 |
|
|
| | | published Thursday, February 05, 2009 | 6772 Views :: 2 Comments | |  |
Dear Senator,
We write to express concern over the $1 billion proposed for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in S.336, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. With Congress seeking to make substantial cuts in the total price tag of the bill, we strongly urge you to eliminate the $1 billion for NNSA. This money is not a cost effective way of accomplishing S.336’s primary stated goals of creating jobs, restoring economic growth and strengthening America’s middle class. Moreover, it would be premature to make major investments in NNSA’s nuclear weapons research and production infrastructure, which the agency proposes to revitalize through “Complex Transformation.” NNSA has a long history of cost overruns and poor management, and is one of the least likely agencies to give taxpayers a sound return on their investment when economic stimulus is so vitally needed. Finally, it is unlikely that this money will go towards preventing terrorism.
Congress has repeatedly noted that the United States lacks clear nuclear weapons policies. Adding $1 billion to NNSA’s $9 billion budget is an 11% increase, a poor investment when there is such a policy vacuum. The 2008 Defense Authorization Act requires that the Obama Administration complete a nuclear posture and policy review. Until the Obama Administration addresses such issues as posture, force structure, size and scope of the nuclear complex, it would be premature to make any decisions about what infrastructure projects are needed. Conversely, making major investments in the complex could potentially prejudice the final outcome of any posture review that the Obama Administration conducts.
Since its inception in 1999, the NNSA has continually experienced significant cost overruns and oversight problems. According to several GAO reports, NNSA had not been fully effective in managing its safeguards and security program. The reports found that there was weakness in security culture, organization, staffing and training. Additionally, two of NNSA’s major projects, the National Ignition Facility (NIF) and the Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility, “experienced major delays and cost overruns because of problems with project management and are still not complete.” The NIF alone, originally expected to cost approximately $2.1 billion upon its completion in 2002, is still not operational and is expected to cost more than $3 billion. While this money is likely not going to these projects, NNSA should not be rewarded for their poor track record with an additional $1 billion.
Senators should also realize that these funds are unlikely to go towards preventing nuclear terrorism, as DOE spends at least 67 percent of its budget on weapons. The Director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) did not mention using any potential stimulus money for securing the incredibly vulnerable highly enriched uranium, which only a few years ago was a priority security issue that could not be addressed due to a lack of funding. Also, these funds will not likely go towards expediting the removal of bomb-grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Recent security tests failure demonstrate that the Lab’s nuclear materials pose a significant risk to its surrounding residential community.
With Congress seeking to make substantial cuts in the total price tag of the bill, we strongly urge you to eliminate the $1 billion for NNSA. Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Should you have any questions, please contact:
Nickolas Roth
Program Director
Alliance For Nuclear Accountability
(p) 202-544-0217
(f) 202-544-6143
nroth@ananuclear.org
National Organization Signatures
Danielle Brian
Executive Director
Project On Government Oversight
David Culp
Legislative Representative
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Ambassador Robert Grey
Director
Bipartisan Security Group
Susan Gordon
Director
Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
Darryl Fagin
Legislative Director
Americans for Democratic Action, Inc.
William Hartung
Director
Arms and Security Initiative, New America Foundation
Mark W. Harrison
Director, Peace with Justice Program
United Methodist General Board of Church and Society
John Isaacs
Executive Director
Council for a Livable World
Terri Lodge
Director of Government Affairs
Ploughshares Fund
Coordinator Arms Control Advocacy Collaborative
Paul Kawika Martin
Organizing, Political and PAC Director
Peace Action & Peace Action Education Fund
Lorelei Kelly
National Security Director
American Progressive Caucus Policy Foundation
Susan Shaer
Executive Director
Women's Action for New Directions
Paul F. Walker, Ph.D.
Director, Security and Sustainability
Global Green USA
Dr. Peter Wilk
Executive Director
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Ron Zucker
Legislative Director
2020 Vision
State Organizations
Joni Arends
Executive Director
Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety
Beatrice Brailsford
Program director
Snake River Alliance, Idaho
Jay Coghlan
Executive Director
Nuke Watch, New Mexico
Amanda Hill
Development Director
Georgia Women's Action for New Directions
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs, California
Eileen McCabe
Acting for a Greener World
Nuclear Policy Advisor, Utah
Judith Mohling
Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center, Colorado
Alice Slater
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, NY
Deanna Taylor
Green Party of Utah
National delegate
|
| Comments |
by Insider on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 | |
You folks are incredibly stupid. You need to do your homework before you oppose legislation. The largest part of the $1 billion in the NNSA package was $360 million for renewable energy generation. Specifically, the NNSA would have build over 100 MW of electrical generating capacity through wind turbines and solar PV. This would have allowed the NNSA to generate over 28% of its electricity from renewables and thereby lead the nation in this area. Also, the NNSA would have saved over $25 million in annual electricity costs. However, you helped to kill this tremendous initiative.
|
|
|
by Cassandra on Wednesday, March 11, 2009 | |
In response to Insider's comment:
It appears as though the fear mongering that has crippled most of the citizens of this world has unfortunately had an effect on your reasoning. To accept a minute allotment of funding that could potentially lead to sustainable infrastructure whilst ignoring that much, much more is being allotted to nuclear annihilation is illogical, and frankly, "stupid." If you were starving, would you eat your own stomach?
|
|
You must be logged in to post a comment. You can login here |
|
 |
|