Anonymously contributed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting, this may have legs, lucky for LLNL that Cat I/II SNM is now gone...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pentagon should take over nuclear plant security: lawmaker
September 21, 2012 - Roberta Rampton - Reuters
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Defense Department should take over security for U.S. nuclear weapons sites after a nuclear complex was broken into with ease in July by an 82-year-old nun and two other peace activists, a top lawmaker in the U.S. House of Representatives said on Friday.
Mike Turner, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services panel that oversees the Energy Department's nuclear weapons complex, has drafted legislation to put the U.S. military in charge of protecting facilities like the Y-12 complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
"The fact that this vulnerability is so widely known has got to be addressed," Turner said in an interview.
The Y-12 facility, built after the September 11, 2001, attacks, had been previously touted as "the Fort Knox of uranium" and was supposed to be one of the most secure facilities in the United States.
But in July, the three anti-nuclear activists cut through several fences and vandalized a building which holds the U.S. stockpile of highly enriched uranium used to make nuclear bombs.
An internal Energy Department watchdog found guards ignored motion sensors because they were routinely triggered by wildlife, and a security camera that should have shown the break-in had been broken for about six months.
The National Nuclear Security Administration, part of the Energy Department, is continuing to investigate what went wrong with its oversight of contractors.
The facility is run by Babcock & Wilcox Co, and WSI Oak Ridge, owned by G4S, provides security. Their contracts are being reviewed, and a number of personnel have been removed from their jobs.
"We have seen just an absolute failure of security at Y-12. We believe from our classified briefing that this is system-wide, that NNSA and (Energy Department) are incapable of providing the level of security necessary for our nuclear weapons facilities," Turner said.
Turner, who has spent a decade monitoring issues with the Energy Department's management of the complex, said he does not believe the NNSA can fix the issues that allowed for the incursion.
Putting the Pentagon in charge would increase security, allow for better technology and weapons to be used in protecting facilities, and eliminate any interdepartmental issues in sharing classified intelligence about threats, he said.
Turner's bill also would charge the Pentagon with securing the transportation of nuclear materials between facilities.
"I am more concerned about the transport than I am the facilities, and the facilities have already shown to be highly vulnerable," he said.
Turner has so far gathered about six Republican cosponsors for his bill, which he hopes to see become part of the annual defense policy legislation when the Senate and House finalize it after the November 6 election.
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
Comments
Not at sites like PX (Nukes,NE’s, Pits) –“Denial” is the Protection Strategy. At these sites “Containment” applies only after “Denial” has failed.
Not sure about DOD but I think it’s similar –“no unauthorized use” = “no hand-on”. Perhaps others can clarify.
Meeting a “Denial” strategy is a lot more difficult than “Containment”.
That dog don't hunt.
"They routinely "beat" the opposing (DOE/NNSA) forces in mock "force-on-force" exercises."
LOL – I’ve participated in lots of FOF exercises, computer based simulations, table-tops, etc. If your pro-force routinely beats these, you’ve got poorly scoped scenarios or someone's cheating (does Y12 sound familiar?)
I thought the US Marines were in charge of overseas embassy security and protection. Did this change?
Private... as in the yahoo's that how run our NNSA labs. Any wonder the security was poorly executed? We've even started to "Bechtel-ize" our embassy security!
IN GENERAL.—The Atomic Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 4508 the following new section:
‘‘SEC. 4509. PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NUCLEAR MATERIAL BY THE ARMED FORCES.
(a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator for Nuclear Security, shall ensure that category 0 and category I special nuclear material of the National Nuclear Security Administration is protected by the Armed Forces in accordance with subsection (b).
(b) LEVEL OF PROTECTION.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the protection provided pursuant to subsection (a) is equivalent to the protection provided by the Secretary for nuclear weapons of the Armed Forces, including with respect to policies, threat scenarios, training requirements, performance testing, and reviews.’’