DOCSLIB.ORG

Nevada Test Site – Site Description Effective Date: 05/27/2008 Type of Document TBD Supersedes: Revision 01

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nevada Test Site – Site Description Effective Date: 05/27/2008 Type of Document TBD Supersedes: Revision 01 ORAU TEAM Dose Reconstruction Project for NIOSH Oak Ridge Associated Universities I Dade Moeller & Associates I MJW Corporation Page 1 of 99 Document Title: Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0008-2 Revision: 01 PC-1 Nevada Test Site – Site Description Effective Date: 05/27/2008 Type of Document TBD Supersedes: Revision 01 Subject Expert(s): Eugene M. Rollins Site Expert(s): N/A Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 02/25/2008 Eugene M. Rollins, Document Owner Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 02/25/2008 John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 02/25/2008 Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 03/12/2008 Kate Kimpan, Project Director Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 05/27/2008 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-0008-2 Revision No. 01 PC-1 Effective Date: 05/27/2008 Page 2 of 99 PUBLICATION RECORD EFFECTIVE REVISION DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 02/02/2004 00 New technical basis document for the Nevada Test Site – Site Description. First approved issue with the restriction that states, “Nevada Test Site incidents are to be included in future revisions of the Nevada Test Site Technical Basis Documents.” Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. 10/01/2007 01 Approved Revision 01 initiated as a result of the biennial document review. Constitutes a total rewrite of document. This revision includes expanded details as to activities and project timeframes at the NTS. General information about access control has been added. New attachments include an enumeration of tests by year, type, and location; a description of nuclear rocket and ramjet tests; an evaluation of exposure potential by contractor job title; and a discussion of post-test drilling technology. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Training required: As determined by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. Approval: Signature on File 09/27/2007 Eugene M. Rollins, TBD Team Leader Signature on File 09/28/2007 John M. Byrne, Task 3 Manager Signature on File 09/27/2007 Edward F. Maher, Task 5 Manager Signature on File 09/27/2007 Kate Kimpan, Project Director Brant A. Ulsh Signature on File for 10/01/2007 James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science 05/27/2008 01 PC-1 Approved page change revision to add information to NTS area descriptions on pages 14, 15, 17, and 25 in Sections 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.2.6, and 2.2.25. Added references on pages 52, 53, 54, and 55. Updated references on pages 27, 32, and 51 in Sections 2.2.31, 2.3.1, and 2.4. Changes were made to Table A-2 on page 63 in Attachment A. Added acronyms on pages 7 and 8. Revised legal language on pages 10 and 11 in Section 2.1. Information was added to Attachment B on page 65 and Attachment C on pages 79 and 80. Changes were made to Table C-1 on pages 81, 82, 83, and 84. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review comments. Training required: As determined by the Task Manager. Initiated by Eugene M. Rollins. Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0008-2 Revision No. 01 PC-1 Effective Date: 05/27/2008 Page 3 of 99 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE Acronyms and Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................7 2.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................10 2.1.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 11 2.1.2 Scope ........................................................................................................................... 11 2.2 Site Activities and Facilities .......................................................................................................11 2.2.1 Area 1 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 12 2.2.2 Area 2 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 14 2.2.3 Area 3 Nuclear Test Zone and Radioactive Waste Management Site ......................... 14 2.2.4 Area 4 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 15 2.2.5 Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site and Spill Test Zones ............................. 15 2.2.6 Area 6 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 16 2.2.7 Area 7 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 18 2.2.8 Area 8 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 18 2.2.9 Area 9 Nuclear Test Zone ............................................................................................ 19 2.2.10 Area 10 Nuclear Test Zone .......................................................................................... 19 2.2.11 Area 11 Nuclear Test and Reserved Zone ................................................................... 19 2.2.12 Area 12 Nuclear or HE Test Zone ................................................................................ 20 2.2.13 Area 13 Nellis Test and Training Range Complex ....................................................... 20 2.2.14 Area 14 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 21 2.2.15 Area 15 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 21 2.2.16 Area 16 Nuclear or HE Test Zone ................................................................................ 21 2.2.17 Area 17 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 22 2.2.18 Area 18 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 22 2.2.19 Area 19 Nuclear Test Zone .......................................................................................... 22 2.2.20 Area 20 Nuclear Test Zone .......................................................................................... 22 2.2.21 Area 21 ......................................................................................................................... 23 2.2.22 Area 22 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 23 2.2.23 Area 23 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 23 2.2.24 Area 24 ......................................................................................................................... 23 2.2.25 Area 25 Yucca Mountain Project, Reserved, and Research and Experiment Zones ........................................................................................................ 24 2.2.26 Area 26 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 26 2.2.27 Area 27 Critical Assembly Zone ................................................................................... 26 2.2.28 Area 28 ......................................................................................................................... 27 2.2.29 Area 29 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 27 2.2.30 Area 30 Reserved Zone ............................................................................................... 27 2.2.31 Nellis Test and Training Range .................................................................................... 27 2.3 Site Operations and Processes ................................................................................................27 2.3.1 Atmospheric Weapons Testing .................................................................................... 29 2.3.2 Safety Tests and Contaminated Surface Soils ............................................................. 36 2.3.3 Underground Tests ...................................................................................................... 39 2.3.3.1 Tests in Vertical Drill Holes and Drill Backs .....................................................39 2.3.3.2 Tests in Mined Tunnels and Mine Backs .........................................................41 2.3.3.3 U1a Subcritical Experiments ............................................................................42 2.3.3.4 Shallow Borehole Tests ...................................................................................43 Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0008-2 Revision No. 01 PC-1 Effective Date: 05/27/2008 Page 4 of 99 2.3.3.5 Radioactive Releases from Nuclear Weapons Testing ....................................43 2.3.4 Nuclear Reactor Development Tests ........................................................................... 46 2.3.5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites ........................................................................ 47 2.3.5.1 Crater Disposal – Area 3 ..................................................................................47 2.3.5.2 Shallow Land Burial – Area 5 Low-Level
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marvel Universe by Hasbro
    Brian's Toys MARVEL Buy List Hasbro/ToyBiz Name Quantity Item Buy List Line Manufacturer Year Released Wave UPC you have TOTAL Notes Number Price to sell Last Updated: April 13, 2015 Questions/Concerns/Other Full Name: Address: Delivery Address: W730 State Road 35 Phone: Fountain City, WI 54629 Tel: 608.687.7572 ext: 3 E-mail: Referred By (please fill in) Fax: 608.687.7573 Email: [email protected] Guidelines for Brian’s Toys will require a list of your items if you are interested in receiving a price quote on your collection. It is very important that we Note: Buylist prices on this sheet may change after 30 days have an accurate description of your items so that we can give you an accurate price quote. By following the below format, you will help Selling Your Collection ensure an accurate quote for your collection. As an alternative to this excel form, we have a webapp available for http://buylist.brianstoys.com/lines/Marvel/toys . STEP 1 Please note: Yellow fields are user editable. You are capable of adding contact information above and quantities/notes below. Before we can confirm your quote, we will need to know what items you have to sell. The below list is by Marvel category. Search for each of your items and enter the quantity you want to sell in column I (see red arrow). (A hint for quick searching, press Ctrl + F to bring up excel's search box) The green total column will adjust the total as you enter in your quantities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA)
    The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) August 5, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46476 SUMMARY R46476 The Energy Employees Occupational Illness August 5, 2020 Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) Scott D. Szymendera During the Cold War, thousands of Americans worked in the development and testing of the Analyst in Disability Policy nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile. Some of these workers were exposed to radiation, beryllium, silica, and other toxic substances that may have contributed to various medical conditions, including different types of cancer. Enacted in 2000, the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA, Title XXXVI of P.L. 106-398) provides cash and medical benefits to former nuclear weapons arsenal workers with covered medical conditions and to their survivors. Part B of EEOICPA provides a fixed amount of compensation and medical coverage to Department of Energy (DOE) employees and contractors, atomic weapons employees, and uranium workers with specified medical conditions, including cancer. Workers with certain radiogenic cancers can access EEOICPA Part B through one of two pathways: dose reconstruction and the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC). Under dose reconstruction, the worker’s individual work history and radiation exposure is evaluated to determine the probability that the worker’s cancer was caused by his or her exposure to ionizing radiation. Under the SEC, workers from the same worksite can petition to be included in the SEC based on the site’s work and exposure history. All members of the SEC with covered cancers are eligible for Part B benefits. Approximately 70% of EEOICPA Part B cancer cases are awarded benefits via the SEC rather than dose reconstruction.
    [Show full text]
  • Richard G. Hewlett and Jack M. Holl. Atoms
    ATOMS PEACE WAR Eisenhower and the Atomic Energy Commission Richard G. Hewlett and lack M. Roll With a Foreword by Richard S. Kirkendall and an Essay on Sources by Roger M. Anders University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London Published 1989 by the University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England Prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission; work made for hire. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hewlett, Richard G. Atoms for peace and war, 1953-1961. (California studies in the history of science) Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Nuclear energy—United States—History. 2. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission—History. 3. Eisenhower, Dwight D. (Dwight David), 1890-1969. 4. United States—Politics and government-1953-1961. I. Holl, Jack M. II. Title. III. Series. QC792. 7. H48 1989 333.79'24'0973 88-29578 ISBN 0-520-06018-0 (alk. paper) Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 CONTENTS List of Illustrations vii List of Figures and Tables ix Foreword by Richard S. Kirkendall xi Preface xix Acknowledgements xxvii 1. A Secret Mission 1 2. The Eisenhower Imprint 17 3. The President and the Bomb 34 4. The Oppenheimer Case 73 5. The Political Arena 113 6. Nuclear Weapons: A New Reality 144 7. Nuclear Power for the Marketplace 183 8. Atoms for Peace: Building American Policy 209 9. Pursuit of the Peaceful Atom 238 10. The Seeds of Anxiety 271 11. Safeguards, EURATOM, and the International Agency 305 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Warhead Development, Stockpiling, and Retirement
    DO0 and DOE Aareements The most recent NWSMs include: Warhead Development, - QY 1979-81, approved by carter, 11 January 1978 Stockpiling, and Retirement fPD-26.1 [ru-:J, devlopment, stockpiling, and retirement of specific FY 1983-87, approved by Reagan, 17 March 1982 nuclear warheads This formal process is highly struc- INSDD-71, tured and includes seven distinct phases A number of kY 1983188, appmved by Reagan, I8 Novembe~ agreements between the DOD or DOE specify the respon- 1982 (NSDD-68). sibilities of the two agencies during these seven phases FY 1984-89, aonraved bv Rewan, 16 Februarv -. Two of the most important agreements date from 1953 1984 [NSDD-?I; * and 1983 The 1953 agreement-titled An Agrmment + FY 1985-90, approved by Reagan, mid-Eebmay Between the AEC and lhe LWD for the Development, Pro- 1985 fNSDD-?L and duction and Standardization of Atomic Weapons, and FY 1986-91, a'iproved by Reagan, 4 March 1986 - .. - - - .. dated 21 March 19534ivides responsiblities between the two departments As set forth in this Agreement the DOD is responst- Nuclear Weapons Development Guidance ble for the military characteristim, development priority, Biennially, the Defense Nuclear Agency prepares a suitability, and acceptability of nuclear weapons; cus- Nuclear Weapons Development Guidance [NWDG] doc- tody and maintenance of the stockpile; development and ument in coordination with DOE This states quaIitative pmduction of delivery systems and support equipment requirements for the devekopment of nuclear warheads for nuclear weapons; and the
    [Show full text]
  • Marvel Universe 3.75" Action Figure Checklist
    Marvel Universe 3.75" Action Figure Checklist Series 1 - Fury Files Wave 1 • 001 - Iron Man (Modern Armor) • 002 - Spider-Man (red/blue costume) (Light Paint Variant) • 002 - Spider-Man (red/blue costume) (Dark Paint Variant) • 003 - Silver Surfer • 004 - Punisher • 005 - Black Panther • 006 - Wolverine (X-Force costume) • 007 - Human Torch (Flamed On) • 008 - Daredevil (Light Red Variant) • 008 - Daredevil (Dark Red Variant) • 009 - Iron Man (Stealth Ops) • 010 - Bullseye (Light Paint Variant) • 010 - Bullseye (Dark Paint Variant) • 011 - Human Torch (Light Blue Costume) • 011 - Human Torch (Dark Blue Costume) Wave 2 • 012 - Captain America (Ultimates) • 013 - Hulk (Green) • 014 - Hulk (Grey) • 015 - Green Goblin • 016 - Ronin • 017 - Iron Fist (Yellow Dragon) • 017 - Iron Fist (Black Dragon Variant) Wave 3 • 018 - Black Costume Spider-Man • 019 - The Thing (Light Pants) • 019 - The Thing (Dark Pants) • 020 - Punisher (Modern Costume & New Head Sculpt) • 021 - Iron Man (Classic Armor) • 022 - Ms. Marvel (Modern Costume) • 023 - Ms. Marvel (Classic Red, Carol Danvers) • 023 - Ms. Marvel (Classic Red, Karla Sofen) • 024 - Hand Ninja (Red) Wave 4 • 026 - Union Jack • 027 - Moon Knight • 028 - Red Hulk • 029 - Blade • 030 - Hobgoblin Wave 5 • 025 - Electro • 031 - Guardian • 032 - Spider-man (Red and Blue, right side up) • 032 - Spider-man (Black and Red, upside down Variant) • 033 - Iron man (Red/Silver Centurion) • 034 - Sub-Mariner (Modern) Series 2 - HAMMER Files Wave 6 • 001 - Spider-Man (House of M) • 002 - Wolverine (Xavier School)
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury Bowling Alley Demolition
    MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION NEVADA FIELD OFFICE, AND THE NEVADA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER REGARDING THE DEMOLITION OF THE MERCURY BOWLING ALLEY, NEVADA NATIONAL SECURITY SITE, NEVADA WHEREAS, the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) intends to demolish the Mercury Bowling Alley (Building 23-517) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, as part of its plans for new construction and modernization of Mercury to support the NNSS's changing role in national security; and WHEREAS, the present undertaking consists of the demolition of Building 23-517 (SHPO Resource Number B 14451) that has remained vacant since the mid-i 990s following the end of nuclear testing activities at the NNSS (formerly Nevada Test Site [NTS]). In planning for the undertaking, NNSA/NFO considered all possible alternatives to avoid and minimize adverse effects to historic properties; and WHEREAS, theNNSA/NFO has defined the undertaking's area of potential effect (APE) as a 4.5-acre area in Mercury bounded on the west by the Mercury Highway, on the east by Teapot Street, on the south by Trinity Avenue, and on the north by a prominent terrace immediately south of a parking lot, park, and tennis/basketbatl court (Attachment A); and WHEREAS, the NNSA/NFO recorded and evaluated Building 23-517 (Attachment A) En accordance with the Nevada ArchUectvral Survey and Inventory Guidelines, and has determined that Building 23-517 is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under the Secretary's Significance Criteria A and C at the locai level of historic significance related to the era of nuclear testing; and WHEREAS, the NNSA/NFO has determined that the undertaking will constitute an adverse effect to the historic property Building 23-517, and has consulted with the Nevada Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 C.F.R.
    [Show full text]
  • 3: Containing Underground Nuclear Explosions
    Chapter 3 Containing Underground Nuclear Explosions . CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION . 31 WHAT HAPPENS DURING AN UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR EXPLOSION 32 Microseconds . 32 Milliseconds . +. 32 Tenths of a Second . 32 A Few Seconds . 32 Minutes to Days . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ........ 32 WHY NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS REMAIN CONTAINED ... ...... SELECTING LOCATION, DEPTH, AND SPACING: . 35 REVIEWING A TEST SITE LOCATION . 37 CONTAINMENT EVALUATION PANEL . .38 CONTAINING VERTICAL SHAFT TESTS . 40 CONTAINING HORIZONTAL TUNNEL TESTS . .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... ...... 41 TYPES OF RADIATION RELEASES . 46 Containment Failure: . 46 Late-Time Seep . 46 Controlled Tunnel Purging . 47 Operational Release . 47 RECORD OF CONTAINMENT . 47 Containment Evaluation Panel . 47 Vertical Drill Hole ’lasts . 48 Horizontal Tunnel Tests . 48 From the Perspective of Human Health Risk . 49 A FEW EXAMPLES: . 49 IS THERE A REAL ESTATE PROBLEM AT NTS? . 51 TIRED MOUNTAIN SYNDROME? . 51 HOW SAFE IS SAFE ENOUGH? . 54 Box Page 3-A. Baneberry . 33 Figures Figure Page 3-1. Formation of Stress “Containment Cage” . 35 3-2. Minimum Shot Separation for Drill Hole Tests . 38 3-3. Minimum Shot Separation for Tunnel Tests . 39 3-4. “Typical’’ Stemming Plan . 41 3-5. Three Redundant Containment Vessels . 42 3-6. Vessel I . 43 3-7. Vessel 1 Closures . 44 3-8. Tunnel Closure Sequence . 45 3-9. Typical Post-Shot Configuration . .46 3-10.4Radius of Decrease in Rock Strength . .. .. ... ... ....... 53 Table Page 3-1. Release From Underground Tests . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .......8 48 Chapter 3 Containing Underground Nuclear Explosions Underground nuclear tests are designed and reviewed for containment, with redundancy and conservatism in each step. INTRODUCTION atmospheric testing was conducted in the Christmas Island and Johnston Island area of the Pacific.
    [Show full text]
  • Duck and Cover: How Print Media, the U.S. Government, and Entertainment Culture Formedamerica's Understanding of the Atom
    DUCK AND COVER: HOW PRINT MEDIA, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, AND ENTERTAINMENT CULTURE FORMEDAMERICA’S UNDERSTANDING OF THE ATOM BOMB A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts By Daniel Patrick Wright B.A., University of Cincinnati, 2013 2015 Wright State University WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL May 5, 2015 I HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION BY Daniel Patrick Wright ENTITLED Duck and Cover: How Print Media, the U.S. Government and Entertainment Culture Formed America’s Understanding of the Atom Bomb BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Arts ________________________________ Jonathan Winkler, Thesis Director ________________________________ Carol Herringer, Chair History Department Committee on College of Liberal Arts Final Examination ________________________________ Drew Swanson, Ph.D. ________________________________ Nancy Garner, Ph.D. ________________________________ Robert E. W. Fyffe, Ph.D. Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School ABSTRACT Wright, Daniel Patrick. M.A. Department of History, Wright State University, 2015. Duck and Cover: How Print Media, the U.S. Government and Entertainment Culture Formed America’s Understanding of the Atom Bomb This research project will explore an overview of the different subsections of American post-war society that contributed to the American “atomic reality” in hopes of revealing how and why the American understanding of atomic weapons did not slowly evolve over the course of a generation, but instead materialize rapidly in the years following the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By analyzing government sources and programs, print media sources such as newspapers and magazines, and the American entertainment culture of the 1940s and 1950s, this research project will answer exactly why and how the American public arrived at its understanding of the atom bomb.
    [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]
  • Location, Event&Q
    # from what/ where which how why who for MOBILE versi on click here when who who where when index source "location, event" "phys, pol, med, doc" detail physical detail political name "9/11 Truth Interactive Spreadsheet Click on dow n arrow to sort / filter, click again to undo." Top 100 / compilations entity entity detail country / state date Item .. right-click on li nk to open in new tab 1 "Francis, Stephen NFU" WTC physical Controlled demolition Explosive experts "Overwhelming evidence indicates that a combination of n uclear, thermitic and conventional explosives were used in a controlled demoliti on of the WTC on 9/11. Nanothermite contributed but does not have sufficient det onation velocity to pulverize the WTC into dust. Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is leading gatekeeper trying to deflect Israel's role. See Cozen O'Connor 9/11 lawsuit." pic "9/11 Truth, anti-Zionists" Engineers / Scie ntists "U.S., Israel, SA, Britain" 2 "Francis, Stephen NFU" "WTC, Pentagon, PA" political False flag Cabal "The cabal: U.S., Britain, Saudi Arabia and Israel execu ted the 9/11 false flag attack in order to usher in a new 'war on terror' along with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and fullfil the PNAC's 'Full Spectrum Dominan ce' of the Middle East and its resources ... all have roots that go back to Zion ist / Nazi Germany, the Cold War ... 9/11 was a planned step." lnk Intel ag encies "Cabal: US, UK, Israel & SA" Mossad / Sayeret Matkal "U.S., Israel, S A, Britain" 3 "Fox, Donald" WTC 1-2 physical "Mini Neutron, Fissionless Fusio n" Controlled demolition "VeteransToday: Fox, Kuehn, Prager, Vike n,Ward, Cimono & Fetzer on mini neutron bombs discuss all major WTC theories micr o nuke (neutron) most promising comparatively low blast effects, a quick blast o f radiation that doesn't linger, a series of shape charged mini-neutron bombs we re detonated from top to bottom to simulate a free fall collapse.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Test Site: Desert Annex of TESTS SINCE the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories 1945 Q Denotes “Subcritical” Introduction Test
    Western States Legal Foundation Nevada Desert Experience Information Bulletin Summer 2005 update 1,000+ U.S. NUCLEAR The Nevada Test Site: Desert Annex of TESTS SINCE the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories 1945 q denotes “subcritical” Introduction test Aardvark 1962 Abeytas 1970 The Nevada Test Site (NTS), an immense tract of desert and mountains northwest of Las Abilene 1988 Able 1946 Able 1951 Vegas, is the test range where the United States government set off over 900 nuclear Able 1951 Able 1952 explosions during the Cold War phase of the arms race. For most Americans, the Test Site is Abo 1985 Absinthe 1967 only a symbol of a closed chapter of history, a time of great danger that now is over. Even Ace 1964 Acushi 1963 those who know that the Nevada Test Site still is used for “subcritical” testing of nuclear Adobe 1962 Adze 1968 weapons materials and components underground may think operations largely have been Agile 1967 Agouti 1962 Agrini 1984 suspended, with unused facilities retained only against the eventuality of a return to full scale Ahtanum 1963 Ajax 1966 underground nuclear testing. But the Test Site remains an important part of the nuclear Ajo 1970 Akavi 1981 weapons complex, both a remote site where dangerous activities can be conducted with little Akbar 1972 Alamo 1988 public knowledge and a weapons laboratory unto itself. High risk programs involving nuclear Aleman 1986 Algodones 1971 material, such as nuclear criticality experiments, are slated for transfer to the Test Site, and it Aligote 1981 Aliment 1969 Allegheny 1962 also is being considered as a location for a proposed factory to mass produce plutonium pits, Alma 1962 Almendro 1973 the atomic explosive “triggers”at the core of most nuclear weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Sandia's Weapons Program
    Sandia’s weapons program: Exciting work ahead, but the fiscal environment will be challenging Joan Woodard talks about program’s accomplishments, prospects, budgets, and staffing The Lab News had the opportunity recently to sit three things that are important. First of all, we down with Deputy Labs Director for Nuclear Weapons need to have a stockpile that’s sized appropriately, Joan Woodard to talk about the state of the program. and the president has made his decision about The interview was conducted by John German and where to go with that stockpile and we’re on that Stephanie Holinka. Here’s a transcript of their course to get there by 2012. conversation. The second part of this issue is that the stock- * * * pile needs to be capable of addressing the interna- Lab News: Let’s start with a big question . tional threat environment; it needs to have the What are the strongest arguments today for mainte- right capabilities. The military and DoD will need nance of the existing stockpile as a credible deterrent? to make that determination. As a nation, we talk There’s a national debate on this subject and the about capabilities-based strategy for national secu- outcome of that debate will determine much of the rity and defense; this strategy needs to be applied Labs’ future. in the nuclear deterrent arena. Joan Woodard: Let me first note that I don’t The third part is maintaining the technical think there’s a person at Sandia — and it would strength and competency to understand nuclear probably be hard to find anyone in the nation — weapons physics, weapons design engineering, who wouldn’t welcome a nuclear weapons-free, advanced technology, survivability, surety technol- peaceful world if we could really get there with ogy and systems, etc.
    [Show full text]