The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability finds Congressionally mandated Nuclear Posture Report supports more money and less accountability. > Alliance for Nuclear Accountability

Current Articles | Search | Syndication

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability finds Congressionally mandated Nuclear Posture Report supports more money and less accountability.

published Wednesday, May 06, 2009

4851 Views

Media Release
For Immediate Release
May 6, 2009
Contact:

Nickolas Roth
914-673-6666

Susan Gordon
505-577-8438

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability finds Congressionally mandated Nuclear Posture Report supports more money and less accountability.

The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States released a report today that fails to support President Obama’s commitment to move towards a world free of nuclear weapons and contains proposals that would undermine his vision and nonproliferation efforts.

While the Commission endorsed positive steps like a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, the idea of reducing the nuclear stockpile, and strengthening nonproliferation efforts, it failed to endorse the necessary steps the United States must take to lead the way. Notably, the report did not endorse deep stockpile reductions and also failed to endorse ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

The report endorsed the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) unnecessary proposal for Complex Transformation and stated that NNSA’s stance that Complex Transformation will not require increased funding is patently wrong. In fact, the Commission calls on Congress to guarantee a steady stream of money at higher levels than in the past.

Alternatives to Complex Transformation, like Curatorship, were not examined. Curatorship would downsize the nuclear weapons complex while maintaining the arsenal safely and reliably while it awaits dismantlement. Unlike the current program to maintain U.S. nuclear weapons and the program the Commission recommends, Curatorship would only allow changes that were absolutely necessary to maintain the safety and reliability of the stockpile.

“If the Commission supports reducing the stockpile and decreased reliance on nuclear weapons, then it should not support new facilities to build new nuclear weapons. This would send the wrong message to the rest of the world by allowing the United States to maintain and potentially expand its nuclear weapons capability,” said Nick Roth, Program Director of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability.

The Strategic Posture Review report contains other alarming recommendations. Specifically, the recommendations to amend the National Nuclear Security Administration Act to establish the NNSA as a separate agency and in the process remove or eliminate outside oversight of their activities. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board has provided important feedback to NNSA concerning safety of buildings, for example seismic issues, working to strengthen safety for workers and the public.

Susan Gordon, ANA director said, “Suggesting that NNSA should not be subjected to the rules that govern the Department of Energy would leave the fox guarding the hen house with no external review. Past experience has shown that ‘self regulation means no regulation’.”

The three nuclear weapons laboratories – Lawrence Livermore, Sandia and Los Alamos – have all lost their original contracts under non-profit universities. They are now operated by profit driven corporations. Giving NNSA further autonomy under private corporations with no supervision could lead to lack of accountability with no enforcement mechanisms.

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability is a national network of organizations mostly located down-wind and down-stream from the Department of Energy’s (DOE) nuclear weapons production and dump sites. These groups have been watch-dogging the DOE and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) for decades working to hold them accountable to U.S. nuclear policy and environmental laws.