In testimony before a House committee yesterday, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff described the possibility of a nuclear bomb being smuggled on to U.S. shores using a small boat or aircraft (Tim Sloan/Getty Images). DHS Head Says Small Planes, Boats Could Carry WMD By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Both noncommercial aircraft and small boats could be used to carry a nuclear weapon to U.S. shores, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said yesterday, while announcing a pair of programs that could be used to close those security gaps (see GSN, June 18)...Full Story

Air Force Relieves Officer After Nuclear Error The U.S. Air Force yesterday relieved the commanding officer in charge of nuclear munitions personnel at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., after six nuclear weapons were mistakenly loaded onto a strategic bomber last week and flown to another air base, Army Times reported (see GSN, Sept. 5)...Full Story

U.S. to Move Plutonium to Savannah River Site The Energy Department plans to move plutonium to the Savannah River Site in South Carolina from nuclear facilities in New Mexico, California and Washington state in an effort to consolidate U.S. nuclear materials, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 5)...Full Story

	Thursday, September 6, 2007

DHS Head Says Small Planes, Boats Could Carry WMD By Jon Fox Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Both noncommercial aircraft and small boats could be used to carry a nuclear weapon to U.S. shores, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said yesterday, while announcing a pair of programs that could be used to close those security gaps (see GSN, June 18). Chertoff’s comments, made before the House Homeland Security Committee, come as both current and former Bush administration officials have begun to push for a radiation detection focus beyond scanning the millions of maritime shipping containers that arrive on U.S. shores each year (see GSN, June 13). Vayl Oxford, head of the Homeland Security Department’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, has described it as a shift away from a “port-centric” approach (see GSN, May 25). Since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, much legislative and media attention has been paid to the threat of a nuclear weapon or nuclear material arriving at a U.S. port inside an anonymous metal freight container.  By the end of 2008 nearly all sea cargo unloaded at “major” U.S. seaports is expected to be scanned for radiation, Chertoff said.  The radiation detection network at the end of 2009 would be extended to nearly all ports of entry including land crossings. “While we’ve made some very significant steps in securing the homeland in these respects, I have to say there are some gaps that require attention, and we are moving forward with those,” he told lawmakers. The United States has deployed radiation detectors widely and Homeland Security officials are backing a more than $1 billion effort to deploy more advanced detectors at commercial ports.  However, small planes and boats could pull an end run around those defenses, Chertoff suggested (see GSN, May 16). “We do worry about the fact that someone could lease or occupy a private plane overseas and then use that as a way to smuggle a ‘dirty bomb’ or weapon of mass destruction into the United States,” he said.  “We do worry that having locked the front door, so to speak, against dangerous containers someone could simply put a dangerous cargo in a private oceangoing vessel and take it into a U.S. port.” In Washington state, the federal government has begun equipping local officials with radiation detection equipment to launch a pilot program to scan small boats at “choke points” in Puget Sound leading to the Port of Seattle. “It is possible to direct all of the traffic through a fairly narrow strait that brings you into the port,” Chertoff said.  The program is to include passive radiation detectors in both fixed and mobile positions, “essentially pushing the perimeter out a little bit,” he said. The “West Cost Maritime pilot program” began in Puget Sound in July with initial assessment activities.  The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office is expected to invest roughly $10 million in the three-year program which is also expected to soon be expanded to San Diego, according to the department. The program “is one that we intend to roll out in other locations, including New York,” Chertoff said. Regarding general aviation aircraft, Chertoff said he expects to soon unveil a plan to tighten security standards for planes traveling to the United States from overseas.  The steps could include a measure requiring private aircraft to submit a list of passengers and crew members to U.S. officials for vetting before flying to the United States, he said. The plan would also involve tightening security standards for planes coming from abroad and working with “overseas allies and the private sector” to screen private aircraft for nuclear or radiological material before they enter U.S. airspace, Chertoff said. Chertoff’s testimony came one day before the Government Accountability Office is expected to release a report critical of the Homeland Security Department, indicating the sprawling agency created in the wake of Sept. 11 has met fewer than half of its performance goals, the Washington Post reported today. The department received poor marks in emergency preparedness and had made “moderate progress” in five of 14 areas — immigration enforcement, aviation, land and transportation security, securing critical infrastructure and property management, the Post reported.  Those were sectors in which the agency had taken action on meeting more than half of identified goals. The report said substantial progress had only been found in one area — maritime and port security. Despite the less-than glowing review expected today, Chertoff said, “I believe we are much safer than we were prior to 9/11.” Back to top

Bush Heard, Then Dismissed Information on Lack of Iraqi WMD Capabilities, Ex-CIA Officials Say U.S. President George W. Bush ignored a report from his top intelligence official in late 2002 that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, Salon.com reported today (see GSN, April 27). Then-CIA Director George Tenet briefed Bush on Sept. 18 of that year, telling him that Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, then on the payroll of U.S. and French intelligence services, had reported Iraq’s lack of WMD capability. “The information detailed that [Iraqi President] Saddam [Hussein] may have wished to have a program, that his engineers had told him they could build a nuclear weapon within two years if they had fissile material, which they didn't, and that they had no chemical or biological weapons,” said one of two former senior CIA officers who spoke with Salon. “Tenet told me he briefed the president personally," said one of the former CIA officers.  Bush called the information "the same old thing." “The president had no interest in the intelligence," said one CIA officer. The other officer added, "Bush didn't give a fuck about the intelligence.  He had his mind made up." Some intelligence officers working the issue “validated” Sabri’s assertions, in part by examining French intercepts of phone calls among top Iraqi officials, according to the CIA officers. However, the leaders of the CIA investigation into Iraqi WMD capabilities discounted any information that came from France. “They kept saying the French were trying to undermine the war,” said one of the former CIA officers. One of Tenet’s deputies told the officers, “You haven’t figured this out yet.  This isn’t about intelligence.  It’s about regime change,” they said. For his part, Tenet described Sabri’s assertions to Bush but never to Secretary of State Colin Powell, who later presented the U.S. case for war before the U.N. Security Council, Salon reported (Sidney Blumenthal, Salon.com, Sept. 6). Back to top

Air Force Relieves Officer After Nuclear Error The U.S. Air Force yesterday relieved the commanding officer in charge of nuclear munitions personnel at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., after six nuclear weapons were mistakenly loaded onto a strategic bomber last week and flown to another air base, Army Times reported (see GSN, Sept. 5). The Aug. 30 loading of the nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise Missiles violated Air Force rules that prohibit bombers from flying with nuclear weapons in peacetime, a policy enacted in 1968 after a B-52 crashed in Greenland and spewed plutonium around the crash site. Air Force crews had intended to load unarmed missiles on to the B-52 bomber for shipment to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., according to Army Times (Michael Hoffman, Army Times, Sept. 5). The Advanced Cruise Missile does not come in a conventionally armed version, said Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists.  Therefore the mistake could not have been caused by ground crews confusing different versions of the missile (Greg Webb, Global Security Newswire, Sept. 6). “There was an error which occurred during a regularly scheduled transfer of weapons between two bases,” Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Ed Thomas said in a written statement issued yesterday.  “The error was discovered by airmen during internal Air Force checks.” There are various reasons for moving munitions to another base, Thomas said, including maintenance, retirement and modernization. “All weapons have been accounted for,” he said.  “All evidence we have seen so far points to an isolated mistake.”  Meanwhile, he added, the service’s Air Combat Command “has directed a command-wide stand-down” for “all units to review their procedures.” How the Minot personnel selected the wrong missiles is now under investigation, said Defense Department officials. Nuclear-armed versions are marked with distinct red symbols, Kristensen said, and the nuclear-tipped bombs weigh considerably more than empty-warhead counterparts. Nuclear weapons are also controlled by much more rigorous command and control systems than conventional weapons.  Accessing or transporting nuclear weapons would require multiple military authorizations from senior officers, Kristensen said. “I just can’t imagine how all of this happened,” added Philip Coyle of the Center for Defense Information.  “The procedures are so rigid; this is the last thing that’s supposed to happen” (Hoffman, Army Times). “We’ve got some operational standards problems here,” weapons expert John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org concurred today.  “This would not have happened in Gen. Curtis LeMay’s Strategic Air Command,” he said, referring to the legendary Cold Warrior who expanded the U.S. bomber force. “The problem is not just with the person that made the mistake,” Pike added.  “The problem is with the chain of command that let a technician in their state of bewilderment get that close to such a weapon.” “There’s a command failure,” he continued.  “This guy was improperly trained and this guy had a chain of command that was not able to identify that this guy was improperly trained.  They need to get some people down there to get this straightened out” (Webb, GSN). The Air Force is scheduled to deliver a report on its investigation by the end of next week to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a Pentagon spokesman said yesterday.  The report would describe what happened and what corrective measures should be taken. Top officials have taken the matter very seriously, said spokesman Geoff Morrell in a press briefing. “It's clearly important enough that the secretary was informed of it and that he has requested daily briefings from [Air Force Chief of Staff] Gen. [Michael] Moseley as to what they are doing to fix the problem and to get to the bottom of the problem,” Morrell said.  “I can also tell you that it's important enough that President Bush was notified of it, so it's clearly important” (U.S. Defense Department release, Sept. 5). Back to top       U.S. to Move Plutonium to Savannah River Site The Energy Department plans to move plutonium to the Savannah River Site in South Carolina from nuclear facilities in New Mexico, California and Washington state in an effort to consolidate U.S. nuclear materials, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Sept. 5). The project “is a key part of the department’s efforts to properly manage surplus plutonium,” said Assistant Energy Secretary James Rispoli, adding that the consolidation would allow nuclear materials to be better secured for less money. He said the shipments could begin as early as October and would be spread over three years. The plutonium in the planned shipments was mostly produced during the Cold War as nuclear weapons material, but it also includes plutonium in fuel rods from a closed U.S. reactor.  Not included in the project is plutonium from dismantled nuclear weapons or material needed for weapons research or for nuclear warhead triggers. The exact amount of the plutonium, some of which is combined with highly enriched uranium, remains classified.  It is stored in 3,000 canisters the size of coffee cans that can each hold up to 9.7 pounds of material.  Rispoli said the canisters are not filled to capacity, AP reported. The Energy Department’s Hanford facility in Washington state now holds about 2,300 of the canisters while an additional 700 canisters are stored at the Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore national laboratories. In response to concerns among South Carolina officials that the state could be permanently used to hold the surplus plutonium, Rispoli said the Energy Department plans to eventually move the material from the state.  “The intent is not only to bring the plutonium there but dispose of it at the (Savannah) site and then have pathways for all of this material to leave the state,” he said, adding that a high-security facility is being prepared at the Savannah River complex to store the plutonium. Energy Department officials plan to either convert the plutonium at Savannah River to a mixed-oxide fuel for civilian power production or encase it in glass logs for transfer to the planned national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Neither facility is expected to open before 2017, and the Yucca Mountain site might never become operational (Associated Press/USA Today, Sept. 5). Back to top       No Uranium Sales to Iran, Australia to Tell Russia Australia would refuse to sell uranium to Russia unless Moscow promises not resell it to Iran or Syria, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said today (see GSN, Aug. 17). Howard is expected to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin tomorrow during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Sydney, Reuters reported.  He said he would put Putin “through the ropes” before signing a deal to export uranium to Russia. “The condition on our selling uranium is that we obtain the guarantees necessary to satisfy us that it won't go to Iran and Syria,” Howard said. “We will be taking the Russians through the ropes in relation to any arrangement we have and we will be wanting to satisfy ourselves completely that won't occur,” he said. Australia exports uranium to 36 countries and holds 40 percent of known uranium reserves. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Russia was aware of international concerns that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. “I really suspect that the Russians understand the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon,” she said yesterday. "Let's remember that Iran is an awful lot closer to Russia than it is to the United States or to Australia.  I know that they would be very careful about the proliferation of any material to Iran,” she said (Michael Perry, Reuters/Washington Post, Sept. 5). Rice added that the United States saw no problem with the uranium deal given that Russia already possesses a major nuclear arsenal and is not likely to pass the material on to Iran, Agence France-Presse reported. “This isn't an issue for us,” Rice said.  “The Russians have plenty of weapons, let's be realistic about it.  The Cold War produced more than a surplus.” Back to top       Radioactive Fluid Splashes Workers at Y-12 Plant Radioactive fluid spilled on to two workers in separate August incidents at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Tennessee, the Knoxville News Sentinel reported today (see GSN, June 13). The personnel were decontaminated and remain under medical supervision, but they “face little health risk from the contamination,” said Bill Wilburn, spokesman for site operators BWX Technologies. Wilburn described an Aug. 14 incident in which personnel tested a valve following maintenance work at the plant’s Enriched Uranium Operations Building. “As part of the test, an equipment pump was switched on to check for leaks,” he said in an e-mail statement.  “Upon turning on the pump, uranium-contaminated liquid sprayed through a drain valve that was slightly open on to the upper leg of an engineer who was observing the test.” The radioactive liquid soaked through the engineer’s clothing, reaching his upper leg. “The employee was taken to Y-12’s on-site medical facilities and decontaminated,” Wilburn said, adding that eight other workers present at the spill are also being evaluated for exposure. In an Aug. 16 incident in the same building, a worker dropped a bottle holding liquid enriched uranium, causing the material to splash on to the person’s shoulder through an opening in protective gear. An investigation of the two accidents is being conducted to “determine what kinds of corrective actions need to be taken,” Wilburn said.  “These were the first incidents of personal skin contamination in nearly four years,’ he said (Frank Munger, Knoxville News Sentinel, Sept. 6). Back to top       No Progress Reported in Japan-North Korea Talks Two days of talks on normalizing diplomatic relations between Japan and North Korea ended today without signs of progress, Reuters reported (see GSN, Sept. 5). The working-level negotiations were one of several sessions held between full six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program.  The meetings are intended to address various issues related to Pyongyang’s February pledge to dismantle its nuclear program. There was no breakthrough regarding the issue of Japanese citizens abducted by North Korea.  Pyongyang argues that it closed the matter in 2002 by acknowledging 13 abductions and returning what it said were the five remaining survivors.  Tokyo is seeking information on the eight others, along with another four suspected victims, and believes survivors might remain in North Korea. “We had in-depth and lengthy discussions on the abduction issue in the morning,” said top Japanese negotiator Yoshiki Mine.  “We stressed that it is indispensable for us to normalize diplomatic relations after resolving the abduction issue.  We urged the North Korean side to take specific action.” That did not occur, Mine said. For its part, Pyongyang sought compensation for Japan’s 1910-1945 occupation of the Korean Peninsula, Reuters reported.  Japan indicated it would have a committee consider the matter if North Korea would again look into the kidnappings. “The relations between Japan and North Korea are at the worst level now,” said North Korean delegate Kim Chol-ho.  He said, though, that further talks are needed. “We think that the meeting was held in a very serious atmosphere and both sides reaffirmed their commitments to previous agreements,” Kim said.  “We need to meet more often” (Irja Halasz, Reuters/Yahoo!News, Sept. 6). The abduction issue is not likely to prevent the United States from removing North Korea from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism, South Korean Foreign Minister Song Min-soon said yesterday.  Pyongyang has demanded that it be freed from that designation as part of the denuclearization process, but Tokyo has expressed concern about such a move (Yonhap News Agency, Sept. 6). Meanwhile, top Chinese and North Korean nuclear negotiators met today in Beijing, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported. Wu Dawei and Kim Kye Gwan addressed the “direction of the next phase of the work” and the next full round of six-party talks expected later this month, said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu. The North Korean envoy indicated his government has “specific plans” for a “full declaration and disablement of the nuclear facilities,” Jiang said. “We hope in the next (six-party) meeting, that the relevant parties could have further discussions on this issue,” she said (Deutsche Press-Agentur/Earth Times, Sept. 6). Back to top

Texas A&M Biosafety Chief Resigns The biosafety director at Texas A&M resigned in the wake of a highly critical federal report on the university’s management of its infectious disease research facilities, the Dallas Morning News reported today (see GSN, Sept. 5). “It has reached a point in my career at Texas A&M that I can no longer effectively pursue my duties in the present environment,” Brent Mattox said in his resignation letter.  Mattox had been at the College Station institution for nine years and oversaw laboratory safety and inspections for the environmental health and safety department. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in a report made public Tuesday, found numerous failings in the university’s safety and security system for its disease research sector.  These included allowing unauthorized personnel to access Q fever and other disease agents, failing to conduct annual inspections on all laboratories storing or using toxins, and losing track of several vials of the bacteria brucella. The university must make at least 12 corrections before it can resume federally funded biodefense research, including preparing an improved laboratory security plan and upgrading training policies.  The government could also assess fines or even file criminal charges against the school. Mattox’s resignation follows that of Richard Ewing, who left his post as vice president for research in August but stayed at the university as a tenured mathematics professor (see GSN, Aug. 2).  One researcher is also on leave. The head of a Texas watchdog group that publicized the university’s biosafety woes cautioned against placing too much blame on Mattox, the Morning News reported. “You would expect the biosafety officer to play a major role in the oversight and administration of select agent rules at an institution,” said Edward Hammond, director of the Sunshine Project.  “It’s not unique to A&M to have these people sort of marginalized” (Emily Ramshaw, Dallas Morning News, Sept. 6). Back to top

Material at U.N. Office Not Chemical Agent, Lab Says A suspected Iraqi chemical weapons agent found in a New York office a block from U.N. headquarters last month is now believed to be a commercial solvent, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Sept. 4). Officials initially described the substance as phosgene, a choking agent used during World War I and again during the 1980s in attacks against Iraqi Kurds by Saddam Hussein’s government. “We learned later,” said a law enforcement official, “that initial tests indicated it might be some kind of over-the-counter solvent, though we don’t know what kind.” The chemical was found Aug. 24 in the office of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission; which is preparing to shut down.  It was kept inside a sealed container within a metal box.  An inventory number indicated that the material was phosgene taken in 1996 from the remains of an Iraqi chemical weapons facility.  Testing at a military laboratory in Edgewood, Md., showed that the substance was not actually phosgene. U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said the agency has not received official reports of the laboratory’s conclusion.  He said that the United Nations planned to investigate why the material was left in the office. “As for questions about any possible mix-up,” he said by e-mail, “the U.N. intends to look into how this particular discovery happened, and we are contacting potential members of an investigation team.” The chemical could have been left by the inspections agency that preceded the commission, the U.N. Special Commission, said UNMOVIC spokesman Ewen Buchanan. “The record just indicates it’s phosgene,” Buchanan said.  “It doesn’t say whether it’s degraded.  Or whether it’s phosgene mixed with a solvent. ” “It could’ve been the remnants of a bad experiment by the Iraqis,” he added. “We have to assume the worst,” he said.  “I don’t think we were wrong in that sense” (Cara Buckley, New York Times, Sept. 6). Back to top

U.S. Presses Forward With Missile Defense Talks Representatives from the United States and the Czech Republic met yesterday in Prague for additional talks on placing a U.S. missile defense radar in the European nation, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Aug. 24). “Negotiations are very detailed, often centered on specific words … they are very intense, sometimes very tough,” said Czech Deputy Foreign Minister Tomas Pojar during a press conference Pojar said Czech negotiators were “mildly surprised” that their U.S. counterparts agreed to some proposals, but that talks are ongoing on some issues.  Additional negotiations are scheduled for next week, AFP reported. Assistant Secretary of State John Rood is scheduled to lead the U.S. delegation in talks today and tomorrow with Polish officials regarding the proposed placement of 10 missile interceptors in Poland. The U.S. team is expected to conduct talks beginning Sept. 15 with officials from Russia and Azerbaijan on the missile defense plan.  Moscow has strenuously objected to the proposal, urging Washington to instead use radar sites in Azerbaijan and southern Russia and to delay deployment of missile interceptors. “I will lead a delegation next week which will discuss the two offers,” Rood said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, Sept. 5). Talks this week in Warsaw would be the third set of missile defense negotiations between Poland and the United States, the Associated Press reported. Polish officials want to “be sure that the project will increase the security of Poland — this is the most important condition,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Robert Szaniawski.  “Which means some additional details.” “This project concerns Poland’s security because of … some problems made by Russia,” he said.  “They still treat this part of Europe … as if it should be under their control” (Vanessa Gera, Associated Press, Sept. 6).   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.