..
of a unit or furnished
c. Items of equipmentexcessto the T,/??
under an operationalprojeotwere returnedto depotsin the U.S.unless
author?.ty
for shipmentto Oahuwas approvedby the Chiefof,the Technioal
Serviceresponsible for the equipment.
d.
Expendable supplies (rations, spar~ parts,etc.)were returned
to Oahu depots.
Navy property: Appendix5 of AnnexE to FieldOrderNo. 2 contained
instructionsfor disp08itiCtn
of Navy propertyand ind~catedthat this
propertywould be screenedprior to disposal. Pursuant to a Chiefof
YEvalOperationsletterof 9 February1948 directingdispositionof Navy
property,Rear Admiral A.J. Welllngswas designatedas the Navy representative for the 6oreeningof propertyitems. He was assistedby othernaval
offioerswithin the JTF organizationconcernedwith propertymatters.
Roperty sureeningactivitywaB primarilyconcernedwith Navyuwned
equipmentin use ashoreat Eniwetok,Kwajalein,Rongerik,~juro, -d
“ Wake. Peat-Sandatone
needswere consideredas well as the oonditionand
availabilityof the equipmentitself. Deoisionshavingbeen reachedas
to diapooalof iteme,accountablepropertyofficershavingcustodyof the
itemswere notifiedby lettervia appropriate
task groupcosmnders of
the actionto be taken. Copiesof thece letterswere sent to CinCPacand
ComServPaofor information.
VI
Conolusione and Reconanendationa
In general,it is consideredthat the logisticalsupportafforded
Joint Task ForoeSevenby the three Departmentsof Amy, Air Force●nd
Navy was satisfactorily
plannedand very well exeouted. No instanoeis
known of failureor prejudiceto the operationthroughany shortageof
SectionIV
●
52