|
DUPONT AND HANFORD (Hanford Engineer Works, 1942)
Events
>
The Plutonium Path to the Bomb, 1942-1944
The scientists of the Met Lab had the
technical expertise to design a production pile, but
construction and management on an industrial scale
required an outside contractor. The DuPont
Corporation was an ideal candidate, but the giant chemical
firm was hesitant to join the project due to concern over
accusations that it had profiteered during World War
I. On October 3, 1942, DuPont agreed to design and
build the chemical separation plant for the production
pile facility then planned for
Oak Ridge.
Leslie Groves tried to entice further
DuPont participation by having the firm prepare an
appraisal of the pile (reactor) project
and by placing three DuPont staff members on the Lewis
Committee. DuPont ultimately agreed to become the
primary contractor for plutonium-related work, but because
of continuing sensitivity about its public image its
contract called for a total payment of only dollar over
actual costs. In addition, DuPont vowed to stay out
of the bomb business after the war and offered all patents
to the United States government.
Groves had done well in convincing DuPont to join the
Manhattan Project. DuPont's proven administrative
structure assured excellent coordination (Crawford
Greenewalt was given the responsibility of coordinating
DuPont and Met Lab planning), and Groves and
Arthur Compton welcomed the company's
demand that it be put in full charge of the Oak Ridge
plutonium project. DuPont had a strong organization and
had studied every aspect of the Met Lab's program
thoroughly before accepting the assignment. While
deeply involved in the overall war effort, DuPont expected
to be able to divert personnel and other resources from
explosives work in time to throw its full weight into the
Oak Ridge plutonium project.
Locating the full-scale production plant at Oak Ridge soon
came into question. DuPont expressed great concern about
the hazards of producing plutonium on a large scale, and
Groves had misgivings about placing the facility adjacent
to electromagnetic and gaseous diffusion plants.
Furthermore, the site was uncomfortably close to Knoxville
should a catastrophe occur, and, aside from potential
hazards, sufficient generating power was not available at
the site for yet another major facility. Thus the
search for an alternate location for the full-scale
plutonium facility began soon after DuPont joined the
production team. A site with at least 225 square miles was
required, according to Met Lab scientists and DuPont
engineers. The planned three or four plutonium
production reactors and one or two chemical separation
complexes would need to be at least a mile apart for
security purposes (ultimately three of each would be built
during the war), and nothing could be allowed within four
miles of the separation complexes for fear of radioactive
accidents. Towns, highways, rail lines, and laboratories
would have to be even further away.
On December 16, 1942, Colonel Franklin T. Matthias (far
right in image at left) of Groves's staff and two DuPont
engineers headed for the Pacific Northwest and southern
California to investigate possible production sites.
Of the possible sites available, none had a better
combination of isolation, long construction season, and
abundant water for hydroelectric power than those found
along the Columbia and Colorado Rivers. After
viewing six locations in Washington, Oregon, and
California, the group agreed that the area around
Hanford, Washington, best met the
criteria established by the Met Lab scientists and DuPont
engineers. The Grand Coulee and Bonneville Dams
offered substantial hydroelectric power, while the flat
but rocky terrain would provide excellent support for the
huge plutonium production buildings. The ample
site
of nearly one-half million acres was far enough inland to
meet security requirements, while existing transportation
facilities could quickly be improved and labor was readily
available. Pleased with the committee's unanimous
report, Groves accepted its recommendation and authorized
the establishment of the Hanford Engineer Works, codenamed
Site W.
Previous Next
Sources and notes for this page.
The text for this page was adapted from, and portions
were taken directly from the
Office of History and Heritage Resources
publications:
F. G. Gosling,
The Manhattan Project: Making the Atomic Bomb
(DOE/MA-0001; Washington: History Division, Department
of Energy, January 1999), 28-29, and Richard G. Hewlett and Oscar E. Anderson,
Jr., The New World, 1939-1946: Volume I,
A History of the United States
Atomic Energy Commission
(Washington: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1972),
188-90. Also used was Vincent C. Jones,
Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb, United
States Army in World War II (Washington: Center of
Military History, United States Army, 1988), 108-9. Also
used was Vincent C. Jones,
Manhattan: The Army and the Atomic Bomb, United
States Army in World War II (Washington: Center of
Military History, United States Army, 1988), 108-9. The
photograph of Walter Carpenter and the generals is
courtesy the DuPont Corporation; it is reprinted in
Stephane Groueff,
Manhattan Project: The Untold Story of the Making of
the Atomic Bomb
(Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1967). The
aerial photograph of the X-10 complex
is courtesy the
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The photograph of
Vannevar Bush,
James Conant,
Leslie Groves, and Franklin Matthias is
courtesy the DuPont Corporation; it is reprinted in
Stephane Groueff,
Manhattan Project: The Untold Story of the Making of
the Atomic Bomb
(Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1967). The
Hanford location map is courtesy the
Hanford Site.
Home |
History Office
|
OpenNet
|
DOE
|
Privacy and Security Notices
About this Site
|
How to Navigate this Site
|
Note on Sources
|
Site Map |
Contact Us
|