Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Volume III, National Security Policy; Arms Control and Disarmament, Microfiche Supplement

212. Memorandum of Discussion at the 423d NSC Meeting¹

Washington, November 5, 1959

SUBJECT

• Discussion at the 423rd NSC Meeting of the National Security Council, Thursday, November 5, 1959

Present at the 423rd NSC Meeting were the President of the United States, presiding; the Secretary of State; the Secretary of Defense; and the Director, Office or Civil and Defense Mobilization. Also present and participating in the Council actions below were the Acting Secretary of the Treasury (Scribner); the Acting Attorney General (Walsh) (Item 1); the Director, Bureau of the Budget; the Chairman Atomic Energy Commission (Item 4); and Mr. Philip Ray for the Secretary of Commerce (Item 1). Also attending the meeting were the Director, U.S. Information Agency; the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Director of Central Intelligence; the Under Secretary of State (Dillon); Special Assistants to the President for Foreign Economic Policy, for National Security Affairs, and for Science and Technology; the White House Staff Secretary; Assistant Secretary of Defense John N. Irwin II; from the Atomic Energy Commission Brig. General Alfred D. Starbird, Edward J. Block and Bruce Mercer; Howard Furnas, Department of State; the Assistant White House Staff Secretary; the Executive Secretary, NSC; the Deputy Executive Secretary, NSC; and Mr. Charles Haskins, NSC.

There follows a summary of the discussion and the main points taken.

[Omitted here are agenda items 1–3.]

4. STATUS OF NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS AS OF JUNE 30, 1959: THE ATOMIC ENERGY PROGRAM

(NSC 5912; Memo for NSC from Executive Secretary, subject: “Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy” transmitting Report by AEC and State on Implementation of NSC 5725/1, dated September 2, 1959)

Mr. Gray said the Planning Board was examining all of the status reports, but had decided that some of them need not be scheduled for Council discussion. However, the Planning Board thought the AEC Report should be discussed by the Council because it deals with one of the major national security programs. Mr. Gray then called on Mr. McCone.

Mr. McCone said he would treat the highlights of the AEC program of $2-¾ billion, 70–75 per cent of which is designed to meet Defense and military requirements, the balance being intended for peaceful purposes. Turning to uranium procurement and deliveries, Mr. McCone displayed and discussed a chart setting forth estimated uranium deliveries based on domestic, overseas, and Canadian commitments. He indicated that through recent stretch-out agreements with domestic suppliers and the Canadian Government we would be able to reduce our requirements in 1960, 1961 and 1962, increasing them in 1963, 1964 and 1965, thereby substantially decreasing and leveling off appropriations for uranium deliveries. Despite the reduction in uranium procurement, the U–235 production rate would be maintained by the CASCADE improvement program and by a recycling the cost of which would be only half the cost of uranium procurement. Savings between uranium commitments for 1960 as against 1967 would amount to approximately $360 million. Mr. McCone believed the present program could adequately meet present military requirements for uranium, but was uncertain about the new requirements which had just been presented by Defense.

Again displaying a chart, Mr. McCone indicated that plutonium production was slightly in excess of requirements now, but that in 1962 we would be short by an insignificant factor in the amount necessary to meet military requirements. He concluded, however, that our plutonium production program was satisfactory and that through improved processes we could produce more plutonium if necessary.

Mr. McCone remarked that our nuclear weapons program had been discussed in detail a few months ago with the President and accordingly would not be covered in detail in his briefing.

Mr. McCone next turned to naval nuclear propulsion. He indicated that by December 31, 1959 we would have one POLARIS and eight other nuclear submarines; by December 31, 1960 we would have five POLARIS and thirteen other nuclear submarines. The GEORGE WASHINGTON, the first POLARIS submarine, will be undergoing sea trials in the near future. The nuclear-powered cruiser LONG BEACH should be operating by the end of 1960, after launching this spring and sea trials in July. The nuclear-powered aircraft carrier ENTERPRISE and the nuclear-powered destroyer BAINBRIDGE should be operating by the latter part of 1961. The naval nuclear propulsion program was summarized as consisting of six land-based prototype reactors, 37 submarines, and 3 surface vessels. Mr. McCone concluded his remarks on maritime nuclear propulsion by indicating that minor modifications in design were being made in the N.S. (Nuclear Ship) SAVANNAH.

In passing, Mr. McCone remarked that we have eight or nine military package power plants in various sizes and types and indicated that they were particularly important in view of their significant contribution to technology.

Mr. McCone then briefly described the PLUTO, ROVER and SNAP devices and the air nuclear propulsion program. He recalled to the President the thermo-couple principle which was embodied in one of the SNAP devices shown to the President, and indicated we were developing more of this type. All of the SNAP devices are being utilized for auxiliary power in space vehicles. A careful review is being made of the SNAP program, which will run to $300–$400 million from the point of view of cost and effectiveness as compared to other power sources such as solar heat. PLUTO involved the development of a ram jet to propel low-level unmanned supersonic missiles. Three to four years would be required for the development of this ram jet, but the program offers good prospects. ROVER is a nuclear propulsion system for a space vehicle; again three to four years of development will be required before its full possibilities are known. Mr. McCone recalled to the President a recent review of the aircraft nuclear propulsion program and indicated that the development rather than the hardware stage of the program is being emphasized as a result of such review. He said we had developed a reactor which would fly a plane, but the reactor would not fly the plane very well. By postponing the hardware stage two or three years, we could probably develop a better reactor for aircraft propulsion. Mr. McCone thought that the Russians were probably coming to a similar conclusion. He noted that the Russians were somewhat evasive in this area, but believed they had been unable to solve the ceramics problem and did not consider it likely they would surprise us with a technical break-through in aircraft nuclear propulsion.

Mr. McCone then turned to the peaceful uses of atomic energy. He displayed charts comparing the nuclear power program of the U.S. and the USSR. During his Moscow trip he had learned of various slippages in the Soviet power program and believed that these resulted from Russian awareness of the difficulties and the cost associated with the development of nuclear power. The Soviets are apparently cutting back or slowing down all phases of their power reactor program except for those projects which are already so far advanced in construction that it would be uneconomical to waste the work already done. The Chairman believed that we were well ahead of the Soviets in our domestic power program. He noted in particular that the DRESDEN Reactor was the largest in the world used exclusively for electrical power. When completed, the U.S. power reactor program would have a capacity of approximately one million KWE.

The President said that Khrushchev during his visit here had remarked that the Russians were eliminating a large number of projects in their nuclear power program.

Mr. McCone said the Soviet slow-down did not, however, apply to the peaceful uses research program, which was broadly based and competently staffed. He had been particularly impressed during his trip to the USSR by the ability of the Soviets to manage and direct their technical personnel, to make prompt decisions, and to carry them out very quickly. He cited their completion of construction of the OGRA, a large controlled thermo-nuclear device, within eleven months of the date of initiating design. The AEC was carefully reviewing means of improving U.S. ability to direct its technical effort, a review that might be helpful in other areas such as space.

Mr. McCone concluded his briefing with a discussion of our high energy physics program, an area in which we are well ahead of the Russians. In connection with our four high energy accelerators, Mr. McCone said a careful review was being made of the Stanford accelerator to resolve some technical problems, such as the question of whether the accelerator could withstand earthquakes.

The President asked whether it would not be wise to remove expensive equipment from tunnels in an earthquake area. Mr. McCone said some scientists believed that the tunnel would not be ruptured by an earthquake.

The National Security Council:

Noted and discussed an oral presentation of the status of the atomic energy program, by the Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission, based on Part 3 of NSC 5912 and recent developments.

Marion W. Boggs

1. Source: Agenda item 4: Status of National Security Programs as of June 30, 1959: The Atomic Energy Program. Top Secret; Eyes Only. Extracts—5 pp. Eisenhower Library, Whitman File, NSC Records.