Vil
board with chairman being the commander of the air task group with
representation from the scientific group.
renainedwith the air task group,
But, the final responsibility
General Estes then advised General
Canterbury to seek a conference with representatives of all agencies
concerned in order to resolve the differences of opinion,
Despite urgent recommendations, the issue was not settled by 1957."
In November 1956, General Canterbury alluded to the fact that "the language
in the agreements anddirectives on the responsibilities of the air
operational commander has been subject to considerable interpretation," 23
In turn, he outlined areas of responsibility which absolved the air
commander of determining all suberdinate details, such as each agency
specified would provide the air commander with the data related to blast
effects, overpressures, predicted yields and other factors from which
the air commander could draw positioning decisions, By 25 Jamary 1957,
General Canterbury had apparently secured that approval for he sent a
communication to all agencies delineating responsibilities for positioning
aircraft.-u
Headquarters, Air Defense Command, Commander, Joint Task Force SEVEN,
and the Atanic Energy Commission, approved Ceneral Canterbury's
recommendations without reservation, 25
Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics,
United States Navy, concurred, reserving final approval of placement
of Naval aircraft to that agency,“°
154
APWLINO
SWEH~2-0034
\1?
we