Nuclear Weapons Surety

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Nuclear Weapons Surety UNCLASSIFIED Document No: DP-20.1/ 9-21·89 Document Consists of 72 Pages Cy No . ....L, of ..5_ Cys. Series B SEPTEMBER1~ Joint Report by the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Energy :. Nuclear Weapons Surety Annual Report to the President(u.) 1988 NOT FOR PUBLIC DISSEMINATION This document contains information that may be subject to the provisions of Section 148 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USC 2158). Review prior to release is required. CLASSIFIED BY: CG-W-5, Jan 84 ,,.. ·".( ·-y (" • . ·;L'f.- ,- .\,!. .Ji. -~ .... : UNCLASSIFIED F { "THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK." .It - UNCLASSIFIED SEPTEMBER 1989 Joint Report by the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Weapons S~rety Annual Report to the President 1988 Prepared by: The Associate Director for Weapons Program Safety Defense Programs Department of Energy U CLASSIFIED l "THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK." .. SSIFIED JOINT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE/DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ANNUAL REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS SURETY, 1988 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of the President, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Energy (DOE) report annually on the status of nuclear weapons surety. · This report responds to guidance in National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 309 and summarizes surety progress made during 1988 in the areas of: nuclear weapons safety, security, use control; personnel reliability and assurance programs; emergency preparedness and response; and, inspection and evaluation programs. Budget constraints are also discussed. As part of its preparation, this report was reviewed by the Nuclear Weapons Council. There are no significant issues of disagreement between DoD and DOE concerning dual-agency judgments and responsibilities for safety, security, and control of nuclear weapons. The Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) is now a key player in nuclear weapon surety. The NWC considers policy matters and safety rules for nuclear weapon system operations as appropriate prior to Secretary of Defense approval. The NWC considers tradeoffs between safety and improved deterrence acquisition actions in the Nuclear Weapon Stockpile Plan. The Stockpile Improvement Program Review examines those nuclear weapons planned for retention by the Department of Defense. In this process, a review is performed of all deployed weapons, their operating environment, present stockpile improvement efforts, Service retirement plans/replacement programs, and recommendations and suggested priorities for nuclear safety improvements are made. The NWC also recommends the development of new warheads, approves their safety design requirements, and reviews DOE warhead safety development performance. These recommendations are consistent with the fiscally constrained 1999-1994 Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Plan. Nuclear weapon testing is an important aspect of the continuing program to enhance the safety of new warheads. Safety features such as insensitive high explosives, fire-resistant pits to contain plutonium, and electrical safety devices integrated in the nuclear package are basic features of new warheads and improve the safety, security, and reliability (surety) responses in all credible environments. The introduction of these and ---------------·. --··----------- ~UNCLASSIFIED other safety features into the stockpile is only possible if continued underground nuclear testing is permitted to assure proper performance. Significant nuclear surety improvements took place in 1988, including actions to address all concerns identified in the 1987 report. Specifically: Field retrofits have been completed on those B28 and B53 strategic bombs used in SAC ALFA Alert operations. These bombs are now equipped with improved nuclear detonation safety subsystems. However, these retrofits still do not meet modern nuclear design safety criteria. Prior to the retrofit, these bombs had been judged by the DoD/DOE to have unpredictable or undesirable safety behavior in credible abnormal environments. The DoD has restricted nonretrofitted B28s from being used in the high risk environments of ALFA Alert and force generation exercises. All B28 and B53 bombs are scheduled to be retired in the early ' 1990s and replaced with modern weapons (B83 bombs and ACM[EPWJjW61). B6l-7s have replaced all of the B61-ls on ALFA Alert aboard B-52 and B-lB aircraft. Retrofit of remaining B61-l bombs to the B6l-7 with a modern nuclear detonation safety subsystem, insensitive high explosive, and category D PAL continued. Full-scale engineering development was authorized for both the W89 warhead for the .. SRAM II missile and the B90 Nuclear Depth/Strike Bomb. These weapons are replacements for the SRAM A/W69 and the • Navy B57 bomb respectively. Both the W89 and B90 will incorporate modern design safety features including insensitive high explosive, fire-resistant pits, category D PAL devices, and modern electrical nuclear safety subsystems. When deployment begins in 1993, a significant improvement in the nuclear safety of the stockpile will be recognized with the phased removal of the W69 and B57 from the stockpile. ii NCLASSIFIED The DoD and the DOE agreed, that by the year 2000, all u.s. nuclear-capable tactical aircraft will be equipped with cockpit Unique Signal Generation capability. This capability permits the aircraft to fully utilize the nuclear detonation safety features designed into modern weapons in all operations including alert and flight. This capability will be compatible with all B6l-6,8,9 and B90 bombs. Until this capability is achieved, the Navy concept of operation for tactical aircraft will be procedurally constrained. Older tactical B6l bombs (B6l-O, 2, and 5) are planned for upgrade as part of the Stockpile Improvement Program to incorporate modern safety, security, and control features for Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps aircraft applications. These improvements will result in all B61 bombs incorporating insensitive high explosives, modern electrical safety subsystem, command disablement, and Category 0 Permissive Action Link devices as appropriate for overseas deployment. In 1988, the Navy accelerated the retirement of remaining W45 Terrier Missiles and nearly all of the W44 Anti-Submarine Rocket-Thrown Depth Charge (ASROC), with the balance to be retired in FY' 1989. (b) (3) (b) (3) This improvement increases" sacutity, reauee! security manpower, enhances weapon survivability, and improves operational readiness by collocating weapons and delivery _aircraft • . DNA physical security technology is also being applied in laser engagement training tor security forces, detection and assessment systems for mobile weapons, and pier-side;water side detection. iii u· C_ ASSIFIE (b) (3) Recommendations from the joint DoD/DOE Stockpile Improvement Program (SIP) 1988 review meeting and current initiatives responding to each of those recommendations have been reviewed by the NWC. Among these initiatives is the establishment of a 1989 joint DoDjDOE study to investigate additional measures that r could reduce the possibility that weapons without modern nuclear design safety features could be involved in an air transport accident. Technical solutions for the following major nuclear surety concerns have been developed for both new production and stockpile improvement programs and depend on adequate continued funding for completion. The two departments will continue to provide adequate support for stockpile safety modernization of: SRAM II missiles and W89 warheads; B6l, B83, and B90 bombs; ACM(EPW) missiles and W61 warheads; Follow-on-To-LANCE missiles and replacement warheads; and initiatives to lift Artillery-Fired Atomic Projectile (AFAP) production restrictions so that older projectiles can be replaced. Some older weapons designed prior to the mid-1970s do not meet the design criteria for modern nuclear weapons that assure, by themselves, that DoD Safety Standards are met. Both Secretaries will continue to pursue expeditious replacement of these older systems through stockpile modernization and, until that time, will continue to require the addition of restrictive operational rules and procedures to achieve maximum safety consistent with operational requirements. iv ~UNCLASSIFIED TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 I. Introduction .. 5 II. Background . 7 A. Roles and Responsibilities 7 B. Glossary of Acronyms . 7 c. Review of Major Concern from the 1987 surety Report. .... 9 l. B2SFI. 9 2. B53 . ..... ' . I •• 9 3. W69. I • • ' • • • • • • • • • 9 D. 1988 Major Actions, Concerns, and Issues .. 10 1. Guidance Actions .... 10 2. SRAM A/W69 Concern ..... 10 J. Air Transport Issue ... 10 E. Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) . 10 l. Background ...... 10 2. Activities ...... lO r. Nuclear Command and Control. 11 III. Department of Defense Programs . lJ A. Security . .... l3 1. Background . ..... 13 2. Programs . • . 13 3. Management of Physical Security R&D. 22 4. Impact of Budget constraints 22 5. Security Appraisal .... 23 B. Nuclear Safety and Use Control 23 1. Background ....... 23 2. Nuclear Detonation Safety .. , ... 24 3. Radioactive Material Dispersal Safety .. 25 4. Use Control •..... ......... 26 5. Nuclear Weapons System Safety Studies .. 27 6. Safety, Control, and Evaluation Appraisal. 29 UNC ASSIFIED TABLE Of CONTENTS (Continued) c. Personnel Reliability Program .. 30 1. Background ........... 30 2. Progress • . • . 30 3. Appraisal ............. 30 D. DoD Nuclear Weapons Technical Inspection (NWTI) Program
Recommended publications
  • Worksop-Inset.Pdf
    Worksop inset map 258 151 43.3m 3 41.8m 139 74 135 ANSTON AVENUE 64 4 SOUTH VIEW 125 AVENUE HARSTOFT 54 3 LB 214 115 42 PCs 31 22 105 40 Shelter 42.4m 13 Supermarket 36 32 El Sub Sta 22 44.5m 1 12 221 81 246 69 2 103 48.2m 37 57 A N S TO N A V E N U E 54 ED & Ward Bdy 52a B L Y TH G R O V E 45 41 Key 33 45.7m 29 23 CR 2 13 STANLEY STREET STANLEY 35 25 3 234 1a3a 1 11 North Nottinghamshire College Shelter 21 5 21 217 (FE) 12 New Housing (ST18) 33 52 12 43 BLYTH ROAD 53 19 222 JA M E S S TR E E T 215 1 G A TE FO R D R O A D 2 Works CR 220 8 Proposed mixed use (Policy 17) 10 54.3m 14 I Ward Bdy 25 13 SP 6 GP 1a 17 1b 208 Shelter 2 1 Committed Housing 36 3 HOLMEFIELD CLOSE HOLMEFIELD 15 43.0m S H E P H E R D 'S A V E N U E 15 2 13 CR Norbridge Academy 29 196 (Sch) 15 PERCIVAL STREET PERCIVAL 38 New Employment (ST08) 2a 24 2 203 L Twrs W52 13 8 1 3 52.4m 10 186 11 S H E P H E R D 'S A V E N U E 34 Pit 18 Wr Pt 9 Exisiting Employment (ST11) SPs 30 12 174 SP 34a M e rry -g o -ro u n d CR 168 28 Locally important openL Twr space (ST48) W ag o n D ep o t The Chestnuts 50.0m 3 El Sub Sta SP Oak Lodge Playingfield and outdoor sportsSandhole Sidings facility (ST49) TU R N E R R O A D 40.0m 20 1 LB El Sub Sta 185 78 Ward Bdy STREET 18 1b 8 CR 1a 102 183 7 Main Green Corridor (ST41) STANLEY 90 72 MP 0.5 50.6m ED Bdy BANK El Sub Sta BLYTH ROAD Turner Road 18a SUNNY ED Bdy TU R N E R R O A D 64 SP Industrial 51.8m Minor Green Corridor (ST41) Estate 18b 54 Club 47.2m 50 Ward Bdy 48.8m 63 61 53 6 50.9m ED Bdy ED & Ward Bdy Ward & ED 49 SUNNY BANK Bowling
    [Show full text]
  • This Is a Converted File. Please Check Before Making the Next Change
    OEM: When controller is mounted, discard either Table 151 or Table 154 before attaching lower portion of the instruction sheet to your equipment. Table 151 should remain when the controller is mounted in a small enclusure(a volume of 860 cubic inches or less), or in the proximity of heat producing components which have the same effect as a small enclosure. Select Table 154 for use on open panels or in very large enclosures. BULLETIN 520, SIZE 2, 3-PHASE, heater Table 151 element selection table for controllers with Table 154 two Bulletin 592 3-pole overload relays. Heater Full Heater Full Type Load WARNING:To provide continued protec- Type Load No. Amps. tion against fire or shock hazard, the No. Amps. complete overload relay must be replaced W50 8.45 if burnout of any heater element occurs. W50 8.58 W51 9.32 W51 9.48 W52 10.3 W52 10.6 W53 11.3 IMPORTANT: When ordering heater W53 11.7 W54 12.3 elements for this controller, always specify W54 12.8 W55 13.4 the desired “Heater Type No.’ W55 14.1 W56 14.5 W56 15.4 W57 15.8 Motors Rated for Continuous Duty with W57 16.9 W58 16.7 Marked Service Factor Not Less Than 1.15 or W58 18.3 W59 18.1 Marked Temperature Rise Not Over 40°C. W59 19.9 W60 20.0 Select the ”Heater Type No.” with the listed W60 21.9 W61 22.0 “Full Load Amps.” nearest the full load W61 24.2 W62 24.5 current value shown on the motor W62 26.8 W63 27.3 nameplate when the ambient temperature W63 29.6 W64 29.2 at the controller and the motor is the same.
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery World 02/03/2018 TD: Bob Patterson-Sumwalt Participants 155 K12 Participants in Tournaments to Date 17 - 18 1774
    Discovery World 02/03/2018 TD: Bob Patterson-Sumwalt Participants 155 K12 Participants in tournaments to date 17 - 18 1774 No. Name Pts Local Team TBrk1 TBrk2 TBrk3 Rnd1 Rnd2 Rnd3 Rnd4 Rnd5 1 KRAEMER, JOHNATHAN 5.0 1222 PIUSwa 12.0 14.0 15.0 W29 W14 W37 W16 W10 2 CHEN, ALEXANDER 4.5 1354 MEQUON15.5 18.0 14.5 W20 W4 W26 W5 D3 3 NEEB, WILL JR 4.5 1323 GOLDmi 12.5 14.5 14.5 W35 W15 W32 W13 D2 4 NEEB, EMMA 4.0 1153 GOLDmi 14.5 16.5 11.0 W6 L2 W39 W23 W19 5 SURESH, ARJUN 4.0 1155 NORTwa 14.0 16.5 13.0 W11 W25 W23 L2 W14 6 RUPLINGER, AARON 4.0 1222 FRANwe 13.0 14.5 10.0 L4 W18 W45 W22 W17 7 HARWOOD, WILLIAM 4.0 1173 MEQUON12.0 14.5 11.0 W17 L13 W25 W21 W15 8 SCHMIDT, NATHAN 4.0 1123 RIVEmi 12.0 14.5 10.0 L15 W21 W28 W18 W13 9 SHANMUGASUNDARAM, TANYA4.0 1014 NORTme 10.5 12.5 10.0 L13 W27 W38 W32 W16 10 MOLINA, MAXIMUS 3.5 968 UNITmi 14.5 16.0 12.0 W22 D11 W44 W19 L1 11 HANSEN, KEEGAN 3.5 940 GOLDmi 11.5 13.0 8.0 L5 D10 W40 W44 W35 12 PAGEL, CARSON 3.5 921 GOLDmi 10.5 12.0 8.0 L14 D44 W31 W26 W30 13 ORTIZ, DIEGO 3.0 1121 UNITmi 16.5 19.5 12.0 W9 W7 W24 L3 L8 14 MARTINEZ, GUSTAVO 3.0 973 UNITmi 15.5 16.5 10.0 W12 L1 W51 W24 L5 15 ALEXANDER, DELIA 3.0 1008 CARMEN 14.5 15.5 10.0 W8 L3 W50 W33 L7 16 VARELA, JAIRO 3.0 850 UNITmi 14.0 15.0 12.0 W53 W20 W43 L1 L9 17 MORALES, RAFAEL 3.0 948 UNITmi 13.0 15.0 9.0 L7 W28 W27 W43 L6 18 SCHESKE, WILLIAM 3.0 855 GOLDmi 12.0 12.5 9.0 W34 L6 W52 L8 W33 19 SCHOMANN, MADDOX 3.0 800 TEMPsu 11.5 13.5 12.0 W39 W34 W33 L10 L4 20 HARPER, TYRONE 3.0 906 GOLDmi 11.5 13.5 6.0 L2 L16 W41 W34 W32 21 CHAPLIN, CARTER 3.0
    [Show full text]
  • Thierry Moreau
    Compilation and Hardware Support for Approximate Acceleration Thierry Moreau, Adrian Sampson, Andre Baixo, Mark Wyse, Ben Ransford, Jacob Nelson, Hadi Esmaeilzadeh (Georgia Tech), Luis Ceze and Mark Oskin University of Washington [email protected] Theme: 2384.004 1 Thierry Moreau Approximate Computing Aims to exploit application resilience to trade-off quality for efficiency 2 Thierry Moreau Approximate Computing 3 Thierry Moreau Approximate Computing ✅ Accurate ✅ Approximate ❌ Expensive ✅ Cheap 4 Thierry Moreau 5 Thierry Moreau 6 Thierry Moreau 7 Thierry Moreau Neural Networks as Approximate Accelerators CPU Esmaeilzadeh et al. [MICRO 2012] 8 Thierry Moreau Neural Acceleration float foo (float a, float b) { AR F … NPUM P G return val; approximation acceleration } 9 Thierry Moreau Neural Acceleration compiler-support float foo (float a, float b) { AR F … NPUM P G return val; approximation acceleration } ACCEPT* *Sampson et. al [UW-TR] 10 Thierry Moreau Neural Acceleration compiler-support HW-support float foo (float a, float b) { AR F … NPUM P G return val; approximation acceleration } ACCEPT SNNAP* *Moreau et. al [HPCA2015] 11 Thierry Moreau Neural Acceleration compiler-support HW-support float foo (float a, float b) { AR F … NPUM P G return val; approximation acceleration } ACCEPT SNNAP 3.8x speedup and 2.8x efficiency - 10% error 12 Thierry Moreau Talk Outline Introduction Compiler Support with ACCEPT SNNAP Accelerator design Evaluation & Comparison with HLS 13 Thierry Moreau Compilation Overview code 1. Region detection annotation 14 Thierry Moreau Compilation Overview ACCEPT code region detection 1. Region detection & program annotation instrumentation 15 Thierry Moreau Compilation Overview ACCEPT code region detection 1. Region detection & program annotation instrumentation back prop.
    [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]
  • K-12 Individual No. Name Team Gr Rate Pts Tbrk1 Tbrk2 Tbrk3 Tbrk4
    K-12 Individual No. Name Team Gr Rate Pts TBrk1 TBrk2 TBrk3 TBrk4 Rnd1 Rnd2 Rnd3 Rnd4 Rnd5 Rnd6 1 Chakraborty, Dipro 11 2299 5.5 21 24 43 20.5 W27 W12 W5 W32 W8 D3 State Champion, AZ Denker Representative 2 Yim, Tony Sung BASISS 8 2135 5 20.5 23.5 38.5 17.5 W24 W10 D3 D16 W11 W9 3 Aletheia-Zomlefer, Soren CHANPR 11 1961 5 20 23 35.5 18.5 W25 W26 D2 W40 W15 D1 4 Desmarais, Nicholas Eduard NOTRED 10 1917 5 18 20 33 18 W39 W23 W18 L15 W10 W8 5 Wong, Kinsleigh Phillip CFHS 10 1992 4.5 20 20 24.5 15 -X- W17 L1 W26 D7 W15 6 Todd, Bryce BASISC 10 1923 4.5 17 19 26.5 14.5 W38 D18 L9 W23 W21 W16 7 Chaliki, Kalyan DSMTHS 9 1726 4.5 17 18.5 26 15 W46 L16 W28 W22 D5 W17 8 Li, Bohan UHS 9 2048 4 22 25 29 18 W30 W11 W45 W9 L1 L4 9 Mittal, Rohan CFHS 9 1916 4 19.5 20.5 23 17 W47 W22 W6 L8 W20 L2 10 Pennock, Joshua CFHS 10 1682 4 19 22 24 14 W31 L2 W25 W21 L4 W29 11 Aradhyula, Sumhith CFHS 9 1631 4 18 20 22 14 W41 L8 W38 W13 L2 W19 12 Johnston, Nicolas Godfrey CFHS 9 1803 4 18 19.5 21 13 W43 L1 W29 L17 W24 W20 13 Martis, Tyler BRHS 12 1787 4 17 18 21 13 W42 L15 W24 L11 W18 W22 14 Plumb, Justin Rodney GCLACA 10 1700 4 16 17 20 13 W51 L32 W19 L20 W28 W27 15 Martinez, Isaac GLPREP 10 2159 3.5 21.5 24.5 27.5 16 W28 W13 D16 W4 L3 L5 16 Chen, Derek H CFHS 10 1965 3.5 21 23.5 26 15.5 W35 W7 D15 D2 D17 L6 17 Woodson, Tyler GILBHS 1640 3.5 19 19 17.5 14 W50 L5 W30 W12 D16 L7 18 Cancio, Aiya CFHS 9 1469 3.5 18.5 20 17.5 12.5 W36 D6 L4 W46 L13 W25 AZ Girls' Invitational Representative 19 Folden, Kurt CHANPR 10 1207 3 14 18 12 10 L32 W50 L14 W31 W23 L11 20 Thornton,
    [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]
  • Instruction Manual Part 11: Computer Edits for Mortality Data, Including
    ____________________________________________________ Instruction Manual Part 11 ____________________________________________________ Computer Edits for Mortality Data, Including Separate Section for Fetal Deaths Effective 2014 From the CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION/ National Center for Health Statistics ____________________________________________________ Instruction Manual Part 11 ____________________________________________________ Computer Edits for Mortality Data, Including Separate Section for Fetal Deaths Effective 2014 Vital Statistics Data Preparation U.S. DEPARTMENT of HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics Hyattsville, Maryland November, 2014 2 Acknowledgments This instruction manual was prepared by the Division of Vital Statistics (DVS) under the general direction of Robert N. Anderson, Ph.D., Chief of the Mortality Statistics Branch (MSB) and Delton Atkinson, Director of DVS. Arialdi Miniño (MSB) wrote the text and coordinated production of the manual. Donna Glenn (ret.) of Mortality Medical Classification Branch (MMCB), Joyce Bius (ret.), Tanya Pitts (ret.), Julia Raynor (ret.), June Pearce (ret.), and Tyringa Crawford (MSB) provided expertise in creating the valid and invalid ICD-10 codes and the edits. Sherry L. Murphy, Donna L. Hoyert, Robert N. Anderson and Kenneth D. Kochanek provided review of the instruction manual. David Johnson of Information Technology Branch, (ITB) provided review of the demographic edits. Questions regarding this manual and related processing problems should be directed as follows: Demographic Data: Data Acquisition, Classification and Evaluation Branch (formerly MMCB), Division of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, P.O. Box 12214, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 Medical Data: Data Acquisition, Classification and Evaluation Branch (formerly MMCB), Division of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • KA-6D Intruder - 1971
    KA-6D Intruder - 1971 United States Type: Tanker (Air Refueling) Min Speed: 300 kt Max Speed: 570 kt Commissioned: 1971 Length: 16.7 m Wingspan: 16.2 m Height: 4.8 m Crew: 2 Empty Weight: 12070 kg Max Weight: 27500 kg Max Payload: 15870 kg Propulsion: 2x J52-P-409 Weapons / Loadouts: - 300 USG Drop Tank - Drop Tank. OVERVIEW: The Grumman A-6 Intruder was an American, twin jet-engine, mid-wing all-weather attack aircraft built by Grumman Aerospace. In service with the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps between 1963 and 1997, the Intruder was designed as an all-weather medium attack aircraft to replace the piston-engined Douglas A-1 Skyraider. As the A-6E was slated for retirement, its precision strike mission was taken over by the Grumman F-14 Tomcat equipped with a LANTIRN pod. From the A-6, a specialized electronic warfare derivative, the EA-6 was developed. DETAILS: The A-6's design team was led by Lawrence Mead, Jr. He later played a lead role in the design of the Grumman F-14 Tomcat and the Lunar Excursion Module. The jet nozzles were originally designed to swivel downwards for shorter takeoffs and landings. This feature was initially included on prototype aircraft, but was removed from the design during flight testing. The cockpit used an unusual double pane windscreen and side-by-side seating arrangement in which the pilot sat in the left seat, while the bombardier/navigator sat to the right and slightly below. The incorporation of an additional crew member with separate responsibilities, along with a unique cathode ray tube (CRT) display that provided a synthetic display of terrain ahead, enabled low-level attack in all weather conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • L-Reactor Operation Savannah River Plant
    DOE/EIS-0108 Volume 3 of 3 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT L-Reactor Operation Savannah River Plant Aiken, S.C. Volume 3 May 1984 U.S. Department of Energy APPENDIX M COMMENTS AND DOE RESPONSES ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT L-REACTOR OPERATION During the 45-day public comment period from October 1 through November 14, 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) received 140 comment letters and statements on the draft version of this environmental impact statement (EIS) . In addition, four comment letters were received after November 14, 1983. Of the total of 144 letters afld statements, 7 were from Federal agencies and 7 were from agencies and off ices of the States of Georgia and South Carolina. Forty- eight statements were presented at public meetings conducted by DOE at Augusta and Savannah, Georgia, and at Aiken and Beau fort, South Carolina, during the week of October 31, 1983. DOE has prepared a public comment/hearing report (DOE /SR - 5009) that includes transcripts of these public meetings, written statements received at the meetings , and all comment letters received by DOE through the mail . This report has been placed in the DOE public documents rooms in Washington, D.C. , and Aiken, South Carolina, and 19 local libraries in South Carolina and Georgia. This appendix presents the individual comment letters and statements and DOE’ s responses to them. If a comment or statement has led to a revision to the text of this EIS, the revision is identified by a vertical line in the margin and a comment letter-number designation.
    [Show full text]
  • Iow Imtx Dpa Ndv Eab Eon Rbs Mzv Bdf Mzv Imdw
    (MDWAY6.MDW) 08157 CHICAGO MIDWAY INTL (MDW) MIDWAY SIX DEPARTURE SL-81 (FAA) CHICAGO, ILLINOIS ATIS TAKEOFF MINIMUMS: BADGER 132.75 PETTY 116.4 BAE B Rwys 4L/R, 13C/L, A N42 49.64' CLNC DEL E Chan 111 W87 38.04' 121.85 22L/R, 31C/R, STANDARD. L-28 GND CON Rwys 13R, 31L, NA, ATC. N43^ 07.01' - W88^17.06' 121.65 L-28, H-5 GIPPER MIDWAY TOWER SIMMN DUPAGE 115.4 GIJ G 118.7 226.3 N41 58.84' JI MIDWAY DEP CON W88 52.71' 108.4 DPA APD Chan 101 118.4 388.0 L-28 Chan 21 N41^ 46.12' - W86^ 19.11' N41^ 53.42' - W88^ 21.01' POLO L-28, H-5-10 L-28 LEWKE 111.2 PLL M VZ N41^ 45.72' Chan 49 W87^ 03.80' R-096 N41^ 57.94' 1500 L-28 W89^ 31.45' 315^ 100 L-28 2400 LOCALIZER 109.9 I-MXT IM TX LOCALIZER 109.9 Chan 36 IOWA CITY I-MDW DMI 116.2 IOW I W WO Chan 36 Chan 109 NOTE: Radar required. 135^ N41^ 31.14' NOTE: Chart not to scale. W91^ 36.80' 224^ EC-3, 03 JUL 2008 to 31 L-28, H-5 1400 1300 4 D M E EARND N41^ 25.52' W87^ 34.33' DENNT MOLINE L-28, H-5 N41^ 25.15' 114.4 MZV ZM V CMSKY W87^ 43.48' Chan 91 BACEN N41^ 19.26' N41^ 24.78' L-28, H-5 ACITO N41^ 24.40' W90^ 38.28' W87^ 52.63' N41^23.92' W88^ 01.78' L-27, H-5 L-28, H-5 W88^11.0' L-28, H-5 PEOTONE L-28, H-5 113.2 EON NEO Chan 79 N41^ 16.18' - W87^ 47.46' NEWTT L-28 N41 03.54' BRADFORD W88 04.60' DANVILLE 114.7 BDF B ROBERTS L-27 111.0 DNV D FD N EC-3, 03 JUL 2008 to 31 Chan 94 V 116.8 RBS R Chan 47 B GUIDO N41^ 09.58' S Chan 115 N40^ 17.42' N40 17.63' W89^ 35.27' N40^ 34.90' - W88^ 09.86' W87^ 51.81' W87 33.43' L-27, H-5 L-27, H-5 H-5 L-27, H-5 T DEPARTURE ROUTE DESCRIPTION TAKE-OFF RWYS 4L/R: Northbound departures assigned headings 360^ (CW) thru 080^, Climbing right turn to 2400 heading 100^ before proceeding on course, thence.
    [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]