DOCSLIB.ORG

National Historic Preservation Act Historic Preservation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Historic Preservation Act Historic Preservation Plan NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE Prepared For UT-Battelle, LLC Prepared By Thomason and Associates Preservation Planners Nashville, Tennessee April 2004 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are due to a number of individuals who provided information and assisted in the completion of this Historic Preservation Plan. Particular thanks go to James Hall, ORNL NEPA/NHPA Coordinator, under whose direction the project was completed. Assistance in the preparation of this plan was provided by a Task Team consisting of Office of Science and Energy (UT-Battelle/ORNL), Office of Environmental Management (Bechtel Jacobs Company), and DOE ORO personnel whose input into the development of this plan was essential. Members of this team were the following: Glenn Anderson Teresa Baer Mark Belvin Rick Dearholt James Hall Gary Hartman David Mabry Carlo Melbihess Jill Mortimore Sheila Thornton ii LIST OF ACRONYMS FREQUENTLY USED IN REPORT AEC Atomic Energy Commission AHPA Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act AIRFA American Indian Religious Freedom Act AMSE American Museum of Science and Energy ANP Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion ARE Aircraft Reactor Experiment ARPA Archaeological Resource Protection Act BJC Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC BSR Bulk Shielding Reactor CAIS Condition Assessment Information System CAS Condition Assessment Survey CC&C Carbide & Carbon Chemicals Company CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, & Liability Act CEW Clinton Engineer Works CLG Certified Local Government Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Council Advisory Council on Historic Preservation CRMP Cultural Resource Management Plan CROET Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee D&D Decontamination & Decommission DOE Department of Energy EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement EM DOE Office of Environmental Management ERDA Energy Research and Development Administration ETTP East Tennessee Technology Park FLPMA Federal Land Policy & Management Act FRP Facilities Revitalization Project HPP Historic Preservation Plan LITR Low Intensity Testing Reactor MED Manhattan Engineering District MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology MMES Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. MOA Memorandum of Agreement MTR Materials Testing Reactor NAGPRA Native American Graves and Repatriation Act NASA National Aeronautics Space Administration NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan NE Nuclear Energy NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFMA National Forest Management Act NHL National Historic Landmark NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NNSA National Nuclear Security Administration NPS National Park Service NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWC Nuclear Weapons Complex iii ORACLE Oak Ridge Automatic Computer and Logical Engine ORAU Oak Ridge Associated Universities ORIC Oak Ridge Isochronous Cyclotron ORINS Oak Ridge Institute of Nuclear Studies ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORO Oak Ridge Operations ORR Oak Ridge Reservation ORSORT Oak Ridge School of Reactor Technology OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Act PA Programmatic Agreement PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl PBCUA Public Buildings Cooperative Use Act of 1976 R&D Research & Development RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ROD Record of Decision for Interim Actions SC DOE Office of Science and Energy SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer S&M Surveillance & Maintenance SWSA Solid Waste Storage Area TSF Tower Shielding Facility TVA Tennessee Valley Authority UT-B UT-Battelle, LLC Y-12 Y-12 National Security Complex iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures..........................................................................................................................................…vi List of Tables...............................................................................................................................................ix 1.0. Management Summary.....................................................................................................................1 2.0. Purpose and Introduction........................…………………………………………………..............4 3.0. ORNL Historical Overview.………...............................................................................................14 4.0. ORNL Historic Properties..........……...................….....................................................................44 5.0. ORNL Archaeological Properties..........……................................................................................64 6.0. ORNL and Historic Property Stewardship.........…........................................................................65 7.0. ORNL Mission and Comprehensive Planning…...........................................................................73 8.0. ORNL Building Management……………...................................................................................162 9.0. Archaeological Site Management................................................................................................165 10.0. Training……………………………………………………………............................................167 11.0. ORNL Historic Property Management and Procedural Review..................................................169 12.0. Summary and Action Plan………………………........................................................................178 13.0. Bibliography.................................................................................................................................182 APPENDICES Appendix A: Resumes of Principal Investigators v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Location of the DOE ORR and Surrounding Region…………………..………………....7 Figure 2: Location of the ORNL within the ORR…………………………………………….……..7 Figure 3: Location of ORNL between Two Ridge Systems..………………….………………….....8 Figure 4: Site Plan of the ORNL Complex……………………………………………..………..….9 Figure 5: Construction of the X-10 site, including the Graphite Reactor, 1943……………...……23 Figure 6: Construction of the hot cells of the chemical separations building,1943….…………….26 Figure 7: Remote controls for the plutonium separations process ……………………………...…27 Figure 8: Concrete shield of the Graphite Reactor………………………………..………………..28 Figure 9: Clinton Laboratories after the war……………………………………….………………30 Figure 10: The Isotope “Alley” at ORNL………………………………………….………………..35 Figure 11: ORNL scientists Ernest Wolland and Clifford Shull………...…….….…………………36 Figure 12: The TSF in 1954………………………….…………..………………………………….38 Figure 13: ORNL’s ORACLE…………………………………………….………….……………...39 Figure 14: ORNL in the early 1950s………………………………….……………………………..40 Figure 15: New Bethel Baptist Church and Cemetery………………………………………….…...45 Figure 16: The Graphite Reactor (Building 3001) is a NHL………………………..…..…….……..46 Figure 17: The ORNL NRHP-eligible Historic District…………………………..…………...……47 Figure 17A: Site Plan of ORNL showing location of Historic District…………………………….…48 Figure 17B: Location of various ORNL facilities/structures on the ORR……………………………49 Figure 18: 7000 Area at ORNL…………………………………………. …………………….…...50 Figure 19: 7500 Area at ORNL………………..…………………………………………….……...50 Figure 20: 7700 Area at ORNL………………………………………………….……….…...……..51 Figure 21: NRHP-eligible White Oak Lake (Lake 7846)……………………………...….………...52 Figure 22: NRHP-eligible White Oak Dam (Building 7813)………………….……………..……...52 vi Figure 23: NRHP-eligible Building 3038…………...………………….……………….…………..57 Figure 24: NRHP-eligible Building 4500N…………………………….……………….…………..58 Figure 25: The Graphite Reactor (Building 3001)………………………………………….……….59 Figure 26: Building 3019(A)…………………………………………………………..…….……...60 Figure 27: Building 7001………………………………………………………………….………...61 Figure 28: Building 3020…………………………………………………………………….……...62 Figure 29: Building 2624……………………………………………………………………………85 Figure 30: Building 3002…………………………………………………………………….……...87 Figure 31: Building 3005…………………………………………………………………….……...89 Figure 32: Building 3008……………………………………………………………………….…...91 Figure 33: Building 3009………………………………………………………………………..…..93 Figure 34: Building 3010..…...………………………….…………………………………………..95 Figure 35: Building 3012……………………………………………………………...……….……97 Figure 36: Building 3017………………………………………………………...………………….99 Figure 37: Building 3018…………………………….……………………………………..……...101 Figure 38: Building 3019(B)…………………………………………………………..…………...103 Figure 39: Building 3026(C)………………………………………………………….……………105 Figure 40: Building 3026(D)…………………………………………………….………………....107 Figure 41: Building 3028……………………………………………………….………………….109 Figure 42: Building 3029……………………………………………………….………………….111 Figure 43: Building 3030……………………………………………………….………………….113 Figure 44: Building 3031………………………………………………………….……………….115 Figure 45: Building 3032………………………………………………………….……………….117 Figure 46: Building 3033……………………………………………………….………………….119 Figure 47: Building 3036……………………………………………………….………………….121 Figure 48: Building 3037……………………………………………………….………………….123 vii Figure 49: Building 3038………………………………………………………….……………….125 Figure 50: Building 3042………………………………………………………….……………….127 Figure 51: Building 3074……………………………………………………………….………….129 Figure 52: Building 3080………………………………………………………………………..…131 Figure 53: Building 3503…………………………………………………………………………..133 Figure 54: Building 3504………………………………………………………………….……….135 Figure 55: Building 3508……………………………………………………………………….….137 Figure 56: Building 3515…………………………………………………………………….…….139 Figure 57: Building 3523…………………………………………………………………….…….141 Figure 58: Building 3587………………………………………………………………….……….143 Figure 59:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report for Fiscal Year 1958
    AnnualkeporE olde FEDERAL MARITIME BOARD and MARITIME ADMINISTRATION 1958 or CPptaT C04n Sfti9iS O UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U S Government Printing O ea Washington 25 D C Price 25 cents paper cover UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Washington D C FEDERAL MARITIME BOARD CLARENCE G MORSE Chairman BEN H GUILL Member THOS E STAKEM Member JAMES L PIMPER Secretary MARITIME ADMINISTRATION CLARENCE G MORSE Maritime Administrator WALTER C FORD Deputy Maritime Administrator LETTERS OF TRANSMITTAL UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FEDERAL MARITIME BOARD MARTTIME ADMINISTRATION Washington 25 D C October 11958 To The Secretary of Commerce FRom Chairman Federal Aaritime Board and Maritime Adminis trator SUBJECT Annual Report for Fiscal Year 1958 I am submitting herewith the report of the Federal Maritime Board and Maritime Administration covering their activities for the fiscal year ended June 30 1908 6 CLARENCE G MORSE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE Washington 25 D C To tTae Congress I have the honor to present the annual report of the Federal Mari time Board and Afaritime Administration of the Department of Com merce for fiscal year 1955 SINCLAIR WEEKS Seretary of Commerce iii CONTENTS Fiscal Year Activities P INTRODUCTION I AID TO SHIPPIN G 2 Construction Differential Subsidy 3 Federal Ship Mortgage and Loan Insurance 5 Other Forms of Construction Aid 6 Operating Differential Subsidy 6 Aid to Vessels Over 20 Years of Age 7 Trade Routes 7 SHIP OPERATIONS AND REPAIR 8 Oceangoing Traffic 8 Charters
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4. CLASSIFICATION UNDER the ATOMIC ENERGY
    Chapter 4 CLASSIFICATION UNDER THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT INTRODUCTION The Atomic Energy Act of 1946 was the first and, other than its successor, the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, to date the only U.S. statute to establish a program to restrict the dissemination of information. This Act transferred control of all aspects of atomic (nuclear) energy from the Army, which had managed the government’s World War II Manhattan Project to produce atomic bombs, to a five-member civilian Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). These new types of bombs, of awesome power, had been developed under stringent secrecy and security conditions. Congress, in enacting the 1946 Atomic Energy Act, continued the Manhattan Project’s comprehensive, rigid controls on U.S. information about atomic bombs and other aspects of atomic energy. That Atomic Energy Act designated the atomic energy information to be protected as “Restricted Data” and defined that data. Two types of atomic energy information were defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Restricted Data (RD) and a type that was subsequently termed Formerly Restricted Data (FRD). Before discussing further the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 and its unique requirements for controlling atomic energy information, some of the special information-control activities that accompanied the research, development, and production efforts that led to the first atomic bomb will be mentioned. Realization that an atomic bomb was possible had a profound impact on the scientists who first became aware of that possibility. The implications of such a weapon were so tremendous that the U.S. scientists conducting the initial, basic research related to nuclear fission voluntarily restricted the publication of their scientific work in this area.
    [Show full text]
  • Norman Hilberry' Dr
    Norman Hilberry' Dr. Norman Hilberry, now retired, was formerly director of Argonne Na tional Laboratory, one of the principal research and development centers in the field of nuclear science and engineering in the United States. The Laboratory is operated by the University of Chicago for the U. S. Atomic Energy Commis sion. Dr. Hilberry's association with the nuclear energy program began late in 1941 when, as personal aide, he joined Dr. A. H. Compton who had just been designated as project director for the Metallurgical Project, later known as the Plutonium Project. In this capacity Dr. Hilberry was associated with the group under Fermi which first achieved a self sustaining, controlled nuclear chain re action on December 2, 1942. As associate project director of the Metallurgical Project, he acted as the project office's representative at Clinton Laboratories during the start-up of the X-10 reactor in the Fall of 1943. Starting in the summer of 1944 he served ( again in his capacity as associate project director) as head of the resident project group which provided the official liaison between the DuPont organization and the Metallurgical Project during the start-up of the production facilities at the Hanford Engineer Works. With the successful operation of Hanford an accomplished fact, Dr. Hilberry returned to the Metallurgical Project office during the winter of 1945. After Dr. Compton's move to St. Louis as Chancellor of Washington University in July, 1945, he took over the closing out of the affairs of the central project office. Dur ing this period he assisted the Manhattan District of the U.
    [Show full text]
  • A Century at Sea Jul
    Guernsey's A Century at Sea (Day 1) Newport, RI Friday - July 19, 2019 A Century at Sea (Day 1) Newport, RI 1: NS Savannah Set of China (31 pieces) USD 800 - 1,200 A collection of thirty-one (31) pieces of china from the NS Savannah. This set of china includes the following pieces: two (2) 10" round plates, three (3) 9 1/2" round plates, one (1) 10" novelty plate, one (1) 9 1/4" x 7" oval plate, one (1) 7 1/4" round plate, four (4) 6" round plates, one (1) ceramic drinking pitcher, one (1) cappachino cup and saucer (diameter of 4 1/2"), two (2) coffee cups and saucers (diameter 4"), one (1) 3 1/2" round cup, one (1) 3" x 3" round cup, one (1) 2 1/2" x 3" drinking glass, one (1) mini cognac glass, two (2) 2" x 4 1/2" shot glasses, three (3) drinking glasses, one (1) 3" x 5" wine glass, two (2) 4 1/2" x 8 3/4" silver dishes. The ship was remarkable in that it was the first nuclear-powered merchant ship. It was constructed with funding from United States government agencies with the mission to prove that the US was committed to the proposition of using atomic power for peace and part of President Eisenhower's larger "Atoms for Peace" project. The sleek and modern design of the ship led to some maritime historians believing it was the prettiest merchant ship ever built. This china embodies both the mission of using nuclear power for peace while incorporating the design inclinations of the ship.
    [Show full text]
  • The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima an Interview with Mr
    Doerr 1 A Rain of Ruin: The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima An Interview with Mr. Francis Mitsuo Tomosawa by Leili Doerr Mr. Alex Haight February 12, 2007 Doerr 2 Table of Contents Release Form 2 Statement of Purpose 3 Biography 4 Historical Contextualization 6 Interview Trmiscription 25 Interview Analysis 81 Appendix 1 90 Appendix 2 91 Appendix 3 92 Appendix 4 93 Appendix 5 94 Appendix 6 95 Appendix 7 96 Appendix 8 97 Appendix 9 98 Appendix 10 99 Appendix 11 100 Appendix 12 101 Appendix 13 102 Appendix 14 103 Time Indexing/Recording Log Ill Works Consulted 113 Doerr 3 Statement of Purpose The purpose of this oral history is to achieve a better understanding ofthe atomic bombing of Hiroshima, and the pacific theatre ofthe Second World War, through an interview with Mr. Francis Mitsuo Tomosawa. The project aims to give a more valuable and intimate perspective of these events thmi can be acquired anywhere else. The Second World War still remains the most 'Sv odd-shaping" event ofthe 20 century and a thorough understanding ofit is a fundmnental part of any study ofthe United States. Doerr 4 Biography ' ^ ^B t ^^ Francis Mitsuo Tomosawa was bom in Honolulu, Hawaii, on January 25, 1930. Bom to Japanese natives, he was the youngest of three sons. Like most Japanese parents in Hawaii, Mr. Tomosawa's parents believed that their three sons must to go to Japan in order to experience a firsthand education about the Japanese culture. Therefore, in April 1941, at the age of eleven, Mr. Tomosawa and his mother lefl: for Hiroshima.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundation Document Manhattan Project National Historical Park Tennessee, New Mexico, Washington January 2017 Foundation Document
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Foundation Document Manhattan Project National Historical Park Tennessee, New Mexico, Washington January 2017 Foundation Document MANHATTAN PROJECT NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK Hanford Washington ! Los Alamos Oak Ridge New Mexico Tennessee ! ! North 0 700 Kilometers 0 700 Miles More detailed maps of each park location are provided in Appendix E. Manhattan Project National Historical Park Contents Mission of the National Park Service 1 Mission of the Department of Energy 2 Introduction 3 Part 1: Core Components 4 Brief Description of the Park. 4 Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 5 Los Alamos, New Mexico . 6 Hanford, Washington. 7 Park Management . 8 Visitor Access. 8 Brief History of the Manhattan Project . 8 Introduction . 8 Neutrons, Fission, and Chain Reactions . 8 The Atomic Bomb and the Manhattan Project . 9 Bomb Design . 11 The Trinity Test . 11 Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan . 12 From the Second World War to the Cold War. 13 Legacy . 14 Park Purpose . 15 Park Signifcance . 16 Fundamental Resources and Values . 18 Related Resources . 22 Interpretive Themes . 26 Part 2: Dynamic Components 27 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments . 27 Special Mandates . 27 Administrative Commitments . 27 Assessment of Planning and Data Needs . 28 Analysis of Fundamental Resources and Values . 28 Identifcation of Key Issues and Associated Planning and Data Needs . 28 Planning and Data Needs . 31 Part 3: Contributors 36 Appendixes 38 Appendix A: Enabling Legislation for Manhattan Project National Historical Park. 38 Appendix B: Inventory of Administrative Commitments . 43 Appendix C: Fundamental Resources and Values Analysis Tables. 48 Appendix D: Traditionally Associated Tribes . 87 Appendix E: Department of Energy Sites within Manhattan Project National Historical Park .
    [Show full text]
  • Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2019
    BUDGET U.S. Department of Transportation ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2019 MARITIME ADMINISTRATION SUBMITTED FOR THE USE OF THE COMMITTEES ON APPROPRIATIONS THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MARITIME ADMINISTRATION Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2019 Table of Contents Section 1 Overview … .............................................................................................................................. 1 Organization Chart showing Direct/Reimbursable Funded Full-Time Equivalents ................. 5 Organization Chart showing Direct/Reimbursable Funded Full-Time Positions ..................... 6 Section 2 Budget Summary Tables Exhibit II-1 – FY 2019 New Budget Authority ............................................................... 7 Exhibit II-2 – FY 2019 Budget Resources by Appropriation Account ............................ 8 Exhibit II-3 – FY 2019 Budget Request by DOT Strategic and Organizational Goal Authority .......................................................................................... 9 Exhibit II-4 – FY 2019 Budget Authority ........................................................................ 10 Exhibit II-5 – FY 2019 Outlays ....................................................................................... 11 Exhibit II-6 – Summary of Requested Funding Changes from Base ............................... 12 Exhibit II-7 – Working Capital Fund ............................................................................... 20 Exhibit II-8 – Personnel Resource Summary
    [Show full text]
  • The Adventures of a Citizen Scientist
    The Adventures of a Citizen Scientist Perhaps one never knows one’s parents, really knows them. You never know their early lives and, as a kid, you’re living inside your own skin, not theirs. After that you’re out of there. Growing up in Chicago, I never knew my dad was famous. He was just a firm, affectionate, if too busy father figure, who loved music and the outdoors, played tennis better than I could, was awfully good with tools, and could explain scientific ideas so well that I almost understood them. I knew he was a physicist and taught at the University, and he and mother often took me on lecture or research trips, but I didn’t know what it was all about. During the war, when he was one of those in charge of the bomb project and we’d moved to Oak Ridge, he was just a hard-working ordinary man doing a job like everybody else. August 6th, 1945, brought a dramatically different perspective, as you might expect. My father was suddenly a national and world figure. That fall, as I went off to college, I began to hear something of his achievements — not only the bomb, but the cosmic ray studies and the Nobel Prize, with all that seemed to entail. At that moment, too, he’d become Chancellor of Washington University in St. Louis, and my college was his college, where his father had been Professor of Philosophy and Psychology and Dean. I was in Wooster, Ohio, the town in which my father had grown up, with his childhood house just down College Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinton Engineer Work – Central Facilities
    v DOOK I - G~ERAL VOLUME ].2.. - CLINTCE mo IN~ /uRKS KAHHATTAK DISTRICT HISTORT '' BOCK I - GENERAL VQUIKS 1 2 - CLIKX0N HKClINBftR WORKS, CENTRAL FACILITIES CLASSIFICATION CANCELLED g f e e » « F ! ' 0 .. .............................. BY AUTHORITY PE DOE/OPC 00 So-/c?.>3 THIS DCCUMEM N£ ISTS OF 3 5 * PAGES N O ... 3 _OF_" f SERIES ./ * _____ ( N o . © * C o p y c-o>'*-e.c.'VeJk wo •fcordawt w,ewto G. H, +o KR.C. *-V J.o(y \,C)4r'j'^ V 1 3 7 5 2 FOREWORD This volume of the Uanh«tt*n L’i»trio t 8ifiW | hi.8 b««rj. prepared to dsfctrlta tt*e purpose, design, construction, development, cost, and func­ tions of the Central Facilities of the Gllnton Engineer Works, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Although the Central Facilities are described at length and in de­ tail In this volume, they may be identified briefly as eabradng the non- industrial features of the Clinton Engineer Works, existing only to pro­ vide the facilities and service;* mere or less common to American urban life. As the Central Facilities exist separately and apart from the in­ dustrial plants, they cannot be described logically in connection with the Manufacturing plants. The Central Facilities are highly important auxiliaries to the manufacturing plants, for without the services and facilities supplied, the resident population necessary for manning the plants could not be maintained. The text of the history of the Central Facilities Is divided into three major parts* A - General Introduction, B - T o m of Oak Ridge, and C - Area Facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • M-1392 Publication Title: Bush-Conant File
    Publication Number: M-1392 Publication Title: Bush-Conant File Relating to the Development of the Atomic Bomb, 1940-1945 Date Published: n.d. BUSH-CONANT FILE RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ATOMIC BOMB, 1940-1945 The Bush-Conant File, reproduced on the 14 rolls of this microfilm publication, M1392, documents the research and development of the atomic bomb from 1940 to 1945. These records were maintained in Dr. James B. Conant's office for himself and Dr. Vannevar Bush. Bush was director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD, 1941-46), chairman of the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) prior to the establishment of OSRD (1940-41), chairman of the Military Policy Committee (1942-45) and member of the Interim Committee (May-June 1945). During this period Conant served under Bush as chairman of the National Defense Research Committee of OSRD (1941-46), chairman of the S-1 Executive Committee (1942-43), alternate chairman of the Military Policy Committee (1942-45), scientific advisor to Maj. Gen. Leslie R. Groves (1943-45), and member of the Interim Committee (May-June 1945). The file, which consists primarily of letters, memorandums, and reports, is part of the Records of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, Record Group (RG) 227. The Bush-Conant File documents OSRD's role in promoting basic scientific research and development on nuclear fission before August 1942. In addition, the files document Bush and Conant's continuing roles, as chairman and alternate chairman of the Military Policy Committee, in overseeing the army's development of the atomic bomb during World War II and, as members of the short-lived Interim Committee, in advising on foreign policy and domestic legislation for the regulation of atomic energy immediately after the war.
    [Show full text]
  • Nrc Inspection Report No. 05000238/2020001, U.S. Department of Transportation, N.S
    UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 2100 RENAISSANCE BLVD., SUITE 100 KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2713 December 2, 2020 Erhard W. Koehler Senior Technical Advisor, N.S. Savannah U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MAR-640.2) 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE W25-209/212 Washington, DC 20590-0001 SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000238/2020001, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, N.S. SAVANNAH, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND Dear Mr. Koehler: On November 19, 2020, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection under Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2545 , “Research and Test Reactor Inspection Program” at the Nuclear Ship (N.S.) Savannah berthed in Baltimore, Maryland. Additional inspection activities (in-office reviews) were conducted remotely as a consequence of the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) during this inspection period. The inspectors examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and the conditions of your license. The inspection consisted of ship walkdowns by the inspectors, observations, interviews with ship personnel, and a review of procedures and records. The results of the inspection were discussed with you at the conclusion of the inspection on November 19, 2020 and are described in the enclosed report. Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of safety significance were identified. In accordance with 10 CFR Part 2.390 of the NRC’s "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of the NRC’s document system (ADAMS).
    [Show full text]
  • J. Robert Oppenheimer Papers [Finding Aid]. Library of Congress
    J. Robert Oppenheimer Papers A Finding Aid to the Collection in the Library of Congress Manuscript Division, Library of Congress Washington, D.C. 2016 Revised 2016 June Contact information: http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.mss/mss.contact Additional search options available at: http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.mss/eadmss.ms998007 LC Online Catalog record: http://lccn.loc.gov/mm77035188 Prepared by Carolyn H. Sung and David Mathisen Revised and expanded by Michael Spangler and Stephen Urgola in 2000, and Michael Folkerts in 2016 Collection Summary Title: J. Robert Oppenheimer Papers Span Dates: 1799-1980 Bulk Dates: (bulk 1947-1967) ID No.: MSS35188 Creator: Oppenheimer, J. Robert, 1904-1967 Extent: 76,450 items ; 301 containers plus 2 classified ; 120.2 linear feet Language: Collection material in English Location: Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. Summary: Physicist and director of the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey. Correspondence, memoranda, speeches, lectures, writings, desk books, lectures, statements, scientific notes, and photographs chiefly comprising Oppenheimer's personal papers while director of the Institute for Advanced Study but reflecting only incidentally his administrative work there. Topics include theoretical physics, development of the atomic bomb, the relationship between government and science, nuclear energy, security, and national loyalty. Selected Search Terms The following terms have been used to index the description of this collection in the Library's online catalog. They are grouped by name of person or organization, by subject or location, and by occupation and listed alphabetically therein. People Bethe, Hans A. (Hans Albrecht), 1906-2005--Correspondence. Birge, Raymond T. (Raymond Thayer), 1887- --Correspondence.
    [Show full text]