Transcript: Pentagon briefing

SPEAKER: REAR ADMIRAL CRAIG QUIGLEY, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, PUBLIC AFFAIRS

QUIGLEY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I have no announcements this afternoon, but I'm prepared to take your questions.

QUESTION: Craig, there's a report that a U.S. observer on the ground was directing the strike last night in Kuwait and belatedly ordered it to be aborted after the bomb was dropped. We assume that this person was not killed by the bomb, this was after the bomb hit the ground and they realized what had happened, that he called for the strike to be aborted.

QUIGLEY: Is there a question in there somewhere?

QUESTION: Yes. Can you tell us what you know about...

QUIGLEY: You're getting into a level of detail I'm not going to be able to help you with, at this point. Those are all perfectly valid issues for the investigation to look at, Charlie, but I can't provide that level of detail. I don't have it, for starters. And if I did, I think it would be inappropriate at this point to announce such things.

QUESTION: Do you know if the...

QUIGLEY: To me, the most significant issue in the last half hour or so has been the Air Force has released the names of the individuals that were killed and injured. I would expect the Army to have that later on this afternoon as well.

QUESTION: Do you know if the Florida air controller was among the dead?

QUIGLEY: No, I don't. I do not have specific assignments of those either killed or injured.

QUESTION: Can you tell us what you know about the sequence of events?

QUIGLEY: This was a close air support exercise, conducted quarterly as part of Operation Desert Spring. This was the former intrinsic action, which was an ongoing series of exercises with Kuwait and oftentimes involving other countries to develop your inter- operability, your ability to operate with other nations. In this particular case, the exercise was close air support. QUIGLEY: The exercise took place on the Udairi range, which is in Kuwait, controlled by Kuwait, nighttime, happened between 7:00 and 7:30 p.m., local time, there in Kuwait.

It was a fairly large-scale exercise; 80-some sorties, I believe. Eighty-some sorties were scheduled, most of which had been completed by the time of the accident. I believe 79 of the 85 had been completed.

Night vision goggles were used here because it was dark. As best I understand it, weather was not an issue in the area, but darkness had fallen, and the F/A-18 was dr not. They were gravity bombs. The aircraft dropped a total of three Mark 82 bombs. These are 500 pound general purpose bombs. And tragically, they hit near the service members that were at an observation post on the range.

The net result of all that was six killed, a total of seven that were injured. Four of the injured were treated and released. They were two Kuwaitis and two U.S. service members.

QUIGLEY: The remaining four that were injured were seriously injured, were initially taken to the medical facilities there in Kuwait. I understand one has been medevaced by a C-17 to Landstuhl at Ramstein Air Base in Germany to the Landstuhl hospital. The other two remain in Kuwaiti medical facilities. They are stable, but they are not fit to travel yet, due to their injuries. When they are, they also be medevaced to Landstuhl for further medical treatment there.

QUESTION: Those are Americans?

QUIGLEY: These were Americans, yes.

QUESTION: Do you know what the device was used to designate targets? Was it an infrared designator, infrared flashlight? Or was it a laser designator?

QUIGLEY: I do not have that.

QUESTION: Who took part in this exercise? Brits, Americans and Kuwaitis or...

QUIGLEY: Well, the large exercise, the quarterly close air support exercise, was involving airplanes of several nations. It was the British; it was the Americans; it was the Kuwaitis; and I believe the Saudis. I believe, let me double-check that, but this evening's activity was strictly American aircraft.

QUESTION: Strictly Navy, were all those sorties, as you mentioned, the 85 sorties, Navy sorties?

QUIGLEY: Oh, no. The 85 took place over a larger period of time, but the activities yesterday evening, Kuwait time, were only American. It was a night-time...

QUIGLEY: Close air support.

QUESTION: That was over several days?

QUIGLEY: I don't have the time frame.

QUESTION: Do you understand the process by which the forward air controller directed this strike?

QUIGLEY: No, I don't.

QUESTION: Troops on the ground, obviously a New Zealander was killed. Was there a mix of British, New Zealand, Americans, or what was the...

QUIGLEY: No, I believe the only non-Americans that were at this particular observation post were the two Kuwaitis that were injured -- and thankfully their injuries were minor -- and the New Zealand major who was killed.

QUESTION: You said that seven people were injured, and yet you say four were treated and released and four were seriously injured. Now, was it in those seven...

QUIGLEY: Well, the category of one changed from injured to deceased, and so you started off with five that were killed, but eventually that went to six.

The injured, by the way, despite the severity of their injuries, their injuries are not life-threatening. And that is the assessment from the medical folks today.

QUESTION: Were the 85 sorties all close air support sorties or a mix of...

QUIGLEY: No, all close air support.

QUESTION: And did they all drop similar amounts of ordnance?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that, sorry.

QUESTION: And concerning the sequence of events, the bomb dropped based on the direction it got from a ground unit. It did not just drop randomly. Is that correct?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that detail either.

QUESTION: You said the three bombs caused these deaths, right?

QUIGLEY: Yes, this particular aircraft dropped three bombs. And these three bombs, in some combination, caused the deaths and injuries that we have here, yes.

QUESTION: Is it unusual to carry three bombs rather than two or four?

QUIGLEY: No. No, it depends on the training requirements, the needs of the training scenario and things of that sort. There's no particular significance to the number, nor the type of ordnance, except for this particular mission had the three Mark 82 gravity bombs. QUESTION: And they dropped them at the same time or relatively the same time?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that detail either.

QUESTION: Craig, did you say that all three bombs hit at that spot, or did one of them have a malfunction or something and...

QUIGLEY: Well, from the photos that I have seen, it appeared that at least two hit there. I was trying to see a third crater, a third impact point. I can't see but two, but I don't think we have that level of detail.

QUESTION: Do you know, as a part of this close air support exercise, whether the full air control has relied exclusively on some kind of technological guiding or whether there is voice communication with the pilots?

QUIGLEY: There are a variety of ways to do close air support, and it can be voice, it can be laser, it can be infrared. There are just a variety of techniques to accomplish close air support missions. It can be done from a variety of altitudes, a variety of air speeds and things of that sort.

Which ones were being particularly used here as part of this exercise, I don't have that level of detail.

QUESTION: One other question, are you aware of any difference in regulations between the Air Force and the Navy on regulating the communication between the FAC and the pilot, in terms of at what point they're cleared?

QUIGLEY: No, I don't think there are. One of the things that comes under the overall rubric of doing a training exercise of this sort is to standardize the procedures so that the forward air controllers, as well as the air crews of the various nations involved here, get used to -- if there's a difference in procedures, then you get used to those difference in procedures.

QUIGLEY: But I don't believe there's a difference in the process. At least U.S. Air Force versus U.S. Navy, I don't believe there is.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Can you tell us about the pilot?

QUIGLEY: This was the commanding officer of the squadron. Commander Dave Zimmerman was his name. This is Strike Fighter Squadron 37, the VFA-37. He was the pilot of the Hornet.

QUESTION: Can you tell us what altitude the bombs were dropped from?

QUIGLEY: Could I go back? On the question before was which countries had aircraft in the exercise? It was the United Kingdom and the United States. I was too expansive there.

STAFF: And Kuwait.

QUIGLEY: And Kuwait. I'm sorry, not Saudi Arabia. United Kingdom, United States and Kuwait. No Saudis.

QUESTION: Can you tell us what altitude, approximately, the bombs were dropped from?

QUIGLEY: No, I don't have that.

QUESTION: How far away the target was?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that either, I'm sorry. I mean, these are all questions that are going to be a part of the investigation. But I don't have that detail yet.

QUESTION: Will you tell us something about the investigation?

QUIGLEY: The investigation will be headed -- it's coming under the overall coordination of U.S. Central Command, that's General Tommy Franks. And he has appointed Lieutenant General Mike DeLong (ph), U.S. Marine Corps, to head the investigation.

QUIGLEY: Each of the services will be asked to provide a member to be on his team to conduct the investigation, as well as New Zealand and Kuwait have been invited to send a representative. To the best of my knowledge, those nations have not yet responded, but the invitations have been extended.

QUESTION: You said you didn't know if the forward air controller who was in charge of this particular run was among the dead. But just to be clear, the weapons were dropped on the forward air controllers?

QUIGLEY: Yes, yes. It was a situation...

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: ... position that was controlling the...

QUIGLEY: Correct.

QUESTION: Was it...

QUIGLEY: It was specifically Observation Post 10 was the site within the Udairi range.

QUESTION: Was the bomb crew involved or just vehicles? Was there a bunker of...

QUIGLEY: I think there was a small structure that was a part of a range. But from beyond that point, it was vehicles, it was Humvees and other tactical vehicles.

QUESTION: I'm sorry, not meaning to belabor, but just to understand. That was the position where the person who directed the strike was actually physically located?

QUIGLEY: I don't know that for sure, but this was the site of the forward air controller from this observation post, of the forward air controller, the FAC, as a unit. So this should have been the point from which the aircraft were controlled that were actually taking part in the training strike.

QUESTION: Would you describe the OP to us a little better? I mean, were all these people crowded in there in addition to the FAC?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that level of detail.

QUESTION: Was it up high and it did something or said it was almost a tower-like structure? Do we know?

QUIGLEY: I don't know.

QUESTION: Do you know what the intended target was?

QUIGLEY: No, I don't.

QUESTION: Do you know what the home port on the squadron is?

QUIGLEY: I believe Oceana.

QUESTION: Oceana?

QUIGLEY: Yes, Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia.

QUESTION: Craig, you're saying 85 strike sorties, they all drop bombs in a cast-roll. This was the only one that went awry.

QUIGLEY: Well, this was the 79th of the 85, and the others had been done without incident.

QUESTION: Do you have a sense of how many bombs were dropped? And was this an accumulative exercise?

QUIGLEY: No, no other types of ordnance that were used either. I don't have that detail.

QUESTION: Was this a new F-18 by the way -- the EF or the older model?

QUIGLEY: No, this is a C -- a single C model.

QUESTION: What's the status of the pilot? Is he flying? Is it pending the investigation?

QUIGLEY: Nobody from the air wing flew today. But I don't know if -- and that was across the broad for the air wing, but I don't know if his flight status has been changed.

QUESTION: Is that a stand-down?

QUIGLEY: I don't know if I would call it that. I know that they just did not fly today. I don't know how to characterize it for you, though.

QUESTION: It's scheduled to drop bombs today, were they not?

QUIGLEY: It would have been the continuation of the exercise. Six of those sorties were yet to go as part of the overall...

QUESTION: So it was canceled?

QUIGLEY: The rest of the exercise was canceled. Now, I'm not absolutely sure whether that would have completed yesterday evening or not. It's possible that -- there was only six sorties to go, so they could have completed the sixth last night. I don't have that end time for you, I'm sorry. QUESTION: But they stopped when people were killed.

QUIGLEY Oh, yes. Yes. The remaining six sorties were not accomplished as part of the exercise.

QUESTION: Could you just go back on the flights that they're not flying today, how would you -- what is this? If you're not sure you'd call it a stand-down, what would you call it?

QUIGLEY: Well, a stand-down has a very specific purpose in mind. Generally you do a stand-down to conduct something. You focus on a particular issue during the course of your stand-down. It can be a day, it can be longer than a day. And I have not characterized it -- I have not heard a characterization of the air wing not flying today other than that they are not flying today.

QUESTION: But were they scheduled to fly? I mean, were flight ops canceled for whatever reason?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that either.

QUESTION: Typically after an exercise like this, would the air wing fly or would there be a day off?

QUIGLEY: That's a hard one, too. It would depend on -- the schedule could be different each and every time. Had there been no accident, and they would have completed the last few missions as part of the exercise, I don't know what today's flight schedule would have called for. I don't have that detail.

QUESTION: Can you tell us about notification of next of kin and movement of remains back to the United States?

QUIGLEY: The notification of next of kin, I know the Air Force is complete. I know that New Zealand has completed theirs. If the Army has not 100 percent completed it, they're very close, and they do anticipate releasing the names of the killed and injured this afternoon. So if they're not quite there, they will be shortly.

The medical condition of the injured -- I've covered that, I won't go over that again.

And I don't have the details on the movement of remains back to the United States.

QUESTION: Do you have a home of record for Commander Zimmer or Zimmerman, is it?

QUIGLEY: It's Zimmerman, and I'm sorry I don't. The Navy might have that.

QUESTION: Do you happen to now or can you find out how many hours he had in the F/A-18, and how experienced he was in flying CASS (ph)?

QUIGLEY: Well, he was -- I don't know the latter part, but he had approximately 3,000 flight hours in the F/A-18.

QUESTION: Where did the squadron do its pre-deployment air-to- ground work?

QUIGLEY: A variety of places -- Fallon, Vieques, Eglin. I don't know if they had been on the Udairi range before yesterday's accident or not. It's a very frequently-used practice range for aircraft once they are in the Gulf region, but I don't know if this had been their first time there or not.

QUESTION: My understanding is that in the past, pilots have been required to fly this range in the daytime, before they did any night runs. Is that still the case?

QUIGLEY: I believe that is still the case, and it was true with Commander Zimmerman in this particular case. Last Friday, the 9th, he flew a daytime run and actually dropped live ordnance on the Udairi range with a Mark-82 (ph), as a matter of fact. That evening, he flew another run using a practice bomb on the Udairi range. So just three days prior, he had one daytime and then one nighttime close air support training hop.

QUESTION: General Franks is sending this accident investigation forward. Is that, essentially, a safety board? Or would their mission be somewhat broader than a safety board?

QUIGLEY: I don't -- that's a good question. I was going to get that, and I ran out of time before I needed to come out here. I will try to get that for you before the day is done.

QUESTION: This is a matter of procedure. Tell us the responsibilities of a forward air controller to deal with close air support.

QUIGLEY: It is to properly identify targets that aircraft are to engage. It is to provide detailed information to the pilot of the aircraft on location of target, type of target, things of that sort, and to transfer that information to the pilot of the aircraft so that the pilot and the forward air controller are in sync, if you will, and that they're referring to the same target under the same parameters.

And so you try to preclude misunderstandings or the engagement of incorrect targets, where some detail of the mission would be misunderstood by either the aircraft of the forward air controller. Your goal is to synchronize their understanding and then coordinate the activities of the aircraft.

QUESTION: How far was the intended target from the observation?

QUIGLEY: I don't have that, I'm sorry.

QUESTION: What kind of targets are there on the bombing range? Are they old vehicles, structures...

QUIGLEY: You could, conceivably, simply use nothing more than a latitude and longitude as a point target, but there are vehicles, there are carcasses of tanks and other sorts of tactical vehicles throughout the range.

QUESTION: To finish up on the responsibility, who's in charge? When the plane is making its run, who's in charge? Who decides whether it is safe to drop the bomb, whether the plane is on the right target?

QUIGLEY: The forward air controller gives a final communication to the aircraft as to whether or not he is cleared to release ordnance or whether the range is foul, or if there is some other issue that there's any question in the controller's mind, then he should call off the aircraft and not let him release ordnance.

QUESTION: Craig, these are still enlisted people, are they not, and not rated people? When I was in, one of the prerequisites for forward air controllers to be trained in air traffic control. Is that still true today?

QUIGLEY: Well, I think the individuals here -- of course, you had the New Zealand major and the other individuals that were either killed or injured are all noncommissioned officers, so these were experienced folks.

QUESTION: You don't know the prerequisite or the training required for a forward air controller.

QUIGLEY: I do not.

QUESTION: Was the procedure for an air controller -- was he killed in the accident? Was he one of the ones?

QUESTION: Just to go back to the idea that this is interoperability training, now you're doing it like...

QUIGLEY: And proficiency training, also.

QUESTION: Sure.

Can you just explain really how the countries are working with each other during these exercises just to clarify? In Kosovo, they're saying that -- they're talking that interoperability while you're there and seeing -- really just explain how they are working together and how, in this instance, as an example.

QUIGLEY: You need to do -- again, these close air support exercises are done quarterly at the Udairi range specifically because you have not only U.S., but other allied forces moving into and out of the region, you have air crews swapping out within units, and so that you have a constant need to refresh your skills and to refresh the familiarization of interoperability amongst the nations that are doing the training.

QUESTION: Well, I guess, what I'm getting at, I understand that, I guess, in this case, how are you doing it, with people from Britain as far as the sorties going in and out? You know, are we communicating with them? The Kuwaitis are leading this -- they are in control of this area and I'm just curious how the communication level goes.

QUIGLEY: You mean the scheduling and the conduct of the quarterly exercises?

QUESTION: And this -- you know, letting this -- the aircraft drop the bomb is -- you know, they're working together in this whole thing. I'm trying to get an idea of how they're communicating and just the process that they're going through.

QUIGLEY: One of the things that you train to do is, in coalition air operations you try to standardize your procedures.

QUIGLEY: And this was something I talked to a little bit before. But it's making sure that the nomenclature is common, the language is not a barrier between air controllers and air crews. And you try to de-mystify the differences that nations' air forces have come to use over the years, so that you do have a common set of procedures despite the nationalities of the individuals on the ground or in the air. And as a coalition, you can still effectively carry out air combat.

QUESTION: Is it true that the forward air controller -- excuse me if this was already answered -- that the forward air controller tried to abort the mission after the ordnance had been dropped?

QUIGLEY: It was asked, but I don't have the answer to that, I'm sorry.

QUESTION: Craig, who was the forward air controller?

QUIGLEY: I don't have...

QUESTION: Do you know what service?

QUIGLEY: No, I don't, I'm sorry.

QUESTION: Was the man responsible for giving the ultimate order to drop the ordnance, was he killed in this accident?

QUIGLEY: I don't know.

QUESTION: Craig, you said it was a Mark-82 (ph), and it was not a laser-guided bomb?

QUIGLEY: Correct.

QUESTION: Was it a self-flying bomb or a smart bomb or was it a dumb bomb?

QUIGLEY: No, this was a dumb bomb. This was a gravity bomb only. It is a very, very commonly used weapon. It's very low tech and it has been in the inventory for many years. But there's no guidance to this at all except the aerodynamic forces on the fins and the body of the bomb itself.

QUIGLEY: Pilot's skill in placing it properly, given its aerodynamic characteristics.

QUESTION: Who would have been the commanding officer in charge of Desert Spring and was this person observing the exercises as they were going on?

QUIGLEY: I don't think that that person was physically present. It would fall under the overall rubric of the commander of the Joint Task Force Kuwait, because -- I don't have that name. We can get that for you, but I don't have it with me.

QUESTION: Is there a standard procedure, whereby the person using infrared or the laser makes a mark to determine that that is where they are versus the other end where the target is, and is that a point of confusion, at all, confusing the two ends of the laser?

QUIGLEY: Another good question, and that'll be a part of the investigation as to what procedures were in place here. But I don't have that today.

QUESTION: Is it possible that no infrared or laser was used in that, just coordinates were radioed to the pilot and that he then make a calculation about where the drop...

QUIGLEY: There are a variety of ways that you can designate a target to an aircraft; daytime, nighttime, there's just a variety of ways to do that. But which one was in use here, I don't have that.

QUESTION: Was the team that the bomb came too close and killed the members, were they involved in some of the prior 79 sorties where there was no incident?

QUIGLEY: I don't know. I don't know.

QUESTION: Different subject?

QUIGLEY: A couple more on that one.

QUESTION: A couple of things. One, does the Pentagon have statistics on how many deaths have been caused by errant bombs in live fire training over, say, the last 10 years?

QUIGLEY: Not readily available. We probably go to the services, I would imagine, and take a look at some of the safety statistics and some of the accident reports and compile that. But I don't know where it would exist today. I mean, that could be brought together, but I don't think it exists -- in one location, anyway.

QUESTION: And then, secondly, can you explain the benefits of using live fire as opposed to just duds?

QUIGLEY: A variety of benefits of using live fire, both for the air crews involved and for the handlers that would load them on aircraft, whether it would be Navy or Air Force or Marine Corps aircraft. If I'm using a piece of practice ordnance, which is much physically smaller but it's aerodynamically identical, so if I'm the pilot of a single-seat Hornet, I can practice my techniques quite well with inert ordnance.

But if I'm a handler on the flight deck or on the flight line, it's a very different process, much larger, and there's that sense of realism, that this is a live piece of ordnance. And I can't replicate that, knowing that this is a training shape that is identical perhaps in size and shape and weight to a piece of ordnance, but I know that it's got cement or steel or something that gives it heft, but it does not explode. So I have, for the handlers of the ordnance, the very real training benefit of using the live ordnance either on the flight deck or the flight line.

Now if I'm an air crew member, I have certain procedures that I can -- there is value in using inert ordnance to train. There is, indeed. And we've done that for many years, and it's a good procedure to use. But, again, you have that sense that I have real ordnance under my wings. And it's an added incentive to take one more check, to double-check your procedures and things of that sort before I release live ordnance.

And in certain other circumstances, you also have troops on the ground, whether they be soldiers or Marines or something, that would have the combined noise and activity of using live ordnance versus inert ordnance in the vicinity of the training.

So both are needed, but both play very different roles, but very important roles.

QUESTION: Admiral, in a exercise like this, would a pilot typically make a run past the target without dropping bombs, then come back and hit the target?

QUIGLEY: Yes, and I believe that was the case here, although I don't know how many times that he had done an orbit of the particular site. But this was the only one that he actually had released ordnance. But it -- he had done an orbit of the vicinity before the actual run where he released the ordnance.

QUESTION: Was the pilot involved in the accident -- did he have the opportunity to train on Vieques in December as part of the last air squadron that trained in Vieques?

QUIGLEY: Well, not with live ordnance, certainly.

QUESTION: But did he train in Vieques in December?

QUIGLEY: I believe so. We'll double-check on that.

QUESTION: Is the fact that live ordnance training is not allowed in Vieques, according to the current agreement, a factor in any way in this accident?

QUIGLEY: I can't really say. Without knowing what the cause of the accident is, I can't make that claim today.

QUESTION: To put it another way, though, did they drop live ordnance in their work-up process, which in the old days would have been in Vieques, before they got to the Persian Gulf?

QUIGLEY: I believe they trained with live ordnance at Fallon, Nevada. Eglin is inert. Vieques is inert. I'm not aware of what training they may have accomplished en route to the Gulf along the way, although some of the sites that naval gunfire ships have used in the past -- Cape Wrath, Capo Delado (ph) -- places like that -- just aren't suitable for air-to-ground ordnance training.

QUESTION: Flying off the deck of a carrier, this may have been the first time in the voyage of this particular ship that these folks have used live ordnance?

QUIGLEY: I just don't know that for sure. I'm sorry.

Different subject? Any others? QUESTION: Follow-up: In light of the accident, is the resumption of live-fire in Vieques on the table during the current discussions that are taking place between the secretary and the governor of Puerto Rico?

QUIGLEY: The secretary and the governor have agreed to not hold their discussions publicly, and both are committed to doing that and are continuing to do that.

QUESTION: The governor of Puerto Rico has stated quite publicly in Puerto Rico that her stated goal, at least her public goal, is immediate and permanent cessation of all bombing in Vieques. Is that on the table in this part of the current discussions?

QUIGLEY: I think that it is two very different topics.

Yes?

QUESTION: We know what the secretary told us last week, when he was here with the NATO secretary general, about not speaking to the Army on the black beret issue, but since then, have there been any high-level discussions with General Shinseki trying to dissuade him from issuing black berets to soldiers on June 14?

QUIGLEY: The deputy secretary, Dr. Paul Wolfowitz, is looking into that issue and will provide his recommendations to the secretary.

QUESTION: A follow-up: General Shinseki has offered some weeks ago to brief the secretary on this topic. Has such a meeting been held, scheduled or anything like that? Have there been any other communications, directly, between the Army and the secretary?

QUIGLEY: They have not, no.

QUESTION: The White House announced that Victoria Clark (ph) is going to be nominated to be spokesperson here. I haven't seen the announcement. She will be nominated as an assistant secretary for public affairs?

QUIGLEY: Correct, yes, the announcement from the White House today -- just for everyone's information, we do have biographies on both, and I'm sure you could go the White House web page and get them as well. But both the assistant secretary for public affairs and the DOD general counsel, the announcements today were for the intent to nominate those individuals to those positions.

QUESTION: Does Dr. Wolfowitz have a deadline to report to the secretary on the black beret? And has the secretary responded to Senator Warner's letter on this?

QUIGLEY: Let me take the second one first. He has not. The letter came in overnight. He has seen the letter, but he has not yet responded to the chairman in that regard.

And there is no particular deadline that the secretary has asked Dr. Wolfowitz to complete this by, but neither is he going to let this tarry too long. He'll move it along pretty quick.

QUESTION: One more follow-up on that. It's really a double issue, in a sense, as, one, the overall issue of the berets, but is Dr. Wolfowitz also looking into the time frame which necessitated the Army seeking a waiver and going outside the United States to six other nations to make the bulk of these berets, and one of these nations being China and some other former Eastern European nations? Is he checking that, too, to see why we're doing that?

QUIGLEY: No, I understand the thrust of your question. There are several different facets to this overall topic, and the deputy secretary has been asked to take a look at each of them and come back holistically to the secretary with his recommendations.

QUESTION: In other words, he is not only looking into who is making the berets, but whether, in fact, the whole Army should be wearing the berets?

QUIGLEY: Well, I don't want to get into too much detail. His charter is very broad, but it is to just say, "I want you to look into this and come back to me with your recommendation."

QUIGLEY: There's several aspects of that. The issue of the berets themselves, the contracting issues involved. It's all part of the look that he will take at the program.

Yes?

QUESTION: Before President Clinton left office, he issued a directive ordering the secretary of defense to provide a report by March 9 on the training that the Navy will obtain for the next two years as part of the Vieques agreement or according to the Vieques agreement. Has that report already been issued?

QUIGLEY: I don't know. Let me take that. We will find out the answer to that question.

QUESTION: Is there any comment on the signed agreement between Serbian military officials and Albanian secessionists in the south part of Serbia?

QUIGLEY: We see that particular piece of that as an important part, but only a part of the overall effort to bring peace to the Balkans. KFOR's decision is to allow elements of the Serb military back into what's called Sector Charlie East. This is a piece of territory, roughly five kilometers by five kilometers, that is at the southeast corner of the ground security zone.

This has been an area where there's been a lot of traffic back and forth by extremists, by smugglers. And it's been -- because it goes right up into the ground safety zone in which there could have been no Serb military forces up to this point, nor KFOR forces had been, it was kind of a free zone. And once you got across the border there and into the ground safety zone, you had quite a ways that you could go with very little risk of being stopped or caught.

Now the agreement to move Serb military forces, with certain restrictions as to their armaments and procedures that we'll use, into that area, that Sector Charlie East, it is hoped that that free pass up the ground safety zone will stop. And the signing of the agreement that you referred to is an important element of that.

QUIGLEY: And we hope, again, the overall goal here is to stop the movement of both criminals and extremists up into that part of the ground safety zone and, hopefully, speed up the process of bringing peace to the Balkans.

QUESTION: One follow-up. It was reported extensively in Athens today that the U.S. is planning to deploy military forces on a bilateral basis in the north part of Greece in the framework of the Balkan crisis. Anything on that?

QUIGLEY: I have not heard that at all.

QUESTION: You take my question, it's...

QUIGLEY: Yes, I have heard nothing of that, though.

QUESTION: Craig, as a housekeeping measure, can you give us a sense of when the B-22 blue ribbon panel hopes to back up its report? Early April, May-April, into May?

QUIGLEY: I don't think they've limited themselves to the portion of April, but I think their intentions are April, but I have not heard a date. I don't think they've actually said one.

QUESTION: Are they going to brief the secretary first and then you're going to roll the report out publicly?

QUIGLEY: Yes.

QUESTION: Are the ongoing discussions on Vieques continuing at the level of Mr. de Leon, Mr. Wolfowitz or the secretary?

QUIGLEY: No, Dr. Wolfowitz and Mr. de Leon.

QUESTION: And is limiting training in Vieques on the table?

QUIGLEY: Their discussions are very wide-ranging, and I'm just not going to characterize them in any way, to try to abide by what the governor and the secretary have each pledged to do and that is to hold their discussions privately. And when they have something to announce publicly, then they will do so.

Thank you.

See related sites about US

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window

External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.