Office of the Historian

345. Action Memorandum From Richard T. Kennedy and Robert Hormats of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger)1

Washington, August 3, 1971.

SUBJECT

  • Your Luncheon Meeting with Peterson—Additional Items

We have been advised that Peterson may wish to discuss with you:

  • —The Kama River Project
  • —East-West Trade
  • —Japan

1. Kama River

You have a memorandum for the President on the subject (copy attached at Tab A).2 Secretary Stans has proposed that the President authorize approval of three pending applications for participation in the Foundry Plant in addition to the application of Mack Trucks for participation in the Production Facility.

Mack Trucks has informed Commerce that it hopes the US Government will give early favorable consideration to its application ($750 million technical services and equipment). The other three applications for participation in the foundry are:

  • —The Swindell/Dressler Company for $13.5 million of technical services. The company claims it has a firm offer from the Soviets, and it expects a follow-on order for $20 million of equipment. Swindell/Dressler is at Pittsburgh.
  • —The C.E. Cast Division of Combustion Engineering, Inc. for $37 million of automatic molding equipment and core making machines. The Cast Division is at Pittsburgh but Combustion Engineering has plants in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Texas, Connecticut, New York, Ohio, Kansas, Illinois, Florida, Rhode Island and Oklahoma.
  • —The Jervis B. Webb Company for $125 million of conveyors and other foundry equipment. Webb is at Detroit, but it also has plants at Avon Lake, Ohio, Cohasset, Mass., and Boyne City, Michigan. These applications are all partially competitive with each other, and consequently if approved would result in exports of less than their total combined value.

[Page 876]

If we approve the three licenses for the foundry and not for Mack Truck we will have a public relations problem of “divisional company treatment.” The question is how much can we go ahead and authorize in terms of its effect as a “signal” to the Russians?

2. East-West Trade

Peterson may propose asking Commerce to prepare a paper on this subject concerning bringing our unilateral control list down to the international COCOM levels. A talker on this subject is at Tab B.3

[Omitted here is section 3 with two paragraphs on Japan. The first deals with textiles and possible complications flowing from the China initiative. The second pertains to the August 6 SRG meeting on Japan.]

  1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Agency Files, Box 218, CIEP. Secret.↩
  2. See Document 343 and footnote 1 thereto.↩
  3. Not printed. The paper at Tab B is based on Document 337 and concludes with a long paragraph on COCOM parity and COCOM lists.↩