The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change Ah dAhead - … · The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change ... National Nuclear Security Administration ... A critical period with respect to the

The NNSA Landscape:The NNSA Landscape:A Year of Change A Year of Change

Ah dAh dAheadAheadINMM SW Chapter

Annual Technical Exchange2012 brought many challenges to the NNSA: the Y-12Security Incident; problems at Los Alamos with a newsecurity perimeter intrusion system; projected multi-$Bcost overruns for the B-61 LEP, the UraniumProcessing Facility in Oak Ridge the MOX facility in

May 16, 2013Taos, New Mexico

Jack Jekowski

Processing Facility in Oak Ridge, the MOX facility inSavannah River, and the CMRR facility in Los Alamos;problems with achieving ignition goals at the LLNLNational Ignition Facility; and difficulties in the awardof 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 inLegislation to look once again at the original constructJack Jekowski

Innovative Technology Partnerships, LLC


TM

http://www.itpnm.com

Legislation to look once again at the original constructthat separated NNSA from DOE. This presentation willexplore the complex current landscape of NNSA, theestablishment and expansion of the role of the new NA-00 organization (Infrastructure & Operations), and whatthe future may hold for the organization as we headinto FY14 and beyond.


TM

Th T f ti f th W C lComplex TransformationComplex Transformation

The Transformation of the Weapons ComplexAn eighth year of examining the future of the U S Nuclear Security Enterprise Complex TransformationComplex Transformation

and the Future of the U.S. Nuclear Security Enterprise

INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical Meeting

The Proposed Restructuring of the Nation’s Nuclear Weapons Complex…past, present and future?

of the U.S. Nuclear Security Enterprise – looking into the second decade of

the new Millennium

INMM SW Chapter Annual Technical MeetingMay 21, 2009

Taos, New Mexico

Jack JekowskiInnovative Technology Partnerships, LLC


TM


Complex TransformationCreating the National Security

Enterprise

The Proposed Restructuring of the Nation’s Nuclear Weapons Complex…past, present and future?

Complex TransformationComplex TransformationThe “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


Taos, New Mexico



TM


Weapons Complex…past, present and future?

The Road to Complex 2030The Road to Complex 2030A look back, one year later, on the


Taos, New Mexico



TM


proposed restructuring of the Nation’s Nuclear Weapons Complex


Taos, New Mexico

Jack JekowskiInnovative Technology Partnerships, LLCTM

The Nuclear Weapons The Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure Task Complex Infrastructure Task

F R t (NWCITF)F R t (NWCITF) Weathering the Perfect

INMM SW Chapter

The NNSA Landscape:A Year of Change

Ahead2012 brought many challenges to the NNSA: the Y-12S it I id t bl t L Al ith

gy p ,Innovative Technology Partnerships, LLC

http://www.itpnm.comForce Report (NWCITF)Force Report (NWCITF)Historical Perspectives and

Future Implications


Taos, New MexicoANS Trinity Section and INMM SW Chapter

Joint Dinner Meeting

gStorm:

Implications of 2012 events on the Nuclear Security

Enterprise (NSE)INMM SW Chapter

Annual Technical ExchangeMay 16, 2013

Taos, New MexicoJack Jekowski



TM


Security Incident; problems at Los Alamos with a newsecurity perimeter intrusion system; projected multi-$Bcost overruns for the B-61 LEP, the Uranium ProcessingFacility in Oak Ridge, the MOX facility in SavannahRiver, and the CMRR facility in Los Alamos; problemswith achieving ignition goals at the LLNL National IgnitionFacility; and difficulties in the award of the newconsolidated Y-12/Pantex M&O contract. These issueshave once again focused Congressional, GAO and IGattention on the NNSA, and has resulted in Legislation tolook once again at the original construct thatseparated NNSA from DOE. This presentation willexplore the complex current landscape of NNSA, theestablishment and expansion of the role of the new NA-00 organization (Infrastructure & Operations), and whatthe future may hold for the organization as we head intoFY14 and beyond. 2



TM


Joint Dinner MeetingNovember 2, 2012

Santa Fe, New MexicoJack Jekowski



TM



TM

Evolution of the DOEEvolution of the DOEFederal Power Commission

(1920)Manhattan Engineer

District(1942-1946)Executive Office of

the President Energy Policy Office

(19 3) Atomic Energy Commission(1947-1975)

(1973)

Federal Energy Office

(1973 1974)Energy Research and Development

Administration(1975-1977)

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(1975)

(1973-1974)

Federal Energy Administration

(1974-1977)

Department of Energy

(1977-2000)

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission(1977-Present)

Department of Energy(2000 P t)

Title XXXII – National Nuclear Security AdministrationPublic Law 106-65, October 5, 1999National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000

3

(2000- Present) National Nuclear Security Administration

(2000-?)A Year of Change AheadA Year of Change Ahead

See: http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourhistory/timeline


TM

DOE T d ( ith NNSA)DOE Today (with NNSA)

Note: Ernest Moniz was President Barack Obama today announcesnominated 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 b S Li d G h

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)

by Senator Lindsey Graham

In July, 2011, the Secretary of EnergySecretary of Energy moved the Offices of Environmental Management and

Legacy Management to

report to the Under Secretary for

Nuclear SecurityDavid Huizenga

4

remains Acting Assistant Secretary


TM

S Hi tSome 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– Science-based Stockpile Stewardship Program started– 3 years of “DOE Abolishment Act”

• 2000’s– Formation of NNSAFormation of NNSA– 9/11– Increased scrutiny and criticism of security problems, project management issues,

compliance and cost overrunsF th d i i O k i T k F C l 2030 N l S it– Further downsizing – Overskei Task Force, Complex 2030, Nuclear Security Enterprise (NSE)

• 2010’s– Large cost overruns for facilities and programsLarge cost overruns for facilities and programs– Continuing security problems, project management issues and environmental

problems 5


TM

T D d f Whit t f th NSETwo Decades of Whitewater for the NSEA critical period with respect to the future of NNSA,

DOE and the Nuclear Security Enterprise Option to reduceNPR New Triad1979

• Three Mile Island1986

• Chernobyl

riticism

ng

ress

March 1, 2000 – Official formation of NNSA

NNSA Formation and 9/11

1990 ‐GAO and IG identification ofDOE

Minot‐Barksdale and Taiwan Nuclear Incidents

DoD Nuclear Program Reports

Administration goal of a world without nuclear weapons

2010: “The Nuclear Spring”

Continuing Negative Reports:• LANL Safety incidents

• EM moved to Under Sec. for Nuclear Security

• DOE combined withDepartment ofCommerce?

•NNSA stands alone?• Closure for Labs proposed

stockpile to 300 weapons

ICBMs

Bombers SLBMsCommand & Control,

Intelligence & Planning

Non-Nuclear & Nuclear Strike Capabilities

Responsive InfrastructureDefenses

Chernobyl• Dingell Hearings

1987K‐25 shut down

1988• SRS Reactors shut down

• DNFSB created1989

• Rocky Flats Raid1991

• Tiger Teams

Three years of increasing detail and support for the s,

sev

erity

of c

rns

tak

en b

y Co

n

Nuclear Weapons Complex

9/11

Criticism and discontent picks up again, August, 2002

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

NNSA Contract RFI

Reliable Replacement Warhead Funding Zeroed – JASON Report

April 2009 Acquisition Strategy Report

“Honeymoon” period, NNSA restructuring and public/Congressional distraction from 9/11

The “Dominoes falling” ‐Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons States:•DPRK• Iran

“Wildcards”:• India•Pakistan• Israeli response to Iran•Global Economic Crisis

ModernizationofNuclear Stockpiles and

•LANL Cyber security• LLNL NIF Budget•DNFSB Risk Mgt•Protective Force Issues•DoD/DOE Nuke security•GAO NSE Cost Concerns

13% increase for NNSA?

Complex 2030 National Security Enterprise

Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE/NNSA and

external pressures from Global War on Terror

“DOE Abolishment Act”H.R. 1649 and S. 896106th Congress, 1999

eque

ncy

of aud

its

nd a

dver

se a

ctio

April 30, 2003, d i i t t

January 30, 2004, Sec. of Energy

announces Schedule June 1 2006LANL

November 7, 2003 H.R. 2754

Congressional mandate to compete

Lab Contracts

Infrastructure Task Force •CRS, I.G., GAO reports ‐2006•NNSA “Complex 2030” plan & PEIS•Defense Science Board – NNWA ‐2006•AAAS Nuclear Weapons Program Review

LLNL Contract Change Sept 30,

2007

Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE result in various task force reviews recommending dramatic changes to the

RRW/LEP concepts

Continuing security and

More LANL Security Problems

Barack Obama

Report

Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the U.S (April 1, 2009)

DoD Quadrennial Defense Review (2010)

Gl b l St ik

Robinson testimony

•Secretary ChuConfirmed•Yucca Mtnabandoned

Modernization of Nuclear Stockpiles and delivery systems:•Russia•China•France•U.K.

Prague Speech

l

•New STARTTreaty signed•Nuclear SecuritySummit•NPT ReviewConference•National SecurityStrategy


• Y‐12/Pantex/SRS Tritium contracts combined• Sandia Contract to be bid in 2013•National Academies Report on Weapons Labs

Late 1990’s Early2000’s

Fre an

9/112001

decision to compete LANL

announces Schedule to compete

contracts of Labs

June 1, 2006 LANL Contract change

2007force reviews recommending dramatic changes to the Nuclear Weapons Complex

Continuing security and management problems at LANL and across DOE/NNSA Amb. Brooks

ResignsLANL RFP

ObamaPresident

•Global StrikeCommandstand up•START ends

New Millennium 2nd Decade

Nuclear Posture Review (2010)

Nuclear Weapons De‐emphasized in National

Security, Nuclear Stockpile numbers released

Osama Bin Laden D dLate 2000’sLate 1990 s Early 2000 s2001

Clinton Administration

2nd DecadeDead

1st Obama AdministrationBush Administration

Late 2000 s

6“A Disturbing Trend Repeating Itself”


TM

Wh t F t P th A it th NSE?What Future Path Awaits the NSE??

A critical period with respect to the future of NNSA, DOE and the Nuclear Security Enterprise

Administration goal of a world without nuclear weapons

2010: “The Nuclear Spring”• EM moved to Under Sec. for Nuclear Security

Option to reducestockpile to 300 weapons

M

1979• Three Mile Island

1986• Chernobyl

• Dingell Hearings1987

K‐25 shut down1988

• SRS Reactors shut down• DNFSB created

1989• Rocky Flats Raid

?

Minot‐Barksdale and Taiwan Nuclear Incidents

DoD Nuclear Program Reports

2010: The Nuclear Spring

The “Dominoes falling” ‐Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons States:•DPRK• Iran

“Wildcards”:

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

• DOE combined withDepartment ofCommerce?

•NNSA stands alone?• Closure for Labs proposed

Complex 2030 National Security Enterprise

Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE/NNSA and

external pressures from Global War on Terror

rity

of

criticism

en b

y Co

ngre

ss NNS1990 ‐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 HoLee

1991• Tiger Teams Cost Overruns

• B-61 LEP• CMRR Facility at LANL• UPF at Oak Ridge• MOX Facility at SRNL• LANL Security System

Security

ex e •CRS, I.G., GAO reports ‐2006

•NNSA “Complex 2030” plan & PEIS•Defense Science Board – NNWA ‐2006•AAAS Nuclear Weapons Program Review

t

NNSA Contract RFI

Reliable Replacement Warhead Funding Zeroed – JASON Report

April 2009 Acquisition Strategy Report

Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the U.S (April 1, 2009)

DoD QuadrennialRobinson •Secretary Chu

• India•Pakistan• Israeli response to Iran•Global Economic Crisis

Modernization of Nuclear Stockpiles and delivery systems:•Russia•China•France•U.K.

•New STARTTreaty signed•Nuclear SecuritySummit•NPTReview


Three years of increasing detail and support for the “DOE Abolishment Act”H.R. 1649 and S. 896106th Congress, 1999

y of

aud

its,

sev

ers

e ac

tion

s ta

k e

Foster Reports, Chiles Report, Wen Ho Lee Security• Y-12 IncidentDOE IG reports DOE/IG-0868 and

DOE/IG-0875• LANL SPO Incident

Big Science• LLNL National Ignition Facility

2006 LANL t change

LLNL Contract Change Sept 30,

2007

concepts

Amb. Brooks Resigns

urity Problems

Barack Obama

President

DoD Quadrennial Defense Review (2010)

•Global StrikeCommandstand up•START ends

testimony•Secretary ChuConfirmed•Yucca Mtnabandoned Prague

Speech

Nuclear Posture Review (2010)

•NPT ReviewConference•National SecurityStrategy

Nuclear Weapons De‐emphasized in National

Security, Nuclear Stockpile numbers released

• Y‐12/Pantex/SRS Tritium contracts combined• Sandia Contract to be bid in 2013•National Academies Report on Weapons Labs

Freq

uenc

yan

d ad

ve

Significant security, environmental, and project management issues within DOE result in various task force reviews recommending dramatic changes to the

Nuclear Weapons Complex

• LLNL National Ignition Facility

Legacy• Hanford Waste Treatment Plant• Yucca Mountain

Management• Contract consolidation

New Millennium 2nd Decade

Osama Bin Laden Dead

1st Obama Administration

Late 2000’sLate 1990’s

Clinton Administration

• 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

7

Cyber Security Energy Supply Environmental Cleanup Human Capital Management Nuclear Waste Disposal Safeguards and Security Stockpile Stewardship


TM

C t NNSA O i ti l St tCurrent NNSA Organizational StructureTom D’Agostino gave notice of his intention to ti J 18

Doug Fremont was reassigned in early September as a result of the Y‐12 Security Incident ‐Jeff Harrell, NA‐15 ADA, took Oversight of Site Offices

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.

Neile is Actingover 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.

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 d h NA 70’ l

Note: On December 7th, the DoD announced the reassignment of Gen. Finan to head the Air

Neile is Acting Administrator.Note: On January 31,

2013, retired AF Col. Steve Asher was named Acting NA‐70 Associate Administrator.

New Management concepts for NA‐00 and NNSA released

AdmJohn M. Richardson , November 2012

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

Force Nuclear Weapons Center at Kirtland AFB, N.M the end of January, 2013

On November 20th, d

Doing the Right things Right, At The Right

Time

Tra

nsp

aren

cy

NA-10

NA-40

NA-1

and NNSA released on February 20, 2013

NNSA announced that Keven Smith would be moving to become the manager for the DOE Office of River Protection (ORP), EM, effective December 30th. Juan Griego, currently Deputy Manager of LASO,

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

Measurement, Analysis &

Improvement

NA-00

Sandia and KCP contracts may be combined and bid in 2013/2014 timeframe

will serve as the Acting LASO Manager upon Smith’s departure.

y) y y2013, but B&W protested – transition on hold

8Updated March 17, 2013


TM

NNSA T f ti l A tiNNSA Transformational ActionsREORGANIZATION STATUS – NA‐00

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

i i d h bl h i i i i h bli hREORGANIZATION STATUS NA 00

Associate Administrator Infrastructure & Operations

Program Executive Officer(VACANT) Reorganization Status

00

concerning cost overrun, security and other problems. Another initiative 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.

Deputy Associate Administrator

*Est 15 Sep 2012

Employee Concerns Program

ExecutiveSecretariat

Transformation

Reorganization Status

• PEO selection in progress.• Detail: D. Dearolph, Special Advisor to NA‐00

00.1 00Est. 15 Sep 2012

Field Coordination Office

Savannah RiverField Office

Livermore Field OfficeEnvironment, Safety & Health

Infrastructure & l l

SustainabilityCenter of Excellence

00‐SV

00‐1000‐LL

00.2

Legend

Sandia Field OfficeKansas City Field Office

Nevada Field Office

Los Alamos Field Office

Capital Planning

Packaging & TransportationQuality Management

Center of Excellence


00‐NV

00‐SN

00‐LA

00‐20

00‐40

00‐60

00‐KC

Security Operations

00‐30

I ‐ Established 26 JUN 2012

II – Established 13 February 2013

III ‐ In development with NA‐70

Facility OperationsNNSA Production Office


00‐NPO 00‐50

00‐70Doing the Right things

Right, At The RightTime

nsp

aren

cy

NA-10

NA-40

NA-1

Measurement, Analysis &

Improvement

Tra

n

NA-00

N

9


TM

NA 00 C ti N P t hi

• A great deal of effort has

NA-00 Creating New Partnerships

• A great deal of effort has been invested in creating NA-00 and the wrap-around management concepts that

Doing the Right things Right, At The Right

Time

g pare hoped will help transform NNSA and address Congressional concerns

NA-10

Tra

nsp

aren

cy

NA-40

NA-1T

NA

Measurement, l i

-00

10

Analysis & Improvement


TM

M Whit t Li Ah dMore Whitewater Lies Ahead• FY14 Congressional Hearingsg g• Sequestration/Budget issues• IG and GAO reports• Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the NSECongressional 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)– 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) difi d t t t ith B 61 i t i t h blW80-1) modified to two types, with B-61 variants interchangeable across delivery platforms

• Global efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons• Continuing repercussions from Fukushima accident• Continuing repercussions from Fukushima accident• Proliferation of nuclear weapons technology• Global terrorism

11


TM

R t C i l H iRecent Congressional Hearings

• Early sessions of the Energy & Water and ArmedEarly 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 p j p y g [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 way to deal with e S does o d a o e e ec e ay o deadesign 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.”y g g

12


TM

S t ti d th D fi itSequestration and the DeficitPresidential Request

NNSA FY14 Request: $11.65B, an increase of 1 6% over FY13 CRof 1.6% over FY13 CR and 5.9% over FY12

NA-10

NA-40

NA 10

13

NA-20NA-70

http://energy.gov/cfo/downloads/fy-2014-budget-justification


TM

2013 DOE IG R d ti2013 DOE IG Recommendations• Apply the Quadrennial Technology ReviewApply the Quadrennial Technology Review

(QTR) strategic planning concept to the Department's entire science and technology portfolio;technology portfolio;

• Eliminate duplicative National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) functions;

• Establish a "BRAC style" commission to• Establish a "BRAC-style" commission to analyze the Department's laboratory and technology complex;R i iti th D t t'• Reprioritize the Department's environmental remediation efforts; and

• Re-evaluate the current structure of the Department's physical security apparatus

14


TM

GAO R t C iti i NNSA• A series of reports in the past

GAO Reports Criticize NNSAA series of reports in the past year have criticized NNSA’s overall management of the Nuclear Security EnterpriseNuclear Security Enterprise– 90% of DOE’s budget is spent

on M&O Contracts“ NNSA’ bl t– “…NNSA’s problems are not caused by excessive oversight, but instead result from i ff ti d t t lineffective departmental oversight…NNSA’s creation…has not yet had the desired effect of fully resolvingdesired effect of fully resolving these management problems.”

15Is the M&O contracting vehicle likewise headed for major change?


TM

C i l C i i NNSACongressional Commission on NNSA• Section 3166, FY13 Defense Authorization Act: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 advisoryof 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.”the nuclear security enterprise.

– Membership: Gen. Richard Mies (co-chair) Norm Augustine (co-chair) Rep Heather Wilson Dr Michael Anastasio* Rep. Heather Wilson Dr. Michael Anastasio Rep. Ellen Tauscher Rep. John Spratt Rep. David Hobson Adm. Kirkland Donald Frank Miller William Schneider T.J. Glauthier Gregory Jaczko

• Panel start delayed due to Sequestration– 180 Day Report due after start * Dr. Anastasio was the last member of 180 Day Report due after start – Final Report due February 1, 2014

16

the Panel selected the end of April. The start date and meeting schedule for the Panel has not been announced.


TM

NPR I l t ti St d“Until such time as the Administration’s goal of a world free of nuclear weapons is achieved, nuclear capabilities will be maintained as a core mission for the Department of Defense. We will maintain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal to deter attack on theUnitedStates and onourallies and partners ”

The QDR analysis strongly suggested that the Department must further rebalance its policy, doctrine, and capabilities to better support the following six key missions:• Defend the United States and support civil authorities at home;• Succeed in counterinsurgency stability and counterterrorism operations;

Consistent, overarching message

NPR Implementation Study• Initiated in 2011, but not yet released “Our Armed Forces will always be a

cornerstone of our security, but they must be complemented. Our security also depends on diplomats who can act in every corner of theworld ”

“With this QTR, we bind together multiple energy t h l i ll

arsenal to deter attack on the United States, and on our allies and partners.

“…pursuing…a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal at the lowest levels consistent with U.S. and allied interests as we pursue the peace and security of a world free of nuclear weapons.”

Succeed in counterinsurgency, stability, and counterterrorism operations;• 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.

NPR Policy Framework:• Preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism;• Reducing the role of U.S. nuclear weapons;•Maintaining strategic deterrence and stability at reducednuclear force levels;

• Strengthening regional deterrence and reassuring U.S. allies andpartners; and

• Sustaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear arsenal.

Joint Tri‐Lab Director statement on Nuclear Posture Review:“We believe that the approach outlined in the NPR, which excludes further nuclear testing and includes the consideration of the full range of life extension options (refurbishment of existing warheads, reuse of nuclear components from different warheads and replacement of nuclear components based on previously tested designs), provides the necessary technical flexibility to manage the nuclear stockpile into the future with an acceptable level of risk.“ , y

– Purportedly includes recommendations forfurther stockpile reductions beyond NewSTART Levels

act in every corner of the world…

Four enduring national interests:• Security of the U.S., allies and partners• Prosperity both in the U.S. and abroad• Values and respect at home and abroad• International Order that promotes peace,security and opportunities

The U.S. will:• Pursue the goal of a world without Nuclear weapons• Strengthen the Nuclear Non‐Proliferation Treaty• Present a clear choice to Iran and North Korea• Secure vulnerable nuclear weapons and material• Support peaceful nuclear energy• Counter biological threats

”U.S. economic and security interests are inextricably linked to developments in the arc extending form the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean region and South Asia…while the U.S. military will continue to contribute to security globally, we will of necessity rebalance toward the Asia‐Pacific region.”

”It is possible that our deterrence goals can be achieved with a smaller nuclear force, which would reduce the number of nuclear weapons in our inventory as well as their role in U.S. national security strategy.”

technologies, as well as multiple DOE energy technology programs, in the common purpose of solving our energy challenges. In addition, the QTR provides a multi‐year framework for our planning. Energy investments are multi‐year, multi‐decade investments. Given this time horizon, we need to take a longer view.”

f

• 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 studythe 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 P t R i ”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;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 k t d t i th t f th d ti i t t ith th ti lwork to date, is that further reductions consistent with the national

security environment will be possible and that continuing modernization of our nuclear capabilities is essential. “ 17


TM

Th F St tThe Four Statesmen • The Nuclear Security Project: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 broadinternational support for the vision and steps to reducethe risks posed by nuclear weapons.

• Addressing the tough technical and policy issuesinvolved in taking concrete steps toward building a world without nuclear weapons

18http://www.nuclearsecurityproject.org


TM

Th N l S it P j t T StThe Nuclear Security Project Ten Steps• Work with leaders of countries with nuclear weapons to turn the goal of a p g

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;unauthorized launch;

• Substantially reduce nuclear forces in all countries that possess them;• Eliminate short-range battlefield nuclear weapons designed to be forward

deployed;p y ;• Adopt a process to bring the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty into effect;• Secure all nuclear weapons and materials globally to the highest possible

standards;De elop a ne international s stem to manage the risks associated ith• Develop a new international system 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 andweapons 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 dpowers; and

• Strengthen verification and enforcement capabilities.19


TM

A Ti f G t U t i t• Partisan political battles

A Time of Great UncertaintyPartisan political battles– Budget Deficit– Congressional elections of 2014

Obama Administration push to– Obama Administration push to deemphasize nuclear deterrence

NPR Implementation Plan• NPR Implementation Plan imminent

• Future of NNSA and Stockpile is in questionin question

• International Nuclear and WMD Security Threats

I DPRK S i Middl E t– Iran, DPRK, Syria, Middle East, Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups

20


TM

A Ti f G t U t i t• Global political strife

A Time of Great Uncertainty

– 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?Cli t Ch N ti l S it– Climate Change – National Security issues - growing indicators

• Disparate perspectives on Nuclear St k ilStockpiles– U.S. and U.K. de-emphasizing role

of nuclear deterrentR i Chi d P ki t– Russia, China, and Pakistan continuing to rely on Stockpiles as core national security strategy –upgrading their stockpiles

21

upgrading their stockpiles


TM

Th L d Ah d F t D iThe Landscape Ahead – Future Drivers• Partisan political battlesp

– NPR “Implementation Study”– Congressional Advisory Panel on the Governance of the NSE– Obama Administration push to deemphasize nuclear deterrence and

l di l ti ff t t t “I t ti l O d ”employ diplomatic efforts to create new “International Order”• Global political strife

– Continuing evolution of the “Arab Spring”– Changes in global leadershipChanges in global leadership

• Global Economic Crisis– U.S. debt and deficit spending– Euro problems – Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Italyp g p y– 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 perspecti es on N clear Stockpiles• Disparate perspectives 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 coreRussia, China, and Pakistan continuing to rely on Stockpiles as core

national security strategy – upgrading their stockpiles22


TM

A L Vi i Ti f G t U t i tA Long View in a Time of Great Uncertainty• 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 Crisisg

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

2323

g pp– 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?


TM

“T ki th L Vi ” Q ti“Taking the Long View” Questions• Challenges to the INMM membership:g p

– 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 p g g

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?Wh t i tifi t h l i l d li i ti INMM t– What scientific, technological 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– How will the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant accident impact the future of the Nuclear Renaissance?

24


TM

Wh t i th F t P th?What is the Future Path?One scenario construct: • Labs/Weapons Program move to new entity

ure

• New national security missions funded for Labs• Revitalization of stockpile funding• Direct “WFO” link to DoD• NPR consensus – Replacement option exercisedConsolidation

• The reduction in the global threat allows the Damn the Torpedoes Full Speed Ahead

NS

A F

utug

consolidation of the Nuclear Security Enterprise into anew entity that maintains a minimal nuclear deterrentwhile scientific resources are re-directed to climatechange and renewable energy issues.

Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead•

• As new nuclear-capable weapons states emerge, theNPT is abandoned and the U.S. and other G-5 statesrevitalize their stockpiles. The U.S. prepares to withdrawfrom the CTBT to test a new replacement warhead. Anew organizational entity is implemented to support a

GD

OE

/N• NPT abandoned

DPRK tests again

• 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

P ki k d

new organizational entity is implemented to support a21st Century nuclear arms race and the NationalLaboratories are infused with new war-related funding.

The Global Nuclear Posture • DPRK tests again• Iran tests• NWS test new designs• Other states move toward nuclear• Pakistan loses control of Nukes

• Pakistan nukes secured• Peaceful use of nuclear power

Global ZeroTh d d l b l th t d l t f ti i iti ti N l S it E t i• The reduced global threat delays transformation initiativesand results in significant weapons funding decrease at theLabs as budget pressures redirect needed funding to social,energy and environmental programs. Confidence in thestockpile gradually erodes, forcing concessions in armscontrol negotiations that assist the Global Zero movement.

Nuclear Security Enterprise• 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

25• NNSA and DOE remain intact• Status quo for LEPs and Complex• NPR stays ambiguous• Budgets continue to decline

genvironment, while the world braces for war.

Can the DOE/NNSA and the Laboratories develop robust strategies to prepare for dramatically different worlds?Can the DOE/NNSA and the Laboratories develop robust strategies to prepare for dramatically different worlds?


TM

Whi h L d D th F t H ld?Which Landscape Does the Future Hold?Path Toward

A discontinuity

World Peace?“Taking the Long View in a Time of Great Uncertainty”

discontinuity event?

Possible Discontinuity Events:

Status Quo?

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

2626

Path Toward Global 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


TM

The NNSA Landscape:The NNSA Landscape:A Year of Change Ahead

Past, Present and…Future?

g

Future?

These are historic times…we need to use all of our collective knowledge

"2012 was a year in which the problems of the world d f d b t t f it iti t d b k I

2013

use all of our collective knowledge, wisdom, and imagination, to ensure that there is no question mark at the

d f h d i l

pressed forward, but too many of its citizens stood back. 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 St t k d b d t ti d ht d b t l t end of the road…our national

security hangs in the balance

States, marked by devastating 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

i hi h ft th ti l ltd

27

For electronic copies of this presentation email Jack Jekowski: [email protected]; visit ITP’s website: (http://www.itpnm.com) and click under “What’s New”

was a year in which -- 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.”

Documents

The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change Ah dAhead - … · The NNSA Landscape: A Year of Change ... National Nuclear Security Administration ... A critical period with respect to the