DOCSLIB.ORG

Nevada Test Site – Occupational External Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Dose Type of Document: TBD Supersedes: Revision 02

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nevada Test Site – Occupational External Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Dose Type of Document: TBD Supersedes: Revision 02 ORAU TEAM Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH Oak Ridge Associated Universities I Dade Moeller I MJW Technical Services Page 1 of 135 DOE Review Release 11/19/2012 Document Title: Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0008-6 Revision: 03 Nevada Test Site – Occupational External Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Dose Type of Document: TBD Supersedes: Revision 02 Subject Expert(s): Cheryl Y. Smith Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 10/25/2012 Eugene M. Rollins, Document Owner Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 10/25/2012 John M. Byrne, Objective 1 Manager Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 10/25/2012 Edward F. Maher, Objective 3 Manager Concurrence: Theresa Yisrael Signature on File for Concurrence Date: 11/01/2012 Kate Kimpan, Project Director Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 11/09/2012 James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science New Total Rewrite Revision Page Change FOR DOCUMENTS MARKED AS A TOTAL REWRITE, REVISION, OR PAGE CHANGE, REPLACE THE PRIOR REVISION AND DISCARD / DESTROY ALL COPIES OF THE PRIOR REVISION. Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0008-6 Revision No. 03 Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Page 2 of 135 PUBLICATION RECORD EFFECTIVE REVISION DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 09/21/2004 00 Information contained in Revision 00 is applicable only to employment periods after 1962 (post-atmospheric testing phase) and to workers not identified as involved with drillback activities prior to 1965. In addition, Revision 00 is not applicable to dose reconstruction for (1) workers involved with weapons testing at locations other than the NTS (South Pacific, Alaska, etc.); (2) workers affected by any of the following 10 underground tests that resulted in unexpected release of radioactive material: 1. BLANCA (October 30, 1958) 2. DES MOINES (June 13, 1962) 3. BANEBERRY (December 18, 1970) 4. CAMPHOR (June 29, 1971) 5. DIAGONAL LINE (November 24, 1971) 6. RIOLA (September 25, 1980) 7. AGRINI (March 31, 1984) 8. MIDAS MYTH (February 15, 1984) 9. MISTY RAIN (April 6, 1985) 10. MIGHTY OAK (April 10, 1986) It is also assumed that, because they were such a rarity, it would be likely that if a claimant was involved in one of these events, he [or his survivor] would mention it in his CATI. All of these conditions are likely verifiable by careful examination of the DOL, DOE (incident reports and dosimetry records), and OCAS documents. Incorporates internal and NIOSH comments. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. 07/21/2006 00 PC-1 Approved page change revision incorporates definitions and directions for dose reconstruction for non-presumptive cancers that are excluded from the 1951 through 1962 Special Exposure Cohort. Text was added or modified on pages 8-9 in Section 6.1. Incorporates NIOSH formal review comments. No sections were deleted. This revision results in no change to the assigned dose and no PER is required. Training required: As determined by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. Approval: Signature on File 07/12/2006 Eugene M. Rollins, TBD Team Leader Signature on File 07/12/2006 John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager Signature on File 07/14/2006 Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager Signature on File 07/20/2006 Kate Kimpan, Project Director Signature on File 07/21/2006 James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0008-6 Revision No. 03 Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Page 3 of 135 EFFECTIVE REVISION DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 01/11/2007 00 PC-2 Approved page change revision incorporates coworker data for completion of external dose prior to universal badging in April 1957. Text was added or modified on pages 40-42 in Sections 6.3.4.1. Added DeMarre reference on page 50. Deleted the term, claimant favorable, from the Glossary on page 54. As a result of changes, corrected table references on page 46 and 48. No further changes occurred as a result of internal formal review. Incorporates NIOSH formal review comments. No sections were deleted. This revision results in an increase in assigned dose and a PER is required. Training required: As determine by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. Approval: Signature on File 12/15/2006 Eugene M. Rollins, TBD Team Leader Signature on File 12/12/2006 John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager Signature on File 12/12/2006 Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager Signature on File 01/11/2007 Kate Kimpan, Project Director Brant A. Ulsh Signature on File for 01/11/2007 James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science 07/30/2007 01 Approved Revision 01 initiated to add Section 6.4 Dose Reconstruction Recommendations, Section 6.5 Claim Analysis Methods. Added Attachments A through D. Constitutes a total rewrite of the document. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Adds Attributions and Annotations section. Training required: As determine by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. 05/28/2008 01 PC-1 Approved page change revision to incorporate expanded co-worker data on pages 45 - 47, 49, and 50 in Section 6.4. Text was added to Section 6.5.1 (page 57) and Section 6.5.2 (page 58) to address hot particle issues and the use of the document Hazards to Personnel Re-entering the Nevada Test Site Following Nuclear Reactor Tests. Changes to attributions and annotations numbering were made on pages 59-61, 67, 68, 92, and 95. No sections were deleted. Made additional changes to correct the wording in Section 6.5.1 on page 57 to be consistent with the information in Section 6.3.5.1 on page 36 regarding the lead covering on the dosimetry and identification of the 25% as a dose correction factor between the years 1960 and 1965. Corrected the dates in Section 6.3.5.1 on page 36 to be consistent with the dates in Table 6-1. Added information for Operations BREN and HENRE and the Super Kukla reactor. As a result of NIOSH formal review, the following pages were changed: 9, 12, 13, 17-19, 21, 24 - 34, 36, 37, 39 - 42, 44 - 47, 49 - 66, 68, 71 - 78, 93 - 95, 101, 102, 104, 105, and 110. These changes occurred in the Acronyms and Abbreviations Section, Sections 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, Reference Section, Glossary Section and Attachment A. Training required: As Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0008-6 Revision No. 03 Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Page 4 of 135 EFFECTIVE REVISION DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION determined by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. Approval: Signature on File 04/23/2008 Eugene M. Rollins, Document Owner Signature on File 05/14/2008 John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager Signature on File 04/22/2008 Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager Signature on File 05/14/2008 Kate Kimpan, Project Director Brant A. Ulsh Signature on File for 05/28/2008 James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science 04/15/2010 02 Revision initiated to incorporate definitions and directions for dose reconstruction for nonpresumptive cancers that are excluded from the 1963 through 1992 Special Exposure Cohort. Changes were made to Sections 6.3.5.1 and 6.5.1 to clarify the application of a 25% dosimeter correction factor for all energy ranges prior to 1966 to account for lead shielding in some dosimeters. Table 6-1, footnote d was revised to reflect this change. Added Section 6.1.2. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Training required: As determined by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. 11/09/2012 03 Revision initiated to fix Table 6-1 for neutron dosimeters (1961–1979, 1979–1986, and 1987–2000) that included a factor of 2 (for claimant favorability) based on the discussion in Sections 6.3.4.2.1, 6.3.4.2.2, and 6.3.4.2.3. This multiplier has been removed and the language in these sections modified. Section 6.3.1.4 – Language was added to clarify REECo reporting practices for workers visiting the site and to document the correct source of information when evaluating REECo employees assigned to TTR. Clarification of the beta-to-gamma ratio to be applied before 1966 during most dose reconstructions. Language was added to Section 6.4.2.1 to direct the reader to Attachment C if a more accurate estimate of the beta to gamma ratio was required. Section 6.4.2.2 was moved to Attachment C, Section C.2, and Section 6.4.2.3 was moved to Attachment C, Section C. 3. In Section 6.5.2 the beta-to-gamma ratio to be used before 1966 was clarified. Uncertainty paragraph was deleted because for beta dose OTIB-ORAUT-0017 is the methodology used. Section 6.5.1 – Language added about unmonitored workers and when no external monitoring indicated a worker was not on NTS. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Constitutes a total rewrite of the document. Training required: As determined by the Objective Manager. Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0008-6 Revision No. 03 Effective Date: 11/09/2012 Page 5 of 135 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 9 6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 12 6.1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 13 6.1.2 Special Exposure Cohort Petition Information for the Nevada Test Site ...................... 13 6.1.3 Scope ......................................................................................................................... 14 6.2 Dosimetric Basis of Comparison ............................................................................................ 14 6.2.1 Photon Measurement Quantities ...............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bibliography on Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Explosions
    BIBLIOGRAPHY ON PEACEFUL USES OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS Bibliography Unit Library & Technical Information Section Bhabha Atomic Research Centre Trombay, Bombay 85. India 1970 We regret that some of the pages in the microfiche copy of this report may not be up to the proper legibility standards, even though the best possible copy was used for preparing the master fiche. FOREWORD The subject of peaceful uses of nuclear explosions hns been attracting increasing attention in view of i~s immense potentialities. The United States of America and the Soviet Union, which are among the countries most ad- vanced in the field of nuclear science and technology, have already conducted several experiments in this dire- ction and have several projects underway. The principai aim of the compilation of the present bibliography is to make available to the Indian scientists and engineers up-to-date information on the subject based upon all available literature. The bibliography comprises 685 references with in- formative abstracts. The main sources of information used for compiling it are .-Nuclear Science Abstracts, (NSA), primary journals and reports. Whenever USA is referred to, its volume and abstract numbers are given at the bottom of the abstract. In addition to the author and report number indexes, a list of major Plowshare events is also given. The compiler of this bibliography is Miss.ft.A.liagarathna of the IN IS Unit of the Library and Technical Information Section of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. Although every effort has been cade to include all available pub- lished literature in this field till May 1970, omissions are inevitable.
    [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]
  • Nevada Offsites Long-Term Hydrologic Monitoring Program – 9424
    WM2009 Conference, March 1-5, 2009 Phoenix, AZ Nevada Offsites Long-Term Hydrologic Monitoring Program – 9424 M. Kautsky U.S. Department of Energy 2597 B3/4 Rd. Grand Junction, CO 81503 L.H. Branstetter Colorado State University 2349 Hampshire Court Fort Collins, CO 80526 R.A. Hodges, R. Findlay, D.M. Peterson S.M. Stoller Corp. 2597 B3/4 Rd. Grand Junction, CO 81503 J.R. Craig, J. Dayvault U.S. Department of Energy 2597 B3/4 Rd. Grand Junction, CO 81503 ABSTRACT The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management has long-term stewardship responsibility for DOE’s Nevada Offsites Project. The Nevada Offsites consist of eight sites, outside the boundaries of the Nevada Test Site, where underground nuclear tests were conducted between 1961 and 1973. The eight Nevada Offsites are Amchitka (Alaska), Shoal and Central Nevada Test Area (Nevada), Rio Blanco and Rulison (Colorado), Gasbuggy and Gnome-Coach (New Mexico), and Salmon (Mississippi). The underground tests resulted in the release of multiple radionuclides to the detonation zone (cavity, chimney, and nuclear-fractured region); however, tritium is the most likely contaminant to migrate significant distances from the detonation zone because of its occurrence both as tritiated liquid water, which moves with ground water, and as tritiated water vapor. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has conducted environmental sampling and long-term monitoring for tritium and other radionuclides since 1972 at the Nevada Offsites under the Long-Term Hydrologic Monitoring Program (LTHMP). The objectives of the monitoring were to detect denotation- related radionuclides, track the fate and transport of other constituents, ensure public safety, inform the public and the news media, and document compliance with state and federal regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Flynn Creek Crater, Tennessee: Final Report, by David J
    1967010060 ASTROGEOLOGIC STUDIES / ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT " July 1, 1965 to July 1, 1966 ° 'i t PART B - h . CRATERINVESTIGATIONS N 67_1_389 N 57-" .]9400 (ACCEC_ION [4U _" EiER! (THRU} .2_ / PP (PAGLS) (CO_ w ) _5 (NASA GR OR I"MX OR AD NUMBER) (_ATEGORY) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOQICAL SURVEY • iri i i i i iiii i i 1967010060-002 ASTROGEOLOGIC STUDIES ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT July i, 1965 to July I, 1966 PART B: CRATER INVESTIGATIONS November 1966 This preliminary report is distributed without editorial and technical review for conformity with official standards and nomenclature. It should not be quoted without permission. This report concerns work done on behalf of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1967010060-003 • #' C OING PAGE ,BLANK NO/" FILMED. CONTENTS PART B--CRATER INVESTIGATIONS Page Introduction ........................ vii History and origin of the Flynn Creek crater, Tennessee: final report, by David J. Roddy .............. 1 Introductien ..................... 1 Geologic history of the Flynn Creek crater ....... 5 Origin of the Flynn Creek crater ............ ii Conc lusions ...................... 32 References cited .................... 35 Geology of the Sierra Madera structure, Texas: progress report, by H. G. Wilshire ............ 41_ Introduction ...................... 41 Stratigraphy ...................... 41 Petrography and chemical composition .......... 49 S truc ture ....................... 62 References cited ............. ...... 69 Some aspects of the Manicouagan Lake structure in Quebec, Canada, by Stephen H. Wolfe ................ 71 f Craters produced by missile impacts, by H. J. Moore ..... 79 Introduction ...................... 79 Experimental procedure ................. 80 Experimental results .................. 81 Summary ........................ 103 References cited .................... 103 Hypervelocity impact craters in pumice, by H. J. Moore and / F.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Facility Decommissioning and Site Remedial Actions
    LOCKHEED MARTI ES/ER/TM-227/Pt2 ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROGRAM Nuclear FacUity Decommissioning and Site Remedial Actions: A Selected Bibliography, Vol. 18 Part 2. Indexes This document has been approved by the East Tennessee Technology Park Technical Information Office for release to the public. Date: 9'/<Z"?7 ENERGYSYSTEMS MANAGED BY LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. FOR THE UNITED STATES ER DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY UCN-17560 (8 8-95) Information International Associates, Inc. contributed to the preparation of this document and should not be considered an eligible contractor for its review. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available from the Remedial Action Program Information Center, 138 Mitchell Road, Oak Ridge, TN 37830-7918, phone: 423-576-6500, fax: 423-576-6547, e-mail: [email protected]. ES/ER/TM-227/Pt2 Nuclear Facility Decommissioning and Site Remedial Actions: A Selected Bibliography, Vol. 18 Part 2. Indexes D8TOUHON OF THJS DOCUMENT IS Date Issued—September 1997 Prepared by Remedial Action Program Information Center and Information International Associates, Inc. Oak Ridge, Tennessee under subcontract 70K-GAM66 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management under budget and reporting code EW 20 LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. managing the Environmental Management Activities at the East Tennessee Technology Park Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant Oak Ridge National Laboratory under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400 for the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government.
    [Show full text]
  • DOE) LM Site Management Guide, Update 21 (July 2018
    LM Control Number: Guide-3-20.0-1.0-20.1 Cover photos, clockwise from upper left: • Trinity Site, Manhattan Project. Site of the world’s first nuclear explosion. • Defense-related uranium mine in Montrose County, Colorado. • Milkweed flower at Rocky Flats, Colorado, Site. • Las Colonias Park amphitheater at the Grand Junction, Colorado, Site. • Center: Gray tree frog at Weldon Spring, Missouri, Site. DOE – Office of Legacy Management July 2018 Table of Contents 1.0 – Introduction ......................................................................................................... Page 2 2.0 – Purpose ................................................................................................................. Page 2 3.0 – Regulatory Drivers and Programmatic Framework ........................................ Page 2 4.0 – Site Categories ..................................................................................................... Page 4 5.0 – Site Counts ........................................................................................................... Page 5 6.0 – Site Nomenclature ............................................................................................... Page 5 7.0 – Site Transition Policy .......................................................................................... Page 6 8.0 – Interrelationship of Site Management Guide Data .......................................... Page 7 9.0 – Appendixes ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment Salmon Site, Lamar County
    DOE/NV-394 UC-700 BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT SALMON SITE LAMAR COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI Prepared for DOE Nevada Operations Office Las Vegas, Nevada J Prepared by £3 rr CORPORATION 4330 South Valley View Boulevard, Suite 114 CO Las Vegas, Nevada 89103 sI— o Q Work Performed Under Contract No. CO DE-AC08-92NV10972 O o2: f— S3 CE CO Q April 1995 DISTRIBUTE > I I IIS - 3 I III k jam is vNUMITEfr MASTER DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, makes a 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 products, process, or service by trade name, mark, 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. Table of Contents List of Figures v List of Tables vi List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ix Executive Summary ES-1 1.0 Introduction 1-1
    [Show full text]
  • Humble Origins.………………………………………………………………18
    Southern Devices: Geology, Industry, and Atomic Testing in Mississippi’s Piney Woods by David Allen Burke A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Auburn, Alabama May 14, 2010 Approved by William F. Trimble, Chair, Professor of History James R. Hansen, Professor of History Jennifer E. Brooks, Professor of History David T. King Jr., Professor of Geology Abstract This work centers on the two underground atomic tests conducted in south central Mississippi on September 22, 1964, and December 3, 1966. The region, known as the “Piney Woods,” hosted the two blasts, conducted by the United States Atomic Energy Commission, in a mammoth subterranean salt formation known as a “salt dome.” These salt domes are common along the Gulf Coast from Texas to the Mississippi-Alabama border. The two tests, codenamed “Project Dribble” were part of a larger test series, “Vela Uniform,” that sought to improve and create seismological methods to detect underground nuclear tests. The two nuclear tests were followed by two methane/oxygen blasts under “Project Miracle Play” to assess whether chemical explosions could simulate nuclear tests in an underground environment. The atomic test program at the Tatum Dome was the result of a unique combination of geological and industrial factors. It succeeded in producing data considered crucial to nuclear weapons control negotiation and treaties, yet it failed to bring the nuclear industry into the Piney Woods. Furthermore, many of the desired economic benefits failed to materialize due to the federal reliance on outside contractors to perform tasks at the site.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Management Guide Data
    LM Control Number: Guide-3-20.0-1.0-20.4 DOE – Office of Legacy Management March 2020 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Regulatory Drivers and Programmatic Framework ................................................................................... 2 4.0 Site Categories ........................................................................................................................................... 4 5.0 Site Counts ................................................................................................................................................. 4 6.0 Site Nomenclature ...................................................................................................................................... 5 7.0 Site Transition Policy ................................................................................................................................. 6 8.0 Interrelationship of Site Management Guide Data ..................................................................................... 6 9.0 Appendixes ............................................................................................................................................................... 7 Appendix A-1: Alphabetical Site
    [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]
  • 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]