Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi (shown in a Nov. 6 photo) said yesterday he hoped that an agreement between Iran and European countries on Tehran’s nuclear program could soon be finalized (AFP photo/Behrouz Mehri). Iran Expected to Accept Uranium Enrichment Freeze Iran could soon sign an agreement to fully freeze its uranium enrichment activities during negotiations with the European powers on a final pact on Tehran’s nuclear program, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 8). “We came very close to agreement (Sunday) but we still need to hear the final word” from Iran, said Cristina Gallach, a spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana...Full Story

Battle Continues Over Chemical Weapons Incineration By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Fourteen years after the United States began destroying its chemical weapons by incineration, environmental activists continue to push the federal government to dispose of all remaining materials with an alternative technology (see GSN, Sept. 22)...Full Story

Senate Negotiators Propose Keeping Intelligence Budget Classified to Move Forward on Reform Bill By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Senate negotiators yesterday offered to drop their earlier insistence that the total intelligence budget be declassified in order to move forward a stalled effort to reach a final intelligence reform bill (see GSN, Nov. 8)...Full Story

	Tuesday, November 9, 2004

Senate Negotiators Propose Keeping Intelligence Budget Classified to Move Forward on Reform Bill By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Senate negotiators yesterday offered to drop their earlier insistence that the total intelligence budget be declassified in order to move forward a stalled effort to reach a final intelligence reform bill (see GSN, Nov. 8). Under the new Senate proposal, the total intelligence budget would remain classified. However, the planned national intelligence director would be directed to submit to Congress a report on the advisability of declassifying the intelligence budget and the total budgets of the individual intelligence agencies.  The Sept. 11 commission included a proposal to declassify the total intelligence budget and the total budgets of various agencies among the intelligence reform recommendations it issued this summer as a way to help improve accountability. While the Senate last month included a budget declassification provision in its reform legislation, the measure was not included in the House bill and is opposed by the White House. In exchange for the “major compromise” of keeping the intelligence budget classified, the national intelligence director would receive “exclusive” budgetary authority over the budget for the National Intelligence Program, which consists of agencies that handle foreign intelligence, according to a joint statement released by Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins and top committee Democrat Joseph Lieberman (Conn.). Currently, the defense secretary controls about 80 percent of intelligence funding. “We believe this Senate offer accomplishes the goal that we are all striving toward — to achieve real and comprehensive intelligence reform, to give the national intelligence director strong budget authority and to ensure effective coordination among the nation’s 15 intelligence agencies,” said Collins and Lieberman, two of the main Senate negotiators. “As with any major legislation, a final agreement will require compromise by both sides,” they added. The Senate negotiators’ move away from declassifying the intelligence budget is “disappointing,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Project on Government Secrecy. “It makes a mockery of the 9/11 commission. Why did the commission spend all that time deliberating over the issue only to be told their conclusions would jeopardize national security?” he said. The Senate proposal is intended to press efforts to reach a final intelligence reform bill, which lawmakers had previously hoped to accomplish by the Nov. 2 elections. Much of the debate has centered on what level of budgetary authority the national intelligence director should have over three intelligence agencies within the Defense Department — the National Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. In their statement yesterday, Collins and Lieberman noted the offer made by House negotiators last month to give the national intelligence director the authority to “determine” the intelligence budgets for the agencies in the National Intelligence Program. The House had previously proposed lesser authority for the director to formulate the agencies’ intelligence budgets. The Washington Post reported today, however, that House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), one of the House negotiators, opposed the Senate offer. Citing a committee spokesman, the Post reported that Hunter opposed the Senate proposal’s provision to provide the national intelligence director with “exclusive” budgetary authority, preferring instead that the director be required to allocate funds to intelligence agencies through the defense secretary instead of directly to the agencies. The Senate proposal is a “nonstarter,” the Post quoted committee Staff Director Harald Stavenas as saying. The Senate negotiators also proposed backing away from a provision in the Senate intelligence reform bill that would give the national intelligence director unlimited authority to transfer funds and personnel among the agencies within the National Intelligence Program. Instead, the director would have the authority to transfer up to 10 percent of an agency’s funding within a single fiscal year. The House proposal would limit the director’s transfer authority to 5 percent of an agency’s funding. “We hope that the House will embrace our offer and move forward with us to send an intelligence reform bill to the full Congress and to the president’s desk before the end of the year,” Collins and Lieberman said. Back to top

India, EU Agree to Increase Nonproliferation Efforts India and the European Union yesterday agreed to a plan to help combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, according to the Press Trust of India news agency (see GSN, Sept. 22). During a summit at The Hague, India and the EU agreed to “enhance collective action to fight the proliferation of WMD and well as the means of delivery,” according to a joint statement. Indian and EU experts are set to meet to discuss detailed areas of cooperation, the statement said. The action plan also calls on India and the EU to increase efforts against terrorism, reduce terrorists’ access to financial resources and to improve border controls, PTI reported (PTI/BBC Worldwide Monitoring, Nov. 8). Back to top

Iran Expected to Accept Uranium Enrichment Freeze Iran could soon sign an agreement to fully freeze its uranium enrichment activities during negotiations with the European powers on a final pact on Tehran’s nuclear program, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 8). “We came very close to agreement (Sunday) but we still need to hear the final word” from Iran, said Cristina Gallach, a spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana. “We think it will be a yes — the noises are positive but we are not sure,” said one diplomat familiar with the talks involving Iran, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Senior Iranian officials also indicated that the preliminary agreement negotiated in Paris last weekend could soon be signed. An announcement was expected this week, according to AP. “The trend of negotiations was a positive trend,” Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi told Iranian state-run television yesterday. “We hope the deal between Iran and Europeans can be finalized and create the necessary confidence.” The deal still could collapse, however, due to resistance by hard-liners in Iran, diplomats told AP. The agreement would only commit Iran to freeze enrichment activities until it finalizes a permanent agreement with the European Union that would include economic incentives and assistance in building a peaceful nuclear energy industry, diplomats said. The United States, however, continues to insist on an indefinite suspension and referral of Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. A deal with Iran could lead to tensions between the Europeans and the United States, one diplomat told AP. “If we solve a problem with the Iranians we hope there will not be a problem with the Americans,” the diplomat said (George Jahn, Associated Press/Billings Gazette, Nov. 8). The extent of any halt by Iran of uranium enrichment activities remained unresolved at the talks in Paris, diplomats told Agence France-Presse yesterday. “The two sides agreed on Saturday on a provisional text, with some bracketed language,” a Western diplomat said, referring to areas of unresolved language. The first area was “over the scope of the suspension, with Iran rejecting the idea of suspending all uranium conversion work,” the diplomat said, while the second question revolved around the EU insistence that the suspension be indefinite. “Iran is pushing for a time-specific duration, namely six months,” the diplomat said, but the Europeans “refused and said the suspension must be maintained until a long-term agreement is reached” between Iran and the EU. The European formula “is a clear-cut suspension, no doubt about it. It is tied to the (ongoing) talks and the talks are indefinite,” a second diplomat said. The first diplomat told AFP that Iran tried to extract a guarantee that the International Atomic Energy Agency would close its investigation before Iran suspended uranium enrichment. The Europeans insisted that suspension must come first (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Nov. 8). Iran’s deal with the European powers is unlikely to work if Washington is not included, diplomats and an expert told Reuters yesterday. “In the long run, I don’t think this deal can work without the U.S. buying into it,” said David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and head of the Institute for Science and International Security think tank. He added that such a deal could work for about six months, but not much longer. “One problem is that Iran can suspend for six months, then resume enrichment and somehow blame the EU,” he said. Several diplomats said Iran could agree to temporarily suspend enrichment to avoid being referred to the Security Council, then have a falling out with the Europeans sometime after the Nov. 25 IAEA meeting and continue uranium enrichment work. “Iran has the parts for 1,100 to 1,200 (enrichment) centrifuges and is eager to put a cascade together,” said one non-U.S. diplomat. “The next stage for Iran will be announcing that they are setting up a pilot enrichment cascade but not enriching any uranium.” (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters, Nov. 8). Back to top       Israel’s Nuclear Weapons Are Obstacle to Middle East Peace, IAEA Chief ElBaradei Says Israel should give up its nuclear arsenal in a settlement with the Palestinians and as part of a greater peace plan for the Middle East, International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei told the Sydney Morning Herald in an interview published today (see GSN, July 9). “This is not really sustainable that you have Israel sitting with nuclear weapons capability there while everyone else is part of the nonproliferation regime,” ElBaradei said, according to Haaretz. Muslims in the Middle East resent Israel’s weapons, he said. “It is a very emotional issue in the Middle East,” ElBaradei said. While he was encouraged by a tentative agreement between Iran and the European powers on suspension of Tehran’s uranium enrichment activities (see related GSN story, today), ElBaradei warned that convincing Iran to abandon any possible nuclear arms ambitions would depend on Israel doing the same. “In my view, in the Middle East you are facing two options,” he said. “Either we will have in the next 10, 20 years three or four countries trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and, worse, have extremist groups trying to get their hands on nuclear devices, or you can try to build a security structure that’s built on confidence, cooperation and trust.” Israel should not be pressured to disarm, ElBaradei said. Instead, a comprehensive Middle East peace plan should be devised that incorporates disarmament. “I don’t think it’s a matter of pressure,” ElBaradei said. “It’s a question of providing Israel with a credible alternative that they are better off without nuclear weapons.” (Haaretz, Nov. 9). Back to top       Y-12 Plant May be Vulnerable to Earthquakes The Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn., could be vulnerable to earthquakes, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Nov. 4). A seismic analysis, conducted on a plant building where uranium warhead components are made, “indicated extensive seismic deficiencies with the building structure as well as facility systems and components,” according to an Oct. 15 memo from the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. A board spokesman declined to discuss details of the building’s weakness, AP reported. It could cost upwards of $72 million and take up to five years to repair the building, according to the memo (Associated Press, Nov. 8).  Back to top       Japanese Officials Arrive in North Korea for Talks on Resuming Nuclear Dialogue Japanese officials arrived in North Korea today to encourage Pyongyang to resume multilateral talks aimed at resolving the standoff over its nuclear program, Reuters reported (see GSN, Nov. 8). Substantive talks are expected begin tomorrow and should last through Friday, said Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda. “We must urge them to restart six-party talks at an early date,” Hosoda said (Teruaki Ueno, Reuters, Nov. 9). Meanwhile, North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Yong Il is in Beijing today also for talks on reopening nuclear negotiations, Chinese officials said. “Kim Yong Il is starting his visit to China from today,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said, according to Agence France-Presse. Kim is expected to meet with Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing and Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei, she said (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Nov. 9). Back to top       Asian-Pacific Officials to Improve Nuclear Security Ministers from 18 Asia-Pacific region nations yesterday agreed to increase security at nuclear facilities, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, July 6). The ministers signed a statement yesterday during a meeting in Sydney promising to “expand and enhance the nuclear safeguards and security framework,” according to AP. Officials from the 18 countries met today to work out the details of the agreement, AP reported. Representatives from the countries also pledged to tighten international security standards and borders to halt illegal exports of nuclear material (Mike Corder, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Nov. 8). Back to top

Focus on Bioterrorism Drains Research Funds for Infectious Diseases, Hong Kong Scientist Warns World leaders have focused on fighting bioterrorism at the expense of funding research on emerging infectious diseases, the scientist who discovered the SARS virus warned today (see GSN, May 25). “The example of SARS and avian flu and many others show us that nature is the most potent bioterrorist of all,” said Malik Peiris, a microbiologist at the University of Hong Kong, according to the Associated Press. “If we skew our investment to focusing on a few diseases that might be potent bioterrorist weapons, I think we are losing a great opportunity to be much better prepared for the next emerging infectious disease that is surely going to hit us,” he added. Peiris said that avian flu, if it were to mutate into a form that allows for human-to-human transmission, could initiate the world’s next pandemic (Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Nov. 9). Back to top

Battle Continues Over Chemical Weapons Incineration By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Fourteen years after the United States began destroying its chemical weapons by incineration, environmental activists continue to push the federal government to dispose of all remaining materials with an alternative technology (see GSN, Sept. 22). Lawsuits are still in play to stop incineration now under way at sites in Oregon and Alabama. Another suit would halt work at all four U.S. chemical weapons incinerators. Away from the courts, citizen activist organizations such as the Chemical Weapons Working Group and GASP maintain an ongoing campaign to focus the attention of legislators and the public to the issue. Even if the groups cannot win the war, they hope to extract smaller victories from the government. Each lawsuit or press release is a chance for critics to explain the perceived environmental and safety dangers of burning and for the U.S. Army to respond with details of the elaborate safety measures it has taken to ensure no dangerous materials escape a facility. “Combustion … is a very polluting approach,” said Craig Williams of the Kentucky-based Chemical Weapons Working Group. “It releases hundreds of toxic compounds as part of its operation, even when it works as designed.” “There are so many safety features built into these facilities … that they are safe as safe can be,” counters Mike Abrams, spokesman for the Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Alabama. “We cannot afford to be hogtied by fear. We have to do something to reduce the danger presented by the storage of chemical weapons.” Under the international Chemical Weapons Convention, the United States has until 2007 to destroy its chemical weapons, with an option to request a five-year extension to 2012. The Army began looking at options in the 1970s to destroy 30,000 tons of sarin, VX, mustard, blister and nerve agents contained in rockets, artillery, mortars, land mines and bulk containers. Officials selected incineration in 1987 for its capability to destroy the agent and explosives and to decontaminate metal pieces, said Jeff Lindblad, a spokesman for the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency. From 1990 to 2000, the Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System burned more than 4 million pounds of nerve and blister agents and 412,732 munitions and containers on a small spit of land 800 miles southwest of Hawaii. Plans originally called for chemical weapons stored at eight sites on the continental United States to be incinerated at facilities near the storage depots. Incinerators are now operating at Anniston, Tooele, Utah, and Umatilla, Ore., with a fourth to begin disposal next year at Pine Bluff, Ark. Something, however, happened on the way to full incineration. In the 1990s, public concerns about incinerators led Congress to direct the Army to consider alternate forms of disposal. The Chemical Materials Agency relented to the pressure, eventually selecting neutralization for four sites where incinerators were not yet being built — Edgewood, Md.; Newport, Ind.; Blue Grass, Ky.; and Pueblo, Colo. It was a victory for opponents of incineration, but Lindblad said changing technologies in midstream should not significantly increase the anticipated $24 billion price tag or slow the schedule of disposal. “We will use the best technologies,” he said. “Both the technologies work and they work well.” Fire and Water While they accept neutralization, Chemical Materials Agency officials have not backed off their belief in the safety of incineration. Anniston has three furnaces — one each for rockets, artillery and chemical agent removed from the munitions. The facility has destroyed nearly 43,000 rockets filled with sarin since operations began in August 2003 (see GSN, Nov. 2). Weapons and agent go separately through a furnace and then a 2,000-degree afterburner. Flames decontaminate metal shells, which are later collected for recycling. All that remains of the chemical agent and other weapons parts are ash and condensation that are chilled to 140 degrees to avoid creating toxic furans. Each furnace contains a pollution abatement system to keep debris and condensation from entering the exhaust stack. Brine from the system is shipped to a landfill, mixed with cement and buried. Remaining exhaust from the furnaces goes through charcoal filters to stop any chemical agent from escaping through the exhaust stack. Monitors have been placed in the stack to detect agent particles, Abrams said. The safety equipment is largely the same at all four incinerators, though Tooele does not have the charcoal filters, Abrams said. Studies of the Johnston Atoll incinerator during a trial burn found that it released fewer toxic dioxins into the air than a diesel truck moving at 40 mph. The dioxin toxicity level from the Johnston stack over a year was equivalent to smoking 1.7 to 17 cigarettes over that same time period, according to a 1995 report by environmental engineer Harvey Rogers of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. “For heavy metals and dioxins, our examinations to date have shown emission levels to be safe. In fact, the dioxin emission levels for the Army incinerators have typically been among the lowest we have seen for all types of incinerators,” Rogers said in another CDC document. Exhaust from the Anniston facility is cleaner than what was found at Johnston Atoll, Abrams said. Opponents and observers have different takes on incineration, with Williams describing both the process and the outcome as deeply flawed. There have been 18 documented releases of chemical agent into the environment since 1986 at incinerators, Williams said. Most releases came out an exhaust stack, though a few happened inside the facility, said Paul Walker, director of the Legacy program at Global Green USA, an organization dedicated to eliminating weapons of mass destruction. Chemical Materials Agency spokesman Greg Mahall charged that “creative accounting” was used to develop those figures, noting that incineration did not begin until 1990. The most significant agent release, at Tooele, dissipated “to no effects within 50 feet or so of the stack,” he said in an e-mail message. The two camps, not surprisingly, dispute many points regarding incinerator safety. Abrams said trial burns at Anniston almost uniformly identified more than 93 percent of materials emitted from the exhaust stack. Williams said the Army’s list of substances fails to include hundreds of materials, and placed the amount of identified substances at 20 percent. “For the other 80 percent they don’t know what it is, they assume it’s not harmful,” he said. “That is absolutely insane.” Thousands of tons of “potentially polluting” gases are released from incinerator stacks each day, Walker said. Monitors do not check for substances such as mercury, lead and heavy metals, he said. Expelled amounts of the materials were within permitted limits during trial burns, Abrams said. Incinerator operators also do not have to consider the existing environmental situation in their communities when burning, Williams said. For example, Anniston has a history of contamination of potentially harmful PCBs, .28 grams of which Abrams said were released during the total elimination of sarin rockets. Chemical agent monitors in exhaust stacks and at depot perimeters regularly sound false alarms, which could slow human reaction in the event of an actual release, Walker said. Neutralization is safer for the environment and workers, Williams said: there is no exhaust to be released into the atmosphere, the process allows for greater control of disposal and batches of agent can be treated more than once if the first run-through does not achieve sufficient destruction. The process is already under way in Maryland, where chemical agent is drained from 1-ton containers and mixed with hot water in industrial reactors for neutralization. Similar procedures are planned for nonweaponized chemicals in Indiana and agents contained in munitions at Kentucky and Colorado. Neutralization isn’t without its own troubles. Plans to ship waste created by the process at the Newport facility in Indiana for processing at a plant in New Jersey have met fierce resistance from officials in Delaware and New Jersey who worry about pollutants being dumped into the Delaware River after the final treatment (see GSN, April 9). Neutralization is the technology of choice in Russia, the world’s other major owner of chemical weapons. Russia plans to neutralize more than 40,000 tons of chemical weapons at seven sites, Walker said. Destruction methods have not been selected for much smaller stockpiles in Libya and Albania, Walker said. The final two countries with acknowledged stockpiles under the Chemical Weapons Convention — India and South Korea — have not said how or where they are eliminating their munitions. The Fight Opponents over the years have filed more than 20 lawsuits to halt incineration at U.S. sites, CMA spokesman Mahall said in an interview with Global Security Newswire. None have yet succeeded. “So far I think our record holds up that we’re being protective,” he said. The most recent battleground has been at Umatilla, where opponents unsuccessfully sought to block operations in September. The Oregon Appeals Court last month rejected an injunction request against the Umatilla incinerator, and indicated it expects the lawsuit by burning opponent GASP to eventually fail (see GSN, Sept. 22). Meanwhile, the Chemical Weapons Working Group and other plaintiffs expect a trial early next year in their lawsuit to stop work at Anniston. Williams said he understands the chances of winning at trial: “To be pragmatic about it, I would say that it is less than even.” Legal cases have value even if they fail to close incinerators, Williams said. An Oregon Circuit Court judge in July refused to revoke the operating permit for the Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, he said, but ordered the state to increase protection for whistleblowers in the facility’s operating permit and required additional agent alarms to be placed in the incinerator building. The dispute over incineration also occurs in the court of public opinion. Each facility has an outreach office in a nearby community. Interested citizens can come in to ask questions or read reports, while local groups can request speakers to make presentations on the facility. “[It is] one-stop shopping for folks coming in for information on the program,” Lindblad said. “Anything that anyone wants to know about, they can go to that office and get that information.” Opponents, lacking the financial support of the U.S. government, take a more grass-roots approach to making their case. The Chemical Weapons Working Group Web site tracks developments at U.S. disposal facilities, and contains a link to Learning Not to Burn, a publication that details the risks of burning waste and offers instruction on organizing against incinerators. The organization continues to seek improved monitoring at all chemical weapons storage and disposal sites, increased protection for workers and whistleblowers and more information on site operations for nearby communities, Williams said. While he sympathized with the concerns expressed by Williams and other incinerator opponents, chemical weapons expert Jonathan Tucker said the priority must remain on destroying the U.S. stockpiles. That means using the existing incinerators rather than slowing the program to adopt new technology at those locations. “For the areas that have already built incinerators at huge investment, I think we should go ahead and destroy the stocks,” said Tucker, a senior researcher at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. “If we delay any more we could miss the 2012 deadline, which would set a very bad precedent for other countries” (see GSN, Nov. 3). Walker agreed that the incinerators are not likely to be shut down at this point. There are other options, he said. Mario Fiori, former assistant Army secretary for installations and the environment, briefly discussed constructing a neutralization facility at Umatilla alongside the depot’s incinerator, Walker said. “Doubling up” would allay some safety fears and speed the disposal process, he said. Depot spokeswoman Mary Binder said the discussion was limited to one public meeting in March 2002: “That never went anywhere.” Even if the battle seems lost, there is still work to be done, said Rufus Kinney, spokesman for Families Concerned About Nerve Gas Incineration, a group that formed in the early 1990s against the Anniston incinerator. In September 2002, the organization drew more than 350 people to a march against the facility. Burning began less than a year later, and even the group’s core membership has dropped to almost nothing, Kinney acknowledged. “It’s hard to keep up the same level of enthusiasm and commitment that I had for so long because they’re burning and they’re not going to stop burning,” said Kinney, who lives in nearby Jacksonville. The organization helped press for safety equipment at residences and school in the area of the incinerator as it became clear that burning would occur, Kinney said. He said he still uses contacts with government officials and the press, letters to the editors and other means to press for improved monitoring at the incinerator and for better public access to information on the facility’s daily operations. After 10 years of fighting the incinerator, Pine Bluff for Safe Disposal Executive Director Evelyn Yates is focusing on improving community preparedness ahead of the Arkansas facility’s expected opening in February.  Families dealing with their daily issues might not have time to plan for an emergency, and lessons could easily be forgotten in the chaos of a chemical agent release, Yates said. She hopes to develop a program to train local students to inform their families and the community on the strategies prepared by the Arkansas Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program. Yates also would like to see an independent monitor set up for the site, to ensure the public knows what it coming out of the exhaust stack. “We fought for years to stop it and it’s in our face,” she said. “We just have to find ways to make sure the facility will be safe.” Back to top       Workers Drain and Decontaminate Leaking Mustard Container at Aberdeen Disposal Facility The U.S. Army this weekend successfully drained and decontaminated a leaking 1-ton container of mustard agent at the Aberdeen Chemical Agent Disposal Facility in Maryland, the Army announced in a press release (see GSN, Aug. 27). After twice being found leaking last summer while in storage, the container was sealed until it could be removed for draining, according to the Army. Components of the kit used to seal the container caused a mustard-agent sensor to sound an alarm yesterday after work was finished. Facility workers had noticed an odor immediately beforehand, the Army said. No mustard vapor escaped the building; workers were examined and cleared of exposure at the facility medical clinic (U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency release, Nov. 8). Back to top

Iran Can Mass-Produce Missile, Defense Minister Says Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani announced today that Iran now has the capability to “mass-produce” its Shahab 3 medium-range ballistic missile, according to Reuters (see GSN, Oct. 20). The Shahab 3 missile was first deployed with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards last year, according to Reuters. Shamkhani said recent improvements to the missile’s range and accuracy were made to allow Iran to fire the Shahab 3 from anywhere within its borders and “not to threaten a certain country.” In response to Shamkhani’s announcement, an Israeli security source said, “We expected this development, and have deployed accordingly.” Reuters reported that the source was referring to the Arrow 2 missile interceptor (Amir Paivar, Reuters, Nov. 9). Back to top

Russian Submarine Dismantled with Japanese Aid A joint Russian-Japanese project has completed the dismantlement of a Russian Pacific Fleet Victor 3-class nuclear submarine, ITAR-Tass reported today (see GSN, Oct. 21). The submarine’s reactor was transported for storage and its spent fuel has been sent to the Mayak facility in the Russian city of Chelyabinsk for reprocessing, according to ITAR-Tass. Japan began supporting the dismantling of Russian submarines last year, ITAR-Tass reported. Plans to dismantle an additional five submarines were Japanese aid are now being considered (ITAR-Tass/BBC Monitoring, Nov. 9).   Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

© Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.