The feeling was expressed that Dr. Bradbury should re-write his
letter of January 18, 1954, to Gen. Fields, in the light of subsequent
experience,
Dr. Fisk, in particular, emphasized that the statement
regarding DOD acceptance! of given preinitiation probability should be
reviewed, It was also felt that test results should be thoroughly considered before any production steps more drastic than the program
|
described by Dr, Pittman were undertaken. (Appendix C, item 2)
Therewas no expression of opinion that the Li-6 program should be. ©
cut back, —
NCRAAF resterayeertiieeresen
}
Ns
a
Vee
;Dr, Rabi ‘suggested that the Committee
porkNohEERSTEdtaap a
revurn to these questions at its next meeting.
Mr. Whitman reported on his visits to Oak Ridge and SavannahRiver.
Reactor
Matters
In general, his impression was excellent. ‘The problems involved in the
production changes were being ably: handled.
Many of his fears on the
Homo- homogeneous reactor project had been allayed, and he thought the corrosion |
geneous
.
neactor problem would be solved. It was felt at Oak Ridge that the homogeneous
reactor would be the answer to any need for large amounts of Lown/g-se2
plutonium,
|
|
_ ‘The reactors at Savannah River looked good, although two problems
Savannah were bothersome at the moment:
Rosen
tors.
(1) The reactors were "nervous", experienc- :
ing frequent shut-downs due to the abundant and active safety controls,
oe
:
(2) There were worries about the safety aspects of enriched loadings.