Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Study of the Securities Industry, Part 9: Appendix to Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, April 14, 17, 25, 26 and May 11-12, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the Appendix to the April 14, 17, 25, 26 and May 11-12, 1972 hearings on "Study of the Securities Industry," held before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the U.S. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. The following items are included in the Appendix: "Summary Statement of ALC [American Life Convention]--LIAA [Life Insurance Association of America], with attachments, exhibits, and charts; submitted by Harold E. Bigler, Jr."; "Prepared Statement of Donald B. Marron, with appendixes, attachments, tables, and charts"; "Letter dated December 23, 1971, from Marshall Barnes, Chairman of the Board of Howe, Barnes & Johnson, Inc.; letter dated January 6, 1972, from A. R. Roalman, President, National Investor Relations Institute; letter dated February 15, 1972, from David M. Mesker, Vice President, A. G. Edwards Sr Sons, Inc.; letter dated March 23, 1972, from J. Walter Sherman, President,. Sherman, Dean St Co., with related material; article entitled, 'Institutional Research, End of an Era?' by Fred Bleakley, Institutional Investor magazine"; "White Paper on Institutional Membership, presented by Chairman William J. Casey"; "The Consequences of Competitive Commissions on the New York Stock Exchange, by Irwin Friend and Marshall E. Blume"; "Statement of Investors Diversified Services, Inc. and Jefferies Company, Inc., before the SEC [U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission], October 19, 1971"; and "Post-Hearing Memorandum of Investors Diversified Services, Inc., before the SEC, January 4, 1972."

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Study of the Securities Industry, Part 6: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, January 26-28, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is from the January 26-28, 1972 hearings on the "Study of the Securities Industry, Part 6" held before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the U.S. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. From the opening statement of John E. Moss: "In our previous hearings we have considered the questions of broker-dealer capital; use of customers' money and securities; appropriate accounting procedures; clearance, settlement, and delivery of securities; and the philosophy of self-regulation and the securities industry. Beginning with today's hearing, and continuing into the spring, the subcommittee turns its attention to the marketplace itself. [...] Growing institutionalization of our securities markets and recent advances in communications technology, suggest that the Nation's securities markets may be in need of restructuring. The subcommittee's hearings will address themselves to this question." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Donald E. Farrar, Donald M. Feuerstein, Richard N. Friedman, Madison H. Haythe, George A. Jensen, William McChesney Martin, Jr., George Reycraft, Morris A. Schapiro, and Richard A. Westcott.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Study of the Securities Industry, Part 7: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, February 23-24 and March 14-16, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is from the February 23-24 and March 14-16, 1972 hearings on the "Study of the Securities Industry, Part 7," held before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the U.S. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. From the opening statement of John E. Moss: "Last month we conducted a hearing on problems relating to market structure, including the possible development of a central market system, combining auction and dealer markets, the respective roles of specialists, block traders and block positioners, the roles of the various exchanges, and the over-the-counter market, the possible development of a 'composite tape' and problems of antitrust immunity. At this hearing, we shall continue our discussion of these problems. At a hearing tentatively scheduled for the middle part of March, we intend to complete our study of market structure and related problems and turn to problems involving commission rates ' whether institutions should be permitted access to exchanges, either directly or indirectly through ownership of broker-dealer affiliates, and the desirability and feasibility of separating brokerage from money management." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Milton Cohen, J. Robert Doyle, William C. Freund, Frank C. Graham, Jr., Robert W. Haack, David B. Heller, George Hender, William E. Jackson, Paul Kolton, William A. Lupien, Stephen M. Peck, Thomas Phelan, Jerome Pustilnik, Carl W. Schneider, Seymour Smidt, Michael Tobin, James W. Walker, Jr., Donald E. Weeden, Will K. Weinstein, John G. Weithers, and Elkins Wetherill.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Study of the Securities Industry, Part 8: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, April 14, 17, 25, 26 and May 11-12, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is from the April 14, 17, 25, 26 and May 11-12, 1972 hearings on the "Study of the Securities Industry, Part 8," held before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the U.S. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. From the opening statement of William S. Stuckey: "Today we have invited representatives of several brokerage firms, including one regional brokerage firm, and a major life insurance company, to present their views concerning issues affecting the Nation's securities markets. Specifically, the topics for discussion today and Monday will be the extent to which commission rates should be negotiated, whether subsidiaries or affiliates of institutions, such as mutual funds and insurance companies, should be prohibited from joining national securities exchanges, and whether Congress should require the separation of brokerage and money management." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Donald I. Baker, Harold E. Bigler, Jr., Paul A. Conley, Irwin Friend, Robert M. Gardiner, Bernard H. Garil, Jerome H. Grossman, T. Lawrence Jones, Donald B. Marron, Charles H. Morin, Joseph Neuhaus, Thomas E. O'Hara, William R. Salomon, Charles W. Shaeffer, Robert F. Shapiro, and Macrae Sykes. The appendix to this set of hearings is in Part 9.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Safety of Dams, Hearing Before the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, United States Senate, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, July 20, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the July 20, 1972 hearing on the "Safety of Dams," held before the U.S. Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. From the opening statement of Frank E. Moss: "The purpose of this hearing before the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs this morning is to take testimony on S. 3449, a bill to authorize and direct the Water Resources Council to coordinate a national program to insure the safety of dams and other water storage and control structures, to provide technical support to State programs for the licensing and inspection of such structures, to encourage adequate State safety laws and methods of implementation thereof, and for other purposes." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Wallace F. Bennett, William B. Davey, Keith Higginson, William N. Holway, W. H. Keating, C. J. Kuiper, W. Don Maughan, John W. Morris, Frank E. Moss, and S. E. Reynolds.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Fire Control Notes (Vol.33 No.4)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the Fall 1972 edition (Volume 33, No.4) of Fire Control Notes, a quarterly periodical devoted to the technique of forest fire control, produced by the U.S. Forest Service.

  United States. Forest Service

  1972
• Fire Control Notes (Vol.33 No.3)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the Summer 1972 edition (Volume 33, No.3) of Fire Control Notes, a quarterly periodical devoted to the technique of forest fire control, produced by the U.S. Forest Service.

  United States. Forest Service

  1972
• Fire Control Notes (Vol.33 No.2)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the Spring 1972 edition (Volume 33, No.2) of Fire Control Notes, a quarterly periodical devoted to the technique of forest fire control, produced by the U.S. Forest Service.

  United States. Forest Service

  1972
• Fire Control Notes (Vol.33 No.1)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is Volume 33 No.1 of Fire Control Notes, a quarterly periodical devoted to the technique of forest fire control, produced by the U.S. Forest Service.

  United States. Forest Service

  1972?
• Agreement on Limitation of Strategic Offensive Weapons, Hearings Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Second Session on Joint Resolutions, to Consider Approval of Interim Agreement Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on Certain Measures with Respect to the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, July 20, 27; August 2 and 9, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the July 20, 27, August 2 and 9, 1972 hearings titled "Agreement on Limitation of Strategic Offensive Weapons" held before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Thomas E. Morgan: "This morning the Committee on Foreign Affairs begins consideration of resolutions expressing congressional approval of the Interim Agreement on limitation of strategic offensive arms concluded between the United States and the Soviet Union." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: William P. Rogers, Richard Helms, Melvin R. Laird, Thomas H. Moorer, Fred Schwengel. and Edward Teller.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• To Limit United States Contributions to the United Nations, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, First Session on Bills to Limit United States Financial Contributions to the United States, November 18 and December 2, 1971

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the November 18 and December 2, 1971 hearings titled "To Limit United States Contributions to the United Nations" held before the House Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Donald M. Fraser: "In the course of today's hearing, it is important for the subcommittee to address itself to questions such as: (1) What obligation has the United States incurred under the Charter of the United Nations to pay assessed contributions to the United Nations? (2) What effect would a reduction such as that proposed in this resolution have on the ability of the United Nations to function? (3) What benefits accrue to the United States by continuing to be a major contributor to the United Nations? (4) What is the justification for basing our contributions on population rather than gross national product?" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Arthur J. Goldberg, Robert L. F. Silkes, Philip M. Crane, Samuel De Palma, Stephen M. Schwebel, and Joe D. Waggonner Jr.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Review of U.N. Charter and Establishment of a Commission on U.S. Participation in the United Nations, Hearings Before the Committee on International Organizations and Movements of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session on H. Con. Res. 80, 258 and Similar and Identical Resolutions and H.J. Res. 1142 and 1144 and Similar and Identical Resolutions, April 27 and May 1, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  These are the April 27 and May 1, 1972 hearings titled "Review of U.N. Charter and Establishment of a Commission on U.S. Participation in the United Nations," held before the House Committee on International Organizations and Movements of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Donald M. Fraser: "This subcommittee has a continuing special interest in proposals improving the effectiveness of the United Nations, both structurally and operationally, beginning with the hearings held last October on the recommendations of the Lodge and Katzenbach Commissions on the United Nations." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Walter F. Hoffmann, William L. Hungate, and Gerard J. Mangone.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Civil Preparedness: A New Dual Mission: U.S. Defense Civil Preparedness Agency Annual Report 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In the late 1950's and early 1960's, 'civil defense' became a household term. To nearly everyone it meant preparation to cope with the effects of attack. For a long time it brought to mind hardhats and CD armbands. The image was World War II vintage. Civil defense has come a long way since then. Today, 'civil defense' really is preparedness to meet a full range of emergencies and disasters in peacetime as well as providing preparedness against the effects of nuclear attack. Today, we face a new world-with new needs and new responsibilities for the public safety. In the complex world of today, civil preparedness must become more and more an essential element of our society. It must be useful every day, and not just a standby program, to be used in the event of an enemy attack. The way toward readiness for any eventuality is to prepare every U.S. community as fully as possible to meet the dangers of peacetime disasters. This also lays the solid foundation for emergency operations in event of an enemy attack. In time, 'civil preparedness' is expected to become a household term-replacing 'civil defense' in the American consciousness as a more meaningful and tangible expression of the responsibility of Federal, State, and local government for the safety and protection of the public. In recognition of the greater need for preparedness to meet the full spectrum of disaster, the President's Office of Emergency Preparedness and the Office of Civil Defense (now the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency) agreed in early 1972 to an expanded role for the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) in assisting local governments plan and prepare for peacetime disasters, and act when they occur."

  United States. Government Printing Office; United States. Defense Civil Preparedness Agency

  1972
• United Nations and Africa, Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Africa and the Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, March 1, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the March 1, 1972 hearing titled "United Nations and Africa" held before the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement Donald M. Fraser: "The members of the Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements and the Subcommittee on Africa, in this joint subcommittee session, are anxious to hear about the Security Council meeting at Africa Hall in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and about your subsequent visits to other African countries." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: George Bush.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), Hearing before the Subcommittee on the Near East of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, April 19, 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the April 19, 1972 hearing titled "United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)," held before the House Subcommittee on the Near East of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Lee H. Hamilton: "Today the Subcommittee on the Near East would like to review the activities of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), and U.S. support of that organization. For over 20 years now, UNRWA has provided the basic relief services, education, and health services that have meant the difference between life and death for many refugees. A great deal has happened in the last two decades in the Middle East, but unfortunately very little has changed in the lives of this fragmented community of Palestinians, most of whom are refugees. [...] The United States, for its part, must redouble its efforts to insure that another generation of Palestinians does not grow up in refugee camps and to find ways and means to provide their lives with hope and dignity, their bodies with sustenance and strength and their vocations with purpose and skills." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John A. Armitage and Laurence V. Michelmore.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• War Powers Legislation, Hearings Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, Ninety-Second Congress, First Session on S. 731, S.J. Res. 18 and S. J. Res. 59, March 8, 9, 24, and 25, April 23 and 26, May 14, July 26 and 27 and October 6, 1971

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  These are the March 8, 9, 24, and 25, April 23 and 26, May 14, July 26 and 27 and October 6, 1971 hearings titled "War Powers Legislation," held before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. From the opening statement of J. W. Fulbright: "In 1969 the Senate, by a vote of 70 to 16 adopted the national commitments resolution expressing the Senate's judgment that a foreign commitment--especially a commitment to war--could only be valid under our Constitution if it were the result of affirmative action taken by both the executive and legislative branches of our Government. Since that time Members of both Houses of Congress have been considering practical means of implementing the national commitments resolution. Sustained and serious thought has been given to problems relating to the war power--problems having to do with the intent of the Constitution, the responsibilities of Congress, the growth of Presidential power, and the need for restoring constitutional balance in the wake of two major undeclared wares in the last 20 years." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: George Ball, Lloyd M. Bentsen, Alexander M. Bickel, McGeorge Bundy, Lawton Chiles, Henry Steele Commager, Thomas F. Eagleton, Paul Findley, Arthur J. Goldberg, Barry Goldwater, Frank Horton, Jacob K. Javits, Alfred H. Kelly, Alpheus T. Mason, Charles McC. Mathias Jr., John Norton Moore, Richard B. Morris, Claiborne Pell, George Reedy, William D. Rogers, William P. Rogers, William B. Spong Jr., John Stennis, and Robert Taft Jr.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1972
• Office of Emergency Preparedness, Report to the Congress: Volume One: Disaster Preparedness

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The report reflects a comprehensive study of the types of major natural disasters experienced in the United States and offers findings and potential solutions to prevent or minimize the loss of life and damage to property. In the preparation of the study, careful consideration has been given to the views of Federal agencies, State and local governments, professional and trade associations, research and academic institutions, private volunteer organizations, and individual experts. The final analysis and findings, however, were developed independently by an Office of Emergency Preparedness Disaster Study Group under my direction. The main thrust of this report points to the need for improvement in disaster preparedness at all levels. The findings contain potential initiatives for moving further toward an improved, concerted national disaster preparedness program. I commend them to the attention of the Congress; however, they should not be viewed as specific proposals for legislation or funds. I am providing the report to all Federal agencies having an interest in the findings, with a request that each agency consider those pertinent to its responsibilities in the preparation of present and future programs. I have requested that these agencies keep my office informed of actions related to the findings, so that we may have a systematic record of progress in the field of disaster preparedness."

  United States. Office of Emergency Preparedness

  1972-01
• Department of Defense Directive 5100.20: National Security Agency and the Central Security Service

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This directive prescribes authorities, functions, and responsibilities of the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Central Security Service (CSS)."

  United States. Department of Defense

  1971-12-23
• National Security Decision Memorandum 144: United States Arctic Policy and Arctic Policy Group

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The President has reviewed the NSC [National Security Council] Under Secretaries Committee's recommendations, conclusions and report regarding United States Arctic policy and organizational arrangements for its implementation, as forwarded by Under Secretary Irwin on August 9, 1971. The President has decided that the United States will support the sound and rational development of the Arctic, guided by the principle of minimizing any adverse effects to the environment; will promote mutually beneficial international cooperation in the Arctic; and will at the same time provide for the protection of essential security interests in the Arctic, including preservation of the principle of freedom of the seas and superjacent airspace."

  National Security Council (U.S.)

  1971-12-22
• Documents on Disarmament, 1970

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The present publication is the latest in a series of volumes that have been issued annually since 1960. It contains basic documents on arms control and disarmament developments during the year. The work of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency is described in the 10th Annual Report, which is printed at the end of the documentary material. The papers are printed chronologically. They are preceded by a topical list of documents and followed by a chronological list. Other reference aids include a bibliography, an index, and lists of abbreviations, international organizations and conferences, and persons. The papers were compiled and annotated by Robert W. Lambert, Chief, Historical Division, with the assistance of Ruth Ihara, Jean Mayer, and Douglas Kline. Useful suggestions were also received from other officers of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Technical editing was done in the Editorial Branch of the Publishing and Reproduction Services Division, Department of State."

  United States. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

  Lambert, Robert W.

  1971-12
• National Security Decision Memorandum 140: Instructions for the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks at Vienna (SALT VI)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum 140 is directed to: the members of the National Security Council; the Attorney General; the Director, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency; and the Director of Central Intelligence. "The President has made the following decisions for Vienna (SALT VI): The basic U.S. position is unchanged; the Delegation should initially concentrate its presentation and discussion on offensive limitations and should insist the Soviets do the same. This initial emphasis should focus on establishing that here will be an overall ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] freeze, with a sub-limit on Modern Large Ballistic Missiles and a precise understanding of what is allowed under modernization and replacement. As for submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), the Delegation should make a strong effort to negotiate their inclusion in any interim offensive agreement. If it appears that this objective can be achieved only by modification of the present U.S. proposal regarding SLBMs, the Delegation should recommend alternatives for Presidential decision."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-11-15
• Testing Chemical, Biological and Radiological Equipment

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The report provides discussion on testing CBR [chemical, biological, and radiological] equipment. Discussion covers categories of CBR equipment and possible problem areas peculiar to CBR equipment testing. Also deals with factors influencing specific test plans such as instrumentation requirements and availability, safety, statistical and data reduction techniques."

  United States. Army Test and Evaluation Command

  1971-11-01
• Activities and Status of Civil Defense in the United States

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Office of Civil Defense has developed a substantial lifesaving capability; however, certain unresolved issues hamper meeting current civil defense objectives. Also a number of important events, such as the acquisition of a nuclear capability by other nations, have occurred in recent years and have significantly affected civil defense planning. The principal goal of the current civil defense program- the development of a nationwide fallout shelter system- is complemented by related program elements, such as warning and detection. There are, however, no programs (other than research) aimed at protecting people against chemical or biological weapons or the direct effects of nuclear explosions, such as blast, heat, and shock. According to the Department of Defense (DoD), present fallout shelters would save 18 million to 30 million lives which would otherwise be lost in the event of a nuclear attack. Alternative combinations of additional fallout and blast protection, ranging in cost from $400 million to $8 billion for fiscal years 1970 to 1975, could save additional millions of lives. Although appropriations for military defense as a whole have increased over recent years, appropriations for civil defense have decreased."

  United States. General Accounting Office

  1971-10-26
• Executive Order 11623: Delegating to the Director of Selective Service Authority to Issue Rules and Regulations Under the Military Selective Service Act

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Director of Selective Service (hereinafter referred to as the Director) is authorized to prescribe the necessary rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of the Act. Regulations heretofore issued by the President to carry out such provisions shall continue in effect until amended or revoked by the Director pursuant to the authority conferred by this Order."

  United States. Office of the Federal Register

  Nixon, Richard M. (Richard Milhous), 1913-1994

  1971-10-12
• National Security Decision Memorandum 128: FY 1972-1974 Nuclear Weapons Stockpile

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum 128 is directed to the Secretary of Defense and Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission. From the Document: "The President has approved the proposed Nuclear Weapons Stockpile for end FY 1973 and FY 1974, except for the production of 155-mm projectiles in FY 1974, and the proposed adjusted stockpile for end FY 1972, submitted by the Department of Defense and the Atomic Energy Commission on May 20, 1971. A decision to proceed with the 155-mm projectile production program is deferred pending the results of the current NSC studies concerning tactical nuclear weapons requirements and rationale."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-08-16
• National Security Decision Memorandum 127: Further Instructions for the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks at Helsinki (SALT V)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum 127 is directed to: the members of the National Security Council, the Attorney General, the Director, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and the Director of Central Intelligence. From the Document: "The President has reviewed the issues raised by the Delegation and discussed by the Verification Panel and has made the following decisions: (1) The U.S. Delegation should not introduce a proposal for zero-level ABM [anti-ballistic missile] deployments nor should the Delegation pursue the issue further in this phase of the negotiations. A ban on all ABM deployments remains an ultimate U.S. objective and will be a subject for negotiations after we have reached an agreement on defensive limitations and an interim agreement on offensive limitations. The Soviet delegation should be informed privately of this position."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-08-12
• National Security Decision Memorandum 121: Nuclear Weapons Deployment Authorization for FY 1972

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum 121 is directed to the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission. From the Document: "The President has approved the Nuclear Weapons Deployment Authorization Plan for FY 1972 contained in the Department of Defense memorandum dated May 24, 1971, subject to the changes indicated herein concerning deployments. The President agrees that the number of weapons shown reflect year-end authorizations with specific conditional deployments treated on a separate basis and that actual deployments against these authorizations will be controlled by the Secretary of Defense. The President authorizes the Secretary of Defense in FY 1972 to: deploy nuclear weapons in the United States without limitation, deploy nuclear weapons to areas outside the United States up to the limits indicated, support non-U.S. forces in accordance with the unites and numbers of weapons indicated."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-07-21
• National Security Decision Memorandum 120: Further Instructions for the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks at Helsinki (SALT V)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum [NSDM] 120 contains further instructions for the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks at Helsinki (SALT V). From the Document: "The President has reviewed issues arising from the preparation of the draft agreements directed by NSDM 117 and has decided as follows: (1) Definitions of ABM [anti-ballistic missile] system components to reinforce corollary constraints should be included in the defensive agreement. (2) The President has considered the question of stringent controls on new large phased-array radars and has decided that the Delegation should seek an arrangement where new large phased-array radars will be built only as mutually agreed by the U.S. and USSR [Union of Soviet Socialist Republics]. (3) The agreement should be written in a manner which does not prohibit deployment of possible future ABM systems other than systems employing ABM interceptor missiles, launchers, and radars."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-07-20
• National Security Decision Memorandum 119: Disclosure of Classified United States Military Information to Foreign Governments and International Organizations

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum 119 addresses the disclosure of classified United States military information to foreign governments and international organizations. From the Document: "The issuance of this National Security Decision Memorandum takes into account the foreign policy implications and national defense aspects of disclosures of classified U.S. military information to foreign governments and international bodies, and the mutual interest and responsibilities of the Secretaries of State and Defense with respect to such disclosures."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-07-20
• National Security Decision Memorandum 117: Instructions for Strategic Arms Limitation Talks at Helsinki (SALT-V)

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  National Security Decision Memorandum 117 is directed to the members of the National Security Council, the Attorney General, the Director, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and the Director of Central Intelligence. From the Document: "Having considered the discussions and recommendations of the National Security Council, I have decided on the United States position for presentation at Helsinki (SALT [Strategic Arms Limitation Talks] V), as detailed: The Delegation should prepare draft language of provisions incorporating the United States position. The Delegation should proceed on the basis that there will be an agreement limiting strategic defensive weapons. The agreement dealing with defensive weapons must contain (1) a cross-reference to the agreement limiting offensive weapons, and (2) provisions requiring continued negotiations on offensive limitations. The language prepared by the Delegation must be returned to the White House for approval prior to presentation to the Soviet delegation. The final form of what is agreed (e.g. treaty) will be determined later. Pending approval and tabling of the written language, the Delegation may outline to the USSR [Union of Soviet Socialist Republics] the principal provisions of the United States position at the beginning of negotiations."

  United States. White House Office

  1971-07-02