U.S. Representative Dave Hobson (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Appropriations Energy and Water Subcommittee, eliminated a Bush administration request to fund nuclear weapons research and development, but executive branch officials may be seeking alternate strategies for funding. Bush Administration Could Seek to Bypass House Committee Chairman on Nuke Research Funding By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The Bush administration may seek to bypass a powerful congressional opponent of its controversial nuclear weapons research and development agenda to resume funding next year that was cut by Congress for fiscal 2005, an official said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 30). Last month, Congress omitted from an appropriations bill $37 million the administration had requested to study the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator and other Advanced Concepts nuclear weapons research and development initiatives...Full Story

Pakistani Ambassador Outlines New Nuclear Security Measures Imposed After Khan Scandal By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Pakistani Ambassador to the United States Jehangir Karamat outlined yesterday the new “custodial measures” his country has put into place to protect its nuclear weapons program in the wake of revelations that Pakistani nuclear technology has been transferred abroad (see GSN, Dec. 6)...Full Story

Rapid Deployment of Antibiotics, Vaccines Would Offer Best Protection in Anthrax Attack, Researchers Say By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A “targeted and rapid” deployment of antibiotics and vaccines after an anthrax attack would more effectively protect victims from illness than a mass inoculation program implemented before a potential incident, Johns Hopkins University researchers said this week (see GSN, Dec. 13)...Full Story

	Thursday, December 16, 2004

Australia Establishes 1,000-Mile Nautical Zone Australia has created a 1,000-nautical-mile security zone around its border, within which it plans to monitor ships for possible terrorist threats, Australian Prime Minister John Howard announced yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 30). All ships that pass through the zone heading to Australia will be required to provide details of their crew, cargo and destination, according to the London Independent. Those ships deemed to be possible threats would be intercepted. Legal experts yesterday, though, questioned whether Australia has the authority to intercept ships outside the traditional 200-nautical-mile limit of its territorial waters, according to the Independent. “With the exception of pirate ships and ships that are not flying flags, and one or two very minor exceptions, there is no real basis upon which any country can just stop any ship at all on the highs seas because it does infringe this fundamental freedom of high seas navigational freedom,” said Sydney University international law professor Don Rothwell (Kathy Marks, London Independent, Dec. 16). Back to top       Canadian Senate Criticizes Border Security A newly released report by the Canadian Senate says the country has been relying on luck to avoid a terrorist attack rather than adequate security measures, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, June 22). “Unfortunately, luck is notoriously untrustworthy,” legislators wrote in the report. Most border crossings are staffed by a single employee, according to the report, and missing airport security badges and uniforms have been found for sale on eBay. “The potential damage to the Canadian economy and other consequences that would come with allowing a terrorist to infiltrate the U.S. through Canada are massive,” the report says. The report calls for reform, increased defense spending and improved cooperation with the United States (Associated Press/Billings Gazette, Dec. 16). Back to top

U.S. Seeks Industry Input on Cargo Security By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge today asked industry for help in devising a national strategy on cargo security. Opening a two-day meeting of Homeland Security Department and cargo industry representatives, Ridge asked participants to use a draft strategy developed by the department as “a starting point” for their deliberations. “Cargo security is a linchpin issue not only for the security of our homeland but also for our economic security as well,” Ridge told the participants, who were convened for the purpose by the federally funded Homeland Security Institute. “We think that you can help us refine and then finalize a national cargo security strategy,” he said. Ridge cited cargo-security achievements by the department since its establishment early last year, including the rapid spread of the Container Security Initiative (see GSN, Dec. 14) and the deployment at U.S. ports of new screening equipment to check cargo for contraband and weapons of mass destruction (see GSN, Oct. 15). Stressing the complexity of protecting supply and distribution networks that stretch across national and international jurisdictions, however, he added that U.S. cargo can still be made much safer. “We’ve made a lot of progress in a very short period of time, but I don’t think there’s any of you in the audience that think we’re done yet,” Ridge said. Ridge was joined at the event by Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson, who as head of the department’s Border and Transportation Security Directorate has at times come under fire for the alleged lack of an overall security strategy (see GSN, Aug. 17). Following the withdrawal of President George W. Bush’s initial choice to replace the departing Ridge, former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, Hutchinson has been one of a handful of antiterrorism officials mentioned frequently as candidates to become the next homeland security secretary (see GSN, Dec. 13). Ridge said today that the border and transportation chief has “been by my side every step of the way,” participating in “every decision.” Hutchinson, an Arkansan, introduced Ridge in part by reading from a recent Arkansas Democrat-Gazette editorial praising the secretary. “I would like for them to be writing about me, but they’re writing about Secretary Ridge,” Hutchinson said. In an editorial Hutchinson did not mention, the Democrat-Gazette yesterday called him “a natural choice” for Ridge’s job but said acquaintances were unsure whether the undersecretary ð— rumored to be considering a run at the Arkansas governorship in 2006, according to the editorial — wanted the top post. Back to top       U.S. Port Security Poorly Funded, Expert Says The United States has not adequately funded port security, despite the fact that maritime transport remains vulnerable to terrorists wanting to transport weapons of mass destruction, a security expert said this week (see GSN, Oct. 15). “Congress and the ports have not stepped up to the plate to make the kind of effort that is needed to protect the ports,” said Jay Grant, director of the Port Security Council of America (see related GSN story, today). The fiscal 2005 homeland security bill signed by U.S. President George W. Bush contains $150 million of the $400 million port officials say is needed to secure their facilities, according to Grant, who also cited U.S. Coast Guard estimates that $1 billion would be needed in port-security funding for the fiscal year. Grant also criticized some aspects of funding for aviation security and local counterterrorism measures. “Spending billions of dollars on programs making all airline passengers remove their shoes at airports or giving chemical protection suits to firefighters in remote areas of the country does not add any real value to fighting terrorism,” he said. He added that that the government collects about $24 billion annually in fees and duties related to ports. “That is probably the best place to go for the money. Now, it all goes into the general treasury. But they could return some of it to the ports, in amounts proportionate to the ports’ size,” he said. Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Asa Hutchinson said earlier this week that, while the government is responsible for setting security policy, ports and the private sector must bear some of the cost for security improvements, according to Lloyd’s List (John McLaughlin, Lloyd’s List, Dec. 16). Back to top       U.S. Government Auditor Sees Room for Improvement in Homeland Security Technology Acquisitions By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Homeland Security Department (DHS) is not making full use of a key tool for acquiring anti-WMD equipment and other antiterrorism technology, government auditors said yesterday in a report to Congress. Twice since the department was established early last year, it has successfully acquired technology through arrangements known as “other transactions,” which have long been commonplace at agencies such as the Defense Department. The special transactions are exempt from the usual regulations on matters such as intellectual-property rights, making them useful for working with companies that otherwise shy away from government work. At the time of the Government Accountability Office’s review earlier this year, Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate had conducted “other transactions” in awarding an estimated $96 million for a prototype project on mobile chemical weapon analysis laboratories and $6.6 million for aircraft defense systems against shoulder-fired missiles. The auditors’ office said Homeland Security is not adequately using lessons learned in such transactions to guide further use of the special agreements, a failure the auditors said could have serious consequences for the department’s ability to acquire technology. “DHS’s ability to identify, prioritize and access the most promising research and technologies in the future will depend in part on its ability to capture and make accessible critical knowledge on the agency’s use of other-transactions authority,” the office said. The auditors said the department should also guide its staff on how and when to audit the transactions and should develop training programs on using them.    The office added that Homeland Security’s contracting staff is “limited in size and capacity, which could impede the department’s ability to manage a potential increase in its other-transactions workload.” “The Department of Homeland Security has issued policy and is developing a work force to implement its other-transactions authority, but the department’s policies need further development, and its contracting work force needs strengthening to promote the successful use of the authority in the future,” the auditors wrote in summing up the situation. The urgency of the chemical-weapon and antimissile projects contributed to Homeland Security’s failure to develop a solid foundation for its “other transactions” activity, the office said. “Initiating and executing these first projects took priority over establishing the directorate’s operating procedures,” leading the directorate to rely on other federal agencies’ acquisition staff to administer the transactions, the auditors said. For fiscal 2004, the special transactions accounted for nearly one-fifth of the directorate’s acquisitions. Describing the transactions’ importance for acquiring advanced technology, the auditors wrote that the agreements “permit considerable latitude by agencies and contractors in negotiating agreement terms. For example, other transactions allow the federal government flexibility in negotiating intellectual property and data rights.” “DHS views the use of other transactions as key to attracting nontraditional government contractors — typically, high-technology firms that do not work with the government — that can offer solutions to meet agency needs,” the office said. In a Dec. 8 letter to the auditors’ office, Homeland Security agreed with the recommendations about audit guidance and training but questioned the “lessons learned” recommendation. The agency said much information about previous transactions “is of marginal long-term value” and that “administrative aspects of collecting, maintaining and monitoring the information over time could be significant.” Back to top

Bush Administration Could Seek to Bypass House Committee Chairman on Nuke Research Funding By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The Bush administration may seek to bypass a powerful congressional opponent of its controversial nuclear weapons research and development agenda to resume funding next year that was cut by Congress for fiscal 2005, an official said yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 30). Last month, Congress omitted from an appropriations bill $37 million the administration had requested to study the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator and other Advanced Concepts nuclear weapons research and development initiatives. Charging the programs could undermine nonproliferation efforts, Representative Dave Hobson (R-Ohio), chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, had led the opposition. He pushed to have the funding omitted from the House and final versions of the Energy Department’s fiscal 2005 appropriations bill. Critics of the programs have said they are concerned the administration in its fiscal 2006 budget could attempt to bypass Hobson by seeking money for the programs from a separate subcommittee that allocates funding for the Defense Department. That would effectively make the Pentagon the programs’ administrator, contracting the work out to the Energy Department. The president’s budget is expected to be delivered to Congress in early February. Asked at a conference in northern Virginia yesterday whether the administration might attempt such a move, John Harvey, the director for policy planning of the Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration, said, “Anything’s possible.” He refused to say, though, whether the administration intends to make the switch and said the White House is weighing its options for the programs. “Let me tell you something, you’ll get me in the biggest trouble I can get in if you ask me to try to forecast what the president is going to put in the budget,” he said. NNSA spokesman Bryan Wilkes said the move is an option. He said, though, “It is too early to talk about what course of action NNSA will take, primarily because we don't yet know ourselves.  We are considering all information from the recent appropriations bill to determine exactly what to do in a number of areas.  Only then will we proceed to take action one way or another.” The National Nuclear Security Administration apparently continues to value the nuclear research programs. At the conference, Harvey appeared on a panel with Hobson aide and Energy and Water staffer Scott Burnison and Mike Lieberman, a defense aide for Senator John Spratt (D-S.C.), to defend the activities. He said the administration has made significant efforts to combat proliferation, and that a few states have sought to “highlight, often in a misleading way, certain activities in U.S. nuclear weapons R&D in order to call into question the U.S. commitment to nonproliferation.” The programs, he said, would not affect alleged North Korean and Iranian proliferation because those countries already fear the use of U.S. conventional capabilities. “North Korean and Iran appear to be seeking weapons of mass destruction to deter the United States [from defending] its allies and interests in each of these regions.  In this regard, their incentives to acquire weapons of mass destruction may be shaped more by U.S. advanced conventional capabilities and the demonstrated will to deploy them to great effect in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, during wars in Iraq,” he said. The two other panelists argued, however, that pursuing the new nuclear weapons capabilities would undermine efforts to persuade Pyongyang and Tehran to abandon their suspected pursuit of nuclear weapons. “It’s counterproductive at a time when we’re trying to get countries like Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear ambitions,” Lieberman said. “We cannot advocate nonproliferation around the world and pursue more usable weapons at home. That inconsistency is not lost on anyone in the international community,” Burnison said, quoting remarks by Hobson in August (see GSN, Aug. 12). Back to top       Pakistani Ambassador Outlines New Nuclear Security Measures Imposed After Khan Scandal By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Pakistani Ambassador to the United States Jehangir Karamat outlined yesterday the new “custodial measures” his country has put into place to protect its nuclear weapons program in the wake of revelations that Pakistani nuclear technology has been transferred abroad (see GSN, Dec. 6). Since the scandal broke early this year, Pakistan has established national regulatory and command authorities with clear lines of command, human technical surveillance measures for security personnel and new reliability programs, according to Karamat.  Pakistan has also created a “foolproof” accounting and auditing system, as well as a new export-control system, Karamat said yesterday in remarks at the Brookings Institution. Pakistan’s new export-control system reportedly imposes a prison sentence of up to 14 years and a fine of up to $85,000 for illegal nuclear-related transfers (see GSN, Sept. 14). Karamat praised the “considerable … technical support” provided by the United States in implementing the new nuclear security measures (see GSN, June 23). Early this year, top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan confessed to transferring nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Khan’s confession, for which he received a pardon by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, set off an international investigation into the network used to orchestrate the technology transfers — an investigation that has stretched to a number of countries, including Malaysia, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates. According to recent reports, however, there are concerns that the investigation into the network may be stalling, due in part to Pakistan’s continued refusal to provide either the International Atomic Energy Agency or the United States with direct access to Khan. There has been little indication that the Bush administration has pushed hard on Islamabad, which is considered a key ally in the war on terrorism, to provide access to Khan. On the other hand, Pakistan has recently agreed to ship some uranium enrichment equipment to Vienna for examination by agency scientists, a Western diplomat familiar with agency activities told Global Security Newswire last week. The schedule for this has not been set, the diplomat said, and the equipment would be returned after testing. To increase Pakistan’s cooperation, U.S. Representative Tom Lantos (Calif.), the top Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, plans to reintroduce legislation next year that contains a provision limiting U.S. aid to Pakistan unless Islamabad increases its assistance in the investigation, including by providing access to Khan and his associates, a Lantos spokeswoman told GSN this week (see GSN, Aug. 9). Karamat said yesterday that there was “total cooperation” between the United States and Pakistan in the Khan network investigation, adding that the “emphasis” of the investigation has now shifted outside of his country.  “I think domestically Pakistan’s resolved that problem; carried out an investigation, settled it domestically. But the international network, I think work has to be done on that to discover exactly what is in Iran or what went into Iran and to discover what happened with North Korea. And I think that is an ongoing process which is now picking up as the focus shifts to the international network,” he said. Karamat also reiterated that the Pakistani government had not approved the activities of Khan and his associates.  In his remarks, Karamat seemed to play down Khan’s role in the network. “I think it was the existence of an international network which involved a number of countries, many areas, many people, and that Dr. Khan was perhaps plugged into that network to get what was required and to do what he did,” he said. Back to top       U.S. Open to Limited Bilateral Talks With North Korea Within Six-Party Framework Bilateral talks between the United States and North Korea are possible, but Pyongyang should not expect additional economic concessions in exchange for shutting down its suspected nuclear weapons program, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 15). “They have to come to the table and respond to the proposal,” which includes U.S. security guarantees, said Ambassador Christopher Hill (see GSN, June 24). “We have to be sure they understand they are not getting a better deal,” he said. He added that Washington would only agree to direct negotiations under the six-party framework, with also includes China, Russia, Japan and South Korea, the Associated Press reported. “We are prepared to talk to North Korea as part of the six-party process, but we are not prepared to undermine the six-party process,” Hill said (Associated Press/USA Today, Dec. 15). Meanwhile, China today urged Japan and North Korea not to complicate efforts to resume six-party nuclear talks, in the wake of Tokyo’s threats to impose sanctions on Pyongyang over ongoing negotiations on Japanese citizens abducted by North Korea in the 1970s, Agence France-Presse reported. “We hope both sides’ actions will not complicate the process of the six-party talks,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Dec. 16). It is too early to say whether sanctions would be imposed by Japan against North Korea, US. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said yesterday. “The Japanese government has not made any statement or decision or shown any inclination to do that,” he said. “And therefore let’s not, sort of, speculate three days down the road, if at all, that that is a course of action the Japanese government is going to follow.” Yuriko Koike, the Japanese state minister in charge of frontier territories, told the Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper that U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Michael Green, Asia chief of the U.S. National Security Council, told her that they saw sanctions as an effective bargaining chip but difficult to effectively implement. Boucher confirmed that Armitage had discussed “some of the factors involved in analyzing whether sanctions are appropriate” (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Dec. 15). Japan said today it would be “careful” in how it pressured North Korea on the kidnapping issue. “Economic sanctions is one possible way,” said Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura. “Whether they would be triggered immediately or not I think needs careful analysis,” Machimura said. Other members of the six-party talks framework have urged Japan to take action that is “not so drastic,” he said (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Dec. 16). North Korea’s nuclear program is expected to be a priority item for discussion in a meeting set for tomorrow in Japan between Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun, according to AP. However, neither leader is expected to present any new ideas for a settlement in the nuclear standoff, a Japanese Foreign Ministry official said. “It won’t be possible to take up that topic in concrete terms,” the official said earlier this week (Kenji Hall, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, Dec. 16). Back to top       India, Pakistan Agree on Nuclear Hot Line, Fail to Make Progress on Advance Missile Test Notification Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan failed to make progress during two days of talks this week on the development of a formal advance notification system for missile tests, officials said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 14). The two countries held senior-level talks Tuesday and yesterday in Islamabad on nuclear confidence-building measures.   The head of the Pakistani delegation to the talks, Foreign Ministry official Tariq Osman Hyder, blamed the failure to reach an accord on a pretest notification system on the “extremely complex” nature of such agreements, according to Agence France-Presse. “When we want to go forward on them we have to examine them carefully and I think both sides understand the concerns of the other side,” Hyder said. India and Pakistan did agree during the talks, though, to move forward with plans to establish a nuclear hot line between foreign ministry officials, and to improve an existing hot line between military commanders, AFP reported. The Indian and Pakistani foreign secretaries are now scheduled to meet Dec. 27-28, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse/SpaceWar.com, Dec. 15). Back to top       IAEA Finishes Fourth Set of South Korea Inspections The International Atomic Energy Agency yesterday concluded a fourth round of inspections related to South Korea’s past nuclear experiments, according to the Yonhap News Agency (see GSN, Dec. 6). The IAEA team left South Korea yesterday after a 10-day stay to conduct inspections at the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute in Daejoen, 160 kilometers south of Seoul, the Xinhua News Agency reported. The special agency investigation of South Korea’s prior experiments with plutonium and uranium is expected to end, and routine inspections of the country’s nuclear facilities will resume, inspectors said during an annual IAEA-South Korea seminar aimed at reviewing Seoul’s compliance with its safeguards agreement. The agency is expected to send a five-member expert group to South Korea during the first part of next year, officials there told Yonhap (Xinhua, Dec. 16). Back to top       One-Third of Los Alamos Buildings in Poor Shape One-third of the more than 2,000 buildings at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico need repair, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 3). During a tour Monday for bidders who may seek the new contract to operate the laboratory, the National Nuclear Security Administration said that 22 percent of the site’s buildings are in excellent condition and that 28 percent are in at least adequate condition, according to AP. About 16 percent of Los Alamos buildings are in fair shape. Los Alamos spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said there was no one cause for the increasing maintenance needs. “Our mission has changed, safety and security requirements have changed, and old buildings can’t keep up with those changes,” she said (Associated Press, Dec. 15). Back to top

Rapid Deployment of Antibiotics, Vaccines Would Offer Best Protection in Anthrax Attack, Researchers Say By Chris Schneidmiller Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — A “targeted and rapid” deployment of antibiotics and vaccines after an anthrax attack would more effectively protect victims from illness than a mass inoculation program implemented before a potential incident, Johns Hopkins University researchers said this week (see GSN, Dec. 13). The researchers developed a probability model to consider the prevention rates achieved by a preventive vaccination campaign or the use of antibiotics after an attack.  Those methods alone had significant drawbacks, but the medicines could work well in tandem as part of a quick response to an outbreak, according to a paper published in today’s issue of Nature. Lead author Ron Brookmeyer said he hoped his work with colleagues Elizabeth Johnson and Robert Bollinger could offer direction to government agencies in developing the best methods to counter an anthrax attack. “I would hope that this work could help form public policy considerations and could help determine where to put limited resources,” Ron Brookmeyer, a biostatistician in the university’s Bloomberg School of Public Health, said yesterday in an interview. Using their mathematical model, the researchers calculated the chances of anthrax spores surviving to germinate within a set of victims and then “forecast what would happen under different public health policies,” Brookmeyer said. Anywhere from 67 to 76 percent of victims of anthrax attack in the model would not become ill if they began taking antibiotics within six days and continued to take the medicine for the recommended period of at least 60 days.  “Is 70 percent good enough? If we could get it to people quick enough we could prevent even more cases,” Brookmeyer said. However, prevention rates in the model fell to less than 50 percent if antibiotics were not delivered until 10 days after exposure. Some U.S. postal workers exposed to tainted letters during the 2001 anthrax attacks did not begin treatment for nine days; two of those employees were among the five people who died following infection. The mail attacks to date have been the only real-life test of the U.S. response capability, leaving it difficult to gauge how quickly local, state and federal health agencies are prepared to detect and respond to a biological attack, Brookmeyer said. Rates of success also dropped if the model victims stopped taking the drugs before 60 days.  Brookmeyer and his colleagues acknowledge that adherence to the treatment regimen could be a problem — less than half of 10,000 people who were potentially exposed to anthrax in 2001 completed their antibiotic treatment. None of the 10,000 contracted anthrax, indicating they were not exposed, took all their antibiotics or possibly came into contact with a low dose of inhaled spores, Brookmeyer said. There is no assurance that future incidents would involve weak spores. The United States is pouring more than $800 million into production of a new anthrax vaccine under the Project Bioshield program.  The planned stockpile would be enough to protect 25 million people (see GSN, Nov. 5). Even in the event that agencies could predict the site of an incident before it occurred, preventing significantly more than 70 percent of anthrax cases would require a potentially unmanageable mass vaccination program The researchers determined that achieving a 90-percent prevention rate among those exposed to the spores would require prevaccinations of 63 percent of “the population you want to protect” — whether it is a neighborhood, a city or the entire country, Brookmeyer said. That vaccination percentage in the model is based on low levels of exposure to anthrax and a rapid post-event response with antibiotics.  Higher levels of exposure, a slower treatment response and failure to complete the antibiotic schedule drove the percentage of the population that would need to be vaccinated as high as 95 percent — higher than the percentage of attack victims in the model who would then theoretically not contract the disease. “A mass preattack vaccination program is probably not the best use of resources,” Brookmeyer said. “There is still a place for an anthrax vaccine and one of the places is in shortening the antibiotic regimen.” Administering a vaccine after an incident could complement spore-killing power of antibiotics, researchers said. The existing vaccine, though, would be of limited value as it requires up to six doses over 18 months and might not take effect until the antibiotics regimen is over, Brookmeyer said.  The vaccine now being developed is hoped to involve only three doses over 28 days, the researchers said. In the model it boosted the prevention rate anywhere from 1 to 9 percent when applied after an attack. A new vaccine with a shorter inoculation schedule also could help overcome a strain of anthrax resistant to antibiotics and reduce the amount of time a victim would need to use the antibiotics, increasing the likelihood of maintaining the treatment regimen. “Shortening a long course of antibiotics may be critical because of difficulty in maintaining adherence, limited supplies of antibiotics, resistance and adverse events associated with long-term antibiotic therapy,” the research paper says. There are many variables that will determine the success of a response, and variables within each component. The rapidity of the response, for example, with depend on health-care workers’ awareness of symptoms of anthrax infection, communication and coordination between health agencies, the time it takes to put together a treatment plan and the availability of medicines. The U.S. Strategic National Stockpile has enough vaccines and antidotes to respond to an outbreak, and is stored around the country to enable delivery to any site within 12 hours, said Von Roebuck, a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The federal health agency has also been teaching local departments on preparing clinics in case of an outbreak. “I think all of this needs to be integrated together and there are lots of things that go into this response,” Brookmeyer said. Back to top

Umatilla Depot Vapor-Escape Incident Caused by Procedural Failures, U.S. Army Report Says Two workers allowed sarin vapor to escape from filter units at the Umatilla Chemical Depot earlier this month by performing work they had not been assigned and ignoring posted warnings to avoid opening a door, according to a report distributed to U.S. Army officials and state regulators on Monday (see GSN, Dec. 15). Chemical weapons destruction is not likely to resume at the depot this week, said Dennis Murphey, administrator for the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s chemical demilitarization program. “It’s not going to happen, there’s no way,” Murphey said. He said he expects depot officials to ensure such an incident is not repeated. The report recommends disciplinary action for the two maintenance workers, the East Oregonian reported Tuesday. The employees were not exposed to sarin, and the chemical was not released into the atmosphere, depot officials said (Amy Jo Brown, The East Oregonian, Dec. 14). Back to top

Failed U.S. Missile Defense Flight Test Could Affect Schedule for Placing System on Alert A failed flight test yesterday of a missile interceptor to be used in the U.S. national missile defense system may affect Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s decision on when to put the system on alert, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Dec. 15). Rumsfeld received “a very cursory description of the test and the results,” Defense Department spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said yesterday. He added that “the test was not connected to any decisions about operational capability.” Rumsfeld had been expected to make a decision on the system’s operability this fall, after six interceptors were installed at a base in Alaska, according to the Post (see GSN, Nov. 15). Missile defense critics said that yesterday’s failed test supports their claims that the Bush administration is moving too fast to deploy an untested system, the Post reported. “I think it points out the inherent complexity of the system and underscores the need for rigorous testing before any deployment,” said Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.), a member of the Armed Services Committee. “I’ve been making that argument for months now.” Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin said earlier this week that Canada would join a U.S. missile defense system only on the conditions that it does not have to provide funding, that no interceptors are based there and that Canada has a say in the system’s operation, the Post reported (see GSN, Dec. 2). Martin also said he would insist that the United States put in writing that it would not place weapons in space (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, Dec. 16). 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.