The new Russian Industry and Energy Ministry, headed by Victor Khristenko, is set to consolidate the management of Russia’s WMD-related facilities (AFP photo). Russian WMD Facilities Prepare to Consolidate Under New Ministry, Report Finds By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The new Russian Industry and Energy Ministry appears set to consolidate most of Russia’s efforts to manage its WMD facilities as part of an ongoing government restructuring, according to a report released this week by the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council (see GSN, April 23). Russian President Vladimir Putin in March initiated the effort, which saw the dissolution of about half of Russia’s Cabinet-level ministries in an act described then by Russian officials as a badly need “administrative reform.”..Full Story

U.S. Senate Passes “Bioshield” Plan By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate yesterday voted 99-0 to establish a program that would use $5.6 billion over 10 years to stimulate private-sector development of vaccines and treatments against agents such as smallpox, anthrax, botulinum toxin, Ebola and plague (see GSN, May 5)...Full Story

No Reactors to North Korea, State Department Says A light-water nuclear power reactor would not be part of a U.S. offer to induce North Korea to end its nuclear activities, a U.S. State Department spokesman said yesterday, responding to a Washington Times report (see GSN, May 19)...Full Story

	Thursday, May 20, 2004

U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Could Use “Barrage Balloons” to Defend Against Terrorist Attacks, Expert Says By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — U.S. nuclear power plants could deploy “barrage balloons” in the airspace overhead to help defend against possible terrorist attacks involving aircraft, an expert with the Project on Government Oversight said last week (see GSN, June 11). There has long been concern that terrorists could attempt to use a small airplane or a hijacked airliner to attack a nuclear power plant. Such fears increased after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Experts have warned that terrorists might attempt to crash a plane into a plant’s reactor or spent fuel storage pool in an attempt to release large amounts of radiation. The nuclear industry has said, though, that studies have found that the structures protecting plant reactors and spent fuel pools are strong enough to prevent radiation releases in the event of an impact. During a presentation before the National Academy of Scientists last week, POGO Senior Investigator Peter Stockton recommended that nuclear power plants deploy “barrage balloons,” which were used by the United Kingdom during World War II to defend against German low-level bombing raids. The balloons, deployed above potential targets, are moored to the ground by cables strong enough to destroy or divert aircraft that collide into them. In a paper published in a 1989 edition of Aerospace Power Journal, U.S Air Force Maj. Franklin Hillson praised the effectiveness of barrage balloons in protecting British targets from German attacks during World War II. Balloons deployed around London in 1944 were credited with bringing down more than 230 German V-1 rockets, the paper says. Balloons could be deployed around the perimeter of nuclear power plants to either destroy or divert terrorist aircraft attacks, according to a copy of Stockton’s May 10 presentation. In a telephone interview with Global Security Newswire yesterday, Stockton acknowledged that a fully loaded Boeing 767 airliner, such as those used in the Sept. 11 attacks, could likely tear the cable off a barrage balloon and survive. The impact, though, would be enough to redirect the plane from its intended path, he said, adding that a successful attack would require a near-direct hit on a plant structure.  The sight of a set of barrage balloons deployed over a U.S. nuclear power plant would also serve as a “hell of a deterrent” to would-be attackers, Stockton said. He added that the balloons could be inexpensively produced and employed “as long as you don’t have a defense contractor making them.” The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering the barrage balloon proposal, Stockton said. A commission spokesman said yesterday that while the commission is reviewing “all sorts of potential threats” against nuclear facilities, it believes that “the most effective strategy” to protect aircraft from hijackings is the use of enhanced security measures, such as passenger and baggage screening and the air marshal program. A spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the main lobbying organization for the nuclear industry, said that aircraft in existence today are larger and heavier than those in use during World War II. “[Barrage balloons] would be somewhat effective against small planes, but small planes don’t pose a problem for nuclear plants due to the robust construction,” NEI spokesman Mitch Singer said in written response to questions. Stockton charged yesterday, though, that the nuclear industry opposes the use of barrage balloons because of concerns that area residents would see the balloons as an indication of the possible threat of attack on a nuclear plant. Some nuclear experts yesterday expressed support for the barrage balloon proposal, but added that the balloons would have to be larger and stronger than their World War II counterparts. In a written response to GSN, Gordon Thompson of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies warned that the potential threat of a terrorist attack on a nuclear power plant remains high. “My present judgment is that nuclear power plants and their spent fuel are comparatively likely targets for the next big attack on the U.S.A., and that one or more general-aviation aircraft (packed with explosive) are the instruments of attack most likely to be chosen,” Thompson wrote.  “The probability of such an attack cannot be quantified, but is increasing as a result of our government’s actions,” he added, criticizing a lack of “conceptual and institutional frameworks” for implementing nuclear facility defenses. Back to top

Russian WMD Facilities Prepare to Consolidate Under New Ministry, Report Finds By Mike Nartker Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The new Russian Industry and Energy Ministry appears set to consolidate most of Russia’s efforts to manage its WMD facilities as part of an ongoing government restructuring, according to a report released this week by the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council (see GSN, April 23). Russian President Vladimir Putin in March initiated the effort, which saw the dissolution of about half of Russia’s Cabinet-level ministries in an act described then by Russian officials as a badly need “administrative reform.” The restructuring also included creation of the new Industry and Energy Ministry, which includes several governmental agencies with nonproliferation-related functions. The ministry is headed by Victor Khristenko, who briefly served as prime minister in late February, and includes Deputy Ministers Ivan Materov and Andrei Rus, the report says. Among the agencies included in the new ministry is the Federal Agency for Atomic Energy (Rosatom), which was formally the Russian Atomic Energy Ministry (Minatom). Both the agency’s director, former Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev, and its deputy director for nuclear weapons issues, Igor Borovkov, are holdovers from the former Minatom, according to the report. While the new structure of the agency would probably not be finalized until the end of this month, it is set to assume full control over Russia’s nuclear activities, including the nation’s “nuclear defense complex,” the report says, citing an April 6 government decree. There has been speculation among some experts as to the level of control the new Atomic Energy Agency would be given over Russia’s nuclear weapons program. Such concerns, according to the RANSAC report, arose out of a footnote in the March governmental decree announcing the restructuring effort that read: “On the issue of the nuclear defense complex, [Rosatom] is subordinate to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.” Possible interpretations of the clause had included that various functions might be divided between the agency and the ministry, that the two might share dual jurisdiction or that the Defense Ministry might have assumed increased bureaucratic influence in the Atomic Energy Ministry.  Citing Russian officials including Khristenko, the report says that it “appears unlikely” that Russia’s nuclear complex would be divided into military and nonmilitary sections.  In addition to the former Minatom, the new Industry and Energy Ministry has absorbed the former GosAtomNadzor (GAN) agency as the new Federal Service for Atomic Inspection, which will monitor security at Russian nuclear facilities and research reactors, as well as oversee the accounting, control and physical protection of nuclear materials, the report says. It also says that while the service has retained the basic structure as its former incarnation, there are concerns about its possible level of independence now that it is part of the Energy and Industry Ministry, which also oversees the Atomic Energy Agency. The new Industry and Energy Ministry also includes the new Federal Industry Agency, which has been given responsibility for eliminating Russia’s stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. The new department replaces the former Russian Munitions Agency, which had been responsible for biological and chemical weapons disposal, according to the report.  Few details are known as to the structure of the new agency, which could delay both current and future disposal efforts, the report says. It also says, though, that former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Alyoshin has been appointed director, increasing the possible significance of the agency and of biological and chemical weapons disposal within the Industry and Energy Ministry. “Alyoshin is one of the players in Moscow,” RANSAC researcher Matthew Bouldin, who prepared the report, told Global Security Newswire this week. Bouldin praised the progress of the Russian governmental reorganization to date, but also said that is was still uncertain as to when the new Russian governmental structure would be finalized and in place. “They’re on their way,” he said. Back to top

No Reactors to North Korea, State Department Says A light-water nuclear power reactor would not be part of a U.S. offer to induce North Korea to end its nuclear activities, a U.S. State Department spokesman said yesterday, responding to a Washington Times report (see GSN, May 19). Spokesman Adam Ereli acknowledged in a press conference yesterday that North Korean negotiators at a working group meeting in Beijing last week “did raise the reactor issue” in the context of ending Pyongyang’s suspected program to enrich uranium. “But it’s not something that we entertained,” he said. “As a matter of policy ... we do not see a future for the light-water reactor project,” he continued. Ereli added that the United States would not offer aid to Pyongyang for any piecemeal steps it might make along the way to ending its nuclear programs, but instead Washington continues to insist on “complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement” of all such efforts. “We’re not prepared to provide inducements to North Korea for compliance with its international obligations,” Ereli said. “Talking about one aspect of North Korea’s nuclear program or another aspect of the nuclear program is not where we’re at,” he added (Marina Malenic, Global Security Newswire, May 20). News of the reactor discussion prompted three Republican lawmakers yesterday to urge the Bush administration not to resurrect any reactor deal with North Korea, the Washington Times reported.  “This idea should be taken off the table immediately,” according to a letter from Representative Christopher Cox (R-Calif.), Representative Henry Hyde, (R-Ill.), and Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) to national security adviser Condoleezza Rice. “North Korea has a long and dangerous history of violating the international nonproliferation agreements it has signed. We urge you to step up America’s public diplomacy on this issue to ease any ambiguity in the U.S. position and to ensure that Kim Jong Il’s negotiators fully comprehend that this aspect of the Agreed Framework will not be resurrected,” the letter adds (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, May 20). Meanwhile, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is set to travel Saturday to Pyongyang for a summit in which both nuclear issues and the abduction of Japanese nationals to North Korea are to be discussed, Reuters reported. Resolving the dispute over abductees would be a political coup for Koizumi ahead of July elections for the Japanese parliament’s upper chamber, according to Reuters. However, officials said Japan was not willing to compromise on the nuclear standoff for the sake of progress in negotiations over the abductees. “I don’t think the Japanese government thinks that it is okay to compromise with North Korea just because the abduction issue alone is resolved,” Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba said (George Nishiyama, Reuters/Yahoo!News, May 20). Koizumi is also set to call on North Korea to rejoin the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and to allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun reported (Kyodo News/Japan Today, May 20). Back to top       Senate Votes for Additional Nuclear Materials Money By Amy Klamper and David Hess CongressDaily WASHINGTON — As it continued working through amendments to the fiscal 2005 defense authorization bill yesterday, the Senate voted to authorize funding to secure vulnerable nuclear sites to keep radioactive materials out of the hands of terrorists (see GSN, April 15). Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) and Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) offered the amendment, which would affect sites regardless of whether the nuclear material was supplied by the United States or the former Soviet Union. It also urged President Bush to create an Energy Department task force on removing nuclear materials. “There are hundreds of facilities around the world that store plutonium or highly enriched uranium, including 24 sites that the State Department has identified as high priority sites,” Feinstein said in a statement issued Wednesday. “Yet, there is no single, integrated U.S. government program to facilitate the removal of these materials,” she added. The amendment’s sponsors said the Bush administration’s current efforts to remove international nuclear materials would take 10 to 20 years to complete at the rate of one facility per year. “I am deeply concerned that the Bush administration’s efforts do not adequately address the seriousness of the issue,” Feinstein said. “We must do everything in our power to prevent terrorists from ever getting their hands on nuclear material and developing nuclear weapons. We have little time to spare,” she said. Domenici and Feinstein’s amendment was one of 16 dealt with by the Senate during yesterday’s debate, which continued as the House began its own debate on its version of the defense authorization bill. Back to top       Bolton Visits Moscow to Discuss Nonproliferation U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton met with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak today in Moscow for nonproliferation talks, which were expected to include discussions on Iran, Iraq and North Korea, according to Agence France-Presse. Bolton and Kislyak were expected to discuss Russia’s construction of the Bushehr nuclear reactor for Iran — a project the United States opposes, AFP reported. Russia has recently appeared to have slowed the reactor, which is years behind schedule, and has increased pressure on Tehran to submit to U.N. inspections of potential military sites, according to AFP (see GSN, May 17). The two officials were also expected to discuss North Korea’s nuclear efforts, as well as the situation in Iraq, officials said (see related GSN story, today). They provided no details, however, as to what those discussions might entail, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse/Channel News Asia, May 20). Bolton’s trip to Moscow comes on the heels of a visit earlier this week by U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, according to the Moscow Times. Russian officials told Rice that while Moscow had a “greater” interest in the Proliferation Security Initiative, a U.S.-led international effort to interdict WMD-related cargo shipments, a decision on joining has not yet been made (see GSN, April 30). Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said last week that U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin would discuss the initiative during a planned summit of the Group of Eight economic powers next month to be held in the United States (Moscow Times, May 20). Back to top

U.S. Senate Passes “Bioshield” Plan By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate yesterday voted 99-0 to establish a program that would use $5.6 billion over 10 years to stimulate private-sector development of vaccines and treatments against agents such as smallpox, anthrax, botulinum toxin, Ebola and plague (see GSN, May 5). The House of Representatives is expected to endorse the bill and pass it on for signature to President George W. Bush in short order. A Health and Human Services Department spokesman said today that the first contract under the program would be for an anthrax vaccine and is expected in “the near future.” First proposed early last year by Bush, Project Bioshield would give the government long-term authority to buy billions of dollars’ worth of new drugs from private companies, speed National Institutes of Health research and development on such medicines and allow the Food and Drug Administration to greatly quicken its drug-approval process during emergencies. The bill would also cover some countermeasures against chemical, radiological and nuclear attacks. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who played a major role in crafting compromises that led to the bill’s passage, yesterday called Project Bioshield “a major component of our defense against future terrorist attacks.” “We need to protect ourselves and our country against the ability of these terrorists to use the weapons they can easily get their hand on to kill innocent Americans. If these Islamic fundamentalists get their hands on a biological weapon like anthrax, they will use it, and they will use it in a place like a subway station, where great numbers of people congregate,” Gregg said. The House voted 421-2 last July to approve its own Bioshield bill, but several key House members said the Senate bill is now likely to be submitted to Bush without a formal conference to reconcile the two versions. “It is my expectation that this will now be passed swiftly by the Senate and the House without any formal conference. … After nearly 18 months of consideration, it is urgent that the Congress send this important public health and safety legislation to the president for his signature. Our national security cannot afford to wait while terrorists act,” House Select Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) said yesterday, shortly before the Senate passed its bill. The impetus for Bioshield was the drug industry’s unwillingness to develop and produce medicines for which the everyday market is small but which could become crucial in an attack. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci said in January 2003 that the project would “assure drug companies there will be a market for their product.” “The medical treatments available for some types of terrorist attacks,” the White House said in February 2003, “have improved little in decades, while there has been tremendous and rapid progress in the treatment of many serious naturally occurring diseases. … The president believes that, by bringing researchers, medical experts and the biomedical industry together in a new and focused way, our nation can achieve the same kind of treatment breakthroughs for bioterrorism and other threats that have significantly reduced the threat of heart disease, cancer and many other serious illnesses.” Biotechnology Industry Organization President Carl Feldbaum said yesterday that by passing the bill, Congress would create “the procurement structure to make product development and production financially viable.” Compromise won out over strong objections to aspects of bills to create Project Bioshield in both chambers of Congress. Representative Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) said last May at a Select Committee on Homeland Security hearing that Bioshield would be “chicken feed to the industry,” while Representative Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) called for more flexibility in deciding what biological threats to guard against. “What if they [terrorists] just do the one thing we don’t have?” Shays asked. In the Senate, opposition to the project was led by Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, and by Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. Byrd withdrew his opposition after a compromise was reached on language governing how the funds would be appropriated. Levin was still expressing reservations about the bill as late as May 7, when a spokesman said the senator sought to increase competition for Bioshield contracts and was concerned about part of the measure that could allow the military to give its members emergency-approved countermeasures without obtaining their informed consent. Expressing support for the bill yesterday, though, Levin said he was “pleased” that the final Senate bill stipulates “full and open competition” for most Bioshield contracts. Provisions in the pending defense appropriations bill, ensures the bill “will not make it more likely that military personnel will be required to take unapproved products without their consent,” Levin said. Although only the House had then passed legislation to create the program, Congress voted last September to fund Bioshield with $890 million for fiscal 2004. The Bush administration’s fiscal 2005 budget proposal includes $2.5 billion for Bioshield under the Homeland Security Department budget. The first contracts are expected within months. Health and Human Services spokesman Marc Wolfson said today that the department’s Office of Emergency Public Health Preparedness is reviewing proposals for an anthrax vaccine and is likely to make an announcement “within the near future.” “That will be the first Bioshield” contract, Wolfson said. Back to top       Redirect Biological Defense Funding Toward Securing Former Soviet WMD, U.S. Researcher Says The head of Harvard University’s Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study called this week for the Bush administration to use some of the funding earmarked for biological defenses to help reduce the threat posed by former Soviet weapons of mass destruction, according to the Bloomberg news agency (see related GSN story, today). In today’s issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, institute Executive Dean Louise Richardson wrote that new biological defense funding to construct secure research laboratories and to train new scientists might result in the spread of biological weapons-related knowledge. Instead, more funding should be allocated to helping prevent terrorists from gaining access to former Soviet biological weapons facilities, she wrote (Geraldine Ryerson-Cruz, Bloomberg, May 20). Back to top       NIH Division to Study Reaction to Smallpox Vaccine The U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases yesterday announced the formation of a nationwide research group to study ways to reduce a potentially fatal complication of smallpox immunization (see GSN, March 10). Eczema vaccinatum occurs almost exclusively in people with a history of atopic dermatitis, or eczema, a skin condition involving itching and scaling. The reaction can develop when patients with a history of atopic dermatitis are given the smallpox vaccine or come into close contact with someone who recently received the vaccine. If untreated, eczema vaccinatum can kill 1 to 6 percent of those affected. The Atopic Dermatitis and Vaccinia Network will include medical researchers from around the nation. They will work on three areas: clinical studies, animal studies and statistic and data coordination. “The information generated by this network will improve our understanding of the immune responses of these patients and should greatly influence the design of a safer smallpox vaccine,” Daniel Rotrosen, director of the NIAID Division of Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation, said in a prepared statement (NIAID Release, May 19). Back to top       New England Man Found Guilty of Anthrax Hoax New England resident Robert McDonald was found guilty yesterday of conducting an anthrax hoax by placing powder-filled envelopes in mailboxes in New Hampshire last year, according to Reuters (see GSN, Dec. 9, 2003).  The 67-year-old man, who was convicted of two counts of obstructing the mails, faces up to a year in prison and total fines of up to $10,000, Reuters reported (Reuters, May 20). Back to top

Parliament Security Review Prompted by Powdering The British House of Commons was evacuated yesterday after a protester threw what appeared to be condoms filled with purple powder at Prime Minister Tony Blair (see GSN, May 7).    The powder was later identified as cornstarch, but the incident was a major security breach in the House of Commons, which recently erected a transparent bulletproof screen to shield members from possible attacks from the public gallery. Some lawmakers noted that a more serious attack could have occurred and that the breach indicated a need for tighter security, the Associated Press reported. “These people have actually done us a favor. This seems to be an innocuous substance and it will highlight the fact there is a problem with security here,” Conservative Party vice chairman Charles Hendry said. “It could have been somebody far more frightening,” he added. Peter Hain, the leader of the House of Commons, said last month that British intelligence had information about threats to Parliament and warned that terrorists could attack with germs or gas, according to the Associated Press. “If an al-Qaeda group managed to throw a vial of anthrax or ricin into the chamber — or maybe even worse a suicide agent released it, without anybody noticing, which we have been advised is quite feasible — the particles would immediately begin spreading,” Hain said. “Because of the way the air flows work, within minutes total contamination would occur,” he added. Fathers 4 Justice, an activist group concerned with child custody issues, claimed responsibility for the incident and said Ron Davies, 44, threw the purple cornstarch. Former Labor Party lawmaker Llin Golding said she signed for the men to enter one of two VIP galleries, which are not behind the new security screen. “I regret to say that it was two guests of mine who were responsible for the very serious incident in the Commons today,” she said. “I shall, of course, give every support and cooperation to the authorities who are now investigating,” she added (Ed Johnson, Associated Press/Boston Herald, May 19). Back to top       Mock Pentagon Attack Tests “Dirty Bomb” Response By Chris Strohm Government Executive WASHINGTON — The U.S. ability to respond to another domestic terrorist attack was put to the test yesterday when a simulated radiological “dirty bomb” went off at the Pentagon. The exercise, called Gallant Fox II, was staged to test the Pentagon Force Protection Agency’s emergency response units in a real-world scenario. Meanwhile, in New York City, the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks at the Pentagon and World Trade Center ended yesterday two days of hearings on emergency response by concluding that agencies were plagued by poor communication and coordination. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge testified Wednesday before the commission. “Poor communications across agencies harmed situational awareness,” the commission announced in a written statement following yesterday’s hearing. “Commanders had difficulty communicating with their units, and could not account comprehensively for units once they arrived at the World Trade Center. The response at the Pentagon, generally successful, was plagued with similar problems of self-dispatching and poor communications.” PFPA Chief John Jester said the drill at the Pentagon showed that agencies could effectively handle another domestic attack. “Here in the Pentagon, we think we’re well prepared,” he said. “I think overall the government is preparing and having exercises throughout the country. Everyone’s working just like we are in trying to teach their personnel how to respond to various situations.” The simulation consisted of a terrorist parking a car with a radiological bomb at a Pentagon parking lot. Sensors near the Pentagon alerted officials that a radiological device was in the area. The terrorist then approached a group of soldiers in training and blew himself up with a conventional bomb, killing some soldiers and injuring many others. The suicide attack was a diversionary tactic to prevent officials from reaching the car and defusing the bomb. Pentagon police and fire crews from Arlington, Va., arrived on the scene and began to tend to the bomb victims while a PFPA hazardous materials crew began searching for the bomb. The crew found the explosive but was unable to defuse it before it went off, sending a plume of radiological smoke into the air heading for a nearby Arlington community. The rest of the exercise consisted of simulated responses, including tending to victims, evacuations and closing of roadways. Jester said his agency was created in May 2002 to replace the Defense Protective Services and provide the capability to respond to any emergency. The agency has 800 employees and is still hiring, he added. “After 9/11, it was decided that we needed to beef up that organization with more resources but also to have an organization that can deal with any kind of threat,” he said. “The term ‘force protection’ within [Defense] is meant to have measures for all kinds of emergencies.” Since then, Pentagon Force Protection Agency has developed a public address and electronic messaging system to inform personnel at the Pentagon what to do during an emergency. The Pentagon was not evacuated Wednesday, but personnel were notified about the drill. “We’re constantly training, constantly looking at our procedures, revising those procedures and trying to stay on top of what intelligence is around so that we’re ready for any event that might occur,” Jester said. “What we’re trying to do is make people in [the Pentagon] more aware of what they should do,” he added. “We have a system in the Pentagon to communicate to the employees. ... We have a public address system which is very clear now throughout the entire building so we can get on one microphone and talk to the entire building, all 17 miles of hallway. At the same time, we have a computer emergency network system where we can put a message on our computer and then send it and it will hit all 20,000 computers in the building within a minute or so.” Other federal, state and local agencies participated in the event, including the Environmental Protection Agency, FBI, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Energy, and Homeland Security departments, U.S. Park Police, the American Red Cross, Washington, D.C., police and several fire and police departments from Virginia. Jester said a formal review of the drill would begin today to determine what lessons were learned.   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.