Document text
Machine-read from the scan, so expect some errors. Lines that couldn’t be read are left out.
Page 1
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION UNDERWATER SEARCH FOR WEAPON DEBRIS AT THUIB Note by the Secretary 17 ^ 1. The General Manager has requested that the attached memorandum of April 18, 1908 from the Assistant General Manager for Military Application, with attachments, be circulated for consideration by the Commission at an early Information Meeting. 2. Related information is contained in AEC 907/28 through DISTRIBUTION COPY NO. DISTRIBUTION COPY NO Secretary 1,28-33 Asst. GM for Operations 15 Biology and Medicine llCommissioner Johnson 5 Congr. Relations 19-20 Commissioner 6 Controller 21ft General Manager 7-8 Inspection 22 Deputy Gen. Mgr. 9 International Affairs 23 Asst. Gen. Mgr. 10 Military Application 24 Exec. Asst, to OM 11 Operational Safety 25 Asst. GM for MA 13
Page 2
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION SUBJECT t UHDERUATBR SEARCH FOR WEAPON DEBRIS AT THU1Z, GREENLAND Tha purposs of this pspsr Is to provlds bsckfround for discussion of tbs desirability of conducting an underwater search for nlsslng Tha DoD is interested in tha consensus of the Cownlssion regarding tha desirability of an underwater search and its possible extent. Additional interest in such an effort la reflected as Article 11 ■eating of March .18-19, 1968, in Washington at which tine it was agreed that tha question of a possible sea bottom search was to be reserved for further study of coats and utility by the U. S. Air Force and tha results of such a search, if undertaken, would be. made available to the Danish AEC. In a letter to Dr. Walske, dated March 26, 1968, Mr. Hans Koch requested that he be Informed in advance if a search is to be made.
Page 3
various approaches to conducting a search under**ice concept was discarded as hot within the currenvcapabllity of the Ravy to conduct and the tine remaining to conduct search operations from the ice surface prior to Ice breakup Is considered insufficient. The Air Force has now funded the Navy in the amount of $10,000 for the purpose of evaluating various concepts of search operations which could be conducted after the Ice has melted and the bay is clear for routine surface operations. The results of the Navy atudy, which should address a number of approaches and the related costs, are expected to be submitted to the Air Force on May 1, 1968. In the meantime, a group of oceanographers has been working .at the Thule site In an effort to estimate where' the residue may logically drift as a result of currents. This group Is scheduled to brief Or. Walske on April 24, 1966. At this time the Air Force does not anticipate a very complicated search since the water is relatively shallow (approximately 600 feet at most) and the bottom of the bay has the characteristics of a small desert. Considering the fact that the point of entry into the water is pinpointed and the terrain to be searched is smooth, use of a towed sonar sled and closed circuit TV appears to be a logical search approach based on remarks made by members of the Air Force staff. Once the sonar has located an object, the TV unit is moved in to look and record on tape what it views. The estimated cost of conducting a search employing sonar and a closed circuit TV scanner, coupled with a photographic capability, is $2,500 to $3,000 per day. The Navy is presently conducting a search of this type for lost aircraft in Lake Ontario; however, since contract surface vessels are being used, the cost per day is about $4,000. We under stand that the Coast Guard may be willing to support the logistic effort since it'conducts routine operations in the Thule area at the time ice breakup occurs. This could serve to reduce the overall cost of a search operation. The estimated cost of using a manned submersible search vessel, such as the Navy's Perry Link, is about $1,800 per ARCHIVES Sandia Corporation has completed a study of the accident to develop an estimated "footprint" on underwater trajectories which may be useful in defining the area.for search operations. The report of the results
Page 4
of this offort i* oxpoctod to arrlvo la Boadquarters'prior to April 19i 1968. Sandia Corporation contributed significantly in identifying the search area off Paloaarea t Spain, The DoD hae considered the desirability of conducting an underwater search. On the one hand, a search leads to questions about what sight be sdeeingt end, clearly, even a very extensive search may be unsuccessful. On the other hand, even a brief search sight find sensitive classified debris which another nation sight recover if we did not, A reeaonable approach say be to let the extent of the imderweter search depend on the results of a brief underwater survey. Attached are brief susnaries of the search efforts conducted at Palomares, Spain, and at Ooldsboro, North Carolina, Brigadier Generel, USAF Assistant General Manager for Military Application 1, Palomares Boob Recovery 2, Goldsboro Boob Recovery
Page 5
PALOMARES BOMB RECOVERY "■ plash point" of the^||||^pP weapon which went Into the water at Palomares was eventually determined by questioning Spaniards who had observed a large parachute descending into the sea. The task of searching was then taken over by the Havy on or about January 20, 1966. The sea floor sloped gradually for about 3 miles, then It went down at a moderately steep slant for about 2.5 miles. It then dropped off very steeply and ended In a vast mud hole about 6,000 feet down. Scuba divers searched the shallower parts, a cub submarine took the medium depths and two-manned underwater craft (one called ALVIN and the other called ALUMINAUT) searched the deep water. The weapon was located some three weeks later by the ALVIN which employed powerful search lights, coupled with visual observation. Once the weapon was located, a new unmanned underwater vehicle, the CURV, was used. The CURV was completely automatic with large "crab-lUte" pinchers, TV cameras and flood lights. A successful hookup was made, and the bomb was lifted aboard on'April 7, 1966, 80 days after the accident. The cost of the Navy recovery operation, which at its peak Involved approximately 25 surface vessels in addition to the previously mentioned underwater craft, was reported to be about six million
Page 6
GOLDSBORO BOMB RECOVERY Tfee B-S2^«P15 north of Seymour Johnson AFB near twoj|||mH0boiaba. The parachute on one of the bombs deployed, and the bond) landed intact. The parachute on the second bomb did not deploy* and the bomb impacted in soft earth. Upon impact* the primary and secondary broke through the nose of the bomb and penetrated further into the soft earth. On the afternoon of January 24* 1961* excavation operations were bigun but proceeded slowly due to freezing weather* surface water in the hole* and care dictated by the presence of HE. The priamry was recovered from a depth of about. 20 feet on January 30* 1961* and excavation operations were continued in an effort to recover the secondary. The Chairman* MIC, informed the Chairman, AEC, by letter dated April 3, 1961, that the excavation effort had gone to a depth of 42 feet to form a crater 200 feet in diameter. However, recovery efforts were complicated by a high water table, and, although 14 wells had been drilled in an effort to control seepage and the combined output of all pumps was about 6,000 gallons per hour, the water could not be con trolled. The Chairman, MIC, expressed an opinion that a reasonable effort had been expended toward recovery of the secondary, and further expenditure of funds would not be ■ Justified. The Commission was asked to concur in a determination that the unrecovered residue be considered Irretrievably The Conmisslon staff, after analysing the problem from the standpoint of security of Restricted Data, cost analysis* t. and public health and safety, recommended that the Commission ■concur in the proposal presented by the Chairman, MIC, with a provision that the DoD insure that it retain a right to DOE ARCHIVES prevent- excavation in the vicinity of the point of impact. On May 22* 1961* the Commission concurred in the Chairman, MIC, recommendation and efforts to recover the missing secondary were terminated on May 25, 1961. The cost of recovery efforts was reported as $63*000 plus approxlmately $10*000 for site restoration. Excavation and recovery operations were accomplished by the Air Force with the assistance of the Any Engineers.