Notwithstanding the verified business licences, the Panel recommends no award of compensation for the asserted business losses in each of these three claims.

In the verification and valuation of these claims, the Panel has applied paragraphs 207 to 219 of the First E4 Report, as adapted in paragraphs 71 to 72 of the Instalment Twenty Three (A) Report for the stand alone claims.

After extensive claim development and the verification measures described earlier in this report, the Panel was able to resolve the competing claims in the instalment.

Before discussing the Panel's specific recommendations for compensating the thirtieth instalment claims, it is important to restate the Panel's approach to the verification and valuation of these claims.

The Panel applied the approach to verification and valuation of overlapping claims that is set out paragraphs 38 42 of the Special report and recommendations made by the E4' and E4A' Panels of Commissioners concerning overlapping claims (S AC.26 2002 28).

Taking into account the evidentiary and causation requirements that must be met by claimants in category D , and considering the legal principles that must be respected in the verification and valuation of compensable losses, a case by case assessment of each claim is required.

The claim preparers were often listed as the contact persons in the claim files and some claim files included attestations from the claim preparers opining on the merits of the claim.

review of non overlapping claims in the FOURTHsecond group of overlapping claims

For these claims, the electronic information existing in the database was compared to the paper claim forms submitted by the claimants.

First F4 instalment, claim Nos. 5000363, 5000408 and 5000409.

Details of the claims or parts of claims that were deferred from previous F4 instalments or transferred from other claims categories are discussed in the relevant sections of this report.

These E4 claims were considered in the second instalment of E4 claims.

A similar exercise was conducted with respect to category C for the purpose of identifying duplicate claims during claims processing.

Claims

The secretariat has also used these electronic searches for duplicate claims in the Palestinian late claims programme, the Bedouin programme and the category A and C late claims programme.

Concerning the issue of duplicate claims, the secretariat indicated that it was aware of the risk of duplicate claims from the outset of claims processing and took steps to identify and eliminate such claims during the course of claims processing.

In connection with the claims by governments for loss of life and reduced quality of life of their nationals, Iraq asserts that the claims are inadmissible because the Claimants concerned lack legal standing to bring such claims before the Commission.

First F4 instalment claim Nos. 5000354, 5000355, 5000356, 5000357, 5000358 and 5000430.

Verification of a generic facility

(c) Verification of compliance with the rules

Verification of business licences

Verification of insurance documents

This global approach was suited to the specifics of category C claims processing, as category C claims are subject to mass claims processing procedures and are not subject to extensive individual review or claim development.

The Panel reviewed the potentially overlapping claims in the fourthsecond group of overlapping claims as and when the information provided by the claimants permitted an initial determination to be made on the existence of overlap.

Category E F claims During the period under review, the secretariat reviewed one request from one Government for corrections to a claim in category E F .

Verification of nuclear disarmament final report on studies into the verification of nuclear warheads and their components

Having reviewed the results of the checks by the secretariat and the response received from Kuwait, the Panel is satisfied that, although there may be a theoretical risk of duplication of parts of this claim with some claims for which awards have been made by the Commission, the risk is marginal and does not warrant an adjustment.

Contingent owned Equipment Verification Unit

Check for new versions of packages

Authentication failed

Verification

Some claimants indicated that they engaged a claim preparer after seeing advertisements placed in Kuwaiti newspapers offering assistance with the filing of Palestinian late claims .

development of the FOURTHsecond group of overlapping claims

review of the FOURTH group of overlapping claims

Based on the results of these cross checks, the Panel is satisfied that there is no risk of duplication of awards of compensation that requires an adjustment to the Panel's recommendations.

Third F4 instalment, claim No. 5000450 and fourth F4 instalment, claim Nos. 5000454 and 5000466.

As the category D Palestinian late claims were not filed until the end of the regular category D work programme, matches between regular and Palestinian category D claims were identified upon review of the latter claims.

(e) Medical claims

In particular, the Panel considered that it was appropriate to propose, as needed, adjustments to such awards in the light of new information and evidence presented.

Duplicate claims

Category C corrections Recommendations for corrections to category C claims are those arising from confirmed duplicate claims, discrepancies between the electronic and paper claim formats, and multiple recovery based on the duplication of claim awards.

Stand alone claims

Recommendations for corrections to category A claims include the following kinds of corrections duplicate claims, higher to lower amounts, family to individual and change of submitting responsible entity.

The awards for these category A claims should be reduced to the amounts appropriate to the proper status of the claims.

So that the impact of each verification technique can be characterized in terms of its contribution to an arms control verification scheme, we have defined two types of verification function, which any of these techniques may fulfil.