• •

•

411111111 • •."`‘ : 71/4110* 31' rAnd31.11 t.

• •

• • •

••• ••

•

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

WAIRIIINGTON

OOP= Olr ?NC Wall= 111:CIIILTARY

Cr leTe—....Z.J.1 _ A' A

U.L”..LemtiZ.3

"Udull '4,0*

111•1111PIN

February 12, 1965

POR xa. VAXCE

Cy,

The attached letter to you franidr.Xemme is character-

. istically misleading.

•

The first two sentences of the letter sat into a?pasition

citation from the N/0 Asreememt referring to inclusion by

the CU of NRO fimds in its budget presentation, and substanris

of the XRO budget by the DM O. in fact, by the NMO Agreement,

=hese actions are not in opposition. The following is the fu_]

text of the applicable provision, which establishes as a

responsibility of the 3K30 the

"Preparation of budget requests for all 00 programs,

and prase ::ration and substantiation of such budget

requests to the Secretary c! Defense and the Director

of Central Intelligence, the Bureau of •fad: Budget and

Congressional Committees. include in its

hudget presentation to the Bureau of the Budget and

Congressional Committees the funds for chose XRP task;

which are assigned to CU and which are to be finance/

from NMO resources:"

The first paragraph of the letter also states "Last year

:.:.ar.: was a general discussion of reconnaissance and other

semsitive programs with Senator Russell, in whichMr. Hitch

=1Z othets representing the Defense Department and I and mamba:

of the CIA. staff participated." Both Dr. Brown and Dr. Hitch,

1---->who participated in such a discussion with Senator Russell, ar.

It= thatlft.MCCone was not present. Mr. Kirkpatrick and two

other representatives of the CIA ware present but they did not

discuss the N/0 budget. Your secretary took the notes and the

transcript is available. OA

• r

111111111111Pea4,444-c.. .7-,0 CVWCISe;

PIACAL.e. -'14:34 .10-1.4...c4L t 4,4 --le,

i Ali.c ev-Kfc. 1,44A 4t...4 etuieg44. nclatx-24-ct Ili

4

I 

ail, P%.401,6 440c-‘44 44.a.,4 -At..41:4 -7 rf e .-te
•

•

!tr. XcCo©s says, "I saw this budget for the first time

only recently." On S Jancary 1965, in response to a Witted

rocas.: from P::. Clarke of the CIL Comp-oller's office citing

ltr.YarCore's dee*. ze sae it, a copy of the budget was sent

toEr. Clarice. •

W. McCaw' states, "the budget:, as submitted to as, rale

lock of understanding concerning the proper allocation of

rasponsibilities, as between the CU and thi Defense Dalmatia

for individual projects." in fact, the budget as subeitted to

Mr. Wiens does not address the assignment of responsibilities

fo projects. Attached is a copy of the format sent to :Mr. Xc

As to Imo. BaCona's proposal for a joint prasentatioa to t

Congress: .t seems to na that tea DoD, as EXAM:1:bn Agent for

the IRP, has the responsibility to present and to substantiate

the budget as necessary; this is provided far in the MR0 Apia

Last you. , Dr. Brown and Dr. Eitdh carried the burden for me,

with try avaerent. Dr. Brown felt that if I did not appear, t

depth and detail of the questioring W.ght be limited and easic

to co=trol. I would Ulu' to participate this year, not to the

axe: union at Dr.. Brown and Dr. Bitch. CIA participation Shoo.

be as needed, based on the types of questions expected. Thor•

should be no question that the presentation is by the DoD.

Incidentally, the inquiries by General Steuart to which

X. Name refers were made because we need to know the backg

1 of ir-owledge of the many Congressman who may be questioning

Air Force witnesses, for the first time, about SI41, TP-1211.,

3-58, and Program, 417. The CIA has not responded to Gen Stec

inquiries; as yet they have not silo= us up-to-date informati

1 about the clearance status of modbers of Congress.

Attached for your consideration is a _. .sed reply to

Mr. McCaw. This has been coordinated ini.

.6.-zu.ebrents Imre

Letter frees Xr. Y..eCons CNN

Umssed latter to Er. Y.r.Cone ••

Arasigu • into

2 111111111111111' 1111111111teft