O DEPARTMENT OFIIIE AIR FOR.

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY

MEMORANDUM

cie

C4

64 Am,'ica&d.44,G, .44,4

gue I,

.44. a At 44.../Rues,y,

,...agar1/47. „ea.

4deMsayse•gare4e .090.4.04t04- ge44AV

AeeSoff s‘d:g•ide Atv.:44/ &a. ieddel,a

Csm.r.em.41.)

a€4.4,A.te, iede.ay.

raa •Lirmi. x.4 ..41,g;4. pdiTaday

2 agea.

4 o•44 z.4r:Nteadrea.vededr.44

dee 4141 ,4 0,044 .24 .4;orst.a.a4tre

re.teXes:

Grofwg;g4o.139, Amedid

7trit..7

•". •

.

•
o

•• • • • t'•-•. . ••• 7.• • *.

.

•••••.•••

. •

DEPARTMENT 00 THE AIR FORO

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY

MEMORANDUM

Adittaift, 4.74.4V4e. 2h pe 9164.

.rod 9.4€416, 16141d-ged.c.akZio. .2

After -tat a& Au•ge;ogg,

044,4e #447444& . 4,6, rt

-Iv efeim• Mew *h 4Meme afedeOssi

4.0.;;f• Ana‘ Ateidam4

*/4 444e, ,rrif44, add ifirsZtde.

10.4.46g a .-404jaesegre.. -0.;a40,0.4„•

*ma. Aftwei /44.

Rua ,e A z6 .4E4640 .ht. didgfra:ff

/144€ 41.446,,f1-1•0z? 44`

‘efe, 4z 41t* AgemA

dug Artote 00,41#1.44

• 046004#A#4;11"Ves desredw4 .;1„

ct,

_••••••••••• .

• *.

.

•

• •

• .

•

. .
•

DEPARTMERT 00 'THE AIR FOR.

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY

MEMORANDUM

/00041.;•Argii Ag#1. A°0444 ade de

arego ALANsalisduert4o .Zattes4u..."

41.ir

esX'044., am ei 01. ‘e Aiwa

efteseie "ad.

•

• • • • •• • 4••• • • • • • r• r•-••••••• •••• ••• • • • •••:••••••• •••••'•*T.•••- ..`" —7r4::•••••-

•

•

•

•
• JAVECRErisi NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE •

WASHINGTON, D.C.

THE NRO STAFF

29 March 1969

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. McLUCAS

SUBJECT: Review of Our Nation's Space Objectives

and Future Programs

BACKGROUND

On February 13, the President asked Secretary Laird,

Mr. Paine, and Dr. DuBridge to meet with the Vice President

to develop a coordinated national space program and budget

(see Tab A). In the DOD, action responsibility for the

department was assigned to Dr. Seamans•as a member of the

Space Task Group (STG) (see Tab B). The staff director of

this activity is Mr. Nevin Palley, assisted by Brigadier

General Russ Hedrick.

PRESENT STATUS 

Brigadier General Russ Hedrick and Mr. Nevin Palley

have briefed me on tentative plans for developing a DOD-wide

space study activity. It was Dr. Flax's understanding that

this Study would not include consideration of the NRP, and

he so advised me; however, it is clear from talking to

General Hedrick and Mr. Palley that they would like to include our program. They cite Dr. DuBridges remark on

March 25, that "the classified DOD space programs will not

be excluded from consideration" (see TabB ).

CONSIDERATIONS

We believe that there are important contributions

which you could offer Dr..Seamans in response to the

President's desire for "goals for the nation's space

•

• DP-SECRETtaCLODUI COON fiefausne essmaiwo•

SOO INBECTIVI 111110 II DOES MOT •PPIN

COPT OT CMS
program in the post-Apollo period." Foremost among these

is an appraisal of factors which influence future national

space policy - factors which the Palley Study is not likely

to consider. Indeed, it seems reasonable to expect that

such an appraisal would be the most helpful contribution

one might make in the general area of satellite reconnaissance. For example, one could develop:

A brief review of existing national policy

(NSA( 156 Committee pionouncements) on satellite reconnaissance, together with comments on likely policy trends over

the next few years.

An analysis of interactions between the NRP

and NASA, pointing out the need fOr continuing our close

cooperative relationship and examining, specifically,

Procedures for applying existing

TIER materials to civil earth-sensing

programs.

The use, by NASA, of SZ-71 and U-2

aircraft as platforms for conducting

earth-sensing work.

3. A similar analysis of interactions between

the NEP and ACDA, covering,

A proposal to maintain emphasis on

the NRP as the primary (covert) means

of verifying SALT-type agreements.

A proposal for a white Arms Control

Satellite, to be developed by NASA

for ACDA.

With regard to the Palley-Hedrick Study, several points

require consideration:

1. There are numerous sub-groups participating in

the Palley Study. The NRO Staff is being pressed to participate with many of these groups. An example of troublesome

COMMIS OS

C•01 OW COMINS•

IKON 41110•1111C .,s...

11109 11111CMI stba III bass NO APR,'
COMM NO

•

COP. Or C0011111

CAC 011100iaTIC 0140A0106

000 10111C1011 SIMI 10 0001 NOT 0001.0

_TOP-UCI1Er

aspects of participation is that a group will f

e shuttle vehicle

when there

s now or ant cipa ing such an app icat •n.

2. Some interchange will be required between the

Palley Study and the NRO; an adequate mechanism for this exchange is the Space Technology Advisory Group, of which I am

a membe on which all members are fully cleared. Examples

of nceP.002 data which can be provided through this mechanism

are:

The space program budget

Launchings by year, booster, and range

through approvals With level extrapolation beyond.

c. Technological areas of interest, including

cheaper boosters, data relay satellites, etc.

This STAG mechanism affords the opportunity for control to prevent over-reaction to potential needs of the NRP,

3. There are two possible future surveillance programs which could be discussed in the Palley Study without

includineeiete This/data. These are,

Strategic War Reconnaissance by satellite

Ocean surveillance.

4. One study group is an ad hoc panel of the SAS,

another is a group of industrial advisors. It seems quite undesirable for such groups to consider the NRP in their planning,

although they may feel compelled to do so.
IIIP-SECREr

5. Consideration of MOL is a special aspedt of

this plannin but will not be commented on here,

since Genera will advise you on that matter.

RECOMMENDATION

Your Staff . recommends that you discuss this matter with

Dr. Seamans (1) advising him that you believe the NRO Staff

can prepare useful papere on satellite reconnaissance for

use at the STG level and (2) requesting his concurrence that,

therefore, it will not be necessary for the Palley-Hedrick

group to include aaM data in its report. A draft

letter for record to eamans is attached (Tab C).

Atchs 111111ga11,1111111ra , USAF 111

Director

• canna as

jrop-sEeRri- MI • VINIMI A•forimc •11••4001• 1441g...A.-.n OrAmnnn

SOO ONIECIWIE WHIMS MS NOT S ►PLI

' COPIn•
JOP-SECR'Er

}SrNATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASHINGTON, O.C.

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR

MEHORANDUR FOR DR. SEAMANS

SUBJECT: NRP Contributions to the Space Task Group

I have reviewed the organization of the study to

provide you with DOD planning inputs for the President's

Space Task Group. I think it is important for you to

have essential information regarding the programs and plans

of the NR11national policy on overhead satellite reconnaissance, and:a discussion of the interaction of these policies

and plans with those of other governmental agencies. With

your concurrence, I will prepare a document containing these

considerations use. This arrangement should eliminate

the need of an material in the on-going DOD study.

JOHN L. McLUCAS

Director

Jap-sEtair- cu M 111114AIRRII

N DIRECTIVE IPSO IS SOU NOT AMA,

ammo. 'so

CORY eV Calif.

mass
• . •

. •

•

t:

't- I

•

•

•

••••••• '

THE WHITE HOUSE

.6

WASHINGTON •

.•

• •

February 13, 1969

. •

▪

. MEMORANDUM FOR .

•

The Vicc President

.• ya-7,--"'''''.."the Secretary of Defense

' The Acting Administrator, National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Thc.Scicncc Adviser

'

' • •. . .

It is necessary for me to have in the near future definitive recommendatior

on the direction which the U. S. space program should take in the post- .

Apollo period. I, therefore, ask the Secretary of Defense, the Acting •

Administrator of NASA, and the Science Adviser each to develop proposed plans and to meet together as a task group, with the Vice •

• President.in the chair, to prepare fok me a coordinated program and

budget proposal. In developing your proposed plans, you may wish to

fleck advice from the scientific, engineering, and industrial communities,

from The Congress and the public. • You will wish also to consult the

Department of State (on international implications and cooperation) and

. other interested agencies, as appropriate, such as the,Dupartments of

Interior, Commerce, and Agriculture; the Atomic Energy Commission,

and the National Science Foundation. I am asking the Science Adviser

also to serve as staff officer for this task group and as coordinator of

the staff studies. •

.

I would like to receive the coordinated proposal by September 1, 1969..

. •

• •

•

•

•
•

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTO, Of DEFENSE FESEARCH AND ENGINEERING

;:. '.01; /;•..Apt,

' ' WASHINGTON, O. C. ,.61

0 . .. !,... :

'. r-bt." froirr

.... . .

.1.. •n

I I I 1 • 1 25 March 1969

I I areS

• .

MEMORANDUNI FOR THE RECORD '

SUBJECT: Space Task Group Meeting, March 22. 1969 •

I

The second meeting of the President's Space Task Group was held on

March 22, 1969 in the Executive Office Building. The agenda is shown

on attachment 4. Attending were:

• • Organization STG Members Staff Committee Observers

. . Executive Ofc Vice Pres. Agnew (Chair) Mr. Wolfe

NASA Admin. Paine .• Dr. Newell

DOD f Secretary Seamans Mr. &alley

PSAC ' Dr. DuBridge ' Dr. Drew

BOB

State .

s

• • •

Mr. Craybill

Mr. Packard

Dir. Mayo

Mr. Pollack

AEC i Mr. Klein.

•

The Vice-President convened the meeting with a short introduction

emphasizing President Nixor)'s interest in establishing goals for the

nation's apace program in the Post-Apollo period and asked Dr.

DuBridge to discuss the structure and content of the STG activity.

•

Dr. DuBridge outlined his preliminary views on the end product of the

effort -- a report to the President by 1 September 1969. It would include

a preface giving the overall "theme" of the program and the report would

depend primirily on the NASA and DOD planning activity now underway.

The classified DOD space programs will not be excluded from consideratic

The STG staff committee will provide continuing coordination of the DOD

and NASA plans with interim reviews and iterations with the PSAC prepare

overall goals. Dr. -i)uBridge presented the following listing of general •

goals or purposes (with samples of program objectives) for a balanced

space plan: •

.

.

a 1

. .

•

I •