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