234. Briefing Note for the January 21 NSC Meeting1
THE ROLE OF MATS IN PEACE AND WAR
Our first item, Mr. President, concerns the role of MATS. The Council just two weeks ago looked at NSC 5919, a draft policy statement on cargo airlift, and heard a summary of the recommendations in the Defense report to you on “The Role of MATS in Peace and War”. The Council did not adopt NSC 5919, but referred it back to the Planning Board for urgent review in the light of the Defense report.
In the past two weeks I have worked with the agencies primarily interested in an effort to reach agreement on the recommendations in the Defense report, feeling that in that way progress could be made most speedily. The paper before you is the product of a three-hour meeting with the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Acting Secretary of Commerce, the Director, Bureau of the Budget, the Chairman, Civil Aeronautics Board, and the Administrator, Federal Aviation Agency. It is contemplated that the President’s decision following our discussion today will be subsequently transmitted to the Secretary of Defense and will not be circulated as an NSC paper.
Turning to the paper itself, paragraph 1 and 2 are agreed revisions of the earlier recommendations of the Department of Defense.
READ PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 2
In paragraph 3, we come to the first split in the paper, at the bottom of page 1. Defense, in its original recommendations, would have provided that the reduction of MATS operations apply only to routine [Facsimile Page 2] channel traffic, that is, regularly scheduled traffic over fixed routes. The JCS support Defense. Budget, Commerce, FAA and CAB would have the reduction apply to all MATS operations.
CALL ON DEPUTY SECRETARY DOUGLAS
GENERAL WHITE
MR. STANS
SECRETARY MUELLER
MR. QUESADA
Looking now at the first line on page 2, Defense and JSC oppose the inclusion of the first footnote on page 2. Their concurrence was based on a misunderstanding.
The next split is also in paragraph 3, at the top of page 2. There is a difference between those who want economical use of remaining [Typeset Page 985] MATS capacity and those who want efficient use. JSC supports Defense in wanting the word economical.
CALL ON DEPUTY SECRETARY DOUGLAS
GENERAL WHITE
MR. STANS
SECRETARY MUELLER
MR. QUESADA
The next split occurs in paragraph 4, on the basis of the JCS views just circulated. They would omit the parenthetical sentence on the grounds that civil capacity should not be expanded with converted passenger aircraft. I think that this is an important split because the language is proposed in order to make clear that increased use of commercial carriers does not have to await the development and production of uncompromised cargo aircraft.
Another split occurs in paragraph 5, at the bottom of page 2. This paragraph is concerned with the procurement policies and practices [Facsimile Page 3] to be followed when commercial airlift services are bought. After a general statement that these procurement policies and practices should be better adapted to long-range Defense requirements, so as to encourage and assist in sound economic growth, development, and maintenance of an increased air cargo capability, there is a list of possibilities whose feasibility is to be explored. The first of these possibilities, (1) (a), is increasing the amount of MATS cargo airlift moving on a common carriage basis with certificated carriers and supplemental carriers. The second possibility, which is the subject of the split, might be clarified if the language were changed to read “and (b) requiring that all cargo carried by commercial carriers be so moved”. This provision would explore the feasibility of eliminating the awarding of contracts on the basis of the lowest competitive bid. Defense objects to listing this possibility as one whose feasibility should be explored.
CALL ON DEPUTY SECRETARY DOUGLAS
MR. QUESADA
SECRETARY MUELLER
MR. STANS
With regard to paragraph 7, the JCS propose that the words “if proposed” be eliminated. This language was put in because handling of this legislation was being left to the regular Budget Bureau process.
The drafting group considered another recommendation which would have been numbered 10, but decided to delete it from the list because it was not the subject of a recommendation in the Defense report. However, the group agreed that the question be raised as to whether the President should be asked to send a letter to the Secretary of Defense asking that two matters be studied:
[Typeset Page 986] [Facsimile Page 4]1. Whether the guidance set forth in these recommendations with respect to the MATS fleet should be applied as appropriate to the operations of the remainder of the military cargo air fleet.
2. Whether there needs to be further integration of the military airlift capability.
CALL ON MR. STANS
DEPUTY SECRETARY DOUGLAS
Reminder: Turning to one last point, the Department of Defense wants its report on MATS to be released to the public, with the recommendations shown in the form approved by the President. In this connection, I’d like to ask Secretary Douglas whether the second sentence of the first footnote on page 1, which talks about the SAC post-strike recovery mission and other matters, is o.k. from the security point of view for release to the public. Perhaps, if there is any question about this sentence, it could just be deleted from the footnote.
CALL ON DEPUTY SECRETARY DOUGLAS
Are there any other comments on this question of releasing the MATS report to the public?
- Source: The role of MATS in peace and war. Official Use Only. 4 pp. Eisenhower Library, Whitman File, NSC Records.↩