Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons
dated 18 July 1996 for the Appendices to the Report of the Inquiry into the Export of Defence Equipment and Dual-Use Goods to Iraq and Related Prosecutions laid before The House on 15 February 1996*

Volume Two
Section D Arms and Defence-Related Exports to Iraq
Chapter 6 Specific Export Licence Applications After the Cease-Fire

Excerpt:
(XVI) DEPLETED URANIUM - AMERSHAM INTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND TESTRADE LIMITED

(XVI) DEPLETED URANIUM - AMERSHAM INTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND TESTRADE LIMITED

Application of Amersham International Limited dated 16 January 1989

D6.388 On 16 January 1989 Amersham International Limited (Amersham) applied for two export licences to supply Depleted Uranium (DU) worth £3750 and £5000 respectively to Iraq. The consignees were the State Organisation for Oil Projects and the Atomic Energy Commission. The applications were included in the lists of ELAs for consideration at the MODWG meeting on 14 April 1989. The lists were distributed to MODWG members on 7 April 1989. *733

D6.389 DU is a metal which has a high atomic number giving very efficient gamma ray absorption. It is used, inter alia, in nuclear and radioisotope transport containers and also in the military field in armour/anti-armour applications such as chemical energy warheads. *734

D6.390 The MODWG at its meeting on 14 April 1989 recommended that both applications be marked “P” ie pending. *735 The recommendations of the MODWG were discussed at the IDC meeting on 28 April 1989. The IDC agreed that the ELAs should remain pending and remarked “MOD to consider further”. *736

D6.391 Amersham’s ELAs were added to the list of pending ELAs to be considered by the MODWG at its next meeting on 10 May 1989. The lists were distributed on 5 May 1989 to the members of the MODWG. *737 The Amersham ELAs were discussed at the meeting on 10 May 1989. Lieut-Colonel Glazebrook annotated his copy of the MODWG list by adding “Defer DESS 1 Tally Sheets” next to the details of the two ELAs. *738 The Tally was maintained by DESS and gave details of licence applications that had been made for the export of DU or equipment containing DU to Iraq and Iran. The details included the amounts (kgs) of DU *739 so that “a check on the running total .... could be monitored to assess whether the overall quantity [of DU] gave rise to concern that this material was being used for purposes other than that for which export licences had been made”. *740 The Tally Sheets are referred to further below. *741

D6.392 The IDC met again on 18 May 1989. The list of pending ELAs contained the two Amersham ELAs. The IDC noted “MODWG and DESS 1A to consider further”. *742

ELA of Testrade Limited

D6.393 Around the end of July 1989 Testrade Limited (Testrade) applied for an export licence to supply Isotope Projection Cameras worth £27,175 to the National Iranian Oil Co. *743 The application was included in the list of ELAs to be considered at the MODWG meeting of 3 August 1989. *744 The description of the equipment was amended at the MODWG to read “Isotope Projection DU Container”. *745

D6.394 The Testrade equipment, known as Isotope projection DU container or DU system, is used in the process of gamma radiography of pipe welds for the purpose of quality assurance and for safety reasons. The DU containers are used as shields against human exposure to gamma rays emitted by the radioactive sources used to film pipe welds. *746

D6.395 At the MODWG meeting on 3 August 1989 the MODWG recommended that the application be marked “P” and commented that “(for DTI: should be Gp 2A) MODWG to consider”. *747 The note about Group 2A was a reminder to inform the DTI that the reference number for the ELA should have been one which identified the nuclear list. A new reference (2A/610/89) was subsequently provided. *748 The remark “MODWG to consider” was a reference to Lieut-Colonel Glazebrook’s intention to consult an MOD expert about the “possible conversion of DU isotope containers into DU tank ammunition” in relation to Iran and Iraq. *749 In a memorandum dated 4 August 1989 to DESS2a, Lieut Colonel Glazebrook reported the advice the expert had given:

“2. He is sceptical because DU [Depleted Uranium] is used in the form of an alloy and the form commonly used for containers (U² Moly) is different from that used for tank ammunition U3/4 Titanium) and the former is unlikely to make good ammunition (the fins will break off on firing).

3. He estimates that 20kgs are required per round (allowing for manufacturing wastage) and says that the actual production, once the metal is available, is comparatively easy and simple.

4. Based on the above, we would not object to the export to IRAN or IRAQ of DU isotope containers as “AI” but we would not wish to see clearance given for larger quantities or other DU alloys.” *750

D6.396 The application by Testrade for the supply of the Isotope Projection DU container was included in the list of pending ELAs and remained annotated “MODWG to consider” until it was considered by the MODWG at its meeting on 8 November 1989. *751

ELA of Testrade dated 13 July 1989

D6.397 On 13 July Testrade made an application for an export licence to supply an isotope projection system to Iraq. The consignee was the North Oil Co. *752 The application was included in the list of ELAs to be considered at the MODWG meeting on 24 August 1989. *753

D6.398 On 24 August the MODWG recommended that the application remain pending whilst it was considered by the MOD branch responsible for intelligence of a scientific and technical nature. *754

D6.399 At the meeting on 24 August 1989 the MODWG also referred to the two applications by Amersham for the supply of DU to Iraq and noted “MODWG to consider further in light of DU Tally”. *755

D6.400 On 10 October 1989 Mr Devlin (DESS2a) circulated to members of the MODWG, including Lieut-Colonel Glazebrook, a minute attaching the “Depleted Uranium tallies for Iran and Iraq” and Lieut-Colonel Glazebrook’s memorandum of 4 August 1989. *756 The tally for Iraq listed four ELAs which had been approved by the IDC and three ELAs marked “P”. Those marked pending were the two Amersham ELAs of 16 January 1989 and the Testrade ELA of 13 July 1989 for the supply of an isotope projection system. The total tally given for all the ELAs in the table was 600.6kg. The tally for Iran listed eight ELAs which had been approved by the IDC and one ELA marked “P”. This was the Testrade application for the supply of an Isotope Projection DU container. *757

D6.401 Mr Devlin’s minute requested that, with regard to the tallies, the two Amersham ELAs and two Testrade ELAs be reconsidered. *758 Mr Devlin asked for a response by 13 October “so that we might put these ELAs before the IDC on Monday 16 October.” *759

D6.402 The four applications were discussed at the IDC meeting on 16 October 1989. The Summary Record of the discussion relating to Testrade’s ELA for the supply of the DU container to Iran said:

“MOD Ministers have no objection per se to the export of DU to Iran but the MOD keep a tally of the type and amount sent. They said that they would check whether, with the export of this item, Iran was still below the agreed limit for the type of DU in question.” *760

The Summary Record listed Testrade’s ELA for supply to Iraq (2A/576/89), and Amersham’s two ELAs (2A/0035/89 and 2A/0039/89) and noted “awaiting check of tally.” *761 A copy of the Summary Record was submitted to Mr Waldegrave by MED (through Mr Gore-Booth and Mr Lamport) on 23 October 1989. *762

D6.403 The Amersham and Testrade ELAs were considered by the MODWG at its meeting on 8 November 1989. The MODWG assessed the four applications as “A(I)”. *763 The recommendations of the MODWG were discussed at the IDC meeting on 15 November 1989. The IDC agreed that the ELAs should be approved. *764 The Summary Record of the 15 November 1989 IDC meeting noted that “The IDC made recommendations on uncontroversial applications in... Group 2 (nuclear list) for submission to Ministers”. *765 In relation to the Testrade ELA for the supply of the DU container to Iran, the Summary Record said that the items had been checked against the tally and remained below the agreed limit.

D6.404 On 16 November 1989 Mr Sherrington (MED) put up a submission to Mr Waldegrave, via Mr Lamport and Mr Gore-Booth, attaching a copy of the Summary Record. *766 The submission recommended endorsement of the IDC’s recommendations. Mr Waldegrave agreed to the recommendations. *767 The DTI were so informed by a letter from MED to Mr Steadman dated 22 November 1989. *768

D6.405 The IDC recommendations were formally put up by Mr Barrett (DESS2) to the Minister (DP), Mr Clark, by a submission dated 17 November 1989. *769 A minute dated 22 November 1989 to Mr Barrett from the Minister (DP)’s APS recorded that the Minister was “content” with the IDC recommendations. *770 Mr Barrett then informed Mr Steadman in a letter dated 22 November 1989 that “MOD Ministers have now endorsed the recommendations of the IDC meeting held on 15 November.” *771

Endnotes:

*733 - MOD/24.2.231 at 237. An application by Amersham International (2A/1029/88) to supply 100 kg of DU was already under consideration.

*734 - MOD/1498

*735 - MOD/25.1.79 at 85

*736 - MOD/25.1.293 at 319

*737 - MOD/25.1.183 at 203

*738 - MOD/25.1.183 at 203

*739 - MOD/30.2.1 at 5 and 7.

*740 - MOD/1529

*741 - see paragraph D6.400 infra

*742 - MOD/25.2.167 at 191.

*743 - MOD/30.2.1 at 5

*744 - MOD/28.1.75 at 83.

*745 - MOD/28.2.243 at 251

*746 - MOD/1501

*747 - Group 2A was for Nuclear Materials.

*748 - MOD/30.2.1 at 9

*749 - MOD/30.2.1 at 3

*750 - MOD/30.2.1 at 3

*751 - see paragraph D6.403 infra

*752 - MOD/30.2.1 at 7

*753 - MOD/28.2.321 at 337.

*754 - MOD/28.2.321 at 337.

*755 - MOD/28.2.375 at 415.

*756 - MOD/30.2.1

*757 - The application had been allocated a new reference number to reflect that it was a Group 2a (nuclear materials) application - MOD/30.2.1 at 9).

*758 - MOD/30.2.1 to 9

*759 - MOD/30.2.1

*760 - FCO/6.1.64 at 65, paragraph 2(i). The MOD has been unable to find any evidence to suggest that there was an agreed limit on the export of DU. Lieut Colonel Glazebrook has no recollection that “a threshold level for this concern” was ever quantified - MOD/1529

*761 - MOD/1529

*762 - FCO/6.1.62.

*763 - MOD/30.2.239 at 255 and 263

*764 - MOD/31.1.11 at 17 and 19

*765 - FCO/6.1.33

*766 - FCO/6.1.32

*767 - FCO/6.1.32

*768 - FCO/6.1.31

*769 - MOD/31.1.11.

* 770 - MOD/31.1.31.

* 771 - MOD/31.1.33.

* The Full report is available from The Stationery Office Ltd., PO Box 276, London, SW8 5DT.