The U.S. nuclear weapons program is handled by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) at the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE). The NNSA is responsible for the design and production of nuclear weapons for the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The Pentagon could be considered as the ultimate “customer” for the NNSA’s nuclear product. Secretary of Energy, Rick Perry is responsible for the oversight of a large group of national laboratories that are in charge of research and development for nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants.
The President of the U.S. is pushing for a massive update program for the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In order to accomplish this, the NNSA at the DoE and the Pentagon must work closely together. Unfortunately, according to a report just published by the DoE, there are five major areas of concern they have with the U.S. nuclear weapons program.
The number one area of concern consists of the fact that there is a total lack of “lack of sustained national leadership focus and priority.” The number two concern is the “blurred accountability” between the DoE and NNSA over the mission of the nuclear program. The number three concern is the “lack of proven management practices, including a dysfunctional relationship between line managers and mission-support staffs." The number four concern is “dysfunctional relationships” between the government and its management and site operators. And, finally, the number five concern is “Insufficient collaboration between DOE/NNSA and Department of Defense weapons customers, resulting in misunderstanding, distrust, and frustration.”
Perry is scheduled to testify this coming Wednesday before the House Appropriations Committee about the fiscal 2019 DoE budget. He will be faced with intense questioning about the U.S. nuclear program and specifically whether he is aware of the report on the five big concerns with the program. The nuclear weapons portion of the proposed DoE budget consumes about half of the 2019 DoE budget.
The new report is the second in a series of reports generated over the past four years aimed at fixing what is considered by many to be a broken and dysfunction nuclear weapons program. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) began its review of the nuclear weapons program inn 2014 when it first mentioned the five big concerns. Now the (NASEM) is tasked with the problem of dealing with the five concerns.
The U.S. just published its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). This is a once every eight years review of the U.S. policy with respect to the development and use of nuclear weapons. Because the NPR discusses strategic issues, the authors of the new DoE report believe that this is the right time to deal with their concerns because they find that many of the problems that they are focused on are caused by what they consider to be “lack of strategic thought.”
The study says, “With the release of the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review and the appointment of a new NNSA administrator, NNSA is faced with an excellent opportunity — and challenge — to move from a tactical to a strategic approach for executing the critical mission of the enterprise. The emphasis in both cases must be on creating a strategic vision that is clearly connected to mission. This is not a call to develop new processes and reports per se, which should follow only once clear and well-rationalized direction has been set.”
