DOCSLIB.ORG

History of Air Force Atomic Cloud Sampling

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
History of Air Force Atomic Cloud Sampling J m -1 .!.. I PRIVACYACTMATERIALREMOVED m“ 1 AF$CHISTORICAL ● 410473 PUBLICATIONSERIES 61-141-1 I u I ‘2=- t .A I “z t 0 HIS$$RYOFAIR FORCE ATOMIC$$)OUDSAMPLING JANUARY1963 NARRATIVE G? 1A CLASSIFICAnCN CANCELLED WITH !3E.ETICNS K2i$44Q’ /’ D -yxq$~;ji SW M-2-0034 ,..n \ Uu PRIVACYACTMATERIALFIEMk’ED 0 AuTHO~ZATION f b affectingthe nationaldefense This-materialcontaiXMinfor~tion of tie EspionageLaws,Title 18, of the UnitedStateswithinthe meaning USC, Sections793 and 794, the trans~ssion ~r,revelationof whj.chin any mannerto ~ unauthorizedperson1s prchlbltedby law. inasmuchas the This docum?ntis . contentsare d+rimd from documentsof whichthe kghest . ● — This documenthas been preparedin accordancewith provisionsof AFR 210.s,AFM 21O-Z,EditorialStyleSheet for Air ForceMilitary History,and Am 20$1~” SPECIALHANDLINGREQUI~ NUT RELEASii%ikTO.-FOREIGNFIATIOR?A= The informationcontainedin this documentwill not be disclosed to foreignnaticnalsor their-representatives... -— . @&2-oo3b.... .- r, . ...— — .— . ‘IHISIS A BLINKPAGE (, / . -- T- AFWL/HO ( “/” ( u \ -i ( BrigadierGenzralJohnW. White SWEH-2-003& 3 AFwutw ( HISTORY OF AIR FORCEATOMICCLOIJDSAMPLING VOLUME I -. NARRATIVE .- “- —, .- ..... ...—— — .- .— by MasterSerge&t LelandB. Taylor . .-. “..- .. —- -—. -- . Historjcal Di%5sion Officeof Information Air Force S~cial WeaponsCenter Air ForceSystemsCommand ,January1963 , 61-IL2-1 -,, ( . ● ● , ( (’ L AJWHO CONTENTS I mmm..... ● 9..*** ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● i INTROEJO’NON-.. ● ☛☛☛☛☛☛ . ● ● ● ✎ ● ● ● ● ● ii LIST OF CHAR’iSAND ILLUSTRATIONS ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● v GIRONOLOGY... ● ✎ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ✎ ● viii r. TESTSPRECEDINGMANNEDSAMPLXNG ● b ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 1 OperationTR@TTY . ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 1 OperationCR@SR~ . ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● SamplingCROSSRUIS . ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ? Evaluationof CROSSROADSsampling ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 13 OperationSANDWONFL-.. ● ● ● ● ● ● ✎ ● ● ● 13 Samplingfor SAl?IJSTONE b ● ● ● ✎ ● ● ● ● ● 15 0peiati6nSANIBTONEConclusions . ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 6 24 Nets. .?.—... ● ● ● ● ✎ ● ✎ b ● ● 25 Ix. EARLYMANNEDSAMPLINGAC’TWI’TI=‘: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 29 SamplingOperationRANGER . ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 9 ● 29 Operation=HOUSE . ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 9 ● ● 34 Operation=TER/JANGLE . ● ● ● 9 ● ● ● ● b ● 38 OperationTUMELER/SNAPPER. ● ● ● ● ● b ● ● b ● L7 Notes . ● ● ✎✎☛☛ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 58 .. \ In ● OPERATICNIVYoooooo ..*s ● @e ● O* ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 63 Aircraftfor Sampling. ● ***O* ● * 4 ● ● ● 63 Trainingfor SamplerPilots . ● ***** .* b ● ● 66 Sam@ing OperationXVY Shots! ● *O*** ● ● 69 KXKEShot. .o . b ● 69 SamplerAiroraftAccident ● ● 72 KING Shot .. o..... ● ☛☛☛☛☛☛ b ● 75 RadiologicalSafetyDuringOperationIVY . ● 4 ● 76 Roll-Upof OperationIVY . ● ☛ ● 76 Notes . ● 9 ● 77 IV. SAMPLINGOPERATIONUPSHOT/KNOTHOLE● ● 0 . 80 SampllngPlanning. .OO. ● * ● 80 Samplingthe Shots.... ● 9* 84 Conclusions. ● ● * 90 Notes . .00 .000’ ● ● * 91 SWEK-2-0034 AFWL/HC r’ v. OPERATIONCASTIJ3!GL THMMONUCLEAI.. ... ● ☛ ● ● ● ● 93 ( Cloud SamplingRequirementsfor CASTLE . ● ☛ ● ● ● ● : 9L UnmannedSamplersfar CfiTLE . ● O ● 9 ● ● 95 . Modif@ng SamplerAircraftfor CASTLE . ● , ● ● ● ● : 97 SamplingCASTLEShots . ● c ● 0 ● ● ● ● 103 Notes . ● * ● ● ● ● : 118 ,. VI. oPERATIONTEAPUI’: CONTINENTALSNm . ● * ● ● ● ● ● 121 SamplingHighli@ts . ● 0 ● ● ● ✎ ● 122 ‘l’heHigh AltitudeNuclearshot . .. ● * ● ● ● ● ● 130 Notes . ..00*0. ● O ● ● ● ● ● 137 . m. oVERSEAS“FOROPEmTION ~G . ● . ● ● . ● ● ● ● ● ● 139 Plans and Operations. .o . .. OOO= ● ● w ● ● 139 Shots and AircraftPatiici@ion . c ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● lM RadiatiarSafety and Monitoring . ● ● ● ● 150 Flieht Safet?-TestArea . ● ● ● ● : 151 Determining“kkcraftPositioningResponsibility ● ● 152 Notes . .. e ..... ...=. ● ● : 155 -. — VTII. OPERATIONPLUMBBOB,A NEW ORGANIZATION . ..-. ● ● 158 Mission of the &9!XJh4Test Group (Nuclear) ● ● ● ● :-158 Manning the L950thtit Grmp (Nuclear). c . 9 ● 159 OperationPlanning. c-~ . ● ● ● c ● ● ● ● ● ● : 161. AircraftRequixwnents. ● ● ● ● SamplingPlans . ..- . ...*.. ● ● ( Shots and AircraftParticipation. ● ● ● 168 Notes . ● ● b ● 173 IX. oPERATIONHARDTACKAND DUAZ SHOXS ● ● ● 174 Shot and AircraftParticipation; ~h;s~ ~ ~ ● ● ● : 182 Shot and AircraftParticipation:Phase II ● ● ● ● 186 Advantagesof Expedience. ● ● ● 9 ● 191 Notes . ..-.-- b ● ● : 196 x. NU3LEAR CLOUD SA~lPLING. ..s.0s ● 198 QuantitativeConsiderations. ● ● : 200 [Characteristicsof Clouds . ● 9 . ● ● . ● . ● . 201 Cloud Heightsand SamplingAltitude. ● RadiationCharacteristicsof Prin=y CloudS . ● : %; Estimationof the In-CloudRadiationExposure .Repired . ● ..2C6 RadiationExposureReceivedDuring Return ● ... 211. ● Some Observationson Techniques● ☛☛ ● ● ● ● ✘ 212 ● Notes . ...* ● . ● . ● ☛☛ ● ● ● ● ☛ 227 H, RADIATIONPRECAUTIO?G● ● . ● ● ● ☛☛ ● ● ✎ ● ☛ ● .* 229 Notes . ● ● ● ● ●’ ● ✎☛ ● ✎ ● ✎☛ ✎ . 2ko ✎✎ SkXH-2-C03h ● ● 242 Notes . ● ● 257 l1926mTEST SQUADRCN (sN4PLING) ● ● 261 XIII— . THE w Test AircraftUnit (TAU) . ● ● 267 RecentSpecialAssignments. ● ● 280 KTWI. .e . ..ee. ● ● 288 SUNDAYPUNCH . ● ● 290 MUSICIAN. ● ● 291 GOLF BUL. ● ● 292 Squadronl%nsfer;e~ {o“M~l;~# Se*ce, . ..e . ● ● 292 Notes-i. ● ● 296 .— APPENDrxI: A liif3TQF AIR FDRCESAMPUNG PEMONNEL . 0 ● ● 300 APPENDIXIx: LXST OF SN4P~ TAKEN R3R EACH SH~ . ● ● ● 303 .. —Q GIOSSARYOF ABEtEVXATIO1’S ● ● ☛☛ ● ● ● ☛ ● ● 306 GAZETTEER● ● ☛☛☛☛☛☛ .*—● ● ● ☛☛ ✎ ● ● ☛ ● ● 316 GU35SARYOF TEIw . ● * ● w ● ● ☛ ● ● 319 INDEX . ● * ● ● ● ● ☛ ● ● 330 . --- .. .. SWEH-2-C03b . AFW1/Ho # -. -— I THIS IS A E?LANKPAGE -— —. -’ s’I?:d-2-OOjb ( FuREwQlul ( Aircraftsamplingof atomiccloudsbecameone of the great flyingadventuresof all time. Scienttiicanalysesof clouddebris requiredretrievalof this materialfrom everyfetiible continental and overseastest shot and representedin the fantasticactivitywere not only the hs@6_$hTest Squadron(Sampling)but also many flyers, scientists,and.supportgroups,both militaryand civilian. In this .- respect,the subduedstyle of this histo~ otscums a multitudeof. personalitieeand euqxrienceswhich if includedwouldhave ov6rdrawn resourcesat hand and delayedthe publicationof the samplingstory .., — indefinitely.It is intended,on the otherhand, that this volumewill serve both as a histo~ and a guide, There is includedcertain instructionsin graphicdetail,generalproblemsare exanhed carefully, such as scheduling,requlsitioningmaterial,and aircraft‘andpersonnel under conditionsof radiation,so that newco~rs tight not be totally unfamiliar‘withsamplingas it was done in the past. On 16 August1961,the 4926thTest Squadrun(Sampltig)transferred from tie Air ForceSpecialhkaponsCenter,to becomea part of Air WeatherSe~ce, MilitaryAir TransportSemnLce. Alongwith the transfer went many years of experienceand profitablerelationshipsamongthe -- Centerand agenciesof the Departmentof lkf’ense.A p% of thatstow is also broughtup-to-dateas a tributeto the peoplawho participated in this invaluableservicetowarddevelopingthe nucleargenie. .. Uti d LL*. ?’(-,;.nr WARD ALAN MINGE & r CenterHistorian— swEH-2-003b p AFwlmo .* IN’HM)USTION Undertakenat a time when atmospherictestingof nuclearweapons or deviceshad been discontinuedfcr more than two years,this monograph u W= to be’s recotiof nuclearcloudsampling. Friorto completionof the compilationof documents, interviews,and the writingof the narratives,the Russianshad startedatmospherictestingand the United Stateshad resortedtowndergroundtesting. As this historywas concluded, -. DOMINICwas underwayand the samplingstorycontinued. From the openingchaptersthe transitionis towarda ~~problem- —.. solvingllattitude. The problem’-whichappearin the earlytests are not the problemsof later tests; the‘-”solutionsto the problemsof the later testsappearto have potentialfutureuse, thereforethey are discussed in detail. Emphasishas been placed”oripresentingthe solutionsto problemsuniqueto the samplingeffort. Nevertheless,the chronicling of the cloudsamplingeffortcannotbe completelydivorcedfrom the entire nucleartestingactivities. Easically,the text containsinformationwhich all of thosedirectly associatedwith nuclearcloud samplingor with decontaminationof.aircraft shouldhave knowledge. It is hoped that a studysuch as’this will result in an increasein the underknding of the need for nuclearcloud sampling; tk-t-fiturn,will resultin an increasein the ~motivationlt . level of thosecalledupon for participationin futuresampl+ngefforts. -. Exceptin such sectionsas are inherentlytechnicalin nature,a concertedefforthas been made to reducetechnicaltermsand phraseology ii swm-2-oo31J AfwLMo to understandablelevels. ~ose readerswho may be requiredto engage in dtrecteffortsassociatedwith the samplingof cloudswill gati an ,. understandingof the overall complexityof the samplingmissionand will xwalize the importanceof theirspecflic~ks or missions. Preparationof the chapterHARDTACKwas made extremelydifficul.t becauseso many of the documentswere in use at JohnstonIslandby those Implenmting Qx2rationDOMINIC. It is regrettablethat this work could not have been completedand publishedsoon after the conclusionof HARDTACK. .. It couldthen have been used as a primaryreferencesourceM planning DOMINIC,with due regard @ the technicalcontentsof’the referenced — speclalizeddocumentsavailablefrom the HistoricalDivldon files. f Fortunately,many of the documentsused in compilingthis specialstudy (’ were assembled~ a fomer memb& of the Air ForceSpeciallleaponscenter , historicalstaff,Mr. Wrren Greene. Had Mr. Greenenot securedthese 1 documnts when he did, mch of the storywouldhave been lost. Unless designatedas being physicallylocatedel.ee~ere,all documentsreferred to are in the filesof the Air ForceSpecialWe-apmsCenterHistorical
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012 04 Newsletter
    United States Atmospheric & Underwater Atomic Weapon Activities National Association of Atomic Veterans, Inc. 1945 “TRINITY“ “Assisting America’s Atomic Veterans Since 1979” ALAMOGORDO, N. M. Website: www.naav.com E-mail: [email protected] 1945 “LITTLE BOY“ HIROSHIMA, JAPAN R. J. RITTER - Editor April, 2012 1945 “FAT MAN“ NAGASAKI, JAPAN 1946 “CROSSROADS“ BIKINI ISLAND 1948 “SANDSTONE“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1951 “RANGER“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1951 “GREENHOUSE“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1951 “BUSTER – JANGLE“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1952 “TUMBLER - SNAPPER“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1952 “IVY“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1953 “UPSHOT - KNOTHOLE“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1954 “CASTLE“ BIKINI ISLAND 1955 “TEAPOT“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1955 “WIGWAM“ OFFSHORE SAN DIEGO 1955 “PROJECT 56“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1956 “REDWING“ ENEWETAK & BIKINI 1957 “PLUMBOB“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1958 “HARDTACK-I“ ENEWETAK & BIKINI 1958 “NEWSREEL“ JOHNSTON ISLAND 1958 “ARGUS“ SOUTH ATLANTIC 1958 “HARDTACK-II“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1961 “NOUGAT“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1962 “DOMINIC-I“ CHRISTMAS ISLAND JOHNSTON ISLAND 1965 “FLINTLOCK“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1969 “MANDREL“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1971 “GROMMET“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1974 “POST TEST EVENTS“ ENEWETAK CLEANUP ------------ “ IF YOU WERE THERE, YOU ARE AN ATOMIC VETERAN “ The Newsletter for America’s Atomic Veterans COMMANDER’S COMMENTS knowing the seriousness of the situation, did not register any Outreach Update: First, let me extend our discomfort, or dissatisfaction on her part. As a matter of fact, it thanks to the membership and friends of NAAV was kind of nice to have some of those callers express their for supporting our “outreach” efforts over the thanks for her kind attention and assistance. We will continue past several years. It is that firm dedication to to insure that all inquires, along these lines, are fully and our Mission-Statement that has driven our adequately addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Technology
    Nuclear Technology Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. GREENWOOD PRESS NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY Sourcebooks in Modern Technology Space Technology Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. Sourcebooks in Modern Technology Nuclear Technology Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. GREENWOOD PRESS Westport, Connecticut • London Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Angelo, Joseph A. Nuclear technology / Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. p. cm.—(Sourcebooks in modern technology) Includes index. ISBN 1–57356–336–6 (alk. paper) 1. Nuclear engineering. I. Title. II. Series. TK9145.A55 2004 621.48—dc22 2004011238 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright © 2004 by Joseph A. Angelo, Jr. All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2004011238 ISBN: 1–57356–336–6 First published in 2004 Greenwood Press, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881 An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. www.greenwood.com Printed in the United States of America The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984). 10987654321 To my wife, Joan—a wonderful companion and soul mate Contents Preface ix Chapter 1. History of Nuclear Technology and Science 1 Chapter 2. Chronology of Nuclear Technology 65 Chapter 3. Profiles of Nuclear Technology Pioneers, Visionaries, and Advocates 95 Chapter 4. How Nuclear Technology Works 155 Chapter 5. Impact 315 Chapter 6. Issues 375 Chapter 7. The Future of Nuclear Technology 443 Chapter 8. Glossary of Terms Used in Nuclear Technology 485 Chapter 9. Associations 539 Chapter 10.
    [Show full text]
  • They Were All Names of Nuclear Tests Conducted at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), Now Known As the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), Between 1951 and 1962
    Introduction What do Ruth, Dixie, Shasta, Butternut, Seersucker, and Mink all have in common? They were all names of nuclear tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), now known as the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), between 1951 and 1962. A total of 928 atmospheric and underground nuclear tests was conducted at the NTS, and each of those tests was christened with a name. Background Beginning with Trinity, the first atomic test in 1945, nuclear tests were all assigned code names as a security measure during wartime operations. All information associated with a nuclear device was classified, so scientists and test planners assigned innocuous code names or inventive nicknames to each test. Approving the names Badger, part of the Upshot-Knothole series, was a 23-kiloton weapons Although test names may seem somewhat effects tower test conducted at the Nevada Test Site on April 18, 1953. whimsical, there was a formal procedure by which test names were approved. A list of possible names was submitted for internal review, where inappropriate or previously used names were removed from the list. The names remaining on the list were sent to U.S. Department of Energy Headquarters in Washington, DC, where the final approvals were made in coordination with other government agencies. The approved lists of names were returned to the NTS for future use. While most names proposed for tests met with approval, there was one notable instance of a test name rejection. In 1969, Los Alamos National Laboratory conducted Operation Mandrel, a series containing tests named for grasses such as Seaweed, Jorum, Mint Leaf, and Cumarin.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads of Technical Information
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2018 Nuclear Spaces: Simulations of Nuclear Warfare in Film, by the Numbers, and on the Atomic Battlefield Donald J. Kinney Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES NUCLEAR SPACES: SIMULATIONS OF NUCLEAR WARFARE IN FILM, BY THE NUMBERS, AND ON THE ATOMIC BATTLEFIELD By DONALD J KINNEY A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2018 Donald J. Kinney defended this dissertation on October 15, 2018. The members of the supervisory committee were: Ronald E. Doel Professor Directing Dissertation Joseph R. Hellweg University Representative Jonathan A. Grant Committee Member Kristine C. Harper Committee Member Guenter Kurt Piehler Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii For Morgan, Nala, Sebastian, Eliza, John, James, and Annette, who all took their turns on watch as I worked. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the members of my committee, Kris Harper, Jonathan Grant, Kurt Piehler, and Joseph Hellweg. I would especially like to thank Ron Doel, without whom none of this would have been possible. It has been a very long road since that afternoon in Powell's City of Books, but Ron made certain that I did not despair. Thank you. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract..............................................................................................................................................................vii 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States Nuclear Weapon Program: A
    DOE/ES-0005 (Draft) 67521 wees ce eee ee ee THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR WEAPON PROGRAM: | A SUMMARYHISTORY '<) March 1983 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Management and Administration Office of The Executive Secretariat History Division DOE/ES-0005 (Draft) THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR | WEAPON PROGRAM: A SUMMARY HISTORY © | « By: Roger M. Anders Archivist With: Jack M. Holl Alice L. Buck Prentice C. Dean March 1983 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Management and Administration Office of The Executive Secretariat History Division Washington, D.C. 20585 The Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977 brought together for the first time in one department most of the Federal Government's energy programs. With these programs came a score of organizational entities, each with its owm history and traditions, from a dozen depart- ‘ments and independent agencies. The History Division has prepared a series of pamphlets on The Institutional Origins of the Department of Energy. Each pamphlet explains the history, goals, and achievements of @ predecessor agency or a major program of the Department of Energy. This pamphlet, which replaces Roger M. Anders' previous booklet cn "The Office of Military Application," traces the history of the United States nuclear weapon program from its inception during World War II to the present. Nuclear weapons form the core of America's modern defenses. anders! history describes the truly formidable efforts of «ne Atomic Energy Commission, the Energy Research and Develogment Administration, and the Departmr to create a diverse anc sophisticated arsenal of nuclear 2 accomplishments of these agencies and their plants and lak : created an “atomic shieic" which protects America today.
    [Show full text]
  • Bob Farquhar
    1 2 Created by Bob Farquhar For and dedicated to my grandchildren, their children, and all humanity. This is Copyright material 3 Table of Contents Preface 4 Conclusions 6 Gadget 8 Making Bombs Tick 15 ‘Little Boy’ 25 ‘Fat Man’ 40 Effectiveness 49 Death By Radiation 52 Crossroads 55 Atomic Bomb Targets 66 Acheson–Lilienthal Report & Baruch Plan 68 The Tests 71 Guinea Pigs 92 Atomic Animals 96 Downwinders 100 The H-Bomb 109 Nukes in Space 119 Going Underground 124 Leaks and Vents 132 Turning Swords Into Plowshares 135 Nuclear Detonations by Other Countries 147 Cessation of Testing 159 Building Bombs 161 Delivering Bombs 178 Strategic Bombers 181 Nuclear Capable Tactical Aircraft 188 Missiles and MIRV’s 193 Naval Delivery 211 Stand-Off & Cruise Missiles 219 U.S. Nuclear Arsenal 229 Enduring Stockpile 246 Nuclear Treaties 251 Duck and Cover 255 Let’s Nuke Des Moines! 265 Conclusion 270 Lest We Forget 274 The Beginning or The End? 280 Update: 7/1/12 Copyright © 2012 rbf 4 Preface 5 Hey there, I’m Ralph. That’s my dog Spot over there. Welcome to the not-so-wonderful world of nuclear weaponry. This book is a journey from 1945 when the first atomic bomb was detonated in the New Mexico desert to where we are today. It’s an interesting and sometimes bizarre journey. It can also be horribly frightening. Today, there are enough nuclear weapons to destroy the civilized world several times over. Over 23,000. “Enough to make the rubble bounce,” Winston Churchill said. The United States alone has over 10,000 warheads in what’s called the ‘enduring stockpile.’ In my time, we took care of things Mano-a-Mano.
    [Show full text]
  • The Atomic Energy Commission
    The Atomic Energy Commission By Alice Buck July 1983 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Management Office of the Executive Secretariat Office of History and Heritage Resources Introduction Almost a year after World War II ended, Congress established the United States Atomic Energy Commission to foster and control the peacetime development of atomic science and technology. Reflecting America's postwar optimism, Congress declared that atomic energy should be employed not only in the Nation's defense, but also to promote world peace, improve the public welfare, and strengthen free competition in private enterprise. After long months of intensive debate among politicians, military planners and atomic scientists, President Harry S. Truman confirmed the civilian control of atomic energy by signing the Atomic Energy Act on August 1, 1946.(1) The provisions of the new Act bore the imprint of the American plan for international control presented to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission two months earlier by U.S. Representative Bernard Baruch. Although the Baruch proposal for a multinational corporation to develop the peaceful uses of atomic energy failed to win the necessary Soviet support, the concept of combining development, production, and control in one agency found acceptance in the domestic legislation creating the United States Atomic Energy Commission.(2) Congress gave the new civilian Commission extraordinary power and independence to carry out its awesome responsibilities. Five Commissioners appointed by the President would exercise authority for the operation of the Commission, while a general manager, also appointed by the President, would serve as chief executive officer. To provide the Commission exceptional freedom in hiring scientists and professionals, Commission employees would be exempt from the Civil Service system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Los Alamos Thermonuclear Weapon Project, 1942-1952
    Igniting The Light Elements: The Los Alamos Thermonuclear Weapon Project, 1942-1952 by Anne Fitzpatrick Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STUDIES Approved: Joseph C. Pitt, Chair Richard M. Burian Burton I. Kaufman Albert E. Moyer Richard Hirsh June 23, 1998 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Nuclear Weapons, Computing, Physics, Los Alamos National Laboratory Igniting the Light Elements: The Los Alamos Thermonuclear Weapon Project, 1942-1952 by Anne Fitzpatrick Committee Chairman: Joseph C. Pitt Science and Technology Studies (ABSTRACT) The American system of nuclear weapons research and development was conceived and developed not as a result of technological determinism, but by a number of individual architects who promoted the growth of this large technologically-based complex. While some of the technological artifacts of this system, such as the fission weapons used in World War II, have been the subject of many historical studies, their technical successors -- fusion (or hydrogen) devices -- are representative of the largely unstudied highly secret realms of nuclear weapons science and engineering. In the postwar period a small number of Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory’s staff and affiliates were responsible for theoretical work on fusion weapons, yet the program was subject to both the provisions and constraints of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, of which Los Alamos was a part. The Commission leadership’s struggle to establish a mission for its network of laboratories, least of all to keep them operating, affected Los Alamos’s leaders’ decisions as to the course of weapons design and development projects.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Nuclear Forensics: Analysis of Nuclear Material for Security
    THE NEW NUCLEAR FORENSICS Analysis of Nuclear Materials for Security Purposes edited by vitaly fedchenko The New Nuclear Forensics Analysis of Nuclear Materials for Security Purposes STOCKHOLM INTERNATIONAL PEACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE SIPRI is an independent international institute dedicated to research into conflict, armaments, arms control and disarmament. Established in 1966, SIPRI provides data, analysis and recommendations, based on open sources, to policymakers, researchers, media and the interested public. The Governing Board is not responsible for the views expressed in the publications of the Institute. GOVERNING BOARD Sven-Olof Petersson, Chairman (Sweden) Dr Dewi Fortuna Anwar (Indonesia) Dr Vladimir Baranovsky (Russia) Ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi (Algeria) Jayantha Dhanapala (Sri Lanka) Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger (Germany) Professor Mary Kaldor (United Kingdom) The Director DIRECTOR Dr Ian Anthony (United Kingdom) Signalistgatan 9 SE-169 70 Solna, Sweden Telephone: +46 8 655 97 00 Fax: +46 8 655 97 33 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.sipri.org The New Nuclear Forensics Analysis of Nuclear Materials for Security Purposes EDITED BY VITALY FEDCHENKO OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 2015 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © SIPRI 2015 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of SIPRI, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • 148 Part 3—Adjudication
    § 2.8 38 CFR Ch. I (7–1–20 Edition) a brief summary of each recommenda- PART 3—ADJUDICATION tion for relief and its disposition. Prep- aration of the report shall be the re- Subpart A—Pension, Compensation, and sponsibility of the General Counsel. Dependency and Indemnity Com- (c) The authority to grant the equi- pensation table relief, referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, has not been GENERAL delegated and is reserved to the Sec- Sec. retary. Recommendation for the cor- 3.1 Definitions. rection of administrative error and for 3.2 Periods of war. appropriate equitable relief therefrom 3.3 Pension. 3.4 Compensation. will be submitted to the Secretary, 3.5 Dependency and indemnity compensa- through the General Counsel. Such rec- tion. ommendation may be initiated by the 3.6 Duty periods. head of the administration having re- 3.7 Individuals and groups considered to sponsibility for the benefit, or of any have performed active military, naval, or concerned staff office, or by the Chair- air service. man, Board of Veterans Appeals. When 3.10 Dependency and indemnity compensa- tion rate for a surviving spouse. a recommendation for relief under 3.11 Homicide. paragraph (a) or (b) of this section is 3.12 Character of discharge. initiated by the head of a staff office, 3.12a Minimum active-duty service require- or the Chairman, Board of Veterans ment. Appeals, the views of the head of the 3.13 Discharge to change status. administration having responsibility 3.14 Validity of enlistments. for the benefit will be obtained and 3.15 Computation of service.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Summary Site Profile for the Pacific Proving Grounds
    Draft ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health REVIEW OF THE SUMMARY SITE PROFILE FOR THE PACIFIC PROVING GROUNDS Contract No. 200-2009-28555 SCA-TR-SP2013-0040, Revision 1 Prepared by U. Hans Behling, PhD, CHP S. Cohen & Associates 1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 Vienna, VA 22182 November 2013 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 42CFR82. 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. November 5, 2013 1 (Draft) SCA-TR-SP2013-0040 2 of 65 Document No. S. COHEN & ASSOCIATES: SCA-TR-SP2013-0040 Technical Support for the Advisory Board on Effective Date: Radiation & Worker Health Review of Draft – November 5, 2013 NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Program Revision No. 1 Review of the Summary Site Profile for the Pacific Page 2 of 65 Proving Grounds Supersedes: Task Manager: Rev. 0 (Draft) __________________________ Date:____________ U. Hans Behling, PhD, MPH Project Manager: Peer Reviewer(s): John Mauro John Stiver __________________________ Date:____________ John Stiver, CHP Record of Revisions Revision Effective Description of Revision Number Date 0 (Draft) 10/21/2013 Initial issue 1 (Draft) 11/05/2013 Revised Finding 1.
    [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]