COPY . Or CONES 

ra4f OF 2 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

-EMI- NATIONAL NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE 

Imaciaser ow. D.C. 

THE NRO STAFF 17 February 1967 

MEMORANDUM FOR DR. FLAX 

SUBJECT: MOL/DORIAN Schedule/Cost Information 

1. After our departure from the West Coast on 15 February, 

the MOL Management Review continued with Evans, Martin, and 

Heran. This continuation was for the purpose of further 

clarifying schedule and cost impact as earlier discussed when 

you were present. 

2. As a result of this discussion a few new facts emerged, 

which follow for your information: 

a. GE and EKC were directed to participate in a 

schedule compatibility session on the West Coast, starting 

Monday, 20 Feb. The other three contractors obviously are 

also participating. The purpose of this session is to work 

out all hardware exchange milestones between contractors, firm 

up component and system flow (factory-pad) and the various subsystem and system test requirements. In other words, first 

work out the interrelationship between contractors before 

costing. The ground rules call out both a 9 and a 12 months 

slip from present flight dates; i.e., first manned flight date 

in present schedule as you remember is Dec 1969; the second is 

April 1970, etc. 

b. Upon completion of this necessary and important 

step, the contractors will then work out the costs associated 

with both schedules. 

c. It is not now clear when the MOL/DORLAN folks will 

come in with their information. I estimate Paul Heran will 

require 3-4 weeks to complete this work with the contractors. 

Harry Evans, I'm sure, has a handle on this one. At any rate 

I am assured that all concerned feel a sense of urgency and a 

desire to get at the schedule/cost decision as soon as possible. 

DORIAN 

NANOLE VIA 

BYEMAN -fib 

CONTROL SYSTEM ENCLUDEO FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING 

DOD DIRECTIVE 5ZOO ID DOES NOT APPLY 
NRO APPR. V 

RELEAS 

--f0P-3E6RET3. Associated with this on-going work are two other points, 

the acoustic testing facility at Rochester, N.Y. which requires 

a very early decision because of its impact on above planning 

and the continuation of the compatibility model in light of a 

schedule slip. I believe you know my feelings regards the 

former. When one removes the noise associated with cost and 

emotion, it is clear that such a testing facility is both 

important and desirable to the act - ," s on objectives. 

I am not of the op n on, owever, that qual testing is as 

important an issue as testing to flight levels. Regards the 

latter, John Martin and Art Simmons have now agreed to drop 

forevermore the terminology of Compatibility Model. However, 

the hardware will become that which is necessary for the first 

fully qualified flight article. If this point is not clear 

I'll discuss it with you further. p7.g.e....... 4j1140._ 

Russell A. Berg 

Brigadier General, USAF 

Director, NRO Staff 

,-9Z2,61 A-do-fe 

F-v62 0 s° aale%404, 

DORIAN 

NANDI.F VIA 

BYEMAN 40P-SE-ORET-- 

CONTROL SVSUM f .CL SIP E 0 IRON, AUTOMATIC AFGRAD1ND 

DOD DIRE C.IIVF 5700 ID DOES NOT APPLY 

CONTROL NO 

COPY Or COPIES 

ppop 2 or 2 PAGES