IESG MEETING: SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 15
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 7, 2010
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: April 25, 1985
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
p
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
ROUTING
3637 (1ael)
29 April 85
Dais
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
S/S 8512545
-eeNFIBENTIAL
Senior Interagency Group No. 34
TO NSC - Mr. Robert Kimmit
April 25, 1985
(:1H
Commerce - Mrs. Helen Robbins
Energy - Mr. William Vitale
Defense - Col. R. J. Affourtit
Interior - Mr. Stephen Gleason
OPD - Mr. John Svahn Linda Arey
Transportation - Ms.
Treasury - Mr. Edward Stuckey
USTR - Mr. Dennis Whitfield
SUBJECT: IESG Meeting: Summary of Discussion
Attached are a Summary of Discussion of the IESG meeting he]
on April 15, 1985, and a list of those who attended.
L.. 2- Nicholas Platt
Executive Secretary
Attachments:
As Stated.
DECL: OADR
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Washington. D.C. 20520
,q-P;)36
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
U.S.-Japan Energy Working Group
Under Secretary Wallis reported on the meeting of the
U.S.-Japan Energy Working Group (EWG) in Tokyo on March 14,
1985. He said that the U.S. side emphasized the President's
desire to accelerate progress on the November 1983 Joint
Statement on Energy of President Reagan apd Prime Minister
Nakasone. The Japanese co-chairman, Teshima of MOFA, stated that
the Japanese considered bilateral energy trade as important as
any of the sectors in the MOSS discussions. On imports of U.S.
steam coal, the Japanese side indicated there might be an
increase within the short-term; on metallurgical coal imports,
U.S. supplies should take a long-term perspective. With regard
to the Sakhalin project, the U.S. side made clear that the USG
would be disappointed if Japanese importers chose to purchase
Sakhalin LNG over competitive U.S. supplies. The Japanese side
indicated it would increase imports of refined petroleum products
such as naptha and residual fuel oil, but not of gasoline and
kerosene.
The Japanese again inquired about the possibility of buying
Alaskan crude oil but, according to the Under Secretary, this
interest did not necessarily mean the Japanese would purchase
this crude oil if it became available for export. Before turning
to George Bradley (DOE) for a status report on a strategy paper
on possible U.S. oil exports, the Under Secretary noted that
Secretary Shultz had drawn his attention to a Wall Street Journal
article the previous week which stated that the U.S. could reduce
its bilateral trade imbalance by $16 billion per year if exports
of Alaskan crude oil were permitted. The article raised the
question whether, in the current atmosphere, there was a greater
willingness to consider exports of Alaskan oil. Japanese Foreign
Minister Abe had asked about Alaskan oil exports in a meeting
with Secretary Shultz on April 13, and the Secretary said that
the Department of State specifically and the Administration
generally favored such exports but that the Export Administration
Act (EAA) created complications. It was less than simple to
charge ahead on this issue.
U.S. Crude Oil Exports
Summing up the status of the DOE strategy paper on U.S. oil
exports, Mr. Bradley said that DOE believed it important to push
ahead. DOE had already identified different scenarios and had
done extensive research. An initiative on U.S. crude exports to
Canada was one possibility; another was exports of Cook Inlet
crude. He noted that Canadian Prime Minister Mulroney had
reaffirmed Canada's desire to increase U.S.-Canada energy
CONFIDENTIAL
DECL: OADR
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
trade during his recent bilateral with President Reagan.
Mr. Bradley asked for Commerce's views on the legal aspects of an
Administration initiative.
David Diebold (Commerce) responded that three issues were on
the table: exports of crude oil to Canada; exports from the
North Slope; and exports from Cook Inlet. Under Secretary Wallis
interjected that Abe had mentioned during his meeting with
Secretary Shultz a letter he had received from Alaskan Governor
Sheffield in which Governor Sheffield offered to sell Japan 6,000
b/d of royalty crude from the Cook Inlet area. Mr. Diebold
continued that lawyers from interested agencies had met on
several occasions to sort out the legal obstacles to U.S. crude
exports; he was awaiting their final report. A Presidential
determination would be necessary to export Cook Inlet crude, and
the lawyers had reached the conclusion that the current "swap"
program with Canada was not broad enough to encompass greater
volumes of U.S. crude exports to Canada. This also would require
a Presidential determination or one by the Secretary of
Commerce. The criteria for crude exports to Canada and for
exports from Alaska were somewhat different, however, but these
were ready to elevate to the policy level for action.
Replying to a query from Don Pearlman (Interior), Mr. Diebold
said he anticipated the interagency legal analysis would be
available within several days and that the analysis could be
presented for Secretary Baldrige's review by the end of the
week. He said that Commerce at that point had not tracked
Congressional interest on the subject.
William F. Martin (NSC) commented that he was somewhat
shocked at the pace of the interagency review: former Treasury
Secretary Regan in January had asked for an early review of the
question of U.S. crude exports to Japan so that it could be
factored into the bilateral between the President and Nakasone
immediately before the Bonn Summit, and no results had been
brought forward even though that meeting was only two weeks
away. Mr. Martin also asked how the interagency findings would
be transmitted to the President and National Security Advisor
McFarlane. Mr. McFarlane's interest had been aroused further by
an arrangement promoted by Jessie Calhoun, head of the Maritime
Union, by which he would support Alaskan oil exports if U.S.
ships participated in transporting Japanese cars to the U.S.
market. Mr. Martin had told Mr. McFarlane that exports from Cook
Inlet should be carefully considered. From the White House
perspective, an options paper was urgently needed. Mr. Martin
stated his view that it would be inappropriate to proceed with
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
crude exports to Canada and not to Japan. Crude exports to Japan
would demonstrate the President's commitment to free trade, and
the timing was perfect in the contexts of the U.S.-Japan trade
imbalance and the USG's efforts to promote a new round of
multilateral trade negotiations. The USG,-should take action in
the next two weeks. Under Secretary Wallis agreed that the USG
needed to reply to Nakasone on the question of Alaskan crude
exports.
Allan Wendt (State) said that there appeared to be
interagency agreement on policy with regard to liberalizing U.S.
crude exports to the maximum extent possible; that policy needed
to be put into practice. The group of interagency lawyers, even
if not totally in agreement, thought that exports could be
allowed. The President needed recommendations, and there was
flexibility in Department of Commerce regulations, which could be
amended relatively easily. There was a timing factor with Canada
as well as with Japan; Canada would remove its volumetric
restrictions on crude oil exports by June 1, but was concerned
about a price spike unless crude could be imported from the U.S.
in certain regions. There was every reason to move forward on
U.S. crude exports to Canada and from Cook Inlet as quickly as
possible.
Jack Silvey (DOE) noted that Commerce perhaps did not
see a
clear
policy consensus on the issue of U.S. crude exports.
He
said
the IESG needed Commerce's guidance on what steps had
to be
taken
by May 2, the date for the Reagan-Nakasone bilateral
in
Bonn,
for a policy to move forward. Mr. Diebold explained
that
there
were three separate issues or one bunched together,
depending on different approaches. If a decision were made to
proceed with either exports to Canada or from Cook Inlet, the
President or Secretary Baldrige would have to make a
determination that such exports were in the national interest.
Commerce was certainly ready to move on a decision.
After Under Secretary Wallis commented that the USG would not
want to pursue initiatives immediately in all three possible
avenues for U.S. crude exports; exports from Alaska's North Slope
did not appear feasible at the current time. Mr. Diebold said
that would be Commerce's recommendation as well given the status
of the EAA. Responding to Mr. Martin's questions about the
process for decision, Mr. Bradley said that specific options
would be developed. The question was, even with options, how
would an initiative receive Cabinet-level approval? Mr. Bradley
agreed that an options paper would be available in two days. Mr.
Martin and Under Secretary Wallis noted that the DOE paper should
include the steps that President would take to permit exports and
the timing involved.
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 4 -
Canadian Energy Developments
Mr. Wendt reported that the Canadian Government on March 28
announced agreement with its three producing provinces to
dismantle the bulk of the National Energy~Program (NEP),
including removal of price and volume controls on crude oil
exports. Greater crude exports would likely result. Because of
its fear of price spikes in certain regions, especially in the
Eastern provinces, the Canadian Government wanted to have the
possibility of importing U.S. crude oil. The March 28
announcement also included promulgation of a more market-based
system for gas exports. The announcement implied that the
Toronto city-gate price would no longer determine prices for gas
exports to the U.S. market. The Canadians planned also to phase
out gradually taxes on gas exports and to phase out their
Petroleum Incentives Program (PIP) for exploration in federal
lands. The announcement made no mention of revision of the NEP's
retroactive back-in clause, but the USG was told that Canada
intends to phase out this provision with regard to exploration on
federal lands. The Canadian Government was sensitive to the fact
that some observers believed it was moving to liberalize its
energy trade too quickly. On the whole, the USG welcomed these
Canadian developments, which were an admission that past Canadian
policies were not in the national interest.
Consultations with the European Community
Mr. Wendt described the upcoming visit of EC Commissioner
Mosar as essentially a "get acquainted" session. Mosar would
stop in the United States after visits to Algeria and Canada. He
evidently wanted to talk about the issue of oil product imports,
on which the USG has had a consistent position. The USG should
take advantage of Mosar's visit -- during which he will talk to
various USG agencies and with key Congressmen -- to discuss
emergency preparedness, energy security (especially concerning
European gas), and oil stocks.
Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Bradley noted that the House Subcommittee on Fossil and
Synthetic Fuels had the previous week passed the Administration
bill on renewal of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA)
with minor changes relating to contingency measures for
conservation by state governments. The full House Energy and
Commerce Committee would mark up the bill on April 24 or May 1
and would consider various amendments. In response to
Mr. Pearlman's questions whether these amendments would be
technical or substantive in nature, Mr. Bradley said they likely
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 5 -
would be more substantive. In this regard, he cited a possible
amendment regarding a test of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
(SPR). There was also discussion about shutting in production
from the Naval Petroleum Reserve (NPR). A number of other issues
might arise, including in the area of economic response measures.
Following a question by Dave Tarbell (Defense) regarding the
NPR, Mr. Silvey said that there was an assumption that the
language in the Subcommittee's bill would be amended to avoid
shutting in the NPR; the Administration, he said, would support
this. Mr. Pearlman then asked whether the Administration
supported such an amendment in the context of promoting a simple
extension of EPCA. Mr. Bradley responded that DOE hoped that
language on NPR would not interfere with passage of a simple
extension. While Interior had opposed continued sales from the
NPR, Mr. Pearlman noted that there had been a clear-cut
understanding in the Cabinet Council on Natural Resources and the
Environment (CCNRE) that there would be no attempt to tamper with
a simple extension of the existing EPCA. He asked whether the
Administration's agreement to revised language on the NPR might
not open "Pandora's box". Mr. Bradley remarked that it would be
the Congress, not the Administration, that reopened the issue.
Mr. Silvey commented that Deputy Energy Secretary Boggs had said
recently in Congressional testimony that he assumed the Congress
would not shut off sales from the NPR simply because the
Administration wanted to freeze the SPR at 489 million barrels.
This was the way the issue was presented to the Congress.
Mr. Tarbell stated that, in Defense's view, the
Administration needed to push a consistent line on the NPR; if
sales from the NPR were halted, it would cost the USG $1.3
billion per year in foregone revenues. He asked whether there
had been further discussions on "out year" spending for the SPR
and sought a specific description of USG policy in this regard.
While simple extension of EPCA was important, the USG should seek
to continue to sell NPR oil and eventually to achieve a 750
million barrel SPR. A different decision should require
discussion at the Cabinet level. He then asked if a one-year
moratorium on SPR fill was the current Administration position.
Dan Taft (OMB) answered that the budgetary process provided for
annual-review of SPR fill. The budget agreement reached between
the President and Senate leadership, however, included a three
year moratorium on SPR fill. Mr. Tarbell responded that the
issue of SPR fill went beyond budgetary considerations and needed
discussion in the full Cabinet. There were conflicting signals
and the interagency process was not working well. Messrs.
Bradley and Silver commented that the Administration needed to
assess the current situation and to clarify it.
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 6 -
IEA Ministerial
Mr. Wendt began discussion of the recent meeting of the IEA
Governing Board. The upcoming IEA Ministerial was discussed at
length at the Governing Board meeting, and the results were
reassuring. The IEA Secretariat was preparing two types of
documents for the Ministerial. The first was an umbrella paper
("brief note") entitled "Energy Policies: Past and Future
Priorities", which would outline what the IEA had achieved;
lessons learned; energy challenges for the present and future;
and what specific policies were necessary for IEA countries to
adopt to achieve a lasting and balanced energy mix.
The umbrella paper would be buttressed by background papers.
Topics would include the oil market, oil product imports, and
emergency preparedness; the electricity sector, focussing on fuel
substitution and pricing policies; a paper of 30-40 pages on
natural gas, a first draft of which was expected that week; and a
paper on research and development that would promote greater
collaborative efforts. Mr. Wendt said the IEA Secretariat would
utilize the background papers to bring appropriate conclusions
into the umbrella paper. On the issue of natural gas, tentative
plans called for a meeting of USG gas experts on April 18 and a
meeting of experts from IEA countries in Paris on April 30. The
CIA had completed an internal USG study on this subject which
would help analyze the Secretariat's paper on the same subject.
The USG wanted to ensure that the Secretariat's paper contained
an objective, factual analysis, especially with regard to the
approaching supply gap in the European market, which could reach
30-40 billion cubic meters per year. The USG should reserve
judgment on the IEA paper until a first draft was available at
the end of May. In the meantime, the USG would formulate its own
conclusions to compare with those of the IEA. The June 13
meeting of the IEA Governing Board would ensure that preparations
for the July 9 Ministerial were well in hand. Overall, the
Ministerial was shaping up well.
Mr. Martin said he wanted to echo Mr. Wendt's comments and
complimented the CIA for its sound and sobering analysis of the
European gas situation. The Soviet Union could capture 60% of
the European gas market by the next century; this indicated that
Norway would have to reform its tax structure and that the
Europeans would have to pay a security premium for non-Soviet
gas. A low-key approach on European gas was preferable: while
the Europeans have agreed to discuss natural gas at the IEA
Ministerial, they have not yet agreed to pay the price for
non-Soviet gas. Mr. Wendt concurred and noted that it was
difficult to obtain agreement of the 21 IEA members on any topic,
CONFIDENTIAL
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
- 7 -
and agreement on natural gas could be controversial. Mr. Martin
replied that the USG was not asking IEA members to agree to
anything more than they had already agreed to at the 1983
Ministerial; rather, the USG was asking fQr progress in
implementing what had been agreed to. He added that the building
of additional oil stocks would also be an important topic at the
Ministerial and ranked with natural gas and research and
development as the most important subjects from the USG
perspective. Mr. Tarbell added that other IEA members needed to
face up to the fact that they have not done much to build
stocks. Mr. Wendt said the USG wanted Ministerial approval of
the strategy on stocks agreed to at the July 1984 Governing Board
meeting. The Administration's proposal for a moratorium on SPR
fill would not help in this regard, however.
Mr. Martin then asked Under Secretary Wallis whether language
on energy would be included in the communique of the Bonn
Economic Summit. Under Secretary Wallis said that the communique
would likely include several sentences on energy and that the
Japanese have supported our efforts for inclusion of language on
energy.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY SECURITY GROUP
April 15, 1985
2:30 PM
Operations Center Conference Room
Department of State
List of Attendees*.
State
Energy
Under Secretary Wallis, Chairman
Craig Bamberger
Robert Cekuta
George Bradley
Elinor G. Constable
John Broadman
Thomas Forbord
Robert Price
Charles Higginson
David Pumphrey
John Hope
Jack Silvey
Robert
Knickmeyer
Charles
Patrizia
USTR
Lucian
Pugliaresi
Robert Reinstein
Pamela
Rockwell
Daniel
Serwer
Treasury
David Sloan
Ernest Chase
Allan Wendt
Charles Schotta
NSC
William F. Martin
Commerce
David Diebold
Cecil Hunt
Doug Perry
John Richards
Interior
Donald Pearlman
Defense
David Tarbell
OMB
Arnie Brooks
John Pfeiffer
Dan Taft
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
ROUTING SLIP
xe ive Secretary
Apr 85
Date
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
S/S 8510124
United States Department of State
9'ashington, D.C. 20520 Exert-i;i~a seglstry,
April 5, 1985 gr~
CONFIDENTIAL
Senior Interagency Group No. 34
Commerce - Mrs. Helen Robbins
Energy - Mr. William Vitale
Defense - Col. R. J. Affourtit
Interior - Mr. Stephen Gleason
OPD - Mr. John Svahn
Transportation - his. Linda Arey
Treasury - Mr. Christopher Hicks
USTR - Mr. Dennis Whitfield
CIA -
International Energy Security Group Meeting:
April 15, 1985
Under Secretary Wallis will chair a meeting of the
International Energy Security Group (IESG) on Monday, April 15
at 2:30 p.m. in the Operations Center conference room (room
7516) of the State Department. We ask that you notify your
representative(s) of the meeting, which will last approximately
one hour. Attendance will be limited to members of the IESG
(or alternates) plus one.
The agenda for the meeting follows:
1. Report on U.S./Japan Energy Working Group Meeting
II. U.S. Crude Oil Exports
III. Report On Canadian Energy Developments
IV. Consultations with the EC
V. Energy Emergency Preparedness
-- Expiration of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
-- Budget provision for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
CONFIDENTIAL
DECL:OADR
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
CONFIDENTIAL
VI.
Preparations for the July 9 IEA Ministerial
--
Results
of March 27 IEA
Governing Board
Meeting
--
Further
USG preparations
--
Progress
report on the IEA gas study
Please provide Steve Ordal (632-1445) with the name(s) of
your agency's representative(s).
List of Representatives and Alternates to the IESG
Nicholas Platt
Executive Secretary
CONFIDENTIAL
DECL:OADR
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
Revised 4/3/85
MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY SECURITY GROUP
National Security Council
William F. Martin 395-3440
Special Assistant to the President and
Senior Director for Coordination----
National Security Council
Room 368 - OEOB
Roger W. Robinson 395-3622
Senior Director of International
Economic Affairs
National Security Council
Room 365 - OEOD
White House Office of Policy Development
Martin Smith 456-7993
Special Assistant to the President for
Policy Development
Room 234 - OEOB
Office of Management and Budget
Randall E. Davis
Program Associate Director for
Natural Resources, Energy & Science
Room 260 - NEOB
Alternate: Daniel Taft 395-3285
Department of Energy
Jan W. Mares 252-5800
Assistant Secretary for International
Affairs and Energy Emergencies
Room 7C-016, Forrestal Building
Alternate: George Bradley 252-5858
Department of Treasury
David C. Mulford 566-7993
Assistant Secretary for International
Affairs
Room 3430
Alternate: Charles Schotta 566-5881
Department of Commerce
Lionel H. Olmer 377-2867
Under Secretary for International
--~'ra a -----
Room 2867
H. P. Goldfield 377-1461
Assistant Secretary for Trade
Development
Room 3832
Department of Defense
Fred C. Ikle 697-7200
Under Secretary for Policy
Room 4E-830 - Pentagon
Alternate: David Tarbell 695-2659
Department of Interior
Donald F. Pearlman 343-7351
Executive Assistant to the
Secretary
Room. 61 51
Alternate: Earl E. Gjelde 343-7351
Department of Transportation
Matthew: V. Scocozza 426-4544
Assistant Secretary for Policy
and International Affairs
Roor 10228
400 - 7th Street, S.W.
Alternate: Donald Igo 426-0783
Office of the US Trade Representative
Charles H. Blum 395-7320
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative
for Industrial Trade Policy
Room 407 - WINDER BUILDINC
600 - 17th Street, N.W.
Alternate: Robert Reinstein 395-7203
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
 - Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6
Central Intelligence Agency
David Low
National Intelligence Officer for
Economics
Room 5G-OO - - - - - -
Department of State
Allen Wallis
IESG Chairman
Under Secretary for Economic Affairs
Room 7256
Richard Fairbanks
IESG Co-Chairman
Ambassador-at-Large S/SA
Room 7527
Alternate: Charles Patrizia 632-1868
Paul D. Wolfowitz 632-9596
Assistant Secretary for East Asian
and Pacific Affairs
Room 6206
Alternate: Richard Howarth 632-0366
Richard W. Murphy 632-9588
Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern
and South Asian Affairs
Room 6244
Alternate: James Placke 632-9076
Peter Rodman 632-2372
Chairman, Policy Planning Council
Room 7311
Alternate: Lou Pugliaresi 632-9571
Elinor G. Constable 632-7950
Acting Assistant Secretary for Economic
and Business Affairs
Room 6828
Alternate: E. Allan Wendt 632-1498
Department of State (Cont'd)
Richard Burt 632-9625X1
Assistant Secretary for European
and Canadian Affairs
-Room 6226
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/01/17: CIA-RDP87M00539R000400510012-6