CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): U.S. COMMENTS

S E C R E T STATE 058248 SIPDIS THE HAGUE FOR CWC DEL ALSO FOR EMBASSY E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/05/2019 TAGS: PARM PREL CWC OPCW SUBJECT: CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC): U.S. COMMENTS ON 2008 VERIFICATION IMPLEMENTATION REPORT REF: A. EC-57/HP/DG.1 (2008 VIR) ¶B. DATED 24 APRIL 2009 Classified By: Philip A. Foley for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) -------------- Overview -------------- ¶1. (U) This is an action request; see paragraph 3. ¶2. (U) The primary means by which the Technical Secretariat (T.S.) provides information to States Parties on implementation of Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) verification requirements is the Verification Implementation Report (VIR). Annual VIR reporting takes place in four phases, beginning with the distribution of the VIR as soon as practical after the end of the reporting period (the end of the calendar year). Later each year, the TS distributes: a corrigendum to the VIR reflecting corrections of fact, based in part on States Parties, comments; a compendium of States Parties, comments on the VIR; and a supplement to the VIR providing additional verification-related information from annual declarations of past activities (ADPA) and annual declarations of anticipated activities (ADAA). The 2008 VIR (Ref) will be on the agenda for the 57th session of the Executive Council (EC),July 14-17, 2009. Consultations on the 2008 VIR will be held on June 24, 2009 to address States Parties, comments and will be the basis for the Council's consideration of the 2008 VIR. ¶3. (U) This cable provides U.S. comments on the 2008 VIR and guidance for the U.S. CWC Delegation (Del) for the upcoming consultations, which are arranged into three sections: -- The first section (paragraphs 4 and 5) provides general comments on the 2008 VIR and VIR reporting process; -- The second section (paragraph 6) raises specific questions and issues with the VIR relating to other States Parties; and -- The third section (paragraph 7) provides comments and, where needed, background relating to U.S. information in the VIR. Del should draw upon comments from these three sections, as appropriate, during the consultations, and report back on the results of discussions. To the extent that issues relating to U.S. information (paragraph 7) are not satisfactorily addressed during the consultations, Del should seek follow-on consultations with and/or written responses from the T.S. Del should submit written U.S. comments (paragraphs 6 and 7) to the TS for circulation to States Parties and incorporation into the compendium of States Parties, comments. Del is also asked in paragraph 8 to provide an additional item of information to the T.S. in a separate discussion. -------------- General Comments -------------- ¶4. (U) The annual VIR and the three subsequent, additional documents provide the information on which States Parties can assess implementation of the CWC verification regime. The critical review of these documents by the EC is an essential part of the Council's oversight responsibilities under paragraphs 30 and 31 of Article VIII, and can provide useful insights as to needed Council actions. Substantive discussion among delegations and the T.S. are needed to clarify issues and determine whether any EC action, including providing guidance to the T.S., is needed. The content and quality of the VIR have been consistent over the past several years ) a very low level of incorrect or outdated information, a consistent publication schedule, and an established consultation format to address specific issues for each annual report. This consultation provides the opportunity to engage the T.S. and other States Parties in discussing a broader more fruitful agenda for the VIR. ¶5. (U) Del should draw upon the following points in direct communications with the T.S., and during the consultations, as appropriate: -- As soon as possible, Del should recommend to the T.S. and the consultation chairperson that the June 2009 consultation begin with a briefing by Verification Division staff highlighting key trends, developments, and issues reflected in the 2008 report ) a suggestion made, but not acted upon, last year. If this request is declined, Del should press the T.S. to agree to present this type of briefing in the near future. -- Del should communicate U.S. interest in increasing the potential benefit of the VIR consultations by encouraging delegations to expand the scope of these discussions, and thus we suggest the June 2009 consultation agenda include a segment dedicated to discussing suggestions made by the T.S. and States Parties for improving the VIR reporting process, including the schedule, reports and report content. -- Del should repeat our long-standing request to provide the entire VIR, or at least the tabulated information, in a more user-friendly form (e.g., as Excel spreadsheets, rather than a pdf file),which would make it much more useful for States Parties. -------------- Written Comments for T.S.: General Issues -------------- ¶6. (S/Rel OPCW) Begin written comments addressing general issues and information on other States Parties: ¶A. Section 2: Executive Summary -- Page 11, paragraph 2.7, line 2: Substitute &warfare agents8 for &weapons8. -- Page 11, paragraph 2.8 (c),line 1: Substitute 98.5% for 99% to correlate with data on VIR page 23. -- Page 11, paragraph 2.9: This paragraph should address the actions taken for the remaining CWPFs for which residual production capacity is not zero, e.g., the number and location of inspections conducted. -- Page 12, paragraph 2.15: This paragraph should include information on optimization measures that were continued from previous years. ¶B. Section 3: Overview of Inspections -- Page 14, paragraph 3.4, Table 3: Remove percent symbols from column 2 rows. ¶C. Section 4: Chemical Weapons -- Page 15, paragraph 4.1, next to last line: Substitute &days8 for &hours8. -- Page 15, paragraph 4.2, line 2: Insert &since EIF of the Convention8 after &destruction8 and in line 5 remove &since EIF of the Convention8. -- Page 15, paragraph 4.4: Correct the first sentence to refer to Table 4, rather than Table 3. -- Page 20, paragraph 4.22, line 3 and page 21, paragraph 4.23 (b),line 4: Correct spelling to &-chloroaceptophenone8. -- Page 23, paragraph 4.33, line 3: Substitute &to be8 for &being8 and in line 4 read &this add-on plant8 for &the add-on plant8. -- Page 25, paragraph 4.43, line 4: Correct spelling to &phosphorus8. -- Page 26, paragraph 4.48 (c) line 2: Correct spelling to &fluoride8. -- Page 29, paragraph 4.60(c),line 2: Substitute &begin8 for &being8. -- Page 31, paragraph 4.71, last line: Correct spelling to &phosphorus8. -- Page 33, after paragraph 4.82: As was done for India (paragraph 4.36),the report should include the Russian Federation aggregate MT and percent destruction as of December 31, 2008. -- Page 36, paragraph 4.89 (b),line 2: Correct spelling to &-chloroaceptophenone8. -- Page 38, paragraph 4.100, line 10: Insert &kiln8 after &rotary8. -- Page 42, after paragraph 4.125: As was done for India (paragraph 4.36),the report should include the U.S. aggregate MT and percent destruction as of December 31, 2008. -- Page 45, paragraph 4.134, line 4: insert &soman8 so within the brackets it will read: &(filled with sarin, soman and lewisite)8. This makes the information consistent with that on VIR page 120. ¶D. Section 5: Chemical Weapons Production Facilities -- Page 47, paragraph 5.6, line 3: Replace &until8 with &no later than8, which is the language in C-11/DEC16. -- Page 49, paragraph 5.15, line 2: After prohibited add &by the Convention8 and after deadline remove &of the Convention8. ¶E. Section 6: Old and Abandoned Chemical Weapons -- Page 55. paragraph 6.4, line 5: Replace &68,7918 with &69,369. This is consistent with Annex 16. -- Page 55, paragraph 6.5, line 9: Replace &around 45,0008 with &41,7278. This is consistent with the data in Annexes 15 and 16. ¶F. Section 7: Industry Verification -- Page 65, Paragraph 7.7: Add the following to the end of the second sentence: &which was submitted to the Council at its Fifty-Fourth session and was pending approval at the end of the review period.8 -- Page 73, paragraph 7.48, line 2: Replace &annual8 with &aggregate8. ¶G. Section 8: Other Verification-Related Activities -- Page 77, paragraph 8.21, line 1: Replace &4 and 58 by &7 and 88. ¶H. Section 9: Technical Support for Verification Activities -- Page 84, paragraph 9.4: A reference should be added to Annex 29, which provides a list of designated laboratories and their status as of the end of the reporting period. ¶I. Annex 3 ) Status of Inspection Files for 2008 -- Page 95-111: The fourth column heading &Observations8 differs from the corresponding heading in previous years, which was &Issues from Inspections.8 The inclusion of observations made from the inspections, not directly related to outstanding issues or follow-up requirements (e.g., declaration updates or amendments) or their need for clarification or correction, does not contribute to defining the status of inspections and should not be included. -------------- Written Comments for T.S.: U.S. Issues -------------- ¶7. (U) Begin written comments addressing U.S. issues: ¶A. Section 4: Chemical Weapons -- Page 17, paragraph 4.8, Table 5: The United States does not agree with the total quantity of United States Category 1 CW destroyed as indicated in Table 5 (15,949.393 MT). The U.S. Annual Report for Destruction (ARD) indicates a total quantity destroyed of 15,949.496 MT, including the Category 2 quantity of 0.010 MT. Removing the Category 2 quantity from the ARD total results in 15,949.486 MT destroyed, representing a 0.093 MT (93 kg) difference from the VIR total. -- Page 20, paragraph 4.22: The United States does not agree with the total quantity of agent destroyed in the 6th line (see Comment on Page 17, Table 5 above). In addition, change the description in the third sentence to read: &(of its declared stockpile of Category 1 and 2 chemical weapons.8 The total destroyed number in this paragraph refers to both the Category 1 and Category 2 CW destroyed according to VIR numbers (15,949.393 0.010 = 15,949.403 MT). -- Page 39, paragraph 4.102: Change the description of the 48 kg destroyed to read: &(as well as 48 kg of recovered VX agent stored in a 30-gallon drum. The 48 kg was not unknown agent from recovered chemical weapons but, rather, a container of VX agent discovered at the former production facility and subsequently declared (NACS 153664). -- Page 39, paragraph 4.107: - Change the type of agent destroyed in the first sentence to read: &(and 18.409 MTs of HT) had(8, as reported in the 2008 TS CWDF interim reports. Pine Bluff does not possess H agent in its stockpile. - Change the type of agent destroyed in the second sentence to read: &((89.481 MTs of VX, (8, as reported in the 2008 T.S. CWDF interim reports. There was no GB destruction at Pine Bluff in 2008. -- Page 40, paragraph 4.110: Correct the munition description in the first sentence to read: &(three M70A1, 115-lb bombs;(8, as reported in TS CWDF interim reports and the CW declaration for the Pine Bluff CWSF. -- Page 40, paragraph 4.112: Change the unknown quantity of agent fill to read: &(both with unknown fill (3.33 kg)(8, as reported in the PDTDF IR #5 and subsequently corrected in NACS #177912. The correct quantity is also found in paragraph 4.113. -- Page 40, paragraph 4.113: Change the overall quantity of agent destroyed at the PDTDF to read: &(containing 21.88 kg(8, as reported in PDTDF IRs #1-5. ¶B. Annexes -- Page 91-111, Annex 3 ) Status of Inspection Files for 2008: The VIR should indicate if a State Party submitted the necessary updates or amendments to declarations within the VIR reporting period (CY2008). Otherwise, the &Observations8 column indicates the requested information has not yet been received as of 1 January 2009. For the United States: -SCHED/172/S1/08,page 100: The United States transmitted the necessary amendment to the T.S. in October 2008. Revise fourth column as &Amendments were provided(8 - SCHED3/224/08, page 102: The United States transmitted the necessary change via amendment to the T.S. in August 2008. Revise fourth column as &Information was updated(8 - SCHED3/232/08, page 102: The United States transmitted the necessary change via amendment to the T.S. in October 2008. Revise fourth column as &Information was updated(8 - OCPF/522/08, page 111: The United States updated the operational status of this plant site in August 2008. Revise fourth column as &The operational status of the OCPF was correctly reflected in update to OCPF list updated.8 - OCPF/539/08, page 111: The United States updated the requested information in August 2008. Revise fourth column as &(and the product group code was updated.8 -- Pages 114-116, Annex 5 - Details Regarding Amendments to Initial Declarations with Respect to Chemical Weapons - Page 114, United State of America, National Aggregate (Chemical Weapons),line 7: Change 3353.536 to 3535.536; the correct total HT in the United States of America is 3535.536 (Reference NACS #177785 dated December 19, 2008). - Page 115: Correct Pine Bluff Chemical Activity Bond Exclusion Area (PBCA BREA) to the correct title Pine Bluff Chemical Activity Bond Road Exclusion Area. -- Pages 122-136, Annex 7 ) Status of Declared Chemicals and Destruction Plans by State Party - Page 134-135: The United States notes different quantities of chemicals destroyed since EIF for four of the agents listed, in addition to the summed total. See the Comment above related to Table 5 on page 17 above. - Page 135: Correct the quantity of UNK agent destroyed in 2008 to 1.426 kg, as reported in the U.S. ARD. - Page 134-135: The United States notes different quantities of chemicals destroyed since EIF for four of the agents listed, in addition to the summed total. See the Comment above related to Table 5 on page 17 above. - Page 135: Correct the quantity of UNK agent destroyed in 2008 to 1.426 kg, as reported in the U.S. ARD. - Annex 7 provides a tool for comparing total destroyed quantities by chemical agent, but there is no single annex that lists all reported annual and total quantities of destroyed quantities by chemical agent by facility, making reconciliation with the VIR destruction figures problematic. Annex 9 provides information on closed facilities, but the destruction numbers in Annex 8, and the basis for deriving them, is unclear. For ease in reconciling data, we recommend adding a new Annex to future VIRs that lists each CWDF, whether active, inactive, or closed, with the associated reporting-year destruction figure (if applicable) and the overall quantity destroyed since EIF. The total destroyed quantity from this new by-site table should match the total quantity destroyed in the by-chemical Annex 7. -- Pages 137-143, Annex 8 ) Chemical Weapons Destruction Facilities in Operation in 2008 or Planned to Operate in the Future - Pages 140-143: The United States does not understand how the quantities reported in the &Verified Destruction (in MTs)8 column were determined or through what time period they are meant to represent. The United States is unable to validate the quantities listed in this column. Please clarify. -- Pages 137-143, Annex 9 - Chemical Weapons Destruction Facilities that Have Completed Operations - Page 146: Correct the quantity of lewisite destroyed in the &Verified Activities8 column to: &0.2 kg.8 The correct quantity of lewisite destroyed is 0.189 kg, as reported in the CAMDS Preliminary Findings, which rounds to 0.2 kg. - Page 147: Change the total destruction of chemical agent at JACADS to: 639.577 MT. The number indicated in the VIR fails to credit approximately 46 kg of agent destroyed and is not in agreement with the declared quantity of chemical agent at USACAP and JACADS upon EIF. -- Pages 161, Annex 15 ) Status of Old Chemical Weapons produced Before 1925: Page 161, United States Row: - Column 2: Change 2 to 1. The interim holding facility at Spring Valley, Washington, DC, is currently the only U.S. facility where old chemical weapons are being stored. - Column 4: Change 8 to 30. The 30 OCW have been previously disposed of. - Column 5: Change 27 to 5. The 5 items declared in 2008 (NACS #176170 dated June 12, 2008 & NACS #177811 dated December 30, 2008) are the only OCW awaiting disposal. -- Page 165-166, Annex 19 - Declared and Inspectable Schedule 2 and 3 Plant Sites: Page 166: The number of Declared Schedule 3 sites should be 51, rather than 53 as reported. -- Page 169, Annex 21 ) Declared, Declarable, and Inspectable OCPFs: Page 170: The data for the United States should be 517, 517, 508, 184, 508, 508, and 161 rather than as reported. -- Page 188, Annex 29 )list of Designated OPCW Laboratories: Page 190, Item 19: Correct the address to: Edgewood Chemical and Biological Forensic Analytical Center, AMSRD-ECB-RT-CF, Bldg 5100, 5183 Blackhawk Road, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5424. The &Edgewood8 before &MD8 has been deleted. End written comments. ¶8. (U) Del should provide the following additional information to the T.S.- regarding page 111, item OCPF/592/08 in Annex 3 - Status of Inspection Files for 2008, in a separate, bilateral discussion: Since this inspection, the plant site has been removed from the list of declared discrete organic chemical plant sites. Thus, the number of DOC plants and the product group code will not be updated, as indicated in the VIR. CLINTON