U.S. Response I:  Homeland Security Department Issues Interim Maritime Security Regulations

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Homeland Security Department yesterday announced new interim regulations to improve maritime and port security (see GSN, June 5).

The new regulations are expected to affect 10,000 maritime vessels, 5,000 facilities and 40 outer continental shelf facilities, such as tank vessels, large passenger vessels, offshore oil platforms and port facilities that handle dangerous kinds of cargo, according to a Homeland Security press release.  Under the new regulations, vessel and facility operators and owners will be required to conduct vulnerability assessments and develop security plans. 

During a press briefing yesterday, U.S. Coast Guard Chief of Staff Vice Adm. Thad Allen said that while some U.S. port facilities are close to completing their own security assessments, others are lagging behind.

“There are some ports and some industries and some facilities where they were right on top of this after 9/11,” Allen said.  “Others are a little further back.  And it’s going to be a challenge to get everybody kind of on the same piece of music, if you will,” he said.

The regulations set a deadline of Dec. 31 for security plans to be submitted for Coast Guard approval, Allen said.  As of July 1, 2004, all regulated vessels and facilities must have their approved security plans in place, he said.

To provide “flexibility” and to “encourage” innovation, the Homeland Security release said, industry organizations may submit alternative security programs for Coast Guard approval.

The new regulations also require vessels and facilities to implement new security measures based on three scalable security levels.  Such measures could include passenger and baggage screening, security patrols, personnel identification procedures and the installation of security equipment.  The new security levels — yellow, orange and red — are meant to match the national terrorism threat alert levels, Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson said yesterday.

A Coast Guard official said that passenger and body screening would likely only be implemented when the U.S. terrorism threat alert level was at “orange,” or high, and only on certain vessels, the Associated Press reported.

The new regulations require that an individual be designated to be responsible for each vessel or facility’s security program.  In addition, the regulations also outline qualifications for security officers and require all personnel to receive training to be able to implement security plans.

The regulations designate Coast Guard captains of the ports as federal maritime security coordinators with the authority to oversee and direct security activities at ports.  In addition, the regulations also establish area maritime security committees, consisting of members of U.S., state and local agencies, industry representatives and others.  These committees are required to conduct vulnerability assessments and to develop security plants for each of the 361 U.S. ports, as well as an annual security exercise, according to the Homeland Security release.

Under the regulations, certain vessels will be required to install Automatic Identification System equipment, which instantly sends ship information to other ships and to shore-based agencies.  Currently, only a “very small percentage” of ships have such equipment installed, a Homeland Security official said yesterday.  “Pretty much all” international vessels, however, will be required to have AIS equipment installed and operational by the end of next year, the official said.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge praised the new regulations yesterday.

“With 95 percent of our nation’s international cargo carried by ship, port security is critical to ensuring our nation’s homeland and economic security,” Ridge said in a statement.  “The port security measures we are putting in place, both here at home and abroad, are about expanding our capabilities — strengthening a vitally important system with additional layers of defense,” he said.

The Coast Guard has estimated that the costs of improving port security will be more than $7 billion over the next 10 years.  Hutchinson said yesterday that $350 million is expected to be made available this year for port security grants to help offset the costs of the new regulations.  He also said, however, that vessel operators and owners will have to cover the bulk of the costs in conducting their vulnerability assessments.

“There have been some pilot programs, some funding available,” Hutchinson said.  “But it is a shared responsibility, and so there will be a burden that will fall on the private sector,” he added.

The interim regulations, designed to implement the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, were published without prior public comment, Allen said.  Even so, Homeland Security held seven public meetings, with more than 2,100 industry, state and local representatives attending, he said.  The department is now conducting a monthlong comment period, with final rules expected to be published in October and set to go into effect 30 days later, Allen said. 

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Police Say Local Response to Terror Alerts Is Muted

Stretched thin by false alarms and tight budgets, some U.S. police chiefs are increasingly disregarding federal terror alerts, USA Today reported today (see GSN, June 3).

“There is a broad consensus that the (federal alert) system just isn’t effective,” said Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske said.  “It isn’t working,” he added.

Law enforcement officials have complained that the Homeland Security Department raises terror alerts but do not give detailed guidance to local authorities.

“They are frustrated with the lack of specificity in the threat information being passed on, and how they should respond,” said Miami Police Chief John Timoney.  “Personally, I think the alerts serve as a good reminder that the enemy is still out there.  But some (chiefs) are saying they are not going to do anything differently anymore when a new threat alert goes out,” he added.

In Oregon, Portland police went to the second highest alert status — orange — during protests over the planned U.S. invasion of Iraq.  The heightened alert cost the city $1.2 million in overtime costs, USA Today reported.  In May, during another orange alert, the city limited its response and incurred only $6,000 in overtime costs.  In the end, financial considerations and tight budgets could dictate security efforts.

“You take the orange (alert) with a grain of salt,” said Portland Police Chief Mark Kroeker.  “It’s a pragmatic approach mixed with the current fiscal crisis,” he added.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said local law enforcement divisions should pay close attention to alerts issued from Washington.

“God forbid something happens in a major city and you didn’t go up” to a higher alert level, Ridge said last month.  “We can’t mandate it, but at least I am hopeful that under these circumstances that (state) homeland security advisers will think twice about not doing something,” he added (Kevin Johnson, USA Today, July 2).

Back to top

Iran:  Tehran Considering Allowing Greater Nuclear Scrutiny

Iran is conditionally prepared for more intrusive International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring of its nuclear activities, a top Iranian official said yesterday (see GSN, July 1).

Tehran “is ready to sign the Additional Protocol to the agreement on nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, but only in an atmosphere of transparency and trust regarding the participants of this document,” said Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran’s nuclear agency.

It was not clear what conditions need to be satisfied before Iran agrees to the additional inspections.  According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, however, Iranian officials have already said they will sign the agreement.

“There are plans to sign this protocol in the near future,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko said yesterday.  “This has been agreed upon with Iran,” he added (Jim Heintz, Associated Press/San Jose Mercury News, July 1).

Meanwhile, Iran plans to ask Russia to participate in the building of additional nuclear facilities, ITAR-Tass reported today.  Russia is currently building a nuclear plant in the southern Iranian city of Bushehr.

“We have plans for building, alongside the Bushehr nuclear power plant, several others having a total capacity of 6,000 megawatts, and we are inviting Russia to take this opportunity,” Aghazadeh said.

He said that Moscow and Tehran were also close to signing an agreement on the return of spent Russian nuclear fuel from Bushehr.

When the new plant is commissioned, Russian technicians will help train Iranian scientists, according to Aghazadeh.  Iran has already sent 700 nuclear specialists to study at Russian nuclear facilities, he said (ITAR-Tass, July 2).

United Kingdom Will Not Attack Iran

British Foreign Minister Jack Straw said Monday that there is no chance of the United Kingdom taking part in an attack on Iran.

“No one should ever compare Iran with Iraq in terms of their political systems or their danger,” he said (Barry Schweid, Associated Press/Austin American-Statesman, July 1).

Back to top

North Korea:  Seoul Faces Heat Over Report on Pyongyang’s Nuclear Weapons

South Korean opposition leaders yesterday called on the government to disclose information that led to a Tuesday New York Times report on allegedly new North Korean nuclear warhead development (see GSN, July 1).

The report identified a North Korean site allegedly used to develop the conventional explosives used to trigger nuclear weapons, according to the Times.

“The New York Times report is shocking,” said Park Jin, spokesman for the opposition Grand National Party.  “The government should not conceal any key information that can seriously affect our national security,” he added.

The National Assembly has directed its intelligence, foreign affairs and defense committees to hold special meetings to look into the report (Charles Whelan, Agence France-Presse, July 2).

“Our government is not in a position to say something (about it),” said an official at the South Korean Foreign Ministry.

The response from U.S. officials was similarly muted.

“We don’t comment on reports like this that are sourced — allegedly sourced — to intelligence information,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher.

The development, however, may not represent new information, Yonhap News Agency reported.  In his book on the Korean Peninsula, veteran journalist Donald Oberdorfer said North Korea had tested powerful conventional explosives as a step toward nuclear testing.

“They (North Koreans) did test apparently some non-nuclear high explosive devices which potentially help trigger nuclear explosions,” Oberdorfer said in a 2000 interview (Yonhap News Agency/BBC Monitoring, July 2).

Officials Plan July 9 Meeting

Diplomats from North and South Korea plan to hold three-day cabinet-level meetings in Seoul beginning July 9, the Korea Times reported (Kim Ki-tae, Korea Times, July 2).

South Korea, Japan and the United States are holding talks today in Washington to discuss their approach to North Korea, the Korea Herald reported.

South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuck, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly and Japanese Director General of Asian and Oceanic Affairs Yabunaka Mitoji will most likely discuss the future of two nuclear reactors being built in North Korea as part of the now defunct 1994 Agreed Framework.

Japan will probably suggest a temporary halt in reactor construction, the Korea Herald reported.  The United States is pushing for the suspension of the project altogether (Kim So-young, Korea Herald, July 2).

U.S. Unlikely To Attack

Kenneth Quinones, a former U.S. negotiator with Pyongyang, said that a military strike on North Korean nuclear facilities could cause ecological disaster.

“Unfortunately, the surgical strike concept simply cannot function,” said Quinones, who is now the Korean affairs director at the International Center in Washington.  “I don’t think the United States is planning to attack.  They are not really focusing on a military option,” he added.

Quinones cautioned, however, that a small misunderstanding could lead to a larger military conflict.

“As tension increases and the channel of communications declines, the prospect of a small incident exploding into a major one increases,” he said (Shigemi Sato, Agence France-Presse, July 2).

A North Korean official, however, said that Pyongyang might abandon the armistice that ended the Korean War 50 years ago.

Korea is at “the crossroads of war or peace,” said the North Korean military representative at Panmunjom, a border village where representatives from each country meet.

“It is, in fact, hardly possible to preserve the cease-fire in Korea by the unilateral efforts of the Korean People’s Army side,” the representative said (Soo-jeong Lee, Associated Press, July 1).

Back to top

United States I:  Review Says Sandia Obstructed Probe Into Security Breach

Sandia National Laboratories managers impeded two internal investigators who were probing various security breaches at the New Mexico facility, according to an independent review (see GSN, June 25).

The investigators were focusing their investigation on an employee who allegedly gained access to sensitive computer files and took photographs of sexual encounters in restricted laboratory areas.

The review — completed by Norman Bay, a former U.S. attorney for New Mexico — noted, however, that managers did not obstruct probes into the loss of a set of master keys to laboratory facilities, videotapes of guards sleeping at work or a security guard stealing computer equipment.

The review also concluded that the investigators did not face any type of retaliation during or following the investigation.

Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) sharply criticized the report, calling it “80 to 90 percent pure whitewash.”  The senator said the Bay report was part of a Sandia culture that attempted to cover up problems and “shoot the messenger” (George Lobsenz, Energy Daily, July 2).

Back to top

United States II:  Navy Receives Minisubmarine for Use on Converted Tridents

The U.S. Navy has taken delivery of an advanced minisubmarine designed to be installed on converted Trident-class ballistic missile submarines, Defense Week reported Monday (see GSN, June 16).

The Naval Sea Systems Command last week received the first Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS), which is designed to attach to an attack submarine or a converted Trident-class submarine, Defense Week reported.  Currently, two Los Angeles-class attack submarines are capable of carrying the ASDS, which will allow SEAL commando teams to travel further distances while limiting exposure to cold water.

The ASDS completed its operational evaluation in May, but the U.S. Special Operations Command, which will be the final user of the system, is waiting for the final evaluation results before taking delivery of the system.

The ASDS program has faced a number of technical difficulties, such as flawed battery cells and a loud propeller, as well as schedule delays since it was launched, according to Defense Week.  The U.S. General Accounting Office said in a report issued earlier this year that the costs for the program had more than tripled since it began and that it was six years behind schedule (Nathan Hodge, Defense Week, June 30). 

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Military Created Mock Biological Facility; Hatfill Involved

Bush administration officials and biological weapons experts have said the United States initiated a secret project in 2000 to help train special operations forces to find and disarm mobile biological weapons laboratories, the New York Times reported today.

The main component in the project was a mock mobile biological facility — real in all aspects but never operational, sources said.  The U.S. Army’s Delta Force unit trained on the mock facility last fall at Fort Bragg, N.C., to learn what to search for while in Iraq and how to respond if it found such a facility, sources said (see GSN, June 27). 

Elisa Harris, a former Clinton administration arms control official, said the mock facility would not violate the Biological Weapons Convention, but she questioned the decision to go through with its construction.

“It will raise concerns in other capitals, in part because the United States has fought tooth and nail to prevent the international community from strengthening the germ treaty,” Harris said.

The U.S. Defense Department has reviewed the mock facility to ensure compliance with the convention, a Bush administration official said.

To design the mock facility, the Pentagon enlisted the help of Steven Hatfill, a former U.S. Army biologist who has been the public focus of the FBI’s investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks, said officials familiar with the project (see GSN, June 30).  Hatfill’s work on the mock facility is a major reason why he has been under such scrutiny by the FBI, officials said.

Hatfill worked on the mock mobile facility while working for U.S. defense contractor Science Applications International Corp., sources said.  In 2000, Hatfill began collecting parts for the mock facility, one biological weapons expert said.  A second quoted Hatfill as saying he had purchased parts for the facility prior to its construction and then stored them at a warehouse.

“It’s all the ordering of equipment that in hindsight looks suspicious,” a third expert said.

Construction of the mock facility began in September 2001, an expert said.  Hatfill supervised the work, which was conducted at A.F.W. Fabrication, a metalworking plant outside of Frederick, Md., and about one mile from Hatfill’s apartment, the Times reported.  That same month, the anthrax attacks began. 

In March of last year, SAIC fired Hatfill.  At that point, the mock facility was about half completed, a source close to Hatfill said.  Hatfill continued to work on the trailer, however, using his own money, experts said.  “He was doing it on his own, using his own money,” one expert said.

As the completed facility was being transported to Fort Bragg, FBI agents stopped it en route to examine it for evidence of anthrax and other biological weapons agents because of suspicions that its components might have been used to produce the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks, according to the Times.  Investigators found nothing, however, to link the mock facility to the attacks, officials and experts said.

After discussions with the FBI, the Pentagon kept the mock facility, which was set up at Fort Bragg last fall for training purposes, according to the Times.  Hatfill conducted some of the training sessions that employed the mock facility, experts said.

Hatfill, who has denied any involvement in the 2001 anthrax attacks, is proud of his work on the mock mobile biological facility and has said it illustrates his desire to aid U.S. biological defense programs, people close to him said.  Hatfill refuses to comment on any secret project or on the possible role he played in such projects, said Hatfill spokesman Pat Clawson (New York Times, July 2).

Back to top

United States:  Spokane Ricin Trial Begins

The trial of a Washington state man accused of plotting to kill his wife with ricin began yesterday, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, April 10).

In her opening statement, Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephanie Whitaker said that Kenneth Olsen possessed enough powdered ricin, which is produced from castor beans, to kill up to 7,500 people.  Olsen has also been accused of researching online how to create poisons that could kill without a trace, AP reported.

“The evidence will show Kenneth Olsen had no peaceful purpose in mind” when he made the ricin, Whitaker said.  “Kenneth Olsen produced and possessed ricin with every intent of using it to harm someone,” she said.

Olsen’s defense attorney, John Clark, said his client was simply a computer technician who had plenty of time to satisfy his “irresponsible sense of curiosity” by researching online.  While prosecutors have obtained 20,000 pages of Internet site searches that Olson allegedly made from his work computer over a one-year time period, only about 1 percent of those searches had anything to do with poisons or murder, Clark said.  Most of the searches dealt with essential oils and massage therapy, a career Olsen was thinking of pursuing in the face of layoffs in the computer industry, Clark said.

Prosecutors have said they plan to call about three dozen witness during the trial, which is expected to last up to four weeks, AP reported (John Wiley, Associated Press/Seattle Times, July 2).

Back to top

United States:  Army Officials Considering Storing VX Byproduct at Newport Chemical Depot

U.S. Army officials are considering whether to store onsite a chemical byproduct of their efforts to neutralize the deadly nerve agent VX at the Newport Chemical Depot in Indiana, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, Nov. 19, 2002).

Parsons Engineering, which built and will operate the Newport depot’s VX disposal plant, has received approval to begin examining the construction of an onsite tank farm to store the hydrolysate byproduct created during VX neutralization, according to Jeff Brubaker, Army site project manager (see GSN, June 18).  While the neutralization is expected to produce about 900,000 gallons of byproduct, the depot only has the capacity to store about 30,000 gallons, AP reported.

The Army, which is set to begin the VX neutralization in October, wants to take the byproduct to a plant in Dayton, Ohio, for further processing, but area residents oppose the plan.  Additional byproduct storage capacity onsite at the depot would allow the disposal effort to continue even if the Dayton treatment plant could not be used, AP reported.

“We are committed to start and complete the destruction of VX as quickly and safely as possible,” Brubaker said (Associated Press/WAVE Television, July 2).

Back to top

International Response:  Hague Code of Conduct Subscribers Discuss Implementation Measures

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Officials from countries that subscribe to an international code of conduct designed to prevent ballistic missile proliferation met last week in Vienna to discuss implementation measures (see GSN, March 31).

During the two-day meeting, subscribers to the Hague Code of Conduct Against Ballistic Missile Proliferation discussed the implementation of confidence-building measures as called for in the code, such as annual declarations on national ballistic missile and space-launch vehicle policies and pre-launch notifications, according to a Dutch Foreign Ministry press statement.  Subscribers discussed “practical” implementation measures and “compared notes,” a U.S. State Department official told Global Security Newswire today, adding that meeting provisions are confidential among code subscribers.

The meeting also included discussion on ways to encourage additional countries to subscribe to the code, according to the Dutch Foreign Ministry statement.  Currently, the code has 106 subscribers, with Turkmenistan and Burundi being the most recent countries to join.  A number of countries the United States believes to be acquiring or proliferating ballistic missiles, such as China, North Korea, India and Pakistan, however, have refused to join the code (see GSN, Nov. 20, 2002). 

In last week’s meeting, code adherents also discussed the relationship of the code to the United Nations.  Such discussions focused on possible ways to “advertise” the code in a U.N. forum to encourage other countries to subscribe and to promote greater recognition, the State Department official said.

The code was formally launched at a ceremony held in November at The Hague.  It calls on subscribers to exercise “maximum possible restraint” in developing and deploying ballistic missiles and to avoid aiding the ballistic missile programs of any countries that might be developing weapons of mass destruction.  To increase transparency, the code calls on members to implement several confidence-building measures.

Code subscribers are expected to meet in October in New York City, with Chile assuming chairmanship of the code from the Netherlands, according to the Dutch Foreign Ministry statement.

Back to top