Weapons-Proliferation Postshot Activities of the Nth Country Experiment-April 1969 Copy 81A EACH PERSON WHO HAS READ ANY PART 01 THIS DOCUMENT PLEASE INITIAL AND DATE BELOW Initial Date Initial Initial Date bate SEN PASTORK ········-·· REP HOLIFIELD ·········-· BAUSER ________ ·--··--··-- -·-·······-- SEN RUSSELL _ ___ _______________ ---·····--·· REP PRICE MURPHY • • • ·······---· -·---·---··· SEN ANDERSON ···········- REP ASPINALL ENGLAND ·-····-·-·-· SEN GORE ___ _____________ ----······- ·---•------- REP_ YOUNG__________ --········- ····-·•----- RADCLIFFE_____ -·---·----- SEN JACKSON --····· ·······--·· ··-··-···-- REP EDMONDSON_ ··········· ·--···-··-- SHWILLER____ SEN AIKEN -·-···-···· REP HOSMER ---···--··-· FAIN _____________ SEN BENNETT -•-·-·-··------·--·······- REP BATES - ···--·----- ····-··-·· SEN CURTIS --··-······ REP ANDERSON_ -·-------·· ····-······ SEN COTTON ______ ______ ··---·--·········--···- REP McCULLOCH - -····----------···--··- ·-·-···-·--· --c-z··-- -4-- - --1-L - GPO 1919-0-27·240 JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY Classified Document No ·--···J _Q 35 1 _ _ _____ Rec'd 12 2 69 SECRET • This documeAt_ ontains 1 Q_pages This is copy_ _l_of 109Series__a _ La __ re n c e JR a d l a 't lo n La bo rato r7 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIVERMORE UCRL-50628 POSTSHOT ACTIVITIES Of THE Nth COUNTRY EXPERIMENT U David A Dobson Robert W Selden W J Frank • -i-ii- NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 SECRET SECRET Contents • -r · 1 Preface Briefing on the Nth Country Experiment Introduction • The fth Country's Report Evolution of the Design The Design 2 2 5 5 7 Design Physics The Literature After the Test 13 The Designers' View of the Experiment 15 9 10 Questions about the Nth Coun_try Experiment 17 A List of the Questions 17 Details and Physics of the Design 17 Design Difficulties and Effort Considerations Information Sources and Intelligence 19 20 21 LRL' s View of the Experiment • The Answers Details and Physics of the Design 21 21 • Design Difficulties and Effort Considerations 36 Information Sources and Intelligence 41 LRL' s View of the Experiment 45 FOIA b Epilogue -iii-iv- NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 5EC R T 3 -42USC2162 -RDDOE SECRET POSTSHOT ACTIVITIES OF THE Nth COUNTRY EXPERIMENT FOIA b • 3 -42 use 2162 - RD DOE Pre ace · ti' w J This report is the fourth and final document about LRL' s Nth Country Experiment It contains -an edited transcript of the briefing given to a number of organizations in Washington and to the AEC Laboratories The Experiment was formally ended The briefing was in September 1968 when some of the modified from time to time the final LRL staff met with the two Experimenters version as presented in the summer of and discussed the Experiment 11 with no 1968 to LASL LRL and Sandia is given here Since the introduction to holds barred -that is with leading and comprehensive questions of the sort the briefing contains most of the material usually avoided at the briefings usually found in a preface I will not re peat it here report were submitted in writing before the September meeting A videotape was made of the briefing presented at LRL All of the Nth Country's contributions to this · An Epilogue by Robert Se den has This-tape is in the LRL Instructional Television Library been added to this report he comments and is available to qualified viewers on the Experiment from his new point of view after working almost half a year with the Laboratory's fission device design group The other published documents on the Experiment are D A Dobson D N Pipkorn and R W Selden The Nth Country Experiment Lawrence Radiation Laboratory Livermore Rept UCRL-50239 December 1966 Title U Report SRD Summary Report of the Nth Country Experiment W J Frank Ed Lawrence Radiation Laboratory Livermore Rept UCRL-50249 March 1967 Title U Report SRD The Nth Country Experiment Supporting Documents W J Frank Ed Lawrence Radiation Laboratory Livermore Rept UCRL-50248 October 1967 Title U Report SRO -1- NW# 38431 Docr d 31971062 SECRET 5 ecRET Bri1efing on the Nth Country Experiment This section is the edited transcript of the Briefing as given in the summer of 1968 support functions such as computations or_ experiments were to be supplied by INTRODUCTION W J Frank the Laboratory staff Statement of the Problem Ground Rules · The phrase Nth Country Problem popularly refers to the design of a fis- We established the following ground rules for the Nth Country Experiment sion nuclear explosive by some small nation that wishes to create a stockpile • of ten to twenty such weapons After the Second World War it seemed to be widely believed that there was some secret to the atomic bomb that could be transmitted to another country on a few pieces of paper A purloined set of official blueprints might indeed convey some • • basic facts about fission weapons Most technical people however would feel that the transferral of knowledge and understanding is much more difficult and at least as important a factor in the success of a design program • The historical conditions for designing and building nuclear weapons are reasonably well known but the exact minimum conditions have not been investigated very thoroughly We decided to ignore the political problems caused by the Test Ban and Nonproliferation Treaties as well as the first major technical problem that of producing the • nuclear materials Instead we looked at the second major te_chnical problem the invention or design of the nuclear weapon To focus on this aspect we limited the active participants to two or three physicists Engineering and fabrication problems were ruled out and -2- NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 SECRET The goal of the Experiment was to produce a credible nuclear explosive design with a militarily significant yield · The Experimenters were to have access to unclassified literature only Any experiments carried out for them by their LRL support groups would also be based only on information and techniques available in the open literature Since the Atomic Energy Act classifies most information about nuclear explosives as Restricted Data regardless of whose auspices it is developed under the Nth Country physicists received a Q clearance and worked inside the LRL fence To avoid such well known security leaks as raised eyebrows or surprised expressions we isolated the Experimenters from the rest of the Laboratory and required that all communications between them and the LRL Committee overseeing the Experiment should be in writing All requests of the Experimenters and answers of the Committee were SECRET History of the Nth Country Experiment subsequently published in UCRL50248 • In the spring of 1964 Dobson and Pip- Although we recognized it might korn came to LRL as postdoctoral re- hinder the Experiment somewhat searchers and would certainly differ from a time on the Experiment true Nth Country environment we an Army research associate and agreed support groups should never volun- to work on the Experiment full time teer additional information or do in December 1966 about three man- On occasion in fact years of effort had been put into the pro- we behaved like the New Englander gram almost half of it was spent working who when asked by the tourist on the final report and other documenta- this road go to Boston 11 replied 11 By the time the final design was submitted anything except what was directly 11 Does In the spring of 1965 Selden came to the Laboratol'y as decided that the Committee and the requested They agreed to work half tion Yes 11 but neglected to There was even the traditional last- minute yield predic tion change in Feb- point out that the tourist was headed ruary 1967 before the device had been in the wrong direction tested Here are a few details of their final design The Physicists' Backgrounds FOIA b 3 -42USC2162 1 -RDDOE The three physicists who worked on ·the Experiment are typical of the Ph D physicists hired by LRL they come without any training in hydrodynamics neutron diffusion theory the practical --------- 1 On April 10 the Committee gave a small party for equations· of state for real materials the Experimenters to celebrate 11 N 6 or even much knowledge about reactors we baked a small cake for the occasion All three got their Ph D degreei in 1nd inecribed it Welcome to the Club Since then there have been a num- 1964 Dave Dobson ber of postshot activities University of California Berkeley Beta decay and nuclear magnetic We have pro- duced three reports the Experimenters' final report with all the physics in it moments Dave Pipkorn University of Illinois Urbana Solid-state physics Massbauer effect mentation report with all the questionand-answer correspondence between the Bob Selden University of Wisconsin Madison two groups UCRL-50248 A briefing on the Experiment was developed after UCRL-50239 a smaller summary report with the Committee's evaluation of the design UCRL-50249 and a docu- i11i_tial tryouts at LRL and the Rand Corporation it was presented to a number Low-temperature physics liquid helium - 1967 side of thermodynamics such as -3- # 38431 -----------------···--··-- Docid 31971062 SECRET 'FOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE SECRET Reviewe s of the AEC and the U S and wish to maintain the Experimenters in their current 11 unclassified11 state Your questions should not reveal or imply classified information 3 The briefing has dropped much of the physics of the Experiment along the way in favor of descriptions of the basic ideas reasons for various decisions and comments and observations on the Experiment from the designers 1 point Intelligen this one of view 4 After the Experimenters submitted of agencies and organizations in Washington the AEC Di vision of Military Application the AEC Commissioners the Defense Atomic Support Agency the ilitary Liaison Committee the Central In elligence Agency the Arms Control isarmament Agency the State Demittee or Atomic Energy the Senior Board A fourth report w·u include a transcript of their final report and received the test results the Committee asked a number of questions to thro W light on the other all the questio asked at the briefings and giving the E erimenters' considered answers aspects of the Nth Country problem Four of these have been included in this briefing 5 Someone once commented that the classification level of our briefing was Unclassified-Restricted Data According to the law however the information in this briefing while derived from unclassified sources is Secret- Restricted Data The fact that this Nth Country Experiment using only unclassified sources has been performed is unclassified The fact that it was successful is A Guide for the Listener unclassified But as many of you who have read classification guides might guess almost any elaboration of these two statements with details of the Experiment is classified Secret- Restricted Data 6 Only two of the Experimenters will present the briefing-Dave Dobson and Bob Selden At this point Dobson and Selden introduced tht mselves and continued the briefing in the form of a Huntley-Brinkley report 2 Questions are acceptab e with this proviso we are still giving briefings -4- NW# 38431 Doc rd 31971062 SECRET SECRET THE Nth COUNTRY'S REPORT Our presentatiorl is in six main sections First the evolution of the design in which we will trace the chronology of D A Dobson and R W Selden R S We are happy to represent the Atomic Energy Commission of our Nth Country here today and to describe how we designed a credible nuclear explosive with a militarily significant yield Our design was achieved with a very modest effort and to illustrate this we would like to show you a sketch of me working in our Nth Country laboratory Slide 1 This sketch was drawn for me by a psychologist friend at UCLA after she learned that I had gone to work at LRL She had no idea how appropriate the cartoon was We don't really mean to imply that the LRL staff who served as our laboratory support groups were no more help than a do-it-yourself kit and a black cat The kit and the cat are simply representative of the nature of our work The Experiment was truly a do-it-yourself project • - ·· the Experiment Second a description of our fission explosive design Third a brief discussion of our understanding of the physics of fission explosives Fourth our comments on the literature we used several other fission design possibilities after our design was tested 3' -42USC2162 a factors affecting the Experiment Evolution of the Design D D Our task as it was proposed to us in May of 1964 was to design a credible nuclear explosive with a militarily significant yield while having no access to classified information To start with we asked rselves what a fission explosive consists of and how it works -RDDOE -5- NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 And last a few remarks on some nontechnical lide 1 Sketch of the Nth Country's laboratory FOIA b Fifth some thoughts about SECRET FOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE • ·•- The design we envisioned which we now ·refer to as our Basic Concepts Design had the following components _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ -6- Docid 31971062 SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Docl' d 31971062 3 -42USC2162 -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 fl - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 • 42 USC 2162 • RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docrd 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RO DOE SECREl FOIA b • After the Test D D After the results of the test of our design were presented to us we were asked how the results affected our understanding of fission explosives -13- NW# 38431 Docid· 31971062 SECRET 3 - 42 use 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc Id 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE 'FOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 fl - RD DOE SECRET l D tion of our presentation 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE SECRET part-time n ure at the beginning led to ity we worked hardest ittee had asked to R S It was incredible how we kept underestimating the time -16- • # 38431 DocI d 31971062 SECRET ------------------------------ r SECRET FOIA b 3 - 42 use 2162 El - RD DOE Thank you we'll have to view their demands in a different light Their science class has the bomb Slide 6 Questions about the Nt Country Experiment Country by the Laboratory in A pril 1967 This section is a collection of questions which were asked during the Nth are included in the answer to Question Country briefings and the Experimenters' 38 considered nswers to these questions Occasionally questions directly or in- A LIST OF THE QUESTIONS directly required an answer from the Committee or LRL these questions are Details and Physics of the Design listed and answered in a separate subsection 1 The results of the test of the Final Design which were given to the Nth -17- NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 CRET 'FOIA b 3 - 42 use 2162 E - RD DOE SECRET 23 24 25 26 7 8 28 29 11 30 In how much detail did you specify 12 the experiments and calculations which you requested 31 13 32 14 15 34 35 Were you given a definition of a militarily significant yield What did you propose to measure during the nuclear test of your de- 21 vice 22 38 What did you learn from the test -18- - DocI d 31971062 S C RET 'FOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 El - RD DOE SECR T 39 51 52 53 54 42 55 43 44 45 56 46 57 Design Difficulties and Effort Con- siderations 58 What kind of questions could you ask of the Laboratory during the Experiment What kind of questions did you ask 59 4 60 61 50 62 -19• NW# 38431 DocI d 31971 062 SECRET SECRET 77 80 81 8 83 Did you find that any document was ------------particularly misleading 84 7 7 8 Information Sources and Intelligence 73 What information was made available to you at the beginning of the Experiment 74 How did you look for information 75 Did anyone assist you in searching for literature 7 6 What sort of a library is necessary - -20- # 38431 Docid 31971062 SECRET SECRET 'FOIA b L 3 - 42 USC 2162 a n c tu vv L 11 - RD DOE Details and Physics of the Design - D A Dobson and R W Selden 87 88 89 With your present understanding of nuclear explosives what information would you instruct your spies to steal LRL' s View of the Experiment 90 Were you surprised at the successful outcome of the Experiment 91 What would you have done if the Ex92 periment had not succeeded Do you think that any three physicists -nuld ha rP -lnne thic Evnoy 11 r IOTJt 93 94 95 96 97 -211---------------------- NW# 38431 · Docid 31971062 SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 DocI d 31971062 3 -42USC2162 1 1 -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE S CRET 1FOIA b 3 18 Were you given a definition of a militarily significant yield The only thing we were told is contained in the original proposal of the Experiment to us in May 1964 The per- tinent part of the proposal is The goal of the participants should be to design an explosive with a militarily significant yield A working context for the experiment might be that the participants have been asked to design a nuclear explosive which if built in small numbers would give a small nation a significant effect on their foreign relations -25- NW# 38431 I Docid 31971062 SECRET - 42 USC 2162 El - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 use 2162 8 - RD DOE SECRET IFOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE IThe results of the calculations were given to us put not the codes themselves 30 In how much detail did you specify the experiments and calculations which vou reauested -28- # 38431 Docid 31971062 5ECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE SECRET FOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 e - RD DOE UUI' r· qU IHl i 1ur Uli l guul iUC n 1 1ults 36 What did you propose to measure during the nuclear test of your device 38 What did you learn from the test The Laboratory's test group told us to assume that our device had been tested and they responded as follows to -30- • NW# 38431 Docrd 31971062 SiCRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc td 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc td 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docl' d 31971062 3 -42USC2162 -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3J - 42 USC 2162 El - RD DOE -· - ·· - - SECRIEi FOIA b ' 3 2 USC 2162 a --- - - - RD DOE --------- 'I It seemed I to us that a maJor part ot the problem was to come up with the right questions 48 What kind of questions did you ask 47 What kind of questions could you ask of the Laboratory during the Exnerim nt 0 -36 # 38431 Docid 31971062 • - _ - - SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc rd 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 fl - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docrd 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc td 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE 'rn1A b 3 - 42 use 2162 El - RD DOE SECRET 76 What sort of a library is neces- sar Inf mation Sources and Intelli ence -D Dobson and R W Selden 73 t information was made avail- We were old that we could use any unclassifie information we could find 74 75 Did anyone assist you in searching for literature Shortly after the Experiment started we requested a search for information on a list of sub· ects -41- NW# 38431 Docid 31971 062 SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 -42USC2162 f -RDDOE SECRET 3 -42USC2162 ' ·•-- a _ --· FOIA b -RODOE -r-•-- w- _ _ ese questions about fission ex- 89 With your present understanding of nuclear explosives what information would you instruct your spies to steal INW# 38431 I DocI d 31971062 -43 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc td 31971062 3 - 42 use 2162 a - RD DOE We think that LRL makes a hires and perhaps an aps because we consc ously feI that such a LRL' s View of the Experiment- W J Frank a ility fa independe t research and t to take th time for the 90 Were you surprised at the successful outcome of the Experiat the th ee Experiment rs are at ment S Ph D 91 What would you have done if the Experiment had not succeeded 92 Do you think that any three phys- icists could have done this Experiment -45- • NW# 38431 Doc Id 31971062 SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 e - RD DOE NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 use 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 use 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 DocI d 31971062 3 -42USC2162 1 1 -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 e - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 • 42 USC 2162 a • RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc r d 31 971062 3 - 42 use 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 -42USC2162 -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 DocI d 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 El - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 -42USC2162 -RDOOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 use 2162 El - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 e - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc td 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 ei - RD DOE SECRET - - FOIA b 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE Epilogue R W Selden March 1969 September of 1968 by a series of planned to LRL facilities including Site 300 the explosive test site and the museum '' events which included two meetings with the LRL Committee and Directors for an and a visit to the Nevada Test Site At the conclusion of these activities open discussion of the Nth Country's un- I joined LRL's B Division and Dave derstanding of nuclear explosives and a Dobson took a teaching position out- The Experiment was formally ended in summary of current U S technology a side the Laboratory historical survey of the development of in most of the activities described nuclear explosives in the U S by Larry above and many of the comments made Germain and Jim Frank and individual here about the Experiment reflect his discussions with staff members visits thoughts -62- - Dave participated # 38431 DocI d 31971062 SECRET FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 -42USC2162 t -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 • 42 USC 2162 El - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 DocI d 31971062 3 -42 use 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 e - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Doc td 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 -42USC2162 -RDDOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 El - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 a - RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 DocI d 31971062 3 • 42 USC 2162 • RD DOE FOIA b NW# 38431 Docid 31971062 3 - 42 USC 2162 e - RD DOE SECRET Distribution Series A Copy No Copy No LRL Internal Distribution C H· Reichardt R E Hollingsworth A M Labowitz G T Seaborg J T Ramey 1-77 External Distribution 88-90 91 92 93-94 95 H Agnew 78 W E Johnson 6 N E Br adbury 79 80 T Thompson U s Atomic Energy Commission Washington D • C 97 E Bowser Joint Committee on Atomic Energy Washington D C 81 J A Hornbeck 98-103 T B Cook Sandia Laboratories Livermore California 82 Lt Gen H C Donnelly Albuquerque Operations Office Albuquerque New Mexico 83 L DuBridge President I s Science Advisory Committee Washington D C 84 G C Smith Arms Control and Disarmament Agency Washington D C 85 J S Foster Defense Research and Engineering Washington D C 86 Maj Gen E B Giller Divsion of Military Application Washington D C 87 C Mark Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Los Alamos New Mexico Sandia Laboratories Albuquerque New Mexico A L Latter F Thomas The Rand Corporation Santa Monica California 104 E C Shute San Francisco Operations 106 Office Berkeley California E D Lermond Jr Defense Atomic Support Agency Washington D C 107 C Walske Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Atomic Energy Washington D C 108 C L Patton Defense Atomic Support Agency Albuquerque New Ml xico 109 GS lh -75- Docid 31971062 105 SECRET