The “Green Run”.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Site Characterization Instructional Goal: Upon completion of this topic the participant will better understand the need to identify and evaluate various.
Advertisements

Radiological Assessment March 29, AMS Summary Ops Summary – Aerial Measuring Systems totaled more than 130 hours of flying – Flight operations were.
Meteorology Combined License NRC Review Process Meteorology Joseph Hoch Physical Scientist U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission June , 2008 Nuclear.
Our Mission To provide safe and secure ground and air transportation of nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons components, and special nuclear materials and.
Weather and X/Q 1 Impact Of Weather Changes On TVA Nuclear Plant Chi/Q (  /Q) Kenneth G. Wastrack Doyle E. Pittman Jennifer M. Call Tennessee Valley Authority.
Radiological Assessment - of effects from - Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant May 13, 2011.
Hanford Thyroid Disease Study (HTDS) Final Report Michael A. McGeehin, Ph.D., M.S.P.H. Director Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects National.
Audrey Campbell.  Nuclear power plants present a hazard to the health and safety of the public because they are subject to accidents.  Example; Chernobyl.
Radiological Monitoring of Air and Drinking Water in British Columbia Following the Fukushima Nuclear Incident Environmental Health Services (EHS) British.
AGREEMENT STATES VS U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AUBREY GODWIN AZ RADIATION REGULATORY AGENCY.
Nuclear Waste Katherine Sanchez Navarro – General Supervisor Shannon McLaughlin – Historian Aleeza Momin – Biologist Rebecca Johnson – Chemist Shahzeb.
Internal Emitters Radioactive material within the body.
The political aspects of monitoring radioactive materials in the environment of our region E. Wirth, M Zähringer Federal Office for Radiation Protection,
and its disadvantages :: iOS7
ANALYTICAL X-RAY SAFETY User Training Centre for Environmental Health, Safety and Security Management.
Atmospheric and Climate Change
Nuclear Power Plants... Operate in most States and produce about 20 percent of the Nation’s power. Nearly 3 million Americans live within 10 miles of an.
It’s not just about Global Warming… The Problem with the Ozone Layer.
1 Chapter 9 Nuclear Radiation 9.1 Natural Radioactivity Copyright © 2009 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Chernobyl Sydney Curley.
DOE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PROGRAM WORKSHOP BIOTA PROTECTION Stephen L. Domotor (202)
Part 1d: Exposure Assessment and Modeling Thomas Robins, MD, MPH.
Ukraine. Background On April 26, 1986, a sudden surge of power during a reactor systems test destroyed Unit 4 of the nuclear power station at Chernobyl,
Radiological Assessment - of effects from - Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant April 18, 2011.
Nuclear and radiological incidents – Introduction
Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) Disposition at the
HOW MUCH RADIOACTIVE WASTE COULD POTENTIALLY BE IMPORTED INTO TEXAS
Radiological impacts from nuclear industrial facilities on the public and the environment : Their magnitude and the next 50 years forecast Sylvain Saint-Pierre.
Nuclear Power.
Chapter 12 Nuclear Energy.
Section 2: Nuclear Energy
Section 2: Nuclear Energy
Objectives Describe nuclear fission.
Unit 4 Lesson 3 Human Impact on the Atmosphere
Chapter 12 Nuclear Energy.
Weather Decision Procedure Director of Operations
Workplace Health and Safety
Weather Decision Procedure
Chapter 4 Nuclear Chemistry
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Disadvantages Inefficient (only 30% efficiency).
Biological Effects of Radiation.
Disadvantages Inefficient (only 30% efficiency).
Nuclear power stations
Nuclear Power Statistics
Chernobyl disaster The worst manmade disaster in human history
MEASURING RADIATION Large doses of radiation are harmful to living tissue. Radiation can be measured with a Geiger counter – a device that measures radioactivity.
Section 2: Nuclear Energy
Nuclear Power.
ASBESTOS Introduction
SAFETY AND SITTING ASSESSMENT FOR NPPs DEPLOYMENT IN INDONESIA
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Radioactive material within the body
Nuclear Chemistry IPC B.
Rosalyn Leitch Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Hanford.
Section 2: Nuclear Energy
Nonrenewable Energy.
Current Radiation Protection Legislation in Slovakia
Section 2: Nuclear Energy
Disadvantages Inefficient (only 30% efficiency).
Nuclear Power Plants Operate in most States and produce about 20 percent of the Nation’s power. Nearly 3 million Americans live within 10 miles.
Radiation Safety External hazards & antagonistic threats
Chapter 8: Nuclear Energy
Objectives Describe nuclear fission.
Section 2: Nuclear Energy
Good Morning! Your flip grid videos are due & both initial posts and responses should be posted. Today is our renewable energy quiz! Study your foldable.
Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)
INTENTIONAL HUMAN DOSING STUDIES (IHDS)
Presentation transcript:

The “Green Run”

In summary, the Green Run test was an atmospheric radioactivity monitoring experiment conducted by the military and the former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). A premise of the test was that aerial monitoring and sampling of a radioactive cloud, even far from the source, could give evidence of nuclear materials. Conducted on December 2-3,1949, the test released a recorded total of almost 28,000 curies of radioactive material from a special spent fuel reprocessing operation into the atmosphere over southeast Washington and Oregon.2 (See fig. 1.1.)

Avoiding radiation safety For the test, some of the plant’s usual radiation safety procedures were intentionally relaxed, resulting in a larger than normal radioactive release. Test participants did not consider the test to be unsafe at the time, and the radiation doses that the off-site populace might have received as a result of the test were not estimated at the time (based on the historical test documentation available to us).

Not up to today’s standards However, according to the AEC, in some locations, the release exceeded then-existing local Hanford limits for deposition in vegetation and animal tissue, and it may not have been permissible under today’s more stringent safety standards for U.S. nuclear sites.

Health effects Presently, to better understand the health effects of the test and other Hanford iodine releases during the middle to late 194Os, a study of historical Hanford doses is under way, directed by the Centers for Disease Control,

Classified Report May 1950 A classified report on the test was issued in May 1950 by the former Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), but the report remained classified in its entirety-and the test remained undisclosed-for almost four decades. Details of the test and concerns about its potential health and safety effects first surfaced in the latter part of the 1980s. When references to the test appeared in other AEC documents that were declassified over the years, several Green Run-related Freedom of Information Act requests and appeals were filed. As a result, the test report was largely declassified in 1989. (Several passages in the report remain classified by determination of the Air Force, on the basis that further declassification of the report could compromise Air Force missions and thereby damage the national security.)

Test Participant Observations According to a test participant, a premise of the test was that aerial monitoring and sampling of a radioactive cloud, even long distances from the source, could give evidence of nuclear materials. The diffusion of the released gases was to be monitored in order to develop air, ground, and aquatic methods of collecting data on nuclear operations and weapons tests. The radioactive cloud was generated by a special spent fuel reprocessing operation.

Radiation Release Consequences …the test released about 27,800 curies of radioactive production off-gases, including about 7,800 curies of iodine and about 20,000 curies of less hazardous xenon, into the atmosphere in southeast Washington and Oregon. The total recorded iodine release was about twice the almost 4,060 curies predicted in pretest calculations. During the test, despite unexpected adverse weather patterns that developed and limited the range of diffusion, the radioactive cloud was detected by an aircraft over 100 miles northeast of the site. After the test, radioactive iodine was found on vegetation over large areas of southeast Washington and Oregon, as shown in figure 1.1.

Did the need for secrecy provide an acceptable rationale for not informing the downwinders at the time? Yes, the Soviets would have learned from the public outcry No, the threat of exposure via the “bossys of the region” to children’s health was more important than secrecy

Did national security justify secrecy until the 1986-1989 period? Yes No I still do not know enough to make this judgment