-10P-SEGREt

MINIM • a noulu • 4 I I ft

Al NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

WASH ING1 ON. D.C.

. THE NRO STAFF 28 January 1975

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. WILLIAMSON, NASA

SUBJECT: NASA/NRO/DOD Study

Attached is a paper which establishes the study which •

was agreed upon by Dr. Fletcher and Mk. Plummer. Mr. Plummer

reviewed this plan and agreed with it yesterday and in addition, he clarified two points. First, he wants to

-conclude the study expeditiously and thought'that my projected flow might be too slow. He has agreed, however, •

that 21 February would be a reasonable date. The other

point was that he is committed to the Secretary of Defense

to submit our final paper to the NSC. He felt that he had

made this clear at the meeting with Dr. Fletcher. I plan

to send you a strawman based upon this outline on Friday,

31 January.

•

Stay in touch.

1 Attachment

1111111iP

Plan

2590-75)

Deputy Director for

Plans and Policy

•

GORY UP INCLA111111V 014 04. OCT.

tlitCLITIVI OWN IMP I WINOMI CAW

otrtRM 1:040111.11 Of --TOPInitEt won Imam. • cotnnoW.

copy A_ _cot

PAGE _Loc_a PAC
lilt al.buL1

NASA/NRO/DOD GUIDELINES FOR EARTH.SENSING 

•

•

•

•

•

I. REVIEW GROUP 

Mr. Plummer - NRO

Dr. Walsh - DDR&E

Dr. Wade - OSD

Dr. Stevens - CIA

Dr. Low - NASA •

Dr. Petrone - NASA

Mr. Mathews - NASA

WORKING GROUP 

LtcolipiNR0

Dr. Coo - R&E

Mr. Anderson - OSD

Mr. Williamson - NASA

Mr. Krueger - NASA

Mr.. Jaffe - NASA

FLOW OF STUDY 

27-30 Jan - Terms of Reference/Outline.

30 Jan-4 Feb - Draft strawman.

4- 7 Feb - Work Group review strawman.

10-12 .Feb - Identify issues/revise strawman.•

12-18 Feb - Review Group evaluation/meet/resolve issues.

18-21 Feb - Formulate final paper.

21 Feb - Submit to NSC through SecDef.

BASELINE STUDY: 1966 NSAM 156 COMMITTEE REVIEW 

Continue to protect NRP security & political integrity.

Enhance U.S. political capital by conducting earth

resources surveys. Start this when payoff is assured

by laying ground work.

C. NASA proceed in VAS, but comply with NASA/NRO

guidelines. •••

CONTR 0 -

COPT_A_OP COPIES

PROILI_OF PROM

•
•

• •

•

..11.811L4StWitt.F.

D. Restrict discussion of unclassified systems to 10-15

feet.

R. NASA should consider alternatives to space borne

sensors.

F. USIB should review decompartmentation.

C. DCI & DNRO should review technical security.

IV. OUTLINE OF REVIEW 

Review 1966 156 Committee guidance.

Civil eVolution of space borne earth sensing since

1966. •

ERS experiments - international commitments.

Methodology of data release.

3. National dependence - operational pilot program.

•

C. Classified evolution of satellite reconnaissance since •

1966.

Systems technology.

Decompartment and security.

1 '

1.

I

!•

3. National dependence on reconnaissance.

D. Political environment.

1. Increased foreign awareness..

•

1 •

• 2. UN Outer Space Committee.

•

3. International cooperation.

• •

3

111111111111 CONTROL iVSTIM

CONT piPel - •

COPv COPIES

PAGO.,,sa,„OF l'AGLS
se

••

4. Fact of policy/Russia &U.S.

4

E. Technical considerations.

1. Present guidelines.

Technology release mechanism.

Issues in:convergence

F. Data release considerations.

Impact on DOD.

•

Value to civil agencies.

International questions.

Issues.

G. "Reconnaissance vs. "Remote Earth Sensing"

•

1. Convergence.

2. Issues. --

R. Conclusions and recommendations.

•

•

. • ••

•

coMIL rnnoP.e WI

COPY OF COPIES

PAGE 3 OF PAGES MUM• OM SA41860105•110•Ola •••1 1 .5 •••••11

•••••••110.41.•• •

•

ti

•

•