1 million dollars should be added to the next fiscal budget for the changesin the weapons underground testing program but made no other N & program budget. SS An 11 March letter to Bethe from Spence Grae. a = © stem and its possible future written by admires the summary of the detection ACK Force. but notes the wealmesses. The Z “Ff vaedest wealmess seems to be any thought of the Russians testing outside of their untry, perhaps in the Southern Hemisphere, and the fact that little or no attention : being given to this and Spence doesn't have any idea how it might be done. As for system with stations set up within the country as discussed in the paper, he states he investigation of 100 events per year (for the U.S.S.R.) might be feasible, but not wolving bombs of less than sbout 1OKT yield. The extension of the present system rd tch more, so I would not attempt to investigate possible sub-surface violations cept for fringe benefits such as Dr. Scoville discusses in his annex to the morandum. The use of inspection teams does not guarantee discovery of violations ’ * course, but the increased. risk of detection seems great enough so that I would doubt ,at Russia would allow inspection teams and then attempt sub-surface shots within the 6.8.R." fA) "110.01 Mid year review" folder: | | 4, fof uf This folder begins with a letter to the Los Alamos Area Manager, Paul Wilson, on 16 Jan 58from Bradberry. This particular letter has very little of interests. Generally these documents have very little narative about the status of the Lab programs but plenty of pages of numbers indicating the funding and man years devoted to the various lab programs. As the title indicates, these reviews are in the middle of the fiscal year and generally update those documents for the Lab's programs at about the beginning of the fiscal year that are covered in "635 Lab. . program." Reteg coke com erie NORAewer eme Htr Fovec . 1 stations inside the U.S.S.R. does not then seem to me to be very advantageous