AEC contractors

I. The technical editor of an organic chemicals firm, in reviewing past difficulties, stressed the pirating of personnel among AEC contractors. He told of filling a chemist-editor s position by compromising for a biologist who had once prepared army parts manuals, only to have him snatched away by a competitor in less time than the 9 months it had taken to fill the position I He likewise deplored the personnel turnover in the library and related how the responsibility for it finally devolved upon the reports file super-... 

Providing a common approach to system safety and safety management to be used throughout the AEC and by AEC contractors... 

JCAE, Hearings on Government Indemnity for Private Licensees and AEC Contractors against Reactor Hazards, 84th Cong., 2d sess., 1956, pp. 63-64. 

A semimonthly journal. Nuclear Science Abstracts 19)is issued by the AEC. It contains abstracts and an index of all current nonclassified research and development reports disseminated by the AEC and its contractors, as well as pertinent nonclassified reports issued by other government agencies or appearing in foreign and domestic journals. 

Electronic and instrument shop. This shop is planned to serrice health physics instruments, radio equipment, alarm system, intercommunication system, etc. This includes all equipment directly under the jurisdiction of the AEC. Servicing of reactor, process, and experimental instruments will be handled by the operating contractor of each particular reactor project. 

Between November,- 1947 and January, 1948 certain administrative decision s were made which changied plans for construction of the MTR or High Flux Reactor at Clinton Laboratories. The Kellex Corporation was withdrawn as design contractor in November, 1947. On December 27. 1947 the AEC announced a decision to centralize reactor development at Argonne National-Laboratory (ANL). This included responsibility for the High.Flux Reactor. It was also announced that Monsanto Chemical, Company would terminate its direct ion. of Clinton Laboratories and that the Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Division of the Union Carbide and Carbon Corporation would assume direction, early in 19-48-The name of the laboratory was officially changed to Oak Ridge National Laboratory- (ORNL). 

Another source of information on atomic energy consists of the meetings and conferences sponsored by the AEC and its contractors. A list and description of the proceedings of these conferences, Proceedings of Technical Meetings, has been issued. 

Tucked away on a high mesa in northern New Mexico, the Los Alamos complex constituted a third major facility of the Manhattan Project. This weapons research-and-development center, renamed after the war the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, had been the key meeting ground for scientists working on the bomb, and it remained the major facility for development of atomic weapons. The University of California operated it for the AEC. In 1950 the agency contracted with the university to open a second weapons-research center in Livermore, California, near San Francisco. The Livermore Laboratory concentrated on developing new and improved types of nuclear weapons. Since the university had been a pioneer in atomic research, it was a logical contractor for those facilities. 

Headed by James W. Parker, president of the Detroit Edison Company, the committee included senior officials of the electric-power industry and industrial-research corporations. After a year s work the group s final report recommended that more technical information be declassified and published and that more contact be allowed between AEC staff, contractors, and industry representatives. The report, however, did not indicate what was perhaps the committee s most positive contribution to atomic-power development. Its work provided knowledge of Commission activities to its members, who were influential leaders of American industry. ... 

This extensive report became a standard document by which the AEC staff and the Safeguard Committee judged the hazards of a reactor. The staff first reviewed it, then sent the report to the committee. It considered the report in two ways. If there were no new or unusual problems either in the report or in the staff comments on it, the committee passed judgment without a formal meeting. If major issues or new types of reactors were involved, the staff and representatives of the contractor were called before the committee to provide additional information."... 

In the summer of 1972, the AEC initiated a major probabilistic study, the Reactor Safety Study (RSS). Professor Norman C. Rasmussen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology served (half-time) as the study director. Saul Levine of the AEC served as full-time staff director of the AEC employees that performed the study with the aid of many contractors and... 

---