When the Office of Defense Affairs was established, the AACB was, as it still is, intended to be the principal NASA-DOD coordinating body. It came into existence through an interagency agreement dated September 13, 1960, but in effect had statutory status since in its functions it replaced the Civilian-Military Liaison Committee established by the Space Act of 1958. Legally, the CMLC was still in existence, but was inactive. It suffered from the fact that, as constituted, the Chairman had no administrative authority or responsibility in either NASA or the DOD, and the Committee had never functioned as intended. By 1960, the CMLC had become generally ineffectual from lack of interest on both sides. Legislative actions were initiated on several occasions to give statutory recognition to the replacement of the CMLC by the AACB through amendment of the Space Act, but these e were opposed by NASA and the DOD, both Agencies preferring to have administrative flexibility to change the composition and functions of the AACB as experience dictated. The substitution was eventually formalized, however, through executive action of the President on May 27, 1965. Reorganization Plan No. 4, transmitted to the Congress on that date, abolished the CMLC and transferred its functions to the President. (The assumption of the functions of the CMLC by the AACB was tacitly understood.)
During 1962 the Launch Vehicle Panel, Space Flight Ground Environment Panel, Supporting Research and Technology Panel, and Unmanned Spacecraft Panel of the AACB had been generally active and effective. The Aeronautics Panel, on the other hand, had held no meeting that year, and the Manned Space Flight Panel was being largely by-passed by direct liaison between OMSF and AFSC outside the machinery of the AACB. In general, the Board was being defeated in its concept and purpose largely through the practice by the designated members, particularly DOD members, of' sending lower echelon substitutes to the meetings.
ln an effort to restore the Board to its proper status as the principal joint mechanism for NASA-DOD coordination, exchange of' information, and concerted action on the policy, planning, and decision making level, Mr. Webb made the re-energization of the AACB a first priority assignment of the new Office of Defense Affairs. I was told to make the AACB work.
Coincidentally, Mr. Webb assigned Dr. Seamans as the NASA Co-chairman of the AACB, vice Dr. Dryden. This was more in line with the Administrator's desires that Dr. Dryden concentrate on NASA's relationships with the scientific community and on international affairs and that Dr. Seamans function as NASA's . General Manager, taking special cognizance of' intra-governmental affairs. See Attachment V-A, pp. 41a-41b .
 At the first meeting of the Board attended by Dr. Seamans and me in our new capacities, the process of revitalization was begun by introducing procedural changes aimed at systematizing the work of the Board, revitalizing the Panels, and providing for a follow-up on all action items. As the next step, Dr. Seamans, on April 15, 1963, promulgated a memorandum prepared by Defense Affairs. In it he reminded the NASA membership of the Board: "The principle underlying the composition and operation of the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board is that the individual members hold line positions of responsibility in their respective agencies, and that they use their authority to take appropriate executive action based on consideration of matters by the Board." He pointed out that the frequent absence of regularly designated members tended to negate this principle and requested the NASA members to attend regularly, in the absence of compelling reasons to the contrary. Dr. Seamans set the example by rarely missing a meeting. A copy of this memorandum was sent to the DOD Co-chairman, Dr. Harold Brown. The message apparently got through. Dr. Brown began attending meetings quite regularly, as did the other DOD members. From this point onward, the Board gained strength and effectiveness in discharging the functions originally assigned to the CMLC in the Space Act.
Early in 1963. Dr. Edward C. Welsh, Executive Secretary of the National Aeronautics and Space Council, indicated his desire to be made a member of the AACB. In order to preserve the integrity of the Board as a bilateral body, it was agreed that in lieu of membership status Dr. Welsh would be furnished a copy of the agenda before each meeting and be invited to attend as an observer whenever the agenda included any item of interest to him. Thereafter, Dr. Welsh was a regular attendee at the Board meetings, a step which served to facilitate the work of the staff of the Council and which, in my opinion, also benefitted both NASA and the DOD.
Later on, the FAA proposed that it be represented on the Board, but once again it was decided that the Board should not be expanded beyond its bilateral structure. It was pointed out to FAA that the work of the Board extended considerably beyond the area of interest of FAA and that matters of mutual FAA-NASA and FAA-DOD interest could better be dealt with on bilateral bases through NASA-FAA and DOD-FAA coordinating committees.
The AACB rapidly gained strength under the new interest and procedures. Meetings were held regularly at about six-week intervals, and the Board became the principal forum for the initiation of new and the correlation of existing policies; the conduct of joint studies; the interchange of scientific, technical, operational, budgetary, programmatic, and administrative information; and the concerting of actions in many areas of mutual interest. As such, its activities commanded much of the thought and effort of the Office of Defense Affairs.
No attempt will be made to chronicle the actions of the AACB and its panels, meeting by meeting. While the consensuses reached in the AACB and the work of Defense Affairs were intricately interwoven, there were many instances in which arrangements for cross-support, agreements for division  of effort or funding, and resolutions of differences between NASA and the DOD were accomplished outside the organizational structure of the AACB but with the knowledge of its membership. Therefore, it will best serve the interests of simplicity and continuity if the activities of the Office of Defense Affairs are treated by project subjects in this narrative history.
 Review of the Functions of the Manned Space Flight Panel
At the AACB meeting on February 23, 1967, it was reported that the Manned Space Flight Panel had not been active for the past two years, its functions having been largely preempted by the Manned Space Flight Policy Committee (MSFPC) and the Manned Space Flight Experiments Board (MSFEB). The need for the continuation of the Panel was questioned. The Panel was requested to review its functions and membership and submit recommendations as to its future.
The matter was discussed at the next AACB meeting, with particular attention being given to the demands made upon the time of the then Chairman, Dr. George E. Mueller, and Vice Chairman, Dr. Alexander H. Flax, both of whom were heavily burdened with other duties.
Final action was taken by the AACB on August 24, 1967. It was recognized that the Panel and the MSFPC could co-exist and do useful work at their respective levels. The Terms of Reference of the Panel were revised to emphasize its responsibilities in coordinating manned earth orbital studies and in the area of promoting flight safety. Subordinates of Dr. Mueller and Dr. Flax were designated as the new Chairman and Vice Chairman.
 Joint Annual Facilities Review
A very important, continuing function of the AACB was to conduct each year a joint review of the requests for new facilities and major expansions of existing facilities appearing in the annual budget submissions of NASA and the DOD, with the objective of reaching agreement as to the justification of such expenditures and the elimination of unnecessary duplication. NASA's representative on the special ad hoc group to conduct these reviews was Mr. William A. Fleming, Office of Program Plans and Analysis.
This annual exercise began at the field level. Each field installation, before submitting a request for a new facility or major expansion, was required to make an informal survey of all other field installations of the two Agencies which might have similar facilities, to determine whether its needs could be met through use of existing capacity elsewhere' possibly involving cross-services. The next step was a Headquarters review in each Agency and finally a joint review, the results of which were presented to the AACB.
The procedure proved effective in that each year it eliminate: a certain amount of construction which, if approved, would have constituted unjustified duplication. These joint reviews served to reassure BuBud and the Congress that NASA and the DOD were effectively working together to make the maximum utilization of existing government facilities to accomplish R&D work.
[41a] Attachment V-A. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION CONCERNING THE AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS COORDINATING BOARD
I. POLICIES AND PURPOSE
II. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BOARD
There is hereby established the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board, which shall be responsible for facilitating&emdash;
III. Composition OF THE BOARD
IV. PRINCIPLES OF OPERATION
For the National Aeronautics and Space Administration:
1 For purposes of clarity, the name of this Panel was changed to Unmanned Spacecraft by the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board at the second meeting on July 26, 1960. NASA-HQ