· ~ 

~ 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 . 

~~ ""'--'-"'''-" 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 

", 

OFFICE: OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON 

MEMORANDUM FOR: General Stewart 

Director, NRO Staff 

SUBJECT: Role of the DDNRO? 

14 00089279D 

March 24, 1966 

Over seven months have transpired since my coming aboard. 

During this time I have exercised relatively little initiative 

in formally defining my areas of interest and responsibility. 

It has been particularly a period of education and orientation 

during which it has seemed to me important to understand as 

best I can Dr. Flax's working methods as well as your own and 

to attempt to fit into them in the most useful way, I thought 

perhaps it would be useful at this point to summarize the way ~ 

things look to me now. 

1. The United States Intelligence Board, 

Particularly COMOR and Its Subgroups. 

In my opening discussion with Dr. Flax on my arrival 

he indicated that by virtue of his experience in R&D program 

matters he would expect to take the iniative and carry the 

responsibility. He further indicated that by virtue of my 

background he would look to me to pay special attention, on 

his behalf, to matters related to the Board. Obviously, he 

did not delegate this responsibility but rather was indicating 

an area of emphasis. 

As you review the last seven months in this regard, 

you are aware that I have shown considerable interest in the 

relations of COMOR and its subgroups to the NRO but have made 

an effort, on principle, to facilitate and aid wherever possible your efforts and those of the Staff rather than to supplant 

them. I could not ask for anyone to be more responsive in this 

regard than you have been. I feel there has been noticable 

improvement principally because of your initiatives with the 

Chairman, COMOR and I here want to make special mention of your 

work in the SIGINT field. You have insured my participation 

in the Staff discussions on these questions to my satisfaction. 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

INTERNAL 

Copy _1_ 

... 

.... 
· , " ~. t 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

~ 

Illu~ual..a ... 

As we look to the future and referring to our frequent 

discussions on the COMOR relationship as it involvesl I 

and Hank Howard, it has occurred to me that an improvement 

which might be instituted, and which I discussed briefly with 

Paul Worthman, is that on fairly major items which require a 

contribution from the NRO in COMOR (or USIB) matters Hank would 

submit to you either for your concurrence or would draft for 

your signature a quote of the COMOR minute followed by amplification comments of his own with identification of the officers 

or component elements of the NRO which need to-be involved in 

seeking a solution of the problem. The presentation would 

include substantive and procedural ,sugges.:t:i;,o.ns, the former 

serving as a jumping-off place to move the problem along. If 

it were preferred that this be prepared for your signature as 

an instruction to component elements of the Staff, or even in 

the other case obviously the action might go any of several 

places. However, it seems to me that it would make sense and 

be a convenience if we could look to Hank as the coordinator 

on such matters. Additionally, his role as coordinator would, 

I believe, strengthen his competence in representing the fin~ 

views of the NRO; it would make him a much better negotiator 

in the COMOR arena. If such a procedure were instituted or 

if indeed some better idea can be contrived, I would consider 

it useful to me to know what is going on and to participate 

ex officio either bilaterally with Hank or with any Staff group 

which would give me a better feel for the problem and the possible solutions as well as possibly permit me at an early date 

to make some constructive suggestion. 

The outcome of such deliberation, however, must 

emanate as an exercise of your responsibility. By virtue of 

our close working relationship, I would feel that the main 

lines of our .posi t ion would be satisfactory to me and there 

should be no difficulty in identifying those matters which, 

prior to or in the midst of negotiation, would require policy 

guidance from Flax. 

As you can see, this is in line with my' oral discussion with you in trying to correct the bad habit whichl I 

and I have gotten into and which, as I said, I feel is~a=n--e~r~r~o~r 

and must be corrected. 

When a paper is going to the Board, it seems to me 

here again Hank must insure earliest possible receipt of the 

papers to be discussed so that both you and I have a chance 

to read them and to move quickly to get a systematic, and if 

possible, appropriate Staff analysis and development of a 

2 INTERNAL 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

-

.... 

""" 
'. 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

~vn[.~' 

briefing paper for Dr. Flax. My participation here again 

should not affect your responsibility for the preparation of 

that paper for Flax. 

2. Relationship between the SOC 

and the Program Directors. 

Here again I at once recognize your responsibility. 

However, it is an area of great interest to me because I believe 

it bears so critically on the operational achievement of the 

requirements of the Board. I would hope with the change of 

personalities, i.e., the substitution of Howard fo~ I that 

there would be fewer sparks and more importantly a better 

working relationship between the Director, SOC and Buzard or 

the West Coast. While friendly relations are desirable, however, th~t is not the objective. What I' am concerned about 

is the recognition by all parties concerned of a viable, substantive relationship which includes not only the ready access 

to information but the assured definition of responsibilities, 

which at times have been in question, by you or if necessary 

by Dr. Flax. It seems to me that in many areas we have discussed, you and I see very much eye to eye. We need to get, 

in a patient way, both the Agency and the Program A to accept 

a coordinating responsibility on the part of the NRO Staff--

the recent Carl Duckett instance being a case in point. It 

seems to me there is an underlying curren~ disturbing to me, 

which relates to the desires of the West Coast to limit the 

activities of the SOC. Although I think I accurately recognize that this exists, I confess I cannot as yet define the 

problems--Iet alone the solutions. In this case also it seems - to me that my role is one of keeping informed and consulting 

with you. In general my objective must be to strengthen your 

role rather than to intrude on it. Where I should intrude, I 

normally would expect it to be as a result of our consultation. 

3. Security. 

Although I have no strong native penchant in this 

field, the last eleven years have forced me into constant 

concern and some responsibility in security. I have taken 

occasion to discuss security questions which have come across 

my desk with Lou Mazza. At an appropriate pOint in security 

discussions, as well as in other questions, I feel that Staff 

action can profit on occasion from consultation among several 

of us. I might mention in this connection, though it relates 

to all papers going to Dr. Flax that I recently noticed a 

paper from Mazza to Flax on the Dr. Cheatham case. I discussed 

3 INTERNAL 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

-
Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

:1,' "I""""l " . " .. ' ,.1 , 

H, 

this with Mazza, explaining that, were I Flax, I would not 

know automatically whether or not the Director of the Staff 

was aware of this problem and had concurred in the recommendation. I feel that papers from the Staff going to Flax 

should be through the Director of the Staff and should be 

initialed by either you or Worthman. 

It seems to me also that in certain instances which 

have to be decided case by case a determination should be 

made as to whether there should be a concurrence. line for me. 

- 4. NRO Mission and Functions in Staffing. 

It seems to me that we have worked out quite satisfactorily understandings on these questions; essentially you 

carry the prime responsibility. My role is mainly the one 

that I have been pursuing--aiding you wherever I usefully can. 

5. Manned Orbiting Laboratory. 

Perhaps because of the way the MOL came about and 

its black and white aspects, I am more or less a late-comer, 

at least in the recognition of the Staff and Dr. Flax that 

essentially the black portion is no different from any of the 

other NRP functions. Accordingly, it seems to me that there 

needs to be an appropriate and timely opportunity for me to 

become acquainted with the problems as they arise and to 

insure my contribution, if any. 

6. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

To a greater degree the comments pertaining to MOL 

above are also applicable to NASA, explainable I think in 

large part by' the fact that the NASA problem has a heavy 

Sec Def aspect. 

7. Film Processing: Production and R&D. 

I have interested myself in this subject in various 

ways for a number of years--I suppose in part because it is so 

closely related to the final acquisition of information. The 

OPIC question still is around though slumbering, the R&D question I have recently gone into with Captain Koch. I leave you 

to choose the appropriate time but it seems to me that 

Captain Koch should be asked to ~repare an R&D briefing for 

Flax at which you and I andl , Iwould be present. Koch 

has pretty well sorted this out ln terms of Westover and EK 

4 INTERNAL 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

-
.. . 

~~ -_.-" 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 ~'-"'-' .. -~~ 

though he has not yet ground in the additional R&D efforts of 

both CIA and Program A. You and I see eye to eye on this problem vis-a-vis Sheldon, quite apart from what final determination Flax may care to make. 

8. Aircraft. 

I am very much interested in this area which 

embraces the U-2, the OXCART, the SR-71, the drones, and the 

GROSBEAK. I made some effort as you know to get_hold of a 

handle for GROSBEAK by having Flax briefed on it. I am afraid 

that hasn't gone anywhere. Perhaps my confusion is shared 

with regard to the NRO responsibilities in these areas though 

varying from case to case, I Ihas recently suggested 

that there are proplems in some of these areas which he thinks 

I could very well dig into~ Here again, however, I, perhaps 

mistakenly, feel that it isn't a question of me in the first 

instance, it is a question of the Director of the Staff and 

his Staff in which I am a contributor. 

9. Programs. 

I expose no secret to confess my shortcomings in 

the engineering and technical and contracting aspects of our 

programs, I guess at the moment I am in the role of a student 

insofar as I can learn anything. I sUPpo~~I tend to have 

views predominantly in the management area/in the relations 

with contractors. 

10. Budget. 

Here is an area where I am quite confused. As I 

indicated tol I during one of our drinking bouts 

up at Rochester, I have a feeling that he pre-empts certain 

programmatic decisions where the initiative more rightfully 

belongs in your hands though I cannot argue this very 

intelligently. 

Summary Comment. I am sure that some of my colleagues 

either here or in the Agency would be prone, if they read the 

foregoing, to find me not sufficiently aggressive in carving 

out my role in the NRO. My thoughts above are as of the 

moment and most certainly I am flexible. However, as I have 

told you on several occasions, I am very strong in my belief 

in the importance of the role of the Director of the Staff 

and I feel it is in the interests of a successful NRO that 

that position be strengthened and depended upon. There may 

5 INTERNAL 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

: ~ 

. I 

i 

r 

'I ~ b 

\~ 

J 

'-
l .. Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 ~;. 'W .. ~-. _ •. _-

~, , 

arise occasions in which Flax wishes to pin a specific responsibility on me beyond what I gather to be his wish in regard 

to my paragraph 1. It seems to me, however, that this is 

something that must come about and cannot be contrived. 

I would appreciate an opportunity to sit down with you 

and discuss these notes soon. 

6 INTERNAL 

Approved for Release: 2018/02/01 C05101997 

... 

... ! ~