Interview with Robert Hahn, October 29, 2004

Nevada Test Site Oral History Project University of Nevada, Las Vegas Interview with Robert Hahn October 29, 2004 Las Vegas, Nevada Interview Conducted By Mary Palevsky © 2007 by UNLV Libraries Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews conducted by an interviewer/ researcher with an interviewee/ narrator who possesses firsthand knowledge of historically significant events. The goal is to create an archive which adds relevant material to the existing historical record. Oral history recordings and transcripts are primary source material and do not represent the final, verified, or complete narrative of the events under discussion. Rather, oral history is a spoken remembrance or dialogue, reflecting the interviewee’s memories, points of view and personal opinions about events in response to the interviewer’s specific questions. Oral history interviews document each interviewee’s personal engagement with the history in question. They are unique records, reflecting the particular meaning the interviewee draws from her/ his individual life experience. Produced by: The Nevada Test Site Oral History Project Departments of History and Sociology University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 89154- 5020 Director and Editor Mary Palevsky Principal Investigators Robert Futrell, Dept. of Sociology Andrew Kirk, Dept. of History The material in the Nevada Test Site Oral History Project archive is based upon work supported by the U. S. Dept. of Energy under award number DEFG52- 03NV99203 and the U. S. Dept. of Education under award number P116Z040093. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in these recordings and transcripts are those of project participants— oral history interviewees and/ or oral history interviewers— and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U. S. Department of Energy or the U. S. Department of Education. UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 1 Interview with Robert Hahn October 29, 2004 Conducted by Mary Palevsky Table of Contents Introduction: In 1957, Mr. Hahn began working at the Nevada Test Site as an employee of Edgerton, Germeshausen, and Grier [ EG& G]. He worked with high- speed cameras and other diagnostic instruments to measure the effects of nuclear tests. 1 Mr. Hahn describes working conditions at the Nevada Test Site and Enewetak in the late 1950s. 4 Mr. Hahn explains the timing and firing diagnostic tools and photographic equipment used by EG& G to capture scientific data from nuclear tests. 8 Rumors of a moratorium on nuclear testing prompted a flurry of activity at the test site as the laboratories scrambled to finish their tests before the deadline. 10 Competition often arose between Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, which had very different styles of experimentation. 12 The 1958 moratorium on nuclear testing forced the laboratories to conduct experiments which were not weapons- related, such as the Rover project. It also forced the end of atmospheric nuclear testing in favor of underground testing. 13 The Cold War affected the attitudes of workers in the nuclear test program. 16 Secrecy affected test site employees both at work and at home. 18 Mr. Hahn discusses the Rover project, which attempted to develop a nuclear- powered rocket engine ( NRDS). 19 Mr. Hahn was eventually promoted to a management position at EG& G, which allowed him to work with the company’s rapidly developing computer systems. 21 The Baneberry test’s venting of radiation prompted changes in procedures regarding radiological safety. 22 In 1989, Mr. Hahn went to Dallas, Texas to work on for EG& G on the Superconducting Super Collider program. 24 As the Cold War neared an end, programs such as the Joint Verification Experiment [ JVE] and the rise of the Internet fostered a new openness in the nuclear community. 28 Mr. Hahn discusses the managerial and organizational structure of EG& G and the test site. 32 Conclusion: Mr. Hahn narrates a series of photographs documenting his career in the nuclear testing program. 33 UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 1 Interview with Robert Hahn October 29, 2004 in Las Vegas, NV Conducted by Mary Palevsky [ 00: 00: 00] Begin Track 2, Disc 1. Robert Hahn: I graduated from the University of Colorado in 1950 and was working in Denver and Arvada and Pueblo, Colorado. Once I got out of the university, I was looking around for a job. And so I, believe it or not, ended up as a manager of a dime store. And this was in 1957 when I finished my work there. When I was working at the dime store one evening, why, we noticed an ad in the paper. Dr. Lewis Fussell and Bruce Carter— actually it was Bruce Carter— were having interviews for people to join EG& G [ Edgerton, Germeshausen, and Grier]. And 1957 was a year that was sort of the starting of the big buildup in the resumption of testing and actual testing— and actually not resumption but continuation of testing. And so I met with Bruce Carter at the Brown Palace Hotel and we had a discussion. My background at the university was in mathematics, so they were interested in someone with that background. So they invited me for an interview to come to Las Vegas. So my wife and I and two children came to Las Vegas for a brief interview, and within about a month, then, we came back and started my career on June 10, 1957. Mary Palevsky: You mentioned Carter, and what was the other fellow’s name? Bruce Carter and Dr. Lewis Fussell. He was one of the early physicists that had worked in Los Alamos [ National Laboratory], and so he was working with Herb Grier and [ Kennth J.] Germeshausen and [ Harold E.] Edgerton. For a while he was working in Boston, but then eventually they moved from Boston to set up here near the [ Nevada] test site because the testing was done during the summer and spring, and so they needed people to do work here and primarily in analysis of test data. UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 2 I have one other question. When you interviewed, how much did they tell you about— did you know about the test site at that point in time and how much did you learn just sort of in the preliminary—? I did not know much about the test site at that time. But they essentially explained how EG& G was involved with both Los Alamos laboratory and the Livermore laboratory [ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory] and what their responsibilities are in term of timing and firing, recording data, and then actually analyzing data for the two laboratories. And so we ended up coming to Las Vegas and got established. In the meantime, testing in 1957 in the spring got going, but the leading group for all of this analysis and information was done by an analysis group from Boston. EG& G, of course that was the headquarters, and so there was a contingent of people that came from Boston that set up shop at 1622 A Street. And at that point, we started the analysis work for the various information that needed to be extracted from the information that was recorded. It was primarily of two phases. One was so- called fireball information and then the other was actually the alpha data information which sort of corroborated the two ways of what the yield of the particular device was. The alpha data. Yes. So you’re analyzing certain qualities of the fireball. Well, actually what we were doing was determining the growth of the fireball, and that in turn was related to the actual energy involved in the device. And we did this through— they recorded [ 00: 05: 00] the fireball with very high speed cameras and this information then was related atmospherically and all those things so that we can eventually determine a rate of growth of the UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 3 fireball, which then in turn helped determine what the energy of the device was. We then did the alpha information which sort of corroborated the information a different way. And so that was the early work that I was involved with. I was recruited out of Denver. Another friend of mine, Larry Wegkamp was recruited actually out of Montana. He had worked for Anaconda Copper Mines. And so he came down and we started to assemble an analysis group in Las Vegas. Spell his name. Larry—? Wegkamp. Oh. OK, thank you for that. So you were sort of the initial analysis group on the ground here in Las Vegas? Actually we were in support of the people from Boston. They were the leaders of the information— they had done it before. But they actually moved their entire families out here and spent the summer here. But during the first two months that I was with EG& G I did not have a Q- clearance, so I was working with the engineers and technicians over in the lab facility, which was sort of where the Holsum Bread factory is located and near the Charleston underpass. And it was a pretty large sort of warehouse, and so that worked very well for the things that they were putting together. Primarily they were either setting up oscilloscopes for recording information and checking them out, and then moving this high speed recording electronics equipment to the test site, and eventually setting it up in a bunker— connecting those pieces of equipment to detectors that were placed near the device, and that information then was recorded and we analyzed it. When you’re there, do you have to wait till you have your clearance to actually go out to the site? UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 4 Yes. I never went to the test site until I actually had the Q- clearance, which took two months in those days, and actually that was pretty fast in comparison to what some other people experienced. But once I had the Q- clearance, I can remember the first day driving to the test site and experiencing everything that was going on. The purpose of our going to the test site was acquaintance, but also to determine some preliminary information because there the test directors wanted information as soon as possible as to how things went. And so the leader developing that information, a guy named Don Barnes from Boston, and he led the analysis group here in Las Vegas. What was it like? So this is 1957. I’ve been to the test site three times now and even though there are some activities sort of ramping up, it’s very desolate. Right. And I tried to imagine, the last time I was there— in the fifties, and then in the sixties there were lots of people up there and lots of activity, and maybe you could just describe what it was like when you first went. Well, when I first went, why, I went to control point and of course there was just lots of activity. That’s where the device’s control information was located. All the timing signals were sent out and all the other information to actually detonate the device— and of course that was usually seven, eight miles away or whatever distance from ground zero. And in those days most of the events were balloon- type events, or tower, but everybody was at the control point when this thing actually was detonated. Which was the first detonation you saw, do you remember? I don’t remember the name of the one. [ 00: 10: 00] Yes, but it was ’ 57. UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 5 But it was in 1957, right. Right. But by the same token, while living here in Las Vegas, the events occurred early in the morning, so many’s the time you could be— if for some reason or other you were up, why, you could actually see the sky light up from the detonation. And you know that’s sixty, almost a hundred miles away, and yet we did see the sky change for a little bit. So those were the early days in 1957. Then we did our preparation, and then in 1958 we went overseas to Enewetak. And in Enewetak we were working with Los Alamos laboratory particularly in analyzing their data and giving that information to the laboratory for their own physicists’ interpretation, but we essentially provided them with the raw data as we developed it. Then in ’ 57, in the early days in Las Vegas, to analyze the information we had a very simplified computer system. It was a Burroughs 101 something- or- other and it was a pegboard- type of computer, but it really ground out the information, rather than us sitting there by a calculator— just a National Cash Register calculator— calculating each individual piece of information. But when we went overseas in 1958, the IBM 704 computer came out. And so Los Alamos developed a very large facility in Enewetak, and that was then our processing tool. It had very limited memory compared to what we have in computers today. Its capability was probably less than a PC [ personal computer] that you have on your desk, but it did the job. And again there was a lot of information that we put together from fireball information and health information. And that was my early work with EG& G. When you went to Enewetak, how long did you stay out there? I was there for one three- month stretch, and then I went back a second time for another five weeks. And on Enewetak, it was a fully- contained effort because there were barracks there, and Holmes and Narver provided all the meals, all the logistics that went on. And every Saturday UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 6 night was big steak night, and that was a favorite time of course [ for] everyone there. And one time I saw one man eat six steaks one night. I just couldn’t believe what he was doing. But the camaraderie and the spirit and morale of the people that were doing all that work was just tremendous. And that was [ Operation] Hardtack, phase I and II. Once we came back from that, then they did— let’s see, [ Operation] Hardtack, phase II, was at the test site, a very short period of time, and then we went into the moratorium. Right. Back to Enewetak for a second, or I guess in general, you’re providing this data but it guess it comes to mind more at Enewetak, I guess, because it’s more isolated. Do you have interaction with all sorts of, quote unquote, “ levels of people?” Are you interacting with the physicists and the engineers and the people that are doing support work pretty much, or is it stratified, or what’s the sense there? [ 00: 15: 00] No, you know there were certain people that were responsible for different activities. As far as our work [ was] concerned in analysis, we had to get with the engineers and physicists because there were calibrations and so on that needed to be determined and equipment certified, so to speak, so that the data would be recorded properly. And we knew a lot of the physics involved as it was being recorded. And so there was the interaction that people were down island, so to speak, because they were in the bunkers and recording information, but their calibration, and so on, had to come back and we had to check that out. So there was a lot of interaction with a lot of people, and the computer facility was a great boon for bringing people together. And were the leaders of EG& G, Herb Grier and those folks, would they be out there? I don’t recall seeing Herb out there. But within each organization there was essentially a test leader— and I don’t think that was the exact name of them— but they essentially represented that UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 7 company in doing things, whether it was Holmes and Narver or EG& G, and we got all the other groups that were involved. And then the laboratories of course had their own test directors and so on that controlled information. Right. One person I had the opportunity to speak to who just died was Bob Campbell. I know he was an early test director out at Los Alamos. Yes. Did you know him? I don’t recall seeing him in the testing program overseas, but when I came back and we were in the moratorium and the Rover program was underway at the test site, Bob of course was the test director up there for a long time and so he directed that. And he was a great guy. Yes. Yes, I’m very happy that I was able to meet him. So your family stays here while you’re in— Our families stayed here while we were in Enewetak, but there were times when— through shortwave radio— we were able to contact them, usually maybe once a week or something like that. But the local EG& G contingent always was aware of what the families were doing. If there were any problems, whatever, those would be immediately relayed overseas and if there was something that needed to be done, why, people could deal with that. But the contact between Las Vegas and, say, Enewetak was just pretty good. Now do you have children? Did you have children at this point? We have two children, two sons, and one now presently works for Los Alamos laboratory at the test site. Oh really? At the test site? At the test site, yes. UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 8 So he lives here still. Yes. He went to school in Reno and finished his work there, and then he eventually came back down and started to work for REECo [ Reynolds Electrical and Engineering Company]. And then from REECo he moved into the Los Alamos laboratory effort and has been here since, golly, I don’t know when. Help me understand— one hears about EG& G, your timing and firing, and diagnostics. I also understand from reading, this diagnostics is related intimately— correct me if I’m wrong— with the photographic aspect and this high speed photography that then allows you to diagnose, but explain how that works. The timing and firing pieces— they do that work for the labs who are developing the actual physics of the device—? That’s correct. OK. So what does that mean, in sort of layperson’s terms, to understand what that phrase “ timing and firing” means? Timing and firing means essentially— there is much checkout of various signals, electronic signals, in a hard cable, hard wired signals, that need to be sent to the device to eventually [ 00: 20: 00] get the detonation. But all this has to be put on monitors. People have to essentially go through a countdown system, so that eventually when the system is really ready to be fired, that control panel at the control point has everything in line. And they know that everything is set and going so that the information, once the device is fired, then that information has got to be recorded on the electronics equipment that’s recording that particular information. Now in a typical bunker system, there would be as high as three dozen cameras and oscilloscopes with open lens cameras attached to them that would record this information. And of course all this information is being recorded in a very short period of time— a couple of microseconds— so you UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 9 can imagine what has to be done to establish all that equipment so that it’s going to do its job when it comes. Now that’s in terms of getting the alpha information. Fireball information is of course involved with above ground devices that are in atmospheric testing. Essentially we’re looking at trying to understand the growth of the fireball as it goes, and eventually it ends up with a mushroom cloud. But in terms of our diagnostic information, that’s doesn’t mean anything, you see. It’s the fireball itself that we are concerned with. And we had developed a special set of diagnostics— equipment, microscope equipment— that we used to put that information together. Most of that was recorded on sixteen- millimeter film, eight- millimeter film, and so we would run this through the microscopes and make measurements a frame at a time. Right. Right. That’s interesting, because I just recalled— I hadn’t recalled it when I was mentioning Bob Campbell, but that’s one of the things he told me was that people don’t appreciate the importance of the photographic equipment in this day and age, how key that was, the images. Oh, that’s correct. Yes. And I guess as things developed electronically, that became less and less important. Well, but as time went on, we went from atmospheric testing to down the holes, and so the devices were put well underground so that you didn’t have that information to look at. And so then you needed to just rely on the so- called alpha information. Interesting. So you come back from the Pacific for Hardtack II, and I’ve spoken to several people from sort of different perspectives about that test series. What was your involvement with that? Well, Hardtack II, you know, that was before the moratorium. And again we were involved with preliminary analysis of information that the directors needed. We’d bring that information back UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 10 down to Las Vegas and analyze it, and then provide that information to Los Alamos or Livermore. And I can remember the last day, as I recall, I think there were four tests on the last day. That was really a hectic day because it was done in Frenchman Flats up in the forward areas, and what a schedule that was. It was almost a twenty- four- hour day as far as things getting set up and handled and, oh, it was just amazing how that went about. [ 00: 25: 00] How early did you have wind that the moratorium was in the works, you know, at the test site itself? I don’t recall how far ahead we had that information, but we knew it was coming. And the laboratories were controlling how that was going to be handled and what sequence of events would occur as we were getting up into the moratorium. And of course those two laboratories were the real— along with Sandia Laboratories— controlling entities that put that all together. And then once the moratorium went into effect, and that was until 1961, during that period of time, why, eventually the size of the EG& G organization decreased here in Las Vegas. Once the testing started to get going again in ’ 61, then EG& G— I guess eventually there were like ten thousand people at the test site at one time. A couple of questions come to mind. So the moratorium goes into effect and it���s hectic. It sounds like what you’re saying is, if I’m understanding you correctly, that the labs are directing what you all need to be doing and that makes it very hectic on the ground to try to complete all those tests. That’s correct. Well, they were essentially coordinating all that and saying what the requirements are. They’re eventually responsible back to the Atomic Energy Commission [ AEC] and all the other activities that are going, so the laboratories are responsible for putting together all the technical data. UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 11 One of the people I also interviewed was Louis Wouters up at Livermore who had this, what’s it called, Reaction History Group. That’s correct. So would this kind of data possibly that you’re doing be supplied to someone like him? It was actually supplied to him directly, yes. Oh, interesting. And his group was one of the groups that we provided information that we had determined. So he would take that raw data— He would take what we put together and then he would get with other physicists and other groups within the laboratory and then they’d eventually use that to analyze how that information and that particular device and set parameters for future tests. So they’re actually, I guess, they’re learning about these reactions at that time as it happens. That’s correct. [ 00: 28: 18] End Track 2, Disc 1. [ 00: 00: 00] Begin Track 3, Disc 1. OK, so the work at the test site and the information that we gathered really ended up with Louis Wouters’ group. And then at Los Alamos there was a group similar to that, and we provided them information. There’s much discussion, especially I think at the labs when I go there, of the differences between the two models of how they’re doing their science and how they’re doing their tests. Was that something that you were ever aware of? Were there different styles, or would that impact you in any way? UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 12 There were different styles but it wasn��t too apparent in terms of the work and information that we were putting together. We realized that, you know, Los Alamos was much more conservative in terms of doing their thing versus Livermore, and so that was sort of apparent, but it didn’t really create any difficulty or what have you with— Yes, because you’re just supplying them with the data. We’re supplying the information. We’re doing the work for them, and doing it according to how they wanted it, and they set a lot of the parameters of what we needed to do. So by “ conservative,” Los Alamos versus— what would that mean to a layperson? Conservative in what sense? Well, how should I say that? They were doing things more based on the information that had been developed in the past and didn’t develop new techniques and so on. They developed new techniques, but they were slower at doing this in terms of what Livermore was doing. Livermore was really just sort of moving way ahead in terms of those things that they wanted to do, so it was a different style of operation. But in both cases it worked out well for EG& G. Did you tend to do an equal amount of work, EG& G, or you in your position for both of them, or—? Initially that was true, but eventually Los Alamos started to pull back some of the work that they wanted to have done. EG& G responded to that because, you know, that’s just the way they wanted to do it. And so we said, Hey, whatever we need to do for you, let us know and we’ll support you. But EG& G always was involved in the timing and firing and the initial setup of all the equipment and running the various tests. UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 13 Yes. That’s really interesting because I’m trying to sort of get a sense in my mind of the organizational structure, and you’ve got the labs and the AEC and the contractors for all these various functions, specialties, I guess you’d say. Right. But it eventually came down to each test director for each laboratory for the test site that pulled things together— assembled meetings and got, whether it was the weather data that the Weather Bureau had to put together, which Phil Allen and his group were involved with— but the director particularly was responsible for getting it put together. Yes. So what kinds of stuff did you do during the moratorium? Well, during the moratorium we were analyzing some additional information for the two labs. And then as time went on we were developing techniques— well, we then got involved with the Rover program and the effort that was going on there, and that lasted for two, three years almost. And so here in Las Vegas the analysis group then did some information in terms of keeping up with what was going on the weapons side. We assembled a group of information people and we did analysis work for the Rover program, and that was for Los Alamos. The Rover [ 00: 05: 00] program provided essentially a means of keeping— many of the physicists and engineers that were involved within the weapons side ended up working on the Rover program. It was a place for them to work and to continue to have their expertise and their knowledge. And what about that for yourself? I would imagine you— what was your degree from Colorado? What’s it in? My degree from Colorado was in mathematics in 1950 with a minor in accounting and some physics work. And during the moratorium one of the things that we were doing was putting together some computer information. After the moratorium, EG& G started to buy computer equipment for the laboratory and using computer equipment for our own work. And so as time UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 14 went on I eventually got involved in helping to establish guidelines and procedures and controls for acquiring computer equipment and relating it to the various activities at the test site. And in one of the early— let’s see, it was 1964, I guess— we purchased a used Control Data 1604 computer system, thirty- two thousand words of memory. It was a giant computer in terms of how much room and space it needed, and cooling. And to get information into it we used punch card equipment, which of course is no longer available or needed today. So as time went on, that’s where I migrated into, starting to help with the development of computer equipment and its use. Oh great. I want to talk about that some more, but before that, what kind of experience is it for you as a mathematician and a thinker? Are you learning things as you go? Is this a job where you’re learning new information that you didn’t have before, or pretty much doing the same things? No, certainly there was new information that we were all getting and had to deal with. And there was some training that went along with that, primarily interacting with the physicists and engineers and trying to figure out just precisely how are we going to record this new information, or record the information, and what equipment is available at the time. And eventually there was a lot of— in terms of analysis of information and getting information early, the Livermore group developed some very special equipment to record that. And eventually some of it was adopted by Los Alamos. OK, so let’s talk a little bit about the end of the moratorium and then this shift, basically, with the treaty to underground testing, because I think there’s not a general— at least on the public’s part, maybe not even on the scholars’ part— understanding of this complete change, or radical change, in the way you all were doing your work. Or is it? UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 15 Well, in some sense of the word it was a change because we no longer relied on fireball and had to do that particular work. But we still had the diagnostic information with the oscilloscopes and the various detectors and so on, and the laying of cables, in order to gather that information. So there was a lot of work involved in getting that information, because it was down hole now, [ 00: 10: 00] that is where it was developed. So all this cabling information, cable system, had to be established and connected to the bunker systems where all these large array of oscilloscopes were located. That information was displayed on those oscilloscopes and with the cameras collected, recorded on film, and film processed, and then we analyzed that information from there. But you’re no longer, or are you any longer, able to look at the explosion itself directly underground? I mean not directly. Photographically, I’m trying to say. Photographically— in terms of the sense of like a fireball gathering— we did not do that at that time, because the cameras would be destroyed. It just was not feasible to do that. But with the detectors, specific kinds of detectors that recorded the information various distances from the device, that information could be relayed out through the cables before they were destroyed. So that information, then, was recorded on the oscilloscopes and recorded on film and then we analyzed it from there. So the diagnostics underground, or the above ground in terms of the alpha information, that was pretty much the same. And it’s this whole problem of staying ahead of the explosion in a certain sense, getting that data out fast enough or— it moves fast enough, I guess— capturing it? Well, it moves up the cable before the cable actually gets destroyed, so that always worked OK. But we needed it all— the cable information, then also the detector information in the device that UNLV Nevada Test Site Oral History Project 16 was being used— to detect the energy out of the device. [ This system was calibrated before the event happened.] We know when a layperson reads the report that the DOE [ Department of Energy] put out of all the tests and it says what it is, weapons related or something like this, do you all, when you’re doing the work, have a sense of what the purpose of a particular test is, say, from the lab’s point of view or the military’s point of view or the Department’s point of view or anything? As far as our analyzing it, we didn’t know that and it wasn’t important to us. Whatever the design criteria that they developed for the device, we were not privy to any of that information. We were just responsible for analyzing that information and whatever we received and putting it together based on previous procedures tha