Manager's Completion Report Amchitka Island, Alaska, Milrow and Cannikin (Deleted)

Page 1

AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION NEVADA OPERATIONS OFFICE Las Vegas, Nevada, 89114

Page 2

This Document Consists No. 54 of ,S= Cop i es AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA ure to any unau pe on is prohibited. MILROW AND CANNIKIN Las Vegas, Nevada, 89114 OELETEO VERSION

Page 4

The Manager's Amchitka Completion Report - Operations MILROW and CANNIKIN, was prepared under the supervision of the Nevada Operations Office (NV) of the u.s. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) in coordination with cognizant government agencies and ABC contractors. This report presents a summary of operations for the underground nuclear detonations, MILROW and CANNIKIN, which were conducted on Amchitka Island on October 2, 1969, and November 6, 1971, respectively. MILROW was a calibration test conducted to obtain information on physical and bioenvironmental effects, from which a realistic evaluation could be made of similar effects to be anticipated from CANNIKIN. CANNIKIN was a proof test of the Spartan missile warhead to verify that it would function as designed and that it could be certified for stockpile. ' Preparation of this report has been guided by three objectives: 1) that it may be utilized as a reference by those who were concerned with the authorization, planning, and execution of the operation; 2) that it may serve as a planning guide for future test operationsi and 3) that information of administrative, technical, and historical significance be recorded in a Operations MILROW and CANNIKIN are discussed from logistical and management viewpoints. Information relative to preoperational planning is included to permit an understanding of the scope of operational and logistical problems. Scientific data resulting from MILBOW and CANNIKIN can be found in the various technical documents prepared by the participating agencies (see Subsection 6.2.3 FINAL REPORTS).

Page 5

The Nevada Operations Office of the u.S. Atomic Energy Commission, the organization responsible for preparation of this document, has been ably assisted by contributions from the participating agencies and contractors on Operations MILROW and CANNIKIN. Participating agencies include: Albuquerque Operations Office, Los Alamos Scientific Department of Defense Federal Aviation Agency National Oceanic and AtmoBattelle Memorial Institute Eberline Instrument Corporation University of Arizona University of Hawaii University of Nevada University of Wisconsin Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. Holmes & Narver, Inc. Engineering Co., Inc. Fenix & Scisson, Inc. nated Western Environmental Research Laboratory (WERt) on May 21, 1971, after being transferred from the Public Health Service to the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on December 2, 1970. WERL later became the National Environmental Research Center ** The National Oceanic & AtmospheriC Administration (NOAA) includes the Air Resources Laboratory, Earthquake Mechanism Laboratory, Earth Science Laboratory, and the Environmental Research Laboratory.

Page 6

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Acronyms and abbreviations used in this report for the agencies, organizations, and contractors that participated in Projects MILROW and CANNIKIN are listed below: Atomic Energy Commission AEC Headquarters, Washington, D.C. AEC Nevada Operations Office AC Electronics (Delco)--Defense Research Laboratories Alaska District Corps of Engineers (COE) Alaska Department of Fish & Game AEC Albuquerque Operations Office Archaeological Research, Inc. Air Resources Laboratory--Las Vegas Office Advanced Research Projects Agency (Texas Instruments) Ben Beckler & Associates Battelle Columbus Laboratories Battelle Memorial Institute U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries & Wildlife Containment Evaluation Panel u.s. Army Corps of Engineers (See ADE above) Colorado School of Mines Defense Atomic Support Agency (Now Defense Nuclear Division of Military Applications

Page 7

DNA Defense Nuclear Agency (Formerly Defense Atomic Support Agency, DASA) DOD Department of Defense DPI Division of Public Information EIC Eberline Instrument Corporation E&L Engineering and Logistics EPA Environmental Pr~tection Agency ERC Environmental Research Corporation ESSA Environmental Sciences Service Administration (Now National Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin., NOAA) FAA Federal Aviation Agency F&S Fenix & Scisson, Inc. GSA General Services Administration H&N Holmes & Narver, Inc. TI Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. JCS Joint Chiefs of Staff JMTG Joint Military Task Group LASL Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory LLL Lawrence Livermore Laboratory MI'GA Military Task Group, Amchitka

Page 8

National Bureau of Standards National Environmental Research Center (Formerly Western Environmental Research Lab., WERL) National Meteorological Center National Marine Fisheries Service (Formerly Bureau of Commerical Fisheries) National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (Formerly Environmental Sciences Service Admin., ESSA) Nevada Operations Office Office of Effects Evaluation Office of Information Services (Formerly Office of Public Affairs, OPA) Office of Public Affairs (Now Office of Information Services, OIS) Office of Test Manager Pan American World Airways Parker Drilling Company Plans and Budgets U.S. Public Health Service Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co., Inc. Radiation Estimates & Research Branch AEC San Francisco Operations Office

Page 9

Southwest Research Institute Southwest Radiological Health Laboratory, USPHS Test Evaluation Panel U.s. Bureau of Sport Fisheries & Wildlife U.S. Coast & Geodetic Survey (Now NOAA/Earth Science Laboratory, ESL, see above) U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service U.S. Public Health Service Universal Services, Inc. Western Environmental Research Laboratory (Formerly SWRHL and now National Environmental Research Center, NERC, see above) Waterways Experiment Station (U.S. COE) Wackenhut Services, Inc. Other acronyms and abbreviations used in this report for titles, sites, locations, standards, plans, facilities, equipment, etc., and for technical words and expressions, are as follows: AE&M Architectural, Engineering, & Management Services AFB Air Force Base

Page 10

Armed Forces Radio Network Air Force Special Weapons Center Assistant General Manager AGM for Military Applications AM for Operations Air Operations Center Air Sampling Unit Bering Daylight Time Bering Standard Time Certificates of Expenditure Commander in Chief, Alaska (U.S. Navy) Commander in Chief, Pacific (U.S. Navy) CDR, Military Task Group, Amchitka Federal Telecommunications System Ground Control Approach

Page 11

Indian Springs Air Force, Auxiliary Field, Nevada Mean Sea Level Notices to Airmen Nevada Test Site Operations Coordination Center Private Automatic Branch Exchange (Telephone) Pseudo Relative Velocity Pasteurized Milk Network Port of Embarkation Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants Remote Area Monitoring System Radiation Alert Network Remote Data Collection Instrumentation System Radio Frequency Interference Recording Trailer Park Surface Ground Zero

Page 12

Sandia Trailer Park Supplemental Test Site Test Group Director Tritium Units (Also Task Unit) Ultra High Frequency Very High Frequency The Second World War

Page 14

UNCLASSIFIED Property of u.s. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CONTENTS RESOURCE CENTER 1.3.2 Amchitka Site Survey Activities 1.4.1 FY 1967, FY 1968, & FY 1969 Activities. 28 1.4.4 Site Restoration Activities ••••••••• 29 1.6 PLANNING BOARDS, PANELS, & SPECIAL REVIEW

Page 15

ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION, & SUPPORT · ...... 55 3.1.4 Engineering for Other Facilities 3.3 SUPPORT (By Other State & Government Agencies) ••• 78 3.3.6 U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries & 3.3.7 National Weather Service, Alaska Region • •• 79

Page 16

3.6.1 CANNIKIN Hole Locations BASE MAINTENANCE & SUPPORT 3.11.2 Demobilization & Restoration Objectives 4.1.7 Occupational Health & Safety 207 4.2.1 Geologic & Hydrologic Investigations • 210 4.2.2 Ground Motion & Water Pressure Studies • 215 4.2.4 Seismic & Earth Strain Investigations 231

Page 18

Identification & Badge Office 8.2 SUMMARY OF COSTS BY PROGRAMMATIC ACTIVITY 10.1.1 Committee for Nuclear Responsibility 10.1.2 Aleut League vs AEC, et al ••••

Page 20

OOMMITTEES, ORGANIZATIONS, & ASSIGNMENTS ....... A-6 CANNIKIN Project Organizational Assignments ••• 317 A-7 Amchitka Prime Contractors & Subcontractors 319 C. OOMMUNICATIONS, SCIENTIFIC, & INSTRUMENTATION

Page 21

I PLANNING, ORGANIZATION, & AUTHORITIES II SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNT Device Package, Prior to Insertion in Hole--CANNIKIN ••• Device Package, Hanging in Mined Cavity--CANNIKIN ••••• III ENGINEERING, CONSTRUcrION, & SUPPORT Main Camp & Baker Runway Areas •••••••••••••• Logistical Support for MILROW & CANNIKIN (Table of

Page 23

4.1-16 Instrument Maintenance Trailer •••••••••••• 4.1-19 RAMS Station No. 11 on 2,500-Foot Arc. • ••••• 4.1-20 RAMS Station No. 11 Showing RAMS Probe, etc. • •••• 4.1-21 Map of RAMS, Air Samplers, & Geophone Stations-- Amchitka Precipitation Amounts & Frequency ••• • North Pacific Ocean Seasonal Storm Tracks • • Amchitka Seasonal Surface Wind Roses ••••••• North Pacific Surface Weather Analysis, 10/2/69 ••• North Pacific Surface Weather Forecast, 10/2/69 • Streamlines & Trajectory Forecast, 10/2/69 North Pacific Surface Weather Analysis, 11/6/71 •••••• North Pacific Surface Weather Forecast, 11/6/71 •••••• External Gamma Exposure on the Hot Line--MILROW • VI INFORMATIONAL & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS PROGRAMS

Page 24

PLANNING, ORGANIZATION, AND AUTHORITIES (See Appendices A and B for copies of items mentioned in this chapter, and see Appendix F for list of references.) The Supplemental Test Site (STS) Program was initiated during 1966 to support the high-yield proof tests that were required to develop the nuclear device needed for the United States Anti-Ballistic Missile Program. In order to prepare for execution of a higher-yield test (CANNIKIN), it was necessary to conduct a lower-yield calibration event to more fully understand the response of Amchitka Island to the high-yield Accordingly, the yield of the MILROW event was set at a level so that the Island's response to a high-yield nuclear detonation could be predicted within acceptable levels of certainty, and yet, be conducted with minimum hazard to on- and off-Island personnel and property. In support of the test objectives, the AEC Nevada Operations Office (AEC/NV) conducted monitoring programs to document the effects of the MILROW detonation upon: 1) the biosphere of the Island (including the effects of ground motion and underwater shock over pressures); 2) water wave production; and 3) aftershocks, strain changes and other This was a proof test of the warhead for the Spartan missile of the Safeguard Ballistic Missile Defense Program. Congress had appropriated funds for the protection of Minuteman missile sites and for that protection to become reality, a proven warhead for the Spartan missile was required. Several nuclear experiments had been conducted in the Weapons Program to develop the warhead. CANNIKIN was the experiment which was to show that the final design operated as expected and that the design could be certified for stockpile. The CANNIKIN device was the most intricate design ever undertaken in the weapons program and incorporated features that were different from any other nuclear weapon produced. The Spartan system is designed for long-range intercept outside the atmosphere with X rays as the kill mechanism. The principal reasons for the full-yield test were: 1) to minimize the possibility of stockpiling a defective design; 2) to measure the yield of the device; and 3) to measure the X-ray flux

Page 26

1.2 DEMOBILIZATION, RESTORATION AND MONITORING OBJECTIVES The objectives of the AEC are as follows: 1) to demobilize and remove all AEC-constructed facilities and equipment on Amchitka Island except those which will be required by Department of the Interior and AEC long-term effects monitoring program personnel. World War II (WII) facilities will remain in place "as-is" except in specific cases where the Department of the Interior and NV agree that removal is advisable. Insofar as is practical, the actions taken should allow for and enhance the natural restoration of land areas disturbed by AEC activities; 2) to assure that radioactive surface hazards do not exist; 3) to return control of Amchitka Island to the Department of the Interior as soon as possible; and 4) to conduct long-term monitoring programs to evaluate and document effects which AEC activities had on the Island and its environment. The STS Selection Program, mentioned above, was initiated when it became apparent that the AEC's Nevada Test Site (NTS) would not be adequate for certain higher-yield tests needed to support U.S. defense policy. The primary limitation at the NTS was anticipated ground motion from a high-yield test and its possible effect on structures in nearby communities, including Las Vegas. A search was begun for a supplemental site that would accommodate a limited number of high-yield tests, and on November 18, 1966, the Manager, NV, established a Site Selection Committee with the basic function of coordinating STS Program site selection actions. After preliminary safety and technical reviews, potential sites were identified for exploration. Of principal interest were: 1) AmchitkaIsland in the Aleutian Chain; and 2) an area in Central Nevada lying generally northeast of Tonopah. Amchitka Island was judged to best satisfy the basic criteria established. Combined here were favorable geology for proper containment of the tests and remoteness to assure safety. After initial identification of the site, detailed investigations and evaluations gave convincing evidence that: 1) the necessary underground tests could be conducted with no hazard to humans and within the constraints of the Limited Test 2) tests could be conducted without serious adverse impact upon wildlife or environment of Amchitka Island or on sea life

Page 27

in adjacent waters (this was a question of particular concern because Amchitka is within the Aleutian Islands National Wildlife Refuge); and 3) testing would not result in damaging sea wave effects. 1.3.2 AMCHITKA SITE SURVEY ACTIVITIES AND DRILL SITE SELECTIONS The Site Selection Committe was assigned the additional function of recommending sites for exploratory and emplacement holes on Amchitka. Between November 30 and December 16, 1966, a u.S. Geological Survey (USGS) team made a geological reconnaissance of most of the southeastern half of the IsI~d. The immediate purpose of the work was to select five sites for deep-drill holes to support STS Program requirements. A generalization of geologic observations made during the reconnaissance and some data gathered in earlier work (particularly in support of Project LONG SHOT) are combined in a USGS Technical Letter Section 4.2.1 of this report also describes geologic and hydrologic investigations by the USGS. An aeromagnetic survey of the total Island and offshore areas was completed about January 7, 1967. During the course of on-site reconnaissance, the USGS team, together with respresentatives of the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL) and the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL, formerly Lawrence Radiation Laboratory) identified five locations and one alternate location which appeared to be best for drillable and chamberable sites, on the basis of established criteria, knowledge acquired from their investigations, and certain geographic limitations. On March 2, 1967, the Site Selection Committee reviewed site geologic data developed by the USGS and recommended locations for the initial three emplacement and exploratory holes scheduled for startup, commenCing in the Fourth Quarter of FY 1967. The Site Selection Report (Reference F-l) summarizes the factors upon which the Committee based its evaluation, and contains the USGS and the Committee's recommended drill site locations. 1.3.3 DRILL SITE SELECTION CRITERIA In the meeting of March 2, 1967, the Site Selection Committee endorsed the Committee Chairman's site selection criteria (Annex D of Site Selection Report). Criteria are summarized below. The geology should provide a favorable environment for drilling, safety and containment.

Page 28

Subsurface geologic characteristics should be such that underground chambers could be constructed at the bottom of 6000' emplacement holes. Primary requirements were that the rock should be relatively impermeable and should have as low a temperature as possible. B. Groundwater and Seawater Contamination Contamination of freshwater and possible communication of radionuclides to seawater through natural or shot-induced fractures must be considered. There should be sufficient impermeable rock below the shot fracture pattern to isolate underlying rocks having a greater transmission potential. Consideration must be given to: 1) effects of ground motion on close-in (Island) facilities; 2) required separation from coastline; 3) possible effects on distant (off-Island) structures; 4) effect of water waves generated by nuclear explosions; and 5) effect of ground shock on terrestrial and marine life in the area. Lateral space between drill holes should be sufficient to support the construction and D. Minimum Disturbance to Environment Test program preparations and operations should be accomplished with minimum disturbance to the natural environment and Fallout patterns and dose estimates, in the …