The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change Ahead http://www.itpnm.com TM INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Exchange May 16, 2013 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski 2012 brought many challenges to the NNSA: the Y-12 Security Incident; problems at Los Alamos with a new security perimeter intrusion system; projected multi-$b cost overruns for the B-61 LEP, the Uranium Processing Facility in Oak Ridge, the MOX facility in Savannah River, and the CMRR facility in Los Alamos; problems with achieving ignition goals at the LLNL National Ignition Facility; and difficulties in the award of the new consolidated Y-12/Pantex M&O contract. These issues have once again focused Congressional, GAO and IG attention on the NNSA, and has resulted in Legislation to look once again at the original construct that separated NNSA from DOE. This presentation will explore the complex current landscape of NNSA, the establishment and expansion of the role of the new NA- 00 organization (Infrastructure & Operations), and what the future may hold for the organization as we head into FY14 and beyond.
TM TM TM TM http://w ww.itpnm.com TM TM http://www.itpnm.com TM The Transformation of the Weapons Complex An eighth year of examining the future of the U.S. Nuclear Security Enterprise looking into the second decade of the new Millennium Complex Transformation and the Future of the U.S. Nuclear Security Enterprise The Proposed Restructuring of the Nation s Nuclear Weapons Complex past, present and future? Complex Transformation Creating the National Security Enterprise http://www.itpnm.com The Proposed Restructuring of the Nation s Nuclear Weapons Complex past, present and future? INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Meeting May 21, 2009 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski Complex Transformation The Nuclear Spring Strategic Implications of Current Events and U.S. Nuclear Policy on the Future of the U.S. Nuclear Security Enterprise, the Stockpile and Deterrence The Road to Complex 2030 http://ww w.itpnm.com A look back, one year later, on the proposed restructuring of the Nation s Nuclear Weapons Complex INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Meeting May 15, 2008 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski http://www.itpnm.com INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Meeting May 20, 2010 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski The Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure Task Force Report R t (NWCITF) http://www.itpnm.com http://www.itpnm.com Historical Perspectives and Future Implications INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Meeting May 18, 2006 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Meeting May 17, 2007 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change Ahead INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Exchange May 16, 2013 Taos, New Mexico Jack Jekowski 2012 brought many challenges to the NNSA: the Y-12 Security Incident; problems at Los Alamos with a new security perimeter intrusion system; projected multi-$b cost overruns for the B-61 LEP, the Uranium Processing Facility in Oak Ridge, the MOX facility in Savannah River, and the CMRR facility in Los Alamos; problems with achieving ignition goals at the LLNL National Ignition Facility; and difficulties in the award of the new consolidated Y-12/Pantex M&O contract. These issues have once again focused Congressional, GAO and IG attention on the NNSA, and has resulted in Legislation to look once again at the original construct that separated NNSA from DOE. This presentation will explore the complex current landscape of NNSA, the establishment and expansion of the role of the new NA- 00 organization (Infrastructure & Operations), and what the future may hold for the organization as we head into FY14 and beyond. Weathering the Perfect Storm: Implications of 2012 events on the Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE) ANS Trinity Section and INMM SW Chapter Joint Dinner Meeting November 2, 2012 Santa Fe, New Mexico Jack Jekowski 2
Evolution of the DOE Executive Office of the President Energy Policy Office (1973) Manhattan Engineer District (1942-1946) (19 3) Atomic Energy Commission (1947-1975) Federal Energy Office (1973-1974) 1974) Federal Energy Administration (1974-1977) Energy Research and Development Administration (1975-1977) Department of Energy (1977-2000) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1975) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (1977-Present) Federal Power Commission (1920) Department of Energy (2000- Present) National Nuclear Security Administration (2000-?) Title XXXII National Nuclear Security Administration Public Law 106-65, October 5, 1999 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 See: http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourhistory/timeline A Year of Change Ahead 3
DOE Today (with NNSA) Note: Ernest Moniz was nominated by President Obama as the new Secretary of Energy on March 4th. Niele Miller is currently Acting Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and Acting NNSA Administrator. Dr. Moniz s confirmation is currently on hold by Senator Lindsey Graham President Barack Obama today announces in the East Room of the White House that he will nominate, from left, MIT physics professor Ernest Moniz for Energy Secretary, and Gina McCarthy as administrator of the EPA (March 4, 2013) In July, 2011, the Secretary of Energy moved the Offices of Environmental Management and Legacy Management to report to the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security David Huizenga remains Acting Assistant Secretary 4
Some History Late 1980 s Congressional attention on DOE Security issues Rep. Dingle Environmental issues closure of Rocky Flats and Sec. Watkins Tiger Teams 1990 s End of Cold War and cessation of underground nuclear testing Peace dividend sought downsizing of the Weapons Complex started Increased focus on security, environmental compliance and costs Science-based Stockpile Stewardship Program started 3 years of DOE Abolishment Act 2000 s Formation of NNSA 9/11 Increased scrutiny and criticism of security problems, project management issues, compliance and cost overruns Further downsizing i Overskei Task Force, Complex 2030, Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE) 2010 s Large cost overruns for facilities and programs Continuing security problems, project management issues and environmental problems 5
Two Decades of Whitewater t for the NSE riticism ngress s, severity of cr ns taken by Con equency of audits nd adverse actio Fre an 1979 Three Mile Island 1986 Chernobyl Dingell Hearings 1987 K 25 shut down 1988 SRS Reactors shut down DNFSB created 1989 Rocky Flats Raid 1991 Tiger Teams 1990 GAO and IG identification of DOE contract management as High Risk area still rated that way in 2013 Galvin, PFIAB, 120 day report, 90 day Study, Foster Reports, Chiles Report, Wen Ho Lee Three years of increasing detail and support for the DOE Abolishment Act H.R. 1649 and S. 896 106th Congress, 1999 Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE result in various task force reviewsrecommendingdramatic recommending dramatic changestothe the Nuclear Weapons Complex March 1, 2000 Official formation of NNSA Defenses NPR New Triad Non-Nuclear & Nuclear Strike Capabilities Bombers ICBMs NNSA Formation and 9/11 Continuingsecurity and management problems at LANL and across DOE/NNSA SLBMs Command & Control, Intelligence & Planning Responsive Infrastructure Honeymoon period, NNSA restructuring and public/congressional distraction from 9/11 Criticism and discontent picks up again, August, 2002 November 7, 2003 H.R. 2754 Congressional mandate to compete Lab Contracts April 30, 2003, decision i to compete LANL Complex 2030 Minot Barksdale and Taiwan Nuclear Incidents DoD Nuclear Program Reports January 30, 2004, More LANL Security Problems LLNL Contract Sec. of Energy Change Sept 30, announcesschedule June1 1, 2006LANL 2007 to compete Contract change contracts of Labs Amb. Brooks LANL RFP Resigns Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE/NNSA and external pressures from Global War on Terror National Security Enterprise Reliable Replacement Warhead Funding Zeroed JASON Report NNSA Contract RFI Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure Task Force CRS, I.G., GAO reports 2006 NNSA Complex 2030 plan & PEIS Defense Science Board NNWA 2006 AAAS Nuclear Weapons Program Review RRW/LEP concepts Robinson Secretary Chu testimony Confirmed A critical period with respect to the future of NNSA, DOE and the Nuclear Security Enterprise Administration goal of a world without nuclear weapons April 2009 Acquisition Strategy Report Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the U.S (April 1, 2009) DoD Quadrennial Defense Review (2010) Yucca Mtn abandoned Prague Barack Speech Obama Global l Strike President Command stand up START ends 2010: The Nuclear Spring Continuing Negative Reports: LANL Safety incidents LANL Cyber security LLNL NIF Budget DNFSB Risk Mgt Protective Force Issues DoD/DOE Nuke security GAO NSE Cost Concerns Nuclear Posture Review (2010) 13% increase for NNSA? New START Treaty signed Nuclear Security Summit NPT Review Conference National Security Strategy Option to reduce stockpile to 300 weapons EM moved to Under Sec. for Nuclear Security DOE combined with Department of Commerce? NNSA stands alone? Closure for Labs proposed The Dominoes falling Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons States: DPRK Iran Wildcards : India Pakistan Israeli response to Iran Global Economic Crisis Modernization ofnuclear Stockpiles and delivery systems: Russia China France U.K. Y 12/Pantex/SRS Tritium contracts combined Sandia Contract to be bid in 2013 National Academies Report on Weapons Labs Nuclear Weapons Deemphasized in National Security, Nuclear Stockpile numbers released Late 1990 s 9/11 2001 Early2000 s Late 2000 s Osama Bin Laden Dead New Millennium 2 nd Decade Clinton Administration Bush Administration 1 st Obama Administration A Disturbing Trend Repeating Itself 6
What Future Path Awaits the NSE? rity of criticism en by Congress Frequency of audits, seve and adve rse actions take 1979 Three Mile Island 1986 Chernobyl Dingell Hearings 1987 K 25 shut down 1988 SRS Reactors shut down DNFSB created 1989 Rocky Flats Raid 1991 Tiger Teams 1990 GAO and IG identification of DOE contract management as High Risk area still rated that way in 2013 Galvin, PFIAB, 120 day report, 90 day Study, Foster Reports, ChilesReport, WenHoLee Three years of increasing detail and support for the DOE Abolishment Act H.R. 1649 and S. 896 106th Congress, 1999 M NNS Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE result in various task force reviews recommending dramatic changes to the Nuclear Weapons Complex Late 1990 s Clinton Administration ex e Complex 2030 Minot Barksdale and Taiwan Nuclear Incidents DoD Nuclear Program Reports Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE/NNSA and external pressures from Global War on Terror National Security Enterprise CRS, I.G., GAO reports 2006 NNSA Complex 2030 plan & PEIS Defense Science Board NNWA 2006 AAAS Nuclear Weapons Program Review concepts urity Problems 2006 LANL t change Amb. Brooks Resigns Reliable Replacement Warhead Funding Zeroed JASON Report LLNL Contract Change Sept 30, 2007 NNSA Contract RFI A critical period with respect to the future of NNSA, DOE and the Nuclear Security Enterprise Administration goal of a world without nuclear weapons April 2009 Acquisition Strategy Report Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the U.S (April 1, 2009) 2010: The Nuclear Spring Continuing Negative Reports: LANL Safety incidents LANL Cyber security LLNL NIF Budget DNFSB Risk Mgt Protective Force Issues DoD/DOE Nuke security GAO NSE Cost Concerns 13% increase for NNSA? New START Treaty signed Nuclear Security Summit Robinson Secretary Chu DoD Quadrennial NPT Review testimony Confirmed Defense Review (2010) Conference Yucca Mtn National Security abandoned Prague Barack Speech Strategy Obama Nuclear Posture President Review (2010) Late 2000 s Global Strike Command stand up START ends 1 st Obama Administration Option to reduce stockpile to 300 weapons EM moved to Under Sec. for Nuclear Security DOE combined with Department of Commerce? NNSA stands alone? Closure for Labs proposed The Dominoes falling Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons States: DPRK Iran Wildcards : India Pakistan Israeli response to Iran Global Economic Crisis Modernization of Nuclear Stockpiles and delivery systems: Russia China France U.K. Y 12/Pantex/SRS Tritium contracts combined Sandia Contract to be bid in 2013 National Academies Report on Weapons Labs Nuclear Weapons Deemphasized in National Security, Nuclear Stockpile numbers released Osama Bin Laden Dead New Millennium 2 nd Decade Cost Overruns B-61 LEP CMRR Facility at LANL UPF at Oak Ridge MOX Facility at SRNL LANL Security System Security? Y-12 Incident DOE IG reports DOE/IG-0868 and DOE/IG-0875 LANL SPO Incident Big Science LLNL National Ignition Facility Legacy Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Yucca Mountain Management Contract consolidation Y-12/Pantex Bid protest GAO Reports DOE IG-0874 Operational Efficiency and Cost Savings Contract and Financial Assistance Award Management Cyber Security Energy Supply Environmental Cleanup Human Capital Management Nuclear Waste Disposal Safeguards and Security Stockpile Stewardship 7
N A - 1 0 N A - 4 0 TM Current NNSA Organizational Structuret Doug Fremont was reassigned in early September as a result of the Y 12 Security Incident Jeff Harrell, NA 15 ADA, took over as acting NA 70, and recently returned to NA 15 as BG Sandra Finan, Principal ADA for Defense Programs, has been assigned to that acting position. Note: On December 7 th, the DoD announced the reassignment of Gen. Finan to head the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center at Kirtland AFB, N.M the end of January, 2013 Note: On January 31, 2013, retired AF Col. Steve Asher was named Acting NA 70 Associate Administrator. AdmJohn M. Richardson, November 2012 New Management concepts for NA 00 and NNSA released on February 20, 2013 Doing the Right things Right, At The Right Time Neile is Acting Administrator. Tom D Agostino gave notice of his intention to retire on January 18, 2013 (just before the Inauguration) after 36 years of federal service, and 5 1/2 years as the NNSA Administrator and Under Secretary for Nuclear Security. Oversight of Site Offices moved out of NA 10 in March, 2012. Note: on February 20, 2013, Neile Miller announced that Site Office Security functions would be moved to report directly through the Site Offices to NA 00 and her. NA 70 s role would be changed to include policy and oversight (similar to HSS). A new Business System Management Plan was also released On November 20 th, NNSA announced that Keven Smith would be moving to become the manager for the DOE Office of River Protection (ORP), EM, effective December 30 th. Juan Griego, currently Deputy Manager of LASO, will serve as the Acting LASO Manager upon Smith s departure. Transparency NA-1 N A - 0 0 Measurement, Analysis & Improvement NNSA Production Office (NPO) set up in June 2012 to oversee combined Y 12/Pantex (and SR Tritium) M&O contract. Award made to Bechtel/LM team (CNS Consolidated Nuclear Security) in early January 2013, but B&W protested transition on hold Sandia and KCP contracts may be combined and bid in 2013/2014 timeframe 8 Updated March 17, 2013
NNSA Transformational Actions Program Executive Officer (VACANT) REORGANIZATION STATUS NA 00 Associate Administrator Infrastructure & Operations 00 Reorganization Status Note: The establishment of the of Office Infrastructure and Operations as the fulcrum of NNSA is one of three major initiatives designed to address criticism by Congress and others concerning cost overrun, security and other problems. Another initiative ii i was the establishment of the Office of Acquisition and Project Management (NA APM) to integrate acquisition and project management staff to improve the way NNSA manages and executes major construction projects. A third initiative is to use the DoD Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) to conduct rigorous external analysis to identify issues and problems in major programs. Executive Secretariat Transformation Employee Concerns Program 00.1 Deputy Associate Administrator *Est. 15 Sep 2012 00 PEO selection in progress. Detail: D. Dearolph, Special Advisor to NA 00 Field Coordination Office 00.2 Savannah River Field Office 00 SV Nevada Field Office 00 NV Livermore Field Office 00 LL Sustainability Center of Excellence 00 60 Environment, Safety & Health 00 10 Infrastructure & Capital Planning 00 20 Security Sandia Field Office Operations 00 30 00 SN Kansas City Field Office 00 KC Packaging & Los Alamos Field Office Quality Management Transportation 00 LA 00 40 Center of Excellence 00 70 NNSA Production Office Facility Operations 00 NPO 00 50 Legend I Established 26 JUN 2012 II Established 13 February 2013 III In development with NA 70 Doing the Right things Right, At The Right Time N A - 1 0 Tran nsparency NA-1 N A - 4 0 N A - 0 0 Measurement, Analysis & Improvement 9
NA-00 Creating New Partnerships A great deal of effort has been invested in creating NA-00 and the wrap-around management concepts that are hoped will help transform NNSA and address Congressional concerns Doing the Right things Right, At The Right Time N A - 1 0 Transparency NA-1 N A - 4 0 N A - 0 0 Measurement, Analysis & Improvement 10
More Whitewater t Lies Ahead FY14 Congressional Hearings Sequestration/Budget issues IG and GAO reports Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the NSE NPR Implementation Study New concepts for nuclear stockpile 3+2 strategy Four warheads for ballistic missiles (W76, W78, W87, and W88) modified to three life-extended, interoperable warheads deployable across delivery platforms Three bomb/cruise missile warheads (B61-3/-4/-10, B61-7/-11, B83, and W80-1) modified d to two types, with B-61 variants interchangeable across delivery platforms Global efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons Continuing repercussions from Fukushima accident Proliferation of nuclear weapons technology Global terrorism 11
Recent Congressional Hearings Early sessions of the Energy & Water and Armed Services Committees Senator Feinstein (D-Calif.), Chair of the Senate Energy & Water Subcommittee: serious doubts about NNSA s ability to properly manage projects and provide necessary oversight [of contractors]...nnsa must do more to overcome these management and oversight deficiencies to restore confidence that it can deliver projects on time and on budget. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Ranking Member of Senate Energy & Water Subcommittee: If the NNSA does not find a more effective ec e way to deal with design of these large, multi-billion dollar facilities it s going to lose Congressional support we have to do a better job at this. That s my overwhelming message. 12
Sequestration ti and the Deficit it Presidential Request NNSA FY14 Request: $11.65B, an increase of 1.6% over FY13 CR and 5.9% over FY12 NA-10 NA-40 NA-20 http://energy.gov/cfo/downloads/fy-2014-budget-justification NA-70 13
2013 DOE IG Recommendations Apply the Quadrennial Technology Review (QTR) strategic planning concept to the Department's entire science and technology portfolio; Eliminate duplicative National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) functions; Establish a "BRAC-style" commission to analyze the Department's laboratory and technology complex; Reprioritize iti the Department's t' environmental remediation efforts; and Re-evaluate the current structure of the Department's physical security apparatus 14
GAO Reports Criticize i NNSA A series of reports in the past year have criticized NNSA s overall management of the Nuclear Security Enterprise 90% of DOE s budget is spent on M&O Contracts NNSA s problems are not caused by excessive oversight, but instead result from ineffective departmental t oversight NNSA s creation has not yet had the desired effect of fully resolving these management problems. Is the M&O contracting vehicle likewise headed for major change? 15
Congressional Commission i on NNSA Section 3166, FY13 Defense Authorization Act: There is established a congressional advisory panel to be known as the Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the Nuclear Security Enterprise The purpose of the advisory panel is to examine options and make recommendations for revising the governance structure, mission, and management of the nuclear security enterprise. Membership: Gen. Richard Mies (co-chair) Rep. Heather Wilson Rep. Ellen Tauscher Rep. David Hobson Frank Miller T.J. Glauthier Panel start delayed due to Sequestration 180 Day Report due after start Final Report due February 1, 2014 Norm Augustine (co-chair) Dr. Michael Anastasio* Rep. John Spratt Adm. Kirkland Donald William Schneider Gregory Jaczko * Dr. Anastasio was the last member of the Panel selected the end of April. The start date and meeting schedule for the Panel has not been announced. 16
NPR Implementation ti Study Initiated in 2011, but not yet released Purportedly includes recommendations for further stockpile reductions beyond New START Levels The QDR analysis strongly suggested that the Department must further rebalance Consistent, overarching message its policy, doctrine, and capabilities to better support the following six key Until such time as the Administration s goal of a world free of nuclear weapons missions: is achieved, nuclear capabilities will be maintained as a core mission for the Defend the United States and support civil authorities at home; Department of Defense. We will maintain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear Succeed in counterinsurgency, stability, and counterterrorism operations; arsenal to deter attack on the UnitedStates, and onourallies our and partners partners. Build the security capacity of partner states; Deter and defeat aggression in anti access environments; Prevent proliferation and counter weapons of mass destruction; and Operate effectively in cyberspace. Joint Tri Lab Director statement on Nuclear Posture Review: NPR Policy Framework: We believe that the approach Preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism; outlined in the NPR, which excludes Reducing the role of U.S. nuclear weapons; further nuclear testing and includes Maintaining strategic deterrence and stability at reduced the consideration of the full range of pursuing a safe, secure, nuclear force levels; life extension options (refurbishment and effective nuclear Strengthening regional deterrence and reassuring U.S. allies and of existing warheads, reuse of arsenal at the lowest levels partners; and nuclear components from different consistent with U.S. and Sustaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal. warheads and replacement of allied interests as we nuclear components based on pursue the peace and Our Armed Forces will always be a previously tested designs), provides security of a world free of cornerstone of our security, but they the necessary technical flexibility to nuclear weapons. must be complemented. Our security manage the nuclear stockpile into With this QTR, we bind also depends on diplomats who can the future with an acceptable level together multiple energy act in every corner oftheworld world of risk. technologies, as well as multiple DOE energy technology programs, in the Four enduring national interests: common purpose of solving our Security of the U.S., allies and partners It is possible that our deterrence goals energy challenges. In addition, Prosperity both in the U.S. and abroad can be achieved with a smaller nuclear the QTR provides a multi year Valuesand respect at home and abroad force, which would reduce the number framework for our planning. International Order that promotes peace, of nuclear weapons in our inventory as Energy investments are multiyear, multi decade security and opportunities well as their role in U.S. national security strategy. investments. Given this time horizon, we need to take a The U.S. will: longer view. U.S. economic and security interests are inextricably Pursue the goal of a world without Nuclear weapons linked to developments in the arc extending form the Strengthen the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean Present a clear choice to Iran and North Korea region and South Asia while the U.S. military will Secure vulnerable nuclear weapons and material continue to contribute to security globally, we will of Support peaceful nuclear energy necessity rebalance toward the Asia Pacific region. Counter biological threats Madeline Creedon, Asst. Sec. of Defense, Global Strategic Affairs, Senate Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, April 17, 2013: the administration has been conducting an NPR implementation study to review our nuclear deterrence requirements and operational plans to ensure they address today s threats The implementation study focuses on the five key strategic objectives established in the Nuclear Posture Review : Preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism; Reducing the role of U.S. nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy; Maintaining strategic deterrence and stability at reduced nuclear force levels; Strengthening regional deterrence and reassuring U.S. allies and partners; and Sustaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal. The analysis is not yet complete, but our preliminary view based on work to date, is that t further reductions consistent t with the national security environment will be possible and that continuing modernization of our nuclear capabilities is essential. 17
The Four Statesmen t The Nuclear Security Project: Toward a World Without Nuclear Weapons Wall Street Journal op-ed series A World Free of Nuclear Weapons January 4, 2007 Toward a Nuclear-Free World, January 15, 2008 How to Protect Our Nuclear Deterrent, January 20, 2010 Deterrence in the Age of Nuclear Proliferation, March 7, 2011 Next Steps in Reducing the Nuclear Risks, March 5, 2013 Two Goals: Generating global momentum among governments, political leaders and the public to build broad international support for the vision and steps to reduce the risks posed by nuclear weapons. Addressing the tough technical and policy issues involved in taking concrete steps toward building a world without nuclear weapons http://www.nuclearsecurityproject.org 18
The Nuclear Security Project Ten Steps Work with leaders of countries with nuclear weapons to turn the goal of a world without nuclear weapons into a joint enterprise; Discard Cold War posture of deployed nuclear weapons for U.S. and Russian forces to reduce the danger of accidental, mistaken or unauthorized launch; Substantially reduce nuclear forces in all countries that possess them; Eliminate short-range battlefield nuclear weapons designed to be forward deployed; Adopt a process to bring the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty into effect; Secure all nuclear weapons and materials globally to the highest possible standards; Develop elop a new international system stem to manage the risks associated with producing fuel for nuclear power; Halt the production globally of plutonium and highly enriched uranium for weapons purposes; phase out the use of HEU in civil commerce and remove weapons-usable uranium from research facilities around the world and render it safe; Redouble efforts to resolve regional conflicts that give rise to new nuclear powers; and Strengthen verification and enforcement capabilities. 19
ATi Time of fgreat tuncertainty t Partisan political battles Budget Deficit Congressional elections of 2014 Obama Administration push to deemphasize nuclear deterrence NPR Implementation Plan imminent Future of NNSA and Stockpile is in question International Nuclear and WMD Security Threats Iran, DPRK, Syria, Middle East, Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups 20
ATi Time of fgreat tuncertainty t Global political strife Continuing saga of the Arab Spring Changes in global leadership Global Economic Crisis U.S. debt and deficit spending Euro problems Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Spain Italy next? Climate Change National Security issues - growing indicators Disparate perspectives on Nuclear Stockpiles U.S. and U.K. de-emphasizing role of nuclear deterrent Russia, China, and Pakistan continuing to rely on Stockpiles as core national security strategy upgrading their stockpiles 21
The Landscape Ahead Future Drivers Partisan political battles NPR Implementation Study Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the NSE Obama Administration push to deemphasize nuclear deterrence and employ diplomatic efforts to create new International ti Order Global political strife Continuing evolution of the Arab Spring Changes in global leadership Global Economic Crisis U.S. debt and deficit spending Euro problems Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italy Climate Change growing indicators of irreversible changes International Nuclear and WMD Security Threats Iran, DPRK, Syria, Middle East, Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups Disparate perspectives es on Nuclear Stockpiles U.S. and U.K. de-emphasizing role of nuclear deterrent; France satisfied with status quo Russia, China, and Pakistan continuing to rely on Stockpiles as core national security strategy upgrading their stockpiles 22
AL Long View in a Time of fgreat tuncertainty t A column to continue the discussion of Externalities and their impact on the INMM mission Based on techniques employed by Global Business Network and Peter Schwartz, customized for use in the National Security environment (see http://www.gbn.com) Designed to challenge the reader to think about what might be Members encouraged to provide topics or guest author Poses strategic questions to the membership Columns to date (since Fall of 2010) Fall 2010 Taking the Long View Winter 2011 Focusing on the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Spring 2011 Preparing for Social Chain Reactions Summer 2011 A Strategic Inflection Point? The Nuclear Crisis in Japan Fall 2011 The Changing Face of INMM Winter 2012 Focusing on the Future of Safeguards and Nonproliferation Spring 2012 Looking Back at a Decade of Tumult Summer 2012 Sustaining the Institute Fall 2012 INMM s International Role Winter 2013 Challenges and Opportunities Ahead Spring 2013 Readjusting Priorities Summer 2013 As the World Turns Toward a More Dangerous Place What should the INMM s role be in a world defined by the new International Order and how should we be preparing today to fill that role in the future? 23
Taking the Long View Questions Challenges to the INMM membership: How will the world deal with the untenable situations in Iran and DPRK? What happens if other nation-states similarly pursue nuclear weapons? How are other nations responding to President Obama s global nuclear initiatives what impact will those responses have on the INMM? What will be the world-wide response to the first terrorist nuclear event (either nuclear or dispersal)? Can nuclear forensics provide the deterrence needed to prevent terrorist attacks? Will unilateral reductions in the U.S. stockpile influence the decision of other Nuclear Weapons States to further reduce their own stockpiles? What is the evolving role of the United Nations and IAEA in the new International Order proposed by President Barack Obama? What scientific, technological l and policy innovations can INMM promote to make the world a safer place? Should INMM have an interactive web presence (social network)? How will the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant accident impact the future of the Nuclear Renaissance? 24
What is the Future Path? One scenario construct: Consolidation The reduction in the global threat allows the consolidation of the Nuclear Security Enterprise into a new entity that maintains a minimal nuclear deterrent while scientific resources are re-directed to climate change and renewable energy issues. NPT Regime is strengthened Iran nuke program shut down DPRK abandons Nuke program U.N role grows source material CTBT enters into force Article VI of NPT pursued Pakistan nukes secured Peaceful use of nuclear power NSA Futu ure DOE/N The Global Nuclear Posture Labs/Weapons Program move to new entity New national security missions funded for Labs Revitalization of stockpile funding Direct WFO link to DoD NPR consensus Replacement option exercised Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead As new nuclear-capable weapons states emerge, the NPT is abandoned and the U.S. and other G-5 states revitalize their stockpiles. The U.S. prepares to withdraw from the CTBT to test a new replacement warhead. A new organizational entity is implemented to support a 21st Century nuclear arms race and the National Laboratories are infused with new war-related funding. Global Zero The reduced d global l threat t delays transformation ti initiativesiti Nuclear Security Enterprise and results in significant weapons funding decrease at the Labs as budget pressures redirect needed funding to social, energy and environmental programs. Confidence in the stockpile gradually erodes, forcing concessions in arms control negotiations that assist the Global Zero movement. NPT abandoned DPRK tests again Iran tests NWS test new designs Other states move toward nuclear Pakistan loses control of Nukes Global proliferation and an increased terrorist threat provide impetus to support NSE Transformation plans and Life Extension Programs as Labs struggle to maintain a reliable stockpile in an austere fiscal environment, while the world braces for war. NNSA and DOE remain intact Status quo for LEPs and Complex NPR stays ambiguous Budgets continue to decline Can the DOE/NNSA and the Laboratories develop robust strategies to prepare for dramatically different worlds? 25
Which h Landscape Does the Future Hold? Taking the Long View in a Time of Great Uncertainty A discontinuity event? Path Toward World Peace? Status Quo? Possible Discontinuity Events: Today Israeli attack on Iran nuclear facilities Iranian nuclear test DPRK and South Korea conflict Destabilization of Pakistani government India/Pakistan conflict Rise of new nuclear powers Middle East war Conflict in the South Asia Sea Terrorism on U.S. soil Non-state use of WMD Fukishima disaster grows or similar events Path Toward Global Conflict? 26
The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change Ahead Past, Present and Future? 2013 "2012 was a year in which the problems of the world pressed dforward, but ttoo many of fits citizens stood dback. In the US elections the focus was "the economy, stupid," with barely a word about the severe long-term trends that threaten the population's well-being to a far greater extent: climate change, the continuing menace of nuclear oblivion, and the vulnerabilities of the world's energy sources. 2012 was the hottest year on record in the contiguous United States, t marked by devastating ti drought and brutal storms. These extreme events are exactly what climate models predict for an atmosphere overburdened with greenhouse gases. 2012 was a year of unrealized opportunity to reduce nuclear stockpiles, to lower the immediacy of destruction from missiles on alert, and to control the spread of fissile materials and keep nuclear terrorism at bay. 2012 was a year in which h -- one year after the partial meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station -- the Japanese nation continued to be at the earliest stages of what will be a costly and long recovery. The stasis of 2012 convinces us, the Science and Security Board, to keep the hands of the Doomsday Clock in place. These are historic times we need to use all of our collective knowledge, wisdom, and imagination, to ensure that there is no question mark at the end of the road our national security hangs in the balance For electronic copies of this presentation email Jack Jekowski: jpjekowski@aol.com; visit ITP s website: (http://www.itpnm.com) and click under What s New 27