• 7. -11.1111111-4)

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

WASHINGTON

Orme or Tim LONNA S.ais7ARr

6 ;Es Xe

MEMORANDUM FOR Dr. McMillan

SUBJECT: 411NRO-Congressional Relationships

Reference is made to Mr. McCone's 5 February letter

to Mr. Vance wherein he express concern that you were

"planning to substantiate" the NRP FY 66 Budget Estimate

to Congressional Committees; proposed that this be a joint

CIA-DOD presentation instead; and indicated he has not yet

agreed with the FY 66 budget (this last item is not dealt

with in this memorandum).

I would guess t CIA's concern is based on two

unrelated actions by the NRO Staff with regard to the

Congressional appropriation process.

3. On 30 December, I wrote the CIA Director of Security:

expressing the belief that a clearly stated

security policy for briefing members of Congress onaNRO

matters was needed;

noting theDNRO's rem risibility to prepare

and substantiate budget requests for NRO Programs;

ro s

noting how Congressmen have been briefed in the

past; and

requesting his advice on the matter (etch 1).

4. Paragraph 2 in the attached letter (sub- paragraph

3b above) is rather loosely worded--and, in retrospect, was

probably superfluous--and undoubtedl is the o that upset

the CIA. I was thinking largely of business

and did not visualize your making a orma presentation/defense

—....ire"; fol .. .

•weil •
You will recall that we have discussed the possible

roblems Air Force witnesses ma y encounter in the

oint-•resentation

an• support . o -y

most a riate sub

• o sal •ce

I believe we

committee members.

ect for an Ex-Com

9. With regard to the

2

the

mus se a un•rs an •

This would appear to be a

discussion.

to all of the Committees. In any event, I have never received

a reply to the 30 December request for "advice", nor has anyone from the CIA contacted me to discuss the matter.

41111111 In late January, I had Mt request an up-dated

list of Congressional Members of key ttees who had been

briefed on the tNIP and/or any specific projects. My

intention was to provide this information to a few select

cleared and key Air Staff witnesses (Gen McConnell, Gen Merrell,

Gen Ger ity, and Gen Ferguson)--not so they could present or

defend givNRO items, but rather so that they could steer

Committees away from sensitive matters by separately soliciting

assistance from the Chairman and key Committee members.

The reason for our concern (pare 6 above) and the intended

use, if necessary, of the cleared-Committee member information

(pare 5 above) has been explained t he CIA staff several times.

Thus far, they have not provided the NRO Staff with up-tooiltd

date information on Committee members, we are thus using

information that is one year old (which is still valid as far

as it goes).

The preceding explanation should allay the concern

expressed in Mr. McCone's letter--no unilateral formal presentation by theNRO to Congressional Committees has ever been

contemplated. l must note, however, that this situation is

rather typical of our dealings with the CIA staff. They seldom

ever seem to refer questions back to the originator, but rather

elevate too many minor items to the DCl/DepSecDef level.
Z •

.1 :

- • .:;•.1 !: •

ilit ; .

,. .. bin.. .f. ...g i. ;

.;..:":'.. - ' . • i: .. •

-.:. 1 t :.- .. =ORAN= FOR DIRECTOR 07 SECURITY, CIA • : •.

-..4

,•

; .1•:- : •

.-,X;

With the advent of anew session of Congress and

' negotiations that will ensue to obtain Congressional

:; approval of thogeportions of the DOD budget which are .•.I r related to the./ National Reconnaissance Program, a

need arises for clearly stated security policy pertaining

r to briefing members of Congress on matters related to this

prograa.

1 As you are probably aware, the agreement of 13 March

1 1963 relating to the management of the Rational Baconnalsrance Program provides that the Dle responsible

for preparation of budget requests for all :NRO programs,

: and the substantiation of such budget requests to the

Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence,

r the Bureau of the Budget and Congressional Committees.

. •

•

1964 es 30 16 13 30 December 1964

BOSS Mr.11111FaC/3° Dec 64 '

z...

SUBJECT: Briear of Members of Congress on

. the National Reconnaissance Program

; Uy staff security officer advises a* that the list of

congressmen currently appearing on the special projects

clearance roster is actually a compilation of the names

derived tram the CIA, Legislative Liaison Office, of those

members of Congress with whom the DCUhad found necessary

,

I E.m:":Ei7i 1. .74 AlUATIC MOMDIUG;

i •0.20 13ES LOT AP:7,Y

••n••••••••.... fos••n••••

from time to time to discurs various aspects of this program.

It is further understood that the briefings were very general.'

in nature, particularly with respect to satellite reconnais-

=co; yore not oriented to the particular project by name,

and that secrecy oaths were not effected, although a security

aftonishment by the DCI occasioned such discussions. It does

not appear clear what if any degree of formal security clearance :tr

processing is necessary with respect to Congressional members. .

Your advice concerning this matter would be greatly lisrciated as it is necessary.to the'formation of the overall

NBP congressional strategy for the forthcoming year. -;

DISTRIBUTION:

162 to "Wares:

3 to SS-3 -

4h5 to BF Ms'

JAMES T. srEwasz

43 40

...alw•••n•n•=1•• MIIND•n•nnn• 111.111=111.•=11• Director ,:.

05), 11R0 Staff coNlialfgC.Ced; 1 745204!,

Brigadier General, USAY

"1.7s

-:: 7-7,.. .t7r-.1',E77777-7T-ww77"7.• -•••14' •

..• . •

• ,• • • v..... • • 't • 1

. •

•

• . . •

•

1. •

a,.

co:;-.-1 agcy