McGeehin wrote that the CDC "has determined that no further funding is available for this study." He noted that so far, seven years of funding has been provided at a total cost of $8,049,988.

"This funding has included a five-year cooperative agreement begun in 1998, a 12-month cost extension of the cooperative agreement and a one-year grant awarded in September 2004," he wrote.

A "special emphasis panel," which is a board of scientific experts from outside the CDC, reviewed Lyon's protocol and recommended that the Utah Tyroid Disease Study not be funded beyond the 2004 grant award, McGeehin wrote.

"Furthermore, CDC at present does not have the resources to extend funding for this study beyond the current budget period. We recommend that you take measures to close out this study by the end of the current budget period, which will occur on Aug. 31, 2005."

Lyon said the study involved examining about 4,000 people who were originally identified in 1965, "and we've examined 1,300 of them."

The study's subjects were children when fallout swept through the St. George-eastern Nevada area. They were in sixth through 12th grades in 1965. In addition, a control group was established in Safford, Ariz.

It turned out that the control group also was exposed to fallout, but it wasn't as heavy in Safford.

"We've found just about 90 percent of them," Lyon said, speaking of the study's 4,000 subjects. "Most of them are willing to participate."

Researchers have been examining them in Salt Lake City, St. George, Phoenix, Tucson and Safford, Ariz.

The study is incomplete and analysis has not been carried out yet, so he is hesitant to talk about results. The analysis can't be concluded until the 4,000 people are examined.

But that may not happen. The federal government is saying, "tough luck," he said.

Lyon had this explanation for the study's continuation beyond the five years originally envisioned: The federal government "put all kinds of bureaucratic hurdles in our path that were not part of the original agreement."

For example, researchers were told they needed to have an institutional review board at the CDC, besides the review at the University of Utah. Establishing that took two years. Then the CDC wanted the National Academy of Sciences to look at the plans — a process that took another two years, including comment time, he said.

A review panel of three U.S. Department of Energy employees "basically focused on the way we calculated the dose for these people," he said.

The researchers responded with a 50-page answer, showing their efforts were state-of-the-art, according to Lyon.

The National Academy of Sciences said changes should be made but that the study should be carried out, he said. "They were supportive."