(such as munitions, spare parts, medical supplies) and combat equipment and vehicles of complexity and unit cost up to that of items such as tanks. We do not invest any significant funds in production facilities for ships and aircraft for the sole purpose of providing a wartime production base. This is because our studies have shown that a great deal of money must be spent in peacetime to provide even small improvements in production acceleration well over a year after the start of a conflict. For this reason, the economics of peacetime procurement dominate our peacetime decisions on investments in ship and aircraft production facilities. "'Other measures being taken to overcome weaknesses in the industrial mobilization base include: (1) the use of negotiation authority under the Armed Services Procurement Regulations where necessary to keep facilities available for industrial mobilization; (2) modernization of plants and equipment where required to reduce maintenance costs and increase productivity and/or safety; (3) economic analyses to determine the most cost-effective mix of production base capability and war reserve stocks; and (4) incentives to industry to encourage continued participation in the maintenance of a viable industrial base. "5. Munitions Production. Since we are largely dependent on in-house facilities for munitions production, we have had to undertake a major program to upgrade these facilities. For example, we are nearing completion of the installation of a continuous nitration process at our TNT plants to replace the batch process that dates back to World War I. This continuous process is far more cost-effective. Automation of the loading and packaging of munitions is another facet of the modernization program. The ability of these automated facilities to expand production quickly reduces the amount of munitions that must be stored pending the availability of new production. The munition production modernization program is scheduled over several years and will cost, when completed, in excess of $6 billion. "6. Manufacturing Technology. Another action that we have taken to assist in the maintenance of a viable production base in this country is the DoD Manufacturing Technology Program. This program is designed to develop improved manufacturing techniques and to provide for timely, reliable and economical production of Defense materiel. The program is production-oriented and is designed to smooth the transition of R&D advances into economical production. These "Although the primary objective of the DoD Manufacturing Technology Program is to resolve defense production problems, the results of the DoD projects are shared with industry. actions have significantly contributed to the modernization of the domestic production base and have assisted in the national drive to increase U. S. productivity. "In cooperation with industry we are exploring various approaches to promote greater use of computers and computer technology in the manufacturing process. We believe that computeraided manufacturing offers many highly significant opportunities for cost reductions in systems acquisition and we plan to pursue the se opportunities aggressively within the limitations of funding. availability. " Reading List 1. Bertsch, Anthony A., and Stanley M. Matelski, Jr., Production Management: The Defense Materials System ("ICAF National Security Management Monograph Series") Washington, D. C. 1967. Kolb, Avery E., Emergency Resources Management Limited Mitchell, Donald W. Civil Defense: Planning for Survival and and Recovery. Washington, D. C., Industrial College of the Armed Forces, 1966. Reich, Eli T., Industrial Preparedness Posture Improved by Secretary of Defense, James R. Schlesinger, Annual Defense Department Report, FY 1976 and FY 197T. (Statement before Congress 5 February 1975) Washington, D. C. 1975. U. S. Department of Defense, The Defense Civil Preparedness U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal ENERGY RESOURCES FISSION, FUSION AND THE BREEDER REACTOR The following seeks to clarify in layman's language the differences (and similarity) among the three terms appearing ever more frequently in the debate over the future of nuclear power: fission, fusion, and the breeder reactor. All too often they are misunderstood and, not infrequently, confused with one another. Space consideration and the pursuit of simplicity have tilted the descriptions well over toward the realm of oversimplification. Thus, as the layman's attention is invited, the scientist's indulgence is begged. FISSION To understand what breeder reactors are all about and glimpse the problems involved in developing fusion power, it is convenient to review the relatively more familiar fission reactor. All the current commercial nuclear power plants in the United States are of this type. Fission takes place when an atom is split apart or broken down as it is struck by a sub-atomic particle such as a neutron. An element most conveniently structured by nature for this particular process is Uranium 235, or in simplified terms U 235, which we find occurring naturally in uranium ore but mixed with a far more numerous relative: U 238. In fact a high grade uranium ore is only about seven tenths of one percent pure in its natural form. That is; for every seven atoms of usable U 235, there are some 993 atoms of the inert U 238, a concentration far too weak to sustain a reaction. Thus the ore must undergo an enrichment process to increase the concentration of U 235 atoms up to a two to four percent level. The physical separation is accomplished by either a defusion or centrifugal process requiring a considerable amount of electircity and no small amount of technological expertise. The resulting fuel is a white powdery substance quite harmless to handle until it is inserted into the nuclear reactor and begins its work. When an atom of U 235 is struck by a fast moving neutron it breaks down into lighter elements and emits, among other things, a burst of energy in the form of heat and more neutrons than were absorbed in the collision. These free neutrons become missiles capable of splitting apart other U 235 atoms and so the process leads 58 upon itself in a sustained reaction, continually producing heat which is drawn off and converted to work. So far it is all very simple, but wait Because more neutrons are produced by the breakdown of a U 235 atom than consummed by the collision, it became apparent that if each free neutron were to find another fissionable atom to strike, the process would rapidly wind up into a multiplying crescendo of self distruction, with rapidly rising temperatures melting down and destroying any container that man might devise. And so it would if each free neutron were to find a U 235 atom. In reality, however, the concentration of fissionable atoms is so sparse in the relative immensity of inner space that the majority of the free neutrons are dissipated elsewhere, absorbed by the reactor shielding, the more numerous U 238 atoms, or the control rods inserted into the reactor mass for the express purpose of controlling the neutron population. The key to the whole thing is proper balance. If too many neutrons are drawn off the laws of chance decree that too few collisions will occur to sustain the reaction, and the process rapidly winds down to zero and shuts off. On the otherhand, once the mass goes critical (that is, becomes self sustaining), an excess of free neutrons would rapidly lead to a runaway reaction. In a sense this is what takes place in an atomic explosion. Highly enriched fissionable material is suddenly brought together in a mass so concentrated that the almost instantaneous "run away" manifests itself in a detonation. Those who worry about a nuclear power plant becoming an atomic bomb, and there are those who do, need only ponder the dynamics involved to lay their fears at rest. It was noted that nuclear power generators utilize a fuel with a concentration of U 235 atoms no greater than four percent. Atomic weapon fuel, by contrast, is in excess of 90 percent pure in terms of fissionable material. Without elaborate controls to preclude run away reaction, commercial grade fuel might well over heat to the point of destroying its container, but it cannot blow up. question of concentration. In a nuclear power plant control rods designed to soak up free neutrons are manipulated to assure proper balance and a steady flow of heat while elaborate safety devices back one another up to minimize accidents. The whole thing is so common place today that we sometimes overlook the incredible technological juggling act which must be maintained if the system is to work. It becomes even more remarkable when we realize that these interactions |