Test blast linked to nuke weapons

Friday, April 28, 2006 | 7:35 a.m.

Contrary to the Pentagon's earlier denials, a government official overseeing a test explosion at the Nevada Test Site in June says the blast could help with the development of nuclear weapons.

The detonation could simulate "a number of weapon concepts," said Doug Bruder, director of the counter-weapons of mass destruction program for the Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

"It could be nuclear or advanced conventional," he said. "A charge of this size would be more related to a nuclear weapon."

Bruder made his remarks during a tour of the Test Site with reporters this week.

The purpose of the test remains an issue in Washington and Nevada as the Defense Department continues to prepare the site for a June 2 blast of 700 tons of conventional explosives.

The Pentagon has denied that the test is intended to aid research into "bunker buster" nuclear weapons - essentially smaller-scale weapons designed to penetrate and destroy facilities built deep below ground.

In keeping with those earlier denials, Bruder said the blast, known as Divine Strake, was not specifically designed to produce a nuclear weapon and "does not replicate any existing or planned nuclear weapon."

As part of the test, researchers plan to measure the damage the blast does to a tunnel dug beneath the explosion site. Those results will help the Pentagon determine the effectiveness of an explosion of that magnitude, whether produced by a conventional or a nuclear weapon.

Last year, Congress forbade any testing intended to advance nuclear weapons. Lawmakers cut funding from the Energy Department's budget for a 700-ton explosion at the Test Site for use in developing a nuclear bunker buster.

Money for the test is now in the Defense Department budget for a conventional weapons program.

Scientists and others opposed to nuclear proliferation have said that the new test is simply an attempt to defy the congressional ban and advance Defense Department research into nuclear weapons.

The blast itself would be with a mixture of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, the same material that brought down the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995. The amount that destroyed the office building was 2.5 tons.

The size of the June 2 bomb is among the evidence scientists cite in arguing that the test could only serve to advance nuclear weapons research. The U.S. military has no way to deliver a 700-ton conventional bomb to a target, other than to truck it into place.

Officials have emphasized that no nuclear materials would be involved in the test, although a group including the Western Shoshone and residents downwind of past nuclear explosions at the Test Site are suing, arguing that the test could kick up radioactive dust. Government officials insist there is no possibility that radioactive materials would be disturbed by the blast.

But Bruder's comments fanned the debate anew.

After watching a CNN tape of remarks by Bruder, Rep. Jim Matheson, a Democrat who represents southwestern Utah, issued a statement Thursday saying: "Officials who say they are using this Divine Strake test in planning for new nuclear weapons seem to be ignoring congressional intent about no new nuclear weapons, and that concerns me."

On the CNN tape, Bruder said: "There are some very hard targets out there and right now it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to defeat with current conventional weapons. Therefore there are some that would probably require nuclear weapons."

Matheson said that he supports development of conventional bunker-busting bombs, but not a nuclear program. "We need to build something that actually defeats the threat without harming our soldiers and innocent civilians," he said.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has said in the past that he does not oppose the test. The Nevada Democrat said he reached that conclusion after he and others in the state's congressional delegation were assured by James Tegnelia, director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, that the test had nothing to do with development of a nuclear device.

On Thursday, Reid spokeswoman Sharyn Stein said the senator continues to support the test as a prelude to a conventional weapon. Reid supports development of a conventional bunker buster as an important tool for national security, she said.

"I realize his (Tegnelia's) people seem to be dancing around that right now, and we're not thrilled about that," Stein said. But Tegnelia personally promised Reid that the test will not lead to resumed nuclear testing, she said.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., received similar assurances. Berkley spokesman David Cherry said the congresswoman is watching the situation.

In a statement, Berkley noted that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency had yet to satisfy the state of Nevada's demand for more information on the environmental impacts before the test can proceed.

"As a Nevadan who lived through the nuclear testing era, I have a healthy skepticism for federal officials who say there is nothing to worry about when it comes to protecting public safety or the environment," she said Thursday.

"Nevadans are not alone in their opposition to both nuclear testing and the development of new nuclear weapons, and I will continue to work with other members of Congress to ensure that our current policy against these twin pursuits remains in place."