DOCSLIB.ORG

ORAUT-OTIB-0018 Rev 01

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ORAUT-OTIB-0018 Rev 01 ORAU Team Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0018 Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH Effective Date: 03/14/2005 Revision No.: 01 Technical Basis Document for Atomic Energy Operations at the Controlled Copy No.: Iowa Army Ammunition Plant (IAAP) Page 1 of 79 Subject Experts: John A. Leonowich/Don Bihl/Jack Fix/Dillard Supersedes: Shipler/Bruce Napier/Mark Rolfes/Tim Taulbee Document Owner Approval: Signature on File Date: 03/14/2005 Revision No.: 00 Judson L. Kenoyer, Task 3 Manager Concurrence: Signature on File Date: 03/14/2005 Richard E. Toohey, Project Director Approval: Signature on File _ Date: 03/14/2005 James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................................ 3 LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................... 4 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 8 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION, OPERATIONAL HISTORY, AND PROCESS................................ 8 2.1 OPERATIONAL HISTORY .............................................................................................. 9 2.2 FISSILE MATERIALS ONSITE ..................................................................................... 10 2.2.1 Early Mission and Responsibilities ....................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Early Weapons Design ......................................................................................... 10 2.2.3 Radiation Safety Program..................................................................................... 11 2.2.4 Fissile Material Assumption.................................................................................. 11 3.0 OCCUPATIONALLY RELATED MEDICAL X-RAYS ....................................................... 13 4.0 OCCUPATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOSE.................................................................. 15 4.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 15 4.2 INTAKES FROM ONSITE ATMOSPHERIC RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS . 15 4.2.1 Intakes from Tritium Releases.............................................................................. 16 4.2.2 Intakes from Release of DU from Burning Sites .................................................. 17 4.2.3 DU Intakes from Potentially Contaminated Drinking Water ................................. 18 4.3 EXTERNAL DOSE......................................................................................................... 20 4.4 UNCERTAINTY.............................................................................................................. 22 5.0 ESTIMATION OF INTERNAL EXPOSURE...................................................................... 22 5.1 TRITIUM EXPOSURE ................................................................................................... 23 5.2 DEPLETED URANIUM.................................................................................................. 25 5.2.1 DU Intakes from Hydroshots................................................................................. 26 Effective Date: 03/14/2005 Revision No. 01 Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0018 Page 2 of 79 5.2.2 DU Intakes from Machining Baratols .................................................................... 29 5.2.3 DU Intakes by Operators at Burning Yard............................................................ 30 5.2.4 DU Intakes from Disassembly of Weapons.......................................................... 31 5.3 RADON .......................................................................................................................... 32 5.4 OTHER SOURCES........................................................................................................ 33 6.0 ESTIMATION OF EXTERNAL RADIATION EXPOSURE ............................................... 34 6.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 34 6.2 WORKPLACE EXTERNAL RADIATION FIELDS ......................................................... 34 6.2.1 Photon Radiation .................................................................................................. 34 6.2.2 Neutron Radiation ................................................................................................. 37 6.2.3 Depleted Uranium ................................................................................................. 38 6.3 EXTERNAL RADIATION DOSE RECORDS ................................................................ 39 6.3.1 IAAP Annual Dose Distributions ........................................................................... 41 6.4 DOSIMETER TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE STUDIES ................................ 43 6.4.1 Photon Radiation .................................................................................................. 43 6.4.2 Neutron Radiation ................................................................................................. 45 6.5 IAAP WORKER EXTERNAL DOSE RECONSTRUCTION .......................................... 46 6.5.1 Unmonitored or Intermittently Monitored Workers ............................................... 46 6.5.2 Monitored Workers................................................................................................ 51 6.5.3 Adjustments to Photon Dose................................................................................ 51 6.5.4 Estimation of Neutron Dose.................................................................................. 52 6.5.5 Skin and Extremity Dose (Reserved) ................................................................... 53 6.6 UNCERTAINTY IN PHOTON AND NEUTRON DOSE................................................. 53 6.7 ORGAN DOSE............................................................................................................... 54 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................. 55 GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................................. 60 Appendix A – Facility Information ................................................................................................. 65 Appendix B – List of Weapons Programs at IAAP ....................................................................... 67 Appendix C – Summary of Intakes and Details of Ingestion Calculations................................... 68 Appendix D – Generic Pit Specifications ...................................................................................... 70 Appendix E – Special Nuclear Material (SNM) Encapsulation and Pit Cladding ........................ 73 Appendix F – IAAP Annual Dosimeter Badge Distributions......................................................... 75 Appendix G –Bladder Cancer Example Calculation for an Unmonitored Worker ....................... 79 Effective Date: 03/14/2005 Revision No. 01 Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0018 Page 3 of 79 LIST OF TABLES Table Page Table 2.1 Significant Radiation Safety Program Events .......................................................... 12 Table 3.1 Results of X-ray study .............................................................................................. 14 Table 3.2 Organ doses from lumbar spine X-rays at IAAP. ..................................................... 15 Table 4.1 Total uranium results from water samples at IAAPa ................................................ 18 Table 4.2 Upper bound equivalent doses (mrem) from ingestion of DU contaminated drinking water.......................................................................................................................... 20 Table 5.1 Mass and radiological characteristics of depleted uranium..................................... 25 Table 5.2 Measured DU air concentrations from hydroshots. ................................................. 27 Table 5.3 Chronic DU intakes from hydroshots for test fire operators and drivers. ................ 27 Table 5.4 Chronic DU intakes from hydroshots for other AEC personnel. .............................. 28 Table 5.5 Chronic DU ingestion intakes from hydroshots for cleanup crew............................ 28 Table 5.6 Summary statistics of 1990 radon measurements at Pantex. ................................. 32 Table 6.1 Energy Distribution from Generic Pit........................................................................ 37 Table 6.2 Summary of Dosimetry Data Available .................................................................... 40 Table 6.3 Personnel Dosimeter Monitoring Eras ..................................................................... 40 Table 6.4 Summary of Annual Dose Distributions ................................................................... 42 Table 6.5 Work factor calculation using the two era dose rates.............................................. 48 Table 6.6 Modeled Annual Dose Using Work Factor Methodology ......................................... 49 Table 6.7 Am -241 Build-up from decay of Pu-241 ..................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (CUWS) Outreach Journal # 1241
    USAF Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) Outreach Journal CUWS Outreach Journal 1241 10 November 2016 Feature Item: “AN EVOLVING NARRATIVE: A Report on the Role and Value of U.S. Nuclear Weapons, 1989-Today.” Authored by Rebecca Hersman, Clark Murdock, and Shanelle Van; A report of the CSIS International Security Program; Published by the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS); October 2016; 76 pages. https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/Evolving-US-Nuclear-Narrative.pdf This study aims to create a dialogue with the nation’s nuclear personnel about the rationales for the U.S. nuclear arsenal that already exist—some of which have been stated at the highest levels of leadership—to ask what the nuclear forces actually hear, what works and what does not, and what motivates them on a daily basis. Over the last few years, many observers, including key Department of Defense (DoD) officials, have commented on the need for DoD to better communicate a more compelling rationale for why the U.S. nuclear arsenal remains essential to the post–Cold War strategy of the United States and to the security of the American people. Those airmen and sailors who comprise the nuclear workforce, and who are asked to dedicate their lives in service of their mission, deserve a persuasive explanation as to why their unwavering stewardship of the U.S. nuclear arsenal will matter as long as these weapons exist in the world. In the assessment of some, including this study’s authors, a coherent narrative about the fundamental role of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr Brandon Doss Assistant State Veterinarian AR Livestock & Poultry
    HATCHERIES, DEALERS, AND INDEPENDENT FLOCKS PARTICIPATING IN THE NATIONAL POULTRY IMPROVMENT PLAN MULTIPLIER MEAT-TYPE CHICKEN BREEDING FLOCKS NPIP. HATCHING PRODUCTS CLASSIFIED ADDITIONAL NO. SUBPART PARTICIPANTS NAME AND ADDRESS EGG U.S. PULLORUM-TYPHOID CLASSIFICATIONS FOR CAPACITY CLEAN WHICH PRODUCTS QUALFIED 71 - Arkansas Dr Brandon Doss Assistant State Veterinarian AR Livestock & Poultry Commission PO Box 8505 Little Rock, AR 72215 Phone: 501-907-2254 Fax:501-907-2259 [email protected] Hatchery Farm/company George's Inc. #1 P.O. Box G Springdale, MGM MSM AI 24 C AR 72764 T CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: OK Farms P.O. Box 1119 Ft. Smith, MGM MSM AI 121 C AR 72902 T19 T3 CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Ozark Mountain Poultry farms, LLC 1420 MGM MSM AI 183 C St Louis St Batesville, AR 72503 T CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Peco Foods 1600 White Drive Batesville, MGM MSM AI 108 C AR 72501 T CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Pilgrim's Pride Corp. P.O. Box MG MS AI CLEAN P/T 189 C 811 Nashville, AR 71852 T CLEAN Phone: Simmons Foods Inc. P.O. Box 430 Siloam MGM MSM AI 185 C Springs, AR 72761 5503680 T9 T19 CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Tyson Foods Inc. 1115 South MGM MSM AI 175 C Elmira Russellville, AR 72801 T CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Tyson Foods Inc. P.O. Box 576 Green 221 C Forest, AR 72638 T AI CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Tyson Foods Inc. P.O. Box 219 C 507 Murfreesboro, AR 71842 T AI CLEAN P/T CLEAN Phone: Tyson Foods Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • National Poultry Improvement Plan
    Historic, archived document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. Jius / / d T(o TJz £f\ United States ^«& Department of Agriculture National Poultry _ Animal and _ -}— Plant Health Inspection Improvement Plan Service Veterinary Services 1981 Directory of Participants APHIS 91-42 Handling Waterfowl, February 1 981 Exhibition Poultry, and Game Birds NATIONAL POULTRY IMPROVEMCNT PLAN U.S. J U.S. | Jush [Pullorum-Typhoic 7 S M.Gollisepticum ^ APPROVED m TCLEANj * *! CLEANF npip! ^H^IPB^pV BJ B* The National Poultry Improvement Plan became operative July 1, 1935, and the National Turkey Improvement Plan became operative September 25, 1943, with the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture. On December 3, 1971, the two Plans were combined under one title, "The National Poultry Improvement Plan," with separate provisions applicable to the different types of poultry. The Plan operates under the authority of an appropriation made by Congress to the United States Department of Agriculture to be used in cooperation with the State authorities in the administration of regulations for the improvement of poultry, poultry products, and hatcheries. Authority for the administration of the Plan is now contained in the Department of Agriculture Organic Act of 1944, as amended (7 U.S.C. 429). Provisions of the Plan are changed from time to time to conform with the development of the industry and with new information as it becomes available. These changes are based on recommendations made at the Biennial National Plan Conferences by official delegates representing participating breeders, hatcheries, and flockowners from all cooperating States. Current provisions of the Plan are described in a publication entitled "The National Poultry Improvement Plan and Auxiliary Provisions." The publication is available from Official State Agencies or on request to the National Poultry Improvement Plan, APHIS-VS, Building 265, BARC- East, Beltsville, Maryland 20705.
    [Show full text]
  • Heater Element Specifications Bulletin Number 592
    Technical Data Heater Element Specifications Bulletin Number 592 Topic Page Description 2 Heater Element Selection Procedure 2 Index to Heater Element Selection Tables 5 Heater Element Selection Tables 6 Additional Resources These documents contain additional information concerning related products from Rockwell Automation. Resource Description Industrial Automation Wiring and Grounding Guidelines, publication 1770-4.1 Provides general guidelines for installing a Rockwell Automation industrial system. Product Certifications website, http://www.ab.com Provides declarations of conformity, certificates, and other certification details. You can view or download publications at http://www.rockwellautomation.com/literature/. To order paper copies of technical documentation, contact your local Allen-Bradley distributor or Rockwell Automation sales representative. For Application on Bulletin 100/500/609/1200 Line Starters Heater Element Specifications Eutectic Alloy Overload Relay Heater Elements Type J — CLASS 10 Type P — CLASS 20 (Bul. 600 ONLY) Type W — CLASS 20 Type WL — CLASS 30 Note: Heater Element Type W/WL does not currently meet the material Type W Heater Elements restrictions related to EU ROHS Description The following is for motors rated for Continuous Duty: For motors with marked service factor of not less than 1.15, or Overload Relay Class Designation motors with a marked temperature rise not over +40 °C United States Industry Standards (NEMA ICS 2 Part 4) designate an (+104 °F), apply application rules 1 through 3. Apply application overload relay by a class number indicating the maximum time in rules 2 and 3 when the temperature difference does not exceed seconds at which it will trip when carrying a current equal to 600 +10 °C (+18 °F).
    [Show full text]
  • Experience a Lower Total Cost of Ownership
    EXPERIENCE A LOWER TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP Timken® Spherical Roller Bearings are engineered to give you more of what you need. Lower Operating Temperatures Rollers are guided by cage pockets—not a center guide ring—eliminating a friction point and resulting in 4–10% less rotational torque and 5ºC lower operating temperatures.* Less rotational torque leads to improved efficiency, lower energy consumption and more savings. Lower temperatures reduce the oil oxidation rate by 50% to extend lubricant life. Tougher Protection Hardened steel cages deliver greater fatigue strength, increased wear resistance and tougher protection against shock and acceleration. Optimized Uptime Unique slots in the cage face improve oil flow and purge more contaminants from the bearing to help extend equipment uptime. Minimized Wear Improved profiles reduce internal stresses and optimize load distribution to minimize wear. Improved Lube Film Enhanced surface finishes avoid metal-to-metal contact to reduce friction and result in improved lube film. Higher Loads Longer rollers result in 4–8% higher load ratings or 14–29% longer predicted bearing life. Higher load ratings enable you to carry heavier loads. Brass Cages Available in all sizes; ready when you need extra strength and durability in the most unrelenting conditions, including extreme shock and vibration, high acceleration forces, and minimal lubrication. Increase your operational efficiencies and extend maintenance intervals. Starting now. Visit Timken.com/spherical to find out more. *All results are from head-to-head
    [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]
  • Nuclear Weapons Technology 101 for Policy Wonks Bruce T
    NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY FOR POLICY WONKS NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 101 FOR POLICY WONKS BRUCE T. GOODWIN BRUCE T. GOODWIN BRUCE T. Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory August 2021 NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 101 FOR POLICY WONKS BRUCE T. GOODWIN Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory August 2021 NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY 101 FOR POLICY WONKS | 1 This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in part under Contract W-7405-Eng-48 and in part under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. The views and opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. ISBN-978-1-952565-11-3 LCCN-2021907474 LLNL-MI-823628 TID-61681 2 | BRUCE T. GOODWIN Table of Contents About the Author. 2 Introduction . .3 The Revolution in Physics That Led to the Bomb . 4 The Nuclear Arms Race Begins. 6 Fission and Fusion are "Natural" Processes . 7 The Basics of the Operation of Nuclear Explosives. 8 The Atom . .9 Isotopes . .9 Half-life . 10 Fission . 10 Chain Reaction . 11 Critical Mass . 11 Fusion . 14 Types of Nuclear Weapons . 16 Finally, How Nuclear Weapons Work . 19 Fission Explosives . 19 Fusion Explosives . 22 Staged Thermonuclear Explosives: the H-bomb . 23 The Modern, Miniature Hydrogen Bomb . 25 Intrinsically Safe Nuclear Weapons . 32 Underground Testing . 35 The End of Nuclear Testing and the Advent of Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship . 39 Stockpile Stewardship Today . 41 Appendix 1: The Nuclear Weapons Complex .
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Nuclear Power 1939 – 2018 Part 1 Introduction
    Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 – 2018 Part 1: Introduction Peter Lobner July 2018 1 Foreword In 2015, I compiled the first edition of this resource document to support a presentation I made in August 2015 to The Lyncean Group of San Diego (www.lynceans.org) commemorating the 60th anniversary of the world’s first “underway on nuclear power” by USS Nautilus on 17 January 1955. That presentation to the Lyncean Group, “60 years of Marine Nuclear Power: 1955 – 2015,” was my attempt to tell a complex story, starting from the early origins of the US Navy’s interest in marine nuclear propulsion in 1939, resetting the clock on 17 January 1955 with USS Nautilus’ historic first voyage, and then tracing the development and exploitation of marine nuclear power over the next 60 years in a remarkable variety of military and civilian vessels created by eight nations. In July 2018, I finished a complete update of the resource document and changed the title to, “Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 – 2018.” What you have here is Part 1: Introduction. The other parts are: Part 2A: United States - Submarines Part 2B: United States - Surface Ships Part 3A: Russia - Submarines Part 3B: Russia - Surface Ships & Non-propulsion Marine Nuclear Applications Part 4: Europe & Canada Part 5: China, India, Japan and Other Nations Part 6: Arctic Operations 2 Foreword This resource document was compiled from unclassified, open sources in the public domain. I acknowledge the great amount of work done by others who have published material in print or posted information on the internet pertaining to international marine nuclear propulsion programs, naval and civilian nuclear powered vessels, naval weapons systems, and other marine nuclear applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Weapon Initiatives: Low-Yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness
    Order Code RL32130 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Nuclear Weapon Initiatives: Low-Yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness Updated March 8, 2004 Jonathan Medalia Specialist in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Nuclear Weapon Initiatives: Low-Yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness Summary The Bush Administration completed its congressionally-mandated Nuclear Posture Review in December 2001. The review led to major changes in U.S. nuclear policy. It found that the Cold War relationship with Russia was “very inappropriate” and that this nation must be able to deal with new threats. It planned to retain Cold War-era nuclear weapons, which would suffice for many contingencies, though at reduced numbers. To complement these weapons so as to improve U.S. ability to deal with new, more dispersed threats in various countries, the Administration sought to explore additional nuclear capabilities. Accordingly, the FY2004 request included four nuclear weapon initiatives: (1) rescinding the ban that Congress imposed in 1993 on R&D on low-yield nuclear weapons; (2) $6 million for the Advanced Concepts Initiative (ACI) to begin certain studies of weapon-related science and technology; (3) $15 million to continue a study of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP), in which an existing bomb would be converted into a weapon able to penetrate into the ground before detonating to improve its ability to destroy buried targets; and (4) $25 million to enable the United States to conduct a nuclear test within 18 months of a presidential order to test, and for related purposes, as compared with the current 24-36 month time that was set shortly after the end of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • A National Pragmatic Safety Limit for Nuclear Weapon Quantities Joshua Pearce, David Denkenberger
    A National Pragmatic Safety Limit for Nuclear Weapon Quantities Joshua Pearce, David Denkenberger To cite this version: Joshua Pearce, David Denkenberger. A National Pragmatic Safety Limit for Nuclear Weapon Quan- tities. Drug Safety, Springer Verlag, 2018, 4 (2), pp.25. 10.3390/safety4020025. hal-02111370 HAL Id: hal-02111370 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02111370 Submitted on 26 Apr 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License safety Article A National Pragmatic Safety Limit for Nuclear Weapon Quantities Joshua M. Pearce 1,2,3,* ID and David C. Denkenberger 4,5 1 Department of Electronics and Nanoengineering, School of Electrical Engineering, Aalto University, FI-00076 Espoo, Finland 2 Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931-1295, USA 3 Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931-1295, USA 4 Tennessee State University, 3500 John A Merritt Boulevard Nashville, Nashville, TN 37209, USA; [email protected] 5 Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disasters (ALLFED), 23532 Calabasas Road, Suite A, Calabasas, CA 91302, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: 906-487-1466 Received: 15 February 2018; Accepted: 6 June 2018; Published: 14 June 2018 Abstract: This study determines the nuclear pragmatic limit where the direct physical negative consequences of nuclear weapons use are counter to national interests, by assuming all unknowns are conservatively optimistic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Weird Nukes of Yesteryear
    The Cold War produced some oddball weapons. Here are three of them. The “Davy Crockett,” shown here mounted on a tripod at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, was the smallest nuclear warhead ever developed by the US. The Weird Nukes DOD photo end of a series of thermonuclear bombs initiated in 1950. This followed the Soviet detonation of an atomic bomb of Yesteryear in 1949, several years before Western By Norman Polmar and Robert S. Norris intelligence agencies expected such an event. y the time the Cold War reached some concern about whether they could It was the era of “bigger is better.” its height in the late 1960s, the be carried in aircraft, due to size. The The zenith of “big bombs” would be American nuclear arsenal had “Little Boy” dropped on Hiroshima seen on Oct. 30, 1961, when the Soviet grown to more than 31,000 tipped the scales at 9,700 pounds, and Union detonated (at Novaya Zemlya in Bweapons. The Army, Navy, Air Force, the “Fat Man” dropped on Nagasaki the Arctic) a thermonuclear bomb that and even the Marine Corps worked weighed 10,300 pounds. The immediate produced an explosion equivalent to to acquire weapons for the “nuclear follow-on bombs were about the same 58 megatons—the largest man-made battlefield,” whether in the air, on the size or smaller. explosion ever achieved. Soviet Premier ground, on water, or underwater. However, the development of ther- Nikita Khrushchev would later write Three of the more unusual—and in monuclear or hydrogen bombs led to in his memoirs: “It was colossal, just the end impractical—of these weapons much larger weapons, with the largest incredible! Our experts later explained were the enormous Mk 17 hydrogen US nuclear weapon being the Mk 17 to me that if you took into account the bomb, the Navy’s drone anti-submarine hydrogen bomb.
    [Show full text]
  • Residual Radioactive Contamination from Decommissioning
    - - - NUREG/CR-55 12 PNL-7994 Vol. 1 Residual Radioactive Contamination From Decommissioning Technical Basis for Translating Contamination Levels to Annual Total Effective Dose Equivalent Final Report Prepared by W. E. Kennedy, Jr., D. L. Strenge Pacific Northwest Laboratory Operated by Battelle Memorial Institute Prepared for I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ---- I I. AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Reference Matenals Cited in NRC Publicabons Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources: 1. The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street. NW., Lower Level. Washington, DC 20555 2. The Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013-7082 3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publications. It Is not Intended to be exhaustive. Referenced documents available for Inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room Include NRC correspondence and Internal NRC memoranda; NRC bulletins, circulars, Information notices. Inspection and investigation notices: licensee event reports: vendor reports and correspondence; Commis- sion papers; and applicant and licensee documents and correspondence. The following documents In the NUREG series are available for purchase from the GPO Sales Program: formal NRC staff and contractor reports. NRC-sponsored conference proceedings. International agreement reports, grant publications, and NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are regulatory guides, NRC regulations In the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances. Documents available from the National Technical Information Service Include NUREG-serles reports and technical reports prepared by other Federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commis- sion.
    [Show full text]