. .. - b. The Air Forcerepliedto our memorandumtothe effectthat recommendations couldunder currentregulationsbe sent to parentunits for actionand that furtheractionon our requestwas thus unnecessary. The Army replywas to similareffectalthoughthe Army did publisha circularrestatingthe policy. This of necessitybecamethe JointTask Force Sevenpolicyon promotionof enlistedmen. Sincethere already existedan establishedpolicyconcerningthe promotionof Navy and Marine Corpsenlistedpersonnelwhile such personnelwere on tempora~ additionalduty or temporaxyduty away from theirhome duty stationsand sincethe existingpromotionpolicywas essentiallyin agreementwith the policyof the Amy and Air Force statedabove,the Navy Department was not approachedon this matter. c. Promotionrecommendations for JointTask Force personnel assignedto USARPACwere forwardedto the AdjutantGeneral,USARPAC, who forwardedthem to subordinateunits by endorsementstatingthat the CommandingGeneraldesiredspecialconsideration to be given in each case. In some cases recommendations went directfrom Eniwetokto parent USARPACunits. d. At one time, about40% of our promotion-recommendations were approved. While this percentagedecreasedas time went on some promotionsof EM permanentlyassignedto the 21 and to USARPACwere effectedas late as the actualtest period. bwever, in VISW of the morale stimulantprovidedby promotionsthe time and energyconsumedby this one projectwas consideredwell spent. 24 SectionX