No subject

ates and noise levels that would put those under the path at nearly as much=
 harm as those at the target.  Main reason the project was terminated was t=
he emergence of the Polaris and ICBMs, resulting in a lack of interest from=
 the Navy, among others.

Bill Bair, Sr. Scientist
Radiological Engineering
NSTec, LLC
Contractor to the US Department of Energy
(702)295-4463 (W)
(702)630-0631 (C)
(702)295-9335 (fax)

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.ph=
ys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Brennan, Mike (DOH)
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 9:42 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthedatformerrockett=
est site n...

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.  Lik=
e 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 shutti=
ng 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 li=
ke 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 unearthedatformerrockett=
est site n...

Mike Brennan/Radsafe:
=20
     Was the reactor using conventional enrichment, or  something approachi=
ng 100% Enrichment???  Was it a thermal or fast neutron reactor???
=20
    Joe Preisig
=20
=20
=20
=20
In a message dated 12/31/2012 12:26:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Mike.Bre=
nnan at DOH.WA.GOV writes:

I had a  professor who worked on the nuclear powered ramjet.  He said it co=
uld  power a bomber to supersonic speeds, but not with the mass needed to s=
hield  the reactor enough to service the plane.  They looked at a lot of di=
fferent possible work-arounds, but never came up with anything that was goo=
d enough.

He said one of the real deal-killers was the acknowledged fact  that airpla=
nes sometimes crash, and no one wanted to be involved in cleanup of  a part=
icularly 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 atformerrocke=
ttest site near Los Angeles -  U.S. News

I believe you are refereing to the "Pluto" program managed by  the Los Alam=
os Lab. Pluto was a rocket powered by liquid hydrogen by running  it throug=
h a nuclear reactor expanding its volume to provide the necessary thrust. I=
t worked, but I assume because it invoved nuclear energy,  it was political=
ly unacceptable to the politicians in Washington. During the same  period (=
the 60's), Livermore Lab was working on a nuclear powered ramjet  engine.=20
Following its first sucessful test, this project was also killed by  the fe=
deral 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 atformerrocke=
t 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 f=
or 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 atformerrocke=
t 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-si=
te areas.  I was surprised at the time because there had not  been any acti=
ve reactors or other obvious sources for the tritium at the site for many y=
ears before that time, but it was equally clear that the plume was associat=
ed 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 th=
at 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 dete=
ctable, 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 formerrocke=
t 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 formerrocke=
t test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News


U.S. EPA's  Final Technical Memorandum Look-Up Table Recommendations This i=
s a link to a  pdf that seems to have the background threshold values for t=
he 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 cond=
ucted a  Radiological Background Study to determine the background levels f=
or  radionuclides in surface and subsurface soils associated with Area IV a=
nd the  Northern Buffer Zone (Area IV Study Area1) of the Santa Susana Fiel=
d Laboratory (SSFL), located in Ventura County, California. In addition, th=
e 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 subs=
urface sediment unless otherwise specified).


I didn't see a doc  that has the presented results of the soil samples, how=
ever, this article at  least has some details:
Latest soil tests at Santa Susana Field Lab site  shows radioactive materia=
l remains - LA Daily News  http://j.mp/TSusGW

The EPA researchers collected 3,735 samples of  mostly surface soil and fou=
nd that of those, 500 contained concentrations of  radioactive materials th=
at exceeded what is known as background standards - or  the levels occurrin=
g naturally in the environment. Almost all were man-made radionuclides. Mos=
t of those samples contained Cesium-137, and of those one  sample reached l=
evels 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 high=
er than background.

Both radioactive elements are  considered dangerous to human health when pr=
esent 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 w=
ith 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 Phy=
sics)Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination  unearthed atformer rock=
et test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News

Not a  very informative statement:  "10 percent contained radioactive conce=
ntrations exceeding background levels."

This could easily be fill  from another location or different aggregate bas=
ed 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 rock=
et test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News

Dec. 13