A2 - page 9
L5 0
considered three possible solutions to the problem.
Proposal A was a
solution in which JTE7 would become a subordinate command of DABA.
Thus
during non-test periods, the Task Force would revert to the control of DASA
and liaison would be maintained with the AEC through the DMA.
Proposal B
Is a second approach in which JTF7 would be assigned to DA§A tor administrative support only but would be responsible to both the DOO and the AEC
at all times as in testing situations.
Proposal C is a third approach
which would visualize disestablishing JTF7 and placing its functions in
existing government agencies.
Under this third plan, only a test planning
board composed members of field command/DASA and ALOO would be retained.
The study group considered the three alternatives and, considering the
fact that the AEC requires joint control only after the decision has been
made to resume testing, concluded that the proposal A would be the most
efficient and acceptable organization.
As for manning decisions, it was recognized that S167 «1 presently located
at Los Alamos, would not be required during the intern period and therefor
it was disestablished with the military personnel returned to their
respective services and the action to be completed by 3! August 1959.
Furthermore, headquarters JTF? and Task Group 7.2 (at the EPG) were
reviewed and 7.2 is reduced from 559 to 393 and headquarters were reduced
56 personnel as of
[4 July 1959.
As the study progressed and the
possible manning figures under the three proposals were clarified, it
became clear that there would be fess manpower actually required under
Proposal C than under Proposals A and B,which would have approximately the
same requirements.
It was finally determined that “in order to maintain
readiness capabilities under the assumptions provided and to perform the
functions set forth in the charter for Proposals A and B,
it is estimated