DNA-TR-82-98 

ANALYSIS OF RADIATION EXPOSURE FOR 

NAVAL PERSONNEL AT OPERATION IVY 

Science Applications, Inc. 

P.O. Box 1303 

McLean, Virginia 22102 

March 1983 

Technical Report 

CONTRACT No. DNA 001-82-C-0012 

THIS WORK WAS SPONSORED BY THE DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY 

UNDER ROT&E RMSS CODE 8384082466 

Prepared for 

Director 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY 

Washington, DC 20305 
Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return 

to sender. 

PLEASE NOTIFY THE DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY, 

ATTN: WASHINGTON, DC IF YOUR 

ADDRESS IS INCORRECT, IF YOU WISH IT DELETED 

FROM THE IF THE ADDRESSEE 

IS NO LONGER EMPLOYED BY YOUR ORGANIZATION. 

f 
 

 

 

 

 

 

- - UNCLASSIFIED -- . SCG”R,TYZLASSlFlCATlON

1. REPORT NUMBER 

DNA-TR-82-98 

2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER 

TITLE 

ANALYSIS OF RADIATION EXPOSURE FOR NAVAL 

PERSONNEL AT OPERATION IVY 

5. TYPE’OF REPORT PERIOD COVERED 

Technical Report 

6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER 

7. 

C. Thomas . Goetz 

J. Stuart J. Klemm 

9. CONTRACT OR GRANT 

DNA 001-82-C-0012 

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 

Science Applications, Inc. 

P.O. Box 1303 

McLean, Virginia 22102 

lo. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK 

AREA WORK UNIT NUMBERS 

Task 

Il. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 

Director 

Defense Nuclear Agency 

Washington, DC 20305 

12. REPORT DATE 

15 March 1983 

13. NUMBER OF PAGES 

74 

14. AGENCY NAME SECURITY CLASS. (of 

UNCLASSIFIED 

DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE 

N/A since UNCLASSIFIED 

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of 

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 

17. STATEMENT (of • babacf Block 

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

This work was sponsored by the Defense Nuclear Agency under 

Code B384082466 

••••••••• ••• Id* 

Operation IVY Task Group 132.3 

Radiation Exposure Assessment Oceanic Nuclear Tests 

Nuclear Test Personnel Review (NTPR) Ship Shielding 

Joint Task Force 132 

by block 

The radiological environments are reconstructed for eighteen ships and the 

residence islands of Enewetak, and Bikini Atolls that received 

fallout following Shots and KING during Operation IVY (November 1952). 

Secondary (late-time) fallout from Shot MIRE was the primary contributor to 

the low-level radiation encountered on the majority of the ships and atolls; 

only the M/V HORIZON received primary (early-time) fallout from this event. 

OF WOV 

UNCLASSIFIED SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF PAGE 
 

 

UNCLASSIFIED 

CLASSIFICATION OF THIS 

20. ABSTRACT (Continued) 

Fallout from Shot KING was minimal. From the reconstructed operations and 

radiological environments, equivalent personnel film badge doses are calculated and compared with available dosimetry data for fourteen of the ships. 

Calculated doses for the majority of the ships are in good agreement with 

the film badge data; however, for three of the participating destroyers 

calculated doses are significantly lower than the dosimetry data 

indicates. 

Calculated mean doses for typical shipboard personnel range from a high of 

0.062 rem on the HORIZON to a low of 0.001 rem on the SPENCER F. BAIRD; for 

island-based personnel, calculated mean doses are less than 0.06 rem. 

UNCLASSIFIED 

SEC UR I TY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Section Page 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 2 

LIST OF TABLES 3 

1. INTRODUCTION 5 

1.1 BACKGROUND 

1.2 NAVAL OPERATIONS 7 

1.3 METHODOLOGY 12 

2. SHIP OPERATIONS AND RADIATION ENVIRONMENTS 16 

2.1 GENERAL SITUATION FOLLOWING SHOTS MIKE AND KING 16 

2.2 RADIATION ENVIRONMENTS 20 

2.2.1 ESTES 24 

2.2.2 USS LEO and USS ELDER 26 

2.2.3 USS USS OAK HILL 

USS and USNS GENERAL E.T. 

COLLINS (TAP-147) 

2.2.4 USS ARIKARA (ATF-98) and USNS DAVID C. SHANKS 

(TAP-180) 31 

2.2.5 USS AGAWAM 32 

2.2.6 USS O’BANNON (DDE-450) 34 

2.2.7 USS RADFORD (DDE-446) and USS CARPENTER 

(DDE-825) 35 

2.2.8 USS FLETCHER (DDE-445) 37 

2.2.9 USS CURTISS 39 

2.2.10 USS YUMA and Kwajalein Atoll 40 

2.2.11 M/V HORIZON 42 

2.2.12 M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD and Bikini Atoll 44 

2.3 INTEGRATED FREE-FIELD INTENSITIES 46 

2.4 SHIP SHIELDING 47 

3. DOSE CALCULATIONS 52 

52 

53 

3.1 PERSONNEL ACTIVITIES 

3.2 CALCULATED PERSONNEL FILM BADGE DOSES 

4. UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS 56 

5. FILM BADGE DOSIMETRY 58 

6. CONCLUSIONS AND TOTAL DOSE SUMMARY 

7. REFERENCES 63 

1 
-

-

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

Figure Page 

l-l Operation IVY Shot Locations 6 

1-2 Organization of Joint Task Force 132 

1-3 Operation IVY Dose Reconstruction Methodology 13 

2-1 Enewetak Lagoon Anchorage Areas for Task Group 132.3 

Ships Following Shot MIKE Operation IVY 18 

2-2 Cumulative Fallout Activity and Average Gamma Intensity 

vs. Time on the USS ESTES 23 

2-3 Gamma Intensity and Activity vs. Time on the USS 25 

2-4 Average Intensity on the USS ESTES and Parry Island 

2-5 Average Intensity on the USS LEO and the USS ELDER 27 

USNS GENERAL E.T. COLLINS, and Enewetak Island 

27 

2-6 Average Intensity on the USS 30 

2-7 Average Intensity on the USS OAK HILL, USS 

30 

2-8 Average Intensity on the USS ARIKARA and USNS 

DAVID C. SHANKS 33 

2-9 Average Intensity on the USS AGAWAM 33 

2-10 Average Intensity on the USS O’BANNON 36 

2-11 Average Intensity on the USS RADFORD 36 

2-12 Average Intensity on the USS CARPENTER 38 

2-13 Average Intensity on the USS FLETCHER 38 

Average Intensity on the USS CURTISS 41 

2-15 Average Intensity on the USS YUMA 41 

2-16 Average Intensity on Kwajalein Atoll 43 

2-17 Average Intensity on the M/V HORIZON 43 

2-18 Average Intensity on the M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD 45 

2-19 Average Intensity on Bikini Atoll 45 

2-20 Ship Shielding Factor vs. Deck Plating Thickness 50 

3-1 M/V HORIZON Crew Activity Time Line Shot MIKE 53 

Operation IVY Dosimetry Data and Dose Calculations 59 

2 
-

LIST OF TABLES 

Table Page 

l-l Operation IVY Shot Data 7 

1-2 Operation IVY Naval Personnel Summary (22 October 9 

2-l Integrated Free-Field Intensities on Task Group 132.3 Ships 

and the Residence Islands of Surrounding Atolls 48 

2-2 Ship Shielding Factors 51 

3-l M/V HORIZON Personnel Dose Calculations 54 

3-2 Calculated Personnel Film Badge Doses on Task Group 132.3 Ships 

and the Residence Islands of Surrounding Atolls 

6-1 Summary of Calculated Doses 62 

3 
--

--

4 
----

Section 1 

INTRODUCTION 

Operation IVY was a nuclear test series conducted by the Atomic Energy 

Commission at the Pacific Proving Grounds during the fall of 1952. With the 

Chief of Staff of the Army acting as executive agent for the Chiefs of Staff, 

Joint Task Force 132 was formed from elements of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and 

civilian scientists to support the operation. While over 11,000 people were assigned to 

JTF 132, approximately 5,500 were attached to the Naval element--Task Group 132.3. 

Generally, most of the TG 132.3 ships remained clear of radiological areas, 

which were well defined. However, radioactivity from secondary (late-time) fallout 

did result in widespread, low-level exposure. Therefore, it is necessary to reconstruct 

the radiation dose using radiological data, ship logs, and crew activity scenarios to 

verify the available dosimetry data. This report describes the operation, the 

radiological situation, and the time-space relationships of each ship with respect to 

the nuclear environment. The results are portrayed as film badge doses for the crews 

of each of the 18 vessels that supported the operation. Because some of the task group 

personnel were on the residence islands of Kwajalein, Bikini, and Enewetak Atolls* 

during the periods of fallout, the radiation environment on these islands has also been 

reconstructed. 

1.1 BACKGROUND 

Enewetak is one of the several atolls making up the Marshall Island group and, 

along with Bikini, had been the site of previous nuclear tests. Figure l-l shows the 

main features of Enewetak Atoll and the Operation IVY shot locations. The two 

detonations of the operation were Shots MIKE and KING. Pertinent details of each 

test are summarized in Table l-l. MIKE was the first nuclear fusion device. Although 

*A better understanding of the Marshall Islands language has permitted a more 

accurate transliteration of Marshall Islands names into English. The newer names/ 

spellings are used in this report. 

5 
Shot 

ENEWETAK ATOLL 

( I 

DEEP ENTRANCE 

0 1 2 3 4 5 

SOUTHERN 

ANCHORAGE 

ENEWETAK 

WIDE 

PASSAGE 

Figure l-l. Operation IVY Shot Locations 

6 
-

--

------

the complexity of the experiment made yield prediction difficult, designers expected a 

yield of at least 4 MT and perhaps as much as 10 MT. Even at the lower yield, 

Shot MIKE would have been the most powerful nuclear device ever detonated. The 

yield for Shot KING was predicted to be about 500 KT, making it the most powerful 

fission device ever detonated. Consequently, planning for both shots was dominated by 

the concern for safety of task force personnel and the camps on Enewetak and Parry 

islands from the blast, thermal, and radiation effects, as well as from the resulting 

fallout. For Shot MIKE, only evacuation of the entire atoll offered an adequate 

margin of safety. 

Table 

Operation IVY Shot Data 

Shot Name MIKE KING 

Date 1 Nov 1952 16 Nov 1952 

Time (Local)* * 0715 1130 

Site (Island) Flora Is.) Yvonne 

Height of Burst Surface 1,480 ft 

Yield 10.4 MT 500 KT 

Source: Reference 1. 

1.2 NAVAL OPERATIONS 

The Naval support units were organized as Task Group 132.3 and provided the 

main transportation and logistical support to the task forces at Enewetak. 

The Naval Task group had the following missions: 

**Local Time was 12 hours ahead of GMT. 
1. Provide for the security of the Enewetak danger area by detecting, 

warning, and escorting unauthorized vessels and aircraft out of the danger 

area. 

2. the requirements of the scientific task group for suitable water 

transportation and shipboard assembly facilities for the MIKE device. 

3. Provide shipboard command facilities for the task force commander as well 

as for the commanders of the subordinate task groups. 

4. Provide ship-to-shore and intra-atoll surface and helicopter transportation, 

including that for damage survey and recovery of scientific samples and 

film. 

5. Provide shipboard facilities to house the entire joint task force while 

afloat. 

summary of naval ships/units and personnel is contained in Table l-2. Task 

Group 132.3 was organized into seven major components as shown in Figure l-2. With 

the exception of the members of the Patrol Plane Unit, which was based on 

most task group personnel apparently were billeted aboard the task group ships. 

While the task force was afloat for the detonation, each ship’s radiation 

safety element was responsible for personnel radiological safety, subject to control by 

the CJTF 132, through the CTG 132.3. During the rest of the operational period, 

prime responsibility for radiological safety rested with TU 132.1.7, a unit of the 

scientific group, using its own resources and with assistance, as required, from the 

rad-safe elements of the other three task groups. 

Operation IVY posed some unique problems because of the predicted large yield 

of the detonations. The MIKE shot was expected to produce a yield far surpassing that 

of any earlier test. There was concern that a device detonated in the atmosphere 

might significantly contaminate the lagoon and restrict its use. Radiological safety of 

8 
 

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

- - - -

Table l-2. Operation IVY Naval Personnel Summary October 

Ship/Unit Officers Civilian Enlisted 

Total 

Personnel 

USS CURTISS 42 687 729 

USS ESTES 

USS LST-836 (at Bikini)* 

USNS DAVID C. SHANKS (TAP-180) 

USNS E.T. COLLINS (TAP-1471 

USS LEO 

48 

6 

5 

12 

518 

123 

17 

16 

216 

566 

129 

191 

192 

228 

USS OAK HILL (LSD-71 19 

TG 132.3 BOAT POOL* 4 

TG 132.3 UDU (at 1 

132.3 SHORE DET (at --

USS AGA\VAM 8 

YOG-69 (at - -

YON- 146 (at - -

USS 5 

USS YUMA 5 

USS ARIKARA 5 

USS ELDER 4 

M/V HORIZON - -

M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD Unk Unk 

311 

198 

20 

- -

114 

14 

- -

74 

71 

75 

45 

Unk 

330 

202 

21 

18 

122 

14 

0 

79 

76 

80 

49 

36 

70 

USS CARPENTER (DDE-825) 

USS FLETCHER (DDE-445) 

USS RADFORD (DDE-446) 

USS O’BANNON (DDE-450) 

15 

17 

18 

261 

241 

238 

234 

276 

258 

256 

251 

IJSS 

(Includes Air Units)* 

107 865 972 

PATRON TWO (at 

COMCORTDESDIV (on CARPENTER) 

COMTASKGROUP 132.3 (on 

47 

5 

17 

--

1 

298 

5 

44 

345 

10 

62 

TOTALS 412 376 4686 5562 

Source: Reference 3 

*The movements of these smaller units could not be followed in sufficient detail to be able 

to reconstruct their film badge doses. 

9 
TASK GROUP 132.1 TASK GROUP 132.2 TASK GROUP 132.3 

(Scientific) 

I 

TASK GROUP 132.4 

(Air Force) 

TASK 132.30 

TASK 132.31 

(Transport) 

-

-

CURTISS 

USS ESTES, LEO, USS LST-836 

GENERAL E.T. COLLINS 

L'SNS DAVID C. SHANKS 

USS OAK HILL, USS AGAWAM, YUMA 

ARIKARA, USS ELDER, USS 

HORIZON, M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD 

USS RADFORD, USS CARPENTER 

USS FLETCHER, USS O'BANNON 

LJSS RADFORD, USS CARPENTER 

USS FLETCHER, O'BANNON 

USS 

TASK UNIT 132.3.1 

. (Patrol Planes PATROL SQUADRON TWO 

Based at Kwajalein) 

Source: 3. 

TASK 132.32 

(Service Harbor 

Control) 

TASK 132.33 

(Destroyers) 

TASK UNIT 132.3.0 

(Carrier Unit) 

Figure 1-2. tion of Joint Task Force 132 

10 

7 
all military and civilian personnel was specified as a command responsibility. Specific 

rad-safe responsibilities for 132.3 included the following (Reference 4): 

1. Ensure that appropriate radiac equipment and qualified personnel are 

aboard each task group unit, and that each unit is prepared to carry out the 

rad-safe mission of the task group. 

2. Provide and train rad-safe monitors, including one airborne monitor for 

each multiengine aircraft crew. 

3. Provide monitors and decontamination crews aboard each ship. 

4. Provide radiac equipment and protective clothing. 

5. Provide repair, spare parts, and calibration facilities. 

6. Provide a limited laboratory facility for radiochemistry techniques, fallout 

studies, and film badge processing for use by TG 132.1 rad-safe operations 

while the task force is embarked. 

7. Provide decontamination facilities for task group aircraft not based on 

Kwajalein. 

8. Provide necessary helicopter air service for surveys before task 

force reentry (monitors furnished by TG 132.1). 

Provide amphibious aircraft for monitoring fallout and for collecting water 

samples from adjacent inhabited islands and atolls. 

Radiological safety was expressly designated as a command responsibility for 

each ship. The rad-safe function was designated to the shipboard damage control 

parties. Normal ship staffing for radiological warfare was considered adequate for 

rad-safe purposes. Prior to obtaining a final radiological clearance and being released 

11 
from the operational control of TG 132.3, the rad-safe team aboard each ship surveyed 

the entire vessel to insure that no areas of radioactive contamination exceeded 

15 mR/day (0.6 If such intensities were found to exist, decontamination was 

undertaken until criteria were met. 

1.3 METHODOLOGY 

The procedures developed in previous dose reconstruction efforts (References 5 

and have been adapted to the shipboard and island radiological environments at 

Operation IVY. Figure l-3 depicts the steps taken in calculating personnel doses. 

These steps are pursued to a level of detail governed by the availability of data. On 

many of the ships and atolls, sufficient data were recorded at the time and enough 

have survived to understand the Naval operations and to characterize the radiation 

environment. For some other ships, however, virtually no radiological data exist; their 

environments are estimated based on their position, i.e., proximity to other 

ships/atolls with known environments, and activity when fallout was encountered. 

Individual ship deck logs (Reference serve as an authoritative source of ship position 

and activity. It is assumed that the units of Task Group 132.3 adhered to the operation 

plans as promulgated by Commander Task Group 132.3; therefore, these operation 

plans serve as guides to ship activities. References 2 and 3 comprise the official 

reports of the tests. Supporting documents and reports prepared by the Naval 

Radiological Defense Laboratory and the Los Scientific Laboratory 

(References 8 and also contain data pertinent to this dose reconstruction. 

Radiological data are used to reconstruct the time-dependent radiation environment on each of the eighteen ships and three atolls manned by Naval personnel while 

at Operation IVY. Characterization of the radiation environment starts with the 

determination of free-field intensities from correlations made between shipboard 

fallout activity and limited radiation intensity data. The periodic shipboard surveys, in 

conjunction with fallout time-of-arrival data and nearby island surveys, serve to define 

the free-field intensity as a function of time. For interpolation between readings and 

for extrapolation beyond the last reading, the intensity is assumed to be a power law 

function of time after burst, determined from fallout decay rates. Specific data 
-- - --

SHIP OPERATIONS 

(DECK 

SHIPBOARD AND 

ISLAND FALLOUT SAMPLES 

AFTER-ACTION 

REPORTS 

FREE-FIELD 

INTENSITY 

FILM BADGE 

DOSE 

UNCERTAINTIES 

FILM BADGE 

DOSE 

DISTRIBUTIONS 

DOSIMETRY 

RECORDS 

Figure 1-3. Operation IVY Dose Reconstruction Methodology 

13 
regarding the development of intensity curves for the ships and islands are presented 

in Section 2. 

Shipboard radiation surveys indicated a considerable variation in topside intensities because of ship geometry, redistribution of fallout during and 

decontamination, and non-uniform adherence of fallout particles to ship materials. If 

only an average survey reading was reported, this value is used. On some ships, 

readings were taken at several predetermined positions on the ship’s exposed surfaces. 

These readings, taken three feet above the surface, are judged to provide an unbiased 

representation of the topside radiation field. The ship’s crew is presumed to have been 

located at random positions when on deck; thus, the mean survey readings, appropriately decayed, are used to determine the mean intensities encountered by the crew 

when topside. The distribution of survey readings suggest a distribution in radiation 

exposure to the crew; this matter is considered in the uncertainty analysis (Section 4). 

The analysis of radiation exposure to the crew also requires estimation of 

radiation intensities below deck and the apportionment of crew activities with time 

below and topside. A ship-shielding factor is defined as the ratio of intensity below to 

the intensity topside. This factor, determined for each type of ship in Section 2.4, is 

approximately 0.1 and is nearly constant over the usual crew locations within a ship. 

Thus, the radiation dose to the crew is dominated by the topside exposure. Specific 

durations of topside exposure are given in ship logs for shot day (rarely thereafter) 

when the situation altered the normal pattern of duties. For other days, 

and when unspecified, the on-deck intervals are taken to be 0800-1200, 1330-1700, and 

1800-2000 hours, which amount to 40 percent of a day. To facilitate the calculation, 

the daily fractional topside duration, rather than the specified intervals, is used when 

the slackening intensity lessens the need for more precision in timing. Because the 

specified intervals are nearly centered around midday, this approximation is suitable 

by the third day. 

The mean film badge dose to the crew is obtained from time integration of 

intensity for all intervals below (including the shielding factor) and topside. A 

conversion factor of 0.7 is used to account for body shielding by the badge wearer 

(Reference 

14 
Cumulative film badge doses to the average crewman of each ship are 

calculated and presented in Section 3. Calculations are continued through 18 

November when the roll-up phase of the operation was nearly complete; subsequent 

dose accrual is negligible compared to that previously accrued. An uncertainty 

analysis of the dose calculations is provided in Section 4. In Section 5, the available 

dosimetry records are analyzed, and their comparability to the calculated doses is 

assessed. 
Section 2 

SHIP OPERATIONS AND RADIATION ENVIRONMENTS 

This section details the individual TG 132.3 ship operations for the period just 

prior to Shot MIKE on 1 November 1952 through the roll-up phase of Operation IVY 

following Shot KING on 16 November 1952. In addition, radiological environments for 

each ship resulting from MIKE and KING fallout are reconstructed based on shipboard 

fallout samples and radiological survey data. For those ships where there are 

insufficient shipboard data to reconstruct the specific radiological environment, it is 

based on the ship’s proximity to other ships with known environments. For instance, no 

radiological data are available for the USS ELDER or USS LEO following Shot MIKE; 

hence, their radiological situation is based on the reconstructed environment for the 

USS ESTES, which was anchored near these ships off Parry Island when Shot MIKE 

fallout was encountered. Because of the large number of ships comprising TG 132.3, 

ships are grouped, where possible, according to their positions at the times that Shot 

MIKE and Shot KING fallout were encountered. Similar radiation environments are 

reconstructed for the residence islands of Kwajalein, Bikini, and Enewetak Atolls. 

These environments are then time-integrated to determine the daily integrated 

field intensities on each of the ships and islands. 

2.1 GENERAL SITUATION FOLLOWING SHOTS MIKE AND KING 

Prior to the MIKE detonation at 0715 hours on 1 November 1952, all of the 

132.3 ships present at Enewetak departed the lagoon and steamed to their respective 

shot positions. With the exception of the M/V HORIZON, which was 65 miles 

northeast of surface zero at shot time, all of the ships were at least 25 miles to 

the south and east of the lagoon. From this distance, no initial nuclear radiation was 

received by any personnel aboard the ships. 

As the MIKE radioactive cloud rose, the low-level winds deposited the primary 

(early-time) fallout in an area generally to the north and west of the MIKE SZ. Within 

four minutes after the detonation, the cloud stabilized with its base at 60,000 feet and 

16 
 

the top at 100,000 feet. Easterly winds between 60,000 and 80,000 feet were pushing 

the lower half of the cloud west while westerly winds between 80,000 and 100,000 feet 

were pushing the upper part the cloud to the east (Reference I). As the cloud top 

drifted to the east, radioactive particles were continuously falling from the cloud back 

into the troposphere where, for several days, the prevailing easterly winds apparently 

took them on a course back toward Enewetak Lagoon. . This secondary (late-time) 

fallout was the source of radioactive contamination aboard the majority of the ships 

participating in Operation IVY. Only the HORIZON, which was on station northeast of 

the MIKE at shot time, received any primary fallout. 

Analysis of lagoon water samples obtained on 1 and 2 November indicated that 

the water in the southern anchorage area of the lagoon was not contaminated by MIKE 

fallout and the TG 132.3 ships began reentering the lagoon at approximately 0930 

hours on 2 November. The USS ESTES USS LEO USS ELDER 

(AN-201 and the USS AGAWAM (AOG-6) anchored off Parry Island while the USS OAK 

HILL USS ARIKARA USS USS 

USNS GENERAL E.T. COLLINS (TAP-147). and the USNS DAVID C. SHANKS 

(TAP-1801 anchored off Enewetak Island (see Figure 2-1). All ships were anchored in 

their respective berths by approximately 1900 hours on 2 November. 

The USS CURTISS (AV-4) and USS YUMA (ATF-94) had also entered the lagoon 

but then departed for Kwajalein during the afternoon of 2 November. The USS 

FLETCHER (DDE-4451, which had been patrolling the waters west of the lagoon during 

the morning of 2 November, provided screen for the CURTISS during its trip to 

Kwajalein and returned to Enewetak on 4 November. The YUMA did not return to 

Enewetak until 7 November, and the CURTISS remained at Kwajalein during the 

remainder of the operation. 

The USS CARPENTER (DDE-825) and USS RADFORD (DDE-446) provided 

antisubmarine warfare patrols in the vicinity of Enewetak and did not reenter the 

lagoon until 8 and 9 November, respectively. The USS O’BANNON (DDE-4501, after 

picking up Dan buoys in support of a Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory 

fallout experiment, reentered the lagoon during the evening of 6 Novernber. 

17 
-

Figure Lagoon Anchorage Areas for Task Croup 132.3 

Following Shot Operation 

18 
The M/V HORIZON continued its operations in the area northeast of the lagoon, 

recovering instruments and equipment that had been laid out prior to the test. On 4 

November, it steamed toward Bikini and arrived there the following morning. The 

HORIZON did not return to Enewetak until 6 November. 

On 2 November, secondary fallout from the MIKE radioactive cloud began to 

contaminate the ships anchored in the lagoon, the destroyers on patrol outside of the . 

lagoon, and the three ships steaming towards Kwajalein. Particle sizes in the fallout 

were quite small 25 precipitation was the mechanism for depositing the debris 

on the task group ships (Reference 3). This secondary fallout continued intermittently 

for several days with average intensities the ships anchored in the lagoon 

reaching a maximum on 4 November. Another “wave” of secondary fallout arrived 

during the evening of 7 November and continued for approximately 12 hours. It is 

assumed that this fallout was so widespread that any ship in the vicinity of Enewetak 

encountered it. This second wave of fallout apparently did not affect Bikini or 

Kwajalein Atolls. 

On completion of the MIKE event, some ships were no longer required and were 

released from TG 132.3. The first ships released were the ELDER and the ARIKARA, 

which departed Enewetak on 8 November for Pearl Harbor. The YUMA was released 

and steamed back to Kwajalein on the same day. The DAVID C. SHANKS was 

reported ready for release on 8 November but did not depart Enewetak until 

November. Although not released from the task group, the LEO also departed 

Enewetak on 8 November to Kwajalein, where it remained until 21 November, 

when it returned to Enewetak. 

The remaining ships comprising TG 132.3 stayed in the vicinity of Enewetak 

preparing for Shot KING. On 14 November, the O’BANNON departed the lagoon 

to the Control Destroyer Station approximately 145 miles southeast of 

Enewetak. Early in the morning of 16 November, all of the task group ships, with the 

exception of the ESTES and the HORIZON, departed Enewetak Lagoon to take up their 

shot positions. The CARPENTER, FLETCHER, AGAWAM, COLLINS and took 

up stations 19 miles south-southeast of the lagoon while the and RADFORD 

took up stations approximately 24 miles southeast of the lagoon. The OAK HILL was 

19 
approxirnately 19 miles east of Enewetak. Of the two ships that remained in the 

lagoon, the ESTES was approximately 9.5 miles south of the KING SZ, while the 

HORIZON was assigned an anchorage near the southern entrance (Wide Passage) of the 

lagoon, off Enewetak Island. 

Shot KING was detonated at 1130 hours, 16 November 1952. Reentry had been 

set for 1550 hours on 16 November and all 132.3 ships that returned to Enewetak 

on shot day were anchored in the lagoon by 1800 hours. The COLLINS and 

anchored off Enewetak Island while the ESTES, OAK HILL, RADFORD, 

CARPENTER, FLETCHER and AGAWAM anchored off Parry Island. The O’BANNON 

left its shot station at 1705 hours and steamed toward Kwajalein. The M/V SPENCER 

F. BAIRD, which had remained at Bikini Atoll throughout most of Operation IVY, 

departed Bikini after Shot KING and arrived at Enewetak at approximately 0700 hours, 

17 November. 

Being an air burst, Shot KING produced very little local fallout. Some ships 

reported a trace of fallout and measured a maximum intensity of 0.6 (beta) 

approximately 24 hours after the shot (Reference 3). It is assumed that all ships in the 

vicinity of Enewetak were contaminated by this fallout. Bikini and Kwajalein Atolls 

did not report any fallout following Shot KING. 

2.2 RADIATION ENVIRONMENTS 

Four main sources of fallout data are used in reconstructing the shipboard 

radiation environments resulting from Shots MIKE and KING: 

For ten ships that participated in a NRDL fallout experiment, fallout 

samples were obtained on two-foot square “sticky-paper” fallout collectors. 

These collectors were placed on a platform high on the main mast of each 

ship to insure they were above any spray from the ship’s system. 

Exposure periods were generally 12 hours, but this varied from ship to ship. 

Measurements made on these fallout samples with a proportional counter 

(counts per minute of beta plus gamma) are given in Reference 8. The 

20 
 continued taking fallout samples for several days after the 

other ships, and it is assumed that this fallout was so widespread that any 

ship in the vicinity of Enewetak received it. Fallout samples were also 

obtained on Kwajalein and Bikini Atolls. 

A second source of fallout data consists of survey measurements taken 

aboard the ESTES. Hourly gamma intensity readings were 

obtained from eight representative locations on the weather decks from 31 

October through 4 November, and approximately every six hours on 5, 6 

and 7 November (Reference Corresponding intensity readings were 

also obtained on a helicopter landing platform that had become 

contaminated by helicopters returning from the shot island on November. 

These readings are not included in determining the average topside 

intensity. This particular reference also indicates that average beta plus 

gamma intensities on the ESTES were 4-5 times the average gamma 

intensity. 

The third major source of data is the activity (counts per minute of beta 

plus gamma) outside the counting laboratory on the hangar deck of the 

(Reference 

The last source of fallout data used in this analysis are beta plus gamma 

intensities measured on the weather surfaces on 4, 5, 

and 6 November (Reference 

Between 1 and 7 November, the fallout samples obtained from the collectors 

aboard ten of the task group ships provide the majority of shipboard intensity data 

used in this analysis. Comparable fallout samples were also obtained on Bikini and 

Kwajalein Atolls. The activity measurements, in counts per minute, were normalized 

to 21 November 1952, apparently because the main purpose of the fallout sampling was 

to determine the time of arrival and the time of maximum intensity of the secondary 

fallout (Reference Alone, the samples would be of little use in reconstructing the 

magnitude of the gamma intensity on the ships and atolls where they were collected. 
Fortunately, on two ships--the ESTES and RENDOVA--free-field (topside) gamma 

intensity readings were obtained during the period 1-7 November, which could be 

correlated with the fallout sample data obtained these ships during the same 

time period. Figure 2-2 is a plot of the average topside gamma intensity on the ESTES 

(minus background) along with the cumulative activity inferred (by from 21 

November back to the time of deposition) from the fallout samples. The cumulative 

activity is plotted at times corresponding to the end of exposure for each sample. The 

cumulative curve is obtained by summing the activity contribution from all previous 

sampling periods, appropriately decayed. The cumulative counts through the end of 

any sampling period should thus correlate with the measured intensity at that end 

time, barring any intervening decontamination. Reference 13 indicates that the ratio 

of beta activity to gamma intensity is nearly constant over the interval in question 

days to 3 weeks after burst). The “spikes” in the topside gamma intensity curve prior 

to 1200 hours on 3 November, correlate quite well with periods of light rainfall. 

The correlation of activity with intensity is derived from comparisons at two 

times on the ESTES and one on the Intensity readings on the ESTES 

through the morning of 3 November are insufficiently distinguishable from background 

to aid in the correlation. Useful comparisons are made at 1900 hours, 3 November, 

and at 0700 hours, 4 November (denoted by solid squares in Figure resulting in 

ratios of 0.069 and 0.025 per Mcpm, respectively. Because of the much higher 

intensities at the latter time, the two comparisons are essentially independent. 

Attempts to decontaminate the ship were begun at approximately 0800 hours on 4 

November, therefore, correlations at later times are not possible. A subsequent rise in 

intensity late on 4 November (at 1300 and 1700 hours) is not associated with a 

substantial increase in activity counts. Curiously, the Roll-Up Phase Report from the 

ESTES (Reference does not mention fallout deposition for the interval of these 

ostensibly highest intensity readings the ship. Perhaps the monitors reported 

peak readings during this interval, rather than the usual average readings. Regardless, 

these two data points are considered inappropriate for use in the correlation. For the 

the only useful comparison leads to a ratio of 0.066 per Mcpm at 

1100 hours on 5 November. The average of the three ratios is about 0.05 per 

Mcpm. This value is used to derive intensity curves for all ships where fallout sample 

data are the only basis for determining activity levels. 
 Cumulative Activity From -

Fallout Samples (cpm) 

Topside Gamma Intensity 

5Nov 

Date (1952) 

7Nov 

Figure 2-2. Cumulative Fallout Activity and Average Gamma 

Intensity vs. Time on the USS 
Reconstructing the ship intensity curves past 7 November requires further 

correlations to be made between the derived topside intensity on the for 

the period 4-7 November and activity measurements obtained on the 

hangar deck during the same period. This activity was continuously monitored from 

before Shot until 42 hours after Shot KING. Because the detector was below the 

weather decks (it was located on the side of a laboratory wall approximately six feet 

above the hangar deck), it is fair to assume that the activity monitored was due to 

gamma radiation only and that the activity measured was proportional to the gamma 

intensity on the flight deck directly over the detector. Figure 2-3 is a plot of the 

activity as measured on the hangar deck from 1-18 Novernber 1952, and 

the average topside gamma intensity derived from the cumulative fallout sample 

correlations described in the paragraph. With the exception of one data 

point on the hangar deck activity curve (1200 hours on 5 November), it appears that 

the hangar deck intensity is proportional to the topside gamma intensity during the 

period 5 November to 7 November. Assuming the proportionality remained constant 

through 18 November, it possible to reconstruct the average topside gamma intensity 

the through its departure from Enewetak on 20 November 1952. It 

is also possible to subtract out the intensity contribution from Shot fallout on 3-

6 November in order to quantify the magnitude of the MIKE fallout that occurred on 

7-8 November and the trace of fallout following Shot KING on 16 November. For the 

task force ships remaining at Enewetak during these two subsequent periods of fallout, 

the gamma intensity contribution from each source is simply added to each ship’s 

intensity curve (derived from the fallout sampling data). 

2.2. I USS ESTES (AGC- 12) 

The ESTES reentered the lagoon at 105 1 hours on 2 November and anchored in 

berth B-l off Parry Island, where it remained until its departure from the lagoon on 19 

November to Pearl Harbor. The radiological contamination on the ESTES 

resulting from Shot MIKE and Shot KING fallout is depicted in Figure 2-4. It is based 

on fallout samples obtained on the ship through 7 November and correlations with the 

hangar deck activity through 21 November. Although some shipboard 

decontamination had taken place, it is not apparent in the intensity curve since the 

24 
 
fallout samples were obtained above any weather surfaces that were decontaminated 

(Section 2.2). By neglecting the effects of decontamination in reconstructing a ship’s 

topside intensity, subsequent dose calculations in Section 3 are high-sided. Radiological data available for the ESTES are contained in two messages to the 

the latter (0715 hours on 3 November) stating that, at MIKE plus 48 hours, “maximum 

dosage received by personnel 0 (Reference 14). This is in good agreement with 

Figure 2-4, which shows that only background intensities were encountered prior to 

0700 hours on 3 November. 

Because the ESTES remained in the lagoon for the remainder of the operation, it 

is assumed that it received the second of fallout on 7-8 November from Shot 

MIKE as well as the fallout on 17 November following Shot KING. Final radiological 

clearance was given to the ESTES on 19 November 1952. 

Radiological surveys and fallout samples were not obtained on Parry Island, 

approximately 1500 yards east of the ESTES. Due to the lack of radiological data 

from this island, it is assumed that Parry received the same fallout that occurred 

the ESTES, depicted in Figure 2-4. 

2.2.2 USS LEO and USS ELDER 

Following Shot MIKE, the LEO entered the lagoon and anchored in berth C-2 off 

Parry Island at 1051 hours on 2 November; the ELDER anchored in berth D-3, also off 

Parry, at 1134 hours 2 November. Both ships were in close proximity to the ESTES, 

which was anchored in berth B-l (see Figure 2-l). Except for a excursion by 

the ELDER to a northern operating area on 3 Novernber to search for instrument 

buoys, both ships remained anchored off Parry until 8 November. The ELDER, having 

received final radiological clearance on 7 November, was released from operational 

control of the Task Group and departed Enewetak at 0927 hours on 8 November 

to Pearl Harbor. The LEO departed the lagoon at 1556 hours on 8 November 

to Kwajalein and did not return to Enewetak until 21 November. The LEO was 

granted final radiological clearance at Kwajalein on 19 November. 

26 
 

 

I I I, 

Shot MIKE Fallout Shipboard Fallout Data 

Shot KING Fallout 

1 2 3 4 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 9 20 

Shot NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure 2-4. Average Intensity on the USS ESTES and Parry Island 

Shot MIKE Fallout 

Based on ESTES Fallout Data 

I , , 

3 4 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 

Figure 2-5. Average Intensity on the USS LEO and the USS ELDER 
 

No radiological data from either ship have been located that would indicate the 

topside gamma intensities resulting from Shot MIKE. Fallout collectors were placed 

on the LEO ‘from l-5 November but an analysis of these samples indicated that no 

fallout occurred on the ship. This appears highly unlikely due to its close proximity to 

the ESTES during this time period. It is assumed that both the LEO and ELDER 

received the same fallout that occurred on the ESTES through 8 November when they 

departed the lagoon. Figure 2-5 depicts the average topside gamma intensity on the 

LEO and ELDER, as inferred from the ESTES data. The Shot KING contribution does 

not apply since neither ship was in the vicinity of Enewetak when the KING fallout 

occurred. 

2.23 USS USS OAK HILL USS (ATF-85) and 

USNS GENERAL E.T. COLLINS (TAP-1471 

On 2 November, the day after Shot MIKE, the OAK HILL, 

and COLLINS reentered the lagoon and anchored off Enewetak Island (see Figure 

All four ships remained in this anchorage area until 5 November when the 

began taking up various positions in the and northern portions of the lagoon 

while aiding the HORIZON in conducting its seismic refraction studies. These studies 

continued through 15 November, during which time the never left the-lagoon. 

On 6 November, the shifted berths to the anchorage area off Parry 

Island and departed the lagoon only twice on 12 and 13 November, to conduct aircraft 

operations. Both times it returned to the anchorage off Parry. 

The OAK HILL remained anchored off Enewetak until 8 November when it 

departed the lagoon, returning to the same berth on 9 November. On 12 November, 

the OAK HILL shifted berths to the anchorage area off Parry where, except for nine 

hours at sea on 13 November, it remained until 16 November. The COLLINS did not 

shift berths following Shot MIKE and left the lagoon only once for approximately six 

hours on 13 November. 

28 
Early in the morning on 16 November, all four ships departed the lagoon to take 

up positions from where the crews would safely observe Shot KING at 1130 hours. 

Later that same afternoon, the and OAK HILL returned to anchorages off 

Parry, while the and COLLINS anchored off Enewetak Island. 

From the fallout samples obtained on the and OAK HILL it is possible 

to estimate the topside gamma intensity on all four ships while at Enewetak. Figure 

2-6 is the derived topside intensity on the and Figure 2-7 is a similar curve 

for the OAK HILL. Since the and COLLINS were anchored in close proximity 

to the OAK HILL following Shot MIKE, it is assumed they received the same fallout. 

It is further assumed that Enewetak Island, being only several thousand yards east of 

these ships, received similar fallout although its occurrence is not documented. 

Because all four of the ships remained in the vicinity of the lagoon for the remainder 

of the operation, it is assumed that each of the ships received similar fallout on 7-3 

November as well as the fallout from Shot KING. 

On 4, 5, and 6 November, intensity measurements obtained on the 

flight deck indicated average beta plus gamma intensities of 2.1 mR/hr, 1.8 and 

0.7 mR/hr, respectively (Reference 12). Assuming a beta plus gamma to gamma ratio 

of 5 (Section these survey readings imply gamma intensities of 0.42 mR/hr, 

0.36 and 0.14 on these three successive days. These values are plotted 

in Figure 2-6 (solid circles on 4, 5, and 6 and, with the exception of the 6 

November survey point, show good agreernent with the average topside gamma 

intensity curve derived from the fallout samples. 

On 8 November, following a radiation survey the COLLINS, average 

intensities ranged from 1.5-2.5 with a maximum of 6 (all beta plus 

gamma). Negative results were obtained below decks (Reference 7). Assuming the 

same ratio as before, average gamma intensities would have been 0.3-0.5 mR/hr. The 

range in average intensities has been plotted in Figure 2-7 and tend to support the 

average curve derived from the OAK HILL fallout samples and hangar deck 

activities. 
 

.5-

2 Shipboard Fallout Data 

. 

Shipboard 

Shot Fallout Intensity 

3 -

2 Shot KING Fallout 

. 

12 I3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 

1952 

Figure 2-6. Average Intensity on the USS 

I'"' "I 

0 

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 

"IKE NOVEMBER 1952 

Shipboard Fallout Data •

Range in average intensity 

measured on the 

Figure 2-7. Average Intensity on the USS OAK HILL, 

GENERAL E.T. COLLINS, and Island 

30 
While helping the HORIZON perform seismic studies in the northern portion of 

the atoll following Shot MIKE, the evaporators became slightly contaminated 

from radioactive water. Although measurements of deposits (scale) obtained from the 

ship’s evaporators indicated intensities above the permissible maximum for Operation 

IVY (0.6 mR/hr, beta plus gamma), it is reported to have been virtually all beta 

radiation (References 2 and 12) and the ship was given an operational radiological 

clearance on 17 November. The COLLINS and OAK HILL received their final 

radiological clearances on 19 November and the received its final 

clearance on 2 December 1952. 

2.2.4 USS ARIKARA (Al-F-981 and USNS DAVID C. SHANKS (TAP-180) 

Following Shot MIKE, the ARIKARA entered the lagoon at 0925 hours on 2 

November with three Navy barges in tow. After discharging its tow in berth D-l, the 

ARIKARA anchored in berth M-4 off Enewetak Island at 1543 hours. In this 

anchorage, the ship was approximately 500 yards from the OAK HILL, and 

essentially surrounded by these three ships (see Figure It remained in 

berth M-4 until 1544 hours on 5 November when it departed the lagoon to a 

position 155 nmi northwest of Enewetak to recover some drifting buoys. It returned to 

the lagoon at 1035 hours on 6 November and anchored in berth M-4 at 1110 hours. The 

ARIKARA shifted berths on 7 November to an anchorage off Parry. The ship also 

received a radiological clearance and was released from operational control of the 

task group on this date. On 8 November, at 0915 hours, the ARIKARA departed 

Enewetak for Pearl Harbor in company with the ELDER. The ARIKARA did not 

participate at Shot KING. 

The deck log from the SHANKS has not been located, hence its operational 

activities while at Enewetak cannot be detailed. It is known that the SHANKS 

departed the lagoon at 1720 hours, 31 October, to take up a position for Shot MIKE, 

and probably returned to the lagoon during the morning of 2 November with the other 

task group ships. It is not known where the SHANKS anchored, but several entries in 

the OAK HILL’s deck log indicate that it was anchored off Enewetak Island near the 

five other ships in this anchorage area. The SHANKS received its final radiological 

31 
clearance on 10 November and, having been released from operational control of CTG 

132.3 on the same day, departed Enewetak on 11 November. Like the ARIKARA, the 

SHANKS did not participate at Shot KING. 

Shipboard radiological data have not been found to indicate that the ARIKARA 

and SHANKS received fallout from Shot MIKE, but because of their proximity to the 

and OAK HILL at the time these two ships received the MIKE fallout, it is 

likely the ARIKARA and SHANKS received similar fallout. Figure is the average 

topside intensity on these two ships as inferred from the OAK HILL intensity data, 

minus the fallout following Shot KING. 

Early in the morning on 6 November, while recovering the buoys northeast of the 

lagoon, 12 of the crewmen aboard the ARIKARA became contaminated when they 

brought aboard a buoy “which was found to be 80 radioactive”. At 0110 hours, 

6 November, the crewmen were monitored and intensities ranged from mR/hr. 

Personnel decontamination was carried out immediately and by 0135 hours “further 

monitoring found the above personnel to be clean of radioactive contamination. Above 

personnel were exposed one hour maximum“ (Reference 7). 

USS AGAWAM 

After observing Shot MIKE, the crew of the ACAWAM reentered the lagoon on 2 

November and moored to POL buoys Fl and F2 off the southern tip of Parry Island at 

1130 hours (see Figure 2-I). Except for a 6-hour period on 5 November when it moved 

to berth N-6, and a SK-hour period on 13 November when it departed the lagoon, the 

ACAWAM remained moored to the POL buoys until 0801 hours on 16 November when 

it left the lagoon in preparation for Shot KING. Following Shot KING, the AGAWAM 

reentered the lagoon and again moored to POL buoys Fl and F2 at 1746 hours on 16 

November. The ship remained in the southern anchorage area of the lagoon until 1307 

hours on 18 November when it departed Enewetak to Kwajalein. 

The average topside gamma intensity the ACAWAM is reconstructed in 

Figure 2-9 from fallout samples and hangar deck activity correlations. 

32 
 

-

Shot MIKE Fallout

Based on OAK HILL Fallout Data

ARIKMA Departs SHANKS ‘Departs

.5 

Shot MIKE Fallout 

Based on OAK HILL Fallout Data 

Departs SHANKS ‘Departs 

NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure 2-8. Average Intensity on the USS ARIKARA and USNS DAVID 

C. SHANKS 

I I I I 

Shipboard Fallout Data 

Shot MIKE Fallout 

•

Shot KING Fallout 

Figure 2-9. Average Intensity on the USS AGAWAM 

33 
Since the AGAWAM remained in the vicinity of Enewetak throughout the operation, it 

is assumed it received the 7-8 November fallout from Shot MIKE and also, the 

contamination following Shot KING. The only reference to any fallout the 

is given in Reference 15, which states that contamination occurred 

except in isolated spots where water had collected and evaporated.” Maximum 

readings were 5 beta plus gamma. Using a beta plus gamma to gamma ratio of 

5 as was deterrnined the ESTES (See Section 2.21, this reading equates to a 

maximum reading of I gamma on 18 November. No average readings were 

mentioned in this reference. Upon arrival at Kwajalein on 21 November, the ship was 

resurveyed, but no appreciable contamination was found. Readings of 2 all 

beta, were found in two isolated locations and measures were taken to remove the 

contaminants. Final radiological clearance was given to the AGAWAM on 22 

November 1952. 

2.2.6 USS O’BANNON (DDE-450) 

The crew observed Shot MIKE from the Control Destroyer Station 

approximately 155 miles southeast of Enewetak, midway between Enewetak and 

Kwajalein. For the next several days the O’BANNON searched for and recovered Dan 

buoys used in an experiment that had been laid out for NRDL on 31 October and 

November by the YUMA. This search led them north to just off the western edge of 

Bikini and eventually in a wide arc which took them to the northeast and north of 

Enewetak during the period 3-5 November. At 0830 hours on 6 November, the search 

was terminated and the O’BANNON entered Enewetak Lagoon and anchored in berth 

D-7 at 1815 hours. It remained anchored in the lagoon until 9 when it 

relieved the RADFORD and assumed patrol duties around Enewetak. The O’BANNON 

briefly reentered the lagoon on 12 and 14 November to refuel and at 0600 hours on 15 

November it was on station for Shot KING approximately 145 miles southeast of 

Enewetak. At 1705 hours on 16 November, the O’BANNON was released from its 

duties and proceeded to Kwajalein. The O’BRNNON did not return to Enewetak after 

Shot KING. 

34 
 

Figure 2-10 depicts the reconstructed topside gamma intensity on the 

O’BANNON resulting from Shot MIKE fallout. The fallout samples obtained frorn the 

O’BANNON from 2-7 November revealed much less activity than observed the 

majority of the other ships participating at Operation IVY. This is probably attributable to the fact that the O’BANNON was well north of Enewetak when the major 

portion of MIKE secondary fallout was being deposited in the lagoon. The slight hump 

in the intensity curve on 6 November is due to fallout that was occurring at Enewetak 

when the ship reentered the lagoon. The O’BANNON was granted final radiological 

clearance on 18 November 1952 while at Kwajalein. 

While recovering Dan buoys on 3 November, 14 crewmen of the O’BANNON were 

slightly contaminated when a radioactive buoy was brought at 2204 hours. 

Maximum intensity readings on personnel were 1.0 on shoes and 0.5 on 

hands. The intensity readings on the main deck (port side aft of Frame were 0.6-

0.7 It is not stated if these readings are beta plus or only gamma but 

all exposed personnel and shipboard areas were decontaminated to a level of 

by 2207 hours (Reference 7). 

2.2.7 USS RADFORD (DDE-446) and USS CARPENTER (DDE-825) 

After the Shot MIKE detonation on November, the RADFORD began patrolling 

the waters east of Enewetak. It continued its anti-submarine patrol until 9 November, 

when it entered the lagoon to take on fuel. Between IO-15 November, the RADFORD 

again assumed patrol duties east and southeast of the atoll, breaking twice to act as 

plane guard for the on 12 and 13 November. With the detonation of Shot 

KING on 16 November, the RADFORD again acted as plane guard for the 

until 1600 hours, after which it entered the lagoon and anchored in berth D-5 at 1655 

hours. After refueling on 17 November, the RADFORD departed Enewetak at 

approximately 1500 hours in company with the CARPENTER and FLETCHER 

to Kwajalein. 

Between 1 and November, while the RADFORD was on patrol east of 

Enewetak, the CARPENTER was patroling the waters to the south (off Wide Passage) 

35 
O’BANNON 

Figure Average Intensity on the USS O'BANNON 

Shot Shipboard Fallout Data 

Shot KING Fallout 

 

'

I I I I IL 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 

NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure Average Intensity on the LJSS 
and west, occasionally serving as plane guard for the on 1 and 2 November. 

On 8 November, the CARPENTER entered the lagoon and anchored in berth D-5 at 

1414 hours. It remained in the lagoon until 11 November, when it resumed patrolling 

the waters to the east and south of Enewetak. The CARPENTER reentered the lagoon 

briefly on 15 November to take on fuel and then began patrolling the waters to the 

west and south. After Shot KING was detonated on 16 November, the CARPENTER 

entered the lagoon and anchored in berth D-4 at 1733 hours. approximately 1500 

hours on 17 November, the CARPENTER departed Enewetak for Kwajalein in company 

with the RADFORD and FLETCHER. 

The RADFORD and CARPENTER, while patrolling east and south of Enewetak, 

were the first task group ships to encounter the secondary fallout from Shot MIKE. 

The fallout samples indicate that both ships began receiving light fallout at approximately noon on 2 November and that it continued intermittently through 7 November. 

Figure 2-11 depicts the average topside gamma intensity the RADFORD as 

inferred from the fallout samples through 7 November, and as calculated from 

correlations through 20 November. Figure 2-l 2 is a comparable intensity 

curve for the CARPENTER. The History of Operation IVY (Reference states that, 

on 3 November, the RADFORD and FLETCHER*, while on patrol outside of the 

lagoon, encountered fallout with average intensities of (gamma) and 

maximum intensities of 4 (gamma). Actual shipboard intensity measurements 

(from fallout samples), and messages from these two ships to CTG 132.3 do not support 

this statement. Both ships received a final radiological clearance from CTG 132.3 on 

17 November, prior to their departure from Enewetak. 

2.2.8 USS FLETCHER (DDE-445) 

Following the MIKE detonation on 1 November, the FLETCHER remained outside 

of the lagoon to provide escort for the and to patrol the waters west of the 

*Although Reference 3 states that the RADFORD and FLETCHER received this 

fallout, it was probably the RADFORD and CARPENTER since the FLETCHER was 

to Kwajalein at this time. 

37 
 

 Shipboard Fallout Data 

. 3 -

2 

Shot MIKE Fallout Shot KING Fallout 

123456789 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 A A 

NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure 2-12. Average Intensity on the USS CARPENTER 

.l 

C IL 

NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure Average Intensity on the USS FLETCHER 

I I I 

Shipboard Fallout Data 

Measured Shipboard 

Intensity 

Shot MIKE Fallout Shot KING Fallout 

FLETCHER Arrives 

3 4 5 6 7 9 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 

38 
 

lagoon. At 1645 hours on 2 November, the FLETCHER took station ahead of the 

CURTISS and provided screen for the weapons ship to Kwajalein. Upon 

reaching Kwajalein on 3 November, the FLETCHER was released from screen duties at 

1536 hours and returned to Enewetak, anchoring in the lagoon in berth D-5 at 1340 

hours on 4 November. On 8 November, the FLETCHER relieved the CARPENTER of 

its patrol duties in the waters to the south, west, and north of Enewetak. The 

FLETCHER reentered the lagoon to refuel on 15 November and remained there until 

its departure at 0635 hours on 16 November for a position 19 miles south-southeast of 

the atoll from where the crew observed Shot KING at 1130 hours. At 1741 hours, the 

FLETCHER returned to the lagoon and anchored in berth D-6. The next day, the 

FLETCHER departed Enewetak at approximately 1500 hours in company with the 

RADFORD and CARPENTER to Kwajalein. 

The average topside gamma intensity reconstructed from the fallout data is 

depicted in Figure 2-13. The only shipboard readings available on the FLETCHER are 

contained in a 4 November message from the FLETCHER to CTG 132.3 (Reference 

which states that, at 1300 hours, average intensities were gamma and 

maximum intensities were 0.1 gamma. The message further states that there 

was an increase since 1000 hours and that they believed a trace of contamination was 

received just prior to entering the lagoon. Both the actual data and the reported 

trends of the data are in good agreement with Figure 2-13. On 17 November 1952, the 

FLETCHER received a final radiological clearance prior to steaming to Kwajalein. 

2.2.9 USS (AV-4) 

In preparation for Shot MIKE, the CURTISS departed Enewetak at 0359 hours on 

1 November and proceeded to its assigned station 35 miles southeast of the lagoon. 

After the detonation, the CURTISS reentered the lagoon and anchored in berth C-3 at 

1010 hours on 2 November. At 1535 hours the same day, after off-loading equipment 

and AEC personnel, the CURTISS departed Enewetak Lagoon. After rendezvousing 

with the FLETCHER at 1645 hours, both ships steamed for Kwajalein. At approximately 1500 hours on 3 November, the CURTISS arrived at Kwajalein and by 1607 

hours was anchored in berth K-14, Kwajalein Atoll. The CURTISS remained at 

until 18 November when it departed for San Francisco. 

39 
 

Figure 2-14 is the reconstructed average topside gamma intensity the 

CURTISS resulting from Shot MIKE secondary fallout, based on fallout samples taken 

on the ship. It is assumed that the CURTISS received the same fallout after arrival at 

Kwajalein that was occurring on that atoll through 7 November. Since the 

remained at Kwajalein until 18 November, it did not receive the fallout that occurred 

over Enewetak after 7 November. The CURTISS received a final radiological 

clearance on 18 November prior to its departure from Kwajalein. 

USS YUMA and Kwajalein Atoll 

On 1 November, the crew of the YUMA observed Shot MIKE from a position 27 

miles southeast of the The day after the detonation, the YUMA entered 

Enewetak lagoon and anchored off Enewetak Island at 1110 hours. At 1335 hours, the 

departed for Kwajalein, arriving at approximately 1500 hours on 3 November. 

About 24 hours later, the YUMA departed Kwajalein towing a fuel barge, arriving 

Enewetak at 0700 hours on 7 November. A radiological inspection tearn boarded at 

1815 hours and gave the YUMA a final radiological clearance prior to its release from 

TG 132.3 operational control. At 1226 hours on 8 November, the got underway 

for Pearl Harbor via Kwajalein. The did not at Shot KING. 

Shipboard radiological data has not been found for the hence, the gamma 

intensity curve in Figure 2-15 is based in part on its proximity to Kwajalein on 2, 3, 

and 4 November and that the ship was at Enewetak when the 7-8 November fallout 

occurred. Fallout samples obtained on Kwajalein are used to reconstruct the island 

intensity curve depicted in Figure The topside intensity is identical 

except for the addition of the 7-8 November secondary fallout it received after 

reentering Enewetak Lagoon on 7 November. Maximum gamma intensities on 

Kwajalein were reported to range from 0.30-0.35 on MIKE + 2 days (Reference 

17). When one considers that maximum readings are often two or three times the 

average, there is good agreement with the fallout sample data. 

40 
 

5

2 -

1 2 3 4 5 5 7 0 9 

Shot MIKE Fallout 

NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure 2-14. Average Intensity on the CURTISS 

Shot MIKE Fallout (Based on Kwajalein Fallout Data) 

a 

Shot NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure 2-15. Average Intensity on the LJSS 

41 
 

M/V HORIZON 

Primary fallout from Shot MIKE occurred on only one TC 132.3 ship, the USNS 

HORIZON, an being used for seismic refraction studies conducted by the 

Scripps Institute of Oceanography. At shot time, the HORIZON was on station 

approximately 65 miles northeast of SZ. At 0745 hours, the HORIZON was ordered to 

proceed to an area 110 miles north-northeast of SZ and, at 1240 hours, the ship 

encountered radioactive fallout in a moderate rainshower. Although the radiation 

levels were low gamma), the ship was closed up, the ventilation system was 

secured, all personnel were ordered below decks, and the system was placed 

in operation. By 1300 hours, the average topside intensity had increased to 5 

with maximum readings of 15 being reported. Radiation levels gradually 

increased to 8 by 1500 hours, with maximum intensities of 35 mR/hr. The 

system remained on as the ship proceeded on a southerly course in an 

attempt to clear the fallout area. At 1630 hours the crew took two air samples which 

indicated no detectable activity in the air and a resurvey of the weather decks at 1700 

hours indicated a slight drop in the intensity levels--average 6 and a maximum 

of 30 mR/hr. The ventilation system was cut on and the ship was opened and washed 

down with high pressure hoses until 1930 hours. work parties were allowed on 

deck; all other personnel were ordered to remain below until decontamination was 

complete. A survey of the ship at 2000 hours indicated average gamma intensities of 3 

and maximum readings of 20 mR/hr. Only a trace of contamination had been 

tracked below decks. Decontamination operations were continued until the ship 

returned to Enewetak on 6 November, when average topside intensities of 0.5 

(with maximum readings of 3 were still being reported (References 3, 9, and 

The deck log of the HORIZON has not been located; therefore activities after 

6 November are not detailed. It is assumed that the HORIZON remained in the 

vicinity of Enewetak through the remainder of Operation IVY. Entries in the deck log 

of the OAK HILL indicate that the HORIZON was anchored in berths Q-3 or Q-5 (off 

Enewetak Island) on 6, 9, IO and 11 November. It is known that at the time of Shot 

KING on 16 November, the HORIZON was anchored off Enewetak Island. It is also 

42 
 

 

 

 III I III I ‘I I I 

Kwajalein Fallout Data 

Range of reported I maximum intensity 

Shot MIKE Fallout 

NOVEMBER 1952 

2-16. Average Intensity on Kwajalein Atoll 

Shot MIKE Fallout • Average Shipboard

Measurements 

Shot KING Fallout 

a 10 12 14 16 20

0 

NOVEMBER 1952 

2-17. Average Intensity on the M/V HORIZON 

Figure 

Shot MIKE 

Fallout

Figure 

43 
known the HORIZON was in the lagoon on 22 November when it was released from 

operational control of CTC 132.3. The HORIZON probably departed Enewetak on 22 

November to Kwajalein where it received an operational radiological clearance on 23 or 24 November. 

Figure 2-17 is the reconstructed topside gamma intensity on the HORIZON 

resulting from Shots MIKE and KING fallout. The solid circles plotted represent 

actual shipboard intensity readings obtained during these time periods. It is assumed 

that the HORIZON received both the 7-8 November fallout from Shot MIKE and the 

fallout Shot KING on 16 November. Gamma intensity taken on 

the HORIZON prior to its release from the task group on 22 November indicated an 

average intensity of 0.1 and a maximum reading of 2 (Reference 

The 0.1 average is in good agreement with the reconstructed intensity for that 

date. 

2.2.12 M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD and Bikini 

The BAIRD was another ship used for the seismic refraction studies conducted by 

the Scripps Institute of Oceanography during Operation IVY. The BAIRD had departed 

on 27 October 1952, to Enewetak via Bikini Atoll. Upon arriving at 

Bikini on 14 November, it was ordered to remain there until Shot KING was detonated 

on 16 November; this step was taken to ensure that it would not be contaminated by 

KING fallout. On 16 November, the BAIRD departed Bikini to Enewetak, 

arriving Enewetak at 0700 hours on 17 November -- just in time to encounter the trace 

of fallout following Shot KING. The BAIRD was released from operational control of 

the task group on 22 November, and probably steamed in company with the HORIZON 

from Enewetak to Kwajalein. On 23 or 24 November, while at Kwajalein, the BAIRD 

received a final radiological clearance. 

Figure 2-18 depicts the reconstructed average gamma intensity on the BAIRD 

resulting from fallout while at Enewetak. Measurements obtained prior to its release 

from the task group on 22 November (probably on 18 or 19 November) indicated 

average readings of 0.05 with maximum readings of 0.1 (Reference 

44 
 

:: -

-

Shot KING Fallout 

0 

Shot NOVEMBER 1952 

Figure 2-18. Average Intensity on the M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD 

II I III I I I I I 

Bikini Atoll Fallout Data 

O 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 

NOVEMBER 1952 A

Figure 2-19. Average Intensity on Bikini Atoll 
 

 =

These readings are in excellent agreement with the reconstructed environment in 

Figure 18. 

Fallout samples obtained on Bikini Atoll are used to reconstruct the island 

intensity depicted in Figure 2-19. The BAIRD did not arrive at Bikini until 

14 November; hence, it was not contaminated by this fallout. 

2.3 INTEGRATED FREE-FIELD INTENSITIES 

The average free-field intensities on the ships and residence islands of the 

various atolls occupied by TG 132.3 personnel, as depicted in Figures 2-4 through 2-19, 

are integrated with respect to time from 1 November to 18 November 1952. 

Calculations are terminated on 18 November because the Operation IVY roll-up phase 

was virtually complete by this time and nearly all of the ships had departed Enewetak. 

The basic expression used to calculate the integrated free-field intensities on the 

ships and islands is given by: t 

MIKE 1 2 

Fallout arrival times for Shots MIKE and and 

KING in hours after the shot. 

Average intensity with respect to time after Shot MIKE 1’ MIKE 2 = 

MIKE for fallout arriving between l-6 November 

and 7-8 November, respectively. 

•

KING Average intensity with respect to time after Shot 

KING. 

46 
The upper limit of integration, t, is the time, in hours after the shot, at the end of the 

period for which is desired to calculate the average film badge dose, i.e., 

18 November’. 

From the fallout activity/gamma intensity correlations inferred from the ESTES 

and data (Figure and the continuous recording of activity on the 

hangar deck (Figure it is possible to quantify the incremental dose 

contributions on the from the 7-8 November fallout and the fallout from 

Shot KING. The second “wave” of Shot MIKE fallout on November contributed 

approximately 7 to the free-field radiation dose on the through 

18 November; Shot KING contributed only 3 

The basic expression used to calculate the integrated intensity thus becomes: t 

ldt + 7 + 

This expression is used to calculate the integrated intensity on each of the task 

group ships and the surrounding atolls during Operation IVY. The results are given in 

Table 2-l. 

2.4 SHIP SHIELDING 

Dose estimates for crewmembers require consideration of the shielding provided 

by the ship structure for radioactive fallout deposited on the weather surfaces of the 

ships. A ship shielding factor, defined as the ratio of radiation intensity at an interior 

location to an intensity topside, depends on such variables as time after detonation, 

distribution of fallout on the weather surface, amount of intervening material 

(decking, bulkheads, piping, etc.) from weather surface to point of interest, and 

distance from weather surface. Consequently, while ship shielding effects have been 

experimentally and theoretically studied by the Navy since Operation CROSSROADS 

*Applies only if the ship was in the vicinity of Enewetak on 7-8 November 

**Applies only if the ship was in the vicinity of Enewetak on 16-17 November. 

47 
Table 2-l. Integrated Free-Field Intensities on Task Group 132.3 Ships

and the Residence Islands of Surrounding Atolls. 

Integrated Intensity from Fallout 

on 

1-6 7-8 16-17 

Ship November November November Total 

USS 55.8 6.7 3.2 65.7 

USS OAK HILL 87.3 6.7 3.2 97.2 

USS ARIKARA 87.3 6.7 0 94.0 

USS 87.3 6.7 3.2 97.2 

USNS DAVID C. SHANKS 87.3 6.7 0 94.0 

USNS GEN. E.T. COLLINS 87.3 6.7 3.2 97.2 

USS AGAWAM 55.3 6.7 3.2 65.2 

USS ESTES 60.2 6.7 3.2 70.1 

USS LEO 60.2 6.7 0 66.9 

USS ELDER 60.2 6.7 0 66.9 

USS CARPENTER 19.8 6.7 3.2 29.7 

USS RADFORD 72.0 6.7 3.2 81.9 

USS O’BANNON 7.8 6.7 0 14.5 

USS FLETCHER 23.9 6.7 3.2 33.8 

USS YUMA 17.8 6.7 0 24.5 

USS CURTISS 16.6 0 0 16.6 

HORIZON 190.7 6.7 3.2 200.6 

M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD 0 0 3.2 3.2 

Atoll 

Enewetak Atoll* 

Enewetak Is. 87.3 6.7 3.2 97.2 

Parry Is. 60.2 6.7 3.2 70.1 

Kwaja!ein Atoll 17.8 0 0 17.8 

Bikini Atoll 3.3 0 0 3.3 

*Inferred from shipboard data 

48 
 

 values of shielding factors remain uncertain. Readings taken on target ships 

during Operation CROSSROADS, and on two test ships (TAG-39 and YAG-40) during 

Operations CASTLE (1954) and REDWING (1956) gave preliminary estimates of 

shielding factors (References 20, 21 and 22). However, a significant fraction of the 

radiation penetrating to the interior of these ships, especially at the lower depths, 

apparently came from radioactive materials in the water and on the hulls of the ships. 

Thus, these shielding factors are not directly applicable to the present problem. 

Experimental results reported by W.F. Waldorf (Reference on radiation from 

Cobalt-60 and Cesium-137 sources on the flight deck penetrating the interior of a 

light aircraft carrier indicated that an average shielding factor could 

be correlated with the thickness of deck plating directly above the point of interest in 

the ship. He further showed that the effects of bulkheads, piping, and other 

miscellaneous intervening material could be approximated (somewhat high-sided) by 

doubling the deck thickness in shielding calculations. Results from British experiments 

on a carrier, destroyer, and light cruiser, referenced by Waldorf, verified these 

conclusions and indicated that this factor of two may apply to most ship types. C.F. 

Ksanda (References 20 and 24) performed detailed calculations on an aircraft carrier 

RANGER), presenting the shielding factors graphically as functions of deck 

plating thickness for various times after detonation. He also accounted for miscellaneous shielding materials by doubling the deck thickness when performing the 

calculations. The results of the Waldorf experiment and the geometric means of 

Ksanda’s upper and lower limit shielding factors for unfractionated U-235 fission 

products at one day after detonation are displayed in Figure Due to geometric 

attenuation, these curves approach values less than one as deck thickness becomes 

small. Comparison indicates that Ksanda’s mean values represent a somewhat 

sided estimate of the shielding factor, since the average gamma energy for the times 

of interest (days to weeks after detonation) is similar to the 0.66 from the cesium 

source. Because of the detailed nature of Ksanda’s effort and the general agreement 

with experiment, the Ksanda mean value is used in the present calculations. 

In the present analysis, it is assumed that, when topside, personnel experienced 

the average external topside intensity, and any shielding provided by the 

49 
.60 -

Waldorf Co-60 (1.25 

K :

Geometric 

Mean 

Waldorf 

cs-137 

(0.66 

1.0 1.2 

Total Deck Plating Thickness 

Figure Ship Shielding Factor vs. Deck Plating Thickness 

50 

1.4 
structure is neglected. Large variations in personnel activities and shielding factors 

preclude a more accurate assessment of this factor. It is further assumed that, when 

below decks, personnel were located on the second deck, with only the thickness of the 

main deck to provide radiation shielding. Personnel below the second deck, and in 

those portions of the second deck under the superstructure, were afforded additional 

radiation shielding not included in these calculations. The main deck thickness and the 

shielding factors used for the types of ships at Operation IVY are given in Table 2-2. 

Table 2-2 Factors 

Estimated Main Deck 

Ship Type Thickness (inches) Shielding Factor 

CVE 0.75 0.06 

LSD, AV 0.60 0.08 

AGC, AKA 0.55 0.09 

AOG 0.53 0.09 

TAP 0.50 0.10 

DDE 0.35 0.14 

ATF, AN 0.30 0.15 

51 
Section 3 

DOSE CALCULATIONS 

To determine the dose to personnel, consideration is given to the time spent 

topside (outside) and below decks (inside) and the radiation protection afforded by a 

ship or building. The free-field integrated intensities from Section 2 are adjusted to 

account for personnel activities, either documented or assumed. The adjusted 

exposures are then multiplied by a film badge conversion factor (0.7 

to determine film badge doses as described in Reference 10. Results are 

presented as cumulative doses to personnel through 18 November 1952, when the IVY 

roll-up phase was nearly complete. 

3.1 PERSONNEL ACTIVITIES 

Normally, during fallout deposition and at early times when intensities are 

relatively high, an estimate of personnel movements each ship is critical in 

determining the film badge dose. This is true for the crew of the M/V 

HORIZON, which encountered primary fallout from Shot MIKE shortly after the 

detonation (see Section 2.2.11). As soon as fallout was detected the 

HORIZON, the ship was buttoned up, the ventilation system turned off and all 

personnel were ordered to remain below decks. While below, the crew was afforded a 

protection factor of approximately 7. Although decontamination of the ship was 

essentially completed at approximately 1930 hours on November, the crew probably 

remained below until the normal crew routine was reestablished on 2 November. For 

the remaining ships participating at Operation IVY, the secondary fallout from Shots 

MIKE and KING was relatively minor and normal crew routines were not altered. For 

these ships, only an estimate of the amount of time spent topside and below decks 

during a typical work day is needed for determining film badge doses. 

With the exception of 1-2 November, when the HORIZON received primary fallout from Shot MIKE for which actual times topside and below must be determined, the 

free-field integrated intensities are multiplied by a time-averaged shielding factor to 

account for the time spent topside (outside) and below (inside) during a “typical” work 

52 
 

 -

day. It is estimated that the typical crew on each ship was on deck at the following 

times: 0800-1200, 1330-1700, and 1800-2000 hours. This amounts to 40 percent of the 

day hours) topside and 60 percent hours) below. While below, the crew was 

offered shielding provided by the ship’s structure. In Section 2.4, it is estimated that 

ship-shielding factors vary from approximately 0.06 to 0.15, depending on the main 

deck thickness. A time-averaged shielding factor is computed as 0.4 0.6 x 

shielding factor, where the 0.4 and 0.6 represent the fraction of the day spent above 

and below the deck, respectively. The time-averaged shielding factors vary from 

approximately 0.44 to 0.49. A similar argument is used to obtain a time-averaged 

shielding factor of 0.8 for the land-based personnel. This assumes that 60 percent of 

the day is spent outside and 40 percent inside. While inside, personnel are afforded a 

protection factor of 2, i.e., a shielding factor of 0.5. 

3.2 CALCULATED PERSONNEL FILM BADGE DOSES 

To demonstrate the effect of crew activities on the film badge dose, personnel 

dose calculations for the crew of the HORIZON on and 2 November are detailed. 

First, a crew activity time-line is inferred from available references on the 1st and 

2nd of November. This time-line, shown in Figure 3-1, indicates the periods during 

these two days that a typical crewman would have been topside and below. For 

1 November 1952 2 November 1952 

0000 0600 1200 1800 2400 0600 1200 1800 2400 

SHOT DAY SHOT DAY 

Shot MIKE 

Above Deck 

Below Deck 

Figure 3-1. M/V HORIZON Crew Activity Time Line Shot MIKE 

53 
 =

-

=

those periods when the crew would have been topside, the average integrated intensity 

would have been received. For those periods spent below, the integrated intensity is 

adjusted to account for the shielding provided by the ship’s structure (see Section 2.4). 

The doses for each period are then added to determine a daily dose for the crew. 

Starting on 3 November, the crew is estimated to have spent approximately 40 percent 

of the day (9.5 hours) above deck and 60 percent (14.5 hours) below; therefore, on 3 

November and thereafter, the time-averaged shielding factor is 0.4 + 0.49, 

where is the ship-shielding factor for the HORIZON (Table 2-2). The dose 

calculations for the crew of the HORIZON are detailed in Table 3-1. 

Table 3-1. M/V HORIZON Personnel Dose Calculations 

Integrated Ship-Shielding Adjusted 

1 Nov 52 Intensity X Factor Exposure 

0000-0700” 0 0 

0700-1200 0 .o 0 

1200-1240” 0 0 

1240-2400” 50.0 7.5 

2 Nov 52 

0000-0800” 10.4 1.6 

1200 3.9 1 .o 3.9 

1200-1330” 1.4 0.2 

1330-1700 3.0 1.0 3.0 

0.9 0.1 

1.7 1.0 1.7 

2000-2400” 1.6 0.2 

3-18 Nov 52 127.7 

Total 200.6 (Table 2-1) 

Nov 52 film badge dose= (80.8 57 

*Denotes time periods below deck (from Figure 

62.6 

54 

80.8 
=

For the remaining personnel at Operation IVY, the normal work routine was not 

interrupted with the occurrence of fallout. The personnel film badge dose is 

calculated by multiplying the average integrated intensity on each ship (atoll> by the 

appropriate time-averaged shielding factor and the film badge correction factor. The 

results of these calculations, as well as those for the HORIZON developed in the 

preceding paragraph, are given in Table 3-2. 

Table 3-2. Calculated Personnel Film Badge Doses on Task Group 132.3 Ships 

and the Residence Islands of Surrounding Atolls. 

Ship 

Integrated 

Intensity 

Shielding 

x Factor x 

0.7 

mrem/mR 

Film Badge 

Dose 

USS OAK HILL 

USS ARIKARA 

USS 

USNS DAVID C. SHANKS 

USNS GEN. E.T. COLLINS 

65.7 

97.2 

94.0 

97.2 

94.0 

97.2 

20 

31 

32 

33 

30 

31 

USS AGAWAM 65.2 21 

USS ESTES 

USS LEO 

USS ELDER 

70.1 

66.9 

66.9 

22 

21 

23 

USS CARPENTER 

USS RADFORD 

USS O’BANNON 

USS FLETCHER 

29.7 

81.9 

14.5 

33.8 

10 

28 

5 

11 

USS YUMA 

USS CURTISS 

24.5 

16.6 

8 

5 

M/V HORIZON 

M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD 

200.6 

3.2 

(Table 57 

1 

A toll 

Enewetak Atoll 

Enewetak Is. 

Parry Is. 

97.2 

70.1 

54 

39 

Kwajalein Atoll 17.8 10 

Bikini Atoll 3.3 2 

55 
Section 4 

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS 

The uncertainty in calculated film badge doses is estimated from the underlying 

parameters. The basic uncertainties include radiation intensities topside (outside), the 

time spent at various locations, and the shielding afforded to personnel below (inside). 

Intensity levels topside are determined from limited shipboard radiological 

survey data, supplemented by fallout sample data from most of the ships and atolls. 

From the few instances in which more than one type of measurement was made of the 

radiation environment, a correlation is developed between topside intensity and other 

measurements. Together with ship log entries regarding proximity to other ships and 

the incidence of fallout, the derived intensities are sufficient to characterize the 

radiological environment on all ships and atolls under consideration. In the event of 

any unreported shipboard decontamination, the calculated intensities would be 

sided. 

Several aspects of a topside intensity determination involve minimal uncertainty. 

Survey meter readings and sample counts are essentially accurate. Variation in 

intensity on the weather decks was generally small, as noted from the hourly readings 

at eight locations one ship. Exceptions were of a transient nature (perhaps 

puddling that motivated localized decontamination) or from a contaminated helicopter 

pad--neither applicable to the typical crewmember. Average topside intensity as a 

function of time rests on a power law interpolation that closely approximates fission 

product decay for the intervals considered. The rise in intensity during fallout 

deposition is not well characterized, but the potential for dose accrual during those 

intervals as compared to other periods of exposure is small. For the only ship 

encountering primary fallout, the precise topside intensities are not at issue during 

deposition because the crew was then below, significantly shielded. Overall, error in 

on-deck intensity is small compared to the uncertainty associated with crew position 

in the non-uniform radiation environment. 

The major source of error in shipboard intensity is the correlation between 

cumulative, normalized fallout sample counts and intensity readings. The three, 

56 
= •

essentially independent comparisons that lead to this correlation provide ratios of 

and per Mcpm. These imply an error factor at the 90-percent 

level of 

The value for the fraction of time spent topside is estimated to be accurate 

within a factor of 1.2 with 90-percent confidence. For the typical day, this 

corresponds to 8 to hours topside. The systematic uncertainty in the time topside 

is considered to be greater than its random variation from day to day and ship to ship. 

The uncertainty in total dose is thus reasonably high-sided by treating the uncertainty 

in time topside as a systematic error. The below-deck contribution introduces a small, 

ship-dependent perturbation to the factor of 1.2. 

The ship-shielding factor reduces the below-deck crew exposure to a minor 

contributor to dose, thus any realistic error in that parameter has only a few percent 

effect on the total dose. For example, for a ship-shielding factor of 0.10, generously 

0.60 065 assumed to be 0.05, the fractional error introduced is + •

Such values negligibly increase the uncertainty in dose from that obtained above. 

Overall, the error factor for calculated film badge doses is 2.0. For each ship, 

this value implies, for the associated lognormal distribution, a mean that is 9 percent 

greater than the best estimate derived in Section 3. 

*Obtained from where is the standard deviation of the log of the 

ratios, provides the 90-percent level, and n is 3. 
 

Section 5 

FILM BADGE DOSIMETRY 

Film badge data are available for 14 of the 18 ships for which doses have been 

reconstructed. Approximately 560 badges were issued to ships’ personnel during 

Operation IVY. The periods of badged exposure vary from ship to ship; therefore, dose 

calculations are performed for these specific badged periods in order to provide a basis 

for comparison. 

Figure 5-1 summarizes the shipboard film badge dosimetry and the corresponding 

film badge dose calculations. The number in parentheses following each ship is the 

number of film badges issued to the crew, while the badged period is annotated below 

each ship. The underlined numbers in the figure are the number of zero doses recorded 

by the issued film badges. Film badge dosimetry data are not available for crews on 

the COLLINS, LEO, RADFORD, and BAIRD. The calculated doses and uncertainties 

are indicated by the inverted solid triangles. 

It is apparent from the figure that reasonably good agreement exists between the 

calculated doses and dosimetry data for crews on the OAK HILL, 

ARIKARA, SHANKS, ESTES, ELDER, and HORIZON. Although the 

calculated dose for the crew of the appears to be significantly lower than 

the dosimetry data suggest, 142 badges, or 68 percent of those issued for the five-day 

exposure period, recorded a dose of zero. Similarly, calculated doses for the crew on 

the ESTES appear somewhat low. In Section 2, intensity readings obtained from the 

contaminated helicopter pad were not included when calculating the average topside 

intensity. The open triangle above the ESTES dosimetry data is the calculated dose 

for personnel who spent their apportioned time topside in the vicinity of this pad. This 

dose (72 may be more applicable to members of the helicopter unit assigned to 

the ESTES than the dose calculated for the average crew. The very high film badge 

readings on the OAK HILL, and ESTES are probably obtained from 

“mission” badges, i.e., badges that were issued to personnel when they were expected 

to enter areas of radioactive contamination other than those routinely encountered 

the ships. 

58 
 

 

 

 

:

-

-- --

 (208) 

HILL (67) 

est. 

(14) 

(12) 

SHANKS 

(22) 

ELDER (14) 

CARPENTER (21) 

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 

AIR 

. . (INCLUDES . . UNITS) . . . 

142 :: : : : NOT 

:: : : 

:: 

NOT SHOWN 

14 

1 

. 

(INCLUDES HELICOPTER

‘~~:::VIi.iii.:.. : : . : : : : : . NOT SHOWN 

220 

NOT SHOWN 

APPROX . 

THRESHOLD 

~ 

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 200 

BADGE DOSE 

FLETCHER (20) 

CURTISS (17) 

HORIZON (28) 

Figure Operation IVY Dosimetry Data and Dose Calculations 
Dose calculations are low for the crew of the AGAWAM when compared to the 

film badge data. This ship, like the OAK HILL, and ESTES 

remained anchored in the lagoon throughout virtually all of the operation until its 

departure from Enewetak in mid-November (see Figure 2-l). Dosimetry data from the 

AGAWAM suggest exposures that are more in line with the calculated doses for the 

OAK HILL and which were anchored several miles southwest of the AGAWAM 

off Enewetak Island during the same badged period. 

Calculated doses are also lower than the film badge readings for the three 

destroyers for which data are available--the CARPENTER, O’BANNON, and 

FLETCHER. Topside intensities on these three ships, as inferred from fallout samples 

obtained on them, do not support the film badge data. It is possible that the hulls of 

these ships became contaminated while patrolling the waters to the west and north of 

Enewetak after Shot MIKE where much of the fallout was deposited. It has been noted 

in previous dose reconstructions (Reference that hull contamination can be a 

significant source of exposure to crews these vessels. The extent to which 

these three ships may have been contaminated cannot be quantified since neither 

exposure times or water intensities, if encountered, were documented. 

A reasonable comparison between the calculated dose for the crew of the YUMA 

and the dosimetry data from that ship cannot be made. Film badge readings for the 

YUMA indicate the badges were turned in and processed on 17 November. This is 

unlikely since the YUMA was from Kwajalein to Pearl Harbor on this date. 

The film badges were probably turned in prior to the departure from 

Enewetak on 8 November and, if they were not processed until 17 November, the 

recorded doses would not be applicable for the crew. 

60 
Section 6 

CONCLUSIONS AND TOTAL DOSE SUMMARY 

Secondary fallout from Shot MIKE was the major contributor to the shipboard 

and island radiological environments to which 132.3 personnel were exposed at 

Operation IVY. Only one ship, the M/V HORIZON, received primary fallout following 

this event. Fallout from Shot KING was insignificant. 

A comparison between calculated film badge doses and available dosimetry data 

from the various ships indicates reasonably good agreement for most ships. Dosimetry 

data available for three of the destroyers indicate exposures significantly 

greater than the calculated doses. Shipboard radiological data do not support the 

dosimetry data for these ships, which suggests that their hulls may have become 

contaminated while steaming in radioactive water (from MIKE fallout), thus 

contributing to the crews’ dose. This possible source of contamination was not 

documented by any of the destroyers. 

The uncertainty analysis indicates an error factor of 2.0 in the calculated 

average film badge doses (from Section 3). This value implies a lognormal distribution 

of doses with a mean value 9 percent greater than the calculated average. Mean doses 

(through 18 November with 90-percent confidence limits, are presented in Table 

6-l. 

61 
Table 1. of Calculated Doses 

Shipboard Personnel 

USS 

USS OAK HILL 

USS ARIKARA 

USS 

USNS DAVID C. SHANKS 

USNS GENERAL COLLINS 

USS AGAWAM 

USS ESTES 

USS LEO 

Island-Based Personnel 

Enewetak Atoll 

Enewetak Island 

Island 

Kwajalein Atoll 

Bikini Atoll 

Mean Dose 

With Bounds 

-12 

-18 

23 -12 

-32 

7 

Shipboard Personnel 

USS ELDER 

USS CARPENTER 

USS RADFORD 

USS O’BANNON 

USS FLETCHER 

USS YUMA 

USS CURTISS 

M/V HORIZON 

M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD 

Mean Dose 

With Bounds 

7 

62 
 

-

Section 7 

REFERENCES 

1. “Compilation of Local Fallout Data from Nuclear Test Detonations, 

Volume II Oceanic U.S. Tests, DNA Defense Nuclear Agency, 1 

1979. 

2. Joint Task Force 132, Commander Task Group 132.3, Final Report of Operation 

IVY, 4 December 1952. 

3. Commander Task Group 132.3, History of Operation IVY. 

4. Annex P to CJTF 132 Operations Plan 2-52, 10 May 1952. 

5. “Analysis of Radiation Exposures for Naval Units at Operation CROSSROADS,” 

DNA-TR-82-05-V& Defense Nuclear Agency, 3 1982. 

6. “Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Personnel at Operation 

GREENHOUSE,” DNA-TR-82-15, Defense Nuclear Agency, 30 July 1982. 

7. Ship Deck Logs: USS (AV-4), USS ESTES USNS GEN E.T. 

COLLINS USS LEO (AKA-60), USS OAK HILL (LSD-7) USS AGAWAM 

(AOG-6), USS USS YUMA (ATF-94), USS ARIKARA (ATF-98), 

USS ELDER (AN-20), USS CARPENTER (DDE-825), USS FLETCHER (DDE-445), 

USS RADFORD (DDE-445), USS O’BANNON (DDE-450), USS 

114). 

Operation IVY, Project “Nature, Intensity, and Distribution of Fall-Out 

from MIKE Shot,” WT-615, U.S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory (NRDL), 

April 1953. 

9. Operation IVY, “Radiological Safety,” WT-614, Los Scientific Laboratory, January 1953. 

63 
“Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Task Force WARRIOR, Shot SMOKY,” 

Exercise Desert Rock VII-VIII, Operation PLUMBBOB, DNA Defense 

Nuclear Agency, May 1979. 

11. “Roll-up Phase Report,” letter from CTU 132.31.0 ESTES (AGC-12)) to 

CTG 132.3, with enclosures, 12 December 1952. 

12. “Radiological Assays with Set AN/MDQ-1 (EX-3) During Operation 

Technical Memorandum 1546, Army Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories, 

16 November 1953 (Unpublished). 

13. “Fallout Inventory and Inhalation Dose to Organs Science 

tions, Inc., 1981. 

14. CTU 132.31.0 message to CTG 132.3, 0219152 November 1952. 

15. “Radiological Safety; Report on Roll-Up Phase,” letter from CO USS AGAWAM 

(AOG-6) to CTG 132.3, 21 November 1952. 

16. USS FLETCHER (DDE-445) message to CTG 132.3, 0403312 November 1952. 

17. “Radioactive Debris from Operation IVY,” NY004522, AEC 28 April 

1953 (Unpublished). 

18. “Radiation Contamination of HORIZON,” memorandum from Scripps Project 

Officer to CTG 132.3, 6 November 1952. 

19. “Preliminary Report of ONR-Scripps Participation in Project IVY,” letter from 

ONR Research and Liason Officer, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, to Chief 

of Naval Research, 7 December 1952. 

20. “Proceedings of Tripartite Symposium on Technical Status of Radiological 

Defense in the Fleets,” Volume I, Reviews and Lectures No. 103, lJ.S. Naval 

Radiological Defense Laboratory, May 1960. 

64 
- -

21. “Proof Testing of Atomic Weapons Ship Countermeasures,” Project 6.4, 

Operation CASTLE, Pacific Proving Grounds, WT-927, U.S. Naval Radiological 

Defense Laboratory, October 1957. 

22. “Ship-Shielding Studies,” Project 2.71, Operation Redwing, Pacific Proving 

Grounds, WT-1321, U.S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, July 1959. 

23. Correlation Between Theory and Experiment in Ship Shielding Studies,” 

USNRDL-TR-373, U.S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, October 1959. 

24. Supplemental material supplied by C.F. Ksanda to Reference 19, September 

1960. 

65 
66 
--

DISTRIBUTION LIST 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Armed Forces Institute of Pathology 

ATTN: Radiation Pathology Br 

ATTN: Director 

Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute 

ATTN: Director 

ATTN: Scientific Director 

ATTN: Deputy Director 

ATTN: Tech Library 

Asst of Def, Public Affairs 

ATTN: ASD, PA 

Asst of Def, Manpower Installations 

ATTN: ASD, MI&L 

Asst of Def, Health Affairs 

ATTN: ASD, HA 

Asst to the of Def, Atomic Energy 

ATTN: LTCDL Riggs 

Defense Nuclear Agency 

ATTN: Director 

ATTN: 

ATTN: GC 

5 cys ATTN: STBE 

54 cys ATTN: 

Defense Tech Info Center 

12 cys ATTN: 

Dep Under of Def for Engrg 

ATTN: DUSDRE, Adv Tech 

Dep Asst of Def, Energy, Env Safety 

ATTN: 

Field Command, DNA, Det 2 

Lawrence Livermore National Lab 

ATTN: FC-1 

Field DNA. Det 2 

Los National Lab/DST 

ATTN: MS-635, FC-2 

Field Command, Defense Nuclear Agency 

ATTN: FCTT. W. Summa 

ATTN: MAJ Evinrude 

ATTN: FCTXE 

ATTN: FCPR 

ATTN: FCL 

2 cys ATTN: FCLS 

Interservice Nuclear Weapons School 

ATTN: TTV 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

Headquarters 

5 cys ATTN: DAAG-AMR, ANTPR 

Harry Diamond Laboratories 

ATTN: Tech Lib 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY (Continued) 

of the Chief of Staff 

ATTN: DACS-DMZ-A, T. Green 

US Army Ballistic Labs 

ATTN: DRDAR-BLV-R, J. Maloney 

US Army Medical Dev Cmd 

ATTN: SGRD-SD 

US Army Chem Agency 

ATTN: MONA-ZB, C. Davidson 

Walter Reed Army Medical Center 

ATTN: Library 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

Bureau of Medicine Surgery 

ATTN: NM&S-3C22 

ATTN: 

ATTN: NM&S-09 

Nationai Naval Medical Center 

ATTN: Dept of Radiology 

ATTN: Medical Library 

Naval Medical Institute 

ATTN: Tech Ref Library 

Naval Ocean Systems Center 

ATTN: Library 

Naval Sea Systems Command 

ATTN: SEA-08, M. Miles 

Naval Surface Weapons Center 

ATTN: Code F31, Levine 

Naval Weapons Facility 

ATTN: G. Binns 

Navy Nuclear Test Personnel Review 

15 cys ATTN: W. Loeffler 

of the Dep Ch of Naval Ops 

ATTN: NOP 0455, CDR Bell 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

Aerospace Medical Division 

ATTN: Library, SCL-4 

Air Force Institute of Technology 

ATTN: ENP, J. Bridgeman 

ATTN: Library 

Air Force Test Personnel Review 

4 cys ATTN: COL Gibbons 

Air Force Weapons Laboratory 

ATTN: DYT 

ATTN: NT 

ATTN. SUL 

67 
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE (Continued) OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (Continued) 

Air University Library Department of Agriculture. BARC-West 

ATTN: AUL-LSE ATTN: R. Jarrett 

USAF Dept of Health Human 

ATTN: SG, M. Chesney ATTN: of Regulation Review 

US Air Force Occupational Env Health Lab Dept of Health Human 

ATTN: CC ATTN: R. Murphy 

4 cys ATTN: TSNTPR 

Dept of Labor 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ATTN: S. Weiner 

Department of Energy Dept of Transportation 

Albuquerque Operations Office ATTN: H. Reighard 

ATTN: R. Cuddihy 

Dept of Health Human 

Department of Energy ATTN: G. Johnson, HFX-4 

of Mil Applications ATTN: J. Villforth, HFX-1 

GTN ATTN: C. Silverman, HFX-101 

ATTN: OMA, DP-22 

ATTN: OMA, C. Morris Environmental Protection Agency 

ATTN: T. Thorslund. RD-689 

Department of Energy ATTN: P. Magno 

Nevada Operations Office 

ATTN: Health Physics Div Environmental Protection Agency 

ATTN: B. Church ATTN: J. Knelson 

ATTN: Public Affairs 

ATTN: L. Environmental Protection Agency 

ATTN: W. Ellett. ANR-460 

Department of Energy ATTN: W. Mills. ANR-460 

Human Health Assessments Div, EV-31 ATTN: D. Rosendaum, ANR-458 

ATTN: H. Hollister. EV-4 ATTN: N. Nelson, ANR-460 

ATTN: N. Barr, 

ATTN: Tech Info Ctr, E-201 Federal Emergency Mgmt Agency 

ATTN: J. Thiesen, EV-32 ATTN: C. Siebentritt 

ATTN: J. Whitnah. EV-50 ATTN: of D. Bensen 

ATTN: W. Burr, EV-2 ATTN: Asst Assoc Dir for J. Kerr 

ATTN: J. Blair, EV-32 

ATTN: C. Edington, EV-31 Library of Congress 

ATTN: Science Technology Div 

OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 

NASA Headquarters 

Cancer Center ATTN: M/S G. Soffen 

ATTN: NIH, A. Knudson ATTN: M/S SBR-3, P. Rambaut 

Centers for Disease Control National Cancer Institute, NIH 

ATTN: Consolidated Surveillance ATTN: J. Murray 

ATTN: K. Choi ATTN: R. Miller 

2 cys ATTN: G. ATTN: M. Knipmayer 

ATTN: V. Zeve 

Central Intel Agency ATTN: G. Beebe 

ATTN: of Medical ATTN: E. Stonehill 

ATTN: S. Stever 

Consumer Prod Safety Commission ATTN: 0. Nyguard 

ATTN: M. Bloom ATTN: J. Rall 

ATTN: P. Pruess 

National Cancer Institute. NIH 

Department of Agriculture ATTN: W. Blot 

ATTN: M. Carter ATTN: C. Land 

ATTN: J. Fraumeni 

National Bureau of Standards 

ATTN: C. Kuyatt National Cancer Institute, NIH 

ATTN: J. Hubell ATTN: J. Gart 

National Institutes of Health National Institute for Occupational Safety Health 

ATTN: Library, Acq Unit Murray, C-27 
- - --

OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (Continued) OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (Continued) 

National Cancer Institute, NIH Veterans Admin Medical Center 

ATTN: A. Rabson ATTN: K. Lee 

ATTN: Pistenmaa 

ATTN: J. Wyngaarden Veterans Admin Medical Center 

ATTN: D. McGregor 

National Library of Medicine, NIH 

ATTN: Library Veterans Admin Medical Center 

ATTN: C. Tessmer 

National Science Foundation 

ATTN: P. Harrlman Veterans Admin Wadsworth Hospital Ctr 

ATTN: Kin-Ping Wong ATTN: T. Makinodan 

Heart, Lung & Blood Institute, NIH Veterans Administration 

ATTN: W. Zukel ATTN: J. Smith 

ATTN: L. Hobson 

of Tech Assessment ATTN: J. 

ATTN: P. Sharfman 2 cys ATTN: D. 

on Smoking Health The White House 

ATTN: J. Pinney ATTN: of Policy Dev, DP 

US Senate, Subcom of Regulatory Committee FOREIGN 

for Env & Public Works 

ATTN: J. Curtiss Canadian Embassy 

ATTN: Library 

US House of Rep, Comm on Armed 

ATTN: Subcommittee on Mil Per Comp EDF-RETN 1 

ATTN: Library 

US House of Rep, Comm on Interstate Foreign Commerce 

ATTN: Subcommittee on Health Envir Indian Council of Medical 

ATTN: A. Taskar 

US House of Rep, Comm on Veterans Affairs 

ATTN: 'R. Wilson Japan-Hawaii Cancer Study 

ATTN: J. McDonnell ATTN: G. Glober 

ATTN: R. 

ATTN: C. Graves French Engineering Bureau 

ATTN: M. Fleming ATTN: M. Delpla 

ATTN: C. Moore 

ATTN: F. Stover McGill University 

ATTN: on Oversight Investigations ATTN: R. Dseasohn 

US Regulatory Commission Presidente Colombo Comitato Nazionale 

Attention R. Whipp for ATTN: Library 

ATTN: F. Arsenault 

ATTN: W. Mills Univ of Puerto Rico Sch of Medicine 

ATTN: R. Minogue ATTN: Library 

US Public Health Svc United Kingdom Scientific Mission 

ATTN: Library ATTN: Mil Liasion for D. Fakley 

2 cys ATTN: Publications for MRC, SO 128 

US Pub Health Svc Hospital 

ATTN: E. Nishimura OTHER 

US Pub Health Svc Hospital Brookhaven National Laboratory 

ATTN: T. Robertson ATTN: M. Bender, Medical Dept 

ATTN: A. Brill, Medical Dept 

US Senate, Comm on Armed ATTN: V. Bond 

ATTN: C. ATTN: Tech Library 

ATTN: E. Cronkite, Medical Dept 

US Senate, Comm on Veterans Affairs 

ATTN: K. California Institute of Technology 

ATTN: V. Raymond ATTN: E. Lewis 

ATTN: J. Susman ATTN: R. Christy 

ATTN: S. Wallace 

ATTN: W. Brew University of Chicago 

ATTN: T. Harvey ATTN: P. Meier 

US Senate, on Governmental Affairs Columbia University 

ATTN: S. Senate Court ATTN: Library 

ATTN: A. Bloom 
OTHER (Continued) OTHER (Continued) 

University of Colorado University of New Mexico 

ATTN: Library ATTN: R. Anderson 

ATTN: C. Key 

Columbia University 

ATTN: Div of Biostatistics New York Univ Medical Center 

ATTN: N. Nelson 

Cornell University 

ATTN: W. Federer New York University 

ATTN: Library 

Medical College of Georgia ATTN: B. Posternack 

ATTN: L. Stoddard ATTN: A. Upton 

Harvard School of Public Health University of North Carolina 

ATTN: R. Reed ATTN: Library for Dean 

ATTN: Library ATTN: B. Greenberg 

Harvard School of Public Health Northwestern University 

ATTN: B. ATTN: H. 

Harvard University Oak Ridge Associated Universities 

W. Cochran ATTN: Lushbaugh 

ATTN: E. Tompkins 

University of Hawaii ATTN: J. Totter 

ATTN: Y. Matsumoto 

University of Oklahoma 

Indiana University ATTN: P. Anderson 

ATTN: F. Putnam 

University of Oregon 

Iowa State University ATTN: B. Pirofsky 

ATTN: T. 

Pacific Northwest Laboratory 

Johns Hopkins University ATTN: S. Marks 

ATTN: A. Kimball 

ATTN: A. Lilienfield Pennsylvania Univ Hospital 

ATTN: R. Seltser ATTN: S. Baum 

Kansas Univ of Agri & Applied Science University of Pennsylvania 

ATTN: H. Fryer ATTN: P. 

Kingston Hospital University of Pittsburgh 

ATTN: K. Johnson ATTN: Library 

ATTN: E. Radford 

Memorial Hosp for Cancer Allied Diseases 

ATTN: P. Lieberman University of Pittsburgh 

ATTN: N. Wald 

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center 

ATTN: P. Marks Rochester Univ Medical Ctr 

ATTN: J. Laughlin ATTN: G. Casarett 

ATTN: C. 

Merck, Sharp Dohme Intl 

Bearn University of Rochester 

ATTN: L. Hempelmann 

University of 

ATTN: P. Hodes Saint Francis Hospital 

ATTN: R. Blaisdell 

University of Michigan Medical School 

ATTN: Neel Medical Univ of South Carolina 

P. Liu 

University of Michigan 

ATTN: R. Cornell University of Southern California 

ATTN: F. Moore ATTN: J. Birren 

University of Minnesota Stanford Univ Medical Center 

ATTN: L. ATTN: J. Brown 

ATTN: J. 

ATTN: Library Stanford University 

ATTN: L. Moses 

Council on Radiation Protection Measurements 

ATTN: W. Sinclair 
OTHER (Continued) 

Stanford University Hospital 

ATTN: D. Dorfman 

Texas A&M University 

ATTN: R. Stone 

University of Texas at Austin 

ATTN: H. Sutton 

University of Texas 

ATTN: R. Stallones 

University of Texas 

ATTN: W. 

University of Texas 

ATTN: G. Taylor 

Universitv of Utah 

Library 

ATTN: E. Wrenn 

ATTN: L. Lyons 

ATTN: C. Mays 

ATTN: Library 

Vanderbilt University 

ATTN: R. Quinn 

University of Washington 

ATTN: Thompson 

University of Washington 

ATTN: A. Motulsky 

University of Wisconsin 

ATTN: J. Crow 

Yale University Sch of Medicine 

ATTN: J. Meigs 

ATTN: Library 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CONTRACTORS 

University of California 

Lawrence Livermore National Lab 

ATTN: Tech Info Library 

ATTN: Y. Ng 

ATTN: L. 

Los National Laboratory 

ATTN: MS218, P. Whalen 

ATTN: Library 

ATTN: T. Dowler 

ATTN: J. 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

ATTN: G. Kerr 

ATTN: C. Clifford 

ATTN: J. Auxier 

ATTN: C. Richmond 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

ATTN: T. Jones 

Reynolds Electrical Engr Co, Inc 

ATTN: J. Brady 

ATTN: Con Facility 

Sandia National Laboratories 

ATTN: Div 1314, S. Durpee 

ATTN: D. Aldridge 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CONTRACTORS 

Advanced Research Applications Corp 

ATTN: R. Armistead 

BDM Corp 

ATTN: J. 

Colorado State University 

ATTN: M. Zelle 

Energy Systems, Inc 

ATTN: T. Gates 

JAYCOR 

ATTN: J. Ozeroff 

JAYCOR 

ATTN: J. Sperling 

JAYCOR 

ATTN: E. Weary 

Kaman Tempo 

ATTN: DASIAC 

3 cys ATTN: E. Martin 

Kaman Tempo 

ATTN: DASIAC 

ATTN: W. Alfonte 

ATTN: S. Jones 

Louisiana Univ Sch of Med, Shreveport 

ATTN: Library 

National Academy of Sciences 

ATTN: Materials Advisory Board 

ATTN: S. Jablon 

7 cys ATTN: C. Robinette 

University of Nebraska 

ATTN: Library 

Ohio State University 

ATTN: Library 

Pacific-Sierra Research Corp 

ATTN: H. Brode, Chairman SAGE 

R&D Associates 

ATTN: C. Lee 

ATTN: J. Mat-cum 

ATTN: P. 

R&D Associates 

ATTN: A. Deverill 

Radiation Research Associates. 

ATTN: N. 

Rand Corp 

ATTN: P. Davis 

ATTN: Library 

Rand Corp 

ATTN: B. Bennett 

Science Applications, 

ATTN: E. Straker 

ATTN: G. Reynolds 

ATTN: W. Scott 

ATTN: W. 

71 
- - --

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CONTRACTORS (Continued) DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CONTRACTORS (Continued) 

Science Applications, Science Applications, Inc 

ATTN: J. Cockayne ATTN: J. Novotney 

ATTN: J. Goetz 

ATTN: W. Scientific Info Inc 

ATTN: ATTN: Library 

5 cys ATTN: J. 

Tech Reps, Inc 

Science Applications, ATTN: Collins 

ATTN: Kaul