Chairman, Subcommittee on Science and Aeronautics
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

July 13, 1998

Ms. Joann Picclo
Vice President and Director, Federal State
and Government Relations
1350 I Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-3305

Dear Ms. Piccolo:

Your letter of July 10th was in stark contrast to the promise of cooperation I had previously received from Motorola. My request for information is consistent with my responsibilities as chairman of the House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, as well as my position as senior member of the House Committee on International Relations.

As far as Mr. Cox's task force is concerned, Congressman Cox has encouraged me to continue my individual efforts and to provide him with any relevant information. Your letter, however, suggests that you believe a "considerable overlap and burden would be created by two (or more) closely related inquiries into the same topics." Coming from a senior vice president for government relations of a major corporation, that seems more than a bit naive... I'll let it stand there.

As I return to Congress, I expect you and your corporation to cooperate with me to the degree that you can. Certainly you have lists of meetings and participants. Certainly, you have names, addresses and phone numbers of those Motorola employees who represent you in China; perhaps some have moved on. Provide me with what you can. Show me you are acting in good faith. The message I have received from your reply to my specific inquiry was nothing less than "buzz off". Your letter and the answer is unacceptable.

Within a short period of time I will be taking my preliminary findings directly to the public and my colleagues in major speeches on the floor of the House. These speeches and media interviews will alert the American people to what appears to be a major compromise of our country's security. Much of the deliberations of the Cox special committee will be conducted behind closed doors, so it is even more important that the information I present is fair, balanced and accurate.

After only two months of open discussions and hearings into the Chinese missile upgrade scandal, a disturbing picture is emerging. It does not look good for Motorola at this moment, but further information could clarify the situation. Your letter indicated you might be helping me clarify that picture. However, I do not believe that your "too much overlap" position does me much good, and I can assure you, it will do you no good as well.

So I hope that you will take a second look at my request and send as much information as you can by not later than July 20. That would be a start and, at least, a sign of good faith. Please feel free to contact me.


Dana Rohrabacher
Member of Congress

1350 I STREET N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3305
(202)371-6900  FAX (202) 842-3578

July 10, 1998

The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Rohrabacher:

We have reviewed your letter of July 1, 1998, requesting
Motorola's assistance in providing certain documents relating to
our use of Chinese satellite launch vehicles for the Iridium
program.  Motorola appreciates the importance of the issues that
have been raised in Congress regarding U.S. companies' use of
Chinese launch services.  Our use of Chinese satellite launches
has complied fully with all applicable U.S. export control laws,
and we look forward to future cooperation with Congress on this

We note that the House of Representatives recently has formed a
select committee to investigate whether any improper transfers
of technology occurred in connection with U.S. companies' use of
Chinese satellite launch services.  See H. Res. 463 (June 18,
1998).  As you know, this Select Committee on U.S. National
Security and Military/Commercial Concerns With the People's
Republic of China will be chaired by Rep. Christopher Cox
(R-Ca.) and is charged with making a "full and complete inquiry"
regarding among other things, "[t]he conduct of defense
contractors, weapons manufacturers, satellite manufacturers, and
other private or government-owned commercial firms" with respect
to technology transfers.  As a result, we expect that the Select
Committee will be conducting its own inquiry into many of the
topics covered by your July, 1 letter.

As you can imagine, considerable overlap and burden would be
created by two (or more) related inquiries into the same topics.
The House contemplated that the investigation into this matter
would be coordinated appropriately.  Due to the significance of
the issues involved, it is important that the inquiry be
conducted in a procedurally fair manner and coordinated with
other committees as much as possible.  Close coordination with
the Select Committee should ensure that the investigation
proceeds in as efficient and productive a manner as possible.
For instance, we note that H.Res. 463 makes express provision
for the Select Committee to submit to any standing committee,
such as the House Science Committee, specific matters within its
jurisdiction and to request that such standing committee pursue
such matters further.  H.Res. 463, Sec. 12(a) ("Cooperation of
Other Committees").  In addition, H.Res. 463 requires other
committees to provide the Select Committee with "all records,
data, charts and files concerning subjects within the
jurisdiction of the Select Committee."  H.Res. 463, Sec. 8,
("Transfer of Information to Select Committee).

We also have concerns about the details of your request.
Because the request seeks proprietary business information
concerning Motorola personnel, operations and technical facts,
it is important that we receive sufficient assurances that such
information will be treated as confidential and will not be
disclosed.  Satellite communications is an extraordinarily
competitive field, and disclosure of proprietary information
could be highly prejudicial.  In this connection, it would be
helpful to clarify whether this request was made on behalf of
the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics in connection with an
investigation by the Subcommittee.  If so, we would like to
discuss what mechanisms and procedures are available to ensure
the confidentiality of information provided to the subcommittee.
If not, ti is important to know who would be receiving the
information and what assurances there are that confidentiality
will be maintained.

Finally, your letter asked for numerous documents to be provided
by July 14.  In our view, this deadline is not feasible given
the extreme breadth of the request.  For instance, the letter
sought "all memorandums, handwritten or informal notes, e-mails,
faxes, telephone conversations and any other means of
communication between members of your company staff, employees,
contract workers or subcontractors, either in the United States
or abroad, involved in meetings and other forms of
communications with Chinese counterparts related to rocket
delivery systems, satellite launches and hardware, software or
technical analyses."

This request must be considered in light of the fact that
Motorola's program for the use of Chinese launch services has
extended over a five year period (July 1993 through July 1998).
Because of the length of this program, the files that may
contain materials that are potentially responsive to your
request are very extensive.  They are stored in more than one
location.  Many have been archived.  Therefore, it may be useful
for us to discuss your request with you or your staff to
identify the documents that would be of greatest relevance to
your inquiry.

As you know Motorola has provided you and your staff with
extensive briefings on many of the matters raised in your
letter.  We are certainly prepared to continue to provide
information that is relevant and necessary to Congressional
investigations in these matters.  We look forward to working
with you and others to clarify the information that would be most
useful and to ensure appropriate coordination with the Select
Committee investigating these issues.

Thank you.

Joann Piccolo
Vice President and Director, Federal State
and Government Relations

HUGHES Electronics

Marcy J.K. Tiffany, Vice President and General Counsel

July 14, 1998

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20105

Dear Congressman Rohrabacher:

I have received your letter of July l, 1998 in which you request
numerous documents to be provided to you by Tuesday, July 14.  I
did not realize that you made a specific document request when
we met in early May.  Nevertheless, Hughes is cooperating with
all the congressional committees looking at these issues and is
making every effort to respond to all requests for documents
that we receive.  However, Hughes does not have much of the
information you have requested, nor are we confident of our
ability to obtain it, and certainly not in within time frame you

In addition, Congressman Cox and Dicks of the Select Committee
on U.S. National Security and Mililtary/Commercial concerns
with the Peoples Republic of China have made a request for
copies of all materials provided in response to previous requests
from members ofthe House and Senate in order to avoid duplication
of effort and assure compliance with their deadlines.  In order
to facilitate a timely response to this request, it would be
very helpful if we could coordinate future requests such as this
through that committee.


Marcy J.K. Tiffany

Corporate Offices
200 N. Sepulveda Boulevard
P.O. Box 958
El Segundo, CA 90245-0956
(310) 662-3985
FAX (310) 322-1862

All content COPYRIGHT SOFTWAR (C) 2000. Any reproduction or use of content herein must be approved by SOFTWAR.