Brig. Gen. K. B. Fields k, =. Ostober 83, 1952 Om returning to Los Alamos [ naturally informed Jack Clark of this understanding. Me was very surprised that he could have been so wrong. Inter that day, lest Monday, Rede Cole eaxe into Clark's office and sonfirmed the eriginal story that the October J decision had been to limit any ene series to tve large anf tvo small shots. Moreover, the FY 195% budget proposals were based upon this assuaption. 5. By this time Norris ané I were thoroughly sonfused beeause ve have been tentatively talking ef one large anf two small shots for Castle, anf we have understoed that Whitney vas likely to propose two shots at least one ef which was large. Therefore, I called you on the telephone but dus to gonnection trouble you had gone to Nr. Dean's office by the tine I got through and I spoke with Chick Eayward instead. Chick confirmed your original statexent to me as indicated in 5. above but also eonfirmed that the budget proposal: made to the Bureau cof the Budget was based upon a maxinum of four shots. This seexed contradictory to me, especially in viev of our ecnversation just prior to your meeting with the Bureau of the Buiget. [tere Chiek assured me that he believed the dollars requested would cover wore than four shots. Me specifically sivised that we should act limit car Plenning for Castle by considering a eeiling of two shots to be proposed by Los Alancs if more seemed advisableand justifiable, foe result of all this is that LASL is proceeding upon the assumption of linitation of LASL participation fin Castle to ene shet in the megaton range, two tover er groundshots iz the kiloton range up to approximately the site of one megaton type ané one drop test. ; This would still allow ene kiloton type cpen te Whitney. Walle it is not at all clear that we can devise or will wish to propose this many tests for Castle, we would be pleased te have eur assumptions eonfirmed or corrected if they are still in error im some way, o“ DCEIALO {_ ee