sma? observed that this was a disappointingly late completion date. ‘Dr, Rabi| sald that both the design and schedule were conservative , and explained the magnitude of the development problem. He mentioned that although the nominal design perfqrmance was for 25 bev at 10,000 gauss, it was hoped ultimately to achieve 35 bev, at 15,000 gauss. | - ” Mr, Waitma’ remarked that the proposal seemed to fit, the previous position of the Committee. Dr. Johnson said that it was intendedbo1 do a 80. As an item of information, Dr, Johnson mentionedthat the Berkeley Oy group hopes to get a beam in the bevatron by Christmas 4153. a | The matter of another ultra high energy accelerator at a second site was briefly considered, Dr. Johnson indicated that the way the cooperation in the midwest group was working out had been unsatisfactory, and that their proposal had been rejected, One of theprincipal aif- ficulties was in the selection of a site; for many reasons, the machine should be at ANL. agree on this. idea, either. However the interested universities had failed to | Dr. Libby said that ANL had not been receptive to this It was unfortunate that ANL and the universities had not yet been able to get together. Dr. Rabi asked Dr. Johnsonabout university contract policy.Dr. Univer- Johnson said that a new policy was in effect, established ‘by Commission Contract action early in September. Policy The policy gets away from the 8% overhead figure, recognizes the full costs of research, and provides for paynient of a lump sum toward the total cost. At 3:50 p.m, this part of the session was concluded, -