VZCZCXYZ0010
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHTC #0288/01 1261740
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 061740Z MAY 09
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2809
INFO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHMFIUU/DTRA ALEX WASHINGTON DC//OSAC PRIORITY

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 000288 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR ISN/CB, VCI/CCA, L/NPV, IO/MPR 
SECDEF FOR OSD/GSA/CN,CP> 
JOINT STAFF FOR DD PMA-A FOR WTC 
COMMERCE FOR BIS (BROWN AND DENYER) 
NSC FOR LUTES 
WINPAC FOR WALTER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM PREL CWC
SUBJECT: CWC: WRAP-UP FOR OPCW 56TH EXECUTIVE COUNCIL 
SESSION, APRIL 21-24, 2009 (EC-56) 
 
REF: A. THE HAGUE 286 
     ¶B. THE HAGUE 287 
     ¶C. THE HAGUE 179 
     ¶D. THE HAGUE 236 
     ¶E. STATE 38618 
 
(U) This is CWC-26-09 
 
------- 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) Executive Council (EC) 56 was 
characterized by a high interest in the search for 
a new Director-General (DG), an extensive agenda of 
routine business and increasingly obstructive 
behavior by the South African delegation.  Iraq's 
presentation of its former chemical weapons (CW) 
program to the EC destruction informals, as well as 
the U.S. and UK supplementary information on CW 
recovered and destroyed in Iraq, caused a stir at 
the beginning of the week (see report by septel). 
The Council discussed the DG selection process at 
length both in formal sessions and in the 
corridors.  Despite a push by a few states for a 
rotation of the DG position through the five 
regional groups, the EC held to the step-by-step 
process begun during the previous session.  The 
next step is an invitation to all candidates to 
address EC-57 in July. 
 
¶2. (SBU) The Council deferred once again the 
Secretariat's recommendations for future 
verification of the UK's converted chemical weapons 
production facility (CWPF) after ten years.  The EC 
also deferred the Secretariat's proposed general 
guidelines on continued verification measures of 
converted CWPFs.  It did, however, note the 
Director-General's Note on a converted Russian CWPF 
after ten years.  After several bilateral meetings, 
the U.S. and Iran agreed to approve the U.S. 
Schedule 1 Facility Agreement and to approve and 
note the changes in a previously-approved Iranian 
Facility Agreement (now an Arrangement) that had 
been deferred at the previous two sessions. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) Key EC issues are detailed below, 
followed by a synopsis of the Director-General's 
opening statement and the general debate, the 
debate on the DG selection process, and lists of 
the agenda items approved (para 34), noted (para 
35) and deferred to the next session (para 36). 
Meetings with the Iraqi delegation as well as a 
meeting with the OPCW Legal Advisor on U.S. 
recoveries in Iraq were reported in refs A and B, 
respectively.  The informal meeting on the status 
of destruction on April 20 and other meetings on 
the margins of the EC will be reported separately. 
End Summary. 
 
--------- 
DG Search 
--------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) The "buzz" at EC-56 was all about the 
search for a new Director-General.  The Turkish 
candidate, Ahmet Uzumcu, visited The Hague for two 
days during the session and met with numerous 
delegations individually and at a lunch hosted by 
the Turkish Ambassador (see septel on the U.S. 
meeting with him).  Deputy Director-General John 
Freeman, also a candidate, kept a low profile 
outside the Council meetings, although he took his 
usual seat on the podium for the plenary sessions. 
Many delegations discussed the awkwardness of 
having Freeman in the center of the Technical 
Secretariat (TS) throughout the months before the 
 
 
choice is made in the fall.  The other local 
candidate, Ambassador Benchaa Dani of Algeria, is 
reportedly holding a series of dinners and meetings 
with delegations; U.S. Rep met with him at his 
embassy (see septel report). 
 
¶5. (SBU) The EC Chairperson wrote and distributed a 
report on her consultations since EC-55.  She 
opened debate on the issue (and her report) on 
Wednesday afternoon, April 22 (detailed below), but 
managed to avoid the effort by a few delegations 
led by South Africa and Pakistan to edit her 
report.  On April 23, she adjourned the afternoon 
plenary to an informal meeting to discuss report 
language on the issue. Delegations argued over 
language through the evening, agreeing in the end 
to a convoluted single sentence that reaffirmed the 
process begun during EC-55, and indicated that all 
candidates would be invited to appear at EC-57 in 
July, with the modalities for their interaction 
with the Council to be discussed further in 
consultations.  The UK urged that all States 
Parties with candidates, or those with an interest 
in hearing from the candidates, should be invited 
to attend the next session, but found no support 
for this idea among Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) 
delegations despite their calls for transparency in 
the consultations. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Del Comment:  That a clear invitation to 
candidates could not be agreed does not bode well 
for future consultations.  Certain delegations 
(South Africa and Iran) appear to be trying to hold 
up the process deliberately, probably to send the 
list of candidates to the Conference of the States 
Parties in December for a vote, where they see an 
advantage in numbers.   End Comment. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
Schedule 1 Facility Agreements -- U.S. and Iran 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶7. (U) The EC considered and approved the U.S. 
Schedule 1 facility agreement that had been 
deferred by the Iran at the last two sessions.  The 
EC also noted the two TS notes on amendments and 
modifications to the Iranian Schedule 1 facility 
agreement.  At the insistence of the Iranian 
delegation, both the U.S and Iranian documents were 
presented to the Council for consideration as a 
package.  U.S. Rep Mikulak then made a brief 
intervention stating that modifications to the 
Iranian agreement should not set a precedent for 
future agreements.  Iran responded with a similar 
statement. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Delreps met bilaterally with the Iranian 
delegation on three separate occasions outside of 
the plenary to further discuss U.S. concerns with 
the proposed modifications on sampling and analysis 
(section 7.4) to the Iranian agreement.  In 
particular, Delreps attempted to obtain feedback on 
the U.S. non-paper suggesting edits to section 7.4 
to emphasize the Inspected State Party's obligation 
to provide an alternative means to fulfill the 
inspection mandate in the event sampling and 
analysis activities are limited or unable to be 
conducted.  Iran, however, saw no value in 
accepting U.S. changes and further had no 
instructions to do so, citing previous arguments 
presented to Delreps during EC-55 (ref C). 
Qpresented to Delreps during EC-55 (ref C). 
 
¶9. (SBU) Acknowledging the difficulty in attempting 
to modify language in the Iranian agreement that 
was copied verbatim from the U.S. agreement, 
Delreps saw no long-term benefit to once again have 
these documents deferred.  In fact, the broader 
 
risk of potentially damaging the credibility of the 
EC process in reviewing and approving such 
documents loomed as a much larger problem that 
outweighed any potential benefit gained in 
attempting to force an unlikely change in Iran's 
position.  Del therefore did not insist on the 
U.S.-proposed changes. 
 
¶10. (U) Delreps recommend that Washington and Del 
coordinate closely on future facility agreements to 
ensure proposed language would be acceptable if 
used by other member states. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
Director-General's Statement and the General Debate 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
 
¶11. (U) Chairperson Tomova (Slovakia) officially 
opened EC-56 on the morning of April 21.  The four 
EC Vice-Chairpersons then briefed the EC on work 
undertaken during the intersessional period in 
their respective portfolios.  Ambassador Benchaa 
Dani (Algeria), Vice-Chair for chemical industry 
and other Article VI issues, called for a 
facilitator on site selection methodology for other 
chemical production facilities (OCPFs).  Iranian 
delegate Hassan Vejdani briefly reported that no 
consultations had taken place on legal, 
organizational, and other issues. 
 
¶12. (U) Director-General Rogelio Pfirter then 
delivered his usual tour d'horizon.  Highlights 
included: 
 
- Following the Dominican Republic's accession as 
the 187th State Party, the Bahamas would be just 
around the corner (Note: The Bahamas deposited its 
accession documents before the end of the week.) 
- He emphasized the importance of Iraq joining the 
Convention given Iraq's history.  Iraq's 
declaration poses a unique implementation challenge 
and will require a great deal of assistance. 
- The TS is developing an OCPF seminar to be held 
in conjunction with the annual National Authorities 
meeting in December but is looking for voluntary 
contributions from member states. 
- The revised Handbook on Chemicals is now 
available, along with a revised version of the 
Declarations Handbook, which has been translated 
into all official languages. 
- Noting that the last challenge inspection field 
exercise was held in 2007, the DG noted the 
importance of these exercises and that the TS would 
be seeking a host for a field exercise in 2010. 
- Following the recent Istanbul universality 
workshop, the TS will be sending technical 
assistance visits to both Israel (in June) and 
Egypt (no date yet). 
- The DG made an appeal for States Parties to pay 
their assessed contributions on time, as a matter 
of concern and urgency. 
- He announced that the draft budget to come out in 
July will once again have zero nominal growth.  He 
indicated that this was partly dependent on States 
Parties paying their assessed contributions on time 
and repeated his call for payments as soon as 
possible. 
- In order to monitor the ongoing financial crisis, 
the TS Investment Committee has been meeting every 
other week. 
 
¶13. (U) The general debate included a large number 
of common themes, including praise for India for 
completing its CW destruction on time, and 
welcoming the Dominican Republic as the newest 
Qwelcoming the Dominican Republic as the newest 
member state.  Many statements recognized Iraq's 
declaration of its former CW program as an 
 
important milestone.  The usual calls were made for 
timely completion of CW destruction efforts, as 
well as full implementation of Articles X and XI. 
Some statements urged more progress to be made in 
the industry cluster, as well as pleas for 
volunteers to facilitate consultations on the OCPF 
site selection methodology and on Article XI.  Most 
noted the importance of having a consensus 
candidate for the next Director-General. 
 
¶14. (U) With regard to the DG search, differences 
emerged in several of the statements.  The European 
Union called for an open, simple and transparent 
process, as did the U.S.  The NAM and the African 
Group called for further consultations to lay out 
"modalities" and procedural steps to ensure a 
transparent, all-inclusive process.  Brazil called 
for a review of qualifications of candidates 
without inflicting complex selection modalities. 
Saudi Arabia urged equitable representation.  The 
African Group also specifically called for the DG 
to come from Africa and encouraged support for the 
Algerian candidate, Ambassador Dani.  Dani used 
Algeria's national statement to introduce his own 
candidacy in flowery French. 
 
¶15. (SBU) Chinese Ambassador Zhang Jun stated that 
the selection process should set the norm for 
future candidates by outlining "guiding 
principles...carried out statutorily, (with) 
psychological and procedural preparations...fully 
made."  (Del note: This caused some stir among 
delegations.  Later, a Chinese delegate told Delrep 
that the "psychological" reference in their 
national statement was not about the candidates, 
but rather warning delegations that they should be 
mentally ready to consider other possibilities -- 
i.e., voting -- if consensus is not reached.  End 
note.) 
 
¶16. (U) The Iraqi national statement outlined 
Iraq's historical overview of its accession 
process, highlighting the assistance provided by 
the U.S., UK, Japan and the TS.  Iraq maintained 
that the security situation would not prevent Iraq 
from destroying its CW but asked for assistance 
from its friends in this endeavor.  The statement 
also noted how some Iraqi CW material had been 
looted during the conflicts, while others had been 
buried, creating environmental and safety concerns 
that will require international assistance. 
 
¶17. (U) With regard to Iraq, the U.S. pointed to 
the need for forward-looking assistance to Iraq in 
both destroying its CW stockpile and implementing 
the rest of the Convention.  India stressed the 
need to consider the unique circumstances in Iraq 
when deciding on a fair deadline for CW 
destruction.   Iran focused considerably on Iraq 
and, while welcoming Iraq's accession, highlighted 
the aggression of the former Iraqi regime against 
the Iranian and Iraqi populations.  Iran also noted 
that perpetrators should not enjoy impunity and 
that states whose nationals or companies were 
involved in the transfer of chemicals and equipment 
to Iraq's chemical weapons program should be 
brought to justice.  Iran offered any requisite 
assistance to Iraq with implementing the Convention 
and destroying its CW stockpile.  Serbia welcomed 
Qand destroying its CW stockpile.  Serbia welcomed 
Iraq's presentations on its past program as well as 
the U.S. and UK explanations of activities in Iraq. 
 
¶18. (U) The Pakistani and Russian national 
statements referred to the U.S. and UK statements 
at the destruction informals the day before 
concerning recovery of CW munitions in Iraq. 
Russian Ambassador Kiril Gevorgian stated that 
 
Russia would be "thoroughly examining all aspects 
of this matter" and reserved its right to return to 
it at a later stage.  On Russia's own destruction 
efforts, Gevorgian contended that Russia faces an 
"extremely complex challenge" to complete the 
destruction of its entire stockpile in 2012. 
 
¶19. (U) China drew attention to its most important 
issue: Japanese abandoned CW (ACW).  Ambassador 
Zhang argued that ACW pose a grave security concern 
to the Chinese population.  With the looming 2012 
destruction deadline fast approaching, Zhang 
criticized Japan for failing to even begin their 
destruction efforts of ACW in China.  Zhang also 
called for industry inspections to be "pursued in 
keeping with the principle of fairness and 
reasonableness." 
 
¶20. (U) Of particular note on the destruction issue 
was Brazil's renewed call for the Council to 
address the feasibility of the 2012 deadline being 
met by possessor states sooner rather than later, 
and that a new specific item should be added to the 
EC agenda on this matter. 
 
¶21. (U) Using even stronger language than they had 
at EC-55 in February, both the African Group and 
NAM again condemned Israel's use of white 
phosphorus in Gaza in January and called for 
international investigations into the matter. 
 
¶22. (U) Brazil, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia and 
Serbia commented on Article X issues, noting the 
need to identify the resources to be placed at the 
disposal of the DG for emergency assistance and the 
removal of transfer restrictions on the provision 
of protective technology and equipment.  Brazil 
noted that it would organize the first Assistance 
and Protection Course on Chemical Emergency 
Response for the GRULAC (Latin America and 
Caribbean Group) region. 
 
¶23. (U) Echoing the NAM statement, India, Iran and 
Saudi Arabia all noted the lack of progress in full 
implementation of Article XI, and called for the 
lifting of transfer restrictions and development of 
an action plan. 
 
¶24. (U) Concerning industry cluster issues, several 
countries recommended that the Council appoint 
facilitators for the remaining two open 
consultations.  India maintained its view of 
concerns of distribution methodology and 
enhancement of OCPF declarations, while the United 
States cited the need for OCPF inspections to be 
focused on relevant sites. 
 
---------------------------------- 
Debate on the DG Selection Process 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶25. (U) On April 22, EC Chairperson Tomova opened 
the plenary discussion on the appointment of the 
Director-General.  She reported that she had 
carried out consultations that included all 
geographic regions and written a report (EC-56/3 
dated 16 April 2009) on those consultations. 
Because of the subject matter, many ambassadors 
participated, unusual for a Wednesday afternoon. 
 
¶26. (U) Several states made interventions about the 
need for a regional rotation when selecting the new 
Director-General, and called for guidelines for the 
process (Pakistan, Malaysia, Libya, Iran and 
India).  Others responded that having a regional 
rotation was in direct conflict with choosing the 
most qualified person for the position (UK, 
Qmost qualified person for the position (UK, 
 
Germany, Italy, Spain, France, Cuba, Chile, 
Ireland, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Sri Lanka, 
Japan, Colombia).  As had happened at EC-55, the 
Latin American states came out forcefully in 
support of the Chairperson and the current open, 
step-by-step process, as did the EU and WEOG 
countries.  There was general agreement on the 
importance of working by consensus on this issue. 
 
¶27. (U) Pakistan, South Africa and Iran requested 
that the text of the Chairperson's report be 
changed; all three objected to paragraphs implying 
agreement by the regional groups.  The delegates 
contended that the regional group coordinators were 
not acting on behalf of their groups when they met 
with the Chair and thus had no mandate for 
"agreements."  Others countered that the 
Chairperson's report was her own, reflecting her 
consultations, and the report did not require the 
Council's concurrence. 
 
¶28. (U) Most delegations agreed that the 
intersessional consultations were important, 
praising the Chairperson for her good work, and 
stating that the selection process should continue 
in an open and transparent manner.  The Council 
agreed that consultations should continue under the 
new Chairperson (Mexican Ambassador Jorge Lomonaco) 
in May.  Lomonaco intervened toward the end to 
state that he had taken careful note of all the 
views expressed, thanked Ambassador Tomova for her 
excellent start and considerable efforts in 
launching the process, and noted what a large job 
he would be filling. 
 
¶29. (U) Tomova addressed the Council at the end of 
the debate, saying that it was important to hear 
all points of view and that the discussions need to 
continue.  She then closed discuss by moving on to 
the next agenda item. 
 
¶30. (SBU) On April 23, during formal discussion of 
the draft report for the Council session, South 
Africa, Pakistan, Iran and India objected to 
language that the Council had "received" the 
Chairperson's report on the appointment of the 
Director-General.  After inconclusive discussion in 
the plenary, Tomova moved the discussion to a small 
room with interested parties.  In a standing-room- 
only setting, the delegates from South Africa and 
Pakistan, with some support from Iran (surprisingly 
represented by only their new, junior delegate) and 
India, resisted language acknowledging the 
Chairperson's report and language that clearly 
invited all candidates for the DG position to come 
to EC-56.  These delegations pushed for ongoing 
consultations to address the "modalities" for their 
appearance (how long they might speak, topics they 
might address, whether there would be an 
opportunity for questions, etc.).  After long hours 
of circuitous arguments, the informal meeting came 
up with a convoluted sentence that all could 
(reluctantly) agree on.  It called for continuing 
consultations but also noted that candidates would 
be invited to present themselves to the July 
session of the EC. 
 
------------------------------------ 
Administrative and Financial Matters 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶31. (SBU) South African delegate Marthinus van 
Schalkwyk insisted that a number of administrative 
QSchalkwyk insisted that a number of administrative 
and financial documents be deferred for 
consideration to EC-57.  Despite two consultations 
on the two Office of Internal Oversight (OIO) 
reports, van Schalkwyk used his absence from both 
 
meetings as an excuse for deferral.  Additionally, 
he indicated that action should be postponed until 
the Advisory Body on Administrative and Financial 
Matters (ABAF) considered the reports and provided 
their substantive comments to the Council.  (Del 
Comment:  Van Schalkwyk was one of three new 
African nominees to the ABAF approved at EC-55. 
His increasingly pugnacious behavior does not bode 
well for the ABAF.  End Comment.) 
 
---------- 
SAB Report 
---------- 
 
¶32. (U) Despite having objected to noting the 
Scientific Advisory Board's (SAB) report during 
previous EC session, Iran remained quiet and let 
the report go through.  However, after Chairperson 
Tomova's report on the meeting of governmental 
experts to consider the SAB report, Iran requested 
the EC-56 report include language taken directly 
from the Second Review Conference (RevCon) on the 
DG making best use of the SAB's expertise.  Despite 
repeated comments by the DG that he plans to issue 
a paper on improving the functioning of the SAB, 
Iran insisted on inserting a lengthy quotation 
which included a reference to the use of 
governmental experts.  After informal consultations 
between Tomova and the Iranian delegation, Iran 
finally agreed to simply refer to their desired 
RevCon passage rather than inserting it verbatim. 
 
------------------------------- 
Any Other Business -- UK Report 
------------------------------- 
 
¶33. (U) Under AOB, the United Kingdom gave an 
update on an issue raised in the informal session 
before EC-44 (March 2006) on a Schedule 2 facility 
that had raised uncertainty during an inspection. 
The UK recognized a problem and conducted a 
criminal investigation which brought charges 
against two directors of the company and resulted 
in the first prosecution under the UK's Chemical 
Weapons Act of 1996.  Both directors were convicted 
and fined.  The UK National Authority reviewed its 
implementation regime following this case and has 
developed a number of lessons learned.  (A copy of 
the UK statement has been sent to ISN/CB). 
 
-------------- 
Items Approved 
-------------- 
 
¶34. (U) The following items were approved: 
 
EC-56/DEC.3  Facility agreement with the United 
States regarding on-site inspections at a Schedule 
1 facility. 
 
EC-56/DEC.4  Amendments to the facility agreement 
with Iran for a Schedule 1 protective purposes 
facility.  (Del Note:  The two associated TS notes 
are listed below under "Items Noted."  End Note.) 
 
EC-56/DEC.1 and EC-56/DG.2  Lists of new validated 
data for the OPCW Central Analytical Database 
(OCAD). 
 
EC-56/DEC.2  Agreement between the OPCW and the UAE 
on privileges and immunities. 
 
Appointment to ABAF of Xiong Shuilong (China), vice 
Gao Huijun, and Andrei Vitalievitch Kovalenko 
(Russia), vice Vladimir A. Iossifov.  (Del Note: 
Curricula vitae for both nominees were submitted to 
the Council and are listed below under "Items 
 
Noted."  End Note.)  Following informal 
consultations, the Council also requested ABAF to 
report on its progress in reviewing its work and 
procedures to EC-57. 
 
-------------- 
Items Deferred 
-------------- 
 
¶35. (U) The following documents were deferred: 
 
EC-56/S/3*  General guidelines on the nature of 
continued verification measures at converted CWPFs 
ten years after certification of conversion. 
 
EC-53/S/1, EC-53/S/1 (Corr. 1) and EC-53/DEC/CRP.1 
Recommendations regarding continued verification 
measures at the converted CWPF at CRP Portreath. 
 
EC-55/DG.13  Status of implementation of Article 
XI.  The Council emphasized the importance of early 
appointment of a facilitator for Article XI. 
 
EC-53/S/5 and EC-53/DG.11  Enhancing information on 
the characteristics of plant sites in OCPF 
declarations and enhancement of OCPF declarations. 
 
EC-55/DG.8  Performance of the modified OCPF site 
selection methodology.  The Council emphasized the 
importance of early appointment of a facilitator on 
the issue.  The Council also asked the DG to 
provide a further progress report at the end of the 
second year of implementation of the modified 
methodology. 
 
EC-56/S/1  Evaluation of the program for 
implementation support.  The facilitator for 
Article VII announced his intention to hold 
consultations on the report prior to EC-57. 
 
EC-56/DG.5  Implementation in 2008 of 
recommendations contained in the 2007 OIO annual 
report. 
 
EC-56/DG.6 (also C-14/DG.3)  2008 OIO annual 
report. 
 
EC-56/DG.3  Reclassification of posts. 
 
----------- 
Items Noted 
----------- 
 
¶36. (U) The Council noted the following documents: 
 
EC-56/DG.1  Notification by Russia of changes at 
the former CWPF Kaprolaktam Plant, Dzerzinsk. 
 
EC-56/DG.9  Progress made in meeting revised 
destruction deadlines. 
 
EC-56/DG.7  Adjustments to the schedule for 
submission of 90-day reports on destruction 
activities. 
 
EC-55/DG.5  Status of implementation of Article X. 
(Del Note:  The Iranian delegation was unsuccessful 
in its attempts to include language on assistance 
for victims in the EC-56 report.  End Note.) 
 
EC-55/S/2 (including corrigenda 1 and 2) 
Evaluation of the effectiveness of Article X 
programs.  The Council requested the evaluation be 
integrated into future reports on the status of 
implementation. 
 
EC-54/S/7 and EC-55/S/1  Amendments and 
 
modifications to the facility agreement with Iran 
for a Schedule 1 protective purposes facility. 
 
EC-56/DG.8  Income and expenditure for the 
financial year to 31 March 2009. 
 
EC-56/DG.4  Alignment of travel related 
entitlements with those in the UN. 
 
EC-55/S/6  Status of implementation in 2008 of the 
recommendations of the External Auditor. 
 
EC-56/S/2  Curricula vitae of ABAF nominees. 
 
SAB-12/1  Report of the Twelfth Session of the SAB. 
 
EC-55/DG.4  Response of the DG to the SAB report. 
The Council also received the Chairperson's report 
on the meeting of governmental experts to review 
the SAB report to the RevCon (EC-56/2/Rev.1). 
 
¶37. (U) EC Representative Mikulak cleared this 
report. 
 
¶38. (U) BEIK SENDS. 
 
GALLAGHER