Thresher

["Karam, Andrew" <Andrew_Karam@URMC.Rochester.edu>]

Dear Tom,

Having served on a Thresher-class (later Permit-class) submarine for nearly
4 years, I think you might be over-simplifying things.  The Thresher was
lost due to a combination of factors, including those you mentioned
(flooding from a non-nuclear seawater fitting that shorted out reactor plant
controls, leading to a scram).  This was compounded by poor design of the
emergency blow system (another non-nuclear system), which froze up and
prevented Thresher from reaching the surface.  However, in spite of the loss
of the Thresher, the reactor plant "failed safe" - to the best of my
knowledge, no fission products have been found near the Thresher and the
reactor vessel and fuel are assumed to remain intact.  The initial failure
was a welding/brazing error and resulted in increased QA/QC procedures and
the recognition of "subsafe" systems - systems which could result in the
loss of a boat if they failed.  The non-nukes in the Navy referred to this
as "creeping nuke-ification" and resented it quite a bit, although applying
nuclear power program standards to the rest of the submarine navy made it
much safer.

I spent 8 years in Naval nuclear power, so I am no doubt biased.  However, I
would agree with Ron that it is a success story, in spite of the loss of
Thresher and Scorpion.  When I left the Navy I was at first very surprised
to find contamination levels of a few thousand dpm in controlled areas, I
had never seen general area dose rates of more than 200 mrem/hr (or any hot
spot higher than a few rem/hr), and my lifetime exposure was about 1.5 rem.
And I was on an older boat.  I now realize how restrictive our standards
were, and I concur with Ron that it is this same concern that has led to the
Navy's outstanding worldwide reputation.

Andy

Andrew Karam, CHP              (716) 275-1473 (voice)
Radiation Safety Officer          (716) 275-3781 (office)
University of Rochester           (716) 256-0365 (fax)
601 Elmwood Ave. Box HPH   Rochester, NY  14642

Andrew_Karam@URMC.Rochester.edu
http://Intranet.urmc.rochester.edu/RadiationSafety

We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has
reached a turning point, that we have seen our best days.  But so said
all before us, and with just as much apparent reason.  On what principle
is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to
expect nothing but deterioration before us?    Lord Thomas B. Macaulay,
1830
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html