CWC: TRILATERAL MEETING BETWEEN LIBYA, UK AND

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 THE HAGUE 000755 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, DENYER AND CRISTOFARO) NSC FOR LUTES WINPAC FOR WALTER E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/17/2019 TAGS: LY PARM PREL CWC SUBJECT: CWC: TRILATERAL MEETING BETWEEN LIBYA, UK AND U.S. DELEGATIONS ON THE STATUS OF LIBYAN CONVERSION AND DESTRUCTION ACTIVITIES REF: A. STATE 115619 ¶B. TRIPOLI 933 ¶C. STATE 122230 Classified By: Janet E. Beik for reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) This is CWC-74-09. -------------- INTRODUCTION -------------- 1.(SBU) On December 2, 2009, the United States, the United Kingdom and the Libyan delegations met to discuss issues related to conversion of the Chemical Weapons Production Facility (CWPF) at Rabta, progress on destruction activity in Ruwagha, and construction of the Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility (CWDF)in Rabta. The trilateral meeting took place on the margins of the 14th Session of the Conference of States Parties (CSP). Libyan delegates included Ahmed Walid (Permanent Representative to the OPCW) and Dr. Ahmed Hesnawy (Member of the Libyan National Authority). (Del note: Gen. Mohamed Rajab El-Ghadi had been confirmed to attend the trilateral meeting and was credentialed as the Head of the Libyan delegation to the CSP; however, he was not present during the week of November 30-December 4). The UK delegation was represented by John Foggo(National Authority, London) and Dr. James McGilly (DSTL Chemical and Biological Sciences, Porton Down). U.S. Delreps David Weekman, Damon Prather, Don Clagett and Jennifer Smith attended. ¶2. (SBU) The CSP approved the request by the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for extension of the intermediate and final deadlines of its Category 1 chemical weapons (EC-58/NAT.5, dated 24 August 2009 and Add. 1, dated October 14 2009). As discussed at the 58th Session of the Executive Council and during the CSP, support for this request was predicated on Libya meeting requested transparency measures. ¶3. (C) During a private discussion with Director- General Rogelio Pfirter on November 30, he indicated to Andrew Weber (Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, and Chemical, and Biological Weapons, Department of Defense) and Dr. Robert Mikulak (ISN/CB Director and Head of the U.S. Delegation to the CSP) that the Technical Secretariat would be exerting increased pressure on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on their destruction progress. This sentiment was supported in informal discussions with members of the Technical Secretariat following the trilateral meeting. -------------- -------------- RABTA CONVERSION: COMPLETION BY DECEMBER 31, 2009 -------------- -------------- ¶4. (SBU) Hesnawy discussed the progress made on the conversion of the CWPF in Rabta and projected that this will be complete by December 31, 2009. Hesnawy emphasized that he was working with the Technical Secretariat to coordinate a visit to verify completion, and that he was keen on this being completed rapidly to enable him to commence commissioning of the facility in preparation for future pharmaceutical production activity. ¶5. (SBU) Hesnawy described the commissioning to include water testing of piping and units operational evaluations of the digital controllers, Qoperational evaluations of the digital controllers, vacuum system (capable of 10 mbar),silicone fluid THE HAGUE 00000755 002 OF 005 based heating unit, cooling units and cooling tower. According to Hesnawy, raw materials and solvents for trial production in the amount of "several tons" are on-site and chemicals and solvents that he could recall included xylene, ethyl acetate, hexane and potassium butyrate. ¶6. (SBU) Hesnawy stated that four active pharmaceutical ingredients are planned for production, all involved with anti-retroviral agents used in treatment of HIV/AIDS. Actual production should begin in the first half of 2010 with product shipment in the June-July 2010 time frame. Dr Hesnawy recalled three of the four pharmaceuticals: zidovudine (AZT),an azidothymidine; nevirapine, a dipyridinodiazipine; and stavudine, a deoxythymidine (the fourth is likely Lamivudine, a thiocytidine, noted in process flow diagrams from SIPSA). (Del note: These are synthetically complex products to produce and it is not clear whether the converted site will produce the final pharmaceuticals or the intermediates. Dr Hesnawy was vague on this point-he might not be involved in the pharmaceutical plant owners' plans.) -------------- DESTRUCTION ACTIVITY PLANNED AT RUWAGHA -------------- ¶7. (SBU) Hesnawy stated that Libya decided not to move the chemical weapon precursors: phosphorus trichloride, thionyl chloride, pinacolyl alchohol and isopropanol from the storage facility in Ruwagha to the Rabta Toxic Chemicals Destruction Facility. Instead they will destroy these chemicals at Ruwagha. This change in plans will require revision of their detailed plans for destruction and their facility agreement. This action has not yet been completed, but Hesnawy indicated that they are working on the revisions with the TS. ¶8. (SBU) Hesnawy asserted that the destruction of the precursors would commence in March 2010 and would take approximately 3-4 months to complete, likely finishing activity in July 2010. ¶9. (SBU) Hesnawy described the process as follows: a concrete basin will be constructed to which will be added water (trucked in) and sodium hydroxide. The phosphorus trichloride and the thionyl chloride will simply be metered into the basin where they will be hydrolyzed to sodium salts. In the case of phosphorus trichloride hydrogen peroxide will be added to convert the phosphite to phosphate. The basin containing the salts will simply be covered up with sand when the operations are complete. An open gas fired burner will be used to destroy the pinacolyl alcohol and the isopropanol which will be metered into the flame. No environmental control will be used as "only carbon dioxide and water will result from the combustion of the alcohols"). -------------- STATUS OF CONSTRUCTION OF CWDF IN RABTA -------------- ¶10. (SBU) Hesnawy described the contracting for the activity to include local contractors for site Qpreparation, utilities, grounding, foundation and structural building construction activity; and an international contract with the Italian firm SIPSA for process units and controls. (Del note: A THE HAGUE 00000755 003 OF 005 request for clarification on which contracts are concluded has been passed to the National Authority in Tripoli via the Libyan delegation) ¶11. (SBU) Hesnawy described the site preparation activity underway by Libyan contractors. The site is rectangular and is surrounded by a fence, ditch and access road. At present the power house is installed at the southwest corner with electric power in the process of being pulled to the site. Water piping has reached the site as far the access road on the west side of the site. An evaporation pond is being dug near the east fence line. In December, grounding and foundation pillars (3 m deep with grounding resistance about 8 ohms) will be installed. The building itself will be prefabricated steel set up on a concrete slab. ¶12. (SBU) According to Hesnawy, the site will be ready to install process equipment in June 2010. The system has been described in the detailed verification plan and includes a rotary kiln (normal operating temperature 900 degrees C) followed by a post combustion chamber (PCC)(normal operating temperature 1200 degrees C) and environmental control equipment. The high temperature of the PCC is expected to preclude dibenzodioxin and dibenzofuran by-product production. Completion of process equipment installation is expected in September 2010. Commissioning and final engineering review by the TS is expected in October 2010 with 1% of the Mustard destroyed by November 1. Category 1 mustard and category 2, 2-chloroethanol, will be destroyed in the PCC by opposed co-injection of diesel oil and mustard or 2-chloroethanol. The mustard will be pumped from the mobile storage wagon (filled in early 2009 at Ruwagha) through flex-hose which will be quick-fit connected to the PCC. 2-chloroethanol will be used to flush the wagon and other contaminated equipment. The mustard/2-chloroethanol and any remaining 2-chloroethanol will be burned in the PCC. ¶13. (SBU) Hesnawy asserted that destruction activities will be completed in 2010 and that the 100% destruction deadline extension of May 15, 2011, was chosen to allow for slippage in the event that unforeseen circumstances arise. In that regard, Hesnawy said that the only unit that might have problematic delivery is the kiln which has a 6 month construction time line, but, as that is necessary only for contaminated solids (dunnage, PE containers, etc.) its absence will not affect the mustard destruction, which is to be accomplished in the PCC. Dr Hesnawy has been working with a Dr. Boccardi of SIPSA on contracts and equipment delivery timing. Hesnawy claims that no changes in the Rabta CWDF detailed verification plan or facility agreement are required. (Del note: This is not likely as the precursor hydrolysis must be removed at the very least.) ¶14. (SBU) When asked about past environmental concerns, Hesnawy claimed that there were no longer any environmental concerns. Q -------------- ONGOING TRANSPARENCY MEASURES -------------- ¶15. (SBU) Weekman and Foggo then addressed the issue of transparency measures. Weekman noted the intervention made by the Swedish delegation on behalf of the European Union at the 58th Session of THE HAGUE 00000755 004 OF 005 the Executive Council in October, which called on Libya to provide more detail on a regular basis so that Member States could be more confident about the Libyan conversion and destruction programs. Weekman suggested that Libya should detail its incremental progress on both conversion and destruction during the informal consultations on destruction activity at the 59th Session of the Executive Council in February and augment its presentation with photos, as discussed previously. Hesnawy stated that it was impossible to answer everyone's questions and concerns and stated that he would make himself available to interested delegations. Smith stated that the expectations of the U.S. ought to be fairly clear, taking into consideration the previously supplied Non-Papers which outlined suggested items to include as transparency measures. She stated that it is likely that other States Parties share these expectations for transparency and emphasized that U.S. support of the deadline extension request was conditioned upon these being met. McGilly and Foggo concurred and reiterated that the expectations of the UK delegation were consistent with those of the U.S. delegation and those included in the European Union statement. ¶16. (SBU) Weekman and Foggo requested a copy of the Libyan National Statement to the CSP and recommended that Libya ensure that it is placed on the OPCW website. Walid stated that he would provide a copy, but that the statement was only in Arabic. Discussion followed on whether the National Statement was circulated as a matter of course, and Weekman described that this had to be requested by the delegation usually during delivery of the statement. ¶17. (SBU) Weekman said that in line with trilateral transparency agreements it would be useful for the UK and the U.S. to review copies of the contracts for the Ruwagha destruction activity and the Rabta CWDF which could also be shared with the Technical Secretariat. He stated further that review of the equipment contracts would help provide a solid piece of evidence that the Libyan CWDF would be built as scheduled, enabling the TS to respond to questions from Member States about Libya's progress with confidence. Hesnawy pushed back, stating that Libya has been transparent and that he is always available to answer questions. (Del note: The request for contracts from Libya was communicated to Dominique Anelli, Head, Chemical Demilitarization Branch, who responded that the requesting of contracts was not common practice and that they would be requesting DFIs.) ¶18. (C) Del Comment: We believe Hesnawy clearly understood the message that is in Libya's interest to be more voluntarily forthcoming. However, the only commitment Hesnawy made was to provide a copy of the Libyan Statement at the Conference (which the Del has not yet received). It remains to be seen whether the Libyans will follow through with transparency measures and the new destruction Qtransparency measures and the new destruction deadlines. End Comment. -------------- IMPRESSIONS OF THE TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT -------------- ¶19. (C) On December 3, Delreps Weekman and Prather followed up with Horst Reeps, Director of the Verification Division, to compare notes after the Technical Secretariat met with the Libyan THE HAGUE 00000755 005 OF 005 delegation earlier that day. Reeps stated the TS was very pessimistic about Libya completing their chemical weapon destruction but felt the precursor destruction timeline was realistic because it was a simple process. ¶20. (C) Reeps stated that the TS will conduct an inspection at the storage facility in Ruwagha during the week of December 7, and plans on observing any progress that Hesnawy claimed at the nearby chemical weapon precursor destruction facility. The Technical Secretariat also plans on visiting the completed conversion facility after January 13, 2010; the chemical weapon precursor destruction facility for an engineering review in mid March 2010; and the CWDF site in September 2010, assuming Libya adheres to their stated schedule. ¶21. (U) BEIK SENDS. LEVIN