Fairfield Enterprises

Frank,
Since you get contacted by lots of people, here is some information.

I still have lots of jobs available, local and non local, to motivated job seekers.

You can pass this message on and have people contact me as appropriate.

Later,
Eric

--
Eric Fairfield, Ph.D.

President
Fairfield Enterprises
P.O. Box 1366
Los Alamos, NM 87544
505-662-3115
Eric.Fairfield@gmail.com

Trinity's 63rd Anniversary

There is nothing I can say about the Trinity test that hasn't already been said.

Click here for more information on the Trinity Site.

LANL unable to release history report

By ROGER SNODGRASS, Los Alamos Monitor Editor

A Los Alamos National Laboratory librarian was unable to release a 30-year-old report on the early history of computing, Steven Aftergood, who directs the Project on Government Secrecy, reported Monday.

“I got an inquiry from a graduate student who was trying to locate a copy of the report for academic purposes,” Aftergood said in a telephone interview Tuesday. “The subject matter seemed intrinsically interesting. It wasn’t some isolated detail in nuclear physics, but rather a broad sweep of technological history.”

He said he found references to the report, “Computing at LASL (Los Alamos Science Laboratory) in the 1940s and 1950s,” but the document itself was not readily available.

“So I naturally turned to the Los Alamos research library,” he said, where he found “a polite but disappointing response.”

The library was unable to provide a copy of the document.

He was, however, able to obtain a copy independently, which was added to the project’s collection of Los Alamos documents.

A spokesperson for LANL said Tuesday that the document could not be released at the time of the request because it did not have a Los Alamos Unclassified Report number (LAUR). A formal clearance is required to indicate the document has been approved for release, said James Rickman of the LANL communications office.

“If the document had not been approved,” he said, “guidance was to tell the requester to seek the document under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which assures a uniform process and that the document receives a proper review.”

The paper was developed from four talks given publicly June 13-16, 1977, at the National Computer Conference in Dallas.

One of the talks was given by Mark B. Wells, a retired laboratory employee who worked in the computer group at the time that later became the Computer Division at the laboratory.

Contacted at home in Los Alamos, Wells said, “The work was never classified.”
In fact, he said, “It was published in a free and open way. It was part of a computer conference, open to anybody.”

Wells’ essay reminisces about the MANIAC computer, especially the MANIAC I, which was located at LASL from 1952-57.

MANIAC was the acronym for “mathematical analyzer, numerical integrator and computer, Wells notes, but he also relates an anecdote about an alternative interpretation expressed by the astronomer and physicist George Gamow, who said it stood for “Metropolis and Neumann invent awful contraption.”

Nicholas Metropolis was the genius behind the early computer research in Los Alamos – “the instigator,” Wells calls him in the paper, for the MANIAC computers.

The laboratory’s computer facility that will soon house the Roadrunner, now rated the fastest supercomputer in the world, is named after Metropolis.

John Von Neumann was also a Manhattan project member and another of the great computer pioneers.

Among the interesting tidbits in Wells article are stories about a chess-playing program on MANIAC. MANIAC’s limited memory restricted a play to board that was six squares by six squares and no bishops or pawns.

“Even then,” he wrote, “moves averaged about 10 minutes for a two-move, look-ahead strategy.”

“That quickly became three moves, four moves, five moves ahead,” Wells said Tuesday, adding the current capability was at least 12 moves ahead.

His essay also includes an anecdote about a moment when the computer seemed to have a mind of its own.

When Princeton physicist Martin Kruskel checkmated the MANIAC on the 38th move of a game, the machine responded with an illegal move.

“We were dumbfounded for a while, until we traced the trouble and realized that the program had never been taught to resign,” Wells wrote.

Facing no moves, the machine was stuck in a loop and the loop changed the program.

“You might call that a learning program,” he recalled.

Rickman said the review policies originated at the National Nuclear Security Administration after the 9/11 attacks, requesting that the lab review its documents to make sure that nothing might be able to aid terrorists.

“We hope to have that task completed soon,” Rickman said, “perhaps by the end of the summer.”

GAO: LANL security lapses not fixed

By ROGER SNODGRASS, Los Alamos Monitor Editor

The Government Accountability Office has returned to the subject of security at Los Alamos National Laboratory, this time calling for long-term strategies for improvement.

In the first part of a lengthy report released this morning, GAO responded to a request by lawmakers to describe the security environment at LANL and determine whether new management approaches would sustain security improvements over the long term.

The laboratory responded this morning with a statement that emphasized improvements identified in the report and actions taken to correct “legacy issues,” including a positive trend in reducing security incidents since 2005, consolidations and reductions in a variety classified media, assets and parts, and the creation of a “Super Vault Type Rooms,” for further limiting routine access to classified materials.

The auditors found that the laboratory is addressing problems raised in previous evaluations on many fronts and has more than two dozen initiatives underway to boost security.

“However, we found that significant security problems identified in these evaluations have not been fully addressed,” the report states. “Specifically, while LANL’s storage of classified parts in unapproved storage containers and its process for ensuring that actions to correct identified security deficiencies have been cited in external security evaluations for years, complete security solutions in these areas have not been implemented.”

The authors of the report were puzzled to find that LANL and its supervisors at the National Nuclear Security Administration had not taken advantage of their initiative calling for a reduction in physical plant to make corresponding reductions in security exposures.

They were also doubtful that the annual performance evaluations by which the laboratory’s management fees are calculated were adequately focused to encourage significant security improvements.

For the most recent evaluation period, the auditors noted, Los Alamos National Security, LLC, the private partnership that manages LANL, was docked 65 percent of the fees available for leadership because of a particularly egregious security incident in the fall of 2006, but at the same time LANS earned 90 percent of the $2.7 million performance award fee available for security performance that year.

“Furthermore, of the $1.43 million potentially available for LANS security performance award fee in fiscal 2008, all but $30,000 is allocated” to paper pushing projects, publishing plans and policies, making lists, and doing well on a survey, the report observed.

The audit was requested by the John D. Dingell, D-Mich. and Joe Barton, R-Tex., the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, along with Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and John Shimkus, R-Ill., chairman and ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, that has held numerous hearings on security issues at Los Alamos in recent years.

“World War II was prosecuted in less time than it is taking DOE and its contractor to bring a robust security system into force at this nuclear weapons lab,” Dingell said in a press release.

Barton said GAO’s findings were the no different than the dozen hearings that have been held on the subject by the Energy and Commerce Committee, and that “the lab was run more like a corner hamburger stand than the crown jewel of the nation’s nuclear weapons.”

NNSA declined to provide specific comment on any recommendations, but stated, “that while there is still much to be accomplished, NNSA believes that progress has been made in addressing a number of specific areas.”

“While time will be the ultimate measure of whether these actions can be sustained, we believe that we have, developed a process to focus on continuous improvement,” the laboratory’s prepared statement added. “Together with an aggressive approach to reducing our classified holdings and providing engineering solutions to common human performance issues, we consider our efforts to be a responsible and focused approach to protecting national security.”

The audit was performed between March 2007 and June 2008. This is the fourth complete assessment of security at LANL since 2000.

Another seven surveys have been conducted by NNSA’s local site office during that period.

The GAO report can be downloaded here.
The congressional news release can be viewed here.
The Washington Post also covered this story here.

Strategic Forces Subcommittee Hearing on Complex Transformation

See the HASC website on the day of the hearing for a link to the webcast.

Thursday, July 17, 2008 – 10:00 am – 2212 Rayburn – Open

The Strategic Forces Subcommittee will meet to hear testimony on nuclear weapons complex modernization.

Witnesses:

Panel 1:
The Honorable Thomas P. D'Agostino
Administrator
National Nuclear Security Administration

Dr. Michael Anastasio
Laboratory Director
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Mr. Dennis Hayes
General Manager, Defense Programs
Washington Savannah River Company

Dr. Thomas O. Hunter
President and Laboratories Director
Sandia National Laboratories

Mr. Darrel P. Kohlhorst
President and General Manager
Babcock and Wilcox Technical Services Y-12, LLC

Mr. J. Greg Meyer
President and General Manager
Babcock and Wilcox Technical Services Pantex, LLC

Dr. George H. Miller
Laboratory Director
Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC

Mr. Vincent Trim
President
Honeywell Federal Manufacturing and Technologies, LLC

Dr. Stephen M. Younger
President
National Security Technologies

Panel 2:
Mr. Gene Aloise
Director, Natural Resources and Environment
U.S. Government Accountability Office

Ms. Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs

Dr. C. Paul Robinson
President Emeritus
Sandia National Laboratories

Approval of Resolution to Exclude Access to Classified Information for a Regent

Meetings of The Regents of the University of California and its committees are scheduled for Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, July 15-17, 2008 at the University Center, Santa Barbara Campus. The meeting agendas and schedule are available here. Of particular interest to blog readers is the meeting of the Committee on Oversight of the Department of Energy Laboratories (agenda here and reprinted below).

Live audio Internet broadcasts of the open sessions are available during the open session meetings. Please use this link to connect to the audio streaming during the meeting: http://california.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2

Does anyone know or care to guess why it is a UC function to revoke access to classified information?

NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
*Date and Time Change*
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY LABORATORIES

Date: July 17, 2008
Time: 9:30 a.m.
Location: University Center, Santa Barbara Campus

Agenda – Open Session

Roll Call

Reading of Notice and Statement of Service Thereof

Action Approval of Minutes of Meeting of May 18, 2008

O1 Information Update on the Department of Energy Laboratories

O2 Information Update on Board of Governors Activities for Los Alamos National Security,
LLC and Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC

O3 Action Approval of Resolution to Exclude Access to Classified
Information for a Regent


Committee Membership: Regents Pattiz, Varner, Marcus, Gould, Hotchkis, Shewmake, Schwarzenegger, Blum and Yudof; Advisory member Brown

The Bechtel Unit of Measure

Frank,
While I was cleaning up the back yard this weekend, I pondered what the unit of measure of one dog stool. In a flash, I realized it was the Bechtel! My dog delivers two Bechtels a day (sometimes three) that need to be gathered and disposed of. I propose a contest to see how many LANS organizations can top the Bechtel mark.

My initial nomination is the Purchasing Department. First, I had to attend a secret training session in the Physics Auditorium (there were less than 20 of us in the entire auditorium) to discover that "Management Level Determination" has absolutely nothing to do with "Management Level. " Then I had a multitude of forms to get signed. I hand-carried the crucial 838c form downtown and the nice man signed it, even though he wasn't sure that it was all copasetic.

Then I went over to the Purchasing Department - in case you haven't been there, it's a very fine building behind the China Moon Restaurant - not at all like the moldy trailers that TSMs work in. There, all the shaded parking spots were occupied by government vehicles, with signs that you'll be towed away if you even pause there. Why the purchasing department (which one would hope does all their business through electronic communications) needs close to a dozen GSA vehicles is beyond me. But, being the dutiful direct employee (instead of one of the far more important Bechtelite indirect employees), I parked outside of the reserved government vehicle area.

I dutifully walked up to the golden door and swiped my Q-Badge (with Sigmas 1-10). You wormy bastard! You cannot enter our exalted space! You might be one of those Los Alamos vagrants that pay our salaries! I called my two contacts from the telephone at the front door and got no response - either they were away from their phones or they had no interest in granting admission to a peasant who might bring them work. Caller ID is a wonderful thing.

For customer service, I give Purchasing 5 Bechtels. For customer friendliness (including their user-hostile parking spaces and front-door reception) I give Purchasing 5 Bechtels for a grand total of 10 out of 10. Any other nominees?
- Anonymous

Is there a conversion factor to UCs?

Moving on in NM

To the creator of the blog----you might get a laugh from a letter in Dear Abby. The writer signed it Moving on in NM.
-A fan of your blog :)

Blog Fan: Thanks! But are you sure the writer is "Moving on" from LANL? It could be Sandia....


DEAR ABBY: I read an article in our local paper a while ago that said good employees who leave a company usually do so because of their boss.
With that in mind, I would like to bring closure to my recent resignation with the following open letter to my former boss:

"Thanks for asking me to stay on, but I respectfully decline. I will be self-employed from now on. However, if in the future I ever feel the need to be publicly humiliated, blind-sided, ostracized and called a spy, be distrusted and disciplined by superiors for no good reason, fight for wages that are rightfully mine, stabbed in the back by fellow employees, used as a pawn in executive rivalries, or (especially) chewed out when you're having a bad day, I'll get back to you!"

-- MOVING ON IN NEW MEXICO


DEAR MOVING ON: I'm printing your letter. I hope that seeing it in print will be cathartic. I wish you good luck in your new career, where someday you may be a boss yourself. And if you are, I'm sure you will create a healthier office environment than the one you left.

I am Kevin, hear me Roark

Frank,
I hope that you all post the latest article from C&E news (from the June 30, 2008 issue) entitled "Numbers Shrink at Weapons Labs". To quote Kevin Roark, a Los Alamos spokesperson..."These reductions (the VSP), along with normal attrition, meant that we did not have to resort to a layoff", and continues, "we are not going to do a separation program again and that Los Alamos is managing its workforce through normal attrition and strategic hiring". Does Kevin understand how Los Alamos get's its budget? Does Kevin understand that things in the future will be very different than in the past? Does Kevin understand that as a nation, we have a nine trillion dollar deficit? And does Kevin understand recession?
-Anonymous

Since Gussie left, "you all" is just me. I've offered to double his salary but he just laughs! Anyway, I can't answer for Kevin. Perhaps he'll drop by and leave a comment for you.

PS Thanks for sending links to the articles you mentioned!

Numbers Shrink At Weapons Labs - June 30, 2008
DOE Warns Of lab Layoffs - July 7, 2008

LANL Could Get Job of Dismantling Bombs

By John Fleck, Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

Los Alamos National Laboratory, already busy building parts for new nuclear warheads, could be assigned the job of taking apart old weapons, as well.

If the project goes forward, Los Alamos would be asked to pick up the slack left by a major dismantlement plant in South Carolina that is years behind schedule and more than a billion dollars over budget, according to a report obtained by the Journal.

Plutonium bomb parts would be dismantled at Los Alamos. The plutonium would be sent to the National Nuclear Security Administration's Savannah River Site in South Carolina, where it would be turned into fuel for electricity-generating nuclear power plants.

The New Mexico nuclear weapons laboratory is being considered for the job because of delays in completing the Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility at Savannah River. The proposed plant would take apart plutonium pits — the explosive cores of nuclear weapons — and convert the dangerously radioactive plutonium into a plutonium-oxygen mixture suitable for use in nuclear power plant fuel.

The plant at Savannah River that was to do the work had an initial price tag of $346 million when it was launched in 2000, and the plant was to be completed and operating by 2004. The current price tag has grown to at least $2.4 billion, with actual construction work yet to begin. The current estimated completion date, according to federal budget documents, is 2019.

That delay poses a problem because of agreements with Russia aimed at reducing both nations' stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium.

Faced with the potential for years of delay, the National Nuclear Security Administration completed a study in May on the feasibility of using Los Alamos' plutonium lab complex to do some of the work in the interim.

Los Alamos set up a small-scale line of plutonium processing equipment in the 1990s to develop and test the equipment to be used in the South Carolina plant. While it was never intended for full-scale operations, the equipment is still there and could be modified to do the job on a modest scale, the study found.

Los Alamos was already planning to use the existing equipment in 2010 to process more than 2 tons of plutonium. The study suggests that work could be continued and expanded to process another 10 tons.

National Nuclear Security Administration spokeswoman Casey Ruberg declined comment, noting that the study was marked "official use only," meaning it was not supposed to be made public.

The work would employ more than 130 people at its peak at Los Alamos, according to the study.

There have been repeated questions in recent years about Los Alamos' ability to expand plutonium work in its 1970s-era concrete laboratory and manufacturing site. The lab is currently also making plutonium weapon cores in the same building, a job that could grow substantially under a plan now under consideration by the federal government. In an August 2006 report, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board questioned whether Los Alamos was capable of an even more modest expansion in bomb dismantlement work.

Los Alamos spokesman Kevin Roark said the lab could do the weapon dismantlement work if needed.

"It's doable if we're asked," Roark said.

Senate Appropriations Committee Markup

Update: This hearing appears to have been rescheduled for 2:30 PM.

At 2:00 PM Eastern the Senate Appropriations Committee markup of the energy and water appropriations bill will be webcast. The bill includes the nuclear weapons programs of the Energy Department. Location is 106 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington.

The video webcast is available on OpenHearings.org; audio only on CapitolHearings.org.

I will post a link to the bill here as soon as it it available.

European Vacation

Comments on posts to this blog usually stray far from the topic. In the case of The Best Possible Shield the topic has drifted to DOE foreign travel/vacation policy, with calls for a new top level post. Did DOE buy a "pig in a poke" when they approved this travel to Dijon, France?

Anonymous said...
Details for Frank:
The rule is that DOE has to approve foreign travel. They generally reject foreign travel if two apparently married people are going, where apparently = same last name. They seldom reject travel if people have different last names.

Married couples with different last names use foreign travel as a way of going on vacations. If you plan it right, you can make it last all summer.

So anyhoo, there is a particular AD [Neu] who is married to a now-naturalized previously-European person. They have used this loophole for about 10 years.

It is a pretty common practice, although this particular couple is really masterful.

Domenici Calls FY2009 DOE Funding Bill “Balanced”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: CHRIS GALLEGOS
JULY 8, 2008 (202) 224-7082

DOMENICI CALLS FY2009 DOE FUNDING BILL “BALANCED”
Senate Takes Different Path, Boosts Lab Science & Clean Energy Thrust

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Pete Domenici today said the Senate’s FY2009
funding plan for the Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons
laboratories strikes a balance that will boost science capabilities at the labs
while increasing R&D into clean energy technologies.

Domenici is ranking member on the Senate Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Subcommittee that Tuesday approved the FY2009 Energy
and Water Development Appropriations Bill. The $33.2 billion bill—which
funds DOE, Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers and related
agencies like the National Nuclear Security Administration—will be considered
by the full Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday.

For Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories,
Domenici said the Senate bill moves on a different path than that taken by the
House Appropriations Committee by avoiding the cuts of nearly $600 million
for weapons activities and almost $300 million in stockpile stewardship
accounts. The bill also adds $20 million as requested in the administration’s
budget for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad.

“We made an effort to put together a balanced bill that makes deployment of
clean energy, environmental cleanup and investment in the science at our
nuclear weapons laboratories the top priorities,” Domenici said. “This is a
more balanced bill because it does not rob Peter to a pay Paul. We take care
of our nuclear security needs while aggressively investing in research and
development, and deployment, of alternative energy technologies. In light of
the recent record price for a barrel of oil, these investments are appropriate.”

The bill outlines $27 billion for the Department of Energy (a $1.1 billion
increase over the president’s budget request), $5.3 billion for the Army Corps
of Engineers ($559 million over the budget request), $1.13 billion for the
Bureau of Reclamation ($333 million over the budget request), and $323.5
million for Independent Agencies ($55.5 million increase).

Domenici stressed the importance of the bill’s investment in science missions
at the national laboratories, including raising the Lab Directed Research and
Development (LDRD) level by 2 percent—to 10 percent from 8 percent of the
gross lab budget allocation to diversify the scientific missions at the labs.

At LANL, Domenici highlighted a $5 million addition to give the lab a role in
Climate Change Modeling Capability, with another $20 million going to all
three National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) labs for this work. The
bill also devotes $7 million to the Matter-Radiation Interactions in Extremes
(MaRIE) initiative at LANL, and provides $26 million for the labs’ Roadrunner
supercomputer.

For Sandia, the bill offers $12 million to implement a cooperative advanced
computing simulation effort for renewable energy sources between Sandia
National Laboratories and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in
Colorado.

“I think we have made a real difference in the investments we make in our
national laboratories. I believe we have put together a bill that not only
recognizes the scientific excellence of the labs, but builds on their capability by
expanding scientific research and investing in new facilities,” Domenici said.

Under the Senate plan, the bill has $9.67 billion for the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA), of which $6.52 billion is outlined for weapons
activities (down $93 million from budget request, but $227 million over
FY2008), and $1.9 billion for nonproliferation activities ($175 million over the
request). The bill also eliminates $10 million requested for the Reliable
Replacement Weapon study, but Domenici indicated his intention to offer a
floor amendment to restore the funding.

Domenici reported that the Senate bill adds $25 million to increase funding for
the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement facility at LANL,
providing $125 million for the project. The budget request was for $100
million, and the House eliminated this funding.

Where the House eliminated $145 million for all pit manufacturing activities at
LANL, the Senate bill provides full funding for pit manufacturing and protects
$22 million, transferring funds from Pit Capability to pit dismantlement
research and offsetting job impacts. This will focus work on MOX fuel
produced at LANL on AIRES. In addition, another $10 million is provided to
shift pit capability work now at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to
LANL.

The Senate bill provides $5.8 million for DOE’s Defense Environmental
Cleanup, a $474 million increase over the budget request. Of this amount,
$245 million would be directed toward LANL—an $83 million increase over the
budget request and a $93 million increase over FY2008 funding levels. An
additional $3 million is provided for cleanup at Sandia.

Domenici also worked to make up a proposed funding cut at WIPP, with the
subcommittee providing $231 million, up $20.1 million above the budget
request. This funding level, however, remains $3 million below FY08 levels.

Among major policy initiatives in the bill, Domenici fully supported an
additional $673 million for renewable energy, $45 million for the creation of an
Integrated University Program for nuclear engineering education; $20 million
for a climate stewardship plan for NNSA laboratories; an additional $175
million for nuclear nonproliferation; and an additional $474 million for DOE
defense environmental cleanup.

Domenici noted that the bill increases investment in: new scientific facilities;
science, engineering and advanced computing; nonproliferation, including
building new science capabilities; and a climate change modeling and
verification that is similar to the science-based stockpile stewardship program.
The bill provides $1.9 billion for the DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy account, a $673 million increase over the request, which entails: $100
million for advanced battery research; $50 million for renewable energy/zero
energy demonstrations for localities; $229 million for solar ($50 million for
concentrating solar); $30 million for ocean energy; and $10 million for solid
state lighting. The bill also restores $200 million for the DOE Weatherization
Program.

The following is a review of funded items in the Senate’s FY2009 Energy &
Water Development Appropriations Bill that are of interest to New Mexico:

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
DOE WEAPONS ACTIVITIES - $6.525 billion, down $93 million from
request, but up $227 million from FY08

Directed Stockpile -- $1.64 billion, down $31.5 million from the request but
$242.9 million over FY08. LANL is expected to receive $375.4 million and
Sandia is expected to receive $379 million.

Nuclear Nonproliferation -- $1.909 billion, up $175million from request
• Nonproliferation R&D – $366 million, up $75 million, including:
o $20 million for Forensics, $30 million investment in lab capabilities, $15
million explosion monitoring;
o $10 million in support of the Integrated University Research Program
• Nonproliferation and International Security - $175 million, up $35
million including:
o $20 million for the Next Generation Safeguards Initiative
o $10 million for dismantling activities in North Korea
o $5 million in support of the Integrated University Program
• Global Threat Reduction -- $284 million, up $65 million over the request
and $91 million over FY08); including $20 million for research reactor fuel HEU
alternatives, and $45 million for global fissile material recovery
• MOX Construction -- $487 million, as requested

Reliable Replacement Weapon – This program is not funded, but Domenici
plans a floor amendment to fund the administration’s $10 million request for
an RRW study

LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY
LANSCE Refurbishment - $35 million, $30 million over the budget request,
for this work which is key to advancing the LANL MaRIE project

Matter-Radiation Interactions in Extremes (MaRIE) – $7.0 million in
DOE science funding added by Domenici to support development of this new
science facility, which would be a next-generation facility to investigate
advanced materials under extreme pressure and radiation environments

Climate Change Modeling Capability -- $5 million added by Domenici for
LANL, with an additional $20 million for all NNSA labs

LANL Pit Activities – Fully funds pit manufacturing ($145 million cut in
House bill) and protects $22 million, with funds transferred from Pit Capability
to accelerate pit dismantlement research and to offset job impacts. This will
focus work on MOX fuel produced at LANL on AIRES. In addition, another $10
million is provided to shift pit capability work now at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory to LANL

Environmental Management & Cleanup (EM) -- $245 million, $83 million
over the budget request and $93 million over FY08, for cleanup of LANL
property. This funding is necessary to allow LANL to make progress on
milestones set in a Consent Order agreement between the NNSA and the state
of New Mexico.

Roadrunner Petaflop -- $26 million in Advanced Simulation Computing
funding to complete the computing acquisition for the Roadrunner
supercomputer, which recently accomplished a petaflop computation (a
thousand trillion computations per second). The Roadrunner gives LANL the
capability to simulate complex physics experiments to validate the reliability of
the U.S. stockpile, without underground testing.

Nuclear Energy – $15 million for LANL infrastructure upgrades to Material
Test Station and Hot Cells to support nuclear fuel development

Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities (RTBF) – $1.703 billion overall
for DOE facilities to provide critical funding to support operations and provides
salaries to lab employees. Within this account, LANL receives $298 million, up
$13 million to accommodate security improvements, including the following:
• Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Facility (CMR-R) --
$125 million, $24 million over the budget request to continue development of
this facility
• TA-55 Reinvestment Project – $7.9 million, the same as the budget
request
• TA-55 Reinvestment -- $8.5 million for Phase II design
• Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility -- $19.6 million, the same
as request
• Safeguards and Security – $859.8 million complex-wide, same as the
request; this includes $46 million for nuclear materials safeguard and security
upgrades at LANL

Manhattan Project Site Restoration -- $500,000 added by Domenici

SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORY

Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities (RTBF) – $1.703 billion overall
for DOE facilities to provide critical funding to support operations and provides
salaries to lab employees. Within this account, Sandia receives $127 million,
the same as the budget request and FY08

Directed Stockpile Work – $1.644 billion, $242 million over FY08. Sandia is
estimated to receive $379 million estimate worth from this $1.64 billion
account.

Z machine -- $102 million, a $17 million increase, to support full shift
operations. The funding is within $453.3 million provided within the Inertial
Confinement Fusion and High Yield account.

Concentrating Solar – $50 million to support pilot scale demonstration of
concentrating solar and $3 million is provided to Sandia to support a lab scale
demonstration facility to produce hydrogen from high temperature
thermochemical process. Sandia is a partner in the ongoing hydrogen
production research program. Domenici also added $2 million to support the
La Samilla Solar Trough Storage Project at Sandia.

Solid State Lighting - $10 million for solid state lighting, to support research
in Solid State Lighting Research. Sandia has been designated as the National
Center for Solid State Lighting.

Energy/Water Research - $12 million through Fossil Energy account to
support research on water and energy usage and to employ water efficiency
technology. Sandia will benefit from this research.

Advanced Simulation and Computing – $7 million to continue a Domenici
proposal that directed the directing the NNSA and the Office of Science to
sustain an Institute of Advanced Architecture and Algorithms at Sandia and
Oak Ridge national labs. In addition, $5 million for Sandia computer facility
upgrades to support national security needs

Renewable Energy Advanced Computing – $12 million to implement a
cooperative advanced computing simulation effort for renewable energy
sources between Sandia and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in
Colorado.

Center for Integrated Nanotechnolgy - $20 million for CINT for this joint
Sandia and Los Alamos venture at Kirtland Air Force Base, funding provided to
initiate operation. Domenici added an additional $5 million for Sandia’s nano-
engineering institute.

Ion Beam Lab -- $10 million, same as the budget request, to continue the
refurbishment of the Ion Beam Lab at Sandia. This antiquated building can tap
available contingency funds to upgrade this facility, which supports the
stockpile surveillance program needs repairs. The estimated cost of this
project is $40 million. Domenici secured $10 million in FY08.

Enhanced Surety - $163 million, $20 million over the budget, to support the
Engineering Campaign, with $20 million directed toward Sandia for enhanced
surety and surveillance activities.

Sandia TA-1 -- $15.75 million, same as the budget request, for Sandia TA-1
heating upgrade. About $22.3 million was provided in FY08

Test Capabilities Facility Revitalization, Phase II, SNL – $3.2 million, the
budget request, for the recovery of this Sandia facility and the expected cost
and timetable.

WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) -- $231.6 million, up $20.1 million
above the request and $3 million below FY08 funding levels. The bill provides:
• Operations: $146.1 million, $20.1 million over the request
• Central Characterization: $29 million, $3.5 million below FY08
• Transportation: $28 million, $1.2 million above FY08
• Community Support: $27 million, $1 million above FY08

Center for Excellence and Hazardous Materials (Carlsbad) – $2.0 million, included by Domenici

WIPP Records Archive (Carlsbad) – $4.0 million, included by Domenici

OTHER NEW MEXICO PROJECTS
MIND Institute -- $12 million for the Mental Illness and Neuroscience
Discovery (MIND) Institute, which includes three national centers of excellence
in functional brain imaging in Albuquerque, Minneapolis, and Boston. The New
Mexico center of excellence involves the University of New Mexico Health
Sciences Center, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Sandia and Los Alamos
national laboratories.

• New Mexico State University Arrowhead Center -- $1.0 million

• Technology Ventures Corp. (TVC) Albuquerque -- $3.0 million to
support technology transfer from each of the three weapons labs

• Hawaii-NMSU Sustainable Energy Security Partnership -- $3.0 million

Senate panel votes to restore LANL funds

By ROGER SNODGRASS, Los Alamos Monitor Editor

A Senate subcommittee this morning proposed to restore funding for a major construction project at Los Alamos National Laboratory, but agreed with the House on withholding funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) project that the Bush Administration requested.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., ranking member of the appropriations subcommittee called the Senate proposal for the Department of Energy, Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation, “one of the most inadequately funded bills,” under consideration.

“There is no relationship between this bill and what people want to have done,” he said.

Still, he found a number of positive provisions to mention in the FY09 spending measure, including “new investments for science facilities and science based stockpile stewardship.”

Funding has “come down a tiny bit” for the defense labs, “but when you look at the overall picture, they are adequately funded,” he said.

He said the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) facility buildings were funded.

“The money is in there to finish them,” he said, “and the pit program is funded.”
Domenici especially praised a provision in the bill that countered the House proposal to reduce Laboratory Directed Research and Development Funds. In a tug-of-war, the House reduced last year’s percentage of the laboratories funds that could be invested at the directors’ discretion from 8 percent to 4 percent.

“We have brought it back up to 10 (percent),” he said.

Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., announced a plan to hold a roundtable forum at the end of this month to talk about a “long-term stabilization funding plan” for the national laboratories.

He said the forum might occur in two stages – with the directors of the weapons laboratories first and then the heads of the other labs. The purpose would be to develop “new and interesting ideas” for sustaining the labs’ scientific contributions into the future.

Domenici has advocated this idea, according to a spokesperson, and intends to participate fully in the process.

The subcommittee meeting was shortened to about a half hour, with time for only a few remarks by committee members.

Information from Domenici’s office after the subcommittee proposal was adopted put the total figure for the National Nuclear Security Administration that supervises the nuclear weapons complex at $9.6 billion. Of that, $6.52 billion was apportioned for weapons activities, $93 million less than requested by the administration, but $227 million more than current funding.

Among the details, the Senate proposal called for $125 million for LANL’s CMRR. In contrast, the House eliminated the president’s $100 million request for the CMRR.

The Senate bill would reinstate $145 million for pit manufacturing activities at LANL. The job of making nuclear triggers was left unfunded in the House Bill. The Senate added some funds as well, including $10 million to shift pit-related work now at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to LANL.

Domenici and Dorgan disagreed about the $10 million requested by the administration to keep plans moving forward on replacing the nuclear warheads in the future stockpile.

According to a recent program plan outline provided to Congress, LLNL receives about $9 million this year for activities on the RRW under the current funding split, while LANL gets about $5 million.

Dorgan said the funding would not be provided, awaiting an ongoing review. He added that the decision would be left for the next administration.

Domenici called the Senate outline “a great bill,” but noted that he was prepared to debate the RRW issue before the full Senate.

The House bill has passed committee and is awaiting a hearing on the floor. The Senate version goes to committee on Thursday and then to the floor. The two versions must then be resolved and approved again by the respective chambers before going to the president for signature.

Clearance Questioned at Labs

By John Fleck
Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer

A Los Alamos National Laboratory worker was able to enter a top-secret area of the lab a day after losing her security clearance, according to an internal Energy Department investigation.

The Nov. 9, 2006, incident happened because the lab's security team failed to update the computer database that keeps track of who has the proper security clearance to enter the lab's most secret areas, according to a report Monday from the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General.

The worker lost her clearance on Nov. 8, 2006, because she was leaving her job at the lab, according to Los Alamos spokesman Kevin Roark. She entered the security area a day later to get a signature she needed on paperwork associated with her departure.

Her name was not removed until five days later from the database that controls who gets access to the building, according to the inspector general's report.

The incident was the most serious of what the Inspector General's Office said were “numerous errors” in the databases used to keep track of high security clearances at Los Alamos and Sandia national labs.

At Los Alamos, the investigators found 13 people who still could have had access to top-security buildings despite having their security clearances terminated up to 10½ months previously.

There was no evidence that the mistakes led to the compromise of any classified information, according to the report.

The problems involved workers with access to “Sensitive Compartmented Information.” The category covers work the labs do for the U.S. intelligence community, such as analysis of the nuclear capabilities of foreign countries.

Roark said the problem happened because two security clearance databases did not communicate well, and the lab is working to fix it. “This is something we recognized early on, before the IG's report,” he said.

Sandia and the Department of Energy, which oversees the security program, released terse statements saying problems in the program were being fixed.

“Sandia carefully manages controls over SCI Access, and any perceived process or procedural issues identified during the review have been corrected,” said Sandia's statement on the issue.

The Department of Energy statement noted that the agency is already making procedural changes to deal with the issue.

Science and the Future of the Labs

Frank, I think this recent article by John Fleck deserves a top-level post:

Written by John Fleck, The Albuquerque Journal
Monday, 07 July 2008

It's become increasingly clear that nuclear weapons funding will not sustain national laboratories the size of Sandia and Los Alamos.

That leaves essentially two possible futures. The labs can shrink around their "core mission" - the nukes. Or they can expand alternative work. At Sandia, we've already seen a dramatic increase in what the bureaucrats call "work for others" - work for federal agencies other than the National Nuclear Security Administration.

But in an interesting interview last week, Dimitri Kusnezov, the NNSA's top science official, told me that "work for others" will never provide the necessary support to really replace the money from declining nuclear weapons budgets - the money that supports the basic infrastructure at the labs.

This is a real chicken and egg problem. To get the WFO funding, you need the basic infrastructure - the supercomputers and lab equipment - that the other federal agencies need to do their special projects. But the nuclear weapons program has always provided that, creating great leverage for other agencies' use. Think of Sandia's big Red Storm supercomputer - valuable to other agencies, paid for by the nuclear weapons program. "Work for others doesn't allow you to buy a Red Storm," Kusnezov told me.

To try to deal with this problem, the NNSA is launching an effort to broaden the science base. (See the announcement here.) The agency is talking to other federal agencies, trying to establish long-term relationships to support the labs beyond the sort of piecework that WFO pays for.

The devil here is in the details, and whether other federal agencies will be willing or able to make the sort of long-term funding commitments to fund the hypothetical Red Storm-style infrastructure at the labs. Kusnezov told me to expect announcements regarding specific agreements by late summer or fall. A lot of the labs' future, I think, is riding on how those deals play out.

Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development

Markup of the energy and water appropriations bill
(Note the time change)

UPDATE: Audio of the hearing is archived here.

9:45 AM, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, markup of the energy and water appropriations bill, which includes the nuclear weapons programs of the Energy Department. 192 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington. Video webcast on OpenHearings.org; audio only on CapitolHearings.org.

Internal Controls Over SCI Access for LANL and Sandia

Department of Energy
Washington, DC 20585
July 1 , 2008

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF INTELLIGENCE AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE

FROM: Gregory H. Friedman, Inspector General

SUBJECT: INFORMATION: Inspection Report on "Internal Controls Over Sensitive Compartmented Information Access for Selected Field Intelligence Elements''

BACKGROUND
As a member of the U.S. Government's Intelligence Community, the Department of Energy (DOE) serves as the premier technical intelligence resource in the areas of nuclear weapons, nonproliferation, energy, science, technology, and emerging threats. DOE accomplishes its intelligence mission by drawing from technical expertise located throughout the Department complex. This necessitates Department-affiliated personnel having access to sensitive compartmented information (SCI), which is a designation given to classified information derived from intelligence sources, methods, or analytical processes that are required to be handled through designated access control systems.

DOE's Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence is responsible for granting SCI access authorization to DOE-affiliated personnel who need access to intelligence information. Individuals must have an active Top Secret or "Q'' clearance to be granted and maintain SCI access authorization. The Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence maintains "Lockbox", a database that it uses to track SCI access authorizations.

To complement a recent Office of Inspector General inspection of internal controls associated with individuals on a DOE Headquarters SCI access roster, we initiated a review of local Field Intelligence Elements that the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence maintains at several DOE sites in support of its intelligence mandate. These field sites have local SCI personnel databases, as well as local databases to control physical access systems, e.g., badge readers, for local SCI facilities. The objective of the inspection was to determine the adequacy of internal controls over access to intelligence information at two of these Field Intelligence Elements, Los Alamos National Laboratory (Los Alamos) and Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia).

RESULTS OF INSPECTION
We concluded that the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence and the subordinate Field Intelligence Elements at Los Alamos and Sandia did not have adequate administrative internal controls over their databases used to track SCI access authorizations. Based on our comparison of Lockbox and four local databases containing the names, authorizations, and facility accesses of Los Alamos and Sandia SCI access holders, we found that:

• The SCI personnel databases used by the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, Los Alamos, and Sandia contained numerous errors, including incorrect database entries and failures to update information relevant to SCI access, which could lead to potentially serious security incidents;
• An individual physically accessed a Los Alamos SCI facility without escort after her SCI access authorization was terminated. Further, Los Alamos Field Intelligence Element officials did not report the security incident to appropriate Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence officials. This incident illustrates the importance of maintaining correct, updated SCI databases; and,
• The Los Alamos Field Intelligence Element had not terminated the SCI access authorizations of 13 individuals whose personnel security clearances had been terminated up to 10 months previously.
  

We made several recommendations aimed at improving the Department's internal controls over SCI access authorizations.

MANAGEMENT REACTION
In responding to a draft of this report, management concurred with our recommendations and identified corrective actions taken, initiated, or planned. Management's verbatim comments are provided in Appendix C of the report.

Attachment

cc: Chief of Staff
Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer
Director, Office of Internal Review (CF-1 .2)

[Download a copy of the IG's report here.]

The Best Possible Shield

Interview by Sergei Balashov and Andrei Zolotov, Jr.
Russia Profile

Scientific Director of the All-Russian Experimental Physics Research Institute, Academician Radiy Ilkaev, is widely perceived as Russia’s top nuclear physicist. Having headed the country’s prime nuclear research center for 12 years, before taking on his current role, he has overseen one of the most important periods in the history of the institution, as it underwent major transformations while adjusting to a rapidly changing environment. Ilkaev shared his view with Russia Profile on the purpose of nuclear weapons, the development of Russia’s nuclear industry and the recent geopolitical trends that affect it.

R.P. How relevant are nuclear weapons today? Would it make sense to invest more money in general purpose armed forces instead?

R.I.: Nuclear weapons have always played a key role in the defense of the country. General purpose forces were severely weakened following the collapse of the Soviet Union, so the role of nuclear technology has increased disproportionately since that time. The Soviet army numbered around 7 million, but now it is down to about a million. These are incommensurable numbers, when compared to those of NATO members and other strong developing nations. If we want to ensure that nobody ever attacks us and never tests our general purpose forces, which have a limited capacity, then it is essential for us to have weapons of deterrence. Like any strong state, we must have weapons with which we can lead a regular local or regional war, but there can be no full defense without nuclear weapons. Having scientists, experts and the state care about nuclear weapons is a priority of the highest magnitude.

R.P. How would you rate the current state of Russia’s nuclear forces?

R.I.: I can clearly say that the nuclear forces of the Russian Federation are wholly preserved and are in absolute order. I believe that there is no question as to their battle preparedness and combat efficiency. The state efficiently, successfully, and skillfully provides all the necessary support. The country’s highest-ranking officials fully realize the key role that nuclear weapons play in the military effectiveness of the country. You can say that this is a common public viewpoint: today, any person understands that the country’s defenses would not be whole without nuclear weapons.

R.P. Are nuclear payloads being modernized?

R.I.: Today, everything necessary is being done to strengthen their security and reliability, and to improve their use in accordance with the plans approved by the state, the government, the Ministry of Defense, and the Russian Atomic Agency. This is not a stagnant complex, but rather one that is evolving and living a very dynamic life. New missile systems are also appearing, such as the Topol, which has been successfully added to our arsenal.

R.P. What tendencies can you note in the area of ammunition development?

R.I.: The most important factors for nuclear ammunition are security, reliability, and accuracy. I would especially point out accuracy. If you increase this characteristic twofold, then the effectiveness of your weapon increases to the third degree, in this case eight times over. This allows us to make more intellectual, cleverer ammunition. The implementation of the latest technological achievements allows us to make the tested payload more effective and more formidable.

R.P. According to some reports, the United States is developing a lightweight nuclear weapon, suitable for use in the field. Does Russia have any similar developments?

R.I.: Questions about whether or not to develop a new generation of nuclear weapons are in the hands of the highest authorities, that is, those of the commander in chief. In my personal opinion, the relevance of this decision is determined by some rather specific circumstances. Our military may develop a need for a tactical payload of a certain magnitude, in the course of an analysis and review of the country’s capabilities in certain aspects of warfare. If there is such a situation, then the required nuclear weapon will be developed in the shortest time possible. We have such an opportunity because we have retained all necessary personnel and technology, and a number of the technologies have been advanced significantly. We are prepared to respond to any challenge and to develop weapons that will ensure our military advantage in any conflict.

R.P. By what means were you able to preserve the staffing potential in such difficult times for the country?

R.I.: Of course, the situation was very grave, but we always told our specialists that these were temporary difficulties. As professionals and patriots, we had to continue the work under the circumstances at hand. On the other hand, we utilized all mechanisms of support for the scientists, including international cooperation, contracts, and a sufficiently large difference in wages. For key professionals, we tried to maintain an acceptable salary level, which took a lot of effort. The result has been positive—we have not actually lost any meaningful specialists, and we preserved the technologies, which are passed down hand to hand. In the early nineties, we had a much reduced influx of young people, which was in part caused by the fact that society and the state did not fully understand the role of the work that we were conducting. But those days are over, and we have long ago switched from the process of survival to the process of sustainable development.

R.P. When did the turning point occur?

R.I.: The situation varied in different sectors at different times. Before Perestroika, we accepted 185 young professionals a year, and over the past six years we have accepted 250 annually. In the early 1990s, it became clear that unless we take action, sooner or later, the future of the institute will be challenged. We adopted a work program with the younger generation, entered into contracts with more than 15 universities around the country, and created departments in the Sarov Physics and Technology University. All of this has allowed us to reverse this situation. The aging of the Institute was halted. Now, about 30 percent of our employees are younger than 33 years old—this is a good, normal situation, and we are maintaining it.

R.P. What is the average salary at the institute today?

R.I.: It varies greatly—one for scientists, another one for workers. Despite the fact that 2007 was a difficult year, we managed to raise the average salary by 18 percent, and this year we want to raise it by no less than 31 percent. We are watching how the country and the region are developing. We have the opportunity to attract young professionals, but it is already evident that unless we solve the housing problem for them, then we will have difficulties. We have an affordable housing program which last year concluded the construction of three residential buildings. The price of housing is constantly growing, so we need to maintain a high level of compensation, so that the youth have an opportunity to participate in this program.

R.P. Recently, more countries are declaring their nuclear status. Will it be hard to maintain the regiment of nuclear non-proliferation?

R.I.: When we say that there are new countries with nuclear weapons, we must understand that the nuclear potential of these states is very low. Moreover, they most likely have very primitive devices, which cannot pose a threat to our country. We must understand very clearly that this matter is not a military one but rather political, and when a country announces that it is in possession of nuclear weapons, the intention can be understood as “do not touch me—I am a nuclear power.”

R.P. In what areas do you maintain international cooperation?

R.I.: We have scientific relations with virtually all nuclear laboratories worldwide. We are collaborating with three nuclear laboratories in the United States—Los Alamos, Livermore, and Sunday [Sandia?]. We have close ties with the commissary for nuclear energy, and its military branch, which is responsible for nuclear weapons in France. We have a scientific connection with the Chinese Academy of Engineering Physics and with our counterparts from Great Britain. Together with the Americans, we are holding joint experiments in high density and particle energy physics, insofar as they do not deal with secret information and address topics on which we openly publish in scientific journals. Without this strong scientific foundation, we cannot keep the very high level of all the scientific and technical issues of Russia’s nuclear arsenal maintenance. Our overseas colleagues are world leaders in many areas. They have the most powerful computers and the most powerful nuclear facilities, so, of course, we are very interested in maintaining relations and seeing how they address these challenges. I believe that for a scientist to work in isolation is both unacceptable and impossible.

R.P. Are any of your developments used for peaceful purposes?

R.I.: From the very outset, we created several civilian units. Several hundred of our employees work for Gazprom. One of our shops makes drills for drilling wells and for retrieving oil from hard to access wells. We have a small diamond processing factory, and now we have begun to create a technology park within five kilometers of Sarov—the only Military Industrial Complex technology park in the country. Presently, there are already 15 companies operating there. We believe that the technology park should enable us to commercialize civilian technology. After some time and with some goodwill, we will achieve a breakthrough that is critical for all the “closed cities.”

R.P. Will the “closed” status of Sarov be revisited?

R.I.: This will be determined by the development of our state. If issues surrounding security, protection of materials, and protection of technologies are resolved, then sooner or later, access to the residential part of the city will be increasingly easy and liberal, which is essential for the city’s development. Anything that must be protected will always be protected very strictly, with the use of the most modern scientific and technological means available.

R.P. What are the prospects for the country’s nuclear forces for the next 20 years?

R.I.: Nuclear weapons, both now and in 20 years, will play a vital role. We have all the advanced technologies, so it is meaningless to abandon this very powerful deterrent. If you start to shift to non-nuclear precision weapons, you have to calculate what borders we have and in how many different directions we need to deter possible aggressors—this brings exorbitant expenses. In my opinion, strategic nuclear weapons are the best kind of protection for Russia.

DOE Concerned About LANL’s Capability to Protect Workers

The Department of Energy (DOE) recently wrote the Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in which they raised concerns about how the new management is not protecting workers from occupational hazards as required by federal safety and health requirements. DOE is also concerned about the delays in responding to the non-compliance reports by the new manager, the Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS).

On June 16, the DOE Director of the Office of Enforcement in the Office of Health, Safety and Security wrote LANL Director and President of LANS, Michael Anastasio, about “fundamental, laboratory-wide non-compliances in the LANL worker safety and health program.” DOE stated that LANS “failed to complete a review of laboratory work activities to identify locations where exposure assessments are appropriate to characterize and control occupational hazards.” This failure may result in increased exposures to airborne contaminants and adverse health effects for employees working in areas where the necessary controls have not been installed because there is inadequate hazard information.

In 2007, DOE conducted their annual environment, safety and health inspection at LANL. They reported continuing failures by LANL in identifying and controlling worker exposures to biological, chemical and physical hazards. DOE is so concerned about the continued failures that they have required LANS to respond within 30 days about how the failures have been addressed.

The letter comes at a time when current and former DOE workers held rallies across the country petitioning for reforms of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. Rallies took place in Las Vegas, Nevada; Denver, Colorado; Cleveland, Ohio; Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Espanola, New Mexico.

Many of these workers became ill when they were exposed to radioactive, toxic and hazardous materials while working at DOE nuclear weapons facilities. Sick workers are eligible for compensation and medical coverage under the Program. But under the existing guidelines, the sick workers are required to prove the link between their illness and occupation. The workers are petitioning for reforms to streamline the process.

The Los Alamos Project on Worker Safety, an organization of former and current LANL workers who became ill from such exposures, hosted the rally in Espanola on June 25, which was attended by about 100 people. Speakers included Michele Jacquez-Ortiz, District Director for Congressman Tom Udall. She read from a prepared statement. Representative Udall said, “These workers are the unsung heroes of American military strength. Their work has made it possible for America to build the most powerful military and science system on earth. They should not be forced to spend their remaining years battling both cancer and their government.” Representative Udall introduced legislation so that the Program would automatically covers LANL workers.

Activists are distressed by the continuing problems with protecting workers at LANL. Joni Arends, of CCNS, said, “Whether during the Cold War or today, workers are being exposed to dangerous materials without the necessary protections. LANL and LANS must comply fully with the federal worker safety and health regulations. To do otherwise, is just plain wrong.”


This has been the CCNS News Update. For more information about this or other nuclear safety issues, please visit our website at nuclearactive.org.

[Download a copy of the enforcement letter here.]