Weapons Complex Monitor
November 27, 2012
Albuquerque Journal Urges Consideration of NNSA Dismantlement
Noting a string of security lapses and project management blunders, the Albuquerque Journal urged a bipartisan commission proposed by a pair of Senators to strongly consider scrapping the National Nuclear Security Administration in an editorial published Nov. 25. “The agency’s track record is appalling,” the Journal wrote. “Not only is it a questionable duplication to the DOE, it has turned the nuclear weapons complex into a bureaucratic quagmire that defies attempts at efficiency. Its inability to move forward with essential projects is itself a threat to our nuclear security.” Sens. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) are planning to offer an amendment to the Senate version of the Fiscal Year 2013 Defense Authorization Act that would establish an “advisory panel” to study governance options for the NNSA, which has been beset by problems on major projects like the Uranium Processing Facility and a security upgrade at Los Alamos National Laboratory, endured an embarrassing security breach at the Y-12 National Security Complex, and angered some Republicans by deferring work on the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility at Los Alamos. The creation of the advisory panel would allow a compromise on controversial NNSA reform language that is in the House version of the Defense Authorization Act but has met resistance in the Senate. “Congress should approve the panel but demand a report with clear recommendations that either put this turkey on the chopping block or figure out how to make it earn its feed,” the Journal wrote.
The Journal’s suggestions appear to have at least some support. The newspaper quoted retiring Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) on the prospects of eliminating the NNSA, perhaps in favor of a move to the Pentagon or the creation of a standalone agency operating outside of the Department of Energy. “I’ve always had problems with the NNSA as another level of bureaucracy between the secretary of energy and the labs,” Bingaman said, according to the Journal. “It doesn’t give me any heartburn to think that we would revisit the decision to set up the NNSA. I think it would make some sense.”
November 27, 2012
Albuquerque Journal Urges Consideration of NNSA Dismantlement
Noting a string of security lapses and project management blunders, the Albuquerque Journal urged a bipartisan commission proposed by a pair of Senators to strongly consider scrapping the National Nuclear Security Administration in an editorial published Nov. 25. “The agency’s track record is appalling,” the Journal wrote. “Not only is it a questionable duplication to the DOE, it has turned the nuclear weapons complex into a bureaucratic quagmire that defies attempts at efficiency. Its inability to move forward with essential projects is itself a threat to our nuclear security.” Sens. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) are planning to offer an amendment to the Senate version of the Fiscal Year 2013 Defense Authorization Act that would establish an “advisory panel” to study governance options for the NNSA, which has been beset by problems on major projects like the Uranium Processing Facility and a security upgrade at Los Alamos National Laboratory, endured an embarrassing security breach at the Y-12 National Security Complex, and angered some Republicans by deferring work on the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement-Nuclear Facility at Los Alamos. The creation of the advisory panel would allow a compromise on controversial NNSA reform language that is in the House version of the Defense Authorization Act but has met resistance in the Senate. “Congress should approve the panel but demand a report with clear recommendations that either put this turkey on the chopping block or figure out how to make it earn its feed,” the Journal wrote.
The Journal’s suggestions appear to have at least some support. The newspaper quoted retiring Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) on the prospects of eliminating the NNSA, perhaps in favor of a move to the Pentagon or the creation of a standalone agency operating outside of the Department of Energy. “I’ve always had problems with the NNSA as another level of bureaucracy between the secretary of energy and the labs,” Bingaman said, according to the Journal. “It doesn’t give me any heartburn to think that we would revisit the decision to set up the NNSA. I think it would make some sense.”
Comments
UC had a sweet deal going on for decades managing the design labs by benign neglect, and it was thrown out due mostly to the screwups at LANL. In replacement a sweet deal was going on for the past several years for the new operators. Once again, it looks like it is going to get screwed up. And guess what, the main cause is our old friend LANL.
Ground hog day, all over again.
Ground hog day, all over again.
November 29, 2012 5:54 PM
No worries, Anastasio, McMillan, and Knapp (all "from Livermore") are have been "turning everything around' at Los Alamos. Thanks Livermore!
You're welcome! What a great opportunity that was to raise the average at both sites!
It is time for HBS to do a case study on how to destroy from within national treasures that were the target of so many former enemies espionage.
But think about how the lab manipulated politicians and the media to buy into the 10-year fusion pilot plant idea, really becoming an embarassment to this country. We are the laughing stock of the academic community for the way NIF scientists are "turning the knobs" as a principal way of performing science and pursuing discovery. Using reasons like "but the code says this," yet are unable to explain what is in the code, what models, what assumptions and constraints, what numerical approach, nothing but a befuddled and whimpering reply.
Dismantle NNSA? yeah sure. But just remember to take out the other trash also, while we're at it. Do it all at once. Get all the unpleasantness over all in one fell swoop.
December 1, 2012 9:02 AM
Illegal under current law (Atomic Energy Act).
December 1, 2012 2:13 PM
Red Herring: "something intended to divert attention from the real problem or matter at hand; a misleading clue."
So how is this a "red herring"?? It is a fact that the AEA transferred design and development of nuclear weapons to the AEC and therefore to its successors ERDA and DOE. There is no provision in US law for the DoD to control those activities. All those who want to work for DoD, raise your hands. You are idiots for wanting to be US government employees. When DoD is cut 25% by sequestration, you will change your tune. Government employees are cheap fodder for debt reduction. Contractors keep the government running.
A Congressional Budget Office study published in January found that the federal retirement package was 2.7 times more generous than what is paid by large private-sector firms.
December 2, 2012 8:51 AM
Only relevant if you retain your government job through the upcoming sequester, and the equally severe cuts to follow.
December 2, 2012 8:51 AM
But is it 2.7 times more generous than TCP-1?
I agree wholeheartedly. I don't know if it is the principal cause of the problem, but it must be a major factor.
and you wonder why taxpayers don't want to pay more?
Here is a great first compromise to start the ball rolling.
Nobody loses their job and the budget deficit for 2013 drops by $100B.
Another $100B from high earners per O'bama.
Raise retirement age to 70 and the medicare age to 68 for all under 50 and another $200b is saved.
Growth in revenues gets $100B and you are 1/2 way there.
A 2% non-compensation mandated reduction gets another $30b.
Getting out of Afghan gets $50B.
An easy 60% reduction in the yearly deficit by a fool in an armchair. What the hell do the federal elected officials do with their time? This is easy.
December 2, 2012 4:56 PM
Yep, nothing like a pretty skit.
Everyone knows that severe cuts in government spending are going to be necessary. The longer we wait to take reparative action, the more severe the cuts will be when they are finally implemented. I'll take 4:53's plan. At least it gets things moving, minimizes painful job losses and starts us in the right direction. Our nation is in serious decline and needs to pull out of the budgetary nose dive.
December 4, 2012 6:29 PM
Yes, but that in no way means that they will actually be done. They are politically impossible.