scheduled to be held at Eniwetok in the spring of 1952, has been
Recent inforpostponed until the winter of 1952-53 by the AKC.
mation from the AEC indteates the probability that another
development test may be held, at the Nevada. Test Site, at about
the same time as IVY.
4. The Federal Civil Defense Administraticn has proposed
that an effects test us ye an atomic weapoen of approximately
to determine the effects on civil deC-KT yield be conducted
Ponse structures and material, and for indoctrination and publicity
The DOD, has been
in connection with the civil defense program.
invited to participate in and assist with the support of the test.
The JCS, in July 1951, considered that, from a purely military
point of view, the expenditure cof fissionable material for the
expressed purposes of this test would not be Justifiable, but
that if the test is approved, the DOD should consider nominal
support, if requested, and stated that the degree of participation and material support for the test should be held to the
absolute minimum.
The AEC has agreed that, If the test is ap-
proved, the AEC will provide the atomic bomb and certain speci-
At this time, it appears improbable that the
fied support.
The AFSWP is
FCDA test will be conducted in the near future.
of the opinion that participation by the military, in the status
of guests and in a suburdinate supporting position, ina test
conducted by and primarily for the FCDA would be undesirable at
best; but that, if the need for a military weapons effects test
is established, the FCDA might be invited to participate to an
extent limited to tests of civil defense structures and materials
under conditionsStipulated by the DOD.
5. The AFSWP has received the effects programs proposed
by the three services for accomplishment in conjunction with the
development test to be conducted in the spring of 1952, SNAPPER.
Some programs are incompatible with a development test and several
will be difficult to integrate into the test because of time,
space and other considerations.
It is recognized that by their
very nature, weapons deve Ropmen’ tests eannot be planned. far in
advance
whereas some weapons cffeets tests must be.
Development tests, by reason of their laboratory nature, are not susceptible to early knowledge of the magnitude of yield of the
various shots, sequence of shots, type of detonation (tower or
air drop), or areas relative to ground.zero which will be
available
to the military participants for construction of
test structures, instrumentation, and exposure of material.
Between the two types of tests there is an inherent conflict
involving mutual interference, divergenee of interests, competition for local facilities and labor, complexity of control
or command, difficulty of accscunting and general incompatibility.
6. Certain types of effects projects, in which the
military have a great intcrest, are of such a nature that they
ean be included in an AEC development test either wholly or to
a limited extent.
Effects projects in this category which should
continue to be ineluded in development tests are those which
involve no large outlay of equipment, extensive construction or
procurement of instruments, and which will not severely interfere
with the development test program.
Tnese will be generally
' limited ta research projects,
checking of test procedures for
future effects tests, tests of atomic warfare operations which
require continual
yield.
evaluation or tests not
sensitive to weapon