[ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthedatformerrockettest site n...
Brennan, Mike (DOH)
Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV
Mon Dec 31 11:41:42 CST 2012
It has been a long time, but as I recall it was very highly enriched,
with solid moderators (I don't know what), and a lot of technical
problems. Like all ramjets it really only had two speeds; "off" and
"FAST!". I seem to recall that he said there were issues with turning
it off, again, as shutting down criticality didn't stop the head of
decay, but it did reduce power below what was needed to keep the
aircraft aloft. All-in-all, it seemed like there were WAY more problems
than advantages.
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of
JPreisig at aol.com
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 9:34 AM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination
unearthedatformerrockettest site n...
Mike Brennan/Radsafe:
Was the reactor using conventional enrichment, or something
approaching 100% Enrichment??? Was it a thermal or fast neutron
reactor???
Joe Preisig
In a message dated 12/31/2012 12:26:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV writes:
I had a professor who worked on the nuclear powered ramjet. He said it
could power a bomber to supersonic speeds, but not with the mass needed
to shield the reactor enough to service the plane. They looked at a
lot of different possible work-arounds, but never came up with anything
that was good enough.
He said one of the real deal-killers was the acknowledged fact that
airplanes sometimes crash, and no one wanted to be involved in cleanup
of a particularly hot reactor after it hit the ground at a couple
hundred miles per hour.
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:20 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed
atformerrockettest site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
I believe you are refereing to the "Pluto" program managed by the Los
Alamos Lab. Pluto was a rocket powered by liquid hydrogen by running it
through a nuclear reactor expanding its volume to provide the necessary
thrust. It worked, but I assume because it invoved nuclear energy, it
was politically unacceptable to the politicians in Washington. During
the same period (the 60's), Livermore Lab was working on a nuclear
powered ramjet engine.
Following its first sucessful test, this project was also killed by the
federal government.
Jerry Cohen
________________________________
From: Edmond <edmond0033 at comcast.net>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Sat, December 29, 2012 10:20:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed
atformerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
I think (not very sure) at one time the DOE or (AEC) was trying to
develop a rocket engine that was to be powered by radioactivity. It was
canceled for whatever reason.
Ed Baratta
edmond0033 at comcast.net
-----Original Message----- From: Douglas Minnema
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 3:44 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed
atformerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Just curious, what about tritium?
Twelve or so years ago, when I was doing a safety management system
review of the DOE-funded cleanup operations at that site, there was
clear (and
acknowledged) evidence of a tritium plume moving from the site into
off-site areas. I was surprised at the time because there had not been
any active reactors or other obvious sources for the tritium at the site
for many years before that time, but it was equally clear that the plume
was associated with one of the old test reactor locations.
I understand that the intervening half-life of time will have reduced
the quantities further (please, no lectures on radioactive decay :-)
but at that time the quantities were easily measurable. I'm not sure
that one half-life would have been enough to "make it go away."
Physical dispersal of the plume might be enough to reduce it to below
detectable, but I don't have a good feel for that.
Doug Minnema, PhD, CHP
US Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Cary Renquist
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 1:54 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed at
formerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Here is the EPA's Fact Sheet on the study results:
EPA Radiological Characterization Study Results http://j.mp/12dBJrt
It lists some of the specific results in a table.
e.g.
Am-241: 3 positive in the 0.05-0.06 pCi/g range
Cs-137: 291 positive in the 0.2-200 pCi/g range
Pu239/240: 14 pos in the 0.02-0.19 pCi/g range
Sr90: 153 pos in the 0.08-21 pCi/g range Etc.
---
Cary Renquist
cary.renquist at ezag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Cary Renquist
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012 10:35 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed at
formerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
U.S. EPA's Final Technical Memorandum Look-Up Table Recommendations
This is a link to a pdf that seems to have the background threshold
values for the nuclides of interest (Table 2 of attachment 1).
http://j.mp/QYILg4
Pursuant to an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of
Energy
(DOE) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the USEPA has
conducted a Radiological Background Study to determine the background
levels for radionuclides in surface and subsurface soils associated
with Area IV and the Northern Buffer Zone (Area IV Study Area1) of the
Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL), located in Ventura County,
California. In addition, the USEPA is currently conducting a
radiological characterization of the Area IV Study Area to identify
areas that exhibit radionuclide concentrations in surface and subsurface
soil and sediment above background levels (herein, "soil" shall mean
surface and subsurface soil as well as surface and subsurface sediment
unless otherwise specified).
I didn't see a doc that has the presented results of the soil samples,
however, this article at least has some details:
Latest soil tests at Santa Susana Field Lab site shows radioactive
material remains - LA Daily News http://j.mp/TSusGW
The EPA researchers collected 3,735 samples of mostly surface soil and
found that of those, 500 contained concentrations of radioactive
materials that exceeded what is known as background standards - or the
levels occurring naturally in the environment. Almost all were man-made
radionuclides. Most of those samples contained Cesium-137, and of those
one sample reached levels up to
1,000 times above background standard. There were 153 samples of
Stronium-90 and of those some hits reached levels that were 284 times
higher than background.
Both radioactive elements are considered dangerous to human health when
present at high levels.
"There were some hits that were elevated but for the most part, they
were in the range that we expected," said John Jones, federal project
director with the Department of Energy.
Cary
---
Cary Renquist
cary.renquist at ezag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Robert J
Gunter
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012 6:38 AM
To: 'Robert Atkinson'; 'The International Radiation Protection (Health
Physics)Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed atformer
rocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Not a very informative statement: "10 percent contained radioactive
concentrations exceeding background levels."
This could easily be fill from another location or different aggregate
based on this statement alone. Is it NORM or Cs-137?
Robert J. Gunter, MSc, CHP
CHP Consultants/CHP Dosimetry
www.chpconsultants.com
www.chpdosimetry.com
Toll Free: (888) 766-4833
Fax: (866) 491-9913
Cel: (865) 387-0028
rjgunter at chpconsultants.com
________________________________
From: Steven Dapra <sjd at swcp.com>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012, 2:53
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed at former
rocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Dec. 13
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list