f°
y
NOTE TO GENERAL STARBIRD
See
ca
4
Cured wivbers | Bb
\2
|
JanuaryA,...1960,
-
i
THRU Colonel Hood and Captain Houston
Pe
Fz
FROM Cdr P . Sanna
» USN
Test Branch
SUBJECT:
ACE TS
a
a
: i oe \ perAOd
dA B20 oo aahees
SAC PLANS TO USE ENIWETOK FOR/ATLAS SHOTS GROUND ZERO
Jim Reeves' attached memorandum of December 29, 1959 discusses Air Force
plans to impact ICBM's fired from Vandenberg AFB, Calif. in the Eniwetok
He wished to correct a
advised him that the AEC had agreed to PMR use of Eniwetok only for
nications and for monitoring.impacts at outside targets by a hydroret
Pcie
Vypeke eatboat dd
to iti
Fee
&
ES —
fp i
wwe ok Ste an
A
| 7.CTHER (SPECYT):|
et
a
&
to
tS:
“misimpression" he may have left the day before. The Navy would not
forbid a firing but instead furnishes to the Air Force safety criteria.
So long as the Air Force can stay within these criteria, they may go ahead,
wt dere
rca CU
Sy
ment ernest
EAL
tt
ru
dg. |
They have received an
informal memo from the 4950th in Albuquerque about the same meeting with
SAC. That memo cites a message from Air Force Headquarters (AFOOP 95623)
telling them to go ahead with the shots using Mack Tower as ground zero.
re
+roel aan
AEs te WW es €,
sp.
gut.
On Jan. 7th JIF-7 called on the same subject.
Later on Jan. 7th Cdr Aller called again.
ALT RON ot A
haa»
Ane
the local PMR staff.
NAME:
AUTHORITY: AUD
IND REVIEWER DATE:
ve
name: _2
ean
PTE TEE ae
- Pe
ao ee
ek
encore he me
=“rr * +
a
ut for our own protection we would be glad to discuss the contents wi
>
WER-DA
AUTHORITY C1A0€
advised them that these were internal memos indicating what our peopl
lunderstood and not suitable to show what the Air Force is planning to
‘oh al
ouay asoiefob
Due to the contradiction in spotting requirements, Navy's PMR office
would like to see or get some details from these memos from Reeves.
MEANT OF ENERGY
oe ae LE eT ee IO ge oe Ne
IFICATION REVIEW
{CIRCLE NUMBER(S)]
RETAINED
HANGEO TO:
Waal
CLASSIFI
CONTA NS NO
ZOCRD
5. CLASSIFICATION
€D
6 CLASSIFIED INFO B
Present firing controls provide for destroying any missile whose tra
jectory is indicated to be erratic. While 1. good flight can be expe
to be surprisingly accurate, it is not possible in flight to detect
inaccuracies of less than 20 miles. Therefore, errors of this order
Imight occur. Probabilities of injuring anyone are so small that shi}
and aircraft are placed within this distance to observe impacts but
our people would not be subjected to this risk.
EMERG ¥ GECLASSIECATION RENES
TMAERYOF
a3
A check with AFOAT indicates that the first firing has been delayed some
45 days. On January 6th I talked to Admiral Connolly, Assistant Ch:
of Navy's Bureau of Weapons for PMR. He had Cdr. Aller of his staf:
call me and assure that shots to impact in the lagoon will not be
approved. He stated that the Air Force has not been permitted to
include funds for impact photography and has assured the Navy that i
is not desired.
Maa we a La
to
gt ye
ve
toe. we
A We fre:
eA SLATS. wi Cut
=
cSe £
Pec AASGIFIED 1 O UpA
area and even in the lagoon as early as January 12, 1960. Needless to
say, ALO is somewhat concerned about safety of our personnel.