months prior to the test, the many tons of critical units for Operation Ivy. The determination of shipping requirements and of the dates on which the equipment from the various organizations and agencies throughout the United States would be ready was essential to a successful movementplan. TG 132.1 informed JTF 132 of some of the major shipping problems as early as January 1952. The Scientific Task Group, however, was unable to furnish realistic schedules or even approximate dates, in some cases, for the bulk of the material which had to be transported overseas in early 1952. This was due to the fact that the speed-up of the operation resulted in research and development being done side by side with production work. This procedure necessitated many changes during the course of production, and the completion schedules were inevitably sometimes unreliable. As plans for the shipment of equipmentto the Forward Area became firm, the Task Force was informed of schedules and requirements. The Task Force then arranged for the necessary air or water transportation as required. Since much of the equipment which was to be shipped by surface transportation departed from the San Francisco area, special handling procedures were arranged with the Naval Supply Center at Oakland, Calif. Complete instructions concerning shipping, labeling, etc., were issued to all participating groups. During a conference in Washington, D. C., in late February, the problems associated with shipment and evacuation of the bulky and delicate hydrogen transport Dewars were discussed. Representatives of JTF 132, TG 132.1, and Camco determined that it would be possible to carry the packaged Dewars in the holds of any Liberty ship. It was proposed at this conference that the Dewars be shipped in two shipments of four Dewars each, one shipment on 2 August and the other on approximately 21 August. This scheduled movement was carried outas ¢ planned. During March 1952, arrangements were made for special warehousing space at Oakland for TG 132.1, and a liaison officer was assigned at Oakland to coordinate and expedite the movement of cargo through the water port of embarkation. At the sametime liaison officers were also assigned to Travis Air Force Base and Hickam Air Force Base for movement of both cargo and personnel through these aerial ports. General air and water transportation requirements for movement of equipment overseas were made known to the J-4 Section of TG 132.1 through the status reports submitted by the various project officers. These requirements were consolidated and forwarded to JTF 132, and the Transportation Officer arranged for the necessary transportation. Air and water transportation requirements were submitted to the Task Force each month in accordance with established procedures. In general, the bulk of the cargo and equipment was shipped by surface craft during July and August 1952. The movement of personnel and cargo by air gradually increased and reached a peak during September and October 1952. Due to several special air shipments required during September and October, serious backlogs sometimes developed at Travis and Hickam. Backlogs as high as 30,000 lb at Travis and 50,000 lb at Hickam were experienced. The Wake Island evacuation, because of the hurricane, accounted for some backlog in late September. The special air shipments which had priority over normal air movementincluded shipments such as the aluminum sheet and the balloons for the helium tunnel of Program 2. Replacement parts for the cryogenics plant compressors required special airlift to the Forward Area. Several special series of flights were arranged to ship last-minute critical equipmentto the coast. Representatives of the J-4 Section of TG 132.1 were placed at critical points during October to expedite the shipment of urgently needed or misplaced items. The normal errors in incorrect marking or obliterated addresses were experienced. Items which were reported as delivered and could not be located were traced by the J-4 Section representatives, Considering the likelihood of backlogs developing, it was found that water transportation of equipment was somewhat more reliable as far as date of delivery was concerned. This no doubt was due to the fact that a little extra cargo does not particularly create a backlog when 25