Defense Threat Reduction Agency

 8725 John J. Kingman Road, MS 

 6201 Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201 

TECHNICAL REPORT

DTRA-TR-11-01

Compendium of Proposed NTPR 

Expedited Processing Groups

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 

November 2011

HDTRA1-07-C-0015

Subcontract No. 06-792-SA

 Prepared by:

 Science Applications International Corporation

 8301 Greensboro Dr., Suite 500, M/S E-5-5 

 McLean, VA 22102
 DESTRUCTION NOTICE:

 Destroy this report when it is no longer needed.

 Do not return to sender.

 PLEASE NOTIFY THE DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION

AGENCY, ATTN: OP-ONIUI, 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD, 

MS-6201, FT BELVOIR, VA 22060-6201, IF YOUR ADDRESS 

IS INCORRECT, IF YOU WISH IT DELETED FROM THE 

DISTRIBUTION LIST, OR IF THE ADDRESSEE IS NO 

LONGER EMPLOYED BY YOUR ORGANIZATION.
STANDARD FORM 298 (Rev. 8/98)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching data sources,

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection

of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington Headquarters Service, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports,

1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget,

Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington, DC 20503.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

30-11-2011 

2. REPORT TYPE

Technical report

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Compendium of Proposed NTPR Expedited Processing Groups

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

HDTRA1-07-C-0015

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

Case, David; Chehata, Mondher; Dunavant, Jason; Mason, Carol; 

McKenzie-Carter, Michael; Singer, Harvey; and Weitz, Ronald. 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

 Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)

 8301 Greensboro Drive, Suite 500, M/S E-5-5 

 McLean, VA 22102

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Nuclear Technology Directorate, Attn: Dr. Blake 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

8725 John J. Kingman Road, Mail Stop 6201 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

DTRA RD-NTSN

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

12. DISTRIBUTION AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

This report provides detailed descriptions of the 32 proposed Expedited Processing Groups (EPGs) developed using 

the procedures and methods discussed in DTRA-TR-10-29, A Technical Approach to Expedited Processing of NTPR 

Radiation Dose Assessments. The discussion of each EPG includes the assumptions used in selecting units and 

participants included in each group; a description of the activities with potential for radiation exposure; the 

characteristics of the radiation environments that may have been encountered; and a description of efforts to 

“maximize” the estimated doses. It provides estimated doses and upper bounds for exposure to external and internal 

sources of radiation to the whole body and to 20 organs and tissues. The report also provides recommendations 

about the use of certain organ doses in the expedited dose reconstruction process. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Nuclear Test Personnel Review, Veterans, Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Test, Dose Reconstruction, Radiation 

Dose Assessment 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT

 U

18. NUMBER

OF PAGES

 ??

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

Dr. Paul K. Blake

a. REPORT

 U

b. ABSTRACT

 

 U

c. THIS PAGE

 

 U

19b. TELEPONE NUMBER (Include area code )

 703 767-3384
CONVERSION TABLE 

Conversion Factors for U.S. Customary to metric (SI) units of measurement. 

MULTIPLY BY TO GET 

 TO GET BY DIVIDE 

meters (m) 

kilo pascal (kPa) 

kilo pascal (kPa) 

meter2

 (m2) 

joule (J) 

joule (J) 

mega joule/m2

 (MJ/m2) 

*giga bacquerel (GBq) 

radian (rad) 

degree kelvin (K) 

joule (J) 

joule (J) 

watt (W) 

meter (m) 

joule (J) 

meter3

 (m3) 

meter (m) 

joule (J) 

Gray (Gy) 

terajoules 

newton (N) 

kilo pascal (kPa) 

newton-second/m2

 (N-s/m2) 

meter (m) 

meter (m) 

meter (m) 

kilogram (kg) 

newton (N) 

newton-meter (N-m) 

newton/meter (N/m) 

kilo pascal (kPa) 

kilo pascal (kPa) 

kilogram (kg) 

kilogram-meter2

 (kg-m

2

) 

kilogram-meter3

 (kg/m3) 

**Gray (Gy) 

coulomb/kilogram (C/kg) 

second (s) 

kilogram (kg) 

kilo pascal (kPa)

1.000 000 x E -10 

1.013 25 x E +2 

1.000 000 x E +2 

1.000 000 x E -28 

1.054 350 x E +3 

4.184 000 

4.184 000 x E -2 

3.700 000 x E +1 

1.745 329 x E -2 

tk

 = (tof + 459.67)/1.8 

1.602 19 x E -19 

1.000 000 x E -7 

1.000 000 x E -7 

3.048 000 x E -1 

1.355 818 

3.785 412 x E -3 

2.540 000 x E -2 

1.000 000 x E +9 

1.000 000 

4.183 

4.448 222 x E +3 

6.894 757 x E +3 

1.000 000 x E +2 

1.000 000 x E -6 

2.540 000 x E -5 

1.609 344 x E +3 

2.834 952 x E -2 

4.448 222 

1.129 848 x E -1 

1.751 268 x E +2 

4.788 026 x E -2 

6.894 757 

4.535 924 x E -1 

4.214 011 x E -2 

1.601 846 x E +1 

1.000 000 x E -2 

2.579 760 x E -4 

1.000 000 x E -8 

1.459 390 x E +1 

1.333 22 x E -1

angstrom 

atmosphere (normal) 

bar 

barn 

British thermal unit (thermochemical) 

calorie (thermochemical) 

cal (thermochemical/cm2

)

curie 

degree (angle) 

degree Fahrenheit 

electron volt 

erg 

erg/second 

foot 

foot-pound-force 

gallon (U.S. liquid) 

inch 

jerk 

joule/kilogram (J/kg) radiation 

 absorbed dose 

kilotons 

kip (1000 lbf) 

kip/inch2

 (ksi) 

ktap 

micron 

mil 

mile (international) 

ounce 

pound-force (lbs avoirdupois) 

pound-force inch 

pound-force/inch 

pound-force/foot2

pound-force/inch2

 (psi) 

pound-mass (lbm avoirdupois) 

pound-mass-foot2

 (moment of inertia) 

pound-mass/foot3

rad (radiation dose absorbed) 

roentgen 

shake 

slug 

torr (mm Hg, 00

 C) 

 *The becquerel (Bq) is the SI unit of radioactivity; 1 Bq = 1 event/s.

**The gray (Gy) is the SI unit of absorbed dose. 
Summary Description

Compendium of

Proposed Expedited Processing Groups

1. Introduction

This document complements the technical basis document for the expedited processing of 

Nuclear Test Personnel Review (NTPR) radiation dose assessments (DTRA, 2011). It provides

the specific details of the composition, exposure scenarios, assumptions and parameters of dose 

calculation, and estimated doses for each Expedited Processing Group (EPG) that has been 

developed to date.

These introductory sections discuss the approach to preparing an EPG, describe participant 

activities and groups (units) that are generally excluded from consideration for an EPG, 

summarize the concepts of highest-dose cohort and maximized dose, and discuss the 

organization of the specific EPG discussions.

2. Approach to Expedited Processing Groups

The foundations for developing EPGs are contained in widely available information and 

publications on atmospheric nuclear testing and military participation in those activities from 

1945 to 1962, as well as in film badge dosimetry records and previously-completed Radiation 

Dose Assessments (RDAs) for units and individuals. The process of establishing doses for an 

EPG consists of the following steps (DTRA, 2011): 

• Identify EPG cohorts based on similarity of scenarios of participation activities and exposure 

pathways of their members.

• Select a “highest-dose cohort” that forms the generic basis for the EPG’s scenario of 

participation and radiation exposure, potential exposure pathways and related radiation 

environments. 

• Modify dose components for specific exposure pathways using details from the scenarios of 

exposure of the cohort(s) within the EPG that results in the highest dose for that specific dose 

component. 

• Maximize each dose component, where possible, by using dose parameter values that further 

overestimate such dose components. 

• Use the limiting plausible values of input parameters that further overestimate each dose 

component. 

• Estimate the EPG’s external gamma dose and internal doses to 20 relevant organs using a 

single combination of the exposure pathways and input parameter values defined in the 

previous steps. The estimated doses are referred to as the “EPG doses.”
Summary Description

Page 2 of 6 

• Calculate upper-bound doses by multiplying the EPG doses by DTRA-approved uncertainty 

factors. In this calculation, it is also assumed that all dose components are dependent, which 

further increases upper-bound doses. This is done for all dose components whether based on 

radiation survey data or film badge dosimetry.

Developed EPGs are reviewed and evaluated to identify opportunities to integrate them into 

other EPGs or combine them to form an EPG or EPGs with expanded membership, which can 

lead to enhancements in case-processing efficiency. 

DTRA (2011) provides complete details about the criteria for selection of cohorts for inclusion 

in an EPG and the principles for developing scenario-based dose assessments. In addition, 

DTRA (2011) describes how successful development of an EPG required that groups or 

individuals who performed certain activities must be excluded from consideration from many 

EPGs as discussed in the next section.

3. General Exclusions

Individuals in any of the following categories of activities or groups are to be considered for 

exclusion from expedited processing because of a potential for high doses. Excluded cases 

require further review and determination of upper-bound doses. Information needed to make this 

decision should be in the individual’s NTPR case file. Personnel and activities to be excluded 

are grouped into three general categories of participation as listed in Table 1–Table 3. 

4. Characteristics of Exposures and Estimated Dose

EPGs were developed to satisfy the criteria recommended by the Subcommittee on Alternative 

Methods for Dose Reconstruction (Subcommittee 5) as summarized below (VBDR, 2007).

• The doses should be upper bounds based on dose reconstructions that are more broadly 

generated and applied than those in individual cases. 

• The doses will be high enough to ensure that the reported dose is not less than the veteran’s 

true upper bound (95th percentile) dose. 

• The doses almost always will be higher than doses estimated in previous RDAs, thus 

providing maximum benefit of the doubt to the veteran. 

• The reported doses are either well above or well below the dose that could result in a positive 

finding of service connection for the claimed medical condition, considering age at exposure 

and age at diagnosis. 

• The assigned upper-bound doses for expedited cases should be based on worst-case (i.e., in 

the direction of overstating exposure) parameters and assumptions, not all of which the 

veteran may have actually encountered.
Summary Description

Page 3 of 6 

Table 1. General Exclusion Guidelines Applicable to Pacific Proving 

Ground Ship-Based Personnel* 

Activity or Cohort

Participation in more than one test series (operation)

Decontamination of any equipment (except for CROSSROADS target 

ship crews)

Personnel who performed maintenance or repair on contaminated 

equipment prior to decontamination

Personnel who were topside during one or more fallout events

Personnel whose regular assignment was to a small boat crew

Divers

Crews of cloud-tracking or cloud-sampling aircraft

Involvement in or near heliborne operations (crew members or 

passengers)

Radioactive sample recovery, handling, or preparation

Personnel who were assigned to support scientific projects, e.g., weapon 

development projects or effects experiments

Personnel whose regular assignment was to a Radiological Safety (RadSafe) unit

Flight drone or sounding rocket operations

Personnel assigned to ships that experienced evaporator or potable 

water system failures that lead to contaminated drinking water

Shore excursion to any test island.

Consumption of meals or being topside during episodes of descending 

fallout

Individuals with film badge records and whose total film badge dose is 

greater than the maximized external dose determined for their respective 

EPG

*

 Exclusions apply unless otherwise stated in a specific EPG.
Summary Description

Page 4 of 6 

Table 2. General Exclusion Guidelines Applicable to Pacific Proving 

Ground Land-Based Personnel* 

Activity or Cohort

Participation in more than one test series (operation).

Decontamination of aircraft, helicopters, vehicles, or equipment.

Personnel who performed maintenance or repair on contaminated 

aircraft, helicopters, vehicles, or equipment prior to decontamination.

Personnel whose regular assignment was to a small boat crew.

Divers.

Crews of cloud-tracking, cloud-sampling, or air delivery aircraft.

Involvement in or near heliborne operations (crew members or 

passengers). 

Radioactive sample recovery, handling, or preparation.

Personnel who were assigned to support scientific projects, e.g., weapon 

development projects or effects experiments (except if participation was 

with Post-CROSSROADS Bikini Resurvey). 

Personnel whose regular assignment was to a Radiological Safety (RadSafe) unit. 

Flight drone or sounding rocket operations .

Shore excursion to any test island.

Consumption of meals or being topside during episodes of descending 

fallout.

Individuals with film badge records and whose total film badge dose is 

greater than the maximized external dose determined for their respective 

EPG. *

 Exclusions apply unless otherwise stated in a specific EPG.
Summary Description

Page 5 of 6 

Table 3. General Exclusion Guidelines Applicable to Participants 

during Testing at the Nevada Test Site* 

Activity or Cohort

Participation in more than one test series (operation).

Volunteer Observers.

Participation in decontamination of aircraft, helicopters, vehicles, or 

equipment.

Personnel who performed maintenance or repair on contaminated 

aircraft, helicopters, vehicles, or equipment prior to decontamination.

Crews of cloud-tracking, cloud-sampling, or air-delivery aircraft.

Members of helicopter crews.

Radioactive sample recovery, handling, or preparation.

Personnel whose regular assignment was to a Radiological Safety (RadSafe) unit.

Personnel who were assigned duties in the forward test area for any 

reason other than to observe a shot or participate in a maneuver (e.g., 

Instructor/Control, Signal, Transportation, Engineering, etc.).

Personnel who were assigned to support scientific projects, e.g., 

weapons development projects and military or civil effects projects.

Personnel whose regular assignment was to a Radiological Safety (RadSafe) unit.

Consumption of meals while outside during episodes of descending 

fallout.

Individuals with film badge records and whose total film badge dose is 

greater than the maximized external dose determined for their respective 

EPG. *

 Exclusions apply unless otherwise stated in a specific EPG.

As explained in DTRA (2011) these criteria were achieved through the selection of the 

highest-dose cohort; i.e. the cohort of personnel with the highest external gamma dose among all 

cohorts included in an EPG. Evaluations were conducted to determine how well the criteria and 

principles for inclusion in an EPG were satisfied for each candidate group or cohort. 

The estimated doses associated with the highest-dose cohort were then maximized by 

investigating whether alternate scenario components or the use of increased dose calculation 

parameter values would produce higher external or internal doses. The scenario elements and 

exposure parameters for other prospective cohorts in the EPG were evaluated to determine if 

certain scenario components would produce a higher dose than similar components of the 

highest-dose cohort. If those were found, they were substituted for the component of the 

highest-dose cohort. In addition, higher values were developed for certain dose calculation 
Summary Description

Page 6 of 6 

parameters compared to the values routinely used in RDAs were implemented. For example, the 

time spent inside a building was assumed to be in a tent, and breathing rates were increased from 

the nominal value of 1.2 m3 hr-1 to 2 m3 hr-1. (DTRA, 2011) Details of all these substitutions and 

parameter increases are discussed in each EPG narrative.

This approach of basing the dose for an EPG on the highest-dose cohort and then maximizing 

the dose by increasing certain parameters, and applying substitute scenario elements produces 

estimated doses that are clearly not less than any individual participant’s actual dose.

5. Organization of Compendium

This compendium is organized into two major sections of EPG discussions—the first for EPGs 

for the Oceanic Series, and the second for EPGs for the Series conducted in the Continental 

United States (CONUS) that occurred mainly at the Nevada Test Site. 

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. A Technical Approach to Expedited 

Processing of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. October. 

VBDR (Veterans’ Advisory Board on Dose Reconstruction), 2007. Letter to Director, Defense 

Threat Reduction Agency. May 7.
Proposed NTPR

Expedited Processing Groups

Oceanic Series

November 2011
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation ARGUS 

Ship-Based Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation ARGUS Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 3 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation ARGUS Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The ARGUS Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of the crews 

of ships assigned to Task Force 88 that participated in Operation ARGUS. The details of 

ARGUS are described in Jones et al. (1982). Participating ships in Task Force 88 that are 

included in this EPG are listed in Table 1 (Jones, et al, 1982). 

Table 1. Naval Ships that Participated in Operation ARGUS

Ship

Test Area 

Arrival 

Date (1958)

Test Area 

Departure 

Date (1958)

Task Group Size

USS ALBEMARLE 

(AV-5) Never in test 

area

Never in test 

area

Task Group 88.5-

Scientific Support 

Group

503 

USS BEARSS 

(DD-654) August 25 September 8 Task Group 88.2-Destroyer Group 257 

USS COURTNEY 

(DE-1021) August 25 September 8 Task Group 88.2-Destroyer Group 160 

USS 

HAMMERBERG 

(DE-1015) 

August 25 September 8 Task Group 88.2- 

Destroyer Group 163 

USS NEOSHO 

(AO-143) August 25 September 9

Task Group 88.3-

Mobile Logistics 

Group

287 

USS NORTON 

SOUND (AVM-1) August 25 September 9 Task Group 88.4, Missile Group. 596 

USS SALAMONIE 

(AO-26) Never in test 

area

Never in test 

area

Task Group 88.3-

Mobile Logistics 

Group

231 

USS TARAWA 

(CVS-40) to include 

Air Antisubmarine 

Squadron 32 and 

Helicopter 

Antisubmarine 

Squadron 5 

August 25 September 8 Task Group 88.1, 

Carrier Group 2091 

USS WARRINGTON 

(DD-843) August 25 September 9 Task Group 88.2-Destroyer Group 271 

Total 4,559
Operation ARGUS Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 3 

Operation ARGUS was a nuclear weapon test series that was conducted in the South Atlantic 

Ocean in 1958. The principal objective of ARGUS was to study military implications of highaltitude nuclear detonations. Three nuclear shots were fired during ARGUS, one each on 

August 27, August 30, and September 6, 1958. Each of the ARGUS warheads was launched on 

a rocket from the guided missile ship USS NORTON SOUND (AVM-1), had a yield of 

1–2 kilotons, and was detonated at an altitude of up to approximately 300 miles (Jones et al., 

1982; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-9). 

There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. This EPG include all ARGUS participants who 

were assigned to any of the nine ships involved in the operation or any land-based participants. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation ARGUS Ship-Based 

Personnel 

The missiles of the three shots were launched from the USS NORTON SOUND. Of the nine 

ships involved in Operation ARGUS, seven of the ships were in the general area of the 

USS NORTON SOUND when the missiles were launched. The other two ships, the 

USS ALBEMARLE and the USS SALAMONIE were outside of the launch area. The ships in 

the test area were deployed around the USS NORTON SOUND. At least one ship of the task 

force was assigned as a weather picket and was more than 100 nautical miles (NMI) from the

launch site at the time of each launch. The seven ships in the test area were the following 

distances below and up range from the detonation as shown in Table 2 (Jones et al., 1982). 

Table 2. Distances from Operation ARGUS shots

Shot Estimated Height of 

Burst (Miles)*

Estimated Lowest Surface Range 

from Nearest Task Force Ship to 

Surface Zero (NMI)

ARGUS 1 ~300 275

ARGUS 2 ~300 85

ARGUS 3 ~300 115 * The exact heights of the bursts could not be found and have been reported at different heights. The 

height reported is used in Jones et al. (1982). 

Due to the horizontal and vertical separations between the ships and the detonations, no 

radiological exposures were anticipated during the test. However, as a precaution, monitor film 

badges were issued to the seven ships in the vicinity of the launch with each ship receiving one 

control badge and ten area monitoring badges. In addition, the weapon handlers and pilots of the 

four aircraft in flight during each test were issued individual film badges (NRC, 1989). The 

highest film badge dose was 0.025 rem to a control badge and the highest dose recorded by an 

individual film badge was 0.01 rem. At the time of the operation, it was concluded that that film 

badge results were spurious and that no radiation dose was incurred by task force personnel as a 

result of the nuclear detonations due to the distance from the detonations and the lack of fallout

(Jones et al., 1982). 
Operation ARGUS Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 3 

Since ship-based personnel received no external radiation doses from ARGUS detonations, 

experienced no episodes of descending fallout, and experienced no instances of personnel or 

equipment contamination during the operation, it was determined that ship-board personnel 

received no internal doses as a result of any ARGUS detonations (Jones et al., 1982). 

3. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

For reasons detailed above, there was no potential for exposure for all members of this EPG. 

4. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Jones, C. B., M. K. Doyle, L. H. Berkhouse, F. S. Calhoun, E. J. Martin, 1982. Operation 

ARGUS 1958. DNA 6039F. Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. April 30.

NRC (National Research Council), 1989. Film Badge Dosimetry in Atmospheric Nuclear Tests. 

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation CROSSROADS 

Support Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 1 of 9

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

Operation CROSSROADS is documented in Berkhouse et al. (1984). The CROSSROADS 

Support Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of the crews of 

support ships present at Bikini Atoll during the Operation, as listed in Table 1 below 

(Weitz et al., 1982c), together with the additional elements and excluding the elements listed 

below. 

Table 1. Operation CROSSROADS Support Ships

USS AJAX USS BOWDITCH USS GUNSTON 

HALL USS MUNSEE USS SAIDOR

USS ALBEMARLE USCG BRAMBLE USS GYPSY USS NEWMAN K. 

PERRY USS SAINT CROIX

USS ALLEN M. 

SUMNER USS BULESON USS HAVEN USS ONEOTA USS SAN MARCOS

USS APL 27 USS CEBU USS HENRICO USS ORCA USS SEVERN

USS APPALACHIAN USS CHARLES P. 

CECIL USS HESPERIA USS OTTAWA USS SHAKAMAXON

USS APPLING USS CHICKASAW USS INGRAHAM USS PALMYRA USS SHANGRI-LA

USS ARD 29 USS CHIKASKIA USS JAMES M. 

GILLISS USS PANAMINT USS SIOUX

USS ARTEMIS USS CHOWANOC USS JOHN BLISH USS PGM 23 USS SPHINX

USS ATA 124 USS CLAMP USS KENNETH 

WHTING USS PGM 24 USS SUNCOCK

USS ATA 180 USS COASTERS 

HARBOR USS LAFFEY USS PGM 25 USS SYLVANIA

USS ATA 185 USS CONSERVER USS LCI 977 USS PGM 29 USS TELAMON

USS ATA 187 USS CREON USS LCI(L) 1062 USS PGM 31 USS TOMBIGBEE

USS ATA 192 USS CUMBERLAND 

SOUND USS LCI 1067 USS PGM 32 USS TURNER

USS ATR 40 USS CURRENT USS LCI 1091 USS PHAON USS WALKE

USS ATR 87 USS DELIVER USS LOWRY USS POLLUX USS WENATCHEE

USS AVERY 

ISLAND USS DIXIE USS LST 388 USS PRESERVER USS WHARTON

USS BARTON USS DUTTON USS LST 817 USS PRESQUE ISLE USS WIDGEON

USS BAYFIELD USS ENOREE USS LST 861 USS QUARTZ USS WILDCAT

USS BEGOR USS ETLAH USS LST 871 USS RECLAIMER USS YMS 354

USS BENEVOLENCE USS FALL RIVER USS LST 881 USS ROBERT K. 

HUNTINGTON USS YMS 358

USS BEXAR USS FLUSSER USS LST 989 USS ROCKBRIDGE USS YMS 413

USS BLUE RIDGE USS FULTON USS MENDER USS ROCKINGHAM USS YMS 463

USS BOTTINEAU USS FURSE USS MOALE USS ROCKWALL USS YOG 63

USS BOUNTIFUL USS GEORGE 

CLYMER

USS MOUNT 

McKINLEY USS ROLETTE
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 2 of 9

In addition to the ships listed above, the following crews and individuals should be included 

for expedited processing in this EPG:

• Crews of six remanned target ships that did not receive topside contamination from Shot 

BAKER: USS BLADEN, USS CORTLAND, USS FILLMORE, USS GENEVA, USS 

NIAGARA, and USS LCI(L) 615 (Weitz et al., 1982b).

• Crew members of any target ship who did not participate in target ship boardings after Shot 

BAKER.

The following individuals or units are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• USS ACHOMAWI: unique exposure pathway (faulty evaporator). 

• USS COUCAL: unique exposure pathway (weather deck contamination after Shot BAKER). 

• USS O’BRIEN: unique exposure pathway (topside fallout after Shot ABLE). 

• Crew members involved in flight and drone operations aboard USS SHANGRI-LA and 

USS SAIDOR

• Individuals who were part of ammunition disposal units at Kwajalein during the PostCROSSROADS period. 

There are approximately 30,000 personnel in this EPG.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for CROSSROADS Support Ship–

Based Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for Operation CROSSROADS support ship-based personnel, an 

exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort that received the highest 

external gamma dose and corresponding internal doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of crew members of the USS RECLAIMER form the basis for the 

generic highest-dose cohort scenario for two primary reasons:

• The RECLAIMER crew members received the largest average external gamma dose among 

all support ship-based personnel. 

• The sources of radiation exposure for this cohort are well documented and are similar to 

those of other support ship-based personnel. 

As explained below, several assumptions were added to the documented RECLAIMER 

scenario (Weitz et al., 1982c) to produce EPG doses. The USS RECLAIMER scenario is 

described directly below, followed by a description of the additional dose components and 

assumptions.
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 3 of 9

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS RECLAIMER Crew

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to support ships during Operation 

CROSSROADS, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was develop based on activities of the 

crew members of the USS RECLAIMER. 

The USS RECLAIMER arrived at Bikini Atoll prior to the first shot of the operation and 

remained in that vicinity until departing for Kwajalein Atoll on September 1, 1946. Missions of 

the RECLAIMER at Bikini included salvaging target vessels damaged by the detonations, 

performing emergency repairs, and fighting fires. In addition, the Director of Ship Materiel 

(DSM) was embarked aboard RECLAIMER to coordinate all salvage operations. The DSM 

aboard RECLAIMER made the first post-shot inspections of the target array (Berkhouse et al., 

1984; Weitz et al., 1982a and 1982c). 

Although the largest average external dose was accrued aboard RECLAIMER, there was little 

potential for the intake of radioactive materials: 

• Neither aerosol nor sea spray from the contaminated lagoon would have been present in 

concentrations sufficient to produce internal doses of more than 0.001 rem for ship-based

personnel (Weitz, 1996).

• The airborne concentration of radioactive materials on a support ship from contaminants 

suspended/resuspended from a nearby target ship after ABLE/BAKER was negligible due to 

the very small propensity for suspension/resuspension and the distance from the source.

• Contaminants that accumulated on the hull and inside the saltwater piping system of a 

support ship after BAKER were located in regions generally inaccessible to ship-based

personnel and, therefore, were not available for inhalation or ingestion while crewmen 

performed normal activities aboard ship. 

As a result, the primary pathways for internal dose to crew members of support ships occurred 

during liberty from the inhalation of resuspended fallout, incidental ingestion of contaminated 

soil and dust while on land, and the ingestion of contaminated water while swimming. The 

Bikini Island recreational facility opened on August 1, 1946, so the crew of RECLAIMER could 

have taken liberty there throughout most of August 1946. 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

USS RECLAIMER cohort analysis: 

• It was observed that the radiation exposure rates in the engine room and other engineering 

spaces of the support ships is greater than those found in non-engineering below deck 

locations (Weitz et al., 1982a). Therefore, crewmen with engineering ratings (i.e., 

boilermaker, carpenter’s mate, fireman, machinist’s mate, ship fitter, water tender, 

engineering officer), who presumably spent more time in areas of the ship with higher 

exposure rates, are expected to have accrued higher external doses. For this reason, the 

highest-dose cohort group is further restricted to engineering personnel.
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 4 of 9

• The internal dose for the crew of the USS BOWDITCH is used instead of the internal dose 

for the USS RECLAIMER since the highest internal dose for support ship crews at 

CROSSROADS is attributed to the ship with the longest post-BAKER duration in Bikini 

Lagoon which is the USS BOWDITCH. The USS BOWDITCH finally departing Bikini on 

September 27, 1946 and had the longest stay (Berkhouse et al., 1984). 

• For the purpose of high-siding the internal dose, the frequency of shore liberty is increased to 

every second day instead of the Operation CROSSROADS standard of every third day 

(Berkhouse et al., 1984). 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 m3 hr−1 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities during 

liberty consisting of a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al. 

2009). Other combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and 

heavy activity levels, result in a similar average breathing rate.

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 5 of 9

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the CROSSROAD Support Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from contaminated 

lagoon water while 

topside aboard ship

Crew members of the USS RECLAIMER 

were exposed to neutron-activated lagoon 

water after ABLE and weapon debriscontaminated lagoon water after BAKER. 

Residual radiation 

from contaminated 

lagoon water while on 

liberty

When swimming at the recreational facility 

during the period August 1 - September 26, 

1946, USS BOWDITCH personnel were 

exposed to contaminated lagoon water.

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

frequency. 

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

support ships

While below deck, crew members of the 

USS RECLAIMER were exposed to 

radiation emitted from contaminants that 

had accumulated on the exterior hulls and in 

the internal saltwater piping systems of the 

ship.

Duty station for all personnel is assumed to 

have been in engineering spaces where 

exposure rates where highest.

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

nearby target ships

While topside, crew members of the USS 

RECLAIMER were frequently exposed to 

contaminated target ships in their vicinity.

Residual radiation 

from land-deposited 

fallout

When on liberty during the period August 1 

- September 26, 1946, personnel of USS 

BOWDITCH were exposed to fallout on 

Bikini Island.

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

frequency.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

When on liberty during the period August 1 

- September 26, 1946, personnel of USS 

RECLAIMER resuspended fallout on Bikini 

Island.

Breathing rate increased from 1.2 m3 hr-1 to 

2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust

Personnel of USS RECLAIMER

incidentally ingested fallout-contaminated 

soil and dust on Bikini Island during shore 

liberty. 

Extended time at Bikini Atoll until 

September, 26, 1946, 

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

frequency.

Ingestion of 

contaminated lagoon 

water

When swimming at the recreational facility 

RELCLAIMER personnel ingested 

contaminated lagoon water.

Extended time at Bikini Atoll until 

September, 26, 1946,

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

frequency.
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 6 of 9

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of the EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStart Earliest date [time] for liberty Aug 1, 1946 [1030]

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1)

DateEnd Latest date [time] for liberty Sep 26, 1946 [2359]

(based on latest ship departure)

EXTERNAL DOSE

DoseExtGam Mean external dose accrued aboard 

support ship

2.6 rem

Derived with XRD code (Raine, 2006)

LibertyInterval Frequency of taking liberty 2 (every second day)

LibertyTime Duration of each liberty 3 hours

TimeBeach

Time spent on beach of Bikini Island 

[with exposure rates Ibeach = (5.47/24)t1.23 R/hr] during each liberty

1 hour

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

TimeInland

Time spent inland on Bikini Island [with 

exposure rate Iinland = (0.90/24)t-1.23 R/hr] 

during each liberty

1 hour

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

TimeSwim

Time spent swimming during each 

liberty

1 hour

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1)

IOBeach

Initial exposure rate on the beach on 

Bikini Atoll

0.2279 R hr-1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1)

IOInland

Initial exposure rate inland on Bikini 

Atoll

0.0375 R hr-1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

λSL Decay exponent for shore leave 1.23

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1

INTERNAL DOSE

BRBikini Breathing rate during liberty 2.0 m3 hr−1

KBikini(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor

KBikini(t) = 

10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

qing Ingestion rate of water while swimming 0.1 l hr-1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be 

resuspended

0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose 

conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values 

among particle sizes of 1–10 μm for 

inhalation)

(Raine et al., 2007; 

DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 7 of 9

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

CROSSROAD support ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound 

external gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 

to independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external 

doses for expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 3 9

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 <0.001 0.003 0.009

Bone Surface 0.2 0.009 2 0.09

Brain <0.001 <0.001 0.003 0.005

Breast <0.001 <0.001 0.003 0.006

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.004 0.003 0.04

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.008 0.003 0.08

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.04 0.003 0.4

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.09 0.003 0.9

Kidney <0.001 0.002 0.006 0.02

Liver 0.03 0.002 0.3 0.03

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Lung 0.003 0.04 0.03 0.4

Muscle <0.001 <0.001 0.003 0.009

Pancreas <0.001 0.001 0.003 0.01

Red Marrow 0.007 0.004 0.07 0.04

Spleen <0.001 <0.001 0.003 0.008

Testes 0.002 <0.001 0.02 0.007

Thymus <0.001 <0.001 0.003 0.007

Thyroid <0.001 0.2 0.003 2

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 8 of 9

The upper-bound doses in Table 4 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 5. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 11

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Liver Liver 10

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S. E., Gladeck, F. R., Hallowell, J. H., Jones, C. B., Martin, E. J., 

McMullan, F. W., and Osborne, M. J., 1984. Operation CROSSROADS: 1946. DNA 

6032F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. May 1.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2009. A Probabilistic Approach to Uncertainty 

Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment - Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, Revision 

1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Raine, D. A. III, 2006. XRD User’s Guide. Science Applications International Corporation, 

McLean, VA. 
Operation CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 9 of 9

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R., Stuart, J., Muller, E., Thomas, C., Knowles, M., Landay, A., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 

1982a. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Units of Operation CROSSROADS, 

Volume I - Basic Report. DNA-TR-82-05-V1, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

D.C. March 3.

Weitz, R., Stuart, J., Muller, E., Thomas, C., Knowles, M., Landay, A., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 

1982b. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Units of Operation CROSSROADS, 

Volume II – (Appendix A) Target Ships. DNA-TR-82-05-V2, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, D.C. March 3.

Weitz, R., Stuart, J., Muller, E., Thomas, C., Knowles, M., Landay, A., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 

1982c. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Units of Operation CROSSROADS, 

Volume III – (Appendix B) Support Ships. DNA-TR-82-05-V3, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, D.C. March 3.

Weitz, R. L., 1996. Internal Dose from Sea Aerosol Intake. Memorandum, Science Applications 

International Corporation, McLean, VA.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation CROSSROADS

Target Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 9 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

Operation CROSSROADS is thoroughly documented in Berkhouse et al. (1984). The 

CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of the 

crews of vessels utilized as target ships during CROSSROADS, as listed in Table 1 (Weitz et al., 

1982b), minus the excluded elements listed below the table. 

Table 1. Operation CROSSROADS Target Ships 

USS ANDERSON USS DAWSON USS LCT 705 USS LCT 1237 USS 

PENNSYLVANIA

USS ARDC 13 USS FALLON USS LCT 746 USS LSM 60 USS PENSACOLA

USS ARKANSAS USS GASCONADE USS LCT 812 USS LST 52 PRINZ EUGEN

USS BANNER USS GILLIAM USS LCT 816 USS LST 125 USS RALPH 

TALBOT

USS BARROW USS HUGHES USS LCT 818 USS LST 133 USS RHIND

USS BRACKEN USS 

INDEPENDENCE USS LCT 874 USS LST 220 SAKAWA

USS BRISCOE USS LAMSON USS LCT 1013 USS LST 545 USS SALT LAKE 

CITY

USS BRULE USS LCI 327 USS LCT 1078 USS LST 661 USS SARATOGA

USS BUTTE USS LCI 329 USS LCT 1112 USS MAYRANT USS STACK

USS CARLISLE USS LCI 332 USS LCT 1113 USS MUGFORD USS TRIPPE

USS CARTERET USS LCI 620 USS LCT 1114 USS MUSTIN USS WAINWRIGHT

USS CATRON USS LCI(L) 549 USS LCT 1115 NAGATO USS WILSON

USS CONYNGHAM USS LCT 412 USS LCT 1175 USS NEVADA USS YO 160

USS CRITTENDEN USS LCT 414 USS LCT 1187 USS NEW YORK USS YOG 83

Five target ships sank without being reboarded after Shot ABLE (USS ANDERSON, USS 

CARLISLE, USS GILLIAM, USS LAMSON, and SAKAWA) and six after Shot BAKER (USS 

ARDC 13, USS ARKANSAS, USS LSM 60, NAGATO, USS SARATOGA, and USS YO 160). 

Crews of sunken target ships were often splintered and reassigned to various ships, including 

other target ships. These crew members are therefore included in the present EPG unless it is 

known that they did not participate in post-BAKER target ship boarding activities (see second 

exclusion listed below).

The following individuals and units are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG:

• Crews of six remanned target ships that did not receive topside contamination from Shot 

BAKER: USS BLADEN, USS CORTLAND, USS FILLMORE, USS GENEVA, 

USS NIAGARA, and USS LCI(L) 615. These personnel are included in the CROSSROADS 

Support Ship-Based Personnel EPG.

• Crew members of any target ships who did not participate in target ship boardings after Shot 

BAKER – these personnel are included in the CROSSROADS Support Ship-Based.
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 9 

• Crew members of any target ships who were subsequently assigned to Ammunition Disposal 

Units and participated in ammunition unloading at Kwajalein.

• Crews of target submarines.

There are approximately 8000 personnel in this EPG.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based 

Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for CROSSROADS target ship-based personnel, an exposure scenario 

was developed based on activities of the group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.”

For this EPG, the activities of the engineering team assigned to the USS CARTERET for the 

basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) for the 

following reasons: 

• A thorough examination of Navy NTPR target ship boarding dose reconstructions, performed 

circa 1983-5, has identified the highest-dose cohort among target ship-based personnel at 

CROSSROADS as members of an engineering team assigned to the target ship 

USS CARTERET.

• Although this cohort stands out as having the largest external gamma dose, it is not unique 

external gamma dose.

• Reboarding teams on other target ships (e.g., USS STACK, USS MUGFORD, 

USS SALT LAKE CITY) received only slightly smaller external doses.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS CARTERET reboarding scenario (NNTPR, 1983) to produce EPG doses. The basic 

scenario of participation and radiation exposure of the USS CARTERET is described in 

Section 3 followed by a description of the additional assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS CARTERET Engineering 

Team

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to CROSSROADS target ships, a 

generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the USS CARTERET. 

USS CARTERET was in a target array of both shots. Its crew evacuated to the attack transport 

USS BEXAR on June 30 in preparation for Shot ABLE, and returned to USS CARTERET after 

the target ship had been declared free of radioactivity by radiation safety personnel on July 2. 

The crew reboarded USS BEXAR on July 24 in preparation for the BAKER test. Although 

USS BEXAR did not reenter Bikini Lagoon until the morning of July 30, some crew members 

returned earlier to participate in an initial reboarding of USS CARTERET on July 29. 

Subsequent boardings of the target ship took place during August 1-18 for decontamination and 
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 9 

painting. While most of the crew was billeted on USS BEXAR during this period, the 

commanding officer and a skeleton crew of engineers remained aboard USS CARTERET 

continuously during August 3-11 to operate the ship’s boilers. This engineering team also stood 

watch and supported decontamination activities by scraping and repainting the deck. The team 

performed these duties, operating mostly topside, until ordered by radsafe personnel to leave 

USS CARTERET on the morning of August 11. Crew members were next allowed aboard the 

ship on August 16-18. The USS CARTERET crew transferred from USS BEXAR to USS 

GEORGE CLYMER on August 20 for transportation to the Continental United States (NNTPR, 

1983; Berkhouse et al., 1984).

As indicated above, the crew members of USS CARTERET and the other target ship were 

billeted aboard one or more “support” ships during and after each shot, but they typically 

reboarded the target ship to conduct inspections, decontamination, and repairs. While billeted 

aboard a support ship, a target ship crewman was exposed to residual radiation from 

contaminants suspended in the lagoon water, deposited on nearby target ships, and retained on 

the exterior hull and in internal saltwater piping system of the billet ship itself (Weitz et al., 

1982a). When aboard his parent target ship, the crewman was exposed to neutron activation 

products after Shot ABLE and deposited weapon debris after Shot BAKER. While on liberty, he 

was exposed to residual radiation from the contaminated seawater and from radionuclides 

deposited as fallout or rainout on Bikini Island.

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were incorporated into the generic 

high-sided analysis: 

• While aboard the billet ships USS BEXER and USS GEORGE CLYMER, the members of 

subject engineering team are assumed to have spent their below-deck time in engineering 

spaces, where the radiation exposure rates were greater than those found in other below-deck 

locations.

• Members of engineering team are assumed to have remained topside while aboard 

USS CARTERET.

• An enhanced factor of 10-5 m-1, instead of the default value of 10-6 m-1, is used to characterize 

the resuspension that resulted from paint chipping and similar decontamination activities 

prior to August 12, 1946. After August 12, 1946 the focus on target ship reboarding shifted 

from decontamination to inspection and repair; the default value of resuspension factor is 

used for boardings that took place on or after that date.

• Members of engineering team are assumed to have chipped paint 4 hours per day during 

August 3-11, and to have ingested 1 cm2 of contaminated paint per hour of chipping.

• The breathing rate during liberty is increased from the default value of 1.2 m3 hr−1 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. 

• Team members are assumed to have taken liberty every second day the facility was available 

to them (August 1-2 and August 11-20).
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 9 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in 

Table 3. 

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from contaminated 

lagoon water while 

topside aboard ship

When topside on billet ships, crew members 

of USS CARTERET were exposed to 

neutron-activated lagoon water after Shot

ABLE and weapon debris-contaminated 

lagoon water after Shot BAKER. 

Residual radiation 

from contaminated 

lagoon water while on 

liberty.

When swimming during liberty, crew 

members of USS CARTERET were 

exposed to contaminated lagoon water.

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

schedule.

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

billet ships

While below decks on billet ships, crew 

members of USS CARTERET were 

exposed to the external radiation from 

contamination that had accumulated on the 

exterior hulls and in the internal saltwater 

piping systems of those ships.

Assumed that engineering team occupied 

engineering spaces 16 hours per day while 

below deck on billet ship.

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

target ships

While aboard USS CARTERET, crew 

members were exposed to external radiation 

due to radioactive contaminants deposited 

topside and below deck.

Assumed that engineering team remained 

topside while on target ship.

Residual radiation 

from land-deposited

fallout

Personnel on liberty were exposed to 

residual radiation from fallout due to Shots 

ABLE and BAKER on Bikini Island.

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

schedule.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

while aboard target 

ship

Personnel on USS CARTERET inhaled

contaminants that were resuspended during 

decontamination and similar shipboard 

activities.

Resuspension factor increased from 10-6 to

10-5 m-1 for topside work on target ship.

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

during shore liberty 

Personnel on liberty inhaled resuspended 

fallout while on Bikini Island.

Breathing rate increased from 1.2 to

2 m3 hr−1 while on liberty.

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust

Personnel incidentally ingested falloutcontaminated soil and dust while on Bikini 

Island.

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

schedule.

Ingestion of 

contaminated lagoon 

water

Personnel on liberty ingested contaminated 

lagoon water while swimming.

Liberty is assumed to have occurred every 

second day instead of the default 3-day 

schedule.

Ingestion of 

contaminated paint 

chips

Chipping paint in preparation for repainting 

topside areas of target ships was a common 

decontamination procedure; some ingestion 

of chipped paint is likely.

Ingestion of 1 cm2 of contaminated paint 

chips per hour spent scraping on target ship.
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 9 

Table 3. Input Parameters Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

EXTERNAL DOSE

DoseDetOperWater

DoseDetOperShipCon

Mean external doses accrued while aboard 

support ships from exposures to radionuclides 

deposited in water and on target ships (first 

parameter) and from ship contamination (second 

parameter).

0.180 rem

0.352 rem

(Derived with XRD code [Raine, 2006]; 

Weitz et al., 1982c)

TstartTS

BoardTS

Target ship boarding dates (1946) and hours 

aboard for each date

July 29 (0.25 hr), Aug 1 (0.17), Aug 2 (3), 

Aug 3 (16), Aug 4-10 (continuous), Aug 11 

(10), Aug 16 (8), Aug 17 (9), Aug 18 (9)

(NNTPR, 1983)

IntDaTS Topside exposure rates on USS CARTERET per Figure A-8, Weitz et al., 1982b

λ SL Decay exponent for shore liberty 1.23

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1)

λ SB Decay exponent for ship reboarding 1.3

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

DateStartSL1 – DateEndSL1

DateStartSL2 – DateEndSL2

Dates during which liberty was available 1-2 Aug 46

11-20 Aug 46

FracSL

Fraction of time spent on liberty

Frequency of taking liberty

3/(24x2) = 0.0625

3 hours every second day

LibertyTime Duration of each liberty 3 hours

FracBeach

Fraction of time spent on beach of Bikini Island

[with exposure rate Ibeach = (5.47/24)t-1.23 R/hr] 

during each liberty

1/3 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

FracInland

Fraction of time spent inland on Bikini Island 

[with exposure rate Iinland = (0.90/24)t-1.23 R/hr] 

during each liberty

1/3 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

FracSwim

Fraction of time spent swimming during each 

liberty

1/3

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) 

INTERNAL DOSE

GSMFShip

Gamma Source Modification Factor for USS 

CARTERET

3.14 (mean value for APA)

(Weitz, 2009) 

KShip

Resuspension factor for topside on USS 

CARTERET 10-5 m-1

BRNom

Breathing rate while aboard USS CARTERET 

and during liberty 2.0 m3

 hr−1 

PaintTS

Hours per day spent chipping paint on USS 

CARTERET during Aug 3-11 4.0 

qPC

Square centimeters of paint ingested per hour of 

scraping 1.0 

KBikini(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor 24 19 01.0 5 10)( m10 −− ×− − +×=

t

Bikini etK

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

qing Ingestion rate of water while swimming 0.1 L hr−1

qintake Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 9 

Table 3. Input Parameters Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

DCFInhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose conversion 

factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

CROSSROADS target ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound 

external gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 

to independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external 

doses for expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 9 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for

Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 3 9

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

Bone Surface 5 0.3 47 3

Brain 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Breast 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Stomach Wall 0.009 0.09 0.09 0.9

Small Intestine Wall 0.009 0.2 0.09 2

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.009 0.8 0.09 8

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.009 2 0.09 19

Kidney 0.02 0.04 0.2 0.4

Liver 1 0.07 11 0.7

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.05 0.9 0.5 9

Lung 0.1 2 1 19

Muscle 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

Pancreas 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

Red Marrow 0.3 0.09 3 0.9

Spleen 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

Testes 0.07 0.02 0.7 0.2

Thymus 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

Thyroid 0.009 5 0.09 45

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.009 0.06 0.09 0.6

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

The upper-bound doses in Table 4 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 5. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 9 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Bile Duct Liver 20

Bone Bone Surface 59

Gall Bladder Liver 20

Liver Liver 20

Thyroid Thyroid 53

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S. E., Gladeck, F. R., Hallowell, J. H., Jones, C. B., Martin, E. J., 

McMullan, F. W., and Osborne, M. J., 1984. Operation CROSSROADS: 1946. DNA 

6032F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. May 1.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment – Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, Revision 1.2. , 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. October 31.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment - Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, Revision

1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

NNTPR (Navy Nuclear Test Personnel Review Team), 1983. NNTPR Radiation Dose 

Assignment for Crew of USS CARTERET (APA-70). October 9 (original) and 18 

(supplement). 

Raine, D. A. III, 2006. XRD User’s Guide. Science Applications International Corporation, 

McLean, VA. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.

Weitz, R.L., 2009. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor (GSMF) for Shipbased Applications. NTPR-TM-09-04, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA.
Operation CROSSROADS Target Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 9 

Weitz, R., Stuart, J., Muller, E., Thomas, C., Knowles, M., Landay, A., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 

1982a. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Units of Operation CROSSROADS, 

Volume I - Basic Report. DNA-TR-82-05-V1, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

D.C. March 3.

Weitz, R., Stuart, J., Muller, E., Thomas, C., Knowles, M., Landay, A., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 

1982b. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Units of Operation CROSSROADS, 

Volume II – (Appendix A) Target Ships. DNA-TR-82-05-V2, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, D.C. March 3.

Weitz, R., Stuart, J., Muller, E., Thomas, C., Knowles, M., Landay, A., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 

1982c. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Units of Operation CROSSROADS, 

Volume III – (Appendix B) Support Ships. DNA-TR-82-05-V3, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, D.C. March 3.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Operation CROSSROADS 

Land-Based Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 5

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

individuals who participated in Operation CROSSROADS who were assigned to and resided on 

the Pacific islands of Kwajalein, Ebeye, Roi-Namur, Enewetak, Wake, Tarawa, and Majuro as 

stated in Berkhouse et al. (1984). Individuals with exposure types identified below as exclusions 

are processed separately. The details of Operation CROSSROADS can be found in Berkhouse et 

al. (1984). Specific to the CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel EPG, air support operations 

were staged out of Kwajalein and Enewetak Islands. Weather monitoring stations were located 

on several distant islands (Berkhouse et al., 1984 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1). 

Approximately 2,600 personnel were assigned to Kwajalein, Enewetak, and distant islands 

during Operation CROSSROADS. The majority of the personnel were stationed on Kwajalein 

Island. Except for the Marine Corps Detachment, land participants were Army-Air Force

personnel who were assigned to Task Group 5.1 as listed in Table 1 (Berkhouse et al., 1984). 

Table 1. Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Units 

Unit Locations Unit Size

Task Unit 1.5.1 

(Tactical Operations Unit) Kwajalein Island 367 

Task Unit 1.5.2 

(Army Air Photographic Unit) Kwajalein Island 412 

Task Unit 1.5.3 

(Instrumentation and Test Requirements Unit) Enewetak Island 450 

Task Unit 1.5.4 (Air Transport Unit) Kwajalein Island 55

Task Unit 1.5.5 (Air Service Unit) Kwajalein and 

Enewetak Islands 

686 

Task Unit 1.5.7 (Army Air Weather 

Reconnaissance Unit) Kwajalein Island 56 

Task Unit 1.5.8 (Air Orientation Unit) Kwajalein Island 27

Task Unit 1.5.9 (Air-Sea Rescue Unit) Enewetak Island 48

Task Unit 1.5.10 (Headquarters, Air Unit) Kwajalein Island 139

Task Unit 1.5 (others) Kwajalein Island 249

Marine Corps Detachment Enewetak Island 107

Total 2,596

The following individuals or activities are excluded from expedited processing under this 

EPG: 

• Individuals who participated in decontamination of target ships moored at Kwajalein Island. 

• Individuals who participated in the towing of target ships to Kwajalein Island. 
Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 5

• Individuals who participated in small boat operations involving contaminated target or 

support ships moored at Kwajalein Island. 

• Individuals who performed surveys, construction, or experiments on Bikini Atoll after Shot 

ABLE. 

• Individuals who participated in unloading, inspecting, handling, moving, and 

decontaminating ammunition on target ships moored at Kwajalein Island. 

• Individuals who participated in the handling of contaminated clothing, waste, or equipment 

created during ammunition inspection and unloading operations at Kwajalein Island. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation CROSSROADS LandBased Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for CROSSROADS land-based personnel, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the cohort that received the highest external gamma dose. This 

cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.”

For this EPG, the activities of those members of Task Unit 1.5.5 that were assigned to 

Enewetak Island who returned to the United States on the USS APPLING form the basis for the 

exposure scenario of the highest-dose cohort for two primary reasons: 

• Task Group 1.5.5 members received the largest external gamma dose among all land-based

personnel due to being on the troop transport ship with the highest exposure rate due to 

residual radioactive contamination on the ship. 

• The sources of radiation exposure for this cohort are well documented and are similar to 

those of other land-based personnel during CROSSROADS 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

TU 1.5.5 scenario to produce EPG doses. The TU 1.5.5 scenario is described directory below 

followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Task Unit 1.5.5 (Enewetak) 

The cohort with the largest external dose among members of the CROSSROADS land-based 

personnel EPG is TU 1.5.5 who were assigned to Enewetak Island and who returned to the U.S. 

on the USS APPLING. The members of the cohort arrived at Enewetak Island prior to the first 

shot of CROSSROADS, departed on August 7, 1946 aboard the USS APPLING, and debarked

the USS APPLING on August 22, 1946 in San Francisco (U.S. Navy, 1946). The members of 

the TU 1.5.5 were only exposed to residual radiation during their time on the transport ship while 

travelling back to the United States. These personnel, along with other members of TG 1.5, were

not exposed to other sources of radiation for the following reasons (CJTF1, 1946; 

Berkhouse et al., 1984 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1): 

• Land-based personnel were beyond the range of any initial radiation to include initial gamma 

and neutron radiations (Weitz and Egbert, 2010). 
Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 5

• The Islands of Kwajalein and Enewetak along with more distant islands did not receive any 

fallout radiation from Shots ABLE and BAKER nor did the islands receive any contaminated 

lagoon water from Bikini Atoll. There was no residual radiation on any of the islands from 

previous tests since CROSSROADS was the first atomic test in the Pacific (Berkhouse et al., 

1984). 

• After Shot BAKER, contaminated target ships were towed from Bikini Atoll to Kwajalein 

Island for removal of ammunition and for storage. However, only personnel who boarded 

the ships or conducted small boat operations near the ships were exposed to residual radiation 

from the contaminated target ships at Kwajalein Island. No ships were towed to Enewetak 

Island or to any of the other island (Berkhouse et al., 1984; Phillips, et al., 1985). 

• Potentially contaminated aircraft landed on Kwajalein and Enewetak Islands. Only those 

individuals who were aircraft crew or who were assigned to aircraft decontamination or 

maintenance could have been exposed to the residual contamination on the aircraft. These 

cases would be referred to further evaluation (Berkhouse et al., 1984). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions 

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

TU 1.5.5 cohort analysis: 

• It is assumed that members of TG 1.5.5 who sailed on the USS APPLING spent 16 hours a 

day below deck and eight hours a day above deck while onboard. Assuming more time 

below deck increase the dose to the EPG members from hull and ship piping contamination. 

• It is assumed that members of TG 1.5.5 who sailed on the USS APPLING did not leave the 

ship while it was moored in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii before continuing on to the continental 

United States. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual salt water

piping contamination 

Members of TU 1.5.5 who sailed on the 

USS APPLING were exposed to residual 

radiation from contamination in the salt 

water piping system. . 

16 hours below deck per day instead of 

14.4 hours below deck.

Residual hull 

contamination 

Members of TU 1.5.5 who sailed back to 

the U.S. on the USS APPLING were 

exposed to residual radiation from 

contamination on the hull of the ship. 

16 hours below deck per day instead of 

14.4 hours below deck. 

INTERNAL

None
Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 5

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

Dateboarding Date [time] of boarding the USS APPLING 7 Aug 1946 [1500]

Datedebarking Date [time] of debarking from the USS APPLING 22 Aug 1946 [1500]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent topside 0.33

(= 8/24)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external dose and corresponding upper-bound dose for the CROSSROADS LandBased Personnel EPG are summarized in Table 4. The EPG external dose and the upper-bound 

external gamma dose from residual radiation were calculated using the XRD software (Raine, 

2006). There was no potential for exposure to internally-deposited radionuclides for this group. 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper-Bounds for 

CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual gamma radiation 0.03 0.09

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

All Organs There was no potential for exposure to internally-deposited 

radionuclides for this group. 

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S. E., Gladeck, F. R., Hallowell, J. H., Jones, C. B., Martin, E. J., 

McMullan, F. W., and Osborne, M. J., 1984. Operation CROSSROADS: 1946. DNA 

6032F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. May 1. 

CJTF1 (Commander Joint Task Force One), 1946. Report on Atomic Bomb Tests ABLE and

BAKER (Operation CROSSROADS). WT-206, Joint Task Force One, Marshall Islands. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 
Operation CROSSROADS Land-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 5

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. An Expedited Approach to NTPR Radiation 

Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA.TBD.

Phillips, R., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 1985. Internal Dose Assessment-Operation COSSROADS. 

DNA-TR-84-119, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. October 30.

Raine, D.A. 2006. XRD User’s Guide. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

June 21.

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1), Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

U.S. Navy, 1946, Deck Log Book for USS APPLING, August 1-31. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

USS BRUSH Crew 

(February 25–27, 1947)

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 1 of 7 

Expedited Processing Group:

USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947)

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The USS BRUSH Crew Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of the approximately 

250-man crew of the destroyer USS BRUSH (DD 745) while the ship was present at Kwajalein 

Atoll February 25–27, 1947 (Berkhouse et al., 1984). Although specific activities of the crew 

members were different, activities that resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. 

Furthermore, the sources of radiation resulting in exposure were common among crew members. 

Therefore, it is reasonable to include the crew of the USS BRUSH in a single EPG.

Operation CROSSROADS consisted of two 21-kT nuclear tests, ABLE and BAKER, 

conducted at Bikini Atoll on July 1 and July 25, 1946, respectively. More than 80 unmanned 

“target” ships were anchored in Bikini Lagoon for each test. In late August and early September,

1946, approximately 60 target ships that had survived the tests at Operation CROSSROADS 

were taken to Kwajalein Atoll, about 210 nautical miles southeast of Bikini Atoll. A primary 

mission at Kwajalein was to remove and dispose of ammunition that had been stored on target 

ships. Personnel also boarded target ships at Kwajalein to perform limited maintenance and 

security tasks intended to keep the ships seaworthy. There were approximately 30 former target 

ships anchored in Kwajalein Lagoon at the time of USS BRUSH’s visit (Berkhouse et al., 1984). 

The following individuals are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG:

• Personnel who transferred to USS BRUSH after the ship’s departure from Kwajalein Atoll 

on February 27, 1947.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for USS BRUSH Crew 

To estimate EPG doses for all USS BRUSH crew members, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of personnel with highest potential for dose from exposure to 

external residual radiation and the corresponding internal doses. These crewmen are referred to 

as the “highest-dose cohorts.”

For this EPG, the activities of USS BRUSH crew members are those who participated in all 

excursions to target ships at Kwajalein Atoll for the basis for the generic highest-dose cohort 

scenario for the primary reason that that were present in the areas of highest possible doses. 

As explained below several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented

USS BRUSH scenario to produce EPG doses. The USS BRUSH scenario is described directly 

below, followed by a listing of the additional dose components and assumptions.
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 2 of 7 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS BRUSH Crew Members 

who Participated in Excursions to Target Ships 

To estimate EPG doses for all personnel assigned to the USS BRUSH, a generic high-sided 

exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the crew members who participated in 

excursions to target ships. The high-sided generic scenario is based on interviews with various 

USS BRUSH crew members unless otherwise attributed. 

While USS BRUSH was anchored in the lagoon, a whale boat was dispatched from the ship 

for approximately four trips to nearby target ships to collect souvenirs. These excursions 

involved about 40 crew members. The average topside radiation exposure rate of all target ships 

present at Kwajalein at that time was 0.0022 R hr-1 (Phillips et al., 1985). Souvenir hunting was 

terminated on orders from the shore base for USS BRUSH personnel to stop boarding target 

ships. The contaminated souvenirs, including a wooden helm, chronometers, boiler gauges, 

brass levers, knobs, and nameplates, were transported to and brought aboard USS BRUSH, then 

placed in the mess area where they were viewed by crew members. The quantity of souvenirs 

was sufficient to cover two 10-man tables. These souvenirs were sold or bartered, and 

subsequently distributed throughout the living spaces of the ship. 

USS BRUSH got underway from Kwajalein on the morning of February 27, 1947, and 

proceeded to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, arriving there on March 11, 1947 (USS BRUSH, 1947). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions are added to the already highsided USS BRUSH cohort analysis: 

• Members of the highest-dose cohort are assumed to have 4 hours on each of four target ships. 

Given the briefness of USS BRUSH’s stay to Kwajalein, 16 hours is considered the 

maximum amount of time that could have been devoted to souvenir gathering. 

• All souvenirs are assumed to have been taken from topside locations on target ships and are 

assumed to be contaminated to the same levels as on the parent vessels. 

• The gamma source modification factor (GSMF) of the target ships boarded is 4.06. 

• The resuspension factor on target ships is 10-5 m-1 instead of the standard value of 10-6 m-1

prescribed in Phillips et al., 1985, due to the mechanical disturbance created by the expedient 

removal of souvenirs from contaminated surfaces. 

• The breathing rate during excursions to target ships is 2.0 m3 hr−1 instead of the standard 

value of 1.2 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities 

consisting of a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). 

Other combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy 

activity levels, result in a similar average breathing rate. 

• Highest-dose cohort members spent 2 hours at a distance of 1 m from the entire collection of 

souvenirs while transporting them to USS BRUSH in the whale boat and while viewing them 

on display in the mess area. This is considered a high-sided duration for viewing the 

souvenirs.
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 3 of 7 

• The souvenirs brought aboard USS BRUSH had a total surface area of 10 m2. 

• Through handling, contaminants on souvenirs are assumed to have transferred to a crew 

member’s hands to the extent that the surface activity density thus accrued on the palms and 

palm-side fingers was equal to 30 percent of the surface activity density that was originally 

on the souvenirs. Half of the amount of contaminant material on the palm sides of the hands 

is assumed to have subsequently transferred to the mouth and ingested. These conservative 

souvenir-to-hand and hand-to-mouth transfer factors are based on a survey of the relevant 

literature (Weitz, 2011).

• The souvenirs are assumed to have eventually dispersed among the crew members and put 

into footlockers or duffle bags that were distributed throughout the living spaces of USS 

BRUSH, an area estimated at 500 m2; the average exposure rate in these spaces decreased 

only though radiological decay. 

• Cohort members spent 2/3 of their time below decks in this radiation environment (e.g., 

while dining and sleeping) from late February 1947 until transferring from USS BRUSH one 

year later. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 1. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in 

Table 2. 

Table 1. Exposure Pathways for the USS BRUSH Crew Members 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

target ships

During excursions to target ships, USS 

BRUSH crew members who collected 

souvenirs were exposed to residual radiation 

emitted from contaminants on/in 

contaminated target ships.

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

souvenirs

While in the proximity of scavenged 

souvenirs, USS BRUSH crew members who 

collected souvenirs were exposed to residual

radiation emitted from contaminants on 

those items.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

USS BRUSH crew members who collected 

souvenirs were exposed to resuspended 

fallout while on contaminated target ships.

Breathing rate of 2.0 m3 hr-1 instead of 1.2 

m3 hr-1. 

GSMF of 4.06 instead of 2. 

Ingestion of 

contaminants on 

souvenirs

USS BRUSH crew members who collected 

souvenirs transferred contaminants from 

souvenir to hands to mouth.
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 4 of 7 

Table 2. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartOp

Date USS BRUSH arrived at Kwajalein 

Atoll

February 25, 1947

(USS BRUSH, 1947)

DateEndOp

Date nominal crewman detached from 

USS BRUSH February 27, 1948

EXTERNAL DOSE

IntTS

Average topside exposure rate of target 

ships at Kwajalein on date of boarding

0.055 R day-1

(Phillips et al., 1985)

TSouv

Time spend in close proximity (within 

one meter) to souvenirs on day of 

collection

2 hours

SATable

Estimated surface area of souvenirs, 

equated to area of display table 10 m2

SABD

Estimated habitable below-deck area of 

USS BRUSH 500 m2

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for times greater than 

H+4380

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

FracBD

Fraction of time nominal crewman spent 

below deck on USS BRUSH 16/24 = 0.667

INTERNAL DOSE

GSMF 

Maximum gamma source modification 

factor for target ships at Kwajalein on 

date of boarding

4.06

(highest value for target ships present; 

Phillips et al., 1985, and Weitz, 2009)

K Resuspension factor while on target 

ships 10-5 m-1

BR Breathing rate while on target ships 2.0 m3 hr−1

SAHands

Estimated surface area of both hands 

(assumed contaminated and ingested) 0.034 m2

Tsh Souvenir-to-hand transfer factor 0.3

(Weitz, 2011)

Thm Hand-to-mouth transfer factor 0.5

(Weitz, 2011)

DCFInhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose 

conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values 

among particle sizes of 1–10 μm for 

inhalation)

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM 

ID01) 
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 5 of 7 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the USS 

BRUSH Crew are summarized in Table 3. The upper-bound external gamma dose from residual 

radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components of the 

EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for expedited processing, all 

external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative assumption. This is 

equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by an uncertainty factor 

of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the EPG internal doses by a 

factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust which are estimated as 

upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in Table 3 are not less than the

upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 3. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

USS BRUSH Crew 

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.08 0.3

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

Bone Surface 5 0.3 51 3

Brain 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Breast 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Stomach Wall 0.009 0.05 0.1 0.5

Small Intestine Wall 0.01 0.1 0.1 1

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.01 0.5 0.2 5

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.02 2 0.2 13

Kidney 0.03 0.03 0.3 0.3

Liver 2 0.06 11 0.6

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.05 0.05 0.5 0.5

Lung 0.1 0.4 1 4

Muscle 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Pancreas 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.3

Red Marrow 0.3 0.08 3 0.8

Spleen 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Testes 0.07 0.02 0.7 0.2

Thymus 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Thyroid 0.009 0.02 0.09 0.2

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.009 0.03 0.09 0.3

* NPE = no potential for exposure. 

The upper-bound doses in Table 3 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 6 of 7 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 4. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 

Table 4. Cancers not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

USS BRUSH Crew

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Bone Bone Surfaces 53

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Bile Duct Liver 12

Gall Bladder Liver 12

Liver Liver 12

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S. E., Gladeck, F. R., Hallowell, J. H., Jones, C. B., Martin, E. J., 

McMullan, F. W., and Osborne, M. J., 1984. Operation CROSSROADS: 1946. DNA 

6032F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. May 1.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2009. A Probabilistic Approach to Uncertainty 

Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment - Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, Revision 

1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Phillips, J., Klemm, J., and Goetz, J., 1985. Internal Dose Assessment – Operation 

CROSSROADS. DNA-TR-84-119, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. October 

30. 
USS BRUSH Crew (February 25–27, 1947) 

Page 7 of 7 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.

USS BRUSH, 1947. Deck Log of USS BRUSH (DD 745), February-March. 

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Weitz, R.L., 2011. Transfer of Deposited Fallout from Surface-to-Hands and from Hands-toMouth. NTPR-TM-11-xx, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team 

(July–August, 1947) 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 1 of 7 

Expedited Processing Group:

Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team 

(July–August, 1947) 

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Bikini Scientific Resurvey (July–August, 1947) Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

consists of personnel who took part in a resurvey of Bikini Atoll in July and August 1947. While 

specific activities of the resurvey participants varied, the sources of radiation resulting in 

exposure were common among team members. Therefore, it is reasonable to include the 

participants of the 1947 Bikini Resurvey in a single EPG.

Operation CROSSROADS consisted of two 21-kiloton nuclear tests, designated ABLE and 

BAKER, conducted in 1946 at Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands and is described in Berkhouse 

et al. (1984).

Some 700 personnel participated in the Bikini Scientific Resurvey during July–August, 1947. 

The list of ships that participated is included in Table 1 (Berkhouse et al., 1984; Hines, 1962). 

There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

Table 1. Participating Ships in Bikini Resurvey 

Ship Function Size

USS CHILTON (APA 38) Task Force 10.12 

Flagship 550*

USS COUCAL (ARS 8) Task Force 10.12 

Underwater Operations 110 

LCI(L) 615 Task Force 10.12 Shipto-Shore Operations 20 

LSM 382 Task Force 10.12 Shipto-Shore Operations 40 

Total 720 * Includes 38 members of Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 1800.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Bikini Scientific Resurvey 

To estimate EPG doses for members of the Bikini Scientific Resurvey team, a scenario was 

developed based on activities of personnel with the highest dose from exposure external residual 

radiation and corresponding internal doses. These individuals are referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” 
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 2 of 7 

For this EPG, the activities of the Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 1800 form the 

basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-1) for the 

following reasons:

• This element consists of a distinct group. 

• The gamma radiation exposure rates and the concentrations of radioactive materials available 

for intake via inhalation and ingestion encountered by island-based personnel were greater 

than those to which ship-based participants were exposed except for the divers assigned to 

USS COUCAL who could have received higher doses.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

Bikini Island resident scenario to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of participation and 

radiation exposure of the Resurvey Team members stationed on Bikini Island is described in 

Section 3 followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions in 

Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Navy Construction Battalion 

Detachment 1800

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel who participated in the 1947 Bikini Scientific 

Resurvey, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the of the 

Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 1800. 

USS CHILTON and USS COUCAL arrived at Bikini Atoll on July 15, 1947, followed by 

LCI(L) 615 on July 17 and LSM 382 on August 5. Immediately after the receipt of radiological 

clearance on July 15 to proceed with work on Bikini Island, personnel from USS CHILTON set 

about offloading equipment and renovating structures. By July 22, barracks, laboratories, a 

galley, and a beer hall were functioning and Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 1800 

established full-time residence on Bikini Island. This contingent remained on the island until 

August 25, when shore establishments were secured and loading of ships commenced 

(Berkhouse et al., 1984; AFSWP, 1947). 

There was potential for radiation exposure on Bikini Island, the only site of land-based 

participants during the resurvey. The initial radiological survey found that the exposure rates at 

that time were 0.004 R day-1 on the lagoon-side beach and 0.03 R day-1 in algal beds and other 

scattered locations in the northwestern tip of the island. The year-old radioactive contamination 

contributed to both the external and internal doses of personnel at those locations. To measure 

external radiation exposures, Radiological Safety Officers issued film badges daily to individuals 

entering hazardous areas, and collected the badges at the end of each day for delivery to the 

Photographic Dosimetry Unit (PDU) for processing. Neither the badges nor listings of readings 

have been located for any of the Bikini Scientific Resurvey participants. However, it is 

documented that none of the more than 500 film badges processed by the PDU had a reading in 

excess of the daily tolerance limit of 0.1 R (0.07 rem) (Berkhouse et al., 1984; AFSWP, 1947). 
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 3 of 7 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions are added to an already high-sided 

Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 1800 cohort analysis: 

• It is assumed that the highest-dose cohort worked and was billeted on the northwest tip of the 

island in the site of the highest measured exposure rate.

• The number of hours spent outside is increased16 hr day-1 from the default 14.4 hr day-1

(DTRA, 2010, ED02). 

• Although personnel spend their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that they spent 100 percent of this time in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2 (DTRA, 2010, 

ED02). 

• The resuspension factor in the vicinity of the cohort is 2 times larger than the standard value 

for aged fallout. This enhancement resulted from mechanical disturbances of the soil during 

construction activities, which are assumed to have continued throughout their stay on the 

island.

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is 2.0 m3 hr−1 instead of the standard value of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity Weitz et al. (2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average breathing rate.

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in 

Table 3. 
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 4 of 7 

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the Bikini Scientific Resurvey Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from contaminants on 

Bikini Island

Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 

1800 personnel were exposed to residual 

radiation from radioactive debris deposited 

on Bikini Island by Shot BAKER. Navy 

Construction Battalion Detachment 1800

personnel worked and billeted at the site of 

the highest exposure rate measured in the 

initial resurvey of Bikini Island.

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1. 

Assumed the lowest protection factor of 1.5 

for tents while indoors. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 

1800 personnel inhaled resuspended Shot 

BAKER fallout while working outside on 

Bikini Island. Navy Construction Battalion 

Detachment 1800 personnel worked and 

billeted at the site of the highest exposure 

rate measured in the initial resurvey of 

Bikini Island.

Cohort spent 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1. 

Resuspension factor was enhanced by a 

factor of 2 due to mechanical disturbances of 

the soil induced by construction activity.

Assumed a breathing rate of 2.0 m3

 hr-1

instead of 1.2 m3

 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust

Navy Construction Battalion Detachment 

1800 personnel incidentally ingested 

fallout-contaminated soil and dust during 

construction work on Bikini Island.

.
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 5 of 7 

Table 3. Input Parameters Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStart

Date first elements of resurvey team 

arrived at Bikini Atoll

July 15, 1947

(Berkhouse et al., 1984)

DateEnd

Date last elements of resurvey team 

departed Bikini Atoll

August 29, 1947

(Berkhouse et al., 1984)

EXTERNAL DOSE

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

Iref

Highest exposure rate measured during 

resurvey of Bikini Island

0.03 R day-1

(Berkhouse et al., 1984)

λBI

Decay exponent for CROSSROADS 

fallout on Bikini Island

1.23

(Thomas, 1986)

Fracos

Fraction of time spent outside on Bikini 

Island 0.67 (= 16/24)

PFt Protection factor while in a tent 1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

INTERNAL DOSE

Ken(t) Resuspension factor on Bikini Island 

(enhanced by factor of 2)

Ken(t) = 2 × 10−5 × e(-0.01 × t/24) + 10 −9 

m-1 

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

BR Breathing rate 2.0 m3 hr−1

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1 

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be 

resuspended

0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose 

conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values 

among particle sizes of 1–10 μm for 

inhalation)

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM 

ID01) 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the Bikini 

Scientific Resurvey Team are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose 

from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 6 of 7 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.8 3

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.02

Bone Surface 5 0.2 49 1

Brain 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.007

Breast 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.01

Stomach Wall 0.009 0.006 0.09 0.02

Small Intestine Wall 0.009 0.01 0.09 0.03

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.009 0.05 0.09 0.1

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.01 0.2 0.09 0.3

Kidney 0.02 0.003 0.3 0.01

Liver 1 0.03 11 0.3

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.05 0.02 0.5 0.2

Lung 0.1 0.3 1 3

Muscle 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.008

Pancreas 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.01

Red Marrow 0.3 0.02 3 0.08

Spleen 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.01

Testes 0.07 0.004 0.7 0.02

Thymus 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.02

Thyroid 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.008

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.009 0.003 0.09 0.008

* NPE = no potential for exposure 

The upper-bound doses in Table 4were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 5. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Page 7 of 7 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Bikini Scientific Resurvey Team

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organs

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Bone Bone Surface 54

Liver Liver 15

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Bile Duct Liver 15

Gall Bladder Liver 15

6. References

AFSWP (Armed Forces Special Weapons Project), 1947. Technical Report (of) Bikini Scientific 

Resurvey – Operations. XRD-212, Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, Kirtland Air 

Force Base, NM. December.

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S. E., Gladeck, F. R., Hallowell, J. H., Jones, C. B., Martin, E. J., 

McMullan, F. W., and Osborne, M. J., 1984. Operation CROSSROADS: 1946. DNA 

6032F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. May 1. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment - Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program. Revision

1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Hines, N. O., 1962. Proving Ground – An Account of the Radiobiological Studies in the Pacific, 

1946-1961 (University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, D.C.).

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11 Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA). 

Thomas, C., 1986. Radiological Contamination on the Islands of Bikini Atoll at Operations 

CROSSROADS. Science Applications International Corporation, McLean, VA. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation SANDSTONE

Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 11

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

consists of approximately 6,400 personnel who were assigned to U.S. Navy and U.S. Army ships 

during Operation SANDSTONE (1948) (Berkhouse et al., 1983; Thomas et al., 1983a). 

Although general activities of the crew members of the various ships in this EPG were different, 

their activities that may have resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. 

Furthermore, the sources of radiation exposure of these participants involving relevant 

SANDSTONE shots were similar. Therefore it is reasonable to include most participants 

assigned to ship crews during Operation SANDSTONE in a single EPG. 

The SANDSTONE test series comprised three shots that were detonated at Enewetak Atoll in 

the Pacific Proving Ground (PPG) from April 15 to May 15, 1948. Joint Task Force 7 (JTF 7) 

was responsible for the conduct of the operation and consisted of elements of all four military 

services, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and Federal civilian agencies and their 

contractors. JTF 7 was organized into functional and service branch oriented task groups (TG), 

although there were cross-service TG assignments. Ship-based personnel were assigned to 

TG 7.3, and consist primarily of naval personnel but also include members of the other services. 

The TG 7.3 ships are listed in Table 1 (Berkhouse et al., 1983; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2; 

Thomas et al., 1983a). 

The following individuals and cohorts are excluded from expedited processing under this 

EPG: 

• Individuals who boarded Operation CROSSROADS target ships moored at Kwajalein. 

• Individuals who participated in Enewetak and Bikini Atoll resurveys during PostSANDSTONE operations. 

• Individuals who participated in a special project known as Operation FITZWILLIAM. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all SANDSTONE ship-based personnel, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.” Exposures to initial 

neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose 

cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first 

minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal doses. 
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 11

Table 1. Ships Assigned to Task Group 7.3* at Operation SANDSTONE

Ship Task Unit Size

USS ALBEMARLE (AV-5) 7.3.2 (Main Naval Task Unit) 537

USS AREQUIPA (AF-31) 7.3.5 (Service Unit) 75 

USS ASKARI (ARL-30) 7.3.7 (Boat Pool Unit) 164

AVR C-26638, AVR C-26653 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 12

USS BAIROKO (CVE-115) 7.3.4 (Helicopter Unit) 770

USS COMSTOCK (LSD-19) 7.3.7 (Boat Pool Unit) 252

USS CURRIER (DE-700) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 136

USS CURTISS (AV 4) 7.3.2 (Main Naval Task Unit) 555

USS DAVISON (DMS-37) 7.3 (Commander, Task Group) 170

USS GARDINERS BAY (AVP-39) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 265

USS GEORGE (DE-697) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 141

USS GULL (AMS-16) 7.3 (Commander, Task Group) 24

USS HENRY W. TUCKER (DDR-875) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 233

LCI(L)-549, LCI(L)-1054, LCI(L)-1090 7.3.7 (Boat Pool Unit) 60

LCT-472, LCT-494, LCT-1194, LCT-1345 7.3.7 (Boat Pool Unit) †

LSM-250, LSM-378 7.3.6 (Cable Unit) 104

USS LST-45, USS LST-219, USS LST-611 7.3.2 (Main Naval Task Unit) 179

USS MARSH (DE-699) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 138

USS MISPILLION (AO-105) 7.3.5 (Service Unit) 173

USS MOUNT MCKINLEY (AGC-7) 7.3.1 (Flagship Unit) 578

USS PASIG (AW-3) 7.3.5 (Service Unit) 164

USS PELICAN (AMS-32) 7.3 (Commander, Task Group) 25

USS PERKINS (DDR-877) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 223

USS PICKAWAY (APA-222) 7.3.2 (Main Naval Task Unit) 290

USS QUICK (DMS-37) 7.3 (Commander, Task Group) 167

USS RABY (DE-698) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 143

USS ROGERS (DDR-876) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 234

USS SPANGLER (DE-696) 7.3.3 (Off-Shore Patrol Unit) 135

USS SWALLOW (AMS-36) 7.3 (Commander, Task Group) 23

USATS FS-211, USATS FS-234, USATS FS-370 7.3 (Commander, Task Group) 52

USS WARRICK (AKA-89) 7.3.2 (Main Naval Task Unit) 167

USS YANCEY (AKA-93) 7.3.2 (Main Naval Task Unit) 148

YOG-64 7.3.5 (Service Unit) 11

YW-94 7.3.5 (Service Unit) †

Total 6,348

*

 Non-TG 7.3 ships are known to have been in or near the PPG during the operation or during pre- or postoperation time periods. These ships were not assigned to JTF 7 and they were not directly involved in 

Operation SANDSTONE. However, these ships may have been subject to fallout from SANDSTONE 

shots. Any doses incurred by crewmembers are bounded by the doses calculated for this EPG, as long as 

no EPG exclusion conditions are met. These ships include USS ASHTABULA (AO-51), USS ATLANTA 

(CL-51), USS CHEHALIS (AOG-48), USS CIMARRON (AO-22), USS DULUTH (CL-87), USS 

HELENA (CA-75), USS KERSTIN (AF-34), USS KLICKITAT (AOG-64), USS LATONA (AF-35), LCI615, USS NEMASKET (AOG-10), USS OAKLAND (CL-95), USS RYER (AG-138), USS TOLEDO 

(CA-133) (Thomas et al., 1983a; DTRA 2008, Appendix B-2). 

†

 Number of crewmembers is unknown (Berkhouse et al., 1983; Thomas et al., 1983a).
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 11

For this EPG, the activities of personnel assigned to USS HENRY W. TUCKER form the basis 

for the exposure scenario of the highest-dose cohort (Thomas et al., 1983a) for two primary 

reasons: 

• The group received the largest average external gamma dose from residual radiation for all 

SANDSTONE ship-based personnel. 

• The operating history of the group of the ship is well-documented. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS HENRY W. TUCKET scenario (Thomas et al., 1983a) to produce EPG doses. The basic 

scenario of participation and radiation exposure of the USS HENRY W. TUCKET is described 

in Section 3 followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions in 

Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Crew of USS HENRY W.

TUCKER

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to residence islands in the PPG or 

supporting islands during Operation SANDSTONE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of crew members of USS HENRY W. TUCKER. This ship was a 

radar picket destroyer that arrived at Enewetak Atoll on March 18, 1948, where it was one of eight 

destroyers assigned to the Off-Shore Patrol Unit. These ships supported ship movements to and from 

Enewetak Atoll and also provided anti-submarine patrols around the atoll while the operation was in

progress. At the times of the three SANDSTONE shots, USS HENRY W. TUCKER was on patrol about 

15 nautical miles off the shot island. When not on patrol, USS HENRY W. TUCKER remained anchored

in the lagoon where it took on fuel, oil, and water in preparation for its next patrol assignment. The crew 

was presumably allowed shore liberty on Enewetak Island or Parry Island during times that the ship was 

anchored in the lagoon. USS HENRY W. TUCKER departed from the PPG on May 21, 1948 

(Berkhouse et al., 1983; DTRA 2008, Appendix B-2; Thomas et al., 1983a). 

USS HENRY W. TUCKER did not receive any primary (early-time) fallout from any 

SANDSTONE shots; secondary (late-time) fallout is the only fallout experienced by the ship. 

All three SANDSTONE shots also resulted in fallout at the shore liberty islands of Enewetak 

Atoll. The three sources of exposure to crewmembers of USS HENRY W. TUCKER were

fallout from SANDSTONE shots while on board the ship, residual radiation from the XRAY 

nuclear cloud, and fallout on liberty islands. Average fallout exposure rates measured on the 

Enewetak Island are applicable to USS HENRY W. TUCKER and other ships anchored in the 

vicinity. The three SANDSTONE shots and the resulting fallout exposure rates for USS 

HENRY W. TUCKER are shown in Table 2 (note that there were two episodes of Shot XRAY 

fallout). The time-dependent fallout exposure rates on USS HENRY W. TUCKER due to fallout 

from the three SANDSTONE shots are shown in Figure 1 , Figure 2, and Figure 3 (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-2). 
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 11

Table 2. Operation SANDSTONE Shots and Resulting Fallout Exposure Rates

on USS HENRY W. TUCKER

Shot Shot Date (1948) 

and Time

Peak Exposure Rate 

(R hr-1)

Peak Time

(H+hr)

XRAY April 15 at 0617 0.00023

0.0001

14

48

YOKE May 1 at 0609 0.0003 54

ZEBRA May 15 at 0604 0.00004 144

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0x100

5x10-5

1x10-4

1.5x10-4

2x10-4

2.5x10-4

3x10-4

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Exposure Rate on USS HENRY W. TUCKER 

from Shot XRAY
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 11

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Topside Residual Exposure Rate on USS HENRY W. TUCKER 

from Shot YOKE

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. Average Topside Residual Exposure Rate on USS HENRY W. TUCKER 

from Shot ZEBRA
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 11

Based on these intensities, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond, the 

crew of USS HENRY W. TUCKER accrued external doses from deposited fallout while topside 

and below deck while on board. The crew also accrued an external dose from the XRAY nuclear 

cloud that passed over USS HENRY W. TUCKER shortly after the XRAY detonation. The final 

source of external dose to crew members was from deposited fallout at the liberty islands. The

crew of USS HENRY W. TUCKER received internal doses from resuspended fallout during 

their time topside while on board ship, during their time out of doors while on shore liberty and 

from incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and dust during shore liberty (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-2). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions, as described below, were added 

to the highest-dose cohort analysis: 

• The period of assignment is from prior to the first fallout event until May 31, 1949. This end 

date corresponds to one year after the end of Operation SANDSTONE. 

• The number of hours spent topside is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours per 

day were spent below deck for sleeping, cleaning and eating. 

• A ship shielding factor of 0.15 (fraction transmitted to below-deck spaces) was used instead 

of the inferred average value of 0.117 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2). 

• Crewmembers are assumed to be topside during the passage of the XRAY nuclear cloud and 

were fully exposed to external residual radiation from the cloud.

• Periodic closures of the shore liberty recreational facilities are ignored, and personnel are 

assumed to have used shore recreational facilities an average of 4 hours every four days 

throughout the period April 15–May 31, 1948 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2). 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 11

Table 3. Exposure pathways for the Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while topside during 

and after Operation 

SANDSTONE

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

were exposed to residual radiation due to 

fallout from Shots XRAY, YOKE, and 

ZEBRA while topside during the 

operational period.

Time topside is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

9.6 hr day−1. 

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while below deck 

during and after 

Operation 

SANDSTONE

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

were exposed to residual radiation due to 

fallout from Shots XRAY, YOKE, and 

ZEBRA while below deck during the 

operational period.

Shielding factor (fraction transmitted) is 0.15 

instead of 0.117. 

External gamma dose 

from cloud shine

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

were exposed to cloud shine from the 

passing XRAY nuclear cloud shortly after 

Shot XRAY.

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation 

SANDSTONE

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

were exposed to residual radiation due to 

fallout from Shots XRAY, YOKE, and 

ZEBRA at Enewetak Atoll during shore 

liberty. 

Shore recreational facilities are available the 

entire operational period for 4 hours every 

4 days. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from three fallout 

episodes while 

topside

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

inhaled resuspended fallout from Shots 

XRAY, YOKE, and ZEBRA until 100 

hours after the time of peak fallout.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

during shore liberty 

periods 

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

inhaled resuspended fallout from Shots 

XRAY, YOKE, and ZEBRA during shore 

liberty periods at Enewetak Atoll. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Shore recreational facilities are available the 

entire operational period For 4 hours every 

4 days. 

. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from three 

fallout episodes

USS HENRY W. TUCKER crew members 

ingested soil and dust at Enewetak Atoll 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

XRAY, YOKE, and ZEBRA during shore 

liberty. 

Shore recreational facilities are available the 

entire operational period For 4 hours every 

4 days. 
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 11

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartOp SANDSTONE start date[time] 15 Apr 1948[0617]

DateEndOp SANDSTONE end date[time] 31 May 1948[2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak Atoll departure date[time] 31 May 1949[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

SF Shielding factor while below deck 0.15

(Thomas, 1983b)

IpeakDetXR1 

TpeakDetXR1 

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot XRAY (first 

episode) aboard ship and at Enewetak Atoll

0.00023 R hr-1 at H+14 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

IpeakDetXR2

TpeakDetXR2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot XRAY (second 

episode) aboard ship and at Enewetak 

0.00010 R hr-1 at H+48

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

IpeakDetYK

TpeakDetYK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot YOKE aboard ship 

and at Enewetak Atoll

0.0003 R hr-1 at H+54

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

IpeakDetZB

TpeakDetZB

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZEBRA aboard ship 

and at Enewetak Atoll

0.00004 R hr-1 at H+144

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λOpXR

Decay exponent Shot XRAY fallout during the 

operational period

1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λOpYK

Decay exponent Shot YOKE fallout during the 

operational period

1.0

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λOpZB

Decay exponent Shot ZEBRA fallout during the 

operational period

1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λ PostXR

Decay exponent Shot XRAY fallout during the 

post-operational period

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λ PostYK

Decay exponent Shot YOKE fallout during the 

post-operational period

1.0

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λ PostZB

Decay exponent Shot ZEBRA fallout during the 

post-operational period

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

DoseDetShine

External dose from passing Shot XRAY nuclear 

cloud

0.020 rem

(= 0.7 rem R-1 × 0.02 R hr-1 × 1.667 hr)

(Thomas et al., 1983a) 

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

GSMF Gamma source modification factor for location 

of exposure rate measurement 1.0 
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 11

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside (time exposed to 

resuspended fallout) 0.67 (= 16/24)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 0.0417 

[4 hr every 4th day = 4/(24 × 4) ]

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during shore 

liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

qing Soil ingestion rate during shore liberty periods 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density during shore liberty periods 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFinhACT 

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the PostREDWING ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma 

dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

doses in Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of 

the EPG.
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 11

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 0.09 0.3 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Bone Surface <0.001 <0.001 0.004 0.002

Brain <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Breast <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Stomach Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.006

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Kidney <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Liver <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Lung <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.03

Muscle <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Pancreas <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Red Marrow <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Spleen <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Testes <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Thymus <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Thyroid <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.03

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010,SM ED02).

6. References

Berkhouse, L.H., Hallowell, J.H., McMullan, F.W., Davis, S.E., Jones, C.B., Osborn, M.J., 

Gladeck, F.R., Martin, E.J., and Rogers, W.E., 1983. Operation SANDSTONE: 1948.

DNA 6033F. Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. December 19.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01. Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 
Operation SANDSTONE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 11 of 11

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Stuart, J., and Klemm, J., 1983a. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for 

Naval Personnel at Operation SANDSTONE. DNA-TR-83-13. Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. August 15. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Stuart, J., and Klemm, J., 1983b. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for 

Naval Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA-TR-82-98. Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. March 15. 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Operation SANDSTONE

Land-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 10

Expedited Processing Group:

Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

consists of approximately 5,000 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence 

islands of Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak and Parry Islands) and Kwajalein Atoll (Kwajalein Island) 

during any period during Operation SANDSTONE. 

The SANDSTONE test series comprised three shots that were detonated at Enewetak Atoll in 

the Pacific Proving Ground (PPG) from April 15 to May 15, 1948. All three shots resulted in 

fallout at Enewetak, Parry, and Kwajalein Islands. Joint Task Force 7 (JTF 7) was responsible 

for the conduct of the operation and consisted of elements of all four military services, the 

Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and Federal civilian agencies and their contractors. JTF 7 

was organized into functional and service branch oriented task groups (TG), although there were 

cross-service TG assignments. Land-based personnel were assigned to all TGs. Approximately 

1,700 Army, 1,200 Navy, 2,000 Air Force, and 150 Marines Corps personnel are included in this 

EPG, as shown in Table 1. Although general activities of the personnel in this EPG were 

different, their activities that may have resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. 

Furthermore, the sources of radiation exposure of these participants involving SANDSTONE 

shots were similar. Therefore it is reasonable to include most participants assigned to one of the 

residence islands at Enewetak or Kwajalein Atoll during Operation SANDSTONE into a single

EPG (Berkhouse et al., 1983; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2). 

The following individuals and cohorts are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Individuals who boarded Operation CROSSROADS target ships moored at Kwajalein. 

• Individuals who participated in a special project known as Operation FITZWILLIAM that 

involved laboratory measurements of radioactive samples. 

• Individuals who participated in the Bikini and Enewetak Atoll resurveys (PostSANDSTONE). 

• Individuals who were stationed at Majuro Atoll, Rongerik Atoll, or Wake Island. 
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 10

Table 1. Units and Land-Based Military Personnel Assigned to JTF 7 Task Groups

at Operation SANDSTONE

Task Group Units* Size†

TG 7.1 (AEC Proving 

Ground Group)

Army: 38th Engineer Battalion 98

Air Force: Unit Not Identified (UNI) 2

TG 7.2 

(Army) 

Army: 

1220th Provisional Engineer Battalion

532nd Engineer Boat & Shore Regiment

461st Transportation Amphibious Truck Company

854th Transportation Port Company 1,422 

Navy: Enewetak Shore Detachment; Signal Unit 1 123

TG 7.3 (Navy) Navy: Air Development Squadron 4 (VX-4) Detachment 54

TG 7.4

(Air Force)

Army: UNI 40

Navy: Photographic personnel 5

Air Force: 

1st Experimental Guided Missiles Group

311th Air Division

514th Weather Reconnaissance Squadron

5th Air Rescue Squadron

71st Airways and Air Communications Services Group

1535th Air Force Base Unit 1,648 

Marines: UNI 1

TG 7.5

(Joint Security Group)

Army: 

369th Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) Detachment

401st CIC Detachment

8456th Military Police 136 

Air Force: UNI 15

Marines: UNI 51

TG 7.6 (Joint Rad-Safe 

Group) 

Army: UNI 35

Air Force: UNI 103

Marines: UNI 2

TG 7.7

(Kwajalein Island 

Command)

Navy: 

Amphibious Patrol Squadron 2 (VPAM-2) Detachment

Civil Administration Unit

Construction Battalion 1509 Detachment

Heavy Lift Patrol Squadron 8 (VPHL-8) Detachment

Naval Air Station, Kwajalein

Naval Station, Kwajalein

Naval Station, Kwajalein, In-Service Craft

Naval Station, Kwajalein, Ship Security Detachment

Transport Squadron 8 (VR-8) Detachment

Utility Transport Squadron 3 (VRU-3) Detachment 971

Air Force: 

2307th Aviation Engineer Company

2308th Aviation Engineer Company

1535th Air Force Base Unit

31-8 Air Weather Service Detachment 213 

Marines: UNI 89

Total 5,008

*

 This listing is not complete due to lack of documentation on contributing units.

†

 Actual levels varied throughout the Operation; these are approximate numbers (Berkhouse et al., 1983).
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 10

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for SANDSTONE Land-Based 

Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all SANDSTONE land-based personnel, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration 

when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario 

of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal 

doses.

For this EPG, TG 7.3 personnel assigned to Kwajalein Island for the basis for the generic 

highest-dose cohort (DTRA, 2008 Appendix B-2; Thomas et al., 1983) for two primary reasons: 

• Members of TG 7.3 were stationed at Kwajalein for the entire duration of the operation. 

• Member of TG 7.3 had no involvement in unique exposure activites. 

• The available film badge dosimetry for TG 7.3 supports the reconstructed dose assigned to 

them.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the TG 7.3 

scenario (Thomas et al., 1983) to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of participation and 

radiation exposure of the Kwajalein Island scenario is described directly below followed by a 

description of the additional dose components and assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Task Group 7.3 Personnel at 

Kwajalein Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to residence islands in the PPG or 

supporting islands during Operation SANDSTONE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of TG 7.3 personnel based at Kwajalein Island. TG 7.3 personnel 

on Kwajalein Island were composed of approximately 54 Navy personnel in the Air 

Development Squadron Detachment assigned to the Off Shore Patrol Task Unit (7.3.3). All 

members of the land-based personnel in this unit lived and were assigned duty at Kwajalein

Island, where they piloted and maintained three patrol aircraft used to fly nightly patrols. This 

unit was assigned to Kwajalein Island for the entire period of Operation SANDSTONE 

(Berkhouse et al., 1983; DTRA 2008, Appendix B-2). 

Personnel in the TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island lived on Kwajalein Island and had no involvement in 

unique exposure activities, so their only source of exposure was fallout from SANDSTONE 

shots while conducting routine island resident activities on Kwajalein Island. The three 

SANDSTONE shots and the resulting fallout exposure rates at Kwajalein Island are shown in 

Table 2. Figures 1–3 show the time-dependent exposure rates on Kwajalein Island due to each 

fallout event. Based on these exposure rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one 

year beyond, TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel accrued external doses from fallout deposited 

on Kwajalein Island while outside and while indoors. TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel also 

received internal doses while outdoors during the same period from inhalation of descending 
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 10

fallout, inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and dust. 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

Table 2. Operation SANDSTONE Shots and Resulting Fallout 

Exposure Rates at Kwajalein 

Shot Shot Date (1948) and Time Peak Exposure rate

(R hr-1) Peak Time (H+hr)

XRAY April 15 at 0617 0.00007 150

YOKE May 1 at 0609 0.0005 42

ZEBRA May 15 at 0604 0.00003 306

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Residual Radiation Exposure Rate at Kwajalein Island 

from Shot XRAY
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 10

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Residual Radiation Exposure Rate at Kwajalein Island 

from Shot YOKE

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. Average Residual Radiation Exposure Rate at Kwajalein Island 

from Shot ZEBRA
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 10

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions, as described below, were added 

to the TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel analysis: 

• The period of assignment to Kwajalein Island is assumed to be from April 15, 1948 to 

May 31, 1949. This start date is the date of the first SANDSTONE shot. The end date 

corresponds to one year after the end of Operation SANDSTONE. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption that personnel activities consisted 

of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other combinations of 

activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, result in a 

similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

• Personnel were assumed to be outdoors during the entire times of descending XRAY, 

YOKE, and ZEBRA fallout.

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 10

Table 3. Exposure pathways for Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from three shots 

during Operation 

SANDSTONE 

TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel

were exposed to residual radiation due 

to fallout from Shots XRAY, YOKE, 

and ZEBRA. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Departure is one year following the end of 

Operation SANDSTONE instead of actual 

departure date. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 instead of 2. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

descending fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel 

were subjected to descending fallout 

from Shots XRAY, YOKE, and 

ZEBRA.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1.

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel 

were subjected to inhalation of 

resuspended fallout from Shots XRAY, 

YOKE, and ZEBRA. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Departure is one year following the end of 

Operation SANDSTONE instead of actual 

departure date. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from three 

fallout episodes

TG 7.3 Kwajalein Island personnel 

incurred doses from incidental 

ingestion of soil and dust contaminated 

with fallout from Shots XRAY, YOKE, 

and ZEBRA. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Departure is one year following the end of 

Operation SANDSTONE instead of actual 

departure date. 
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 10

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartOp SANDSTONE start date[time] 15 Apr 1948[0617]

DateEndOp SANDSTONE end date[time] 31 May 1948[2400]

DateDeparted Kwajalein departure date[time] 31 May 1949[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos

Fraction of time spent outside on Kwajalein 

Island

0.67 

(= 16/24)

FFB Film-Badge Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

PFt

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetXR

TpeakDetXR

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot XRAY 

0.00007 R hr-1 at H+150

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

IpeakDetYK

TpeakDetYK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot YOKE

0.0005 R hr-1 at H+42

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

IpeakDetZB

TpeakDetZB

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZEBRA

0.00003 R hr-1 at H+306

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λOpXR Decay expoenent for Shot XRAY 0.545

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λOpYK Decay expoenent for Shot YOKE 1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λOpZB Decay expoenent for Shot ZEBRA 1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λ postop Decay exponent for post-operation 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr

−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhFBE

DCFInhAct

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 10

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

SANDSTONE land-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external 

gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to 

independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external 

doses for expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.

 

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 0.2 0.6 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.007

Bone Surface 0.05 0.007 0.5 0.07

Brain <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.003

Breast <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.006

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.004 <0.001 0.03

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.02 <0.001 0.2

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.03 <0.001 0.3

Kidney <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.005

Liver 0.01 0.002 0.1 0.02

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.001 0.04 0.005 0.4

Lung 0.001 0.08 0.01 0.8

Muscle <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.005

Pancreas <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.006

Red Marrow 0.002 0.003 0.03 0.03

Spleen 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.005

Testes <0.001 <0.001 0.006 0.003

Thymus <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.007

Thyroid <0.001 0.06 0.002 0.6

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.01

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).
Operation SANDSTONE Land-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 10

6. References

Berkhouse, L.H., Hallowell, J.H., McMullan, F.W., Davis, S.E., Jones, C.B., Osborn, M.J., 

Gladeck, F.R., Martin, E.J., and Rogers, W.E., 1983. Operation SANDSTONE: 1948.

DNA 6033F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. December 19.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Stuart, J., and Klemm, J., 1983. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation SANDSTONE. DNA-TR-83-13, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. August 15. 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation GREENHOUSE 

Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 10 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel 

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

consists of the crews of ships present at the Pacific Proving Ground (PPG) during and after the 

operation, as listed in Table 1 and Table 2 below (Thomas et al., 1982; Berkhouse et al., 1983).

Operation GREENHOUSE was a test series in which four nuclear devices were detonated at

Enewetak Atoll in the PPG in the spring of 1951. Joint Task Force 3 (JTF 3) was responsible for 

the conduct of the operation. Approximately 3000 Navy personnel were assigned to JTF 3, most 

of who served aboard ships in the Enewetak area. The Navy operated the ten ships identified in 

Table 1 in the PPG in support of GREENHOUSE, the first seven (and about 60 small craft) 

during the operation and the last three during the post-operational period. The transient ships 

listed in Table 2 are known to have been in or near the PPG during the operation or during postoperational time periods. These ships were not assigned to JTF 3 and were not directly involved 

in Operation GREENHOUSE. However, these ships may have been subject to fallout from 

GREENHOUSE shots. Any doses incurred by crewmembers are bounded by the doses 

calculated for this EPG, provided no EPG exclusion conditions are met (Berkhouse et al., 1983). 

There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

Table 1. Operation GREENHOUSE Support Ship-Based Personnel

Ship Designation Mission(s) Size

USS CABILDO LSD 16 Boat pool 306

USS CURTISS AV 4 Flag ship; convoy & escort 638

LST 859 LST 859 Transport of scientific 

personnel 113 

USNS SGT. CHARLES 

E. MOWER

TAP 186 General transport duties 29 

USS SPROSTON DDE 577 Surface patrol; convoy & 

escort 283 

USS WALKER DDE 517 Surface patrol; convoy & 

escort 317 

USNS LT. ROBERT 

CRAIG

TAK 252 General transport duties 12 

USS CATAMOUNT† LSD 17 Landing craft retrieval ~240 

USNS FRED C. 

AINSWORTH†

TAP 181 Cargo transportation ~200 

USS RIO GRANDE† AOG 3 Transport of petroleum 

supplies

~130 

Support Ship Total ~2,300 

† Participated only during post-operational period.
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 10 

Table 2. Operation GREENHOUSE Transient Ship-Based Personnel 

Ship Designation Size†

USNS BALD EAGLE T-AF-50 50 

USS NEMASKET AOG-10 130

USCGC PLANETREE WAGL-307 40

USS PC- 1546 PC-533 Class Submarine Chaser 65

USS CIMARRON AO-22 300

USNS PVT. F.J. PETRARCA T-AK-250 80

USS FARIBAULT AK-179 80

USS PICTOR AF-54 290

USNS PVT. JOE E. MANN T-AK-253 100

USNS GENERAL D.E. AULTMAM T-AP-156 350

USNS GENERAL DANIEL SULTAN T-AP-120 350

USNS SGT. TRUMAN KIMBRO T-AK-254 50

USS SUSSEX AK-213 80

USNS LT ROBERT CRAIG T-AK-252 100

USS ZELIMA AF-49 290

Transient Ship Total ~2,355

† All crew sizes are approximate.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation GREENHOUSE ShipBased Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all GREENHOUSE ship-based personnel, an exposure scenario 

was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.” For this EPG, personnel 

assigned to the USNS SGT. CHARLES E. MOWER form the basis for the exposure scenario of 

the highest-dose cohort. 

This scenario forms an adequate basis of the generic highest-dose cohort scenario for this EPG 

for two primary reasons:

• Personnel assigned to USNS MOWER received the largest average external gamma dose 

from residual radiation for all GREENHOUSE ship-based personnel (Thomas et al., 1982). 

• The operating history of the ship is well-documented (Thomas et al., 1982). 

 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USNS MOWER scenario to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario is described directly below, 

followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions.
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 10 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Crew of USNS MOWER

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to ships that operated in the PPG 

during and shortly after GREENHOUSE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of crew members of USNS MOWER. This ship was present at the PPG for 

all four GREENHOUSE shots (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3). The peak exposure rates and time 

of peak exposure for all fallout episodes that occurred on USNS MOWER are listed in Table 3

and shown in Figure 1-Figure 3. This ship was equipped with a wash down system for use 

during periods of fallout. (Thomas et al., 1982; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) Employment of 

the washdown system prevented the exposure rates aboard USNS MOWER from reaching levels 

greater than those listed in Table 3. 

Table 3. Operation GREENHOUSE Fallout Exposure Rates 

on USNS MOWER

Shot Peak Exposure Rate 

(R hr-1)

Peak Exposure Rate Time 

(H+hr)

DOG 0.0384 3.1

EASY 0.0010 24

ITEM 0.0586 11.1

The USNS MOWER also accumulated external doses during shore liberty. 
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 10 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0x100

5x10-3

1x10-2

1.5x10-2

2x10-2

2.5x10-2

3x10-2

3.5x10-2

4x10-2

4.5x10-2

5x10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USNS MOWER from Shot DOG

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0x100

2x10-4

4x10-4

6x10-4

8x10-4

1x10-3

1.2x10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USNS MOWER from Shot EASY
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 10 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USNS MOWER from Shot ITEM

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the generic highsided analysis: 

• The average time spent topside is increased from the default value of 9.6 hr day-1 (40 percent 

of 24 hours) to 16 hr day-1. 

• The average shielding factor for below-deck locations (i.e., the ratio of below-deck exposure 

rate to topside rate) is 0.15, instead of the nominal value 0.10.

• The breathing rate of the cohort is 2.0 m3 hr−1 for all activities instead of the standard value 

of 1.2 m3 hr−1. This enhances the amount of resuspended fallout inhaled. The higher value is 

based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of a mix of 50% light activity and 

50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other combinations of activity levels, including 

short durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, result in a similar average breathing 

rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 4. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 5. 
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 10 

Table 4. Exposure Pathways for GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway

Basis for Exposure Pathway 

(High-Dose Scenario) Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from fallout deposited 

topside during and 

after Operation 

GREENHOUSE

Crewmembers of USNS MOWER were 

exposed to fallout from Shots DOG, EASY, 

and ITEM while topside and below deck 

during the operational period and for one 

year following the end of Operation 

GREENHOUSE.

Time topside is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Used high-sided below-deck ship shielding 

factor (transmission factor ) of 0.15 instead 

of 0.10. 

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while on shore liberty

during Operation 

GREENHOUSE 

Crewmembers of USNS MOWER were 

exposed to fallout from Shots DOG, EASY, 

and ITEM during shore liberty periods at 

Enewetak Atoll. 

Assumed shore recreational facilities were 

available the entire operational period of 

GREENHOUSE

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

while topside on ship

Crewmembers of USNS MOWER were 

exposed to resuspended fallout from Shots 

DOG, EASY, and ITEM. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

during shore liberty 

periods

Crewmembers of USNS MOWER were 

exposed to resuspended fallout from Shots 

DOG, EASY, and ITEM during shore 

liberty periods at Enewetak Atoll.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust during shore 

liberty periods

Crewmembers of USNS MOWER incurred 

doses from incidental ingestion of soil and 

dust contaminated with fallout from Shots 

DOG, EASY, and ITEM during shore 

liberty periods at Enewetak Atoll.

Assumed shore liberty for four hours every 

four days. 
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 10 

Table 5. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartOp GREENHOUSE start date[time] 8 Apr 1951[0634]

DateEndOp GREENHOUSE end date[time] 31 May 1951[2400]

DateDetached Ship detached date[time] 31 May 1952[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 (= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

SF Protection factor while below deck 0.15

(Thomas, et al., 1983)

IpeakDetDG

TpeakDetDG 

Peak topside exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot DOG 

aboard ship

0.0384 R hr-1 at H+3.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDetES

TpeakDetES

Peak topside exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot EASY 

aboard ship

0.001 R hr-1 at H+24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDetIT 

TpeakDetIT 

Peak topside exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot ITEM 

aboard ship

0.0586 R hr-1 at H+11

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDetDGEnew

TpeakDetDGEnew

Peak topside exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot DOG 

during shore liberty

0.083 R hr-1 at H+6

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDetESENew

TpeakDetESEnew

Peak topside exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot EASY 

during shore liberty

0.001 R hr-1 at H+24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDetITENew 

TpeakDetITEnew

Peak topside exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot ITEM 

during shore liberty

0.118 R hr-1 at H+14

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ DG

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

Shot DOG

1.083

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

λ ES

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

Shot EASY

1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

λ IT

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

Shot ITEM

1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ postop

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

post operation periods

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for all activities 2.0 m3 hr−1

GSMFTAP

Gamma source modification factor the USNS 

SGT. CHARLES E. MOWER

2.78

(Weitz, 2009)

GSMFLAND Gamma source modification factor land 1.0

(Weitz, 2009)
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 10 

Table 5. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

GSMFLSD

Gamma source modification factor the USS 

CABILDO

2.75

(Weitz, 2009)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 4 hr every 4th day

0.0417 = 4/(24 × 4)

KShip(t) Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5 for t ≤ 100 hrs, 0 for t > 100 hrs

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during shore 

liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhFBE

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

GREENHOUSE ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 6. The upper-bound external 

gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to 

independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external 

doses for expedited processing doses, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated 

as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying 

the total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 6 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any

member of the EPG.
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 10 

Table 6. External and Internal Doses and Upper-Bounds for 

GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 3 7

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Bone Surface 0.01 0.02 0.1 0.2

Brain <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.01

Breast <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.01 <0.001 0.1

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.02 <0.001 0.2

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.07 <0.001 0.7

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.2 <0.001 2

Kidney <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Liver 0.003 0.003 0.03 0.03

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.2 0.001 2

Lung <0.001 0.3 0.003 3

Muscle <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Pancreas <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Red Marrow <0.001 0.006 0.005 0.06

Spleen <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Testes <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.009

Thymus <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Thyroid <0.001 0.3 <0.001 3

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.006 <0.001 0.06

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

The upper-bound doses in Table 6 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 7. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 10 

Table 7. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

GREENHOUSE Ship-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 10

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S.E., Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Jones, C.B., Martin, E.J., McMullan, 

F.W., and Osborne, M.J., 1983. Operation GREENHOUSE: 1951, United States 

Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel Review. DNA 6034F, 

Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. June 15.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.

Thomas, C., Gminder, R., Stuart, J., Weitz, R., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1982. Analysis of 

Radiation Exposure for Naval Personnel at Operation GREENHOUSE. DNA-TR-82-15, 

Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C. July 30.

Thomas, C., Stuart, J., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1983, Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA TR-82-98, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC, March 15

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R. L., 2009. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor (GSMF) for Shipbased Applications. NTPR-TM-09-04, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. December 31. 
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation GREENHOUSE

Land-Based Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 11 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

the personnel assigned to the units present at Enewetak Atoll, Bikati Island, Majuro Atoll, or

Kwajalein Atoll during the operation, as listed in Table 1Table 1 below (Berkhouse et al., 1983, 

DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3).

Table 1. Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Units

Unit Location Size

Headquarters (HQ) Joint Task Force 3 Parry Island 320

HQ TG 3.2 (Army) Enewetak Island 68

79th Engineer Construction Battalion 64

7127th Army Unit to include the 7th Engineer Brigade, 

8128th Army Unit, 70th Automotive Maintenance 

Ordnance Detachment, 7127th Communication 

Detachment, 7129th Army Unit, and 7130th Army Unit 

Special Services Detachment, 4th Transportation Truck 

Company

Enewetak Island 146 

3rd Mobile Army Surgical Hospital Enewetak Island 43

HQ 18th Transportation Corps Port Company Enewetak Island 10

511th Transportation Corps Port Company Enewetak Island 208

506th Counterintelligence Corps Detachment Enewetak Island 10

516th Military Policy Service Company Enewetak Atoll to 

include Parry and 

Japtan Islands. 

228 

TG 7.1 to include Office of the Quartermaster General, 

Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories, Army Chemical 

Center and Ballistic Research Laboratories

Enewetak Atoll 84 

Navy personnel in Task Group 3.1 Enewetak Atoll 349

Air Transport Squadron 3 Enewetak Island 119

Air Force personnel in Task Group 3.1 Enewetak Atoll 125

Task Group 3.4.1 to include the 158th Fighter Squadron; 

3204th Medical Group; 3200th Drone Squadron

Detachment; and 634th, 645th, 646th, 647th, 648th, 653th, 

654th, 655th, 656th, 658th, 660th, 661th, 667th, 669th, 670th, 

677th Aircraft Control and Warning Squadrons

Enewetak Atoll 660 

Task Group 3.4.1 Detachment Kwajalein Island 232

Task Group 3.4.2 to include the 3200th Drone Squadron Enewetak Island 649
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 11 

Table 1. Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Units (cont.)

Unit Location Size

Task Group 3.4.2 Detachment to include the 3151st 

Electronic Group and the 3171st Electronic Research 

and Development Group

Kwajalein Island 

and Enewetak 

Island

98

Task Unit 3.4.3 to include the 1810th Airways and Air 

Communication Service (AACS) Group; and 1909th and

1960th AACS Squadrons

Enewetak Island 

with a detachment 

on Kwajalein Atoll

139 

Task Unit 3.4.4 to include the 57th Strategic 

Reconnaissance Squadron 

Kwajalein Atoll 

with a detachment 

on Enewetak Atoll

323 

Task Unit 3.4.5 to include the 26th Weather Squadron; 

2060th Mobile Weather Squadron; 1600th and 1701st

Food Service Squadrons; 1801st and 1814th AACS 

Groups; 1901st, 1905th, 1907th, 1909th, 1922nd, 1923rd, 

and 1928th AACS Squadrons; and 1921-1, 1921-2, 

1921-4, 1921-6, and 1921-9 AACS Detachments

Enewetak Island 

with detachments 

on Kwajalein, 

Kusaie, Nauru, 

Bikati, and Majuro 

Islands 

105 

Task Unit 3.4.6 to include the 2600th Air Base 

Squadron; 4415th and 4910th Air Base Groups; 4th

Liaison Flights; and the 5th Helicopter Flight

Enewetak Atoll 107 

Task Unit 3.4.7 to include the 4th Rescue Squadron, 5th

Rescue Squadron, and 11th Air Rescue Squadron. 

Kwajalein Island 

with Detachments 

on Enewetak Island

52 

Task Unit 3.4.8 to include individuals from Air Force 

Lookout Mountain Laboratory. Enewetak Island 30 

Other Air Force units Unknown 41

Total 4210

The following individuals are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Individuals who participated in clothing contamination tests. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation GREENHOUSE LandBased Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for GREENHOISE land-based personnel, the cohort that received the 

highest external residual radiation dose was identified and its exposure scenario reconstructed. 

For this EPG, the activities of Headquarters (HQ), Joint Task Force (JTF) 3 form the basis for 

the generic highest-dose cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) for the following reason:

• The previous dose reconstructions have shown that personnel assigned to Parry Island at 

Enewetak Atoll received the highest doses.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

HQ JTF 3 Parry Island resident scenario to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of 
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 11 

participation and radiation exposure of the HQ JTF-3 is described in Section 3 followed by a 

description of the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: HQ JTF-3 

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to islands in the PPG during 

Operation GREENOUSE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on 

activities of HQ JTF 3 personnel on Parry Island, Enewetak Atoll. The HQ JTF 3 island 

residents on Parry Island worked in all areas of the JTF 3. (Berkhouse et al., 1983; DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-3) 

HQ JTF 3 personnel on Parry Island were exposed to fallout from three GREENHOUSE shots

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3). Table 2 lists the fallout episodes on Parry Island. Figure 1 to 

Figure 3 display the peak radiation exposure rates on Parry Island due to each fallout event. 

Table 2. Peak Radiation Exposure Rates on Parry Island 

during Operation GREENHOUSE

Shot Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1)

Peak Exposure Rate Time

(H+hr)

DOG 0.083 6

EASY 0.001 24

ITEM 0.118 14.7

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Measued

Calculated

Figure 1. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island from Shot DOG
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 11 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island from Shot EASY

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island from Shot ITEM
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 11 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided HQ

JTF 3 Parry Island resident cohort analysis. These are described below. 

• The period of assignment is assumed to be from Jan 8, 1951 to May 31, 1952.

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1 assuming that 

8 hours were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning and eating

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that they spent 100 percent of this time in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2.

• Personnel are assumed to be outdoors during descending fallout and the fallout is considered 

light enough so that daily duty routines were not altered. (Thomas et al., 1984)

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 

1.2 to 2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities 

consisting of a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al. 2009). 

Other combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy 

activity levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 11 

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from Operation 

SANDSTONE shots

HQ JTF 3 personnel were exposed to fallout 

from Operation SANDSTONE Shots. 

The number of hours spent topside was 

increased from 8 to 16 hr day−1. 

Assumed a protection factor of 0.15 for all 

structures. 

Residual radiation 

from three shots 

during Operation 

GREENHOUSE

HQ JTF 3 personnel residents were exposed 

to fallout from Shots DOG, EASY, and 

ITEM during the operational period and 

post-operation period.

The number of hours spent topside was 

increased from 8 to 16 hr day−1. 

Assumed a protection factor of 0.15 for all 

structures.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

descending fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

HQ JTF 3 personnel were subjected to 

descending fallout from Shots DOG, EASY, 

and ITEM.

Used a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

from Operation 

SANDSTONE shots

HQ JTF 3 personnel were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Operation SANDSTONE shots. 

Used a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from three 

GREENHOUSE 

shots

HQ JTF 3 personnel were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from Shots 

DOG, EASY, and ITEM

Used a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from 

Operation 

SANDSTONE shots

HQ JTF 3 personnel incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Operation 

SANDSTONE shots 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from

GREENHOUSE 

shots

HQ JTF 3 personnel incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots DOG, 

EASY, and ITEM
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 11 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived- Enewetak arrival date 8 Jan 1951[0000]

DateStartOp GREENHOUSE start date[time] 8 Apr 1951[0634]

DateEndOp GREENHOUSE end date[time] 31 May 1951[2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak departure date[time] 31 May 1952[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak Atoll 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

PFt

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

IpeakDetDG

TpeakDetDG

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot DOG

0.083 R hr-1 at H+6

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDetES

TpeakDetES

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot EASY

0.001 R hr-1 at H+24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

IpeakDetIT 

TpeakDetIT

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ITEM

0.118 R hr-1 at H+14

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ DG

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

Shot DOG

1.083

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

λ ES

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

Shot EASY

1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ IT

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

Shot ITEM

1.1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ postop

Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 for 

post operation periods

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

DoseDetPre

External gamma dose due to fallout from 

Operation SANDSTONE residual radiation

0.001 rem

(Mason, 2009)

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DoseIntDetPre

Internal doses due to fallout from Operation 

SANDSTONE residual radiation (Mason, 2009)
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 11 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

DCFInhfbe

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

GREENHOUSE land-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external 

gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to 

independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external 

doses for expedited processing doses, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated 

as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying 

the total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 11 

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 7 21

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Bone Surface 0.3 0.2 3 2

Brain <0.001 0.008 0.005 0.08

Breast <0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.09 0.005 0.9

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.2 0.005 2

Upper Large Intestines Wall <0.001 0.5 0.005 5

Lower Large Intestines Wall <0.001 0.9 0.005 8

Kidney 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Liver 0.06 0.03 0.6 0.3

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.003 2 0.03 12

Lung 0.006 2 0.06 15

Muscle <0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Pancreas <0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Red Marrow 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.5

Spleen <0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Testes 0.004 0.007 0.04 0.06

Thymus <0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Thyroid <0.001 2 0.005 16

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.05 0.005 0.4

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

The upper-bound doses in Table 5 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 11 

Table 6. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Liver Liver 22

Gall Gladder Liver 22

Bile Duct Liver 22

Thyroid Thyroid 37

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Lung Lung 36

Esophagus Extra-Thoracic Region 33

Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia Red Bone Marrow 22

Colon Lower Large Intestine Wall 29

Stomach Wall Stomach Wall 22

Parathyroid Thyroid 37

6. References

Berkhouse, L.; Davis, S.E.; Gladeck, F.R.; Hallowell, J.H.; Jones, C.B.; Martin, E.J. ; 

McMullan, F.W.; and Osborne, M.J., 1983. Operation GREENHOUSE: 1951, United 

States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel Review. DNA 

6034F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. June 15.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA

Mason, C, 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.
Operation GREENHOUSE Land-Based Personnel

Page 11 of 11 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Klemm, J., and Weitz, R., 1984. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation CASTLE. DNA-TR-84-6, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. February 28. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R. L., and Egbert, S. D., 2009. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric 

Test Participants. NTPR-TM-09-01, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. December 31.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Operation IVY 

Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 10 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 4,700 personnel who were assigned to U.S. Navy and U.S. Army ships during 

Operation IVY (1952) (Gladeck et al., 1982; Thomas et al., 1983). Although general activities of 

the crew members of the various ships in this EPG were different, their activities that may have 

resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. Furthermore, the sources of radiation 

exposure of these participants involving relevant IVY shots were similar. Therefore it is 

reasonable to include most participants assigned to ship crews during Operation IVY into a 

single EPG. 

The IVY test series of two detonations was conducted from November 1 to 18, 1952 at 

Enewetak Atoll in the Pacific Proving Ground (PPG). Joint Task Force 132 (JTF 132) was 

responsible for the conduct of the operation and consisted of elements of all four military 

services, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and Federal civilian agencies and their 

contractors. JTF 132 was organized into functional and service branch oriented task groups 

(TG), although there were cross-service TG assignments. Ship-based personnel were assigned to 

TG 132.3, and consist primarily of naval personnel but also include members of the other 

services. The TG 132.3 ships included in this EPG are listed in Table 1 (Gladeck et al., 1982; 

DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4; Thomas et al., 1983). There are no specific exclusions for this 

EPG. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for IVY Ship-Based Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all Operation IVY ship-based personnel, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.” Exposures to initial 

neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose 

cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first 

minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal doses.

For this EPG, personnel assigned to USS LIPAN form the basis for the exposure scenario of 

the highest-dose cohort (Thomas et al., 1983) for two primary reasons: 

• The crew members received the largest average external gamma dose from residual radiation 

for all IVY ship-based personnel, 

• The operating history of the ship is well-documented 
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 10 

Table 1. Ships Assigned to Task Group 132.3 at Operation IVY

Ship Task Element Size

USS AGAWAM (AOG-6) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control) 122

USS ARIKARA (ATF-98) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control) 80

USS CARPENTER (DDE-825) 132.33 (Destroyer Element) 276

USS CURTISS (AV-4)3 132.30 (Weapons Element) 722

USNS DAVID C. SHANKS (TAP-180) 132.31 (Transport Element) 191

USS ELDER (AN-20) 2 132.31 (Transport Element) 49

USS ESTES (AGC-12) 132.31 (Transport Element) 566

USS FLETCHER (DDE-448) 132.33 (Destroyer Element) 258

USNS GENERAL E.T. COLLINS (TAP-147) 132.31 (Transport Element) 192

M/V HORIZON (ex ATA) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control Element) 26*

USS LEO (AKA-60) 132.31 (Transport Element) 228

USS LIPAN (ATF-85) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control Element) 79

USS LST-8364 132.31 (Transport Element) 129

USS OAK HILL (LSD-7) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control Element) 230

USS O’BANNON (DDE-450) 132.33 (Destroyer Element) 251

USS RADFORD (DDE-446) 132.33 (Destroyer Element) 256

USS RENDOVA (CVE-114) 132.34 (Convoy and Escort Element) 876

M/V SPENCER F. BAIRD (ex ATA) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control Element) 21*

TG 132.3 Boat Pool (LCU-666, LCU-667, 

LCU-709, LCU-764, LCU-851; 3 AVRs, 19 

LCMs, 4 LCP(L)s

132.32 (Service & Harbor Control) 45†

USS YUMA (ATF-94) 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control Element) 76

YOG-69 132.32 (Service & Harbor Control Element) 14

Total 4,687

*

 Civilian crews not included. † Number of LCU crew members only (Gladeck et al., 1982).

As explained below, several dose components and assumption were added to the documented 

USS LIPAN scenario (Thomas et al., 1983) to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of 

participation and radiation exposure of the USS LIPAN is described directly below, followed by 

a description of the additional dose components and assumptions. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Crew of USS LIPAN

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to ships during Operation IVY, a 

generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of crew members of 

USS LIPAN. USS LIPAN was a fleet ocean tug that arrived at Enewetak Atoll on October 20, 

1952, and served in the Towing Unit of the Service and Harbor Control Element (Task 

Element 132.32). Its primary function was to provide the task force with towing and salvage 

services. 

When MIKE was detonated at 0715 on November 1, 1952, USS LIPAN was at sea at a 

distance of approximately 25 nautical miles east of the surface zero on Elugelab Island. Prior to 

its return to the Enewetak Lagoon, USS LIPAN operated in the contaminated waters close to the 

MIKE test site area. As a result, USS LIPAN became contaminated, with most of the 

contamination confined to the evaporators, fire and flushing system, anchor chain, and the 

exterior of the hull below the waterline. USS LIPAN reentered Enewetak Lagoon on 
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 10 

November 2, 1952, and moored off of Enewetak Island, about 25 nautical miles southeast of the 

MIKE crater. When KING was detonated at 1130 on November 16, 1952, USS LIPAN was at 

sea 19 nmi south-southeast of the airburst over Runit Island. USS LIPAN reentered Enewetak 

Lagoon later that same day and anchored off of Enewetak Island. The crew was presumably 

allowed shore liberty on Enewetak Island or Parry Island during times that the ship was anchored 

in the lagoon. The ship was given an operational radiological clearance on November 17, 1952. 

USS LIPAN departed from Enewetak on November 18, 1952, enroute to Guam, where it arrived 

on November 26, 1952 (Gladeck et al., 1983; DTRA 2008, Appendix B-4; Thomas et al., 1983). 

USS LIPAN did not receive any primary (early-time) fallout from either IVY shot; secondary 

(late-time) fallout is the only fallout experienced by the ship. Both IVY shots also resulted in 

fallout at the shore liberty islands of Enewetak Atoll. The two sources of exposure to 

crewmembers of USS LIPAN were fallout from IVY shots while on board the ship and fallout on 

liberty islands. Average fallout exposure rates measured on the Enewetak Island are applicable 

to USS LIPAN and other ships anchored in the vicinity. The IVY shots and the resulting fallout 

exposure rates for USS LIPAN are shown in Table 2 (note that there were two episodes of Shot 

MIKE fallout). The time-dependent fallout exposure rates on USS LIPAN due to fallout from 

the two IVY shots are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4). 

Table 2. Operation IVY Shots and Resulting Fallout Exposure Rates 

on USS LIPAN

Shot Shot Date (1952) and Time Peak Exposure 

Rate (R hr-1) 

Peak Time 

(H+hr)

MIKE* November 1 at 0715 0.00063

0.00004 

77

168 

KING November 16 at 1130 0.00012 24 * Two separate fallout waves
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 10 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS LIPAN following both Waves of Fallout from Shot MIKE

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Topside Exposure Rate on USS LIPAN 

from Shot KING
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 10 

Based on these exposure rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond,

the crew of USS LIPAN accrued external doses from deposited fallout while topside and below 

deck while on board. An additional source of external dose to crew members was from 

deposited fallout at the liberty islands. The crew of USS LIPAN received internal doses from 

resuspended fallout during their time topside while on board ship and during their time out of 

doors while on shore liberty, and from incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and dust during 

shore liberty (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions, as described below, were added 

to the highest-dose cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure was from prior to the first fallout event until November 18, 1953. 

• The number of hours spent topside is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours per 

day were spent below deck for sleeping, cleaning and eating.

• Periodic closures of the shore liberty recreational facilities are ignored, and personnel are 

assumed to have used shore recreational facilities during the entire operational period.

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

• No parameter assumption for the ship shielding factor for this scenario was necessary. The 

ship shielding factor for the USS LIPAN is 0.15 (fraction transmitted to below-deck spaces)

and is already the largest reasonable value (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4). 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 10 

Table 3. Exposure pathways for the Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while topside during 

and after Operation 

IVY

USS LIPAN crew members were exposed 

to residual radiation due to fallout from 

Shots MIKE and KING while topside 

during the operational period.

Time topside is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

9.6 hr day−1. 

The period of assignment was extended to 

one year after the end of Operation IVY. 

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while below deck 

during and after 

Operation IVY

USS LIPAN crew members were exposed 

to residual radiation due to fallout from 

Shots MIKE and KING while below deck 

during the operational period.

Used the below-deck dose shielding factor of 

0.15 (fraction transmitted) for time spent 

below deck.

The period of assignment was extended to 

one year after the end of Operation IVY

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation IVY

USS LIPAN crew members were exposed 

to fallout from Shots MIKE and KING

while on shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll 

during the operational period. 

Assumed shore leave every 4th day for four 

hours. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from three fallout 

episodes while 

topside 

USS LIPAN crew members inhaled 

resuspended fallout from Shots MIKE and 

KING until 100 hours after the time of peak 

fallout.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Time topside is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

9.6 hr day−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

during shore liberty 

periods 

USS LIPAN crew members inhaled

resuspended fallout from Shots MIKE and 

KING while on shore liberty at Enewetak 

Atoll during the operational period.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed shore leave every 4th day for four 

hours. 

. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from two

fallout episodes

USS LIPAN crew members ingested soil 

and dust at Enewetak Atoll contaminated 

with fallout from Shots MIKE and KING

while on shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll 

during the operational period. 

Assumed shore leave every 4th day for four 

hours. 

. 
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 10 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartOp IVY start date[time] 1 Nov 1952[0715]

DateEndOp IVY end date[time] 18 Nov 1952[2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak Atoll departure date[time] 18 Nov 1953[2400]

EXTERNAL

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

SF Shielding factor while below deck 0.15

(Thomas et al., 1983)

IpeakDetMK1

TpeakDetMK1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MIKE (first 

episode) aboard ship and at Enewetak Atoll 

during shore liberty

0.00063 R hr-1 at H+77

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

IpeakDetMK2

TpeakDetMK2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MIKE (second 

episode) aboard ship and at Enewetak Atoll 

during shore liberty

0.0004 R hr-1 at H+168

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

IpeakDetKG

TpeakDetKG

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot KING aboard ship 

and at Enewetak Atoll during shore liberty

0.00012 R hr-1 at H+24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

λ postop Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

GSMF Gamma source modification factor for location 

of exposure rate measurement

1.0 

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside (time exposed to 

resuspended fallout) 0.67 (= 16/24)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 0.0417 

[4 hr every 4th day = 4/(24 × 4) ]

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during shore 

liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

qing Soil ingestion rate during shore liberty periods 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density during shore liberty periods 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 10 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

DCFinhFBE

DCFinhAct

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the IVY shipbased personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 10 

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.07 0.2

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + 

Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Bone Surface 0.003 0.002 0.03 0.02

Brain <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Breast <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Stomach Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.004

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.004 <0.001 0.04

Kidney <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Liver <0.001 <0.001 0.005 0.004

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.005 <0.001 0.05

Lung <0.001 0.008 <0.001 0.08

Muscle <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Pancreas <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Red Marrow <0.001 <0.001 0.002 0.002

Spleen <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Testes <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Thymus <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Thyroid <0.001 0.005 <0.001 0.05

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01. Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.H., Pozega, R., Rogers, 

W.E., Rowland, R.H., Shelton, L., Berkhouse, L., Davis, S.E., Doyle. M.K., and Jones, 

C.B., 1982. Operation IVY: 1952. DNA 6036F. Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. December 1. 
Operation IVY Ship-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 10 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Stuart, J., and Klemm, J., 1983. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA-TR-82-98. Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. March 15. 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation IVY

Land-Based Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 1 of 11 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation IVY Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation IVY Land-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

most of the military personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak and Parry Islands), Kwajalein Atoll, and the so-called “weather” 

atolls of Ponape, Kusaie, Majuro, and Bikini in support of Operation IVY during any period of 

that operation. Manned weather stations were established on Ponape (approximately 500 nmi 

southwest of Enewetak), Kusaie (approximately 400 nmi south of Enewetak), Majuro 

(approximately 600 nmi southeast of Enewetak), and Bikini (approximately 200 nmi east of 

Enewetak) (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4; Gladeck et al., 1982; Thomas et al., 1983). 

Operation IVY was the series of atmospheric nuclear weapon tests conducted in November 

1952 by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) with participation from the Department of 

Defense (DoD) at Enewetak Atoll in the Pacific Proving Ground (PPG). Units included in this 

EPG consist of the land-based units of all the tasks groups that participated in Operation IVY, 

which are listed in Table 1, along with their sizes (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4; Gladeck et al., 

1982). 

Although general activities of the personnel in this EPG were different, their activities that 

may have resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. Furthermore, the sources of 

radiation exposure of these participants involving IVY shots were similar. Therefore it is 

reasonable to include most participants assigned to one of the residence islands at Enewetak or 

Kwajalein Atoll or on one of the “weather” islands during Operation IVY into a single EPG 

(Gladeck et al., 1982; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4). There are no specific exclusions for this 

EPG. 
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 2 of 11 

Table 1. Land-Based Units and Military Personnel of JTF 132 Task Groups 

at Operation IVY

Task Group (TG)* Units Size

TG 132.1 (Scientific) [E]

Army (miscellaneous)

Navy (miscellaneous)

Air Force

Marines

105

80 

33 

4 

TG 132.2 (Army) [E] 

Headquarters Task Group 132.2 (7126th AU)

Temporary duty from U.S. Army, Pacific 

7131st Army Unit Signal Detachment

7131st Army Unit Signal Detachment

516th Military Police Company

Communications Security Detachment 1, 8607th AAU

18th Military Police Criminal Investigation Division

Counterintelligence Corps, Provisional, Sub-Detachment C

125th Military Police, Provost Marshal Detachment

511th Transport Port Company

4th Transport Truck Company

1,196 

Air Force 2

Navy: 2

Coast Guard: Loran Station Detachment [E] 9

TG 132.3 (Navy)

Navy:

Boat Pool [E] 

Underwater Detection Unit [E]

Patrol Plane Unit [K]

Air Transport Units (Non-JTF 132) [K]

Fleet Post Office (FPO) 824 [K]

656 

Marines: Kwajalein Naval Base 93

TG 132.4 (Air Force) [K]

Kwajalein: 

Headquarters Task Group 132.4:

Air Force Special Weapons Center

 4925th Test Squadron

Test Support Unit 

 4930th Test Support Squadron

 4908th Motor Vehicle Squadron

Test Aircraft Unit (TAU):

Headquarters Strategic Air Command

 3902nd Air Base Wing 

 12th Air Division 

 93rd Bombardment Wing 

Sampler Element:

 12th Fighter-Escort Wing 

 27th Fighter Wing 

 561st Fighter-Escort Squadron 

Drop Element:

 7th Bombardment Wing

 11th Bombardment Wing 

 42nd Bombardment Squadron 

 19th Air Division

Control & Tanker Element:

 307th Air Refueling Squadron 

 509th Bombardment Wing

2,073 

* E = Enewetak Atoll, K = Kwajalein, W = “weather” islands of Ponape, Kusaie, Majuro, and Bikini.
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 3 of 11 

Table 1. Land-Based Units and Military Personnel of JTF 132 Task Groups (cont.)

Task Group (TG)* Units Size

TG 132.4 (Air Force) [K]

(cont.)

Effects Element:

 6520th Flight Test Squadron 

Air Force Cambridge Research Center 

Air Research and Development Center 

 3160th Electronic Group 

Wright Air Development Center 

Test Services Unit:

 47th Air Transport Squadron

 48th Air Transport Squadron

 50th Air Transport Squadron

 1254th Air Transport Squadron

MATS Pacific Division

Weather Reconnaissance Element:

 57th Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron 

Weather Reporting Element [E, K, W]*:

 6th Weather Squadron

 9th Weather Group (Weather Reporting Element)

 1500th Weather Reporting Squadron 

Communications Element:

 1810th Airways & Air Comm Service Squadron

Search and Rescue Element:

 11th Air Rescue Squadron 

Photo Element:

 6th Air Division 

 306th Bombardment Wing

 2nd Bombardment 

 338th Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron

 1352nd Motion Picture Squadron

 523rd Motion Picture Squadron

 15th Bombardment Wing

USAF Lookout Mountain Laboratory

TG 132.4 (Air Force) [E]

Enewetak:

Test Support Unit 

 4930th Test Support Squadron

 4908th Motor Vehicle Squadron

Test Services Unit

Weather Reporting Element:

 6th Weather Squadron (Weather Reporting Element)

 9th Weather Group (Weather Reporting Element)

Communications Element:

 1810th Airways & Air Communications Service 

Squadron

355 

TG 132.4 (Air Force) [W]

Weather Islands:

Test Services Unit

 6th Weather Squadron (Weather Reporting Element)

 9th Weather Group (Weather Reporting Element)

 1810th Airways and Air Communications Service 

Squadron

84 

Total 4,692

* E = Enewetak Atoll, K = Kwajalein, W = “weather” islands of Ponape, Kusaie, Majuro, and Bikini. 
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 4 of 11 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for the IVY Land-Based Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all Operation IVY Land-Based Personnel, an exposure scenario 

was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration 

when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario 

of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal 

doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of the 7126th Army Unit (AU) form an adequate basis of the 

generic highest-dose cohort scenario for this EPG for three primary reasons:

• This group was the largest single cohort that was in residence on Enewetak Atoll. 

• The group was in residence at Enewetak Atoll for the entire time of Operation IVY.

• Most of the subunits of the 7126th Army Unit were not involved in radiological safety 

activities such as monitoring or decontamination that would increase the dose received well 

above other members of the cohort. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

7126th Army Unit scenario (Gladeck et al., 1982). The basic scenario of participation and 

radiation exposure of the 7126th Army Unit scenario is described directly below, followed by a 

description of the additional dose components and assumptions. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: 7126th Army Unit

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to land-based units during 

Operation CASTLE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on the 

activities of the 7126th AU. 

Approximately 500 members of the Army were assigned to the 7126th AU, the core of the 

Army Task Group, during Operation IVY. Most service members assigned to the 7126th AU

arrived before November 1, 1952 and stayed until the end of the operation on November 18, 

1952. Members of the 7126th AU lived in tents or barracks on Enewetak and Parry Islands and 

had their meals in indoor dining facilities (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4; Gladeck et al., 1982). 

For Shot MIKE, nearly all land-based personnel embarked on task force ships and evacuated 

to sea at distances of least 25 nautical miles (nmi) south and east of the lagoon prior to Shot 

MIKE. A few personnel remained on Enewetak Island during MIKE to man the airstrip for 

potential emergency landings. The ships returned to the atoll and reentered the lagoon the day 

following MIKE, allowing the embarked land-based personnel to return to duty. Land-based 

personnel stationed at Enewetak Atoll were not evacuated for Shot KING and remained ashore 

during the detonation at distances of at least 10 nmi from the surface zero (SZ) (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-4; Gladeck et al., 1982). 

Enewetak Atoll was directly affected by both IVY shots. Secondary fallout from Shot MIKE 

was the primary contributor to the low-level radiation encountered on Enewetak Atoll and 
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 5 of 11 

arrived in two episodes or “waves.” Being an airburst, Shot KING produced little fallout. Even 

so, Enewetak Atoll encountered a trace amount of fallout. Fallout from both IVY detonations 

that descended on Enewetak Atoll was a source of residual radiation that contributed to the dose 

accrued by members of this EPG. The peak radiation exposure rates at Enewetak Island during 

IVY are listed in Table 2 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4; Gladeck et al., 1982). 

Table 2. IVY Peak Exposure Rates for Enewetak Island

Shot Peak Exposure 

Rate (R hr−1) 

Hours After Shot

(H+hr) 

MIKE* 0.00063

0.00004 

77

168 

KING 0.00012 24

* Two separate fallout waves

The time series of radiation exposure rates on Enewetak Island for these three fallout events 

are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2. 

 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0x100

1x10-4

2x10-4

3x10-4

4x10-4

5x10-4

6x10-4

7x10-4

8x10-4

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Residual Exposure Rate on Enewetak Island following both Waves 

of Fallout from Shot MIKE
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 6 of 11 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0x100

2x10-5

4x10-5

6x10-5

8x10-5

1x10-4

1.2x10-4

1.4x10-4

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Residual Exposure Rate on Enewetak Island from Shot KING

Based on these exposure rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond,

Enewetak Atoll residents accrued external doses from deposited fallout while outside and while 

indoors. They also received internal doses while outdoors from inhalation of resuspended fallout 

and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and dust during the same period (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-4). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

7126th AU cohort analysis: 

• The period of assignment to Enewetak Atoll is assumed to include the entire IVY operational 

period. The assignment period used is three months prior to Shot MIKE, specifically 

August 1, 1952, to one year after the end of the operational period, specifically November 

18, 1953 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4). 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from the nominal value of 14.4 hr day−1 to 

16 hr day−1. 

• Although personnel spend their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that they spent 100 percent of this time in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 7 of 11 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate.

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for the Operation IVY Land-Based Personnel 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL DOSE

Residual radiation 

from fallout from the 

previous operation’s 

shots

7126th AU personnel were exposed to 

residual radiation due to fallout from 

Operation GREENHOUSE shots

throughout their period of residence.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 

instead of 2.

Arrival is three months prior to the 

start of operation (August 1, 1952) 

instead of actual arrival date.

Departure is one year following the 

end of Operation IVY 

(November 18, 1953) instead of 

actual departure date.

Residual radiation 

from IVY fallout 

deposited on the 

residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll

7126th AU personnel were exposed to 

residual radiation due to fallout from 

Shots MIKE and KING during the 

operational period until their departure. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Departure is one year following the 

end of Operation IVY 

(November 18, 1953) instead of 

actual departure date. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 

instead of 2.

INTERNAL DOSE

Inhalation of 

descending fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

7126th AU personnel were subjected to

inhalation of descending fallout from 

Shots MIKE and KING.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

from previous 

operation’s shots

7126th AU personnel were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Operation GREENHOUSE shots 

throughout their period of residence.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Arrival is three months prior to the 

start of operation (August 1, 1952) 

instead of actual arrival date.

Departure is one year following the 

end of Operation IVY 

(November 18, 1953) instead of 

actual departure date.
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 8 of 11 

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for the Operation IVY Land-Based Personnel (cont.)

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

INTERNAL DOSE

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from current 

operation’s shots

7126th AU personnel were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots MIKE and KING during the 

operational period until their time of 

departure. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Departure is one year following the 

end of Operation IVY 

(November 18, 1953) instead of 

actual departure date.

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from fallout 

from previous 

operation’s shots 

7126th AU personnel incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from 

Operation GREENHOUSE shots 

throughout their period of residence.

Arrival is three months prior to the 

start of operation (August 1, 1952) 

instead of actual arrival date. 

Departure is one year following the 

end of Operation IVY 

(November 18, 1953) instead of 

actual departure date.

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from fallout 

from current 

operation’s shots

7126th AU personnel incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

MIKE and KING during the operational 

period until their time of departure.

Departure is one year following the 

end of Operation IVY 

(November 18, 1953) instead of 

actual departure date.

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived Enewetak arrival date 1 Aug 1952

DateStartOp IVY start date[time] 1 Nov 1952[0715]

DateEndOp IVY end date[time] 18 Nov 1952[2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak departure date[time] 18 Nov 1953[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos

Fraction of time spent outside on 

Enewetak Atoll

0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

PFt

Protection factor while indoors, assumed 

inside a tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetMK1

TpeakDetMK1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot 

MIKE (first episode)

0.00063 R hr-1 at H+77

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

IpeakDetMK2

TpeakDetMK2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot 

MIKE (second episode)

0.00004 R hr-1 at H+168

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

IpeakDetKG

TpeakDetKG

Peak exposure rate and time of peak 

exposure rate due to fallout from Shot 

KING

0.00012 R hr-1 at H+24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 9 of 11 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

EXTERNAL DOSE

λ postop Decay exponent for times of H+ < 4380 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times of H+ > 4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

 DoseDetPre

External gamma dose due to fallout from 

Operation GREENHOUSE residual 

radiation prior to November 1, 1952

0.034 rem

(DTRA, 2009b)

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside 

areas

2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFinhAct

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent 

and activity) and ingestion dose 

conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

 Int DosePreOps

Internal doses due to fallout from 

Operation GREENHOUSE residual 

radiation

See (DTRA, 2009b) for a list of organ doses

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the IVY landbased personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 10 of 11 

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

the Operation IVY Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.2 0.4

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.003 0.002 0.02

Bone Surface 0.2 0.07 2 0.7

Brain <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.007

Breast <0.001 0.002 0.002 0.02

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.005 0.002 0.04

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.008 0.002 0.08

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.04 0.002 0.4

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.08 0.002 0.7

Kidney <0.001 0.002 0.004 0.02

Liver 0.03 0.02 0.3 0.2

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.002 0.1 0.02 1

Lung 0.003 0.3 0.03 3

Muscle <0.001 0.002 0.002 0.02

Pancreas <0.001 0.002 0.002 0.02

Red Marrow 0.006 0.008 0.06 0.08

Spleen <0.001 0.002 0.002 0.02

Testes 0.002 0.001 0.02 0.009

Thymus <0.001 0.002 0.002 0.02

Thyroid <0.001 0.08 0.002 0.8

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.002 0.002 0.02

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02). 

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment – Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, Revision 1.2, 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment - Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program, Revision 

1.3/1.3a, DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

January 31/March 31. 
Operation IVY Land -Based Personnel

Page 11 of 11 

Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.H., Pozega, R., Rogers, 

W.E., Rowland, R.H., Shelton, L., Berkhouse, L., Davis, S.E., Doyle, M.K., and Jones, 

C.B., 1982. Operation IVY: 1952, United States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, 

Nuclear Test Personnel Review, DNA 6036F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

D.C. December 1. 

Mason, C, 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code 

for the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer 

User’s Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11 Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Thomas, C., Stuart, J., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1983, Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY, DNA TR-82-98, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

D.C. March 15. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation CASTLE

High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 10

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group 

(EPG) consists of approximately 1,350 military personnel who were assigned to certain U.S. 

Navy ships during Operation CASTLE (1954) (Martin and Rowland, 1982; DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-5). Operation CASTLE is described in Martin and Rowland (1982) and DTRA 

(2008, Appendix B-5). 

Although general activities of the crew members of the various ships in this EPG were 

different, their activities that may have resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. 

Furthermore, the sources of radiation exposure of these participants involving relevant CASTLE 

shots were similar. Therefore it is reasonable to include most high-dose (i.e., >2 rem external 

gamma dose due to higher fallout) ship crew members during Operation CASTLE in a single 

EPG. 

The naval ships involved in Operation CASTLE experienced fallout from Shots BRAVO, 

ROMEO, YANKEE, NECTAR, and UNION. However, no ship received fallout from all five 

shots. In addition, the high-dose naval ships involved in Operation CASTLE list in Table 1

experienced radioactive hull contamination and shine from radioactive material floating in the 

water near the ship. (Martin and Rowland, 1982) 

Table 1. Naval Ships that Participated in Operation CASTLE

(High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel) 

Ship Arrival Date 

(1954)*

Departure 

Date (1954)

Duty (unit and 

Task Unit) Size

USS BAIROKO 

(CVE 115) Feb 20 May 17 7.3.2 Carrier Unit 892 plus 118 in the aviation unit

USS GYPSY (ARSD 1) Jan 26 Mar 26 7.3.5 Utility Unit 62

USS PHILIP (DDE 498) Jan 24 May 31 7.3.1 Surface 

Security Unit 274 

Total 1,346 

* Some of the arrival dates are estimated from other ships. 

The following individuals and units are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG:

• Ships that received light fallout that are in a distinct EPG (Operation CASTLE Low-Dose 

Ship-Based Personnel).

• Individuals who made shore excursions on Rongelap or Rongerik Atolls.

• Crew members of YAG 39 (USS GEORGE EASTMAN), USS PATAPSCO (AOG 1), or 

YAG 40 (GRANVILLE S. HALL).
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 10

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation CASTLE High-Dose 

Ship-Based Personnel 

To estimate EPG doses for all Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel, an 

exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest 

dose from exposure to external residual radiation and corresponding internal doses. Exposures to 

initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration when selecting a “highestdose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first 

minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal doses.

For this EPG, the activities of the USS PHILIP form the basis for the generic highest-dose 

cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) for two primary reasons: 

• This group received the largest external gamma dose from residual radiation for all CASTLE

High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel. 

• The activities of this group are well-documented and are representative of other CASTLE

High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS PHILIP scenario (Martin and Rowland., 1982) to produce EPG doses. The basic USS 

PHILIP scenario is described directly below, followed by a description of the additional dose 

components and assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS PHILIP Scenario

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to high-dose U.S. Navy ships during 

Operation CASTLE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of 

the crew members of the USS PHILIP. The crew members of the USS PHILIP received the 

highest average external dose of any crew members in the Castle High-Dose Ship-Based 

Personnel EPG (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). The fallout episodes experienced by the USS 

PHILIP are listed in Table 2 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

The radiation exposure rates aboard USS PHILIP resulting from the two fallout events of 

Shots BRAVO and ROMEO are listed in Table 2 and are shown in Figure 1–Figure 2. These 

two fallout events were the only incidents of fallout deposited on the USS PHILIP. Based on 

these exposure rates, decayed to the end of the USS PHILIP participation, crew members 

accrued external doses from deposited fallout while topside and while below deck. They are 

assumed to have spent all day every day on board the ship during the period Mar 1–May 30, 

1954, except for shore liberty. They also received internal doses while topside from inhalation 

of resuspended fallout for the first 100 hours after each fallout episode (Thomas et al., 1984 and 

DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 10

Table 2. Peak Radiation Exposure Rates on USS PHILIP 

during Operation CASTLE

Shot Shot Date (1954) 

(Time)

Peak Exposure Rate 

(R hr-1) 

Time of Peak 

Exposure Rate

(H+hr)

BRAVO Mar 1

(0645)

0.75 

0.25 

2.25 

17.25 

ROMEO Mar 27

(0630)

0.03

0.02 

8.25

45.5 

The USS PHILIP crew also accrued external doses from three other sources: accumulated 

radioactive materials on its underwater hull and in salt water piping and evaporators, radiation 

“shine” from contaminated lagoon water, and radioactive fallout in beach and shore areas during 

shore liberty. Although partially attenuated by the hull and piping structures, the gamma 

radiation emitted by these contaminants was a source of exposure to crewmembers in belowdeck spaces. Crewmen who were topside when the ship operated in contaminated water were 

exposed to gamma radiation emitted directly from the contaminants in the water. Crew members 

were exposed to radioactive fallout while on Bikini and Enewetak Atoll during shore liberty

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

Time

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on USS PHILIP

from Shot BRAVO
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 10

TIME

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on USS PHILIP

from Shot ROMEO

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided USS 

PHILIP cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure used is from the onset of BRAVO fallout until one year after the USS 

PHILIP departed from the PPG (Mar 1, 1954–May 30, 1955). 

• The number of hours spent topside is increased to 16 hr day−1 from the default 8 hr day−1

(DTRA, 2010, ED02).

• A shielding factor of 0.15 (fraction transmitted) for time spent below deck is used 

(Thomas et al., 1983).

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate.

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 10

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

during and after 

Operation CASTLE 

USS PHILIP crew members were exposed 

to fallout from Shots BRAVO and ROMEO 

while topside and while below deck during 

the operational period and for one year 

following the end of Operation CASTLE.

Assumed 16 hr day-1 topside instead of 

9.6 hr day-1. 

Assumed a shielding factor of 0.15 instead 

of ship specific shielding factor of 0.14. 

Residual radiation 

from hull 

contamination while 

below deck during 

and after Operation 

CASTLE

USS PHILIP crew members were exposed 

to radiation from accumulated radioactive 

materials on the underwater hull from Shots 

BRAVO and ROMEO during the 

operational period and for one year 

following the end of Operation CASTLE.

Residual radiation 

from contaminated 

salt water piping and 

evaporators while 

below deck during 

and after Operation 

CASTLE

USS PHILIP crew members were exposed 

to radiation from accumulated radioactive 

materials in the salt water piping and 

evaporators from Shots BRAVO and 

ROMEO during the operational period and 

for one year following the end of Operation 

CASTLE.

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation 

CASTLE

USS PHILIP crew members were exposed 

to residual fallout from Shots BRAVO, 

ROMEO, and KOON during shore liberty 

periods at Bikini Atoll, and from Shots 

BRAVO and ROMEO during shore liberty 

periods at Enewetak Atoll during the 

operational period of Operation CASTLE.

Assumed shore liberty for 4 hours every 

4th day with entire shore liberty time spent 

outside. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

while topside from 

two fallout episodes

USS PHILIP crew members were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots BRAVO and ROMEO until 100 hr 

after the time of peak exposure rate.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Used a gamma source modification factor of 

4.31 instead of 2. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

during shore liberty 

periods 

USS PHILIP crew members were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, and KOON 

during shore liberty periods at Bikini Atoll, 

and from Shots BRAVO and ROMEO 

during shore liberty periods at Enewetak 

Atoll during the operational period of 

Operation CASTLE.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed shore liberty for 4 hours every 

4th day with entire shore liberty time spent 

outside. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust during shore 

liberty periods.

USS PHILIP crew members incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

BRAVO, ROMEO, and KOON during 

shore liberty periods at Bikini Atoll, and 

from Shots BRAVO and ROMEO during 

shore liberty periods at Enewetak Atoll 

during the operational period of Operation 

CASTLE.

Assumed shore liberty for 4 hours every 

4th day with entire shore liberty time spent 

outside. 
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 10

Table 4. Input Parameter Values and Other Values in EPG Scenario Dose Analysis

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateReported CASTLE start date[time] 1 Mar 1954[0645]

DateEndOp CASTLE end date[time] 31 May 1954[2400]

DateDetacked Ship detached date[time] 31 May 1955[2400]

DateEnew1Start

Shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll Period 1 start 

date[time] 1 Mar 1954[0645] 

DateEnew1End

Shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll Period 1 end 

date[time] 7 Apr 1954[2400] 

DateEnyuStart Shore liberty at Bikini Atoll start date[time] 8 Apr 1954[0000]

DateEnyuEnd Shore liberty at Bikini Atoll end date[time] 25 Apr 1954[2400]

DateEnew2Start

Shore liberty at Enewetak Period 2 start 

date[time] 26 Apr 1954[0000] 

DateEnew2End

Shore liberty at Enewetak Period 2 end 

date[time] 31 May 1954[2400] 

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 

(= 16/24)

SF Shielding factor while below deck 0.15

(Thomas et al., 1983)

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetBR1

TpeakDetBR1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate on USS PHILIP due to fallout from Shot 

BRAVO (first episode)

0.750 R hr-1 at H+2.25

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetBR2

TpeakDetBR2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate on USS PHILIP due to fallout from Shot 

BRAVO (second episode)

0.25 R hr-1 at H+17.25

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetRM1

TpeakDetRM1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate on USS PHILIP due to fallout from Shot 

ROMEO (first episode)

0.003 R hr-1 at H+8.5

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetRM2

TpeakDetRM2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate on USS PHILIP due to fallout from Shot 

ROMEO (second episode)

0.02 R hr-1 at H+45.5

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetBREnew

TpeakDetBREnew

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot BRAVO at 

Enewetak Atoll

0.010 R hr-1 at H+16

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetRMEnew

TpeakDetRMEnew

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO at 

Enewetak Atoll

0.009 R hr-1 at H+77.5

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetBREnyu

TpeakDetBREnyu

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot BRAVO at Bikini 

Atoll (Eneu Island)

1.7 R hr-1 at H+48

(Thomas et al., 1984)
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 10

Table 4. Input Parameter Values and Other Values in EPG Scenario Dose Analysis (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

IpeakDetRMEnyu

TpeakDetRMEnyu

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO at Bikini 

Atoll (Eneu Island)

0.10 R hr-1 at H+48

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetKNEnyu

TpeakDetKNEnyu

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot KOON at Bikini 

Atoll (Eneu Island)

0.032 R hr-1 at H+120

(Thomas et al., 1984)

λ 1 Decay exponent for times less H+3 1.34

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

λ 2

Decay exponent for times between H+3 and 

H+10

1.19

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 3

Decay exponent for times between H+10 and 

H+48

0.82

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

λ 4

Decay exponent for times between H+48 and 

H+480

1.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 5

Decay exponent for times between H+480 and 

H+4380

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 6 Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

λ 7

Decay exponent for hull contamination and salt 

water system contamination

1.3

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

ShipConDet Ship contamination exposure rate during 

Operation CASTLE Thomas et al., 1984

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for ship-based and shore liberty 

activities

2.0 m3 hr−1

(Weitz et al., 2009)

GSMFPHILIP 

Gamma source modification factor for Shot 

BRAVO exposure rate measurements 

4.31 (mean value for the USS PHILIP)

(Weitz, 2010)

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside (time exposed to 

resuspended fallout during Shots BRAVO and 

ROMEO)

0.67 (= 16/24)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 4 hr every 4th day

0.0417 = 4/(24 × 4) 

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5 m-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during shore 

liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

qing Soil ingestion rate during shore liberty periods 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density during shore liberty periods 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhfbe

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 10

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the CASTLE 

high-dose ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma 

dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 8 23

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.001 0.02 0.009 0.2

Bone Surface 0.5 0.5 5 5

Brain 0.001 0.008 0.009 0.08

Breast 0.001 0.02 0.009 0.2

Stomach Wall 0.001 0.1 0.009 1

Small Intestine Wall 0.001 0.2 0.009 2

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.7 0.009 7

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.001 2 0.009 13

Kidney 0.003 0.03 0.03 0.3

Liver 0.1 0.08 1 0.8

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.005 2 0.05 21

Lung 0.02 3 0.2 24

Muscle 0.001 0.03 0.009 0.2

Pancreas 0.001 0.02 0.009 0.2

Red Marrow 0.03 0.05 0.3 0.5

Spleen 0.001 0.02 0.009 0.2

Testes 0.007 0.01 0.07 0.2

Thymus 0.001 0.02 0.009 0.2

Thyroid 0.001 2 0.009 16

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.001 0.04 0.009 0.4

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 10

The upper-bound doses in Table 5 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 

Table 6. Cancer Cases not recommended for Expedited Processing for 

CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Bile Duct Liver 25

Esophagus Extra-Thoracic Region 44

Gall Bladder Liver 25

Liver Liver 25

Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia Red Bone Marrow 24

Thyroid Thyroid 38

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Acute Myeloid Leukemia Red Bone Marrow 24

Bone Bone Surface 33

Stomach Stomach Wall 24

Colon Lower Large Intestine Wall 36

Lung Lung 47

Parathyroid Thyroid 38

6. References

DNA (Defense Nuclear Agency), 1981. Operation CASTLE Radiological Safety. WT-942 (EX), 

Extracted Version, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. April 1.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 
 Operation CASTLE High-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 10

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Martin, E.J., and Rowland, R.H., 1982. CASTLE Series, 1954. DNA 6035F, Defense Nuclear 

Agency, Washington, DC. April 1. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

 VA. May.

Thomas, C., Goetz, J. and Weitz, R. 1984. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Personnel 

at Operation CASTLE. DNA-TR-84-6, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

February 28.

Thomas, C., Stuart, J., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1983, Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA TR-82-98, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC, March 15

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation CASTLE 

Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 1 of 12 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

consists of approximately 4,000 military personnel who were assigned to U.S. Navy ships during

Operation CASTLE (1954) (Martin and Rowland, 1982; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

Although general activities of the crew members of the various ships in this EPG were different, 

their activities that may have resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. 

Furthermore, the sources of radiation exposure of these participants involving relevant CASTLE 

shots were similar. Therefore it is reasonable to include most participants assigned to the lowdose (i.e., <2 rem external gamma dose for the entire Operation CASTLE period and received 

lighter fallout) ship-based personnel during CASTLE in an EPG. The ships participated in a 

variety of shots during CASTLE. A list of the CASTLE ships is included in Table 1. A list of 

the transient ships in the PPG during CASTLE is included in Table 2 (Martin and Rowland, 

1982). 

Table 1. Naval Ships that Participated in Operation CASTLE 

(Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel) 

Ship

Arrival 

Date 

(1954)

Departure 

Date (1954)

Duty (unit and 

Task Unit) Size

USNS FRED C. 

AINSWORTH (TAP 181) Feb 24 May 21 7.3.9 Transport Unit 30 

USS APACHE (ATF 67) ~Feb 1* Mar 14 7.3.5 Utility Unit 82

USS BELLE GROVE 

(LSD 2) Feb 19 May 14 7.3.9 Transport Unit 338 

USS COCOPA (ATF 101) Feb 13 May 18 7.3.5 Utility Unit 81

USS CURTISS (AV 4) Jan 24 May 14 7.3.0 Special 

Devices Unit 708 

USS EPPERSON (DDE 719) Jan 24 May 14 7.3.1 Surface 

Security Unit 307 

USS ESTES (AGC 12) Feb 6 May 14

7.3.4 Joint Task 

Force Flagship 

Unit

647 

LST 551 Jan 5 May 16 7.3.9 Special 

Devices Transport 105 

LST-762 Feb 11 May 30 7.3.9 Special 

Devices Transport 128 

LST 825 Feb 11 Mar 2 7.3.9 Special 

Devices Transport 108 
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 2 of 12 

Table 1. Naval Ships that Participated in Operation CASTLE 

(Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel) (cont.)

Ship

Arrival 

Date 

(1954)

Departure 

Date (1954)

Duty (unit and 

Task Unit) Size

LST 1146 Mar 14 April 5 7.3.9 Special 

Devices Transport 95 

LST 1157 Mar 24 May 13 7.3.7 Landing Ship 

Dock Element 134 

USS MENDER (ARSD 2) Mar 24 May 12 7.3.5 Utility Unit 64

USS MOLALA (ATF 106) Feb 6 May 25 7.3.5 Utility Unit 86

USS NICHOLAS (DDE 449) Jan 24 May 15 7.3.1 Surface 

Security Unit 273 

PC 1546 Feb 20 May 8 7.3.1 Surface 

Security Unit 60 

USS RECLAIMER (ARS 42) April 7 May 4 7.3.7 Landing Ship 

Dock Element 94 

USS RENSHAW (DDE 499) Jan 24 May 15 7.3.1 Surface 

Security Unit 259 

USS SHEA (DM 30) Mar 30 May 8 7.3.7 Landing Ship 

Dock Element 272 

USS SIOUX (ATF 75) Jan 26 May 18 7.3.5 Utility Unit 86

USS TAWAKONI (ATF 

114) Feb 6 May 8 7.3.5 Utility Unit 81 

USS MANATEE (AO 58), 

USS MISPILLION (AO 

105), USS NAMAKAGON 

(AOG 53), USS 

NAVASOTA (AO 106)

Various Various Fuel Tanker Various

USS DOUGLAS A. 

MUNRO (DDE 442), USS 

EDMONDS (DE 406), LST 

975, PC 1141, PC 1145, USS 

SILVERSTEIN (DE 534)

Various Various Search and Rescue Various

Total 4,030 +

* Estimated from arrival dates of other ships.
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 3 of 12 

Table 2. Transient Naval Ships that Participated in Operation CASTLE 

(Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel)

Ship

Arrival 

Date 

(1954)

Departure 

Date (1954) Duty (unit and Task Unit)

USS AREQUIPA (AF 31) May 1 May 8 Cargo

USS DELIVER (ARS 23) ~April 26 ~May 14 Cargo

USS DOUGLAS A. 

MUNRO (DDE 442) March 1 March 4 Search and Rescue for Australian Canberra Bomber

USS EDMONDS (DE 406) Feb 24 Mar 2 Search and Rescue for Australian 

Canberra Bomber

USS GENESEE (AOC 18) March 17 March 22 Gasoline Tanker

USS KARIN (AF 38) April 2 April 9 Cargo

USNS LEO (T-AKA 60) April 22 May 5 Cargo

LST-975 April 28 ~May 7 Towing LST-762

USS MANATEE (AO 58) March 14 April 14 Oiler

USS MERAPI (AF 38) March 6 ~March 11 Cargo

USS MISPILLION (AO 105) Feb 21 March 4 Oiler

USS NAMAKAGON 

(AOG 53) May 10 May 13 Gasoline Tanker

USS NAVASOTA (AO 106) April 30 May 5 Oiler

PC 1141 Mar 1 Mar 3 Search and Rescue for Australian 

Canberra Bomber

PC 1145 Feb 27 Mar 3 Search and Rescue for Australian 

Canberra Bomber

USS SILVERSTEIN 

(DE 534) Mar 2 Mar 3 Search and Rescue for Australian Canberra Bomber

USS UNADILLA (ATA 182) April 8 April 9 Cargo

The following individuals and cohorts are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Individuals who made shore excursions on Rongelap or Rongerik Atolls. 

• Crew member of YAG 39 (USS GEORGE EASTMAN), USS PATAPSCO (AOG 1), or 

YAG 40 (GRANVILLE S. HALL).

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation CASTLE, Low-Dose 

Ship-Based Personnel 

To estimate EPG doses for all Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel an 

exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest 

dose from exposure to external residual radiation and corresponding internal doses. Exposures to 

initial neutron and gamma radiation are not taken into consideration when selecting a “highestdose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first 

minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal doses. 
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 4 of 12 

This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort”. For this EPG, the activities of the USS 

ESTES form the basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

for two primary reasons: 

• This group received the largest external gamma dose from residual radiation for all Operation 

CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

• The activities of this group are well-documented and are representative of other Operation 

CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS ESTES scenario (Martin and Rowland, 1982) to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of 

participation and radiation exposure of the USS ESTES is described in Section 3 followed by a 

description of the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS ESTES Personnel

To estimate bounding doses for all military personnel assigned to low-dose U.S. Navy ships 

during Operation CASTLE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on 

activities of the crew members of the USS ESTES. 

The USS ESTES was the amphibious force command ship that served as the joint task force 

flag ship in Task Unit 7.3.4, Joint Task Force Flagship Unit, during Operation CASTLE (Martin 

and Rowland, 1982). 

The radiation exposure rates aboard the USS ESTES resulting from two fallout events of Shots 

BRAVO and ROMEO are listed in Table 3 and shown in Figure 1–Figure 2. These two fallouts 

were the only ones that deposited on USS ESTES. Based on these exposure rates, decayed to the 

end of the USS ESTES participation, crew members accrued external doses from deposited 

fallout while topside and while below deck. They are assumed to have spent all day every day 

on board the ship during the period Mar 1–May 30, 1954 except for shore liberty. They also 

received internal doses while topside from inhalation of resuspended fallout for the first 100 

hours after each fallout episode. (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

Table 3. Peak Radiation Exposure Rates on USS ESTES during Operation CASTLE

Shot Shot Date (1954) 

(Time)

Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1) 

Time of Peak Exposure Rate

(H+hr)

BRAVO Mar 1 

(0645) 0.400 16 

ROMEO Mar 27

(0630) 0.012 42 
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 5 of 12 

Time (hours) after Shot BRAVO

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rates on USS ESTES

from Shot BRAVO

 

Time

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

0.011

0.012

0.013

0.014

0.015

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on USS ESTES 

from Shot ROMEO
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 6 of 12 

The USS ESTES crew also accrued external doses from three other sources: accumulated 

radioactive materials on its underwater hull; accumulated radioactive materials in its salt water 

piping and evaporators; and radioactive fallout in beach and shore areas during shore liberty. 

Although partially attenuated by the hull and piping structures, the gamma radiation emitted by 

these hull and salt water system contaminants was a source of exposure to crewmembers in 

below-deck spaces. Crew members were exposure to radioactive fallout while on Bikini and 

Enewetak Atoll during shore liberty (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided USS 

ESTES cohort analysis. These are described below.

• The period of assignment to USS ESTES is assumed to include the entire potential period of 

exposure to fallout while USS ESTES was in the PPG. The assignment period used is from 

the onset of BRAVO fallout until one year after the departed from the PPG (Mar 1–May 30) 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

• The number of hours spent topside is increased from 9.6 to 16 hr day−1. 

• The highest shielding factor of 0.15 (fraction transmitted) for time spent below deck is used

(Thomas et al., 1983). 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate.

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 4. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 5. 
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 7 of 12 

Table 4. Exposure Pathways for CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

during and after 

Operation CASTLE 

USS ESTES crew members were exposed 

to fallout from Shots BRAVO and ROMEO 

while topside during the operational period 

and for one year following the end of 

Operation CASTLE.

Assumed 16 hr day-1 topside instead of 

9.6 r day-1. 

Shielding factor (fraction transmitted) was 

increased to 0.15 from 0.09. 

Residual radiation 

from hull 

contamination while 

below deck during 

and after Operation 

CASTLE

USS ESTES crew members were exposed 

to radiation from accumulated radioactive 

materials on the underwater hull during the 

operational period and for one year 

following the end of Operation CASTLE.

Residual radiation 

from salt water piping 

and evaporator 

contamination while 

below deck during 

and after Operation 

CASTLE

USS ESTES crew members were exposed 

to radiation from accumulated radioactive 

materials on the underwater hull and in salt 

water piping and evaporators during the 

operational period and for one year 

following the end of Operation CASTLE.

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation 

CASTLE

USS ESTES crew members were exposed 

to fallout from Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, 

and KOON during shore liberty periods at 

Bikini Atoll, and from Shots BRAVO and 

ROMEO during shore liberty periods at 

Enewetak Atoll during the operational 

period of Operation CASTLE.

Assumed exposure rate was the highest for 

any part of the island during shore liberty 

island. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

while topside from 

three fallout episodes

USS ESTES crew members were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, and YANKEE 

until 100 hr after the time of peak exposure 

rate. 

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

during shore liberty 

periods 

USS ESTES crew members were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, and KOON 

during shore liberty periods at Bikini Atoll, 

and from Shots BRAVO and ROMEO 

during shore liberty periods at Enewetak 

Atoll during the operational period of 

Operation CASTLE.

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust during shore 

liberty periods.

USS ESTES crew members incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

BRAVO, ROMEO, and KOON during 

shore liberty periods at Bikini Atoll, and 

from Shots BRAVO and ROMEO during 

shore liberty periods at Enewetak Atoll 

during the operational period of Operation 

CASTLE.
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 8 of 12 

Table 5. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateReported CASTLE start date[time] 1 Mar 1954[0645]

DateEndOp CASTLE end date[time] 31 May 1954[2400]

DateDetacked Ship detached date[time] 31 May 1955[2400]

DateEnew1Start

Shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll Period 1 start 

date[time] 1 Mar 1954[0645] 

DateEnew1End

Shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll Period 1 end 

date[time] 7 Apr 1954[2400] 

DateEnyuStart Shore liberty at Bikini Atoll start date[time] 8 Apr 1954[0000]

DateEnyuEnd Shore liberty at Bikini Atoll end date[time] 25 Apr 1954[2400]

DateEnew2Start

Shore liberty at Enewetak Period 2 start 

date[time] 26 Apr 1954[0000] 

DateEnew2End

Shore liberty at Enewetak Period 2 end 

date[time] 31 May 1954[2400] 

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

SF Shielding factor (fraction transmitted) while 

below deck

0.15

(Thomas et al., 1983)

IpeakDetBR

TpeakDetBR

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot BRAVO (also 

applies to shore liberty at Enewetak Atoll)

0.40 R hr-1 at H+2.25 

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetRM1

TpeakDetRM1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO (first 

episode)

0.012 R hr-1 at H+42 

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetRM2

TpeakDetRM2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO (second 

episode) (also applies to shore liberty at 

Enewetak Atoll)

0.008 R hr-1 at H+77

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetBREnyu

TpeakDetBREnyu

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot BRAVO at Bikini 

Atoll (Enyu Island)

1.7 R hr-1 at H+48

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetRMEnyu

TpeakDetRMEny

u

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO at Bikini 

Atoll (Enyu Island)

0.100 R hr-1 at H+48

(Thomas et al., 1984)

IpeakDetKNEnyu

TpeakDetKNEnyu

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot KOON at Bikini 

Atoll (Enyu Island)

0.032 R hr-1 at H+120

(Thomas et al., 1984)
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 9 of 12 

Table 5. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

λ 1 Decay exponent for times less H+3 1.34

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 2

Decay exponent for times between H+3 and 

H+10

1.19

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

λ 3

Decay exponent for times between H+10 and 

H+48

0.82

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 4

Decay exponent for times between H+48 and 

H+480

1.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 5

Decay exponent for times between H+480 and 

H+4380 

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5) 

λ 6 Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 7

Decay exponent for hull contamination and salt 

water system contamination

1.3

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

ShipConDet Ship contamination exposure rate during 

Operation CASTLE Thomas et al., 1984

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for ship-based activities and shore 

liberty

2.0 m3 hr−1

(Weitz et al., 2009)

GSMFESTES

Gamma source modification factor for Shot 

BRAVO and ROMEO exposure rate

measurements 

2.95 (mean value for the USS ESTES) 

(Weitz, 2010)

GSMFland

Gamma source modification factor based on the 

Enewetak Island where the exposure rate 

measurements were made. 

1.0 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside (time exposed to 

resuspended fallout during Shots BRAVO, 

ROMEO, and KOON)

0.67 (= 16/24)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 4 hr every 4th day

0.0417 = 4/(24 × 4)

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during shore 

liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

qing Soil ingestion rate during shore liberty periods 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density during shore liberty periods 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhfbe

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 10 of 12 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the CASTLE 

low-dose ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 6. The upper-bound external gamma 

dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 6 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG.

Table 6. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 4 12

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.008 0.02 0.08

Bone Surface 0.7 0.5 7 5

Brain 0.002 0.004 0.02 0.04

Breast 0.002 0.007 0.02 0.07

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.04 0.02 0.4

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.07 0.02 0.7

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.3 0.02 3

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.6 0.02 6

Kidney 0.003 0.02 0.03 0.2

Liver 0.2 0.09 2 0.9

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.007 0.8 0.07 8

Lung 0.02 2 0.2 12

Muscle 0.002 0.007 0.02 0.07

Pancreas 0.002 0.008 0.02 0.08

Red Marrow 0.04 0.04 0.4 0.4

Spleen 0.002 0.007 0.02 0.07

Testes 0.01 0.008 0.1 0.08

Thymus 0.002 0.009 0.02 0.09

Thyroid 0.002 0.7 0.02 7

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 11 of 12 

The upper-bound doses in Table 6 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 7. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 

Table 7. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 9

Liver Liver 15

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Gall Bladder Liver 15

Bile Duct Liver 15

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Martin, E.J., and Rowland, R.H., 1982. CASTLE Series, 1954. DNA 6035F, Defense Nuclear 

Agency, Washington, DC. April 1. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 
Operation CASTLE Low-Dose Ship-Based Personnel 

Page 12 of 12 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J. and Weitz, R. 1984. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Personnel 

at Operation CASTLE. DNA-TR-84-6, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

February 28. 

Thomas, C., Stuart, J., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1983, Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA TR-82-98, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC, March 15

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation CASTLE 

Land-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.

Important Note
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 10

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 3,200 military personnel who were assigned to support Operation CASTLE 

(Martin and Rowland, 1982; DTRA, 2008). These personnel were stationed on the residence 

islands of Enewetak Atoll, consisting of Enewetak, Parry, and Japtan Islands, along with Eneu 

Island, Bikini Atoll, and Kwajalein Atoll along with the weather stations on Kusaie Island and

Ponape Island. 

The land-based residents had a wide range of assignments but their activities would have 

resulted in exposures to residual radiations that were similar. Furthermore, the sources of 

radiation exposure and activities resulting in exposure of these residents from relevant Operation 

CASTLE shots were similar. Therefore it is reasonable to include all island residents in a single 

EPG. 

The CASTLE test series is described in Martin and Rowland (1982). Specific land-based units 

are listed in Table 1. 

The following individuals are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Individuals who visited or resided on Rongelap or Rongerik Atolls after Shot BRAVO.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation CASTLE Land-Based 

Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all CASTLE Land-Based personnel, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the island residents group that received the highest dose from 

exposure to external residual radiation and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred 

to as the “highest-dose cohort.” Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiation are not taken 

into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these activities are not 

correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated 

with accrual of internal doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of service members assigned to the 7126th Army Unit while 

resident on Enewetak Island form the basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario for four 

primary reasons:

• This group was the largest single cohort that was in residence on Enewetak Atoll. 

• The group was in residence at Enewetak Atoll for the entire time of Operation CASTLE.

• Most of the subunits of the 7126th Army Unit were not involved in Radsafe activities such as 

monitoring or decontamination.

• The Enewetak island residents were not evacuated during any shot nor took special 

precautions. 
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 10

Table 1. Land-Based Units during Operation CASTLE*

Unit Size

Headquarters, Joint Task Force 7 3

Task Group 7.1 (Scientific) Army

Air Force

150

140 

7126th Army Unit 1294

8600th Anti-Aircraft Artillery Unit 35

Criminal Investigation Division and Counter-Intelligence Corps Unit 8

Naval Patrol Plane Unit to include VP-29, NAS-Kwajalein, and VR-7 260

Enewetak Harbor Element Boat Pool and Underwater Detection 125

Bikini Harbor Element Boat Pool 200

97th Bombardment Wing to include the 341st Bombardment 

Squadron, Biggs Air Force Base (ARB), Texas 5

7th bombardment Wing to include the 9th Bombardment Squadron, the 

436th Bombardment Squadron, and the 11th Bombardment Wings, 

Carswell AFB

47

77th Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron, Ellsworth AFB 25

4930th Test Support Group to include the 4931st Test Support

Squadron, the 4932nd Test Support Squadron, the 50th Air Transport 

Squadron, the 1500th Air Transport Squadron, and the 1500-3 Air 

Base Wing, Enewetak Island

170

Air Defense Command Liaison Officers 15

1901st Airways and Air Communication Service Detachment, 

Hamilton AFB 2

47th, 49th, and 51st Air Transport Squadrons; 57th Strategic Weather 

Squadron; HQ, Test Services Unit (Provisional); and Document 

Photo Element, Hickam AFB

192

HQ, Special Weapons Center; 4926th Test Squadron, 4932nd Test 

Support Squadron, Kirtland AFB 131

Lockout Mountain Air Force Station 2

57th strategic Reconnaissance Squadron, March AFB 3

Air University, Maxwell AFB 2

6th Weather Reconnaissance Squadron, Team 101, McClellan AFB 8

6th Weather Squadron, Tinker AFB 43

1960th Airways and Air Communication Service, Travis AFB 3

1298th Air Transport Squadron, Washington, DC 1

Others ~10

Total 2,590

* Martin and Rowland (1982)
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 10

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

7126th Army Unit scenario to produce the EPG doses. The basic scenario of participation and 

radiation exposure of the 7126th Army Unit is described in Section 3 followed by a description of 

the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: 7126th Army Unit

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to the 7126th Army Unit during 

CASTLE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was develop based upon activates of the 

7126th Army Unit. Approximately 1300 members of the Army were assigned to the 7126th Army 

Unit during CASTLE. Most service members assigned to the 7126th Army Unit arrived before 

January 1, 1954 and stayed until the end of the Operation on May 31, 1954. Members of the 

7126th Army Unit lived in tents or barracks on Enewetak Atoll and had their meals in indoor 

dining facilities. Table 2 lists the fallout events on Enewetak Atoll during Operation CASTLE. 

The calculated exposure rates due to each descending fallout event are included in Figures 1 to 3

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5; Martin and Rowland, 1982).

Table 2. Fallout on Enewetak Atoll during CASTLE 

CASTLE Shot SHOT Date/Time

(1954)

Peak Exposure Rate

Measured on Enewetak 

Atoll (R hr-1

)

Time After Shot (hr)

BRAVO Mar 1 at 0645 0.010 16

ROMEO (first 

fallout episode) Mar 27 at 0630 0.003 14.5

ROMEO 

(second fallout 

episode)

“ 0.009 77.5

NECTAR May 14 at 0630 0.002 14.7
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 10

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

0.011

0.012

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak Atoll from Shot BRAVO 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak Atoll from Shot ROMEO 
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 10

Time

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0x100

2.5x10-4

5x10-4

7.5x10-4

1x10-3

1.25x10-3

1.5x10-3

1.75x10-3

2x10-3

2.25x10-3

2.5x10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak Atoll from Shot NECTAR

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions are added to the highest-sided 

7126th Army Unit cohort analysis:

• The period of assignment to Enewetak is assumed to be from December 1, 1953 to May 31, 

1955.

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1 assuming that 

8 hours were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning and eating (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02). 

• Although personnel spend their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that they spent 100 percent of this time in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2.

• The island residents is assumed to be outdoors during descending fallout and the fallout was 

considered light enough so that daily duty routines were not altered (Thomas et al., 1984).

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate.
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 10

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4.

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from fallout from 

previous operations’ 

shots

7126th Army Unit personnel were exposed 

to fallout from Operations GREENHOUSE 

and IVY shots for three months prior to the 

start of Operation CASTLE (December 1, 

1953).

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Used the lowest protection factor while 

indoors (1.5 for tents). 

Residual radiation 

from fallout deposited 

on the residence 

islands of Enewetak 

Atoll

7126th Army Unit personnel were exposed 

to fallout from Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, 

and NECTAR during the operational period 

and for one year following the end of 

Operation CASTLE.

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Used the lowest protection factor while 

indoors (1.5 for tents). 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

descending fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

7126th Army Unit personnel were subjected 

to descending fallout from Shots BRAVO, 

ROMEO, and NECTAR.

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1.

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

from previous 

operations’ shots

7126th Army Unit personnel were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Operations GREENHOUSE and IVY shots 

for three months prior to the start of 

Operation CASTLE (December 1, 1953).

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1.

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from current 

operation’s shots

7126th Army Unit personnel were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, and NECTAR 

during the period March 1, 1954 until the 

island residents left the Atoll, assumed to be 

one year after the end of Operation 

CASTLE (May 31, 1955).

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Used the lowest protection factor while 

indoors (1.5 for tents). 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from fallout 

from previous 

operations’ shots

7126th Army Unit personnel incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Operations 

GREENHOUSE and IVY shots for three 

months prior to the start of Operation 

CASTLE (December 1, 1953).

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from fallout 

from current 

operation’s shots

7126th Army Unit personnel incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

BRAVO, ROMEO, and NECTAR from 

March 1, 1954 until departure from 

Enewetak Atoll, assumed to be one year 

after the end of Operation CASTLE (May 

31, 1955).
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 10

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrive- Enewetak arrival date 1 Dec 1953

DateStartOp CASTLE start date[time] 1 Mar 1954[0645]

DateEndOp CASTLE end date[time] 31 May 1954[2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak departure date[time] 31 May 1955[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak Atoll 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

PFt

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

IpeakDetBR

TpeakDetBR

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot BRAVO

0.010 R hr-1 at H+16

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

IpeakDetRM1

TpeakDetRM1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO (first 

episode)

0.003 R hr-1 at H+14.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

IpeakDetRM2

TpeakDetRM2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO (second 

episode)

0.009 R hr-1 at H+77.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

IpeakDetNR

TpeakDetNR

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot NECTAR

0.002 R hr-1 at H+14.7

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 1 Decay exponent for times less H+3 1.34

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5)

λ 2

Decay exponent for times between H+3 and 

H+10

1.19

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5)

λ 3

Decay exponent for times between H+10 and 

H+48

0.82

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5)

λ 4

Decay exponent for times between H+48 and 

H+480

1.5

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5)

λ 5

Decay exponent for times between H+480 and 

H+4380

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5)

λ 6 Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, , Appendix B-5)

 DoseDetPre

External gamma dose due to fallout from 

Operations GREENHOUSE and IVY residual 

radiation

0.009 rem

(Mason, 2009)
Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInFBE

DCFInhdes

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation)

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ResInhPre

IncIngPre

Internal doses due to fallout from Operations 

GREENHOUSE and IVY residual radiation See (DTRA, 2009b) for a list of organ doses

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the CASTLE 

land-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

The upper-bound doses in Table 5 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 10

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 2 5

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.01 0.02 0.1

Bone Surface 0.7 0.5 7 5

Brain 0.002 0.005 0.02 0.05

Breast 0.002 0.008 0.02 0.08

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.05 0.02 0.5

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.09 0.02 0.9

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.4 0.02 4

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.8 0.02 7

Kidney 0.003 0.02 0.03 0.2

Liver 0.2 0.09 2 0.9

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.007 1 0.07 11

Lung 0.02 2 0.2 15

Muscle 0.002 0.008 0.02 0.08

Pancreas 0.002 0.009 0.02 0.09

Red Marrow 0.04 0.04 0.4 0.4

Spleen 0.002 0.008 0.02 0.08

Testes 0.01 0.009 0.1 0.08

Thymus 0.002 0.01 0.02 0.1

Thyroid 0.002 0.8 0.02 8

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).
Operation CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 10

Table 6. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

CASTLE Land-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 13

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Liver Liver 8

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 3

Martin, E.J., and Rowland, R.H., 1982. CASTLE Series, 1954. DNA 6035F, Defense Nuclear 

Agency, Washington, DC. April 1. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May.

Thomas, C., Goetz, J. and Weitz, R. 1984. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Personnel 

at Operation CASTLE. DNA-TR-84-6, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

February 28.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D.

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation WIGWAM 

Ship-Based Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 9 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel 

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists 

of approximately 6,200 military personnel who were assigned to U.S. Navy ships during 

Operation WIGWAM (1955) (Weary et al., 1981; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-6). Although 

general activities of the crew members of the various ships were different, activities that resulted 

in exposure residual radiation were similar. Furthermore, the sources of radiation and activities 

resulting in exposure of participants involving a single test were similar. Therefore it is 

reasonable to include most participants during Operation WIGWAM into a single EPG.

Operation WIGWAM is described in Weary et al. (1981). A list of the ships at WIGWAM is 

included in Table 1 (Weary et al., 1981). 

U.S. Navy Ships involved in WIGWAM experienced fallout on deck and contamination on 

deck, on the hull, and in the salt water systems from only one shot. In addition, some of the 

ships involved in Operation WIGWAM experienced radioactive hull contamination and shine 

from radioactive material floating in the water near surface zero if the ships entered the areas of 

contaminated ocean water (Weary et al., 1981). 

The following individuals are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Individual who participated in large scale decontamination. 

Ship crews involved in small scale ship decontamination are included in the EPG. Small scale 

decontamination includes salt-water wash down and hand scrubbing with freshwater and 

detergent (SAIC, 1981).

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all WIGWAM ships crews, an exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of the cohort group that received one of the highest doses from exposure to 

external residual radiation based upon film badge results. This cohort is referred to as the 

“highest-dose cohort”. Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into 

consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to 

the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual 

of internal doses. 
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 9 

Table 1. U.S. Navy Ships that Participated in Operation WIGWAM 

Ship Duty (unit and Task Unit) Size

Motor Vessel (M/V) 

SPENCER F. BAIRD* 7.3.1.8 Oceanographic Support 16 U.S. NavyPersonnel 

USS BLUE ((DD-744) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 266

USS BOLSTER (ARS-38) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 91

USS BUTTERNUT (AN-9) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 42

USS CHANTICLEER (ASR-7) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 96

USS COMSTOCK (LSD-19) 7.4.3.1 Transport 241

USS CREE (ATF-84) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 68

USS ALFRED D. 

CUNNINGHAM (DD-752) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 268

USS CURTISS (AV-4) 7.3.0 Flagship 573

USS FRANK E. EVANS

(DD-754) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 269

USS FORT MARION 

(LSD-22) 7.4.3.1 Transport 279

USS GEORGE EASTMAN 

(YAG-39) 7.1.3.7 Radiological Support 48

USS GRANVILLE S. HALL 

(YAG-40) 7.1.3.7 Radiological Support 48

USS HITCHITI (ATF-103) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 76

M/V HORIZON 7.3.1.8 Oceanographic Support 18 U.S. Navy 

Personnel 

USS HARRY E. HUBBARD 

(DD-748) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 258

USS MCKEAN (DDR-784) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 256

USS MARION COUNTY 

(LST-975) 7.4.3.1 Transport 100

USS MOCTOBI (ATF-105) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 69

USS MOLALA (ATF-106) 7.1.3.7 Radiological Support 76

USS MORGAN COUNTY 

(LST-1048) 7.4.3.1 Transport 96

USS MOUNT MCKINLEY 

(AGC-7) 7.3.0 Flagship 552

USS O’BRIEN (DD-725) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 285

M/V PAOLINA* 7.3.1.8 Oceanographic Support 5 U.S. Navy 

Personnel 

USS RECLAIMER (ARS-42) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 78

USS ERNEST G. SMALL 

(DDR-838) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 265

USS TAWASA (ATF-92) 7.3.4.3 Towing and Savage 73

M/V T-BOAT 7.3.1.8 Oceanographic Support 10 U.S. Navy 

Personnel

USS WALKE (DD-723) 7.3.3 Surface Patrol 261

USS WRIGHT (CVL-49) 7.3.2 Carrier Air Support 974 plus 93 in air 

units

Total ~ 6,080

* The crews of ships using the M/V designation were generally civilians.
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 9 

For this EPG, the activities of the USS CHANTICLEER form the basis for the generic highestdose cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-6) for two primary reasons:

• USS CHANTICLEER crew members received, on average, the largest external gamma dose 

from residual radiation for all Operation WIGWAM ship-based personnel. E ighty-one of the 

96 personnel on USS CHANTICLEER received a dose above 0.1 rem (Weary et al., 1981). 

Personnel doses are from film badge dosimetry that includes most crewmembers. 

• The activities of this group are well-documented and are representative of other Operation 

WIGWAM Shipboard Personnel. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS CHANTICLEER scenario (Weary et al., 1981) to produce EPG doses. The basic USS 

CHANTICLEER crew member scenario is described directly in Section 3, followed by a 

description of the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS CHANTICLEER Crew 

Members

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to U.S. Navy ships during Operation 

WIGWAM, a generic exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the U.S. Navy ship 

crew members of the USS CHANTICLEER. The crew members of the USS CHANTICLEER

received the highest average external dose of any ship crew at Operation WIGWAM (DTRA, 

2008, Appendix B-6). 

The USS CHANTICLEER was a submarine rescue ship assigned to the Towing and Salvage

Unit (Task Unit 7.3.4.3). The USS CHANTICLEER performed test support operations to 

include recovering experimentation and salvaging portions of the test array involved in the shot. 

The USS CHANTICLEER had to enter into ocean waters with radioactive contamination (Weary 

et al., 1981). The USS CHANTICLEER cohort exposure scenario is described below, followed 

by a description of the additional dose factors and assumptions. 

At the time of the shot at 1300 hours, May 14, 1955, USS CHANTICLEER was upwind of 

ground zero and did not receive any descending fallout. Only two ships, the USS GEORGE 

EASTMAN and USS GRANVILLE S. HALL were downwind of the shot and received 

descending fallout. However, the ships that were downwind had all of their crews below deck in 

shielded rooms (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-6; Weary et al., 1981). Sixteen hours after the 

detonation, the USS CHANTICLEER entered an area of radioactive contamination during 

recovery and salvage operations. Twenty three (23) hours after detonation, USS 

CHANTICLEER left the area of contaminated water but realized that the deck has been 

contaminated by contaminated spray and mist. Decontamination was then conducted that 

lowered the exposure rates by about 60%. (SAIC, 1981) 

The USS CHANTICLEER’s crew also accrued external doses from accumulated radioactive 

materials on its underwater hull, from contamination in the salt water piping, and from shine due 

to radioactive contamination in the ocean water. Although partially attenuated by the hull and 

piping structures, the gamma radiation emitted by these hull and salt water system contaminants 
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 9 

was a source of exposure to crewmembers in below-deck spaces. The engine room had a 

residual exposure rate of 0.015 R hr-1 and the engine cooling-water discharge line had an 

exposure rate of 0.12 R hr-1. Crewmen who were topside when the ship operated in 

contaminated water were exposed to gamma radiation emitted directly from the contaminants in 

the water. A shine exposure rate of 0.095 R hr-1 was reported. The shine was assumed to be part 

of the external exposure rate measured topside. After decontamination, the engine room exposure 

rate dropped to 0.004 R hr-1 and the cooling-water discharge line had an exposure rate of 0.06 R 

hr-1 (SAIC, 1981; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-6). 

The crew of USS CHANTICLEER was issued film badges for Operation WIGWAM. Of the 

100 individuals aboard, 96 individuals have an exposure record. The recorded mean exposure 

reading for the 96 is 0.104 rem and the mode was 0.13 rem (SAIC, 1981; DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-6). 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions 

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the already highsided USS CHANTICLEER cohort analysis: 

• The individual external dose is reconstructed using an average positive film badge result of 

0.13 rem that does not include film badge doses lower that the detection limit and represents 

the mode of all film badge results. 

• The number of hours spent topside is increased from the default 8 to 16 hr day−1. 

• A deck shielding factor of 0.15 (fraction transmitted) for time spent below deck is used 

(Thomas et al., 1983). 

• The breathing rate associated with intakes of contaminated materials by inhalation is

increased from the default value of 1.2 to 2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the 

assumption of personnel activities consisting of a mix of 50% light activity and 50% 

moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other combinations of activity levels, including short 

durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, result in a similar average breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in 

Table 3. 
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 9 

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

while topside aboard

ship. 

USS CHANTICLEER crew members were 

exposed to topside radioactive 

contamination from contaminated water 

spray and mist. 

Assumed 16 hr day-1 topside instead of 

9.6 hr day-1. 

Assumed a film badge result of 0.13 rem for 

all crew members. 

Residual radiation 

while below deck

aboard ship. 

USS CHANTICLEER crew members were 

exposed to external gamma radiation from

top side, hull, and salt water system 

contamination while below deck for all 

times from May 15, 1955 until one year 

after the start of the operation to account for 

crew remaining on the USS CHANTICLEE

after the end of the operation (May 17, 

1956). 

Deck shielding factor (fraction transmitted) 

was increased from 0.1 to 0.15. (Thomas, 

1983) 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended

contamination while 

topside. 

USS CHANTICLEER crew members were 

subjected to inhalation of contamination

resuspended from the weather decks. The 

deck contamination was assumed to have 

been deposited by contaminated mist and 

spray while the USS CHANTICLEER 

operated in contaminated waters. 

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1, 

instead of the default 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed 16 hr day-1 topside instead of 

9.6 hr day-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended 

contamination while 

performing 

decontamination 

operation. 

USS CHANTICLEER crew members were 

subjected to inhalation of contamination 

resuspended from the weather decks for 

4 hours on May 15, 1956 
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 9 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived

Start Date for USS CHANTICLEER exposures

[time] May 14, 1955

DateWM

Date and time of shot during Operation 

WIGWAM May 14, 1955 [1300] 

DateDeparted 

End Date for USS CHANTICLEER exposures 

from fixed residual contamination on the USS 

CHANTICLEER

May 17, 1956

DateFBtturnin The date that the film badge was turned in. May 17, 1955

EXTERNAL DOSE

DoseFILM

The film badge dose used to reconstruct the 

external dose

0.13 rem

(Weary et al., 1981)

TimeDecon

The time assumed to decontaminated the USS 

CHANTICLEER

4 hrs 

(SAIC, 1981)

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside on USS 

CHANTICLEER (time exposed to external 

radiation)

0.67 

(= 16/24)

Fraction 

Below Deck

Fraction of time spent below deck on USS 

CHANTICLEER (time exposed to shielded 

external radiation)

0.33 

(= 1 − Fts) 

Shielding 

Factor 

Shielding factor (fraction transmitted) while 

below deck

0.15

(Thomas, 1983)

λ Decay Exponent 1.2

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED-02)

Fdecon 

Decontamination Factor to lower exposure rates 

after decontamination 0.4 

Film badge 

dose 

Dose received from external exposure while 

topside due to radioactive contamination and 

below deck contamination

0.13 rem

(SAIC, 1981)
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 9 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.) 

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of 

contamination from ship surfaces

K = 10−5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

KDecon

Resuspension factor for resuspension of 

contamination from ship surfaces during 

decontamination

K = 10−4

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Tresuspend

Duration of contamination resuspension from 

ship surfaces

The period from the start of entry into the 

contaminated area (H+16) to 100 hours 

following the start of entry into the 

contaminated area (H+116).

GSMF Gamma Source Modification Factor 4.4

(Weitz, 2010)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Inhalation dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm)

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the WIGWAM 

ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 9 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds 

for WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.3 0.6

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha† Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.007

Bone Surface 0.02 0.005 0.2 0.05

Brain <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.004

Breast <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.006

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.004 <0.001 0.04

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.007 <0.001 0.07

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.03 <0.001 0.3

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.05 <0.001 0.5

Kidney <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.007

Liver 0.003 0.001 0.03 0.009

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.08 0.002 0.8

Lung <0.001 0.07 0.003 0.7

Muscle <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.006

Pancreas <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.007

Red Marrow 0.001 0.002 0.006 0.02

Spleen <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.006

Testes <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.004

Thymus <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.007

Thyroid <0.001 0.1 <0.001 1

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.03 * Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 
Operation WIGWAM Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 9 

Thomas, C., Stuart, J., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1983, Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA TR-82-98, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC, March 15

SAIC, 1981, “History of USS CHANTICLEER (ASR-7) During Operation WIGWAM”, May. 

Weary, S.E., Ozerroff, W.J., Sperling, J.L., Collins, B., Lowery, C.W., and Obermiller, S.K., 

1981. Operation WIGWAM. 6000F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

September 1.

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Operation REDWING 

Ship-Based Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 13 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists 

of approximately 4,000 military personnel who were assigned to U.S. Navy ships during 

Operation REDWING (1956) (Bruce-Henderson et al., 1982; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7). 

Although general activities of the crew members of the various ships were different, their 

activities that may have resulted in exposure to residual radiation were similar. Furthermore, the 

sources of radiation exposure and activities resulting in exposure of these participants involving 

relevant REDWING shots were similar. Therefore it is reasonable to include most participants 

assigned as ships’ crew members during Operation REDWING in a single EPG. 

Operation REDWING is described in Bruce-Henderson et al. (1982). A list of the 

participating ships is included in Table 1. A list of transient ships that were in the area during the 

operation is included in Table 2 (Bruce-Henderson et al., 1982). 

There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

Table 1. Naval Ships that Participated in Operation REDWING

Ship Arrival 

Date (1956)

Departure 

Date (1956)

Duty (Unit and 

Task Unit) Size

USS ABNAKI (ATF-96) Mar 19 Jul 27, 1956 Utility (7.3.2) 73

USNS FRED C. 

AINSWORTH

(T-AP-181)

Apr 25 Jul 23 Accommodation 

(7.3.9) 

21 

146 civilians

USS BADOENG STRAIT 

(CVE-116) Mar 16 Jul 26 Carrier (7.3.1)

724

151 (Marine 

Corps Helicopter 

Unit) 

USNS BERNALILLO 

COUNTY (LSD-306) Feb 27 Jul 25 Utility (7.3.2) 49 

USS CATAMOUNT 

(LSD-17) Feb 2 Jul 23 Boat Pool (7.3.7) 260 

USS CHICKASAW 

(ATF-83) Apr 2 Jul 26 Utility (7.3.2) 72 

USS CROOK COUNTY

(LST-611) Apr 8 Unknown Rad Support (7.3.6) 80 

USS CURTISS (AV-4) Apr 10 Jul 26 Special Devices 

(7.3.8) 560 

USS ESTES (AGC-12) Mar 31 Jul 25 Flagship (7.3.0) 550

USS GEORGE EASTMAN 

(YAG-39) Mar 28 Jul 28 Rad Support (7.3.6) 51 

USS GRANVILLE S. HALL 

(YAG-40) Mar 28 Jul 28 Rad Support (7.3.6) 51 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 13 

Table 1. Naval Ships that Participated in Operation REDWING (cont.)

Ship Arrival 

Date (1956)

Departure 

Date (1956)

Duty (Unit and 

Task Unit) Size

USS KNUDSON (APD-101) Apr 10 Jul 23 Surface Patrol and 

Transport (7.3.3) 156 

USS J.E. KYES (DD-787) Apr 10 Jul 25 Surface Patrol and 

Transport (7.3.3) 346 

USS LIPAN (ATF-85) Mar 30 Jul 21 Utility (7.3.2) 69

USS MCGINTY (DE-365) Apr 10 Jul 28 Surface Patrol and 

Transport (7.3.3) 157 

USS MOUNT MCKINLEY 

(ACG-7) May 15 May 22 Press and Observer Ship Unknown*

USS SHELTON (DD-790) Apr 10 Jul 25 Surface Patrol and 

Transport (7.3.3) 228 

USS SILVERSTEIN 

(DE-534) Apr 10 Jul 25 Surface Patrol and Transport (7.3.3) 155 

USS SIOUX (ATF-75) Mar 22 Jul 24 Utility (7.3.2) 68

USS WALTON (DE-361) Jun 5 Jun 23 Rad Support 

(7.3.6) Unknown 

Total 3,918

plus unknowns * The USS MOUNT MCKINLEY was not apart of the naval task force but was used by observers and the 

media.

Table 2. Transient Ships that were Present in the PPG during Operation REDWING

Ship Arrival 

Date (1956)

Departure 

Date (1956)

Duty (unit and 

Task Unit) Size

USS AGAWAM (AOG-6) May 21, Jul 16 Oiler 131

USS CALIENTE (AO-53) July 3 Aug 1 Oiler 220 

USS CIMARRON (AO-22) Early Aug Late Aug Oiler Unknown

USS ELKHORN (AOG-7) Early May Late may Oiler Unknown 

USS KARIN (AF-33) Oiler Unknown

USS KISHWAUKEE (AOG-9) June 3 July 15 Oiler Unknown 

USS MERAPI (AF-38

USS MISPILLION, (AO-105) Early May Late May Oiler Unknown

USS NAMAKAGON 

(AOG-53) Jun 8 July 21 Oiler Unknown 

USNS PVT JOE E. MANN 

(T-AK-253) May Jul Cargo 16 

USS NATCHAUG (AOG-54) June 16 June 19 Oiler Unknown

USS NAVASOTA (A-106) May June Oiler Unknown 

USS NEMASKET (APG-10) Jul Jul Oiler Unknown

USS SUSSEX (AF-213) Jun 11 Jul 27 Cargo 38

USNS SGT ARCHER T. 

GAMMON (T-AK-243) Jun 7 Jun 11 Transport 16 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 13 

2. Basis for Operation REDWING, Ship-Based Personnel

To estimate EPG doses for all Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel, an exposure 

scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest dose 

from exposure to external radiation and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to 

as the “highest-dose cohort”. Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken 

into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not 

correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated 

with accrual of internal doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of the USS SILVERSTEIN form the basis for the highest-dose 

cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) for two primary reasons: 

• This group received the largest external gamma dose from residual radiation of all Operation 

REDWING ship-based personnel. 

• The activities of this group are well-documented and are representative of other Operation 

REDWING ship-based personnel. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS SILVERSTEIN scenario (Bruce-Henderson et al., 1982). The basic scenario of 

participation and radiation exposure of the USS SILVERSTEIN is described in Section 3 

followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: USS SILVERSTEIN 

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to U.S. Navy ships during Operation 

REDWING, a basic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the crew 

members of the U.S. Navy ship, the USS SILVERSTEIN. The crew members of the USS 

SILVERSTEIN received the highest average external dose of any crew members (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-7). The fallout episodes experienced by the USS SILVERSTEIN are listed in 

Table 3 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7). 

USS SILVERSTEIN was a destroyer escort assigned to the Surface Patrol and Transport Unit 

(Task Unit 7.3.3) whose primary mission was to support Project 2.62a. This support involved 

entry into areas of predicted fallout, as soon as radiological conditions permitted, for the 

collection of surface water samples and measurement of surface and sub-surface gamma 

radiation levels (Bruce-Henderson et al., 1982). 

The USS SILVERSTEIN cohort exposure scenario is described directly below, followed by a 

description of the additional assumptions.

The radiation exposure rates aboard USS SILVERSTEIN during and shortly after the five 

fallout events are listed in Table 3 and displayed in Figure 1 to Figure 5. Based on these 

exposure rates, decayed to the end of the USS SILVERSTEIN participation, USS 

SILVERSTEIN crew members accrued external doses from deposited fallout while topside and 

while below deck. They are assumed to have spent all day every day on board ship during the 

period April 4–July 27, 1956 except for shore liberty. They also received internal doses from 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 13 

resuspended fallout for the first 100 hours after each fallout episode during the same period 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7). 

Table 3. Peak Radiation Exposure Rates on USS SILVERSTEIN 

during Operation REDWING

Shot Shot Date (1956) (Time) Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1) 

Time of Peak 

Exposure (H+)

ZUNI May 28 (0556) 0.020 32

FLATHEAD Jun 26 (0626) 0.00143 35.5

MOHAWK Jul 3 (0606) 0.003 2.4

MOHAWK Jul 3 (0606) 0.00208 13.9

NAVAJO Jul 11 (0556) 0.00149 22

TEWA Jul 21 (0546) 0.00368 18.25

The USS SILVERSTEIN crew also accrued external doses from four other sources: 

accumulated radioactive materials on its underwater hull, radioactive contamination in salt water 

piping and evaporators, radiation “shine” from contaminated lagoon water, and radioactive 

fallout in beach and shore areas during shore liberty. Although partially attenuated by the hull 

and piping structures, the gamma radiation emitted by these contaminants was a source of 

exposure to crewmembers in below-deck spaces. Crewmen who were topside when the ship 

operated in contaminated water were exposed to gamma radiation emitted directly from the 

contaminants in the water. Crew members were exposed to radioactive fallout while on Bikini 

and Enewetak Atoll during shore liberty. (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 13 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS SILVERSTEIN from Shot ZUNI

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS SILVERSTEIN from Shot FLATHEAD
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 13 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS SILVERSTEIN from Shot MOHAWK

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 4. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS SILVERSTEIN from Shot NAVAJO
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 13 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 5. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS SILVERSTEIN from Shot TEWA

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided USS 

SILVERSTEIN cohort analysis: 

• The period of assignment to USS SILVERSTEIN is assumed to include the entire potential 

period of exposure to fallout while USS SILVERSTEIN was in the PPG. The assignment 

period used is from the onset of ZUNI fallout until USS SILVERSTEIN departed from the 

PPG (May 5–July 25) (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7). 

• The number of hours spent topside is increased from 8 to 16 hr day−1. 

• A shielding factor of 0.15 (fraction transmitted) for time spent below deck is used instead of 

0.14 (Thomas et al., 1983). 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption that personnel activities consisted 

of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other combinations of 

activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, result in a 

similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 4. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 5. 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 13 

Table 4. Exposure Pathways for the REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

while topside and 

while below deck

aboard ship during 

and after Operation 

REDWING.

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

exposed to residual radiation due to ZUNI, 

FLATHEAD, MOHAWK, NAVAJO and 

TEWA fallout while topside.. 

The number of hours spent topside is

increased from 8 to 16 hr day−1. 

Shielding factor (fraction transmitted) is the 

highest possible value at 0.15 instead of 

0.14. 

Residual radiation 

from hull 

contamination while 

below deck during 

and after Operation 

REDWING.

SS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

exposed to residual radiation from 

accumulated radioactive materials on the 

underwater hull for approximately 150 

days (SAIC, 1992). 

Residual radiation 

from contaminated 

salt water system 

while below deck 

during and after 

Operation 

REDWING.

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

exposed to residual radiation from 

accumulated radioactive materials in salt 

water piping and evaporators for 

approximately 150 days (SAIC, 1992). 

Residual radiation 

from lagoon 

contamination while 

topside during 

Operation 

REDWING.

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

exposed to external gamma radiation from 

contaminated lagoon water during and just 

after episodes of fallout (SAIC, 1992). 

The number of hours spent topside is

increased from 8 to 16 hr day−1

Residual radiation in 

the recreation areas 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation 

REDWING. 

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

exposed to residual radiation while on shore 

for shore liberty from Shots ZUNI 

MOHAWK, APACHE, and TEWA. 

Assumed shore liberty for 4 hours every 4th

day with entire shore liberty time spent 

outside. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

while topside during 

and after Operation 

REDWING. 

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

subjected to inhalation of airborne fallout 

resuspended from the weather decks. The 

resuspended fallout was from shots ZUNI, 

FLATHEAD, MOHAWK, NAVAJO and 

TEWA. (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7).

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed shore liberty for 4 hours every 4th

day with entire shore liberty time spent 

outside. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation 

REDWING

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

subjected to inhalation of airborne fallout 

resuspended while on shore liberty. The 

resuspended fallout was from shots ZUNI, 

MOHAWK, APACHE and TEWA. 

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of fallout during 

Operation 

REDWING

USS SILVERSTEIN crew members were 

subjected to incidental ingestion of fallout 

while on shore liberty. The fallout was 

from shots ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE 

and TEWA. (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7).

Assumed shore liberty for 4 hours every 4th

day with entire shore liberty time spent 

outside. 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 13 

Table 5. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

Date Arrived 

in PPG

Start Date for USS SILVERSTEIN 

exposures[time] 10 April 1956

DateDeparted 

PPG

End Date for USS SILVERSTEIN exposures 

from Shore Liberty 27 July1956

Date Departed 

the USS 

SILVERSTEIN

End Date for USS SILVERSTEIN exposures 

from residual contamination on the USS 

SILVERSTEIN

10 April 1957

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

SF Shielding factor (fraction transmitted) while 

below deck 

0.15

(Thomas et al, 1983)

IpeakZN

TpeakZN

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZUNI 

0.02 R hr-1 at H+32

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

IpeakFL

TpeakFL

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot FLATHEAD

0.00143 R hr-1 at H+ 35.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakMO1 

TpeakMO1

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MOHAWK, 1st

Episode

0.003 R hr-1 at H+ 2.4 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakMO2

TpeakMO2

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MOHAWK 2nd

Episode

0.00208 R hr-1 at H+13.9

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakNV 

TpeakNV

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot NAVAJO

0.00149 R hr-1 at H+22

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakTW

TpeakTW

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot TEWA

0.00368 R hr-1 at H+18.25

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

IpeakZNland

TpeakZNland

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZUNI on land

0.00025 R hr-1 at H+11

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakMOland

TpeakMOland

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MOHAWK on land

0.0195 R hr-1 at H+2.9

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakAPland

TpeakAPland

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot APACHE on land

0.00084R hr-1 at H+20.9

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

IpeakTWland

TpeakTWland

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot TEWA on land

0.01155R hr-1 at H+25

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

λ postop Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

Frequency of 

Shore Liberty

The frequency and time of shore liberty on 

Enewetak Island 4 hours every four days
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 13 

Table 5. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

KShipDet

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside on USS 

SILVERSTEIN (time exposed to resuspended 

fallout)

0.67 

(= 16/24)

GSMFZN

Gamma Source Modification Factor for Shot 

ZUNI (average of YAG-39 and Eneu Island)

1.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

GSMFFL

Gamma Source Modification Factor for Shot 

FLATHEAD (USNS FRED AINSWORTH)

3

(Weitz, 2010)

GSMFMO1

Gamma Source Modification Factor for Shot 

MOHAWK 1st Episode (LST-306)

3.2

(Weitz, 2010)

GSMFMO2

Gamma Source Modification Factor for Shot 

MOHAWK 2nd Episode (Parry Island)

1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

GSMFNV

Gamma Source Modification Factor for Shot 

NAVAJO (USNS FRED AINSWORTH)

3

(Weitz, 2010) 

GSMFTW

Gamma Source Modification Factor for Shot 

ZUNI (Eneu Island)

1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 4 hr every 4th day

0.0417 = 4/(24 × 4)

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5

(SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010)

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during shore 

liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

qing Soil ingestion rate during shore liberty periods 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density during shore liberty periods 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhFBE

DCFInhAct

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the REDWING 

ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 6. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 11 of 13 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 6 are not less than the upper bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 6. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

REDWING Ship-Based Personnel 

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 3 7

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.01

Bone Surface 0.009 0.01 0.09 0.1

Brain <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.005

Breast <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.008

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.005 <0.001 0.05

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.01 <0.001 0.09

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.04 <0.001 0.4

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.08 <0.001 0.8

Kidney <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Liver 0.002 0.002 0.02 0.02

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.2 <0.001 2

Lung <0.001 0.2 0.002 2

Muscle <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.009

Pancreas <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.01

Red Marrow <0.001 0.003 0.005 0.03

Spleen <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.008

Testes <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.005

Thymus <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.02

Thyroid <0.001 0.2 <0.001 2

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.03 * Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

The upper-bound doses in Table 6 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 7. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 12 of 13 

Table 7. Cancers not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 8

6. References

Berkhouse, L.H., Bruce-Henderson, S., Davis, S., Dean, P., DeSantis, H., Doyle, M.K.,Gladeck, 

F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.H., Patterson, D.S., 

Rogers, W.E., Rowland, R.H., Shelton, C.F., and Sturman, P., 1956. Operation 

REDWING: 1956. DNA 6037F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. August 1. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

SAIC, 1992, USS SILVERSTEIN, Operation REDWING, Ship Contamination and Shine 

Calculations, SAIC, McLean, VA. November 10. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Stuart, J., and Klemm, J., 1983. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA-TR-82-98. Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. March 15. 

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 
Operation REDWING Ship-Based Personnel

Page 13 of 13 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Operation REDWING

Land-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 10

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group 

The Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

generally consists of approximately 5,000 military personnel who were assigned to Enewetak 

Atoll consisting of Enewetak, Parry, and Japtan; to Eneu Island, to Kwajalein Atoll, or to the 

weather islands of Tarawa, Rongerik, Kusaie, and Kapingamarangi during any period of the 

operation (Berkhouse et al., 1982; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7). The land-based personnel had 

a wide range of assignments but their activities would have resulted in exposures to residual 

radiations that were similar. Furthermore, the sources of radiation exposure and activities 

resulting in exposure of these personnel from relevant REDWING shots were similar. Therefore 

it is reasonable to include all land-based personnel in a single EPG. There are no specific 

exclusions for this EPG.

REDWING is described in Berkhouse et al. (1982). The units included in the EPG are listed 

in Table 1. 

Table 1. Island Resident Units during Operation REDWING

Unit Size

Headquarters, Joint Task Force 7 327

Task Group 7.1, Scientific 519

505th Military Police Battalion 255

902nd Counter-Intelligence Corps Detachment 8

7126th Army Unit 1,035

8452nd Anti-Aircraft Artillery Unit 1

8600th Army Unit, 2nd Army Security Agency 42

Patrol Squadron One 354

Transport Squadron Three 181

Transport Squadron Eight 10

Enewetak Boat Pool 39

Bikini Boat Pool 203

Headquarters, Task Group 7.4 123

Test Base Unit 93

4931st Operations Squadron 221

4932nd Maintenance Squadron 375

Helicopter Element 50

Test Aircraft Unit 550

Test Services Unit 1,044

Miscellaneous 23

Total 5,453
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 10

2. Basis for REDWING Land-Based Personnel 

To estimate EPG doses for all REDWING land-based personnel an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the land-based personnel group that received the highest dose 

from exposure to external residual radiation and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is 

referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.” Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiation are 

not taken into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these activities are 

not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not 

associated with accrual of internal doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of the members of the 7126th Army Unit form an adequate basis of 

the generic highest-dose cohort scenario for this EPG for four primary reasons: 

• This group was the largest cohort that was in residence on Enewetak Atoll. 

• The group was in residence at Enewetak Atoll for the duration of Operation REDWING.

• Most of the subunits of the 7126th Army Unit were not involved in Radsafe activities such as 

monitoring or decontamination that would increase the dose received well above other 

members of the cohort. 

• The Enewetak island residents were not evacuated during any shot nor took any special 

precautions.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

7126th Army Unit scenario (Berkhouse et al., 1982) to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of 

participation and radiation exposure of the 7126th Army Unit is described in Section 3 followed 

by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: 7126th Army Unit Scenario

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to the 7126th Army Unit during 

REDWING, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was develop based upon activates of the 

7126th Army Unit. Approximately 1050 members of the Army were assigned to the 7126th Army 

Unit during REDWING. Most service members assigned to the 7126th Army Unit arrived before 

April 18, 1956 and stayed until the end of the REDWING on August 6, 1956. Members of the 

7126th Army Unit lived in tents or barracks on Enewetak Atoll and had their meals in indoor 

dining facilities. Table 2 lists the fallout events on Enewetak Atoll during Operation 

REDWING. The calculated exposure rates due to each descending fallout event are included in 

Figure 1 to Figure 4 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7; Berkhouse et al., 1982). 
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 10

Table 2. Fallout on Enewetak during Operation REDWING

REDWING 

Shot

SHOT Date/Time

(1956) 

Peak Exposure Rate 

Measured on Enewetak 

Atoll (R hr-1) 

Time of Peak Exposure 

Rate (H+hr) 

ZUNI May 28 at 0556 0.00025 11

MOHAWK Jul 3 at 0606 0.012 3

APACHE Jul 9 at 0606 0.00084 20.9

TEWA Jul 21 at 0546 0.12 25

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-8

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak from Shot ZUNI
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 10

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak from Shot MOHAWK

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak from Shot APACHE
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 10

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Measured

Calculated

Figure 4. Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on Enewetak from Shot TEWA

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

7126th Army Unit cohort analysis: 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1 assuming that 

8 hours were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning and eating (DTRA, 2010, ED02). 

• Although personnel spend their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that they spent 100 percent of this time in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2 (DTRA, 2010, 

ED02). 

• The Enewetak Island residents are assumed to be outdoors during descending fallout and the 

fallout was considered light enough so that daily duty routines were not altered 

(Thomas et al., 1984). 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al, 2009). Other combinations of 

activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, result in a 

similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 10

Table 3. Exposure pathways for the REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from Operation 

CASTLE shots

7126th Army Unit members were exposed to 

residual radiation due to fallout from 

Operation CASTLE shots for three months 

prior to the start of Operation REDWING 

(January 18, 1956).

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Used the lowest protection factor while 

indoors (1.5 for tents).

Residual radiation 

from four shots 

during Operation 

REDWING

7126th Army Unit members were exposed to

residual radiation due to fallout from Shots 

ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE, and TEWA 

during the operational period and for one 

year following the end of Operation 

REDWING.

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Used the lowest protection factor while 

indoors (1.5 for tents).

. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

descending fallout

from four fallout 

episodes

7126th Army Unit members were subjected 

inhalation of descending fallout from Shots 

ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE, and TEWA.

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

from Operation 

CASTLE

7126th Army Unit members were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Operation CASTLE shots for three months 

prior to the start of Operation REDWING 

(January 18, 1956).

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from four fallout 

episodes

7126th Army Unit members were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE, and 

TEWA. 

Assumed a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Assumed 16 hr day-1 outside instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 outside. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from 

Operation CASTLE 

shots

7126th Army Unit members incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Operation 

CASTLE shots for three months prior to the 

start of Operation REDWING (January 18, 

1956). 

 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from four 

fallout episodes

7126th Army Unit members incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots ZUNI, 

MOHAWK, APACHE, and TEWA.

 
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 10

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived Enewetak arrival date January 18, 1956

DateStartOp REDWING start date[time] 18 Apr 1956 [0800]

DateEndOp REDWING end date[time] August 6, 1956 [2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak departure date[time] August 6 , 1957 [2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak Atoll 0.67 (= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

PFt

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetZN

TpeakDetZN

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZUNI

0.00025 R hr-1 at H+11

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakDetMH

TpeakDetMH

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MOHAWK

0.012 R hr-1 at H+3

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

IpeakDetAP

TpeakDetAP

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot APACHE

0.00084 R hr-1 at H+20.9

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

IpeakDetTW

TpeakDetTW

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot TEWA

0.12 R hr-1 at H+25

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

λ postop Decay exponent for times of H+ < 4380 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times of H+ > 4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

DoseDetPre

External gamma dose due to fallout from 

Operation CASTLE residual radiation

0.006 rem

(Mason, 2009)

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInFBE

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ResInhPre

IncIngPre

Internal doses due to fallout from Operations 

CASTLE residual radiation See Mason, 2009 for a list of organ doses
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 10

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the REDWING 

land-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper- external doses for expedited processing, all 

external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative assumption. This is 

equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by an uncertainty factor 

of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the EPG internal doses by a 

factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust which are estimated as 

upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in Table 5 are not less than the 

upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

REDWING Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose 

(rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 6 18 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose 

(rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Bone Surface 0.9 0.5 9 5

Brain 0.002 0.01 0.02 0.2

Breast 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.2 0.02 2

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.3 0.02 3

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 1 0.02 9

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 2 0.02 16

Kidney 0.004 0.04 0.04 0.4

Liver 0.2 0.09 2 0.9

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.009 3 0.09 25

Lung 0.02 3 0.2 30

Muscle 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Pancreas 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Red Marrow 0.05 0.07 0.5 0.7

Spleen 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Testes 0.02 0.02 0.2 0.2

Thymus 0.002 0.03 0.02 0.3

Thyroid 0.002 3 0.02 23

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.07 0.02 0.6

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure 

in accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02). 
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 10 

The upper-bound doses in Table 5 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 

Table 6. Cancers not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Bile Duct Liver 21

Esophagus Extra-Thoracic Region 44

Gall Bladder Liver 21

Liver Liver 21

Thyroid Thyroid 37

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Bone Bone Surfaces 32

Stomach Stomach Wall 20

Colon Lower Large Intestine Wall 34

Lung Lung 49

Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia Red Bone Marrow 20

Parathyroid Thyroid 41

6. References

Berkhouse, L.H., Bruce-Henderson, S., Davis, S., Dean, P., DeSantis, H., Doyle, M.K.,Gladeck, 

F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.H., Patterson, D.S., 

Rogers, W.E., Rowland, R.H., Shelton, C.F., and Sturman, P., 1956. Operation 

REDWING: 1956. DNA 6037F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. August 1. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 
Operation REDWING Land-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 10 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 3. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J. and Weitz, R. 1984. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval Personnel 

at Operation CASTLE. DNA-TR-84-6, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

February 28. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November. 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Operation HARDTACK I

Support Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 8 

Expedited Processing Group:

Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group (EPG) 

consists of the crews of support ships present at the Enewetak Proving Ground and/or Johnston 

Island during the operation, as listed in Table 1 (Gladeck et al., 1982).

Table 1. Support Ships that Participated in Operation HARDTACK I

USS ARIKARA USS CARTER 

HALL

USNS FRED C. 

AINSWORTH USS MAGOFFIN USS ORLICK

USS BELLE 

GROVE

USS 

CHANTICLEER USS GRASP USS MANSFIELD USS PERKINS

USS BENNER USS CHOWANOC USS HOOPER 

ISLAND USS MERAPI USS REHOBOTH

USS BOLSTER USS COLLETT USS JOHN R. 

CRAIG USS MOCTOBI USS RENVILLE

USS BOXER USS CREE USS JOYCE USS 

MONTICELLO USS SAFEGUARD

USS CABILDO USS DeHAVEN USS KARIN USS MUNSEE USS STERLET

USS CACAPON USS ELKHORN USS LANSING USS NAVARRO USS TAKELMA

USS CAPE 

ESPERANCE

USS FLOYD B. 

PARKS

USS LAWRENCE 

COUNTY USS NEMASKET USS TOMBIGBEE

The following individuals and units are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Crew members of ships that served as unmanned target vessels for the underwater shots 

WAHOO and UMBRELLA. Target vessels include three destroyers (KILLEN, 

HOWORTH, and FULLAM), a liberty ship (SS MICHAEL MORAN), and a submarine 

(BONITA). 

• Crew members of seven ships (USS COGSWELL, USS COMSTOCK, USS EPPERSON, 

USS HITCHITI, USS SILVERSTEIN, USS TILLAMOOK, and USS TORTUGA) that only

participated in shots at Johnston Island. These personnel form a separate EPG. 

There are approximately 6,000 personnel in the HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

EPG.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based 

Personnel 

To estimate EPG doses for Operation HARDTACK I ship-based personnel, an exposure 

scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest dose 

from exposure to external residual radiation and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is 
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 8 

referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.” Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiation are 

not taken into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are 

not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a short and are not 

associated with accrual of internal doses. 

 For this EPG, the extensive issuance of film badges for this operation facilitated the

identification of this highest-dose cohort as the crew of the fleet tug USS ARIKARA. The crew

members of the USS ARIKARA form an adequate basis of the generic highest-dose cohort 

scenario for this EPG for the following primary reasons (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8): 

• The crew of the USS ARIKARA had the highest external doses of any ship during 

HARDTACK I. 

• The exposures received by the crew of the USS ARIKARA are representative of exposures 

received by other ships during HARDTACK I. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

USS ARIKARA scenario to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario of participation and 

radiation exposure of the crew of the USS ARIKARA is described in Section 3 followed by a 

description of the additional dose components and assumptions in Section 4.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Crew of USS ARIKARA

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to low-dose U.S. Navy ships during 

Operation CASTLE, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of 

the crew members of the USS ARIKARA. The USS ARIKARA was present at Enewetak 

Proving Ground for 29 of the 35 HARDTACK I shots, was assigned to decontaminate, position, 

and salvage ships in the target arrays of the two underwater shots. Prior to these activities, USS 

ARIKARA received an undocumented amount of fallout following the detonations of Shot FIR 

on May 12 and Shot KOA on May 13. Following Shot WAHOO on May 16, personnel from 

USS ARIKARA decontaminated the target ship FULLAM by hosing it down and monitoring it 

for two days. After Shot UMBRELLA on June 9, the ship was assigned the mission of 

collecting radioactive water samples (Gladeck et al., 1982). 

The fallout episodes experienced by the USS ARIKARA are listed Table 2 (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-8). The radiation exposure rate aboard USS ARIKARA resulted from the one 

combined fallout event are shown in Figure 1. 

Table 2. Peak Radiation Exposure Rates on USS ARIKARA 

during Operation HARDTACK I

Shot Shot Date (1954) 

(Time)

Peak Exposure 

Rate 

(R hr-1)

Peak Exposure 

Rate Time H+ 

(hr)

FIR/KOA FIR: May 12 (0550)

KOA: May 13 (0630) 0.0298 58.17 
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 8 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. Average Topside Residual Radiation Exposure Rate on 

USS ARIKARA from Shots FIR and KOA

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the generic highsided USS ARIKARA cohort analysis: 

• An unknown portion of the USS ARIKARA crew’s film badge dose was accrued during their 

decontamination and water sampling activities. Neither of these tasks portends a high risk of 

inhalation or ingestion of radioactive contaminants. Wash down systems on the target ships 

were activated prior to the WAHOO detonation and ran continuously post-shot for 

approximately 6 hours (Gladeck et al., 1982). As a result, most of the easily-lofted 

contaminant material would have been washed off FULLAM prior to the start of 

decontamination, and the wet topside environment on the target ship during decontamination 

would have further inhibited resuspension. Similarly, intake of contaminants via inhalation 

of aerosol or sea spray encountered while collecting water samples from the contaminated 

pool produced by UMBRELLA would have been quite small (Weitz, 1996). The potential 

for intake is much larger from exposure to fallout deposited on USS ARIKARA itself. 

Consequently, the internal dose is high-sided by assuming that all film badge dose accrued 

from exposure to shipboard fallout deposited during the May 14 fallout event.

• The breathing rate is increased from the default value of 1.2 m3 hr−1 to 2.0 m3 hr−1 for all 

activities. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of a 

mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz, et al., 2009). Other 
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 8 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average breathing rate. 

• Time spent topside on USS ARIKARA is increased from the default value of 9.6 hr day-1

(40 percent of 24 hours) to 16 hr day-1. 

• A shielding factor of 0.15 (fraction transmitted) for time spent below deck is used (Thomas et 

al., 1983).

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 

Table 3. Exposure pathways for the HARDTACK I 

Support Ship-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway

Basis for Exposure Pathway 

(High-Dose Scenario) Additional Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while topside during 

and after Operation 

HARDTACK I. 

USS ARIKARA personnel were exposed to 

fallout from Shots FIR/KOA while topside 

from the time of deposition until 1 year 

beyond the start of the operation.

Assumed 16 hr day-1. topside instead of 9.6 

hr day-1. 

Increased exposure rate of fallout due to 

FIR/KOA to 0.0298 R hr-1 at H+58. 

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while below deck 

during and after 

Operation 

HARDTACK I.

USS ARIKARA personnel were exposed to 

fallout from Shots FIR/KOA while below 

deck from the time of deposition until 1 

year beyond the start of the operation.

Assumed 8 hr day-1 below deck instead of 

14.4 hr day-1 below. 

Used the highest ship shielding factor 

(fraction transmitted) while below deck of 

0.15. 

Residual radiation 

from deposited fallout 

while on shore liberty 

during Operation 

HARDTACK I.

USS ARIKARA personnel were exposed to 

fallout from Shots FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, 

and OAK during shore liberty periods at 

Enewetak Atoll during the operational 

period.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

while topside 

following one fallout 

episode.

USS ARIKARA personnel were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots FIR/KOA for 100 hours following 

end of deposition.

Use g a high breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1

instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

during shore liberty 

periods. 

USS ARIKARA personnel were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, and OAK 

during shore liberty periods at Enewetak 

Atoll during the operational period. 

Use g a high breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1

instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1.. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust during shore 

liberty periods.

USS ARIKARA personnel incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, and OAK during 

shore liberty periods at Enewetak Atoll 

during the operational period. 
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 8 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateReported

HARDTACK I start date[time] – date of first 

shot (YUCCA) Apr 28, 1958[1440] 

DateEndOp

Ship departure date[time] – date ARIKARA 

departed test site Aug 15, 1958[2400] 

DateDetacked

Ship detached date[time] – 1 year beyond start of 

operation Apr 28, 1959[1440] 

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fts Fraction of time spent topside while aboard ship 0.67 

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

SF Shielding factor while below deck 0.15

(Thomas, 1983)

IpeakDetFK

TpeakDetFK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate on USS ARIKARA due to shipboard fallout 

from Shots FIR/KOA

0.0298 R hr-1 at H+58

(Peak exposure rate selected such that 

reconstructed external dose equals film badge 

mean dose.)

IpeakDetFKpi

TpeakDetFKpi

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shots FIR/KOA on Parry 

Island, Enewetak Atoll

0.025 R hr-1 at H+58

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetRDpi

TpeakDetRDpi

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot REDWOOD on 

Parry Island, Enewetak Atoll

0.0007 R hr-1 at H+13.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetOKpi

TpeakDetOKpi

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot OAK on Parry 

Island, Enewetak Atoll

0.0025 R hr-1 at H+14

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

λ postop Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for ship-based activities 2.0 m3 hr−1

GSMF Gamma source modification factor 3.79 (mean value for fleet tug)

(Weitz, 2009)

Fts

Fraction of time spent topside (time exposed to 

resuspended fallout) 0.67 (= 16/24)

FracSL Fraction of time spent on shore liberty 4 hr every 4th day

0.0417 = 4/(24 × 4)

KShip

Resuspension factor for resuspension of fallout 

from ship surfaces

K = 10−5 m-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

KLand(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor during 

shore liberty periods

K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

qing Soil ingestion rate during shore liberty periods 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 8 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

ρsoil Soil bulk density during shore liberty periods 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFInhFBE

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

HARDTACK I ship-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external 

gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to 

independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculations of upper-bound doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of 

soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound doses 

in Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the 

EPG.

The upper-bound doses in were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and were 

further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound organ 

dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011).
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 8 

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 2 6 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Bone Surface 0.2 0.04 2 0.4

Brain <0.001 0.002 0.003 0.02

Breast <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.008 0.003 0.08

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.02 0.003 0.2

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.08 0.003 0.8

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.2 0.003 2

Kidney <0.001 0.02 0.007 0.2

Liver 0.04 0.009 0.4 0.09

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.002 0.3 0.02 3

Lung 0.004 0.3 0.04 3

Muscle <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Pancreas <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Red Marrow 0.008 0.009 0.08 0.09

Spleen <0.001 0.02 0.003 0.2

Testes 0.003 0.002 0.03 0.02

Thymus <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Thyroid <0.001 0.3 0.003 3

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.02 0.003 0.2

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

Table 6. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 9
Operation HARDTACK I Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 8 

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment – Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program. Revision 1.2. 

October 31.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment - Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program. Revision 

1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA

Gladeck, F.R., Gould, K.G., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.A., 

Osborn, M.J., Shelton, C.F., Berkhouse, L., and Calhoun, F.S., 1982. Operation 

HARDTACK I (1958). DNA 6038F (Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C.).

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11 (Science Applications International Corporation, 

McLean, VA, and Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA). 

Thomas, C., Stuart, J., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1983, Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation IVY. DNA TR-82-98, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC, March 15

Weitz, R. L., 1996. Internal Dose from Sea Aerosol Intake. Memorandum, Science Applications 

International Corporation, McLean, VA.

Weitz, R.L., 2009. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor (GSMF) for Shipbased Applications. NTPR-TM-09-04 (Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Washington, 

D.C.)

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation HARDTACK I

Land-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 12 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel Expedited Participant Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 7,000 personnel assigned to the units present at the Enewetak Proving Ground to 

include Enewetak Island, Parry Island, Enue Island, Ugelang Atoll, Utirik Atoll, Wotho Atoll, 

Rongelap Atoll, and Kwajalein Atoll. 

Operation HARDTACK I was a series of 35 atmospheric nuclear weapon tests conducted in 

the Pacific Ocean from April 28 to August 18, 1958 and is described in Gladeck et al., (1982) 

and DTRA (2008, Appendix B-8). The list of units involved in HARDTACK I is listed in Table 

1 below (Gladeck et al., 1982).

Table 1. Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Units

Unit Location Size

Task Group 7.1 Enewetak Atoll 811

Task Group 7.2 Administrative 

Detachment

Enewetak Atoll 532

Task Group 7.2 Operations 

Detachment

Enewetak Atoll 404

1st Provisional Military Policy Enewetak and Bikini 141

Bikini Boat Pool Element Eneu Island 227

Task Group 7.3 Boat Pool Operation 

(Enewetak)

Enewetak Atoll 209

Task Group 7.3 Special Projects Unit Enewetak Island 164

Explosive Ordinance Disposal Unit 1 Enewetak Island 6

Patrol Squadron 22 Kwajalein Island 154

Patrol Squadron 28 Kwajalein Island 378

Kwajalein Naval Air Station Kwajalein Island 22

4925th Test Group Enewetak Island 62

4950 th Test Group Enewetak Island 90

4926 th Test Squadron Enewetak Island 167

4951st Test Squadron Enewetak Island 430

4952nd Test Squadron Enewetak Island 352

HQ USAF Enewetak Island 20

HQ and Pacific Command, Military 

Air Transport Service)

Enewetak Island 10

Military Air Transport Service 

Terminal

Enewetak Island 1011
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 12 

Table 1. Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Units (cont.)

Unit Location Size

HQ Air Force Weather Service Enewetak Atoll, 

Kwajalein, and Weather 

Islands

21

6th Weather Squadron Enewetak Atoll 142

57th Weather Reconnaissance 

Squadron

Enewetak Atoll 388

HQ Airways and Air Communication 

Service

Enewetak Atoll 7

1253rd Airways and Air 

Communication Service Squadron

Enewetak Atoll 402

1352nd Photographic Squadron Enewetak Atoll 26

1371st Map and Charting Squadron Enewetak Atoll 83

64th Air Reconnaissance Squadron Enewetak Atoll 168

24th Helicopter Squadron Enewetak Atoll 120

4080th Strategic Reconnaissance 

Wing

Enewetak Atoll 130

Others Unknown 28

Total 6705

The following individuals are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Personnel who resided on Japtan Island during Operation HARDTACK I (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-8). 

• Personnel assigned to Johnston Island. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for HARDTACK I Land-Based 

Personnel 

To estimate EPG doses for all Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel, an exposure 

scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest dose 

from exposure to external radiation and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to 

as the “highest-dose cohort”. Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken 

into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not 

correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated 

with accrual of internal doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of the Task Group 7.1 Personnel on Parry Island form the basis for 

the highest-dose cohort scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) for the two primary reasons:

• This group received the largest external gamma dose from residual radiation of all Operation 

HARDTACK I land-based personnel except for those individuals assigned to Japtan Island.

• The activities of this group are well-documented and are representative of other 

HARDTACK I land-based personnel.
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 3 of 12 

Several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented Task Group 7.1 

Personnel on Parry Island scenario (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) to produce EPG doses. The 

Task Group 7.1 Personnel on Parry Island is described below followed by a description of the 

additional dose components and assumptions. 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Task Group 7.1 Personnel on 

Parry Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to islands in the Pacific Proving 

Ground (PPG) during Operation HARDTACK I, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of TG 7.1 personnel on Parry Island. The TG 7.1island residents 

on Parry Island supported a variety of experiments and provided support for TG 7.1 to include 

Task Unit 7.1.3, DOD programs, and Task Unit 7.1.6, Radiation Safety (Gladeck et al., 1982; 

DTRA 2008, Appendix B-8). 

TG 7.1 personnel on Parry Island were exposed to fallout from six HARDTACK I shots. 

However, the fallout from Shots KOA and FIR arrived at the same time (Gladeck et al., 1982; 

DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8). During the fallout episode for FIR/KOA, it is assumed that 40% 

of the fallout is due to Shot FIR and 60% of the fallout is due to Shot KOA. Table 2 lists the 

fallout episodes on Parry Island. Figure 1 - Figure 5 are of the exposure rates on Parry Island 

due to each fallout event (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8). 

Table 2. Fallout Episodes on Parry Island

Shot Peak Exposure Rate 

Time (H+)

Peak Exposure Rate

(R/hr)

FIR/KOA 58 0.025

REDWOOD 13.5 0.0003

OAK 14 0.002

POPLAR 12.25 0.0015

PISONIA 3.8 0.034
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 4 of 12 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

Measured

Calculated

Figure 1. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island 

from Shots FIR/KOA

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

Measured

Calculated

Figure 2. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island 

from Shot REDWOOD
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 5 of 12 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 3. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island 

from Shot OAK

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Measured

Calculated

Figure 4. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island 

from Shot POPLAR
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 6 of 12 

Time (hours) after shot

Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

100 101 102 103 104

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

Measured

Calculated

Figure 5. External Radiation Exposure Rate on Parry Island 

from Shot PISONIA

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided Task 

Group 7.1 cohort analysis:

• The period of assignment was assumed to be from January 31, 1958 to July 6, 1959. This is 

longer than any known participant actually stayed at Enewetak Atoll, Bikini Atoll, or 

Kwajalein Atoll. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1 assuming that 8 

hours were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning and eating. 

• It is assumed that 100 percent of this time spent indoors was spent in a tent for which the 

protection factor (protection afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection 

factor is 2. 

• The EPG members are assumed to be outdoors during descending fallout and the fallout is 

considered light enough so that daily duty routines were not altered (Thomas et al., 1984). 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al. 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 7 of 12 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from Operation 

REDWING

Task Group 7.1 members were exposed to 

fallout from Operation REDWING

The time outside was 16 hr day-1 instead of 

14.4 hr day-1. 

Protection factor was high-sided at 1.5

Residual radiation 

from six shots during 

Operation 

HARDTACK I

Task Group 7.1 members were exposed to 

fallout from Shots FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, 

OAK, POPLAR, and PISONIA. . 

The number of hours spent outside was 

increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1. 

Protection factor was high-sided at 1.5

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

from Operation 

REDWING shots

Task Group 7.1 members were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Operation REDWING shots. 

Used a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from six shots during 

Operation 

HARDTACK I 

Task Group 7.1 members were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from Shots 

FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, OAK, POPLAR, 

and PISONIA. 

Used a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from 

Operation 

REDWING shots

Task Group 7.1 members incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Operation 

REDWING shots. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from six 

shots during 

Operation 

HARDTACK I

Task Group 7.1 members incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, OAK, POPLAR

and PISONIA. 
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 8 of 12 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived- Parry Island arrival date 31 Jan 1958 [1200]

DateStartOp HARDTACK I start date[time] 12 May 1958[0550]

DateEndOp HARDTACK I end date[time] 18 Aug 1958[2400]

DateDeparted Parry Island departure date[time] 18 Aug 1959[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside on Parry Island 0.67

(= 16/24)

FB Film-badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(SM ED02 of DTRA, 2010)

PFt

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(SM ED02 of DTRA, 2010)

IpeakDetFK

TpeakDetFK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot FIR/KOA

0.025 R hr-1 at H+58

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetRD

TpeakDetRD

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot REDWOOD

0.0003 R hr-1 at H+13.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

IpeakDetOK

TpeakDetOK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot OAK

0.002 R hr-1 at H+14

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetPO

TpeakDetPO

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot POPLAR

0.0015 R hr-1 at H+12.25

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

IpeakDetPI

TpeakDetPI

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot PISONIA

0.034 R hr-1 at H+3.8

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

λ postop Decay exponent for times less than H+ 4380 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

λ 6mon Decay exponent for times greater than H+4380 2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

DoseDetPre

External gamma dose due to fallout from 

Operation REDWING residual radiation

0.022 rem

(Mason, 2009)

INTERNAL DOSE

Hmin Initial cloud debris height 10,000 m

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DoseintPre

Internal dose due to fallout from Operation 

REDWING residual radiation

per Mason, 2009

Used a breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 (instead of 

1.2 m3 hr-1).

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 9 of 12 

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

DCFInhfbe

DCFInhact

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent and 

activity) and ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the 

HARDTACK I land-based personnel are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external 

gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to 

independent components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external 

doses for expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The doses in Table 5

are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 10 of 12 

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 3 8 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Bone Surface 2 0.3 12 3

Brain 0.002 0.007 0.02 0.07

Breast 0.002 0.01 0.02 0.2

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.05 0.02 0.4

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.09 0.02 0.8

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.4 0.02 4

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.9 0.02 8

Kidney 0.006 0.06 0.06 0.6

Liver 0.3 0.06 3 0.6

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.02 2 0.2 12

Lung 0.03 1 0.3 11

Muscle 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Pancreas 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Red Marrow 0.06 0.05 0.6 0.5

Spleen 0.002 0.05 0.02 0.5

Testes 0.02 0.008 0.2 0.08

Thymus 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.2

Thyroid 0.002 1.1 0.02 11

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.06 0.02 0.6

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure (DTRA, 2010, SM ED02).

The upper-bound doses in Table 5 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 11 of 12 

Table 6. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Liver Liver 12

Thyroid Thyroid 18

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Bone Bone Surface 23

Bile Duct Liver 12

Gall Bladder Liver 12

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Gladeck, F.R., Gould, K.G., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.A., 

Osborn, M.J., Shelton, C.F., Berkhouse, L., and Calhoun, F.S., 1982. Operation 

HARDTACK I (1958). DNA 6038F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C.

December 1. 

Mason, C, 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Thomas, C., Goetz, J., Klemm, J., and Weitz, R., 1984. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Naval 

Personnel at Operation CASTLE. DNA-TR-84-6, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. February 28.
Operation HARDTACK I Land-Based Personnel

Page 12 of 12 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.. 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation HARDTACK I 

Non-Exposed Support Ship-Based Personnel 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation HARDTACK I Non-Exposed Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 1 of 2 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation HARDTACK I 

Non-Exposed Support Ship-Based Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The HARDTACK I Non-Exposed Support Ship-Based Personnel Expedited Processing Group 

(EPG) consists of the crews of ships that were present either at the Enewetak Proving Ground or 

Johnston Island during the operation, were present as a direct consequence of the operation, or 

who were issued film badges in anticipation of supporting HARDTACK I, but for which there 

was no potential for external or internal exposure to radiation. Ships included in this EPG are 

listed in Table 1 (Gladeck et al., 1982). 

Excluded from this EPG are two crew members of USS COMSTOCK who received non-zero 

readings on film badges issued to them (see discussion below).

Table 1. Non-Exposed Naval Ships that Participated in Operation HARDTACK 

Ship Location Arrival (1958) Departure 

(1958) Size

USS COGSWELL 

(DD 651) Johnston Island July 10 August 1 238

USS COMSTOCK

(LSD 19)

Enewetak Atoll 

Pre-Operation January 20 May 1 230

USS EPPERSON 

(DDE 719) Johnston Island August 7 August 12 ~300

USS HITCHITI 

(ATF 103) Johnston Island July 30, August 2 71

USS SILVERSTEIN 

(DE 534)

Enewetak to 

Guam Cruise 

Post-Operation

August 31 September 13

~230

USS TILLAMOOK 

(ATA 192) Johnston Island July 28 August 7 ~20

USS TORTUGA 

(LSD 26)

Enewetak Atoll 

Pre-Operation March 1 April 14 326

Total ~1,400

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for HARDTACK I Non-Exposed 

Support Ship Crew 

Four ships (USS COGSWELL, USS EPPERSON, USS HITCHITI, and USS TILLAMOOK) 

operated solely in the vicinity of Johnston Island while supporting HARDTACK I. There was no 
Operation HARDTACK I Non-Exposed Support Ship-Based Personnel

Page 2 of 2 

potential for exposure at that location except for those ships specifically designated to assist in 

the recovery of rocket nosecones. These four ships were not assigned recovery duties, and their 

crews were not issued film badges (Gladeck et al., 1982).

USS COMSTOCK primarily participated in pre-operational activities in the Enewetak Proving 

Ground and at Johnston Island. The ship arrived in the test area (Enewetak) in January 1958 and 

departed the test area (Johnston Island) three days before the first shot of the operation 

(YUCCA). COMSTOCK returned to the test area for a single day (Johnston Island on May 1, 

three months before the first of the two high altitude shots launched from that site), then departed 

for the U.S. West Coast. The entire crew of 230 personnel was issued film badges; all but two 

recorded zero dose. The two outliers registered small doses on their badges, almost certainly 

from non-radiological environmental conditions (NRC, 1989). Nevertheless, the two recipients 

of the non-zero badge readings are excluded from the EPG (Gladeck et al., 1982).

USS SILVERSTEIN did not participate in any of the HARDTACK I shots, but its mission 

derived from the operation. The ship arrived at Enewetak Atoll 13 days after the last detonation 

of the series and immediately departed on a two-week round trip to Guam. The USS 

SILVERSTEIN collected water samples approximately every 250 nmi along its route to survey 

the dispersal of radioactivity in the ocean. The crew was not badged, apparently due to lack of 

potential for exposure (Gladeck et al., 1982). Any radioactivity found in water samples drawn at 

these times and distances would have been so dilute as to preclude measureable exposure.

USS TORTUGA participated only in the pre-operational phase of HARDTACK I, departing 

the test area two weeks before the first shot of the series. The ship’s crew was issued film 

badges because it was initially anticipated that TORTUGA would play a much more significant 

role in the operation. None of the issued badges recorded an exposure (Gladeck et al., 1982). 

3. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

For the reasons detailed above, there was no potential for exposure for all members of this 

EPG.

4. References

Gladeck, F.R., Gould, K.G., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.A., 

Osborn, M.J., Shelton, C.F., Berkhouse, L., and Calhoun, F.S., 1982. Operation 

HARDTACK I (1958). DNA 6038F (Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C.).

NRC (National Research Council), 1989. “Film Badge Dosimetry in Atmospheric Nuclear 

Tests”. (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.).
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation DOMINIC I

Personnel

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation DOMINIC I Personnel 

Page 1 of 4

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation DOMINIC I Personnel

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The DOMINIC I Expedited Processing Participant Group (EPG) consists of all individuals 

who participated in Operation DOMINIC I to include ship- and island-based personnel. 

Individuals with exposure types identified below as exclusions are processed separately. 

Operation DOMINIC I was a series of 36 atmospheric nuclear tests held in the Pacific Ocean 

during 1962. The tests, which included high-altitude airdrops, missile launched detonations, and 

underwater tests, were conducted by Joint Task Force Eight (JTF 8). Details of the various tests, 

types of nuclear devices, and locations can be found in Berkhouse et al. (1983) and DTRA, 

Appendix B-10 (2008). 

Approximately 28,000 personnel who manned 90 ships (78 U.S. Navy, six Military Sea 

Transport Service, three Commercial, two U.S. Coast Guard, and one U.S. Army), two island 

facilities, and 136 aircraft participated in DOMINIC I. The majority of the personnel were 

stationed at Christmas and Johnston Islands or aboard Navy ships. More than 80 percent of the 

participants were military personnel. Of the military personnel, about 81 percent were in the 

Navy, 13 percent in the Air Force, and the rest in the Army and Marine Corps (DTRA, 2008, 

Appendix B-10). 

The following individuals and units are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Crewmembers of USS SIOUX (ATF 75), USC&GSS PIONEER (OSS-31), and 

USS MONTICELLO (LSD-35) during Shot SWORDFISH. 

• Crewmember of any ship involved in the recovery/handling of radioactively contaminated 

instrumented pods and rocket nose cones associated with successful THOR missile and 

rocket launches. 

• Crewmembers of any ship involved in recovery/decontamination operations after any of the 

THOR missile incidents during Shots BLUEGILL, STARFISH, BLUEGILL PRIME. 

• Crewmembers of any ship involved in recovery, servicing, or boarding of target rafts after

airdrop shots,

• Crewmembers of any ship involved in the recovery/handling of other contaminated with 

radioactive materials due to neutron activation. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Operation DOMINIC I Personnel

The nuclear tests during Operation DOMINIC I were conducted in a manner to limit radiation 

exposures of test participants. At Christmas Island, tests were airdrops from B-52 aircraft and 

detonations occurred at elevations between 2610 and 15995 feet above sea level. The devices 

were detonated at sufficient altitudes that the fireballs did not touch the ocean surface and thus, 

no local fallout was formed. The closest ship to the shots was between 23 and 30 nautical miles 

(nmi) from surface zero (Berkhouse et al., 1983). Five of the tests at Johnston Atoll were also 
Operation DOMINIC I Personnel 

Page 2 of 4

B-52 airdrops with detonations occurring at high elevations. The nearest ship to surface zero of 

the five Johnston Island airbursts was 30 nmi. For Shot SWORDFISH, an underwater test, the 

nearest ship was 2 nmi from the projected surface zero and was upwind. Individuals on ships 

who were close enough to contaminated water and had the potential for exposure to external 

radiation are excluded from this EPG (see list of excluded individuals in Section 1 above). For 

the rocket-launched shots that were the FISHBOWL portion of DOMINIC I on Johnston Island, 

any participants who were possibly exposed to ionizing radiation are excluded from this EPG

and all of the exposures were due to the clean up of debris from failed shots (Berkhouse et al., 

1983). 

Of the DOMINIC I participants, about 25,000 military and civilian personnel were issued film 

badges. About 3,000 participants who were manning radiation detection instruments or 

conducting experiments on islands that were located hundreds of kilometers from the tests were 

not badged. About 43,000 film badges were used. Two dosimetry sections in the Pacific 

processed about 33,000 badges. The remaining film badges, numbering approximately 10,000 

were processed at the Nevada Test Site radiological safety laboratory after the end of 

DOMINIC I. 

Many of the film badges were worn for long periods of time and experienced damage due to 

heat, humidity, light leaks, and emulsion aging that caused increased optical density and, thus, 

recorded incorrect external dose results (NRC, 1989). Many of the dosimeter films from badges 

worn by DOMINIC I personnel had water damage. In addition to water damage, the films from 

badges had a high incidence of damage due to light leaks from breaches in the plastic covering of 

the badge. Such light damage occurred in film badges that were worn for long periods, which 

appeared to correlate with a higher frequency of emulsion and/or process damage. Many films 

with long wear periods also exhibited spurious “filter images” due to background radiation 

(without appropriate controls) and/or pressure from the lead filter strip (NRC, 1989; SAIC and 

NST - LLC, 1989–2006; Perkins and Hammond, 1980). The lack of appropriate background 

subtraction and the inadequate screening of dose results were the principal reasons for the 

positive doses assigned to individuals who had no potential for exposure to any radiation (NRC, 

1989). 

Many of the film badge results above zero are not indicative of true external radiation 

exposure. Not all of the optical intensity of the film badges can be attributed to ionizing 

radiation exposure. However, the amount of increased optical density due to radiation exposure 

compared to environmental damage cannot be easily quantified (Berkhouse et al., 1983).

For potentially damaged film badges, the NTPR standard operating procedures (DTRA, 2010)

recommend that, if possible, individual film badges are evaluated and results reassessed. 

However, for the purpose of expedited processing, there is no need to expend resources to prove 

or disprove a film badge dose for individuals who had no potential for exposure to any ionizing 

radiation but had non-zero film badge readings. For these individuals, benefit of the doubt 

principles are used and the recorded film badge dose is assigned as an upper bound external dose

(DTRA, 2010). No internal doses are assigned as there was no potential for intake of 

contaminated materials from any source for members of this group (Berkhouse et al., 1983). 
Operation DOMINIC I Personnel 

Page 3 of 4

3. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external dose for DOMINIC I Personnel EPG is summarized in Table 1. The 

maximized upper bound external gamma dose for a member of this EPG is assumed to be the 

film badge dose assigned from the veteran’s records. There was no potential for exposure to 

internally-deposited radionuclides for this group. For members with no recorded film badge 

doses, their dose assessment should report that “the veteran had no potential for exposure to 

external or internal radiation.” 

 

Table 1. External and Internal Doses and Upper-Bounds for DOMINIC I Personnel

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual gamma radiation for 

participants with film badge 

records

n/a Film badge dose

Residual gamma radiation for 

participants with no film 

badge records

No potential for exposure to external radiation

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

All Organs There was no potential for exposure to internally-deposited 

radionuclides for this group. 

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are estimated separately based on the actual participant’s exposure in 

accordance with NTPR standard operating procedure SM ED02 (DTRA, 2010).

4. References

Berkhouse, L. Davis, S.E., Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Jones, C.B., Martin, E.J., Miller, R.A., 

McMullan, F.W., Osborne, M.J., 1983. Operation DOMINIC I 1962. DNA 6040F, 

Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. February 1.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011, An Expedited Approach to NTPR Radiation 

Dose Assessments. TBD, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.TBD.

NRC (National Research Council), 1989. Film Badge Dosimetry in Atmospheric Nuclear Tests. 

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Operation DOMINIC I Personnel 

Page 4 of 4

Perkins, W. W., and Hammond, R. R., 1980. Navy Film Badge Review: DOMINIC, Navy 

Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program. NOSC TR 583, Naval Ocean Systems Center. 

May 28.

SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation) and NST - LLC (National Securities 

Technologies LLC), 1989–2006. Evaluations of dosimeter films conducted from about 

1989 to 2006. Las Vegas, Nevada.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll 

Page 1 of 6

Expedited Processing Group: 

Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Post-SANDSTONE-Enewetak Atoll Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 1,889 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak, Japtan, and Parry Islands) during the period between June 1, 1948 

and April 8, 1951 (Mason, 2009). 

Operation SANDSTONE is described in Berkhouse et al (1983) and DTRA (2008, Appendix 

B-2). After the formal end of the operation, individuals remained on Enewetak Atoll to serve as 

the garrison for the Pacific Proving Ground. There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll

To estimate EPG doses for Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll personnel, an exposure 

scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external 

residual radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the 

“highest-dose cohort.” 

For this EPG, Post-SANDSTONE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island who arrived on June 

1, 1948 are identified as the generic highest-dose cohort. Post-SANDSTONE personnel assigned 

to Enewetak Island are representative of personnel on Enewetak Atoll who received the highest 

dose for post-SANDSTONE personnel during the interval between SANDSTONE and Operation

GREENHOUSE. 

Post-SANDSTONE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island form an adequate basis of the 

generic highest-dose cohort scenario (Mason, 2009; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) for this EPG 

for two primary reasons: 

• The group was assigned to Enewetak Atoll similar to most inter-operational personnel. 

• The group did not have any involvement in unique exposure activities. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

Enewetak Island residents’ scenario to produce EPG doses. The Post-SANDSTONE personnel 

assigned to Enewetak Island scenario is described directly below, followed by a description of 

the dose components and assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Post-SANDSTONE Personnel 

Assigned to Enewetak Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to Enewetak Atoll during the PostSANDSTONE inter-operational period, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of Post-SANDSTONE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island. 
Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll 

Page 2 of 6

Post-SANDSTONE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island had no involvement in unique 

exposure activities, so their only source of exposure was fallout from Operation SANDSTONE 

shots that were conducted before their assumed arrival. The SANDSTONE shots and the 

resulting fallout exposure rates at Enewetak Island are shown in Table 1. Based on these 

exposure rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond, the PostSANDSTONE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island who lived on Enewetak Island accrued 

external doses from fallout deposited on Enewetak Island while outside and while indoors. PostSANDSTONE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island also received internal doses while 

outdoors during the same period from inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion 

of contaminated soil and dust (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2). 

Table 1. Operation SANDSTONE Detonations that Affected Enewetak Island

Shot Time and Date of 

Detonation

Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1)

Peak Time 

(H+hr)

XRAY April 15, 1948 at 0617 0.0001 48

YOKE May 1 1948 at 0609 0.0003 54

ZEBRA May 15, 1948 at 0604 0.00004 144

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

Enewetak Atoll resident cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure to Enewetak Island is assumed to be from June 1, 1948 to May 31, 

1949. This start date is the first of the month after the last SANDSTONE Shot. The end date 

corresponds to one year later. The internal doses were calculated through April 8, 1951 

(Mason, 2009). 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning, and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2.

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz, et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 
Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll 

Page 3 of 6

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll Residents

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from three shots of

Operation 

SANDSTONE

Post-SANDSTONE Personnel assigned 

to Enewetak Island were exposed to 

residual radiation fallout from Shots 

XRAY, YOKE, and ZEBRA. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 instead of 2. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

Post-SANDSTONE Personnel assigned 

to Enewetak Island were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from

Shots XRAY, YOKE, and ZEBRA.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from three 

fallout episodes

Post-SANDSTONE Personnel assigned 

to Enewetak Island incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from XRAY, 

YOKE, and ZEBRA.
Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll 

Page 4 of 6

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartPSS Post-SANDSTONE start date[time] 1 June 1948[0000]

DateEndPSS Post-SANDSTONE end date[time] 31 May 1949[2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak Island departure date[time] 31 May 1949[2400]

DateDepartedint

Enewetak Island departure date for internal dose 

calculations [time] 8 April 1952[2400] 

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos

Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak 

Island

0.67 

(= 16/24)

PFtent

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

FB Film badge conversion factor 0.7

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

λ postopXY Decay exponent for post-operation- Shot XRAY 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

λ postopYK Decay exponent for post-operation- Shot YOKE 1.0

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λ postopZE

Decay exponent for post-operation- Shot 

ZEBRA

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for times greater than H+6 

months

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

IpeakDetXY

TpeakDetXY

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot XRAY

0.0001 R hr-1 at H+48

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

IpeakDetYK

TpeakDetYK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot YOKE

0.0003 R hr-1 at H+ 54

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2)

IpeakDetZE

TpeakDetZE

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZEBRA

0.00004 R hr-1 at H+144 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-2) 

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Soil thickness 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent) and 

ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll 

Page 5 of 6

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the PostSANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma 

dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.05 0.2

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Bone Surface 0.009 0.003 0.08 0.02

Brain <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Breast <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Stomach Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.009

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.005 <0.001 0.03

Kidney <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Liver 0.002 <0.001 0.02 0.003

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.003 <0.001 0.03

Lung <0.001 0.02 0.002 0.2

Muscle <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Pancreas <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Red Marrow <0.001 0.001 0.004 0.005

Spleen <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Testes <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001

Thymus <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002

Thyroid <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.009

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001

* NPE = no potential for exposure.

† Organ doses were obtained from Mason (2009) and adjusted to incorporate EPG assumptions. 
Post-SANDSTONE Enewetak Atoll 

Page 6 of 6

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S.E., Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Jones, C.B., Martin, E.J. , 

McMullan, F.W., Rogers, W.E., and Osborne, M.J., 1983. Operation SANDSTONE: 

1948, United States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel 

Review. DNA 6033F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. Dec 19.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Weitz, R.L. and Egbert, S.D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric Test 

Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 1 of 7 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Post-GREENHOUSE-Enewetak Atoll Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 2,564 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak, Japtan, and Parry Islands) during the period between June 1, 1951 

and November 1, 1952 (Mason, 2009). 

Operation GREENHOUSE is described in Berkhouse et al. (1983) and DTRA (2008, 

Appendix B-3. After the formal end of the operation, individuals remained on Enewetak Atoll to 

serve as the garrison for the Pacific Proving Ground. 

There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak 

Atoll

To estimate EPG doses for Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll personnel, an exposure 

scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external 

residual radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the 

“highest-dose cohort.” 

For this EPG, Post-GREENHOUSE personnel assigned to Parry Island who arrived on June 1, 

1951 are identified as the generic highest-dose cohort. Post-GREENHOUSE personnel assigned 

to Parry Island are representative of personnel on Enewetak Atoll who received the highest dose 

for post-GREENHOUSE personnel during the interval between GREENHOUSE and Operation 

IVY. 

Post-GREENHOUSE personnel assigned to Parry Island form an adequate basis of the generic 

highest-dose cohort scenario Mason, 2009 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) for this EPG for 

two primary reasons: 

• The group was assigned to Enewetak Atoll similar to most inter-operational personnel. 

• The group did not have any involvement in unique exposure activites. 

For use with the EPG, the generic highest-dose cohort scenario is augmented with additional 

dose components and assumptions. The basic scenario of participation and radiation exposure of 

the Post-GREENHOUSE personnel assigned to Parry Island scenario is described directly below, 

followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions.
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 2 of 7 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Post-GREENHOUSE 

Personnel Assigned to Parry Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to Enewetak Atoll during the PostGREENHOUSE inter-operational period, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of Post-GREENHOUSE personnel assigned to Parry Island. 

Post-GREENHOUSE personnel assigned to Parry Island had no involvement in unique 

exposure activities, so their only source of exposure was fallout from Operation GREENHOUSE 

shots that were conducted before their assumed arrival. The GREENHOUSE shots and the 

resulting fallout exposure rates at Parry Island are shown in Table 1. Based on these exposure 

rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond, the Post-GREENHOUSE 

personnel assigned to Parry Island who lived on Parry Island accrued external doses from fallout 

deposited on Parry Island while outside and while indoors. Post-GREENHOUSE personnel 

assigned to Parry Island personnel also received internal doses while outdoors during the same 

period from inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and 

dust (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3). 

Table 1. Operation GREENHOUSE Detonations that Affected Parry Island

Shot Time and Date of 

Detonation

Peak Exposure Rate 

(R hr-1) Peak Time (H+hr)

DOG April 8, 1951 at 0634 0.083 6

EASY April 21 1951 at 0627 0.001 24

ITEM May 25, 1951 at 0617 0.118 14

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided

Parry Island resident cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure to Parry Island is assumed to be from June 1, 1951 to May 31, 1952. 

This start date is the first of the month after the last GREENHOUSE Shot. The end date 

corresponds to one year later. The internal dose calculations were through March 1, 1954 the 

start of Operation CASTLE. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning, and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 3 of 7 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

• The exposure rate for Shot ITEM fallout for Enewetak Island of 0.118 R hr-1at H+14 is used 

instead of the 0.0885 R hr-1. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll Residents 

Exposure Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation from 

three shots of Operation 

GREENOUSE

Post-GREENHOUSE Personnel 

assigned to Parry Island were exposed to 

fallout from Shots DOG, EASY, and 

ITEM.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 

instead of 2.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of resuspended 

fallout from three fallout 

episodes

Post-GREENHOUSE Personnel 

assigned to Parry Island were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout from

Shots DOG, EASY, and ITEM.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3

 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion of 

contaminated soil/dust

from three fallout episodes

Post-GREENHOUSE Personnel 

assigned to Parry Island incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

DOG, EASY, and ITEM.

 
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 4 of 7 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartPGH Post-GREENHOUSE start date[time] 1 June 1951[0000]

DateEndPGH Post-GREENHOUSE end date[time] 31 May 1952[2400]

DateDeparted Parry Island departure date[time] 31 May 1952[2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside on Parry Island 0.67 

(= 16/24)

PFtent

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

FB Film badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

λ postopDG Decay exponent for post operation- Shot DOG 1.083

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ postopES Decay exponent for post operation- Shot EASY 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

λ postopIT Decay exponent for post operation- Shot ITEM 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for post-operation for times 

greater than H+6 months

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakDG

TpeakDG

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot DOG

0.083 R hr-1 at H+6

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

IpeakES

TpeakES

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot EASY

0.001 R hr-1 at H+ 24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3) 

IpeakIT 

TpeakIT

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ITEM

0.118 R hr-1 at H+14 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-3)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Soil thickness that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent) and 

ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 5 of 7 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the PostGREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma 

dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

EPG doses in Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the EPG. 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll Residents

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 3 8

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.007 0.004 0.06

Bone Surface 0.3 0.08 3 0.6

Brain <0.001 0.003 0.004 0.02

Breast <0.001 0.006 0.004 0.05

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.01 0.004 0.07

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.02 0.004 0.2

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.09 0.004 0.5

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.3 0.004 2

Kidney 0.001 0.005 0.009 0.04

Liver 0.05 0.02 0.5 0.1

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.002 0.2 0.03 2

Lung 0.005 0.7 0.05 7

Muscle <0.001 0.005 0.004 0.04

Pancreas <0.001 0.006 0.004 0.05

Red Marrow 0.01 0.04 0.1 0.3

Spleen <0.001 0.006 0.004 0.04

Testes 0.003 0.003 0.03 0.02

Thymus <0.001 0.007 0.004 0.06

Thyroid <0.001 0.2 0.004 2

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.006 0.004 0.04

* NPE = no potential for exposure. 

† Organ doses were obtained from Mason (2009) and then adjusted to EPG assumptions. 
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 6 of 7 

The upper-bound doses in Table 4 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and were 

further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound organ 

dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 5. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 9

6. References

Berkhouse, L., Davis, S.E., Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Jones, C.B., Martin, E.J., 

McMullan, F.W., and Osborne, M.J., 1983. Operation GREENHOUSE: 1951, United 

States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel Review. DNA 

6034F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. June 15. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31.
Post-GREENHOUSE Enewetak Atoll

Page 7 of 7 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

Page 1 of 6

Expedited Processing Group: 

Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Post-IVY-Enewetak Atoll Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of approximately 

599 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of Enewetak Atoll 

(Enewetak, Japtan, and Parry Islands) during the period between November 18, 1952 and

February 28, 1954 (Mason, 2009). 

Operation IVY is described in Gladeck et al. (1982) and DTRA (2008, Appendix B-4). After 

the formal end of the operation, individuals remained on Enewetak Atoll to serve as the garrison 

for the Pacific Proving Ground. There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

To estimate EPG doses for Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll personnel, an exposure scenario was 

developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” 

For this EPG, Post-IVY personnel assigned to Enewetak Island who arrived on November 18, 

1952 are identified as the generic highest-dose cohort. Post-IVY personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island are representative of personnel on Enewetak Atoll who received the highest 

dose for post-IVY personnel during the interval between IVY and Operation CASTLE. 

Post-IVY personnel assigned to Enewetak Island form an adequate basis of the generic 

highest-dose cohort scenario (Mason, 2009 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) for this EPG for 

two primary reasons: 

• The group was assigned to Enewetak Atoll similar to most inter-operational personnel. 

• The group had no involvement in unique exposure activities. 

For use with the EPG, the generic highest-dose cohort scenario is augmented with additional 

dose components and assumptions. The basic scenario of participation and radiation exposure of 

the Post-IVY personnel assigned to Enewetak Island scenario is described directly below, 

followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Post-IVY Personnel Assigned 

to Enewetak Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to Enewetak Atoll during the PostIVY inter-operational period, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on 

activities of Post-IVY personnel assigned to Enewetak Island. 
Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

Page 2 of 6

Post-IVY personnel assigned to Enewetak Island had no involvement in unique exposure 

activities, so their only source of exposure was fallout from Operation GREENHOUSE shots and 

Operation IVY shots that were conducted before their assumed arrival. The IVY shots and the 

resulting fallout exposure rates at Enewetak Island are shown in Table 1. Based on these 

exposure rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond, the Post-IVY

personnel assigned to Enewetak Island who lived on Enewetak Island accrued external doses 

from fallout deposited on Enewetak Island while outside and while indoors. Post-IVY personnel 

assigned to Enewetak Island personnel also received internal doses while outdoors during the 

same period from inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil 

and dust (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4). 

Table 1. Operation IVY Detonations that Affected Enewetak Island

Shot Time and Date of 

Detonation (1952)

Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1)

Peak Time 

(H+hr)

MIKE Nov 1 at 0715 0.000041 168

KING May 18 at 1130 0.00012 24

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided

Enewetak Atoll resident cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure to Enewetak Island is assumed to be from November 18, 1952 to 

November 30, 1953. This start date is the end of IVY. The end date corresponds to one year 

later. The internal doses were calculated through a date of March 1, 1954. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning, and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz, et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. .

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 
Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

Page 3 of 6

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll Residents

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from two shots of

Operation IVY

Post-IVY Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island were exposed residual 

radiation due to fallout from Shots 

MIKE and KING. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 

instead of 2. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from two fallout 

episodes

Post-IVY Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from

Shots MIKE and KING.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead 

of 1.2 m3 hr-1.

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from two 

fallout episodes

Post-IVY Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

MIKE and KING.

 
Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

Page 4 of 6

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartPIV Post-IVY start date [time] 18 November 1952 [0000]

DateEndPIV Post-IVY end date [time] 31 November 1953 [2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak Island departure date [time] 31 November 1953 [2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos

Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak

Island 0.67 (= 16/24)

PFtent

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

FB Film badge conversion factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

λ postop Decay exponent for post-operations 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for post-operation for times 

greater than H+6 months

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4)

IpeakDetMK

TpeakDetMK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MIKE

0.000041 R hr-1 at H+168

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

IpeakDetKG

TpeakDetKG

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot KING

0.00012 R hr-1 at H+ 24

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-4) 

DoseGH

Dose due to residual radiation from Operation 

GREENHOUSE

0.01 rem

(Mason, 2009)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Soil thickness 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent) and 

ingestion dose conversion factors 

Per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the Post-IVY 

Enewetak Atoll are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound doses for expedited processing, all 

external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative assumption. This is 
Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

Page 5 of 6

equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by an uncertainty factor 

of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the internal EPG doses by a 

factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust which are estimated as 

upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in Table 4 are not less than the 

upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll Residents

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.03 0.09

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Bone Surface 0.02 0.007 0.2 0.07

Brain <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Breast <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Stomach Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.004

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.009

Kidney <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001

Liver 0.003 0.002 0.03 0.02

Extra-Thoracic Region <0.001 0.001 0.002 0.02

Lung <0.001 0.005 0.003 0.05

Muscle <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Pancreas <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Red Marrow 0.001 <0.001 0.006 0.004

Spleen <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Testes <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001

Thymus <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Thyroid <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.01

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

* NPE = no potential for exposure.

† Organ doses were obtained from Mason (2009) and then adjusted to incorporate EPG assumptions. 

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 
Post-IVY Enewetak Atoll

Page 6 of 6

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R.H., Pozega, R.; Rogers, 

W.E., Rowland, R.H., Shelton, C.F., Berkhouse, L., Davis, S., Doyle, M.K., and Jones, 

C.B., 1982. Operation IVY: 1952, United States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, 

Nuclear Test Personnel Review. DNA 6036F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. Dec 1. 

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

Page 1 of 6

Expedited Processing Group: 

Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Post-CASTLE-Enewetak Atoll Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 1063 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak, Japtan, and Parry Islands) during the period between June 1, 1954

and May 5, 1956 (Mason, 2009). 

Operation CASTLE is described in Martin and Rowland (1982) and DTRA (2008, 

Appendix B-5. After the formal end of the operation, individuals remained on Enewetak Atoll 

to serve as the garrison for the Pacific Proving Ground. There are no specific exclusions for this 

EPG. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

To estimate EPG doses for Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll personnel, an exposure scenario 

was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” 

For this EPG, Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island who arrived on June 1, 

1954 are identified as the generic highest-dose cohort. Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island are representative of personnel on Enewetak Atoll who received the highest 

dose for post-CASTLE personnel during the interval between CASTLE and Operation 

REDWING. 

Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island form an adequate basis of the generic 

highest-dose cohort scenario (Mason, 2009 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) for this EPG for 

two primary reasons: 

• The group was assigned to Enewetak Atoll similar to most inter-operational personnel. 

• The group had no involvement in unique exposure activites. 

For use with the EPG, the generic highest-dose cohort scenario is augmented with additional 

dose components and assumptions. The basic scenario of participation and radiation exposure of 

the Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island scenario is described directly below, 

followed by a description of the dose components and assumptions.
Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

Page 2 of 6

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Post-CASTLE Personnel 

Assigned to Enewetak Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to Enewetak Atoll during the PostCASTLE inter-operational period, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based 

on activities of Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island. 

Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to Enewetak Island had no involvement in unique exposure 

activities, so their only source of exposure was fallout from Operation CASTLE shots that were 

conducted before their assumed arrival. The CASTLE shots and the resulting fallout exposure 

rates at Enewetak Island are shown in Table 1. Based on these exposure rates, decayed to the 

end of the operation and then one year beyond, the Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island who lived on Enewetak Island accrued external doses from fallout deposited on

Enewetak Island while outside and while indoors. Post-CASTLE personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island personnel also received internal doses while outdoors during the same period 

from inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and dust

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5). 

Table 1. Operation CASTLE Detonations that Affected Enewetak Island

Shot Date and Time of 

Detonation (1954)

Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1)

Peak Time 

(H+hr)

BRAVO Mar 1 at 0645 0.01 16

ROMEO Mar 27 at 0630 0.009 77.5

NECTAR May 14 at 0620 0.002 14.7

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

Enewetak Atoll resident cohort analysis: 

• The period of assignment to Enewetak Island is assumed to be from June 1, 1954 to May 31, 

1955. This start date is the first of the month after the last CASTLE Shot. The end date 

corresponds to one year later. The internal doses were calculated through a date of 

May 5, 1956. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning, and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al. 2009). Other 
Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

Page 3 of 6

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll Residents 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from three shots of

Operation CASTLE

Post-CASTLE Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island were exposed to 

residual radiation due to fallout from 

Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, and 

NECTAR. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 instead of 2. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from three fallout 

episodes

Post-CASTLE Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots BRAVO, ROMEO, and 

NECTAR.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from three 

fallout episodes

Post-CASTLE Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

BRAVO, ROMEO, and NECTAR.
Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

Page 4 of 6

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses 

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartPCS Post-CASTLE start date [time] 1 June 1954 [0000]

DateEndPCS Post-CASTLE end date [time] 31 May 1955 [2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak Island departure date [time] 31 May 1955 [2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos

Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak

Island 0.67 (= 16/24)

PFtent

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

FB Film-Badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetBR

TpeakDetBR

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot BRAVO

0.01 R hr-1 at H+16

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

IpeakDetRM

TpeakDetRM

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ROMEO

0.009 R hr-1 at H+ 77.5

 (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

IpeakDetNC 

TpeakDetNC

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot NECTAR

0.002 R hr-1 at H+ 14.7

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 3

Decay exponent for times between H+10 and 

H+48

0.82 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

λ 4

Decay exponent for times between H+48 and 

H+480

1.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5)

λ 5

Decay exponent for times between H+480 and 

H+4380 

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for times greater than H+6 

months

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-5) 

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01) 

Thick Thickness of soil 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent) and 

ingestion dose conversion factors 

Per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

Page 5 of 6

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the PostCASTLE Enewetak Atoll are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose 

from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

internal EPG doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper bound EPG doses in 

Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll Residents

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.3 0.8

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.008

Bone Surface 0.3 0.2 3 2

Brain 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.005

Breast 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.008

Stomach Wall 0.001 0.002 0.006 0.008 

Small Intestine Wall 0.001 0.003 0.006 0.02 

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.009 0.006 0.04

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.03 0.006 0.1

Kidney 0.002 0.001 0.02 0.008

Liver 0.07 0.04 0.7 0.4

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.003 0.01 0.03 0.2

Lung 0.007 0.08 0.07 0.8

Muscle 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.006 

Pancreas 0.004 0.003 0.04 0.03 

Red Marrow 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.007

Spleen 0.02 0.009 0.2 0.08

Testes 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.005

Thymus 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.007

Thyroid 0.005 0.003 0.05 0.03 

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.009 

* NPE = no potential for exposure.

† Organ doses were obtained from Mason (2009) and adjusted to incorporate EPG assumptions. 
Post-CASTLE Enewetak Atoll

Page 6 of 6

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Martin, E.J. and Rowland, R.H. 1982. CASTLE Series, 1954, United States Atmospheric Nuclear 

Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel Review. DNA 6035F, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. April 1.

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 1 of 7 

Expedited Processing Group: 

Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Post-REDWING-Enewetak Atoll Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 4.466 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak, Japtan, and Parry Islands) during the period between August 6, 1956 

and May 11, 1958 (Mason, 2009). 

Operation REDWING is described in Bruce-Henderson et al (1982) and DTRA (2008, 

Appendix B-7). After the formal end of the operation, individuals remained on Enewetak Atoll 

to serve as the garrison for the Pacific Proving Ground. There are no specific exclusions for this 

EPG.

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

To estimate EPG doses for Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll personnel, an exposure scenario 

was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” 

For this EPG, Post-REDWING personnel assigned to Enewetak Island who arrived on August 

6, 1956 are identified as the generic highest-dose cohort. Post-REDWING personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island are representative of personnel on Enewetak Atoll who received the highest 

dose for post-REDWING personnel during the interval between REDWING and Operation 

HARDTACK I. 

Post-REDWING personnel assigned to Enewetak Island form an adequate basis of the generic 

highest-dose cohort scenario (Mason, 2009; DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) for this EPG for two 

primary reasons: 

• The group was assigned to Enewetak Atoll similar to most inter-operational personnel. 

• The group had no involvement in unique exposure activities. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

Enewetak Island resident scenario to produce EPG doses. The Post-REDWING personnel 

assigned to Enewetak Island scenario is described directly below, followed by a description of 

the additional dose components and assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Post-REDWING Personnel 

Assigned to Enewetak Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to Enewetak Atoll during the PostREDWING inter-operational period, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of Post-REDWING personnel assigned to Enewetak Island. 
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 2 of 7 

Post-REDWING personnel assigned to Enewetak Island had no involvement in unique 

exposure activities, so their only source of exposure was fallout from Operation Enewetak shots

that were conducted before their assumed arrival. The REDWING shots and the resulting fallout 

exposure rates at Enewetak Island are shown in Table 1. Based on these exposure rates, decayed 

to the end of the operation and then one year beyond, the Post-REDWING personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island who lived on Enewetak Island personnel accrued external doses from fallout 

deposited on Enewetak Island while outside and while indoors. Post-REDWING personnel 

assigned to Enewetak Island personnel also received internal doses while outdoors during the 

same period from inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil 

and dust (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7). 

Table 1. Operation REDWING Detonations that Affected Enewetak Island

Shot Time and Date of 

Detonation

Peak Exposure Rates

(R hr-1)

Peak Time

(H+hr)

ZUNI May 28, 1956 at 0556 0.00025 11

MOHAWK July 3, 1956 at 0606 0.01194 2.9

APACHE July 9, 1956 at 0606 0.00084 20.9

TEWA July 21, 1956 at 0546 0.1155 26

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided

Enewetak Island resident cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure to Enewetak Island is assumed to be from August 6, 1956 to August 

31, 1957. This start date is the end of REDWING. The end date corresponds to the end of 

the month one year later. The internal doses were calculated through a date of May 12, 1958. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning, and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities is increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 3 of 7 

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll Residents 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from four shots of

Operation 

REDWING

Post-REDWING Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island were exposed residual 

radiation due to fallout from Shots 

ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE, and 

TEWA.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 instead of 2. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from four fallout 

episodes

Post-REDWING Personnel assigned to 

Enewetak Island were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout from 

Shots ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE, 

and TEWA.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust from four 

fallout episodes

Post-REDWING Personnel assigned to

Enewetak Island incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout from Shots 

ZUNI, MOHAWK, APACHE, and 

TEWA.

 
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 4 of 7 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartPRW Post-REDWING start date[time] 6 August, 1956[0000]

DateEndPRW Post-REDWING end date[time] 31 August 1957 [2400]

DateDeparted Enewetak Island departure date[time] 31 August 1957 [2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos

Fraction of time spent outside on Enewetak

Island

0.67 

(= 16/24)

PFtent

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetZN

TpeakDetZN

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot ZUNI

0.00025 R hr-1 at H+11

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakDetMH

TpeakDetMH

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot MOHAWK

0.01194 R hr-1 at H+ 2.9

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

IpeakDetAP

TpeakDetAP

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot APACHE

0.00084 R hr-1 at H+ 20.9

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

IpeakDetTW

TpeakDetTW

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot TEWA

0.1155 R hr-1 at H+ 26

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

λ postop Decay exponent for times less than H+6 months 1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7)

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for times greater than H+6 

months

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-7) 

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent) and 

ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation)

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 5 of 7 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the PostREDWING Enewetak Atoll are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose 

from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculation of upper-bound external doses for 

expedited processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a 

conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the 

total dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by 

multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion 

of soil and dust which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound 

doses in Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of 

the EPG.

The upper-bound doses in Table 5 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ dose (combined external and internal doses) that is close to or exceeds the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 6 of 7 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll Residents

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 2 6

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.05

Bone Surface 0.8 0.3 8 3

Brain 0.002 0.003 0.02 0.02

Breast 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.05

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.009 0.02 0.06

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.02 0.02 0.09

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.07 0.02 0.4

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.2 0.02 1

Kidney 0.004 0.005 0.04 0.04

Liver 0.2 0.05 2 0.5

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.008 0.2 0.08 2

Lung 0.02 0.6 0.2 7

Muscle 0.002 0.004 0.02 0.03

Pancreas 0.002 0.005 0.02 0.04

Red Marrow 0.04 0.03 0.4 0.3

Spleen 0.002 0.005 0.02 0.04

Testes 0.01 0.005 0.2 0.04

Thymus 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06

Thyroid 0.002 0.1 0.02 0.8

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.005 0.02 0.03 * NPE = no potential for exposure.

† Organ doses were obtained from Mason (2009) and adjusted to incorporate EPG assumptions. 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 7
Post-REDWING Enewetak Atoll

Page 7 of 7 

6. References

Bruce-Henderson, S., Gladeck, F.R., Hallowell, J.H., Martin, E.J., McMullan, F.W., Miller, R. 

H., Rogers, W.E., Rowland, C.F., Shelton, C.F, Sturman, P., Berkhouse, L., Davis, S., 

DeSantis, H., Dean, P., Doyle, M.K., and Patterson, D.S., 1982. Operation REDWING: 

1956, United States Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests, Nuclear Test Personnel 

Review. DNA 6037F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. August 1.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

Page 1 of 6

Expedited Processing Group:

Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Post-HARDTACK I-Enewetak Atoll Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 973 personnel that were stationed and billeted on the residence islands of 

Enewetak Atoll (Enewetak and Parry Islands) during the period between August 19, 1958 and

April 24, 1962 (Mason, 2009 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8). 

Operation HARDTACK I is described in Gladeck et al. (1982) and DTRA (2008, 

Appendix B-8. After the formal end of the operation, individuals remained on Enewetak Atoll to 

serve as the garrison for the Pacific Proving Ground. 

The following individuals are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Individuals who resided on Japtan Island during the Post-HARDTACK I period. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

To estimate EPG doses for Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll personnel, an exposure 

scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external 

residual radiation dose and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the 

“highest-dose cohort.” 

For this EPG, Post-HARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island who arrived on July 6, 

1958 are identified as the generic highest-dose cohort. Post-HARDTACK I personnel assigned 

to Parry Island are representative of personnel on Enewetak Atoll who received the highest dose 

for post-HARDTACK I personnel during the interval between HARDTACK I and Operation 

DOMINIC I. 

Post-HARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island form an adequate basis of the generic 

highest-dose cohort scenario (Mason, 2009 and DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) for this EPG for 

two primary reasons: 

• The group was assigned to Enewetak Atoll similar to most inter-operational personnel. 

• The group had no involvement in unique exposure activites. 

For use with the EPG, the generic highest-dose cohort scenario is augmented with additional 

dose components and assumptions. The basic scenario of participation and radiation exposure of 

the Post-HARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island scenario is described directly below, 

followed by a description of the additional dose components and assumptions. 
Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

Page 2 of 6

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: Post-HARDTACK I Personnel 

Assigned to Parry Island

To estimate EPG doses for all military personnel assigned to Enewetak Atoll during the PostHARDTACK I inter-operational period, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of Post-HARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island. 

Post-HARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island had no involvement in unique 

exposure activities, so their only significant source of exposure was fallout from Operation 

HARDTACK I shots that were conducted before their assumed arrival. The HARDTACK I

shots and the resulting fallout exposure rates at Parry Island are shown in Table 1. Based on 

these exposure rates, decayed to the end of the operation and then one year beyond, the PostHARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island who lived on Parry Island accrued external 

doses from fallout deposited on Parry Island while outside and while indoors. PostHARDTACK I personnel assigned to Parry Island also received internal doses while outdoors 

during the same period from inhalation of resuspended fallout, and incidental ingestion of 

contaminated soil and dust (DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8). 

Table 1. Operation HARDTACK I Detonations that Affected Parry Island

Shot Time and Date of 

Detonation

Peak Exposure Rate

(R hr-1)

Peak Time 

(H+hr)

FIR/KOA May 12, 1958 at 0550 0.025* 58*

REDWOOD June 28, 1958 at 0530 0.0003 13.5

OAK June 29, 1958 at 0730 0.002 14

POPLAR July 13, 1958 at 0345 0.0015 12.25

PISONIA July 18, 1958 at 1449 0.034 3.82

* Assumed peak exposure rate and peak time for combined fallout from Shots FIR and 

KOA

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to the high-sided 

Parry Island resident cohort analysis: 

• The period of exposure to Parry Island is assumed to be from July 6, 1958 to August 18, 

1959. This start date is the end of HARDTACK I. The end date corresponds to the end of 

the month one year later. The internal doses were calculated through a date of April 25, 

1962. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors is increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors for sleeping, cleaning, and eating. 

• Although personnel spent their time indoors in either a tent or a metal building, it is assumed 

that 100 percent of the time indoors was in a tent for which the protection factor (protection 

afforded) is 1.5 compared to a building for which the protection factor is 2. 
Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

Page 3 of 6

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50% light activity and 50% moderate activity (Weitz, et al. 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 

Table 2. Exposure pathways for the Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll Residents

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

due to fallout from 

shots of Operation 

HARDTACK I. 

Post-HARDTACK I Personnel 

assigned to Parry Island were exposed 

residual radiation due to fallout from 

Shots FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, OAK, 

POPLAR, and PISONIA. 

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Building protection factor is 1.5 instead of 2. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout

from HARDTACK I 

shots.

Post-HARDTACK I Personnel 

assigned to Parry Island were subjected 

to inhalation of resuspended fallout 

from Shots FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, 

OAK, POPLAR, and PISONIA.

Time outdoors is 16 hr day−1 instead of 

14.4 hr day−1. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr-1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust due to 

residual radiation 

from HARDTACK I 

shots

Post-HARDTACK I Personnel 

assigned to Parry Island incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and 

dust contaminated with fallout from

Shots FIR/KOA, REDWOOD, OAK, 

POPLAR, and PISONIA.
Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

Page 4 of 6

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateStartPHTI Post-HARDTACK I start date[time] 7 July, 1958[0000]

DateEndHTI Post-HARDTACK I end date[time] 31 July 1959 [2400]

DateDeparted Parry Island departure date[time] 31 July 1959 [2400]

EXTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside on Parry Island 0.67 

(= 16/24)

PFtent

Protection factor while indoors, assumed inside a 

tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02) 

FB Film-badge conversion Factor 0.7 rem R-1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

IpeakDetFK

TpeakDetFK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot FIR/KOA

0.025 R hr-1 at H+58

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetFK

TpeakDetFK

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot REDWOOD

0.0007 R hr-1 at H+ 13.5

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

IpeakDetAP

TpeakDetAP

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot OAK

0.0025 R hr-1 at H+ 14

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetPO

TpeakDetPO

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot POPLAR

0.0015 R hr-1 at H+ 12.25

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

IpeakDetPI

TpeakDetPI

Peak exposure rate and time of peak exposure 

rate due to fallout from Shot PISONIA

0.034 R hr-1 at H+ 3.82

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

λ postop

Decay exponent for the first six months after 

detonation

1.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8) 

λ 6mon

Decay exponent for more than six months after 

detonation

2.2

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix B-8)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of soil that can be resuspended 0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

DCFinhFBE

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation (film-badge equivalent) and 

ingestion dose conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (select maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)
Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

Page 5 of 6

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper-Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the PostHARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma 

dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent 

components of the EPG dose. However, for calculations of upper-bound doses for expedited 

processing, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative 

assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper-bound doses by multiplying the total dose by 

an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 1 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll Residents

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.4 1

Initial Gamma* NPE NPE

Neutron* NPE NPE

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.009

Bone Surface 0.4 0.05 4 0.5

Brain 0.001 <0.001 0.006 0.004

Breast 0.001 0.0001 0.006 0.007

Stomach Wall 0.001 0.002 0.006 0.02

Small Intestine Wall 0.001 0.004 0.006 0.02

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.02 0.006 0.2

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.06 0.006 0.4

Kidney 0.002 0.007 0.02 0.06

Liver 0.07 0.01 0.7 0.1

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.004 0.03 0.04 0.4

Lung 0.008 0.1 0.08 1

Muscle 0.007 0.001 0.006 0.005

Pancreas 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.007

Red Marrow 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.05

Spleen 0.001 0.006 0.006 0.05

Testes 0.005 0.001 0.05 0.007

Thymus 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.008

Thyroid 0.001 0.003 0.006 0.02

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.001 0.002 0.006 0.02

* NPE = no potential for exposure. 

† Organ doses were obtained from Mason (2009) and adjusted to incorporate EPG assumptions. 
Post-HARDTACK I Enewetak Atoll

Page 6 of 6

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Gladeck, F. R., Gould, K. G., Hallowell, J. H., Martin, E. J., McMullan, F. W., Miller, 

R.A.,Osborn, M. J., Shelton, C. F., Berkhouse, L., and Calhoun, F. S., 1982. Operation 

HARDTACK I: 1958. DNA 6038F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

December 1. 

Mason, C., 2009. Doses Accrued at the Residence Islands of Enewetak Atoll from Previous 

Operations. NTPR-TM-09-02, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

December 31.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide (Revision 4). DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

Weitz, R.L., 2010. Formulation of the Gamma Source Modification Factor for Ship-based 

Applications (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-04 (R1), Defense Threat Reduction Agency, 

Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
Proposed NTPR

Expedited Processing Groups

CONUS Series

November 2011
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure for 

Expedited Processing

NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops 

(1951–1962) 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 1 of 25 

Expedited Processing Group: 

NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962) 

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Nevada Test Site (NTS) Observer and Maneuver Troop Expedited Processing Group 

(EPG) consists of Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force personnel who participated in an

observer or maneuver program during any one of the eight NTS test series from 1951 through 

1962. This EPG primarily consists of observer and maneuver troops who participated in 

Exercise Desert Rock (EDR) programs starting with EDR I in 1951 through EDR VII in 1958. 

These personnel were short-term assignees to Camp Desert Rock (CDR) who participated in 

formal EDR troop observer or tactical troop maneuver programs. Also included are some CDR 

support personnel who were participants in Exercise IVY FLATS in 1962. Although not all EPG 

members were stationed at CDR for the same period of time (see below), activities that may have 

resulted in exposure to residual radiation and the sources of residual radiation resulting in 

exposure of these troops were similar. Therefore, it is reasonable to include participants from all 

NTS test series into a single EPG.

During the eight relevant test series that were conducted at the NTS from 1951 to 1962,

approximately 42,600 members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force participated as

official observers and in tactical troop maneuvers (Table 1). Observer and maneuver troops were 

typically billeted at CDR. Most of these troops traveled from their home station to CDR 

specifically to participate in observer or maneuver activities. These troops spent only a short 

time at CDR (e.g., 1–2 weeks), and their participation consisted solely as observer or maneuver 

troops. Other observer and maneuver troops were composed of CDR support troops, i.e., those 

troops who provided support functions for the camp or conducted EDR activities. These troops 

were drawn from units of the Sixth Army, and were generally stationed at the camp throughout 

the series, although many did not remain for the entire period. Only those CDR support troops 

whose CDR support assignment did not require them to routinely enter the forward test area are

included in this EPG (e.g., administration, mess services, band, and laundry services personnel) 

(e.g., Ponton et al., 1982a). 

As described above, this EPG generally consists of military personnel who participated only as 

an observer or maneuver troop during any one of the eight NTS test series. However, doses in 

this EPG should not be assigned to any observer or maneuver participant for whom any of the 

general exclusions for NTS personnel are applicable. This includes CDR support troops who are 

known to have participated in or supported maneuvers and may have also been required to enter 

the forward test area to help prepare for later EDR activities, assist in operations during a test 

event, or help with recovery operations after other shots. In addition to the general exclusions, 

the following individuals, units, cohorts, or individuals are excluded from expedited processing 

under this EPG: 

• Individuals who participated in one of the Volunteer Observer Programs conducted during 

some of the test series. Volunteer observers—typically officers—were positioned in trenches 

well forward of other observers, and they did not always participate in all observer activities. 

• Any individuals who participated in more than one maneuver group at more than one shot. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 2 of 25 

• Individuals who were members of the 2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

at UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE Shot BADGER or Task Force WARRIOR at PLUMBBOB Shot 

SMOKY (EDR VII/VIII Project 50.1). These groups are each evaluated in a different EPG.

Two Appendices describe dose analyses for specific groups that are included in this EPG, even 

though their activities might otherwise cause them to be excluded. Appendix A describes a dose 

analysis for CDR support troops who were members of the 505th Military Police Battalion that 

participated during Operations UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE or TEAPOT. Members of the 505th

Military Police Battalion would normally be excluded from any EPGs based on the general 

exclusion relating to routine forward area activities. Appendix B describes a dose analysis for a 

maneuver group (Task Force BIG BANG) that participated during Operation PLUMBBOB. 

This group was originally a distinct EPG, but as described in Appendix B they may be included 

in this EPG. Based on the magnitude of the calculated doses listed in these two, Appendices,

personnel in both of these units may be included in the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop

EPG, provided that no other general exclusions apply. 

Table 1. Approximate Number of Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force 

Observer and Maneuver Troop Participants in NTS Test Series

NTS Test Series

(year) Program(s) Observer Troops 

Maneuver 

Troops Totals 

RANGER (1951)* - 3 0 3

BUSTER-JANGLE 

(1951) 

EDR I, II, III

Troop Observer, and

Troop Maneuver

3,127 1,095 4,222 

TUMBLER-SNAPPER 

(1952) 

EDR IV

Troop Observer, and

Tactical Troop Maneuvers

2,850 4,875 7,725 

UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE 

(1953) 

EDR V

Troop Orientation and

Indoctrination, and Tactical 

Troop Maneuvers

4,480 11,125 15,605 

TEAPOT (1955) EDR VI

Service and Troop Observers 

(Projects 41.3, 41.4, 40.11, 41.7, 

41.8), and

Troop Tests (Projects 41.2, 41.6)

4,600 3,271 7,871 

PLUMBBOB (1957) EDR VII, VIII

Troop Observers (Projects 50.2 

and 52,2), and Troop Maneuvers 

(Projects 50.1, 52.1 and Task 

Force BIG BANG)

4,631 1,517 6,148 

HARDTACK-II (1958)† - 0 0 0

DOMINIC-II (1962) Exercise IVY FLATS 500 549 1,049

Totals 20,191 22,432 42,623

* During RANGER, a brigadier general assigned to the Atomic Energy Commission, a Marine officer assigned to 

Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, and a Navy officer assigned to the U.S. Public Health Service may have 

observed one or more shots from south of the Control Point (Maag et al., 1982). † There were no military observer or maneuver troops at HARDTACK-II; listed here only for completeness 

(Ponton et al., 1982b).
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 3 of 25 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop 

EPG

An exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort group that received the 

highest external dose and associated internal doses from residual radiation. This cohort is 

referred to as the “highest-dose cohort”. Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are 

not taken into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are 

not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not 

associated with accrual of internal doses. 

For this EPG, the activities of Battalion Combat Team Able (BCT-A) at Shot SIMON during 

Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE form the basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario 

(Part IV of DTRA, 2008). The SIMON BCT-A scenario forms an adequate basis for the generic 

highest-dose cohort scenario for this EPG for two primary reasons:

• This group received the largest external gamma dose from residual radiation for all NTS 

observer and maneuver troops.

• The activities of this group are well-documented and are representative of other NTS 

observer and maneuver troops.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

SIMON BCT-A scenario (Edwards et al., 1985) to produce maximized doses. The basic SIMON 

BCT A scenario is described directly below, followed by a description of the additional 

maximizing assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: SIMON BCT-A Scenario

Approximately 2,450 Army and Air Force troops participated in the maneuver at Shot 

SIMON. These troops were roughly divided into halves to form two BCTs. The maneuver 

troops arrived at CDR by April 22, 1953, with some troops arriving as early as April 19. On 

April 22, an orientation at CDR was provided for BCT-A, and a rehearsal of the shot-day 

activities was conducted in the forward test area on April 23. At shot time (0430 on April 25) all 

maneuver troops were in trenches 4,000 yards from ground zero (GZ). Fourteen minutes after 

the blast, both BCTs began their simulated attack to their objectives. The advance continued 

until the BCT-A radiological monitors ordered a halt. The troops then began moving northwest 

to avoid high radiation exposure rates. The forward advance was again halted at 0600 hours at a 

location about 1,400 yards from GZ. BCT-A then turned around and moved to the 2000-yard 

line of the equipment display area for an examination of the equipment there. The BCT troops 

then moved back to the trench area, examining the display equipment along the way. At the 

trench area, the troops mustered and then boarded vehicles for the return to CDR, departing at 

about 0800-0815 hours. The point values of exposure rates estimated from contour plots and the 

modeled exposure rate function encountered by the BCT-A troops during the maneuver and 

display area tour are depicted in Figure 1 (DTRA, 2008; Edwards et al., 1985). 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 4 of 25 

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4

10-2

10-1

100

101

Point Estimate

Modeled Function

Figure 1. Residual Exposure Rates Encountered by SIMON BCT-A Maneuver Troops

during Maneuver and Display Area Tour

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to or substituted into 

the highest-dose cohort analysis (SIMON BCT-A scenario) are described below. 

Members of SIMON BCT-A were at CDR for approximately eight days, and the typical period 

of assignment to CDR was less than one month. However, some CDR support troops in this 

EPG may have been stationed at CDR for extended periods of time. Therefore, a 3-month period 

of assignment at CDR was used for the EPG analysis. This corresponds to the 3-month period

starting on the day of fallout at CDR and ending one month after the end of the operation. This 

maximizes the exposure to fallout deposited at CDR (DTRA, 2008; VA, 2010). 

Members of SIMON BCT-A were exposed to fallout at CDR. Fallout from four NTS shots is 

known to have been deposited at CDR:

• Shot CHARLIE, Operation TUMBLER-SNAPPER (1952). 

• Shot BADGER, Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE (1953). 

• Shot POST, Operation TEAPOT (1955). 

• Shot WILSON, Operation PLUMBBOB (1957). 

In order to maximize both external and internal doses from fallout at CDR, it is assumed that a 

member of this EPG was exposed to Shot POST fallout, which resulted in the largest total organ 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 5 of 25 

doses of any of the fallout events. (DTRA, 2008). External and internal doses from Shot POST 

fallout were calculated for this EPG. 

Members of SIMON BCT-A were not exposed to descending fallout. However, some 

members of the EPG were at CDR during periods of descending fallout there. Therefore, 

exposure to descending POST fallout at CDR was included as a maximizing dose pathway for all 

members of the EPG. 

The number of hours spent outdoors at CDR by observer and maneuver troops was increased 

from the CDR default of 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours each day were spent in a tent while

sleeping, cleaning and eating. This affects the internal and external doses from fallout at CDR. 

The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of a 

mix of 50 percent light activity and 50 percent moderate activity Weitz et al. (2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, 

result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Some members of the EPG were subject to inhalation doses from blast-driven resuspension of 

previously-deposited fallout. Such doses are included in the EPG analysis and are based on the 

highest organ doses from blast effects for any NTS observer or maneuver group. Scenarios for 

which previously-calculated doses exist for observer and maneuver troops that were exposed to 

blast-driven resuspension include the participation at the following shots (DTRA, 2008):

• Shot FOX, Operation TUMBLER-SNAPPER (1952). 

• Shots ANNIE, NANCY, HARRY and BADGER, Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE (1953). 

• Shots TESLA, BEE, APPLE I and APPLE II, Operation TEAPOT (1955). 

• Shot BOLTZMANN, Operation PLUMBBOB (1957). 

In order to maximize internal doses, it is assumed that all members of this EPG were exposed 

to blast-driven resuspended fallout corresponding to the observers at Operation UPSHOTKNOTHOLE Shot HARRY. Doses for these exposures were calculated using the current 

recommended effective resuspension factors for blast effects, and were adjusted to account for a 

breathing rate higher than the default value (DTRA, 2008; Kocher et al., 2009).

Exposure pathways for the maximized scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for 

the primary parameters in the maximized external and internal dose analyses are shown in 

Table 3. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 6 of 25 

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

during maneuver and 

display area tour

SIMON BCT-A troops were 

exposed to the SIMON fallout 

radiation field between about 

H+0.23 and H+3.3

Residual radiation 

from fallout at billet 

location

EPG members were exposed to 

POST fallout at CDR from their 

arrival date until departure. 

Assignment at CDR is approximately 

91 days instead of 8 days. 

Number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

descending fallout at 

CDR

Members of the EPG were exposed 

to descending POST fallout at CDR.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

during maneuver and 

display area tour

SIMON BCT-A troops inhaled 

resuspended fallout during the entire 

period of their maneuver and 

display area tour. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of blastdriven resuspended 

fallout, deposited by 

earlier shots, during 

display area tour

Members of the EPG were exposed 

to blast-driven resuspended fallout, 

as estimated for observers at Shot 

HARRY. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout at 

CDR

SIMON BCT-A troops inhaled 

resuspended fallout while outdoors 

at CDR from their arrival date until 

their departure. 

Inhalation of resuspended fallout at 

CDR for approximately 91 days instead

of 8 days. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Incidental ingestion of 

contaminated soil/dust 

at CDR

SIMON BCT-A troops incurred 

doses from incidental ingestion of 

soil and dust contaminated with 

fallout at CDR, from their arrival 

date until departure. 

Incidental ingestion of fallout at CDR 

for approximately 91 days instead of 8 

days.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 7 of 25 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived CDR start date[time] (day of fallout at CDR) 9 Apr 55[1348]

DateDeparted CDR end date[time] (1 month after end of 

operation)

10 Jul 55[1200]

EXTERNAL DOSE

ST Departure time from trenches to start maneuver H+0.23 (14 min)

- Departure time from trench area after maneuver 

and display area tour

H+3.3

Ratewalk Walk rates during maneuver and display area 

tour

30–70 yd min−1

LT1 Linger time at 450-yard line 5 min

LT2 - LT5 Linger time at each display (at 2,000, 2,500, 

3,000, and 3,500 yards)

5 min

Int(t) Residual exposure rates encountered by 

maneuver troops during maneuver and display 

area tour

see Figure 1

IntCDR Peak POST exposure rate at CDR 0.0014 R hr−1

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-6)

Tpkint Time of peak POST exposure rate at CDR H+12.8

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-6) 

- Duration of exposure to POST fallout at CDR 2216 hr

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 0.67 

(= 16/24)

Ftent Fraction of indoor time at CDR spent in a tent 1.0

PFt Protection factor while indoors at CDR (tent) 1.5

TWSF Time-Weighted Shielding Factor for time at 

CDR (calculated using Fos, Ftent, and PFt) 0.889 

λ Default fallout exposure rate decay exponent 

for times less than 6 months after shot (used as 

[H+hours]λ

) 

−1.2 

FB Film badge equivalent conversion factor 0.7 rem R−1

(DTRA, 2010)

UFext Upper bound factor for external doses 3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1 

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

Kpc, Kbw Resuspension factors for fallout in precursor 

(thermal pulse) or blast wave regions due to 

detonation effects

Kpc = 110-3 m−1

Kbw = 110-4 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1 

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01) 

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

DCFInh

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose 

conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (selected maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

UFint Upper bound factor for internal doses 10 

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 8 of 25 

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for NTS Observer 

and Maneuver Troops are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose from 

residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components 

of the EPG dose. However, for expedited processing doses, all external dose components are 

assumed to be correlated as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper 

bound external doses by multiplying the total external dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The 

upper bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 

10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust, and from inhalation of blastdriven resuspended fallout, which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The 

upper-bound EPG doses in Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued 

by any member of the EPG.

The upper-bound doses in Table 4 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. However, the upperbound EPG doses do not include contributions from initial radiation, which must be considered 

for cases involving certain organs before processing these cases using expedited processing. 

Several cohorts that are included in this EPG received neutron and initial gamma doses while 

participating as observers or maneuver troops. For most of the cohorts these doses are less than 

1 rem (Weitz and Egbert, 2010) and have no effect on whether a total upper-bound organ dose 

that includes the initial doses is close to or exceeds either the corresponding screening dose or 

the dose corresponding to 40% probability of causation (DTRA, 2011). However, several 

cohorts received initial neutron or gamma upper-bound doses higher than 1 rem. Of those

cohorts with high initial doses, the only cohort for whom consideration of initial doses makes a 

difference with regard to the comparison of total organ doses with screening doses is the 

observers at Shot TESLA during Operation TEAPOT (Weitz and Egbert, 2010). The upperbound initial doses for this cohort are 4 rem from neutrons and 1 rem from initial gamma 

radiation. 

To assess the impacts of initial doses on expedited processing decisions for members of this 

EPG, total upper-bound organ doses (combined upper-bounds for EPG external, EPG internal, 

and initial doses) were calculated for all organs. The upper-bound initial doses for TESLA 

observers were used in order to cover all cohorts in the EPG. The resulting total upper-bound 

organ doses that are close to or exceed corresponding screening doses (DTRA, 2011) for the 

specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG are listed in Table 5. The total upperbound organ dose is deemed close to the screening dose for the corresponding cancer model if 

the estimated probability of causation is equal to or higher than 40 percent (DTRA, 2011). 

Because of the potential for initial doses for some members of this EPG, in cases involving any 

of the organs listed in Table 5 the EPG upper-bound doses may not be appropriate for 

assignment to members of this EPG without further analysis as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 9 of 25 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops 

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 4 10 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.01 0.008 0.02

Bone Surface 2 0.1 5 0.2

Brain 0.002 0.004 0.008 0.006

Breast 0.002 0.009 0.008 0.01

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.02 0.008 0.05

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.03 0.008 0.07

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.2 0.008 0.2

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.3 0.008 0.4

Kidney 0.005 0.007 0.02 0.009

Liver 0.3 0.02 1 0.03

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.02 0.4 0.05 0.7

Lung 0.03 2 0.1 2

Muscle 0.002 0.007 0.008 0.009

Pancreas 0.002 0.008 0.008 0.02

Red Marrow 0.06 0.04 0.3 0.05

Spleen 0.002 0.007 0.008 0.01

Testes 0.02 0.003 0.06 0.005

Thymus 0.002 0.01 0.008 0.02

Thyroid 0.002 0.5 0.008 0.8

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.009 0.008 0.02

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are treated separately and are based on the actual participant’s exposure 

conditions at the time of detonations. 

† Internal doses for this EPG are dominated by the dose from the inhalation of blast-driven resuspended fallout for 

which only upper bound values are evaluated. The contributions to EPG and upper bound EPG doses from 

inhalation of blast-driven resuspended fallout are numerically equal.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 10 of 25 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops 

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard 

Organ 

Total Upper-Bound Organ Dose 

(External + Internal + Initial) 

(rem)

Total upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Liver Liver 16

Thyroid Thyroid 16

Total upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Gallbladder Liver 16

Bile Duct Liver 16

Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia Red Bone Marrow 16

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

Edwards, R., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1985. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Maneuver 

Troops, Exercise Desert Rock V, Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE. DNA-TR-84-303, 

Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. October 15.

Kocher, D.C., Trabalka, J.R., Apostoaei, A.I., 2009. Derivation of Effective Resuspension 

Factors in Scenarios for Inhalation Exposure Involving Resuspension of PreviouslyDeposited Fallout by Nuclear Detonations at Nevada Test Site. DTRA-TR-09-15, 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Maag, C., Rohrer, S., and Shepanek, R., 1982. Operation RANGER, Shots ABLE, BAKER, 

EASY, BAKER-2, FOX, 25 January – 6 February 1951. DNA 6022F, Defense Nuclear 

Agency, Washington, DC. February 26. 

Ponton, J., Massie, J., Maag C., Shepanek, R., and Rohrer, S., 1982a. Operation UPSHOTKNOTHOLE, 1953. DNA 6014F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC.

January 11. 

Ponton, J., Rohrer, S., Maag, C., Shepanek, R., and Gravitis, I., 1982b. Operation HARDTACK 

II, 1958. DNA 6026F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. December 3. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 11 of 25 

Guide Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.

VA (Department of Veterans Affairs), 2010. “Disease subject to presumptive service 

connection”, Title 38, Part 3.309, Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=%2Findex.tpl. Accessed 

October 18. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R. L., and Egbert, S. D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric 

Test Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.
This page intentionally left blank.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 12 of 25 

Appendix A Dose Analysis for the 505th Military Police Battalion at 

Operations UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE and TEAPOT

This Appendix addresses the dose evaluation for Army personnel who were assigned to the 

505th Military Police Battalion (505 MPB) with temporary duty at CDR, Nevada during 

Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE (1953) or TEAPOT (1955). Because of their routine duties in 

NTS forward areas, these troops would normally be excluded from any EPGs. The purpose of 

the analysis in this Appendix is to describe the evaluation of their doses and provide justification 

for including them in the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG.

A-1 Description of the Group

The group addressed here is composed of members of the 505 MPB that participated at the 

NTS in 1953 or 1955. This group of military police (MP) provided routine MP duties at CDR 

during UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE and TEAPOT. Their mission also included providing traffic 

control for all military vehicular movement at the NTS during EDR activities. In this capacity, 

the MPs were exposed to residual radiation in the NTS forward test area during rehearsals and 

shot-day activities for the 14 shots involving military participation in a shot area during these 

two operations. As CDR support personnel, these troops also participated in a maneuver, and 

likely also participated as observers at a detonation. Therefore, the 505 MPB activities that may 

have resulted in exposure to residual radiation and the sources of residual radiation resulting in 

exposure were similar to those of the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG, and it is 

reasonable to consider including them in the larger EPG provided that they do not meet any other 

general exclusions (DTRA, 2011; Edwards et al., 1985; Frank, 1982; Goetz et al., 1981). 

A-2 Basis for 505 MPB Dose Analysis

The exposure scenarios of individual 505 MPB members while conducting their forward test 

area duties were similar for all members of the 505 MPB, although participation at specific shots 

may have differed. In order to control the vehicular movements of all participating groups, the 

MPs were assigned tasks in two general categories, Traffic Control (TC) and March Unit Guide 

(MG). TC duties involved postings at road junctions leading into and out of a shot area before 

and following a detonation, and MG duties involved leading march units to and from the troop 

trench areas. Both of these general duties are described in more detail below (Frank, 1982).

Traffic Control: Personnel of the 505 MPB assigned to this duty were posted at road junctions 

along the route leading into and out of the shot area. These men (one or two men at each 

location) were posted approximately 30 minutes prior to the arrival of the first march unit, and 

they remained at these posts until the last march unit had passed. They were then picked up and 

taken to a parking area where they remained during the detonation. Shortly after the detonation, 

the MPs were again posted at the road junctions along the planned route. The MPs were picked 

up and returned to CDR after the last convoy elements had passed.

March Unit Guides: MPs were also assigned to the march units participating in the shot 

activities to assist in the movement of the vehicles into and out of the shot areas. March units 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 13 of 25 

were established for the control group, troop maneuver units, and troop observer units. The MPs 

traveled in jeeps at the front of each march unit. The MPs led the march units to the troop 

trenches, and then led the trucks to a parking area where they remained during the detonation. 

When the trucks were called back to the troop loading area, the MPs again led the march units. 

They remained at the loading area while the troops loaded onto the trucks and then led the 

elements of the convoy back to CDR.

A-3 Highest-Dose Exposure Scenario

There are three 505 MPB cohorts considered: Co. C that was assigned to CDR for all of 

Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE (1953); Co. A that was assigned to CDR from January 4–

March 2, 1955 (Operation TEAPOT); and Co. C that was assigned to CDR from March 2– 

May 13, 1955 (Operation TEAPOT). Note that although Co. C was assigned to CDR for 

multiple operations, individual members of the unit may not have been present for more than one 

operation. To estimate bounding doses for all 505 MPB troops participating at either UPSHOTKNOTHOLE or TEAPOT, an exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the cohort 

group that received the highest external dose and associated internal doses from residual 

radiation while participating during a single operation. The highest-dose cohort scenario is Co. 

C that was assigned to CDR during the entire UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE series (henceforth referred 

to simply as “Co. C”). In addition to routine MP duties at CDR, members of Co. C participated 

in rehearsals and shot-day activities for the seven UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE shots in the forward 

test area involving military participation (Shots ANNIE, NANCY, BADGER, SIMON, 

ENCORE, HARRY, and GRABLE). In the forward area, the MPs were assigned tasks in two 

major categories, traffic control and march unit guide as described above. As a maximizing 

technique, the generic Co. C MP is assumed to have participated in the activity at each shot that 

resulted in the largest external dose. This implies performing march guide duty at Shots ANNIE, 

NANCY, HARRY and GRABLE, and traffic control duty at Shots BADGER and SIMON. 

There was no involvement in a contaminated area for ENCORE. (Frank, 1982; Ortlieb, 1991; 

Philips, 1983).

Other activities involving Co. C personnel may have included participation in a maneuver as 

part of Battalion Combat Team-A at Shot ANNIE, and participation as part of the over 500 CDR 

support troops that participated in the observer program at Shot HARRY. For the purpose of 

evaluating the Co C. doses, it is assumed to be unlikely that a member of Co. C participated in 

both the ANNIE observer program and the HARRY maneuver program. Participation as a 

maneuver troop at ANNIE would have fulfilled the goal to have all CDR support troops observe 

a detonation, making it unnecessary to also participate at HARRY. Likewise, if an individual 

conducted MP duties at ANNIE instead of participating in the maneuver, it is more likely that 

they would have participated in the observer program at Shot HARRY. Because the external 

gamma dose for observers at HARRY is larger than the external gamma dose for maneuver 

troops at ANNIE, it is assumed for this analysis that Co. C participated in the observer program 

at Shot HARRY and conducted MP duties at Shot ANNIE. (Edwards, et al., 1985; Goetz et al., 

1981).

505 MPB personnel were assigned to CDR during periods of fallout there, so exposure to 

descending POST fallout at CDR (during TEAPOT) is assumed for the analysis (Edwards, et al., 

1985; Frank, 1982; Goetz et al., 1981). 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 14 of 25 

Other assumptions similar to those used in the NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG were used 

for the analysis of Co. C doses, such as departure from CDR one month after the end of the 

operation. In particular, the exposure pathways described in Table A-1 were incorporated.

Table A-1. Exposure Pathways for Co. C, 505th Military Police

Exposure Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation during 

MP duties in the forward 

test area

Co. C troops conducted MP guide 

duty at Shots ANNIE, NANCY, 

HARRY and GRABLE, and MP 

traffic control duty at Shots 

BADGER and SIMON

Residual radiation during 

display area tour

Co. C troops participated as 

observers at UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE 

shot HARRY. 

Residual radiation from 

fallout at billet location

Co. C troops were exposed to fallout 

at CDR from the date of fallout until 

the end of the operation

(approximately 63 days). 

Assignment at CDR ends one month 

after the end of the operation, 

approximately 92 days after CDR 

fallout instead of 63 days.

Number of hours outside is 16 hr 

day−1 instead of 14.4 hr day−1.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of descending 

fallout at CDR

Co. C troops were exposed to 

descending fallout at CDR.

Breathing rate of 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

during MP duties in the 

forward area.

Co. C troops were exposed to 

resuspended fallout while at their 

duty locations in the forward test 

areas on 7 shot days.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

during display area tour

Co. C troops inhaled resuspended 

contaminants during the entire period 

of their display area tour. 

Inhalation of resuspended HARRY 

fallout with a breathing rate of 

2 m3 hr-1 instead of 1.2 m3 hr−1.

Inhalation of ,blastdriven resuspended 

fallout, deposited by 

earlier shots, during 

display area tour

Co. C troops were exposed to blastdriven resuspended fallout at Shot 

HARRY test area. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout at 

CDR

Co. C troops were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended fallout at 

CDR from the date of fallout until 

the end of the operation 

(approximately 63 days). 

Assignment at CDR ends one month 

after the end of the operation, 

approximately 92 days after CDR 

fallout instead of 63 days.

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr-1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Number of hours outside is 16 hr 

day−1 instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Incidental ingestion of 

contaminated soil/dust at 

CDR

Co. C troops incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with fallout at CDR, 

from the date of fallout until the end 

of the operation (approximately 

63 days).

Assignment at CDR ends one month 

after the end of the operation, 

approximately 92 days after CDR 

fallout instead of 63 days.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 15 of 25 

A-4 Doses and Upper Bounds

The external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for Co. C, 505 MPB are 

summarized in Table A-2. The upper-bound external gamma dose from residual radiation is 

calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components of the total dose. 

However, for the expedited processing analysis, all external dose components are assumed to be 

correlated as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper bound external 

doses by multiplying the total external dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper bound 

internal doses are calculated by multiplying the total internal doses by a factor of 10, except 

doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust, and from inhalation of blast-driven 

resuspended fallout, which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upperbound doses in Table A-2 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any 

member of the 505 MPB that participated at UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE or TEAPOT.

A-5 Comparison of 505 MPB Doses to NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG Doses

In order to support inclusion of members of the 505 MPB that participated at Operation 

UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE or Operation TEAPOT in the larger NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop 

EPG, a comparison of the upper-bound doses has been made. The upper-bound doses for the 

NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG are shown in Table 4, and the 505 MPB upper-bound 

doses are in Table A-2. Ratios of the respective upper-bound doses are shown in Table A-3. 

Ratios greater than 1.0 indicate that the 505 MPB dose is larger than the respective NTS 

Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG dose. 

The dose ratios in Table A-3 show that the Co. C, 505 MPB doses are very similar to the 

corresponding NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG doses. All corresponding external and 

internal doses are within a factor of 2 of each other, and most 505 MPB doses are equal to or less 

than corresponding NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG doses. The largest difference in doses is 

that for the external gamma dose, for which the 505 MPB upper-bound dose is 1 rem lower than 

the corresponding NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG doses. Differences in upper-bound 

internal doses are much smaller: the largest difference is 0.1 rem for the beta+gamma dose to 

lower large intestine wall (ratio is 1.2). The relatively large dose ratio of 2.0 for beta+gamma 

doses to breast represents an actual dose difference of only 0.01 rem. 

For evaluating whether the 505 MPB may be included in the NTS Observer and Maneuver 

Troop EPG, two points relevant to the doses are considered. These points are important to an 

understanding of the total organ doses, and their subsequent use in the NTPR Program.

• The 505 MPB upper-bound external dose is 1 rem lower than that of the NTS Observer and 

Maneuver Troop EPG. 

• For internal organ doses for which the 505 MP dose is larger than the corresponding NTS 

Observer and Maneuver EPG dose, no 505 MP dose is more than 0.1 rem larger than the 

corresponding NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG dose. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 16 of 25 

Table A-2. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

the 505 MPB at UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE or TEAPOT 

External Doses Dose (rem) Upper-Bound Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 3 9

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.002 0.01 0.008 0.02

Bone Surface 1 0.1 5 0.2

Brain 0.002 0.004 0.008 0.006

Breast 0.002 0.009 0.008 0.02

Stomach Wall 0.002 0.02 0.008 0.05

Small Intestine Wall 0.002 0.03 0.008 0.06

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.2 0.008 0.2

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.002 0.3 0.008 0.5

Kidney 0.005 0.007 0.02 0.01

Liver 0.3 0.02 1 0.03

Extrathoracic Region 0.01 0.4 0.05 0.7

Lung 0.03 1 0.1 2

Muscle 0.002 0.007 0.008 0.009

Pancreas 0.002 0.008 0.008 0.02

Red Marrow 0.06 0.04 0.3 0.05

Spleen 0.002 0.008 0.008 0.01

Testes 0.02 0.003 0.07 0.005

Thymus 0.002 0.01 0.008 0.02

Thyroid 0.002 0.5 0.008 0.8

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.002 0.009 0.008 0.02

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are treated separately and are based on the actual participant’s 

exposure conditions at the time of detonations. 

† Internal doses for this cohort are dominated by the dose from the inhalation of blast-driven 

resuspended fallout for which only upper bound values are evaluated. The contributions to total and 

upper bound doses from inhalation of blast-driven resuspended fallout are numerically equal.

Subsequent use of doses assigned to a veteran in the NTPR program involves an evaluation of 

the likelihood that the total organ dose is the cause of the veteran’s disease. Because the large 

difference in external doses (1 rem) far exceeds the small differences in internal doses for any 

organ (0.1 rem maximum), total organ doses for all organs in the NTS Observer and Maneuver

EPG are much larger than those estimated for the 505 MPB. The small differences in internal 

organ doses, especially at the level of these doses, are insignificant with regard to the likelihood

that they might be the cause of a veteran’s disease. Therefore, including the 505 MPB

UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE and TEAPOT troops in the larger NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop 

EPG will not result in any meaningful underestimates of any organ doses for any member of the 

505 MPB participating at Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE or Operation TEAPOT. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 17 of 25 

Table A-3. Comparison of Doses for 505 MPB and NTS 

Observer & Maneuver Troop EPGs 

Upper-bound Dose Ratios

(505 MPB / NTS ObsMan EPG)

External Dose Ratio 0.9

Internal Dose Ratios for

Standard NTPR Organs Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 1.0 1.0

Bone Surface 1.0 1.0

Brain 1.0 1.0

Breast 1.0 2.0 (0.01)*

Stomach Wall 1.0 1.0

Small Intestine Wall 1.0 0.9

Upper Large Intestine Wall 1.0 1.0

Lower Large Intestine Wall 1.0 1.2 (0.1)

Kidney 1.0 1.1 (0.001)

Liver 1.0 1.0

Extra-Thoracic Region 1.0 1.0

Lung 1.0 1.0

Muscle 1.0 1.0

Pancreas 1.0 2.0 (0.01)

Red Marrow 1.0 1.0

Spleen 1.0 1.0

Testes 1.2 (0.01) 1.0

Thymus 1.0 1.0

Thyroid 1.0 1.0

Urinary Bladder Wall 1.0 1.0

* For dose ratios greater than 1.0, the amount (rem) that the 505 MPB dose exceeds the 

NTS Observer Maneuver EPG dose is shown in parentheses.

A-6 Appendix A References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a, DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

Edwards, R., Goetz, J., and Klemm, J., 1985. Analysis of Radiation Exposure for Maneuver 

Troops, Exercise Desert Rock V, Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE. DNA-TR-84-303, 

Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. October 15.

Frank, G. 1982. "Radiation Dose for Personnel of the 505th Military Police (MP) Battalion, 

Exercise Desert Rock V, Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE," Memorandum to File. 

Science Applications, Inc., McLean, VA. February 15. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 18 of 25 

Goetz, J., Kaul, D., Klemm, J., McGahan, J., and Weitz, R., 1981. Analysis of Radiation 

Exposure for Troop Observers, Exercise Desert Rock V, Operation UPSHOTKNOTHOLE. DNA 5742F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. April 28.

Ortlieb, E., 1991. “Radiation Dose Reconstruction for Personnel of Companies A and C of the 

505th Military Police Battalion, Exercise Desert Rock VI, Operation TEAPOT,” 

Memorandum to M. Owais (DNA-RARP/NTPR). Science Applications International 

Corporation, McLean, VA. November 7.

Phillips, J., 1983. “Radiation Dose Estimate for Personnel of the 505th Military Police Battalion, 

Exercise Desert Rock VI, Operation TEAPOT,” Memorandum to File, Science 

Applications, Inc., McLean, VA. December 5.
This page intentionally left blank.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 19 of 25 

Appendix B Dose Analysis for Task Force BIG BANG at Operation 

PLUMBBOB

This Appendix addresses the dose evaluation for Army personnel who were members of Task 

Force BIG BANG (TFBB) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) during Operation PLUMBBOB in 

1957. The purpose is to describe the evaluation of their doses and provide justification for 

including them in the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG.

B-1 Description of the Group

TFBB was a provisional company from the 82nd Airborne Division that participated in 

rehearsals and an exercise at the NTS in 1957. Most members of TFBB arrived at the NTS in 

mid-August, and their participation culminated with an exercise sponsored by the Human 

Resources Research Office (HumRRO) in conjunction with Shot GALILEO on September 2, 

1957. TFBB activities included training that began upon arrival at Camp Desert Rock (CDR), 

rehearsals, baseline testing, and the exercise on September 2. All training was conducted at 

CDR. The rehearsals, baseline testing, and the HumRRO exercise were conducted in the 

forward NTS test area, and included observation of one or more shots from News Nob, 

observation of Shot GALILEO from Mercury Highway, and performance of specific military 

tasks prior to and following a detonation. Departure of TFBB personnel from CDR was

approximately September 3, 1957. The TFBB activities that may have resulted in exposure to 

residual radiation and the sources of residual radiation resulting in exposure were similar to those 

of the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG, and it is reasonable to consider including them 

in that EPG provided that they do not meet any other general exclusions (DTRA, 2011; Goetz et 

al., 1980; Ponton, 1981). 

B-2 Basis for TFBB Dose Analysis

TFBB personnel were exposed to residual radiation from fallout of four shots in the forward 

test area during two rehearsals and the exercise on September 2, 1957. They were also exposed 

to radiation from fallout from Shot WILSON while at CDR. The exposure scenarios of 

individual TFBB members while conducting their activities were similar for all members of the

task force. This EPG consists of three main cohorts, distinguished primarily by the timing of 

their completion of an infiltration course during the exercise on September 2. TFBB are 

distinguished here by whether they were in the early, middle, or late group of finishers of the 

infiltration course. For this analysis, the TFBB personnel that were in the last group of finishers 

form the basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario. The TFBB “latest finishers” 

scenario forms an adequate basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario for this analysis 

because the calculated film badge dose for this group was the largest of any TFBB test troop 

group. (DTRA, 2008; Goetz et al., 1980)
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 20 of 25 

B-3 Highest-Dose Exposure Scenario

Three Exercise Desert Rock VII and VIII projects were conducted at Shot GALILEO. The 

largest of these was the Army troop test sponsored by HumRRO and conducted by TFBB. The 

HumRRO test involved disassembling and reassembling a rifle, clearing a practice minefield, 

and negotiating a combat course (infiltration course) in a contaminated area. These activities 

were conducted during two rehearsals (on August 23 and August 26), and during the exercise on 

September 2 (Goetz et al., 1980). 

TFBB originally consisted of 160 enlisted men and seven officers. Those 100 men who had 

rifles were selected to participate in the HumRRO troop test. The remaining 67 were to assist 

HumRRO in various tasks in support of the troop test. Preliminary training and briefings, such 

as radiological safety training, were conducted at CDR starting on August 12 (their CDR arrival 

date). On August 23, TFBB personnel conducted their first activities in the forward test area, 

consisting of familiarization and rehearsal activities in the SMOKY test area. On August 26, the 

TFBB personnel returned to the forward area for baseline testing and the final rehearsal. Some 

members of TFBB witnessed Shot FRANKLIN PRIME on August 30 from News Nob, then 

returned to CDR. The entire task force witnessed Shot SMOKY on August 31 from News Nob, 

and then returned to CDR. Because of the distances from News Nob to the ground zeroes of 

these two shots there were no doses accrued by any member of TFBB during or after the 

detonations. Early on the morning of September 2, those TFBB personnel who had returned 

from weekend pass and were available (thought to be about 110 personnel) were transported to 

the forward NTS test area. They observed Shot GALILEO from an observer area that was on or 

near Mercury Highway, almost 5,000 yards from the GALILEO detonation. The observation 

area was beyond the area in which previous fallout may have been resuspended by the 

GALILEO detonation. TFBB personnel remained at the observation area for a short time, and 

then departed and moved by truck away from the GALILEO shot area toward the SMOKY test 

area. About two hours after GALILEO, they assembled in the parking area near the SMOKY 

test area. TFBB personnel then marched to the infiltration course, where they assembled into 

groups of four and five personnel. The groups moved through the course one group at a time, 

conducting various activities as they progressed through the course, including crawling under 

and between wire barriers. As the first group completed the course and returned to the parking 

area, the next group in line began the course. After the last group finished the course and had 

returned to the parking area, accompanied by test monitors, the troops loaded into trucks and 

were transported to CDR (Goetz et al., 1980; Ponton et al., 1981). 

Assumptions similar to those used in the NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG were used for the 

analysis of TFBB doses, such as including a CDR descending fallout dose pathway, use of a 

higher breathing rate and outside occupancy, and departure from CDR one month after the end of 

the operation. In particular, the exposure pathways described in Table B-1 were incorporated.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 21 of 25 

Table B-1. Exposure Pathways for TFBB

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual 

radiation from 

fallout at

locations of 

rehearsals and 

the exercise

TFBB personnel were exposed to

BOLTZMANN, DIABLO, and 

SHASTA fallout during rehearsals 

on August 23 and 26, and 

BOLTZMANN, DIABLO, 

SHASTA, and SMOKY fallout 

during the exercise on September 2.

Residual 

radiation from 

fallout at billet 

location

TFBB personnel were exposed to 

WILSON fallout at CDR from their 

arrival until their departure after the 

exercise (approximately 23 days). 

Exposure to WILSON fallout at CDR for 

approximately 157 days instead of 22 days. 

The number of hours per day spent outside is 

16 hr day−1 instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

WILSON fallout exposure rate decay model 

is based on composite PLUMBBOB decay 

terms instead of on the default decay model 

using (H+hours)−1.2. This increases the CDR 

doses by a factor of approximately 1.5.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended 

fallout during 

rehearsals and 

the exercise

TFBB troops inhaled resuspended 

fallout during rehearsals and the 

exercise consistent with their 

activities, which included crawling 

over open terrain and also more 

typical activities such as walking 

over open terrain.

A resuspension factor of 10−4 m−1 that is 

applicable to troops that are crawling over 

open terrain (DTRA, 2008, ID01) was used 

for all activities during rehearsals instead of 

only during the time spent in the infiltration 

course. 

Inhalation of 

descending 

fallout at billet 

location 

Some early-arriving TFBB troops

were at CDR during WILSON 

fallout there, thereby being exposed 

to descending WILSON fallout at 

CDR.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 1.2 m3

hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended 

fallout at billet 

location

TFBB troops were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended WILSON

fallout at CDR from their arrival 

until their departure after the 

exercise (approximately 22 days). 

Inhalation of resuspended WILSON fallout 

for approximately 157 days instead of for 

22 days. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Number of hours spent outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Incidental 

ingestion of 

contaminated 

soil/dust at billet 

location

TFBB troops incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with WILSON fallout 

at CDR, from their arrival until their 

departure after the exercise 

(approximately 22 days). 

Incidental ingestion of WILSON fallout at 

CDR for approximately 157 days instead of 

for 22 days.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 22 of 25 

B-4 Doses and Upper Bounds

The external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for TFBB are 

summarized in Table B-2. The upper-bound external gamma dose from residual radiation is 

calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components of the total dose. 

However, for the expedited processing analysis, all external dose components are assumed to be 

correlated as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper bound external 

doses by multiplying the total external dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper bound 

internal doses are calculated by multiplying the internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses 

from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust, which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 

2010). The upper-bound doses in Table B-2 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially 

accrued by any member of TFBB.

Table B-2. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

Task Force BIG BANG 

External Doses Dose (rem) Upper-Bound Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 2 6

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

Dose (rem) Upper-Bound Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.02

Bone Surface 0.3 0.06 3 0.6

Brain 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.006

Breast 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.02

Stomach Wall 0.001 0.003 0.005 0.03

Small Intestine Wall 0.001 0.005 0.005 0.05

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.02 0.005 0.2

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.05 0.005 0.5

Kidney 0.002 0.001 0.02 0.01

Liver 0.06 0.02 0.6 0.2

Extrathoracic Region 0.003 0.06 0.03 0.6

Lung 0.008 0.2 0.08 2

Muscle 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.009

Pancreas 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.01

Red Marrow 0.02 0.006 0.2 0.06

Spleen 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.01

Testes 0.004 0.001 0.04 0.01

Thymus 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.02

Thyroid 0.001 0.08 0.005 0.8

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.001 0.002 0.005 0.02

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are treated separately and are based on the actual participant’s 

exposure conditions at the time of detonations. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 23 of 25 

B-5 Comparison of TFBB Doses to NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG Doses

In order to support inclusion members of the TFBB in the larger NTS Observer and Maneuver 

Troop EPG, a comparison of the upper-bound doses has been made. The upper-bound doses for 

the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG are shown in Table 4, and the TFBB upper-bound 

doses are in Table B-2. Ratios of the respective upper-bound doses are shown in Table B-3. 

Ratios greater than 1.0 indicate that the TFBB dose is larger than the respective NTS Observer 

and Maneuver Troop EPG dose. 

The dose ratios in Table B-3 show that the TFBB organ doses are similar to the corresponding 

NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG doses. Almost all corresponding external and internal 

doses are within a factor of 2 of each other, and most TFBB doses are the same as or less than 

corresponding NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG doses. The largest dose difference is that for 

the external gamma doses, for which the TFBB upper-bound dose is 4 rem lower than the NTS 

Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG dose (ratio is 0.6). Differences in upper-bound internal 

doses are much smaller: the largest difference is 0.4 rem for the beta+gamma dose to bone 

surface (ratio is 3.0). The relatively large dose ratio of 6.7 for beta+gamma doses to liver 

represents a dose difference of only 0.17 rem. 

For evaluating whether TFBB may be included in the NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop 

EPG, two important points relevant to the doses are considered. These points are important to an 

understanding of the total organ doses, and their subsequent use in the NTPR Program.

• The TFBB upper-bound external dose is 4 rem lower than that of the NTS Observer and 

Maneuver Troop EPG. 

• For internal organ doses for which the TFBB dose is larger than the corresponding NTS 

Observer and Maneuver EPG dose, no TFBB dose is more than 0.4 rem larger than the 

corresponding NTS Observer and Maneuver Troop EPG dose. 

Subsequent use of doses assigned to a veteran in the NTPR program involves an evaluation of 

the likelihood that the total organ dose is the cause of the veteran’s disease. Because the large 

difference in external doses (4 rem) far exceeds the small differences in any organ doses (0.4 rem 

maximum), total organ doses for all organs in the NTS Observer and Maneuver EPG are much 

larger than those estimated for TFBB. The small differences in internal doses, especially at the 

level of these doses, are insignificant with regard to the likelihood that they might be the cause of 

a veteran’s disease. Therefore, including the TFBB troops in the NTS Observer and Maneuver 

Troop EPG will not result in any meaningful underestimates of any TFBB organ doses.
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 24 of 25 

Table B-3. Comparison of Doses for TFBB and 

NTS Observer & Maneuver Troop EPG

Upper-bound Dose Ratios

(TFBB / NTS ObsMan EPG)

External Dose Ratio 0.6

Internal Dose Ratios for

NTPR Standard Organs Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.6 1.0

Bone Surface 0.6 3.0 (0.4)

*

Brain 0.6 1.0

Breast 0.6 2.0 (0.01)

Stomach Wall 0.6 0.6

Small Intestine Wall 0.6 0.7

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.6 1.0

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.6 1.2 (0.1)

Kidney 1.0 1.1 (0.001)

Liver 0.6 6.7 (0.17)

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.6 0.9

Lung 0.8 1.0

Muscle 0.6 1.0

Pancreas 0.6 0.5

Red Marrow 0.7 1.2 (0.01)

Spleen 0.6 1.0

Testes 0.7 2.0 (0.005)

Thymus 0.6 1.0

Thyroid 0.6 1.0

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.6 1.0

* For dose ratios greater than 1.0, the amount (rem) that the TFBB dose exceeds the 

NTS Observer Maneuver EPG dose is shown in parentheses.

B-6 Appendix B References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 
NTS Observer and Maneuver Troops (1951–1962)

Page 25 of 25 

Goetz, J. L., McGahan, J. T., Kaul, D., McRaney, W.K., Klemm, J., 1980. Analysis of Radiation 

Exposure For Task Force BIG BANG, Shot GALILEO, Exercise Desert Rock VII – VIII, 

Operation PLUMBBOB. DNA 4772F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

April 9. 

Ponton, J., Wilkinson, M., Striegel, J., Collins, B., 1981. Shot GALILEO, A Test of the 

PLUMBBOB Series, 2 September 1957. DNA 6001F, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. February 27.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure

for Expedited Processing

NTS Support Troops with no 

Forward Area Activities 

(1951–1962) 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure. 
This page intentionally left blank.
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 1 of 9

Expedited Processing Group:

NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities

(1951–1962) 

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

This Expedited Processing Group (EPG) generally consists of Army, Navy, Marine Corps and 

Air Force participants who were stationed at one of the NTS billet locations that housed troops 

supporting routine operations at the NTS during the period 1951–1962. Specifically, this EPG 

consists of military participants that were stationed at Camp Mercury, Camp Desert Rock 

(CDR), Indian Springs Air Force Base (AFB), or Nellis AFB and did not conduct any activities 

in any of the forward NTS test areas during their assignment. Most personnel in this EPG were 

assigned to one of the billet locations during a single operational period from 1951 through 1962. 

Additional personnel in this EPG include participants assigned to one of the billet locations

during an interoperation period following one of the eight operations. Only those individuals 

whose participation did not require them to routinely enter the NTS forward test area are 

included in this EPG. For the purpose of this EPG, “NTS forward NTS test area” means test 

areas north of News Nob near the NTS Area 6 Control Point, and the Frenchman Flat test area 

east of the Mercury Highway in NTS Area 5 (Figure 1). Although not all EPG members were 

stationed at their billet location for the same period of time, activities that may have resulted in 

exposure to residual radiation and the sources of residual radiation resulting in exposure of these 

troops were similar. Therefore, it is reasonable to include operational and interoperational 

participants from all NTS test series into a single EPG.

The eight relevant test series that were conducted at the NTS from 1951 to 1962 and their 

operational periods are shown in Table 1. An interoperational period is generally defined as 

starting on the day after an operation and lasting until the day before the start of the following 

operation. The 1-year period following Operation DOMINIC-II is also used here as an 

interoperation period. Three primary locations were used to house personnel supporting the NTS 

tests: Camp Mercury, CDR, and Indian Springs AFB. Camp Mercury was located at the 

southern boundary of the NTS, and was the base of management operations for the joint civilianmilitary planning and management organization. It was a permanent installation built by the 

Atomic Energy Commission after Operation RANGER in 1951, and provided office and living 

quarters, laboratory facilities, and warehouses for the temporary and permanent personnel 

participating in various NTS test activities. Personnel were housed in dormitories, huts, and 

trailers. The population of Camp Mercury during operational periods was typically no more than 

a few thousand personnel. Camp Desert Rock served as headquarters of the Sixth Army Desert 

Rock exercises, and was located just south of the southern boundary of the NTS (about 2 miles 

southwest of Camp Mercury). Camp Desert Rock was established during Operation BUSTERJANGLE, and consisted of Quonset huts and semi-permanent structures augmented by trailers 

and tents as necessary. The camp population varied considerably, depending on the schedule of 

weapons tests and associated troop maneuvers. During test periods, CDR often housed several 

thousand DOD personnel assigned to participate in the nuclear weapons tests. When tests were 

not being conducted, however, fewer than 100 people maintained the camp. Indian Springs AFB 

was approximately 20 miles east of Camp Mercury, and was the principle staging base for Air 
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 2 of 9

Force Special Weapons Center (AFSWC) aircraft. Permanent facilities provided housing; 

messing; and security and air base operations for the AFSWC support activities. Typically 

between 200 and 400 personnel were assigned to ISAFB for test support. A fourth location, 

Nellis AFB, was located about 60 miles east of the NTS and was used as the headquarters for the 

Atomic Energy Commission during Operation RANGER (1951). Other locations, such as 

Kirtland AFB in New Mexico, served as staging and decontamination areas for Air Force 

aircraft; however, personnel at these locations are typically excluded from this EPG based on 

their activities (Harris et al., 1981; Maag et al., 1982; Ponton et al., 1981; Ponton et al., 

1982a-d; Ponton et al., 1983). 

0 1 2 4 6 8 10

Approximate Scale (miles) 

Camp Desert Rock Camp Mercury 

(app. 2 miles south)

Frenchman Flat

Yucca Flat

Control Point News Nob

Mercury Highway

N

Frenchman

Lake

“Forward 

Test Area”

“Forward 

Test Area”

Approximate 

NTS 

Boundary

Figure 1. Schematic of NTS 1951-1962 Indicating Approximate Locations of 

Forward Test Areas 
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 3 of 9

Table 1. NTS Support Billeting Locations during the NTS Operations 

NTS Operation Operational Period Camp 

Mercury

Camp 

Desert 

Rock

Indian 

Springs 

AFB

RANGER* Jan 27–Feb 6, 1951 **

BUSTER-JANGLE Oct 22–Dec 20, 1951   

TUMBLER-SNAPPER Apr 1–Jun 20, 1952  §    

UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE Mar 17–Jun 20, 1953      

TEAPOT Feb 18–Jun 10, 1955      

PLUMBBOB May 28–Oct 22, 1957      

HARDTACK-II Sep 19–Oct 31, 1958  † 

DOMINIC-II Jul 6– Aug 15, 1962  ‡ 

* Personnel were also housed at the main Atomic Energy Commission headquarters at Nellis AFB 

located near Las Vegas, NV during RANGER. ** "",indicates that personnel were housed at the location, but no fallout was detected at the location 

during the operation.

§ " " indicates that personnel were housed at the location and that fallout was detected at the 

location during the operation.

† Desert Rock Exercises were not conducted during HADRDTACK-II, and it is not known if 

personnel were stationed at CDR.

 ‡ Desert Rock Exercises were not conducted during DOMINIC-II, however Army personnel may have 

been stationed at CDR to support Exercise IVY.

As described above, this EPG generally consists of military participants providing support to 

NTS operations that were stationed at Camp Mercury, CDR, Indian Springs AFB, or Nellis AFB 

during or after any one of the eight NTS operations, and that did not conduct any activities in any 

of the forward NTS test areas during their assignment. However, doses in this EPG should not 

be assigned to any participant for whom any of the general exclusions for NTS personnel are 

applicable. There are no specific exclusions for this EPG. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for NTS Support Troops with no 

Forward Area Activities 

To estimate bounding doses for all NTS support troops, an exposure scenario was developed 

based on activities of the cohort group that received the highest external residual radiation dose 

and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort”. 

Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration when 

selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario of 

exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal 

doses. 

For this EPG, the support troops stationed at CDR during Operation TEAPOT form the basis 

for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario. The TEAPOT CDR scenario forms an adequate 

basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario for this EPG for three primary reasons (DTRA, 

2008): 
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 4 of 9

• This group received an external gamma dose from residual radiation that was comparable to 

the largest dose received by any NTS support troop cohort.

• This group received internal organ doses from residual radiation that were significantly larger 

than the highest doses received by any other NTS support troop cohort.

• The radiation sources of exposure for this group are well-documented and are representative 

of other NTS support troops.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

TEAPOT CDR scenario to produce EPG doses. The basic TEAPOT CDR scenario is described 

directly below, followed by a description of additional maximizing dose components and 

assumptions.

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: CDR Support Troops at 

Operation TEAPOT

Approximately 11,000 Department of Defense personnel, both military and civilian, 

participated in various activities at Operation TEAPOT. These Department of Defense personnel 

participated in administration and support activities, Test Group military effects and diagnostic 

activities, DOD operational training projects, EDR programs and support, and air support 

activities. Most of these participants, approximately 8,000, took part in the EDR training and 

test program at TEAPOT; this number included about 2,000 DOD personnel who were required 

to administer and support the exercises from the EDR headquarters at CDR. The remaining 

DOD personnel assisted in the administration of Operation TEAPOT or took part in the 

scientific, diagnostic, and operational training programs (Ponton et al., 1981).

Fallout at CDR is the only source of radiation exposure for CDR support troops. As shown in 

Table 1, fallout was deposited at support troop billeting locations during operations TUMBLERSNAPPER (1952), UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE (1953), TEAPOT (1955), and PLUMBBOB (1957). 

No more than one shot deposited fallout resulting in an exposure rate of greater than 

0.001 roentgen per hour (R hr−1) at any location during any one of these test series. Fallout from 

Shot SMOKY (Operation PLUMBBOB) at Indian Springs AFB and Shot POST (Operation 

TEAPOT) at CDR resulted in similar measured exposure rates that were the highest rates and 

integrated exposures at any billeting location. Fallout from Shot POST could have resulted in 

internal organ doses that are from 2–3 orders of magnitude larger than those from Shot SMOKY 

or any other fallout shot. Therefore, external doses from deposited POST fallout at CDR were 

calculated for this EPG, as well as internal doses from inhalation of descending and subsequently 

resuspended POST fallout at CDR. CDR TEAPOT support troops were exposed to residual 

radiation from POST fallout from April 9 until their departure from CDR, nominally shortly after 

the last shot of the operation (May 15, 1955). The residual radiation exposure rates of POST 

fallout at CDR are shown in Figure 2. 
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 5 of 9

Time (hours) after shot

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

1 10 100 1000 10000

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

Point Estimate

Modeled Function

Figure 2. Residual Radiation Exposure Rates Encountered by TEAPOT 

CDR Support Troops while at CDR

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to or substituted into 

the high-dose TEAPOT CDR scenario cohort analysis.

• Because some CDR support troops in this EPG may have been stationed at CDR for 

extended periods of time, a period of assignment at CDR lasting until 92 days after Shot 

POST was used. This end date corresponds to one month after the end of Operation 

TEAPOT instead of until the end of the operation (62 days after POST). This increases the 

exposure to fallout deposited at CDR. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors was increased from 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours 

were spent indoors in a tent for sleeping, cleaning and eating. This increases both the 

internal and external doses from fallout at CDR. 

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of 

a mix of 50 percent light activity and 50 percent moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 2. The values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 3. 
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 6 of 9

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the TEAPOT CDR Support Troops

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from fallout at billet

location

CDR support troops were exposed to 

POST fallout at CDR from POST shot 

day until their departure. 

Assignment at CDR following Shot POST is

approximately 92 days instead of 62 days. 

The number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

descending fallout at 

billet location

CDR support troops were exposed to 

descending POST fallout at CDR.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 1.2 m3

hr−1

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

at billet location

CDR support troops were subjected to 

inhalation of resuspended POST fallout 

at CDR from POST shot day until their 

departure. 

Inhalation of resuspended POST fallout for 

approximately 92 days instead of for 62 days. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr−1 instead of 1.2 m3

hr−1. 

Number of hours spent outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust at billet 

location

CDR support troops incurred doses 

from incidental ingestion of soil and 

dust contaminated with POST fallout at 

CDR, from POST shot day until their 

departure (approximately 62 days).

Incidental ingestion of POST fallout at CDR 

for approximately 92 days instead of 62 days.
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 7 of 9

Table 3. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrived CDR start date[time] (day of fallout at CDR) 9 Apr 55[1348]

DateDeparted CDR end date[time] (one month after end of 

TEAPOT)

10 Jul 55[1200]

EXTERNAL DOSE

IntCDR Peak POST fallout exposure rate at CDR 0.0014 R hr−1 at H+12.8

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-6) 

Tpeak H+ time of peak exposure rate H+12.8

- Duration of exposure to POST fallout at CDR 2216 hr

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 0.67 

(= 16/24)

PFt Protection factor while indoors at CDR, 

assumed to be inside a tent

1.5

(DTRA, 2010, ED02)

TWSF Time-Weighted Shielding Factor for time at 

CDR (calculated using Fos and PFt) 0.889 

λ Default fallout exposure rate decay exponent 

for times less than 6 months after shot (used as 

[H+hours]λ)

−1.2 

λ6mos Default fallout exposure rate decay exponent 

for times greater than 6 months after shot (used 

as [H+hours]λ)

−2.2 

FB Film badge equivalent conversion factor 0.7 rem R−1

(DTRA, 2010)

UFext Upper bound factor for external doses 3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM01)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1 

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM01) 

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1 

(DTRA, 2010, SM01

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM01) 

DCFInh

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose 

conversion factors 

per FIIDOS (selected maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation)

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM01) 

UFint Upper bound factor for internal doses 10 

(DTRA, 2010, SM01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound EPG doses for NTS 

Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities are summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound 

external gamma dose from residual radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 

to independent components of the EPG dose. However, for expedited processing upper-bound 

doses, all external dose components are assumed to be correlated as a conservative assumption. 

This is equivalent to estimating upper bound external doses by multiplying the total external dose 
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 8 of 9

by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the 

EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except doses from the incidental ingestion of soil and dust, 

which are estimated as upper-bound doses (DTRA, 2010). The upper-bound EPG doses in Table 

4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 

NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 0.04 0.1

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR

Standard Organ

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.001 <0.001 0.007 <0.001

Bone Surface 0.4 0.005 4 0.05

Brain 0.001 <0.001 0.007 <0.001

Breast 0.001 <0.001 0.007 <0.001

Stomach Wall 0.001 0.001 0.007 0.006

Small Intestine Wall 0.001 0.001 0.007 0.009

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.003 0.007 0.03

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.001 0.006 0.007 0.05

Kidney 0.002 <0.001 0.02 <0.001

Liver 0.08 0.002 0.8 0.02

Extra-Thoracic Region 0.004 0.009 0.04 0.09

Lung 0.008 0.009 0.08 0.09

Muscle 0.001 <0.001 0.007 <0.001

Pancreas 0.001 <0.001 0.007 <0.001

Red Marrow 0.02 <0.001 0.2 0.004

Spleen 0.001 <0.001 0.007 <0.001

Testes 0.005 <0.001 0.05 0.001

Thymus 0.001 <0.001 0.007 0.001

Thyroid 0.001 0.02 0.007 0.2

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.001 <0.001 0.007 0.003 * Initial gamma and neutron doses are treated separately and are based on the actual participant’s exposure 

conditions at the time of detonations.

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31.
NTS Support Troops with no Forward Area Activities (1951–1962) 

Page 9 of 9

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

Harris, P.S., Lowery, C., Nelson, A., Obermiller, S., Ozeroff, W.J., and Weary, S.E., 1981. 

PLUMBBOB Series, 1957. DNA 6005F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

September 15. 

Maag, C., Rohrer, S., and Shepanek, R., 1982. Operation RANGER, Shots ABLE, BAKER, 

EASY, BAKER-2, FOX, 25 January – 6 February 1951. DNA 6022F, Defense Nuclear 

Agency, Washington, DC. February 26. 

Ponton, J., Maag, C., Wilkinson, M., and Shepanek, R., 1981. Operation TEAPOT, 1955. 

DNA 6009F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. November 23. 

Ponton, J., Maag C., Barrett, M.F., and Shepanek, R., 1982a. Operation TUMBLER-SNAPPER, 

1952. DNA 6019F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. June 14. 

Ponton, J., Massie, J., Maag C., Shepanek, R., and Rohrer, S., 1982b. Operation UPSHOTKNOTHOLE, 1953. DNA 6014F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. 

January 11. 

Ponton, J., Rohrer, S., Maag, C., Shepanek, R., and Gravitis, I., 1982c. Operation HARDTACK 

II, 1958. DNA 6026F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. December 3. 

Ponton, J., Rohrer, S., Maag, C., Shepanek, R., and Massie, J., 1982d. Operation BUSTERJANGLE, 1951. DNA 6023F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. June 21. 

Ponton, J., Maag, C., Rohrer, S., Shepanek, R., 1983. Operation DOMINIC II, Shots LITTLE 

FELLER II, JOHNIE BOY, SMALL BOY, Little FELLER I, 7 July – 17 July, 1962. DNA 

6027F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. January 31. 

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11 Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May. 

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

 

 

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE 

2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic 

Exercise Brigade 

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 1 of 11 

Expedited Processing Group: 

2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The 2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade (2MCPAEB) Expedited 

Processing Group (EPG) consists of approximately 2,000 Marine Corps personnel who were 

members of the 2MCPAEB at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) during Operation UPSHOTKNOTHOLE in 1953.

The 2MCPAEB conducted the Marine Corps portion of Exercise Desert Rock V (EDR V) at 

Shot BADGER. Four primary units composed the 2MCPAEB: a Brigade Headquarters group 

(HQ); 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment (1/8); 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment (2/3), and 

Marine Helicopter Transport Group 16. The two battalions were reinforced by personnel from 

several unidentified units, including a howitzer battery; tank, engineer, and ordnance 

maintenance platoons; air control personnel; naval gunfire liaison personnel; and an aviation 

detachment. While assigned to Camp Desert Rock (CDR) in April, 1953, 2MCPAEB personnel 

observed three detonations; participated in a rehearsal and an exercise; and assessed equipment 

damage at the NTS (Frank et al., 1982; Massie et al., 1982). 

As described above, this EPG consists of members of 2MCPAEB. Specifically, the EPG 

includes participants assigned to or participating as a member of a company in one of the 

battalions (1/8 or 2/3), or HQ. This includes 2MCPAEB radiation monitors whose only 

monitoring activities involved those with 2MCPAEB on April 16-19, 1953. Doses in this EPG 

should not be assigned to any 2MCPAEB participant for whom any of the general exclusions for 

NTS personnel are applicable. In addition to the general exclusions, the following individuals, 

units, or cohorts are excluded from expedited processing under this EPG:

• Personnel in Marine Helicopter Transport Group 16 that conducted air operations during the 

2MCPAEB activities at Shot BADGER.

• Personnel in the 2MCPAEB Provisional Helicopter Atomic Test Unit that participated in the 

Operational Helicopter Test Program at several shots including Shot BADGER. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for 2MCPAEB

To estimate bounding doses for all 2MCPAEB personnel in this EPG, an exposure scenario 

was developed based on activities of the cohort that received the highest external residual 

radiation dose. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose cohort.” Exposures to initial 

neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration when selecting a “highest-dose 

cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario of exposure beyond the first 

minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal doses. 

2MCPAEB personnel were exposed to a complex radiation environment during and following 

their maneuver in the BADGER test area. Exposures during this time contributed the largest 

component of their total doses. The available iso-contour plots of the BADGER test area are 

inconsistent, reflecting the complexity and also suggesting that personnel had difficulty making 
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 2 of 11 

accurate measurements and interpreting the readings. Therefore, the previously-reconstructed 

doses that are based on published survey data (Frank et al., 1982) were not used as the basis for 

determination of the highest-dose cohort. Instead, available film badge records were used as 

described below. The next section describes the use of film badge records for estimation of the 

EPG doses. (Brown, 1953; Frank et al., 1982; DTRA, 2010a) 

The 2MCPAEB EPG comprises nine cohorts, consisting of the four Companies in each of the 

two participating battalions, plus HQ. Each of these cohorts was a cohesive unit for which all 

members conducted similar activities. Approximately two film badges were issued to each 

platoon of 2MCPAEB. Representative film badge records are available for all cohorts (Table 1), 

and these records form the basis for identifying the highest-dose cohort. Based on the film badge 

records (DTRA, 2010a), Company C of 1/8 (C/1/8) is the highest dose cohort because both the 

average and highest film badge readings for this unit are the highest of all cohorts in the EPG 

(DTRA, 2008; Frank et al., 1982). 

Table 1. Dosimetry Records for 2MCPAEB Cohorts

Cohort

Number of 

Film Badge 

Records

Film Badge Readings (R)

High Low Average 

HQ 21 6.60 3.40 4.14

D/2/3 10 5.20 3.33 3.96

E/2/3 5 3.35 2.59 2.92

F/2/3 12 5.18 2.70 3.43

HS/2/3 8 5.12 3.00 3.52

A/1/8 5 6.20 2.98 4.16

B/1/8 6 3.50 2.00 2.96

C/1/8 4 7.10 4.20 5.42

HS/1/8 6 3.70 1.00 2.30

The activities of C/1/8 form an adequate basis for the generic highest-dose cohort scenario for 

this EPG for two primary reasons:

• The high and mean film badge readings for this cohort were both higher than for any other 

2MCPAEB cohort.

• This cohort received an average external gamma dose from fallout that was similar to other 

cohorts in the EPG. 

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

C/1/8 scenario (Frank et al., 1982) to produce doses that are bounding for all EPG members. The 

basic C/1/8 scenario is described directly below, followed by a description of the additional 

maximizing assumptions.
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 3 of 11 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: 1/8 Company C

A generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of C/1/8 personnel 

(Brown, 1953; DTRA, 2008; Frank et al., 1982; Massie et al., 1982). The four 1/8 companies 

arrived at CDR on April 13, 1953, and the first subsequent 2MCPAEB activity in the forward 

area was a full rehearsal conducted on April 16. C/1/8 personnel then participated in the

maneuver immediately after the BADGER detonation on April 18. Their maneuver activities 

ended prematurely after marching about 500 yards to the 3500-yard line, where they encountered 

high radiation levels. At this point they halted, reversed their course and returned to the 

BADGER trench area where they remained for the remainder of the maneuver. Other 

2MCPAEB personnel completed the maneuver, including one unit (E/2/3) that conducted an air 

assault in Marine helicopters. After completion of the maneuver, all 2MCPAEB units except 

C/1/8 conducted a tour of the BADGER display area, during which they may have reached as far 

forward as the displays located 500 yards from the BADGER ground zero. 2MCPAEB 

personnel departed from the BADGER test area for CDR within an hour after completion of the 

display area tour. Sometime after the maneuver, a 2MCPAEB damage evaluation team (possibly 

including C/1/8 personnel) inspected and documented the condition of the equipment display

items. Because of possible Rad-Safe restrictions, this activity may not have taken place until 

April 19, the day after Shot BADGER. C/1/8 was scheduled to depart from CDR on April 19, 

and all units were scheduled to depart by April 21. (Brown, 1953; DTRA, 2008; Frank et al., 

1982; Massie et al., 1982)

Although C/1/8 did not complete the maneuver, they received a higher external dose than other 

2MCPAEB units. The higher dose was due in part to radiation from the stem of the BADGER 

nuclear cloud that passed near their location at the time they halted their advance. Because they 

returned to the trenches without completing the maneuver, they were not subjected to the same 

potential for inhalation of resuspended fallout as were other units. However, diagnostic runs 

conducted for this EPG analysis show that the magnitude of the differences in their film badge 

readings (Table 1), is much greater than any internal organ doses they may have received from 

inhalation of resuspended BADGER fallout during the maneuver. 

Because of the uncertainty in the radiation environments C/1/8 encountered on BADGER shot 

day, available film badge records were used for estimation of the EPG doses. The C/1/8 mean 

film badge reading of 5.42 R was used as the highest-dose cohort dose for all activities and 

sources over the period April 18–19, 1953. Note that although some 2MCPAEB personnel 

received doses higher than this (Table 1), use of the higher doses would unreasonably high-side 

the EPG doses. The use of the mean C/1/8 reading of 5.42 rem as the basis for the external dose 

for this EPG is justified by considering that the application of the upper-bound factor of 3 results 

in an upper-bound EPG external gamma dose of over 16 rem. This upper-bound dose far 

exceeds the highest upper-bound dose of approximately 11.4 rem that would be obtained by 

using a film badge dose of 7.10 rem (Table 1) and the upper-bound film badge factor that would 

be used in a Radiation Dose Analysis based on the available film badge readings. (DTRA, 

2010b, ED01; Frank et al., 1982; NRC, 1989; SAIC, 2006)

During the period April 18–19, C/1/8 conducted several activities where they accrued doses. 

In order to unravel the film badge dose components for the assessment of internal doses, the 

activities and estimated doses for three of the four primary contributors are listed below (Frank et 

al., 1982); the small contribution from BADGER initial gamma radiation (<0.01 rem) is not 

included. 
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 4 of 11 

• Radiation from NANCY fallout in the BADGER trench area on April 18: 0.03 rem.

• Radiation from the BADGER stem during the aborted maneuver on April 18: 2 rem.

• Radiation from BADGER fallout during the damage evaluation on April 19: 1 rem.

The fourth primary dose contributor—deposited BADGER fallout during the aborted 

maneuver— was assumed to be the remainder of the mean film badge reading. The dose of 

2.39 rem for this source was thus determined by subtracting the sum of the first three dose 

components (3.03 rem) from the mean film badge reading of 5.42 rem. 

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to or substituted into 

the highest-dose cohort analysis. These are described below. 

• Some members of the 2MCPAEB were stationed at CDR longer than the duration of about 

one week typically used for 2MCPAEB Radiation Dose Assessments. The period of 

assignment at CDR used for the EPG scenario is defined as starting in early April and lasting 

until after the end of Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE. The start date precedes BADGER 

fallout at CDR, and the end date is one month after the official end of UPSHOTKNOTHOLE (VA, 2010). This extended period of assignment lengthens the time of 

exposure to BADGER fallout deposited at CDR relative to a routine 2MCPAEB Radiation 

Dose Assessment. 

• The number of hours spent outdoors at CDR was increased from the default of 14.4 to 16 hr 

day−1, while 8 hours each day were spent in a tent while sleeping, cleaning and eating. This 

affects the internal and external doses from BADGER fallout at CDR.

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 2.0 m3

hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of a mix 

of 50 percent light activity and 50 percent moderate activity Weitz, et al. (2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity 

levels, result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

• The internal doses received by 2/3 and HQ personnel from the inhalation of blastresuspended fallout are included in the EPG scenario for all EPG members. Doses from 

inhalation of blast-driven resuspended fallout from Shot HOW (TUMBLER-SNAPPER) and 

NANCY (UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE) during the maneuver and display area tour are included. 

These doses are included in the highest-cohort analysis as an additional dose component to 

ensure that estimated internal organ doses are bounding for all EPG personnel. The blastdriven resuspension doses are based on the generic organ doses from blast effects for a

BADGER maneuver participant, calculated using the current recommended effective 

resuspension factors for blast effects (DTRA, 2008; Kocher et al., 2009).

• The internal doses received by E/2/3 personnel from the inhalation of NANCY and 

BADGER fallout resuspended by helicopter rotor wash are included in the EPG scenario for 

all EPG members. These doses are included in the highest-cohort analysis as an additional 

dose component to ensure that estimated internal organ doses are bounding for all EPG 
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 5 of 11 

personnel. The rotor wash resuspension doses are based on the recommended resuspension 

factor in DTRA (2010b). 

• The earliest possible arrival time at CDR following the 2MCPAEB maneuver is included in 

the EPG scenario for all EPG members. This is incorporated into the highest-cohort analysis 

to increase the period of time used for inhalation of descending BADGER fallout, and thus 

maximize internal organ doses. 

• Doses from participation in the damage evaluation activity are included in the EPG scenario

for all EPG members, although the damage evaluation team involved only a few personnel. 

This exposure pathway is included in the highest-cohort analysis to ensure that estimated 

internal organ doses bound the internal doses for all EPG members. 

Exposure pathways and maximizing factors for the 2MCPAEB EPG are described in Table 2. 

Values used for the primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown 

in Table 3. 

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the 2MCPAEB

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Residual radiation 

from fallout at the 

BADGER test area. 

C/1/8 personnel were exposed to NANCY 

fallout during the rehearsal, and NANCY 

and BADGER fallout during the 

abbreviated maneuver. The damage 

evaluation team was exposed to NANCY 

and BADGER fallout during the damage 

evaluation activity.

.

Residual radiation 

from the stem of the 

BADGER fireball in 

the forward area.

C/1/8 personnel received a dose from this 

source while moving forward to a location 

about 500 yards from the trenches.

Residual radiation 

from fallout at billet 

location. 

C/1/8 personnel were exposed to BADGER 

fallout at CDR from the time of their arrival 

after the maneuver until their departure 

(approximately 3 days). 

Assignment at CDR following BADGER is

approximately 93 days instead of 3 days. 

Number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1.

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

during forward-area 

activities.

C/1/8 personnel inhaled resuspended fallout 

during the rehearsal and abbreviated 

maneuver. 2/3 and HQ personnel inhaled 

resuspended fallout during the entire 

maneuver and display area tour. The 

damage evaluation team inhaled 

resuspended fallout during the damage 

evaluation activity.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

descending fallout at 

CDR. 

C/1/8 personnel were exposed to descending 

BADGER fallout at CDR for approximately 

5.5 hours. 

Inhalation of descending BADGER fallout at 

CDR for 7.6 hours instead of 5.5 hours.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1.
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 6 of 11 

Table 2. Exposure Pathways for the 2MCPAEB (cont.)

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

INTERNAL

Inhalation of blastdriven resuspended 

fallout.

2/3 and Brigade HQ personnel inhaled

blast-driven resuspended fallout during the 

maneuver and display area tour. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of fallout 

resuspended by 

helicopter operations.

E/2/3 personnel inhaled helicopterresuspended fallout during 

loadings/unloading conducted during the 

rehearsal and maneuver.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout at 

billet location.

C/1/8 personnel inhaled resuspended 

BADGER fallout at CDR from the time of 

their return after the maneuver until their 

departure (approximately 3 days).

Assignment at CDR following BADGER is 

approximately 93 days instead of 3 days. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3 hr−1. 

Number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1.

Incidental ingestion 

of contaminated 

soil/dust at billet 

location.

C/1/8 personnel incurred doses from 

incidental ingestion of soil and dust 

contaminated with BADGER fallout at 

CDR, from the time of their return after the 

maneuver until their departure

(approximately 3 days).

Assignment at CDR following BADGER is 

approximately 93 days instead of 3 days. 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values and for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrCDR Date [time] of arrival at CDR 5 Apr 53[0800]

DateArrCDRpostman Date [time] of return to CDR after the maneuver 18 Apr 53[0900]

DateDepCDR Date [time] of departure from CDR (1 month 

after the end of UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE) 20 Jul 53[1200]

TpkintBD Time of peak BADGER fallout exposure rate at 

CDR BADGER H+12 

Duration 

Durations of various 2MCPAEB activities:

Rehearsal 3.5 hr

Pre-shot time at BADGER trenches 1.8 hr

Maneuver and waiting at trench area 2.3 hr

Damage Evaluation 2.3 hr

Duration of exposure to descending BADGER 

fallout at CDR 7.6 hr

Duration of each exposure to highlyresuspended fallout in the vicinity of 

helicopter operations

3 min
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 7 of 11 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values and for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

EXTERNAL DOSE

BadgeData18CoC Average C/1/8 film badge reading 5.42 rem (DTRA, 2010a)

Dosestem

Portion of average C/1/8 film badge reading 

attributable to passing BADGER stem 2.0 rem

DoseDE

Portion of average C/1/8 film badge reading 

attributable to damage evaluation activity 1.0 rem

DoseNAN

Portion of average C/1/8 film badge reading 

attributable to NANCY fallout in the BADGER 

trench area on April 18

0.03 rem

IntNY.BDtrenches

Residual NANCY fallout exposure rate during 

rehearsal and pre-maneuver time in trenches 0.02 R hr−1

IntpeakBD.CDR Peak BADGER fallout exposure rate at CDR 0.0004 R hr−1 at H+12

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 16/24 = 0.67

PFt Protection factor while indoors at CDR, 

assumed to be inside a tent 1.5 

TWSF Time-Weighted Shielding Factor for time at 

CDR (calculated using Fos, Ftent, and PFt) 0.889 

λ Default fallout decay exponent for times less 

than 6 months after shot (used as [H+hours]λ) −1.2 

FB Film badge equivalent conversion factor 0.7 rem R−1

(DTRA, 2010b)

UFext Upper bound factor for external doses 3 

(DTRA, 2010b, SM UA01)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1 

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m−1

(SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010b)

Khelo Resuspension factor for helicopter operations 10−3 m−1

(SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010b) 

Kpc, Kbw Resuspension factors for fallout in precursor 

(thermal pulse) region (0–1280 yd) or blast 

wave region (1280–2530 yd) due to detonation 

effects

Kpc = 110-3 m−1

Kbw = 110-4 m−1

(SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010b; 

Appendix C-5 of DTRA, 2008)

Numhelo Total number of exposures to highlyresuspended fallout while loading and unloading 

from helicopters 

4 
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 8 of 11 

Table 3. Input Parameter Values and for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

INTERNAL DOSE

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 16/24 = 0.67 

qing Soil ingestion rate 500 mg day−1 

(SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010b) 

ρsoil Soil bulk density 1.3 g cm−3 

(SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010b) 

DCFInh

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose conversion 

factors 

per FIIDOS (selected maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; SM ID01 of DTRA, 2010b) 

UFint Upper bound factor for internal doses 10 

(SM UA01 of DTRA, 2010b)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for 2MCPAEB are 

summarized in Table 4. The upper-bound external gamma dose from residual radiation is 

calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components of the EPG dose. 

However, for expedited processing doses, all external dose components are assumed to be 

correlated as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper bound external 

doses by multiplying the total external dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper-bound 

internal doses are calculated by multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, except

doses from inhalation of blast-driven resuspended fallout and incidental ingestion of soil and 

dust, which are estimated as upper bound doses (DTRA, 2010b). The upper-bound EPG doses in 

Table 4 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially accrued by any member of the EPG.

 
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 9 of 11 

Table 4. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds for 2MCPAEB

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma Radiation 6 17

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR

Standard Organs

EPG Dose† (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Bone Surface 0.4 0.03 2 0.3

Brain <0.001 0.002 0.003 0.02

Breast <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.02

Stomach Wall <0.001 0.02 0.003 0.2

Small Intestine Wall <0.001 0.02 0.003 0.2

Upper Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.07 0.003 0.6

Lower Large Intestine Wall <0.001 0.2 0.003 2

Kidney 0.002 0.003 0.007 0.02

Liver 0.08 0.005 0.4 0.04

Extrathoracic Region 0.004 0.2 0.02 2

Lung 0.008 0.4 0.04 3

Muscle <0.001 0.002 0.003 0.02

Pancreas <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.02

Red Marrow 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.08

Spleen <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.02

Testes 0.005 0.001 0.03 0.009

Thymus <0.001 0.003 0.003 0.03

Thyroid <0.001 0.2 0.003 2

Urinary Bladder Wall <0.001 0.005 0.003 0.05

* Initial gamma and neutron doses are treated separately and are based on the actual participant’s exposure 

conditions at the time of detonations. 

† Internal doses for this EPG include significant contributions from the inhalation of blast-driven resuspended 

fallout for which only upper bound values are evaluated. The contributions to EPG and upper bound EPG 

doses from inhalation of blast-driven resuspended fallout are numerically equal.

The upper-bound doses in Table 4 were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and 

were further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. The total upper-bound 

organ doses (combined external and internal doses) that are close to or exceed the corresponding 

screening dose (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or tissue cancer for members of this EPG 

are listed in Table 5. The total upper-bound EPG/organ dose is deemed close to the screening 

dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated probability of causation is equal to or 

higher than 40% (DTRA, 2011). In cases involving any of these organs, the EPG upper-bound 

doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the EPG by means of expedited 

processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 10 of 11 

Table 5. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE 2MCPAEB

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard Organ

Total Upper-Bound 

Organ Dose 

(External + Internal)

(rem)

Total EPG upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Liver Liver 17

Gall bladder Liver 17

Bile duct Liver 17

Thyroid Thyroid 19

6. References

Brown, W.S., 1953. “Exercise Desert Rock V Marine Corps Report,” letter report to the 

Commandant of the Marine Corps, Headquarters 2d Marine Corps Provisional Atomic 

Exercise Brigade, Camp Pendleton, CA. May 19. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010a. "NuTRIS - Nuclear Test Research 

Information System," Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA.

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010b. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

Frank, G., Goetz, J., Schweizer, T., Weitz, R., Klemm, J., 1982. Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for 2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade, Exercise Desert Rock V, 

Operation UPSHOT-KNOTHOLE. DNA-TR-82-03, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. February 5. 

Kocher, D.C., Trabalka, J.R., and Apostoaei, A.I., 2009. Derivation of Effective Resuspension 

Factors in Scenarios for Inhalation Exposure Involving Resuspension of Previously 

Deposited Fallout by Nuclear Detonations at Nevada Test Site. DTRA-TR-09-15, 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
2nd Marine Corps Provisional Atomic Exercise Brigade

Page 11 of 11 

Massie, J., Maag, C., Rohrer, S., Shepanek, R., 1982. Shot BADGER, A Test of the UPSHOTKNOTHOLE Series, 18 April 1953. DNA 6015F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, 

DC. January 12. 

NRC (National Research Council), 1989. Film Badge Dosimetry in Atmospheric Nuclear Tests. 

National Academy Press, Washington, DC. December.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. May. 

SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation), 2006. FBDOSE User’s Guide, Science 

Applications International Corporation, McLean, VA. June 26.

VA (Department of Veteran Affairs), 2010. Disease Subject to Presumptive Service Connection. 

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 38, § 3.309. National Archives and Records 

Administration's Office of the Federal Register (College Park, MD) and the Government 

Printing Office (Washington , DC). http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&tpl=%2Findex.tpl. Accessed October 18. 

Weitz, R.L., Case, D.R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S.D., Mason, C.L., Singer, H.A., Martinez, D.G.,

McKenzie-Carter, M.A., Shaw, R.S., and Stiver, J.S., 2009. A Probabilistic Approach to 

Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-09-13, Defense 

Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.
This page intentionally left blank.
Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program

Analysis of Radiation Exposure 

for Expedited Processing

Operation PLUMBBOB

Task Force WARRIOR

November 2011

Important Note

Reconstructed doses developed for expedited processing and included in this pre-decisional 

document are provided for information only. The official doses for expedited processing will be 

published in the relevant NTPR standard operating procedure.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 1 of 14

Expedited Processing Group: 

Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR 

1. Description of the Expedited Processing Group

The Task Force WARRIOR (TFW) Expedited Processing Group (EPG) consists of 

approximately 350 Army personnel who were members of TFW at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

during Operation PLUMBBOB in 1957. This task force conducted the Exercise Desert Rock 

VII/VIII troop test at Shot SMOKY, designated as Project 50.1. TFW was a provisional unit 

from the 4th Infantry Division that participated in rehearsals, a maneuver exercise, and related 

activities at the NTS in July, August, and early September of 1957. Although not all TFW 

members participated in exactly the same activities, all activities that may have resulted in 

significant exposures to residual radiation and the sources of residual radiation resulting in 

exposures of TFW members were similar. That is, TFW personnel generally conducted 

activities typical of maneuver troops in forward NTS test areas where fallout from PLUMBBOB 

shots was present. Therefore, it is reasonable to include all members of TFW into a single EPG. 

(DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-7; Goetz et al., 1979; Harris et al., 1981). 

Of the total number of personnel involved with the Project 50.1 troop test at Shot SMOKY, the 

primary troops composing the TFW EPG are maneuver personnel consisting of members of 

elements of Company C (Reinforced), 1st Battle Group, 12th Infantry listed in Table 1 (Goetz et 

al., 1979). Activities of other Battle Group personnel (e.g., Companies A, B, and D) are not fully 

documented, and may have been different than those of the personnel in elements listed in 

Table 1. 

Table 1. Elements of Company C, 1st Battle Group, 12th Infantry 

included in TFW

Element Size

Company Headquarters 12

Four rifle platoons (1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Platoons) 188

Weapons Platoon 36

Reconnaissance Platoon 21

1st Platoon, Mortar Battery 54

Medical Detachment 17

Communications Detachment 16

3rd Squad, Engineer Platoon 7
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 2 of 14

Project 50.1 personnel may be included in expedited processing under this EPG only if the 

extent of their participation is encompassed by the activities described herein for the TFW EPG 

analysis. The following individuals and units who were members of or affiliated with TFW are 

excluded from expedited processing under this EPG: 

• Members of the 7th Platoon, Queen’s Own Rifles (a Canadian Army Platoon).

• Members of the 3rd Transportation Battalion (Helicopter).

• Any 1st Battle Group personnel who are not in one of the units identified in Table 1 and 

whose activities are not encompassed by the TFW activities described herein. 

2. Basis of Dose Analysis for Task Force WARRIOR 

To estimate bounding doses for all TFW members, an exposure scenario was developed based 

on activities of the cohort group that received the highest dose from exposure to external residual 

radiation and corresponding internal doses. This cohort is referred to as the “highest-dose 

cohort.” Exposures to initial neutron and gamma radiations are not taken into consideration 

when selecting a “highest-dose cohort” because these sources are not correlated to the scenario 

of exposure beyond the first minute after a shot and are not associated with accrual of internal 

doses. 

Complete and reliable film badge records are available for TFW personnel and were used in 

the TFW EPG analysis. These records were used first to identify the highest-dose cohort. The 

film badge records were subsequently used to estimate the dose for TFW activities in an area of

the test site where no survey data are available and where the highest exposures of TFW 

occurred. For two film badge periods together encompassing the time from July 25 to September 

2, 1957, there is a group of 20 badges with an average total reading about 1 rem higher than the 

average for all other badges. The mean of the total film badge readings of the group of 

20 badges is 1.545 rem (upper bound is 2.128 rem), whereas the mean of the total film badge 

readings for all other badges is 0.575 rem (upper bound is 0.789 rem) (Goetz et al., 1979; NRC, 

1989; SAIC, 2006). About 0.14 rem of these mean readings is due to initial DOPPLER gamma 

radiation (Goetz, et al., 1979). The difference in film badge readings noted above is primarily 

due to the film badges worn during the period of August 27–September 2 that encompasses the 

date of Shot SMOKY on August 31. The film badge readings for this period account for 

0.955 rem out of the total difference of 0.970 rem in mean readings. Based on the readings and 

the film density characteristics of the 20 badges worn on August 31, it was concluded (Goetz et 

al., 1979) that the personnel wearing them were together when their badges were exposed. 

Furthermore, based on the possible sources of exposure on August 31, these badges were worn 

by a platoon section, patrol, or task group that was exposed to higher levels of SMOKY fallout 

than other members of TFW, likely during the assault on Quartzite Ridge east of the primary 

objective area. Accordingly, the activities of this group of 20 TFW personnel form the basis for 

the generic highest-dose cohort. For the purpose of developing an exposure scenario, these 

badges are assumed to have been worn by members of the 2nd Platoon, which is identified as the 

highest-dose cohort because this platoon participated in the assault on Quartzite Ridge and also 

because it was in the first serial transported to the primary objective on SMOKY shot day. 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 3 of 14

Reliable radiation survey data are available for the majority of TFW activities, and these 

survey data were used to reconstruct doses for most activities of this EPG. However, survey data 

are not available for the area of the assault on Quartzite Ridge. Therefore, film badge records 

were used to estimate the 2nd Platoon dose from exposures during the assault. 

For use with the EPG, the generic highest-dose cohort scenario is augmented with additional 

exposure pathways, reasonably maximizing assumptions, and high-sided values for some dose 

calculation parameters. This ensures that the results bound the doses for all members of the 

EPG. The members of the 2nd Platoon, TFW, form an adequate basis of the generic highest-dose 

cohort scenario for this EPG for the following primary reasons (DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-7; 

Goetz et al., 1979):

• The average external gamma dose from residual radiation for members of the 2nd Platoon was 

the largest dose for any TFW participant groups. 

• The 2nd Platoon formed a cohesive unit during the period of their greatest exposure.

• With the exception of one additional exposure from inhalation of descending SMOKY 

fallout, the sources of radiation exposure for the 2nd Platoon are similar to those of other 

TFW personnel.

As explained below, several dose components and assumptions were added to the documented 

2nd Platoon scenario to produce EPG doses. The basic scenario is described directly below, 

followed by a description of the additional maximizing assumptions. 

 

3. Highest-Dose Cohort Scenario: 2nd Platoon of TFW

To estimate bounding doses for all military personnel assigned to TFW during Operation 

PLUMBBOB, a generic high-sided exposure scenario was developed based on activities of the 

2nd Platoon. Most 2nd Platoon members arrived at CDR in late July 1957 and stayed until after 

the completion of their exercise in early September 1957. Activities of the 2nd Platoon in 

forward NTS areas included four rehearsals conducted August 5–8; preparation of defensive 

positions on August 12–13; observation of Shot DOPPLER on August 23; and observation of 

Shot SMOKY and participation in a maneuver on August 31, including an assault on Quartzite 

Ridge. Some members of the 2nd Platoon may have also been assigned to the teams that 

recovered equipment in the maneuver area and inspected the defensive positions following the 

maneuver. (DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-7; Goetz et al., 1979) 

Sources of external exposure routinely included for the 2nd Platoon consist of residual fallout 

from several shots during TFW rehearsals, preparation of defensive positions, maneuver 

activities, and while billeted at CDR. As described below, additional external exposures from 

residual fallout during equipment recovery and inspection of defensive positions are also 

included for this EPG analysis, as is exposure to descending SMOKY fallout during the assault 

on Quartzite Ridge. Unlike for most TFW activities, reliable survey data are not available for the 

area of the assault on Quartzite Ridge. Therefore, it was assumed that the difference of 

0.955 rem between mean film badge readings for the second badged period described above was 

accrued during the assault. In addition, based on an evaluation of TFW exposures (NRC, 2003), 

it is assumed that the dose increment of 0.955 rem is attributable to SMOKY fallout descending 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 4 of 14

from a portion of the rising SMOKY fireball that was transported to the area of the assault on 

Quartzite Ridge. To implement this assumption, a descending SMOKY fallout exposure rate 

function and exposure period were defined such that the calculated film badge equivalent

external dose for the period of the assault on Quartzite Ridge equaled the film badge increment 

of 0.955 rem. 

Average fallout exposure rates associated with 2nd Platoon activities are shown in Table 2. 

The highest exposure rates encountered by the 2nd Platoon were those encountered during the 

activities conducted on SMOKY shot day (August 31), as shown in Figure 1. The constant 

exposure rate shown in Figure 1 for the period H−2 to H+1.5 corresponds to the time spent at the 

location from where they observed Shot SMOKY (primarily due to KEPLER fallout, see 

Table 2). The 2nd Platoon then moved to Helicopter Loading Area B, where they experienced a 

slightly lower exposure rate (also from KEPLER) for a short time until they loaded into 

helicopters and were transported to the Primary Objective Area. At this location they were 

exposed to a relatively constant exposure rate (primarily from SHASTA fallout) during the 

period H+1.75 to H+3, which corresponds to the time spent at the Primary Objective prior to the 

assault on Quartzite Ridge. The increasing exposure rate for the period approximately H+3 to 

H+4.25 corresponds to the time of the assault. The assault exposure rates were derived using the 

increment of higher film badge reading for this cohort as described above, assuming that the 

source was descending SMOKY fallout. A simple descending fallout function was developed 

that involved fallout descending between H+1 and H+6 with a peak intensity of 2.1 R hr−1 at 

H+6. Therefore, the 2nd Platoon is assumed to have experienced descending SMOKY fallout 

during roughly the middle third of its assumed period of deposition at the Quartzite Ridge assault 

location; the highest estimated exposure rate experienced by the 2nd Platoon is about 1.4 R hr−1. 

As reflected in Figure 1, after the conclusion of the assault at H+4.25, the 2nd Platoon returned to 

the Primary Objective Area, and then was transported to CDR by H+5.5.

Sources of internal exposure include inhalation of resuspended fallout during TFW rehearsals, 

preparation and post-shot inspection of defensive positions, maneuver activities, equipment 

recovery activities, and while at CDR, and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil and dust at 

CDR. Activities resulting in resuspension of fallout included proximity to helicopter operations, 

SMOKY blast effects, hand-digging defensive positions, and typical activities such as walking 

over open terrain. In addition to resuspended fallout and incidental ingestion, members of 2nd

Platoon are assumed to have inhaled descending SMOKY fallout during the assault on Quartzite 

Ridge (DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-7; Goetz et al., 1979; NRC, 2003).

 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 5 of 14

Table 2. Activities and Fallout Exposure Rates Relevant to the 2nd Platoon of TFW

Date(s) of 

Activity (1957) Activity and Locations Source of Fallout (Shot)

Exposure Rate*

(R hr−1)

August 5 and 

August 6

Rehearsals

Observation Area/Loading Area B WILSON

KEPLER

0.00006 

0.005 

August 7 and 

August 8 Observation Area/Loading Area A 

BOLTZMANN

FRANKLIN

WILSON

0.00004

0.000004 

0.00003

August 5 and 

August 7 Primary Objective BOLTZMANNDIABLO

0.00004

0.001 

August 6 and 

August 8 Secondary Objective DIABLO 0.003 

August 12–13 Preparation of Defensive Positions 

Defensive Positions Area BOLTZMANN

DIABLO

0.0012 

0.029

August 31 Observation of SMOKY 

Observation Area/Loading Area B WILSON 

KEPLER

0.000003 

0.008 

August 31

TFW Maneuver 

Loading Area B WILSON

KEPLER

0.00006 

0.005 

Primary Objective Area

BOLTZMANN

DIABLO

SHASTA

0.0003

0.00005 

0.04 

South of Quartzite Ridge SMOKY 2.1†

August 31

SMOKY Shot Area

(used only for internal dose 

calculations)

BOLTZMANN

DIABLO

SHASTA

0.0003

0.005 

0.01

September 1 Equipment Recovery 

Primary Objective Area

BOLTZMANN

DIABLO

SHASTA 

0.0003 

0.00005 

0.028 

September 1 Inspection of Defensive Positions 

Defensive Positions Area

BOLTZMANN

DIABLO

SHASTA

SMOKY

0.0009 

0.016 

0.02 

0.025 

July 15–Nov 22 CDR WILSON 0.0004‡

* Most exposure rates listed are average values experienced by TFW for the date(s) of each activity/location, 

estimated from survey data (Goetz et al., 1979). Exceptions are noted. 

†

 This exposure rate from SMOKY fallout south of Quartzite Ridge is the peak exposure rate on August 31 in this 

area, estimated using film badge readings; it is estimated to have occurred at H+6 (see text for details of this 

estimate). ‡ This is the peak exposure rate from WILSON fallout measured at CDR (DTRA, 2008, Appendix C-7). 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 6 of 14

Time (hours) Relative to Shot SMOKY Detonation Time

Average Exposure Rate (R hr-1)

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

101

SMOKY Observation Area

Helicopter Landing Area

Near Quartzite Ridge

Primary Objective Area

Point Estimates

Modeled Function

Figure 1. Fallout Exposure Rates Encountered by 2nd Platoon on SMOKY Shot Day

4. Maximizing Scenario and Parameter Assumptions

The following additional dose components and assumptions were added to or substituted into 

the 2nd Platoon of TFW scenario cohort analysis. 

• The normal period of assignment at CDR for TFW personnel was approximately 40 days, from 

late July until early September, 1957. In order to reasonably maximize the exposure of TFW 

personnel to WILSON fallout at CDR, the period of assignment for the EPG analysis was

increased to 130 days by assuming an arrival date of July 15, 1957 (after the last departure date 

of Marine personnel participating at Shot HOOD), and lasting until November 22, 1957 (one 

month after the end of PLUMBBOB) (Harris et al., 1981; Maag et al., 1983; VA, 2010). 

• On September 1, a recovery party consisting of about 15 TFW personnel was transported to 

the Primary Objective area. It was assumed that a member of the 2nd Platoon was assigned to 

this recovery party, which was transported by helicopter to the Primary Objective area to 

recover equipment and supplies left there on shot day. These personnel spent about 2 hours in 

the Primary Objective area locating and collecting equipment (Goetz et al., 1979). 

• On September 1, selected TFW personnel inspected the defensive positions to determine the 

effects of the SMOKY detonation on the previous day. It was assumed for the EPG analysis 

that a member of the 2nd Platoon was included in this activity. The inspection team was 

transported to the area of the defensive positions by helicopter, and spent about 2 hours 

inspecting and recording the damage before returning to CDR.
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 7 of 14

• The number of hours spent outdoors at CDR by TFW personnel was increased from the CDR 

default of 14.4 to 16 hr day−1, while 8 hours each day were spent in a tent while sleeping, 

cleaning and eating. 

• Rather than using an exposure rate decay model based on the default decay term of 

(H+hours)−1.2, the time-dependent decay of WILSON fallout at CDR was modeled using a 

series of decay exponents other than (−1.2) that represent the composite decay of a generic 

PLUMBBOB shot (Table II-5, Goetz et al., 1979). This results in higher exposure rates than 

those obtained from use of the default decay term, and results in a 30 percent higher external 

dose for the period of TFW exposure to WILSON fallout at CDR. 

• Exposure rates used for DIABLO fallout at the defensive positions and SHASTA fallout at the 

Primary Objective Area reflect increases of 30 percent and 20 percent, respectively, over 

average values in those areas. This accounts for the possibility that the members of the 

highest-dose cohort may have conducted their activities close to the line of highest exposure 

rate along the fallout path of these shots (Goetz et al., 1979). 

• Inhalation of respirable descending SMOKY fallout during the assault on Quartzite Ridge was 

included as a maximizing internal dose pathway for 2nd Platoon troops. This dose pathway is 

based on the assumption of a northwesterly wind at low elevations that transported lower 

portions of the SMOKY nuclear cloud to the area of the assault, and has been described to 

explain the additional external dose received by the highest-dose cohort (NRC, 2003). Note 

that the assumption that all of the fallout particles were respirable constitutes the maximizing 

feature of this assumption because fallout at H+3 to H+4 would likely contain a large fraction 

of particles that would be too large to be respired (Glasstone and Dolan, 1977).

• Exposure to blast-driven resuspended fallout during the assault on Quartzite Ridge was 

included as a maximizing dose pathway for 2nd Platoon troops, although the area of the assault 

was outside the area of blast-driven resuspension (Kocher et al., 2009). This dose pathway 

was included based on the same assumption of a northwesterly wind at low elevations that was 

made as the basis for the inclusion of the descending fallout dose pathway. As a conservative 

assumption, blast-driven resuspended fallout from PLUMBBOB shots BOLTZMANN, 

DIABLO, and SHASTA was assumed to be resuspended by effects of the SMOKY detonation 

and transported without dilution to the Quartzite Ridge assault area.

• The breathing rate for outdoor activities was increased from the default value of 1.2 to 

2.0 m3 hr−1. The higher value is based on the assumption of personnel activities consisting of a 

mix of 50 percent light activity and 50 percent moderate activity (Weitz et al., 2009). Other 

combinations of activity levels, including short durations of both rest and heavy activity levels, 

result in a similar average outdoor breathing rate. 

Exposure pathways for the EPG scenario are described in Table 3. Values used for the 

primary parameters in the EPG external and internal dose analyses are shown in Table 4. 

 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 8 of 14

Table 3. Exposure Pathways for TFW Troops 

Exposure 

Pathway Basis for Exposure Pathway Maximizing Factors

EXTERNAL

Radiation from 

residual and 

descending fallout at

locations in the 

forward area 

Members of 2nd Platoon were exposed to fallout 

from seven shots during rehearsals, preparation of 

defensive positions, and maneuver activities. A 

limited number of TFW personnel were also 

exposed during recovery of equipment and 

inspection of defensive positions. 

Exposure rates for DIABLO fallout at 

the defensive positions and SHASTA 

fallout at the Primary Objective are 

higher than average rates by 30 percent 

and 20 percent respectively. 

Residual radiation 

from fallout at billet 

location

Members of 2nd Platoon were exposed to 

WILSON fallout at CDR from late July until 

early September. 

Assignment at CDR is approximately 

130 days instead of 40 days.

Number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

WILSON fallout exposure rate decay 

model is based on composite 

PLUMBBOB decay terms instead of 

on the default decay model, resulting

in a 30 percent higher external dose for 

this pathway. 

INTERNAL

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout 

during forward-area 

activities

Members of 2nd Platoon inhaled resuspended 

fallout during rehearsals, preparation of defensive 

positions, and the maneuver. A limited number 

of TWF personnel inhaled resuspended fallout 

while participating in post-shot equipment 

recovery and inspection of defensive positions 

after SMOKY shot day.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

descending fallout 

Members of 2nd Platoon inhaled respirable-sized 

descending SMOKY fallout on August 31 during 

the assault on Quartzite Ridge from H+3 until 

H+4.25. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Inhalation of blastdriven resuspended 

fallout

Members of 2nd Platoon inhaled blast-driven 

resuspended fallout from previous PLUMBBOB 

shots during the assault on Quartzite Ridge.

Breathing rate is 2 m3 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Inhalation of fallout 

resuspended by 

helicopter operations

Members of 2nd Platoon inhaled resuspended 

fallout due to helicopter rotor wash during 

loading/unloading conducted during rehearsals, 

preparation of defensive positions, and the 

maneuver. Some TWF personnel inhaled rotor 

wash-resuspended fallout during equipment 

recovery and inspection of defensive positions. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Inhalation of 

resuspended fallout at 

billet location

Members of 2nd Platoon inhaled resuspended 

WILSON fallout while outdoors at CDR from 

late July until early September. 

Assignment at CDR is approximately 

130 days instead of 40 days. 

Breathing rate is 2 m3

 hr−1 instead of 

1.2 m3

 hr−1. 

Number of hours outside is 16 hr day−1

instead of 14.4 hr day−1. 

Incidental ingestion of 

contaminated soil/dust 

at billet location

Members of 2nd Platoon incidentally ingested soil 

and dust at CDR contaminated from WILSON

fallout from late July until early September.

Assignment at CDR is approximately 

130 days instead of 40 days.
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 9 of 14

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses

Parameter Definition Value

DATES AND TIMES

DateArrCDR Date [time] of arrival at CDR 15 July 57[0800]

DateDepCDR Date [time] of departure from CDR (1 month after 

the end of PLUMBBOB) 22 Nov 57[1200]

Duration 

Duration of TFW activities at specific locations (Goetz et al., 1979)

 Each Rehearsal:

 Helicopter Loading/Observation Areas

 Primary Objective Area

 Secondary Objective Area

2 hr 

4 hr

2 hr

 Preparing defensive positions

 Digging

 Traveling to/from area

 Inspection

7.5 hr 

2 hr 

2.5hr

 Maneuver:

 Observation Area

 Helicopter Loading Area

 Objective Area 

 Assault on Quartzite Ridge

3.5 hr 

0.25 hr 

2.5 hr (= 1.25 + 1.25)

1.25 hr

 Equipment Recovery (Objective Area) 2 hr

 Inspecting defensive positions after SMOKY 2 hr

EXTERNAL DOSE

Intshot Average or peak fallout exposure rates at each 

location during TFW activities

See

Table 2 

IntSMQz SMOKY fallout exposure rates near Quartzite Ridge

(Note: 2nd Platoon was present at this location from 

H+3 to H+4.25).

 0.21 R hr−1 @ H+1

 0.42 R hr−1 @ H+2 

 0.84 R hr−1 @ H+3 

1.3 R hr−1 @ H+4 

1.7 R hr−1 @ H+5 

 2.1 R hr−1 @ H+6 (peak) 

IntWL Average WILSON fallout exposure rates at CDR 0.0001 R hr−1 @ H+3.8

 0.0004 R hr−1 @ H+12.9 (peak) 

λ Default fallout exposure rate decay exponent for 

times less than 6 months after shot (used as 

[H+hours]λ

) 

−1.2 

Fallout exposure rate decay model for shots 

FRANKLIN, WILSON, KEPLER

PLUMBBOB composite decay rates

(Tables II-5 and II-6, Goetz et al., 1979)

Fallout exposure rate decay models for shots

BOLTZMANN, DIABLO, SHASTA, and SMOKY

Shot-specific decay rates based on 

measured exposure rates

(Tables II-1 to II-4 and II-6, Goetz et al., 1979)

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 0.67 

(= 16/24)

Ftent Fraction of indoor time at CDR spent in a tent 1.0

PFt Protection factor while inside a tent 1.5

(DTRA, 2008)

TWSF Time-Weighted Shielding Factor for time at CDR

(calculated using Fos, Ftent, and PFt) 0.889 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 10 of 14

Table 4. Input Parameter Values for the Calculation of EPG Doses (cont.)

Parameter Definition Value

EXTERNAL DOSE

FB Film badge equivalent conversion factor 0.7 rem R−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ED02)

UFext Upper bound factor for external doses 3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

INTERNAL DOSE

BR Breathing rate for activities in outside areas 2.0 m3 hr−1 

K(t) Time-dependent resuspension factor K(t) = 10−5 × exp(-0.01 × t/24) + 10−9 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Kdig Resuspension factor used for digging of defensive 

positions

10−4 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Khelo Resuspension factor for helicopter operations 10−3 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Kblast Resuspension factor for blast-driven resuspension (10−3 m−1  10−4 m−1)

0.5 = 3.1610−4 m−1

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Durdig Duration of enhanced resuspension during digging 

while preparing defensive positions 7.5 hr

Durhelo Duration of each exposure to highly-resuspended 

fallout in the vicinity of helicopter operations 3 min

Numhelo Total number of exposures to highly-resuspended 

fallout while loading and unloading from helicopters 24 

Duration Duration of inhalation of descending SMOKY 

fallout and blast-driven resuspended fallout in the 

vicinity of the assault on Quartzite Ridge

1.25 hr

Fos Fraction of time spent outside at CDR 0.67 (= 16/24)

qing Soil incidental ingestion rate 500 mg day−1 

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

ρsoil Soil bulk density

 (for incidental soil ingestion pathway)

1.3 g cm−3 

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

Thick Thickness of contaminated soil layer 

 (for incidental soil ingestion pathway)

0.01 m

(DTRA, 2010, SM ID01

DCFInh

DCFIng

Fallout inhalation and ingestion dose conversion 

factors 

per FIIDOS (selected maximum values among 

particle sizes of 1–10 μm for inhalation) 

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

RhrCim2 Fallout radiation exposure rate/surface activity ratios per FIIDOS

(Raine et al., 2007; DTRA, 2010, SM ID01)

UFint Upper bound factor for internal doses 10 

(DTRA, 2010, SM UA01)

5. Summary of EPG Doses and Upper Bounds

The EPG external and internal doses and corresponding upper-bound doses for the TFW 

Troops EPG are summarized in Table 5. The upper-bound external gamma dose from residual 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 11 of 14

radiation is calculated by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to independent components of the 

EPG dose. However, for expedited processing doses, all external dose components are assumed 

to be correlated as a conservative assumption. This is equivalent to estimating upper bound 

external doses by multiplying the total external dose by an uncertainty factor of 3. The upper 

bound internal doses are calculated by multiplying the EPG internal doses by a factor of 10, 

except for doses from incidental ingestion of soil and dust, and doses from inhalation of blastdriven resuspended fallout inhalation, which are estimated as upper bound doses (DTRA, 2010). 

The upper-bound EPG doses in Table 5 are not less than the upper-bound doses potentially 

accrued by any member of the EPG. 

The EPG and upper-bound EPG external doses in exceed the mean and upper-bound film

badge readings of 1.545 rem and 2.128 rem discussed above. In addition, excluding outliers with 

questionable readings, the highest possible combined TFW film badge dose for the two film 

badge periods described above is no more than 2 rem, with a corresponding upper bound of no 

more than 2.8 rem (Goetz et al., 1979; NRC, 1989; SAIC, 2006). Therefore, the upper-bound 

EPG external dose in exceeds the highest upper-bound TFW dose based on film badge readings. 

The upper-bound doses in were calculated using a highest-dose cohort scenario and were 

further increased by the use of additional high-sided assumptions. However, the upper-bound 

EPG doses do not include contributions from initial radiation, which must be considered for 

cases involving certain organs before processing these cases using expedited processing. 

Members of this EPG received neutron and initial gamma doses while observing Shot 

DOPPLER; the upper-bound neutron dose is 1.7 rem, and the upper-bound gamma dose is 

0.42 rem (Goetz et al., 1979; Weitz and Egbert, 2010). 

To assess the impacts of initial doses on expedited processing decisions for members of this 

EPG, total upper-bound organ doses (combined upper-bounds for EPG external, EPG internal, 

and initial doses) were calculated for all organs. The resulting total upper-bound organ doses 

that are close to or exceed corresponding screening doses (DTRA, 2011) for the specific organ or 

tissue cancer for members of this EPG are listed in Table 6. The total upper-bound organ dose is 

deemed close to the screening dose for the corresponding cancer model if the estimated 

probability of causation is equal to or higher than 40 percent (DTRA, 2011). Because of the 

potential for initial doses for members of this EPG, in cases involving any of the organs listed in 

Table 6 the EPG upper-bound doses may not be appropriate for assignment to all members of the

EPG by means of expedited processing as discussed in DTRA (2011). 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 12 of 14

Table 5. External and Internal Doses and Upper Bounds 

for Task Force Warrior 

External Doses EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Residual Gamma 

Radiation 2 5 

Initial Gamma* - -

Neutron* - -

Internal Doses for NTPR 

Standard Organs 

EPG Dose (rem) Upper-Bound EPG Dose (rem)

Alpha Beta + Gamma Alpha Beta + Gamma

Adrenals 0.003 0.01 0.02 0.09

Bone Surface 2 0.3 10 2

Brain 0.003 0.006 0.02 0.06

Breast 0.003 0.009 0.02 0.07

Stomach Wall 0.003 0.08 0.02 0.7

Small Intestine Wall 0.003 0.1 0.02 1

Upper Large Intestine Wall 0.003 0.3 0.02 3

Lower Large Intestine Wall 0.003 0.5 0.02 4

Kidney 0.006 0.009 0.05 0.08

Liver 0.3 0.06 2 0.4

Extrathoracic Region 0.02 0.9 0.2 9

Lung 0.05 0.9 0.4 8

Muscle 0.003 0.009 0.02 0.08

Pancreas 0.003 0.01 0.02 0.09

Red Marrow 0.06 0.04 0.5 0.4

Spleen 0.003 0.009 0.02 0.08

Testes 0.02 0.007 0.2 0.06

Thymus 0.003 0.02 0.02 0.1

Thyroid 0.003 0.9 0.02 9

Urinary Bladder Wall 0.003 0.03 0.02 0.3 * Initial gamma and neutron doses are treated separately and are based on the actual participant’s 

exposure conditions at the time of detonations.

Table 6. Cancer Cases not Recommended for Expedited Processing for

Task Force WARRIOR

Organ or Tissue Cancer NTPR Standard

Organs 

Total Upper-Bound Organ Dose 

(External + Internal + Initial) 

(rem)

Total upper-bound dose larger than the screening dose

Thyroid Thyroid 16

Total upper-bound dose below but close to the screening dose

Liver Liver 9.5
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 13 of 14

6. References

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2008. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.2. Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort 

Belvoir, VA. October 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2010. Standard Operating Procedures Manual for 

Radiation Dose Assessment, Revision 1.3/1.3a. DTRA-SOP-10-01, Defense Threat 

Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. January 31/March 31. 

DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), 2011. Technical Approach to Expedited Processing 

of NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. DTRA-TR-10-29, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. 

Glasstone, S. and Dolan, P.J., 1977. The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. Third Edition. U.S. 

Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Energy.

Goetz, J. L., Kaul, D., Klemm, J., and McGahan, J.T., 1979. Analysis of Radiation Exposure For 

Task Force WARRIOR–Shot SMOKY–Exercise Desert Rock VII – VIII, Operation 

PLUMBBOB. DNA 4747F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. May 31.

Harris, P.S., Lowery, C., Nelson, A.G., Obermiller, S., Ozeroff, W.J., and Weary, E., 1981. Shot 

SMOKY, A Test of the PLUMBBOB Series, DNA 6004F, Defense Nuclear Agency, 

Washington, DC. May 31.

Kocher, D.K., Trabalka, J.R., and Apostoaei, A.I., 2009. Derivation of Effective Resuspension 

Factors in Scenarios for Inhalation Exposure Involving Resuspension of Previously 

Deposited Fallout by Nuclear Detonations at Nevada Test Site. DTRA-TR-09-15, 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30.

Maag, C., Wilkinson, M., Striegel, J., and Collins, B., 1983. Shot HOOD, A Test of the 

PLUMBBOB Series. DNA 6002F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC. May 13. 

NRC (National Research Council), 1989. Film Badge Dosimetry in Atmospheric Nuclear Tests. 

National Academy Press, Washington, DC. December.

NRC (National Research Council), 2003. A Review of the Dose Reconstruction Program of the 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.

Raine, D.A. III, Egbert, S.D., Stiver, J.H., and Case, D.R., 2007. FIIDOS - A Computer Code for 

the Computation of Fallout Inhalation and Ingestion Dose to Organs, Computer User’s 

Guide, Revision 4. DTRA-TR-07-11, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, 

VA. May.

SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation), 2006. FBDOSE User’s Guide, Science 

Applications International Corporation, McLean, VA. June 26.

VA (Department of Veterans Affairs), 2010. “Disease subject to presumptive service 

connection”. Title 38, Part 3.309, Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=%2Findex.tpl. Accessed 

October 18. 
Operation PLUMBBOB Task Force WARRIOR

Page 14 of 14

Weitz, R. L., Case, D. R., Chehata, M., Egbert, S. D., Mason, C. L., Singer, H. A., Martinez, D. 

G., McKenzie-Carter, M. A., Shaw, R. S., and Stiver, J. S., 2009. A Probabilistic 

Approach to Uncertainty Analysis in NTPR Radiation Dose Assessments. 

DTRA-TR-09-13, and Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November.

Weitz, R. L., and Egbert, S. D., 2010. Compilation of Initial Radiation Doses to Atmospheric 

Test Participants (Revision 1). NTPR-TM-09-01 (R1). Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, Fort Belvoir, VA. November 30. 
DISTRIBUTION LIST

DTRA-TR-11-01 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Technical Information Center

Attn: DTIC/OCA 

8725 John J. Kingman Road

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency

Attn: RD-NTSN

8725 John J. Kingman Road, 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201

Defense Threat Reduction Information Analysis Center

Attn: OP-ONIUI

8725 John J. Kingman Road

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Department of Veterans Affairs

Veterans Health Administration

Director, Environmental Agents Service (10P3A)

810 Vermont Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20420

Department of Veterans Affairs

Veterans Benefits Administration

Director, Compensation Service (211B) 

810 Vermont Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20420

Department of Veterans Affairs

VA Regional Office

Attn: Director (21 - Radiation) 

1600 East Woodrow Wilson Ave.

Jackson, MS 39216

FEDERAL AGENCY ADVISORY BOARDS

Veterans’ Advisory Board on Dose Reconstruction

801 North Quincy Street, Suite 600

Arlington, VA 22203 
Veterans’ Advisory Committee on Environmental Hazards

Department of Veterans Affairs

Compensation Service (211)

810 Vermont Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20420 

NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES

SAIC, Inc.

8301 Greensboro Drive, M/S E-5-5 

McLean, VA 22102

L-3 Services, Inc.

11410 Isaac Newton Square North, Suite 103

Reston, VA 20190-5005 

SENES Oak Ridge, Inc.

102 Donner Drive

Oak Ridge, TN 37830

Oak Ridge Associated Universities

9950 W. 80th Ave., Ste 17

Arvada, CO 80005