DOCSLIB.ORG

Operation Ivy, Report of Commander, Task

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MARSHALL ISLANDS FILE TRACKING DOCUMENT Record Number: /YJ Document Number (ID): DATE: i ‘!/4.5--e Previous Location (FROM): Q cc Addditional Information: OrMIbox: CyMIbox: WT-608 (EX) EXTRACTED VERSION OPERATIONIVY REPORT OF COMMANDER, TASK GROUP 132.1 Pacific Proving Grounds Joint Task Force 132 November 1952 NOTICE This is an extract of WT-608, which remains classified SECRET/RESTRICTED DATA as of this date. Extract version prepared for: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. Director DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY Washington, D. C. 20305 31 October 1984 OPERATLON IVY, REPORT OF COMMANDER, TASK GROUP 132.1 a* lI(I~OIYIWOOI8.acCOat*~~~~* WT.608 (EX) * MJTnowJ 0. COt@Ta*Ct on ea*t,T yuY@(yaJ Stanley W. Burriss . •RWO(II~I~O O~CANIZATION MAUL Am0 AOO*CSS lo. PROGRAM LLLmtMT. lROltCT. TAM ARCA A WRU WIT nur@ER~ Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Los Alamos, New Mexico 1.CO(~TLIOLLI)IO OIIICL MAW AI@0 AOOI(LSt 1% I)WOlT OATl Approved for public release; unlimited distribution. S. SUCPLtYfMTARY MOTES This report has had the classified information removed and has been republished in unclassified form for public release. This work was performed by Kaman Tempo under contract DNAOOl-83-C-0286 with the close cooperation Of the Classification Management Division of the Defense NuclearAgency. I. ICY wonos (Cus,knn on t.vu,o aids II rorobr~ md rdmttr* by UOCb ntmbw Operation IVY D.AmSTRACt (CaWmv8 m rowuao #4d# iI me--V ti I-ldb c bbek -J The mission of the Task Group included the responsibilities to conduct experimental measurement programs on Shots Mike and King and to conduct the radiological safety program. Programs were established to make radiochemical analysis of bomb debris; to follow _theprogress of the nuclear reaction; to make neutron, gamma ray, blast. thermal radiation, and electromagnetic measurements; and to make a prellmlnarY geophysical and marine survey of the test area. The organizational structure and command relations to accomplish the mission are outlined. 00 ,:rn 1473 COITIOY OI fi MOV SS IS O~SOLCTL UNCLASSIFIED 'FOREWORD This report has had classified material removed in order to make the information available on an unclassified, open publicationbasis, to any interested parties. This effort to declassify this report has been accomplished specifically to support the Department of Defense Nuclear Test Personnel Review (NTPR) Program. The objective is to facilitate studies of the low levels of radiation received by some individuals during the atmosphericnuclear test program by making as much information as possible available to all interested parties. The material which has been deleted is all currently classifiedas Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data under the provision of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, (as amended) or is National Security Information. This report has been reproduced directly from available copies of the original material. The locations from which material has been deleted is generally obvious by the spacings and "holes" in the text. Thus the context of the material deleted is identiffed to assist the reader in the determination of whether the deleted information is germane to his study. It is the belief of the individualswho have participated in preparing this report by deleting the classified material and of the Defense Nuclear Agency that the report accurately portrays the contents of the original and that the deleted material fs of little or no significance to studies into the amounts or types of radiation received by any individuals during the atmospheric nuclear test program. CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 DEVICES TESTED . 7 1.1 Mike Device . 7 1.1.1 Objective of Detohation . 7 1.1.2 General Deecrlption . 7 1.1.3 Critical Materials . 7 1.1.4 Yield . * . 7 1.1.5 Remarka . 8 1.2 King Weapon . 8 1.2.1 Objective of Detonation . 8 1.2.2 General Description . 8 1.2.3 Critical Materials . 8 1.2.4 Operation . 8 1.3.5 Yield . 8 1.2.6 Remarks . 8 CHAPTER2 SUMMABY OF EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM8 . t 9 2.1 Program 1, Radiochemistry . 9 a.2 Program a, Progrers of the Nuclek Reaction . 9 a.3 Program 3, Scientific Photography . 10 2.4 Program 4, Neutron Measurement8 . 10 2.5 Program 5, Gamma-ray Meaeurementr . 10 2.6 Program 6, Blast Measurements . 11 2.7 Program 7, Long-range Detection . 12 2.8 Program 8, Thermal-radiauon Melaurementrr . 12 2.9 Program 9, Electromagnetic Phenomena . 13 2.10 Program 10, Timing and Firing . 13 2.11 Program 11, Preliminary Geophysical ud Marine Survey of the TeatArea . 14 CHAPTER 3 GENERAL ACTIVITIES OF TASK GROUP 133.1 . 15 3.1 Mirrion . 15 3.2 Organization and Command Rblationr . 15 3.3 The Advisory Group . 19 3.4 PlanningandTraining . 19 3.4.1 Device Planning . 19 3.4.2 Basic Requirement8 . 20 3.4.3 Experimental Program8 . 21 3.4.4 Determination and Support of Project Requirement8 . l . 21 . 21 3.4.5, Training . l 3 CONTENTS (Continued) Page 3.5 Movement to the Forward Area and Assembly of Subordinate Units . 22 3.5.1 Personnel . 22 3.5.2 Equipment . 23 3.8 Movement of Devices and Components. 28 3.7 On-site Operations and Rehearsals . 28 3.7.1 General . 28 3.7.2 Construction . 28 3.7.3 Xntra-atoll Airlift Service . 27 3.7.4 Motor Vehicle Transportation . 29 3.7.5 Intra-atoll Boat Service . l 29 3.7.8 Off-atoll Activities . 30 3.8 Shot Phase Evacuation . 32 3.8.1 Mike Shot . 32 3.8.2 King Shot . 34 3.8 Operations Moat . 34 3.10 Sample Return . 34 3.11 Recovery Operations . 35 3.12 Postshot Re-entry . 38 3.12.1 Mike Shot . 38 3.12.2 Ring Shot . - . * . 57 3.13 Documentary Photography . 37 3.14 Radiological Safety . 39 3.14.1 Early History . 39 3.14.2 Orientation and Training of Task Unit 7 Personnel . 40 3.14.3 Organization and Activities of Task Unit 7 . 40 3.14.4 General Comments . 43 3.15 Classification Activities . 43 3.18 security . 45 3.17 Communications . 48 3.17.1 Mission . 48 3.17.2 Organization . 48 3.17.3 Preliminary Planning . 47 3.17.4 On-site Operations and Rehearsals . 47 3.17.5 Control Station Communications . 47 3.18 Disposition of Forces (Roll-up) . 48 3.18.1 General . 48 3.18.2 Phase-out of Personnel . 49 3.18.3 Property Roil-up . 49 3.18.4 Headquarters Roll-up . 50 3.19 Conclusions and Recommendations . 50 3.19.1 J-l Section, Personnel and Administration . 50 3i19.2 J-2 Section, Security . 51 3.19.3 J33 Section, Plans and Operations . 51 3.19.4 J-4 Section, Logistics . 53 3.19.5 Documentary Photography . 53 3.19.8 Shot Island and Off-atoll Organization . 53 4 CONTENTS (Continued) . Page CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY OF TASK UNITACTMTIES . 55 4.1 Task Unit 1, Scientific Programs . 55 4.2 Task Unit 2, Production . 55 4.3 Task Unit 3, Special Materials Facilities (Cambridge Corp.) . 56 4.4 Task Unit 4, Mike Assembly . , . l 57 4.5 Task Unit 5, King Assembly . 58 4.6 Task Unit 6, Firing Party . 58 4.7 Task Unit 7, Radiological Safety . 59 4.8 Task Unit 8, Technical Photography . * . 59 4.9 Task Unit 9, Documentary Photography . 59 4.10 Task Unit 10, Test Facilities ...... 59 4.11 Task Unit 11, Base Facilities ...... 59 ILLUSTRATIONS CRAPTER 3 GENERAL ACTIVITIES OF TASK GROUP 132.1 3.1 Organization Chart of Task Group 132.1 . 7 3.2 Relation of Task Group 132.1 to Higher Headquarters . ! a 3.3 Weekly Average of Task Group Personnel in Forward &ei . 24 rABLE CHAPTER 3 GENERAL ACTIVITIES OF TASK GROUP 132.1 3.1 Radiation Levels, from Aerial and Ground Surveys, in Milliroentgens per Hour . 41 5-d CHAPTER 1 DEVICES TESTED 1.1 MIXE DEVICE 1.1.1 Objective of Detonation The objective of Mike Shot was to test, by actual detonation, the theory of design for a thermonuclear reaction on a large scale, the results of which test could be used to design, test, and produce stockpile thermonuclear weapons. 1.1.4 Yield In order to be assured that a thermonuclear reaction progressed to a desired magnitude, the Mike device was essentially overdesigned. The yield of this device is considered to be within the range of 8 to 12 Mt. A better yield figure is not available at the date of writing, pending a more complete analysir of test data.*7 @Application of the LASL analytic solution method to the EGbG photographic data has re- sulted in the. following as the fireball yield figure aa of May 15, 1953: Mike, 11 f 1 Mt; King, 550 f 20 Lt. Wee note on p. 14. 7 P 1.1.5 Remarks It is desirable to point out that the thermonuclear device tested was not a weapon. All be diagnostic experiments were designed to measure certain specific reactions in an effort to confirm the predictions of theories that went into the design of this device. This type of ther- monuclear device may be adaptable to a major redesign for weapon purposes. It is believed that the over-all size and weight can be reduced and that the cryogenics system can be sim- plified to make a usable weapon. It is hoped that a new design will be ready for overseas tests in the spring of 1954. 1.2 MNG WEAPON 1.2.1 Objective of Detonation The objective of King Shot was to Data on the field variables leading to consideration of weapon effects in this yield range were also desired.
Recommended publications
  • Congressional Record—Senate S652

    Congressional Record—Senate S652

    S652 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 30, 2014 the Senate by Mr. Pate, one of his sec- Whereas, on October 31, 1952, Operation Ivy Guam, separated by a scant 30 miles, and retaries. was conducted on Elugelab Island (‘‘Flora’’) both are affected by the same win, weather in the Enewetak Atoll, in which the first and ocean current patterns, it logically fol- f true thermonuclear hydrogen bomb (a 10.4 lows that radiation which affects the Terri- EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED megaton device) code name Mike was deto- tory of Guam necessarily affects the Com- nated, destroying the entire island leaving monwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; As in executive session the Presiding behind a 6,240 feet across and 164 feet deep and Officer laid before the Senate messages crater in its aftermath; and Whereas, as a result, the Nuclear and Radi- from the President of the United Whereas, in 90 seconds the mushroom cloud ation Studies Board (‘‘NSRB’’) published in States submitting sundry nominations climbed to 57,000 feet into the atmosphere 2005 its report entitled ‘‘Assessment of the and two withdrawals which were re- and within 30 minutes had stretched 60 miles Scientific information for the Radiation Ex- in diameter with the base of the mushroom posure Screening and Education Program’’; ferred to the appropriate committees. head joining the stem of 45,000 feet; and and (The messages received today are Whereas, radioactive fallout is the after ef- Whereas, because fallout may have been printed at the end of the Senate pro- fect of the detonation
  • Congressional Record—Senate S652

    Congressional Record—Senate S652

    S652 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 30, 2014 the Senate by Mr. Pate, one of his sec- Whereas, on October 31, 1952, Operation Ivy Guam, separated by a scant 30 miles, and retaries. was conducted on Elugelab Island (‘‘Flora’’) both are affected by the same win, weather in the Enewetak Atoll, in which the first and ocean current patterns, it logically fol- f true thermonuclear hydrogen bomb (a 10.4 lows that radiation which affects the Terri- EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED megaton device) code name Mike was deto- tory of Guam necessarily affects the Com- nated, destroying the entire island leaving monwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; As in executive session the Presiding behind a 6,240 feet across and 164 feet deep and Officer laid before the Senate messages crater in its aftermath; and Whereas, as a result, the Nuclear and Radi- from the President of the United Whereas, in 90 seconds the mushroom cloud ation Studies Board (‘‘NSRB’’) published in States submitting sundry nominations climbed to 57,000 feet into the atmosphere 2005 its report entitled ‘‘Assessment of the and two withdrawals which were re- and within 30 minutes had stretched 60 miles Scientific information for the Radiation Ex- in diameter with the base of the mushroom posure Screening and Education Program’’; ferred to the appropriate committees. head joining the stem of 45,000 feet; and and (The messages received today are Whereas, radioactive fallout is the after ef- Whereas, because fallout may have been printed at the end of the Senate pro- fect of the detonation
  • The Newsletter for America's Atomic Veterans

    The Newsletter for America's Atomic Veterans

    United States Atmospheric & Underwater Atomic Weapon Activities National Association of Atomic Veterans, Inc. 1945 “TRINITY“ “Assisting America’s Atomic Veterans Since 1979” ALAMOGORDO, N. M. Website: www.naav.com E-mail: [email protected] 1945 “LITTLE BOY“ HIROSHIMA, JAPAN R. J. RITTER - Editor July, 2011 1945 “FAT MAN“ NAGASAKI, JAPAN 1946 “CROSSROADS“ BIKINI ISLAND 1948 “SANDSTONE“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1951 “RANGER“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1951 “GREENHOUSE“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1951 “BUSTER – JANGLE“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1952 “TUMBLER - SNAPPER“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1952 “IVY“ ENEWETAK ATOLL 1953 “UPSHOT - KNOTHOLE“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1954 “CASTLE“ BIKINI ISLAND 1955 “TEAPOT“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1955 “WIGWAM“ OFFSHORE SAN DIEGO 1955 “PROJECT 56“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1956 “REDWING“ ENEWETAK & BIKINI 1957 “PLUMBOB“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1958 “HARDTACK-I“ ENEWETAK & BIKINI 1958 “NEWSREEL“ JOHNSON ISLAND 1958 “ARGUS“ SOUTH ATLANTIC 1958 “HARDTACK-II“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1961 “NOUGAT“ NEVADA TEST SITE 1962 “DOMINIC-I“ CHRISTMAS ISLAND JOHNSON ISLAND 1965 “FLINTLOCK“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1969 “MANDREL“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1971 “GROMMET“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA 1974 “POST TEST EVENTS“ AMCHITKA, ALASKA ------------ “ IF YOU WERE THERE, THE 1957 LAS VEGAS “MISS-NUKE” CONTEST WINNER YOU ARE AN ATOMIC VETERAN “ The Newsletter for America’s Atomic Veterans COMMANDER’S COMMENTS We will gather in Richmond, Va., on October 01, 2011 to celebrate 31 years of service to A. H. Bolin ( MN ) G. M. Everett ( MS ) honor the service and sacrifices of more Don McFarland ( WA ) W. J. Mitchell ( WA ) than 500,000 Atomic-Veterans, the majority J. C. Phillips ( AL ) M. A. Morriss ( VA ) of whom are now deceased, having carried G. D. Sherman ( ND ) R.
  • The United States Nuclear Weapon Program: A

    The United States Nuclear Weapon Program: A

    DOE/ES-0005 (Draft) 67521 wees ce eee ee ee THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR WEAPON PROGRAM: | A SUMMARYHISTORY '<) March 1983 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Management and Administration Office of The Executive Secretariat History Division DOE/ES-0005 (Draft) THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR | WEAPON PROGRAM: A SUMMARY HISTORY © | « By: Roger M. Anders Archivist With: Jack M. Holl Alice L. Buck Prentice C. Dean March 1983 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Management and Administration Office of The Executive Secretariat History Division Washington, D.C. 20585 The Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977 brought together for the first time in one department most of the Federal Government's energy programs. With these programs came a score of organizational entities, each with its owm history and traditions, from a dozen depart- ‘ments and independent agencies. The History Division has prepared a series of pamphlets on The Institutional Origins of the Department of Energy. Each pamphlet explains the history, goals, and achievements of @ predecessor agency or a major program of the Department of Energy. This pamphlet, which replaces Roger M. Anders' previous booklet cn "The Office of Military Application," traces the history of the United States nuclear weapon program from its inception during World War II to the present. Nuclear weapons form the core of America's modern defenses. anders! history describes the truly formidable efforts of «ne Atomic Energy Commission, the Energy Research and Develogment Administration, and the Departmr to create a diverse anc sophisticated arsenal of nuclear 2 accomplishments of these agencies and their plants and lak : created an “atomic shieic" which protects America today.
  • Nuclear Fallout and Intelligence As Secrets, Problems, and Limitations on the Arms Race, 1940-1964

    Nuclear Fallout and Intelligence As Secrets, Problems, and Limitations on the Arms Race, 1940-1964

    © Copyright 2016 Michael R. Lehman NUISANCE TO NEMESIS: NUCLEAR FALLOUT AND INTELLIGENCE AS SECRETS, PROBLEMS, AND LIMITATIONS ON THE ARMS RACE, 1940-1964 BY MICHAEL R. LEHMAN DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2016 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Lillian Hoddeson, Chair Professor Kristin Hoganson, Co-Chair Professor Michael Weissman Professor Robert Jacobs, Hiroshima City University Abstract Fallout sampling and other nuclear intelligence techniques were the most important sources of United States strategic intelligence in the early Cold War. Operated as the Atomic Energy Detection System by a covert Air Force unit known as AFOAT-1, the AEDS detected emissions and analyzed fallout from Soviet nuclear tests, as well as provided quantitative intelligence on the size of the Russian nuclear stockpile. Virtually unknown because the only greater Cold War secret than nuclear weapons was intelligence gathered about them, data on the Soviet threat produced by AFOAT-1 was an extraordinary influence on early National Intelligence Estimates, the rapid growth of the Strategic Air Command, and strategic war plans. Official guidance beginning with the first nuclear test in 1945 otherwise suggested fallout was an insignificant effect of nuclear weapons. Following AFOAT-1’s detection of Soviet testing in fall 1949 and against the cautions raised about the problematic nature of higher yield weapons by the General Advisory Committee, the Atomic Energy Commission’s top scientific advisers, President Harry Truman ordered the AEC to quickly build these extraordinarily powerful weapons, testing the first in secrecy in November 1952.
  • The Isotopic Signature of Fallout North Pacific Plutonium In

    The Isotopic Signature of Fallout North Pacific Plutonium In

    J. Environ. Radioactivity, Vol. 36, No. I, pp. 69-83, 1997 0 1997 Elsevier Science LImited All rights reserved. Printed in Ireland PII: SO265-931X(96)00071-9 0265-931X/97 $17.00 + 0.00 ELSEVIER The Isotopic Signature of Fallout Plutonium in the North Pacific Ken 0. Buesseler Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA (Received 27 June 1996; accepted 15 August 1996) ABSTRACT Plutonium analyses of a dated coral record from the French Frigate Shoals in the central North Pacific indicate that there are two major sources of PM in this basin: close-in (troposphertc) fallout from nuclear weapons testing at the Pact& Proving Grounds in the Marshall Islands in the 1950s and global (stratospheric) fallout which peaked in 1962. Furthermore, the 240Pu/239Pu atom ratio of fallout ,from the Pacific Proving Grounds is characteristically higher (0.24) than that of global jhllout Pu (O.l8+I9). Seawater and sediment samples from the North Pacific exhibit a wide range of “40Pu/239Pu values (0.19-+34), with a trend towards higher ratios in the subsurface waters and sediment. Deep water 240Pul”39Pu ratios are higher in the vicinity of the Marshall Islands relative to stations further from this close-in fallout source. These preli- minary data suggest that fallout Pu from the Pacific Proving Grounds is more rapidly removed from the surface waters than is global fallout Pu. Plutonium geochemistry appears to be related to the physical/chemical form of PM-bearing particles generated by dtfferent ,fallout sources. (‘ 1997 Elsevier Science Limited. INTRODUCTION The input of fallout plutonium (Pu) from atmospheric nuclear weapons testing is the largest source of Pu to the environment, including the oceans (Harley, 1980; Perkins & Thomas, 1980).
  • Castle Bravo

    Castle Bravo

    Defense Threat Reduction Agency Defense Threat Reduction Information Analysis Center 1680 Texas Street SE Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-5669 DTRIAC SR-12-001 CASTLE BRAVO: FIFTY YEARS OF LEGEND AND LORE A Guide to Off-Site Radiation Exposures January 2013 Distribution A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Trade Names Statement: The use of trade names in this document does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial hardware or software. This document may not be cited for purposes of advertisement. REPORT Authored by: Thomas Kunkle Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico and Byron Ristvet Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Albuquerque, New Mexico SPECIAL Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2.
  • RCED-96-7W Energy and Science

    RCED-96-7W Energy and Science

    United States General Accounting Office Resources, Community, and Economic GAO Development Division December 1995 Energy and Science: Five-Year Bibliography 1990-1994 GAO/RCED-96-7W Preface The General Accounting Office (GAO), an arm of the Congress, was established to provide independent oversight of federal programs and activities. GAO’s Energy and Science Issue Area examines the activities of such entities as the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the Patent and Trademark Office. The Issue Area’s work generally focuses on examining the role and continued need for a federal presence in these areas, exposing incidences of waste and mismanagement, and promoting a smaller, more efficient, and cost-effective government. Organized by our four primary areas of responsibility, this 5-year bibliography lists the energy- and science-related products issued from January 1990 through December 1994. The products are listed chronologically, with the most recent reports first. To help you locate individual reports, a subject index is included in the back of this document. Questions can be directed to me at the U.S. General Accounting Office, Room 1842, 441 G Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20548. I can also be reached on (202) 512-3841 or on the Internet at [email protected]. Readers interested in ordering documents or in requesting bibliographic searches on a specific topic should call the Document Handling and Information Service at (202) 512-6000 or fax a request to (301) 258-4066.
  • Marshall Islands Chronology: 1944-1981

    Marshall Islands Chronology: 1944-1981

    b , KARSHALL ISLANDS CHRONOLOGY - ERRATUM SHEET Page 12. column 1 and 2. “1955 - March 9 United Xations. .‘I and “May Enewetak . .” This should read. L956 - IMarch 9 United Nations..,“and IMay Enewetak .--*‘ Marshal ACHRONOLOGY: 1944-1981 LISRARY - ~ASHINCTGN, D.C. 2054-5 MICRONESIA SUPPORT COMlITTEE Honolulu, Hawalt F- ‘ifm ti R.EAD TICS ~RO?OLOGY: Weapons Testim--even numbered left hand pages 4-34; destruction of island home- Lands and radioactive wntamination of people, land and food sources. Resettlement of People--odd numbered right hand pages 5-39; the struggle to survive in exile. There is some necessary overlap for clarity; a list of sources used concludes the Chronology on pages 36 and 38. BIKINI ATOLL IN 1946, PRIOR TO THE START OF THE NUCLEAR TESTS. 1st edition publishe'dJuly 1978 2nd edition published August 1981 “?aRTlEGooDoFM ANKlND..~ Marshall Islands people have borne the brunt of U.S. military activity in Micronesia, from nuclear weapons experiments and missile testing to relocations of people and radio- active contamination of people and their environment. All, as an American military com- mder said of the Bikini teats, “for the good of mankind and to end all world wars.” Of eleven United Nations Trusteeships created after World War II, only Micronesia was designated a “strategic” trust, reflecting its military importance to the United States. Ihe U.N. agreement haa allowed the U.S. to use the islands for military purposes, while binding the U.S. to advance the well being of the people of Micronesia. Western nuclear powers have looked on the Pacific, because of its small isolated popu- lations, aa an “ideal” location to conduct nuclear activities unwanted In their own countries.
  • Review of the Summary Site Profile for the Pacific Proving Grounds

    Review of the Summary Site Profile for the Pacific Proving Grounds

    Draft ADVISORY BOARD ON RADIATION AND WORKER HEALTH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health REVIEW OF THE SUMMARY SITE PROFILE FOR THE PACIFIC PROVING GROUNDS Contract No. 200-2009-28555 SCA-TR-SP2013-0040, Revision 1 Prepared by U. Hans Behling, PhD, CHP S. Cohen & Associates 1608 Spring Hill Road, Suite 400 Vienna, VA 22182 November 2013 Disclaimer This document is made available in accordance with the unanimous desire of the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH) to maintain all possible openness in its deliberations. However, the ABRWH and its contractor, SC&A, caution the reader that at the time of its release, this report is pre- decisional and has not been reviewed by the Board for factual accuracy or applicability within the requirements of 42CFR82. This implies that once reviewed by the ABRWH, the Board’s position may differ from the report’s conclusions. Thus, the reader should be cautioned that this report is for information only and that premature interpretations regarding its conclusions are unwarranted. Effective Date: Revision No. Document No. Page No. November 5, 2013 1 (Draft) SCA-TR-SP2013-0040 2 of 65 Document No. S. COHEN & ASSOCIATES: SCA-TR-SP2013-0040 Technical Support for the Advisory Board on Effective Date: Radiation & Worker Health Review of Draft – November 5, 2013 NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Program Revision No. 1 Review of the Summary Site Profile for the Pacific Page 2 of 65 Proving Grounds Supersedes: Task Manager: Rev. 0 (Draft) __________________________ Date:____________ U. Hans Behling, PhD, MPH Project Manager: Peer Reviewer(s): John Mauro John Stiver __________________________ Date:____________ John Stiver, CHP Record of Revisions Revision Effective Description of Revision Number Date 0 (Draft) 10/21/2013 Initial issue 1 (Draft) 11/05/2013 Revised Finding 1.
  • Bikini Atoll.Pages

    Bikini Atoll.Pages

    Bikini Atoll Itinerary The following is a sample itinerary of dive sites and wrecks we may visit during your liveaboard safari with Master Liveaboards in Bikini Atoll. We wish to show you the very best diving possible but a number of factors can determine where we visit. Weather, tides, currents and other factors play a part in the Cruise Director’s decision of which route the yacht takes. Whilst we attempt to ensure the number of dives we have scheduled is fulfilled, bad weather can hinder the yacht’s ability to reach a specified dive site in good time. The safety of all on board is paramount and we always do our best in offering diving at alternate locations should we be unable to visit those sites listed below. As most wrecks at Bikini Atoll are beyond recreational depth limits, this itinerary is recommended only for technical divers with previous wreck experience. Your Cruise Director will schedule 2 dives per day. The diving day has a typical schedule as follows: Breakfast followed by a briefing & Dive 1 Lunch, relaxation followed by briefing & Dive 2 Snack, relaxation, Dinner Explosive history In 1946, following the end of World War II, the United States gathered together a “mock” naval fleet in order to test the effects of atomic bomb blasts on a large naval fleet. They named it Operation Crossroads and designated Bikini Atoll to be one of the sites for the explosive tests, with the local inhabitants displaced to another atoll. More Operations followed suit; from land, on the reef, on the sea, from the air and underwater.
  • U.S. Atmospheric Nuclear Tests

    U.S. Atmospheric Nuclear Tests

    U.S. NUCLEAR TESTING FROM PROJECT TRINITY TO THE PLOWSHARE PROGRAM [From For the Record – A History of the Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, 1978-1986, by Abby A. Johnson, et al, Defense Nuclear Agency, DNA 6041F, 1986. The United States conducted Project TRINITY, the world's first nuclear detonation, in 1945. From 1946 to 1963, when the limited nuclear test ban treaty was signed, the U.S. conducted 18 atmospheric nuclear test series, identified below as operations, and a program of testing called PLOWSHARE. In addition, the U.S. staged safety experiments to determine the weapons' susceptibility to fission due to accidents in storage and transport. This chapter provides historical summaries of the tests, listed below in the order in which they occurred and are addressed: · Project TRINITY, 1945 (CONUS) · Operation CROSSROADS, 1946 (Oceanic) · Operation SANDSTONE, 1948 (Oceanic) · Operation RANGER, 1951 (CONUS) · Operation GREENHOUSE, 1951 (Oceanic) · Operation BUSTER-JANGLE, 1951 (CONUS) · Operation TUMBLER-SNAPPER, 1952 (CONUS) · Operation IVY, 1952 (Oceanic) · Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE, 1953 (CONUS) · Operation CASTLE, 1954 (Oceanic) · Operation TEAPOT, 1955 (CONUS) · Operation WIGWAM, 1955 (Oceanic) · Operation REDWING, 1956 (Oceanic) · Operation PLUMBBOB, 1957 (CONUS) · Operation HARDTACK I, 1958 (Oceanic) · Operation ARGUS, 1958 (Oceanic) · Operation HARDTACK II, 1958 (CONUS) · Safety Experiments, 1955-1958 (CONUS) · Operation DOMINIC I, 1962 (Oceanic) · Operation DOMINIC II, 1962 (CONUS) · PLOWSHARE Program, 1961-1962 (CONUS). Most of the oceanic tests were conducted at the Pacific Proving Ground, which consisted principally of the Enewetak and Bikini Atolls in the northwestern Marshall Islands of the Pacific Ocean. The Marshall Islands are in the easternmost part of Micronesia.