September 13, 2013

Nation's bloated nuclear spending comes under fire

Virtually every major project under the National Nuclear Security Administration's oversight is behind schedule and over budget.

By Jeri Clausing and Matthew Daly / The Associated Press

LOS ALAMOS, N.M. — At Los Alamos National Laboratory, a seven-year, $213 million upgrade to the security system that protects the lab's most sensitive nuclear bomb-making facilities doesn't work. Those same facilities, which sit atop a fault line, remain susceptible to collapse and dangerous radiation releases, despite millions more spent on improvement plans.

click image to enlarge

Aerial view shows the Los Alamos National laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M. It is built in an area that is susceptible to earthquakes.

AP

In Tennessee, the price tag for a new uranium processing facility has grown nearly sevenfold in eight years to upward of $6 billion because of problems that include a redesign to raise the roof. And the estimated cost of an ongoing effort to refurbish 400 of the country's B61 bombs has grown from $1.5 billion to $10 billion.

Virtually every major project under the National Nuclear Security Administration's oversight is behind schedule and over budget — the result, watchdogs and government auditors say, of years of lax accountability and nearly automatic annual budget increases for the agency responsible for maintaining the nation's nuclear stockpile.

The NNSA has racked up $16 billion in cost overruns on 10 major projects that are a combined 38 years behind schedule, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reports. Other projects have been cancelled or suspended, despite hundreds of millions of dollars already spent, because they grew too bloated.

Advocates say spending increases are necessary to keep the nation's nuclear arsenal operating and safe, and to continue cutting-edge research at the nation's nuclear labs. But critics say the nuclear program — run largely by private contractors and overseen by the NNSA, an arm of the U.S. Energy Department — has turned into a massive jobs program with duplicative functions.

"The post-Cold War nuclear warhead complex has become a gigantic self-licking ice cream cone for contractors," said Greg Mello of the Los Alamos Study Group, a watchdog organization.

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security financial and contracting oversight subcommittee, said a key problem is the Energy Department's reliance on private contractors to carry out its mission. The DOE has fewer than 16,000 employees and more than 92,000 contractors.

"Unfortunately for the taxpayer ... cost overruns, scheduled delays and technical failures are the rule, not the exception," said McCaskill, D-Mo. "We need to find a better way to do this because we can't just afford the status quo anymore."

The retired head of one of those contractors, former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine, told Congress this spring that the absence of day-to-day accountability and an ineffectual structure at the NNSA pose a national security risk. He described a "pervasive culture of tolerating the intolerable and accepting the unacceptable."

DOE and NNSA officials agree there are problems. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said earlier this month that addressing the cost overruns, and also embarrassing security breaches at some facilities, is a top priority. A congressionally appointed panel, co-chaired by Augustine recently began studying a potential overhaul of the NNSA.

Moniz acknowledged some projects had seen "substantial cost overruns" and said he considers the review by the panel "a good chance to ... have this dialogue and reach a conclusion."

An NNSA spokesman referred The Associated Press to congressional testimony by the agency's project and acquisitions manager, Bob Raines, who said projects completed in the last two years had met cost goals and finished under budget.

"We are making progress," Raines testified in March before a House subcommittee.

(Continued on page 2)

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors




Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)