shelters on the same line,
but closer to the zero point.
There
was some feeling that the presence of the closer AEC installations
might have disturbed the data recorded further away,
at the
Department of Defense structures.
19, While neither of the two examples of interference given
above, no? in fact any others Whicn occurred, proved serious or
highly significant,
also trve that
it is true that they were disturbing.
G is
on the basis of non-interference only, it might
be advantageous to nave separate snots, cach designed for the
objective of major interest.
interest would be barred;
This is not to say that the secondary
instead,
the secondary interest would be
satisfied only bo the extent possibic under a policy of noninterference with the ma jor interest.
Thus,
the degree of develop-
mental experimentation included in a special shot for effects purposes would depend entirely on opportunities remaining after effects.
needs were satisfied.
In other words, pre-planning policy would
announce the agency having major interest in each shot and
that
agency would be given recognized authority and responsibility for
the program content for the shot.
ll. Seeurity of Restricted Data also offers a problem in
joint
tests.
A major requirement -in
the
original FCDA proposal
was the attendance of large numbers of unclearcd personnel from
the country-wide civil defense organizations 5s well as state and
local officials for orientation and education in connection with
aA 3) wuilar problem is presented
oe
atomic exolosions.
in the proposal
of the Department of Defense for the participation of a 5000-man
Regimental Combat Tean,
together With an additional 3500 military
observers at BUSTER-JANGLE.
It is neither feasible nor desirable
to give these people "Q" clearances.
nuinbors
in the test area
Yet their control in such
to prevent the loss of classified data
~ how
4
CeOTe ee
ey a
Py
AS
WSF] eS Py
RL ST