DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft: SC&A Review of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft: SC&A Review of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site August 27, 2007 Mr. David Staudt Center for Disease Control and Prevention Acquisition and Assistance Field Branch Post Office Box 18070 626 Cochrans Mill Road – B-140 Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0295 Re: Contract No. 200-2004-03805, Task Order 1: Transmittal of Draft SCA-TR-TASK1-0018, Revision 1: Privacy Act-cleared version of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site Profile Review Dear Mr. Staudt: SC&A, Inc., is please to submit Revision 1 of a draft report titled, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site Profile Review, SCA-TR-TASK1-0018. Revision 0 of this report was forwarded to you on July 23, 2007, pending review for Privacy Act (PA) information. The document has now been revised in accordance with that review and has been cleared for distribution. Please note, however, that this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 732-530-0104. Sincerely, John Mauro, PhD, CHP Project Manager cc: P. Ziemer, PhD, Board Chairperson A. Makhijani, PhD, SC&A Advisory Board Members H. Behling, PhD, MHP, SC&A L. Wade, PhD, NIOSH M. Thorne, SC&A L. Elliott, NIOSH H. Chmelynski, SC&A J. Neton, PhD, NIOSH J. Fitzgerald, Saliant S. Hinnefeld, NIOSH J. Lipsztein, SC&A L. Homoki-Titus, NIOSH K. Robertson-DeMers, CHP, Saliant A. Brand, NIOSH S. Ostrow, PhD, SC&A J. Broehm, NIOSH K. Behling, SC&A L. Shields, NIOSH T. Bell, Saliant Project File (ANIOS/001/18) 1608 SPRING HILL ROAD, SUITE 400 • VIENNA, VIRGINIA • 22182 • 703.893.6600 • FAX 703.821.8236 Draft ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site Profile Review Contract No. 200-2004-03805 Task Order No. 1 SCA-TR-TASK1-0018, Revision 1 Prepared by S. Cohen & Associates 1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 Vienna, Virginia 22182 Saliant, Inc. 5579 Catholic Church Road Jefferson, Maryland 21755 August 2007 Disclaimer This document is made available in accordance with the unanimous desire of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH) to maintain all possible openness in its deliberations. However, the ABRWH and its contractor, SC&A, caution the reader that at the time of its release, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Board for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. This implies that once reviewed by the ABRWH, the Board’s position may differ from the report’s conclusions. Thus, the reader should be cautioned that this report is for information only and that premature interpretations regarding its conclusions are unwarranted. Effective Date: Revision No. Document No. Page No. August 27, 2007 1 SCA-TR-TASK1-0018 2 of 168 S. Cohen & Associates: Document No. SCA-TR-TASK1-0018 Technical Support for the Advisory Board on Effective Date: Radiation & Worker Health Review of Draft — August 27, 2007 NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Program Revision No. 1 – PA-Cleared Draft LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL Page 1 of 168 LABORATORY SITE PROFILE REVIEW Supersedes: Task Manager: 0 ________________________ Date: ___________ Joseph Fitzgerald Project Manager: ________________________ Date: ___________ John Mauro NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. Effective Date: Revision No. Document No. Page No. August 27, 2007 1 SCA-TR-TASK1-0018 3 of 168 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................5 1.0 Executive Summary.............................................................................................................9 1.1 Summary of Findings.............................................................................................14 1.2 Opportunities for Improvement .............................................................................19 2.0 Scope and Introduction ......................................................................................................22 2.1 Review Scope.........................................................................................................22 2.2 Review Approach...................................................................................................24 2.3 Report Organization...............................................................................................25 3.0 Assessment Criteria and Methods......................................................................................27 3.1 Objectives ..............................................................................................................27 3.1.1 Objective 1: Completeness of Data Sources.............................................27 3.1.2 Objective 2: Technical Accuracy..............................................................27 3.1.3 Objective 3: Adequacy of Data.................................................................28 3.1.4 Objective 4: Consistency among Site Profiles..........................................28 3.1.5 Objective 5: Regulatory Compliance........................................................28 4.0 Site Profile Strengths .........................................................................................................32 5.0 Vertical Issues....................................................................................................................33 5.1 Dose Estimation for LLNL Personnel Assigned to Weapons Testing has not been Adequately Considered .................................................................................33 5.2 Inadequate Consideration has been given in the Site Profile to Potential Exposure Received at Site 300 ..............................................................................37 5.3 Completeness and Accuracy of the Data used in Dose Reconstruction is Lacking in the Internal Dose TBD.........................................................................40 5.4 Inadequate Consideration has been given in the TBD to Potential Exposure and Missed Dose from Secondary Radionuclides .................................................43 5.5 The TBD Provides No Guidance on Bioassay Data for Intakes of Tritium, Metal Tritides, or Organically Bound Tritium.......................................................44 5.6 The TBD Does not Identify Possible Chemical Forms of Airborne Radonuclides to which Workers have been Exposed ............................................46 5.7 The Internal Dose TBD has not Adequately Identified and Reviewed Applicable Bioassay Frequencies and Detection Levels .......................................48 5.8 An Approach for Determining Internal Dose for Unmonitored or Inadequately Monitored Workers does not address Plutonium, Tritium, or Other Radionuclides...............................................................................................49 5.9 Specific Guidance is Lacking for Intake and Dose Assessment............................52 5.10 External Dose Records are Inadequately Characterized........................................53 5.10.1 1952–Present..............................................................................................53 5.10.2 1952–1957..................................................................................................54 5.11 Inadequacies Exist in How Dose of Record is Compared with Worker’s Actual Dose; Insufficient Basis Provided for Neutron Dose Estimation...............55 NOTICE: This report has been reviewed for Privacy Act information and has been cleared for distribution. However, this report is pre-decisional and has not been reviewed by the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42 CFR 82. Effective Date: Revision No. Document No. Page No. August 27, 2007 1 SCA-TR-TASK1-0018 4 of 168 5.11.1 Photon dose................................................................................................56 5.11.2 Neutron dose ..............................................................................................56 5.12 Lack of Valid External Dose Coworker Approach Hinders Adequate Dose Estimation for Early Unmonitored Workers..........................................................59 5.13 Secondary Issues....................................................................................................60 5.13.1 The Occupational Internal Dose TBD Lacks Information on Incidents that Could Cause Significant Intakes or External Dose .............60 5.13.2 Occupational Medical X-rays Incompletely Characterized for Dose Estimation ..................................................................................................61 5.13.3 Beam Quality, Filtration, and X-ray Tube Output are not Well Known........................................................................................................64 5.13.4 Reliance on ICRP Publication 34 for Applicable DCFs May Underestimate Dose...................................................................................66 5.13.5 Lack of Maintenance, Collimation, and X-ray Protocol Data Increase Uncertainty ..................................................................................67 5.13.6 Gaps Exist in the Occupational
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Davy Crockett Weapon System Would Soon Launch the Little Feller I Shot
    Introduction The desert temperature hovered at 90 degrees Fahrenheit the morning of July 17, 1962 at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), now known at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Eventually the beating sun would increase the heat to over 105 degrees later that day, but at 10:00 a.m., a crowd of 396 spectators braved the scorching temperature and relentless sun to witness the last atmospheric test ever conducted by the United States. The crowd gathered in Area 18 of the NTS, approximately two miles from ground zero, where a Davy Crockett weapon system would soon launch the Little Feller I shot. Davy Crockett The Davy Crockett weapons system is mounted on a vehicle and prepared for launch. In 1962, Davy Crockett, hero of the Alamo, had been dead for 126 years. But on this hot summer morning, the name 'Davy Crockett' referred to the weapons system that fired projectiles from recoilless rifles with a firing range of 1.24 to 2.49 miles and could launch projectiles that weighed up to 79 pounds. Little Feller I, the fourth and last test of the Dominic II series (also known as Operation Sunbeam) conducted at the NTS, was a stockpile Davy Crockett tactical weapon with a nuclear warhead. Weighing only 51 pounds, Little Feller I was the smallest and lightest fission-type weapon deployed by the United States. The objectives of the test were threefold: 1. Test the Davy Crockett weapons system in a simulated tactical situation Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General 2. Train military personnel in the use of tactical Maxwell Taylor (left), and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Corrective Action Investigation Plan for CAU 097: Yucca Flat/Climax
    UNCONTROLLED When Printed UNCONTROLLED When Printed Nevada DOE/NV--659 Environmental Restoration Project Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada Test Site, Nevada Controlled Copy No.: Revision No.: 0 September 2000 Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited. Environmental Restoration Division U.S. Department of Energy UNCONTROLLED When Printed Nevada Operations Office Available for sale to the public, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Phone: 800.553.6847 Fax: 703.605.6900 Email: [email protected] Online ordering: http//www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm Available electronically at http://www.doe.gov/bridge. Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 Phone: 865.576.8401 Fax: 865.576.5728 Email: [email protected] Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors. Printed on recycled paper UNCONTROLLED When Printed DOE/NV--659 CORRECTIVE ACTION INVESTIGATION PLAN FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 97: YUCCA FLAT/CLIMAX MINE NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA DOE Nevada Operations Office Las Vegas, Nevada Controlled Copy No.: Revision No.: 0 September 2000 Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited. UNCONTROLLED When Printed CORRECTIVE ACTION INVESTIGATION PLAN FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 97: YUCCA FLAT/CLIMAX MINE NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA Approved by: Date: Robert M.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Atmospheric Nuclear Tests
    U.S. NUCLEAR TESTING FROM PROJECT TRINITY TO THE PLOWSHARE PROGRAM [From For the Record – A History of the Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, 1978-1986, by Abby A. Johnson, et al, Defense Nuclear Agency, DNA 6041F, 1986. The United States conducted Project TRINITY, the world's first nuclear detonation, in 1945. From 1946 to 1963, when the limited nuclear test ban treaty was signed, the U.S. conducted 18 atmospheric nuclear test series, identified below as operations, and a program of testing called PLOWSHARE. In addition, the U.S. staged safety experiments to determine the weapons' susceptibility to fission due to accidents in storage and transport. This chapter provides historical summaries of the tests, listed below in the order in which they occurred and are addressed: · Project TRINITY, 1945 (CONUS) · Operation CROSSROADS, 1946 (Oceanic) · Operation SANDSTONE, 1948 (Oceanic) · Operation RANGER, 1951 (CONUS) · Operation GREENHOUSE, 1951 (Oceanic) · Operation BUSTER-JANGLE, 1951 (CONUS) · Operation TUMBLER-SNAPPER, 1952 (CONUS) · Operation IVY, 1952 (Oceanic) · Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE, 1953 (CONUS) · Operation CASTLE, 1954 (Oceanic) · Operation TEAPOT, 1955 (CONUS) · Operation WIGWAM, 1955 (Oceanic) · Operation REDWING, 1956 (Oceanic) · Operation PLUMBBOB, 1957 (CONUS) · Operation HARDTACK I, 1958 (Oceanic) · Operation ARGUS, 1958 (Oceanic) · Operation HARDTACK II, 1958 (CONUS) · Safety Experiments, 1955-1958 (CONUS) · Operation DOMINIC I, 1962 (Oceanic) · Operation DOMINIC II, 1962 (CONUS) · PLOWSHARE Program, 1961-1962 (CONUS). Most of the oceanic tests were conducted at the Pacific Proving Ground, which consisted principally of the Enewetak and Bikini Atolls in the northwestern Marshall Islands of the Pacific Ocean. The Marshall Islands are in the easternmost part of Micronesia.
    [Show full text]
  • AN ELEGY on SPECIES OBITUARIES by Stinne Storm A
    AN ELEGY ON SPECIES OBITUARIES by Stinne Storm A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Utah in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Humanities College of Humanities The University of Utah August 2015 Copyright © Stinne Storm 2015 All Rights Reserved The University of Utah Graduate School STATEMENT OF THESIS APPROVAL The thesis of Stinne Storm has been approved by the following supervisory committee members: Stephen Tatum , Chair 03Date- 27Approved-15 Brett Clark , Member 03Date- 27Approved-15 Terry Tempest Williams , Member 03Date- 27Approved-15 and by Jeffrey McCarthy , Chair/Dean of the Department/College/School of Environmental Humanities and by David B. Kieda, Dean of The Graduate School. ABSTRACT This thesis explores “the sixth extinction,” as a contemporary poetic of loss. Animals and their voices are interpreted as “a language of loss.” It portrays decrease in biodiversity, contemporary environmental circumstances, and the mass dying out of species as the elegies of our time. It draws on ecological science as well as literary and contemporary art references. Death is a taboo in Western societies even though loss and pain are a part of existing and are linked to beauty and happiness. This thesis is about the quality of mourning that enables us to bear witness beyond our own baselines. Homer may be distant, but the vitality of narrating mourning, positioning of human among nonhuman, seems a suitable literary reference to make a leap into our bleak future, while searching for and insisting on beauty. We lack a language that pronounces the contemporary environmental depth and fault lines: disunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Testing
    Battlefi eld of the Cold War The Nevada Test Site Volume I Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Testing 1951 - 1963 United States Department of Energy Of related interest: Origins of the Nevada Test Site by Terrence R. Fehner and F. G. Gosling The Manhattan Project: Making the Atomic Bomb * by F. G. Gosling The United States Department of Energy: A Summary History, 1977 – 1994 * by Terrence R. Fehner and Jack M. Holl * Copies available from the U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave. S.W., Washington, DC 20585 Attention: Offi ce of History and Heritage Resources Telephone: 301-903-5431 DOE/MA-0003 Terrence R. Fehner & F. G. Gosling Offi ce of History and Heritage Resources Executive Secretariat Offi ce of Management Department of Energy September 2006 Battlefi eld of the Cold War The Nevada Test Site Volume I Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Testing 1951-1963 Volume II Underground Nuclear Weapons Testing 1957-1992 (projected) These volumes are a joint project of the Offi ce of History and Heritage Resources and the National Nuclear Security Administration. Acknowledgements Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Testing, Volume I of Battlefi eld of the Cold War: The Nevada Test Site, was written in conjunction with the opening of the Atomic Testing Museum in Las Vegas, Nevada. The museum with its state-of-the-art facility is the culmination of a unique cooperative effort among cross-governmental, community, and private sector partners. The initial impetus was provided by the Nevada Test Site Historical Foundation, a group primarily consisting of former U.S. Department of Energy and Nevada Test Site federal and contractor employees.
    [Show full text]
  • US Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office Film
    U.S. Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office Film Declassification Project Video Tape Fact Sheets Updated September 2000 Released by Nevada Operations Office Coordination & Information Center Operated by Bechtel Nevada Under Contract DE-AC08-96NV11718 Film Declassification Project - Video Tape Fact Sheets Summary Information The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Albuquerque Operations Office, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), is committed to making available to the public historically significant films describing various aspects of the U.S. nuclear weapons development program. The process of declassifying these films is an ongoing task. The film footage is available on video tape in three formats: VHS ($10.00 each plus shipping and handling); beta ($80-$100 each plus shipping and handling); and VHS PAL ($40.00 each plus shipping and handling). All payment must be made by check or money order in U.S. dollars, payable to Bechtel Nevada. The enclosed fact sheets provide information on each video. The video listing and fact sheets can also be found on the Internet at: http//www.nv.doe.gov under “News & Publications” and the subheading “Historical Nuclear Weapons Test Films.” To purchase these videos or obtain additional information, please contact: U.S. DOE/Nevada Operations Office - Public Reading Facility Bechtel Nevada P. O. Box 98521 M/S NLV040 Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521 Telephone: 1-877-DOE-FILM (1-877-363-3456) (Toll Free) or (702) 295-1628 Facsimile: (702) 295-1624 E-mail: [email protected] iii Table of Contents Listing or Number Page 0800000 - NUCLEAR TESTING REVIEW ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Nougat I1
    POR - 1818 (WT - 1818) OPERATION NOUGAT I1 SHOT DANNY BOY PROJECT 2.4 SOME RADIOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF FALLOUT DEBRIS FROM A NUCLEAR CRATERING EXPERIMEPPT, SHOT DANNY BOY __. ___-- - - I LEGAL NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work -..- -- sponsored by the United States Government. Nelther Harold M. Mork 1- *I K. H. Larson \- * I i- Wood 18. R. A. L - 'J-/ 1 B)BmUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT 1s CjiYUJ&~ B. W. Kowalewsky n University of California School of Medicine Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology Los Angeles, California July 1970 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. ABSTRACT The fallout pattern from a nuclear device buried in-hardrock- i‘ i, (basalt);’ at 33.5 meters below ground surface was delineated by ground survey from the edge of the ejecta out to 7.6 kilometers.
    [Show full text]
  • Tritium Inventory
    Appendix C Appendix C Tritium Inventory In this appendix several estimates using different The combined atmospheric releases of tritium from assumptions are made of the total tritium inventory in the F and H separations areas at Savannah River through weapons and available for weapons The first, which is the year 1983 are presented in column 2 of Table C 1 and referred to as the "steady-state estimate," assumes that Figure C 1 These are routine releases, mainly from tri- there was no change in the tritium inventory during the tium processing in the 200-H area An examination of late 1970s In other words, the amount produced equal- these data indicates that the tritium releases during 1965- led the amount lost through radioactive decay during 70 and 1974-81 wererelatively low, and there were few if this period The tritium in the U S stockpile is produced any dedicated tritium production runs during these at the Savannah River Plant The second inventory esti- years Also, the tritium releases per megawatt-day of pro- mate made assumes that the routine atmospheric releases duction during these periods are comparable, suggesting of tritium from the tritium recovery operations at SRP are that the tritium release fraction from the separations area proportional to the amount of tritium processed [i e ,pro- has remained relatively constant over the lifetime of the duced) facility-at least through 1981 In an attempt to place upper and lower hounds on It is assumed that in the years 1960-63 a single reac- the tritium inventory estimate two additional
    [Show full text]
  • United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 Through September 1992
    United States Nuclear Tests July 1945 Through September 1992 Chronologically (370KB) Alphabetically (259KB) Glossary Total Tests by Calendar Year, Location, Purpose, and Type This document lists chronologically and alphabetically by name all nuclear tests and simultaneous detonations conducted by the United States from July 1945 through September 1992. Several tests conducted during Operation Dominic involved missile launches from Johnston Atoll. Several of these missile launches were aborted, resulting in the destruction of the missile and nuclear device either on the pad or in the air. On August 5, 1963, the United States and the former Soviet Union signed the Limited Test Ban Treaty which effectively banned testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, the oceans, and space. In 1974 and 1976, the United States and former Soviet Union also signed the Threshold Test Ban Treaty and the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty, respectively, restricting all nuclear test explosions to yields no greater than 150 kilotons. On December 7, 1993 and June 27, 1994, the Secretary of Energy declassified information related to previously unannounced nuclear weapons tests; simultaneous detonations associated with nuclear weapons tests; yields of an additional 77 atmospheric tests; and yields of 20 underground nuclear weapons tests that released radioactivity detected off the Nevada Test Site. Data on United States tests were obtained from, and verified by, the Department of Energy's three weapons laboratories -- Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico; Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California; and Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico; and the Defense Nuclear Agency. Additionally, data were obtained from public announcements issued by the Atomic Energy Commission and its successors, the Energy Research and Development Administration, and the Department of Energy, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement for Nevada Test Site
    NEVADA TEST SITE Nye County, Nevada Energy Research & Development Administration SEPTEMBER 1977 Available from: National Technical Information Service (NTIS) U.S. Department of Commerce 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 Price: Printed Copy: $9.00 Microfiche: $9.00 ERDA- UC 2.11 Final Environmental Impact Statement NEVADA TEST SITE Nye County, Nevada Energy Research & Development Responsible Official Administration James L Uverman Assistant Administrator for Environment and Safety TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY II. BACKGROUND A. Need for Nuclear Weapons Testing B. Location C. Historical Background of NTS Area 1. Pre-1951 2. Selection of NTS 3. Post-1951 0. The Existing Environment 1. Surrounding Environs a. Population Distribution b. Anticipated Population Growth c. Land Use of NTS Environs d. Industrial Complexes e. Recreational Areas f. Airspace Control g. Air Transportation h. Highways i. Railroads 2. Topography 3. Climate and Meteorology 4. Geology 5. Hydrology 6. Ground Motion and Structural Response 7. Natural and Stimulated Seismicity 8. Radiologic Environment a. Onsite Radioactivity b. Safety Tests c. Ecological Studies of Plutonium and Other Radionuclides d. Radioactive Wastes 2-99 e. Offsite Radioactivity 9. Bioenvironment 10. Archaeological and Historical Values 11. Onsite Facilities 12. Safeguards and Security 13. Economy and Work Force 14. Public Information III DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY A. Underground Nuclear Testing 1. General Description of Testing 2. Areas Used (Land Use) 3. Normal Operations a. Review and Survey Panels b. Approval Authorities c. Safety Precautions d. Meteorological Methods e. Postevent Activities 4. Emergency Procedures B. Other Activities at the Nevada Test Site I. High-Explosive Tests 2. The Cane Spring Test Range (CSTR) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Atomvåbenproduktion I USA Af Holger Terp, Fredsakademiet Det Atomvåbenindustrielle Kompleks I USA Er Så Vidt Jeg Ved Det
    Atomvåbenproduktion i USA Af Holger Terp, Fredsakademiet Det atomvåbenindustrielle kompleks i USA er så vidt jeg ved det, ikke beskrevet på dansk. Atompolitikken i Danmark har lige siden 1945 beskæftiget sig generelt med atomfy- sik1, og atomvåben - eksempelvis deres udstationering og de forskellige opfattelser af, hvordan denne politik har påvirket vores allesammens sikkerhed.2 Men der er ingen her til lands der har beskrevet de miner, hvor råmaterialerne til ker- nevåbenproduktion var, fabrikkerne der fremstillede atomvåben, styrelserne der traf og stadig træffer beslutningerne herom i dybeste hemmelighed, atomvåbenforsøgene, samt deres menneskelige, miljømæssige og økonomiske omkostninger. 1 Issaacson, Walter: Einstein : Hans liv og univers. Gyldendal, 2006. - 742 s. : ill. 2 National Security Archive: How Many and Where Were the Nukes? What the U.S. Government No Longer Wants You to Know about Nuclear Weapons During the Cold War. National Security Archive Elec- tronic Briefing Book No. 197, 2006l. National Security Archive:U.S. Strategic Nuclear Policy: A Video History, 1945-2004 : Sandia Labs Historical Video Documents History of U.S. Strategic Nuclear Policy, 2011. Air Force Special Film Project 416, "Power of Decision". Produced by Air Photographic and Charting Ser- vice. Circa 1958, For Official Use Only. Source: Digital copy prepared by National Archives and Records Administration Motion Pictures Unit, Record Group 342, Department of the Air Force. Wittner, Lawrence S.: The Struggle Against the Bomb, I-III. Stanford University Press, 1993, 1997 & 2003. 1 Jeg fik ideen til projektet for et lille års tid siden og der mangler formodentlig meget endnu. Det følgende er derfor smagsprøver på en meget omfattende og kompleks historie, der meget gerne må kommenteres og debatteres.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Nuclear Tests July 1945 Through September 1992
    DOE/NV--209-REV 16 September 2015 United States Nuclear Tests July 1945 through September 1992 U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office This publication supersedes DOE/NV--209, Rev. 15, dated December 2000. This publication has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available for sale to the public from: U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service 5301 Shawnee Road Alexandria, VA 22312 Telephone: 800.553.6847 Fax: 703.605.6900 E-mail: [email protected] Online Ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/scitech Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 Phone: 865.576.8401 Fax: 865.576.5728 Email: [email protected] Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors. Front cover photos Top: Baker was the third nuclear test conducted by the United States at Bikini Atoll on July 24, 1946. Baker was detonated underwater using a Mark 3 device similar to “Fat Man” with a yield of 21 kilotons. Visible in the spout are ships subjected to the effects of the underwater detonation. Bottom left: Grable was the 42nd nuclear test conducted by the United States at the Nevada National Security Site on May 25, 1953.
    [Show full text]