Global zero is a beautiful idea but, as you'll understand, this idea can only be reached as a result of concerted work by all nuclear states.

--Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, on hopes for worldwide nuclear disarmament.

Russia and the United States are "close to agreement on practically all questions" over a pending successor to the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expired in December, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said yesterday (see GSN, March 1).

(Mar. 2) - Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, shown yesterday, suggested his nation and the United States could soon reach agreement on a successor to a key Cold War-era nuclear arms control treaty (Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images).

"In essence, we have reached the final part of negotiations," Reuters quoted Medvedev as saying. "I hope these negotiations will be finished in the very near future."

Medvedev and U.S. President Barack Obama pledged last July to cut their nations' respective strategic arsenals to between 1,500 and 1,675 deployed nuclear warheads under the new treaty. Negotiators have reportedly also agreed to reduce each state's arsenal of nuclear delivery vehicles -- missiles, submarines and bombers -- to between 700 and 800, down from the 1,100-vehicle limit set by the leaders.

After wrapping up a one-month negotiation session Saturday, Russian and U.S. officials plan to reconvene March 9 in Geneva, Switzerland, "with the aim of finalizing the future treaty and presenting it for signing by the presidents of Russia and the United States," the Russian Foreign Ministry stated yesterday (Denis Dyomkin, Reuters, March 1).

Medvedev expressed general support for President Obama's global nuclear disarmament agenda, but he warned that a world without nuclear weapons would be difficult to achieve, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Feb. 19).

"Global zero is a beautiful idea but, as you'll understand, this idea can only be reached as a result of concerted work by all nuclear states," he stated.

Russia requires "confidence that 'stowaways' will not remain in the nuclear club -- those who got there without a ticket," he said, referring to nations that possess nuclear weapons outside the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

"We cannot leave this issue without oversight," Medvedev said (Anna Smolchenko, Agence France-Presse I/Google News, March 1).

Russia has sought the right to stop participating in the START replacement if the nation deemed U.S. missile defenses to undermine the deterrent capability of its ICBM fleet, a high-level U.S. official told the McClatchy Newspapers yesterday.

The United States has ruled out such a provision over concerns that it could prevent the document from receiving congressional approval. Ratification of the treaty would require the support of 66 U.S. senators, meaning that no fewer than seven Republican lawmakers in the chamber would have to endorse the pact.

"The issue here is what do the Russians feel they need, but also keeping an eye on not trying to complicate the ratification process," the official said.

"We don't think that these problems are insurmountable," he added. "We are trying to find a way to manage Russian concerns."

Obama and Medvedev failed in a telephone conversation last week to end the deadlock. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov addressed the issue in a separate telephone call, but they were also unable to negotiate a solution.

A U.S. expert brushed off Russian concerns about an Obama administration plan to field 20 Standard Missile 3 interceptors in Romania as part of a larger European missile shield (see GSN, March 1).

The SM-3 interceptor "has a configuration that gives it a range of 900 kilometers. That doesn't get it to Russia," said former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer. "They will not endanger Russia's ability to have a strong robust deterrent," he said (Jonathan Landay, McClatchy Newspapers, March 1).

In Washington, a forthcoming U.S. nuclear strategy review is expected to advocate significant cutbacks to the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile, a high-level Obama administration official reaffirmed in an AFP article (see GSN, March 1).

The Nuclear Posture Review "will point to dramatic reductions in the stockpile, while maintaining a strong and reliable deterrent through the investments that have been made in the budget," the official said.

In addition, the document would "point to a greater role for conventional weapons in deterrence" and reject any role for nuclear bunker-buster bombs in hitting hardened facilities, the official said.

Descriptions of the report, though, indicate "a very conventional document that will fall far short of the president's rhetoric" on nuclear disarmament, analyst Jeffrey Lewis wrote in the Arms Control Wonk blog (Tangi Quemener, Agence France-Presse II/Yahoo!News, March 2).

China has outlined to fellow six-party talks members a process for restarting stalled nuclear disarmament negotiations with North Korea, informed sources told Kyodo News yesterday (see GSN, March 1).

(Mar. 2) - Activists in South Korea prepare last month to release balloons carrying anti-North Korea leaflets across the fortified border dividing the two nations. Beijing yesterday recommended steps for resuming multilateral denuclearization talks with Pyongyang (Jung Yeon-je/Getty Images).

The three-part process as outlined by Beijing would begin with another round of direct talks between the United States and the North that would cover several issues. Preliminary talks would come after that with Pyongyang, Washington and the remaining members of the multilateral negotiations: China, Japan, Russia and South Korea. The last step would see the six-party talks formally restarted, Kyodo News reported.

Chinese special envoy Wu Dawei shared the proposal with representatives from Washington and Seoul in February, according to sources. Moscow, Tokyo and Pyongyang have also been briefed on the plan.

Beijing's outline does not touch on the North's demands that it be freed from U.N. Security Council sanctions and that peace talks with the United States begin before the multilateral negotiations resume, diplomatic sources said.

Reactions to the Chinese proposal are reportedly divided in South Korea, Japan and the United States (Kyodo News/Breitbart.com, March 1).

Multilateral negotiations were last held in December 2008. The North announced that it was leaving the talks last spring and proceeded to conduct its second nuclear test, for which it was punished with stronger U.N. Security Council sanctions. The regime has since suggested a willingness to rejoin the denuclearization talks but has stuck to its sanctions and talks demands.

Today, the Stalinist regime promised it would boost its strategic arsenal and its nuclear-weapon delivery systems, the Associated Press reported.

"Should the U.S. persist in its unrealistic moves to stifle the (North) in disregard of its realistic proposal, this will only compel it to boost its nuclear deterrent and its delivery means," the North's official Korean Central News Agency announced.

North Korea regularly threatens to strengthen its nuclear deterrent but the apparent reference to missiles is new, AP reported.

North Korea is thought to possess adequate reserves of bomb-grade plutonium to make a minimum of six nuclear warheads and has been working on a long-range missile for possible use against the United States. The aspiring nuclear power does not yet have, though, the ability to attach a nuclear bomb to a missile, experts say (Kwang-Tae Kim, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 2).

The Stalinist state continued its criticism of an annual U.S.-South Korea military exercise set to take place from March 8-18, saying that it comes "at a time when the international community is growing more vocal than ever before calling for a settlement for the nuclear issue," Agence France-Presse reported.

Pyongyang accused Seoul and Washington of trying to "disturb the peace on the [Korean] Peninsula and torpedo the process for its denuclearization" (Lim Chang-won, Agence France-Presse/Google News , March 2).

The U.S. Homeland Security Department is curtailing its efforts on a new generation of radiation monitors that were at one point intended to replace the current line of sensors that screen cargo containers coming into the United States for material that could be used in a nuclear attack, a Senate committee announced yesterday (see GSN, Nov. 18, 2009).

(Mar. 2) - A U.S. radiation portal monitor. The Obama administration is reining in the program to field a next-generation radiation detection system at the nation's border crossings and seaports (U.S. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory photo).

The department's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office told Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) that it was ceasing development of the Advanced Spectroscopic Portal monitors for use as primary screening tools at U.S. ports and border crossings, the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee said in a release.

The office hopes to continue working on the ASP monitors for use as secondary screening devices on cargo shipments that have already set off the first round of radiation sensors. However, the "decision does not mean that ASPs will be purchased and deployed to secondary" screening sites, according to a letter to Lieberman from acting DNDO chief William Hagan.

The $1.1 billion ASP effort began in 2005. The new monitors were intended to take the place of the existing portal sensors at all first and secondary screening locations in the DHS Radiation Portal Monitor Program, according to the committee release.

However, the initiative failed "to live up to expectations," the release states. Congressional auditors have found that the ASP system was susceptible to a significant number of false alarms and other technical difficulties.

"The threat of nuclear terrorism cannot be ignored, which is why I’m an advocate for strategic investments to improve our defenses against the smuggling of nuclear materials into this country," said Lieberman, who chairs the committee, in released comments. "Thus, it is unfortunate that four years have been lost on the basic DNDO mission of improving the nation’s existing system of domestic defenses against a nuclear terrorist attack" (U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee release, March 1).

The Obama administration's top diplomat appeared to hedge yesterday on her earlier estimate that the U.N. Security Council would take up new punitive measures against Iran within "30 to 60 days," instead stating that a fourth sanctions resolution could be achieved in "months," Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, March 1).

"We are moving expeditiously and thoroughly in the Security Council. I can't give you an exact date, but I would assume sometime in the next several months," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said.

The United States and other Western powers have pursued economic penalties aimed at pressuring Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program, an effort they suspect is aimed at producing nuclear-weapon material. Tehran has insisted its atomic work would only advance civilian endeavors.

Clinton spoke to journalists ahead of meeting with Argentine President Cristina Kirchner to discuss the Iran nuclear dispute.

"The Argentines have a very clear understanding of the dangers of the proliferation of nuclear weapons," she said. "They have been a very strong proponent in the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) against the proliferation, and have voted such even with respect to Iran. So I do expect it to come up."

She was set today to discuss the Iranian standoff in talks with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Foreign Minister Celso Amorim. As a nonpermanent Security Council member, Brazil can vote on council resolutions but it does not wield veto authority like the body's five permanent members: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Clinton said she would tell the Brazilian president "that the United States recognizes Iran has the right to peaceful civil nuclear power but does not under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty have the right to nuclear weapons."

Tehran "is violating its international obligations, it has been found to be in violation of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.N. Security Council," she said. "These are not findings by the United States. These are findings by the international community.

"It is going to be the topic of the U.N. Security Council so I want to be sure he has the same understanding that we do as to how this matter is going to unfold," Clinton added (Lachlan Carmichael, Agence France-Presse I/Google News, March 1).

Meanwhile, Iran has returned the bulk of its low-enriched uranium stockpile to the underground portion of its Natanz complex, Iran's ambassador to the U.N. nuclear watchdog said yesterday. The nation had temporarily transferred the uranium to the exposed site, which is more vulnerable to airstrikes, to begin refining some of the material to the higher, 20 percent enrichment level.

The nuclear agency verified that Iran moved the low-enriched uranium back underground, but the organization was unsure how much of material had been siphoned off for further refinement.

"(This) was merely for producing material for the Iran research reactor. That is why that container is (now) back to its original location," said Iranian envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh. "(We) just moved the capsule because technically they needed it and they have put it back. We used the material which we needed for the Tehran Research Reactor."

Tehran is not capable of preparing the more highly enriched material for the medical reactor, prompting skepticism among some IAEA and Western officials about Tehran's intentions, Reuters reported. The officials expressed concern that enriching uranium to the 20 percent level would move Iran closer to producing weapon-grade uranium, which has an enrichment level around 90 percent (Heinrich/Westall, Reuters I, March 1).

"In experts' opinion, 80 percent enrichment will go much easier after the intensive and complicated technology of enriching uranium to 20 percent has been mastered, which suggests that the 20 percent marks the stage beyond which Iran's nuclear program will go military," French Ambassador to Russia Jean de Gliniasty told Interfax (Interfax, March 1).

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev yesterday said his nation was prepared to weigh additional economic penalties against Iran over its nuclear work, the Associated Press reported. Moscow and Beijing have resisted some Western calls for punitive measures against Tehran in the past.

"Unfortunately, everything we have tried to say to the Iranian leaders, all our appeals to them to work on a peaceful nuclear program under the control of the international community, haven't provided any results," he said.

"We believe that it's not over yet, that we can still reach an agreement," Medvedev added. "But if we don't succeed, Russia is ready -- along with our partners, as I have already said -- to consider the question of adopting sanctions" (George Jahn, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 1).

"Sanctions must be at the limit of where dialogue is no longer possible," Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty quoted him as saying. "This is why we're discussing various initiatives, and we are ready to continue the discussion of this question with our partners. Although, of course, it would be good to avoid the sanctions" (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, March 2).

Moscow has supported measures that could be immediately lifted if Tehran halted its uranium enrichment effort, World Security Research Institute analyst Aleksey Fenenko told Russia Today yesterday.

"Washington and London proposed an idea of permanent sanctions against Iran," he said. "Russia proposed reversible sanctions and China supported Russia here" (Russia Today, March 1).

China today indicated it would continue to seek a negotiated solution to the nuclear dispute, Reuters reported.

"We believe there is still room for diplomatic efforts and the parties concerned should intensify those efforts," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.

Strong economic ties with Iran make Beijing more likely to support a very limited Security Council resolution on the nuclear standoff, officials and independent experts said.

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and other U.S. diplomats traveled to Beijing today to discuss matters including the nuclear standoff (Chris Buckley, Reuters II, March 2).

Beijing is unlikely to veto an additional U.N. sanctions resolution against Iran, a high-level Israeli official told Reuters yesterday.

Israeli diplomats discussed Jerusalem's concerns about Iran's nuclear program in a meeting last week with Chinese officials, including state counselor Dai Bingguo.

"There was openness, a willingness to listen," the Israeli official said. "If I had to give my assessment, it's hard to believe that they (China) will cast a veto. We should be seeing the results in the coming weeks."

"Our stance is of course the right stance, that in the end of the day we need crippling sanctions that will confront the Iranian regime with the choice of either having the bomb, or surviving," the Israeli official added. "But it's currently clear that for the United States what is more important is getting as many countries on board as possible."

Participants hinted during the meeting at the impact that a military attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would have on the country's petroleum trade, the official said. The Israeli representatives also described how a nuclear-armed Iran could destabilize the Middle East.

"As far as we are concerned, the Iranian military nuclear project has to be stopped, one way or another. And we made that clear there as well," the source said.

The Israeli delegation showed Chinese officials some of Jerusalem's intelligence on Iran, and "the impression was that some of the information was revelatory for them," the official said.

China, would ultimately back a new sanctions resolution on Iran, said Ying Gang, an analyst with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Beijing would not "stand shoulder to shoulder with a country which sees U.N. resolutions as wastepaper," Ying said, according to China Daily (Dan Williams, Reuters III, March 1).

Elsewhere, the Obama administration yesterday announced it had frozen more than $43 million in Iranian holdings last year, up from $19.5 million in 2008, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse II/Spacewar.com, March 1).

Two U.S. Air Force units that work with nuclear missiles fielded in Montana did not pass inspections in February, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 12).

The public faced no danger from the situation, the service said. The 341st Missile Wing and 16th Munitions Squadron at Malmstrom Air Force Base continue to carry out their job duties as they work to right the issues that led to their "unsatisfactory" ratings from Air Force inspector general officials, according to the units' parent organizations.

Air Force officials said security concerns prevented them from providing specifics on the failures identified during the nuclear surety inspections.

"There were no critical deficiencies noted. The wing is still fully able, in the eyes of the inspector general team, to conduct its mission safely, securely and with credibility," said Lt. Col. John Thomas, spokesman for the Air Force's Global Strike Command, which has oversight of the missile wing as part of its management of U.S. ICBMs and strategic bombers.

The missile wing is charged with the safeguarding, upkeep and operations of 150 Minuteman 3 ICBMs fielded in the north-central section of the state. Problems with its operations were identified in a 2008 inspection, but the wing receiving passing grades in another examination conducted a short time afterward, AP reported.

The munitions squadron conducts maintenance work under the auspices of the Air Force Material Command. It is addressing its inspection failings and will not lose its nuclear certification, according to a command statement.

The two units are due to be inspected again in no more than 90 days (Matt Volz, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 1).

The U.S. Homeland Security Department has not met an executive mandate to produce a national recovery plan to deal with the lingering effects of a terrorist assault involving a radiological "dirty bomb" or a crude nuclear device, according to a Government Accountability Office report released Friday (see GSN, Jan. 25).

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, "the DHS agency responsible for developing a comprehensive emergency management system, has not developed a national disaster recovery strategy, as required by law, or issued specific guidance to coordinate federal, state, and local government recovery planning for" radiological dispersal device or improvised nuclear device events, "as directed by executive guidance," the report finds.

Presently, much of federal planning for dealing with a "dirty bomb" attack has centered on immediate response efforts such as evacuating residents and providing them with medical countermeasures. Longer-term efforts to sanitize contaminated land have lagged behind, according to the report.

Officials from 13 cities deemed to be at particular risk for an attack and officials from the 10 states in which those municipalities are located expected to lean on the federal government for funding and operation of environmental remediation following an attack, congressional auditors found. However, they offered various responses on which federal agencies would provide that aid.

The report advises the DHS agency to issue a "national recovery strategy" that would detail exactly what part federal agencies would play in cleanup efforts and that additional disaster exercises be held to examine recovery preparation efforts (U.S. Government Accountability Office release, Feb. 26).

"Local and state governments have admitted that they could not handle cleanup and rebuilding efforts on their own," Representative Bennie Thompson (D- Miss), who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee, said in a released statement.

"To truly protect this country from long-term economic and social disruption, however, will require proper recovery plans, resources, and leadership to be ready and available at the federal level," he added (U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee release release, Feb. 26).

A few days after renewing high-level talks with neighboring rival Pakistan, India's air force on Sunday conducted war exercises not far from the Pakistani border, Reuters reported (see GSN, Feb. 26).

The simulation involved the targeting by warplanes of fake enemy bunkers and simulated training camps and was attended by military representatives from approximately 30 nations. Envoys from Pakistan and China were not present.

"This is not just a firepower demonstration but a clear message about what India's air force is capable of," New Delhi-based strategic affairs expert Uday Bhaskar said. "It is a message to the neighbors."

After meeting for several hours last week, the foreign secretaries of the two nuclear-armed neighbors agreed to remain in contact, an underwhelming development that reflects how badly strained ties have become since the 2008 attacks that killed more than 160 people in the Indian city of Mumbai. New Delhi has criticized Islamabad for not doing enough to eliminate the Pakistani-based extremists it blames for the attacks.

"Our real concern is the existence of armed terrorist camps intact across our borders," said Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony during the military drill. "We feel there is no serious attempt or effort to dismantle these terrorist camps. So we are concerned, we are very worried about that" (Bappa Majumdar, Reuters, Feb. 28).

Yesterday in Saudi Arabia, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said his country wishes for a lasting peace with Islamabad as the two South Asian neighbors are closely tied together, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported.

"If there is cooperation between India and Pakistan, vast opportunities will open up for trade, travel and development that will create prosperity in both countries and in South Asia as a whole," Singh said in a report by the Press Trust of India.

However, Pakistan must "act decisively against terrorism" if that is to happen, Singh said (Deutsche Presse-Agentur/Earth Times, March 1).

Delegates from rival nuclear states India and Pakistan are set to participate next month in U.S. President Barack Obama's Global Nuclear Security Summit, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 20).

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has announced his intention to attend the conference, scheduled for April 12-13 in Washington. Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit confirmed that Islamabad would send officials to the summit, "but we don't know the composition of the delegation yet."

Participants at the event are expected to discuss securing loose nuclear materials and countering the threat of nuclear terrorism. Invitations have been sent to more than 40 nations, but it remains to be seen how many states will send delegates (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, March 2).

Meanwhile, one of the leaders of the International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament said yesterday that 2010 could be a historic year for global nuclear weapons reduction, the Xinhua News Agency (see GSN, Dec. 15, 2009).

"I am reserving judgment. I want 2010 to be a big year for nuclear disarmament," said former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans.

He also expressed hopes for the nuclear summit and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference in May.

"I want the review conference to be a success; I want the Obama summit on nuclear security to be a success; I want [nuclear arms control] negotiations between Russia and the U.S. to be conclude," Evans said (see related GSN story, today).

"Of course I want, like everybody else, some solutions of the Iran and North Korea problems," Evans told reporters (see related GSN stories, today; Xinhua News Agency/Istockanalyst.com, March 2).

The Obama administration does not intend to pursue a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with Pakistan similar to the U.S. deal with India, Dawn reported yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 18).

"Nuclear power is not currently part of our discussions," the U.S. official said.

Islamabad's ambassador to Washington reportedly said recently that talks on such an arrangement were under way. Washington, though, has informed Pakistani leaders that “there is no way they can get a civilian nuclear deal similar to the one the Obama administration has signed with India," the official said, adding that the U.S.-Indian agreement was “specific to India only and there is no thinking going on in the administration to create a template for it.”

The United States agreed in 2008 to provide civilian nuclear fuel and technology to New Delhi in exchange for opening Indian civilian nuclear energy facilities to international oversight (Anwar Iqbal, Dawn, March 1).

Indian lawmakers are soon expected to consider a bill that would protect supply firms from the United States and elsewhere from paying damages for a nuclear power plant accident in the South Asian state, the Hindustan Times reported yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 4).

Liability limitation measures in the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill were considered necessary for putting into effect a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement finalized by Washington and New Delhi in 2008. The deal allows U.S. companies to ship sensitive material and technology to India, a nuclear-armed state that has not joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The bill, approved last November by India's Cabinet, would place responsibility for damage with operators of Indian nuclear facilities, an arrangement that has prompted opposition among liberals and lawyers in the country.

The legislation would prevent Indian nuclear facility operators from being held responsible for more than roughly $65 million in damages over an accident, but language in the proposed bill would permit New Delhi to adjust an operator's liability.

The manager of a nuclear site could not be found liable under the bill for incidents caused by war, terrorism or a "grave national disaster of exceptional character."

In addition, the legislation calls for the creation of a Nuclear Damage Claims Commission that would serve as a court in hearing and ruling on nuclear cases (Hindustan Times, March 1).

A federally mandated study has found that there would be "no significant impacts" to the environment through a U.S. Defense Department proposal to detonate a portion of the chemical weapons stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado, the Pentagon announced Friday (see GSN, Feb. 19).

The environmental assessment was conducted by the Pueblo depot and the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program, which is preparing for disposal operations in Colorado and at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky. The study examined the possible environmental effects of installing and operating the Army's Explosive Destruction System and other explosive detonation technologies at the weapons site, according to an ACWA release (U.S. Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives release, Feb. 26).

"The environmental assessment concludes that no significant environmental impacts would occur as the result of the construction and operation of the EDS and/or other explosive destruction technology systems," according to a release from the Pueblo installation.

Chemical weapons disposal operations at Colorado are projected to wrap up in 2017 and disposal work is slated to finish four years later in Kentucky. Current projections indicate that there will be periods when no chemical weapons disposal work would be occurring in the United States, following the destruction of the last materials overseen by the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Agency around 2012.

In order to bridge that gap, the Pentagon has proposed to use explosive technologies to eliminate a portion of the munitions stockpiled in Colorado and Kentucky while work on the chemical neutralization facilities in the two states continues.

Leaking munitions that have been placed in special containers would be destroyed in the initial phase of the proposed plan, according to the Pueblo release. The second phase would involve the blowing up of boxed munitions. When the Pueblo neutralization facility goes online, only troublesome ordnance and any remaining overpacked weapons would be destroyed by explosives.

"The proposed action would support the overall goals of (1) increasing the program's confidence to complete destruction of the [Pueblo Chemical Depot] inventory of chemical weapons by 2017, (2) maintaining the continuity of U.S. chemical weapons destruction operations and (3) conducting the destruction activities in a safe and environmentally acceptable manner," the release states (U.S. Pueblo Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant release, Feb. 26).

Irene Kornelly, chairwoman of the Colorado Chemical Demilitarization Citizens' Advisory Commission, told the Associated Press that the study did not provide sufficient details.

"They say, 'Well, we're going to have enough water to do the process' ... but they don't tell us how much water the process needs," Kornelly said.

Another member of the advisory panel, Ross Vincent, said he would have liked to see the Defense Department undertake a more detailed assessment that would have provided a greater degree of documentation and specifics as well as have a longer public review process.

"Now they want to do a major change in the project and they want to blow it off with a superficial document and a finding of no significant impact," Vincent said.

The public has two months, from Feb. 27 to April 27, to comment on the document.

ACWA Program Manager Kevin Flamm said the study was comprehensive and pointed out that the public comment period extends a month longer than what is mandated by law.

"If the public feels we have overlooked some aspect, that's what the comment period is for," Flamm said (Dan Elliott, Associated Press/Google News, March 1).

Meanwhile, Pentagon officials and depot contractors informed the Pueblo City Council yesterday that they were on track to eliminate the 780,000 mustard munitions stockpiled at the depot between 2015 and 2017, the Pueblo Chieftain reported (Peter Roper, Pueblo Chieftain, March 2).

After Russia finishes developing its latest fighter jet, the country must begin work on a new nuclear-capable strategic bomber, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 23, 2009).

"Certainly, we should not confine ourselves to developing just one new model. After the fifth-generation fighter jet, we must think and get down to work on a next-generation, long-range aviation complex -- our new strategic missile carrier," Putin told Cabinet officials in Moscow, Reuters reported.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia was left with a fleet of deteriorating though still dangerous Tupolev Tu-95MS turboprop strategic bombers and "Bear" missile platforms. The country also possesses a smaller number of the more advanced Tupolev Tu-160 jet bombers, which are the largest warplanes to be built by any nation to date.

As president in 2007, Putin commanded the resumption of bomber patrols around the planet as a means to raise Russia's stature in the international community (Gleb Bryanski, Reuters, March 1).

Meanwhile, Russia intends to remove spent nuclear fuel this month from a Borisoglebsk K-496 nuclear-fueled submarine, Interfax reported.

"The unloading started in December 2009. It is proceeding normally," a source at the Zvezdochka shipyard said.

Dismantlement of the submarine is being paid for by Russia's atomic energy organization and foreign sources. Canada is funding the removal of used fuel and Washington is financing the destruction of missile silos and the reactor unit.

The submarine is equipped with 16 launchers for RSM-50 ICBMs (Interfax, March 1).

The Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee yesterday announced that it had transferred more than half of its weapon-grade uranium to a new, high-security storage facility (see GSN, Jan. 27).

The transfer has taken place under an expedited scheduled aimed at consolidating most of the site's HEU stockpile at the $549 million Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility within 90 days. The process was originally slated to take 13 months

"I have to credit the teamwork of many organizations at Y‑12 for this successful transfer,” Les Reed, a vice president for managing contractor B&W Technical Services Y-12, said in a statement. “We prepared for this transfer with careful planning and extensive training, and the result is a safe, secure transfer that is running ahead of schedule.”

The new storage facility is expected to aid in securing the material, which is intended for use in U.S. nuclear weapons and the Navy's nuclear propulsion program. In addition, the uranium's enrichment level could be reduced to give the material additional, civilian applications (Y-12 National Security Complex release, March 1).

Israel has started allocating new gas masks to its citizens in an effort to combat the threat of future chemical or biological warfare, Agence France-Presse reported Sunday (see GSN, Jan. 6).

"The civil defense has asked the Israeli postal service to begin distributing gas masks on an experimental basis to the residents of Or Yehuda," an Israeli military spokesman said.

"Gradually, based on the lessons learned in this operation and in accordance with the Israeli government's decision, the distribution will be extended to the entire population," he said.

Jerusalem plans by 2013 to provide 8 million Israeli citizens with gas masks.

Possible use of chemical and biological weapons by Iran or Syria has been a cause of concern in Israel; however, the provision of gas masks is not directly related to any impending threat, according to Israeli officials (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, Feb. 28).