Truth & Transparency is both a guiding organizational goal of Rocky Flats Downwinders and a specific project seeking an independent expert independent assessment of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's Rocky Flats cancer studies.

CDPHE’s cancer studies provide limited geographic comparisons, but they did not identify exposed residents, reconstruct residential histories, measure individual exposure, or follow people over time. Without that information—and with questions about the study boundaries and Denver metro comparison population—the health effects of Rocky Flats remain unresolved.

Rocky Flats Downwinders is seeking independent researchers in epidemiology, biostatistics, environmental health, research methodology, health policy and public-health communication to evaluate both CDPHE's Rocky Flats cancer studies and how their findings have been communicated. The objective is not to predetermine whether Rocky Flats caused disease. It is to determine what the existing evidence can—and cannot—establish and ensure that Colorado communicates those distinctions

CDPHE has analyzed cancer-registry data around Rocky Flats for decades. But cancer-registry analysis is not the same as monitoring the long-term health of people who may have been exposed during Rocky Flats operations. Understanding that distinction is essential to understanding what Colorado's cancer studies can—and cannot—tell us.

Existing cancer-registry studies provide useful information about people diagnosed while living near Rocky Flats—but that is not the same as following the people who lived there during historically relevant periods. RFD is advocating for independent research that considers residential history, migration, latency, exposure-informed geography and long-term health outcomes.

Rocky Flats Downwinders is launching the Truth & Transparency Campaign to ask Colorado for clearer disclosure about what existing Rocky Flats cancer studies can—and cannot—tell us, greater data transparency, independent technical review, and research designed to address the health experiences of people who actually lived near Rocky Flats during historically relevant periods.

CDPHE says decades of cancer monitoring have not found elevated rates among residents living near Rocky Flats. But who was actually studied: people present during potential exposure or people living nearby when diagnosed? Our exchange with Colorado’s cancer registry examines this critical distinction

On Mother’s Day 1969, plutonium caught fire inside Rocky Flats Buildings 776/777. Firefighters battled the blaze for hours as portions of the filtration system were damaged and plutonium escaped. The accident became a turning point—bringing questions about contamination from the secretive nuclear weapons plant into public view.

Randy Stafford spent months reviewing decades of Rocky Flats contamination and health studies for the Jefferson Parkway Advisory Committee. His 26-page analysis identified contradictions in study methods, risk models and conclusions—raising a larger question: what would it take to finally conduct the kind of health research Rocky Flats communities need?

Colorado has monitored cancer incidence around Rocky Flats for decades, but an exchange with the state's cancer registry raises an important methodological question: Can data based largely on where people live when diagnosed adequately evaluate a community defined by where people may have lived and been exposed decades earlier?

In a 2018 position paper, Jefferson Parkway Advisory Committee member Randy Stafford examined decades of soil studies, health research and historical records to argue that disturbing soil along Indiana Street could create additional public-health risks. His paper brings together important evidence—and competing interpretations—at the center of the Jefferson Parkway debate.

In a 2017 Denverite article, RFD co-founder Nicholas Hansen challenged the methodology of Colorado's cancer registry studies. His concerns about former residents, cancer latency, and the limitations of the state's conclusions remain central to our Truth & Transparency project today.

After the 1989 FBI raid halted plutonium production, Rocky Flats underwent an accelerated cleanup that reached physical completion in 2005. More than 800 structures were removed, but the cleanup did not eliminate all contamination. What remained, how were the decisions made, and why does Rocky Flats still require long-term environmental stewardship?

In a December 2002 letter, environmental researcher Bernd Franke challenged the methodology of a CDPHE cancer registry study near Rocky Flats. He questioned its statistical sensitivity, comparison population, and scientific usefulness. More than two decades later, his concerns closely parallel the questions RFD is raising through its Truth & Transparency project.

CDPHE's Rocky Flats Historical Public Exposures Studies reconstructed radioactive and chemical releases, modeled potential exposures, and estimated cancer risks. But the research was federally funded, relied on incomplete historical records and hypothetical exposure scenarios, and did not follow the actual long-term health outcomes of Downwinders. We examine its findings, limitations, funding, and influential recommendation against further epidemiological studies.