UPDATES
DOE Conceals Cost of SRS Plutonium Pit Plant – SRS Watch news, Oct. 19, 2026
DOE Hides Just-Approved, Official Cost Estimate of SRS Plutonium Pit Plant, Keeps Public in the Dark about Size of Escalating Cost for New Nuclear Weapons Facility,
Cost could Soar to Over $30 Billion
New Estimate Likely to Go Higher than 2026 Unofficial Estimate of $18-25 Billion, More than Doubling the 2021 Official Estimate of $7-11 Billion – Just to Refurbish the Terminated MOX Plant, into which $5-8 Billion has already been Sunk
For Release October 19, 2026 – Savannah River Site Watch (SRS Watch), Columbia, SC, www.srswatch.org
Contact: Tom Clements, Director, cell 803-240-7268, tomclements329@cs.com
New release posted on SRS Watch website: https://srswatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/News-on-CD-2-lack-of-SRS-pit-platn-cost-estimate-October-19-2026-SRS-Watch.pdf
Columbia, SC — The Department of Energy claimed on October 16, 2026 that it approved a new cost estimate for the massive facility to make 50 or more plutonium pits per year – for new nuclear weapons’ cores – at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, but the department has refused to publicly release the estimate. It is believed that the cost for the new facility could soar above a recent unofficial cost estimate of $30 billion.
It was anticipated that the new cost estimate for the plutonium bomb plant, per DOE practice, would be publicly released. That the cost has not been released raises suspicion that the skyrocketing cost to refurbish the partially finished, terminated plutonium fuel (MOX) building is being hidden from both the public and Congress.
“DOE must immediately reveal what the cost to the taxpayer will be to produce new, unneeded plutonium pits at SRS for new nuclear warheads,” said Tom Clements, director of the public interest group Savannah River Site Watch, based in Columbia, SC. “It’s clear that the cost of the unnecessary plutonium pit project continues to soar while the schedule slips, which is the way DOE works, and it’s time for Congress to place a hold on construction while the cost and need for the facility are assessed. Suppression of the cost estimate by DOE is a mistake that will backfire as it smacks of a cover-up,” added Clements.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: October 2026 Updates
Nuclear Weapons:
John Pope, Chief Audience Officer at Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:
Some interesting polling on existential risk from the well respected “America Speaks” poll from NORC at UChicago. One question really stood out for nuclear work – when asked about global threats nuclear war was the most commonly ranked “greatest risk” by participants: [54% said nuclear war]
And drilling into the cross tabs younger audiences were most likely to see it as a threat: [61% of younger adults]:
Nuclear Watch New Mexico Presentation to Indivisible Albuquerque – September 21, 2026
Recording of Nuclear Watch New Mexico Presentation to Indivisible Albuquerque, Jay Coghlan and Sophia Stroud – September 21, 2026:
WHY EXPANDED PLUTONIUM PIT PRODUCTION IS WRONG
The Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is aggressively expanding the production of plutonium pits, the radioactive cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. Their production has been the choke point of resumed industrial-scale U.S. nuclear weapons production ever since a 1989 FBI raid investigating environmental crimes shut down the Rocky Flats Plant near Denver. In 1996 production was transferred back to the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico, but capped at no more than 20 pits per year. In 2018 NNSA declared it would produce at least 30 pits per year at LANL and 50 per year at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. NNSA now plans to produce up to 205 pits every year for the new arms race.
Expanded plutonium pit bomb core production is wrong because:
- No future production is to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing, tested stockpile. New pits are for new nuclear weapons designs, specifically the W87-1 ICBM and the W93 sub-launched warheads. New designs can’t be tested under the global testing moratorium, thereby perhaps degrading stockpile confidence. Or the U.S. could resume testing, after which other countries would surely follow.
- There are existing, lasting pits. A new expert study states, “The Pu [plutonium] in the stockpile appears to be aging slowly. The degradation issues that have been observed do not call into question present weapons performance.” This directly contradicts NNSA’s assertion that new pits will have to be manufactured “in the coming years” because of aging concerns. This finding reaffirms the 2006 study that showed most pit types have minimum lives over 100 years and those that don’t have clear fixes. Pits are now around 43 years old. More than 15,000 existing pits are already stored at the Pantex Plant in Texas.
- Pit production is NNSA’s most expensive program ever, with $5 billion to be spent over each of the next six years and at least $60 billion over the next 20 years. However, the independent Government Accountability Office has repeatedly found that NNSA has no credible cost estimates.
- The rad waste problem: The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) is demanding that DOE prioritize LANL’s Cold War wastes for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southern New Mexico instead of new plutonium pit bomb wastes. NMED is also requiring DOE to look for a new out-of-state dump. In short, there is no certain path for the safe disposal of future radioactive bomb wastes.
- LANL’s existing limited pit production capability should be sufficient should stockpile problems arise in the future. It should not be expanded. Pit production at SRS should be vigorously opposed because it could be scaled up way beyond LANL for the new nuclear arms race. In addition, DOE is legally required to remove plutonium from South Carolina, not add plutonium because of pit production.
- LANL’s pit production facility is outdated and unsafe: Known as “PF-4,” it is 48 years old, not designed for mass production, and has a long history of nuclear safety infractions. Moreover, DOE is “deferring” comprehensive cleanup at the Lab until pit production is done (which in effect means never).
- DOE ordered a “special assessment” of NNSA’s troubled pit production program scheduled for completion in mid-December 2025. It is being covered up, but NukeWatch NM has sued to obtain it.
- Planned plutonium pit production for the next 50 years violates the 1970 NonProliferation Treaty’s requirement for nuclear weapons states to enter into negotiations leading to disarmament.
- NNSA illegally pursued expanded pit production bypassing required National Environmental Policy Act review. However, it is being forced to do so by co-plaintiffs’ (including NukeWatch NM) successful lawsuit.
Concerned citizens can submit supplemental PEIS comments to NNSA via email to PitPEIS@nnsa.doe.gov – For legal and procedural reasons, these comments should be accepted despite being filed after the official comment period ended on July 16, 2026, since NNSA has withheld and is still withholding crucial documents needed for well-informed comment. CLICK HERE for suggested supplemental comments.
IDA Executive Summary on Pit Production
There IS NO need for speed.
That is no need for speed other than the National Nuclear Security Administration’s and LANL’s aggressive agenda to get unneeded plutonium “pit” bomb core production established as a fait accompli by stripping safety standards and blocking independent oversight before the lack of true need and the astonishing costs are publicly recognized.
There is no need for speed because no future pit production is to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. Instead, it is all for new-design nuclear weapons for the new nuclear arms race that threatens us all. Further, these new-design nuclear weapons could prompt the U.S. to resume nuclear weapons testing, which Trump has already threatened. This would have disastrous international proliferation consequences (Putin has already said Russia will test if the U.S. does).
The Department of Energy and the NNSA have been on the independent Government Accountability Office’s High Risk List for project mismanagement and waste of taxpayers’ dollars ever since the GAO started the List in 1991. The NNSA is going to spend $4 billion at LANL and the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina for pit production over each of the next six years. Yet the GAO has repeatedly stated that NNSA has no credible cost estimates for its most expensive and complex program ever.
Plutonium pit production at LANL will cause more contamination and radioactive wastes.
Public Interest Groups Warn NNSA on Plutonium Giveaway
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, September 8, 2026
Joint Press Release from: South Carolina Environmental Law Project, Savannah River Site Watch & Nuclear Watch New Mexico
Contact: Tom Clements, Director, SRS Watch, 803-240-7268 | Email
Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch NM, 505-989-7342 | Email
Shelby Cohen, Comms Manager, SC Env. Law Project, 864.414.7726 | Email
South Carolina – Today, the South Carolina Environmental Law Project (SCELP) sent a letter of demand to the Department of Energy (DOE) and its semi-autonomous agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), about their proposed unsound and dangerous management of U.S. plutonium. The letter notified them that they must comply with the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirement for public review of the Trump Administration’s troubling plan to give away 19.7 metric tons of nuclear weapons-grade plutonium to private corporations.
SCELP’S letter, on behalf of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, Savannah River Site Watch, and a private citizen who lives near the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, outlines why NNSA must be held to its legal NEPA obligations. The letter describes how recently issued presidential executive orders:
…constitute a vast change in the prior decisions and purposes of the DOE/NNSA surplus plutonium disposition program that has been in place since at least 1996… This change is also contrary to the larger nuclear non-proliferation policy of the United States restricting the commercial use of plutonium that has been in place for approximately fifty years.
This action follows SCELP’s earlier NEPA lawsuit on behalf of SRS Watch and Nuclear Watch New Mexico. In a landmark settlement, that litigation successfully compelled the NNSA to prepare a nationwide programmatic environmental impact statement on the production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores for nuclear weapons (the “Pit Production PEIS”).
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: September 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Pentagon drafting a new U.S. nuclear strategy in case of regional war with China or Russia, sources say
The Defense Department’s policy chief is drafting a new U.S. nuclear strategy that emphasizes the possible use of shorter-range tactical weapons in case of a regional war with China or Russia, according to five people familiar with the plans. The new strategy, which is classified, challenges the approach to nuclear weapons that has been settled policy for decades… Colby has long pushed for an emphasis on tactical weapons, arguing that America’s adversaries would simply not believe the U.S. would seriously contemplate launching long-range weapons aimed at wiping out an enemy’s nuclear forces — as is the emphasis of the
Pentagon reviewing plans for low-level nuclear war: thebulletin.org/2026/09/pentagons-secret-plan-reviving-cold-war-doctrines-to-lower-the-threshold-for-nuclear-war/
Policy chief fears a regional nuclear conflict will dangerously escalate – The Washington Times https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/aug/18/pentagon-reviewing-plans-low-level-nuclear-war/
- The NNSA Administrator is explicitly turning NNSA back into a nuclear weapons production agency. “NNSA is a production organization,” Williams said. “NNSA has always been a production organization all the way back to the Manhattan Project… But Williams said production is only one piece of the culture he is trying to establish. “Starting with deterrence really inspires people,” he said. “Urgency, because our times have changed.””
That only reinforces my opinion that we need to puncture the myth of deterrence. It’s not that deterrence is a lie, but that it’s a half-truth. The other side of the equation is that the U.S. and Russia have always maintain nuclear warfighting capabilities, which is why we have 1,000s of nuclear weapons and a $2 trillion “modernization” program to keep them forever.
Continue reading
FOLLOW-ON SUPPLEMENTAL Sample Comment on the Draft Plutonium Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)
This is a sample supplemental comment for the draft Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). Plutonium pits are the fissile cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. For legal and procedural reasons, this comment should be accepted despite being filed after the official comment period ended on July 16, 2026. This is justified by the fact that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has withheld and is still withholding crucial documents needed for well-informed comment. Please download, edit, and send in your supplemental comment to PitPEIS@nnsa.doe.gov today (and please CC info@pitpeis.com)! We must stand up against NNSA’s lack of transparency.
NNSA Releases New Plutonium Life Study – Key Finding: Plutonium Aging Not Affecting Existing Nuclear Weapons
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, August 10, 2026
Contact: Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, 505.989.7342, c. 505.470.3154 | Email
Sophia Stroud, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, 505.231.9736 | Email
Santa Fe, NM – In response to Freedom of Information Act requests, the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has released a new study entitled Plutonium Aging: Executive Summary (Unclassified) by long-time scientific advisors to the U.S. government called the JASONs. The key “High-Level Finding” of this new report is:
“The Pu [plutonium] in the stockpile appears to be aging slowly. The degradation issues that have been observed do not call into question present weapons performance.”
Plutonium “pits” are the all-important radioactive cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. The NNSA has repeatedly claimed that potential aging effects drive the need for the aggressive expansion of plutonium pit production, which is the agency’s most expensive and complex program ever. The Pentagon has stated that expanded pit production is one of the most critical issues in its $2 trillion “modernization” program to keep nuclear weapons forever.
However, the independent Government Accountability Office (GAO) has repeatedly stated that the NNSA has no credible costs estimates and no “Integrated Master Schedule” for simultaneous production at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in northern New Mexico and the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. In fact, DOE and NNSA have been on the GAO’s “High Risk List” for project mismanagement and waste of taxpayers’ dollars since 1991. At more than $30 billion, the plutonium pit plant at SRS is on track to become the most expensive building in U.S. history. A comparable amount will be spent at LANL on facility upgrades and related projects, for which the NNSA fails to keep total aggregated costs.
NEW 2026 JASON Plutonium Aging Executive Summary
“The Pu in the stockpile appears to be aging slowly. The degradation issues that have been observed do not call into question present weapons performance.”
Today, August 6, 2026, is the 81st Anniversary of the U.S. Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima.
Recommended Reading: John Hersey and the horrors of Hiroshima
The American journalist’s account of the Hiroshima bombing and its aftermath, told through the eyes of Japanese survivors, forced the world to reckon with the terrifying power of nuclear weapons.
Iain MacGregor August 5, 2026 engelsbergideas.com
The New START treaty – enforced since 2011 and the last remaining arms‑control agreement between the United States and Russia – expired in February 2026 with nothing to replace it. The final legal barrier limiting the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals was removed, ushering in what analysts describe as a period of Great Power uncertainty. China, meanwhile, is rapidly expanding and modernising its nuclear forces, with its stockpile more than doubling in just five years and further growth expected throughout the decade.
In the Middle East, the erosion of nuclear restraint has accelerated sharply. Recent US-Israeli attacks have pushed Iran closer than ever to abandoning the Nuclear Non‑Proliferation Treaty (NPT): Tehran still possesses enough enriched uranium to place it within short technical reach of multiple nuclear warheads, while senior political and security figures openly debate withdrawal from the NPT as a defensive necessity rather than a diplomatic taboo. The precedent – of a major regional power crossing the nuclear threshold outside any arms‑control framework – would reverberate far beyond the region.
North Korea, emboldened by global fragmentation, insists that its arsenal is ‘irreversible’. Across Europe and Asia, public opinion in countries such as Poland, Turkey and South Korea is shifting toward domestic nuclear capability as confidence in US security guarantees becomes frayed. The precarious equilibrium of the non‑proliferation era is cracking just when the living memory of the bomb’s human cost has never been more vital.
In such a landscape, the work of remembering what nuclear weapons do – not in theory, but to human bodies and cities – becomes urgent again. Eighty years ago, one American writer succeeded in forcing the world to confront this reality. His name was John Hersey, and the story he told in August 1946 in the New Yorker magazine, about the world’s first nuclear strike against the Japanese port city of Hiroshima the previous year, remains one of the clearest moral documents of the atomic age…
Ian MacGregor outlines precisely above the current state and reality of the new nuclear arms race we are now in, more dangerous than the first.
“Rationality will not save us… this is very important: at the end we lucked out. It was luck that prevented nuclear war.” Robert McNamara
Nuclear Watchdog Sues for Plutonium Pit Production “Special Study”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, August 4, 2026
Contact: Jules Zacher, Esq., 215.888.5183, | Email
Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, 505.989.7342, c. 505.470.3154 | Email
Sophia Stroud, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, 505.231.9736 | Email
Santa Fe, NM – Nuclear Watch New Mexico has sued the Department of Energy under the Freedom of Information Act for its Special Study of the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Leadership and Management of the Plutonium Pit Production Mission. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is the semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency within DOE.
Plutonium “pits” are the radioactive cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. Their expanded manufacturing has been the chokepoint of resumed industrial-scale nuclear weapons production by the U.S. Crucially, no future pit production is to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing stockpile. Instead, it is all for new-design nuclear weapons for the new arms race. These new weapons can’t be tested because of the existing global testing moratorium, thereby perhaps degrading confidence in the stockpile. Or new-design nuclear weapons testing could prompt the U.S. to resume testing, which would have severe international proliferation consequences.
Plutonium pit production is the NNSA’s most expensive and complex program to date. However, the independent Government Accountability Office (GAO) has repeatedly stated that the agency has no credible costs estimates and no “Integrated Master Schedule” for simultaneous production at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in northern New Mexico and the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. In fact, DOE and NNSA have been on the GAO’s “High Risk List” for project mismanagement and waste of taxpayers’ dollars since 1991. At more than $30 billion, the plutonium pit plant at SRS is on track to become the most expensive building in U.S. history. A comparable amount will be spent at LANL on facility upgrades and related projects, for which the NNSA fails to keep total aggregated costs.
Nuclear Watch New Mexico sues Department of Energy for plutonium pit report
Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, wrote in a statement there is a “massive coverup” related to plutonium pit production.
“To grease expanded nuclear weapons production, they have rescinded nuclear safety regulations, illegally restricted the access of the independent Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, and are withholding crucial documents from the American taxpayer,” Coghlan wrote.
“We hope this lawsuit will help to bring [the National Nuclear Security Administration] plutonium house of cards tumbling down,” he added.
Santa Fe New Mexican | August 5, 2026 santafenewmexican.com
A nuclear watchdog group that focuses on Los Alamos National Laboratory recently sued the federal government for what it says are failures to comply with open records law and hand over a study.
Nuclear Watch New Mexico filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., on July 23 against the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Nuclear Security Administration. The group on Dec. 22 filed a records request under the Freedom of Information Act seeking a copy of a study related to plutonium pit production, the complaint states, but hasn’t received any of the records.
A spokesperson for the Department of Energy, which also houses the National Nuclear Security Administration, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.
LANL is for now the only facility in the nation capable of producing plutonium pits, which serve as the trigger devices for nuclear weapons…
A World Without Nuclear Weapons: Trinity Test Commemoration Recording July 19, 2026
From Reflection to Action: An Interfaith Remembrance of the Trinity Test with Archbishop John Wester, Archdiocese of Santa Fe
Event Speakers Include:
- Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch New Mexico
- Tina Cordova, Co-Founder, Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium
- Dr. Michael Ketterer, Professor Emeritus, Northern Arizona University
- Keynote: Secretary James C. Kenney, New Mexico Environment Dept.
Note: You may have already seen this event as a livestream on YouTube. This recording is a significantly improved version with enhanced audio, where you can hear most all of the speakers loudly and clearly.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: July 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Budget: The House of Representatives passed a fiscal 2027 continuing resolution to keep the government running through Dec. 4 (the new fiscal year begins Oct 1). The White House Office of Management and Budget is requesting a series of anomalies, or exceptions, to the CR rule that funding be limited to the levels of the prior fiscal year. One anomaly is for the new Trump-class battleship.
For the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA): it’s the Electrical Power Capacity Upgrade (the new powerline across the Caja del Rio); enhanced subcritical tests at the Nevada National Security Site; and, most dangerous of all, allowing the NNSA to reprogram funding by itself within its Total Weapons Activities budget category.
The Senate is basically doing the same, plus an anomaly for ‘‘21– D–401 Hoisting Capability Project’’ at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. WIPP has been operationally shut down for a few months now due to a burnt-out hoist motor.
The House and Senate must resolve their relatively minor differences and get Trump’s signature before October 1 to prevent a government shutdown.
Regular authorization (the annual Defense Authorization Act) and appropriations are unlikely to move until mid-term elections (~86 days to go).
Plutonium pit production:
- exchangemonitor.com/williams-nnsa-accelerating-plutonium-pit-production-toward-2028-goal/ August 06, 2026 Williams: NNSA accelerating plutonium pit production toward 2028 goal – OMAHA, Neb. – Brandon Williams, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), said here Thursday Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico is accelerating plutonium pit production, with the site targeting 100 pits by December 2028.
- We filed suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for DOE’s “Special Study.” See https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/Nuclear-Weapons-Watchdog-Sues-for-Pit-Production-Special-Study.pdf
- The South Carolina Environmental Law Project sent a letter to DOE/NNSA demanding 3 crucial documents: the “Special Study,” the unclassified summary of the new JASON pit life study, and LANL’s new Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis. See our press release at https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Plaintiffs-Demand-Release-of-Critical-Documents-and-Extension-of-Public-Comment-Period-on-Expanded-Plutonium-Bomb-Core-Production.pdf
- The Pit Production PEIS comment period ended July 16 (81st anniversary of the Trinity Test). We submitted 64-page comments plus exhibits, see nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Formal-Comments-on-the-Pit-Production-Programmatic-Environmental-Impact-Statement.pdf NNSA ignored our demand for a comment period time extension because of the withheld documents.
- We received an unredacted version of the new JASON pit life study (see https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/2026-JASON-Plutonium-Aging-Executive-Summary.pdf). “High Level Finding:… “The Pu in the stockpile appears to be aging slowly. The degradation issues that have been observed do not call into question present weapons performance.” We had received one title page and 2 completely blank narrative pages the day before the PEIS comment period expired.
Other/Related
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2026/08/why-hill-republicans-are-competing-for-nuclear-waste-01015140 Why some Republicans want to bring nuclear waste home – For decades, politicians have treated nuclear waste as politically radioactive. Now, Republicans are competing to bring it home. The Department of Energy announced last week that it had signed memorandums of agreement with Utah, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Idaho to explore creating facilities to support the full nuclear fuel cycle — from enrichment of uranium and fabricating fuel to disposing of waste. Rather than resisting an initiative that could bring more nuclear waste to their states, some Republicans are actively courting the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses, arguing they could anchor advanced nuclear industries and bring billions of dollars in investment.
*Also mixed in with AI and data centers, for which Small Modular Reactors might supply power.
Accelerating Arms Race:
- nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-drafting-new-us-nuclear-strategy-case-regional-war-china-russ-rcna587370 Pentagon drafting a new U.S. nuclear strategy in case of regional war with China or Russia, sources say – The Defense Department’s policy chief is drafting a new U.S. nuclear strategy that emphasizes the possible use of shorter-range tactical weapons in case of a regional war with China or Russia, according to five people familiar with the plans. The new strategy, which is classified, challenges the approach to nuclear weapons that has been settled policy for decades… Colby has long pushed for an emphasis on tactical weapons, arguing that America’s adversaries would simply not believe the U.S. would seriously contemplate launching long-range weapons aimed at wiping out an enemy’s nuclear forces — as is the emphasis of the
- united24media.com/world/nato-weighs-nuclear-expansion-as-poland-finland-lithuania-emerge-as-options-21249NATO Weighs Nuclear Expansion as Poland, Finland, Lithuania Emerge as Options – NATO is currently examining options to position additional American nuclear capabilities across Europe as a response to threats posed by Russia. Poland, Finland, and Lithuania are under consideration as potential host countries, according to Süddeutschen Zeitung on July 31. The discussions include Poland aiming to join the Nuclear Sharing program, Finland lifting its long-standing prohibition on nuclear weapons transit and import, and the Lithuanian parliament reviewing legislation to remove its constitutional ban on nuclear deployments.
- https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/07/saudi-us-nuclear-deal-abraham-accords-123-agreement – What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal – Peaceful nuclear cooperation agreements, known colloquially as 123 agreements (after the relevant section in the U.S. Atomic Energy Act), rarely make headlines, but this one stands out. Although the administration has not yet released the full text, the agreement reportedly will not require Riyadh to categorically forgo fuel cycle activities that would be conducive to a nuclear weapons program (namely enrichment and reprocessing) or to accept the highest standard of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, known as the Additional Protocol, or AP.
Sample Comments for the Draft Plutonium Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)
Why should you comment? This process produces valuable information, increases government accountability and transparency, and creates a legal administrative record that has led to important litigation in the past. The Trump administration is severely limiting and removing key opportunities for public comment and objection. Significantly, there is no other legally required opportunity that enables the public to comment on the “modernization” program to keep nuclear weapons forever.
BACKGROUND: The Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is aggressively expanding the production of plutonium pits, the radioactive cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico has been capable of producing plutonium pits since 1996, and until 2018 production was capped at no more than 20 pits per year. NNSA now plans to produce up to 205 pits every year for the new arms race, with at least 80 pits per year made at LANL and at least 125 per year at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina.
Grassroots activist organizations Nuclear Watch New Mexico of Santa Fe, NM; Savannah River Site Watch of Columbia, SC; the Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition of coastal Georgia, and Tri-Valley CARES of Livermore, CA successfully sued the NNSA over its failure to complete a required nationwide “programmatic environmental impact statement” (PEIS) for its plan to massively expand plutonium pits production. A draft of this PEIS was released in April 2026, kicking off in-person hearings in Livermore, CA, Santa Fe, NM, Aiken, SC, Kansas City, MO, and Washington, DC, as well as a 90-day public comment period ending July 16, 2026. This provides a unique and critical opportunity for public scrutiny of and formal comment on the government’s plans to make new nuclear bombs for a new arms race!
Plaintiffs Demand Release of Critical Documents and Extension of Public Comment Period on Expanded Plutonium Bomb Core Production
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, July 6, 2026
Contact: Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, 505.989.7342, c. 505.470.3154 | Email
Scott Yundt, Tri-Valley CAREs, 925.443.7148 | Email
Georgetown, SC — Today the South Carolina Environmental Law Project (SCELP) notified the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), that it must publicly release three critical documents. At issue is the fact that NNSA is withholding important information from American taxpayers during a public comment period for a Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS).[1] The public comment period ends this July 16 (ironically the 81st anniversary of the Trinity Test of the first plutonium pit).
Plutonium “pits” are the radioactive fissile cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. None of NNSA’s future pit production is to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. Instead, it is all for new-design nuclear weapons that could prompt the U.S. to return to testing and accelerate the new arms race.
SCELP, representing the nonprofit organizations Savannah River Site Watch, Tri-Valley CAREs and Nuclear Watch New Mexico, sued NNSA to force it to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. This resulted in a federal judge finding NNSA violated NEPA and the agency ultimately agreeing to complete a Pit Production PEIS. Now it appears that NNSA is cherry-picking information to support its aggressive agenda of expanded plutonium pit production and suppressing negative information that could work against it.
The three documents that SCELP is demanding are:
- A new plutonium pit life study by independent scientists known as the JASONs. NNSA claims that potential aging effects drive the need for the immediate production of new pits, thereby ruling out the alternative of reusing some 15,000 existing pits. In contrast, a 2006 JASON pit life study concluded that most pit types have reliable lives of more than 100 years and those that don’t have relatively easy fixes[2] (the average pit age is now ~43). We believe that NNSA has been withholding an unclassified summary of the new JASON pit life study since the end of 2025. NNSA has not released it despite requests by Members of Congress and public Freedom of Information Act requests.
- A Department of Energy “Special Study” on NNSA leadership and management of its troubled plutonium pit production program, scheduled for completion in December 2025.[3] That Study is expected to be critical of the new pit production plant at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, which will be the most expensive building in US history ($30 billion-plus). DOE has not released this Special Study despite requests by Members of Congress and public Freedom of Information Act requests.
- A new “Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis” (PSHA) for the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) that is nearly a decade overdue.[4] A 2007 LANL seismic analysis prompted badly needed seismic upgrades to the Lab’s plutonium pit production facility. NNSA’s April 2026 draft Pit Production PEIS stated that the new PSHA would be completed in early 2026,[5] yet it is still not available for public comment.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: June 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Budget: Record $1 trillion military budget. Now Trump wants a reconciliation bill that adds $350 billion. He also wants the “Save America” voter suppression Act attached to it which is bound to be ruled not proper by the Senate parliamentarian (reconciliation bills are supposed to deal only with the budget). This could lead to a crisis of some kind.
Favorable polling for Trump is going down with the war in Iran and economic impacts. Will voter suppression will be the only thing that keeps Republicans in control of Congress?
There is also talk of $80 billion supplemental appropriation for the war in Iran.
Defense Authorization Act:
- Passed by House, Senate is considering.
- Hard line House congressional Trumpers want the Save America Act attached to the DAA. That would kill its passage in the Senate and probably won’t happen.
- Proposed 180 pits per year by 2050.
- Numerically expands the US nuclear weapons stockpile to deal with the alleged China threat. This will probably result in MIRVing of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) and more warheads on already MIRVed sub-launched warheads.
- Proposes to more closely integrate US and Israeli military and guarantee $3 billion per year to Israeli military.
Overall trend very bad. Welcome to the new nuclear arms race.
Plutonium Pit Production Draft PEIS Congressional Briefing: Choices Before Congress on Plutonium Pit Production for New Nuclear Warheads
Plutonium Pit Production Draft PEIS – Recording of Public Hearing in Santa Fe, NM, Thurs May 14, 2026
Plan to increase nuclear pit production at Los Alamos lab gets heavy pushback at Santa Fe forum
“The environmental impact statement was produced as a result of a January 2025 settlement between the National Nuclear Security Administration and various groups, including Nuclear Watch New Mexico. The lawsuit claimed the federal government failed to appropriately consider the impacts of production of plutonium pits at LANL and the Savannah River Site, under national environmental law.”
| May 14, 2026 santafenewmexican.com
A draft environmental impact statement on the production of the trigger devices for nuclear weapons faced overwhelming public pushback Thursday evening at a Santa Fe hearing.
The roughly 130 people who attended the meeting at the Santa Fe Farmers Market Institute in person and 100 more who joined online were almost all against plutonium pit production in their backyard — and many criticized the nuclear industry.
Sean Arent, a member of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, brought up that state’s long cleanup process at the Hanford Site, a defunct and decommissioned plutonium production site.
The hearing was one of five scheduled around the country this month and follows meetings in South Carolina, Missouri and California. The final hearing is planned for May 20 in Washington, D.C., and does not have a virtual option.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: May 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
https://www.twz.com/nuclear/new-nuclear-bunker-buster-bomb-plans-revealed
New Nuclear Bunker Buster Bomb Plans Revealed The Department of Energy is seeking millions of dollars for work in part on a new bunker-busting nuclear weapon called the Nuclear Deterrent System-Air-delivered (NDS-A) in its latest budget request… Beyond that it will be air-delivered, there are also no details currently available publicly about the weapon’s design, including whether it will be based on something already in the stockpile.
See the graph below found on the Kansas City National Security Complex website. There are three future new-design nuclear weapons on the right above the W93 (“F” is all 3 cases means “Future”). These new-design nuclear weapons presumably will have new-design pits like the W93.
COMMENT TRAINING for the Plutonium Pit Production Draft PEIS – Recording of Kansas City-Focused Training May 6, 2026
Learn more about the government’s plan to mass produce new plutonium pits for nuclear weapons, Kansas City’s role in this program, and how to give a well-informed and impactful testimony at the public comment hearing in Kansas City on May 7 or submit written comments until July 16.
Presented by PeaceWorks KC, Physicians for Social Responsibility KC, Veterans for Peace KC and special guests from Nuclear Watch New Mexico and the Union of Concerned Scientists.
See more info at https://PitPEIS.com
https://peaceworkskc.org/plutonium/
Plutonium Pit Production Draft PEIS – Recording of Public Hearing North Augusta, South Carolina, Tues May 5, 2026
Kansas City: Inside America’s Nuclear Weapons Capital, As It Builds the Newest American Bomb
“For seventy-seven years, Kansas City has built most of nearly every American nuclear weapon. On May 7, the federal government will hold a hearing to ask if Kansas City consents to the next chapter.”
By | May 6, 2026 kansascitydefender.com
His hands did the work. Maurice Copeland was a tool and die supervisor at the Kansas City Plant for the last twelve of his thirty-two years there, and for most of that time he passed chemicals he did not know were poison across a workbench to men he supervised.
He was a Black Vietnam veteran when Bendix Corporation hired him in 1968, one among thousands of Black returning soldiers Bendix brought in as the Cold War pushed weapons assembly to wartime pace.
The plant at 1500 East Bannister Road sat at the edge of Troost Avenue, the apartheid line that has divided this city since before he was born. What Copeland and the men he supervised handled with their bare hands, included benzene, beryllium, trichloroethylene, polychlorinated biphenyls, asbestos, mercury, lead, and depleted uranium. Group 1 carcinogens.
Plutonium Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) is Out Now! Visit PitPEIS.com for More!
The Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for Plutonium Pit Production was released by NNSA on Friday, April 10th. This opens a critical window for public comment on NNSA’s unnecessary plan to expand production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores. This PEIS was brought on by a lawsuit against NNSA over its failure to complete the NEPA process for this plan. As you likely know, NEPA is fully under attack by the current administration — this may be the last foreseeable full NEPA process taking place, making it all the more critical to be involved.
As a resource to help you comment and encourage widespread comment-making in your community, we (lawsuit plaintiffs Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Tri-Valley CAREs, as well as the Union of Concerned Scientists, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and groups from the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability), created a website that is now live!
Your Pit PEIS central hub for information and action: https://pitpeis.com/
Please take a look and feel free to share, and note that we’ll be continuing to update it as soon as new resources become available.
For example, we will soon have:
– A schedule of comment trainings
– Sample comments and talking points
– Regional-focused resources to help engage your local community around this issue
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: April 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Trump has gone beyond the pale, threatening to wipe out an entire civilization (Iran). The Senate majority leader John Thune tweeted thuggishly, “Iran would be wise to take President Trump at his word. They can choose the easy way or the hard way.” Speaker Mike Johnson had adjourned the House.
There is only one thing made by man that can wipe out a civilization overnight and that is nuclear weapons. NNSA and LANL are all complicit in this. 46 Democratic House members have invoked the 25th amendment to get rid of Trump but no Republicans. We have a two week truce which Netanyahu seems determined to destroy by carpet bombing Lebanon.
FY 2027 budget: See press release and press release.
- Military spending in FY 2026 was already a record breaker at $1 trillion. Trump proposes nearly $1.5 trillion for FY 2027. $1.1 trillion as base budget, $355 billion through reconciliation.
- $18 billion for Golden Dome through reconciliation. In the Alice in Wonderland world of nuclear weapons policies, defense is offense.
- $53.9 billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) in FY 2027. Sixty-one per cent ($32.8 billion) is for its semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). DOE’s Office of Science is gutted by $1.1 billion which “eliminates funding for climate change and Green New Scam research.” DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is eliminated. Nationwide cleanup of legacy Cold War radioactive and toxic wastes at DOE sites is cut by $386 million to $8.2 billion. LANL’s cleanup program is given a modest 5% bump but there is escalating conflict with the New Mexico Environment Department.
- Funding for plutonium pit production is increased by 87%, an average of $5.1 billion in projected costs for each year FY 2028-2031, pretty much equally divided between LANL and the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. LANL will spend $14 billion for pit production over the next six years. None of this is to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. It is all for new designs.
- Aggressive nuclear warhead production, including the new-design W93. More new designs in the wings.
Performance Evaluation Reports: Received via the Freedom of Information Act and posted into NNSA’s E-FOIA reading room, thanks to our two earlier lawsuits. Concerning the LANL PER please see our press release at https://nukewatch.org/press-release-item/lanl-2025-per-pr-3-6-26/ Tom Clements of SRS Watch points out that the SRS PER makes clear poor contractor performance at the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility. This shows the value of the PERs and can be used as a cudgel against them. I smell blood in the water over the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility.
LANL AI center in Ypsilanti, MI: The Township lawyer contacted me after the article Tiny City Fears Iran Drone Strikes Because of New Nuclear Weapons Datacenter was published. I ended up having a 1.5 hour zoom with him and Township staff. They are fighting LANL’s AI center hard. I sent them our press release on the LANL SWEIS which they say was helpful. In response to a commenter’s question (probably me), the final SWEIS explicitly says that a data center will not be built at LANL. However, it completely fails to mention the one in Ypsilanti, is really duplicitous.
Accelerating Arms Race: Trump’s threat to obliterate a 7.000 year old civilization. Now Iran will really want nuclear weapons.
Trump Accelerates New Nuclear Warhead Production
Nearly Doubles Funding for Plutonium “Pit” Bomb Core Production
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, April 6, 2026
Contact: Jay Coghlan, 505.989.7342, c. 505.470.3154 | Email
Sophie Stroud, 505.231.9736 | Email
Santa Fe, NM – The Trump Administration has released military budget numbers for the federal fiscal year 2027 (which begins October 1, 2026). This still current fiscal year 2026 is already a record breaker for military spending at one trillion dollars. Trump now proposes nearly $1.5 trillion in military spending in FY 2027, of which $1.1 trillion is base funding for the Department of War and an additional $350 million is through so-called budget reconciliation. On top of all this, Trump will likely seek $200 billion in supplementary appropriations for the war in Iran, for a potential total of $1.7 trillion in military spending in FY 2027 (a 70% increase above FY 2026). At the same time, there is a 10% across-the-board cut to non-military spending. Much of the remaining discretionary funding for education, wildfire protection, environmental regulations, health care, etc., will be constrained by a focus on border control and immigration enforcement.
Trump proposes $53.9 billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) in FY 2027. Sixty-one per cent ($32.8 billion) is for its semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). DOE’s Office of Science is gutted by $1.1 billion which “eliminates funding for climate change and Green New Scam research.” DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is eliminated. Nationwide cleanup of legacy Cold War radioactive and toxic wastes at DOE sites is cut by $386 million to $8.2 billion ($3 billion of which is reserved for the Hanford Site; other site-specific cleanup budget numbers are still not yet available).
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: March 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Trump’s FY 2027 budget is expected at the end of this month, where he has said that he will add a half-trillion to the already $1 trillion military budget, primarily for Golden Dome. It will probably be topline numbers only, with details to dribble out over weeks. On top of this there will likely be supplemental appropriations for the U.S.-Israel assault on Iran.
Post-New START, U.S. headed to MIRVING land-based ICBMs: 3/6/26 Exchange Monitor reports that a March 3, 2026 Minuteman III flight test launched from Vandenberg Space Force Base (formerly AFB) to the Kwajalein Atoll had two warheads. Under the now-expired New START, the U.S. previously limited land-based ICBMs to one warhead each. “Multiple Independently-targeted Reentry Vehicles” are regarded as particularly dangerous and destabilizing since land-based solos are fixed, known targets inviting preemptive strike and/or use them or lose them scenarios. The ICBM fields in the Upper Mid-West are meant in part to act as a “nuclear sponge” for incoming Russian warheads.
AI Opted to Use Nuclear Weapons 95% of the Time During War Games: Researcher www.commondreams.org/news/ai-nuclear-war-simulation Feb 25, 2026
“There was little sense of horror or revulsion at the prospect of all out nuclear war, even though the models had been reminded about the devastating implications.”
An artificial intelligence researcher conducting a war games experiment with three of the world’s most used AI models found that they decided to deploy nuclear weapons in 95% of the scenarios he designed.
AI Opted to Use Nuclear Weapons 95% of the Time During War Games: Researcher
NNSA’s FY 2025 Performance Evaluation Report for LANL made clear the Lab’s growing involvement with artificial intelligence.
Plutonium pit production:
NNSA is directing LANL to double plutonium pit production to at least 60 pits per year. This is largely due to ongoing delays and cost escalation at the Savannah River Site. At the same time the Department of Energy is lowering worker safety regulations (see https://nukewatch.org/press-release-item/department-of-energy-seeks-to-eliminate-radiation-protections-requiring-controls-as-low-as-reasonably-achievable/ from last November):
NNSA is also reportedly eliminating the “diamond stamp” certification for individual plutonium pits and instead certifying “processes.” National Environmental Policy Act requirements are being quashed as well. In short, it looks like NNSA and LANL are trying to cut corners and remove all speed bumps for plutonium pit production, which is being prioritized above everything else.
Accelerating Arms Race (in addition to the U.S.-Israel assault on Iran, it’s unfortunately been a busy month):
Iran will target Israeli nuclear site if regime change is sought, Iranian official says https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-will-target-israeli-nuclear-site-if-regime-change-is-sought-iranian-2026-03-04/
Iran will target the Israeli nuclear site of Dimona if Israel and the U.S. seek regime change in the Islamic Republic, semi-official ISNA news agency reported on Wednesday, citing an Iranian military official.
————
Allegations of a Chinese nuclear blast may reignite weapons testing
As new global arms race looms, accusation highlights limits to monitoring low-yield tests
In the afternoon on 22 June 2020, a seismic station in eastern Kazakhstan registered two small earthquakes 12 seconds apart near China’s Lop Nur nuclear test site. Closely spaced jolts can arise from underground explosions followed by a cavity collapse, or simply from earthquakes. But U.S. officials this month asserted the shaking was from a clandestine nuclear detonation—an accusation that could sound the starting gun for a new global arms race.
————
Exclusive: US intelligence agencies tie Chinese explosive test to push for a completely new nuclear arsenal
https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/21/politics/china-nuclear-arsenal-new-technology, Feb 20, 2026
US intelligence agencies believe that China is developing a new generation of nuclear weapons and has conducted at least one covert explosive test in recent years as part of a broader push to completely transform its nuclear arsenal into the world’s most technologically advanced, according to multiple sources familiar with the US intelligence assessments.
The US assessment of China’s intention to radically advance its nuclear weapons is fueling debate inside the intelligence community and beyond over whether there has been a shift in Beijing’s thinking on nuclear strategy, the sources said. The investment in its nuclear arsenal is pushing China closer to peer status with Russia and the US and could yield technical capabilities neither of the two dominant nuclear powers currently possess.
————
Institute for Study of War
Kim Jong Un reaffirmed the centrality of nuclear weapons to North Korea’s deterrence strategy and outlined plans to expand North Korea’s nuclear arsenal during the 9th Party Congress, a continuation of his 8th Party Congress objectives. North Korean state media released a report on February 20 and 21 that established Kim’s “uncompromising” stance on maintaining its nuclear capabilities. Kim mentioned the enactment of the 2022 Nuclear Force Policy Law, which states that an attack against senior leadership or the nuclear command and control (C2) system would result in an automatic North Korean nuclear attack against the perpetrator. Kim also formalized the “nuclear trigger” system, established in 2023, which is intended to provide a more systematic approach to nuclear decision-making during periods of crisis. This system would allow for “automatic” retaliation against nuclear threats, which echoes other statements Kim made pushing for the development of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven military technology. Kim’s statements at the 9th Party Congress expanded on his remarks at the 8th Party Congress, where he called for the development of a nuclear deterrent.
————
Finland to lift full ban on hosting nuclear arms, government says https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/finland-lift-full-ban-hosting-nuclear-arms-government-says-2026-03-05/
HELSINKI, March 5 (Reuters) – Finland plans to lift a long-standing ban on having nuclear arms on its territory, the government said on Thursday, aligning with Nordic neighbours in a move that could open the door to deploying atomic bombs on Finnish soil during times of war.
Finland’s Nuclear Energy Act, passed in 1987, prohibits the import, manufacture, possession and detonation of nuclear explosives on its soil, seen by some Finns as a clause that would benefit only Russia if there ever was a war.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: February 2026
American imperialism:
Recommended listening: Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos speech at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnE2HTfDivQ
Talking about Trump’s impacts, he said, “This not a transition, it is a rupture.” Speaking on American imperialism (without explicitly calling it that) to “Middle Powers” such as Canada, he said “We are either at the table, or we on the menu.”
Recommended reading concerning pending dictatorship: Robert Kagan’s interview at https://www.npr.org/2026/02/04/nx-s1-5699388/is-the-u-s-heading-into-a-dictatorship
Nuclear Weapons
Trump is proposing to increase the military budget from $1 trillion this FY 2026 to $1.5 trillion next year. The largest single component in this will probably be his ill-conceived Golden Dome. In the Alice in Wonderland upside down world of nuclear weapons policies, defense is offense and offense is defense. Unrealistic ballistic missile defenses have always the enemy of nuclear disarmament, starting with Edward Teller’s lies to Reagan that kept him from signing a nuclear weapons ban treaty with Mikhail Gorbachev in 1986.
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) expired yesterday (Feb 5), the first time the word is without any arms control treaties since the mid-1970s. The US and Russia are now likely to upload more warheads since the 1,550 numerical cap is now gone. Multiple warheads is regarded as particularly dangerous and destabilizing, inviting preemptive strikes and use them or lose them scenarios.
Today (Feb 6) the Trump Administration accused China of conducting a hydronuclear test in 2020, just above the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty’s no yield threshold. This may be a prelude to the US resuming testing.
Plutonium pit production:
DOE’s “special assessment” was scheduled for completion mid-December 2025 — It is still not publicly available. Sen. Warren and Rep. Garamendi demanded its release on January 9.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: January 2026
American imperialism:
On the U.S. raid on Venezuela to oust Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan president:
Stephen Miller, Donald Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security advisor, told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Monday January 5, 2026:
“We live in a world in which you can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else, but we live in a world—in the real world, Jake—that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world that have existed since the beginning of time.”
The “Donroe Doctrine” is a more aggressive Trumpian take on the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, a foreign policy approach focused on unilateral U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere. How far does this administration intend to force this new doctrine?
DOE now department of nuclear weapons and Venezuelan oil: The Trump administration engaged the Department of Energy (DOE) and Secretary Chris Wright to oversee the seizure and marketing of Venezuelan oil following the capture of Nicolás Maduro. The U.S. intends to control Venezuelan oil, aiming to sell 30–50 million barrels of accumulated, sanctioned crude to the American people.
Greenland:
Trump describes Greenland as an “absolute necessity” for national security and the defense of the Arctic.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said that the president believes Greenland is “essential for the Golden Dome missile shield.” https://www.wcvb.com/article/greenland-trump-explainer/70097863
Los Alamos National Lab (LANL) Town Hall December 3rd, 2025 – Thoughts from Nuclear Watch New Mexico:
The LANL Director mentioned Non-proliferation is a big part of their work. However, the Nuclear Nonproliferation program budget is a mere 6.5% of the total Lab budget (Nuclear Weapons is 84%, with a Billion dollar increase for FY26). https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/FY26-Lab-Table-spreadsheets-Chart-1.pdf Nuclear Nonproliferation is a valuable program that LANL does well, and its funding should not be cut to provide more money for nuclear weapons production (literally the opposite of nonproliferation). The Nuclear Nonproliferation budget should be increased, especially if the Lab director agrees on its importance. NukeWatch NM is entirely supportive of LANL’s Sealed Sources program, which serves as the nation’s lead for collecting potentially dangerous radioactive materials that are no longer needed, securing them, and ensuring they don’t fall into the wrong hands, protecting communities and enhancing security.
On the discussion of AI missions at the lab:
The lab is partnering with NVIDIA for their hardware and ChatGPT/Open AI for their models. “The goal is to harness the power of the next evolution of high performance computing and apply it to our national security science and technology. Big development on this front is the “genesis” mission…” and in an answer to a question, want to “use artificial intelligence to [for example] help us develop the molecules that could deliver a therapeutic isotope to a cancer cell with high specificity so that when that undergoes radioactive decay the decay products basically kill the cancer cell but no surrounding tissue”
Again, the lab’s nuclear weapons budget ate up almost all else this year – how does the lab propose to work on this kind of work when its’ science budget is less than 1%? How will this advancement of AI be applied to our national security science and technology in terms of nuclear weapons? NukeWatch has serious concerns and questions regarding the tangible risks associated with integrating commercial AI infrastructure to be with active national security and nuclear defense programs. Beyond this, a $1.25 billion advanced computing campus is planned in Michigan to support far-away Los Alamos Lab in high-performance computing and AI research.
Continue reading
Nuclear Watch New Mexico Attends the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability Fall Meeting Nov. 21-23 in Las Vegas, Protesting Nuclear Testing in Nevada & Much More!
Department of Energy Seeks to Eliminate Radiation Protections Requiring Controls “As Low As Reasonably Achievable”
An internal Department of Energy (DOE) memorandum eliminates worker and public radiation protection rules known “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA). This fundamental departure from decades of accepted health physics practices is being promoted by senior DOE political appointees with little background in health or radiation control. It is marked as “URGENCY: High” under the auspices of the DOE Deputy Secretary, the Under Secretary for Science, and the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration. The memorandum awaits the final signature of DOE Secretary Chris Wright.
The memo’s stated goal is to:
“…remove the ALARA principle from all DOE directives and regulations, including DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, NE [Office of Nuclear Energy] Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public, and, upon completion of the rulemaking process, 10 CFR [Code of Federal Regulations] 835, Occupational Radiation Protection.” [1]
It follows the playbook of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which called for:
“Set[ting] clear radiation exposure and protection standards by eliminating ALARA (“as low as reasonably achievable”) as a regulatory principle and setting clear standards according to radiological risk and dose rather than arbitrary objectives.” [2]
Los Alamos’ plutonium facility safety systems need improvement, oversight board says
Nuclear Watch New Mexico executive direcor Jay Coghlan sees PF-4 as being a bigger scale — and having bigger risks — than the other aging buildings.
“PF-4 is not unique in being old,” Coghlan said. “However, PF-4 is totally unique in currently being the only facility that can process large amounts of plutonium … particularly including plutonium pit production. I think, in part, that’s why the Safety Board focuses more on PF-4 than, to my knowledge, than any other single individual facility.”
| November 7, 2025 santafenewmexican.com
An independent oversight agency wants to see improved safety systems at the facility at the heart of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s plutonium pit mission: PF-4.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board reported what it believes to be gaps in a safety analysis drafted for PF-4 and delays in upgrades to safety systems in a letter last month to Energy Secretary Chris Wright.
“Maintaining momentum for these safety infrastructure projects is more important in light of the issues with the safety analysis,” the board wrote in the letter dated Oct. 10. It was signed by former acting chairman Thomas Summers.
“A House of Dynamite” New Netflix Nuclear Catastrophe Film: Fiction, for Now
The reviews are rolling in for “A House of Dynamite,” which premiered in Europe earlier this month before coming to the U.S. on October 10th, with a full Netflix release scheduled for the 24th. Here’s the trailer, and see the schedule for Santa Fe theater showings here:
This Week! Santa Fe Theater Screenings for the Film “A House of Dynamite”
I attended one of these screenings last night, and I’ll let the professional critic reviews give the gist:
The Kathryn Bigelow thriller looks at what might happen if a ballistic missile were headed to the U.S. The director hopes the movie will start a conversation. New York Times: At Venice, ‘A House of Dynamite’ Is Scarier Than Most Horror Films
“The Netflix thriller captures from multiple perspectives the White House response to an unattributed missile launch headed for a major U.S. city in the harrowing 20 minutes until projected impact…”An unrelenting chokehold thriller so controlled, kinetic and unsettlingly immersive that you stagger out at the end of it wondering if the world will still be intact.” ‘A House of Dynamite’ Review: Idris Elba and Rebecca Ferguson in Kathryn Bigelow’s Precision-Tooled, Viscerally Unsettling Nail-Biter
“Told from the perspective of soldiers at a remote Alaskan missile base, staffers in the White House situation room, military officials at US Central Command (CENTCOM), and the president of the United States, the film weaves an overlapping timeline to show how the United States would respond to a missile attack…The film doesn’t want viewers to ask themselves how to thwart a nuclear attack on the United States. Rather, it wants the viewer to question the value of having nuclear weapons at all. ‘None of this makes sense,’ the President (Idris Elba) bemoans, ‘Making all these bombs and all these plans.'”
“A House of Dynamite is a terrifying examination of how terribly wrong things can go even with highly competent people in charge…But that’s also not necessarily the world we’re living in…The film shows why the worst can happen, even when competent, well-meaning people are trying to do the right thing.
But what if competence and decency are in short supply?” A House of Dynamite: Bigelow’s latest thriller shows why nuclear bombs are only part of the danger
This film left me reeling with tension and anxiety and exactly as the Times article titles it, is scarier than most horror films. Unlike ‘Oppenheimer,’ which largely glorified the invention of the atomic weapon, ‘A House of Dynamite’ makes it impossible to ignore the threat that nuclear weapons pose to our world. Working backwards from perspectives, and focused on how we can actually improve our odds of keeping this story a fictional one, here is what struck me most about this film:
-
-
Only one person decides what happens. But the real threat isn’t one reckless leader — it’s a reckless system. The final segment of the film features the “nuclear football” heavily, a briefcase containing launch procedures and options. In the United States, the president holds the sole and absolute authority to order the use of nuclear weapons. In the film, there are many voices in the President’s ear, but two primary perspectives quickly emerge after the defense fails and the ICBM remains inbound to its U.S. target: “One side advocates a retaliatory strike; the other, nothing. ‘It’s surrender or suicide,’ one adviser tells the President,” – thebulletin.org. The military aide carrying the nuclear football is tasked with providing the President the list of options if retaliation is chosen. An absolute must-read, Daniel Ellsberg’s book “The Doomsday Machine” breaks down many of the themes in the film with pure and terrifyingly honest account of Cold War-era nuclear strategy. In terms of launch authority, he describes how the inherent instability of the delegated command structure of the nuclear apparatus makes accidental or unwanted war an ever-present danger.
-
August 6th U.S. Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima Commemoration in Santa Fe
NukeWatch in DC Advocating for Nuclear Disarmament and Non-Proliferation
Your Nuclear Watch New Mexico team has just returned from a weeklong trip to Washington D.C. (we went so you don’t have to!). The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) hosts an annual “DC Days” conference and following Spring Meeting, and we proudly joined as part of a record number of groups this year. Over 60 individuals from 30+ organizations journeyed to DC to advocate for nuclear weapons disarmament, nuclear energy, and waste policy on behalf of the frontline nuclear communities we represent. Members were present from groups representing the entire U.S. nuclear complex, including sites in Georgia, New Mexico, Tennessee, California, Missouri, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada and beyond. NukeWatch NM brought all three staff members—Jay Coghlan, Scott Kovac, and Sophia Stroud (whose participation was made possible by a youth scholarship from ANA)—to participate in DC Days and the subsequent two-day spring meeting. The ANA DC Days schedule included over 70 meetings with senators, representatives, and other relevant agencies, such as the Department of Energy, the Government Accountability Office, and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. Our NukeWatch team attended nearly 30 of these meetings. The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability put together a new report to present our “asks” to congress as a coalition, including analysis and recommendations for nuclear weapons, nuclear waste, and nuclear energy policy and funding. Please click HERE for the full report, and HERE for a short summary.
I was glad to see increased representation from Nevada this year, and especially Indigenous representation. In light of the current administration’s attacks on Environmental Justice, it is more important than ever that ANA as a whole, as well as individual member groups, continue to prioritize uplifting Native American voices, not only because of their deep cultural, spiritual, and social connections to the land, including sacred sites and traditional knowledge essential to religious freedom and access, but also because of the violent legacy and ongoing reality of nuclear colonialism, in which Indigenous lands and peoples have been deliberately and disproportionately targeted in the nuclear industry with uranium mining, nuclear weapons testing and production, and the disposal of radioactive waste. To learn more about Nuclear Colonialism, see: www.networkadvocates.org/downwinders and read Nuclear Nuevo México: Colonialism and the Effects of the Nuclear Industrial Complex on Nuevomexicanos by Myrriah Gómez.
The Workers, the Waste, and the Warnings from Bomb Country
“From South Carolina to California, locals in nuclear weapons towns raise health, safety, and environmental concerns over renewed plutonium pit manufacturing.”
| June 12, 2025 inkstickmedia.com
The United States’ plans to restock its entire nuclear weapons arsenal, known in military parlance as nuclear “modernization,” hit a bump in the road in January. A scrappy coalition of grassroots watchdog groups and impacted communities from places like the Gullah/Geechee sea islands off the Georgia and South Carolina coasts and San Francisco Bay Area neighborhoods near a weapons laboratory sued the government agency that oversees the security of the US nuclear weapons complex.
The plaintiffs argued that the government was moving ahead with plans to produce new plutonium pits for warheads at plants in rural South Carolina and the Los Alamos laboratory in New Mexico without properly evaluating alternatives under the National Environmental Policy Act. A federal judge agreed, and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) settled with the grassroots groups, agreeing to perform a multi-year environmental analysis.
The extensive environmental impact study is a rare speed bump that everyday Americans have been able to place in the way of the 21st century’s new nuclear arms race — and one that forces the government to hear from locals in the specific communities across the country that produce parts for the weapons.
“A nuclear arms race can feel abstract and distant, but it very much isn’t,” Ravi Garla, a consultant for the Nuclear Threat Initiative, told Inkstick. Garla recently worked on a campaign that led to a unanimous vote in the Nevada state legislature to oppose any resumption of explosive nuclear tests at a desert site outside Las Vegas where the government carried out more than 900 tests during and after the Cold War.
Top photo: A billboard by an advocacy group opposed to nuclear weapons testing in Nevada (Courtesy of Nevadans Against Nuclear Weapons Testing)
Plutonium Pit PEIS Scoping Hearing Presentation: Slides and Recording
Get Prepared: A coalition of advocacy groups, including Union of Concerned Scientists, Tri-Valley CAREs, and NukeWatch New Mexico recently held a training to help participants prepare effective comments.
Watch the recording here
Password: gP=&0LYZ
Lawsuit Compels Nationwide Public Review of Plutonium Bomb Core Production
AIKEN, S.C. — Today the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency within the Department of Energy, published a formal Notice of Intent in the Federal Register to complete a nationwide “programmatic environmental impact statement” on the expanded production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores. Pits are the essential radioactive triggers of modern nuclear weapons. The NNSA is aggressively seeking their expanded production for new-design nuclear weapons for the new nuclear arms race.
The South Carolina Environmental Law Project (SCELP) successfully represented the Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition and Nuclear Watch New Mexico, Savannah River Site Watch and Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment in a legal challenge to NNSA’s attempt to improperly jump start dual site pit production. On September 30, 2024, United States District Court Judge Mary Geiger Lewis ruled that the NNSA had violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to properly consider alternatives before proceeding with its plan to produce at least 30 pits per year at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico and at least 50 pits per year at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina.
Formal Comments on the Draft Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory
The National Environmental Policy Act requires the Los Alamos National Laboratory to periodically prepare a new “Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) for Continued Operations.”
Please use NukeWatch NM’s recent extensive comments on the Lab’s new draft SWEIS as a resource and citizens’ guide to Lab issues.
Did you know, for example, that:
• LANL’s nuclear weapons production budget has doubled over the last decade?
• The Lab’s so-called cleanup plan is to “cap and cover” some 200,000 cubic yards of radioactive and toxic waste, leaving them permanently buried as a perpetual threat to groundwater?
• There is a planned intentional release of up to 30,000 curies of radioactive tritium gas, all without a public hearing?
Use our lengthy formal comments as a starting point, toolkit or resource for dissecting ongoing and future issues at LANL!
We encourage you to use our comments to ask for follow-up info, either from us here at NukeWatch or from the Lab, and to demand better accountability and transparency! Use as background or briefing material for local and congressional advocacy.
For example:
- Cite or excerpt our comments in future public processes under the National Environmental Policy Act. For example, we are expecting that a nationwide programmatic environmental impact statement for plutonium “pit” bomb core production will be announced soon, the result of a lawsuit in which NukeWatch led.
- Share with those organizing around stopping expanded plutonium pit production and advocating for genuine radioactive and toxic wastes cleanup.
- Learn about LANL’s proposed electrical transmission line across the environmentally and culturally sensitive Caja del Rio and alternatives that were not considered.
- The National Environmental Policy Act itself is under assault by the Trump Administration. We expect environmental justice and climate change issues to be stripped from LANL’s final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement. This needs to be resisted!
NukeWatch NM argued that the draft SWEIS should be withdrawn and a new one issued because:
• The NNSA has rigged the draft LANL Site-Wide EIS with three self-serving scenarios:
– Expanded nuclear weapons programs (contradictorily called the “No Action Alternative”).
– Yet more expanded nuclear weapons programs (“Modernized Operations Alternative”).
– Yet far more expanded nuclear weapons programs (“Expanded Operations Alternative”).
• A Reduced Operations Alternative must be included.
• The SWEIS’ fundamental justification for expanded nuclear weapons programs is “deterrence.” But “deterrence” has always included nuclear warfighting capabilities that could end human civilization overnight.
• The SWEIS purports to align with U.S. obligations under the 1970 NonProliferation Treaty. That is demonstrably false.
• Future plutonium pit production is NOT to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. Instead, it is for new-design nuclear weapons that could lower confidence in stockpile reliability and/or prompt a return to testing.
• The SWEIS’ No-Action Alternative violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
• The legally required programmatic environmental impact statement on pit production should be completed first, followed by the LANL SWEIS.
• Plutonium pit reuse should be analyzed as a credible alternative to pit production.
• A recent proposal for a data center at LANL is not in the SWEIS. It raises huge issues of future water and electrical use, the appropriateness of commercial interests at a federal lab, and the possible fusion of artificial intelligence and nuclear weapons command and control.
• Recent Executive Orders could strip the final SWEIS of environmental justice and climate change analyses. This must have clarification.
• Planned tritium releases should be fully analyzed.
• The Electrical Power Capacity Upgrade should be analyzed will all credible alternatives.
• The proposed BioSafety Level-3 facility must have its own standalone EIS.
• All Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board concerns should be addressed and resolved.
• Genuine comprehensive cleanup should be a preferred alternative.
• A new SWEIS should follow a new overdue Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis.
Exchange Monitor: Compromise reached on pit production suit environmental review
“The National Nuclear Security Administration and environmental plaintiffs settled a lawsuit that could put a pause on plutonium pit production efforts at Savannah River Site if approved.”
By Exchange Monitor | January 29, 2025 exchangemonitor.com
The agreement, made public Jan. 16, would leave Los Alamos National Laboratory as the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) sole pit factory until an environmental impact statement is completed as part of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). The process is expected to take at least two-and-a-half years, according to the document.
Until a record of decision is issued from the environmental review, NNSA is enjoined from installing classified equipment or introducing nuclear material at the Savannah River plant, according to a press release from the citizen groups. Actual pit production at Savannah River is not expected before the 2030s, according to NNSA.
The plaintiffs alleged in the lawsuit from 2021 that NNSA and DOE would violate NEPA by producing plutonium pits at Los Alamos and Savannah River Site without conducting a proper environmental review. A federal judge agreed with the plaintiffs in September, but instigated months of back and forth between both parties by forcing them to agree to a solution themselves.
The settlement requires NNSA to produce a new programmatic environmental impact statement within two-and-a-half years. Until that is complete in a process that would include public hearings nationwide and public comment on the draft of the statement, NNSA would not be able to process nuclear material at Savannah River’s plutonium facility.
The plaintiffs in the suit include environmental watch group Savannah River Site Watch of South Carolina; Tom Clements, director of Savannah River Site Watch; The Gullah Geechee Sea Island Coalition, a group representing the interests of some descendants of enslaved Africans dwelling on the lower Atlantic coast; Nuclear Watch New Mexico of Santa Fe, N.M.; and the Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment, of Livermore, Calif.
Hot Plutonium Pit Bomb Redux
“Plaintiffs including Savannah River Site Watch, South Carolina Environmental Law Project Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition, Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Tri-Valley CAREs forced NNSA to halt construction on many phases of its plutonium pit facility near Aiken, SC, to hold public scoping meetings, solicit public comments, and produce a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement within thirty months.”
By Mark Muhich, Counterpunch | January 31, 2025 counterpunch.com
Last week U.S. District Judge Mary Lewis Geiger, South Carolina, faulted the Department of Energy and the National Nuclear Security Agency for ignoring the National Environmental Protection Act and rushing plans to fabricate plutonium pit bombs at Savannah River Site, near Aiken, South Carolina.
Newly designed plutonium pits will serve as “triggers” for the next generation of nuclear warheads mounted atop Sentinel, the next generation of intercontinental ballistic missile, and for new submarine-launched nuclear weapons. Combined, these projects comprise major components in the trillion-dollar “modernization” of the U.S. strategic deterrence force.
Continue reading
Historic Settlement Reached in NEPA Lawsuit Over Plutonium “Pit” Bomb Core Production
Nonprofit public interest groups have reached an historic settlement agreement with the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This is the successful result of a lawsuit against NNSA over its failure to complete a programmatic environmental impact statement on the expanded production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This agreement and a joint motion to dismiss have been submitted to Judge Mary Lewis Geiger of the Federal District of South Carolina. Should the Court enter the dismissal and retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, the agreement will go into effect.
This lawsuit was first filed in June 2021 by co-plaintiffs Savannah River Site Watch of Columbia, SC; Nuclear Watch New Mexico of Santa Fe, NM; Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment (CAREs), based in Livermore, CA; and the Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition of coastal Georgia. NNSA promptly moved to have the case dismissed which in February 2023 Judge Lewis rejected, calling her decision “not a close call.”
In September 2024, Judge Lewis ruled that DOE and NNSA had violated NEPA by failing to properly consider alternatives before proceeding with their plan to produce plutonium pits, a critical component of nuclear weapons, at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico and, for the first time ever, at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. The Court found that the plan’s purpose had fundamentally changed from NNSA’s earlier analyses which had not considered simultaneous pit production at two sites. Judge Lewis directed the Defendants and Plaintiffs to prepare a joint proposal for an appropriate remedy which fostered additional negotiations.
Historic Settlement Reached in NEPA Lawsuit Over Plutonium “Pit” Bomb Core Production
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, January 17, 2025
Media Contacts:
Ben Cunningham, Esquire, SCELP, 843-527-0078, ben@scelp.org
Tom Clements, Savannah River Site Watch, 803-834-3084, tomclements329@cs.com
Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, 505-989-7342, jay@nukewatch.org
Scott Yundt, Tri-Valley CAREs, 925-443-7148, scott@trivalleycares.org
Queen Quet, Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition, 843-838-1171, GullGeeCo@aol.com
AIKEN, S.C. — Nonprofit public interest groups have reached an historic settlement agreement with the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This is the successful result of a lawsuit against NNSA over its failure to complete a programmatic environmental impact statement on the expanded production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This agreement and a joint motion to dismiss have been submitted to Judge Mary Lewis Geiger of the Federal District of South Carolina. Should the Court enter the dismissal and retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, the agreement will go into effect.
This lawsuit was first filed in June 2021 by co-plaintiffs Savannah River Site Watch of Columbia, SC; Nuclear Watch New Mexico of Santa Fe, NM; Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment (CAREs), based in Livermore, CA; and the Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition of coastal Georgia. NNSA promptly moved to have the case dismissed which in February 2023 Judge Lewis rejected, calling her decision “not a close call.”
Anti-nuclear advocates, feds, compromise on pit production lawsuit
“We’re generally satisfied [with the terms],” said Nuclear Watch New Mexico executive director Jay Coghlan.
But what about the other half of the two-site plan?
“The fish that got away is Los Alamos,” Coghlan said.
Alaina Mencinger | January 17, 2025 santafenewmexican.com
The National Nuclear Security Administration and anti-nuclear advocates have reached agreement in a lawsuit over the National Environmental Protection Act that could temporarily halt plutonium pit production efforts at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
If approved, the proposed agreement, reached Thursday, would leave Los Alamos National Laboratory as the agency’s only pit production site until a far-reaching environmental impact statement can be completed, which is expected to take at least 2½ years.
Nuclear Watch New Mexico and other groups around the country alleged in a 2021 lawsuit the federal government had violated the National Environmental Protection Act in the course of deciding to produce plutonium pits, the trigger device for nuclear weapons, at both Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Savannah River Site.
New Draft LANL Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement is Released
NNSA’s Preferred Future for the Lab is Radically Expanded Nuclear Weapons Programs
The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has finally released its Draft Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) for Continued Operation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. This is more than two years after it was first announced and sixteen years after the last site-wide EIS. During that time the Lab has become more and more a nuclear weapons production site for the new global nuclear arms race. Accordingly, the central point of the new draft LANL SWEIS is “NNSA has identified the Expanded Operations Alternative as the preferred alternative for the continuing operations of LANL.” Draft LANL SWEIS, page S-13.
As policy background, the draft LANL SWEIS pays lip service to the 1970 NonProliferation Treaty (NPT):
“In Article VI of the NPT, treaty parties “undertake to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament…” The U.S. takes this commitment seriously and has emphasized dedication to both the long-term goal of eliminating nuclear weapons and the requirement that the U.S. has modern, flexible, and resilient nuclear capabilities that are safe and secure, until such a time as nuclear weapons can prudently be eliminated from the world.” P. 1-7.
Left unsaid is that no nuclear power, including the United States, has ever even tried to enter into good faith negotiations toward nuclear weapons disarmament, pledged to more than a half-century ago. Instead, all nuclear weapons states are now engaged in massive “modernization” programs to keep nuclear weapons forever, leading to today’s accelerating nuclear weapons arms race. Also, very much left unsaid is the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, ratified by 73 countries, nearing its fourth anniversary since it went into effect.