U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt visits a CDC laboratory in 2005. The expansion of such biodefense laboratories requires better government oversight to ensure safety, U.S. auditors said yesterday (Health and Human Services photo). Lax Biodefense Lab Oversight Putting U.S. at Risk, GAO Says By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The number of U.S. biological laboratories dealing with the most dangerous pathogens has exploded since 2001, increasing the risk of deadly accidents, the Government Accountability Office said yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 25)...Full Story

U.S. Lawmakers Urge Nuclear Suppliers Group to Impose Requirements for Trade With India By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Three U.S. lawmakers yesterday issued a letter urging the 45-member consortium of countries that sell nuclear materials to only approve a controversial U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal if certain conditions are met (see GSN, Oct. 3)...Full Story

North Korea Ready to Give up Nukes, South Says Following his summit this week with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said he believed the Stalinist state is ready to give up its nuclear weapons (see GSN, Oct. 4)...Full Story

	Friday, October 5, 2007

U.S. Lawmakers Urge Nuclear Suppliers Group to Impose Requirements for Trade With India By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Three U.S. lawmakers yesterday issued a letter urging the 45-member consortium of countries that sell nuclear materials to only approve a controversial U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal if certain conditions are met (see GSN, Oct. 3). Representatives Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Sam Farr (D-Calif.) called on the Nuclear Suppliers Group to relax long-standing guidelines governing the sale of nuclear material to India only following the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the enactment of a fissile material cutoff treaty with “robust and effective” verification measures (see GSN, Sept. 18). Congress in late 2006 passed by wide margins the Hyde Act, a bill altering U.S. law to allow the nuclear trade with India, a state which has developed nuclear weapons outside the constraints of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The road to completing the deal, though, has turned out to be longer and more serpentine than anticipated by leaders in both countries. In return for opening the way to imports of U.S. nuclear material and technology, India agreed to allow international inspections of its civilian nuclear infrastructure.  The details of that inspection regime have yet to be solidified with the U.N. nuclear watchdog. The Nuclear Suppliers Group must exempt India from rules barring exports of nuclear technology or materials to nations that have not joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or allowed international monitoring of their full range of atomic activities Then, ultimately, the deal comes back to Washington for a final approval from Congress. Many here opposed passage of the deal’s enabling legislation on nonproliferation grounds, arguing that if India were to receive U.S. civilian nuclear fuel it could redirect its relatively limited domestic supply of uranium entirely toward its military program. That, some contended, would result in an increased production of military-grade fissile material which could lead to a Southeast Asian arms race with neighboring rival Pakistan and possibly China. “It is important for the NSG to realize that although this bill has been signed by President Bush there are still many in Congress who stand by the basic principle that keeping nuclear weapons and know-how out of the wrong hands should be our top national security priority and the most critical objective for both U.S. and international nuclear policy,” Tauscher said in announcing the letter. The letter reaffirms U.S. support for the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as expressed in the Hyde Act as well as a U.S. commitment to nonproliferation as a critical U.S. foreign policy objective. “We strongly agree with these goals and we wish to share with you our concerns that without further stipulations, the deal contained in the legislation could have a negative impact on efforts to reduce proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology,” the U.S. lawmakers wrote. The United States has signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty but ratification of the pact died in the Senate in 1999 and the Bush administration has subsequently opposed U.S. ratification (see GSN, March 5). “We need not belabor with you the importance of the CTBT,” Tauscher and her colleagues wrote to the Nuclear Suppliers Group nations.  “It remains a litmus test of full compliance with NPT commitments and we remain embarrassed to have been the only country to have joined North Korea in recent General Assembly votes to not support this treaty.” The Bush administration has indicated it supports a treaty to ban further production of fissile material that could fuel a nuclear bomb but has said it does not believe a verifiable treaty regime is realistic The U.S. lawmakers asked NSG member states to consider their suggestions “in light of this critical period in which those who oppose international security based on legally mandated norms and obligations challenge the very structure upon which the NPT is based.” The letter comes before what close watchers suggest could be a battle in the Nuclear Suppliers Group to include language in any approval of India trade to impose certain conditions, such as consequences for an Indian resumption of nuclear testing.  India is expected to strongly oppose such language. Representatives Howard Berman (D-Calif.), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) and Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) submitted a nonbinding resolution yesterday also calling for conditions to be included in NSG passage of the trade deal, the Washington Post reported. The resolution says U.S. support for the NSG exemption should be connected to the inclusion of critical conditions in the Hyde Act, including the cessation of nuclear trade should India conduct a nuclear test and the prohibition of exports of U.S. enrichment and reprocessing technology to India. Should Congress ultimately vote against the pact while India receives an exemption from the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the United States would face the “competitive disadvantage” of being blocked from trade with New Delhi that could be open to all other nations, one congressional aide told the Post. Back to top       North Korea Ready to Give up Nukes, South Says Following his summit this week with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said he believed the Stalinist state is ready to give up its nuclear weapons (see GSN, Oct. 4). The two men signed an agreement yesterday to carry out agreements reached at the six-party talks “for the solution of the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula,” the Associated Press reported. “Now that the highest leader of North Korea confirmed a clear commitment to the North’s nuclear dismantlement, I don’t see any problem in carrying it out,” Roh said (Burt Herman, Associated Press/SouthCoastToday.com, Oct. 5). Kim himself has never before signed a document on denuclearization, the Chosun Ilbo reported (Chosun Ilbo, Oct. 4). Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune reported yesterday that all officials from North Korea’s mission to the United Nations in New York — along with their spouses and children — were secretly given a tour of Washington, D.C. in September. The officials are generally not allowed to leave New York, but their excursion received approval from U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, Washington’s lead envoy to the six-party talks. A minibus took the visitors to the White House and the Lincoln Memorial and past the Pentagon.  They left less than impressed with the president’s residence, the Tribune reported. “They were like, ‘Is that all?’” said tour escort Fred Carriere, executive director of the Korea Society (Bay Fang, Chicago Tribune, Oct. 5). Back to top       Chinese Nuclear Missile Subs Sighted by Satellite A commercial satellite has photographed two ballistic missile submarines docked in a shipyard in China, the Federation of American Scientists said yesterday (see GSN, July 6) In the second discovery of new Chinese ballistic missile submarines photographs in the last three months, the U.S. organization spotted the suspected Type 094 Jin-class submarines at China’s Bohai shipyard in Huludao, about 250 miles east of Beijing. The submarines could be seen in commercial satellite images taken on May 3, 2007, and they have the same dimensions as the craft found in July 2007 in satellite imagery from October 2006 of Xiaopingdao. However, it remains unclear whether China has entered two or three Jin-class nuclear-powered ballistic submarines into operation.  Images of the submarine photographed last year might have been captured again if it moved to Huludao to undergo repairs or maintenance.  The two new submarines might also be the second and third Jin-class submarines that China has been expected to build. The U.S. Naval Intelligence Office said last December that “a fleet of probably five Type 094 SSBNs will be built in order to provide more redundancy and capacity for a near-continuous at-sea SSBN presence.” China has not confirmed any plans to build five submarines, and no publicly available information has positively confirmed Beijing’s intent (Hans Kristensen, Federation of American Scientists, Oct. 4). Back to top       Iran Dismisses European Nuclear Sanctions Threat Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday promised Iran would never bend to international pressure to suspend its uranium enrichment program after France called on EU countries to enact independent sanctions against the Middle Eastern nation, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Oct. 4). “On the nuclear issue, the enemies have assembled all they have but I tell the whole world that Iran has conquered difficult passes and no power can halt the successive victories of Iran,” he told state media (Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Oct. 4). An economic analysis by the French Embassy in Tehran has found that EU sanctions against Iran would be the most expensive for France, Italy and Germany, AFP reported. Trade with the 27 EU nations accounted for 37 percent of Iran’s total trade between March 2006 and March 2007, the report found. However, EU trade “is down compared to the two previous years,” the document said, because the European Union is “progressively losing its share of the market to Asian countries” (Agence France-Presse II/Spacewar.com, Oct. 4). Meanwhile, a European diplomat questioned estimates that Iran would have 3,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges installed and running by the end of the month, Reuters reported. “Running a large number of centrifuges in parallel over a sustained period at full speed — that would be a technical achievement they have not thus far shown they can do,” the diplomat said. Some diplomats and analysts have suggested that Iran has deliberately slowed its speed of enrichment to undermine U.S. efforts to place a new round of U.N. Security Council sanctions on Tehran (Parisa Hafezi, Reuters/Washington Post, Oct. 4). Back to top

Lax Biodefense Lab Oversight Putting U.S. at Risk, GAO Says By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The number of U.S. biological laboratories dealing with the most dangerous pathogens has exploded since 2001, increasing the risk of deadly accidents, the Government Accountability Office said yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 25). Last year’s exposure of Texas A&M University researchers to dangerous pathogens and safety breaches at other universities, along with the recent release of foot-and-mouth disease from a laboratory in the United Kingdom, have prompted heightened concerns about the level of risk associated with the proliferation of biological defense facilities (see GSN, Aug. 10). In testimony yesterday before the House Energy and Water oversight subcommittee, GAO chief technologist Keith Rhodes described a new sprawling biodefense research infrastructure that operates without any centralized government oversight. More accidents are bound to happen as the number of laboratories increase and more researchers — with varying levels of experience — handle deadly agents, Rhodes said. Before the terrorists attacks of 2001, there were five high-containment facilities working with the most deadly agents, so-called Biosafety Level Four laboratories.  Now there are 14 such research centers and one in the planning stage, government auditors found. “The more BSL-4 laboratories there are, the more opportunities for mistakes there are, the more opportunities for release,” Rhodes warned.  “Accidents and safety breaches have occurred in the past and will occur in the future.” The growing number of laboratories produces more staff, more background checks and more handling and transfer of dangerous agents.  “It becomes an extremely complex management of material problem,” Rhodes said. He added that the government has no firm figures for the number of operational Biosafety Level 3 facilities that deal with slightly less dangerous but still potentially lethal pathogens.  “No one knows how many there are,” Rhodes said, “but the number is surely in the thousands.” “The biosafety and biosecurity risks associated with the dramatic and ongoing expansion of high-containment research and research facilities are both real and growing,” Alan Pearson, director of Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation’s Biological and Chemical Weapons Control Program, said in his written testimony. Spurred sharply by the 2001 anthrax mail attacks that killed five people, the Bush administration began devoting billions of dollars to biodefense research (see GSN, June 11).  The federal government has authorized 15 separate agencies to fund such facilities without producing a single oversight office. According to an analysis from the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation funding for bioweapons-related research has increased from $583 million in fiscal 2001 to more than $3 billion in fiscal 2007, with the president’s request for fiscal 2008 topping $3.3 billion. Rhodes called the current oversight system, or lack thereof, “fragmented and decentralized,” but he stopped short of suggesting which federal agency should be tapped to take the reins in this arena.  That recommendation, he said, is expected in March 2008 when the Government Accountability Office releases its complete findings on biodefense laboratories. Rhodes did say that the oversight has to be “completely independent,” the oversight agency entirely divorced from the operations of the laboratories. Subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) struggled to determine if the “mushrooming growth” of these facilities was necessary to develop bioagent countermeasures or if the potential risk outweighs the benefit. “Has the proliferation of these labs reached a point at which there are so many labs doing this research that you actually increase the chances of a catastrophic release of a deadly disease?” he asked. Rhodes said the answer to that question is yes but suggested that proper oversight could reduce that risk. “I want no one to take our preliminary findings and think we’re throwing the baby out with the bath water,” he said.  Rhodes said he was not attacking the number of facilities but rather the convoluted nature of the current oversight system. “I mean I have a very smart team and even we can’t figure it out,” he said. Richard Besser, terrorism preparedness and emergency response director at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said his agency is “really going to take a hard look at all of our lab safety issues.” Most incidents in laboratories, he told the panel, involve human error.  “Even a lab that follows all biosafety guidelines may have accidents,” Besser said. The increase in research since 2001 has put the nation in a better position to respond to an attack using a biological agent such as anthrax, he said without offering precise details. While the administration handed down a directive to increase research on countermeasures following the 2001 terrorist attacks, the number of total laboratories needed to conduct such work was never explicitly outlined.  If lawmakers were looking for a suggested number during the hearing yesterday, they did not find it. “I don’t know if we need more or if we need to have less, but we need to know the ones that we have and we need to know what they’re doing,” Rhodes said. Stupak seemed to suggest that the nation already had more than enough.  “Less construction, more research,” he said. The Government Accountability Office offered six lessons from recent security incidents at biological facilities in its preliminary findings:  officials must identify and overcome barriers to reporting of accidents in order to enhance safety through shared learning from incidents; laboratory staff should be trained in general biosafety as well as in the particular characteristics, safe handling procedures and health effects of agents being studied; strategies for informing medical providers about the agents being used in a particular laboratory should be developed for quick diagnosis and treatment; officials should address confusion over the definition of exposure to aid consistent reporting; ensuring security measures are commensurate with the level of risk; and continued maintenance at the laboratories to ensure the integrity of the facilities’ infrastructure. Back to top       Plum Island Lab Might Not Close, Senator Says U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that the Plum Island Animal Research Center might not be forced to close when the Homeland Security Department builds a higher-security facility, Newsday reported (see GSN, Aug. 24). The site near Long Island is due to be replaced around 2013 by the National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility that would conduct research on anthrax, botulism and other diseases that could prove fatal to humans and animals. However, Plum Island might be allowed to remain in operation in its current configuration, as a Biosafety Level 3 laboratory handling only animal diseases, Schumer said.  “I don’t want to overstate it,” he said.  “They have not made a decision.  But as of this afternoon they told us explicitly that this is an option they are considering.  That’s big news and it’s good news.  But it doesn’t mean the deal is done.” There are more than 250 skilled workers employed at the center, Newsday reported. A Homeland Security Department official said, though, that the agency had no intention of operating both Plum Island and the new $450 million, Biosafety Level 4 facility.  The agency wants one site conducting research on a range of diseases, the official said.  “It would totally defeat the purpose to build a second lab in another location, while keeping Plum Island open,” he said. Plum Island has not been eliminated from the list of six candidate sites to house the new facility, the official said.  Residents near the current facility have voiced opposition to having it updated to conduct research on pathogens that could kill humans (Carol Eisenberg, Newsday, Oct. 4). Back to top       Boston Biodefense Laboratory Shows Off Security Boston University has outfitted a $178 million biological defense facility under construction on its urban campus with state-of-the-art security features, the Boston Herald reported yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 7). Security measures at the Biosafety Level 4 facility include eye scanners, “intelligent” cameras that lock on to intruders, blast-proof walls and sealed laboratories enclosed in reinforced concrete.  Site plans also call for armed patrols, according to university officials. “It’s amazing how many redundancies there are here — and that’s what drives up costs,” said David Flynn, the university’s assistant vice president of facilities. University officials have been addressing concerns among local residents about the safety of locating the biological defense complex in the densely populated urban area. On Wednesday, the university allowed the Boston Herald to tour the seven-story building where researchers are expected to study deadly biological agents such as Ebola, plague and anthrax when the site is completed in about one year. None of the laboratories have yet been completed, but concrete encasements were in place that have been planned to eventually hold fortified “high containment” vaults.  The facility’s Biosafety Level 4 laboratories would include inch-thick glass windows, and they would be kept airtight with inch-thick stainless steel doors with self-sealing “bladders” around their edges. Researchers are expected to work in pressurized suits, and they would not be allowed to leave laboratories without first undergoing disinfection, said Boston University molecular medicine head Jack Murphy, one of the laboratory’s head researchers. Murphy said that even firefighters would be restricted from certain areas in emergencies to prevent the escape of dangerous biological agents (Jay Fitzgerald, Boston Herald, Oct. 4). Back to top       U.S. Signs $9.5M Biological Countermeasures Deal The U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency has issued a $9.5 million contract to a California company to find existing drugs that could help counter dangerous biological agents, the Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal reported yesterday (see GSN, March 21). SRI International said its job would be to evaluate drugs that are already on the market for their potential value against agents of bioterrorism. In carrying out the research, the company said it plans to work with BioRosettex Corp., the U.S. Army Institute for Infectious Diseases, the Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research and the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal, Oct. 4). Back to top

Mustard Leaks Found at Deseret Depot One cup of liquid mustard agent spilled out of three 155 mm munitions stored at the Deseret Chemical Depot in Utah, the U.S. Army said yesterday (see GSN, Oct. 1). The leaks were discovered during routine monitoring and cleaned up by toxic material handlers at the facility.  The leaking munitions are now being kept in airtight containers. There was no escape of mustard agent from the storage igloo, the Army said (U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency release, Oct. 4). Back to top

India Tests Nuclear-Capable Missile The Indian army said it today conducted a successful ‘user trial” launch of a shorter-range version of its nuclear-capable Agni 1 missile, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, July 9). The 39-foot missile was fired from Wheeler Island near the state of Orissa in east India, according to a defense official. “The test matched all mission objectives,” the official said. The midrange version of the Agni 1 can be fired from a mobile launcher, carrying a 1-ton payload to a target within 420 miles.  Its range would enable it to hit most potential targets in neighboring rival Pakistan. The Indian Defense Research and Development Organization designed the Agni, which is Sanskrit for “fire,” as well as the Prithvi, the surface-to-air Trishul, the multipurpose Akash and the antitank Nag missiles (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Oct. 5).   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.