NRO APPROWED. FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

, • • mmrrs. sr....Yam,. 

• 

•RANDUm 

OFF:CE OF THE SECRETARY 

igt eA.c; Fe-4-41 

ice 4tt tArt" fl) Caj ?":4444:(; 1 401414'4 

vt(a.t- a kiyA (1.sstat 

t?-4-t-e-e 144 -/ 

0441-4=4;etx27 latsid-fir • Yet.4.4 

Sc4,4,t4,4,*:‘t , zreu-0.1-41 ,t-cd •-t• 

1.0-4444.0...A.44. • 

.s • 4: ‘ ' • I. .• • 

•-.. .... 1 ,.1.':.'i. • ., O. ,... , 

'' ' • ‘; "e; 

1 .. f ••,..1.: 1; . .1 

1, • 2:1 . •••■ ,•: P.:. er.,...., 1 

..:.: f• t. •":t,i':.; :,I;,, ... 0: . ,•.,•, ..1.,: .....:1 

',.• • . „ All,' "., ...; 4.7... ...6- 1, • 

'''' ...' :'. : •• : :: k. " •Y•at'..i 

i'.,;.'0 '. ,. • :' * i,' " .....t . ..:.r. .,:.A. .0: r,'„ . -.1 • ,': 

• ', ,.,,,' i",.:.i.,... • ,,.-,,,.,•,.: .7 

A 
JI 

1 

, 

il( - 7

L 12L 

,) ,C (.,.. ,--. ,/ , G A );2./L /

.." 

.a 4 • DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

MEMORANDUM 

--) 

A, • 

•tik‘ 

Au! 

U 

14'7 L-/ 

11) 

CviCi 

kr, 

NRO APPROVED FO 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 
NRO .APPROVED FOR 

RELF.ASE .1 DULY 2015 

, 

A-ZIS 

(c,;t4,e Aio e 

MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL STEWART 

28 September 1965 

Functions: NRO Staff 

Functions: MOL 

SUBJECT: Your Relationship to the DORIAN Program 

1%5 

During the next few months you will be witness to a continuing 

dialogue between Generals Evans and Martin over the DORIAN Program. The basic positions of these gentlemen are poles apart and 

are essentially these: 

General Evans: "If I'm running the MOL Program, I expect 

to run all parts of it and to direct all participants. It 

General Martin: "The DORIAN Program is run by the Director, NRO. My guidance and direction 

comes solely from him. " 

These differences are fundamental and may be irresolvable. Parenthetically, General Martin seems to be much closer to General 

Schriever than to General Evans in arriving at a solution. 

I believe that our office will be wise to avoid this debate. After 

all, the principals are both our friends. Their management dilemma 

is a predictable outgrowth of the rejection of our Program E solution, 

proposed last January. 

I also believe that we must maintain the organizational integrity 

of SAFSS during this debate. This must be done in the most realistic 

terms. Any effort to blur the distinction between SAFSL and SAFSS 

is a wasting effort which, in the long run, will inevitably displease 

both Generals Martin and Evans and place us squarely in the middle 

of the debate. Specifically, I see very little stability in an arrangement where we pretend a MOL-man is really part of your office or 

where we try to make one of your employees half SL and half SP. 

What is the basic problem, i. e. , what is your SAFSS obligation 

to SAFSL? Our responsibilities with respect to the MOL Program 

were spelled out in some detail in Mr. Zuckert's memorandum of 

24 August 1965 to the Secretary of Defense. As the program has 

DORIAN 

19■> :•,Nium 

:, • tr. ;1; 
NRO AIRO-VED FOR 

RUE:AS,E tJULY 2015 * „ 

evolved, it has become clear that General Martin prefers to work 

through SAFSS in conducting DORIAN, and therefore, General Evans 

must rely on us to keep him advised of the status and progress of 

this part of the program. I think we have carried out our prescribed responsibilities rather effectively. The question now is how 

we keep General Evans current on DORIAN status. 

The answer is surprisingly simple (so simple that it is bound 

to create some argument). We point to one man on your staff -- I 

suggest Dave Carter -- and say "Keep General Evans and me current 

on DORIAN." Dave can deliver on that order in a very short time. 

He can keep you and General Evans current, after that, at the 

expenditure of 1/10 of .a man or less. And by "current," I mean 

overwhelmed with data and information. 

This solution has the following positive features: 

1. It keeps both SAFSS and SAFSL informed on DORIAN 

progress. 

2. It satisfies General Martin's desire for an SAFSS focal 

point. 

3. It satisfies General Evans because it utilizes Dave Carter, 

in whom he has trust and confidence. 

4. It maintains the integrity of your staff. 

5. It conserves people. 

6. It maintains the integrity of the program management arrangement, so recently approved. 

I think it's worth a try. 

PAUL E. WORTHMAN 

Colonel, USAF 

DORIAN 

• •