TRIP REPORT OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE US/USSR WORKING GROUP ON POLLUTION FROM SHIPPING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00798A001000030004-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 25, 2013
• Sequence Number: 4
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
I Cr
Trip Report o` th:n Second Meeting of the US/USSR Working Group on
pollution from Shipping
? The Joint US/i'-SBCWorking Group on Marine Pollution from Shipping
met in the Soviet Union during the period 19 August through 2 September
1973. The purpose of this meeting was to examine various Soviet
facilities concerne,< with marine pollutio4 problems and to discuss
future joint effort: for the program.
ITINERARY
The U. S. delegation arrived in Moscow on 19 August and checked in
at the "Moscow Hotel." Two days of meetings at the Ministry of the
Merchant Marine, beginning 20 August, were held in order to give the
U. S. delegation a general overview of marine pollution control in
the Soviet Union. On the first day of meetings, the principal
speaker was Mr. V. F. Kostin from the Ministry of Water Resources,
which is the primary law enforcement agency in this particular field.
Other speakers included Mrs. A. V. Tsybul from i1YDROIMET, Mr. F. L. Ryzhov
of the Ministry of the River Fleet, Mr. V. P. Volokhov of the Ministry
of Fisheries, and Captain K. V. Bannov of the Ministry of the Merchant
Marine. Mr. Alcksandr P. Morozov, chairman of the Soviet delegation,
was the official host of the U. S. delegation and chairman of the meetings in
Moscog.
Sightseeing during the initial. stay in Moscow included a visit to
Lenin's Tomb and a tour of the Armoury Chamber wi thin the Kremlin.
Additionally, the U. S. delegation toured the "Pietro" subway system in
Moscow under the guidance of Mr. Morozov.
On 22 August the U. S. delegation, Mr. Morozov and Captain Bannov
departed for the port of Odessa. Upon arrival in Odessa, the contingent
was met by Mr. Sergei Nunuparov, the Director of the Black Sea Design
Bureau, Captain Yuriy B. D:imov, a member of the initial Soviet delegation
to the U. S. and a Division Manager of the Black Sea Designing Bureau, and
Mr. V. V. Philipenko, the Manager of the External Relations Department
of the Black Sea Shipping Company. The Working Group was housed in the
Krasnaya Hotel..
Two days of discussions took place at the Sailor's Rest Home of the
Black Sea Shipping Company. During these discussions, additional papers
were presented by the Soviet side explaining, in general terms, the
technological program of the Shipping Company for removing discharged. oil
and preventing w the discharge of oil from vessels.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
Sightseeiu_ included a guided tour of the city of Odessa, a
demonstration of oi.l/garbage collection vessel., a performance of
the Odessa Ball-, ',.any, a tour of the offices of the Black Sea
Design Bureau, to a Soviet-flag dry cargo vessel, and a tour
of the fifteer. :. P .d oii part of Illyitchovsk.
On the eveni
Novorossiysk abou.i.
of the Black Sea E
the Working Group departed Odessa for
_ vll-, "Shota Rustaveli", a passenger cruise ship
;t-'p Company. The trip lasted two days and included,
i Yalta. A working session was held aboard ship
a.
a twelve hour stop
after departure frc-
On 27 August, th; W~-king Group arrived in Novorossiysk and was met
by Mr. Leonid Krystyn, the General Technical Manager of the Novorossiysk
Shipping Company and a member of the first Soviet delegation to the U. S.
The first day in Novorossiysk included a tour of a Soviet-flag tanker
of approximately 40,000 DWWT, and a demonstration of the port's oil spill
response equipment and capabilities.
On 28 August, the Working Group examined a "shore-reception facility"
for treating dirty ballast water from tankers calling at the port to
load oil. After lunch, the Working Group toured the winery at Abrau-Dyurso.
The Working Group departed Novorossiysk on 29 August and sailed on
board a "Kometa" type hydrofoil craft to Tuapse where another shore-
reception facility was toured. This facility utilizes a different
treating system and provided the American delegation the opportunity
to compare the two methods of oil-water separation.
After a short stay in Tuapse, the Working Group continued on to
Sochi for the flight to Moscow the next day.
On 30 August, the Working Group returned to Moscow for the purpose
of negotiating an agreement on the program for 1974 and preparing a
Protocol. The Protocol was signed on 31 August by Morozov for the Soviet
Union and Captain Wallace for the U. S. (see attachment 1).
Social and Cultural Activities
In addition to sightseeing in each of the cities visited, the U. S.
delegation attended performances of the Odessa Ba:liet Company in Odessa
and the Tashkent Ballet Company at the Palace of Congresses in Moscow,
and received tours of the site of the "Yalta Conference" and the Abrau-
Dyurso Winery near Novorossiysk.
Three official dinners were given in honor of the U. S. Delegation.
While these dinners were extremely lavish, it was noted that there was
little difference between unofficial dinners and official dinners, all
of the dinners would qualify as feasts.
-2-
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
There wi?z, few opportunities to speak with Soviet citizens other than
those peopT.h _iated with the program. When the opportunities did arise,
however, t' L- delegation was quick to take advantage of the
situation. result, those people were given an opportunity to see
Americans in ,eeal life situations. Interestingly enough, the inability
to speak Russi Americans and English by the Soviets did not
hamper the abi -- rcc--o-.verse with the people. The exchange of thoughts
was usually ma -0--rough sign language and a significant number of toasts.
Negotiations fo, t Program
Negotiations f:r the development of a Protocol for this meeting of
the Working Group vegan when the delegations returned to Moscow from the
Black Sea area. It became apparent at the first meeting that in order
to develop an agre.lment which would provide for a meaningful program, a
significant amount of work would have to be accomplished. This was in
sharp contrast to the meeting in the U. S., where there was no true
negotiating, merely acceptance of U. S. proposals. One of the reasons
for this was that the U. S. side was now in a position to know more
about: marine pollution control activities in the Soviet Union and was
therefore more precise in its proposals for the program.
The first proposal for the 1.974 program was made by the Soviet side.
It was actually in the form of a counter-proposal to the Soviet Arctic
test program made at the meeting in the U. S. The proposal, made by
Mrs. Tsybul of HYDROMET, was basically to study the effects of
oil An low temperature conditions. The U. S. side studied this proposal
and indicated that it might be an acceptable exchange for a Soviet
technician to take part in U. S. tests of oil. spill containment and
recovery equipment in low temperature conditions. However, after
additional consideration, the U. S. side determined that the proposal
was outside the purview of the Working Group and strongly recommended
that it be transmitted to the Working Group on Effects of Pollutants
on Marine Organisms for their consideration. This was accepted by the
Soviet side, but it did leave the Arctic project in jeopardy. The .
Soviet side was willing to send a technician to the U. S. test, but they
could not make any firm commitments regarding similar Soviet tests. This
was acceptable to the U. S. after the Soviets agreed to investigate
the feasibility of U. S. participation in their testing program.
.For the most part, the development of the Protocol was left with
the U. S. side. Apparently, the Soviets felt more comfortable
about passing judgment on proposals rather than developing their own.
It was an obvious mistake then for the U. S. delegation to go to the
Soviet Union without firm proposals worked out in the U. S. Time was
lost in developing original proposals and little opportunity was giver,.
to the U. S. side to work out proposals. It must be stated however that
the Soviet side had no proposals prepared in advance, other than the
aforementioned Arctic test.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
The Protocol :,,at was finally agreed upon is the culmination of long
hours of work on iht last two days of the visit. The Soviets were
quite amenable t.: _L.~ing the Protocol as written by the U. S. side,
with some minor -^,ns and additions.
The Protocol As--:: some joint projects for 1974, but they are couched in
be established -L_ auurs who will head-up each invididual project
is again oriented data and information exchanges.
General Observations
are
There were no ma-;-- problems encountered during the visit, but there
some observations-,orthy of note.
4
It was obvious to a27?members of the delegation that we were kept
under surveillance, both electronic and visual, while at least in Moscow.
This may have been limited to this delegation because of the large number
of military personnel. It was felt that the Soviets do not clearly understand
the position of the Coast-Guard in the military structure and may have been
quite concerned about unescorted U. S. military presence in Moscow.
The itinerary proposed by the Soviet side allowed sufficient time for
working sessions but, as it evolved in reality, the time allotted for
working sessions was reduced by overruns of other events. This seriously
hindered the amount of work which would be accomplished and resulted in
extreme exhaustion on the part of all participants. When asked if an event
could be cancelled or cut short, Mr. Morozov would reply that he too
was only a guest and we were in the hands of other hosts. It was felt
that this situation could be alleviated in the future by insisting well in
advance on keeping to the schedule, particularly work sessions.
As previously stated in "Negotiations for the Program" the fact that.
neither side had firm proposals for the Protocol caused considerable
difficulty in the final negotiations.
The overall attitude of the U. S. delegation at the end of the trip
was pessimistic. The Soviets appear to be far behind the U. S. in the
technical aspects of marine pollution control and seem to be interested
in receiving as much technical information as possible while giving
as little as they can. Documents received from the Soviets thus far
have been superficial and general and foretell of the tenor of their
future input to the program. It must be kept in mind that the Soviet
side is represented by the Ministry of the Merchant Marine which is the
"regulated", while the Coast Cuard, on the U. S. side is the "regulator"
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
Which gray irindeer ratherirrp, F +-;
i.l 1.nrr~ -j on r.evearch Pm~*rar conceived
by other "ini:;Lrie>. The ciualit:y and qu,rntity of i.nnfnrr ltion received
in the next >i:; rnr~nt`.s aid tlrc le re ]. of Soviet: partict ~aLion in joint:
proprarrs 'reretofore a^rerd to, will e stahli ;Ir the direction-of t`ie
p ro,cyra:n for Lhe future.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/04/25: CIA-RDP79-00798AO01000030004-0
Report on "irst "eeting of US/USS' :'or.l:ing Crone on 'urine Pollution
frorl Sllior) i.ng
The .Toint T T S/t!SSP T.;or',iTI rroun on 'Inrinc Poll.uton frcr.; Shi')*?ln net
in the united States Burins' tee peri.n(1 14*`a'' throusll 27 '1v 1973. 'Purinn
this period discussions were held to identify areas of nutu; 1 intcre?:t
for future ?)rnlectr, and field trios '!ere. made to a variety or facilities
ill the U. S. dealing 1'i tll marine Pollution matters.
Itinerary'
After arri_vinn in New York and erec cd'.ng*, to T'a,llington on 13 "a"?
t lle Soviet; delec'atio'1 T yet: the U. dole, ati.en and departed on 14
for the U. S. Coast, guard Academy at :'e w London, Connocti c)lt ? 1t tili s
t il:le the two delec?at1c:154 i1lcl.uCled: mirtl.CiPant:.`; in the S1lienin'n !'roue
as well as the ,'Orkin-. rr:)uo on : an ne Poll.ution from fill. and gas ('01 1
Drilling and Producing OOnn_ratioIl s. A 1 1/2 (ln? mint confc'.rc:ncr', was
bold at the Ac'.30er , during' 11C!i bac round information Cis caCh%nged
rep arc1ing,' such 1_tems aS bureaucrat to Or" inizatioll and .itare-ef-t}hC^art.
teclnolo^p' iii pol!.ution prevent-J011. At the. of the ln:i-nt conrerc':.Ce,
t lle 0 1 Production ?'o r', Inc croup den)arted for New Orleans, the
S1;iP')in.c, -rouT) remained at the ,lcaeel v for further di.scussiosc.
From 15 "a^ throw h 17 `a", the Slll')T)ing grou") met and liscusa-G
items for inc1 us loll 1n tlir' minutes of ag,reeement: Protocol, oC enCI
On 17 "n,,, the Sill'c')_i::;g grout) departed Ne1n London and ma('e. a brio F
s ton at Loan Airnnrt in ",o:;ton, ''risc,1Ci:usctts to oi,cerv,, a denonstr,^L'-O^
of the JP" e'.4-1'.0r, all Oil removal device. Berton:;t:raL,o:1 was
included in the itinerar" at th s-)e(i fic renl:est of tl Soviet ClelO ";ttion.
The grow) then departe(1 for U. S. Coast Guard Air St1.tinll Pane Co,.,
where a recent:iou was ie , f C'Cl by the Air Station in honor of the Soy' O-L
d elegy ati_on. Cr: 13 v, t..' 1.roun toured .t'1:' T') (-s Pole Oceeclllner.anh4 c
ins titutloli at ',100(1 3 7 O~.C, assail u.` (.? .ttfi Ind :a^ i_ven. t'O-) nrt(lil't
,..1` Oil T)n1lllt_ C)11,
to dine l t'. e ^rohici Of marine Pn1llltl.O1?, nrtjell!
L: it11 the Strlff Of t'1C' .anti tutl.na. 1.C'. groin) then dctr