The establishment of the NCS is intended to ensure that the President and other key civil and military officials will have reliable, fast, secure, and survivable communications in all cases, including nuclear attack and other national emergencies. It is also expected that savings will be realized in the unit cost of information transmitted, and that technological advances in communications will be fully exploited to the benefit of all user agencies.

Creation of the NCS can be viewed as the latest step in a continuing effort to improve the organization and management of Federal Government communications. There have been two principal precursors to the NCS, both of which are now incorporated into it: The Defense Communications System (DCS) and the Federal Telecommunications System (FTS). The first was established by the Secretary of Defense in 1960 to serve the needs of the Defense Department and is adminis tered by the Defense Communications Agency. The second was established in the General Services Administration to serve civil agencies in the United States pursuant to instructions of President Eisenhower in January 1961.

Evolution toward a unified national communications system was accelerated by the Cuban crisis, which revealed a number of significant deficiencies in national security communications. At the very beginning of that emergency, President Kennedy charged a task force headed by William H. Orrick, Jr., then Deputy Under Secretary of State for Administration, with providing for the creation of a national communications system which would make U.S. worldwide communications as prompt, reliable, and secure as possible. The Orrick committee brought about many significant improvements on an ad hoc basis. At the same time the Bureau of the Budget, working closely with the Orrick committee, undertook to consider alternative means of organizing a national communications system to attain the President's longer-term communications objectives.

Principal elements of the NCS are the DCS and FTS, mentioned above, and other civil agency communications, including NASA, FAA, and the diplomatic communications of the Department of State. The NCS will include all point-to-point telecommunications facilities owned or leased by the Federal Government which are necessary to meet national security needs either in peacetime or in a national

emergency.

The President's NSAM of July 11, assigns responsibility for NCS policy direction and requirements determination to the Director of Telecommunications Management (DTM) whose position was estab lished by Executive Order 10995 of February 16, 1962. Placing these functions in the Executive Office of the President was considered ap propriate to the role of the DTM and to the need for coordination and supervision of the integration of the Government's major telecommunications systems.

To underscore the President's interest in national security communications, the DTM was given a second title, that of Special Assist ant to the President for Telecommunications. Since the DTM's post is now vacant, Jerome B. Wiesner, Director of the Office of Science and Technology, is acting as Special Assistant to the President for Telecommunications.

Designing the NCS to satisfy approved requirements is the task of the Secretary of Defense, as "Executive Agent." To aid him as

Executive Agent, the Secretary has designated Mr. Solis Horwitz, Director of the Office of Organizational and Management Planning, as his Assistant for NCS matters. Lt. Gen. Alfred D. Starbird (USA), Director, Defense Communications Agency, has been designated Manager, NCS.

The Manager, NCS has already completed a detailed inventory of all Federal Government point-to-point communications networks to determine which should be initially included in the NCS. Based on this inventory and the communications requirements submitted by the NCS agencies, the Manager, NCS, has completed near-term planning for the NCS. Work has begun on the first NCS long-range plan, which will be submitted to the President next April.

2. Foreign Affairs Information Management.-The problem of "national security communications" involves such functions as the distribution and control of information conveyed by a communication system as well as the facilities, equipment, and technical procedures used to convey it. Particular emphasis has recently been given to the information processes of the Department of State.

There is growing recognition that the State Department cannot adequately fulfill its essential leadership role in national security affairs if it does not improve its "information management"; i.e., its system of collecting and processing data, screening and converting these data into information relevant to national security decisionmaking, and disseminating the information to users (in and out of State) on a timely basis. Since State's leadership role must be founded upon effective interagency relationships, the technical characteristics and scope of the system must take into account the systems used by other agencies. Thus, any advanced system developed by State should be technically compatible with the existing and planned systems of other agencies in the national security field, primarily the Defense Department and the Central Intelligence Agency. Its scope must comprehend not only the type of information traditionally generated and used by State, but also that generated and used by other foreign affairs agencies with which the State Department interchanges substantial quantities of information. Whether an even broader scope might be required-such as a "National Security Information System" serving common information needs of all the national security agencies-is dependent on the outcome of current planning efforts discussed below.

The Bureau's assistance in dealing with State's information management problem was requested by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Management in May 1963. As a result of this request, an exploratory review of current information handling activities was conducted by a joint Bureau of the Budget/State Department group. Although this review concentrated on the traditional elements of the State Department, it included limited discussions with officials of AID, USIA, ACDA, the Defense Department, and CIA.

A number of deficiencies in information management in the State Department have been revealed. Among these deficiencies are: inadequate definition of reporting requirements; unnecessary duplication of documents and files; lack of an effective mechanism for controlling the flow of information between the point of acquisition and the end user; lack of a common data base and classification code to facilitate interchange of information between State and other agencies.

Such deficiencies stem from a variety of factors: the difficulty of securing personnel who are expert both in foreign affairs and in information systems work; the subtle and subjective nature of much foreign affairs data; and the severe budgetary limitations imposed on the Department by the Congress. As a result of the deficiencies identified, the typical consumer of information gets a great deal of information that he does not need. A more serious result of inadequate information management is that all too often consumers of information may not receive all the information that they really need and when they do receive it, it may sometimes be too late to make full use of it. Some efforts to improve various aspects of this situation have been undertaken in the State Department; however, the joint study clearly revealed that a comprehensive approach to the problem is now required.

The Bureau and the State Department have concluded that a staff group of skilled professional employees and consultants should be established in State to develop an approach and action plan to improve foreign affairs information management. Consideration is being given to including in the President's budget for fiscal year 1965 funds to support this program.

The first, and probably most crucial, step in the action plan would be the identification, validation and definition of each user's requirement for foreign affairs information. Requirements for key officials would be stated as precisely as possible, in order to permit the preparation of a "profile of interest" for each official. This would be followed by a review of current information handling practices and development of a system design. Such a system design would provide for phased evolutionary improvements in existing practices, looking toward the ultimate establishment of an advanced information system. 3. Guidelines for International Activities.-Before World War II, the foreign activities of the United States were limited substantially to those involved in traditional diplomatic exchange. These activities were carried out almost exclusively by Foreign Service officers who served not only the State Department but also the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor. During the postwar period the character of our activities overseas has diversified and changed. Extensive military and foreign aid commitments were undertaken. A large information program was initiated and many "domestic" agencies found it necessary to station personnel abroad. The expanded role of the United States in the world has placed extensive burdens on the Ambassador and on the State Department. Not the least of these burdens is the need to review, coordinate, and assess the foreign policy implications of, the oversea efforts of almost 30 separate agencies of the U.S. Government.

It is our belief that some guidelines on oversea activities are necessary to assist in making decisions on the assignment of functions by statute and Executive orders; in the examination of competing requirements among foreign affairs programs; in the evaluation of programs to be carried out at home or abroad; and in the general formulation of the President's budget. To facilitate these objectives, the Bureau of the Budget has been attempting to develop, in consultation with the State Department, a framework for reviewing the activities of the various agencies overseas.

Within this framework, a distinction would be made between those activities which contribute directly to the foreign policy objectives of the United States and those activities which are carried out overseas in order to support an agency's domestic mission. The technical assistance functions carried out by a number of agencies are examples of activities in the first category. The functions performed overseas by offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Veterans' Administration are examples of the latter type of activity.

We are considering arrangements under which so-called domestic agencies will be expected to enter into agreements with the State Department or another foreign affairs agency with respect to the scope and level of foreign affairs activities which the domestic agencies are to perform. The budgets for such activities which support foreign affairs programs would be submitted to the appropriate foreign affairs agency for review of the proposed staffing and program funding levels. An agreed-to statement of justification would be submitted along with the estimate to the Bureau of the Budget. All annual and supplemental requests would be handled in a similar

manner.

The programs that are carried out overseas in direct support of an agency's domestic mission would not need to be approved by a foreign affairs agency and would be justified as a regular part of the agency's programs. The Department of State would, however, be asked to raise objections regarding the foreign policy implications of these programs, where appropriate. This system should also facilitate the general coordination responsibilities of the Ambassador by permitting him to comment on proposed programs as a part of the State Department review. Such advance knowledge of developing programs would be helpful to him in his forward planning for operations within his assigned country.

This approach would be only a first step toward_improving the classification and review of international activities. It should, however, help to improve the effectiveness of the budget process with respect to the oversea activities of the Federal Government and should also provide the Secretary of State with a useful "action forcing process" in his role as the President's "agent of coordination" in foreign affairs.

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, August 21, 1963.

Memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies.
Subject: Establishment of the National Communications System.

CONCEPT AND OBJECTIVES

In order to strengthen the communications support of all major functions of Government there is need to establish a unified governmental communications system which will be called the National Communications System (NCS). It shall be established and developed by linking together, improving, and extending on an evolutionary basis the communications facilities and components of the various Federal agencies.

The objective of the NCS will be to provide necessary communications for the Federal Government under all conditions ranging from a normal situation to national emergencies and international crises, including nuclear attack. The system will be developed and operated to be responsive to the variety of needs of the national command and user agencies and be capable of meeting priority requirements under emergency or war conditions through use of reserve capacity and additional private facilities. The NCS will also provide the necessary

combinations of hardness, mobility, and circuit redundancy to obtain survivability of essential communications in all circumstances.

Initial emphasis in developing the NCS will be on meeting the most critical needs for communications in national security programs, particularly to oversea areas. As rapidly as is consistent with meeting critical needs, other Government needs will be examined and satisfied, as warranted, in the context of the NCS. The extent and character of the system require careful consideration in light of the priorities of need, the benefits to be obtained, and the costs involved.

Although no complete definition of the National Communications System can be made in advance of design studies and evolution in practice, it is generally conceived that the National Communications System would be comprised primarily of the long haul, point-to-point, trunk communications which can serve one or more agencies.

The President has directed the following organizational arrangements relating to the establishment and effective operation of the NCS.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE RESPONSIBILITIES

In carrying out his functions pursuant to Executive Orders 10705 and 10995 and under this memorandum, the Director of Telecommunications Management shall be responsible for policy direction of the development and operation of a National Communications System. In this capacity, he shall also serve as a Special Assistant to the President for Telecommunications and shall

(a) Advise with respect to communication requirements to be supplied through the National Communications System; the responsibilities of the agencies in implementing and utilizing the National Communications System; the guidance to be given to the Secretary of Defense as Executive Agent for the National Communications System with respect to the design and operation of the National Communications System; and the adequacy of system designs developed by the Executive Agent to provide, on a priority basis and under varying conditions of emergency, communications to the users of the National Communications System.

(b) Identify those requirements unique to the needs of the Presidency. (c) Formulate and issue to the Executive Agent guidance as to the relative priorities of requirements.

(d) Exercise review and surveillance of actions to insure compliance with policy determinations and guidance.

(e) Insure that there is adequate planning to meet future needs of the National Communications System.

(f) Assist the President with respect to his coordinating and other funetions under the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 as may be specified by Executive order or otherwise.

In performing these functions, the Special Assistant to the President for Telecommunications will work closely with the Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs; he will consult with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology and the Director of the Bureau of the Budget, as appropriate; will establish arrangements for interagency consultation to insure that the National Communications System will meet the essential needs of all Government agencies; and will be responsible for carrying on the work of the Subcommittee on Communications of the Executive Committee of the National Security Council which is hereby abolished. In addition to staff regularly assigned, he is authorized to arrange for the assignment of communications and other specialists from any agency by detail or temporary assignment. The Bureau of the Budget, in consultation with the Special Assistant to the President for Telecommunications, the Executive Agent, and the Administrator of General Services, will prescribe general guidelines and procedures for reviewing the financing of the National Communications System within the budgetary process and for preparation of budget estimates by the participating agencies.

EXECUTIVE AGENT RESPONSIBILITIES

To obtain the benefits of unified technical planning and operations, a single Executive Agent for the National Communications System is necessary. The President has designated the Secretary of Defense to serve in this capacity. He shall

(a) Design, for the approval of the President, the National Communications System, taking into consideration the communication needs and resources of all Federal agencies.