U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policies And the LANL SiteWide EIS

1
U.S. Nuclear Weapons PoliciesAnd the LANL
Site-Wide EIS
Jay Coghlan, Executive Director Scott Kovac,
Program Director John Witham, Communications
Director August 2, 3, 5, 2006, Taos, Dixon
Eldorado, NM The purpose of this presentation is
to help encourage citizen opposition to the U.S.
current nuclear weapons policies and the role
that the Los Alamos National Laboratory plays in
them.
2
Mission Statement
The mission of Nuclear Watch of New Mexico is to
provide timely and accurate information to the
public on nuclear issues in New Mexico and the
Southwest and thereby help promote effective
citizen action on environmental issues and
nuclear weapon policies. Nuclear Watch is proud
to be a member of the Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability www.nuclear.org.
3
Why a Site-Wide EIS?
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
requires that complex federal sites like the the
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) have new
site-wide environmental impact statements every
10 years, and review them for currency after 5
years. The National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) has decided to prepare a
new Site-Wide EIS for continued operations at
the Lab. This is due to proposed expanded
nuclear weapons activities on top of previously
expanded nuclear weapons activities and
environmental changes (e.g., the Cerro Grande
Fire)
4
What Expanded Nuclear Weapons Activities?
Los Alamos is using this Site-Wide EIS to, among
other things Quadruple from 20 to 80 per
year the production of plutonium pits, the atomic
triggers for todays modern thermonuclear
weapons. Increased production will just under
double the radioactive bomb wastes that will
travel on public highways to WIPP, the worlds
only geologic dump for bomb wastes,
coincidentally also in NM. Increase
storage capacity for special nuclear materials,
mainly plutonium to 7.3 tons. LANL had 3 tons
of plutonium in 1994 . NNSA specifically
rejected a greener alternative because it
would not support the nuclear weapons mission
assigned to LANL.
5
New Nuclear Weapon Facilities
Under the LANL Site-Wide EIS the Lab would
Build a Center for Weapons Physics (350,000
square feet) Build eleven 2-story replacement
buildings in Technical Area-3 Build a
Radiological Science Institute (up to 13 new
buildings) Upgrade the Radioactive Liquid
Waste Treatment Facility Refurbish the Los
Alamos Neutron Science Center Build a
Radiography Facility at the pit production site
Refurbish the plutonium pit production
facility Build a 400,000 square foot Science
Center Expand its computing center
(51,000,000 gallons H2O/year) No costs are
given. Demolition of existing structures would
produce up to 1,740 cubic yards of radioactive
WIPP wastes, 153,000 cubic yards of low level
radioactive wastes, and 4,300,000 pounds of
chemical wastes.
6
No Action
So called No Action under the LANL Site-Wide
EIS includes Construction of a new plutonium
facility costing up to 1 billion called the
Chemical and Metallurgical Research Building
Replacement Project (CMRR). Future operation
of an advanced facility that would research
bioweapons agents such as anthrax and plague,
purportedly for defensive purposes. However,
because we sued, those operations are subject to
a separate pending EIS, expected soon.
7
Los Alamos Permanent Site for Plutonium Pit
Production?
Congress rejected funding for a super bomb
plant, proposed to be built at one of 4
candidate sites other than Los Alamos, capable of
450 plutonium pits per year. Victory for the good
guys, but will boomerang on Los Alamos.
Domenicis budget committee noted that new
weapons plutonium facilities other than Los
Alamos are financially unlikely. His
committee ordered NNSA to study expanding the
mission of LANLs new plutonium facility. CMRR
will be located next to existing plutonium pit
production facility, and could enable yet higher
production rates over the years.
8
Nuclear Weapons Complex Map
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
One Environmental Note
The LANL Site-Wide EIS correctly leaves many
future cleanup decisions to the NM Environment
Department. However, the Site-Wide EIS does state
that if full cleanup were to occur, it would
result in 22,000 cubic yards of WIPP wastes
1 million cubic yards low level radioactive
wastes 180,000 cubic yards mixed low level
wastes 97 million pounds of chemical
wastes This would be over 100,000 offsite
shipments. Why make more wastes from expanding
nuclear weapons programs?
12
A Brief Post Cold War History of U.S. Nuclear
Weapons Policies
13
Opportunity Missed Gone
Nuclear Posture Reviews 1994 Reduced delivery
systems, not nuclear warheads. No new-design
nuclear warhead production. Good news
Fully implement nuclear arms control agreements
and NPT NonProliferation Treaty, BWC
Biological Weapons Convention , and CWC
Chemical Weapons Convention. 2001 Expanded
the rationale for potential use of nuclear
weapons and targeting from 2 countries to 7.
Mandated capability to certify new warheads in
response to new national requirements and
maintain readiness to resume underground nuclear
testing if required." Called for the Robust
Nuclear Earth Penetrator and lower-yield, more
usable nuclear weapons.
14
It Gets Worse

May 2002 Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty
Russia and U.S. to each go down to 2,200 or under
deployed nuclear weapons. Treaty expires
December 31, 2012, unless extended. No
verification. Either party can withdraw at
anytime with 3 months notice. No mandate for
irreversible dismantlements. Omits tactical
battlefield nuclear weapons. May 2002 National
Security Strategy assumes right to pre-emptive
war. Pentagons March 2005 draft Doctrine for
Joint Nuclear Operations Geographic combatant
commanders may request Presidential approval for
use of nuclear weapons for (e) For rapid
and favorable war termination on US terms.
(f) To ensure success of US and multinational
operations. Draft was withdrawn after adverse
national and international publicity.
15
The 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty
Article VI Each of the Parties to the Treaty
undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith
on effective measures relating to cessation of
the nuclear arms race at an early date and to
nuclear disarmament... In 1996, the
International Court of Justice ruled that the use
or threat of use of nuclear weapons was illegal,
except for dire national survival, and concrete
steps toward disarmament were required. 2000 NPT
Review Conference nuclear weapons signatories
pledged to 13 specific disarmament steps.
16
What has the Bush Administration done?
Unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty, potentially leading to a resumed
nuclear arms race with Russia. Blocked a
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Targeted
non-nuclear weapons states with nuclear weapons,
giving them additional incentive to acquire
nuclear weapons (e.g., Iran and North Korea).
Made a nuclear deal with India, a NPT
non-signatory. Declared the self-appointed
right to pre-emptive war, including nuclear
war. Started pursuing new-design weapons
through the Reliable Replacement Warhead.
17
The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program
In 2005 Congress created the RRW Program for
improving the long-term safety, reliability, and
security of the U.S. nuclear weapons
stockpile. Despite 68 billion invested, NNSA
and weapons labs say the Stockpile Stewardship
Program is no longer sustainable. Linton
Brooks, head of NNSA, to US Senate, April 2005
The Cold War legacy stockpile may also be the
wrong stockpile from a military perspective and
we can develop RRW by 2012-2015. Linton Brooks
at Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, March 2006 the
RRW can adapt an existing weapon within 18 months
and design, develop and begin production of that
new design within 3-4 years we can respond
quickly to changing military requirements.
18
Existing U.S. Nuclear Weapons Are Reliable
More than 1,000 tests. Lab directors have
certified reliability since 1992. Most
components are non-nuclear and can be tested in
labs. Senior scientists say there are
straightforward ways of guaranteeing
reliability, such as more tritium
replenishment. To nuclear war planners,
reliability is whether a weapons yield is 5
of design, not if it actually explodes. The
stockpile is healthy, it is reliable. It meets
all the safety standards, it is ready to go, and
it will kill you You think our weapons don't
work? Go stand under one. But don't take your
wife and kids." Bob Peurifoy, retired Sandia
nuclear weapons scientist, March 12, 2006
19
What can concerned citizens do?
Vote!!! Watchdawg says if you dont vote, dont
itch. Hassle your congressional delegation,
make your opinions known, write letters to the
editor, etc. Most importantly, DONT MOURN,
ORGANIZE!!!
Submit comments on the LANL Site-Wide EIS by
September 5 (well have sample comments on our
website not later than August 30). Argue that
money spent on US nuclear weapons is better spent
on true long-term national security threats, such
as energy independence, global climate change,
natural disasters, health care needs and true
nuclear weapons nonproliferation by
example. Stayed informed, tune in, and support
us at WWW.NUKEWATCH.ORG. Our children,
grandchildren, and their kids deserve better than
nuclear weapons.
20
Why Bother to Submit Comments?
Federal agencies are required to respond to
comments. As a result, the public gets more,
often difficult to get information. It also helps
create more extensive public legal record.
Citizen comment compelled Los Alamos to include
wildfire risks in its final 1999 Site-Wide EIS.
Nine months later the Cerro Grande Fire broke
out. Risk analysis arguably helped prevent
serious contamination. Federal agencies are
required to look at reducing adverse
environmental effects. This can result in
greater protection. Lack of comment on policy
just emboldens the nuclear weaponeers. However,
comments for the LANL Site-Wide EIS on policies
are ultimately just one step in what needs to be
a broader movement.
21
Where Do I Submit Comments?
By mail to Ms. Elizabeth Withers LANL SWEIS
Document Manager National Nuclear Security
Administration Los Alamos Site Office 528 35th
Street, Los Alamos, New Mexico, 87544 By fax
to [phone] By e-mail to
LANL_SWEIS_at_doeal.gov By telephone for
recording to 877.491.4957 Do it not later
than September 5!
22
Public Hearings
Tuesday, August 8, 630 - 930 p.m. Fuller
Lodge 2132 Central Avenue, Los Alamos
Wednesday, August 9 (Nagasaki Day!), 630 - 930
p.m., Northern New Mexico Community College
(Eagle Memorial Sportsplex), 921 Paseo de
Oñate, Española. Thursday, August 10, 630
- 930 p.m. Santa Fe Community College Main
Building, Jemez Rooms 6401 Richards Avenue, Santa
Fe.
23
Keeping It Real
President Bush has declared all options are on
the table when it comes to dealing with alleged
Iranian nuclear facilities. Should there be
a U.S. nuclear strike against Iran, the weapon of
choice would probably be an earth-penetrator
designed to destroy underground targets. It
would inevitably cause massive collateral damage
and widespread fallout. That earth-penetrator
is a variant of a Los Alamos design, weaponized
by Sandia, and produced by the weapons complex.