Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory, San Francisco, California.
This
naval laboratory was the largest naval group in TG 7.1, with 46
civil-
ians and 8 military involved in nuclear radiation projects (Prbpjects
2.5a,
2.6a,
2.7,
and 6.4).
These experiments had an inherent
greater
potential for exposure to nuclear radiation both in data-recovery operations and the associated laboratory operations than others,f.as illustrated by the higher than average exposures for these persohnel
(Table 59).
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C.
NRL was the third majpr naval
laboratory organization participating in CASTLE.
Thirty-three] civil-
ians and six military manned two projects in TU 13, Projects 114 and
2.3, and four interrelated experiments for LASL in TU l.
Naval Receiving Station, Treasure Island, California.
This organigation
furnished three enlisted personnel to NRDL for Project 2.5a.
' hese,
judging from their ratings, were seamen and were likely used 4 buoyrecovery operations.
missible Exposure
One received 11 R, well over the Maximum Per-
(MPE)
of 3.9 R.
Naval Station, New Orleans, Louisiana.
One individual from this sifation
appears on the Consolidated List for TG 7.1, but his test activ ity
cannot be identified.
Naval Supply Activity, Brooklyn, New York.
One individual from thib
or=
ganization was badged with TG 7.1, but his test activity cannot be
identified.
Naval Schools Command, Treasure Island, California.
Four men from this
organization were used by NRDL in Project 6.4, all in the "Pers pnnel
Protection"
{radsafe)
activity.
Exposures for this group are s bmewhat
lower than for others who participated in this same activity fof Project 6.4.
Exposures for Naval Schools Command men are given in
59, which includes a fifth man whose activity cannot be definit
associated with any test project or other discrete activity.
338
rable
ly