REMARKS BY SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY, EGYPTIAN FOREIGN MINISTER FAHMY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Remarks With Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy Before Their Meeting

Remarks

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Treaty Room

Washington, DC

April 29, 2014

---

SECRETARY KERRY: Good morning, everybody. I am pleased to welcome the Foreign Minister of Egypt, Nabil Fahmy, who is no stranger in Washington. He spent many years in the United States. Actually, he was born in New York. I think he spoke English before Arabic, (inaudible). (Laughter.) And he and I have been in constant touch in recent months by telephone, so it’s good to have a chance to catch up. We’ve seen each other at a couple of conferences, but today we obviously have very important issues to discuss.

Egypt, for a long time, has been a very important strategic partner of the United States, and we do share common interests, particularly the stability of the region, counterterrorism, peace with Israel, and other concerns. Egypt is a very important country. It is one quarter of the Arab world, and historically Egypt has always played a central role in the region and in our efforts to maintain the peace process, as well as the stability of the region itself.

Clearly, Egypt has been going through a very difficult transitional process. What happens in the next weeks and months is very, very important to all of us. We want the interim government to be successful. We are hopeful and look for a political process of inclusivity, a constitution implemented which brings people politically to the table, and broadens the democratic base of Egypt. Egypt’s constitution is a positive step forward. It has taken steps, and they are moving now to an election. But even as these positive steps have been taken, we all know there have been disturbing decisions within the judicial process – the court system – that have raised serious challenges for all of us.

We will discuss these issues today very candidly and forthrightly, and we do so in a spirit that wants to find a way for Egypt to be able to make it through this transition and share a full democracy with its people and be able to take the steps that create the stability and strength that is necessary from a country like Egypt where everybody looks to the potential of Egypt’s reemergence on the global stage as a major partner in our strategic concerns.

So we are hopeful for that. We look to work very closely in that effort. But as I’ve mentioned to the foreign minister a number of times, we really are looking for certain things to happen that will give people the sense of confidence about this road ahead. It’s actions, not words, that will make the difference, and that’s really the discussion that we look forward to have this morning.
So Mr. Foreign Minister, I really welcome you here.

FOREIGN MINISTER FAHMY: Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: You’ve given us a lot of insight as to what is happening. I know you yourself are pushing for – in many of these things – and we look forward to a good discussion.

FOREIGN MINISTER FAHMY: Thank you, John. Thank you very much for inviting me back to Washington. It’s been – the State Department has been a frequent visit for me in the past in my previous capacity. And this venue, in particular this hall, was an event – an area for many events that I attended. But the American-Egyptian relationship is something that’s extremely important to me personally and to Egypt, as well as as a nation.

All of the strategic elements that the Secretary mentioned regarding our common goals, I don’t want to repeat because I completely agree with him on those issues. What’s different in my visit this time than in my previous capacity is I come now representing people that want democracy, they want to be stakeholders in the future, they want to build a better country, that are going through a transformation that is societal, not simply changing one president for the other. I believe we are moving forward. Again, as the Secretary said, the constitution in particular was a very constructive step. We’re going forward with the election for president in a few weeks and then hopefully soon after that for parliament.

As we do that, we need to deal with the challenges that we face without disturbing institutional relationships. The Secretary mentioned some of the challenges within the judicial system. They are completely independent from the government, but of course, they’re part of what Egypt is all about. I can’t comment on the content of the decisions themselves, but I’m confident that due process is allowed – that due process is allowed, and that the legal system will ultimately end up with proper decisions in each of these cases. And we will build a democracy based on the rule of law, and the rule of law means applying laws that are consistent with the constitution through a legal system that’s independent and credible to us all – most of all, to the Egyptian people.

And that’s a commitment that I make not to you here in Washington, but to my own people. So I’m glad to say it here as well at the same time. We’re going to have an interesting discussion on a number of the regional issues, on our bilaterals, and of course, I’ll be happy to explain what’s happening in Egypt domestically as well. Thank you, John, for having me here.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, Nabil. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Thanks.

U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS FOR APRIL 29, 2014

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

CONTRACTS

ARMY

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, Orlando, Fla. was awarded a $80,663,444 modification (P00055) under contract W58RGZ-11-C-0120 for U.S. and foreign military sales (Indonesia). The contract is for Lot 9 Modernized Target Acquisition Pilot Night Vision Sensors to include eight US systems with one spare and four additional systems with four war replacement spares. It also covers eight systems for Indonesia with one spare. Other procurement funds in the amount of $19,705,128 for fiscal 2014; $17,385,938 for fiscal 2013; and $43,577,378 for fiscal 2010 were obligated at the time of the award. Work will be performed in Orlando, Fla., with an estimated completion date of July 31, 2018. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity.
DynCorp International LLC, McLean, Va., was awarded a $49,898,634 modification (P00034) to cost-plus-fixed-fee contract W91CRB-11-C-0053 for mentoring and training in support of the Afghanistan Ministry of Interior and Afghanistan National Police. Work will be performed in Afghanistan with an expected completion date of Dec. 31, 2014. Fiscal 2013 other funds in the amount of $24,949,317 are being oblicated at award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting agency.

PAT GD Joint Venture LLC.,* Rochester Hills, Mich. was awarded a $24,400,000 firm-fixed-price foreign military sales contract for piers and dredging, Umm Nasr, Iraq to include the design and construction of an approximately 165meter floating pier for use by the Iraqi Navy and dredging of the adjacent harbor and navigational channel. The contractor also must ensure the harbor and navigational channel remain dredged to the required depth for one year following the initial dredging. Fiscal 2014 other procurement funds in the amount of $24,400,000 were obligated at the time of the award. Estimated completion date is Nov. 6, 2015. Bids were solicited via the Internet with eight received. Work will be performed in Uum Qasr, Iraq. Army Corps of Engineers, Winchester, Va. is the contracting activity (W912ER-14-C-0013).

Dynamic Aviation Group Inc., Bridgewater, Va., was awarded a $22,359,136 firm-fixed-price contract for continued operations, sustainment, and integration of three communications electronic attack with surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft, currently deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance, Army funds in the amount of $5,919,114 are being obligated at award. Work will be performed in Bridgewater, Va. (20 percent) and Afghanistan (80 percent), with an estimated completion date of April 30, 2015. One bid was solicited and one received. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal (Aviation), Redstone, Ala., is the contracting agency (W58RGZ-14-C-0037).

Oshkosh Corp., Oshkosh, Wis., was awarded an $8,583,960 modification (000730) to firm-fixed-price contract W56HZV-09-D-0159 for 39 each family of medium tactical vehicles and applicable federal retail excise tax in support of the U.S. Army in the continental U.S. Work will be performed in Oshkosh, Wis., with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2015. Fiscal 2013 other funds in the amount of $394,077 and fiscal 2012 funds in the amount of $8,189,883 are being obligated at award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command-Tank and Automotive (Warren), Warren, Mich., is the contracting agency.

NAVY

Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Charlottesville, Va., is being awarded an $88,153,800 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price supply contract with a contract line item for cost-plus-fixed-fee engineering and technical services to acquire integrated bridge systems and steering/ship control systems, related hardware and associated services. The systems are comprised of chart servers, network interface boxes, flat panel displays, radar systems, navigation software, ship control software, global positioning systems, weather sensors, depth sensors, speed sensors, digital compass systems, ship control display systems and sonar systems. These items represent a modernization upgrade from existing systems currently in use. In addition, Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., will be required to provide services associated with the analysis, repair, improvement, installation, testing and operational training of fleet personnel on this equipment. Work will be conducted at various ship homeports inside and outside the United States and on deployed vessels, and will completed by April 2019. Fiscal 2014 other procurement, Navy contract funds in the estimated amount of $100,000 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) - only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, Ship System Engineering Station, Philadelphia, Pa., is the contracting activity (N65540-14-D-0002).

Sikorsky Aerospace Maintenance, Stratford, Conn., is being awarded a $7,927,579 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-09-C-0024) to exercise an option for organizational, selected intermediate, and limited depot-level maintenance for aircraft operated by adversary squadrons. Work will be performed at the Naval Air Station (NAS) Key West, Fla. (40 percent); NAS Fallon, Nev. (30 percent); and the Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma, Ariz. (30 percent), and is expected to be completed in December 2014. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance, Navy Reserve funds in the amount of $7,927,579 are being obligated at time of award, all of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

AIR FORCE

Mirador Enterprises Inc., El Paso, Texas, has been awarded a $45,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the Holloman Air Force Base Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements program. Task orders will be issued for a broad range of maintenance, repair, minor construction/alteration and renovation work on real property at Holloman AFB, N.M., and federal real property within 60 mile radius of Holloman post office. Work will be performed at Holloman, N.M., and is expected to be completed by April 22, 2019. The award is the result of a competitive 8(a) acquisition. An unlimited number of offers were solicited through Federal Business Opportunities and 19 offers were received. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $2,000 for task order 0001 are being obligated at time of award. 49 Contracting Squadron, Holloman AFB, N.M., is the contracting activity (FA4801-14-D-0007).

WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES

SRA International Inc., Fairfax, Va., is being awarded a $7,349,801 firm-fixed-price contract to provide IT network support services for the Pentagon Force Protection Agency. Work will be performed in Alexandria, Va., and Arlington, Va., with an expected completion date of Feb. 28, 2015. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $7,349,801 are being obligated on this award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was a sole-source procurement. Washington Headquarters Services, Arlington, Va., is the contracting activity. (HQ0034-14-F-0104)

*Small Business

BARRIO AZTECA LT. RESPONSIBLE FOR 2010 U.S. CONSULATE MURDERS SENTENCED TO LIFE IN PRISON

FROM:  JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Barrio Azteca Lieutenant Who Ordered the Consulate Murders in Ciudad Juarez Sentenced to Life in Prison

Arturo Gallegos Castrellon, aka “Benny,” “Farmero,” “51,” “Guero,” “Pecas,” “Tury,” and “86,” 35, of Chihuahua, Mexico, the Barrio Azteca Lieutenant who ordered the March 2010 murders of a U.S. Consulate employee, her husband and the husband of another U.S. Consulate employee, was sentenced today to serve life in prison.

Acting Assistant Attorney General David A. O’Neil of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Robert Pitman for the Western District of Texas, Special Agent in Charge Douglas E. Lindquist of the FBI’s El Paso Division and Administrator Michele M. Leonhart of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) made the announcement.

“ Arturo Gallegos Castrellon led the teams of assassins who carried out the U.S. Consulate shootings in March 2010 and ruthlessly murdered nearly 1,600 others as part of a cartel conflict over a drug trafficking route from Mexico into the United States,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General O’Neil.   “His gang of killers terrorized and victimized men and women on both sides of the border, but thanks to the hard work of our law enforcement partners he will now spend the rest of his life in prison for his crimes.”

“I cannot overstate the significance of this victory in our ongoing efforts to end the depredations of the cartels operating along our Southern border,” said U.S. Attorney Pitman.  “This prosecution has called to account Arturo Gallegos Castrellon for the senseless murders he orchestrated in Ciudad Juarez and elsewhere and demonstrates our commitment to ending the murder and mayhem he and the cartels have fomented.”

“The DEA is committed to ensuring cold-blooded criminals, like Arturo Gallegos Castrellon, who murder innocent victims, traffic huge amounts of drugs worldwide, and incite violence are taken off the street and remain behind bars,” said DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart.  “Castrellon’s conviction and life sentence is a clear sign that the DEA, along with our law enforcement partners, will not tolerate those who attack Americans abroad and is committed to upholding the rule of law, protecting our citizens, and bringing to justice the world’s worst criminals.”

Today’s sentence was imposed by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone in the Western District of Texas.   In addition, Judge Cardone ordered Gallegos Castrellon to pay $998,840 in restitution and $785,500 in forfeiture.

After his extradition from Mexico on June 28, 2012, a federal jury found Gallegos Castrellon guilty of six counts of murder and conspiracies to commit racketeering, narcotics trafficking, narcotics importation, murder in a foreign country and money laundering.

Evidence at trial proved that Gallegos Castrellon was a leader in the Barrio Azteca (BA), a violent street and prison gang that began in the late 1980s and expanded into a transnational criminal organization.   The BA formed an alliance with “La Linea,” part of the Juarez Drug Cartel, which is also known as the Vincente Carrillo Fuentes Drug Cartel (VCF).   The purpose of the BA-La Linea alliance was to battle the Sinaloa Cartel and its allies for control of the drug trafficking route through Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico.   The drug route through Juarez, known as the Juarez Plaza, is important to drug trafficking organizations because it is a principal illicit drug trafficking route into the United States.

Evidence at trial also proved that Gallegos Castrellon was in charge of BA teams of assassins, which he helped create and supervised in 2008 through 2010.   His teams killed up to 800 persons between January and August 2010, reaching a total of nearly 1,600 in a multi-year period.

Trial evidence also proved that Gallegos Castrellon ordered the March 13, 2010, triple homicide in Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico, of U.S. Consulate employee Leslie Enriquez, her husband Arthur Redelfs, and Jorge Salcido Ceniceros, the husband of another U.S. Consulate employee.

A total of 35 defendants were charged in the third superseding indictment and are alleged to have committed various criminal acts, including the 2010 Juarez Consulate murders, as well as racketeering, narcotics distribution and importation, retaliation against persons providing information to U.S. law enforcement, extortion, money laundering, murder and obstruction of justice.  Of the 35 defendants charged, 26 have been convicted, one committed suicide before the conclusion of his trial, and two remain fugitives, including Eduardo Ravelo, an FBI Top Ten Most Wanted Fugitive.

The case was investigated by the FBI’s El Paso Field Office, Albuquerque Field Office (Las Cruces Resident Agency), DEA Juarez, and DEA El Paso.   Special assistance was provided by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Immigration and Customs Enforcement; the U.S. Marshals Service; U.S. Customs and Border Protection; the Federal Bureau of Prisons; the U.S. Diplomatic Security Service; the Texas Department of Public Safety; the Texas Department of Criminal Justice; the El Paso Police Department; the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office; the El Paso Independent School District Police Department; the Texas Alcohol and Beverage Commission; the New Mexico State Police; the Dona Ana County, N.M., Sheriff’s Office; the Las Cruces, N.M., Police Department; the Southern New Mexico Correctional Facility and the Otero County Prison Facility New Mexico.

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Joseph A. Cooley of the Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section, Trial Attorney Brian Skaret of the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney John Gibson of the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Western District of Texas - El Paso Division.   Valuable assistance was provided by the Criminal Division’s Offices of International Affairs and Enforcement Operations.

AG HOLDER SAYS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT WILL COLLECT DATA ON STOPS AND ARRESTS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Monday, April 28, 2014

Attorney General Holder: Justice Dept. to Collect Data on Stops, Arrests as Part of Effort to Curb Racial Bias in Criminal Justice System

$4.75m Project Seeks to Ease Mistrust Between Law Enforcement, Minority Communities

Noting that African-American and Hispanic males are arrested at disproportionately high rates, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday that the Justice Department will seek to collect data about stops, searches and arrests as part of a larger effort to analyze and reduce the possible effect of bias within the criminal justice system.

Attorney General Holder said the project grew out of President Obama’s call, issued last July following the verdict in the Trayvon Martin case, for the Justice Department to seek to reduce tensions between law enforcement and minority communities.

“Racial disparities contribute to tension in our nation generally and within communities of color specifically, and tend to breed resentment towards law enforcement that is counterproductive to the goal of reducing crime,” Attorney General Holder said. “Of course, to be successful in reducing both the experience and the perception of bias, we must have verifiable data about the problem.  As a key part of this initiative, we will work with grant recipients and local law enforcement to collect data about stops and searches, arrests, and case outcomes in order to help assess the impact of possible bias.”

The data collection is one part of the Department’s new National Center for Building Community Trust and Justice. It will be funded through $4.75 million in competitively

WHITE HOUSE FACT SHEET ON SEXUAL ASSAULT ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES

April 29, 2014

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

FACT SHEET: Not Alone – Protecting Students from Sexual Assault

One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college.  Most often, it happens her freshman or sophomore year.  In the great majority of cases, it’s by someone she knows – and also most often, she does not report what happened.  And though fewer, men, too, are victimized.

The Administration is committed to putting an end to this violence. That’s why the President established the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault on January 22, 2014, with a mandate to strengthen federal enforcement efforts and provide schools with additional tools to combat sexual assault on their campuses. 

Today, the Task Force is announcing a series of actions to: (1)  identify the scope of the problem on college campuses, (2) help prevent campus sexual assault, (3) help schools respond effectively when a student is assaulted, and (4) improve, and make more transparent, the federal government’s enforcement efforts.  We will continue to pursue additional executive or legislative actions in the future.

These steps build on the Administration’s previous work to combat sexual assault.  The Task Force formulated its recommendations after a 90-day review period during which it heard from thousands of people from across the country -- via 27 online and in-person listening sessions and written comments from a wide variety of stakeholders.

Helping Schools Identify the Problem: Climate Surveys
As we know, campus sexual assault is chronically underreported – so victim reports don’t provide a fair measure of the problem.  A campus climate survey, however, can.  So, today:

• We are providing schools with a toolkit for developing and conducting a climate survey.  This survey has evidence-based sample questions that schools can use to gauge the prevalence of sexual assault on campus, test students’ attitudes and awareness about the issue, and craft solutions.  We call on schools to voluntarily conduct the climate survey next year and, based on what we learn, we will further refine the survey methodology.  This process will culminate in a survey for all schools to use.
• We will explore legislative or administrative options to require colleges and universities to conduct an evidence-based survey in 2016.  A mandate for schools to periodically conduct a climate survey will change the national dynamic: with a better picture of what’s really happening on campus, schools will be able to more effectively tackle the problem and measure the success of their efforts.   

Preventing Sexual Assault – and Bringing in the Bystander
The college years are formative for many students.  If we implement effective prevention programs, today’s students will leave college knowing that sexual assault is simply unacceptable.  And that, in itself, can create a sea change.

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted a systematic review of primary prevention strategies for reducing sexual violence, and is releasing an advance summary of its findings.  This review summarizes some of the best available research in the area, and highlights evidence-based prevention strategies that work, some that are promising, and those that don’t work.  The report points to steps colleges can take now to prevent sexual assault on their campuses.
• The CDC and the Justice Department’s Office on Violence Against Women will pilot and evaluate prevention strategies on college campuses.  This work will build on the CDC’s systematic review, and will identify and fill gaps in the research on sexual violence prevention.
• Getting Bystanders to Step In and Help Is a Promising Practice.  Bystander intervention programs work to change social norms, and teach everyone to speak out and intervene if someone is at risk of being assaulted.  These programs are among those the CDC found most promising. 

Helping Schools Respond Effectively When A Student is Sexually Assaulted: Confidentiality, Training, Better Investigations, and Community Partnerships
By law, schools that receive federal funds are obliged to protect students from sexual assault.  It is the Task Force’s mission to help schools meet not only the letter, but the spirit, of that obligation.  And that can mean a number of things – from giving a victim a confidential place to turn for advice and support, to providing specialized training for school officials, to effectively investigating and finding out what happened, to sanctioning the perpetrator, to doing everything we can to help a survivor recover. 

• Many survivors need someone to talk to in confidence.  While many survivors of sexual assault are ready to press forward with a formal complaint right away, others aren’t so sure.  For some, having a confidential place to go can mean the difference between getting help and staying silent.  Today, the Department of Education is releasing new guidance clarifying that on-campus counselors and advocates can talk to a survivor in confidence.  This support can help victims come forward, get help, and make a formal report if they choose to.
• We are providing a sample confidentiality and reporting policy.  Even victims who make a formal report may still request that the information be held in confidence, and that the school not investigate or take action against the perpetrator.   Schools, however, also have an obligation to keep the larger community safe.  To help them strike this balance, we are providing schools with a sample reporting and confidentiality policy, which recommends factors a school should consider in making this decision.
• We are providing specialized training for school officials.  School officials and first responders need to understand how sexual assault occurs, the tactics used by perpetrators, and the common reactions of victims.   The Justice Department will help by developing new training programs for campus officials involved in investigating and adjudicating sexual assault cases and by launching a technical assistance project for campus officials. The Department of Education will develop training materials for campus health center staff to improve services to victims.
• We will give schools guidance on how to improve their investigative and adjudicative protocols.  We need to know more about what investigative and adjudicative systems work best on campus.  The Justice Department will undertake this work, and will begin evaluating different models this year with the goal of identifying the most promising practices.  The Department of Education’s new guidance also urges some important improvements to the disciplinary process.
• We are helping schools forge partnerships with community resources.  Community partnerships are critical to getting survivors the help they need:  while some schools can provide comprehensive services on campus, others may need to partner with community-based organizations.  Rape crisis centers in particular can help schools better serve their students.  We are releasing a sample agreement between schools and rape crisis centers, so survivors have a full network of services in place. 

Improving and Making More Transparent Federal Enforcement Efforts
To better address sexual assault at our nation’s schools, the federal government needs to both strengthen our enforcement efforts and increase coordination among responsible agencies.  Importantly, we also need to improve communication with survivors, parents, school administrators, faculty, and the public, by making our efforts more transparent.

• On Tuesday, we are launching a dedicated website – www.NotAlone.gov – to make enforcement data public and to make other resources accessible to students and schools.  On the website, students can learn about their rights, search enforcement data, and read about how to file a complaint.  The website will also help schools and advocates:  it will make available federal guidance on legal obligations, best available evidence and research, and relevant legislation.  Finally, the website will have trustworthy resources from outside the federal government, such as hotline numbers and mental health services locatable by simply typing in a zip code.
• The Department of Education is providing more clarity on schools’ legal obligations.  The Department of Education is releasing answers to frequently asked questions about schools’ legal obligations to prevent and respond to sexual assault.  Among many other topics, the new guidance makes clear that federal law protects all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, immigration status, or whether they have a disability.  It also makes clear questions about a survivor’s sexual history with anyone other than the alleged perpetrator shouldn’t be permitted during a judicial hearing, and also that a previous sexual relationship doesn’t imply consent or preclude a finding of sexual violence.  And that schools should take steps to protect and assist a survivor pending an investigation.
• The Departments of Justice and Education have entered into an agreement clarifying each agency’s role.  Both agencies have a critical role to play in enforcing the laws that require schools to prevent and respond to sexual assault on their campuses.  The agencies have entered into a formal agreement to increase coordination and strengthen enforcement.

Next Steps
The action steps highlighted in this report are the initial phase of an ongoing plan and commitment to putting an end to this violence on campuses.  We will continue to work toward solutions, clarity, and better coordination. We will review the legal frameworks surrounding sexual assault for possible regulatory or statutory improvements, and seek new resources to enhance enforcement.  Campus law enforcement agencies have special expertise- and they, too, should be tapped to play a more central role.  And we will also consider how our recommendations apply to public elementary and secondary schools – and what more we can do to help there.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

On Support for Israel

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

April 28, 2014

---

For more than thirty years in the United States Senate, I didn’t just speak words in support of Israel, I walked the walk when it came time to vote and when it came time to fight. As Secretary of State, I have spent countless hours working with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Justice Minister Livni because I believe in the kind of future that Israel not only wants, but Israel deserves. I want to see a two state solution that results in a secure Jewish state and a prosperous Palestinian state, and I’ve actually worked for it.

I will not allow my commitment to Israel to be questioned by anyone, particularly for partisan, political purposes, so I want to be crystal clear about what I believe and what I don’t believe.

First, Israel is a vibrant democracy and I do not believe, nor have I ever stated, publicly or privately, that Israel is an apartheid state or that it intends to become one. Anyone who knows anything about me knows that without a shred of doubt.

Second, I have been around long enough to also know the power of words to create a misimpression, even when unintentional, and if I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word to describe my firm belief that the only way in the long term to have a Jewish state and two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two state solution. In the long term, a unitary, binational state cannot be the democratic Jewish state that Israel deserves or the prosperous state with full rights that the Palestinian people deserve. That’s what I said, and it’s also what Prime Minister Netanyahu has said. While Justice Minister Livni, former Prime Ministers Barak and Ohlmert have all invoked the specter of apartheid to underscore the dangers of a unitary state for the future, it is a word best left out of the debate here at home.

PRESIDENT OBAMA VISITS TROOPS IN SOUTH KOREA

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

U.S. service members rush to get a final photograph of U.S. President Barack Obama as he waves goodbye following his speech on U.S. Army Garrison Yongsan in South Korea, April 26, 2014. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Chris Church.

U.S. President Barack Obama participates in a naturalization ceremony at the War Memorial of Korea in Seoul, April 25, 2014. Walter Haith, director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for the Seoul field office, called the name of each candidate, and Robert Daum, deputy district director of the agency's Asia-Pacific district, administered the oath of allegiance. White House photo by Pete Souza,

DOJ SAYS INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY WORKING TO RECOVER STOLEN ASSETS FROM PEOPLE OF UKRAINE

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Monday, April 28, 2014

International Community Mobilizes to Recover Stolen Assets for People of Ukraine

A high-level international meeting to support the Government of Ukraine in recovering stolen assets begins tomorrow in London. The gathering is a landmark for Ukraine in underscoring the rule of law and international cooperation. The international community and the Government of Ukraine are united in their commitment and determination in returning stolen assets to the people of Ukraine.

The Ukraine Forum on Asset Recovery (UFAR) is jointly organized by the United Kingdom and the United States of America in support of efforts by the Government of Ukraine to recover stolen assets. Asset recovery is essential in stopping those who have stolen assets from benefitting from their crimes, and in sending a strong message that there can be no impunity for those who carry out such illegal actions. The two-day meeting brings together representatives of key international financial centers and international organizations to bolster collective action, foster direct exchange between practitioners and plan practical steps towards this goal. Key objectives include:

• Reaffirming the political commitment of the international community in tracing and recovering stolen assets;
• Facilitating international cooperation for the early tracing of such assets;
• Enabling  sharing of best practices, lessons learned and available tools;
• Addressing ways of tracing assets hidden behind complex corporate structures;
• Facilitating networking and trust-building among practitioners across jurisdictions; and
• Identifying specific capacity building needs for Ukraine.

Senior government officials alongside policy makers, judicial experts, prosecutors, financial intelligence analysts, and regulators are participating in UFAR. Bilateral meetings between Ukrainian officials and other delegations will be an important feature of UFAR in helping to identify concrete actions to be taken to advance asset recovery.

Attorney General Eric Holder of the United States, which is jointly organizing UFAR, emphasized the importance of asset recovery in bringing justice and in mobilizing against corruption.

“This community of nations stands united in our determination to support Ukrainian leaders and citizens as they combat corruption and strive to ensure the stability, the independence, and the national sovereignty of a strong and free Ukraine.

“We know that the costs of corruption can be immense and long-lasting.  That is why, within days of the fall of President Yanukovych’s regime, the U.S. Department of Justice had a response team on the ground in Kyiv to assess the needs of Ukraine’s investigation into any stolen assets belonging to its people; to provide assistance with document review and preservation; and to help initiate and coordinate any and all efforts required by further investigations.

“The United States will never stop fighting alongside Ukraine and its partners to ensure accountability, to strengthen transnational cooperation, and to meet instability with resolve – and robust diplomacy.”

In hosting UFAR in London, the British Home Secretary, the Right Hon. Theresa May MP, stressed the importance of the international community’s role in assisting Ukraine.

“By taking urgent and immediate steps to provide political and economic stability, the UK, US and wider international community has already demonstrated a strong commitment to the people of Ukraine. This forum provides a further opportunity to show our ongoing support.

“Building on our expertise in the field of asset recovery, it will also provide practical leadership and assistance to the Ukrainian government as they identify and recover assets looted under the Yanukovych regime and introduce political and economic reform.

“The message is clear - we are making it harder than ever for corrupt regimes or individuals around the world to move, hide and profit from the proceeds of their crime.”

STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS REMARKS ON CONVENTIONAL ARMS TRANSFER POLICY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Conventional Arms Transfer Policy: Advancing American National Security Through Security Cooperation

Remarks

Gregory M. Kausner
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

Remarks to IISS

Washington, DC

April 23, 2014

---

Introduction
Thank you very much Sam. Sam is one of the leading Russia experts around, and as we grapple with the situation unfolding in Ukraine, his work will provide vital insight. So, I glad to share the stage with him. I am grateful to the International Institute for Strategic Studies for hosting me today. With its founding focus on arms control and renowned for its annual evaluation of the global military balance, the institute is the perfect venue for this discussion. For more than half a century IISS has helped us see beyond the headlines, so it is well placed to facilitate our understanding of the U.S. Conventional Arms Transfer Policy.

While the Conventional Arms Transfer policy is complex, its objective is clear: when the United States provides defense articles and military training to our partners and allies, it does so for one main reason: to further U.S. national security interests.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt called on us to look outward and fulfill our role as the great “Arsenal of Democracy,” and, in 1941, his Lend-Lease program enabled military aid to flow across the Atlantic to a beleaguered Britain. FDR championed U.S.-security assistance not just because it was the right thing to do, but because it was in our interest to stand with an ally fighting for freedom.

Security cooperation as a tool of U.S. foreign policy remains as important today as ever before. In a world of transnational threats, the United States is safer when countries and regions are secure, stable, and free.

With the globalization of commerce and the interconnected nature of economies and peoples, our security is now linked to more places, countries, and regions than ever before.
While the United States remains an unrivaled military power that can rapidly deploy forces around the world to ensure stability, we cannot be everywhere at once, nor do we seek to be. One of our country’s great strengths is that through our alliances and partnerships we do not have to be everywhere. We can share the burden of maintaining global security with others. In order to do so, however, we must ensure that our partners have the necessary capabilities and resources to contribute to the fight.

Opportunities and Challenges

People are often surprised to learn that it is the State Department that oversees security assistance. In some countries, arms transfers are treated as strictly economic, industrial, or military decisions. But in the United States security assistance is treated as a matter of foreign policy.

When we provide a defense article to a foreign recipient, we view it as more than just commercial transaction; it is a way to exert American influence and export our values. Security cooperation is about using all of our equipment, skills, and knowledge to shape a more prosperous and secure future – not just for us, but also for our partners.

Training and equipping these partners can advance a broad agenda of our foreign policy goals. Let me highlight some examples of what I mean:

Security assistance provides us with influence. When we transfer or sell a defense system to a partner nation, the delivery of that system is the beginning – not the end – of an enduring relationship – a relationship that includes maintenance, end-use monitoring -- and most importantly, training. That training happens at all levels – from the tactical to the strategic. Our security cooperation is not just about building new partnerships on a national level. It’s about creating personal relationships —relationships that often transcend the volatile political climates of the day. Personal relationships enable us to pick up the phone and call our counterparts when tensions run high -- to not only respond to crises, but to forestall them.

Security assistance provides the United States with access. Our aid oftentimes facilitates our transit through airspace and busy shipping lanes; provides the freedom to use foreign ports and bases; and offers unfettered access to critical geo-strategic locations – all crucial elements of our global posture.

Our security assistance enables us to operate together with partner militaries. In Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, we re-discovered the importance of interoperability on the battlefield. We are more effective when we can fight together, side by side using common platforms, because of the similarities in tools, training, tactics, techniques, and procedures.

Security assistance can support regional balance. Our arms transfers are an unequivocal signal to those who seek to counter U.S. interests or undermine international norms. When we train and equip our allies, it sends a message that their military strength should not be tested.

Finally, our security assistance enables burden sharing. By providing defense capabilities to our partners, we build their capacity to become self-reliant; to respond to threats; and to better contribute to multilateral coalitions. Such cooperation reduces our international burden and makes Americans safer at a lower cost.
That’s the power of our security assistance in action. And w
hile the advantages are unmistakable, the risks are real.

The influx of advanced weapons into a region can destabilize established power balances.
Arms, when in the wrong hands, can contribute to human rights violations.
Industrial competitors are eager to exploit U.S. technology, the outcome of which could not only affect the health of the U.S. industrial base, but also endanger American lives.

So, the question isn’t whether there are challenges. We know there are. It is whether we can mitigate the risks and seize the opportunities that our security assistance provides. And I am confident that we can.

Conventional Arms Transfer Policy

This January, President Obama signed Presidential Policy Directive 27 on Conventional Arms Transfers – the CAT Policy for short. The President’s Directive brings clarity and purpose to U.S. security assistance. When we consider the merits of an arms transfer, we now have a transparent set of objectives to weigh.

The policy provides clear criteria -- applied on a case-by-case basis -- to ensure that every U.S. arms transfer promotes U.S. national security.

The CAT policy is not a formula. We cannot plug in complex variables and hope for a perfect policy prescription. It is instead a decision-making framework, the efficacy of which depends on policymakers being able to balance its two fundamental tenets:

On one hand, support for transfers that meet the legitimate security requirements of our allies and partners to advance our national security and foreign policy interests -- and on the other, promotion of restraint, in transfers of weapon systems that may be destabilizing or dangerous to international peace and security.

Why Now?

Before I get into the details of what this means in practice, let me answer the question of why we decided to update the CAT policy this year.
Much has changed since 1995, when the original CAT policy was issued. Our current doctrine needed to reflect the realities of the 21st century not those of the Cold War.

• Transnational threats challenge our interests today in ways that were hardly imagined 20 years ago.
• From Afghanistan to Libya, coalitions have emerged to play a central role in U.S. defense policy.
• Technology has evolved. The provision of services and technical data related to arms has, in many cases, become as significant as the transfer of weapon.
• Regional dynamics have changed dramatically. Take the remarkable events in the Middle East, which began in 2011. But the shifting geo-political landscape does not end there. As is evident in Eastern Europe and the Asia Pacific, territorial and maritime disputes continue to drive instability.
• And while the importance of protecting fundamental freedoms and human rights hasn’t changed, it needed to be more prominently reflected in the policy. These ideals are not only central to promoting American values, but to preserving U.S. security.

We of course considered all of these realities prior to the President’s update. It is a standard of good governance, however, to regularly reevaluate our assumptions. Now, the context of today’s security environment is reflected in the text. And by updating the policy, we have re-validated its importance.

Objectives and Criteria

So what does the new CAT policy actually say? In short, it details objectives and criteria to consider when making or denying arms transfers. It is up to policymakers, however, to strike the appropriate balance between permitting legitimate transfers that support our security, and the need for restraint against the proliferation of arms. Indeed, that can be a challenging balance to maintain, so I will enumerate, in no particular order, each objective and some of the criteria we consider:

• First, ensuring U.S. military forces, and those of allies and partners, continue to enjoy technological superiority over potential adversaries. This cuts both ways: We make transfers to bolster our partners’ legitimate defense capabilities. We deny transfers, however, when there is a high probability that the technology involved could be illegally diverted.
  
  To avoid such a result, we assess a potential recipient’s capacity to protect sensitive software and hardware design, development, manufacturing, and integration knowledge – critical to not only safeguard the U.S. industrial base, but to ensure system vulnerabilities are not revealed to those who seek to exploit U.S. operational capabilities.
   
• Second, promoting the acquisition of U.S. systems to increase interoperability with allies and partners, lower the unit costs for all, and strengthen the industrial base. If we hope to retain our technological edge in a time of fiscal austerity, we must continue to invest in research and development. By contributing to economies of scale, foreign sales can help maintain U.S. investment in the defense sector.
  
  While we do not approve transfers strictly based on the health of the U.S. industrial base, we would be foolish not to consider its impact.
   
• Third, enhancing the ability of allies and partners to deter or defend themselves against aggression. As President Obama said, “we should not be the world's policeman.” Supporting our partners not only lifts the burden from the shoulders of our military, but it also contributes to a more stable international order. To this end, we assess the ability of the recipient to field, support, and appropriately employ the requested system in accordance with its intended end-use.
   
• Fourth, encouraging the maintenance and expansion of U.S. security partnerships with those who share our objectives, and regional access in areas critical to U.S. interests. The relationships we forge through security assistance are not only government-to-government – they are commercial, institutional, and personal. Think about the scope of a major arms sale, and the range of cooperation it often entails – from companies that collaborate on co-production, to technicians who team to maintain a common platform, to soldiers who train in shared tactics. But for such cooperation to take root, we must ensure that we team with stable partners.
   
• Fifth, promoting regional stability, peaceful conflict resolution, and arms control. We are committed to nonproliferation and to the furtherance of peace. When we make the decision to transfer a capability to a foreign nation we do so mindful of the impact it could have on regional balance. So, we consider if capabilities that project power, provide for anti-access and area denial, or that are new introductions into a region, could foster increased tension or contribute to an arms race. We weigh the human rights, democratization, counterterrorism, counter proliferation, and nonproliferation record of the recipient, and the potential for misuse of the export in question.
  
  We also must consider if a country could procure arms from another source. The arms industry is a competitive market. Just because another exporter is willing to sell to a potential recipient, however, does not mean we should. But the influence that comes with an arms sale should not be underestimated, and we should be careful not to cede such influence to others.
   
• Sixth, preventing the proliferation of conventional weapons that could be used as delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction. Countering WMD proliferation is a core U.S. national security goal. We recognize that some conventional arms may be used to support unconventional capabilities. For this reason, the CAT policy closely aligns with constraints imposed by multilateral arms control arrangements; where there is a strong potential for misuse or a transfer would set a dangerous precedent, we withhold our assistance. We assess the degree of protection afforded by the recipient country to sensitive technology and potential for unauthorized third-party transfer, as well as in-country diversion.
   
• Seventh, supporting counterterrorism efforts. As Secretary Kerry said, “…the threat that we face is more diffuse, decentralized, and geographically dispersed than ever before, and addressing this threat will require every tool in our arsenal...” When a partner or ally can aid in the fight to confront the destructive forces of transnational terrorism, we will look to train and equip them.
   
• Eighth, combating transnational organized crime and related threats to national security. International crime is not a new phenomenon, but its reach is expanded by a globalized economy and interconnected world. The U.S. cannot expect to effectively combat the threat alone.
  
  While any strategy must include efforts to reform institutions and build capacity throughout the justice sector, targeted security assistance will enable partners to identify, disrupt, and dismantle transnational criminal groups.
   
• Ninth, supporting democratic governance and other related U.S. foreign policy objectives. Our security assistance can provide the United States ac  cess and influence that can be used to advance democratic ideals and promote good governance. We need to be clear-eyed though. Security assistance is not always the most effective leverage. To promote gains in democracy or governance, we should consider the full spectrum of tools at our disposal and not rely on security assistance as a panacea.
   
• This brings me to the final objective: ensuring that arms transfers do not contribute to human rights violations or violations of international humanitarian law. This is a fundamental national value -- and, for all of us in the State Department, one we take personally. The policy makes very clear that we will not make transfers if U.S. equipment and training could be used to commit: genocide, crimes against humanity, or violations of international humanitarian law.

In updating the policy – outlining all of these objectives and criteria in a transparent way – we recognize that the example set by the United States as an exporter of security assistance plays a critical role in shaping international norms.

The Arms Sale Process

Some refer to our arms transfer decision-making process as onerous, inflexible, and arcane. There is no question; it is not perfect. As the policy states, we will continue to pursue efforts to streamline security cooperation. The deliberate review of U.S. arms transfers, however, is an affirmation of how seriously we take this business.

Both the Departments of State and Defense assess the policy and technical impacts of each and every transfer. The U.S. Congress plays a vital oversight role as well. All major arms transfers require us to notify Congress, and an extensive consultation process exists to ensure that congressional concerns are addressed.

Now, we often hear the question – do you ever reject an arms transfer? Although we do not advertise such decisions, we reject sales all the time.

When we decide to move forward with a transfer, however, transparency remains a hallmark of the CAT policy – in fact, our major Foreign Military Sales are posted upon notification to Congress on the public website of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, and the texts of both Foreign Military Sales and Direct Commercial Sales notifications are published in the Federal Register.

Conclusion

We recognize the challenges associated with U.S. arms transfers. Across the interagency, we work day in and day out to ensure transfers are carefully considered, and made – or denied – for the right reasons that promote American security and reflect American values.
Each delivery of U.S. security assistance sends a message to our friends and foes. It is an act of support and trust for our partners and allies. It provides them the capabilities to defend themselves, and to provide for the stability of their region.

The advantages of security assistance as both a complement to, and a substitute for, U.S. “boots on the ground” are clear and compelling. As someone who works these issues every day, however, I will be the first to tell you that the decision to train or equip a foreign partner is not always an easy one. Yet we cannot simply turn our back on the complexities of building partner capacity. To do so would open the door for other suppliers and actors. It would hamper our allies’ efforts to work with us on common security issues. It would distance us from our partners.

It would disadvantage the very industry on which we rely for our technological security capabilities and advantage. It would take away our voice in circumstances where it might matter the most.

So, we transfer arms with our eyes wide open, with laws, regulation, and policy designed to reflect caution, but also shaped to ensure that our security policy supports, and reinforces, our foreign policy. And we see results every day, from coalition operations against shared threats, to multinational training exercises, to the conversations that occur between American troops and foreign partners – partners who came here for training and left here as friends. We will remain cautious in using arms transfers as a tool of foreign policy, but we should never forget that our national security is in many ways dependent upon, and advanced as a result of, our security cooperation.

Thank you.

GRAPHENE: USES IN THE REAL WORLD

FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Making graphene work for real-world devices

Fundamental research in phonon scattering helps researchers design graphene materials for applications

Graphene, a one-atom-thick form of the carbon material graphite, has been hailed as a wonder material--strong, light, nearly transparent and an excellent conductor of electricity and heat--and it very well may be. But a number of practical challenges must be overcome before it can emerge as a replacement for silicon and other materials in microprocessors and next-generation energy devices.

One particular challenge concerns the question of how graphene sheets can be utilized in real devices.

"When you fabricate devices using graphene, you have to support the graphene on a substrate and doing so actually suppresses the high thermal conductivity of graphene," said Li Shi, a professor of mechanical engineering at The University of Texas at Austin, whose work is partially funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Thermal conductivity is critical in electronics, especially as components shrink to the nanoscale. High thermal conductivity is a good thing for electronic devices fabricated from graphene. It means the device can spread the heat it generates to prevent the formation of local hot spots. However, in the case of graphene, when the needed supporting materials are also used, graphene loses some of the superhigh thermal conductivity that is predicted for its idealized state when it is freely suspended in a vacuum.

In a paper published in September 2013 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Shi, along with graduate research assistant Mir Mohammad Sadeghi and post-doctoral fellow Insun Jo, designed an experiment to observe the effects of thermal conductivity when the thickness of graphene supported on an amorphous glass layer was increased. They observed that thermal conductivity increased as the number of layers grew from a single one-atom layer to as thick as 34 layers. However, even at 34 layers, the thermal conductivity had not recovered to the point where it was as high as bulk graphite, which is an excellent heat conductor.

These findings are leading Shi and others to explore novel ways of supporting or connecting graphene with the macroscopic world, including three-dimensional interconnected foam structures of graphene and ultrathin graphite, or the use of hexagonal boron nitride, which has nearly the same crystal structure as graphene.

"One of our objectives is to use graphene and other layered materials to make flexible electronic devices. And those devices will be made on plastic substrates, which are flexible, but also have very low thermal conductivity," Shi explained. "When you run current through the devices, a lot of them fail. The heat cannot be dissipated effectively, so it becomes very hot and it just melts the substrate."

Melting isn't the only problem. As temperatures get higher, the flexible polymer substrate can become a molten and rubber-like material that breaks the electronic materials built on top and causes tiny conducting wires in electronic devices to easily fail.

"In general, a hot chip is not good for the devices," Shi said. "The transistors will switch slower and will require more power."

Shi has been exploring the physical properties of graphene-based materials for more than a decade. He co-authored a 2001 paper in Physical Review Letters that reported the first measurement of high thermal conductivity in individual carbon nanotubes, a cousin of graphene. He also co-authored a 2010 paper in Science that provided critical insight into the thermal conductivity and thermal transport in single layer graphene supported on a substrate.

Shi is trying to answer fundamental questions about how phonons--the vibrations of atoms in solids--transport heat. Phonons are like electrons or photons (light particles), in that they carry heat energy. However, much less is known about phonons because their effects are less apparent at the macro-scale at which we live.

"This fundamental study allowed us to understand the intrinsic physics of the scattering of lattice waves," Shi said.

Shi's experiments let his team infer how phonons scatter as a function of thickness of the graphene layers, based on observations of how the thermal conductivity varied with different numbers of layers.

To gather these insights, his team conducted theoretical calculations using the Stampede supercomputer at the Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC), based at The University of Texas at Austin.

The simulations led them to better understand their experimental results.

"In order to really understand the physics, you need to include additional theoretical calculations. That's why we use the supercomputers at TACC," said Shi. "When you do an experiment, you see a trend, but without doing the calculations you don't really know what it means. The combination of the two is very powerful. If you just do one without doing the other, you might not develop the understanding needed."

Most of the thermal systems used today are based on legacy technologies, according to Shi. Copper and aluminum serve as heat sink materials in computers; molten salts and paraffin wax are used as the storage medium of energy in thermal storage devices; and to perform thermoelectric conversion for waste heat recovery, we use materials like bismuth telluride or lead telluride that contain elements that are either not abundant in the earth crust or not environmentally friendly.

"We're really limited by the materials," Shi said. "Can we come up with more effective materials to replace copper interconnects and copper heat-sinks, or replace silicon transistors? Can we develop thermally stable insulators for applications like fire protection? I think in 10 years, new materials will be discovered and implemented to replace these legacy technologies."

Recently, he has been exploring how multi-layered graphene can recover some of the high thermal conductivity that is lost as graphene is placed on a glass substrate, and also looking into other crystalline materials for supporting graphene.

Shi and his team are experimenting and modeling new dielectric supports, like boron nitride, which has a comparable crystal structure to graphene. The hope is that its similar crystal structure will lead to better thermal conductivity and less phonon scattering when they are used to support graphene. In a recent paper in Applied Physical Letters, Shi and Steve Cronin's team at University of Southern California reported their investigation of thermal transport across a graphene/boron-nitride interface. The results suggest the importance of improving the interface quality in order to increase the interface's conductance.

Another line of Shi's research looks at materials for thermal energy storage. Writing in the December 2013 issue of the journal Energy and Environmental Science, Shi's team showed that ultrathin graphene foams can be used to increase the power capacity of thermal storage devices by increasing the rate that heat can be charged and discharged into the phase change materials used to store the thermal energy.

"The increased thermal cycling stability, and applicability to a diverse range of phase change materials suggests that ultra-thin graphite foam composites are a promising route to achieving the high power capacity targets of a number of thermal storage applications, including building and vehicle heating and cooling, solar thermal harvesting, and thermal management of electrochemical energy storage and electronic devices," said Michael Pettes, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Connecticut and co-author of the paper.

"It is Shi's fundamental work on nanoscale materials including graphene that has guided the design of scalable materials which can benefit from nanostructuring and provide possibly revolutionary societal benefits."

The common thread for all this research is the development of an understanding of how the fundamental energy carriers--including electrons, photons, phonons and molecules--are transported and coupled to each other in materials, Shi said.

"Professor Shi has pioneered work on the measurements of phonon transport at the nano-scale and has undertaken measurements across a range of nano-scale systems. He was among the first to report measurements showing the important effect of a substrate on thermal conductivity reduction in graphene," said Sumant Acharya, an NSF program officer. "NSF has also supported Professor Shi on the development of low-cost silicide thermoelectric materials with the intent of fostering the development of thermoelectric-based waste heat recovery from automobiles. Professor Shi is a leader in the field of nano-scale heat transport, and I am pleased that NSF has been able to support many of Prof. Shi's groundbreaking research."

In addition to NSF's Thermal Transport Processes Program, Shi's research has been supported by the Office of Naval Research, the Department of Energy Office of Basic Energy Science and ARPA-E. One of their projects is now part of the overall effort by the Nanomanufacturing Systems for Mobile Computing and Mobile Energy Technologies (NASCENT) center, founded in 2013 and based at The University of Texas at Austin. The NSF-funded engineering research center develops high throughput, high yield and versatile nanomanufacturing systems to take nano-science discoveries from the lab to the marketplace.

Despite a long history exploring and designing with the material, Shi doesn't claim graphene will always be superior to other materials.

"But it has exciting prospects for applications," he said. "And there's great physics involved."

-- Aaron Dubrow, NSF 703-292-4489 adubrow@nsf.gov
Investigators
Li Shi
Insun Jo
Dan Sellan
Xiaoqin Li
Hengxign Ji
Jianshi Zhou
Matthew Hall
Rodney Ruoff
Steve Cronin
Michael Pettes
John Goodenough
Mir Mohammad Sadeghi
Related Institutions/Organizations
University of Texas at Austin

READOUT: NSA ADVISER RICE'S MEETING WITH MALAYSIAN OPPOSITION LEADERS

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

April 28, 2014

Readout of National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice's Meeting with Malaysian Opposition Leaders

Today, National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice met with three top leaders of the Malaysian political opposition to hear their views on the situation in Malaysia and their efforts to press for greater democracy, transparency, and reform.  Ambassador Rice underscored that the President's historic visit to Malaysia has been an important opportunity to continue the transformation of the relationship between our two countries--but that even as we deepen our cooperation with the Malaysian government, we are looking to expand our engagement with all of Malaysia, including civil society, industry, students, and participants from across the political spectrum.

Ambassador Rice reiterated the President's message that countries that welcome the contributions, and uphold the human rights of all their citizens, regardless of their political affiliation, ethnicity, race or religion are ultimately more prosperous and more successful. She also shared the United States' view that it is critical for Malaysia to apply the rule of law fairly, transparently, and apolitically in order to promote confidence in Malaysia’s democracy and judiciary.

Ambassador Rice emphasized to Mr. Anwar that the United States has followed his case closely, and that the decision to prosecute him and the trial have raised a number of concerns regarding the rule of law and the independence of the courts.

Ambassador Rice told the opposition leaders  that the United States will continue to raise our concerns about issues of political freedom,  the basic universal rights of freedom of expression, freedom of association, and religious liberty--as well as the need to respect and protect the rights of all people, regardless of their ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation.

Finally, Ambassador Rice conveyed deep condolences on the passing of democracy and civil rights activist Mr. Karpal Singh.

Participants:

Anwar Ibrahim (Mr. Anwar), Leader of the Opposition, chairman of the People’s Justice Party
Lim Guan Eng (Mr. Lim), Leader of the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and opposition Member of Parliament
Mustafa Ali (Mr. Mustafa), Secretary General of the Pan-Malaysia Islamic Party (PAS) and opposition Member of Parliament
Pictures of the meeting can be found HERE and HERE

DEFENSE COOPERATION EXPANDED THROUGH NEW PACT BETWEEN U.S.-PHILIPPINES

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
U.S.-Philippine Pact Expands Defense Cooperation
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 28, 2014 – U.S. and Philippine leaders praised the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement the two nations signed yesterday, saying it updates and builds on the Mutual Defense Treaty of 1951.
The agreement “facilitates the enhanced rotational presence of U.S. forces, expands opportunities for training and supports the long-term modernization of the Philippine military,” Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters today.

The United States is “particularly focused” on strengthening Philippine maritime security, enhancing maritime domain awareness and improving humanitarian assistance and disaster relief capabilities, the colonel said.

The agreement was announced during President Barack Obama's visit to the Phillippines.  President Benigno Aquino III touted the benefits of the pact during a news conference in Manila yesterday.

“The Philippines is a vital partner on issues such as maritime security and freedom of navigation,” Obama said. “The goal for this agreement is to build Philippine capacity, to engage in training, to engage in coordination -- not simply to deal with issues of maritime security, but also to enhance our capabilities so that if there’s a natural disaster that takes place, we’re able to potentially respond more quickly, [and] if there are additional threats that may arise, that we are able to work in a cooperative fashion.”

The agreement will allow the United States to pre-position relief supplies in the Philippines, Warren said, but “does not provide for permanent U.S. bases, and we have no intent to open permanent bases in the Philippines.”

Aquino called the U.S.-Philippine security agreement a continuation of a strategic partnership. “Our deepening relations are attuned to the realities and needs that have emerged in the 21st century, which affect not only our two countries, but also the entire community of nations,” he said.

The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement “takes security cooperation to a higher level of engagement, reaffirms our countries’ commitment to mutual defense and security and promotes regional peace and stability,” Aquino said.

Details of the agreement remain to be worked out. Officials could not say how the rotational U.S. presence in the Philippine archipelago will work, nor could they say where these rotations will take place.

The agreement does provide for the possibility of the United States building some infrastructure to support the rotations, officials said.

DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL REASSURED THAT RUSSIAN FORCES WILL NOT INVADE UKRAINE

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Hagel Reassured by Russian Counterpart on Ukraine

By Nick Simeone

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 28, 2014 – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel spoke by phone today with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoygu and received assurances that Moscow has no plans to invade Ukraine, a Pentagon spokesman said.
In a statement issued after the call, Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said Hagel emphasized to his Russian counterpart how dangerous the situation in Ukraine remains and that Shoygu "reiterated his assurance that Russian forces would not invade."

Kirby said Hagel reiterated that the Ukrainian government has a right to preserve law and order within its own borders and also asked for Russia's help in freeing seven members of a military observer mission from the Ogranization for Security and Cooperation in Europe who are being held by pro-Russian militias in eastern Ukraine.

In addition, Kirby said Hagel called on Russia to observe an agreement negotiated earlier this month aimed at defusing the crisis and "repeated his call for an end to Russia's destabilizing influence inside Ukraine and warned that continued aggression would further isolate Russia and result in more diplomatic and economic pressure."

The warning came on the same day that the Obama administration imposed additional sanctions on Russian officials, businessmen and companies for Moscow's intervention in Ukraine.

Kirby said both leaders agreed to "have continued conversations seeking a way forward" on the Ukraine situation.

U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS FOR APRIL 28, 2014

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
CONTRACTS
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

NYP Corp.,* Elizabeth, N.J., has been awarded a maximum $74,383,433 modification (P00100) exercising the first option period on a two-year base contract (SPM8E6-12-D-0007) with three one-year option periods for acrylic sandbags. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment contract. Location of performance is New Jersey with a May 24, 2015 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa.
Dayton Bag and Burlap,* Dayton, Ohio, has been awarded a maximum $74,098,240 modification (P00101) exercising the first option period on a two-year base contract (SPM8E6-12-D-0005) with three one-year option periods for acrylic sandbags. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment contract. Location of performance is Ohio with a May 24, 2015 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa.
Hutchinson Industries Inc., Trenton, N.J., has been awarded a maximum $28,168,596 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for wheel and tire assemblies. This is a competitive acquisition and three offers were received. This is a three-year base contract with no options. Location of performance is New Jersey with an Aug. 28, 2017 performance completion date. Using service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 through fiscal 2017 Army working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Warren, Mich., (SPRDL1-14-D-0029).

NAVY

Electric Boat Corp., Groton, Conn., is being awarded a $17,645,580,644 fixed-price incentive multiyear contract for construction of 10 Virginia-class submarines from fiscal 2014 to 2018. This contract includes options for on-board repair parts in support of each submarine which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $17,827,808,738. Electric Boat Corp., will continue to subcontract with Huntington Ingalls Industries-Newport News. Work will be performed in Newport News, Va. (24 percent); Groton, Conn. (18 percent); Quonset Point, R.I. (16 percent); Sunnyvale, Calif. (8 percent); Cheswick, Pa. (1.7 percent); Annapolis, Md. (1.2 percent), and with other efforts performed at various sites throughout the United States (31.1 percent). Work is expected to be complete by August 2024. No contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was procured sole source from Electric Boat Corp., pursuant to 10 United States Code 2304 (c)(1) and Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1 (only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements). The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-12-C-2115).

American Rheinmetall Munition Inc., Stafford, Va., is being awarded a $12,811,540 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for 66mm vehicle launched infrared smoke grenades in support of the U.S. Navy. The grenades will be used to provide a visible and infrared smoke screen to protect combat vehicles from observation and subsequent targeting by laser illuminators, targeting devices and rangefinders. Consequently, probability of damage or loss from adversarial forces is decreased as sensor guided weapons are rendered less effective. Work will be performed in Neuenburg, Germany, and is expected to be completed by April 2019. Fiscal 2014 procurement of ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps contract funds in the amount of $221,053 will be obligated at time of contract award. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with one offer received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division, Crane, Ind., is the contracting activity (N00164-14-D-JR23).

ARMY

ARMTEC Countermeasures Co., Cochella, Calif., was awarded an $11,450,440 modification (P00034) to firm-fixed-price contract W52P1J-09-C-0055 to exercise the option for 390,800 each M206 decoy countermeasure flares (389,300 for U.S. Air Force and 1500 each for the U.S. Army) for protection of helicopters and low altitude aircraft. Work will be performed in East Camden, Ark., with an estimated completion date of July 31, 2015. Fiscal 2012 other procurement funding in the amount of $44,950; and fiscal 2014 other procurement funding in the amount of $11,406,490 are being obligated at award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity.
Kilgore Flares Co, LLC., Toone, Tenn., was awarded a $10,176,036 modification (P00039) to firm-fixed-price contract W52P1J-09-C-0056 to exercise the option to procure 318,600 each for U.S. Air Force and 1,200 each for U.S. Army for protection of helicopters and low altitude aircraft. Work will be performed in Toone, Tenn., with an estimated completion date of July 31, 2015. Fiscal 2012 other procurement funding in the amount of $38,184; and fiscal 2014 other procurement funding in the amount of $10,137,852 are being obligated at award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity.

Health Facility Solutions Company*, San Antonio, Texas, was awarded a $7,000,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery contract for architect and engineering services to support the construction management activities for the Mobile District and South Atlantic Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Funding and performance location(s) are to be determined with each order. Bids were solicited via the Web with 97 bids received. Estimated completion date is April 29, 2019. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Mobile District, Mobile, Ala., is the contracting activity (W91278-14-D-0038).

*Small Business

JOINT STATEMENT BY SEC COMMISSIONERS GALLAGHER, PIWOWAR ON CONFLICT MINERALS DECISION

FROM:  SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

Joint Statement on the Conflict Minerals Decision

Commissioners Daniel M. Gallagher and Michael S. Piwowar

April 28, 2014

On April 14, 2014, the D.C. Circuit decided that requiring issuers to describe certain of their products as not DRC conflict free violated the First Amendment.[1] It remanded the case to the district court to determine how much of the Commission’s conflict minerals rule is therefore unconstitutional. We believe that the entirety of the rule should be stayed, and no further regulatory obligations should be imposed, pending the outcome of this litigation. Indeed, a stay should have been granted when the litigation commenced in 2012.

A full stay is essential because the district court could (and, in our view, should) determine that the entire rule is invalid.

First, the First Amendment concerns permeate all the required disclosures, not just the listing of products that have not been determined to be DRC conflict free. As the D.C. Circuit noted, an issuer is required “to tell consumers that its products are ethically tainted, even if they only indirectly finance armed groups.”[2] A limited modification to our rule eliminating the requirement to declare certain products as “not DRC conflict free” would fail to fully address the First Amendment violation. For example, the fact that an issuer would still be required to include a description of its due diligence procedures in its reports would suggest that the issuer may have “blood on its hands” for its products since it is sourcing certain minerals from the DRC. Moreover, current staff guidance restricts an issuer from stating that its products are not indirectly financing or benefiting armed groups in the DRC in the absence of a costly independent private sector audit report.[3]

Second, even assuming that the due diligence disclosures standing alone do not implicate First Amendment concerns, we believe that the “name and shame” approach is at the heart of not only the Commission’s rule, but of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act itself. The disclosures about the due diligence process are not themselves sufficient to achieve the benefits that Congress sought to advance. Rather, it is the listing of products—the apotheosis of the diligence process—that is central to the rule. Thus, disclosures about the due diligence process should not be seen as severable from the unconstitutional scarlet letter of not DRC conflict free.

A finding that the entire rule is invalid, and that the invalidity is rooted in the statute, would permit Congress to reconsider whether Section 1502 achieves the benefits that it was supposed to attain. Unfortunately, the evidence is that it has been profoundly counterproductive, resulting in a de facto embargo on Congolese tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold, thereby impoverishing approximately a million legitimate miners who cannot sell their products up the supply chain to U.S. companies.[4] Reconsidering Section 1502’s core approach would also save investors billions of dollars in compliance costs,[5] and ease the problem of information overload by eliminating special interest disclosures that are immaterial to investment decisions.

Perhaps the District Court will not ultimately agree with us, and will permit some portion of the Commission’s rule to continue in force. But given the uncertainty, the wisest course of action would be for the Commission to stay the effectiveness of the entire rule until the litigation has concluded. Marching ahead with some portion of the rule that might ultimately be invalidated is a waste of the Commission’s time and resources—far too much of which have been spent on this rule already—and a waste of vast sums of shareholder money. A full stay of the effective and compliance dates of the conflict minerals rule would not fix the damage this rule has already caused, but it would at least stanch some of the bleeding.


[1] Nat’l Ass’n of Mfgrs v. SEC, No. 13-5252 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 14, 2014).

[2] Id. at 20.

[3] Division of Corporation Finance, Frequently Asked Questions on Conflict Minerals, available at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/guidance/conflictminerals-faq.htm (Question 15).

[4] See, e.g., The Unintended Consequences of Dodd-Frank’s Conflict Minerals Provision, Hearing before the Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade of the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services, No. 113-23 (May 21, 2013).

[5] The Commission estimated compliance costs at $3–4 billion for initial compliance, and $207–609 million per year thereafter. See Rel. 34-67716, Conflict Minerals (Aug. 22, 2012) at 302.

WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY MAKES STATEMENT ON FURTHER SANCTIONS REGARDING UKRAINE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

April 28, 2014

Statement by the Press Secretary on Ukraine

The United States has taken further action today in response to Russia’s continued illegal intervention in Ukraine and provocative acts that undermine Ukraine’s democracy and threaten its peace, security, stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.  At the contact group meeting in Geneva on April 17, 2014, Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and the European Union decided on a number of steps to deescalate the situation in eastern Ukraine, including refraining from further violence or provocative acts.   Since April 17, Russia has done nothing to meet its Geneva commitments and in fact has further escalated the crisis.  Russia’s involvement in the recent violence in eastern Ukraine is indisputable.

The United States made clear it would impose additional costs on Russia if it failed live up to its Geneva commitments and take concrete steps to deescalate the situation in Ukraine.  Consequently, today the United States is imposing targeted sanctions on a number of Russian individuals and entities and restricting licenses for certain U.S. exports to Russia.  The Department of the Treasury is imposing sanctions on seven Russian government officials, including two members of President Putin’s inner circle, who will be subject to an asset freeze and a U.S. visa ban, and 17 companies linked to Putin’s inner circle, which will be subject to an asset freeze.  In addition, the Department of Commerce has imposed additional restrictions on 13 of those companies by imposing a license requirement with a presumption of denial for the export, re-export or other foreign transfer of U.S.-origin items to the companies.  Further, today the Departments of Commerce and State have announced a tightened policy to deny export license applications for any high-technology items that could contribute to Russia’s military capabilities.  Those Departments also will revoke any existing export licenses that meet these conditions.

The international community has been unified in its position that Russia must cease its illegal intervention and provocative actions in Ukraine.  The United States, working closely with its partners, remains prepared to impose still greater costs on Russia if the Russian leadership continues these provocations instead of de-escalating the situation, consistent with its Geneva commitments.  The executive order signed by the President on March 20, 2014, authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to impose sanctions on individuals and entities operating in key sectors of the Russian economy, such as financial services, energy, metals and mining, engineering, and defense.  If there is further Russian military intervention in Ukraine, we are prepared to sanction entities under this authority.