VZCZCXYZ0014
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHUNV #0387 2251357
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 131357Z AUG 09
FM USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9946
INFO RUEHII/VIENNA IAEA POSTS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RHEBAAA/DOE WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEANFA/NRC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAHLC/HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC PRIORITY

UNCLAS UNVIE VIENNA 000387 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
State for IO/T, ISN/MNSA, ISN/NESS 
NRC FOR OIP - Nfragoyannis/Jholzman 
NA-243-RGoorevich, Mrupa, JHill; NA-212-IIliopulos, ACuthbertson; 
NA-25-DHuizenga, MBarlow; NA-46-VMcClelland 
DHS FOR DNDO - MWittrock 
DOD FOR OSD - Aprible 
JCS-JMiller 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: IAEA KNNP TRGY AFIN ABUD AORC
SUBJECT: IAEA RESPONSE TO USG PROPOSAL TO FORMALIZE NUCLEAR SECURITY 
PROGRAM REVIEW AND PLANNING MEETINGS 
 
Reference:  State 062491 
 
------- 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  The IAEA's Office of Nuclear Security (ONS)has 
accepted a USG proposal to formalize annual USG-IAEA/ONS nuclear 
security program review and planning meetings.  ONS indicated that 
ONS top management would be available to participate in the first 
such meeting in October 2009, in Washington, D.C.  In response to 
USG desire for full ONS management participation in the annual 
meetings, ONS suggested that some portion of the meeting could be 
conducted instead via video conference with ONS section heads and 
other appropriate ONS personnel.  USG rep indicated the U.S. would 
develop a draft proposed agenda for the first annual meeting for ONS 
consideration.  End Summary. 
 
---------------------- 
Agreement on a Meeting 
---------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) Officials from ONS, DOS, NSA and UNVIE convened July 31 to 
discuss ONS response to setting up formalized USG-IAEA Nuclear 
Security Program Review and planning meetings in a manner that 
parallels, as appropriate, the existing annual USG-IAEA safeguards 
meetings (reftel).  Janette Hill (NNSA) noted the USG preference to 
hold annual meetings in the June-July timeframe so as to allow USG 
nuclear security program managers to make funding requests and 
decisions based in part on data gathered from the meeting. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Tim Andrews (ONS) supported the proposal and stated their 
wish to establish this structure as soon as possible.  The USG reps 
and Andrews recognized that the June-July timeframe for the first 
meeting was not viable, and Andrews suggested that sometime after 
the General Conference would be the best time for the first meeting. 
 When asked to specify potential dates, he stated that currently, 
the weeks of 5, 19 and 26 October were available. 
 
¶4. (SBU) As for future annual meetings, Andrews noted that meetings 
in the June-July timeframe would be possible but the likelihood is 
that ONS does not complete its planning for the coming year until 
after the General Conference so some discussions might be limited. 
Andrews noted that ONS would be able to provide the USG with a 
clearer picture of ONS activities planned for the following year, 
particularly the training program, if future annual meetings were 
also held after the General Conference.  No specific decision was 
made with regard to the timing of these meetings. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Hill asked which ONS staff would attend consultations in 
Washington.  Andrew replied that given the constraints under which 
ONS is operating at the moment (i.e., reduced staff travel 
requirements, budget, and need to keep some managers in the office), 
ONS would only be sending Anita Nilsson and himself.  Andrews 
suggested that the USG consider using video conferencing for some 
portion of the meeting so as to allow ONS sections heads to 
participate.   One suggestion is to have  a plenary discussion in 
Washington, supplemented by video conferences for the respective 
technical level discussions. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Andrews also mentioned that Nilsson would like to arrange 
some side consultations on the margins of the first meeting, and 
noted as examples a meeting with UNSCR 1540 Coordinator Tom Wuchte 
and follow-up meetings as necessary on the U.S. Nuclear Security 
Summit arrangements. 
 
---------- 
Next Steps 
---------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) It was agreed that the next step will be for NNSA rep Hill 
to draft a proposed agenda for circulation among the interagency and 
ONS, and provide a response to ONS' proposed October dates.