the ship to Malta failed; her troops were taken off and the ship was scuttled. During the morning of 28 September, the convoy came into range of Malta-based fighters. The rest of the convoy reached Malta at {{nowrap|1:30 p.m.}} and landed {{convert|85000|ST|t|abbr=on}} of supplies. Halberd was the last convoy operation of 1941.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=530–531}}

===October===

====Operations Callboy and MG 3====
{{see also|Force K#Force K (1941)}}

On 16 October, Force H covered Operation Callboy, another Club Run by ''Ark Royal'', to fly off thirteen Swordfish and Albacore torpedo bombers for Malta, delivered to Gibraltar by ''Argus''.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=532–533}} On 12 October, the cruisers {{HMS|Aurora|12|6}} and {{HMS|Penelope|97|2}} had sailed from Scapa Flow for Malta and were joined by the destroyers {{HMS|Lance|G87|6}} and {{HMS|Lively|G40|2}} of Force H at Gibraltar, reaching the island on 21 October. The squadron was named [[Force K]] (reviving a title used in 1939) for operations against the Italian supply route to North Africa. Operation MG 3 was a convoy planned to despatch the Halberd merchant ships from Malta but the ships sailed in succession. Two departed on 16 October but one ship had to turn back with engine trouble. The second ship was covered by the fleet movements of Operation Callboy which reached the flying off point on 17 October and arrived on 19 October, having dodged a torpedo bomber attack. Two cruisers and two destroyers of Force H loaded equipment and ammunition for Malta as soon as they got back to Gibraltar and sailed again on 0 October, arriving at Grand Harbour in Malta the next day. Two ships sailed from Malta in ballast on 21 October and arrived at Gibraltar despite air attacks; one ship with engine trouble left Malta again on 22 October, watched over by [[Consolidated PBY Catalina|Catalina]] flying boats, but failed to arrive; an Italian radio broadcast claimed the sinking. The fourth ship sailed on 24 October but was attacked by an Italian aircraft and recalled, having been spotted so quickly.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=240–243}}

===November===

====Operation Perpetual====

Force K of two cruisers and two destroyers sailed from Malta on 8 November and sank the merchant ships of an Axis convoy off Cape Spartivento.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=532}}{{efn|Force K sank seven merchantmen and one of its destroyer escorts; the force was back at Malta by the afternoon of 9 November and the submarine ''Upholder'' from Malta sank another destroyer.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=532–533}}}} On 10 November, ''Ark Royal'' and ''Argus'' sailed from Gibraltar and flew off thirty-seven Hurricanes, thirty-four arriving successfully; seven Blenheims flew direct from Gibraltar.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=243–245}} On 13 November, ''Ark Royal'' was torpedoed and sank the next day, {{convert|25|nmi|mi km|abbr=on}} from Gibraltar.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=533}}

====Operation Astrologer====

Operation Astrologer (14–15 November 1941), an attempt to supply Malta by two unescorted freighters, [[List of Empire ships (P)|''Empire Pelican'']] and {{SS|Empire Defender||2}} disguised as neutral Spanish then French ships. ''Empire Pelican'' passed Gibraltar on 12 November and sailed close to the Moroccan, Algerian and Tunisian coasts but was spotted by Italian aircraft at early on 14 November south of [[Galite Islands]] and sunk by torpedo bombers. ''Empire Defender'' was sunk at sunset the nest day in the same place; Astrologer was the last attempt to send merchant ships to Malta from the west for six months.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=250–251}}



===December===

====Operations MF 1 and MD 1====

To alleviate a fuel oil shortage on Malta, [[MV Breconshire|MV ''Breconshire'']] was escorted from Malta on 5 December by a cruiser and four destroyers of Force K in Operation MF 1 towards Alexandria; next day, a cruiser and two destroyers left Alexandria. During the evening of 6 December the cruiser and two destroyers returned to Malta and two destroyers carried on with ''Breconshire'', meeting the cruiser and two destroyers from Alexandria at dawn on 7 December. Two destroyers went on to Malta and ''Breconshire'' continued to Alexandria accompanied by the cruiser and its two destroyers, reaching Alexandria on 8 December, less the cruiser which was detached to help a sloop damaged by air attack of Tobruk. ''Breconshire'' was filled with {{convert|5000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of boiler oil and every space was filled with supplies. On 15 December, MD 1 began when ''Breconshire'' sailed for Malta with three cruiser and eight destroyer escorts. During the night ''Breconshire'' was slowed by engine trouble and on 16 December the force headed west in daylight without zig-zagging. After dark a cruiser and two destroyers turned back and made spurious wireless broadcasts to simulate the battle fleet at sea. Destroyers left Malta on 16 December and at {{nowrap|6:00 p.m.}} Force K comprising two cruisers and two destroyers sailed to meet ''Breconshire'' and escort it into Grand Harbour.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=263–264, 267–268}}

During the afternoon, an Italian battleship convoy was spotted and every seaworthy ship at Malta was ordered out to bring in ''Breconshire''. Only one cruiser and two destroyers were operational but they met the oncoming force before dawn on 17 December and the ships made a circle round ''Breconshire''; the ''Luftwaffe'' and ''Regia Aeronautica'' attacked through the afternoon with bombs and torpedoes. As night was falling, three Italian battleships two cruisers and ten destroyers appeared and ''Breconshire'' and two escorts were diverted to the south-west as the rest of the British ships turned towards the Italian fleet. With the escorts between the Italians and ''Breconshire'', the ship was handed over to Force K as it arrived and set a smoke screen. The opposing ships diverged in the dark and Force K turned for Malta with ''Breconshire''; the rest of the ships returned to Alexandria and the Italian freighters reached Libya. Force K and ''Breconshire'' spent 18 December under air attack, until Malta Hurricanes arrived in the afternoon and at around {{nowrap|3:00 p.m.}} the ships arrived in Malta.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=268–270}}

==1942==

===January===

====Operation MF 2====

[[File:HMS Dido (37).jpg|thumb|{{centre|HMS ''Dido'' at anchor in the Firth of Forth}}]]

On 5 January, the fast supply ship {{HMS|Glengyle||6}} was escorted from Alexandria by [[15th Cruiser Squadron]] (Force B, commanded by Rear Admiral [[Philip Vian]], made up of [[Dido-class cruiser|''Dido''-class]] [[light cruiser]]s ''Naiad'', ''Dido'', and ''Euryalus'' and the [[Cruiser#Anti-aircraft cruisers|Anti-aircraft cruiser]] {{HMS|Carlisle|D67|6}}) and six destroyers. The cruisers served as a bluff, in the absence of more heavily-armed ships capable of challenging a sortie by the ''Regia Marina''.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|p=44}}{{efn|The [[Dido-class cruiser]]s were equipped with a main armament of [[Dual-purpose gun|dual-purpose]] [[QF 5.25 inch gun]]s and had been designed for convoy protection{{cn|date=January 2019|reason=5.25" AA guns for convoy protection? I really doubt it}} and service in the Mediterranean.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|p=44}}{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=485}}}} ''Breconshire'' had sailed from Malta on 6 January escorted by four destroyers of Force C; the two forces met on 7 January and Force C with ''Glengyle'' reached Malta on 8 January, Force B with ''Breconshire'' arriving at Alexandria the next day.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=279–280}}

====Operation MF 3====
On 16 January the convoys MW8A and MW8B with two ships each, sailed from Alexandria in Operation MF3, accompanied by ''Carlisle'' and two [[Destroyer squadron#Royal Navy|destroyer division]]s.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|p=295}} 15th Cruiser Squadron sortied on 17 January January to join the escort for both convoys. Force K (still short ''Aurora'') departed Malta to rendezvous with the convoy on 18 January. ''Thermopylae'' (6,655 tons), in MW8A, developed mechanical faults and was diverted to Benghazi but was severely damaged by bombing ''en route'' and had to be scuttled. On 17 January, the destroyer {{HMS|Gurkha|G63|6}} was torpedoed by {{GS|U-133|1941|2}}; the Dutch destroyer {{HNLMS|Isaac Sweers||6}} towed her clear of blazing oil, allowing most of her crew to be rescued before she sank. The three remaining freighters reached Malta, air attacks on the ships being intercepted by fighters from [[No. 201 Group RAF|No. 201 (Naval Co-operation) Group]] based in Cyrenaica, the convoy and escorts' anti-aircraft guns; once the convoy was in range. Hurricanes from Malta also provided air cover and the ships docked on 19 January.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=280–281}} On 26 January, in a similar operation, ''Breconshire'' and escorts from Alexandria met two ships which had sailed from Malta on 25 January transporting service families from Malta with escorts from Force K, which escorted ''Breconshire'' back to the island on 27 January.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|pp=44–45}}{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=282}}

===February===

====Operation MF 5====

[[File:Tunisia - Sicily - South Italy.jpg|thumb|{{centre|Satellite image of Sardinia, Italy, Sicily, Malta and Tunisia}}]]

On 12 February, a three ship convoy MW 9, escorted by ''Carlisle'' and eight destroyers, sailed from Alexandria in [[Operation MF5]]; several hours later, two cruisers from 15th Cruiser Squadron, escorted by eight destroyers, sortied to protect it. On 14 February, {{SS|Clan Campbell|1937|6}} was bombed and forced to seek shelter in [[Tobruk]], [[Cameron-class steamship|''Clan Chattan'']] was bombed, caught fire and [[Scuttling|scuttled]] in the afternoon; [[Union-Castle Line|''Rowallan Castle'']] was near-missed, disabled and taken under tow but scuttled by ''Lively'' after it was realised she could not reach Malta before dark: the escort had been warned the Italian battleship {{Ship|Italian battleship|Caio Duilio||2}} had sailed from Taranto to intercept the convoy.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|p=48}}{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=285–286}}

===March===

====Operation Spotter====

{{see also|Second Battle of Sirte}}

{|class="wikitable" align=right style="margin:0 0 1em 1em"
|+Convoy MW 10 westbound, March 1942{{sfn|Roskill|1962|p=73}}
|-
! Type
! No.
! Sunk
! Dgd
|-
| Cruisers ||align="center"|4||align="center"|—||align="center"|3
|-
| AA Ships ||align="center"|1||align="center"|—||align="center"|—
|-
| Destroyers ||align="center"|18||align="center"|3||align="center"|2
|-
| Submarines ||align="center"|5||align="center"|1||align="center"|—
|-
| Freighters ||align="center"|4||align="center"|1||align="center"|—
|-
| Freighters arriving ||align="center"|3||align="center"|3 in dock||align="center"|—
|}
On 6 March, Operation Spotter, a Club Run by the aircraft carriers ''Eagle'' and ''Argus'' flew off the first 15 Spitfire reinforcements for Malta. An earlier attempt had been abandoned but the right external ferry tanks were fitted; seven Blenheims flew direct from Gibraltar. On 10 March, the Spitfires flew their first sorties against a raid by Ju 88s escorted by Bf 109 fighters.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=291}}

====Operation MG 1====
Operation MG 1 began with convoy MW 10 of four ships sailing from Alexandria at {{nowrap|7:10 a.m.}} on 20 March, each with a navy liaison party and [[Defensively equipped merchant ship]] (DEMS) gunners, supplemented by service passengers. The convoy was escorted by Force B, the cruisers {{HMS|Cleopatra|33|6}}, {{HMS|Dido|37|2}}, {{HMS|Euryalus|42|2}}, the anti-aircraft cruiser ''Carlisle'' and the six ships of the [[22nd Destroyer Flotilla]]. The 5th Destroyer Flotilla sailed from Tobruk on an anti-submarine sweep, before joining the convoy on 21 March. ''Clan Campbell'' struggled to keep up because of engine trouble and the convoy timetable was not met. Several British submarines participated near Messina and Taranto to watch for Italian ships. [[Long Range Desert Group]] parties were to attack the airfields at Martuba and Tmimi in Cyrenaica as RAF and FAA aircraft bombed them to ground Ju 88 bombers; 201 Group RAF provided air cover and reconnaissance of the convoy route. A club run, Operation Picket was to use ''Argus'' and ''Eagle'', with Force H as a decoy, but the Spitfire ferry tanks were found to be defective and the operation was called off.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=293–295}}

On 22 March, when MW 10 was through Bomb Alley, news arrived that an Italian squadron had sailed and from {{nowrap|10:35 a.m. – 12:05 p.m.}} five Italian torpedo bomber attacks were made but with no hits. In the afternoon, German and Italian air attacks began, with bombs and torpedoes, again to no effect. Smoke was seen at {{nowrap|2:10 p.m.}} and the escorts moved to intercept in rough seas as the convoy was hidden by a smoke screen. Italian cruisers commenced fire, then turned to lure the British cruisers towards ''Littorio''; the British did not take the bait. The exchange was the beginning of the Second Battle of Sirte and Axis aircraft concentrated on the convoy, which manoeuvred so effectively that no ship was hit, but the ships and close escort fired much of their ammunition. During the battle near the convoy, the escorts kept laying smoke screens and the Italians came within {{convert|8|nmi|mi km|abbr=on}} as Force B dodged around in the smoke, attacking at every opportunity.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=300, 303}}

German air attacks continued and Force B turned for Alexandria, very short of fuel as Force K joined the convoy for the last leg. The convoy had been ordered to disperse, three ships diverting southwards and ''Clan Campbell'' making straight for Grand Harbour, the diversions being calculated to bring the ships back together just short of Malta by daylight on 23 March. The detours were a mistake and ''Pampas'' was hit by a bomb during the morning but kept going, reaching Malta. ''Talabot'' was also frequently attacked but arrived undamaged, except from some small bombs dropped by a Bf 109 fighter-bomber. ''Clan Campbell'' was sunk {{convert|20|nmi|mi km|abbr=on}} from Malta and ''Breconshire'', after being taken in tow by destroyers and tugs several times, reached Marsaxlokk harbour on 25 March. Unloading of the ships was very slow and ''Luftwaffe'' attacks on 26 March sank ''Breconshire'' in the evening and continued bombing Valletta harbour into the night. ''Talabot'' and ''Pampas'' were set on fire before unloading, only {{convert|4952|ST|t|abbr=on}} of the {{convert|29500|ST|t|abbr=on}} of supplies were landed and several destroyers were seriously damaged.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=306–316}}

====Operation Picket====

On 22 March, a Club Run by ''Argus'' and ''Eagle'' covered by Force H sailed from Gibraltar to deliver Spitfires to Malta and to divert attention from MG 1. Two Italian submarines spotted the British ships and one fired torpedoes at ''Argus'' with no effect but the operation was cancelled when the long range fuel tanks of the Spitfires were found to be defective. The operation was repeated on 27 March and sixteen Spitfires were flown off for Malta, the ships returning to Gibraltar on 30 March.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=295, 317}}

===April===

====Operation Calendar====

{{main|Operation Calendar}}

As Malta's effectiveness as an effective offensive base diminished, forty-seven Spitfires were flown off as reinforcements. They were delivered by the [[United States Navy|American]] carrier {{USS|Wasp|CV-7|6}}, escorted by the battlecruiser ''Renown'', cruisers {{HMS|Cairo|D87|6}} and {{HMS|Charybdis|88|2}} and six British and US destroyers. Most of the aircraft were destroyed on the ground by bombing.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=320–322}}

===May===

====Operations Bowery and LB====
{{see also|Operation Bowery}}

In Operation Bowery, 64 Spitfires were flown off ''Wasp'' and ''Eagle''. A second batch of 16 fighters were flown off ''Eagle'' in Operation LB.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=321–322, 328}}

===June===

====Operation Style====
On 20 May, {{SS|Empire Conrad||6}} departed from [[Milford Haven]], [[Wales]] with a cargo of 32 Spitfires in cases. The aircraft were all Spitfire Mk VcT. Also on board were the ground crew who were to assemble them, a total of over 110 men. ''Empire Conrad'' was escorted by the 29th ML Flotilla and the [[corvette]] {{HMS|Spirea|K08|6}}. The convoy was later joined by the [[minesweeper (ship)|Minesweepers]] {{HMS|Hythe|J194|6}} and {{HMS|Rye|J76|2}}. ''Empire Conrad'' arrived at Gibraltar on 27 May. The aircraft were transferred to the aircraft carrier {{HMS|Eagle|R05|6}} where they were assembled. On 2 June, ''Eagle'' departed from Gibraltar escorted by the cruiser ''Charybdis'' and destroyers {{HMS|Antelope|H36|6}}, {{HMS|Ithuriel|H05|2}}, {{HMS|Partridge|G30|2}}, {{HMS|Westcott|D47|2}} and {{HMS|Wishart|D67|2}}. On 3 June, the aircraft were flown off ''Eagle'', bound for Malta. Twenty-eight arrived safely, with the other four being shot down en route.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=211, 328}}

====Operation Julius (Harpoon and Vigorous)====

{{Main|Operation Harpoon (1942)|Operation Vigorous}}

[[File:STS059-238-074 Strait of Gibraltar.jpg|thumb|{{centre|Satellite photograph of the Straits of Gibraltar, the starting point for Operation Harpoon}}]]
The arrival of more Spitfires from ''Eagle'' and the transfer of German aircraft to the [[Eastern Front (World War II)|Russian Front]] eased the pressure on Malta but supplies were needed. [[Operation Julius]] was planned to send convoys simultaneously from both ends of the Mediterranean.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=328–329}} The ships for Operation Harpoon sailed from Britain on 5 June and entered the Mediterranean on the night of 11/12 June. Several stations were called on to obtain one battleship, the aircraft carriers ''Eagle'' and ''Argus'', three cruisers, and eight destroyers for the escort and covering force to the Narrows, the close escort into Malta comprising the anti-aircraft cruiser ''Cairo'', nine destroyers, four fleet minesweepers, and six minesweeping motor launches. Once the convoy of three British, one Dutch and two U.S. freighters, carrying {{convert|43000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of supplies, had been swept through the Axis minefields, the minesweepers were to remain at Malta.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=63–64}}

The ships from Gibraltar and Alexandria were intended to arrive on consecutive days. Axis naval and air forces attacks began on the morning of 12 June; one cruiser was badly damaged and one merchantman sunk. On 15 June, an Italian cruiser force engaged the close escort and as ''Cairo'' and the small destroyers made smoke, the fleet destroyers attacked the Italian ships. Two of the fleet destroyers were soon disabled the remaining three managed to hit an Italian destroyer and were then joined by the cruiser and the four smaller destroyers. Dive-bombers attacked the convoy soon after and one merchant ship was sunk and another damaged and taken in tow. Near noon, another air attack damaged another merchant ship and it and the ship in tow were sunk to increase the speed of the remaining two ships, which under cover of the Malta Spitfires which defeated several more air attacks, arrived with {{convert|15000|ST|t|abbr=on}} of supplies; the destroyers {{HMS|Bedouin|F67|6}} and the [[Poland|Polish]] {{Ship|ORP|Kujawiak|L72|2}} were also sunk.{{sfn|Roskill|1957|pp=64–66}}{{efn|''Merlins over Malta'' ([http://merlinsovermalta.gdenney.co.uk/worldwar2/timeline/ Chronology of the Siege of Malta, 1940–43]) states that 25,000 tons were landed, enough to sustain the population for two to three months.}}

A convoy of eleven merchant ships from [[Haifa]], [[Mandate Palestine|Palestine]] and [[Port Said]], Egypt sailed in Operation Vigorous and was attacked by aircraft, torpedo boats and submarines for four days, then threatened by a strong Italian task force and turned back. The cruiser {{HMS|Hermione|74|6}} and destroyers {{HMS|Hasty|H24|6}}, ''Airedale'', ''Nestor'', along with two merchantmen, were sunk.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=329–370}}

===July===

====Operation Pinpoint====

''Welshman'' departed Gibraltar 14 July, carrying powdered milk, cooking oil, fats and flour, soap, and minesweeping stores. She was in company of an aircraft carrier, two cruisers, These were protected by powerful escort and covering forces, totalling forty-four warships, including the aircraft carriers ''Eagle'', ''Indomitable'' and ''Victorious'' and battleships ''Nelson'' and ''Rodney''. A diversionary operation was staged from Alexandria. The convoy was attacked fiercely. Three transports reached Malta on 13 August and another on 14 August. ''Ohio'' arrived on 15 August, ''Ohio'' arrived on 15 August, heavily damaged by air attacks, under tow by destroyers {{HMS|Penn|G77|6}} and {{HMS|Ledbury|L90|2}}. The rest were sunk. ''Ohio'' later broke in two in Valletta Harbour but not before much of her cargo had been unloaded. ''Eagle'', cruisers ''Cairo'' and {{HMS|Manchester|C15|2}} and the destroyer {{HMS|Foresight|H68|6}} were sunk and there was serious damage to other warships; Italian losses were two submarines and damage to two cruisers.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=283, 372–380, 386–442, 454–455, 463}}

This convoy, especially the arrival of ''Ohio'', was seen as ''divine intervention'' by the people of Malta. August 15 is celebrated as the feast of the [[Assumption of Mary]] and many Maltese attributed the arrival of ''Ohio'' into Grand Harbour as the answer to their prayers.{{sfn|Castillo|2006|p=207}} It had been agreed by military commanders at the time that if supplies became any lower, they would surrender the islands (the actual date, deferred as supplies were received, was referred to as the target date).{{sfn|Woodman|2003|p=283}}  Pedestal delivered {{convert|12000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of coal, {{convert|32000|LT|t|abbr=on}} freight and {{convert|11000|LT|t|abbr=on}} of oil aboard ''Ohio''. The commodities landed were enough for Malta to last until mid-November.{{sfn|Castillo|2006|p=199}} The 568 survivors of the Pedestal convoy were evacuated, 207 men on three destroyers to Gibraltar and the remainder by submarine and aircraft.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=450–457}}

====Operation Baritone====

[[File:Baleares-rotulado.png|thumb|{{centre|Formetera in the Balearic Islands}}]]
On 16 August, a cruiser and twelve destroyers escorted ''Furious'' to the area south of [[Formentera]] in the south-west of the [[Balearic Islands]], where she flew off 32 Spitfires; one crashed on take-off and two turned back, the rest reaching Malta that afternoon.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=456–457}}

===September===

ubmarine {{HMS|Talisman|N78|6}} was lost 17 September on a supply run from Gibraltar, either in a minefield or depth-charged by Italian torpedo boats north-west of Malta.{{sfn|DNC|1952|p=376}}
===October===

Magic Carpet rides by submarine reached Malta on 2 October (''Rorqual''), 3 October (''Parthian''), and 6 October (''Clyde''), with petrol and other stores, departing for Beirut on 8 October carrying survivors from Pedestal.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=450–457}}

====Operation Train====

A continuous flow of new Spitfires to Malta had become necessary after the Axis air forces resorted to attacks by fighter-bombers; in another Club Run from 28 to 30 October, two cruisers and eight destroyers escorted ''Furious'' which flew off 29 Spitfires for Malta, of which two returned with engine trouble. Ten Italian submarines were patrolling but were not able to attack and Axis aircraft were held off until the afternoon of 29 October, when a Ju 88 managed to drop a bomb which landed {{convert|600|ft|m|abbr=on}} astern of ''Furious''.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|pp=311–312}}

===November===

====Operations Stone Age and Crupper====

{{Main|Operation Stoneage}}

[[File:Fairey Albacore ExCC.jpg|thumb|{{centre|[[Fairey Albacore]]}}]]

An attempt in early November to sneak an independently routed, disguised freighter to Malta from Alexandria failed; on Operation Crupper, the disguised merchant ships ''Ardeola'' (2,609 tons) and ''Tadorna'' (1,947 tons) from Gibraltar, were captured and interned at Bizerta while passing through Vichy territorial waters. ''Welshman'' made a dash from Gibraltar with a cargo of dried food and torpedoes during the Allied landings in French North Africa (Operation Torch), {{HMS|Manxman|M70|2}} and six destroyers sailed from Alexandria on 11 November; both efforts succeeded.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|pp=340, 312}} On 17 November, convoy MW 13 (two U.S., one Dutch, and one British merchant ship, carrying {{convert|35000|ST|t|abbr=on}} of supplies) departed Alexandria, escorted by three cruisers of the 15th Cruiser Squadron; from 18 November, this was reduced to ten destroyers. Axis air attacks began and after the main escort had detached, the cruiser {{HMS|Arethusa|26|6}} was torpedoed and set on fire. Many of the air attacks were intercepted by Allied fighters flying from desert airfields and on 20 November, MW 13 arrived, escorted by ''Euryalus'' and ten Hunt-class destroyers. By 25 November, the ships had landed an adequate quantity of aviation fuel and Magic Carpet rides were cancelled.  The success of Stone Age relieved the siege of Malta, albeit by a narrow margin because the lack of military stores and food for the population would have been exhausted by December.

===December===

====Operation Portcullis====

{{Main|Operation Portcullis}}

In Operation Portcullis, the five ships of convoy MW 14 arrived from Port Said with {{convert|55000|ST|t|abbr=on}} of supplies, the first convoy to arrive without loss since 1941.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|p=346}} Nine more ships arrived in convoys MW 15 to MW 18, delivering {{convert|18200|ST|t|abbr=on}} of fuel and another {{convert|58500|ST|t|abbr=on}} of general supplies and military [[materiel|stores]] by the end of December; thirteen ships returned to Alexandria as convoys ME 11 and ME 12. Increased rations to civilians helped to stave off the general decline in health of the population, which had led to an outbreak of [[poliomyelitis]].{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=461–464}}

===December 1942 – January 1943===

====Operation Quadrangle====

Portcullis was the last direct convoy to Malta; in Operations Quadrangle A, B, C and D, pairs of ships to Malta joined with ordinary west-bound convoys then rendezvoused with escorts from Force K, arriving with no loss.{{sfn|Roskill|1962|p=346}} In Operation Quadrangle A, convoy MW 15 of two ships was a side convoy from the new Port Said to Benghazi service. When the main convoy arrived off [[Marj|Barce]] in Libya, the ships for Malta rendezvoused with eight destroyer escorts and empty ships from the island. The ships exchanged escorts for the return voyage to Grand Harbour, MW 15 arriving on 10 December. Operation Quadrangle B covered convoy MW 16 of one tanker escorted by six destroyers and a minesweeper. Four ships of MW 13 were formed into convoy MW 12 and nine destroyers departed Grand Harbour on 17 December. Quadrangle B was attacked by JU 88s the next day to no effect. Several escorts handed over MW 12 at Barce to ships from Alexandria and took over convoy MW 17, two freighters in Operation Quadrangle C to Malta. Convoy ME 13 was omitted and convoy ME 14 with four empty ships sailed from Malta on 28 December with five destroyers. In December, {{convert|58500|LT|t|abbr=on}} of general cargo and {{convert|18200|LT|t|abbr=on}} of fuel oil was delivered. Convoy MW 18 with a tanker and a merchant ship departed from Alexandria in Operation Quadrangle D with six destroyer escorts, arriving at Malta on 2 January 1943.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=463–465}}

====Operation Survey====

Convoy MW 19 left Alexandria on 7 January 1943 with five freighters and a tanker with nine destroyers and survived an attack by torpedo bombers at dusk on 8 January. During a night attack, a merchantman and a destroyer were near-missed and a destroyer evaded a torpedo and on 9 January a storm slowed the tanker and the convoy missed the meeting with Force K and later made rendezvous with three Malta destroyers. As the storm abated the ships gathered speed and for most of the run to Malta Beaufighters provided air cover, one being vectored onto a He 111 during 11 January, which was attacked and driven off, the convoy arriving at Malta during the evening.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=465–466}}

==Aftermath==

===Analysis===
There were 35 large supply operations to Malta from 1940 to 1942. Operations White, Tiger, Halberd, MF5, MG1, Harpoon, Vigorous and Pedestal were turned back or suffered severe losses from Axis forces. There were long periods when no convoy runs were even attempted and only a trickle of supplies reached Malta by submarine or fast warship. The worst period for Malta was from December 1941 to October 1942, when Axis forces had air and naval supremacy in the central Mediterranean.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=455, 467}}

===Casualties===

From June 1940 to December 1943, about 1,600 civilians and 700 soldiers were killed on Malta. The RAF lost about 900 men killed, 547 aircraft on operations and 160 on the ground and Royal Navy losses were 1,700 submariners and 2,200 sailors; about 200 merchant navy men died. Of 110 voyages by merchant ships to Malta 79 arrived, three to be sunk soon after reaching the island and one ship was sunk on a return voyage. Six of seven independent sailings failed, three ships being sunk, two were interned by Vichy authorities and one ship turned back. The Mediterranean Fleet lost a battleship, two aircraft carriers, four cruisers, a fast minelayer, twenty destroyers and minesweepers and forty submarines. Many small ships were sunk and many surviving ships were damaged.{{sfn|Woodman|2003|pp=470–471}}

==See also==
* [[Bonner Fellers#World War II|Bonner Fellers]] - the US [[military attaché]] in Egypt whose reports to Washington were being read by the Axis
* [[Mediterranean U-boat Campaign (World War II)]]

==Notes==
{{Notelist}}

==Footnotes==
{{Reflist|20em}}

==References==
{{refbegin}}
'''Books'''
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Bartimeus|1944}}
|last=Bartimeus |first=W. M. |authorlink=|title=East of Malta, West of Suez |publisher=Little, Brown |year=1944 |location=New York/Boston |oclc=1727304}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Castillo|2006}}
|last=Castillo |first=Dennis Angelo |title=The Maltese Cross: A Strategic History of Malta |publisher=Greenwood |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-313-32329-4}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Greene|Massignani|2002}}
|title=The Naval War in the Mediterranean 1940–1943 |last1=Greene |first1=J. |last2=Massignani |first2=A. |year=2002 |orig-year=1998 |publisher=Chatham |location=Rochester |edition=pbk. |isbn=978-1-86176-190-3}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Hague|2000}}
|last=Hague |first=Arnold |authorlink=|title=The Allied Convoy System 1939–1945 |publisher=Naval Institute Press |year=2000 |location=Annapolis, MD |isbn=978-1-55750-019-9}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|DNC|1952}}
|author= |title=H. M. Ships Damaged or Sunk by Enemy Action, 3rd September, 1939 to 2nd September, 1945 |publisher=Admiralty: Director of Naval Construction |location=London |year=1952 |url=http://www.navy.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Ships%20Damaged%20or%20Sunk%20by%20Enemy%20Action_opt_0.pdf |accessdate=9 October 2016 |oclc=38570200}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Hooton|2010}}
|last=Hooton |first=E. R. |title=Eagle in Flames: Defeat of the Luftwaffe |year=2010 |orig-year=1997 |publisher=Weidenfeld & Nicolson |location=London |isbn=978-1-85409-343-1}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Playfair|2004}}
|last1=Playfair |first1=Major-General I. S. O. |last2=Flynn |first2=Captain F. C. RN |last3=Molony |first3=Brigadier C. J. C. |last4=Gleave |first4=Group Captain T. P. |editor-last=Butler |editor-first=Sir James |series=History of the Second World War, United Kingdom Military Series |title=The Mediterranean and Middle East: British Fortunes Reach Their Lowest Ebb (September 1941 to September 1942) |volume=III |publisher=Naval & Military Press |location=Uckfield, UK |year=2004 |orig-year=1st. pub. HMSO:1960 |isbn=978-1-84574-067-2 |display-authors=1}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Potter|Nimitz|1960}}
|editor1-last=Potter |editor1-first=E. B. |editor2-last=Nimitz |editor2-first=C. W. |authorlink=Chester W. Nimitz |title=Sea Power |year=1960 |publisher=Prentice-Hall |location=Englewood Cliffs |oclc=933965485}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Richards|Saunders|1975}}
|last1=Richards |first1=D. |last2=St G. Saunders |first2=H. |title=Royal Air Force 1939–45: The Fight Avails |volume=II |year=1975 |orig-year=1954 |publisher=HMSO |location=London |url=https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RAF-II/index.html |accessdate=14 January 2019 |edition=repr. |isbn=978-0-11-771593-6}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Roskill|1957}}
|series=History of the Second World War United Kingdom Military Series |title=The War at Sea 1939–1945: The Defensive |volume=I |last=Roskill |first=S. W. |authorlink=Stephen Roskill |editor-last=Butler |editor-first=J. R. M. |editor-link=James Ramsay Montagu Butler |year=1957 |orig-year=1954 |publisher=HMSO |location=London |edition=4th impr. |url=http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RN-I/index.html |accessdate=14 January 2019 |oclc=881709135}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Roskill|1962}}
|last=Roskill |first=S. W. |series=[[History of the Second World War]]: The War at Sea 1939–1945 |title=The Period of Balance |volume=II |publisher=[[HMSO]] |location=London |year=1962 |orig-year=1956 |edition=3rd impression |url=http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RN-II/index.html |accessdate=25 November 2016 |oclc=174453986}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Thomas|1999}}
|last=Thomas |first=D. A. |title=Malta Convoys |publisher=[[Pen and Sword Books]] |year=1999 |location=[[Barnsley]] |isbn=978-0-85052-663-9}}
* {{cite book |ref={{harvid|Woodman|2003}}
|last=Woodman |first=R. |title=Malta Convoys 1940–1943 |year=2003 |publisher=John Murray |location=London |edition=pbk. |isbn=978-0-7195-6408-6}}

'''Websites'''
* {{cite web |ref={{harvid|Helgason|2012}}
|url=http://uboat.net/flotillas/23flo.htm |title=23rd Flotilla |first=Guðmundur |last=Helgason |website=German U-boats of WWII - uboat.net |accessdate=20 June 2012}}
{{refend}}

==Further reading==
'''Books'''
* {{cite book |last=Jackson |first=Ashley |authorlink=|title=The British Empire and the Second World War |publisher=Hambledon Continuum |year=2006 |location=London |isbn=978-1-85285-417-1}}
* {{cite book |last1=Playfair |first1=Major-General I. S. O. |last2=Flynn |first2=Captain F. C. RN |last3=Molony |first3=Brigadier C. J. C. |last4=Gleave |first4=Group Captain T. P. |editor-last=Butler |editor-first=Sir James |series=History of the Second World War, United Kingdom Military Series |title=The Mediterranean and Middle East: British Fortunes Reach Their Lowest Ebb (September 1941 to September 1942) |volume=III |publisher=Naval & Military Press |location=Uckfield, UK |year=2004 |orig-year=1st. pub. HMSO: 1960 |isbn=978-1-84574-067-2 |display-authors=1}}
* {{cite book |first1=Major-General I. S. O. |last1=Playfair |first2=Brigadier C. J. C. |last2=and Molony |first3=Captain F. C. |last3=with Flynn RN |first4=Group Captain T. P. |last4=Gleave |editor-last=Butler |editor-first=J. R. M. |title=The Mediterranean and Middle East: The Destruction of the Axis Forces in Africa |volume=IV |series=History of the Second World War United Kingdom Military Series |orig-year=HMSO 1966 |year=2004 |location=Uckfield |publisher=Naval & Military Press |isbn=978-1-84574-068-9 |display-authors=1}}
* {{cite book |last=Richards |first=Denis |url=http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RAF-I/UK-RAF-I-5.html |accessdate=9 October 2016 |title=Royal Air Force 1939–1945: The Fight At Odds |volume=I |location=London |publisher=[[HMSO]] |year=1974 |orig-year=1953 |edition=paperback |isbn=978-0-11-771592-9}}
* {{cite book |title=L'aeronautica italiana nella seconda guerra mondiale |volume=II |trans-title=The Italian Air Force in WWII |last=Santoro |first=G. |authorlink= |year=1957 |publisher=Edizione Esse |location=Milano-Roma |edition=1st |others=[semi-official history] |url=http://www.avia-it.com/act/biblioteca/libri/PDF_Libri_By_AVIA/Aeronautica%20Italiana%20nella%20Seconda%20G.M.%20vol.%202%20%20-%20Santoro%20G..pdf |accessdate=9 October 2016 |oclc=60102091}}
* {{cite book |title=The Rise and Fall of the German Air Force |others=Air 41/10 |number=248 |author= |year=2001 |orig-year=1948 |publisher=Air Ministry |location=Richmond, Surrey |edition=Public Record Office War Histories |isbn=978-1-903365-30-4}}

'''Journals'''
* {{cite journal |last=Vego |first=M. |title=Major Convoy Operation To Malta, 10–15 August 1942 (Operation Pedestal) |work=Naval War College Review |volume=63 |issue=1 |date=Winter 2010 |url=https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/4679327a-c2e5-495e-9b97-ca231dae2516/Major-Convoy-Operation-to-Malta,-10-15-August-1942 |accessdate=9 October 2016 |issn=0028-1484}}

'''Theses'''
* {{cite thesis |last=Hammond |first=R. J. |title=The British Anti-shipping Campaign in the Mediterranean 1940–1944: Comparing Methods of Attack |type=PhD |url=http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.548977 |others=registration |year=2011 |publisher=University of Exeter |accessdate=31 October 2016 |docket=uk.bl.ethos.548977 |oclc=798399582}}

'''Websites'''
* {{cite web |last=Hague |first=Arnold |authorlink=|title=The Supply of Malta 1940–1942 |others=Part 1 |work=naval-history.com |date=4 December 2010 |url=http://www.naval-history.net/xAH-MaltaSupply01b.htm |accessdate=9 October 2016}}
* {{cite web |last=Smith |first=G. |authorlink=|title=Royal Navy Vessels Lost at Sea, 1939–45 |work=naval-history.com |date=7 November 2010 |url=http://www.naval-history.net/WW2BritishLosses1Major.htm |accessdate=9 October 2016}}

==External links==
{{Commons category|Malta convoys}}
* [http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsItaly.htm Mediterranean naval campaign]
* [http://www.hmsnaiad.co.uk/naiad_dido.html HMS Naiad - Dido Class Cruiser]
* [https://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://geocities.com/mike_buhagiar/convoy/convoy.html&date=2009-10-25+03:45:08 Operation Harpoon]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070311062547/http://members.fortunecity.com/rwbrown1942/Busterssite/id18.html Photos of Operation Pedestal]
* [http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=81593 Documentary film: ''Convoy to Malta'']
* [http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/LondonGazette/38377.pdf MEDITERRANEAN CONVOY OPERATIONS] ([[London Gazette]])
* [http://www.nzetc.org/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2-2Epi-c4-WH2-2Epi-e.html NZETC SPITFIRES OVER MALTA]

{{World War I}}

[[Category:Malta Convoys| ]]
[[Category:Battle of the Mediterranean]]
[[Category:Mediterranean Sea operations of World War II]]
[[Category:Malta in World War II]]
[[Category:Naval battles and operations of World War II involving the United Kingdom]]

Missbrauchsskandal von Rochdale

2018-07-17T09:44:12Z

Modulus12: Fixed reference, combined duplicates

{{EngvarB|date=October 2013}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2013}}
The '''Rochdale child sex abuse ring''' involved under-age teenage girls in [[Rochdale]], [[Greater Manchester]], England. Nine men were convicted of [[sex trafficking]] and other offences including rape, trafficking girls for sex and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child, on 8 May 2012 and 10 more were convicted in another investigation in 2015.<ref name=Telegraph/> Forty-seven girls were identified as victims of [[Child sexual abuse|child sexual exploitation]] during the police investigation.<ref name=Respected/><ref name=BBC120508/><ref name=teleg120508/> The men were [[British Pakistanis]] which led to discussion on whether the failure to investigate them was linked to the authorities' fear of being accused of prejudice.<ref name=week120928/> The girls were mainly [[white British]].<ref name=week120928/> In March 2015, [[Greater Manchester Police]] apologised for its failure to investigate the child sexual exploitation allegations more thoroughly between 2008 and 2010.<ref name=bbc130315>{{cite news|title=Police 'sorry' over Rochdale child sex abuse failures |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31857066 |accessdate=13 March 2015 |work=[[BBC News]] |date=13 March 2015}}</ref> [[Sara Rowbotham]], the sexual health worker who first recognised patterns of child abuse in the community and fought tirelessly to bring these crimes to police attention was made redundant in 2017.<ref>www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/what-happened-three-girls-whistleblower-13060183</ref>

==Perpetrators==
Twelve men were initially charged with [[sex trafficking]] and other offences including rape, trafficking girls for sex and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child. Nine men were convicted, of whom eight were of British Pakistani origin and one was an Afghan [[asylum-seeker]]. Of the three not convicted, one was cleared of all charges, the jury was unable to reach a verdict in the case of the second, and the third was not present at the trial after fleeing to Pakistan while on bail.<ref name=Telegraph/><ref name=Vulnerable/> Most of the men were married and well-respected within their community.<ref name=Respected/> One gang member convicted of sex trafficking was a religious studies teacher at a mosque and a married father of five.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/04/senior-judge-slams-lawyers-obstructing-rochdale-child-sex-grooming/|title=Senior judge slams lawyers for obstructing Rochdale child sex grooming gang deportation case|work=The Telegraph|access-date=2017-05-19|language=en-GB}}</ref> The men were aged between 24 and 59 and all knew each other. Two worked for the same taxi firm and another two worked at a takeaway restaurant; some came from the same village in Pakistan and another pair shared a flat.<ref name=teleg120509/> The gang worked to secure underage girls for sex.<ref name=sky120509sent/><ref name=sky120509prof/>

==Abuse==
The abuse of underage girls that occurred in 2008 and 2009 centred around two [[Take-out|takeaways]] in [[Heywood, Greater Manchester|Heywood]] near Rochdale. Despite one victim going to the police in 2008 to report the [[child grooming]], the [[Crown Prosecution Service]] decided not to prosecute two men, invoking the witness's credibility.

Attempts by Rochdale Crisis Intervention Team co-ordinator for the NHS, [[Sara Rowbotham]] to alert police and authorities to "patterns of sexual abuse" were ignored. Between 2003 and 2014, Sara Rowbothan, made more than 180 attempts to alert police and social services but was told the witnesses were not reliable. <ref>>www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sara-rowbotham-sarah-champion_uk_59bbad52e4b02da0e14106d5</ref>

As a result of the CPS dropping the case, the police halted their investigation, which was resumed when a second girl made complaints of a similar nature in December 2009.<ref name=bbcdropped/> The CPS's original decision was overturned in 2011 when a new chief prosecutor for the region, [[Nazir Afzal]], a first generation British-Pakistani,<ref name=indepafzal/> was appointed.<ref name=Respected/>

The victims, vulnerable teenagers from deprived, dysfunctional backgrounds, were targeted in "honeypot locations" where young people congregated, such as takeaway food shops. One victim, a 15-year-old known as the Honey Monster, acted as a recruiter, procuring girls as young as 13 for the gang. The victims were coerced and bribed into keeping quiet about the abuse by a combination of alcohol and drugs, food, small sums of money and other gifts.<ref name=Telegraph/><ref name=Respected/>

The oldest person to be convicted, Shabir Ahmed,<ref name=guardianname/> was for a while the main trafficker of the victims. On one occasion he ordered a girl aged 15 to have sex with Kabeer Hassan, as a "treat" for his birthday — Hassan then raped the girl himself.<ref name=guardcon/> Abdul Aziz, a married father of three, took over from Shabir Ahmed as the main trafficker and was paid by various men to supply underage girls for sex.<ref name=guardcon/>

Victims were physically assaulted and raped by as many as five men at a time,<ref name=Telegraph/> or obliged to have sex with "several men in a day, several times a week".<ref name=Vulnerable/> The victims, plied with drugs and alcohol, were passed around friends and family,<ref name=IBT120508/> and taken to various locations in the north of England, including [[Rochdale]], [[Oldham]], [[Nelson, Lancashire|Nelson]], [[Bradford]] and [[Leeds]].<ref name=Telegraph/> The abusers paid small sums of money for the encounters.<ref name=Telegraph/> One 13-year-old victim recounted that, after being forced to have sex in exchange for vodka, her abuser immediately raped her again and gave her £40 to not say anything about the incident.<ref name=IBT120508/> Among the incidents that police recorded were a 15-year-old victim too drunk to recall being raped by 20 men, one after the other; and another victim so drunk that she vomited over the side of the bed as she was being raped by two men.<ref name=Respected/> One thirteen-year-old victim had an abortion after becoming pregnant.<ref name=Vulnerable/>

==Trial and sentences==
[[File:Burj Khalifa.jpg|thumb|left|Some of the convicted have attempted to leave for [[Dubai]]]]

Some gang members told the court the girls were willing participants and happy having sex with the men. The ring-leader, 59-year-old Shabir Ahmed, claimed the girls were "prostitutes" who had been running a "business empire" and it was all "white lies". He shouted in court, "Where are the white people? You have only got my kind here."<ref name=Respected/><ref name=sky120509sent/> Shabir Ahmed's threatening behaviour and calling Judge Gerald Clifton a "racist bastard" resulted in him being banned from the court for the sentencing hearing.<ref name=guardianname/>

The trial concluded in May 2012 with the nine convictions. Shabir Ahmed received the longest sentence, 19 years for rape, aiding and abetting a rape, sexual assault, trafficking for sexual exploitation and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children.<ref name=bbc120621/> Mohammed Sajid was sentenced to 12 years for rape, sexual activity with a girl under 16, trafficking for sexual exploitation and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children. Kabeer Hassan was sentenced to nine years for rape and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children. Abdul Aziz received a similar sentence nine years (concurrently) for trafficking for sexual exploitation and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children. Abdul Rauf was sentenced to six years for trafficking for sexual exploitation and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children. Adil Khan was sentenced to eight years for the same offences. Mohammed Amin received a five-year sentence for sexual assault and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children. Another five-year sentence was given to Abdul Qayyum for conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children while Hamid Safi received four years for trafficking for sexual exploitation and conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with children.{{fact|date=March 2017}}

Four of the convicted Shabir Ahmed, Adil Khan, Abdul Rauf and Abdul Aziz who had dual British and Pakistani citizenships had their [[British nationality law|British citizenships]] revoked by then [[Home Secretary]] [[Theresa May]] in order for them to be [[Deportation|deported]] to [[Pakistan]]. May stated the revocations were “conducive to the public good”.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/09/members-of-rochdale-grooming-gang-face-deportation-to-pakistan|title=Members of Rochdale grooming gang face deportation to Pakistan|last=Parveen|first=Nazia|date=2017-02-09|work=The Guardian|access-date=2017-07-18|language=en-GB|issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

==Second sex ring and Operation Doublet==
{{main|Operation Doublet}}
Following the break up of the first sex ring in May 2012, the police made arrests in relation to another child sexual exploitation ring in Rochdale. Nine men between 24 and 38 years old were arrested on suspicion of sexual activity with a child.<ref name=second/> Operation Doublet was launched at the same time as an investigation into [[child grooming]] and sexual abuse in the region. Assistant Chief Constable Steve Heywood said that about 550 officers were working on Operation Doublet in May 2013. He said the investigation was at "an extremely sensitive stage" and street grooming was the force's top priority, "a bigger priority than gun crime". He said the investigation was looking at cases in Rochdale dating back to 2003.<ref name="evening news">{{cite news | url=http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/police-vow-arrest-even-more-4002537 | title= Police vow to arrest even more child sex suspects | first = Chris | last = Jones| work = Manchester Evening News | location = Manchester | date = 23 May 2013 | accessdate=4 March 2015 }}</ref>

In March 2015, ten men aged between 26 and 45 were charged with serious sex offences against seven females aged between 13 and 23 at the time. The alleged offences that took place in Rochdale between 2005 and 2013 included rape, conspiracy to rape, inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, sexual activity with a child, and sexual assault.<ref name=bbc31695832>{{cite news | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31695832| title= Ten men charged over Rochdale child abuse claims | work = BBC News | location = | date = 2 March 2015 | accessdate=4 March 2015 }}</ref>

==Reaction and public debate==
The case raised a serious debate about whether the crimes were racially motivated.<ref name=second/> Suggestions emerged that police and social work departments failed to act when details of the gang emerged for [[Political correctness|fear of appearing racist]], and vulnerable white teenagers being groomed by Pakistani men were ignored.<ref name=timesreport/><ref name=police/><ref name=Asian/> About a dozen more cases involving Asian Muslims in Northern England were investigated.<ref name=dh120628/> A report by the deputy children's commissioner in 2012 said that 33% of child sex abuse by gangs in Britain was committed by [[British Asian]], where Asians are 7% of the population, but concluded that it was "irresponsible" to dwell on the data.<ref name=afp122021/>

[[Ann Cryer]], Labour MP for Keighley, recalled in a BBC documentary filmed in 2012 that she had worked with the families of the victims involved, and had been "round at the police station virtually every week" and was "begging" both the police and social services to do something. Cryer said, "Neither the police nor social services would touch those cases. I think it was they were afraid of being called racist."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03ghfyp/Quitting_the_English_Defence_League_When_Tommy_Met_Mo/ "Quitting the English Defence League: When Tommy Met Mo"] BBC One, Producer/Director: Amanda McGlynn: video from 18:14. Broadcast 28 October 2013. Accessed 31 October 2013</ref> Cryer had attempted to reach the Muslim community and persuade it to take action: "I went to a friend of mine, who was a local councillor and happened to be a Muslim and therefore able to represent me to the elders, because I thought it was a good move to try to get those elders involved. I hoped that I would be able to persuade the elders to go knocking on doors and say 'this behaviour is un-Islamic and I want it to stop because I'm going to tell the whole community about you and what you’re doing if you don’t'. Now they weren’t prepared to do that."<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03ghfyp/Quitting_the_English_Defence_League_When_Tommy_Met_Mo/ "Quitting the English Defence League: When Tommy Met Mo"] BBC One: video from 19:13. Broadcast 28 October 2013. Accessed 31 October 2013</ref>

[[Tim Loughton]], the [[Department for Education|Minister for Children and Families]], said that while there was no evidence that ethnic communities condoned child sexual abuse, he was concerned that some had been slow to report it to the police, and urged police and social workers not to allow "political correctness around ethnicity" to hinder their work to apprehend such criminals.<ref name=PCguardian/>

In late 2011, the [[Children's Commissioner for England|Office of the Children's Commissioner]] started a two-year long inquiry into child sexual exploitation by street gangs.<ref name=indegrooming/> The inquiry issued its final report in November 2013.<ref name=Berelowitz /> After members of the Rochdale gang were sentenced, the UK's Department of Education announced new funding for a specialist foster care scheme to protect vulnerable children in residential care, where some victims had been.<ref name=guard120606/>

===''The Times'' report of 5 January 2011===
A report compiled by ''[[The Times]]'' on 5 January 2011, related to convictions for child sex grooming in [[North of England|the North]] and Midlands. Of the 56 offenders convicted since 1997 for crimes relating to on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16, three were white, 53 were Asian of which 50 were Muslim, and most were from the British Pakistani community.<ref name=timesreport/> Furthermore, ''The Times'' article alleged: "with the exception of one town there is scant evidence of work being undertaken in British Pakistani communities to confront the problem" of "pimping gangs" largely consisting of "members of the British Pakistani community".<ref name=timesreport/>

The findings have been questioned by researchers Ella Cockbain and Helen Brayley, from whose work for the [[UCL Jill Dando Institute|UCL Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science]] ''The Times'' report had drawn much of its evidence.<ref name=jillguard/> "The citations are correct but they have been taken out of context," Cockbain told ''The Independent''; "Nor do they acknowledge the small sample size of the original research, which focused on just two large cases." Cockbain and Brayley expressed concern that "findings were being overextended from a small, geographically concentrated sample to characterise an entire crime type".<ref name=indegrooming/>

===Coalition for the Removal of Pimping===
Hilary Willmer, representing a Leeds-based support group for parents of sexually exploited girls, the Coalition for the Removal of Pimping (Crop), was quoted as saying "The vast majority [of] perpetrators are Pakistani Asians",<ref name=jillguard/> with sources inside Crop claiming a percentage as high as 80 per cent although, ''The Independent'' noted, "Kurdish, Romanian and Albanian gangs were also involved". Willmer added: "We think this is the tip of the iceberg", although she cautioned against treating the matter as a race crime: "It's a criminal thing."<ref name=jillguard/> By May 2012, according to ''The Independent'', Crop had "gone suddenly silent" concerning the percentage of abusers of Asian origin who had come to the organisation's attention: Willmer explained to the paper: "We've been accused of being a cover for the [[British National Party|BNP]]".<ref name=indegrooming/>

===Child protection organisations===
In 2011, the [[Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre]] launched a five-month long investigation into whether there was a link between racial profile and the crime of underage grooming. The organisation defined underage grooming as any situation where a child or young person received a gift in exchange for sexual favours. It drew statistics from organisations such as [[Barnardo's]] but the findings were considered inconclusive by expert academics because not all the figures had been compiled in the same way and ethnicity had not always been noted with each reported crime.<ref name=indegrooming/> Ella Cockbain and Helen Brayley pointed out, "There is no criminal offence of 'on-street grooming' and as a result it is very difficult to measure the extent of the crime based on court statistics."<ref name=indegrooming/> Further research has been pursued since late 2011 by the Office of the Children's Commissioner.<ref name=indegrooming/>

Wendy Shepherd, child sexual exploitation project manager for Barnardo's in the north of England, said that since she started working with the organisation, there has been "a shift from the men selling children in ones or twos to something that is much more organised in groups and networks. The networks of men come from different backgrounds: in the North and Midlands many have been British Asians; in Devon it was white men; in Bath and Bristol, Afro-Caribbeans; in London, all ethnic mixes, whites, Iraqis, Kurds, Afghans, Somalis.” She noted that white male predators on the street tend to work alone. She added: "The danger with saying that the problem is with one ethnicity is that then people will only be on the lookout for that group – and will risk missing other threats."<ref name=indegrooming/>

The former head of Barnardo's, Martin Narey, said on [[BBC Radio 4]]'s ''[[Today (BBC Radio 4)|Today]]'' programme: "For this particular type of crime, the street grooming of teenage girls in northern towns … there is very troubling evidence that Asians are overwhelmingly represented in the prosecutions for such offences."<ref name=guardnarey/> Narey rejected the idea that such gangs were specifically targeting white girls, but suggested vulnerable girls on the street were more likely to be white since Asian girls were subjected to strict parenting and were more likely to be kept off the streets.<ref name=guardnarey/>

===Response from Muslim spokespeople===
In a BBC documentary investigating grooming young girls for sex by some Pakistani men, Imam Irfan Chishti from the Rochdale Council of Mosques deplored the practice, saying it was "very shocking to see fellow [[Islam in the United Kingdom|British Muslims]] brought to court for this kind of horrific offence."<ref name=rdol111207/><ref name=bbccentre/> [[Mohammed Shafiq]], chief executive of the [[Ramadhan Foundation]], accused elders of the Pakistani community of "burying their heads in the sand" on the matter of sexual grooming. He said that of convictions involving child sexual exploitation, 87% were of British Pakistani men and it was a significant problem for that community. He said the actions of criminals who thought "white teenage girls are worthless and can be abused" were "bringing shame on our community."<ref name=BBC120508/>

[[Sayeeda Warsi]], co-chairperson of the Conservative Party, in an interview with the ''[[Evening Standard]]'', said "You can only start solving a problem if you acknowledge it first," and added, "This small minority who see women as second class citizens, and white women probably as third class citizens, are to be spoken out against." She described the Rochdale case as "even more disgusting" than cases of girls being passed around street gangs, as the perpetrators "were grown men, some of them religious teachers or running businesses, with young families of their own."<ref name=til120518/>

[[Nazir Afzal]], who as the newly appointed chief [[Crown Prosecution Service|crown prosecutor]] decided to bring the case to trial, said that gender, not race, was the key issue: "There is no community where women and girls are not vulnerable to sexual attack and that's a fact."<ref name=guardnotab/>

===Far-right protests===
Protestors from far-right organisations, the [[British National Party]] and [[English Defence League]], held demonstrations with banners stating <nowiki>''Refugees not welcome''</nowiki> amongst others.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/far-right-group-north-west-11162840|title=Far-right group North West Infidels stage protest in Rochdale|last=Rucki|first=Alexandra|date=2016-04-09|work=men|access-date=2017-05-19}}</ref>

===Hindu and Sikh objections===
Hindu and Sikh groups have objected to media use of the "Asian" description saying that the culprits were "almost always of Pakistani origin" and "Muslim". They contend that clouding the issue by calling them "Asians" is unfair towards other groups and detrimental to a frank discussion.<ref name=bbc120516/><ref name=teleg120608/><ref name=dc120508/>

===Taxi controversy===
Two of the convicted gang members worked at Eagle Taxis, which was taken over by Car 2000 after the scandal. The company's owner said that due to requests, clients could choose to have a white driver but this was reversed after 50 Asian drivers protested.<ref>{{cite news|title=Rochdale taxi firm boss in 'race choice' U-turn|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-29785062|accessdate=2 November 2014|work=BBC News|date=27 October 2014}}</ref>

===Moral panic===
Researchers have suggested that the British media’s portrayal of South Asian men as perpetrators of sexual violence against white victims is an example of a [[moral panic]].<ref name=Gill /> In particular they point out that the inquiry by the Office of the Children's Commissioner<ref name=Berelowitz /> found that, "perpetrators and their victims were ethnically diverse."<ref name=Gill />

===BBC series===
In May 2017, the BBC broadcast ''[[Three Girls (miniseries)|Three Girls]]'', a miniseries about the case. Actress [[Maxine Peake]] starred in the series as [[Sara Rowbotham]], the sexual health aid worker who first uncovered the patterns of severe abuse in the area, but struggled to bring it to the attention of authorities.<ref>www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/what-happened-three-girls-whistleblower-13060183</ref>

==Review of police actions==
On 13 March 2015, Greater Manchester Police apologised for its failure to investigate child sexual exploitation allegations more thoroughly between 2008 and 2010. The apology was made after a review by the [[Independent Police Complaints Commission]] "examined the conduct and actions of 13 officers who were involved in Operation Span and the policing of Rochdale Division." Operation Span was the investigation launched in December 2009 into allegations made against the individuals who were convicted in 2012, and others. Assistant Chief Constable Dawn Copley said that, at the time of the earlier investigation, "there was a strong target driven focus, predominantly on serious acquisitive crime. At best this was distracting for leaders and influenced the areas that resources were focussed on". She said that seven officers had been served with misconduct notices, but no further disciplinary action would be taken against them. Copley said: "We apologise to the victims and we give them our assurance that lessons have been learned, changes have been made and we are determined to use this to continue making improvements."<ref name=bbc130315 /><ref>[http://www.gmp.police.uk/Content/WebsitePages/5852C2381F45C0A080257E07002FA81A?OpenDocument Greater Manchester Police, Report into Rochdale CSE investigation, 13 March 2015]. Retrieved 13 March 2015</ref>

==See also==
{{portal|Crime|Greater Manchester}}
*[[List of sexual abuses perpetrated by groups]]
*[[Post-assault treatment of sexual assault victims]]

==References==
{{reflist|colwidth=30em|refs=

<ref name=BBC120508>{{cite news | url = https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17989463 | title = Rochdale grooming trial: Nine found guilty of child sex charges | publisher = BBC News | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate=8 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=bbcdropped>{{cite news | url = https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17853560 | title = Rochdale child sex grooming case originally dropped | first= Paul | last = Burnell | publisher= BBC News | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate= 27 August 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=bbc120516>{{cite news | url = https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18092605 | title = Complaints over use of 'Asian' label in grooming cases | publisher = BBC News | date = 16 May 2012 | accessdate = 12 September 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=bbc120621>{{cite news | url = https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18540902 | title = Rochdale grooming leader guilty of child rape | publisher = BBC News | date = 21 June 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=bbccentre>{{cite news | url = https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17899841 | title= Heywood: Rochdale town at the centre of child sex ring | first = Emma | last= Stanley | publisher= BBC News | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate=9 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=Berelowitz>{{Cite journal | last1 = Berelowitz | first1 = Sue | last2 = Clifton | first2 = Jenny | last3 = Firimin | first3 = Carlene | last4 = Gulyurtlu | first4 = Sandra | last5 = Edwards | first5 = Gareth | title = "If only someone had listened": Office of the Children's Commissioner's Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Gangs and Groups: final report | publisher = [[Children's Commissioner for England|Office of the Children's Commissioner]] | url = http://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-client-groups/children-young-people/childrenscommissioner/ifonly13.aspx | date = November 2013 | deadurl = yes | archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20160305075243/http://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-client-groups/children-young-people/childrenscommissioner/ifonly13.aspx | archivedate = 5 March 2016 | df = dmy-all }} [http://www.thebromleytrust.org.uk/files/chidrens-commission.pdf Pdf.]</ref>

<ref name=Gill>{{Cite journal | last1 = Gill | first1 = Aisha K. | last2 = Harrison | first2 = Karen | title = Child grooming and sexual exploitation: are South Asian men the UK media’s new folk devils? | journal = International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy | volume = 4 | issue = 2 | pages = 34-49 | publisher = [[Public Knowledge Project]] | doi = 10.5204/ijcjsd.v4i2.214 | date = 2015 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v4i2.214 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} [https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/article/view/214/pdf Pdf.]</ref>

<ref name=rdol111207>{{cite news | url = http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news/64181/rochdale-featured-in-sex-grooming-documentary | title= Rochdale featured in sex grooming documentary | work= Rochdale Online | date= 7 December 2011 | accessdate= 9 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=Respected>{{cite news | url = https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/may/08/rochdale-child-sex-ring-case?intcmp=239 | title = Rochdale child sex ring case: respected men who preyed on the vulnerable | first = Helen | last = Carter | work = The Guardian | location= London | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate=8 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=guardianname>{{cite news | url = https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/21/ringleader-rochdale-paedophiles-named | title = Rochdale paedophile ringleader is named | agency = Press Association | work= The Guardian | location= London | date = 21 June 2012 | accessdate= 21 July 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=guardcon>{{cite news | url = https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/may/09/rochdale-child-sex-ring-jailed | title = Rochdale child sex ring: nine men jailed | agency = Press Association | work = The Guardian | date=9 May 2012 | accessdate = 23 July 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=Vulnerable>{{cite news | url = https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/may/08/men-guilty-abusing-girls-rochdale | title = Nine men found guilty of sexually abusing vulnerable girls in Rochdale | first = Helen | last = Carter | work = The Guardian | location = London | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate=8 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=PCguardian>{{cite news | url = https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2012/jul/03/cameron-grilled-mps-eurozone-live-blog | title = Politics Live with Andrew Sparrow | first = Andrew | last = Sparrow | work = The Guardian | location = London | date = 3 July 2012 | accessdate= 23 July 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=jillguard>{{cite news | url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/jan/06/child-sex-trafficking-racial-stereotyping | title= Child sex trafficking study sparks exaggerated racial stereotyping | work= The Guardian | date= 6 January 2011 | accessdate= 23 July 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=guardnarey>{{cite news | url= https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/may/09/grooming-girls-asian-men-barnados | title= Grooming offences committed mostly by Asian men, says ex-Barnardo's chief | first=Haroon | last=Siddique | work = The Guardian | location=London | date= 9 May 2012 | accessdate= 23 July 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=guard120606>{{cite news | url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/06/sexually-exploited-children-barnados | title= Sexually exploited children are at further risk in care, says Barnardo's | first=Alexandra | last=Topping | work=The Guardian | location=London | date=6 June 2012 | accessdate= 26 August 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=guardnotab>{{cite news | url = https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/may/09/rochdale-grooming-trial-race | title = Why the Rochdale 'grooming trial' wasn't about race | first = Jane | last = Martinson | work = The Guardian | date = 9 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=police>{{cite news | url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9253250/Rochdale-grooming-trial-Police-accused-of-failing-to-investigate-paedophile-gang-for-fear-of-appearing-racist.html | title= Rochdale grooming trial: Police accused of failing to investigate paedophile gang for fear of appearing racist | first = Nigel | last = Bunyan | work = The Telegraph | location = London | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate=9 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=Telegraph>{{cite news | url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9239126/Rochdale-grooming-trial-gang-convicted-for-sex-trafficking.html | title= Rochdale grooming trial: gang convicted for sex trafficking | first= Nigel | last = Bunyan | work= The Telegraph | location=London | date=8 May 2012 | accessdate=8 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=teleg120508>{{cite news | url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9253267/Rochdale-grooming-trial-how-the-case-unfolded.html | title=Rochdale grooming trial: how the case unfolded | first= Nigel | last = Bunyan | work= The Telegraph | location=London | date=8 May 2012 | accessdate=8 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=teleg120509>{{cite news | url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9254232/Members-of-paedophile-gang-treated-victims-as-worthless.html | title= Members of paedophile gang treated victims as 'worthless' | first1 = Victoria | last1 = Ward | first2 = Nigel | last2 = Bunyan | work = The Telegraph | location= London | date= 9 May 2012 | accessdate=9 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=second>{{cite news | url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9261748/Arrests-made-in-second-Rochdale-sex-grooming-scandal.html | title= Arrests made in second Rochdale sex grooming scandal | first = Julie | last = Henry | work = The Telegraph | location = London | date = 12 May 2012 | accessdate=12 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=Asian>{{cite news | url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9253016/Rochdale-grooming-trial-Asian-grooming-gangs-the-uncomfortable-issue.html | title= Rochdale grooming trial: Asian grooming gangs, the uncomfortable issue | first = Nigel | last = Bunyan | work = The Telegraph | location= London | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate= 9 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=teleg120608>{{cite news | url = https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9314448/Its-time-to-stop-using-the-word-Asians.html | title = It's time to stop using the word 'Asians' | first = Hardeep | last = Singh | work = The Telegraph | date = 8 June 2012 | accessdate = 12 September 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=indegrooming>{{cite web | url = https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/child-sex-grooming-the-asian-question-7729068.html | title = Child sex grooming: the Asian question | first = Paul | last = Vallely | work = The Independent | date = 10 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=indepafzal>{{cite news | url = https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/nazir-afzal-we-tackled-grooming-gangs-now-we-have-to-confront-forced-marriage-among-travellers-7769697.html | title = Nazir Afzal: 'We tackled grooming gangs. Now we have to confront forced marriage among Travellers' | first = Jonathan | last = Brown | work = The Independent | date = 21 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=sky120509sent>{{cite news | url=http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16224161 | title=Gang To Be Sentenced Over Child Sex Crimes | publisher=Sky News | date=9 May 2012|accessdate=8 May 2012}}</ref>

<ref name=sky120509prof>{{cite news | url=http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16224243 | title=Profiles of Child Sex Abuse Gang Members | publisher=Sky News | accessdate=8 May 2012|date = 9 May 2012}}</ref>

<ref name=dh120628>{{cite news | url = http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120628/news/706289541/ | title = British sex grooming cases spark racial tensions | agency = [[Associated Press]] | work = Daily Herald | date = 29 June 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=afp122021>{{cite news | url = https://archive.is/JTNT0#selection-381.0-381.168 | title = Report 'downplays sex abuse by Asian men' | agency = [[Agence France-Presse]] | publisher = Google | date = 21 November 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=timesreport>{{cite web | url= http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article2863058.ece | title=Revealed: conspiracy of silence on UK sex gangs | work=The Times | date= 5 January 2011 | accessdate= 23 July 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=week120928>{{cite news | url = http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/49280/rochdale-child-sex-ring-did-political-correctness-delay-justice | title = Rochdale child sex ring: did political correctness delay justice? | publisher = TheWeek.co.uk | date = 28 September 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=IBT120508>{{cite news | url= http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/338573/20120508/nine-men-being-tried-sexual-exploitation-charges.htm | title= Rochdale Child Sex Ring: 'Master', 'Tiger' and Seven Others Guilty of Rape and Trafficking | first= Jamie | last=Lewis | work=International Business Times | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate=8 May 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=dc120508>{{cite news | url = http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/world/europe/uk-hindus-sikhs-protest-%E2%80%98asian%E2%80%99-label-culprits-670 | title = UK Hindus, Sikhs protest 'Asian' label for culprits | first = Sarju | last = Kaul | newspaper=Deccan Chronicle | date= 8 May 2012 | accessdate= 30 September 2012 }}</ref>

<ref name=til120518>{{cite news | url = http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/politics/full-interview-with-baroness-warsi-father-asked-me-why-be-a-leader-if-you-dont-take-the-lead-7766362.html | title = Full interview with Baroness Warsi | work = London Evening Standard | date = 18 May 2012 }}</ref>

}}

==External links==
* [http://www.rbscb.org/CSEReport.pdf The Rochdale Borough Safeguarding Children Board, Review of Multi-Agency Responses to the Sexual Exploitation of Children]
* [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmhaff/68/68i.pdf House of Commons Home Affairs Committee ''Child sexual exploitation and the response to localized grooming: Second Report of Session 2013–14, Vol. 1'']
* [https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmhaff/68/68ii.pdf House of Commons Home Affairs Committee ''Child sexual exploitation and the response to localized grooming: Second Report of Session 2013–14, Vol. 2'']

{{Child sexual abuse in the UK}}

[[Category:2008 crimes in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:2008 in England]]
[[Category:2009 crimes in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:2009 in England]]
[[Category:2012 in England]]
[[Category:Child prostitution]]
[[Category:Child sexual abuse in England]]
[[Category:Crime in Greater Manchester]]
[[Category:Forced prostitution]]
[[Category:History of Rochdale]]
[[Category:Human trafficking in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Modern street gangs]]
[[Category:Pakistani-British gangs]]
[[Category:Rape in England]]
[[Category:Sex crimes in England]]
[[Category:Sex gangs]]
[[Category:Racism in England]]

Supreme (Bekleidung)

2016-07-08T03:58:42Z

Modulus12: Fix reference, remove non-notables, clean up links

{{Infobox company
| name = Supreme

| logo = [[File:Supreme logo.gif]]
| foundation = 1994
| founder = James Jebbia
| defunct = 
| location_city = [[New York City]], [[New York]]
| location_country = [[United States]]
| locations =
| products = Clothing, accessories, Shoes
| revenue =
| operating_income =
| net_income =
| homepage = {{URL|supremenewyork.com}}
}}
'''Supreme''' is a skateboarding shop/clothing [[brand]]<ref>{{cite web| title = PULSE: LAFAYETTE STREET; 'Kids' Welcome, Dress: Baggy | url = http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30F12FB385A0C708CDDA90994D1494D81 | first = Julia | last = Chaplin | work = [[The New York Times]] | publisher = [[Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.]] | date = October 3, 1999 | accessdate = September 29, 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| title = 50 Things You Didn't Know About Supreme. | url = http://www.complex.com/style/2013/03/50-things-you-didnt-know-about-supreme | first1 = Nick | last1 = Grant | first2 = Jian | last2 = Deleon | first3 = Noah | last3 = Johnson | work = [[Complex (magazine)]] | publisher = Complex Media | date = March 20, 2013 | accessdate = May 1, 2013}}</ref> established in [[New York City]] in April 1994.

The brand was originally founded by James Jebbia. Although he was born in the US, he lived in England from until he was nineteen.<ref>{{Cite web|title = 50 Things You Didn't Know About Supreme - James Jebbia is British. He was born in the United States, but lived in England from age one to 19.|url = http://uk.complex.com/style/2013/03/50-things-you-didnt-know-about-supreme/james-jebbia-is-british-he-was-born-in-the-united-states-but-lived-in-england-from-age-one-to-19|website = Complex UK|access-date = 2016-01-17}}</ref> The first Supreme store opened on Lafayette Street in downtown [[Manhattan]] in 1994.<ref>{{cite web| title = Supreme | url = http://www.supremenewyork.com/about | accessdate = May 9, 2013}}</ref> It was designed with skaters in mind, with a unique design on the store layout; the clothes arranged around the outside of the store with a large space in the middle. This meant that skaters with backpacks on could skate right into the store, and still feel comfortable.<ref>{{Cite web|title = 50 Things You Didn't Know About Supreme - Jebbia's design for the Supreme New York store was more open so skaters could come right in with their skateboards.|url = http://uk.complex.com/style/2013/03/50-things-you-didnt-know-about-supreme/jebbias-design-for-the-supreme-new-york-store-was-more-open-so-skaters-could-come-right-in-with-their-skateboards|website = Complex UK|access-date = 2016-01-17}}</ref> In 2004, a store was opened on North Fairfax Ave in [[Los Angeles, California]], which is almost double the size of the original [[New York City|New York]] store and also includes an indoor skate bowl.<ref>{{cite web| title = Into L.A.'s Deli Land, Enter the Skaters | url = http://travel.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/travel/16surface.html | first = Micah | last = Abrams | work = The New York Times | publisher = Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. | date = April 16, 2006 | accessdate = September 29, 2012}}</ref> There are other stores in [[Paris]], [[London]], [[Tokyo]] (Harajuku, Daikanyama & Shibuya), [[Nagoya]], [[Osaka]], and [[Fukuoka]].<ref>{{cite web| title = Supreme | url = http://www.supremenewyork.com/stores | accessdate = September 29, 2012}}</ref> These modern stores still try to emulate the original Lafayette Street store design.

The distinctive red box logo containing "Supreme" in Futura Heavy Oblique is largely based on [[Barbara Kruger]]'s propaganda art.<ref>{{Cite web|title = 50 Things You Didn't Know About Supreme - The Supreme logo is largely based on Barbara Kruger's propaganda art.|url = http://uk.complex.com/style/2013/03/50-things-you-didnt-know-about-supreme/the-supreme-logo-is-largely-based-on-barbara-krugers-propaganda-art|website = Complex UK|access-date = 2016-01-17}}</ref>

The brand caters to the [[Skateboarding]], [[Hip hop]] and [[Punk rock]] cultures, and the youth culture at large. They make clothes and accessories, but also manufacture skateboards that are collected like modern art. Supreme has released skateboard decks featuring the artworks of [[Rammellzee]], [[Ryan McGinness]], [[KAWS (artist)|KAWS]], [[Larry Clark]], [[Jeff Koons]], [[Richard Prince]], [[Christopher Wool]], [[Nate Lowman]], [[Damien Hirst]], and [[John Baldessari]]. They have also collaborated with other photographers, artists, and designers such as [[Marilyn Minter]], [[Takashi Murakami]], [[Daniel Johnston]], [[Peter Saville (graphic designer)]], [[Futura 2000]], Adam Kimmel, [[Bad Brains]] and [[H. R. Giger]].

Unlike other clothing brands, who release their new collections all at once, Supreme releases a small number of items at a time, typically five to fifteen. This "drop" occurs online and in store once every week on Thursdays at eleven in the morning (eastern US time). This strategy maintains the aura of "hype" that the brand creates. Their shoes, clothing, and accessories create a big secondary market for supreme clothing, because items are produced to a very limited quantity and also because there are only ten stores worldwide.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Supreme stores|url = http://www.supremenewyork.com/stores|website = www.supremenewyork.com|accessdate = 2015-07-22}}</ref> Supreme has a line of collaborations with brands such as [[Nike, Inc.|Nike]], [[Air Jordan]], [[Vans]],<ref>{{cite web| title = Supreme x Vans Spring/Summer 2015 Blends In (Get It?) | url = http://fourpins.com/style/supreme-vans-spring-summer-2015/ | first = Skylar | last = Bergyl | work = Four Pins | publisher = Four Pins | date = March 18, 2015 | access-date = April 21, 2015}}</ref> [[C. & J. Clark|Clarks]], [[The North Face]],<ref>{{cite web| title = Supreme x The North Face Spring/Summer 2015 | url = http://fourpins.com/style/supreme-the-north-face-spring-summer-2015/ | first = Skylar | last = Bergyl | work = Four Pins | publisher = Four Pins | date = April 20, 2015 | access-date = April 21, 2015}}</ref> [[Hanes]], [[Playboy]], [[levi Strauss & Co.|Levi's]], [[The Timberland Company|Timberland]], [[Comme des Garçons]], [[Stone Island]], UNDERCOVER, [[White Castle (restaurant)|White Castle]] as well as many more. Fashion photographer [[Terry Richardson]] has produced some of the most notable pieces which include photographs of [[Michael Jordan]], [[Kermit the Frog]],<ref>{{cite web| title = Terry Richardson x Supreme x Kermit the Frog | url =http://hypebeast.com/2008/2/terry-richardson-x-supreme-x-kermit-frog | date = February 29, 2008 | access-date = April 22, 2015}}</ref> [[Three Six Mafia]], [[Lou Reed]], [[Lady Gaga]], [[Neil Young]],<ref>{{cite web| title = Supreme Fall/Winter 2014 Editorial by Terry Richardson for ‘SENSE’ Magazine | url = http://www.highsnobiety.com/2014/10/13/supreme-fall-winter-2014-editorial-terry-richardson-lucien-smith-sense-magazine/ | first = Brock | last = Cardiner | work = High Snobiety | date = October 13, 2014 | accessdate = April 21, 2015}}</ref> and [[Morrissey]].

Supreme stocks its own clothing label as well as [[Vans]], [[Nike Skateboarding|Nike SB]], [[Spitfire]], [[Thrasher (magazine)|Thrasher]] and [[Girl Distribution Company]].<ref>{{cite web| title = Get 'Em While They're Cool: Footwear for the Few | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/31/nyregion/get-em-while-they-re-cool-footwear-for-the-few.html | first = Anna | last = Bahney | work = The New York Times | publisher = Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. | date = October 31, 2003 | accessdate = September 29, 2012}}</ref>

Notable celebrities who have worn Supreme clothing in public include [[Tyler, The Creator]], [[Kanye West]], [[Chris Brown]], [[ASAP Rocky]], [[Kylie Jenner]], [[Drake (musician)|Drake]], [[Frank Ocean]], [[Nas]], [[Pharrell Williams]], [[John Mayer]], [[Kid Cudi]], [[Justin Bieber]], [[Sean Combs|P. Diddy]], [[Morrissey]], and [[Lil Uzi Vert]].<ref>{{Cite web|title = Gallery: Celebrities Wearing Supreme|url = http://uk.complex.com/style/2011/09/gallery-celebrities-wearing-supreme/|accessdate = 2015-07-22}}</ref>

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== External links ==
*[http://www.supremenewyork.com/ Supreme Web Site]

[[Category:Clothing brands of the United States]]
[[Category:Companies established in 1994]]
[[Category:Clothing retailers of the United States]]
[[Category:Clothing]]

Collabora

2015-12-28T23:05:02Z

Modulus12: Fixed comment code

{{Infobox company
|name = Collabora
|logo = [[File:COLLABORA LOGO.svg|Collabora Logo]]
|type = [[Private company limited by shares|Ltd.]]
|foundation = {{Start date|2005|07}} 
|founder = Robert McQueen, Philippe Kalaf and Robert Taylor
|location =  
|locations = 
|key_people = Philippe Kalaf, Michael Meeks, Guy Lunardi
|area_served = Worldwide
|industry = Software Consulting, Software Products, Open Source
|products = [[Telepathy (software)|Telepathy Communications framework]], [[GStreamer]], [[Webkit]], [[Blink_(layout_engine)|Blink]], [[DLNA]], [[LibreOffice]], [[Wayland (display server protocol)|Wayland]], [[PulseAudio]]
|services = [[Open source]] consultancy and engineering
|revenue =
|operating_income =
|net_income =
|num_employees = 84<ref>[http://people.collabora.com/ Collabora People]. People.collabora.com. Retrieved on 2013-07-17.</ref>
|parent =
|divisions =
|subsid =
|caption = '''Open First'''
|homepage = {{URL|http://www.collabora.com}}
|dissolved =
|footnotes =
|intl = 
}}

'''Collabora''' is a global [[private company]] founded by Robert McQueen, Philippe Kalaf and Robert Taylor based in [[Cambridge, United Kingdom]], with offices in [[Cambridge]] and [[Montreal]]. Collabora's mission is to accelerate the adoption of [[open source]] technologies, methodologies and philosophy.<ref>[http://www.collabora.com/about/ About us]</ref> It does this by providing consultancy to companies who are deploying open source technologies in their products, by providing its own open source based products and through knowledge sharing activities such as training.<ref>https://www.collabora.com/services/training/</ref>

Collabora's initial focus was [[instant messaging]] (IM), [[Voice over IP]] (VoIP) and [[videoconferencing]] technologies, but the company has since expanded its offering to include general multimedia, mobile web technologies, collaboration infrastructure, automotive infotainment platforms, graphics optimization, multimedia interoperability & [[productivity software]]. It is one of the main developers of [[LibreOffice]].<ref>{{cite web|dead-url=yes|url=http://www.collabora.co.uk/press/2007/10/collabora-expands-with-new-multimedia-division.html|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20110829163022/http://www.collabora.com/press/2007/10/collabora-expands-with-new-multimedia-division.html|archive-date=2011-08-29|title=Collabora expands with new Multimedia Division}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|dead-url=yes|url=https://www.collabora.com/press/2013/09/collabora-productivity-targets-a-marketplace-of-one-billion-desktops.html|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20140221032500/http://www.collabora.com/press/2013/09/collabora-productivity-targets-a-marketplace-of-one-billion-desktops.html|archive-date=2014-02-21|title=Collabora Productivity targets a marketplace of one billion desktops}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://betanews.com/2015/03/25/libreoffice-moves-to-the-cloud-to-take-on-office-online-and-google-docs/|title=LibreOffice moves to the cloud to take on Office Online and Google Docs|author=Mark Wilson|date=2015-03-25|work=BetaNews.com}}</ref>

Collabora's customers include many large IT corporations such as [[Nokia]], [[Samsung]], [[Intel]], [[Texas Instruments]], [[Google]] and the [[Crown Commercial Service]].<ref>[http://www.collabora.co.uk/about/ About us]. Collabora. Retrieved on 2013-07-17.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/collabora-deal-will-provide-savings-on-open-source-office-software|title=Collabora deal will provide savings on Open Source office software|work=www.gov.uk}}</ref>

== Projects sponsored or founded by Collabora ==
* [[LibreOffice]]: Collabora Productivity sells support and development services on the office suite. The former [[SUSE]] development team joined Collabora in September 2013.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.collabora.com/press/2013/09/collabora-productivity-targets-a-marketplace-of-one-billion-desktops.html |title=Collabora Productivity targets a marketplace of one billion desktops |date=3 September 2013 |accessdate=3 September 2013}}</ref><ref>[https://www.collabora.com/projects/libreoffice Collabora's LibreOffice Website]</ref>

:The company announced a collaboration with [[IceWarp]] to work on LibreOffice Online.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/03/libreoffice-in-the-browser-revealed-in-2011-finally-close-to-reality/|title=LibreOffice in the browser, revealed in 2011, finally close to reality|work=Ars Technica}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://betanews.com/2015/03/25/libreoffice-moves-to-the-cloud-to-take-on-office-online-and-google-docs/|title=LibreOffice moves to the cloud to take on Office Online and Google Docs|work=BetaNews}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.softpedia.com/news/uk-government-is-kicking-out-microsoft-office-and-adopts-libreoffice-494919.shtml|title=UK Government Kicks Out Microsoft Office and Adopts LibreOffice|author=Silviu Stahie|date=20 October 2015|work=softpedia}}</ref>

:On 15 December 2015, the company announced partnership with [[ownCloud]] and release of ''CODE'', a distribution of LibreOffice Online and ownCloud Server.<ref>{{cite press release | url=https://www.collaboraoffice.com/collabora-and-owncloud-announce-partnership-and-release-code-for-libreoffice-online-developers/ | title=Collabora and ownCloud announce Partnership and release CODE for LibreOffice Online developers. | publisher=Collabora Productivity | date=15 December 2015 | accessdate=27 December 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://owncloud.org/blog/libreoffice-online-has-arrived-in-owncloud/ | title=Collabora brings LibreOffice Online to ownCloud | publisher=ownCloud, Inc. | date=15 December 2015 | accessdate=27 December 2015}}</ref>

:Branded versions of LibreOffice include LibreOffice-From-Collabora, Collabora Office and Collabora GovOffice.

* [[GStreamer]], a multimedia framework.
* [[D-Bus]], a free and open-source inter-process communication (IPC) system.
* [[PulseAudio]], a sound system for POSIX OSes used as the default audio server on most GNU/Linux open source distributions.
* [[Wayland (display server protocol)|Wayland & Weston]]: Collabora employs major Wayland contributors such as Daniel Stone and [[Pekka Paalanen]]<ref>http://www.ohloh.net/p/wayland/contributors?query=&sort=commits</ref><ref>http://www.ohloh.net/p/weston/contributors?query=&sort=commits</ref>
* [[Linux kernel]] Bluetooth Subsystem: Collabora employs [[Gustavo Padovan]], the Linux kernel Bluetooth subsystem maintainer<ref>https://www.kernel.org/doc/linux/MAINTAINERS</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://padovan.org/blog/2010/10/bluetooth-subsystem-maintainership-change/|title=Bluetooth Subsystem maintainership change|work=Gustavo Padovan}}</ref> who also contributes to [[BlueZ]]<ref>http://www.ohloh.net/p/bluez/contributors?query=&sort=commits</ref>
* [[Farstream]] and [[Telepathy (software)|Telepathy]], a VoIP and collaboration framework created by Collabora founders. Includes the Empathy chat client.
* [[Pitivi]] and GES, a video editor for the [[free software]] desktop. Between 2008 and 2009, Collabora's Multimedia division worked on improving Pitivi.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Supporting Pitivi|author=Christian Schaller|url = https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2008/10/09/supporting-pitivi/|website = blogs.gnome.org|accessdate = 2015-10-15}}</ref> The GES library was initially created by Collabora in 2011 to provide video editing capabilities to the [[MeeGo]] platform.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pitivi.org/videos/talks/meeconf-2011.webm|title=Video Editing in your pocket|author=Edward Hervey}}</ref>
* [[Maynard (software)|Maynard]], a Weston shell

== See also ==
* [[Fluendo]]

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== External links ==
* {{Official website|http://www.collabora.com/}}

[[Category:Companies established in 2005]]
[[Category:2005 establishments in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Companies based in Cambridge]]
[[Category:Information technology consulting firms of the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:International information technology consulting firms]]
[[Category:LibreOffice]]

Hayward-Verwerfung

2015-08-02T06:51:10Z

Modulus12: Fixed reference

[[Image:122-38HaywardFault.jpg|thumb|300px|USGS map showing faults that span the Pacific–North America plate boundary.]]

The '''Hayward Fault Zone''' is a [[geologic fault]] zone capable of generating significantly destructive [[earthquake]]s. This fault is about {{convert|74|mi|km|abbr=on}} long,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.conservation.ca.gov/index/Pages/HaywardFaultFactSheet.aspx|title=Hayward Fault Fact Sheet|publisher=[[California Geological Survey]]|date=October 7, 2008|accessdate=2011-04-18}}</ref> situated mainly along the western base of the hills on the east side of [[San Francisco Bay]]. It runs through densely populated areas, including the cities of [[Richmond, California|Richmond]], [[El Cerrito, Contra Costa County, California|El Cerrito]], [[Berkeley, California|Berkeley]], [[Oakland, California|Oakland]], [[San Leandro, California|San Leandro]], [[Hayward, California|Hayward]], [[Union City, California|Union City]], [[Fremont, California|Fremont]], and [[San Jose, California|San Jose]], in order from north-to-south.

The Hayward Fault is parallel to its more famous (and much longer) westerly neighbor, the [[San Andreas Fault]], which lies offshore and through the San Francisco peninsula. To the south of the Hayward lies the [[Calaveras Fault]]. In 2007 the Hayward Fault was discovered to merge with the Calaveras Fault east of San Jose at a depth of {{convert|4|mi|km|sp=us}}, with the potential of creating earthquakes much larger than previously expected. Some geologists have suggested that the Southern Calaveras should be renamed as the Southern Hayward.<ref name=Lyons>{{cite news |url= http://www.contracostatimes.com/search/ci_7692907 |title= Major quake on Hayward fault more likely, scientists say |first=Julie|last=Sevrens Lyons|date=December 11, 2007|newspaper=[[San Jose Mercury News]]}}</ref>

North of [[San Pablo Bay]], and somewhat offset from the Hayward Fault is the '''Rodgers Creek Fault'''. This structure may be an extension of the Hayward Fault Zone. Another fault further north, the [[Maacama Fault]], is also considered to be part of the "Hayward Fault subsystem".<ref>{{cite web|title=North-of-the-Delta Offstream Storage Investigation (draft)|url=http://www.water.ca.gov/storage/docs/NODOS%20Project%20Docs/NODOS%20Progress%20Report/App.%20O/o_reg_geo_plate_faulting.pdf|publisher=[[United States Bureau of Reclamation]]|page=26|date=September 2008|accessdate=2011-12-11}}</ref><ref>[http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005CD/finalprogram/abstract_85295.htm Paleoseismic Investigation Of The Maacama Fault At The Haehl Creek Site, Willits, California]</ref>

While the San Andreas Fault is the principal [[transform fault|transform boundary]] between the [[Pacific Plate]] and the [[North American Plate]], the Hayward Fault takes up a share of the overall motion between the plates.

==Tectonic setting==
[[Image:PlateMovementEaNoPac.png|thumb|left|250px|Relative plate motions of North America showing the [[San Francisco Bay Area]] centered on the slip-strike San Andreas Fault System]]
{{main|Fault (geology)|Seafloor spreading|Subduction|Plate tectonics|Earthquake}}

The [[Pacific Plate]] is a major section of the Earth's crust, gradually [[Seafloor spreading|expanding]] by the eruption of [[magma]] along the [[East Pacific Rise]] to the southeast. It is also being subducted far to the northwest into the [[Aleutian Trench]]. In California, the plate is sliding northwestward along a [[transform boundary]], the [[San Andreas Fault]], toward the subduction zone. At the same time, the [[North American Plate]] is moving southwestward, but relatively southeast along the fault. The westward component of the North American Plate's motion results in some compressive force along the San Andreas and its associated faults, thus helping lift the [[Pacific Coast Ranges]] and other parallel inland ranges to the west of the [[Central Valley (California)|Central Valley]], in this region most notably the [[Diablo Range]]. The Hayward Fault shares the same relative motions of the San Andreas. As with portions of other faults, a large extent of the Hayward Fault trace is formed from a narrow complex zone of deformation which can span hundreds of feet in width.

The transform boundary defined by the San Andreas Fault is not perfectly straight, and the motion of the [[North American plate]] is not entirely parallel to the plate boundary. Thus, movement along the boundary here creates stresses in the crust on either side of the boundary, resulting in additional faulting on both sides of the San Andreas Fault. The Hayward Fault is one of the larger faults created this way, along with the [[Calaveras Fault]] to the east and the [[San Gregorio Fault]], west of the San Andreas.

The complete fault zone, including the Rodgers Creek fault, is divided by seismologists into three segments – Rodgers Creek, Northern Hayward, and Southern Hayward. It is expected that these segments may fail singly or in adjacent pairs, creating earthquakes of varying magnitude. The [[Association of Bay Area Governments]] (ABAG) in concert with other government agencies has sponsored the analysis of local conditions and the preparation of maps indicative of the destructive potential of these earthquakes. The various ABAG maps shown below represent some of the more likely possible combinations.

While there are indications that a substantial earthquake on a nearby parallel fault can release stress and so also decrease the near-term probability of an earthquake, the opposite appears to be true concerning sequential segments. A release on a major segment can substantially increase the likelihood of an earthquake on an adjacent fault segment, increasing the likelihood of two major regional earthquakes within a period of a few months.

[[Image:Eq-prob.jpg|thumb|San Francisco Bay region earthquake probability]]

===Rodgers Creek Fault Zone===
The connection between the Rodgers Creek Fault Zone and the Hayward Fault Zone is unclear as they are not aligned under San Pablo Bay. In fact, the Rodgers Creek Fault is actually aligned with the Pinole Valley Fault, not the Hayward Fault. Nonetheless, the current view is that the Hayward Fault and Rodgers Creek Fault are probably connected by a series of ''en echelon'' fault strands beneath San Pablo Bay. It is considered possible that a major seismic event on either fault may involve movement on the other, either concurrently or within an interval of up to several months. The [[Association of Bay Area Governments]] has prepared ground shaking maps that include a possible concurrent scenario (these are shown below).

===Calaveras Fault===
{{main|Calaveras Fault}}
The Calaveras Fault is considered to be continuous from the Sunol area south to [[Hollister, California|Hollister]]. It was long believed that there was no connection between the Hayward Fault and the Calaveras. Recent geological studies<ref>[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/12/MN4OTS8KK.DTL&tsp=1 Hayward, Calaveras faults may be connected, geologist says]</ref> (particularly the examination of very small and deep earthquakes) suggest that the two faults may be connected. If true, this would have significant implications for the potential maximum strength of earthquakes on the Hayward, since this strength is determined by the maximum length of the fault rupture and this rupture could extend beyond the juncture point and so include some portion of the Calaveras. (This potential is not shown in the shake intensity maps shown below.)

==Earthquakes==
{{Main|1868 Hayward earthquake}}
The largest quake on the Hayward Fault in ''recorded'' history occurred in 1868, with an estimated [[Moment magnitude scale|magnitude]] of 7.0. It occurred on the southern segment of the fault, receiving its name (some decades later) from the nascent town of [[Hayward, California|Hayward]] where it was determined the quake's epicenter was located. However, the 1868 quake caused much damage throughout the then sparsely settled Bay Area, including the city of San Francisco.<ref>{{cite news|title=Earthquake in San Francisco and Neighboring Places — Nearly a Million Dollars Worth of Property Destroyed|url=http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9801E5DB1E3CE13BBC4A51DFB6678383679FDE|date=October 22, 1868|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=California's Last Big Earthquake — How the People of Oakland Feared for San Francisco|url=http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9401E3D71039E033A25757C1A96F9C94649ED7CF|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|date=September 14, 1895}}</ref> In fact, the 1868 event became known as the "Great San Francisco earthquake" until the larger tremor in 1906.

Many seismologists believe that the [[1906 San Francisco earthquake]], which occurred on the San Andreas fault, reduced the stress on many faults in the Bay Area including the Hayward fault, creating an "earthquake shadow": a quiescent period following a major earthquake. Since the 1906 San Andreas event there have been no moderately strong earthquakes on the Hayward fault as were seen before that earthquake. It also appears likely that this quiet period in the earthquake shadow is ending, as projected by the rate of plate motion and the stress state of other faults in the region.

The following table chronologically lists all of the historic earthquakes on the Hayward Fault Zone which have exceeded magnitude 5.5.

{|class="wikitable" border="1" align="center" width="600px"
|+
|+
|+
|+
!width="5%"|Year
!width="15%"|City
!width="20%"|Date
!width="5%"|Magnitude
!width="55%"|Epicenter and notes
|-
||1864|| South Hayward area||May 21, 1864||5.8||Epicenter coordinates:37.6,-121.9<ref>[http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/quakes/historical/events/18640521_0201/18640521_0201.html California Geologic Survey, 1864 May 21]</ref>
|-
||[[1868 Hayward earthquake|1868]]||Hayward||October 21, 1868||6.8 to 7.0||Epicenter coordinates:37.7,-122.10<ref>[http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/quakes/eq_chron.htm California Geologic Survey, Significant California Earthquakes]</ref><ref>[http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/quakes/historical/events/18681021_1553/18681021_1553.html California Geologic Survey, 1868 October 21]</ref> This event left 30 dead, and $350,000 in property damage.
|-
||1870||Berkeley||April 2, 1870||5.8||Epicenter coordinates:37.9,-122.3<ref>[http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/quakes/historical/events/18700402_1948/18700402_1948.html California Geologic Survey, 1870 April 2]</ref>
|-
||1889||Alameda County (now east Oakland area)||July 31, 1889||5.6||Epicenter coordinates:37.8,-122.2<ref>[http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/quakes/historical/events/18890731_1247/18890731_1247.html California Geologic Survey, 1889 July 31]</ref>
|}

The 1868 earthquake occurred well before the [[East Bay (San Francisco Bay Area)|East Bay]] region was extensively urbanized.<ref>[http://www.museumoflocalhistory.org/pages/list.php?topic=earthquake Museum of Local History, Links to the 1868 Earthquake]</ref> The following year, in 1869, the William Meek Estate became one of the first developments in the area, built on 3,000 acres (12 km²) in what became known as the Cherryland district of Eden Township.<ref>[http://www.haywardareahistory.org/meek.html Meek Estate], Hayward Area Historical Society</ref> Recent renovations of the Meek Mansion have revealed that with the 1868 earthquake still fresh in minds of residents of the time, some unusual diagonal bracing was built into the original construction.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Historic Meek Mansion hides surprises |url=http://www.insidebayarea.com/timesstar/ci_4691156 |first=Matt |last=O'Brien |date=November 20, 2006 |newspaper=[[Oakland Tribune]], Metro 4}}</ref> Although its magnitude was less than the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, the intensity of shaking experienced in the Hayward area may have been greater than in 1906 due to the proximity of the Hayward Fault.

Earlier earthquakes have been detected by trench exposure and associated [[radiocarbon dating]]. Combined with the historic record, the last five major events were in 1315, 1470, 1630, 1725, and 1868,<ref>[http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3019/fs2008-3019.pdf USGS The Hayward Fault—Is It Due for a Repeat of the Powerful 1868 Earthquake?]</ref> which have intervals of about 140 years (note that 2008 is 140 years from the major 1868 event).

==Probability of future activity==
[[United States Geological Survey]] (USGS) scientists state that a major earthquake occurring on the zone is "increasingly likely".<ref name=Most>{{cite web|url=http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1899|title=The Hayward Fault: America’s Most Dangerous?|publisher=[[United States Geological Survey]]|date=March 21, 2008|accessdate=February 26, 2009}}</ref> When the next major earthquake occurs on the fault, damage will be catastrophic. More than 1.5 trillion [[United States dollar|U.S. dollars]] in property exists in the affected area, and more than 165 billion US dollars in damage would likely result if the 1868 earthquake were to reoccur. Since the fault runs through heavily populated areas, more than 5 million would be affected directly. Water could be cut off to 2.4 million people living in California's [[San Francisco Bay Area]].<ref name=Most/>

The probability of a major earthquake on the Hayward within the next thirty years was estimated at nearly 30 percent, compared to about 20 percent for the San Andreas Fault, which can have larger earthquakes but farther away from a significant portion of the urbanized parts of the Bay Area. Recent (January 2008) assessments suggest that the Hayward, Rodgers Creek, and Calaveras faults may be more likely to fail in the next few decades than previously thought.<ref name=Lyons/>

[[Image:BayareaUSGS.jpg|thumb|left|250px|USGS satellite photo of the San Francisco Bay Area. Light gray areas are heavily urbanized regions]]

The 140th anniversary of the 1868 event was in 2008, and the average time between the last five major events is also averaged at 140 years. Recent estimates of the damage potential of a major Hayward Fault earthquake by a professional [[risk management]] firm indicate the potential for huge economic losses, of which only a small percentage is insured against earth movement.<ref>{{cite news|title=Report: Next major earthquake on Hayward fault will be catastrophic|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8639349|first=Betsy|last=Mason|date=March 20, 2008|newspaper=[[San Jose Mercury News]]}}</ref> (Earthquake insurance is not only quite expensive, it tends to be burdened with huge deductibles - at least 15 percent). Depending upon seasonal weather conditions at the time of a major event a seismic event could be followed by huge urban wildfires compounded by damage to water systems or massive landslides in saturated soils. In addition to direct damage the effects on commerce due to damaged infrastructure would also be substantial. Experience with large area urban destruction such as caused by earthquake, hurricane, and firestorms has shown that complete rebuilding can take up to a decade, owing to various factors including disputes with insurance companies, a lack of qualified local builders, shortages of supplies, and an influx of contractors from outside of the region of dubious qualifications with no incentive to maintain and enhance a local reputation.

The progressively more severe reports and estimates of event probability and consequences have awakened a broad interest in training people for emergency response. It is becoming widely understood that professional fire fighting, police, and medical services will be overwhelmed by a major event and that neighbors will have to assist each other as best they can. Appropriate area response organizations would likely be similar to the 1950s [[civil defense]] structure, but such civilian participation has yet to be organized.

In 2012, USGS scientists said the fault is due for another magnitude 6.8 to 7.0 earthquake, with the California Geological Survey concurring, stating they believe there is a 31 percent chance of a magnitude-6.7 earthquake or greater along the Rogers Creek-Hayward Fault in the next 30 years.<ref>{{cite news|title=Reminder: Hayward Fault due for next Big One|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_21957124/reminder-hayward-fault-due-next-big-one|first=Keith|last=Burbank|date=November 8, 2012|newspaper=[[San Jose Mercury News]]}}</ref>

In March 2015, the United State Geological Survey released "UCERF3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California's Complex Fault System." The UCERF3 represents the best available science to date, and it now considers "multifault ruptures" and "fault readiness," in addition to historical seismicity, in the calculus of earthquake forecasting. The upshot, for those who live in the San Francisco Bay Area, is that experts say there is a 72% chance of experiencing a magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake in the next 30 years. Moreover, there have a 51% chance of a M≥7 (threshold to be considered a "major" quake), a 20% chance of a M≥7.5 and a 4% chance of a M≥8 (a "great" quake).<ref>{{citation|title=UCERF3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California’s Complex Fault System|url=http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2015/3009/|author=Field, E. H.|author2=2014 WGCEP|year=2015|publisher=[[United States Geological Survey]]|series=U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2015-3009|doi=10.3133/fs20153009}}</ref>

==Fault effects==
[[Image:HaywardFaultCreep.jpg|thumb|right|175px|The effects of 15 years of [[Aseismic creep|fault creep]] on a curb in [[Fremont, California|Fremont]].]]

===Fault creep===
{{Main|Aseismic creep}}
The surface of the fault is creeping at less than 0.5 cm (0.2 in) per year in the regions of concern. Extreme southern regions of the fault are creeping more quickly, perhaps sufficiently to prevent fault rupture there, but mostly the creep is insufficient to relieve the accumulating forces upon most of the fault and so will not prevent a large earthquake. The creep is sufficient to displace roads, curbs, and sidewalks and so visibly reveal the surface trace in many locations. Creep damage to asphalt road surfaces will usually appear as a series of [[echelon cracks]]. Creep effects may be seen also in older structures crossing the fault, some of which have been fitted with expansion joints to accommodate this slow motion.

===Earthquake shaking===
The magnitude of an earthquake, as measured by the [[moment magnitude scale]] (or for small events the more commonly known [[Richter magnitude scale]]) is roughly proportional to the length of the rupture, while the ground motion in a large region surrounding the fault is highly dependent upon the local soil conditions, somewhat upon the distance and relationship to the progression of the fault rupture and (as recently recognized in the [[Loma Prieta earthquake]]) reflected energy from deep discontinuities in the Earth's structure. The area affected by an earthquake is also dependent upon the density and uniformity of the soils surrounding the fault.

<gallery class="center">
Image:RogersCrkNorthHayward.gif|Combined Rodgers Creek and northern Hayward fault slip, [[Richter magnitude scale|magnitude]] 7.1
Image:NorthHaywardShake.gif|Northern Hayward fault slip, magnitude 6.5 *
Image:SouthHaywardShake.gif|Southern Hayward fault slip, magnitude 6.7 *
</gallery>
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>Recent examination of damage reports from the 1868 event suggest that the rupture over only portions of the Northern and Southern Hayward fault could generate a magnitude 7.0 event, far more powerful than either the 6.5 event shown here or the 6.7 previously recognized as a likely maximum.<ref>Contra Costa Times article, February 6, 2007, page 1</ref>
:''The terms used by ABAG for shaking intensity differ from the official descriptions of the [[Mercalli intensity scale]], being somewhat softened (perhaps due to the extensive local experience with earthquakes), with terms such as "Rather Strong" becoming "Light", and "Ruinous" and "Disastrous" becoming variations of "Violent".

====Bayside soil conditions====
[[Image:SFBALiqufactionMap.jpg|thumb|250px|right|Liquefaction susceptibility map – excerpt of USGS map. Maps indicating shake amplification have similar appearance.]]
:''Main articles: [[Bay mud]], [[Soil liquefaction]]
The Hayward fault is considered to be particularly dangerous due to the poor soil conditions in the [[alluvial plain]] that drops from the East Bay Hills to the eastern shoreline of [[San Francisco Bay]]. At the lower elevations near the bay the soil is mostly water saturated mud and sand, placed in the early 20th century as fill in marsh areas. This soil tends to amplify the effects of an earthquake and so producing significantly greater ground motion. Additionally, the soil itself can fail, turning into a liquid mud from the agitation, a mud unable to support buildings erected upon once-firm soil. This region is also covered with dense low-rise urban development, most of which was built soon after the [[1906 San Francisco earthquake]], and long before even moderately earthquake resistant construction practices had been developed in the late 1920s.

Further improvement in the construction of resistant structures and the development of retrofitting method have only recently been developed, largely in response to the effects of the 1971 [[Sylmar earthquake|Sylmar]], 1989 [[Loma Prieta earthquake|Loma Prieta]], and 1994 [[Northridge earthquake|Northridge]] events in California – none of which were hugely catastrophic, but each of which caused loss of life in structures not thought to be vulnerable, and so increased public, engineering, and government awareness of the need for specific remediations and construction methods required for improved life safety.

Although many structures have undergone [[seismic retrofit]]ting there are a large number of dangerous unreinforced [[masonry]] (mostly brick) structures and chimneys, which can be extremely hazardous to occupants in a large earthquake, and a large number of buildings which are either not bolted to their foundations or which are elevated upon partial stories that are insufficiently resistant to shear forces. Foundation and partial story weaknesses are easily remediated in most cases, but this is only effective if the work is competently done, with proper attention to minor details such as nailing patterns and proper connections. Local surveys of recently completed work have exposed deficient workmanship in a number of cases involving household retrofits.

====Landslides====
{{Main|Landslide}}
There are many small active landslides and evidence of numerous large archaic landslides in the [[Berkeley Hills]]. Such areas may be stable only under present conditions. There is the possibility that a large earthquake could trigger very large earth flows, particularly if the soils are seasonally saturated with water, possibly rendering extensive areas unbuildable. (See the [[#Virtual tour|Virtual tour]] - Google Earth Flyover below.)

===Potentially impacted structures and features===
Many structures near the bay shore on either side would probably be severely affected by either a major Hayward Fault rupture or a nearby San Andreas Fault rupture. Severe effects were seen in both Oakland and northern San Francisco from the 1989 [[Loma Prieta earthquake]], even though this event was not extremely large and was centered a significant distance away in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Most of the severe effects of that event were due to poorly responding soil conditions and design deficiencies in large structures. Only a portion of the structural deficiencies in the larger area have been addressed, and the surface motion effects of a large event are likely to be far more severe than seen in the Loma Prieta event.

====Freeways and overcrossings====
{{Unreferenced section|date=December 2008}} 
Many modifications have been made to freeway structures to reduce life hazards during seismic events. Significant adverse conditions remain which can cause disruption with possible long-term effects upon critical traffic infrastructure despite these modifications.

'''Warren Freeway portion of Highway 13'''

In its northern extent, the Hayward Fault lies directly beneath the portion of [[California State Route 13|Highway 13]] (the ''Warren Freeway'') that is south of its intersection with [[California State Route 24|Highway 24]] and north of its terminal connection with [[Interstate 580 (California)|Interstate 580]] (the ''MacArthur Freeway''). In this [[rift]] valley there are a number of elevated street crossings in the [[Montclair, Oakland, California|Montclair District]] that cross the fault.

'''Highway 24'''

[[California State Route 24|State Highway 24]], connecting Oakland to Orinda, Lafayette, and Walnut Creek through the [[Caldecott Tunnel]], is composed of extensive earth fill at the location where the fault is crossed. An earthquake may cause minor landsliding on some slopes of the freeway, and the plastic movement of the fill would likely disrupt the pavement if the movement here of the surface displacement is substantial, possibly presenting a hazard to motorists and shutting down the highway for a while. More extensive disruption and greater hazard could be caused by the failure of elevated structures, both those over which the highway passes and overcrossings of the freeway, of which there are two nearby. As elsewhere in the area, such structures have undergone extensive [[retrofitting]] for safety.

'''Highways 80 and 880 and the Port of Oakland'''

[[Image:I-80 Eastshore Fwy.jpg|thumb|right|200px|[[Eastshore Freeway]]]]
A severe earthquake is more likely to disable the offshore causeway portions of [[Interstate 80 (California)|Interstate Highway 80]] (the [[Eastshore Freeway]]), since it is built on fill placed in the 1930s atop mudflats whose upper layers were deposited in the 19th century as a result of extensive [[placer mining|hydraulic gold mining]] in the distant [[Sierra Nevada (U.S.)|Sierra Nevada]] mountain foothills. This soft mud is expected to amplify earthquake shaking, and the mud supporting the heavy fill may liquefy, and so possibly cause major disruption of the highway due to failure by sinking of the highway and by differential movement of large sections. (More modern construction for these conditions employs linked and "floating" - in mud - lightweight [[concrete]] and plastic foam box structures to support a road.) Similar conditions underlie the eastern approach roads to the Bay Bridge. Better, but still locally poor soils underlie the portion of [[Interstate 880 (California)|Interstate Highway 880]] that extends to the South Bay region from the eastern terminus of the [[San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge]]. As the bulk of cargo containers from the [[Port of Oakland]] travel on these two roads, the disabling of both would cause severe disruption of West Coast import and export goods, owing to the consequent overloading of other West Coast container handling ports.

'''Highway 580'''

A major route for commuters traveling from Southern Alameda County, the San Joaquin Valley and the East Bay hills to [[downtown Oakland]] and San Francisco, [[Interstate 580 (California)|Interstate 580]] crosses the fault twice, and runs very close to the fault between the intersections with [[State Route 13 (California)|State Route 13]] (the Warren Freeway) and [[Interstate 238 (California)|Interstate 238]].

====San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge====
[[File:SFOBBESR-1787C-May15-2011.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Eastern span and replacement construction]]
{{See also|Eastern span replacement of the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge}}
The [[1989 Loma Prieta earthquake]] caused a failure of a single section of the upper deck of the eastern span of the [[San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge]], which closed the bridge for 30 days. Engineers and much of the public have long recognized that a strong earthquake centered close to the bridge on either the Hayward or San Andreas faults could cause a complete collapse of the eastern span. A replacement of the eastern span was completed in August 2013.
{{Clear}}

====Railroads====
Parallel to the Eastshore Freeway and inland only two blocks is a four-track railroad route used for general freight traffic, including that generated by the [[Port of Oakland]] ([[Union Pacific Railroad|Union Pacific]] and [[BNSF Railway|BNSF]] railroads) and by [[Amtrak]] passenger traffic to the Pacific Northwest and eastward through [[Reno, Nevada|Reno]] and [[Salt Lake City, Utah|Salt Lake City]]. Along the north shore of [[Contra Costa County, California|Contra Costa County]], substantial amounts of pressurized liquid gas, flammable liquids, caustic materials, and various toxics are stored temporarily in bulk railcars adjacent to passenger and freight traffic mainlines, with great potential hazards should a derailment occur. Derailments have often occurred during major earthquakes, both directly by tipping and by roadbed failures; industrial accidents involving these materials have caused extensive health hazards in the mixed residential–industrial areas of Richmond.

====Bay Area Rapid Transit====
{{Main|Bay Area Rapid Transit}}

In addition to extensive modifications to over crossings and elevated structures, largely to prevent dismantling due to shaking or destruction by soil failure, several other unique system feature require special treatment.

'''Transbay tube'''

BART trains travel between San Francisco and Oakland through an underwater tube structure. The tube is composed of welded plate steel segments. Each oval outer section carries two inner train tubes of circular cross section and a central rectangular access and rescue tunnel, with the void between elements filled with concrete. The segments were sunk into a ditch dredged through bay mud and covered with rock fill, and then pumped free of water upon completion, making the resulting tube somewhat buoyant, but held in place with a rock overfill. Subsequent seismic analysis indicated the possibility that the overfill could fail due to agitation, allowing the buoyant tube to float upward, misaligning the tracks and possibly overstressing the bolted connections. This potential problem has been addressed by vibratory compaction of the overfill covering the tube. Additional stabilization includes the driving of large pilings and the connection of additional restraints.

'''Slip joint'''
{{Main|Seismic retrofit#Underwater tubes}}
The transbay tube terminates at an under-bay [[slip joint]] near the Embarcadero Station in San Francisco. The designed slip margin has been reduced by half due to unforeseen settlement of the tube structure. The projected worst-case motion at this joint has been determined to be beyond that for which the joint is presently capable, which could cause severe structural problems and mud and water entry into the tube and adjacent subway systems. This is to be corrected at great expense – first estimated at $142 million but expected to cost far more – probably the largest single cost item in the list of BART seismic retrofits.

'''Berkeley Hills Tunnel'''

In June 2006 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) management announced that they have elected not to modify the Berkeley Hills Tunnel, which actually penetrates the Hayward Fault, arguing that it would be cheaper (and less disruptive to current operations) to rebore a misaligned portion after the fact than to protect riders (either by extensive modifications of the tunnel or by replacing it with a higher bore) against the small likelihood that a train (or two) would crash into or be cut in two by a major slippage of the fault. Modified train scheduling to prevent multiple train exposure at faults has been determined by BART engineers to be impractical due to variations in train passage, but [[automation|automated]] event-related realtime train operational response is considered practical (see below).

'''Seismic sensor network'''

BART has installed and continues to enhance a network of seismic sensors (an [[earthquake warning system]]) to trigger a system halt in the event of a major event, this to include automated event progression analysis to determine the best action with regard to individual trains for maximum safety (a fault rip can take up to several tens of seconds to completely propagate from the epicenter to the more distant affected locations). Such sensor networks and warning devices have a potential to reduce the hazards from falling objects and furnishings provided that the people notified are well trained in appropriate responses (similar to the [[Cold War|Cold War's]] "[[duck and cover]]" training of schoolchildren).

====Refineries====
[[Image:ShellMartinez-refi.jpg|right|thumb|200px|View of Shell Oil Refinery in Martinez, California.]]
Of primary concern with respect to the Hayward Fault is the huge [[Chevron Richmond Refinery]] in [[Richmond, California|Richmond]]. Although founded on better ground than most of the shoreline, this refinery has extensive crude oil and finished product docks and pipelines extending into the bay, which could produce catastrophic spills into the bay, with the potential to adversely affect hundreds of miles of sensitive wetlands. Dismantling of high pressure and temperature process units and the consequent fire danger to personnel and equipment could produce substantial economic consequences for the western states. Large liquid storage tanks are protected by berms that are designed to contain the contents should a tank fail under normal conditions. Similar process and product conditions exist at other refineries further inland near [[Martinez, California|Martinez]], but mostly these plants are exposed to earthquakes from other faults.

====Fuel pipelines====
Gasoline is continuously shipped under pressure from Richmond and Martinez area refineries through [[Kinder Morgan Energy Partners]] pipelines which run under heavily populated East Bay urban areas to tank terminals near San Jose Airport in North San Jose. Aviation fuels are piped from these same refineries to the Oakland Airport. A number of spills have previously occurred due to landslides and such spill and related toxic and flammable material release may be prevalent in a major seismic event. A November 9, 2004, construction accident on this pipeline system in Walnut Creek killed five people.<ref>{{cite news| first = Henry | last = Lee | title = $6 million settlement in 2004 pipeline blast: 3 injured workers, dead man's kin to share funds | publisher = San Francisco Chronicle |date = 2006-10-20 | url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/10/20/BAG6TLST121.DTL | accessdate = 2006-01-23}}</ref> As seen in other worldwide pipeline ruptures, even an instantaneous stop of pumping would take several minutes to significantly lower pipeline pressure after a break, and would likely result in the release of significant amounts of flammable liquid fuels. Chevron also has a petroleum products pipeline that crosses the fault.

Pacific Gas & Electric Company has numerous gas distribution lines crossing or near the Hayward Fault. Several PG&E gas transmission pipelines also cross the fault. After a non-earthquake related gas transmission pipeline failure in [[San Bruno, California]] on September 9, 2010, it took PG&E crews 95 minutes to stop the gas flow to both ends of that failed pipeline.<ref>http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2011/PAR1101.pdf</ref>

====Bay Area water supplies====
[[East Bay Municipal Utility District]] (EBMUD) supplies water to 800,000 East Bay customers who live west of the [[Berkeley Hills]]. Prior to the adoption and implementation of a $200 million seismic improvement project all of the water for these customers went through one vulnerable tunnel that crosses the Hayward Fault near the [[Caldecott Tunnel]]. As part of this project, that tunnel – the Claremont Tunnel – was seismically retrofitted. Additionally, EBMUD created a second route to bring water to these west-of-the-hills customers through the Southern Loop Bypass near [[Castro Valley]]. The Southern Loop was completed in 2002, while the seismic retrofitting of the Claremont tunnel was completed in February 2007.<ref>[http://www.quake06.org/quake06/best_practices/WSSIP.html EBMUD Water Supply Seismic Improvement Program]</ref><ref>[http://www.ktvu.com/news/11138463/detail.html Major East Bay Water Supply Line Retrofit Completed]</ref>

The [[Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct]], which supplies 270 to 315 million gallons of water per day to the City of San Francisco and other Bay Area communities, directly crosses the Hayward Fault in [[Fremont, California|Fremont]]. A 2002 report by the Bay Area Economic Forum suggests that a breakdown in the aqueduct due to an earthquake could cut off Hetch Hetchy water to the Bay Area for 60 days. In addition to depriving 85% of San Francisco residents of their drinking water, this would cut off supplies for firefighting and water-intensive industry, causing economic damage of $17.2–28.7 billion.<ref>[http://www.sfchroniclemarketplace.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/10/09/BA139730.DTL&hw=quakes&sn=553&sc=099 San Francisco Chronicle, October 9, 2002: "$28 billion Hetchy loss in big quake"]</ref> Extensive reconstruction work at the Hayward Fault crossing includes a multi-sectioned tunnel structure to allow shear without collapse, this is to contain a section of water pipe with ball joints and a slip joint.

====Lake Temescal====
The fault continues north under the eastern margin of [[Temescal Regional Park|Lake Temescal]] and its dam, which is unlikely to fail since it has been completely reinforced by the extensive earth fill supporting the subsequently improved Highway 24.

====University of California, Berkeley====

Many of the structures at the UC Berkeley academic campus have been self-rated as having "poor" earthquake performance. Numerous chemical, radiological, and biohazardous materials are present (in relatively small quantities) on campus and on the associated [[Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory]], in the hills above the university. However, the University has undertaken an extensive retrofitting project over the past decade to systematically retrofit all academic buildings on Campus to withstand a significant earthquake.

'''Memorial Stadium'''

{{multiple image
| align = right
| image1 = Berkeley stadium fault creep P1320489.jpg
| image2 = CalMemStadFaultCreep.jpg
| footer = Memorial Stadium supporting columns diverging at the top due to [[Aseismic creep|fault creep]] (the bottoms are in a common footing). External offset shown on left
}}

Further north the fault passes under the lengthwise midline of the football field of [[California Memorial Stadium]] at the [[University of California, Berkeley]]. Fault creep since 1923 offset the original walls at the north and south ends 13 inches (33 cm).

Extensive upgrades over a recent eighteen-month interval have addressed the life safety issues,<ref>[http://stadium.berkeley.edu/] California Memorial Stadium Website</ref> including replacement of the [[American football|football]] players' facilities, and an extensive seismic retrofit of those sections not subject to fault shearing. The work was the subject of several lawsuits from neighborhood and environmental groups, who were concerned about such extensive construction on top of a major earthquake fault. During the reconstruction, the Cal Bears have played at [[AT&T Park]] in San Francisco for one season.<ref>[http://www.calbears.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/051010aae.html Cal Football to Play 2011 Home Season at San Francisco's AT&T Park] (Official Cal Bears website)</ref> The modifications completed in Summer 2012 involved the cutting of the stadium into four independent sections, followed by the demolition of the two segments directly over the rubble zone. The north and south ends are formed of new bridging sections that rest upon floating mats (foundations that do not penetrate the surface, rather sitting upon plastic sheets over level graded gravel and sand) where they pass over and near the fault, with appropriate sliding connections between the sections for the safety of spectators and the ability to absorb the relative rotation between the east and west fixed sections and the and new north and south mobile sections.

====Electrical and communication system disruption====
Affected areas are likely to be without electrical power for an extensive period. This in turn can make fuel supplies for vehicles and emergency generators unavailable locally and impact both domestic water, industrial water, sewage plants, and drainage pumping. Due to the extensive use of point of sale scanners and registers in supermarkets this could also impact the ability of stores to sell essential items such as groceries and to preserve frozen food items, as well as terminating cable TV and most internet access.

Cellphone and most landline telephone service, while theoretically survivable for a short time on battery and emergency power, could instead suffer immediate disruption from ground shaking effects.

====Cities affected====
Some of the cities in the eastern bay shore and south bay region near this fault include [[Richmond, California|Richmond]], [[El Cerrito, Contra Costa County, California|El Cerrito]], [[Berkeley, California|Berkeley]], [[Albany, California|Albany]], [[Emeryville, California|Emeryville]], [[Kensington, California|Kensington]], [[Oakland, California|Oakland]], [[Piedmont, California|Piedmont]], [[San Leandro, California|San Leandro]], [[San Lorenzo, California|San Lorenzo]], [[Castro Valley, California|Castro Valley]], [[Hayward, California|Hayward]], [[Union City, California|Union City]], [[Fremont, California|Fremont]], [[Newark, California|Newark]], [[Milpitas, California|Milpitas]], [[Niles, California|Niles]], and portions of [[San Jose, California|San Jose]].

Similar dangerous soil conditions and insufficiently resistant buildings are also on the southern, western and northern boundaries of San Francisco and San Pablo bays and would also be severely affected by a major earthquake on the Hayward fault. As that portion includes the so-called [[Silicon Valley]], the potential economic disruption due to destruction of works in progress and the dismantling of microelectronics fabrication plants could have an economic effect extending worldwide. The current estimates of the probability of a major earthquake on any of the numerous regional faults range up to 70 percent within the thirty-year period 2000–2029. A recent ''quiet period'' following many years of minor activity is considered to be particularly ominous by many, although geologists have not yet been able to predict earthquakes with any useful accuracy. They do warn that all residents of the region should be prepared for a large event and its subsequent effects (e. g., lack of water, firefighting, first aid, electricity, motor and heating fuels, etc.) and that much life-safety protective work remains to be done.

===Retrofits for survivability===
{{Main|Seismic retrofit}}
[[Image:BandedRetroColumn.jpg|thumb|left|200px|[[State Route 24 (California)|State Route 24]] [[Seismic retrofit|retrofit]] at the [[Rockridge (BART station)|Rockridge BART Station]] parking lot. Jacketed and grouted column on left, unmodified on right]]
It is primarily the likelihood of a severe earthquake on the Hayward or San Andreas faults that has spurred a substantial effort to [[Seismic retrofit|retrofit]] and sometimes replace large structures at risk, particularly the eastern and western spans of the [[San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge]], the [[San Francisco City Hall|San Francisco]] and [[Oakland, California|Oakland]] city halls, and numerous elevated rail, road, and pedestrian structures and [[overpass]]es. Much work remains to be done in the region and progress is being hampered by budget constraints imposed by trickle down federal-state-regional deficits, design and construction delays due to state and local political bickering over design, and unexpectedly high [[steel]] and [[cement]] costs due to the extensive construction work being done in [[People's Republic of China|China]]. Nonetheless, Bay area cities and counties have long expected a major earthquake and as a result all building in the past 30 years has been required to adhere to strict guidelines regarding earthquake resistance. Of all the earthquake prone regions of the world, the San Francisco Bay Area is among the most prepared structurally for the eventuality of a major quake while remaining grossly unprepared in both civil response planning and in the retrofitting of older buildings.<ref>[http://www.spur.org/publications/library/report/thedilemmaofexistingbuildings_020109 SPUR Report] "The dilemma of existing buildings: Private Property, Public Risk" (An extensive report and analysis for San Francisco, but with broad applicability to the region. This addresses particularly the difference in requirements between life safety and habitability after an earthquake)</ref>
{{Clear}}

==Further information==

===Virtual tour===
The [[Google Earth]] website, in cooperation with the [[United States Geological Survey]], has prepared a virtual helicopter tour of the fault, with much additional information available through the tour. Potentially dangerous landslide areas are also marked, showing great areas beyond the fault that could be rendered uninhabitable by a major event.

===References in popular culture===
The [[Tom Wolfe]] novel ''[[A Man in Full]]'' features a fictional major earthquake on the Hayward Fault as a [[deus ex machina]] method (freeing a major character from prison) and plot development point.

The [[James Bond]] movie ''[[A View to a Kill]]'' (1985) involved a plot, referred as "Main Strike", by [[Max Zorin]] to detonate explosives along the Hayward Fault, San Andreas Fault and at the "geological lock" to flood the two faults with water from nearby lakes and cause both faults to move causing a "double earthquake" that would destroy Silicon Valley, all in order for Zorin to monopolize the microchip market.

===Special exhibit===
[[Fremont, California|Fremont]] Earthquake Exhibit: ''The Hayward Fault Exposed''
[[Image:HaywardFaultExposed5911.JPG|left|250px|thumb|A docent leads a visitor to a viewing platform within the pit. Click image for more information]]
This [[geotourism]] exhibit (April through October 2006, now closed) featured a 12- to {{convert|15|ft|m|0|sing=on}} deep pit exposing the Hayward Fault, which could be viewed "face to face" from a shaded platform by descending a staircase. Significant features were noted and marked. Similar trench excavations are used in the determination of the frequency and magnitude of prehistoric earthquakes and to determine the location of latent faults as part of the science of [[Paleoseismology]]
*Extensive additional interpretive material concerning the geology and seismology of the Bay Area was presented for viewing, most of which is currently accessible online.[http://www.msnucleus.org/haywardfault/index.htm]
*Funding and organization for a permanent exhibit at this location is being actively sought, with planning in progress.[http://www.msnucleus.org/haywardfault/proposal07.pdf]
{{clear}}
{{wide image|HaywardFaultExposedComposite.jpg|600px|align-cap=center|Multiple image view from the platform. The fault has here been marked with cordage and various features labeled.}}
{{wide image|HaywardFaultExposedNoted.jpg|600px|align-cap=center|Image with enhanced annotation added}}
</center>
{{Clear}}

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==External links==
{{Portal|San Francisco Bay Area}}
*[http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/research/geology/hf_map/ Active Traces of the Hayward Fault] – [[United States Geological Survey|USGS]] (includes links to the Google Earth virtual tour of the fault)
*[http://www.eastbayexpress.com/gyrobase/its-not-our-fault/Content?oid=1076729&showFullText=true "It's Not Our Fault"] – ''[[East Bay Express]]''
*[http://seismo.berkeley.edu/geotour/ The geology of "Bear Territory"] – University of California at Berkeley geology tour
*[http://www.msnucleus.org/haywardfault/index.htm Fremont Earthquake Exhibit – The Hayward Fault Exposed] msnucleus.org, K-12 math and science education site
*[http://pasadena.wr.usgs.gov/shake/ca/ Recent significant events in the California region] with opportunity to report via ''did you feel it?''
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jtAKPO4iHA The Hayward Fault: Predictable Peril] – [[KQED (TV)|KQED]]
*[http://quake.abag.ca.gov ABAG Quake website] – [[Association of Bay Area Governments]]
*[http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3019/fs2008-3019.pdf The Hayward Fault—Is It Due for a Repeat of the Powerful 1868 Earthquake?] – United States Geological Survey
*[http://www.bart.gov/about/projects/eqs/updates.aspx Earthquake Safety Program Construction Updates] – Bay Area Rapid Transit

{{-}}
{{California Faults}}
{{Faults}}

[[Category:Seismic faults of California]]
[[Category:Geography of the San Francisco Bay Area]]
[[Category:Geography of Alameda County, California]]
[[Category:Natural history of Contra Costa County, California]]
[[Category:Geography of Napa County, California]]
[[Category:Natural history of Solano County, California]]
[[Category:Strike-slip faults]]