COORDINATING COMMITTEE RECORD OF DISCUSSION ON NETHERLANDS PROPOSAL CONCERING THE INTERPRETATION OF ITEM 1521 (D) - D.C. AMPLIFIERS 23RD MAY, 1960

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP62-00647A000100060064-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: November 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 9, 1998
• Sequence Number: 64
• Publication Date: June 8, 1960
• Content Type: MIN

Approved For
Bt. h JJune, 1860.
COCOM Document 3715.21/6
COORDINATING COMMITTEE
RECORD OF DISCUSSION
ON
NETHERLANDS PROPOSAL CONCERNING TIiF INTERPRETATION OF ITEM 1521 d
- D , C. A: LIPIERS
1d1LMa1Y_z_196O
Present: Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, United Kingdom,
United States.
References:COCOMI Docs. Nos. 3715.21/'2,3,4 and 5.
1. The CHAIMMN drew the Committee's attention to the Netherlands Memo-
rand= concerning the interpretation of Item 1521(d) and referred to the Memo-
randum submitted by the United Kingdom elcgation (COCOM Doc. 3715.21/2), the
ensuing iscussion (COC0M Doc. 3715.21) and the German statement (COCOM Doc.
3715.21/ -) in this connexion. He asked the United Kingdom Delegate if he was
in a position to suggest a redefinition of Item 1521(d), as requested by the
Netherlands Delegation.
2. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate stated that it was clear from the dis-
cussions which had already taken place that little harm was at present being
done from the strategic point of view, He agreed with the Netherlands Delega-
tion, however, that the situation was somewhat confused and that a redefinition
was highly desirable- His authorities had not as yet made any suggestion, and
the Delegate believed that the matter could best be settled with the help of
experts. He therefore suggested that the matter be deferred until the autumn,
when experts would be available for the List Review. The Netherlands authori-
ties had further invited his Delegation to differentiate between a "vibrating
condensor" and a "chopper type amplifier". He had boon instructed to state
that, in the simplest terms, a chopper typo amplifier had a low input impedance
resulting in a fast response, while a --vibrating-road condensor had a high input
impedance resulting in a slow response. The United Kingdom authorities for
their part regarded all chopper type amplifiers meeting the terms of sub-item
1521(d) as under embargo.
3. The NETHERLANDS Delegate th nked his United Kingdom colleague for
the information he had just supplied. He was ready to agree to the latter's
suggestion to postpone discussion until the next List Review.
4. The ITALIAN Delegate stated that he too could agree in principle to
postpone discussion until the autumn. He had been instructed to state that his
authorities were in full agreement with the German Delegate's statement as re-
corded in COCCM Doc. 3715.214. This did not, however, prejudge their position
as to the equipment just described by the United Kingdom Delegate.
5. The FRENCH Delegate stated that his Delegation had studied the pro-
blem very thoroughly, and had found that the German statement in CfCOM Doc.
3715.21/4 went a long way in clarifying the situation as regards the definition,
which lent to confusion. For their .[)art, they would not wish to postpone the
matter until the autumn. In the view of the French experts, three types of
instruments with different characteristics had been confused. As far as electro-
meters were concerned, the French authorities did not think that simple power-
measurin; equipment should be embargoed, since certain types had been in use
for 70 years. Moreover in exploiting electronic tubes, equipment had been
00647A000100060064-6
Approved Fo : CIA-RDP62-00647A000100060064-6
C 0 N T T li L
 CO iDENTIAJ
e6t 3715.21/6
---approved For Release "dRDP62-00647AOO04 O9Q64
developed which was capable of measuring direct and alternating current. If the
inp '~ power needed to operate an olectr-meter were calculated, it might reach
10 watts, i.e. the power indicated in Item 1521(d). However, such eloctro-
meters did not have amplifiers in the strict sense of the term. With a high
input voltage, electronic tubes served to overate a sensitive indicator usually
having a low resistance. On the other hand, there were amplifiers not associa-
ted with electrometers requiring only a very low input power. Amplifiers of
the type indicated in Item 1521(d) were of the standard type used on analogue
computers and were under embargo on account of their gain, their low noise level
and their drift. This type of amplifier was defined satisfactorily. There wore,
however, other ways of measuring direct voltages with amplifiers having the same
characteristics. Such amplifiers were produced by converting direct input cur-
rent into alternating current and by using the principle of alternating ampli-
tiers which were easier to pr:duce, and the use of a low bandwidth made it pos-
sible to reduce the noise level and zero drift. For this purpose, use could be
made either of a vi.bratin,; condenser or of a "mechanical modulator" (chopper).
The Delegate did not think, however, that this modulator was capable of reaching
the noise level indicated in Item 1521(d), whereas a ring modulator could ap-
prcach such values. In conclusion, the :Delegate felt that the type of amplifier
to be covered should first be clearly defined, and that a separate sub-item
might be drawn up for amplifiers with no reference to power-measuring equipment.
6. The UNITED STATES Delegate stated that he could agree to postpone
discussion until the autumn, if the Committee so desired. He thanked the United
Kingdom Delegation for the information supplied and undertook to study the tech-
nical data provided by the French Delegation. Turning to the German statement
in COCOM 3715.21/4, the Delegate requested a clarification thereof. Specifical-
ly did this statement refer only to German electrometers as the United States
Delegate had understood, or did it mean, as stated in the final sentence of the
German statement, that no electrometers fell under embargo by virtue of Adminis-
trative Principle No. 3 ? The Delegate also enquired what interpretation the
Italian and French Delegates placed on the German document when they said that
they supported it.
7. The GERMAN Delegate was also fully prepared to postpone discussion
until the List Review, and would be unable to discuss the matter without a con-
crete redefinition proposal. He thanked the French Delegate for the technical
comments made and undertook to study them attentively. As to his United States
colleague's question, he could not say whether any German electrometers were
covered by the embargo rules. The German authorities held the view that normal
electrometers with D.C. amplifiers would not use those of the typo described
under Item 1521(d), and would therefore be free from. embargo. However, electro-
meters using amplifiers as defined under Item 1521(d) would be regarded as under
embargo by virtue of Administrative Principle No- 3.
8. The ITALIAN Delegate agreed with certain of his colleagues as to the
difficulty of discussing such a technical matter without expert help. After
listening to the German Delegate's last remarks, he believed that these were the
grounds on which his authorities had reached their conclusion. He undertook to
seek further advice in this respect.
9. The FRENCH Delegate, replying to his United States colleague, stated
that it was possible that so T8 electrometers alight have a noise level, referred
to the input circuit, of 10 watts. Electrometers used a scale-type measuring
insrument, however, and such instruments only required a signal/noise ratio of
10 . Thus electrometer amplifiers having an indicator were not caught by Item
1521(d). The French Delegation -therefore hold the same view as the German De-
legation, but for different technical reasons. In conclusion, the Delegate
stated that, in view of the complexity of the matter, his Delegation were also
ready, like the majority of their colleagues, to postpone discussion until after
the recess.
10. The COMMITTEE agreed to adjourn its iiscussion until the next List
Review in the autumn, unless a redefinition proposal were submitted in the
meantime.
Approved Forpgl"e: gib-f gP162-0,0647A000100060064-6
 Approved For Release-: CIA-RDP62-00647A0001.O,t9Qp(64'--e
C O N F I D E N T I A L
th June, 1960.
CORRIGENDUM TC
COCOM Document 3715.21/6
COORDINATING CC:I"iuIIT'TEE
(English Only)
RECORD OF DISCUSSION
ON
NETHERLANDS PRr'P^SAL C" NCERMING THE INTERPRETATION OF ITEM[ 1521(dj
- D.C. AMPLIFIERS
Paragraph 1. Line 4. Chan,`;'e "COD',-MM Doc. 3715.21/4" to read "CnCCM Doc.
3715.21/;
Line 5. Chani e "C''C2M Icc. 3715.21/5" to read "CGCOM Doc.
3715..21/4"
C O N F I D E N TIA L
Approved For R e. y; ~'~
6 647A000100060064-6