New Zealand has not decided whether to exempt India from Nuclear Suppliers Group rules for nuclear trade, Disarmament Minister Phil Goff said Wednesday (Mario Johny Dos Santos/Getty Images). Nuclear Exporting Nations Question India Trade Waiver Diplomats close to the Nuclear Suppliers Group said the organization is unlikely to support a U.S.-drafted waiver that would give India access to international nuclear trade for the first time in decades, Reuters reported yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 14). Representatives from the 45-nation group of nuclear exporters are scheduled to meet next week in Vienna to consider the exemption.  Diplomats representing several NSG states said, though, that the current document is weaker than earlier U.S. offers, that some parts were simply not acceptable, and that it would violate present U.S. laws regarding nuclear trade with India. “I would be very surprised if that would happen,” said one diplomat.  “There are no conditions.  Obviously what is missing is that (the waiver) is void if there is another atomic test.”..Full Story

Science Panel Backs Conventional Trident Missile By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — An independent panel today advised that the U.S. Navy develop and field a conventional version of its nuclear-armed Trident D-5 missile, a Defense Department initiative that has received scant support thus far from a skeptical Congress (see GSN, March 20)...Full Story

Poland, U.S. Reach Agreement on Missile Interceptors Poland agreed yesterday to become home to 10 U.S. missile interceptors in exchange for defense assurances from the United States, the New York Times reported (see GSN, Aug. 13)...Full Story

	Friday, August 15, 2008

NYC Holds Nuclear Interdiction Drill More than 100 emergency responders were set to track down a mock nuclear device entering New York Harbor today, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, July 30). The drill was scheduled to take place on-board a ship entering the harbor, where fire, port and U.S. Coast Guard crews and police from New York and New Jersey would attempt to track down a mock nuclear weapon with federally provided detection gear, New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said. The drill was expected to take roughly six hours to complete (Associated Press/Courier-Post, Aug. 14). Meanwhile, emergency crews this week responded to a simulated release of sarin nerve agent at a race track in Utah, the Salt Lake Tribune reported yesterday. Evidence pointing to the sarin attack was recovered from a mock gunman at a hostage drill in Midvale City, Utah.  Responders proceeded to Rocky Mountain Raceways in West Valley City, where they encountered a burning car and a U-Haul truck leaking an unknown agent. Local responders dealt with the material and conducted evacuation and decontamination of  bystanders.  The National Guard’s 92nd Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team from Nevada offered additional support, bringing a mobile laboratory used to identify the mock agent in the attack. "For us it's just excellent training," said West Valley Assistant Fire Chief Kris Romijn.  "It allows us to use all the tools in our toolbox." The drill helped to improve coordination between local and federal emergency officials, South Salt Lake Fire Chief Steve Foote added. (Katie Drake, Salt Lake Tribune, Aug. 14). Back to top

Nuclear Exporting Nations Question India Trade Waiver Diplomats close to the Nuclear Suppliers Group said the organization is unlikely to support a U.S.-drafted waiver that would give India access to international nuclear trade for the first time in decades, Reuters reported yesterday (see GSN, Aug. 14). Representatives from the 45-nation group of nuclear exporters are scheduled to meet next week in Vienna to consider the exemption.  Diplomats representing several NSG states said, though, that the current document is weaker than earlier U.S. offers, that some parts were simply not acceptable, and that it would violate present U.S. laws regarding nuclear trade with India. “I would be very surprised if that would happen,” said one diplomat.  “There are no conditions.  Obviously what is missing is that (the waiver) is void if there is another atomic test.” “I think a majority of countries feel that the current draft is very weak and there is no conditionality at all. ... I don't really think that the U.S. [officials] expect that they are able to pass this draft,” said a second source. A waiver is not likely to pass unless it stipulates a review and potential cessation of trade should India take certain actions, such as another nuclear test or restricting inspections of its civilian nuclear facilities.  That access was included in the planned U.S.-Indian nuclear trade deal and cemented when the International Atomic Energy Agency governing board approved a safeguards deal with India. Should the exporter nations fail to back the exemption during meetings next week and in early September, they might not take action on the matter before the U.S. Congress ends its session next month ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November.  That could put the waiver, along with the nuclear trade deal between New Delhi and Washington, in a state of suspension (Boris Groendahl, Reuters/Yahoo!News, Aug. 14). The Nuclear Suppliers Group makes its decisions by consensus.  New Zealand is seen as one possible obstacle to the exemption, but Disarmament Minister Phil Goff said Wednesday that no decision had been made, the New Zealand Herald reported. “We know that there’s a lot of momentum and pressure for countries to agree to an exemption being given,” Goff said.  “But we have genuinely held and sincere concerns that we want to see addressed.” Goff met Monday with Indian Deputy Foreign Secretary Hardeep Singh Puri to discuss the matter. “I indicated that New Zealand had not reached a final position, that it was giving the issue careful and serious consideration, which we are, that we would be working with like-minded countries like Austria, Sweden, the Netherlands, Ireland. “Is granting an exemption something that would weaken the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and are the advantages of having greater controls over India’s nuclear industry outweighed by the disadvantage of weakening the NPT?” Goff said. Representatives of the NSG states are expected to consider a number of issues during their meeting next week, Goff said, including whether to require that the waiver be suspended should India test another nuclear weapon; India’s possible acceptance of the Additional Protocol to its IAEA safeguards deal, which would allow for more intrusive inspections of the nation’s nuclear sites; and how to ensure India does not receive enrichment equipment or other technology that could be put to weapons purposes (Audrey Young, New Zealand Herald, Aug. 14). Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said that nuclear trade with the United States would be crucial for the continued development of his nation, United Press International reported. The agreement would “open up new opportunities for trade in dual-use technologies, opening up new pathways to accelerate industrialization of our country,” Singh said in his independence day speech. Singh said the deal “will enable us to provide electricity to meet the needs of our farmers, our artisans, our traders and our industry,” according to the Press Trust of India. India’s nuclear energy program is being hurt by lack of access to necessary material and technology, Singh said (United Press International, Aug. 15). Back to top       Science Panel Backs Conventional Trident Missile By Elaine M. Grossman Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — An independent panel today advised that the U.S. Navy develop and field a conventional version of its nuclear-armed Trident D-5 missile, a Defense Department initiative that has received scant support thus far from a skeptical Congress (see GSN, March 20). In a 192-page report, commissioned by lawmakers in 2006 (see GSN, July 24, 2006), the National Academy of Sciences experts take issue with a Capitol Hill decision to eliminate this year’s funding for the Conventional Trident Modification.  “The committee disagrees with the congressional decision not to fund testing of [the] CTM [missile] in 2008, and recommends instead that Congress fund” Conventional Trident Modification research and development “at a level sufficient to achieve early deployment if tests confirm system effectiveness,” writes the group, composed of 18 national defense and nuclear weapons experts. The Navy missile was to be the first weapon developed and deployed for a new mission called “prompt global strike,” in which terrorist targets or rogue nations could be attacked within just one hour of a launch command.  Currently, nuclear weapons are the only tools in the U.S. military arsenal available to hit urgent targets halfway around the world in such short order. Lawmakers last year decided that the Navy project would be limited to basic research and development and must share a $100 million budget in fiscal 2008 with an array of other “promising conventional prompt global strike technologies.”  Critics on Capitol Hill cited concerns that, if launched from the same Ohio-class submarines that carry an identical nuclear weapon, a conventional D-5 ballistic missile might be mistaken for a nuclear salvo and elicit a violent response from other atomic powers like Russia or China (see GSN, Dec. 13, 2007). In its report, the NAS Committee on Conventional Prompt Global Strike Capability argued that virtually any long-range weapon built for the mission might introduce some risk of the nuclear “ambiguity” that Congress seeks to avoid. Calling nuclear ambiguity “an understandable concern” with the Conventional Trident Modification, the panel said that the risk of a conventional prompt global strike attack “being misinterpreted and leading to a nuclear attack on the United States could be mitigated and managed through readily available mechanisms.” These “cooperative measures” might include “providing information to bilateral partners about the [conventional prompt global strike] system, its operation and the doctrine for its use; immediately notifying of launches against countries; and installing devices (such as continuous monitoring systems) to increase the confidence that conventional warheads had not been replaced by nuclear warheads,” according to the report, “U.S. Conventional Prompt Global Strike: Issues for 2008 and Beyond.” However, some critics of the conventional Trident option contend that land-based missile systems are better suited to reducing ambiguity and building confidence abroad. “Some conventional prompt global strike systems, like some of the ground-based concepts, have gone out of their way to separate themselves from nuclear systems ... and [we] could open these to [international] inspections,” one former military officer with considerable strategic policy experience said today.  “The Navy submarine is nowhere near as open to inspection as the bomber or the ICBM.” The Army and Air Force have developed concepts for land-based conventional missiles that could be based at installations that house no nuclear weapons.  Their launches might appear markedly different from those of current ICBMs, their warheads could be verified through on-site inspections and their activities could be monitored by spy satellites, said the former official, who was not authorized to address the matter publicly and requested anonymity. The National Academy of Sciences panel found there are a number of “credible scenarios” in which a prompt global strike weapon might be useful, and noted that there are multiple future technologies that might augment or replace a submarine-based ballistic missile for the mission. Threats might include “a ballistic missile launcher poised to launch a nuclear weapon at the United States or at an ally,” a “gathering of terrorist leaders or a shipment of weapons of mass destruction during a brief period of vulnerability,” or “an adversary’s command-and-control capability as the leading edge of a broader combat operation,” the report states. “In light of the appropriately extreme reluctance to use nuclear weapons, conventional prompt global strike could be of particular value in some important scenarios,” according to the science panel, “in that it would eliminate the dilemma of having to choose between responding to a sudden threat either by using nuclear weapons or by not responding at all.” The panel describes seven potential weapon systems that might be capable of undertaking the mission, including a couple of concepts that the committee itself developed: — Existing systems:  These include tactical aircraft, cruise missiles, armed unmanned aerial vehicles and bomber aircraft.  Any of these would have to be deployed within range of a surprise threat to be successful at hitting the target within a 60-minute time frame. — Conventional Trident Modification:  The Navy concept involves converting two D-5 missiles on each of the Navy’s 12 deployed ballistic missile submarines from nuclear- to conventionally armed.  Available as early as 2011, each missile could carry as many as four re-entry vehicles with precision-targeting capability. — Conventional Trident Modification-2:  This committee concept calls for a missile that uses just two of the D-5’s current three rocket stages, allowing for a bigger payload and additional options for the kind of munitions delivered.  This version, which could be ready by 2013, would still achieve the weapon’s objective 4,000-nautical-mile range, according to the report. — Submarine-Launched Global Strike Missile:  The Navy’s mid- to long-term concept would be launched from so-called “SSGN” Ohio-class submarines, converted for conventional missions.  This intermediate-range weapon, deployable before 2015, could carry a single, heavy warhead for attacking some hard targets or, like the CTM missile, could dispense kinetic-energy projectiles against buildings, vehicles or human targets. — Conventional Strike Missile-1:  This Air Force concept for a boost-glide weapon would launch like a ballistic missile from U.S. land installations and then fly at hypersonic speeds into its targets with considerable range and maneuvering capability.  It could carry payloads similar to the Submarine-Launched Global Strike Missile but might not be available until 2016 or later. — Conventional Strike Missile-2:  This committee concept is for a variant with longer glide time than the initial CSM weapon, allowing extended range and increased capability to dispense multiple munitions, the document explains.  Such a weapon, potentially available between 2018 and 2024, might also be able to dispense intelligence-gathering modules or offer re-attack capability, among other features. — Hypersonic Cruise Missiles:  Calling these concepts “long-term alternatives,” the panel said such fast weapons could be launched from long-range aircraft, or deployed at sea or in foreign nations.  Possibly available for fielding between 2020 and 2024, hypersonic cruise missiles might offer “considerable capability” for dispensing smart munitions or surveillance modules, the report states. The committee addressed additional concerns about the prompt global strike mission, including some critics’ view that detailed and reliable intelligence is rarely available to support a short-notice attack.  In light of such worries, a fielded weapon should “be employed only on the order of the president,” the panel advised. Committee members also recommended that the U.S. government undertake “a comprehensive study of the military and diplomatic implications” of fielding and potentially using conventional prompt global strike capabilities.  The assessment should consider “factors such as the potential for inappropriate, mistaken, or accidental use; the implications for nuclear deterrence and crisis stability (including ambiguity considerations); the impact of [weapon] overflight and debris [potentially affecting foreign nations]; and the implications for arms control and associated agreements,” the panel states. The publication was preceded by an interim letter report in May 2007.  Today’s document is the NAS committee’s final report, according to the panel. Back to top       U.S., Kyrgyzstan Sign Nuclear Detector Agreement The U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration said today that it was set to install radiation detectors at several border locations in Kyrgyzstan as a deterrent against smuggling of nuclear or radiological materials (see GSN, Oct. 1, 2007). Officials from the semiautonomous branch of the Energy Department and the Kyrgyzstan State Customs Committee today signed an agreement that allows for deployment of U.S. sensors and communications technology and training of Kyrgyz customs personnel. “Today’s agreement with Kyrgyzstan will help keep nuclear and radiological material out of the hands of terrorists and criminals,” NNSA Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation William Tobey said in a press release.  “NNSA will continue to foster international partnerships to detect, secure and dispose of dangerous nuclear material around the world.” U.S. detection technology has been installed at more than 160 foreign border posts, airports, seaports and other locations under the NNSA Second Line of Defense Program (U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration release, Aug. 15). Back to top       Plutonium Contamination Found in More Lab Workers Radioactive contamination has been found in roughly half of 29 people in the vicinity of the June 9 spill of a radioactive plutonium mixture at the National Institute of Standards and Technology laboratory in Boulder, Colo., the Denver Post reported yesterday (see GSN, July 31). The laboratory had said “a small number of personnel” were contaminated in the spill, which occurred during a radiological “dirty bomb” detection project. A NIST spokeswoman said the affected workers are unlikely to suffer any major adverse health consequences from internal exposure to the material.  Edward Cetaruk, a toxins expert at the University of Colorado at Denver, agreed that the contamination would probably not have a major health effect on those exposed.  The laboratory personnel were tested for radioactive contamination using thermal ionization mass spectrometry at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.  Results for six additional workers are scheduled to be ready in roughly one month, NIST officials said. "We hope having these definitive tests confirm that there are no significant health effects expected will reassure those affected and their families," said NIST Deputy Director James Turner.  "Nevertheless, we continue to regret that any exposures occurred.  Meanwhile, we are aggressively moving to strengthen NIST's safety system from top to bottom" (Howard Pankratz, Denver Post, Aug. 14). Back to top       Y-12 Plant Prepares W-76 Warhead Replacement Parts The Y-12 nuclear weapons facility in Tennessee has completed its first round of new W-76 nuclear warhead components as part of a refurbishing effort aimed at ensuring the reliability of the weapons, a U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration official said Wednesday (see GSN, May 15). The new parts demonstrate progress in a long-delayed effort to refurbish the warheads, which fit onto Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles, the Knoxville News Sentinel reported. "My understanding is the first production unit (of the W-76) has been diamond-stamped here within the past couple of weeks," NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator Bill Ostendorff said at the plant Wednesday.  Y-12 site manager Ted Sherry verified the accomplishment. The Y-12 plant, which produces secondary stages for nuclear warheads, is slated to continue the refurbishing project for several years. The delay of more than a year on the project has been attributed in certain reports to a material referred to only as “Fogbank,” the News Sentinel said (see GSN, March 6; Frank Munger, Knoxville News Sentinel, Aug. 14). Back to top       U.S. Pledges to Pursue Nuclear Diplomacy With Iran The United States today pledged to pursue a peaceful resolution over Iranian nuclear activities that could support possible efforts to develop a nuclear weapon, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Aug. 14). Washington and other Western powers are pressuring Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program, which Tehran insists is exclusively civilian in nature. "The United States is committed to securing a diplomatic resolution with Iran on the nuclear issue," Sada Cumber, U.S. representative to the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference, told journalists.  "Once that is resolved, there will be enough opportunities with Iran, through the OIC and others, to work on other areas.” The envoy said Iran had an important regional role and notable sway with followers of Islam.  "We want Iran to play a responsible role in the region and it is an important country,” he said (Agence France-Presse I/Spacewar.com, Aug. 15). Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday reaffirmed his country’s willingness to pursue dialogue over the nuclear standoff. "We believe that dialogue is the best way to resolve the issue and we are always ready for dialogue," he told reporters after meeting with Turkish President Abdullah Gul in Istanbul. However, the Iranian president warned other powers that Iran is entitled to develop nuclear energy capabilities. "Those who do not respect that will lose themselves.  There will be no change in the will of the Iranian people," he said. Ahmadinejad said that in upcoming discussions, the five permanent U.N. Security Council member nations and Germany could work with Iran to review interests shared in his government’s s proposal for negotiations and a package of political and economic benefits the six nations would give Tehran for halting uranium enrichment. "We believe it will be reasonable to discuss the common issues in those packages and reach a compromise.  This could pave the way for resolving the disputed issues," he said. Gul called the six-nation offer “a new and very important window of opportunity” to resolve the nuclear crisis. "We expect the negotiation process to continue with the good will of all parties... and reach a positive outcome in a short time," Gul said, adding that Turkey would support the diplomatic process (Agence France-Presse II/Spacewar.com, Aug. 14). Meanwhile, sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear activities are taking a toll on the country’s economy, the International Monetary Fund said in a report released yesterday. “Intensified international pressures on Iran have negatively affected economic activity,” the report states, noting that tightened financial restrictions have dissuaded international financing of Iranian industries and slashed the profits of government banks, Reuters reported (Lesley Wroughton, Reuters/Yahoo!News, Aug. 14). Back to top

FBI Ignored Leads Pointing to Anthrax Suspect As the FBI focused its investigation into the 2001 anthrax mailings on one former U.S. Army scientist, the agency failed to note information that would eventually help it to identify another researcher as the sole suspect in the attacks that killed five people, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, Aug. 14). Investigators spent thousands of hours looking into biological defense researcher Steven Hatfill for the mailings (see GSN, Aug. 11) before they began concentrating on U.S. Army microbiologist Bruce Ivins early last year as the suspected perpetrator.  Ivins killed himself late last month as federal prosecutors were reportedly preparing to file charges against him. In the early aftermath of the mailings, investigators could have learned through security records that Ivins had recently logged hours working alone on evenings and weekends in a restricted laboratory at the U.S. Army Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Md. In May 2002, an independent research group released a genetic assessment of the anthrax used in the mailings linking the agent to samples produced at the Army facility. "I would have felt very confident at the time that the top place to look was at Fort Detrick," said Jonathan Eisen, a biologist at the University of California at Davis who had worked with the independent researchers at the Institute for Genomic Research in Rockville, Md. That February, Ivins did not supply the FBI with a sample of the anthrax strain RMR-1029 that had been requested by an investigator.  The bureau seized a flask of the agent in 2004 and it was eventually linked to the material used in the mailings. In December 2001, Ivins spilled anthrax at his work site, attempted to clean the contaminated area with bleach and failed to report the incident.  He confessed to the spill in sworn statements to an Army investigator the following May and said he should have promptly reported the accident. After reviewing case records released last week, one Army officer with knowledge of the incident concluded Ivins failed to report the spill because the material could have been linked to spores from the mailings. "Of course I think it was a cover-up," the officer said.  "He was trying to clean up the material.” The officer said the FBI could have acquired the statement from Ivins and other information collected in the investigation of the spill. The FBI needed years of “analysis and review” to confidently link the materials, a step that was necessary for investigators to focus on Ivins, U.S. Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said yesterday (David Willman, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 15). Back to top       Biodefense Lab Price Tag Rises by at Least $200M The planned U.S. National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility is expected to cost no less than $200 million more than originally anticipated, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported today (see GSN, Aug. 11). Congress in 2006 authorized $451 million for the biodefense research site.  The Homeland Security Department now estimates the cost at anywhere from $648 million to $939 million, based on which of six possible locations is selected. The increased price tag is due to inflation in construction costs and $75 million to $140 million in extra expenses related to each specific site, costs not covered by the original congressional action, according to Homeland Security laboratories chief Jamie Johnson. One possible site for the facility is Athens, Ga., where residents attended two public hearings yesterday.  Some area residents argue that the disease agents held at the site would pose a threat to humans and animals, and could have an adverse effect on the local water supply and the neighboring Botanical Garden of Georgia. “I support all the good goals,” said Richard Cooke of Watkinsville.  “I don’t support them here.  Accidents happen.  We all know that.” Supporters of bringing the facility to Georgia said it would create hundreds of jobs. “A $60,000 job can change someone’s life,” said Watkinsville City Councilman Brian Brodrick.  “That’s the kind of green we should respect.” It is expected to cost slightly less than $680 million to build the facility in Athens.  The least expensive location would be in Mississippi, where construction is estimated at $648 million.  Building the laboratory at the site of the facility it is replacing, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center in New York, is the most costly option at $939 million.  The other candidate sites are in Kansas, North Carolina and Texas (Ken Foskett, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Aug. 15). Back to top

Poland, U.S. Reach Agreement on Missile Interceptors Poland agreed yesterday to become home to 10 U.S. missile interceptors in exchange for defense assurances from the United States, the New York Times reported (see GSN, Aug. 13). Negotiations began nearly two years ago and continued through a change of government in Warsaw.  The finalization of the agreement appeared to have been spurred by Russia’s invasion last week of Georgia. “Poland and the Poles do not want to be in alliances in which assistance comes at some point later — it is no good when assistance comes to dead people,” said Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk. “Poland wants to be in alliances where assistance comes in the very first hours of — knock on wood — any possible conflict.” The Bush administration has now reached both necessary agreements for deployment of missile interceptors in Poland and a companion early warning radar in the Czech Republic.  Operations at the sites are expected to begin by 2012, with the stated intention of providing defense against ballistic missiles fired by a nation such as Iran. As part of the agreement, Warsaw and the United States pledged to conduct “enhanced security cooperation,” which includes installation of a U.S. Patriot air defense battery in Poland for protection against aircraft or limited-range missiles.  Roughly 100 U.S. military personnel would operate the system. The deal also requires the United States to protect Poland against an attack more expeditiously than NATO. Polish lawmakers are set to study the agreement, though it was not known if their support was necessary for establishment of the interceptor site. The White House stated again that the missile defense elements are not being prepared with Russia in mind, the Times reported. “In no way is the president’s plan for missile defense aimed at Russia,” said spokeswoman Dana Perino.  “In fact, it’s just not even logically possible for it to be aimed at Russia, given how Russia could overwhelm it.  The purpose of missile defense is to protect our European allies from any rogue threats, such as a missile from Iran” (Shanker/Kulish, New York Times, Aug. 15). Russian officials, who have long characterized the U.S. plan as a threat to their nation’s security, were clearly not convinced, Reuters reported. “The fact that this was signed in a period of very difficult crisis in the relations between Russia and the United States over the situation in Georgia shows that, of course, the missile defense system will be deployed not against Iran but against the strategic potential of Russia,” said Dmitry Rogozin, Russian envoy to NATO (Guy Faulconbridge, Reuters/Yahoo!News, Aug. 15). Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy head of the Russian general staff, said today that the U.S.-Polish agreement “cannot go unpunished,” the Associated Press reported (Associated Press I/Yahoo!News, Aug. 15). “Poland, by deploying (the system) is exposing itself to a strike — 100 percent,” Nogovitsyn added. Under Russia’s military doctrine, the nation can use nuclear weapons “against the allies of countries having nuclear weapons if they in some way help them,” the general noted (Jim Heintz, Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, Aug. 15). 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.