VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #1851/01 2771627
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 041627Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0470
INFO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 001851 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
 
STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCB, L/ACV, IO/S 
SECDEF FOR OSD/ISP 
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC 
COMMERCE FOR BIS (GOLDMAN) 
NSC FOR LEDDY 
WINPAC FOR WALTER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): WRAP-UP FOR 
OPCW EXECUTIVE COUNCIL SESSION, SEPTEMBER 25-28, 2007 
(EC-50) 
 
REF: STATE 134655 
 
This is CWC-79-07. 
 
 
¶1. (U) ACTION ITEMS -- see paragraphs 31 and 69. 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶2. (U)  Executive Council 50 approved the OPCW's zero nominal 
growth budget for 2008, in a newly productive spirit of 
getting things done after the large agenda of unfinished 
business it inherited from the previous  session.  The 
Ambassador's statement urging cooperation in resolving the 
backlog was echoed by several others, and individual 
delegates expressed appreciation in private for the 
statement.  Consultations on the budget continued during the 
lunch break throughout the week and ended on the floor of the 
Council Friday evening, with a hard-fought consensus on the 
Director General's proposal to use funds from the revised 
destruction inspection schedules toward inspector training 
and equipment.  NAM members, particularly Iran and South 
Africa, fought for a shift of funding to International 
Cooperation and Assistance programs, but in the end agreed to 
compromise language to identify additional voluntary funding 
for ICA programs. 
 
¶3. (U) Although passing the budget before the Conference of 
States Parties (CSP) was the most notable achievement, EC 50 
also agreed to continue work toward a decision at the CSP on 
Article VII implementation.  NAM efforts to push an Article 
XI action plan, and linking Articles XI and VII, continued, 
but the EC agreed to ongoing consultations on Article XI 
without language on a possible decision. 
 
¶4. (U) The Director General's proposal for a Programme in 
Africa in lieu of an OPCW office in Africa found fairly 
widespread support among the African group.  Donor 
delegations, including the U.S., succeeded in adding language 
on budgetary implications and including donors in future 
consultations on the program to the EC report welcoming the 
DG's initiative. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Our stand-off with the Russians over approval of the 
Maradykovsky documents, with their reciprocation on Pine 
Bluff and Newport, continued.  In a private intervention with 
the Russian delegation at the traditional Russian/U.S. EC 
reception, Ambassador and delreps requested that the Russians 
allow approval of the first-ever U.S. industrial (Schedule 2) 
facility agreement (CIBA).  There was no discussion of the 
agreement which was gaveled through in the Council.  End 
Summary. 
 
-------------------------- 
DONOR COORDINATION MEETING 
-------------------------- 
 
¶6. (U) The September 24 informal coordination meeting of 
States Parties assisting Russia in its CW destruction was 
chaired by Mr. Frank Van Beuningen of the Dutch MFA.  After 
accepting the draft report of the last meeting, delegations 
provided an update on their assistance efforts, with more 
detailed presentations from the U.S, UK and Canada.  Dr. Tom 
Hopkins (Acting Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for 
Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs) provided a 
comprehensive overview of U.S. CTR efforts in Russia, 
including projects completed and precise figures to clarify 
exactly how much the U.S. spends in Russia and on Russian 
contractors.  Hopkins also touched on CTR assistance in 
Albania, noting the parallels in complexity and 
unpredictability of CW destruction 
 
¶7. (U) UK MOD rep James Harrison noted some improvements in 
cooperation with Russia's Federal Agency for Industry, but 
also highlighted some areas of particular concern, especially 
 
 
with restrictions imposed by Russian import legislation and 
continuing difficulties in resolving disagreements over 
customs/taxes.  Canada provided an update on the agreement 
being negotiated for joint Canada/UK assistance at Khizner, 
and on its efforts at Shchuch'ye, highlighting lengthy delays 
caused by such bureaucratic requirements as obtaining 
tree-cutting permits before continuing work on the railway 
between the storage and destruction facilities. 
 
¶8. (U) The Russian delegation gave an overview of progress, 
accompanied by its usual call for "urgent action" on the part 
of donor states and provision of a schedule for disbursement 
of the remaining funds.  In response to other presentations, 
Russia highlighted the need for donors to comply with Russian 
legislation, particularly where taxes were concerned, and 
noted that Russia has no legal basis to provide site access 
to any SP except those which have signed direct agreements 
with Russia (thereby excluding donors who contribute through 
the UK). 
 
 
--------------------- 
DESTRUCTION INFORMALS 
--------------------- 
 
¶9. (U) The Monday session (September 24) of the destruction 
informals was in keeping with recent sessions in its lack of 
dialogue and seeming lack of interest by delegations in using 
the opportunities provided for questions of the Technical 
Secretariat and the possessor states.  Where available, hard 
 
SIPDIS 
copies of presentations will be forwarded to Washington. 
Director of Verification Horst Reeps briefed delegations on 
verification of CW destruction and industry since the last 
session of the EC, noting the number of OCPF inspections that 
had been "wasted" on facilities that should not have been 
declared.  Head of Declarations Steve Wade provided an update 
on declarations received and/or processed during the 
intersessional period.  Head of Chemical Demilitarization 
Branch Dominique Anelli provided an unusually lengthy and 
detailed update on destruction activities in the possessor 
states; in the case of the U.S. he covered much of the same 
information presented later in the session by Mr. Dale 
Ormond. 
 
¶10. (U) Russia provided an update on destruction and 
construction activities since EC-49.  At Maradykovsky, all 
spray tanks have been drained, along with 85 percent of the 
aerial bombs, the Metal Parts Furnace and incinerator are 
apparently being tested with inert liquids.  The second train 
(smaller caliber munitions) is expected to be operational in 
the summer of 2008.  At Leonidovka, infrastructure 
construction is well under way and Russia expects to begin 
testing operations with live agent in June 2008.  At 
Shchuch'ye, Russia highlighted the changes made to the 
implementing agreement, with a pointed remark about "American 
responsibility."  Russia also indicated progress being made 
at Pochep and continuing discussions with the UK and Canada 
on assistance at Khizner.  Finally, the Russia rep stressed 
the importance of launching the new facilities in order to 
meet the Phase III deadline of December 31, 2009. 
 
 
¶11. (U) Mr. Dale Ormond, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the 
Army for the Elimination of Chemical Weapons, presented the 
detailed U.S. update on destruction, highlighting the 
achievement of 45 percent destruction six months ahead of the 
deadline, and major operations at U.S. destruction 
facilities.  A State Party reported that it expects to 
complete destruction within its extended deadlines, barring 
any unforeseen mechanical problems or local resident 
activities to interfere with facility operations.  India 
noted that it is in a difficult period of destruction due to 
efforts to destroy heels in its bulk mustard containers. 
China and Japan each made statements regarding progress in 
planning for Abandoned Chemical Weapons destruction and 
summarizing excavation, packing and recovery efforts in the 
intersessional period. 
 
 
 
¶12. (U) Libya provided a two-part briefing on progress in 
conversion of Rabta I and II and plans for the new Rabta 
Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility.  The Libyan official 
thanked the U.S., UK and Italy for help in "charting the 
destruction course," and provided information consistent with 
previous details provided on plans for the destruction 
facility, to include an estimate that destruction could be 
completed a year ahead of the extended deadline.  On the 
conversion of the former Chemical Weapons Production Facility 
at Rabta, Libya presented an interesting slide show on future 
plans for production of pharmaceuticals to combat AIDS, 
tuberculosis and malaria in Africa.  Light on details on the 
actual progress in conversion, the briefing focused on the 
planned capacity for the new facility and the great impact 
the pharmaceuticals could have on the African continent.  The 
slides did include a few pictures of Rabta today, most 
notably one of the sandbag wall planted with palm trees, 
which was accompanied by a 
 pitch from the speaker to be allowed to retain this wall, 
originally scheduled for destruction as part of the 
conversion plan. 
 
 
--------------------------------- 
LIBYA MEETING (WITH UK AND ITALY) 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶13. (SBU) Del reps met with Dr. Hesnawy and other Libyan 
National Committee officials, and representatives from the UK 
and Italy to press Libya for more details on its plans for 
conversion of the former production facility at Rabta, the 
new chemical weapons destruction facility to be located 
nearby, and its national implementation in general.  Hesnawy 
provided information on destruction plans consistent with 
that provided to del rep during earlier discussions in The 
Hague, and some clarification of the actual reasons for 
delays in the Rabta conversion. 
 
¶14. (SBU) On plans for destruction, Hesnawy enumerated the 
reasons for choosing to transport Libya's CW stockpiles from 
Al Juffra to Rabta for destruction.  He expressed great 
confidence in the contractor selected, which he confirmed to 
be S.I.P.S.A. Engineering, a firm which apparently has 
Italian and Swiss branches, both of which Libya plans to work 
with.  He gave no reason for continued delays in signing the 
contract, but seemed to have no concerns about meeting the 
extended destruction deadlines well ahead of schedule. 
Hesnawy also confirmed plans to mix the agent with gas/oil 
during the transfer to ten isotainers prior to shipment, and 
indicated in response to more general UK/U.S. questions about 
project risk (intended to focus on commercial risk) that 
transportation might pose the biggest risk. 
 
¶15. (SBU) On conversion of the former CWPF at Rabta, Hesnawy 
admitted that delays have occurred because priority was 
placed on modifications and construction necessary for 
pharmaceutical production operations, and not on requirements 
for conversion in accordance with the CWC.  He denied that 
additional funding could have been helpful, and noted his 
displeasure at the EU statement to EC-50, which "noted with 
disappointment" the delays in conversion.  In response to a 
U.S. question, Hesnawy explained that on its third visit to 
Rabta, the Technical Secretariat requested itemization of 
equipment inside several additional commercial buildings. 
Although this should have been requested during earlier TS 
visits, it does not appear to have any significant impact on 
the schedule for conversion. 
 
¶16. (SBU) In a private meeting with the U.S., Dr. Hesnawy 
later asked for U.S. support in a future Libyan request for a 
change to its conversion plan that would allow it to retain 
the sandbag wall around the facility.  Hesnawy highlighted 
the damage that could be caused to sensitive equipment simply 
by the dust raised by tearing down the wall, and the 
protection the wall offered against desert winds and 
sandstorms.  As his colleague had already done during the 
 
 
destruction informals, Hesnawy noted the possibility of 
planting palm trees to alter the original, clearly military, 
appearance of the wall.  U.S. del told Hesnawy it will 
forward the request to Washington for consideration. 
 
¶17. (SBU) UK rep Chris Rampling also asked several questions 
related to national implementation.  In response to a 
question about assessed contributions, local delegate Mr. 
Gheton said that Libya had recently paid its 40,000 Euro to 
the OPCW.  Dr. Hesnawy noted that Libya's legislation has 
undergone legal review, but still has to go to the General 
People's Congress (National Assembly).  He also noted a 
problem with insufficient information being received by the 
National Committee, highlighting an incident in which 
approximately 700 tons of Schedule 2/3 chemicals were 
imported from Belgium and India without being declared.  The 
National Committee is still unclear as to which companies 
imported the chemicals (one of which Hesnawy identified as 
CAS 105-59-9: methyldiethanolamine), and for what purpose, 
but suspect based on the chemicals that they are intended for 
use in petroleum processing. 
 
¶18. (SBU) Finally, Rampling noted that there are "certain 
States Parties" with an interest in proving that Libya is not 
a successful case study in terms of renouncing a WMD program 
and joining/implementing the CWC.  Rampling stressed that it 
is important to show that Libya made the right decision in 
renouncing its program, and recommended continuing regular, 
detailed reporting to the Executive Council. 
 
 
------------------------------------ 
EC 50 - Director General's Statement 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶19. (U) Director General Pfirter opened the formal session of 
the Council on September 25, speaking at length on quite a 
number of topics.  The full text can be found on the OPCW 
external server under document number EC-50/DG.16.  He noted 
the full agenda for this session which he acknowledged as 
partly a result of the number of items remaining open from 
previous sessions.  Pfirter congratulated Albania on becoming 
the first possessor state to completely eliminate its entire 
chemical weapons stockpile.  He stated that as of August 31, 
2007 the total amount of Category 1 chemical weapons 
destroyed by Albania, a State Party, India, Russian 
Federation and United States of America was 33.88 percent of 
the total declared quantity of chemical weapons in this 
category.  The DG acknowledged the two Chemical Weapons 
Destruction Facilities (CWDF) currently operational in the 
Russian Federation - Kambarka and Maradykovsky.  He 
recognized the importance of the prompt commissioning of the 
units at Maradykovsky and the Rus 
sian commitment to completing the work early.  The DG further 
stated that the new site selection methodology will begin in 
January 2008 and will allow for more equitable site selection. 
 
¶20. (U) DG Pfirter called for all those States Parties that 
have not yet done so to fulfill their obligations to Article 
VII and expressed the Secretariat's commitment to providing 
assistance wherever necessary.  Pfirter praised the financial 
contributions of the EU and other States Parties that allowed 
the Secretariat to provide a number of courses on assistance 
and protection.  He noted that the subject of the OPCW office 
in Africa has been on the agenda for some time and he had 
directed the staff of the ICA division to develop a proposal 
for a program that would help accelerate progress towards 
universality and enhance national implementation in the 
region. (Note: The Programme for Africa appeared the next day 
for Council consideration.) 
 
¶21. (U) The DG noted the success of various tenth anniversary 
events, the Academic Forum and the Industry Protection Forum, 
and expressed his gratitude to Ambassador Javits for his 
contribution in organizing the upcoming event at Columbia 
University.  The zero nominal growth budget was commended by 
the DG as meeting the OPCW's objectives and he urged its 
 
 
acceptance by States Parties.  He also urged prompt payment 
of assessed contributions.  Finally, Pfirter advocated 
aligning OPCW HR practices with the UN common system in 
regard to lump sum home leave, education grants and paternity 
leave.  He expressed his gratitude to Saudi Arabia and St. 
Lucia for their contributions to the Scientific Advisory 
Board and encouraged other States Parties to provide 
expertise and financial support. 
 
-------------- 
GENERAL DEBATE 
-------------- 
 
¶22. (U) Debate started with Cuba (speaking on behalf of the 
"NAM CWC States Parties and China"), Portugal (speaking on 
behalf of the EU and a number of associated countries) and 
South Africa (speaking on behalf of African States Parties), 
before moving to individual national statements.  Many of the 
national statements from developing countries referenced 
Cuba's remarks and built on them.  Almost all statements 
expressed support for a zero nominal growth budget; most 
statements also congratulated Albania for being the first 
possessor state to fulfill its destruction obligations. 
Cuba, the African states, Thailand, China (in it's national 
statement) and Mexico underlined the importance of balance 
and appropriate allocations and called for more funds to be 
directed towards International Cooperation programs.  Several 
States Parties expressed disappointment in the slow progress 
in the implementation of Article VII; Russia described the 
failure of States Parties to implement legislation as the 
weak link in the " 
non-proliferation chain".  Mexico was proud to draw attention 
to its recent establishment of CANDESTI, the government 
entity which will act as the permanent National Authority in 
Mexico. 
 
¶23. (U) The new site selection methodology was praised by 
many States Parties as a step in the right direction.  Cuba 
and the African states called for the speedy appointment of a 
new facilitator to guide the elements of the methodology that 
still require attention.  South Africa (both in speaking on 
behalf of African states and in its national statement) 
welcomed the DG's initiative on the "Programme for Africa" 
and requested that the Organization take into consideration 
the special needs of Member States on the Continent, 
especially in terms of assistance and protection. 
 
¶24. (U) Mexico, China, Algeria and South Africa all stressed 
the importance of Article XI and the need to follow through 
on comprehensive implementation.  The Iranian Ambassador 
chose to ignore the notes which had been prepared for him and 
in his off-the-cuff speech called for a realistic action plan 
for the implementation of Article XI.  China also pointed out 
that to date there has been no destruction of Japanese 
abandoned chemical weapons in China and urged a heightened 
sense of urgency for their complete destruction.  Iran, 
Russia and Cuba stated their strong support for the work of 
the Host Country Committee, with Cuba inviting the Host 
Country to address issues in a more proactive and inclusive 
manner. 
 
------ 
BUDGET 
------ 
 
¶25. (U) Following grueling daily consultations during the EC 
and intense negotiations all day Friday with Iran, the EC 
adopted the 2008 Programme and Budget, including the DG's 
proposal to reallocate EUR 570,000 within Chapter I for 
additional training and equipment.  Since the excess EUR 
570,000 had been identified after revised estimates of U.S. 
and Russian destruction schedules, a number of countries 
(most vocally Iran and South Africa, but also Mexico) were 
intent on moving at least some of those funds  to Chapter II 
to support ICA activities.  A number of countries (mostly 
WEOG) agreed with leaving the whole amount in Chapter II but 
disagreed with the DG's proposed use, preferring to see the 
 
 
money spent on additional OCPF inspections.  During the 
course of consultations, most delegations decided to accept 
the DG's proposal as the best solution to reach consensus; 
Mexico signaled that it would accept the DG's proposal, 
leaving South Africa and Iran to come around.  Early 
interventions by some WEOG states 
to cut the budget rather than reallocate the funds faded 
toward consensus around the DG's proposal by the end of the 
week; Japan held out for the cut until Friday's final round 
when it, too, joined consensus. 
 
¶26. (U) With the help of the co-facilitators, the TS 
identified approximately EUR 30,000 in Chapter II that it 
agreed could be reallocated to ICA activities, specifically 
to support internships and research projects (South Africa's 
two main areas of interest).  However, Iran continued to 
employ obstructionist tactics but no concrete proposals to 
the bitter end, insisting that the budget remain open for 
debate until the CSP. 
 
¶27. (U) Amb. Javits played a pivotal role in securing the 
NAM's agreement to join consensus at the last moment on 
Friday night.  He proposed report language to allow 
interested States Parties to work with the TS in identifying 
ICA-related activities that could be funded through voluntary 
contributions.  However, EU member states almost derailed the 
process when a few questioned whether it might jeopardize the 
EU Joint Action or whether Brussels would agree to the 
additional report language.  At the magic hour of sundown 
during Ramadan, consensus language was reached and the budget 
approved. 
 
------------------------------------------- 
AGENDA ITEM FIVE - Status of implementation 
------------------------------------------- 
 
Sub-item 5(a): Detailed plans for destruction verification 
 
¶28. (U) Item 5.1: The Council considered amendments to the 
agreed detailed plan for verification of the destruction of 
chemical weapons at the Newport Chemical Agent Disposal 
Facility, Newport (EC-49/DEC/CRP.4,dated 12 April 2007), 
these documents were deferred to the next regular Session 
(EC-51) by the Russian delegation.  As no delegation, to 
include the Russian Federation, has offered comments or 
requests for revision on the Newport documents, this can be 
considered a response to U.S. deferral of the Maradykovsky 
documents. 
 
¶29. (SBU) Item 5.2: The Council considered amendments to the 
agreed detailed plan for verification of the destruction of 
Category 1 chemical weapons at Maradykovsky chemical weapons 
destruction facility, Kirovskaya Oblast, the Russian 
Federation (EC-49/DEC/CRP.8, dated 18 May 2007), and decided 
to consider them further at its next regular Session (EC-51). 
 Likely due to a desire to defer consideration of the 
documents until after the incinerator (second stage) is 
operational, the Russian delegation suggested several times 
to the U.S. that deferral without debate would be the most 
constructive way to proceed.  Del held to its position that 
discussion in the plenary was necessary, and voiced support 
for the DG's statement from EC-49, as articulating the 
requirements for second stage treatment before destruction 
could be considered complete.  (Support was echoed by France, 
Germany, the UK and Chile.) 
 
¶30. (SBU) Russia continues to insist that CW destruction is 
complete after the first stage, highlighting a fundamental 
difference in interpretation of the Convention that may prove 
difficult to overcome if the U.S. insists on seeking 
assurances of second stage destruction under Article IV. 
Although the usual voices on destruction (UK, France, 
Germany) actually sparked this debate with their desire to 
approve an acceptable form of the Maradykovsky documents as 
soon as possible, the U.S. took its traditional role as 
interlocutor with the Russian delegation, and the week ended 
in a stalemate on the broader issue of end point of 
 
 
destruction.  Allied delegations agreed that this topic 
should be discussed further in Berlin on October 25th.  With 
the exception of the aforementioned delegations, there seemed 
to be little to no concern across the regional groups at the 
implications of approving the Maradykovsky documents in their 
current form. 
 
¶31. (SBU) Russia does not appear to feel any pressure to 
alter the text of its documents, or to accept any draft 
decision language that defines destruction as occurring after 
the second stage or refers to verification under Article IV. 
Del recommends Washington consider a way ahead in advance of 
the upcoming CWC meeting in Berlin, and will work with local 
delegations to assess the level of support for any possible 
efforts. 
 
¶32. (U) Item 5.3: The Council considered amendments to the 
agreed detailed plan for verification of the destruction of 
chemical weapons at the Pine Bluff Binary Destruction 
Facility (PBBDF), Arkansas (EC-49/DEC/CRP.8, dated 18 May 
2007) and these documents were deferred to the next regular 
session (EC-51) by the Russian delegation, despite del's 
efforts in the plenary to highlight the relatively 
minor/administrative nature of the changes to the PBBDF 
verification plan.  In a clear response to deferral of its 
Maradykovsky documents, Russia cited vague concerns about the 
possible implications of any changes, no matter how minor, 
and refused to break the Pine Bluff documents free from the 
reciprocal deferral of destruction documents. 
 
 
Sub-item 5(b): Conversion of CWPF 
 
¶33. (U) Item 5.4: The Council noted a national paper by the 
Russian Federation entitled "Information on the Measures 
Being Undertaken to Complete Conversion of the Former 
Facility for Production of VX-Type Substance and Filling It 
into Munitions, Novocheboksarsk (EC-49/NAT.3, dated 13 June 
2007). 
 
¶34. (U) Item 5.5: The Council noted a national paper by the 
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya entitled "Information on the Measures 
Being Undertaken to Complete Conversion of the Former 
Chemical Weapons Production Facilities Rabta Pharmaceutical 
Factory 1 and Rabta Pharmaceutical Factory 2, Libyan Arab 
Jamahiriya (EC-50/NAT.5, dated 10 September 2007). 
 
Sub-item 5(c): Progress in meeting revised deadlines 
 
35.(U) Item 5.7:  The Council noted a Note by the 
Director-General on the progress made by those States Parties 
that have been granted extensions of deadlines for the 
destruction of their Category 1 chemical weapons 
(EC-50/DG.12, dated 11 September 2007). 
 
¶36. (SBU) Item 5.8:  The Council noted a Note by the 
Director-General on the destruction by Albania of its 
Category 1 chemical weapons stockpiles (EC-50/DG.1, dated 4 
July 2007), and another such Note on the completion by 
Albania of the destruction of its chemical weapons stockpiles 
(EC-50/DG.2, dated 11 July 2007).  It also noted the 
information Albania had provided in this regard (EC-50 
NAT.6/Rev.1, dated 26 September 2007), but only after Russia 
insisted Albania remove a paragraph referring to their 
destruction having been "in accordance with the Convention," 
citing the inconsistency of this statement with the fact that 
Albania had been unable to complete its destruction by the 
approved extended deadlines. 
 
¶37. (U) Item 5.9: The Council considered and noted a national 
paper by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya entitled "Report to the 
Executive Council on CW destruction Activities during the 
Extension Period after 29 April 2007 (29 April 2007-30 June 
2007)" (EC-50/NAT.4, dated 23 July 2007, and Cor.1, dated 13 
August 2007)." 
 
¶38. (U) Item 5.10: The Council considered and noted a 
 
 
national paper by A State Party entitled "Report to the 
Executive Council on CW destruction Activities during the 
Extension Period after 29 April 2007 (29 April-30 June 2007)" 
(EC-50/HP/NAT.2, dated 23 July 2007). 
 
¶39. (U) Item 5.11: The Council considered and noted a 
national paper by India entitled "Report to the Executive 
Council on CW destruction Activities during the Extension 
Period after 29 April 2007 (29 April-30 June 2007)" 
(EC-50/HP/NAT.3, dated 25 July 2007). 
 
¶40. (SBU) Item 5.12: The Council considered and noted a 
national paper by the U.S. entitled "Report to the Executive 
Council - Destruction Activity As of 30 June 2007" 
(EC-50/NAT.3, dated 27 July 2007).  After a wandering and 
groundless intervention about the inconsistencies between the 
U.S. national paper, the DG's suggested modalities for 
reporting (EC-49/DG.1) and the CSP decision approving the 
U.S. extension (CSP-11/DEC.17), Iran finally agreed on Friday 
to note the U.S. paper subject to the inclusion of a chapeau 
paragraph about possessor state obligations in the report 
language. 
 
¶41. (U) Item 5.13: The Council considered and noted a 
national paper by the Russian Federation entitled "Report on 
Chemical Weapons Destruction Activity at the End of the 
Current 90-Days Period after 29 April 2007 (As at 30 June 
2007)" (EC-50/P/NAT.1, dated 24 July 2007). 
 
¶42. (U) Item 5.14: The Council considered and noted a 
national paper by China entitled "Progress Report on the 
Issue of Japanese Abandoned Chemical Weapons in China" 
(EC-50//nat.1, dated 28 July 2007), and a national paper by 
Japan entitled "The Current Status of ACW Projects in China" 
(EC-50/NAT.2*, dated 24 July 2007). 
 
Sub-item 5(d): Progress made on Article VII 
 
¶43. (SBU) The EC noted the DG's Note on status of 
implementation of Article VII (EC-50/DG.10, dated 7 September 
2007).  The report language for this item refers to the 
various reports made regarding progress and recommends (as 
per C-11/DEC.4, dated 6 December 2006) that work continue on 
a decision for CSP-12 to recommend further actions.  The 
facilitator has already issued a draft text for this 
decision, based on a proposal from the U.S. 
 
Sub-item 5(e): Status of implementation of Article XI 
 
¶44. (SBU) The EC noted the DG's report on the status of 
implementation of Article XI (EC-48/DG.12, dated 5 March 2007 
and Corr. 1, dated 8 March 2007).  The report language for 
this item was carefully crafted to only encourage further 
consultations with the goal of recommendations for CSP-12 - 
no mention of an action plan. 
 
Sub-item 5(f): Universality 
 
¶45. (U) Items 5.17 and 5.18.  The Council noted the annual 
report on the implementation of the action plan from 30 
September 2006 to 331 August 2007 (EC-50/DG.14 C-12/DG.4, 
dated 14 September 2007) without discussion. 
 
 
Sub-item 5(g): Facility agreements 
 
¶46. (U) Item 5.23: The Council considered and approved a 
facility arrangement with the United Kingdom at the converted 
chemical weapons production facility located at Randle Island 
Landfill Site (formerly ICI Randle), Astmoor, Runcorn 
Cheshire (EC-48/DEC/CRP.3/Rev.2, dated 25 September 2007). 
 
¶47. (U) Item 5.24: The Council considered and approved a 
facility arrangement with the United Kingdom at the former 
CWPF located at Valley Site (formerly ICI Valley), Rhydymwny, 
Mold, North Wales (EC-48/DEC/CRP.4/Rev.2, dated 25 September 
2007). 
 
 
 
¶48. (U) Item 5.25: The Council considered and approved a 
facility arrangement with the United Kingdom at the converted 
CWPF located at CRP Portreath (formerly Chemical Defence 
Establishment, Nancekuke), Portreath Redruth, Cornwall 
(EC-48/DEC/CRP.8/Rev.2,dated 25 September 2007). 
 
¶49. (U) Items 5.26 and 5.27:  The related amendments to the 
agreed detailed plan for verification of the destruction of 
chemical weapons at the Newport Chemical Agent Disposal 
Facility (EC-49/DEC/CRP.3, dated 12 April 2007) were again 
deferred at Russia's request until the next regular session. 
 
¶50. (U) Item 5.28: The facility agreement with the Russian 
Federation located in Maradykovsky, Kirovskaya 
(EC-49/DEC/CRP.5, dated 17 April 2007) was deferred at U.s. 
request until the next regular session. (See paragraph above 
on Item 5.2.) 
 
¶51. (U) Items 5.29 and 5.30: The Council further considered 
modifications to the Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal 
Facility (EC-49/S/2, dated 14 May 2007), and at the Pine 
Bluff Binary Destruction Facility (EC-49/S/4, dated 18 May 
2007).  Both these agreements were deferred by the Russian 
delegation until the next regular session.  (See paragraph 
above on Item 5.3.) 
 
¶52. (SBU) After being deferred in EC-49, this EC approved the 
U.S. Schedule 2 facility agreement (Ciba) (EC-49/DEC/CRP.11, 
dated 8 June 2007) without discussion.  Ambassador and 
delreps had earlier requested that the Russian delegation not 
hold this first industrial agreement hostage with the other 
U.S. documents; they did not. 
 
¶53. (U) Item 5.32:  The Council noted a Note by the DG 
updating it on Schedule 2 facility agreements (EC-50/DG.9, 
dated 5 September 2007). 
 
Sub-item 5(h):  2006 Verification Implementation Report 
 
¶54. (U) Further to its consideration at EC-49, the Council 
considered and noted the 2006 VIR and associated documents 
without discussion. 
 
 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
ITEMS SIX AND SEVEN: OIO and External Auditor Reports 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶55. (U) The Council noted both the DG's report on the 
implementation of the recommendations of the Office of 
Internal Oversight (item 6.1) and the TS's note on the status 
of implementation of the recommendations of the External 
Auditor (item 6.2). 
 
¶56. (U) The Council also noted the annual report of the OIO 
for 2006, with no comments being made about the report. 
 
¶57. (U) Facilitator Takayuki Kitagawa (Japan) made oral 
reports to the Council on items six and seven. 
 
---------------------------- 
ITEM EIGHT: Office in Africa 
---------------------------- 
 
¶58. (SBU) During the EC, the DG released his proposal for a 
"Programme for Africa."  Initial report language circulated 
by the Africa Group warmly welcomed the proposal; however, 
the report language was toned down after Delreps engaged 
South Africa and Algeria and offered alternative language. 
In the end, the Council welcomed the DG's initiative (rather 
than the proposal itself), noted the need for a facilitator 
to guide consultations, asked the TS to provide budgetary 
implications for any additional activities, and also ensured 
the inclusion of donors and other interested parties in 
further discussions on the "Programme." 
 
 
¶59. (SBU) During the adoption of the report language, the DG 
admitted that the "Programme" was essentially a repackaging 
of current efforts in Africa and did not include any new 
initiatives.  He also further noted that any new activities 
would have to be funded through voluntary contributions. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
ITEM NINE: Administrative and Financial Matters 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶60. (U) Item 9.2: The Council noted the Medium Term Plan. 
 
¶61. (U) Item 9.3: The Council approved Guatemala's request 
for a multi-year payment plan for its outstanding assessed 
contributions.  Amb. Rodriguez Mancia (Guatemala) expressed 
her country's thanks for the Council's decision. 
 
¶62. (U) Item 9.4: The Council noted and forwarded to the CSP 
a report on the status of implementation of agreed multi-year 
payment plans. 
 
¶63. (U) Item 9.5: The Council noted the TS's note on the 
status in 2007 of implementation of the recommendations of 
the External Auditor. 
 
¶64. (U) Item 9.6: The Council noted the audited financial 
statements for 2006. 
 
¶65. (U) Item 9.7: The Council forwarded to the CSP the DG's 
report on income and expenditure for 2007. 
 
¶66. (U) Item 9.8: The Council noted the DG's note on the cash 
situation and use of the Working Capital Fund for 2007.  The 
UK, France and Germany all made interventions calling on 
States Parties to pay their assessed contributions promptly 
and in full; however, there was no direct mention of the U.S. 
 
¶67. (U) Item 9.9: Del did not block consensus, and the 
Council recommended to the CSP the proposed alignment of OPCW 
Staff Regulation 3.2(a) with the corresponding UN Staff 
Regulation. 
 
¶68. (U) Item 9.10: Germany intervened, noting its concern 
with the DG's proposal on adopting lump-sum payment for 
travel-related entitlements.  Del rep also noted U.S. 
concerns and proposed that the DG's plan be adopted for a 
one-year trial period; the DG countered that a two-year trial 
was necessary in order to evaluate the change after it ran 
for a full financial year.  Japan echoed the U.S. and German 
comments.  The Council agreed to the two-year trial period 
(2008-2009) and noted the DG's note. 
 
¶69. (U) Items 9.11 and 9.12: The Council noted the DG's note 
on the report of Security Audit Team IV (SAT-IV).  SAT-IV 
Chair Yonosuke Haranda (Japan) gave an oral report to the 
Council, which was followed by the DG encouraging States 
Parties to support SAT-V both politically and through the 
nomination qualified auditors.  (NOTE: The deadline for 
nominating auditors for SAT-V is November 30, 2007.) 
 
------------------------------------ 
ITEM TEN: ABAF Report and Membership 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶70. (U) The Council noted both the 23rd ABAF Report and the 
DG's note with responses to the ABAF's recommendations (item 
10.1).  The Council also noted the resignations of Gianpaolo 
Malpaga and John Fox and approved the appointment of Mary 
Rios (vice Fox). 
 
Item 11:  Reports of the Scientific Advisory Board 
 
¶71. (U) Further to its consideration at EC-49, the Council 
considered and noted the reports of the Ninth and Tenth 
sessions of the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB-9/1, dated 14 
February 2007 and SAB-10/1, dated 23 May 2007 and Corr.1, 
dated 22 June 2007), and the Director General's note on the 
 
 
same (EC-49/DG.16, dated 21 June 2007). 
 
------------------------------------ 
ITEM TWELVE: Report on EC Activities 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶72. (U) The Council approved and submitted to the CSP its 
draft report on the performance of its activities (covering 8 
July 2006 to 29 June 2007). 
 
--------------------------------- 
ITEM FOURTEEN: Any other business 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶73. (U) The Council approved an addendum to the report by the 
DG on the credentials of representatives of members to the 
Council.  Amb. Lak (Netherlands) announced an open meeting 
for delegates to discuss the 10-14 September 2007 Deft 
challenge inspection.  The meeting will be held in the third 
week in October to discuss lessons learned and issues with 
the challenge inspection mechanism. 
 
¶74. (U) The Director General, who returned from New York for 
the last day of the EC, reported on the high level meeting in 
honor of the tenth anniversary of the CWC held at the United 
Nations on September 27.  The Council welcomed his oral 
report at the final action of the Session. 
 
 
BEIK SENDS. 
Arnall