Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Regulation of Armaments; Atomic Energy, Volume XX

46. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, July 13, 1955¹

Washington , July 13, 1955

SUBJECT

• Implementation of NSC 5507/2²

PARTICIPANTS

• AEC—Mr. Hall
• AEC—Mr. Gardner
• S/AE—Mr. Smith
• S/AE—Mr. Farley
• S/AE—Mr. Schaetzel

In answer to Mr. Smith’s preliminary inquiry about steps being taken to implement NSC 5507/2, Mr. Hall said that there had been discussion of one of the principal points in the Commission, namely the amount of fissionable material that could be made available for power purposes and that the next step was a discussion between Admiral Strauss and Admiral Radford. Mr. Hall said that the AEC was thinking of an announcement of this sort which might be made at Geneva either by Admiral Strauss on behalf of the President or possibly in Dr. Libby’s concluding speech. He felt that discussion of the amounts of fissionable material required would incidentally demonstrate to other countries the necessity for the power bilaterals. Mr. Smith noted that the JCS and the President had approved in principle an allocation of fissionable material for power purposes but he gathered that the point Mr. Hall was making was that it was now necessary to get down to the actual kgs required for the next several years. This was so, said Mr. Hall, and he pointed out actual transfers of material would not be required before 1957 or 1958. He went on to say that Mr. K. Davis was working on the general letter of inquiry sent over by the Department on April 18³ and that in addition to other information he thought we would get a figure within thirty days on the question under discussion. As a footnote, Mr. Hall said that a definite statement on this point at Geneva might undercut the interest of other nations in developing their own gaseous diffusion facilities. Mr. Farley observed that in discussions with the Germans there was some feeling that they were putting forward suggestions for U–235 production by centrifuges with the idea that this might make U.S. amenable to selling Germany U–235.

Mr. Hall mentioned in passing the discussion he had had the previous day with the Walter Kidde representatives on the Brazilian project. He said that they had not realized in the Commission the economic difficulties created by the ten year limitation. They had asked the company for a memorandum of their proposal.

Mr. Smith asked how the AEC was coming along on the declassification of power technology. Mr. Hall said this was being considered by Admiral Strauss and would be discussed in general terms at Geneva. He felt what Admiral Strauss would say there would unquestionably ease the declassification problem.

There was a reference to the standard form power bilateral and Mr. Gardner promised he would send over the most recent draft. Mr. Hall noted that if the declassification process moves rapidly enough the necessity for a separate power agreement might be limited to the material to be transferred and we could use the standard bilateral.

Mr. Smith then asked whether the Commission had given any thought to the financing of the peaceful uses as suggested in paragraph 27 (d) of NSC 5507/2 which called for the seeking of specific appropriations in fiscal year 1957. Mr. Hall answered in the negative.

Mr. Hall mentioned the idea that had been discussed by the Belgians for installing a power reactor in connection with the Fair in 1958.⁴ He said that Westinghouse had been approached. The Belgians were thinking in terms of a 75,000 kw station. Mr. Hall said that he would send over the correspondence on this matter.

Mr. Smith then asked whether Mr. Hall felt that the State Department was at fault for not having solicited other nations to approach the United States in connection with nuclear power, bearing in mind the policy decisions contained in 5507/2. Mr. Hall replied certainly not. He noted that the President had made the offer of the United States clear in the Penn State speech.⁵ The immediate step was to move ahead on the research reactor program and to see that we did not fail to live up to the commitments we had already entered into. He felt it would not be prudent to push in the power field for at least a couple of months.

Mr. Smith asked what the AEC program was for implementation of the research reactor agreements. Mr. Hall said that the first thing they wish to do was to advise the Embassies formally that the bilaterals were in effect and request that each Embassy identify an officer to work with the AEC. It was agreed that it would be appropriate for such a letter to go from the State Department to the Ambassador. In transmitting a copy of the first such letter the Department might appropriately indicate that while it is expected that in the technical field the relationship would be continuing and direct between the AEC and the Embassy, however, it would be expected that the AEC would advise the Department on all foreign policy matters. Mr. Smith raised the interest of ICA, for five million dollars of their money was involved. It was thought that in time it might be necessary to set up some sort of tripartite group (State, AEC, and ICA) to consider the financial or grant problems.

Mr. Hall noted that it might be of interest to indicate some of the ideas that they had on implementation of the U.K., Belgian and Canadian agreements. Responsibility would be placed in the General Manager’s office. Normal channels for classified information would be used. The general channel for information would presumably be through Hall, S/AE and abroad. Mr. Hall inquired as to whether some thought might not be given to establishing a liaison man in London and Brussels, perhaps jointly financed by State and AEC. AEC wants to be sure that a finger is kept on everything, especially security. Mr. Smith said that they should bear in mind that Mr. Robinson ⁶ was now a Foreign Service Officer and we could not anticipate that he would be available for more intensive work in this field, but would presumably move increasingly into the political sphere. Mr. Hall agreed with Mr. Smith’s suggestion that we ought to get a man such as we presently have in Canada. As Mr. Hall saw it the task of a liaison officer in London or Brussels would be both administrative, reporting, and channeling classified material.

Returning to the question of general implementation, Mr. Hall said he was resisting the idea of putting this function in the hands of the Licensing Division. Mr. Smith inquired as to whether the Licensing people were advising Mr. Hall about arrangements such as the authorization to Walter Kidde and Company to negotiate in Brazil. Mr. Hall responded that this had been a sort of procedural breakdown. He thought we could expect improvement in the future and also that he did not believe any other licenses of this sort had been issued.

Mr. Smith asked what had been done on the 10,000 kw power reactor called for in the NSC decision. Mr. Hall said he did not know but we would have to ask Mr. Davis.

Mr. Smith noted that the contemplated Strauss speech in Geneva might raise problems with the Belgians. Mr. Hall agreed that this was so but that anything we did to carry out the NSC paper would tend to diminish Belgium’s privileged position. It was a problem that had to be faced. He agreed that we certainly could inform the Belgians in advance of what was to be said.

Mr. Smith then inquired as to what was happening regarding the teams that might be sent out to maintain momentum in the program. He noted that Strauss had a somewhat negative view of this suggestion originally, while on the other hand, Mr. Hall had been somewhat favorably inclined. Mr. Hall said that he agreed that there was a value in having a man in the field who was competent to say “no” as far as excessively ambitious ideas were concerned, but he was not sure due to staff shortages that this type of consultation could be carried on in connection with the research bilaterals. Mr. Smith observed that in the next year it might be necessary to have technical people in the field.

Mr. Smith asked if Mr. Hall could tell him what Admiral Strauss intended to say tomorrow in connection with the progress report before the NSC on 5507/2. Mr. Hall replied that he wasn’t sure, he thought that it was merely a question of bringing the Council up to date and report that things were proceeding pretty well. It was, of course, possible that he might get into the statement to be made at Geneva.

Mr. Farley asked whether it might be possible to consider briefly and on a very preliminary basis some of the questions that were arising in connection with a common European atomic authority. He noted the support this general idea had in the Department in particular and in the entire Executive Branch and in the Congress, and also mentioned the Secretary’s instructions to pursue the matter with AEC. Mr. Hall recalled that a provision had been written into Dr. Libby’s speech, and while this had been deleted, AEC General Counsel, Mitchell,⁷ still thought it might be appropriate. Mr. Smith said that there would be a security problem and it would be necessary to consider the engineering sense of any such proposal.

Mr. Hall said categorically that it would be impossible for the Belgians to cooperate in the sense of transmitting classified information, even if the other countries were to negotiate with us agreements similar to the present Belgian bilateral. He went on to question the general idea of cooperation which involved the transmittal of classified information. Mr. Farley called attention to the NATO analogy which allows highly classified American information to be transmitted to a regional group. Mr. Smith said that if we were to get along with declassification this might tend to provide a solution. Mr. Hall inquired whether in an engineering sense regionalism was a useful idea.

It was agreed that there would be a meeting on Friday,⁸ to include EUR, with the AEC to pursue the question of European integration.

As a final question Mr. Smith asked whether there had been any disposition on the part of the AEC to speed work on the PWR. Mr. Hall said on the contrary, the Bureau of the Budget requested the AEC to make savings of one-hundred-fifty million dollars and to accomplish this the Bureau suggested that the period of development and construction of AEC reactor projects could be stretched out.

1. Source: Department of State, Atomic Energy Files: Lot 57 D 688, NSC 5507/2. Secret. Drafted by Schaetzel.
2. Document 14.
3. Not found in Department of State files.
4. Reference is to the Brussels World Fair held in 1958.
5. For text of Eisenhower’s commencement address at Penn State University on June 11, see Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1955, pp. 593–600.
6. Howard A. Robinson, First Secretary of the Embassy in Paris.
7. William Mitchell.
8. For the record of the meeting of Friday, July 15, see the memorandum of conversation, vol. IV, p. 313.