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