Fallout shelter

I searched around here and on a few other forums and found little, to no discussion on perhaps one of the least prepared for public emergencies that could occur. We can have plans in place for wild fires, tornados, and hurricanes, etc.... But from a terrorist perspective one "event" that would have federal/state and local authorities in OUR country scrambling is a nuclear event. The objective (real) danger would be potentially smallish (depending), and yet would leave the general public in hysterics, and scrambling to understanding their risk and how to even proceed. The SUBJECTIVE (percieved) danger would VERY high. In this spirit I have begun a collection and understanding of pertinant issues of NBC events and how to protect my young family at least for the 1-3 months while things "cool down". We cannot know who, what, where, when, but there are some general things one can do to be knowlegable, and even slightly more prepared. I would likely to begin at least a general dialog that would surpass the government's "Duct tape and plastic" solution (quite funny actually). Some countries have historically had quite comprehensive NBC shelters (Swiss, and Russian). The historc arguements of "Mutually Assured Destruction" MAD, worked with the Soviets, but today there is no "other" to "destroy". Also, missing and prolilfic "nucs" floating around, and terrorists seeking them. Makes for a very bad "cocktail".

I am not fear mongering, just thinking prudently, and attempting to create some degree of preparedness. I am VERY surprised some "officals" dont at least recognize the risk more publically.

Ironwood (former Army SpecOps targeting guy)

Google: Nuclear War Survival Skills by Kearney

This tells one how to build expedient and full blown fallout shelters

My plan is a "non-ground zero" shelter mostly oriented toward earth shielded and marginal blast proofness. We are not a good target where I live. just likely to get downwind impact. Thanks for the recommendation .

Ironwood

if you start with the "duct tape and plastic"....a positive ventilation structure that would prevent contaminated particles from entering... with some decontamination station provided for anyone needing to exit/ re enter

presumes you are outside the immediate blast and thermal effect range and plan on sheltering in place...that the device is a fission, or fission-fusion-fission device that is somewhat dirty and produces decay daughters from the fissionable source that are bone or tissue seekers in the human body... most likely source material of plutonium or uranium and fission produced radioisotopes (the usual suspects) strontium a +2 oxidation element that would replace calcium and magnesium in the body....cesium a +1 oxidation that would replace potassium and sodium, and iodine found in the thyroid... stores of potassium iodide or equivalent, vitamin or mineral supplements

alpha, beta and gamma radiation... neutrons would be present at the initiation, but found only in fissionable materials..

alpha is the easiest to defeat, but because of the size the most damaging if allowed to enter the body... check of food stuffs and R95 or N95 masks...decontamination routine showering... usually has about a 10cm decay range

beta is a high speed electron, small in size but is still ionizing and disrupts about 1000x the area provided by a strike of a tissue containing atom/electron in the body

gamma...high energy electromagnetic wave...ionizes tissue...travels in straight line, so entrance to a earth shielded shelter needs to have a right angle separating the living area and outside entrance

having a 3 month supply of food and water would be a start...burn supplies and radiation monitoring equipment (monitors that rely on a Geiger-Muller ionization tube will block alpha and beta by the detector tube construction) so probably a scintillation counter would be the best...

my bet on a location would be a port area where a device could be entered in a conex container...

a good thought problem, but a couple dozen dedicated individuals shooting out power stations across the Eastern seaboard would be a whole lot easier to accomplish, and a whole lot cheaper

comments...

I live in DC and would just as soon the bomb, if there is to be a big one here, fell on my head. In any event, I don't expect to have any advance notice.

There was a report issued this winter that said the likelier terrorist nuclear scenario - a small yield ground explosion - would not be as terrible for the region as once postulated because high-rise buildings will contain some of the blast.

And, encouraging to me depending on what time of day and exactly where in town it hit: brick rowhouses would be a pretty effective shelter from radiation -- especially one a few addresses in from the corner. That's if the bomb were not too close, of course.

I posted the link to that document on ETS sometime over the winter.

Think that instead of the 1950s backyard shelter I'd be looking at hardening an interior area of my home. If at work or elsewhere when it happens, oh well....

There is a lot to be said for a fallout shelter, and remember that a suitable structure will also give protection against fire, tornadoes, earthquakes and blast.

It could however be argued that a fallout shelter is less needed now than in the cold war era.
At that time there was considered to be a risk of large scale attack with numerous nuclear weapons. Shelter would then be vital, evacuation not being feasible if a large part of the country was affected.

Todays risk would appear to be terrorists aquiring a single nuclear device. Evacuation after use of such would be feasible as most of the rest of the country should be unaffected.

IMHO spending on just a fallout shelter might not be justified, unless it is designed to also withstand earthquakes, tornadoes, fire, and civil disorder.

An all purpose "doom shelter" is more worth considering.

I am aware of one in the UK.
It consists of an underground concrete shelter with 3 high security entrances. Food, water, and fuel are stored sufficient to shelter a family for several months.
It is designed to withstand the following
A direct hit with a conventional explosive bomb, such as a vehicle bomb parked adjacent.
A nuclear weapon detonation a few miles away.
Fallout
Extreme weather, including collapse of nearby buildings.
Attack with chemical or biolgical weapons.
Criminal or terrorist attack with automatic weapons, grenades, and demolition charges.

If you are rich and paranoid, why not? The construction industry can use the stimulus....

Don't be surprised. I don't want to stray into the political realm too far except to say that any negative talk about things "nuclear" in this post-Cold War era has the risk of negatively impacting a multi-billion dollar nuclear industry that depends on people feeling comfortable with the technology, and who contribute a lot of campaign money to politicians and lobbyists.

Just noting another change from the 1950's is that nobody at all is home a large part of the day.

With moms working, if the bomb goes off during daylight hours, the home shelter won't be occupied for awhile (if at all).

Employer-provided shelter anyone???

I actually work at home, my wife less than a mile away, and my kids are within 3 miles. So,.... we could reconviene at our home within about 15-20 minutes. Additionally, I am looking to do this in the most resourceful way possible. I have moved 5000 tons of fill last year and 2000 already this year, so it is not like a have to invest in a 20K hole to begin my shelter. I think as an ETS thinker we should all at least educate those around us as well as ourselves. Self hardening of a home or row house makes sense. Yes, I am thinking smallish scale event wit hlarge scale percieved danger...... thanks for chiming in,


Ironwood

Ironwood, could you clarify something because I'm a bit confused about your stated goals. On the one hand, you want a shelter against blast forces, although you only expect downwind effects, meaning fallout, I assume? I don't mean to bust your chops just for the sake of it, but just trying to get a clearer focus of what kind of situation you're trying to prep for. And I'm certainly no armchair expert on radiation and nuclear war scenarios, so for what it's worth--

Unless some nation-state is attacking us with ICBM's from a long distance, I wonder if it is practical to plan on a scenario where there is enough warning seek shelter from blast effects? Seems that a relatively small, low yield nuke device snuck into a high value target area and exploded at or near ground level surreptitiously would be a more likely scenario today. Sounds like you don't live in a high value area, like DC or Manhattan.

Have you considered making evacuation your primary response? If downwind effects are your main worry, I would personally get out of Dodge, especially with young kids. Unlike a full scale nuclear exchange that we all feared during the Cold War, an isolated nuke is going to leave plenty of areas to escape to. There isn't as much need to hunker down for weeks or months nowadays IMHO. And as Chernobyl and Fukushima demonstrate, it's not like these radionuclides that contaminate your area are going to just fizzle and disappear any time soon. The sooner you can leave the affected area, the less damage to you and your family. I think in your situation, I would worry more about the longterm damage to your family, and less on the acute effects so that's where my thinking is coming from.

So, assuming something like an isolated detonation and no major direct blast or gamma ray effects to really worry about, I think I would focus on evacuation. I may hunker down for a short time to let the most radioactive, short half-life radionuclides and fallout dissipate first and figure out which way the radioactive plume is heading, then proceed to bug out. Not sure if there would also be a mad rush to escape at first or not. Nutritional measures to mitigate radiation exposure inside our bodies, respiratory protection, particularly for the kids, and having enough uncontaminated food and water to make it to safety. Of course, if EMP is in play in your area, too, and knocks out all transporation... Hmm, that's a pickle.

A small nuke set off near ground level should have a very small EMP footprint.

The latest information I've read suggests that modern cars will suffer significantly less from EMP than originally feared.

Yes, that's a big if regarding EMP. A terrorist scenario will likely not be a high altitude detonation. Then again, a different terrorist scenario would be an EMP attack using a device specifically created for that, like a high power microwave-type weapon, but that's another topic.

I've read that about modern cars, too, although I don't know if anyone has actually tried to test that out in one of the few facillities that can simulate an EMP. So, that may just be an educated guess by someone.

find an old copy of "Life After Doomsday" by Bruce D. Clayton, best how-to-survive-a-nuclear-attack manual i've found, which contains many references to, and even copies of, Kearney's documents. having been published in 1980 its a bit outdated but much of the basic info is still important. plus its useful for finding the right mind-set and focus.

i just checked to see if the book is still available and it is.

additionally, amazon posted this info about the author:
"...Clayton is a state-certified instructor of radiological defense techniques and fallout shelter management in California and has been trained in disaster shelter management and damage assessment by the American Red Cross. ..."

Arny,

No worries on chop busting. In addition to many other talents I am a welder and blacksmith and will do all the necessary protections but not the super crazy door specs (like a vault with internal rods). I will do the 90 degree turn, heavy door (concrete reinforced)but not one of the $4000 dollar ones. so, to answer, it will primarily be fallout shelter with some blast hardening options. ventilation system will be simple but effective, likely use a large butterfly valve with removable rods as a backup (cheap and common wood dust airlock type)should suffice.Mostly doing this on the cheap, and self building. I work in many mediums and in all sorts of ways, tinkerer, inventor, designer.

Yes, consider evac. and have some preps in that regard. challenge is fuel stockpiling, I usually have 300 gallon diesel here for truck (forklift/ truck crane to load it on truck/trailer with)You really cant stockpile gasoline in any quantity due to shelf life issues. Bug out issues include traffic jambs, road problems (human panic type), and go to where (long term location)? Also, what if you blow some tires, how you gonna get those fixed in the middle of a crisis? Got foam filled tires or run flats? Just some thoughts. I would rather wait it out here for a few critical weeks, then move once known issues would be addressed. Ideal bug out vehical, is diesel, dually, carrying fuel and water, split 50/50 truck trailer. ditch trailer if need be. fuel is 2400lbs, water is about same wieght.

I just think a smart targeting plan (terrorist side) will include small nuke with the potenial for other elements dominoing afterward. This would create multiple risks to public health, and hence panic. I do have full face masks for the kids and my wife and I and picked up some new "riot control" MSA filters (40 that retail for $38 each for $100 for all 40 pieces new in sealed pouches) These are for tear gas so may not be effective for other gases but better than just a particulate filter. I have been reading up on decon issues and proceedures and decon rooms. gonna get some Tyvek suits to keep in the bag with the masks. Mostly wanna keep the kids safe. they are young, I may even have them dress up next Halloween in their suits to make them more comfortable with the idea of wearing them.

Ironwood

From the thread this winter on the recent report on a DC nuke scenario:


In sum, duck and cover....

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/fema/ncr.pdf


Posted at 10:48 AM ET, 03/16/2012

Government study predicts the fallout of a nuclear terrorist attack in D.C.

"A recent study conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) analyzed the specific implications of nuking the intersection of 16th and K streets NW.

The key to the question, it seems, is the size of the bomb. Ten kilotons is considered “small” by nuclear weapon standards and would presumably leave survivors, according to the study."


The study itself:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/fema/ncr.pdf

"Another urge to overcome is the desire to flee the area (or worse, run into fallout areas to reunite with family members), which can place people outdoors in the first few minutes and hours when fallout exposures are the greatest.Those outside or in vehicles will have little protection from the penetrating radiation coming off fallout particles as they accumulate on roofs and the ground.

Sheltering is an early imperative for the public within the broken glass and blast damage area, which could extend for several miles in all directions from a blast.There is a chance that many parts of the area may not be affected by fallout; however, it will be virtually impossible to distinguish between radioactive and non- radioactive smoke, dust, and debris that will be generated by the event (see Figure 5). Potentially dangerous levels of fallout could begin falling within a few minutes."

And also from that winter thread:



This little nuke could cause "flash blindness" during daytime out to 12 miles - the blindness could last from several seconds to minutes. That'll make the traffic cams interesting viewing.

Also EMP discussion. Lots of interesting detail in this report.

Must remember: bright flash = don't look out the windows.


"Because of EMP and effects of a blast wave on critical infrastructure (e.g., power and communication substations), for planning purposes it should be expected that electricity and land line communication would not be functional in the SDZ, MDZ, and LDZ.The disrupting nature of the detonation, including a sudden loss of electrical load on the power grid and the possibility of cascading infrastructure issues may affect the electrical and communication infrastructure of surrounding counties.

Fortunately it is likely that most battery (or hand crank) radios in the LDZ will still function. Moreover, emergency radio broadcasts from surrounding areas will be received and instructions provided (EMPC, 2008). Modern vehicles would also likely be unaffected outside of the SDZ and MDZ; however, debris on roadways, traffic accidents caused by flash blindness, and the loss of traffic control systems (one of the more sensitive electronic systems with respect to EMP effect) will make vehicular travel challenging in the LDZ."

Makes a lot of sense to harden part of the house - interior space or basement - especially in areas also prone to wind events.

Given the space, money (or skills to to it yourself) - a shelter in the yard that accessed the house via a tunnel as well as a separate surface access seems worthwhile, too.

It's not on my priority list but we're all about noodling scenarios on ETS and there is still a nuclear threat - with more dimensions than commonly imagined even thirty years ago.

I read somewhere that the nuclear power reactors which provide a lot of electricity need the grid to power their coolant pumps. A safeguard so the the very reliable grid would provide for this critical function. If an EMP causes a grid cascade, those pumps get turned off. If that power is not restored quickly, the nuclear blast may be the least of our problems. Fukushima on steroids, here...

Every site has backup power. Fukushima would not have gone the way it did if the tsunami hadn't taken out all the backup power.

Just how robust are those back-ups? Back-up systems have a limited duration. They are designed to be on-line until normal power is restored. If the grid is down long-term other arrangements will need to be made.

The obvious limitation is fuel supply to the generators. But chances are pretty good that it's a long-enough supply to continue pumping until decay heat levels drop.
A good design would then implement natural circulation or some other relatively passive means to dissipate the decay heat after the pumps are stopped.

But if you could get diesel fuel to the site continuously, then you could run the generators continuously (until they break).

I have a buddy who is an engineer in the Nuclear field here locally, and the new Westinghouse AP1000 design just got final design certification, this system is a PASSIVE system so if in case of loss of power etc,.... it should be able to natually convect (not that that will help us in our current state of affairs). Additionally, you just never know!!!

I did read that DC report from last winter a few months back as well, thanks for linking it.

"and there is still a nuclear threat - with more dimensions than commonly imagined even thirty years ago." My thoughts exactly.

I would love to do a "tunnel connect" to my house but it is just not feasible too much bedrock. Where backfill is possible on our 20+ acres is about 500' from the house. Again trying to do this low budget, the idea of a 30,000 lbs excavator with a rock hammer doesnt fit into my low budget, LOL

Ironwood

Excellent reasoning and even better advice. Thank you.

>I actually work at home, my wife less than a mile away, and my >kids are within 3 miles. So,.... we could reconviene at our >home within about 15-20 minutes.

In the novel Resurrection Day by Brendan DuBois (excellent); a post atomic war USA, has gangs of feral orphans on the streets because all the parents naturally went straight to the schools for them when the missiles started landing. And the surest way to end up dead is to be outside in the fallout.

qjs

I'm not familiar with that book so this is not a direct comment on the storyline, but children are far more vulnerable to radiation than adults are. The younger they are, the more sensitive they are and the more likely they are to suffer short and long term effects.

That's why my main advice regarding Ironwood's question was to consider just getting the heck away, for the sake of his kids. Evacuate, and if you need to come back to the house later on, then just have the adults return to the hot zone. Or better yet (in a cold, calculating, amoral way), send the grandparents back to retrieve things.

As a grandfather, I resemble that remark! Actually, it makes perfect sense to me, and I am pretty sure that is what I would do if the situation ever arose. I suppose morality issues would come into play as to whether the grandparents were fully informed about the circumstances and consequences

If it happened here and I had to do a hasty shelter you bet I would be the last one in after I covered the abandoned old house next doors cement porch floor with dirt, there is a sizeable room under it, and I would use the skidloader to rip the aluminum enclosure off it in short order. I am expendable........

Ironwood

I never have understood this.
1. Why not put a transformer on site & use the power from the turbines to run the cooling pumps?
2. Control the damping rods with an electromagnet connection. If the pumps are out of power long enough for the electromagnets to lose charge, the rods drop.

My understanding is that scramming the control rods is easily done. I also understand that power for cooling is needed long after power generation has ceased.

the NRC requires 7 days of fuel for the back-up generators on site; and 28 days worth readily accessible. If the nuclear power generator(s) shut down, the core of nuclear fuel and the storage pools for spent fuel still need back-up electrical power from elsewhere to continue to circulate water to keep the zirconium cladding on the fuel rods from overheating and melting, as happened at Fukushima.

The robustness of the tanks and their mountings, of the piping running from the tanks to the generators, and of what do if roads to the nuclear plant are severed, are other issues.

I'm a bit hazy on the details of nuclear power plant specs, but I believe that the Fukushima reactors do/did have passive (and pump-less) means to cool the reactors even without power, but I believe that they all failed eventually. Unit 1 had something called an isolation condenser (IC). Unit 4's is called a reactor core isolation condenser (RCIC). Not sure about Units 2 and 3. I don't know if they would be able to cool the reactors enough all by themselves all the way to cold shutdown or whether they are just stop gap measures.

As for #2, I suspect that the practicalities of needing room to periodically load/unload fuel rods from the top of the reactor vessel is why the control rods come up from the bottom.

Good point. It would make it more difficult from above. I'll be the first to admit I don't know much beyond the basics about nuclear reactors. It just seems strange that an electricity producer would have to have grid power to operate.

Under normal operating conditions, a nuclear power plant needs no external source of electricity. The cooling water pumps and other auxilary machinery are powered by using a small proportion of the output power of the reactor.

If however the reactor is shut down, then no power is produced, but the reactor core still produces heat for some time.
Under these conditions power must be either produced on site or imported from the grid, unless the reactor is designed for passive cooling.

The heat produced from a shut down reactor is not constant but steadily reduces, eventually to a level low enough for passive cooling.

Here in the UK a friend has restored to usable condition an abandoned cold war bunker.
Some years ago they purchased land that included a small bunker and originally only regarded this as an interesting relic of the past.

Recently they have cleared out all the junk, steam cleaned and repainted and stocked the shelter.
These shelters are quite basic and rather small, about 7 feet high, 7 feet wide, and 18 feet long.
No air filtration or specific radiation protective measures are installed, but the simple fact of being 20 feet below ground is said to reduce the radiation to one five hundredth of that received on the surface.
Originally no mains services were installed, but I have added grid electricity. This is unlikely to be available after TSHTF, but whilst times are normal grid powered lighting, a dehumidifier and a battery charger are useful.

(BTW, I know that this is a very old thread, but the points raised are still relevant and I saw no point in starting a new thread on the same subject)

How is air supplied? Can a filtration system be added? 20 feet below ground I would be concerned about air supply & quality after the lights go out.

A filtered air supply is required as is a 2" pipe the runs from 1/4" from the lowest part of the floor and then runs straight up to the outside with a flapper valve on top. The 1st brings air in, the 2nd forces CO2 out.

The existing ventilation arrangements are entirely passive. At one end of the shelter is the access shaft and immediately adjacent to this is an air shaft, a second air shaft is at the other end.
This works OK but does not filter the air.

Lighting is battery powered, with candles in reserve.
Any ground water that enters is removed by a small hand pump.
No plumbing is provided, just a chemical closet.

This virtual tour gives a good idea of the design,
video tour of a bunker

Considering the air supply, I'd dump the candles and replace whatever lights you have with low wattage LED's. Candles will literally burn up your air supply. LED's will allow the batteries to last much longer.

I'm assuming the shelter design in the video is more generic than specific to your friend's bunker. If it is just like that with the above ground structures, armored hatch and air vents, very cool.

Were I to have a nice deep fallout shelter, I'd build a greenhouse over it and install an air filter and a small air pump to ensure a good air supply to the bunker during a possibly long period underground. Since there might be an EMP associated with whatever I intended to shelter against, I'd have a couple solar panels in the bunker which would be brought to the surface after the EMP threat passed and would be used to keep the batteries charged, air flowing and lights on. With an EMP in mind I might even consider taking the shelter/greenhouse off-grid so that street power/grid electricity didn't destroy the electric system which would kill the lights and turn off the air. But that's just me thinking without seeing the layout of the subject bunker -- where it's located relative to London or other juicy targets. Worth about $.02 or less...

The virtual video tour is an accurate representation of my friends bunker, many hundreds were built to the same design.

The lighting is all 12 volt fluorescent and LED and with several hundred AH of battery capacity it is most unlikely that the candles would be needed, but it seems sensible to keep them just in case.
BTW, the original lighting was one bulb of 3 watts, that was it in total, no light in access shaft or the chemical closet room.

Here is a link to pictures of an actual shelter, for reasons of security and privacy this is NOT my friends one, but they are all of the same basic design.

restored bunker

They all had the vertical shaft descending into the chemical closet room and tool store, portable generator stored on shelf above closet.
The main room contained shelving or racking behind the door, batteries on bottom shelf.
Fixed or folding table along most of the left hand wall with a cupboard near the end.
Two bunks across end wall.
The detailed internal fit out varied a bit, but the basic structure was identical.

Thanks, I like that more than the simulation -- very nice. Looks like a greenhouse would cover that vertical shaft entrance easily. Plants in the greenhouse would tend to use excess CO2.

If the surface air was contaminated, as in fallout, wouldn't you need a CO2 scrubber (bunker air) or a NBC filter (surface air)for prolonged existance. It seems that pumping radioactive surface air into the shelter, or croaking of CO2 poisoning, would negate the entire idea of a fallout shelter.

That was my thought which is one reason I mentioned having the air pump and filter in my earlier post. The greenhouse is really an enclosure to reduce direct contamination while topside servicing the "air handler". It also serves to protect the solar panels while allowing them to continue working.

I'm a bit surprised the bunker didn't have a filter of some sort when built. They have a contamination wash-down area outside the main room of the bunker, so fallout was considered in their planning, which makes the lack of an air filter puzzling.

Now that is weird, someone has gone to the bother of doing up the Abernite ROC bunker 'End of the World' Last Ditch Observation bunker..which is about 10 minutes drive away from me in the Sidlaw Hills which was part of the DUN Caledonian Sector

http://www.ringbell.co.uk/ukwmo/Page232.htm

So is the cold war - soon to be hot war back on the cards at the moment with the NATO crazies preparing their own version of Operation Barbarossa in the Ukraine..

I'll need to check the other two ROC stations nearby to see if there has been any recent activity to see if I can begin to see a trend at work here!

Coincidentally, the #1 free app on i-Tunes this month is: "Fallout Shelter"


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-...allout-shelter/


I'm downloading it now.


.

I haven't seen so much State Sponsored Propaganda and outright lies since this was on my record player..back when Able Archer 83 was on go, but no seems to listening this time around..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnh7x8aU26g

http://www.spike.com/full-episodes/gujqfa/surviving-disaster-nuclear-attack-season-1-ep-108

not available from the UK

qjs

I was an officer in the Royal Observer Corps responsible for a cluster of six of these 'bunkers'.

We had the job of reporting the fall of nuclear weapons, location and power. Intensity and arrival of fallout (we were responsible for fallout warning of the population) and secondarily providing weather information to provide a wartime forecast service.

The purpose did not include surviving a nuclear war. A destroyed post still provided information in a way.

There was a programme of installing hand operated Luwa filter units to some posts but the stand down occurred before it could be rolled out.

The 3W pea bulb was supplied from a large NiFe battery and a generator was supplied for recharging but it would last weeks, It was plenty of light to operate and, of course, helped during a night deployment. A one hour timer was fitted that had to be continuously reset to ensure the load was not left on accidental.

We had regular exercises where the post was operational for 72 hours with three people and ventilation was never a problem, We cooked on picnic stoves, gas or paraffin with no difficulties and heating was never needed, the temperature was just about comfortable.

I think that is all the points above, any more questions?

An interesting first hand report, thanks.
Yes the purpose was not perhaps to survive a nuclear war, but the chances of survival in such a post would be considerably greater than on the surface.
The original 3 watt bulb was not as bad as it sounds in a small and white painted area. Most posts had a 12 volt fluorescent light retrofitted over the table.
Many reports state that the battery was lead acid, but they are incorrect. As you state it was nickel iron, wet alkaline.
Many posts had additional lead acid batteries retrofitted but the original was definatly alkaline, I have seen several.
I have stayed overnight in such a post and confirm that the ventilation seemed fine, even if using a couple of candles.
The degree of ventilation was adjustable by sliding covers over the vents.
The vent above the upper bunk admits perceptible daylight in bright weather if fully open, just enough for cautious movement without use of the electric light.
A hand or battery powered blower with an NBC filter seems a sensible present day retrofit.

I imagine there were a number of nuclear war missions planned during the cold war that were not survivable -- manning this bunker being just one. That said, in the here and now with less than full-blown nuclear war in mind (think EMP/dirty bomb) a cold war bunker may be ideal. NBC filters are a good start, but if your friend has any interest in gardening, a greenhouse or storage shed built over the bunker could provide support to the bunker and could be very useful even without the bunker. Whatever, those are my thoughts and may not be of interest or within budget. Have fun.

When I put not survivable above I meant that the posts were designed to increase chances of surviving not guaranteeing survival.

They would easily withstand a 10PSI overpressure and the accompanying blast. Fallout PF was about 1000 and particle protection was perhaps three days. All enough to do the job and probably good enough for the great majority of observers. a closer detonation or being in a rained out fallout plume would have been a problem.

spending more money and installing more kit would not have changed the odds much, getting into the area of diminishing returns. It is difficult to define the line for such kit.

There appears a common misconception that nuclear war would involve many weapons, in reality a few would probably be enough. In the last nuclear war two weapons were enough, and one of those was superfluous and just used as a weapons test.

Since these bunkers were (fortunately) never used during an actual nuclear strike, there is no empirical track record on which to base improvements. It seems prudent that if you are going to rehab one, it makes sense to add air filtration just to mitigate particles and NBC contamination/agents finding their way into the shelter. The concrete structure under 20 feet of soil should do a good job protecting the occupants from Gamma radiation, but it seems that the unfiltered air would allow other contaminants into the structure where they could be ingested. Just my opinion.