I’ve often heard and read that the selection of Rocky Flats as the location where a new nuclear weapons production facility code named “Project Apple” would be constructed was flawed because those doing the selection used wind direction at what was then the Stapleton Field, which led them to believe the wind would frequently blow towards the mountains instead of toward Denver. I recently found a copy of the report prepared by the Austin Company titled “Engineering Survey and Report for Santa Fe Operations Office of the Atomic Energy Commission on the Location and Site for Project Apple” in the archives of the Rocky Flats Museum.  The report, which was submitted on March 27, 1951, says in the cover letter, “As we advised representatives of…the Atomic Energy Commission, the Site Review Committee and representatives of the Dow Chemical Company …on March 14 and 15, we have recommended site 4, at Rocky Flats northwest of Denver, as best satisfying the Site Selection Criteria…” The report states that the location was to be “West of the Mississippi River, North of Texas, but include Panhandle Area, South of the northern boundary of Colorado; East of Utah.” There were nine cities that met the preliminary criteria of being 5 to 25 miles from a city of at or near 25,000 people (from which to recruit a work force). The cities were Oklahoma City, Omaha, Lincoln, Amarillo, Springfield, Topeka, Denver, Colorado Springs, and Pueblo. There were 35 sites investigated in the vicinity of those nine cities. Six additional cities with populations fewer than 25,000 were added to the consideration, but none were judged to provide any advantage that would overcome the smaller population.

The site area was required to “…be a square, two miles on a side. Land presently owned or controlled by the Government is preferable.”  The plant area had to meet some basic suitability requirements for building construction and require a minimum displacement of homes and people. It was desired that the region have living conditions, community facilities, and recreational opportunities that would be attractive to workers. A low humidity climate was a primary consideration, since the plant would require significant air conditioning that was expected to be provided by evaporative cooling. Rail, highway, and air transportation factored into the evaluation as well as availability of power, water, and fuel. It was determined that the three Colorado cities were the only ones to meet the crucial climatic criteria. “Pueblo is less suitable than Denver in being less attractive to workers and in being home of Colorado Fuel and Iron’s vital industrial operations (a possible military target). Colorado Springs has the fundamental disadvantage of being served by a relatively small local electrical utility which has no interconnections with other utilities as emergency sources.”

It was determined that a site near Denver would be selected, and dozens of potential sites were evaluated. It is frequently asked why anyone would build a plant manufacturing plutonium components near a major metropolitan area. The report makes it clear that proximity to Denver was a positive consideration to those doing the evaluation. “The field survey reduced (the number of sites) to seven sites which lie nearest to the City of Denver and could be economically served with power, water, railroads, and highways.” (Emphasis added) The seven sites were:

North of and adjacent to the Rocky Mountain Arsenal

Six and a half miles northeast of Brighton

Gunbarrel Hill seven miles northeast of Boulder

Rocky Flats

South of the Federal Center

South of Marston Lake, two miles from Littleton, by the South Platte River

Two miles south of Littleton by the South Platte River

The selected site was Rocky Flats and the alternate was the one by the Rocky Mountain Arsenal. It is interesting that an “advantage” of the Arsenal location was it was nearer to present residential areas and considerably nearer to Stapleton Field. The advantages were overcome by “…the undesirable reaction of the public to having this additional ‘secret’ project close to the civilian installations northeast of Denver and in the South Platte Valley.” One mention of wind direction was in a table that lists “Unfavorable Factors” for the sites south of Marston Lake and the one south of Littleton that the prevailing wind was toward Denver.

I wrote in my book “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats, Urban myths debunked,” that I found arguments that Rocky Flats shouldn’t have been selected because wind directions were misinterpreted to be “tedious.” The Stapleton Field wind rose shows the wind blowing in all directions, including to the north just under a fourth of the time and to the south a tenth of the time. I predict no one who thought or thinks Rocky Flats was a poor place to build a nuclear weapons plant would have endorsed any of the seven Denver locations or the 35 original sites near other cities.