(CC

|

eeeENT ye

Peeryror rer

atte

£oy%

-16-

:

a

*

ae

after 1957 .ep: year would be needed,

Several of

those present commented that this was a more favorable situation than

the one with respect to uranium ores,
.
iti

Dr. Rabi Anguired from Dr, Bradbury what arguments were against
None appeared,

Dr. Bradbury said that the strongest argument for

U-233 was the increased degree of flexibility in weapon design.

He

would sti21 advocate the proposal even if a brig + idea developed which
would greatly reduce the
The neutrons were not being thrown away; the added cost is not great;
the weapon design and ore supply advantages are very considerable.
To a question of Dr, Rabits on possible effects on the Livermore progra

he said it would give them another parameter to.work with,
Dr. Rabi asked whether iniB larger criticalmass would introduce

Dr. Hark said
this consideration was already in the exchange rate. .
Mr. Whitman said it would be a good thing to get a second raw
material into the program.

He also felt that the reactor program

rculd probably benefit from this extension of technology.
Dr. Libby, who said he had been searching for an objection to
schedule B, observed that it might remove the pressure from Ceveloping
the technology of separating Pu-240 from high g/T plutonium.
felt, however, that this was not too likely.

It was

.

Dr, Rabi said his view was that the proposed step may be a gccd
thing but is not likely to be of practical significance in the thermsnuclear program, There will continue to be every incentive to improve

DOE ARCHIVES

Go

Select target paragraph3