NukeWatch in the Media (2018 & Past)

Two Upcoming Events

Two upcoming events

Sunday Mornings @ The Travel Bug
April 22, Sunday, 11 am
839 Paseo de Peralta, Santa Fe

Jay Coghlan, Executive Director Of Nuclear Watch New Mexico
in Conversation with Michelle Victoria – NukeFreeNow on the work Jay has
done over the last 22 years on nuclear safety and what Michelle is planning
for the NukeFreeNow.
http://www.journeysantafe.com/travelbug.php
Travel Bug is an independent travel specialty store in Santa Fe, NM,
839 Paseo de Peralta 505-474-1457

And

CMRR Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 25 from 6:30 – 8:30
Fuller Lodge, Los Alamos

The Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMMR) Project is the
Lab’s $6 billion dream facility that would enable expanded production
capabilities for plutonium nuclear weapons components. The Obama
Administration has recently proposed deferring the project for 5 years,
which will likely lead to its termination.

This will be the 13th semi-annual public meeting required as part of a 2005
settlement between DOE/LANL and an network of community groups:
• Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety
• Embudo Valley Environmental Monitoring Group
• Loretto Community
• New Mexico Environmental Law Center
• Nuclear Watch New Mexico
• Peace Action New Mexico
• Tewa Women United

You are invited to come and be inspired as LANL CMRR project personnel give
updates on the project while our network of community groups give updates of
our concerns.

Defense Dept. Memo Criticizes Cost of Nuclear Weapons Labs While Los Alamos Director’s Salary Nearly Triples

Our colleagues and friends at the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) have released an explosive report based on a leaked Department of Defense memo concluding that “The Department of Energy’s network of privately-operated nuclear weapons laboratories are riddled with waste, redundancies and lackluster scientific standards.” POGO also found that “that seven of the top 15 officials at the three DOE nuclear labs make more than $700,000 per year, with one earning $1.7 million—more than the president of the United States and many government executives.”

Coincidentally, Nuclear Watch New Mexico had been independently compiling data on the salaries of the three laboratory directors, as presented in the table below. It shows that the salary of the Los Alamos Director has nearly tripled since for-profit management began in June 2006, even as the Lab is cutting some 600 jobs. As seen below, privatization of the nuclear weapons labs’ management contracts has resulted in directors’ salaries far above average in both the federal government and the private sector.

 

 

The DoD memo leaked by POGO contains the following admirable passage on good governance:
Diminishing Public Accountability. Without a strong yardstick, our government cannot govern well — not even if it retains the best and brightest on contract. The government’s own assets must capably bear the responsibility for decisions that affect national interests, and they must maintain public confidence by the manner in which those decisions are made.

In contrast, the directors of the three nuclear weapons labs (the Los Alamos, Sandia and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories) wear two hats, first as lab directors, but secondly as the presidents of the board of directors of the for-profit limited liability corporations (LLCs) that run the labs. That may be a questionable conflict of interests, in which the LLCs are enjoying record profits from issues that deeply “affect national interests” (i.e., nuclear weapons) while the salaries of their “CEOs” (the lab directors) are exploding.

Arguably the lab directors have not maintained public confidence in the decisions they make because of the general trend of increasingly withholding crucial public information. One example is the Performance Evaluation Reports that rate contractors’ performance and determines the amount of taxpayers’ money awarded to them. Those reports were publicly available until 2009 when the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) began to withhold them, and became recently available again only after NukeWatch NM sued for them under the Freedom of Information Act.

NNSA awarded the limited liability corporation that runs Los Alamos Lab $74.2 million for FY 2010, followed by $83.7 million in profit for FY 2011, a 13% increase in one year, and 10 times more than what the University of California (UC) use to be awarded when it was LANL’s sole nonprofit manager. Jay Coghlan, NukeWatch Director, commented, “In today’s political and economic climate citizens need to remain vigilant that for-profit corporate interests don’t corrupt serious national issues. This very much applies to how our nuclear weapons labs are run as well. We specifically call upon Los Alamos Lab to fully explain to northern New Mexicans why it needs to cut some 600 jobs while at the same time the for-profit management corporation is enjoying record profits and the Director’s salary has nearly tripled in six years.”

# # #

All data on nuclear weapons labs directors’ salaries are from:
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/pages/RecipientProjectSummary508.aspx?AwardIdSur=74953
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/pages/RecipientProjectSummary508.aspx?AwardIDSUR=115066&qtr=2011Q1
http://www.upte.org/LosAlamos/salaries/salaries.html

POGO’s press release “Leaked Defense Memo Criticizes the Department of Energy’s Push to Expand Nuclear Weapons Laboratories” is at http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/alerts/nuclear-security-safety/nss-nwc-20110418-nuclear-waste-dept-of-energy.html

POGO’s detailed letter to congressional committees on these issues is at http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/letters/nuclear-security-safety/nss-nwc-20120418-nuclear-weapons-labs.html

To read the leaked DoD memo, click here https://web.archive.org/web/20211025065956/http://pogoarchives.org/m/nss/new-missions-for-the-nuclear-weapons-labs-11-16-2011.pdf

551 W. Cordova Rd., #808, Santa Fe, NM 87505-4100 • Voice and fax: 505.989.7342
[email protected] • www.nukewatch.org • https://nukewatch.org/watchblog/
http://www.facebook.com/NukeWatch.NM

Love and Loss in the Jemez

We’re lucky in that it appears Los Alamos Lab has dodged the bullet with respect to the Las Conchas Fire, but I do want to say something about 100,000 acres of some of the most beautiful land in New Mexico burning up in the Jemez Mountains. I know it fairly well.

Back in the early 1980’s I would take my kids out on a full moon night in the winter after it snowed on Highway 4 near the Valle Grande and pull them on an upside down car hood chained to my pickup (not recommended, but they loved it). I use to rock climb a lot at the Las Conchas Canyon on the east fork of the Jemez River (near where the fire broke out), and down at the southern end of the fire at Cochiti Mesa and Eagle Canyon (the erosion in Eagle Canyon after the 1996 Dome Fire was shocking, a harbinger of what is to come with this fire). I remember taking my kids to the beautiful Santa Clara Canyon to the north, which the fire is now devastating (my heartfelt condolences to the Pueblo). My parents took photos of me and my two brothers when we were small in the late 1950’s sitting in a Bandelier National Monument “cavate” (a hole in the canyon volcanic tuff further carved out by the Anasazi to live in), posing as the three little monkeys who hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

As an adult I’ve been back country many times in Bandelier (now half burned), where on a map it looks like you walk say 5 miles but it will actually be eight by the time you climb up and down canyons. I know of a ponderosa pine in the Jemez where a buddy bigger than me (and I’m six feet) and I could not touch our fingers together while hugging its girth. I’m a tree hugger, but I also had chain saw thinning contracts all over the Jemez, including one on the south rim of the Frijoles Canyon above Bandelier (where thinning is sorely needed). I would occasionally run across unexcavated Anasazi pueblos and walls.

I’ve seen acres of trees in the Jemez covered with monarch butterflies during their migration to Mexico.

All this burned area is beautiful, beautiful country – beautiful forests, hoodoo rocks, clear streams, elk, bear, deer, eagles, hawks, peregrine falcons, ponderosa, pinon, alligator juniper in the south, blue spruce up high, New Mexico turquoise skies, deep snows in winter (in a good year) and hot springs.  These beautiful Jemez Mountains (not really peaks, but the more you know this land the more it grows on you). Are typically wetter than most of New Mexico, but this year so dry, and burning.

I pray that the trees, animals and the rains come back. But we humans must do our part, in the near term taking preventative measures against what could be devastating erosion now that the trees and grasses are gone. We need better forest management practices that allow fire to periodically sweep the forests (ponderosa pine evolved to adapt to and benefit from these low intensity fires), instead of suppressing them to the point where catastrophic crown fires break out. Longer term we need to begin to grapple effectively with global climate change, otherwise we may never get our Jemez forests back.

And we should comprehensively clean up Los Alamos Lab, because while it dodged the bullet this time, it may not the next time.

Beautiful, beautiful Jemez land, much of it gone – I love it and now I’m deeply missing it.

Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico
Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico

 

Still Time to Comment on LANL’s Burning Desire for Expanded Weapons Production

Ironically today (June 28) is the deadline for public comment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for concerned citizens to comment on a proposed ~$5 billion facility at the Los Alamos Lab ponderously called the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Project- Nuclear Facility. In short, it is a huge new plutonium facility that will provide materials characterization and analytical chemistry in direct support of production of the atomic cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons, commonly called the plutonium pits. The Nuclear Facility will be the keystone to an expanded complex at LANL’s Technical Area-55 that will quadruple production capacity from 20 to 80 pits per year.

I say ironically because of the fire that is now threatening the Lab. We need to begin questioning whether expanded nuclear weapons production at Los Alamos is feasible in a possibly long-term drought and climate warming punctuated with catastrophic forest fires. More broadly, as we face increasing budget and resource constraints, we need to decide whether our money and water go into expanded nuclear weapons production, or do they go into repairing schools and infrastructure for the common good of society?

 

The Risk to Waste Stored at Area G

We pride ourselves here at Nuclear Watch New Mexico on trying to stick to the facts as we best we know them and not being alarmist. That said, the Las Conchas Fire that has now crossed the Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (LANL’s) southwestern boundary is a real threat. For starters is the mind-blowing fact that in just 30 hours this fire has grown bigger than the notorious 2000 Cerro Grande Fire which burned ~48,000 acres (~5,000 acres within Lab boundaries), and traveled in a beeline 12 miles to get to the Lab. With forecasted days of strong winds and gusts and high temperatures it’s hard to say where this fire might go and what it might do. Pray for rain.

We are not so concerned about the hardened facilities at the Lab constructed of concrete and cleared of combustible materials (i.e., trees and brush) around their perimeters. We doubt that there would be any breech to their containment that would let contaminants escape (with one caveat below). But we do have concerns. One is the fact that over 6 decades the Lab has blown up a lot of uranium and depleted uranium in dynamic high explosives experiments in the general area in front of the fire. We don’t know to what extent the shrapnel or debris has been cleaned up and could possibly be aerosolized.

Another concern, given both the velocity and ferocity of the Las Conchas Fire, is whether any Lab facilities loose their power and back up generators failed to work for whatever reason. In that case containment systems could fail with unknown safety implications.

LANL TA-54 Material Disposal Area G
Domes at LANL's TA-54 Material Disposal Area G

But our biggest concern is whether the fire could reach the fabric buildings (essentially very large tents) at Technical Area-54’s Area G that store some 20,000 barrels of plutonium-contaminated wastes from nuclear weapons research and production. We recommend that the public use satellite-based fire detection data and fire intelligence information published by the US Forest Service to monitor the situation (see related post for instructions on how use it). From that we can “see” that the leading edge of the fire is a little more than three miles from Area G.

The good news is that the fire should slow down if and when it heads toward Area G because it will have to leave the mostly ponderosa forest into pinon and juniper country (which doesn’t crown fire like ponderosa). Also, the Lab has cleared trees and vegetation around Area G, and the fire would have to jump some major canyons just to get there.

So here’s hoping the fire doesn’t get anywhere close to Area G. But watch out if it does. The public should be concerned and really pay close attention. It might be a good time to take a road trip somewhere away from being downwind. This is one fire that cannot be underestimated.

 

Extensive B61 Life Extension Serves Lab’s Self-Interest More than Weapon’s Mission

To add to the uncertainty surrounding the pending B61 Life Extension Program:

The NNSA’s FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request says that among other things the scope of the B61 LEP will include “implementation and maturation of enhanced surety technologies into the nuclear explosive package,” a major rationale for the program to begin with. B61 surety is especially sensitive given their forward deployment in Europe.

During the last few months I have learned the following from anonymous congressional staff:

•           Prestigious consultants to the government (the JASONs) finished a study in January or February on the surety of US nuclear weapons. It is classified with no unclassified summary. One aim of the study (perhaps the aim) was to create baseline criteria for applying surety mechanisms to existing US nuclear weapons.

•           In that study the JASONs raised some concerns that NNSA-proposed enhanced surety technologies could impact nuclear weapons reliability. NNSA is now in the process of responding that its enhanced surety technologies are maturing.

•           Some congressional staff seriously doubts these new surety technologies will be mature enough for inclusion in the B61 LEP if it starts as scheduled in FY 2012 (which begins this October 1). If I understood correctly, these concerns revolve around multi-point safety and optical detonation. It’s not clear to me whether or not the JASONs share these particular concerns.

•           The JASONs are also in the process of preparing a separate cost benefit study on the proposed B61 LEP.

To be clear, I have no way of independently verifying the above, nor do I have a full (or even good) understanding of their implications. It is obvious that the B61 LEP is a very big deal to the nuclear weapons labs. For example, Sandia calls it “the largest effort in more than 30 years, the largest, probably, since the original development of the B61-3, 4, a full-up weapon development effort that began in the late 1970s and entered the stockpile in 1979.” (“Launching the B61 Life Extension Program,” Sandia Lab News, March 25, 2011).

NNSA and the nuclear weapons labs seem anxious to rush the B61 Life Extension Program now before the political momentum of increased nuclear weapons funding as a condition of New START ratification begins to recede. To the contrary, we should hit the pause button on the B61 LEP instead of automatically following the labs’ vested self-interests. In order to prudently conserve taxpayers’ dollars, the B61 LEP should be delayed for a few years while new surety technologies and other issues (such as continuing forward deployment in Europe) are sorted out.

 

Replacement of Neutron Generators is Routine

At a town hall meeting this week in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, near the proposed location of the new “UPF” nuclear weapons facility at the Y-12 National Security Complex, the state’s junior senator, Bob Corker quipped:

It’s just about the fact that our nuclear arsenal is absolutely obsolete. I saw neutron generators, literally, out in New Mexico that will quit working in the year 2015, which means it renders the weaponry totally obsolete.

Whew. Stunning.

Neutron generators are “limited life components” (LLCs). The NNSA FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request has this to say: Many age-related changes affecting various nuclear warhead components are predictable and well understood. Limited life component exchanges are performed routinely to replace these components periodically throughout the lifetime of the weapon. Components such as power sources, neutron generators and tritium reservoirs deteriorate predictably and must be replaced before their deterioration adversely affects function or personnel safety. Page 50, emphasis added.

Changing out neutron generators in fact appears so routine that it seems the military changes them out in the field. A July 1995 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (p. 78) mentions “On April 11, [1995] Sandia delivered 36 recertified neutron generators to the Navy…” Emphasis added.

NNSA says under FY 2010 Accomplishments for Stockpile Systems: “Delivered all scheduled LLCs (GTS [gas transfer systems, meaning tritium] reservoirs and neutron generators (NG)) and alteration kits to the DoD and Pantex to maintain the nuclear weapons stockpile.” NNSA FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request (CBR), p. 61, emphasis added.

Also of interest on the same page: “Selected a common NG for the B61 and B83 that will reduce development, production, and maintenance costs.”

Neutron generators are testable, and the testing devices themselves are being improved. “FY 2010 Accomplishments Stockpile Readiness Nonnuclear Readiness… Deployed Neutron Generator (NG) Testers, which assures neutron generator test capability by modernizing testers as required to support NG production and shelf-life programs.” NNSA FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request, p. 135.

A MC4380 Neutron Generator for the W76-1
Neutron Generator, Sandia Lab News, March 2011

In the current Life Extension Program W76-1’s are being outfitted with new-design neutron generators (the MC4380). Corker is seeing neutron generators in New Mexico because Sandia produces them and loads tritium into the neutron target tubes that are a critical part of neutron generators. Production of neutron generators is being both improved and expanded.

This from Sandia Labs “Labs Accomplishments:”

During FY10, Sandia shipped more than twice as many neutron generator assemblies (NGAs) to its NNSA and military customers than in any previous year. This totaled 850 NGAs and 340 packaging requirement kits. Record completion rates were achieved in four different production areas within the neutron generator supply chain, in concert with a shift to a common neutron generator subassembly that improved production efficiency. Sandia established a balanced supply chain capacity approach to help meet future NG directive schedule challenges with a diverse neutron generator product mix supporting numerous weapon systems.

http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/labs-accomplish/2011/lab_accomp-2011.pdf, p. 5

Neutron generators themselves are being continuously improved, for example:

In the early 1990s Sandia undertook to design a replacement neutron generator for the W76 nuclear warhead on the Mark 4 reentry body of the Navy’s Trident I system. There were several compelling reasons for doing so, including the need to increase the component’s design margins, simplify its manufacturability, augment its resistance to new profiles of hostile environments, and increase its life span.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/w76.htm

In 1999 the MC4380 Neutron Generator and its MC4378 Timer, MC4705 Voltage Bar, MC4148 Rod, MC4437 Current Stack, and MC4277 Neutron Tube were qualified for use in the Navy’s W76 weapon system. This culminated a multi-year development effort which included the transfer of production capability from the Pinellas Plant to Sandia. This is the first weaponized neutron generator to employ a focused ion-beam neutron tube for higher reliability, the first produced at Sandia, and the first Sandia component with radiation hardness requirements to be qualified without underground testing.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/w76.htm

The neutron generator business is very robust, and Corker’s claims of obsolescence are absurd.

 

 

 

Big Money for the B61’s New Ride

In a mid April report to Congress, the Pentagon stated lifetime cycle costs of the dual [nuclear] capable F-35 Joint Strike Fighter  will exceed $1 trillion. The F-35 will have a lot to do with future forward deployment in Europe (or not) of the proposed heavily modified B61-12 tactical nuclear bomb.

According to Inside Defense, problems with development and production aspects of the F-35 program will delay the deployment of the aircraft another two years and require an additional $7.2 to complete the development phase.

Ironically, Lockheed Martin is the lead contractor for the F-35. It is also the contractor that runs the Sandia National Laboratories, which is the lead lab for the B61 Life Extension Program (LEP). One of the main purposes of that LEP is transform the B61 “analog controlled” bomb into a “digitally controlled” bomb that mates with the advanced electronics and avionics of the F-35.

The B61 LEP will begin in FY 2012 with $223.6 million in funding. Total cost is currently estimated at ~$5 billion

The Corporate Folly of Nuclear Power

Meltdowns at the reactors are not the biggest threat, as horrific as they are. Instead the biggest threat is the spent fuel rod pools if they lose circulating water.

The reactors at Fukushima were designed by US General Electric, whose corporate slogan is “bringing good things to life.” The Fukushima reactors had their back up diesel generators at ground level, hence a few feet above sea level, and their spent fuel pools on the “top deck” of the reactor buildings, the equivalent of 3-4 stories up. When the earthquake knocked out the electric power required to circulate absolutely essential liquid coolant the diesel generators kicked in as designed. So far so good.

But then the diesel generators were wiped out 55 minutes later by the tsunami (duh!, the Fukushima nuclear power complex is right on the coast – didn’t the “experts” think of that?). The resulting lack of circulating water has precipitated this crisis that is now on the verge of being an unprecedented catastrophe. A spent fuel rod fire can release far more radioactivity than Chernobyl (see below).

The pathetic irony is that to prevent this catastrophe Tokyo Electric MUST get circulating water UP to the spent fuel rod pools because the diesel generators were swamped DOWN below. The placement of the generators and the waste pools relative to each other was exactly and tragically back *sswards. Do not trust “EXPERTS!,” meaning that citizen activism is always required. IT IS A MUST!

I shun hysteria, but this situation is way serious, it could really get out of control. Pray for the Japanese people, already the victims of history’s only two (so far) atomic attacks. If the fuel rods go count this as the 3rd attack, albeit self-inflicted. Nuclear operations require perfect human operation 24/7/eternity (i.e., as long as we run them). Humans are fallible, and nature can shrug us off like flies.

Get rid of nukes, period (except medicine). It takes only once on the balance sheet to wipe out any potential benefits, and indebt seven future generations environmentally, economically, politically and genetically all at the same time. It’s NOT worth it.

To end on a cheery note (not!): “As flies to wanton boys, are we to the gods. They kill us for their sport.” Shakespeare’s King Lear, 4. 1. The gods may do what they want, but don’t let international corporate nuclear power interests kill us. Fight back!

Mother Earth Gives Nuclear Renaissance a Black Eye

Our hearts and prayers go out go out to the people of Japan.

As Japan is faced with the possibility of nuclear meltdowns in five earthquake-damaged nuclear reactors, the U.S. and other countries are re-considering nuclear plans. While it is unlikely that radiation that has leaked or will leak from the Japanese reactor accidents will reach the United States.  This could change if there is an explosion and/or fire affecting one or more of the reactor cores or spent fuel pools. The accident at Chernobyl (25th anniversary is April 26th) affected the entire Northern Hemisphere because of a massive explosion in the core, and an out-of-control fire that burned for days.  This same scenario is unlikely in Japan. But reactors have been damaged beyond repair and old questions are being raised again.

In the U.S., Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Democratic Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts have made statements – “But I think we’ve got to kind of quietly put, quickly put, the brakes on until we can absorb what has happened in Japan as a result of the earthquake and the tsunami and then see what more, if anything, we can demand of the new power plants that are coming on line,” Lieberman stated. “Any plant that is being considered for a seismically vulnerable area in the United States should be reconsidered right now,” Markey said, adding that the Japanese earthquake registering 8.9 in magnitude was “a hundred times greater in intensity” than the level that U.S. plants are built to withstand.

Countries in Europe are pausing to re-consider, also. Japan’s nuclear emergency Monday prompted Germany and Switzerland to halt nuclear programmes as anxious Europe scrambled to review cross-border safety while safeguarding the powerful industry. More

Why were the Fukushima reactors at sea level? Japan’s nuclear accident exposes the dilemma of whether to build power plants on tsunami-prone coasts or inland sites where water supplies are unreliable, a problem likely to be aggravated by climate change, experts say. (More from Reuters)

What happened at the Fukushima plant? “Three of its six reactors were in operation when the earthquake hit. The reactors — which went into service between 1970 and 1979 — are designed to shut down automatically when a quake strikes, and emergency diesel generators began the task of pumping water around the reactors to cool them down. However, these stopped about an hour later. The failure of the back-up generators has been blamed on tsunami flooding by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).” More –

This event shows how Mother Earth can have her way with the best-made plans. The power company said that that 7.9 was the highest magnitude for which they tested the safety for their No. 1 and No. 2 nuclear power plants in Fukushima. The original magnitude was estimated to be 8.9, which would have been 10 ten times the magnitude 7.9 that the structures were tested for. The Japan Meteorological Agency up-rated Friday’s earthquake to 9.0 on the Richter scale, meaning that it was twice as powerful as initially thought. More

Here at home, we have no commercial reactors in New Mexico, but there are national nuclear weapons facilities, including Los Alamos National Laboratory, which currently has plans for a $5 billion addition to the Lab’s plutonium weapons production complex. This addition, called the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement project Nuclear Facility (CMRR-NF) is being designed to survive a 7.0 magnitude earthquake without releasing plutonium.  Much of the estimated cost is to seismically qualify the CMRR-NF to be built on the fault-ridden Pajarito Plateau. The plans call for a storage vault with the capacity of six metric tons of radioactive materials, such as plutonium.

Now would be a good time to re-consider any plans that make us feel invincible.

 

2018 Media

NMED And EM-LA Present FY2019 Legacy Cleanup Priorities In Community Meeting

Los Alamos Reporter, Dec 1, 2018, By Marie O’Neill

Under public comment, Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico confronted the two DOE officials about DOE’s overall plans for clean-up…

 

Nuclear groups challenge pit program expansion

Los Alamos Monitor-Nov 5, 2018

Nuclear Watch New Mexico, Savannah River Site Watch and Tri-Valley CAREs wrote a letter to NNSA Undersecretary and Administrator Lisa …

 

Groups call for environmental review of more ‘pit’ production

Albuquerque Journal-Nov 2, 2018

Nuclear Watch New Mexico, SRS Watch in South Carolina and Tri-Valley CAREs Livermore, Calif. — home of another weapons lab — say an …

 

Watchdog groups seek review of plutonium plan

Santa Fe New Mexican-Nov 1, 2018

Three nuclear watchdog groups across the U.S., including Santa Fe-based Nuclear Watch New Mexico, are accusing the National Nuclear …

 

WIPP: Calculation change will not impact facility’s capacity

Carlsbad Current-Argus-Oct 24, 2018

Scott Kovac with Nuclear Watch New Mexico said the change could make WIPP’s volume tracking needlessly complicated. “This modification …

 

Studies renew worry about contamination from US arms testing

SaukValley.com-Oct 4, 2018

Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, cited a long history of denial about the claims of “down winders,” the residents …

 

Hidden danger: Radioactive dust is found in communities around …

Los Angeles Times-Sep 28, 2018

Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, cited a long history of denial about the claims of “down winders,” the residents of …

 

End of Public Comment Period on Nuke Site Draws Criticism

U.S. News & World Report-Sep 21, 2018

… four organizations — Southwest Research and Information Center, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, Nuclear Watch New Mexico and …

 

Embattled coalition says it’s a ‘powerful voice’

Albuquerque Journal-Sep 20, 2018

Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico also said that the RCLC actually “colludes” with the U.S. Department of Energy – which happens to …

 

Press Release: Watchdog groups oppose DOE attempt to limit oversight, endanger safety at nuclear facilities

Watchdog groups from across the nuclear weapons complex are pushing back against a new Department of Energy order that severely constrains the oversight capacity of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board [DNFSB] at an August 28 hearing in Washington, DC.

 

Suit seeking fines against Los Alamos lab goes forward

Albuquerque Journal-Jul 13, 2018

The 2016 suit by Nuclear Watch New Mexico alleges DOE and the contractor — Los Alamos National Security LLC (LANS) — owe hundreds of …

 

NukeWatch Media and Public Appearances through August 2018 2018

Daily Bruin, July 1, 2018
UC retains management of Los Alamos nuclear laboratory with new contract https://dailybruin.com/2018/07/01/uc-retains-management-of-los-alamos-nuclear-laboratory- with-new-contract/
Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, an organization that promotes accountability at nuclear weapon facilities, said in a statement he thinks the UC went forward with its bid with new partners to improve its reputation after the safety lapses of the past several years.

Bloomberg BNA, June 21, 2018
Los Alamos Lab Contract Centers on Improving Worker Safety https://www.bna.com/los-alamos-lab-n73014476701/

” Anti-nuclear group Nuclear Watch New Mexico fought to have the environmental management contract separate from the lab management contract, Scott Kovac, operations and research director, told Bloomberg Environment. Groups also said the number of parties involved in managing the lab could make accountability more difficult.
“We’re going to be focused on who’s running the lab and who are they responsible to,” Kovac said.”

The Nation, June 21, 2018
Nuclear Weapons Pose the Ultimate Threat to Mankind https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/nuclear-weapons-pose-ultimate-threat-mankind/
The current global dynamics of fear, dysfunctional governments, and capitalism run amok are helping to drive the nuclear-arms race. But long-standing groups like Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Tri-Valley Cares, located near nuclear labs and production facilities, are mobilizing with a new intensity against the restarting of industrial-scale plutonium-pit manufacturing.

POGO, June 13, 2018:

Nonprofit group wins LANL contract

“The latest plan would see part of this mission moved across the country to the partially constructed MOX facility at the Savannah River Site. Producing plutonium pits at the site would be a completely new mission for Savannah River and would ultimately cost almost $10 billion more than the agency’s alternative plan to expand plutonium production capacity at Los Alamos, according to new documents obtained by Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Savannah River Site Watch.
“Producing plutonium pits at the site would be a completely new mission for Savannah River and would ultimately cost almost $10 billion more than the agency’s alternative plan to expand plutonium production capacity at Los Alamos, according to new documents obtained by Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Savannah River Site Watch.
“In a letter to the Senate Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee last month, the Project On Government Oversight was joined by Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Savannah River Site Watch in requesting justification for this expanded capacity. NNSA has

page1image1473438272

over 14,000 plutonium cores already constructed and in storage, many of them specifically designated for potential reuse in new nuclear weapons as part of a “strategic reserve.” -Lydia Dennett, POGO investigator See her full report at POGO)

Albuquerque Journal, June 8, 2018:

Nonprofit group wins LANL contract

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said UC ‘basically ditched Bechtel and went with a safe bet’ with new partners after the safety lapses of the past several years.”

Augusta Chronicle, May 31, 2018:

Report: MOX project dead, more waste and 1,800 jobs from replacement

“In a nearly 300-page report from the National Nuclear Security Administration released Thursday by Savannah River Site Watch and Nuclear Watch New Mexico, the analysis already assumes Congress will act to terminate the project and it would then be available for conversion to a plutonium pit production facility by 2030.
“But it is also the most expensive of the four alternatives studied in detail, according to a news release from SRS Watch and Nuclear Watch. Upgrading and retrofitting those facilities will cost around $10 billion and run $46 billion over the life cycles of those facilities, costs that are likely to rise with overruns, the groups said. Moreover, each pit produced at the new facility at SRS would generate 10 drums of radioactive waste or 500 drums a year, according to the report.
“SRS Watch and Nuclear Watch said the report fails to make the case for either facility and casts doubt on the need to ramp up production, anyway. There are already 20,000 pits being stored at a DOE plant in Texas and one study estimated each one could last more than a century, the groups said.”

Los Alamos Monitor, May 11, 2018:

NNSA announces decision on pit production

“Nuclear Watch New Mexico criticized the decision as purely political. ‘First, in Nuclear Watch’s view, this decision is in large part a political decision, designed to keep the congressional delegations of both New Mexico and South Carolina happy,’ said Nuclear Watch Executive Director Jay Coghlan. ‘New Mexico Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich are adamantly against relocating plutonium pit production to South Carolina. On the other hand, South Carolina Senator Lindsay Graham was keeping the boondoggle Mixed Oxide (MOX) program on life support, and this pit production decision may help to mollify him.’

“Coghlan said he believes the split plan will ultimately fail. ‘NNSA has already tried four times to expand plutonium pit production, only to be defeated by citizen opposition and its own cost overruns and incompetence,’ Coghlan said. ‘But we realize that this fifth attempt is the most serious.

“‘However, we remain confident it too will fall apart, because of its enormous financial and environmental costs and the fact that expanded plutonium pit production is simply not needed for the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. We think the American public will reject new-design nuclear weapons, which is what this expanded pit production decision is really all about.'”

Public Integrity, May 11, 2018:

Los Alamos would lose some future bomb production under new Trump administration plan

page2image1517149360 page2image1517144368 page2image1517144560page2image1517144848 page2image1517145136

“Jay Coghlan, who directs the advocacy group Nuclear Watch New Mexico and closely follows weapons activities in the state, questioned why the administration needs to prepare for future production of so many plutonium cores. There is, he said, ‘no justification to the American taxpayer why the enormous expense of expanded production is necessary.'”

Public News Service, May 11, 2018:

Los Alamos to Build Part of Next-Gen Nuclear Weapons

“‘We’re trying to preach restraint to Iran, North Korea, the rest of the world,’ says Coghlan, ‘and we’re going to go on to develop new-design nuclear weapons? That’s not practicing what we preach.’ Coghlan argues that the NNSA should be required to explain why the increased pit production is needed, and what it will cost taxpayers – in terms of financial, safety and environmental risks. ‘We don’t need it to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing stockpile,’ says Coghlan. ‘All of this future production is for speculative, new-design nuclear weapons.’ Coghlan believes the decision was ‘in large part political, designed to keep the congressional delegations of both states happy.'”

Santa Fe New Mexican, May 10, 2018:

Feds: Los Alamos lab to share plutonium work with South Carolina site

“Jay Coghlan, director of Santa Fe-based Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said the lack of such a review ‘is of questionable legality.’ The NNSA also has failed to justify the need to fund such an expensive weapons project, he said. Coghlan called the decision to split the work between the two sites largely a political one, ‘designed to keep the congressional delegations of both New Mexico and South Carolina happy.'”

Albuquerque Journal, May 10, 2018:

Feds split ‘pit’ work between LANL and S.C.

“Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuke Watch New Mexico, said the NNSA announcement represented ‘in large part a political decision, designed to keep the congressional delegations of both New Mexico and South Carolina happy.’
“‘There is no explanation why the Department of Defense requires at least 80 pits per year, and no justification to the American taxpayer why the enormous expense of expanded production is necessary,’ Coghlan said.”

Albuquerque Journal, May 4, 2018:

Assessment of LANL Rad Lab premature, incomplete

This article is an OpEd by Jay Coghlan, essentially the press release of May 2, 2018.

Albuquerque Journal, May 1, 2018:

LANL welcomes new contractor

“‘Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a frequent critic of the lab, still has concerns about the transition. ‘It’s far (from) being a new era when the swamp just gets deeper,’ he said in an email to the Journal.
Coghlan said that more than half of Tetra Tech’s work cleaning up an old naval base in San Francisco was “downright fraudulent” and cost American taxpayers a quarter of a billion dollars to do over. He also said New Mexico’s next governor should throw out the “toothless” consent order governing the cleanup negotiated by Gov. Susana Martinez’s Environment Department.

page3image1536842400 page3image1536842688page3image1536836144 page3image1536836432 page3image1536836720

“‘When those two things are done, then maybe it will be a new era for cleanup at Los Alamos,’ he said.”

Albuquerque Journal, April 6, 2018:

Bathroom sink overflow raises safety issue at LANL

“‘We never dreamed water could leak to the basement from the first (processing) floor, now apparently proved by a bathroom faucet,’ said Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico.”

Los Alamos Monitor, March 2, 2018:

DOE says Tetra Tech will stay in cleanup contract

“The Department of Energy’s Environmental Management Office Thursday responded to a nuclear and environmental safety group’s request to reconsider the Los Alamos National Laboratory’s choice of contractor to clean up waste generated by the laboratory between the Manhattan Project era and 1999.

“A nuclear watchdog group released information earlier this week, raising concerns about allegations of fraud surrounding Tetra Tech prior to the LANL work.
“The watchdog group, Nuclear Watch, pointed to several earlier reports made regarding the company’s work.

“‘Serious allegations of fraud by Tetra Tech were raised long before the LANL cleanup contract was awarded,’ a written statement from Nuclear Watch said. ‘The US Navy found that the company had committed widespread radiological data falsification, doctored records and supporting documentation, and covered up fraud at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard cleanup project in San Francisco, CA.’

Nuclear Watch Executive Director Jay Coghlan : “That’s B.S. I remind the American taxpayer that DOE cleanup programs have been on the high risk list formulated by the Government Accountability Office since 1990.’ Coghlan said. ‘DOE is notorious for lack of contractor oversight. It’s getting a little bit better… It’s getting better because of two things, the security incident at Y-12 and the way Los Alamos closed down WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) for three years with a ruptured drum.’

“Coghlan said subcontractor Tetra Tech should not have been on the main contractor (N3B of Los Alamos) team because of past allegations of abuse and fraud related to other Department of Energy Projects.
“Nuclear Watch Research Director Scott Kovac called Tetra Tech’s inclusion in the cleanup contract ‘Same old monkeys, different trees.’

“‘It took years for the DOE Environmental Management Office in Los Alamos to put a cleanup contract in place. We are seriously disappointed that there are major problems before the contract even starts. This situation shines a light on the cozy DOE contractor system, where every cleanup site has different combinations of the same contractors. Call it different trees, but the same old monkeys, where the real priority is to profit off of taxpayers dollars before a shovel turns over any waste,’ Kovac said.”

* Update note, April 10, 2018:

New EPA docs: Faked cleanup at Hunters Point Shipyard much worse than Navy estimates- 90 to 97 percent of cleanup at two sites is questionable -“biggest case of eco-fraud in U.S.

history”

page4image1540905120 page4image1540905408page4image1540905696

Santa Fe New Mexican, March 2, 2018:

Funds for ostrich farm fuel criticism of regional coalition

“‘It is, at a minimum, unseemly for the Executive Director of the Regional Coalition, which lobbies for increased LANL funding, to receive funding for her private business from LANS, who runs LANL,’ Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said in a news release. ‘Ultimately that funding for her private business comes from the American taxpayer.’

“Romero said Nuclear Watch ‘very clearly disagrees with the lab’s activities across the board, no matter what they are. ‘It’s been very clear since their inception that their ultimate mission is to take down the lab,’ she said.
“Coghlan laughed at the suggestion. ‘Clearly, Ms. Romero is in a pretty vulnerable spot right now,’ he said, ‘and I think she’s saying such things and making such categorical statements against Nuclear Watch New Mexico out of desperation.’

“Coghlan said Nuclear Watch advocates for ‘genuine and complete cleanup’ of radioactive waste, an effort that he said would not only benefit the environment but create hundreds of well-paying jobs.
“‘We are arguing for radical expansion of the cleanup programs at the laboratory, so in that sense, she’s completely wrong,’ he said. ‘Not only that, she is complicit, as is the regional coalition, in condoning the incomplete and fake cleanup that the Los Alamos lab is promoting.’ “The friction between Romero and Nuclear Watch is the latest entanglement for Romero, who has come under fire over revelations of taxpayer-funded spending by the coalition that included the purchase of alcohol during expensive restaurant meals and tickets for a professional baseball game in Washington, D.C.”

Los Alamos Monitor, March 1, 2018:

New high-level nuclear waste facility application OK’d in southeast NM

Nuclear and environmental groups across the state immediately reacted to the news of Holtec’s application acceptance by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for review.
Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, was critical of proposal. ‘This is more evidence of how New Mexico is being targeted to be the country’s sacrifice zone for radioactive wastes, but now with the most lethal kind in highly irradiated nuclear reactor rods. This is especially ironic given that our state has never had a commercial nuclear power plant,’ Coghlan said. ‘The Land of Enchantment! First in nuclear weapons and radioactive wastes, second to last in child well-being.'”

Albuquerque Journal, February 28, 2018:

LANL water cleanup firm facing questions over San Francisco work

“Watchdog group Nuclear Watch New Mexico said in a Wednesday news release that awarding the contract to a group including Tetra Tech raises serious questions about DOE’s ‘due diligence’ in reviewing the performance histories of bidding companies. ‘This situation shines a light on the cozy DOE contractor system, where every cleanup site has different combinations of the same contractors,’ said NukeWatch research director Scott Kovac.”

East Bay Express, February 28, 2018:

The University of Nuclear Bombs

“The University of California is once again bidding to manage Los Alamos nuclear weapons lab

page5image1540770960 page5image1540771248page5image1540771536 page5image1540771824

at a time when the threat of nuclear war is rising… Watchdog groups have differing views on the UC’s role in overseeing such activities. Scott Kovac, operations and research director of Nuke Watch of New Mexico, opposes the current corporate-university consortium but said he would support a return to management by the UC sans its current corporate partners. “University management makes more sense,” he said. “The large corporate entities at Los Alamos have had a lot less transparency than the UC did as sole manager.”

Al Jazeera, February 23, 2018:

US takes steps to resume plutonium pit production for nukes

“Nuke Watch New Mexico, a group that tracks environmental and budgetary oversight in US nuclear weapon facilities, questioned the need for the increase in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.The US already has ‘some 15,000 pits’ stored at a facility in Texas, the group said. “Nuclear Watch Director Jay Coghlan said that instead of an increase, ‘there should … be a programmatic review of all aspects of expanded plutonium pit production, including the inevitable cost overruns, nuclear safety problems, and contamination.'”

Albuquerque Journal, February 22, 2018:

NNSA wants more plutonium in Los Alamos facility

“The release of the document drew immediate fire from watchdogs and critics of the lab. Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said recategorizing RLUOB was approved by former Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz in 2015 and more than $2 million has been spent since then. Coghlan said conducting an environmental assessment ‘after the fact’ may violate federal law that requires public comment before commitment of ‘irretrievable resources.’ “Coghlan added, ‘This environmental assessment to raise the plutonium limit in the Rad Lab should not be a standalone document, but instead be part of a far broader programmatic environmental impact statement on expanded plutonium pit production.’

“Critics like Coghlan and Mello say no new pits are needed with thousands produced in the past still around and the Navy’s distaste for a new kind of warhead for which new pits have been proposed.”

Albuquerque Journal, February 11, 2018:

More federal dollars for NM’s labs?

“Meanwhile, Jay Coghlan, director of Nuke Watch New Mexico and a close observer of weapons budgets, joins other New Mexico nuclear watchdogs in contending the expensive demand for more plutonium pits and lower-yield nuclear weapons in the Nuclear Posture Review is overkill and a waste of tax dollars.
“Nuke Watch’s Coghlan said the Nuclear Posture Review expands the NNSA’s demand for plutonium pits from previous benchmarks. He said the 2015 Defense Authorization Act called for production of between 50 and 80 plutonium pits per year. The new posture review says the Defense Department now demands “at least 80 pits per year by 2030.”Coghlan said the increase could push at least some production to Savannah River.
“‘It’s mission creep,’ Coghlan said. “‘The more pits they want to produce the more it tilts to Savannah River for industrial type production. We’re going back to a Cold War configuration.’ “Coghlan said he envisions a scenario in which Los Alamos becomes more tilted to ’boutique’ research and development of plutonium pits with Savannah River performing more large-scale ‘assembly line’ pit production.”

page6image1541578944 page6image1541579232 page6image1541579520

Santa Fe New Mexican, February 2, 2018:

Nuclear buildup could mean work for labs in N.M.

“What this means for Northern New Mexico is unnecessary plutonium pit production for unneeded new nuclear weapons designs in an escalating arms race,” said Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico. “That will inevitably bring more contamination and safety problems.”

Counterpunch, January 25, 2018:

Trump’s Draft Nuclear Posture Review Degrades National Security

“Nuclear Watch New Mexico in Santa Fe keeps a critical eye on programs and problems at the state’s two nuclear weapons design and production laboratories, Los Alamos and Sandia. In the following, Nuclear Watch NM provides expert analysis of the latest official gibberish.”
[Here follow the essential points from the NukeWatch press release of January 12, 2018.]

“Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch’s Executive Director, concludes with a grim prognosis:
“‘The new NPR does not even begin to meet our long-term need to eliminate the one class of weapons of mass destruction that can truly destroy our country. It will instead set back arms control efforts and further hollow out our country by diverting yet more huge sums of money to the usual giant weapons contractors at the expense of public health and education, environmental protection, natural disaster recovery, etc. Under the Trump Administration and this NPR, expect Medicare and social security to be attacked to help pay for a false sense of military superiority.'”

Los Alamos Daily Post, January 18, 2018:

DOE And NMED Hold Joint Meeting On Legacy Waste Clean-Up

Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch told EM and NMED officials there has been no opportunity for the public to provide input before decisions are made and that’s what counts. “You’re standing here telling us what decisions are being made and we’re going to have strong disagreement,” Coghlan said.

Other concerns also were voiced about the lack of public participation and the opportunity to comment on the clean-up schedule as well as the feeling that the schedule is determined by funding at DOE’s discretion rather than the schedule driving the funding as it was under the 2005 Consent Order.

NMED Hazardous Waste Bureau Chief John Kieling was questioned about whether stipulated penalties under the Consent Order would be paid out of clean-up funds or come from elsewhere such as from funds docked from contractors by NNSA. Kieling said he had not talked to the NMED Secretary recently but he believed the stipulated penalties would come from elsewhere.

2017-2013 Media

2017

Albuquerque Journal, December 20, 2017:

LANL work merged in contract

The contract amount comes to “cleanup on the cheap”, said Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a frequent lab critic. A federal estimate shows that $3.8 billion in cleanup work remains at the lab, even while leaving much of the waste buried, Coghlan said.

page7image1542731808 page7image1542732096page7image1542732384 page7image1542732672

Roswell Daily Record, December 9, 2017:

Groups plan opposition to proposed nuclear fuel site

The Saturday meeting in Roswell at North Main hotel brought together college students, faith leaders and people from various New Mexico advocacy groups. Those included the Alliance for Environmental Strategies, the Sierra Club, Beyond Nuclear, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, the Nuclear Issues Study Group, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety and the Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment. A few representatives from groups in other states also attended.

Santa Fe New Mexican, November 30, 2017:

State auditors challenge WIPP leak settlement

Instead of imposing the fines, however, the state Environment Department issued a new consent order in 2016 that creates milestones for future cleanup but does not stipulate deadlines or penalties.
Jay Coghlan, director of the nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico and a critic of the Environment Department, filed a lawsuit against the state for failing to enforce lab cleanup penalties. In a statement this week, he said Tongate “and others are positioning the state’s Environment Department to ‘cooperate’ with the lab. Nuke Watch views it as ‘collaborating’ with the lab, in the pejorative sense of the word.

“We want a New Mexico Environment Department that actively, aggressively protects the environment,” Coghlan said.

Albuquerque Journal, November 28, 2017:

Terry Wallace named new director of Los Alamos lab

A frequent lab critic wasn’t impressed with Wallace’s history at LANL. “Wallace is a lab good ol’ boy,” said Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico. “He’ll no doubt have his hand out for more taxpayer dollars for more nuclear weapons programs on the Hill, plus his own pet billion dollar boondoggles.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, November 13, 2017:

Letters: A plume of contamination

New Mexico Environment Department Secretary Butch Tongate must have been joking to accuse Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico of personally profiting from Los Alamos National Laboratory’s environmental failures (“Full extent of chromium plume unknown,” Nov. 3). Tongate must know his $125,000-a-year salary plus benefits dwarfs Coghlan’s salary from his struggling nonprofit.
But even more inappropriate is Tongate’s description of the New Mexico Environment Department’s relationship to LANL as “cooperative.” The city water task force I served on in the early 2000s was told by a LANL hydrologist that there was zero possibility of lab contaminants reaching the regional aquifer where a toxic chromium plume is now spreading. Tongate and his staff’s job is to protect our health and environment- it is not to cooperate with LANL in cheating us by allowing “cleanup” on the cheap. Fortunately, in 14 months, this administration will end, and with it the coddling of LANL. Then maybe we can see some real, job-producing cleanup at the lab.
– Cathie Sullivan (Ms. Sullivan serves on Nukewatch’s steering committee)

page8image1542086656 page8image1542086944page8image1542087232 page8image1542087520

Santa Fe New Mexican, November 3, 2017:

Full extent of chromium plume remains unknown

Butch Tongate, secretary of the New Mexico Environment Department, told lawmakers the state was working with the lab on the cleanup and would not require it to drill new wells at this time around the area of the plume.
That spurred criticism from Jay Coghlan, director of the nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico and a long-standing critic of the lab. Coghlan said he was disappointed to hear the secretary say that “there is no urgent requirement to put in new monitoring wells in the near future.”

Outside the hearing room, Tongate accused Coghlan of profiting from his criticism of environmental failures at the lab. “We think you are in a mode- I would call it a collaborationist- with Los Alamos,” Coghlan fired back, “which we don’t like.” “Well, I would call it cooperative,” Tongate said of his agency’s relationship with the lab. “I don’t see any benefit in being adversarial,” he said, “the way it was” under the previous administration.

Los Alamos Monitor, November 1, 2017:

Santa Fe’s call to halt plutonium pit program will not affect Los Alamos

Nuclear Watch Executive Director Jay Coghlan said they would like to see more communities in the region pass similar resolutions, with a goal to get LANL and the state to listen to their concerns. Santa Fe Mayor Javier Gonzales is the chairman the Regional Coalition of LANL Communities, a coalition that represents the community‚Äôs interests in relation to the LANL. “Other local governments may pass resolutions similar to that just passed by the City of Santa Fe. Perhaps this could persuade the Regional Coalition to actively advocate for enhanced nuclear safety before plutonium pit production is expanded, and genuine, comprehensive cleanup that could truly drive regional economic development,” Coghlan said in a written statement.

Oak Ridge Today, October 23, 2017:

DOE, NNSA deny alleged risk of ‘catastrophic collapse’ of old Y-12 buildings

The plaintiffs in a civil lawsuit filed in federal court in July alleged that there is a risk of a catastrophic collapse of old buildings containing nuclear weapon components at the Y-12 National Security Complex, possibly due to a large earthquake. The 44-page civil complaint, which is related to the planned Uranium Processing Facility at Y-12, was filed July 20 in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. The seven plaintiffs include three public interest organizations- Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, and Natural Resources Defense Council of Washington, D.C.

Santa Fe New Mexican, September 19, 2017:

Further tests are needed after tainted well sample, officials say

“Scott Kovac, with the nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which first discovered lab reports of the new well’s chromium levels on a website, said the state and federal response to the issue leaves significant questions about how large the plume really is and how the laboratory will proceed in treating the extensive contamination.

“‘LANL has spent millions of dollars on the models and used the data to choose the location of the well in question,’ he said, yet ‘the models missed the size of the plume.’ If water is injected into the newly drilled well to pump and treat the contamination, ‘the plume will likely grow,’ he added. “Now, Kovac said, the lab’s whole mitigation plan ‘has just turned into big question mark.'”

page9image1543648256 page9image1543648544page9image1543648832 page9image1543649120

Albuquerque Journal, September 18, 2017:

High chromium levels found at one Los Alamos well

“The readings were first made public by Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which said in a news release, ‘The new data suggest there will have to be a complete rethinking of chromium groundwater treatment’ and that cleanup will take longer and cost more.”
Los Alamos Monitor, September 18, 2017:

Mortandad Canyon chromium plume may be wider than expected

“According to Nuclear Watch Director Jay Coghlan, the data further bolsters the group’s argument that the Department of Energy and the New Mexico Environment Department need to rework its 2016 consent order. The order is a blueprint of cleanup criteria and milestones LANL and the DOE Environmental Management office needs to adhere to in its waste cleanup operations around the site.
“Timely budgets for additional urgently needed cleanup work at Los Alamos are far from being a given. The 2016 Consent Order that NMED and DOE negotiated both weakened and delayed cleanup at LANL, and allows DOE to get out of cleanup by simply claiming that it is too expensive or difficult, Coghlan said. ‘But we demand that DOE find additional funding to immediately address this threat to New Mexico’s precious water resources, without robbing other badly needed cleanup projects.'”
Santa Fe New Mexican, September 16, 2017:
Cancer-causing chemicals appear to spread in regional aquifer near LANL
“Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which first discovered the high levels of chromium in CrIV-6, called the plume a serious threat to New Mexico’s water resource.
“‘The remediation is turning out to be this decades-long- or longer- process of investigating exactly where the plume is,’ said Scott Kovac, director of operations and research for Nuclear Watch.’The geology under Los Alamos is so complicated, anybody that says they know what’s happening under there is taking liberties.’
Kovac said the high levels of chromium indicate the plume may be growing more rapidly than the lab anticipated and may result in higher costs, as well as a longer time frame, to clean up the widespread pollution.
“‘It is easy for data to get buried and never see the light of day in the Lab’s contamination database,’ he added in a statement. ‘LANL should proactively keep the public continuously informed of important new developments.'”
KSFR Radio Santa Fe, Sept 7, 2017:
Rep. Ted Lieu and Jay Coghlan Interview on 101.1 FM
Congressman Lieu (D.CA) was given the Leadership Award by Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in May of this year for his sponsorship of HR 669, a bill to restrict the president’s sole authority to launch nuclear war (mirrored in the Senate by S.200 introduced by Sen. Ed Markey D.MA). Nukewatch director Jay Coghlan is the current chairman of ANA. “Living on the Edge” with David Bacon, 101.1 FM
***Archived Podcast***
Albuquerque Journal, September 5, 2017:
When it comes to nukes, it’s complicated
[Regarding a resolution before the Santa Fe City Council]
“Here’s what Jay Coghlan of the watchdog Nuclear Watch New Mexico group said about the Obama administration’s last budget plan: ‘Recall that President Obama received the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for calling for the abolition of nuclear weapons. Instead, the last budget of his

page10image1543258992 page10image1543259280page10image1543259568 page10image1543259856page10image1543260208 page10image1543260496

administrations sets an all-time record for funding Department of Energy nuclear weapons programs. What this means at Los Alamos is that the lab’s future is being increasingly tied to expanded production of plutonium pits, the radioactive cores of nuclear weapons.'” Albuquerque Journal, September 5, 2017:

LANL director announces retirement

“The watchdog Nuclear Watch New Mexico said of McMillan’s departure: ‘There’s got to be a whole lot more behind this abrupt resignation.‚Ķ He’s the poster child for why the profit motive should not run nuclear weapons facilities. Here’s hoping for better LANL management next time.’ The lab listed McMillan’s total compensation at $1.5 million in a 2013 federal disclosure report.”

Santa Fe New Mexican Sep 5, 2017 :

Los Alamos lab director retiring at year’s end

“Others said the high salary that McMillan received while he oversaw serious safety lapses highlighted fundamental issues at the lab. Jay Coghlan, director of the watchdog group Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said, ‘We like to call him McMillion for the annual paycheck he was receiving while running the lab into the ground with an exploding radioactive waste drum at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and ongoing nuclear safety lapses at Los Alamos’ plutonium facility. He’s the poster child for why the profit motive should not run nuclear weapons facilities,’ he said.

“With the lab management contract out for bid, Coghlan and others, including the University Professional and Technical Employees union, have questioned the for-profit management model at the lab, which began when Los Alamos National Security was hired in 2006 to run LANL.” Albuquerque Journal, August 14, 2017:
Two board members question move by nuclear safety agency
“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico commended the two board members for raising objections. ‘It’s part of a continuing pattern to try and muzzle the board,’ he said of the staff deal. “Don Hancock of the Albuquerque-based Southwest Research and Information Center said it was ‘pretty unusual’ to see a public split among DNFSB members, who are presidential appointees. ‘From the public’s standpoint, we need more confidence in the oversight of DOE and the NNSA, not less,’ he said.”
Colorado Daily, August 10, 2017:
Peace Train: On the brink of nuclear hostilities
“If they do not now accept our terms, they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth.”
– President Harry Truman, Aug. 6, 1945
“They will be met with fire and fury and, frankly, power the likes of which this world has never seen before.”
– President Donald Trump, Aug. 8, 2017
“Steve Miller of Nuclear Watch New Mexico noticed the two similar quotes, from Truman and Trump, 72 years apart. Two hours later, North Korea said it was reviewing plans to strike U.S. military targets in Guam with medium-range ballistic missiles to create “enveloping fire,” according to North Korean state media.
“Miller went on to say, ‘So here we stand on the brink of nuclear hostilities. Note that the nuclear weapons state with the smallest arsenal and a barely functioning ICBM is still an existential threat, even to the country with the largest arsenal and the most advanced delivery systems on the planet. It seems that the nuclear weapon is most useful to the smallest power, transforming it

page11image1544812016 page11image1544812304 page11image1544812592page11image1544812880

from a military gnat into a lethal danger to even the most powerful states. One would think that it would be in the interest of the powerful country to seek the complete removal of nuclear weapons from the picture. ASAP. But in fact, given the opportunity- of the Ban Treaty negotiations for example- the US has refused to have anything to do with any such effort. (‘We do not intend to sign, ratify or ever become party to it.’). Instead, a trillion dollar renewal and ‘modernization’ of our nuclear forces is planned. Where does that road lead?'”

Aug 3, 2017

Jay Coghlan, Nukewatch Director Interview

With David Bacon on Living on the Edge, KSFR. Archived podcast here
Santa Fe New Mexican, August 4, 2017:
Lab Might Have Known Dangerous Waste Was Unmarked
“Jay Coghlan, director of the nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico, questioned why, if the state had discovered the problem with the container, it didn’t ‘deal with it immediately as an imminent danger that put workers and the public at risk?’

“Coghlan said the state has undervalued the lab’s waste management violations in the past, setting fines that are too low. And, he said, millions of dollars in fines for a number of violations that accrued under a 2005 consent order governing the management of the lab’s legacy waste went unpaid. Instead, the cleanup order was revised in June 2016, and outstanding penalties were wiped away.
“Coghlan filed a lawsuit against the state for not imposing penalties under the former cleanup agreement, but a ruling in that case is still pending.
“The Environment Department has said the new consent order creates a stronger enforcement policy than the previous agreement.
“Coghlan disagrees. ‘All of this demonstrates a lack of oversight,’ he said, ‘and a failure to use its authority on the part of Governor Martinez and the Environment Department.'”
ABC News, May 27, 2017:
US nuclear lab’s future up in the air after recent fire
“Fattening up our already bloated nuclear weapons stockpile is not going to improve our national security,” said Jay Coghlan, the director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, in a news release issued Friday. “New Mexicans desperately need better funded schools and health care, not expanded plutonium pit production that will cause more pollution and threaten our scarce water
resources.”
(Article picked up from the SF NewMexican piece below)
Santa Fe New Mexican, May 20, 2017:
Lab fire highlights ongoing LANL waste problems
“Fattening up our already bloated nuclear weapons stockpile is not going to improve our national security,” said Jay Coghlan, the director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, in a news release issued Friday. “New Mexicans desperately need better funded schools and health care, not expanded plutonium pit production that will cause more pollution and threaten our scarce water resources.” Los Alamos Monitor, March 31, 2017:
Citizen board recommends DOE shed more light on WIPP waste storage
“Scott Kovac, of Nuclear Watch, wished the DOE didn’t propose the above ground facility in the first place, because it adds an extra step and delays in getting the dangerous waste into WIPP’s permanent below ground facility.
“‘They should just spend the money fixing up WIPP instead of these other things, I think they’d be farther along.’ Kovac said.”

page12image1544171680 page12image1544171968 page12image1544172256page12image1544172544 page12image1544172896page12image1544173184

Reaching Critical Will, March 28, 2017:

US Nuclear Weapon Modernization: Implications For The Ban Treaty

Report on the panel discussion at the UN, March 28, 2017.
“Coghlan said that responsibility for pit fabrication shifted to Los Alamos National Lab in the late 1980s, but repeated efforts to establish full-scale (80 warheads/ year) production capacity have failed. The Trump Administration and a Republican Congress are likely to advance funding for new pit facilities at Los Alamos. ‘All of this is in the name of Stockpile Stewardship,’ said Coghlan, ‘which is a fig leaf to disguise new weapons design.'”
“More information on US modernization plans can be found in the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability’s Trillion Dollar Trainwreck.”
Truth-Out, March 6, 2017:
Trump Is Bankrupting Our Nation to Enrich the War Profiteers
This is a well researched paper [in spite of blaming Obama admin developments on Trump] with many linked sources, including in three instances, links to NukeWatch.org:
– “Yet the Trump administration [sic] is proposing to spend a trillion dollars or more over the next three decades upgrading the US nuclear weapons triad…”
– “We know from other sources that $1.4 billion a year is coming from the DOE for operation of the Sandia nuclear weapons lab…”
– “Components arm, fuse, fire, generate neutrons to start nuclear reactions…”
The Daily Beast, February 28, 2017:
What Was Trump’s Air Force Pick Doing For All That Cash?
Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, an anti-nuclear watchdog group in Wilson‚Äôs home state, was even more skeptical. Wilson’s work for Lockheed Martin and other nuclear contractors “obviously raises very serious ethical questions,” Coghlan said. Coghlan conceded that the recent presidential election represented a vote for change, but added that “part of that change should be appointing ethical people to senior positions. And [Wilson has] failed that test.”
Center for Public Integrity, February 8, 2017:
Air Force Secretary Nominee Helped A Major Defense Contractor Lobby For More Federal Funds
Wilson’s appointment got the attention of an anti-nuclear watchdog group in her home state, Nuclear Watch New Mexico. Wilson ignored pleas by the group’s executive director, Jay Coghlan, to step down from the congressional commission over the perceived conflict of interest.
For Nuclear Watch New Mexico’s Coghlan, Wilson’s prospective role as the head of the Air Force- one of the primary customers for Lockheed Martin and the other nuclear weapon contractors that employed her- sets off alarms.
“It obviously raises very serious ethical questions,” Coghlan said. “The presidential vote can be viewed as a popular vote for change, but part of that change should be appointing ethical people to senior positions. And she’s failed that test. I anticipate she’s going to be asked some tough questions during her confirmation hearing.”
Politico, February 8, 2017:
Records show how Air Force nominee skirted lobbying restrictions
Same article by Patrick Malone as above, including the same citations of Nuclear Watch and Jay Coghlan.
NM Political Report, February 10, 2017:

page13image1545332432 page13image1545332720page13image1545333008 page13image1545333296 page13image1545333648 page13image1545333936page13image1545334224 page13image1545334512page13image1545334928

Air Force Secretary nominee helped a major defense contractor lobby for more federal funds
Same article by Patrick Malone as above, including the same citations of Nuclear Watch and Jay Coghlan.

Santa Fe New Mexican, January 4, 2017:

LANL Improves In Annual Federal Evaluation; Safety, Waste Issues Persist

Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said in a statement that while the Energy Department has said it learned its lesson from Rocky Flats, Los Alamos “has had a long history of inadequate safety analyses and unacceptable nuclear criticality risks.”
“Clearly these issues need to be 100 percent resolved before NNSA even thinks about expanding plutonium pit production,” he said.

Albuquerque Journal, January 4, 2017:

Amid transitions, both NM nuke labs get good evaluations

Despite this year’s “very good” rating for LANL, Watchdog group Nuclear Watch New Mexico noted shortcomings that NNSA cited in the evaluation over criticality safety issues related to plutonium work (a nuclear criticality event is an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction) as the lab moves toward ramping up production of plutonium “pits,” the cores that trigger nuclear weapons’ explosions. Parts of the evaluation say that required improvements “to the Criticality Safety Program are moving at an unacceptably slow rate” and that the leadership in operations management “has not prioritized needed criticality safety activities and improvements adequately… The number and latency of infractions in the plutonium facility is of concern.” 2016

The Guardian, November 1, 2016:

Atomic City, USA: how once-secret Los Alamos became a millionaire’s enclave

Home to the scientists who built the nuclear bomb, the company town of Los Alamos, New Mexico is today one of the richest in the country – even as toxic waste threatens its residents and neighboring Española struggles with poverty
“‘It’s a stark example of the proverbial 1% and the other 99%,’ says Jay Coghlan, sitting in a large reclining chair in the living room of his home in Santa Fe. A 45 minute drive south-east from Los Alamos, his home doubles as an office for Nuclear Watch New Mexico. ‘Neighboring communities have not benefited much at all, with the obvious exception that there’s jobs,’ he says. ‘Benefits have been very insular and privileged to the nuclear enclave itself.’ The environmental impact of living next door to a nuclear research lab is another sore issue. Some radioactive waste is still disposed of at the lab’s ‘Area G’ compound (although this could end next year), and there is still so-called ‘legacy waste’, which has not been cleaned up and will take billions of dollars to address. The carcinogenic plume of hexavalent chromium, meanwhile, which was discovered 10 years ago, is migrating towards nearby Native lands and the regional aquifer.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, October 10, 2016:

LANL makes progress on Area G cleanup, but doubts remain

“Watchdog groups suggested the decision was based on the fact that Area G is nearing capacity. The last open trench, pit 38, which spans more than 100 meters, is the only area with space to accept new waste. ‘The pit is going to be full,’ said Scott Kovac, research director for Nuclear Watch New Mexico. ‘It is not like they are just stopping out of the goodness of their own heart.’ Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said these estimates were based on false

page14image1545793984page14image1545794272 page14image1545794560page14image1545794848 page14image1545795200

assumptions. ‘I will call it willful misrepresentation, ignoring 90 percent of the waste that is there,’ he said. Coghlan estimates that the full scope of waste is 30 times higher than the numbers provided by the lab.”

Sputnik International News, October 6, 2016:

End of US-Russia Plutonium Pact ‘Not Catastrophic’ for Nonproliferation Goals

WASHINGTON (Sputnik), Leandra Bernstein. Nuclear Watch New Mexico Executive Director Jay Coghlan claims that Moscow’s decision to cancel the US-Russia Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, which is aimed at reducing stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium, will not hurt the goal of nuclear nonproliferation.

“Moscow’s decision to cancel the US-Russia Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, which is aimed at reducing stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium, will not hurt the goal of nuclear nonproliferation, Nuclear Watch New Mexico Executive Director Jay Coghlan told Sputnik. “It’s significant, but not catastrophic,” Coghlan said on Wednesday. “I still think that both countries will eventually dispose of the excess plutonium. But I cynically add that this is only because‚Ķboth countries already have too much plutonium for their weapons, so they don’t really care.”
“Coghlan expressed skepticism that any significant nonproliferation goals would have been met under the agreement.
“‘The US has more than enough plutonium to do what it wants with nuclear weapons on into the indefinite future,’ he said. Because the agreement calls for converting weapons-grade plutonium into a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel to be used for civilian nuclear power, Russia could continue producing plutonium, Coghlan argued. ‘Russian use of MOX in breeder reactors could produce additional plutonium, depending on how the reactors are configured,’ he stated.”

Albuquerque Journal, October 6, 2016:

Report: Los Alamos to end radioactive on-site waste disposal

“Critics maintain the DOE’s cost estimates are low and note that the agency expects to use an engineered cover’ at the site, instead of exhuming and removing hazardous materials, which Nuclear Watch New Mexico says would leave the materials permanently buried above the regional aquifer and three miles uphill from the Rio Grande.

“New Mexico and the U.S. Energy Department first signed a consent order that guides cleanup at Los Alamos National Laboratory more than a decade ago. A revised order was signed this year. Nuke Watch is challenging the new agreement in court.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, September 24, 2016:

After controversial firing, ex-LANL employee looking to rebuild career

“Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said it was “highly unethical of the lab to fire him in the first place, and they were stomping on his right to free speech because he wasn’t stomping for the party line… His study was retroactively classified and the lab could do that because of just one word that he used,” Coghlan said. “And that word is ‘Israel.’ He listed Israel among the known nuclear weapons powers – didn’t single Israel out, just, again, mentioned the word Israel. So it goes to show just how ridiculous the nuclear weapons policies are about the use of classification. That’s kind of the worst-kept secret in the world – that Israel has nuclear weapons.”

page15image1546336112 page15image1546336400page15image1546336688

Albuquerque Journal, September 21, 2016:

Nuke Watch: Lab cleanup report understates costs, waste amounts at Los Alamos

“Nuclear Watch New Mexico says a highly touted new cost estimate for completing cleanup of decades‚Äô worth of radioactive and hazardous waste at Los Alamos National Laboratory is based more on the likely stream of federal funding rather than the actual cost of dealing with the toxic materials.” Note: This entire article is a review of Nuclear Watch’s critique of the new DOE report on LANL cleanup; see the full article.

San Francisco Chronicle, September 10, 2016:

Los Alamos Lab in for long environmental clean-up process

“Advocacy groups have challenged the validity of the clean-up process. Some say the polluted water is still doing damage and making animals sick. ‘The Department of Energy and Los Alamos Labs, they need to have their feet held to the fire,’ said Jay Coghlan, director of anti- nuclear weapons group Nuke Watch New Mexico. His group recently filed a lawsuit, calling for a judge to void a new clean-up agreement between the state and federal government.” (Article deleted)

Amarillo Globe-News, September 8, 2016:

Report: Pantex in dire need of upgrades

“However, some nuclear watchdogs are not convinced. Jay Coghlan- a representative of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a group that seeks to promote safety and environmental protection at regional nuclear facilities- said the cost of nuclear facilities is ‘a real burden on the American taxpayer. The $3.7 billion is a big number that has accrued over the years that shows chronic disregard of safety.’ He pointed to comments from Thornberry made in 2015 during a talk at the Atlantic Council, a think tank in the field of international affairs, alleging that workers at nuclear facilities have to ‘shoot rats off of their lunch in some of the facilities that they were working in.’ In Coghlan’s view, the federal government is too lax in its oversight of Pantex and other national security complexes. ‘This is one of the root problems. The private contractors who essentially run (Pantex) are greedy and on the lookout for more money, however they can get it,’ Coghlan said. ‘If they had prudently safeguarded things as it went along, they wouldn’t be asking for more taxpayer money.'”

KUNM FM, September 7, 2016:

LANL’s Long Environmental Cleanup

All said, the cleanup at Los Alamos has been a contentious process, to put it mildly. “‘It’s gutless,’ said Jay Coghlan, director of the anti-nuclear weapons group Nuke Watch New Mexico. ‘The Department of Energy and Los Alamos Labs, they need to have their feet held to the fire.’ “Nuke Watch recently filed a lawsuit asking a judge to throw out a new cleanup agreement between the state and the federal government- called a consent order- saying it is ineffective and was put together without the required public input.
“‘They’ve now come out with a new consent order that lacks any true enforceability,’ Coghlan said. “For example, the department of energy or Los Alamos lab can simply claim that it doesn’t have enough money for cleanup and then get out of cleanup. Or claim that it’s too technically difficult.’
“The New Mexico Environment Department has criticized the DOE’s cleanup proposals, too, but they’ve called Nuke Watch’s lawsuit ‘frivolous’ and are now seeking to block it in court.”

page16image1546867248 page16image1546867536page16image1546867824 page16image1546868112 page16image1546868464

Albuquerque Journal, September 1, 2016:

State: Dismiss LANL cleanup lawsuit

“The New Mexico Environment Department has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Nuclear Watch New Mexico that seeks invalidation of a new agreement between the state and federal governments over cleanup of radioactive and hazardous waste from nuclear weapons work at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

“Nuke Watch maintains that a June ‘consent order’ agreement between the Environment Department and DOE was executed without a formal public hearing, as required by terms of an original 2005 cleanup deal between the state and the federal government.
“The Nuke Watch litigation also alleges DOE and the private contractor that runs the laboratory owe hundreds of millions of dollars in fines for missing cleanup deadlines set in 2005… The department wasn’t named as a defendant in the Nuke Watch suit but intervened in the case. “Nuke Watch director Jay Coghlan said via email Wednesday there’s ‘great irony in that NMED intervenes against us, raising the question whose side is it on, the environment or the polluter (in this case a $2.3 billion/year nuclear weapons facility).’ Coghlan also noted state government’s budget woes, which include a $600 million deficit. ‘Yet by our tally NMED forgave more than $300 million in potential fines for missed milestones in the 2005 Consent Order,’ he wrote.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, August 31, 2016:

State seeks to block lawsuit over LANL cleanup deal

The 2016 cleanup agreement explicitly states that the final version is not subject to appeal or public hearing, which drew criticism in June from several groups that said such language stifles public input.
Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch, called the department’s argument “flimsy semantics.” “The so-called Environment Department, whose charge is to protect the environment, takes an existing consent order that was pretty tough and essentially guts it, and further claims the public has no recourse,” he told The New Mexican on Wednesday.

Coghlan said Nuclear Watch maintains that the full public participation requirements apply to the new guidelines.
At a time when the state faces a massive deficit, Coghlan added, the state deferred to the interests of the lab and the Department of Energy rather than enforcing violations that would have generated funds for the state through fines and would have provided jobs in waste cleanup.
Some people praised the new agreement, but others raised concerns that it fails to establish any real, long-term cleanup deadlines and includes language that would enable cleanup work to be suspended if it were deemed too costly or “unreasonable.”
“We are seeing the level of funding go down for cleanup while weapons programs are rising, and the consent order is no longer the stick by which to compel increased funding for cleanup because its not enforceable,” Coghlan said. “It’s a giveaway.”

Amarillo News, August 16, 2016:

Pantex Plant to store more nuclear materials produced at Los Alamos lab

“‘Here you have the NNSA site with the most weapons-grade plutonium, a dramatically increasing mission in weapons production, yet the old site-wide environmental impact statement dates back to 1996,’ said Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico. ‘I would assert that an environmental statement is long overdue, whether we are approaching the cap on storage

page17image1547840880 page17image1547841168page17image1547841456

at Pantex or not.'”

Albuquerque Journal, August 12, 2016:

LANL plutonium project called ‘a house of cards’

“Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said the GAO report reveals the CMMR project to be ‘a house of cards.’ He said the DOE, because of cost overruns and busted deadlines, has been on GAO’s ‘high-risk list’ watch list for the past 25 years. ‘I assert this is more of the same,’ he said.

“Coghlan noted that the report makes it clear that NNSA intends to upgrade the existing Radiological Laboratory Utility Office Building that opened in 2014 to a nuclear facility that can accommodate additional plutonium and giving it a ‘Hazard Category 3’ designation – the rating for a nuclear facility where the risks are ‘for only local significant consequences,’ as opposed to bigger risks of off-site or more widespread on-campus contamination.
“Coghlan said there’s been no environmental impact statement on that change and points to findings in the report that LANL has already started acquiring glove-boxes for the rad-lab that would have to be changed out and that the ventilation system also would need to be improved. “‘This is the first time ever the NNSA, a troubled agency to begin with, has taken a radiological lab and tried to make it into a Hazard Category 3,’ he said.”
August 6, 2016
Jay Coghlan, Nukewatch Director Interview
Earth Matters Radio re legacy of the US nuclear weapons program on the 70th anniversary of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings. Thursday Aug 6 at 10 am and 8 pm on 89.1FM. Archived podcast here
Albuquerque Journal, July 29, 2016:
Environment secretary resigns from Cabinet post
“‘The departure of Ryan Flynn is very welcome for those of us who believe that the mission of the state Environment Department is to protect the environment,’ said Douglas Meiklejohn, executive director of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center. Flynn has also been at odds with Nuclear Watch New Mexico over a “consent order” agreement last month with the federal government over cleanup of decades worth of radioactive and hazardous waste at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Nuclear Watch has filed a court challenge to the deal, saying it contains too many loopholes.
“Nuclear Watch Director Jay Coghlan said the consent order ‘is going to be a big stain on (Flynn’s) legacy. Having said that, I’ll give him kudos that he did give us pretty good access and did hold serious discussions with us.'”

Santa Fe New Mexican, July 28, 2016:

Feds estimates LANL cleanup at $1 billion less than state

Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said in a statement that the federal cost estimate is not merely too low but also suggests “that the Lab’s major radioactive and toxic wastes dumps will not be cleaned up.” The lower price point, he said, indicates the Energy Department plans to “cap and cover” the estimated 200,000 cubic yards of toxic waste at sites atop Los Alamos mesas rather than move it to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad or another secure facility. The “so-called cleanup ‚Ķ leaves tons of radioactive and toxic wastes in the ground that will permanently threaten Northern New Mexico’s precious water resources,” Coghlan said. Nuclear Watch New Mexico has been critical of both the Energy Department and

page18image1547370528 page18image1547370816 page18image1547371104 page18image1547371392page18image1547371744 page18image1547372032

the state Environment Department over delays in cleanup at Los Alamos. The organization filed a recent lawsuit against the lab and its federal regulators over an agreement with the state that governs the lab’s cleanup activities.

New Mexico Political Report, July 22, 2016:

Lowered deadline standards on new nuclear cleanup plan worries some

“‘The Department of Energy hates penalties,’ Scott Kovac, research and operations director with Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said in an interview. ‘A deadline might shake out some funding from its budget.’
“Jon Block, a Santa Fe attorney helping Nuclear Watch in a lawsuit against the Environment Department over the cleanup issue, said consent orders on waste cleanup are supposed to allow states to hold the federal government accountable to complete the clean up. Instead, he argued that the state Environment Department is doing the opposite. ‘They’ve turned over the cleanup to the polluter,’ Block said in an interview. ‘Instead of being the enforcer of noncompliance, they’re the cooperator, the negotiator, ‘we’re your pal.’ Block says this presents a problem because DOE’s approach to cleaning up nuclear waste is to ‘do the least work possible and spend the least amount of money.’

“The new consent order also gives DOE power to ‘update’ the Los Alamos cleanup deadlines based on issues like ‘actual work progress, changed conditions and changes in anticipated funding levels.’ To Kovac, this means that if DOE loses some of its money, the agency can use that as an excuse to not meet even the less flexible deadlines set under the new consent order.”

Albuquerque Journal, July 19th, 2016:

Nuke Watch wants June LANL cleanup agreement tossed

“NuclearWatch New Mexico is asking a federal judge to invalidate a new agreement between New Mexico and the federal government over how and when to clean up decades’ worth of hazardous waste left over from nuclear weapons work at Los Alamos National Laboratory.
“In an expanded version of a lawsuit Nuke Watch filed in May, the advocacy group maintains that the June “consent order” agreement between the New Mexico Environment Department and the federal Department of Energy was executed without a required, formal public hearing. “Scott Kovac, Nuke Watch’s research director, said in statement, “We will not let the public’s right for cleanup at the Los Alamos Lab be papered over by DOE and NMED. Both agencies agreed to all parts of the 2005 Consent Order, which included rigorous public participation requirements and a detailed the cleanup schedule, including a final compliance date. We will continue to push for the public to have a true voice in these important matters.”

New Mexico Environmental Law Center, July 19th, 2016:

Groups Ask Judge to Declare New LANL Consent Order Invalid

“On behalf of Nuclear Watch New Mexico (NukeWatch), the New Mexico Environmental Law Center filed an amended complaint in its federal case to obtain ‘reasonable but aggressive’ cleanup at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The amended complaint asserts that the Consent Order signed by the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) on June 24, 2016 is invalid.”

Albuquerque Journal, July 14th, 2016:

Debate is on over making more nuke triggers at Los Alamos lab

page19image1548844432 page19image1548844720page19image1548845008 page19image1548845296

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico notes that the wording of the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act that calls for making 80 pits annually asserts that the need is not driven solely by ‘life extension programs’ intended to keep current weapons in good shape.
“‘It’s not about simple maintenance,’ Coghlan said. ‘It’s about advancing weapons designs ‚Ķ I assert that that’s a blank check for them to do what they want to do.’ He added: ‘They are seeking to divorce expanded pit production from the technical necessities of the stockpile.'”

“Critics still say nothing has been offered to specifically justify up to 80 pits a year. ‘You see the stated need and then there’s no solid justification,’ said Coghlan. He cites a 2008 interview with former Republican House member David Hobson of Ohio, who helped fight off the Modern Pit Facility. When Hobson questioned the need for 450 pits annually after years of being told that the weapons stockpile was in good shape, NNSA came back with a new offer of 250 pits, Hobson told Mother Jones magazine. ‘These were nuclear weapons we were talking about and they hadn’t given it more thought than that?’ said Hobson, who served in the House from 1991 through 2009.

“Coghlan and Mello dispute the need to replace or retire weapons that have ostensibly been well- maintained over the years and with the 2006 report supporting a long life remaining for existing pits. Coughlan cites a study by Sandia National Laboratory from 1993, just after the U.S. stopped real-world nuclear weapons test explosions, that found no example of ‘a nuclear weapon retirement where age was ever a major factor in the retirement decision.'”

Albuquerque Journal, June 24, 2016:

New Mexico, feds ink new agreement for Los Alamos cleanup

“But the head of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which called for more public input on the new order and recently sued DOE and the lab‚Äôs contract operator for missing deadlines set in the 2005 consent order, says the new deal allows too much leeway. It ‘puts DOE in the driver’s seat’ by permitting milestones or targets to be changed if there‚Äôs not adequate funding or when DOE determines that cleanup plans are ‘technically infeasible.’ Nuke Watch’s Jay Coghlan said.” “Coghlan said Flynn’s claims about the new agreement are ‘hollow and misleading’ and that the document contains ‘no long-term enforceability for cleanup at Los Alamos.’ … ‘DOE can just go, ‘This is not practical or feasible’, and get out of it,’ he said. Coghlan also said Flynn allowed LANL more than 150 compliance extensions under the old consent order and is ‘now giving DOE a new gift’ of enforcement loopholes.

Albuquerque Journal, June 17, 2016:

Environment Department: LANL cleanup could cost $4B

Some critics, however, have said that having flexible deadlines for cleanup work is not an effective way to hold the lab accountable.
In April, Nuclear Watch New Mexico filed a lawsuit against Los Alamos National Security and the Department of Energy over their failures to meet cleanup milestones under the 2005 consent order. The watchdog group said the state could have collected more than $300 million in penalties if the federal government was held accountable for the deadlines.
The state issued 150 extensions under the Martinez administration, which the lab still failed to meet, the group said.
Nuclear Watch Director Jay Coghlan said in a news release at the time that the group was aiming to make the lab and federal agency “clean up their radioactive and toxic mess first before making another one for a nuclear weapons stockpile that is already bloated far beyond what we need.”

page20image1548344656 page20image1548344944

He was referring to plans pending in Congress to increase plutonium pit production in Los Alamos over the coming decades.

Albuquerque Journal, June 17, 2016:

National military, policy experts to attend nuclear symposium

“But critics contend the billions spent on nuclear weapons in New Mexico don’t help the economy as much as the labs’ boosters claim. Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which advocates for nuclear weapons budget reductions, characterized the coming symposium as a ‘love fest for the pending $1 trillion modernization of U.S. nuclear forces, which has the usual giant defense contractors salivating over huge profits.'”

KSFR FM, June 3, 2016:

Nuke Safety Activists Criticize Delayed LANL Performance Report

“Jay Coghlan, director of nuclear safety organization Nuclear Watch New Mexico, says there‚Äôs no good reason to have kept this information from the public for so long, especially when we‚Äôre footing the bill for LANL‚Äôs budget. KSFR‚Äôs Kate Powell checked in with Coghlan and brings us this report.”

Albuquerque Journal, June 3, 2016:

Lockheed Martin planning Sandia bid

‘Critics of Lockheed Martin have said the company should be disqualified based on a 2014 report by the Department of Energy’s Office of Inspector General that concluded the firm wrongfully used federal funds for lab operations to lobby for the no-bid contract extension it received several years ago. Sandia Corp. and its parent company, Lockheed Martin, paid the federal government a $4.8 million fine for using tax dollars to lobby Congress and federal agencies for renewal of its then-$2.4 billion Sandia contract with the Department of Energy in violation of federal law. ‘”How can Lockheed Martin be entrusted to run the country’s biggest nuclear weapons lab when it intentionally violates established U.S. law?” asked Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which scrutinizes budgets and operations at Sandia and Los Alamos national laboratories.

Public News Service, May 31, 2016:

Watchdog Sues Feds Over Los Alamos Nuke Waste Removal

“Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, says the DOE and its contractor, Los Alamos National Security or LANS, has done little more than kick the can down the road. ‘We are alleging 12 counts, and it’s pretty much indisputable, where they have missed compliance milestone deadlines,’ says Coghlan. ‘So, that’s what our lawsuit’s about, to try and compel the lab to meet those deadlines, which have passed.’
“Coghlan says the New Mexico Environment Department is revising its 2005 consent order to extend the deadline beyond 2018 to clean up the dumpsite. But he says there is a loophole, for it to be enforceable Congress would have to OK enough funds to complete the project. Today is the last day for public comment on the revisions. Coghlan says under the original consent order, DOE and LANS a partnership that includes Bechtel Corporation and the University of California have racked up and not yet paid more than $300 million in fines for missing deadlines. He thinks they should be forced to pay and to complete the work they’ve already been paid billions to perform.

page21image1549349952 page21image1549350240page21image1549350528 page21image1549350816

“‘There is an estimated 200,000 cubic yards of mixed waste, both radioactive and hazardous,’ says Coghlan. ‘The lab’s idea (of) cleaning up is capping and covering them, and leaving them permanently buried.'”

Santa Fe Reporter, May 18, 2016:

Stalled LANL Cleanup to Court

“‘The federal government plans to spend a trillion dollars over the next 30 years completely rebuilding US nuclear forces. Meanwhile, cleanup at the Los Alamos Lab, the birthplace of nuclear weapons, continues to be delayed, delayed, delayed,’ Jay Coghlan, executive director of NukeWatch, said in a press release. ‘We seek to make the for-profit nuclear weaponeers clean up their radioactive and toxic mess first before making another one for a nuclear weapons stockpile that is already bloated far beyond what we need.'”

Albuquerque Journal, May 17, 2016:

Nuke Watch sues for fines against DOE, Los Alamos lab over missed cleanup deadlines

“Nuke Watch’s lawsuit asks for a court order requiring DOE and LANS to meet the 2005 cleanup requirements “‘according to a reasonable but aggressive schedule ordered by the court’ and imposing the $37,000-per-day fines for each expired deadline- now approaches $300 million, Nuke Watch said in a news release.

“The suit, filed for Nuke Watch by the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, does not name NMED as a defendant. But Nuke Watch attacked the state agency in its news release, saying that in 2011 under Gov. Susana Martinez, NMED allowed LANS ‘to stop virtually all cleanup, instead engaging in a ‘campaign’ to move above-ground, monitored radioactive transuranic wastes to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.’

“‘‚Ķ That campaign ended in disaster when an improperly treated radioactive waste drum from LANL ruptured, contaminating 21 workers and indefinitely closing that multi-billion dollar facility,’ said Nuke Watch, referring to a February 2014 incident for which DOE has payed a $74 million settlement.

“Nuke Watch says NMED’s proposed consent order revisions would settle the outstanding cleanup violations and ‘absolve’ DOE and LANS of any fines.
“Scott Kovac, Nuke Watch’s research director, said that ‘under the Martinez administration NMED granted more than 150 extension requests, and DOE and LANS have still missed many of those deadlines. Nuke Watch has taken this necessary step to enforce cleanup at LANL, to hold DOE accountable for protecting New Mexicans, and to make cleanup of legacy wastes the top priority. It’s ridiculous that we have to have this cleanup debate after 70 years of contamination from nuclear weapons research and production.'”

Amarillo Globe-News, May 17, 2016:

Feds Give Pantex Contractor ‘Scathing’ Review

“‘That blew my mind,’ said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico and board president of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability. ‘They were saying, ‘We gotta have the B61-12. We gotta rush production. Then they send the wrong tail kit.’
… “‘I was a little surprised,’ Coghlan said. “(The strike) was one area where I thought that maybe CNS got unfairly dinged.’

… “‘I think this is a root cause of a number of deficiencies. They are not being self-critical and they have their hand out for taxpayer money and expect to be paid,’ Coghlan said.

page22image1549924464 page22image1549924752page22image1549925040

“‘We are talking about extremely serious matters here. We are talking about special nuclear materials where you could end up having criticality events.'”

Santa Fe New Mexican, May 14, 2016:

Feds find progress in LANL’s performance, but still short of mark

NukeWatch Director Jay Coghlan published comment:

“The article’s last sentence on how LANL did not agree to standard whistleblower protection deserves special attention. This raises the question of who is calling the shots, the federal government as overseers, or the self-vested for-profit nuclear weapons lab that receives more than $2 billion in taxpayer money every year, and has a long dismal history of whistleblower retaliation.

“The NNSA’s Performance Evaluation Report reads:

Several contract clauses that were bilaterally incorporated into prime contracts at all other NNSA sites, including clauses for whistleblower protection for Laboratory employees and for conference management requirements, were not accepted by the Laboratory, resulting in atypical unilateral modifications by NNSA. ((report, see p. 44)

“I find this a shocking example of Lab exceptionalism, when every other NNSA site has agreed to standard whistleblower protections, but LANL does not. This is especially striking when Los Alamos is arguably the most scandal-ridden NNSA site, from the botched Wen Ho Lee affair to the missing classified tapes to the abrupt firing of two highly experienced investigators brought in to root out corruption at the Lab. How can an institution that routinely retaliates against whistleblowers be trusted?

“One of the things I am most proud about Nuclear Watch New Mexico is that we have three LANL whistleblowers on our Steering Committee. Whistleblowers must be honored, not retaliated against, for standing up on principle and exposing the incompetence, malfeasance, waste, fraud and abuse that is endemic across the Department of Energy‚Äôs nuclear weapons complex, but seems especially pronounced at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). “One cure is to have Congress make Los Alamos National Security, LLC, the for-profit contractor running the Lab, pay out of its own pocket for litigation costs against whistleblowers, instead of letting it keep its nose in a trough of unlimited taxpayers’ money.”

Jay Coghlan
Director, Nuclear Watch New Mexico

Santa Fe New Mexican, May 14, 2016:

Sandia Labs contract up for bid

Lockheed Martin is considered the front-runner, but Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, thinks it should be barred. A Department of Energy Office of Inspector General report in 2014 found that Lockheed Martin used taxpayer money in lobbying for its no- bid contract extension several years ago. Sandia Corp. and Lockheed Martin paid a $4.8 million fine. “The lab does create jobs, of that there is no dispute, but there is a lot of economic propaganda that it has this multiplying effect,” Coghlan also said. “I just don’t think it’s true.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, May 13, 2016:

Nuclear watchdog group sues feds, LANL over 2005 accord

“The nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico filed a lawsuit Thursday in U.S. District Court, accusing the federal government and lab managers of over a dozen violations of a 2005 consent

page23image1550450208 page23image1550450496 page23image1550450784page23image1550451072

order to clean up hazardous waste left after decades of nuclear weapons and chemical research. Under federal law, if the nonprofit wins the case, the lab and the federal agency could be on the hook for $37,500 a day for each violation of the order.”

Albuquerque Journal, May 13, 2016:

Sandia gets outstanding evaluation from feds, but is criticized for lobbying

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, in a statement today, reacted to the evaluation’s comment that the lobbying controversy had hurt Sandia’s reputation.
“‘What an understatement!’ he wrote in an email. He said ‘Lockheed Martin should be made to seriously pay for its lobbying crimes at Sandia’ and called the $140,000 fee deduction for leadership ‘peanuts.’

“‘This is absurd and another sign of the out-of-control nuclear weapons industry, when Sandia officials should have been prosecuted for blatantly illegal lobbying activities and Lockheed Martin barred from competing for Sandia’s new management contract because of its criminal history.'”

Albuquerque Journal, May 13, 2016:

Sandia Labs earn high marks in annual review

Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico reacted by saying in a statement that Lockheed Martin “should be made to seriously pay for its lobbying crimes at Sandia” and called the $140,000 fee deduction “peanuts.” “Sandia officials should have been prosecuted for blatantly illegal lobbying activities and Lockheed Martin barred from competing for Sandia’s new management contract because of its criminal history,” he said

Santa Fe New Mexican May 12, 2016:

Nuclear watchdog group sues feds, LANL over 2005 accord

The nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico filed a lawsuit Thursday in U.S. District Court, accusing the federal government and lab managers of over a dozen violations of a 2005 consent order to clean up hazardous waste left after decades of nuclear weapons and chemical research. Under federal law, if the nonprofit wins the case, the lab and the federal agency could be on the hook for $37,500 a day for each violation of the order.
Without the extensions, argue attorneys for Nuclear Watch New Mexico, the lab and the Department of Energy are violating the consent order.
Albuquerque Journal, May 12, 2016:
Who will run Sandia Labs?
“Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a nuclear weapons watchdog group, told the Journal the expectation that significant private-sector job growth can result from any new Sandia contract is na√Øve, especially given that the lab has been a part of the Albuquerque community for decades and the city‚Äôs economy is still sputtering.
“‘The lab does create jobs, of that there is no dispute, but there is a lot of economic propaganda that it has this multiplying effect,’ Coghlan said. ‘I just don‚Äôt think it‚Äôs true.’
Coghlan also said although Sandia is ‘clearly better-run’ than Los Alamos or Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, he would prefer that Lockheed Martin be barred from receiving a Sandia contract.
“‘In my view, Lockheed Martin should be barred from competing because of its clearly illegal

page24image1550927280 page24image1550927568page24image1550927856 page24image1550928144

lobbying practices,’ Coghlan said.”

Huntington News, May 3, 2016:

NNSA releases Environmental Review of UPF Bomb Plant Plans

“The Supplement Analysis (SA) does exactly what we expected,” said Ralph Hutchison, coordinator of the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance which, along with Nuclear Watch New Mexico, filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the Supplement Analysis more than a year ago. “It attempts to shrug off radical changes as no big deal in order to move forward with the modernization of Y12.”
“An SA is supposed to take a look at the existing environmental analysis and decide if it still matches up with the new proposed action. In this case, even though the new action is profoundly different from the old proposal, the NNSA says no new analysis is required.”

Los Alamos Daily Post, April 21, 2016:

Montano’s Whistleblowing Recognized On Capitol Hill

On Tuesday, Montano was given an award by the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, a national network of organizations devoted to issues of nuclear weapons and nuclear waste. He was recognized for his lifetime achievement as a whistleblower at LANL, where he worked for 32 years and retired in 2010, when his long-standing complaint of whistleblower retaliation was settled. During his embattled career he stood up to withering retaliation, while revealing business practice scandals at the lab, fighting for workers’ rights and uncovering pay discrepancies for female workers.

At a ceremony in the Senate Hart Building, Montano, along with Sen. Diane Feinstein, (D-Calif) and Rep. Adam Smith, (D-WA), ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, also were honored for their efforts to hold the nuclear weapons military-industrial complex accountable.

“Nothing could mean more to me from any other group,” Montano said. “These are people who are not paid for trying to do the right thing, dealing with issues of nuclear weapons and contamination of sites. They are my kind of people, doing the right thing because it’s the right thing to do.”

Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico and president of the ANA Board of Directors, said Montano’s award was a tribute to his tireless efforts to expose fraud, waste and abuse and standing up against whistleblower retaliation. “We so value his courageous stance and he’s been doing it over decades,” Coghlan said in a call between lobbying visits in Washington Wednesday. “Whistleblowers are invaluable. We need to nurture them, not retaliate against them, and to listen carefully to the truth they speak to power.”
Chuck Montano serves on the NuclearWatch NM steering committee.

Albuquerque Journal, April 8, 2016:

Watchdog pushes for labs’ eval data

“Nuclear Watch New Mexico has filed a second request under the Freedom of Information Act for the evaluation reports, this time calling for ‘expedited processing’ for the documents that Nuke Watch maintains is required by law.
“Nuke Watch’s new request cites part of the federal open records law that said agencies should provide a quick response to records requests if ‘a compelling need exists when failure to obtain records expeditiously could reasonably be expected to pose a threat to the life or physical safety

page25image1551424800 page25image1551425088page25image1551425376

of an individual or, when a request is submitted by a person primarily engaged in disseminating information and there is an urgency to inform the public about actual or alleged Federal Government activity.’
“Nuke Watch says that there is ‘great public interest in the NNSA’s Contractor Performance Evaluation Reports for many NNSA Facilities, but particularly in those reports for the Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories.’

“The letter from the watchdog group’s Jay Coghlan and Scott Kovac cites a recent Journal editorial that said, ‘Either the National Nuclear Security Administration is running really late in completing performance evaluations of national weapons contractors or it is stonewalling in releasing them. Neither possibility is good.’ The Journal also has submitted a FOIA request for the evaluations.
“Nuke Watch notes that, in 2012, after release of PERs was denied, it filed a lawsuit. The evaluations were released six days later and have since been posted annually. The latest request says that, under FOIA, the reports must be posted online in the NNSA’s ‘Electronic Reading Room’ because the evaluations are ‘frequently requested records.'”

Albuquerque Journal, March 31, 2016:

State proposes overhaul of LANL cleanup agreement with DOE

“Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said Wednesday he found too many loopholes in the draft agreement. He said it essentially holds cleanup hostage to DOE funding and that ‘if DOE finds cleanup impractical’ or technically unfeasible, ‘they can get out of it.’ Under the draft plan, milestones required of the DOE would be enforced using penalties. Coghlan commented that Flynn ‘said the current consent order doesn’t work. The reason it didn’t work is because he eviscerated the consent order with more than 150 milestone extensions.’ “Coghlan also said again that there hasn’t been enough public participation in the consent order changes and they should have faced a formal process under which interested parties could request hearings to resolve disagreements.”

Albuquerque Journal, March 30, 2016:

NM Environment Dept. rolls out new plan to require cleanup at Los Alamos

“Critics including Nuclear Watch New Mexico have said development of the draft proposal should have gone through a more formal public hearing process under which interested parties can request hearings to resolve disagreements and call witnesses that can be cross-examined. A hearing officer then would make recommendations to the Environment Department.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, March 30, 2016:

Feds plan to send nuke waste to N.M.

“In January, the watchdog group Nuclear Watch New Mexico filed a notice with the state Environment Department of its intent to sue over the missed deadline.
“Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said the ventilation problems at WIPP are worrisome and need to be resolved before the plutonium is stored there. ‘We don‚Äôt think they can do it without compromising workers safety,’ he said of the plutonium plan. Plutonium is highly carcinogenic when it‚Äôs inhaled, he said.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, March 30, 2016:

New Mexico rolls out cleanup proposal for federal lab

page26image1552024032 page26image1552024320page26image1552024608 page26image1552024896

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico argued that there are “giant loopholes” in the proposal that would allow the Department of Energy to call the shots and even delay cleanup if funding isn’t available… He also voiced concerns about the lack of public participation in developing the order and the ability of the public to weigh in on future changes.

“Watchdog groups have been critical of cleanup efforts at the lab, suggesting officials aren’t going far enough to address the waste that was placed in drums, plastic bags and cardboard boxes and buried years ago in unlined pits and shafts on lab property. Nuclear Watch New Mexico contends soil samples taken from Area G show detectable amounts of plutonium and americium. The group maintains there are still threats to the regional aquifer that supplies water to several Northern New Mexico communities and that the radioactive waste needs to be moved before cleanup can begin at Area G.

“We want nothing short of comprehensive cleanup at the Los Alamos lab,” Coghlan said. “That would be a real win-win for New Mexicans, permanently protecting our water and the environment while creating hundreds of high-paying jobs.”

Albuquerque Journal, March 23, 2016:

LANL meeting with safety board reveals concerns

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said the lab‚Äôs belief in its own ‚Äúexceptionalism‚Äù is the problem and that LANL feels it doesn‚Äôt have to follow DOE rules.”

Albuquerque Journal, March 18, 2016:

NNSA fails to release lab evaluations for past fiscal year

Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said this week, “There is no good reason why the government should withhold information on how contractors paid by the American taxpayer perform. It looks like we going to have to sue again to get what should have already been automatically released in the name of good governance and contractor accountability.”

Independant News, Jan 28, 2016:

Lawsuit Filed Against DOE, Los Alamos

“A New Mexico anti-nuclear group last week announced plans to sue the U.S. Department of Energy and Los Alamos National Laboratory, charging that the Laboratory has continually failed to meet hazardous waste cleanup milestones established by the state’s Environment Department. The plans were detailed in a January 20 letter from the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, a Santa Fe based firm representing the anti-nuclear organization, Nuclear Watch New Mexico. “According to a news release issued by Nuclear Watch, the January 20 letter gives the formal notice that is required in order to file the suit, ‘which (we) intend to do within 60 days.’ Jay Coghlan, director of the anti-nuclear group, complained, ‘The nuclear weaponeers plan to spend a trillion dollars over the next 30 years completely rebuilding U.S. nuclear forces (while) cleanup at the Los Alamos Lab, the birthplace of nuclear weapons, continues to be delayed, delayed, delayed.’ He said the lawsuit would aim to force DOE and Los Alamos ‘to clean up their radioactive and toxic mess first before making another one for a nuclear weapons stockpile that is already bloated far beyond what we need.’
“A $74 million settlement between DOE and the New Mexico Environment Department, announced late last week, will not affect plans for the lawsuit, according to Scott Kovac, another Nuclear Watch leader. That settlement was related to problems arising from shipments of

page27image1552998048 page27image1552998336 page27image1552998624

transuranic radioactive waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.”

Amarillo News, Jan 24, 2016:

Rise in plutonium production points to more work at Pantex

“‘Expanded plutonium pit production at the Los Alamos Lab is really all about future new-design nuclear weapons with new military capabilities produced through so-called Life Extension Programs for existing nuclear weapons,’ said Nuclear Watch Director Jay Coghlan.
“‘The real irony is that this Interoperable Warhead has been delayed for at least five years, if not forever, because of its enormous estimated expense and Navy skepticism. Yet this doesn’t keep Los Alamos and the (National Nuclear Security Administration) from spending billions of taxpayer dollars … for unnecessary and provocative expanded plutonium pit production.’

“‘In reality, no stockpile pits have been manufactured since 2011, and none are currently scheduled, to us illustrating the lack of true need for any pit production to begin with,’ Coghlan said. ‘Future production would be for W87 pits for the Interoperable Warhead that would be a combined W78 and W97 warhead. But again, the IW has been delayed for 5 years, which bureaucratically could mean its death, especially given lack of Navy support.'”
– Story also carried by Lubbock Online

Los Alamos Daily Post, Jan 24, 2016:

LANL’s Plutonium Plans Move Forward, Draw Fire

“The over-all 100-fold increase in exposure was criticized last week by Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety and Nuclear Watch New Mexico and will certainly be challenged as the project unfolds.”

KRQE/AP, Jan 23, 2016:

Nuclear trigger production could resume at Los Alamos lab

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said there is no need for expanded production in terms of the safety and reliability of the current stockpile, but that it is needed for future designs.”

Public News Service, Jan. 22, 2016:

Watchdog Plans Lawsuit Over Lack of Los Alamos Cleanup

“Nuclear Watch New Mexico has put the federal government and the Los Alamos National Laboratory on notice that it plans to sue over what it contends is the failure to clean up nuclear and toxic waste at the lab site. The watchdog group says the lab hasn’t executed its part of a 2005 consent order with the New Mexico Environmental Department to remove the waste. The group’s biggest concern at Los Alamos is a site known as ‘Area G,’ which Nuclear Watch director Jay Coghlan said contains up to 200,000 cubic yards of poisonous debris, much of it left over from the Cold War. ‘It’s a waste dump for both radioactive and toxic materials that dates back to 1957,’ he said. ‘The lab plans to simply cap and cover it, and leave it forever.’
“Coghlan said the deadline for the lab to have a cleanup plan in place was last December. Coghlan said his group’s concerns were raised recently when DOE announced plans for a trillion-dollar upgrade of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, with much of that money earmarked to improve the facilities at Los Alamos. ‘To oversimplify, the nuclear weaponeers are getting ready to create a whole new round of nuclear weapons,’ he said. ‘Before cleaning up their first mess, they’re getting ready to cause another.’ He said Nuclear Watch filed a legally required notice with

page28image1553503968 page28image1553504256 page28image1553504544page28image1553504832 page28image1553505184

DOE this week, and if the department takes no action, his group will file suit within 60 days to enforce the consent agreement.
“The DOE complaint letter is online at Nukewatch.org.”

Albuquerque Journal North, Jan 22, 2016:

‘Steps’ toward pit production made at Los Alamos

The Nuclear Watch New Mexico watchdog group, in a news release last week, said the recent moves “make explicit” the decision to expand pit-production capabilities at Los Alamos.
Lab watchdogs in New Mexico don’t believe a case has been made for mass production of pits, even as they also question DOE’s plans for how to make more of the nuclear triggers.

Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said, “There is no need for expanded plutonium pit production to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile, but it is vital for future new designs that the nuclear weaponeers want.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, Jan. 22, 2016:

Watchdog plans to sue over LANL’s delayed cleanup

“Cleanup at the Los Alamos Lab cannot be open-ended or it will never be accomplished,” said Scott Kovac, a NukeWatch research director, in a statement issued Wednesday.
“We’ve got to stop seeing the decline in cleanup funding,” Jay Coghlan, executive director of NukeWatch, said in an interview Thursday. Coghlan said the money should be directed to waste management rather than creating new waste. He believes the lab needs at least $50 million more than its annual funding for cleanup, a budget of about $185 million. “I really doubt [cleanup] will move forward without the lawsuit,” he said.

NukeWatch said it is seeking full accountability at every step of the cleanup effort, as well as a public comment period before the new consent order is “set in stone.”

Albuquerque Journal North, Jan. 21, 2016:

Nuclear Watch to sue over LANL cleanup problems

“We are putting the weaponeers on notice that they have to clean up their radioactive and toxic mess first before making another one for a nuclear weapons stockpile that is already bloated far beyond what we need,” said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuke Watch, a nonprofit watchdog group. He was referring to DOE’s recent preliminary approvals for changes at Los Alamos, including new underground facilities, to accommodate re-starting production of plutonium “pits,” the triggers for nuclear weapons.

Nuke Watch’s Coghlan said Wednesday that cleanup at Los Alamos “continues to be delayed, delayed, delayed,” despite plans to spend a trillion dollars over 30 years to rebuild the U.S. nuclear weapons force.
Nuke Watch also has been pushing for a formal public hearing process- which Nuke Watch contends is required and allows interested parties to submit materials and question witnesses- as a revised consent order on cleanup is developed.

2015

Albuquerque Journal North, Dec. 18, 2015:

LANL contract up for bid after 2017

“Jay Coghlan of the Nuclear Watch New Mexico watchdog group said the situation as described by McMillan [in the Lab Director’s letter to LANL employees], with LANS getting an extension despite failing to earn an award term, was ‘deja vu all over again,’ similar to a later-rescinded

page29image1553972448 page29image1553972736 page29image1553989632page29image1553989824 page29image1553990176

waiver that granted LANS an award year for fiscal 2012, although it hadn’t met all the performance criteria. ‘It seems awfully premature for director McMillan to indicate there’s going to be a contract extension before it’s actually finalized by the U.S. government,’ Coghlan said. ‘He’s putting the cart before the horse, maybe putting on a happy face for his employees before they leave for Christmas.'”

Santa Fe Reporter, Dec. 18, 2015:

Some Cleanup, Some Patience

“Here we are more than 40 years after the last chromium was dumped into Sandia Canyon, and we are now starting cleanup,” Nuclear Watch New Mexico’s Scott Kovac writes SFR in an email. “This shows the Lab’s preferred cleanup method, ‘natural attenuation,’ is really not cleanup at all. It’s time to start comprehensive cleanup across Los Alamos, instead of hoping for the contaminants to go away.”

McClatchy DC, Dec. 11, 2015:

America’s modernized nuclear arms roil diplomatic waters

“‘What they’re doing is taking a dumb bomb and turning it into a smart bomb and claiming that it’s not a new military capability,’ said Jay Coghlan, executive director at Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a nonproliferation group. ‘It just doesn’t square with reality.’
“Coghlan added that the B61-12’s improved accuracy and lower yield could make it easier to justify its use in the future, since smaller, more precise blasts mean less radioactive fallout. “Russia has its own modernization programs, Coghlan points out. ‘The end result is an arms race.'”

Santa Fe Reporter, Dec. 8, 2015:

Los Alamos Cleanup Past Due

“‘It’s delay, delay, delay,’ says Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a watchdog group that took the occasion to sound the alarm on the practices and failures that they see bogging down cleanup at the lab. ‘Under the Martinez administration, the [New Mexico Environment Department] granted more than 150 extensions, which is the opposite of enforcement, and essentially eviscerated the consent order and we see declining levels of funding for cleanup at Los Alamos.’ The concern is that the longer this cleanup is postponed, the more it will fade from memory, and the less people will think to argue for a cleanup that could bring jobs to the area now, and protect its groundwater for the long term. “‘We hear that we can’t afford to do cleanup and at the same time the US government is ready to embark on a trillion dollar modernization of nuclear forces, so budget arguments against cleanup ring pretty hollow in our view,’ Coghlan says. ‘Go ask the public what they want, and ask northern New Mexicans what they want. They want cleanup over weapons.'”

Santa Fe New Mexican, Dec. 7, 2015:

LANL misses cleanup deadline set in 2005 for largest waste site

Sunday’s deadline focused on “Area G,” LANL’s largest waste deposit site. A local watchdog group, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said comprehensive cleanup for the site “is still decades away.” In a statement released Monday, Nuclear Watch stressed the need for public participation in the revised cleanup order, including a public hearing, and condemned a plan proposed by LANL to “cap and cover” waste in Area G.

page30image1554475664 page30image1554475952 page30image1554476240page30image1554476528

“Cleanup just keeps being delayed. If not corrected, cleanup simply won’t happen,” said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch. “Nobody ever thought cleanup would be fully completed by the end of 2015; nobody is under any illusions about that,” he added.

Santa Fe Reporter, Nov. 18, 2015:

Consenting to Cleanup

“Jay Coghlan said, ‘My biggest fear is that through this revised consent order, the NMED is basically giving up on being in the driver’s seat.’ Coghlan said annual planning should be in the state’s control, and pointed to ‘the Department of Energy’s presence on the Government Accountability Office’s high-risk list for 25 years as justifying the skepticism… The department has a record of blown schedules and blown costs.’ he said.”

Albuquerque Journal, Nov. 13, 2015:

What price a LANL cleanup? Somewhere north of $1.2B, says NMED secretary

“During a public comment period, Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said Hintze shouldn’t ask the public to be ‘realistic’ about the LANL cleanup because DOE itself is a ‘thoroughly unrealistic department’ with a history of blown deadlines and blown cost estimates. He said that what LANL gets for cleanup is small compared to what’s being spent by DOE to develop ‘smart’ new nuclear weapons.

“Coghlan said NMED needs to be ‘in the driver’s seat’ in dictating cleanup work to DOE and that NMED had ‘eviscerated’ the 2005 consent decree by granting more than 100 milestone extensions. The intent of the 2005 agreement was to ‘make it hurt’ when the lab didn’t meet requirements, Coghlan said. Flynn responded that he agrees that NMED needs to be in the driver’s seat and that his administration has fined DOE more than any agency in the country. But he said it was his job to make sure the lab is clean, and to protect people and the environment, not to ‘punish the lab.'”

Los Alamos Daily Post, Nov. 13, 2015:

Wash, Dry And Repeat… Billion Dollar Cleanup Settlement Starts Over

“Scott Kovak of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said he would reserve his judgement until there were more concrete details about the nature of the campaigns, but that he didn’t see what was wrong with having deadlines and deliverables. Why, when problems and surprises came up, did the managers not revise the schedules, he wondered. ‘There is no reason that schedules could not have been updated along the way,’ he said.”

page31image1552415536 page31image1552415824page31image1552416112

page32image1549488320

PBS News Hour, Nov. 5, 2015:

America’s nuclear bomb gets a makeover

“Jay Coghlin is with Nuclear Watch New Mexico, an anti-nuclear watchdog group. ‘The American taxpayer should know that the directors of these nuclear weapons laboratories that are pushing these extreme proposals actually have an inherent conflict of interest: they are both the lab directors, and at the same time they are the presidents of the corporations running the labs. It’s in their interest and to their bottom line to be able to have these life extension programs…'” (watch clip)

page32image1552603920 page32image1552604208

Albuquerque Journal, Oct. 9, 2015:

Consent Order on Los Alamos Lab Clean-up Facing Changes

“… But Nuclear Watch New Mexico is raising questions about how NMED is proceeding. The watchdog group says the state is violating the existing 2005 consent order by not following strict public participation rules that are part of the agreement.
‘Our core fear is, we’re afraid that the public participation ends up being public comment on a done deal already negotiated between DOE, Los Alamos National Laboratory and the environment department,’ said Nuclear Watch’s Jay Coghlan. ‘We are just not confident that deep changes would occur that way.

‘What NukeWatch wants is genuine, comprehensive cleanup that would be real win-win for New Mexico, permanently protecting New Mexicans while creating hundreds of high-paying jobs,’ said Coghlan.
Nuclear Watch’s Coghlan and Scott Kovac point to a portion of the existing consent order that mandates using the permit rules for public participation before certain kinds changes to the consent order, including ‘extension of final compliance date.’

‘It’s there in black and white,’ said Coghlan.
In a letter to NMED, NukeWatch’s leaders say ‘we seek the full public participation process required by the existing Consent Order, which includes the opportunity for a hearing if negotiations are not successful.’
Coghlan said the rigorous public participation rules ‘get to disagreements before there is a done deal.’ NukeWatch wants to assure that the public has ‘a role in defining a matter of public interest- cleanup at Los Alamos to protect our water supply,’ he said.
Coghlan said NMED has in the past granted more than 100 extensions of the consent order milestones and that its previous effort at a ‘campaign’ approach- the 3706 Campaign to push the lab to move out all of the TRU waste drums- ‘ended in disaster with the closure of WIPP.’
‘Can we be confident that the environment department is going to meet the genuine expectations of the public and that the lab will thoroughly be cleaned up? The answer to that is no.’
In a formal statement, NMED said that, under the consent order revisions, ‘We’ve received Nuclear Watch’s letter indicating that they believe that the revision of the CO agreement should be treated as a permit renewal instead, with public involvement to include full, year-long adjudicative hearings and we are taking that point of view into consideration because we agree that active public involvement improves outcomes.'”

page32image1552878560

Santa Fe Reporter, Oct. 7, 2015:

Leaks from the Lab: LANL works to pull chromium contamination back across property line and out of aquifer
“‘The fact that it’s 1,000 parts per billion 3 miles from where they dumped into the canyon is kind of scary, because it seems like there might be a lot of it out there,’ says Scott Kovac, operations and research director for Nuclear Watch New Mexico. ‘Chromium is very soluble; it’s an indicator, like a canary in a coal mine… They dumped chromium in the upper part of Sandia Canyon from the ’50s to the ’70s, and it’s already in the aquifer, so you can’t tell me that the rest of the stuff [won’t get there, too].’ Ultimately, for all possible contaminants still stored on site at LANL, Kovac adds, ‘The conclusion has to be to remove all the sources.'”

KZFR California, September 4th 2015:

Jay Coghlan Radio Interview

(podcast link)- begins Part 1, 33 minutes in.

The Independent, Livermore, CA, August 27, 2015

Effort to Avoid Contract Competition Will Cost Sandia Corp. $4.8 Million

“Nuclear Watch New Mexico, on the other hand, stated on its blog that it ‘denounces the… settlement agreement as a slap on the wrist for the world’s biggest defense contractor’ Lockheed Martin. It called for Lockheed Martin to be banned from future competition for Sandia’s operating contract.”

Sputnik News, August 25, 2015:

US Nuclear Weapons Contractor Must Pay Millions for Misuse of Federal Funds

“For Jay Coghlan, executive director of watchdog group Nuclear Watch New Mexico, Sandia‚Äôs punishment amounts to ‘a slap on the wrist.’ ‘There should be criminal prosecutions for clear violations of federal anti-lobbying laws,’ he wrote on NWNM‚Äôs website. ‘Lockheed Martin clearly broke the law by engaging in illegal lobbying activities to extend its Sandia contract without competition, and earned more than 100 million dollars while doing so.'”

Washington Post, August 24, 2015:

Lockheed Martin Pays $4.7 Million To Settle Charges It Lobbied For Federal Contract With Federal Money
“Friday’s settlement was disparaged by bloggers critical of the national labs. Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico called the deal a ‘slap on the wrist for the world’s biggest defense contractor to pay.’

“‘Lockheed Martin clearly broke the law by engaging in illegal lobbying activities to extend its Sandia contract without competition, and earned more than 100 million dollars while doing so,’ Coghlan wrote on the NuclearWatch blog, calling for criminal prosecution of the company. ‘Lockheed engaged in deep and systemic corruption, including paying Congresswoman Heather Wilson $10,000 a month starting the day after she left office for so-called consulting services that had no written work requirements.'”

Center for Public Integrity, August 24, 2015:

Nuclear weapons contractor to pay millions for misuse of federal funds

page33image1554924912 page33image1554925200 page33image1554925488 page33image1554925776page33image1554926128page33image1554926416 page33image1554926704page33image1554926992

By Patrick Malone
“Jay Coghlan, executive director of the nonprofit watchdog organization Nuclear Watch New Mexico, called the sum Sandia Corporation agreed to pay ‘a slap on the wrist.’ He said ‘there should be criminal prosecutions for clear violations of federal anti-lobbying laws.'”

Patrick Malone’s story was also carried, with Jay’s quote, in several venues, including: – Public Radio International
– TIME
– The Daily Beast

– NM Political Report

AllGov.com, August 24 2015:

Lockheed Pays Minor Penalty for Using Federal Funds to Lobby for more Federal Funds

AllGov provided a research link to the settlement agreement hosted at Nukewatch.org. “To Learn More:
– Settlement Agreement (NukeWatch.org) (pdf)”

Albuquerque Journal, August 24, 2015:

Feds fine Sandia for improper lobbying

“Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said the fine was ‘a slap on the wrist for the world’s biggest defense contractor.’ ‘Lockheed Martin clearly broke the law by engaging in illegal lobbying activities to extend its Sandia contract without competition,’ Coghlan said. ‘There should be criminal prosecutions for clear violations of federal anti-lobbying laws, and Lockheed Martin should be barred from future competition for the Sandia Labs contract, expected next year.'”

Panel Discussion, Santa Fe, August 8, 2015:

Nuclear Weapons, Los Alamos and Nonviolence

Panel discussion on the 70th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with Bud Ryan, Jay Coghlan, Rev. Jim Lawson, Marian Naranjo, and Beata Tsosie- Pena.

Earth Matters Radio, Aug 6, 2015:

The Legacy of the US nuclear weapons program on the 70th anniversary of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings.
Jay Coghlan, Nukewatch Director, interview: Earth Matters Radio 89.1 FM

Huffington Post, August 5, 2015:

John Dear: Bob Dylan and America’s 70-Year Nuclear Nightmare

“… On Saturday, we will hear from the leading voices of nonviolence in the nation- such as the great historian of nonviolence, Professor Erica Chenoweth; Ken Butigan, director of Campaign Nonviolence; Kathy Kelly of Voices for Creative Nonviolence; Medea Benjamin, founder of CODEPINK; Rev. Lennox Yearwood of the HipHop Caucus; Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico; Marian Naranjo of Honor Our Pueblo Existence from the Santa Clara Pueblo, NM; Beata Tsosie-Pena from Tewa Women United in New Mexico; Dr. James Boyle, formerly of the Los Alamos National Labs; and Sister Joan Brown, an environmental activist and teacher.”

page34image1556365840 page34image1556366128 page34image1556366416 page34image1556366704page34image1556367056 page34image1556367344 page34image1556367632page34image1556367920 page34image1556368336page34image1556368624

Santa Fe New Mexican, July 30, 2015:

Latest audit cites more safety shortfalls at LANL

“‘Los Alamos National Laboratory has been absolutely dismal about keeping its safety bases current and updated,’ said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico.”

Public News Service, July 15, 2015:

Udall: We Need to Understand Iran Nuclear Deal Specifics

“Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said he agrees with Udall that any agreement with any nation wanting a nuclear bomb is a good thing.
“‘This has been a long dance between the United States and Iran, full of mutual recriminations and grievances,’ he said. ‘Let’s just hope that this is a step forward towards a peaceful and potentially productive relationship.’ More information on Nuclear Watch is online at nukewatch.org.”

Truth Out, June 12, 2015:

Nuclear Weapons Labs Hit With Sizable Fines for New Security Violations

“‘The fact that [Los Alamos National Security] didn’t realize this material was missing for five years, and the unreliable nature of their review of it when they did learn about it is very disturbing,’ Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a nonprofit watchdog organization that tracks nuclear labs in that state, said. ‘It’s particularly troubling because the investigators’ report says it could have had a high level of damage to national security.'”

Santa Fe New Mexican, May 1, 2015:

$73M in WIPP leak fines to pay for roadwork, other projects

“Scott Kovac of the Santa Fe-based nonprofit watchdog Nuclear Watch New Mexico also saw good and bad in the settlement. ‘It‚Äôs great that the fines did not come out of LANL‚Äôs cleanup budget… ‘ he said in an email. ‘But have the for-profit contractors that run these facilities learned anything, except that Daddy DOE will bail them out?’‚Äù

Counterpunch, April 30, 2015:

Arresting the Wrong Suspects

“The day before, Sec. of State John Kerry double-spoke to the Gen. Assembly, promising to both continue with US nuclear posturing and dream of a nuclear-free world. I skipped the puffery and listened to Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch South explain the US government‚Äôs plans for three new H-bomb factories (one each in Tenn., Kansas and New Mexico), and the building of 80 new warheads every year until 2070. In 1996, the World Court declared the NPT to be a binding legal obligation to denuclearize. We got charged with it, but it‚Äôs the US that has refused a lawful order.”

Albuquerque Journal, Feb. 2, 2015

White House budget plan a mixed bag for state’s labs, WIPP

“Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico said the jump in spending is ‘for an agency that the Government Accountability Office has long put on its high-risk list for wasting taxpayers‚Äô money.’ He said, ‘the guilty are being rewarded.’ They also criticized an announcement in the

page35image1556810368 page35image1556810656page35image1556810944 page35image1556811232page35image1556811584 page35image1556811872

budget to spend $675 million on plans to upgrade a radiological lab facility to handle heavier grades of plutonium and another $1.4 billion to upgrade the lab’s main plutonium facility. ‘It‚Äôs common knowledge that NNSA’s nuclear weapons programs have a staggering track record of cost overruns, schedule delays and security breaches,’ Coghlan said.”

Santa Fe New Mexican Jan. 18, 2015

New report by fired by LANL worker questions U.S. commitment to nonproliferation

“Last week, Doyle released a report developed in conjunction with the Santa Fe-based nonprofit Nuclear Watch New Mexico. In the report, ‘Essential Capabilities for Nuclear Security’, he argues the merits of arms-control technology that he says was gaining momentum before funding efforts in Congress died. Instead, resources were diverted to building new components for aging nuclear weapons, such as the long-range campaign at Los Alamos, authorized by Congress and Obama, to produce replacement triggers at a pace not seen since the Cold War.

“‘There’s essentially technology with these capabilities sitting on the shelf up at Los Alamos and other national labs that haven’t really been pushed out for deployment’, said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico.”

Public News Service, Jan. 17, 2015

Nuclear Watch NM: Government Could Spend $1 Trillion Modernizing Nukes

“Santa Fe, N.M. Nuclear Watch New Mexico says the U.S. government could spend a trillion dollars modernizing nuclear weapons that may not need modernizing.
Jay Coghlan, the watchdog group’s executive director, cites a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report that projects the government could spend $355 billion updating the atomic weapons over the next decade.

Coghlan says the plan could reach the trillion-dollar mark over the next three decades.
He calls it an effort backed by the defense industry to make more money.
‘And we do suggest that institutional greed is at the bottom of much of this,’ he adds. ‘You must remember, the nuclear-weapons complex is being run by for profit contractors.’
Coghlan points out U.S. nuclear bombs and defense strategy date back to the Cold War.
He says a modern attack would likely be similar to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001, not a nuclear hit from another country.
Coghlan adds there is no point in spending a fortune modernizing weapons that research shows work just fine.
‘Repeated studies have shown the existing stockpile to be even more reliable than previously thought,’ he explains.”

Los Angeles Times, January 11, 2015

Los Alamos lab contractor loses $57 million over nuclear waste accident

“‘The size of the cut was astounding,’ said Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a group that scrutinizes operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory. ‘It is a step in the right direction.’ Coghlan said the Energy Department also reduced the duration of the management contract by one year for the consortium, which was selected in 2007 to help restore order to the lab’s operations after more than a decade of security lapses, management errors and accounting scandals.” This report was also carried on Phys.org entitled $57-million pay cut for lab contractor.

page36image1555479648page36image1555479936 page36image1555480224page36image1555480512 page36image1555480864

KVSF Santa Fe, January 9, 2015:

Jay Coghlan Radio Interview

NukeWatch executive director Jay Coghlan appeared on the Julia Goldberg Show (KVSF 101.5 FM) on January 9, speaking on the recent 90% award fee cuts against Los Alamos, as well as nuclear ‘modernization’ and the so-called ‘second nuclear age’. Jay is on beginning at 28m 56s.

2014

Albuquerque Journal, Dec. 29, 2014

Feds slash management fee for LANL contractor

“Jay Coghlan, of the Nuclear Watch New Mexico watchdog group, said he was stunned by the fee cut and said the lab contract should be rebid now. ‘LANL lives in a little bit of a fantasy world and their own echo chamber of how great they are,’ he said. ‘This ought to be a real wake- up call.'”

Santa Fe Reporter, Dec. 19, 2014

Labs On The Naughty List- Watchdog groups urge feds to block incentives for Sandia and LANL
“‘It’s an incentive to do their job well… [and] both are misbehaving more than normal’ says Scott Kovac, a research director at Nuclear Watch”

LA Times, Dec. 6, 2014

Mishaps at nuke repository lead to $54 million in penalties

“Last week, the Project on Government Oversight and Nuclear Watch New Mexico, two organizations that closely monitor the Energy Department, said in a letter to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz that the consortium operating the Los Alamos lab should have its profits ‘slashed’ because of substandard performance. The two groups noted that the contractor could earn fees of up to $57 million for the fiscal year that ended in September.”

KUNM, Nov. 18, 2014

Nuclear Security Expert James Doyle Talks WIPP, LANL And Non-Proliferation

“Doyle was terminated in July due to a reduction in force. He‚Äôs begun doing contract work for Nuclear Watch New Mexico in Santa Fe and the Belfer Center at Harvard University. He says the real reason he lost his job is that he had published an article challenging the logic behind nuclear weapons.”

The Jicarita, October 28, 2014:

The B61 Bomb or Nonproliferation: Which Do You Prefer?

“At the end of July, the Center for Public Integrity revealed that LANL had fired James Doyle, its non-proliferation specialist. Doyle is the author of a study, “Why Eliminate Nuclear Weapons?”, which LANL retroactively classified, although Doyle wrote it as a personal project and it remains available on the Nuclear Watch New Mexico website and other internet sites. In an October 9 press release, Nuclear Watch stated that Doyle’s firing ‘was widely viewed as a political move to punish an internal voice of nuclear weapons abolition.’ In the report Doyle makes the argument for limiting this country’s nuclear stockpile as a first step towards global disarmament.

The press release announced a new collaborative project between Doyle and Nuclear Watch to

page37image1557259664 page37image1557259952page37image1557260240 page37image1557260528page37image1557260880 page37image1557261168page37image1557261456

“assess and augment the nonproliferation programs of the National Nuclear Security administration. Our ultimate goal is to redirect the focus of three national security labs from wasteful nuclear weapons research and production programs to expanded research and development of the monitoring and verification technologies needed for global abolition.” Nonproliferation programs are slated for a 21 percent cut in FY 2015, and nuclear weapons dismantlements will be cut by 45 percent.

Now there’s something you’d think Udall and Lujan and Heinrich would get behind instead of the B61 bomb: “the monitoring and verification technologies needed for global abolition.” If they’re so convinced, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the well being of our state- particularly El Norte- is so dependent on the federal trough and the “trickle-down economics” trope, then let’s keep the money rolling in for nonproliferation..”

The Guardian, September 29, 2014:

Congress pushes nuclear expansion despite accidents at weapons lab

“‘We view the Obama administration’s position as increasingly hypocritical,’ said Jay Coghlan of New Mexico Nuclear Watch, a non-profit watchdog group. ‘Obama’s proposed 2015 budget is the highest ever for nuclear weapons research and production. And at the same time they’re cutting nonproliferation budgets to pay for it.'”

Albuquerque Journal, August 1, 2014:

LANL fires anti-nuke article author

“Jay Coghlan, director of the watchdog group Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said Doyle‚Äôs article was reposted on its website about a year ago and remains on the Nuclear Watch website. He called Doyle‚Äôs dismissal ‘a clear political firing and abuse of classification procedures’ in a statement issued Thursday. He demanded that federal officials reprimand the lab, reinstate Doyle, fire those responsible for his dismissal and cut award fees for Los Alamos National Security, the contractor that runs the lab, because of ‘chronically poor performance and leadership’. Coghlan says that Doyle was let go because LANL didn‚Äôt like his message and sought to kill it through retroactively deciding his article contained classified information that is not supposed be released publicly.”

Santa Fe New Mexican, July 31, 2014:

LANL worker says firing tied to anti-nuke article

“‘The laboratory is going to regret this- mark my words- making a political firing’ said Jay Coghlan, executive director of the watchdog organization Nuclear Watch New Mexico.
‘In nuclear watchdog circles, Doyle is revered for his work verifying the drawdown in nuclear stockpiles by the United States and Russia’, Coghlan said.
“Coghlan, of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which has posted an unabridged copy of the classified report on its website, nukewatch.com[sic], said the lab’s treatment of Doyle raises questions about how far its administration is willing to go to silence critics of its mission to produce nuclear weapons.
“‘It’s absurd that the laboratory would retroactively classify Jim’s report,’ Coghlan said. ‘Any reasonable reader would conclude that there is no classified information in the report to begin with, and secondly, it’s been on the Internet for a substantial amount of time. There’s no bringing it back. The laboratory is foolish in this and it’s political retribution to a messenger whose message they don’t like.'”

page38image1557788656 page38image1557788944page38image1557789232

Albuquerque Journal, June 27, 2014:

State denies waste clean-up time waivers at LANL

“A watchdog group praised NMED’s denial of the extensions. Nuclear Watch New Mexico said more extensive clean-up of long-term waste has been on hold because of the focus on removing the above-ground barrels. Projects to deal with more than a million cubic meters ‘of all types of radioactive waste, hazardous waste, and contaminated backfill buried across the Lab were put on the back burner,’ the group said.

“‘After granting more than one hundred extension requests to delay cleanup, we salute the New Mexico Environment Department for denying further requests,’ said Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch’s executive director.
“Coghlan said his group encourages NMED ‘to make LANL comply with its legally mandated cleanup order’ from 2005. ‘This in turn will drive increased federal funding for genuine cleanup at the lab, creating hundreds of jobs while permanently protecting our precious water and environment.’

“Nuclear Watch said LANL doesn’t face any penalties for missing the Monday deadline because the 2012 agreement over removing the above-ground barrels was ‘non-binding.’ NMED’s Winchester said via e-mail: ‘Penalties/sanctions for missed deadlines and/or the June 30th deadline are still under consideration.'”

Albuquerque Journal, June 15, 2014:

Closure of WIPP Casts Long Shadow

“The lab remains under a consent order to remediate some 200,000 cubic meters of radioactive and hazardous waste in what’s known as ‘Area G,’ some of which is believed to be transuranic, according to Scott Kovac of Santa Fe’s Nuclear Watch New Mexico.
“WIPP also takes the roughly 400 cubic meters of transuranic waste Los Alamos generates annually from its work maintaining and upgrading the weapons stockpile, Kovac said.

Huntington News, May 19, 2014:

Nuclear Site Watchdogs Offer Fresh Analysis, Solutions

“Scott Kovac from Nuclear Watch New Mexico continued, ‘With federal budget caps, funding hikes for nuclear weapons projects mean cuts in programs that clean up the radioactive and toxic legacy of the Cold War. As a result, environmental work at many sites is falling short of legally mandated milestones. That results in additional contamination and increased long-term costs. At the Hanford Washington site, leaking waste tanks threaten the Columbia River, and at the Waste Isolation Pilot Project in New Mexico radioactive particles were recently released to the environment.'”

Voice of Russia US, May 1, 2014:

U.S. disguises nuclear proliferation in modernization program

Nuclear Watch reports the Department of Energy is misleading Congress
“Jay Coghlan, the executive director of Nuclear Watch, says, ‘The nuclear weapons agency of the Department of Energy is trying a new sales pitch to Congress that intentionally seeks to give the impression of lower costs. And we’re talking about costs on the order of $100 billion over the next couple of decades to heavily modify existing nuclear weapons, but it’s actually more on the order of $1 trillion over 30 years.’

page39image1555958528 page39image1555958816 page39image1555959104page39image1555959392

“Adding to the price tag, the Obama administration is asking for a delay in the production of the ‘interoperable’ missiles [sic], which Coghlan says will inevitably add more money to the bill. As for the Life Extension Programs, Coghlan argues it’s just a way for the U.S. to create new warheads by pretending to upgrade the current ones.

“‘All of this is under the so-called name of modernization, which is deceptive- who can be against ‘modernization’? But what is actually occurring is that the Department of Energy and the nuclear weapons labs, through this heavy modifications that they intend to take place under life extension programs for existing nuclear weapons, they’re going to so heavily modify those weapons and give them new nuclear capabilities at the same time.’
“President Obama has promised to scale back the U.S.’s nuclear weapons program, but the Congressional Budget Office recently reported the U.S. plans on spending $355 billion over the next decade on nuclear weapons and their delivery systems.
“‘For all of Obama’s rhetoric, the U.S. has actually dismantled or made inactive only on the order of 300 nuclear warheads over the last four years.'”
Voice of Russia, May 1

RSN, March 25, 2014:

As Nuclear Summit Begins, Critics Slam Expansion of US Arsenal

“Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, argued in an interview last week that a reduction of the U.S. nuclear arsenal would be a step towards greater ‘national security.’ ‘Every weapon that we retire is one less nuclear weapon waiting for an accident or that we cannot fail to keep absolutely secure,’ he argues.”

Ploughshares Blog, March 20, 2014:

In Desperate Need of Spring Cleaning? The US Nuclear Complex

“While the rest of the nation is concerned with shrinking budgets, incompetence among the nuclear personnel, and pullback from wars abroad, the Obama Administration’s FY 2015 budget inexplicably calls for an increased nuclear weapons budget. Even more disturbingly, the Administration is calling for a decrease in programs to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and a slowdown in the dismantlement of nuclear weapons that we’ve already committed to destroying. To get an expert view, we talked to our grantee, Executive Director Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico. Here, he describes how the time is ripe for reform to the American nuclear weapons complex…”

Cibola County Beacon, March 11, 2014:

2014 Film Fest This Weekend in Grants

“… a panel discussion led by Susan Gordon, Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment (MASE) coordinator, and Scott Kovac, Nuclear Watch New Mexico operations and research director.”

ABQ Journal, Feb 21 2014:

WIPP leaks ‘should never occur’

“They’ve wanted to bring different types of waste and expand WIPP’s mission and the size of WIPP,” said Scott Kovac, operations and research director with Nuclear Watch New Mexico. “It’s not the place. The problem is that WIPP is the only functioning geological repository in the country. What’s lacking in the discussion is, what replaces WIPP?”

page40image1558531840 page40image1558532128page40image1558532416 page40image1558532704 page40image1558533056

page41image1549501344

NukeWatch Presentation to Northern New Mexico Citizens’ Advisory Board on LANL’s Area G, February 12, 2014
Scott Kovac, Director of Operations for NukeWatch, gave a talk at the public meeting of the Northern New Mexico Citizens’ Advisory Board on the problem of LANL’s Area G, February 12th, 2014.

View the slide presentation (pdf)
See NukeWatch Area G Fact Sheet Updated Dec.12, 2013 (PDF)

NYTimes, Jan 20 2014:

Texas Company, Alone in US, Cashes In on Nuclear Waste

“WCS began disposing of nuclear waste in April 2012… Kovac, operations and research director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which has criticized¬†…”

ABQ Journal, 1/15/14:

Budget bill would boost New Mexico labs, bases

“In a statement, Jay Coghlan, president of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said the increased funding for the B61 “contradict(s) Obama’s rhetoric of¬†…”

Troy Wilde, Public News Service-NM, Jan 17 2014:

Nuclear Watch NM: Government Could Spend $1 Trillion Modernizing Nukes

“SANTA FE, N.M. ‚Äì Nuclear Watch New Mexico says the U.S. government could spend a trillion dollars modernizing nuclear weapons that may not need modernizing. Jay Coghlan, the watchdog group’s executive director, cites a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report that projects the government could spend $355 billion updating the atomic weapons over the next decade. Coghlan says the plan could reach the trillion-dollar mark over the next three decades…” Jay Coghlan is quoted extensively in this article.

2013

Dec. 5, 2013
Jay Coghlan On Mayor Coss Radio Show on Santa Fe’s KVSF-FM, discussing City Council Resolution re Area G

Nov. 6, 2013
Independence Examiner: Anti-nuclear activist speaking in Independence
“Jay Coghlan will speak in Independence on Friday night on the topic of nuclear weapons production…”

page41image1558828624 page41image1558828912 page41image1558829200page41image1558829552 page41image1558829840page41image1558830128

Nov. 6, 2013
POGO: New Documents Show Former Rep. Ran Through Revolving Door
“Now, new documents obtained by Nuclear Watch New Mexico director Jay Coghlan and publicized by the Albuquerque Journal reveal that Wilson left Congress on January 3, 2009, and began working for Sandia National Laboratories for $10,000 a month the very next day…”

November 1, 2013
Santa Fe New Mexican: New ideas, technologies from LANL could boost region’s economy see article comments by Jay Coghlan

Oct 30, 2013
ABQJournal: Budget battles threaten U.S. nuclear modernization
“Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, a government watchdog group, said Tuesday that the potential spending spike illustrates his contention that nuclear budgets- including that of the B6- are out of control. ‘Only in government can you cut tens of millions and end up adding hundreds of millions,’ Coghlan said.”

Jay Coghlan on the Nuclear Defense Industry

KSFR Santa Fe: Living on the Edge, October 17, 2013. David Bacon with Jay Coghlan, NukeWatch E.D. (online podcast)
More audio podcasts:
Jay Coghlan on Unicopia Radio

November 10, 2012; October 6, 2012; August 25, 2012

Oct 6, 2013
ABQJournal: Editorial: Bureaucratic ineptitude entrenched at LANL See article comments by Jay

August 1, 2013
Jay Coghlan radio interview, Santa Fe KSFR-FM

July 7, 2013
Santa Fe New Mexican: Letter to the editor
Richard Johnson (NWNM Steering Committee), re the Udall vote on the B61 upgrade.

June 28, 2013
ABQJournal: Panel OKs funds for B61 nukes
“Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said the Senate committee’s decision to set B61 funding lower than Obama’s request ‚Äì at least unless cost and schedule benchmarks are met ‚Äì was a ‘victory for good governance.'”

June 18, 2013

Lease Aims at Big Savings

Maura Webber Sadovi, Wall St. Journal
The U.S. General Services Administration agreed to lease five buildings on a new 185-acre campus in Kansas City, Mo., for $61.5 million annually for the next 20 years.

page42image1559235168 page42image1559235456page42image1559235744 page42image1559236032 page42image1559236384 page42image1559236672page42image1559236960 page42image1559237248 page42image1559237664 page42image1559237952

“Critics of the nuclear agency such as Jay Coghlan, director of Nuke Watch New Mexico, said the agency should have consolidated the Kansas City workers at one of its other sites. The NNSA’s other sites include the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. Mr. Coghlan, whose group has pushed for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear-weapons complex, said it more efficient to own given the long life span of such sites. ‘After 20 years, the NNSA is throwing money away to private developers’, Mr. Coghlan said.”

May 17, 2013
Larry Barker KRQE TV report w. interview Jay Coghlan. (video) / NWNM press release (PDF)

March 15, 2013

NNSA outlines steps taken to improve safety culture at Pantex

By Greg Rohloff, The Amarillo Independent
During a daylong hearing on concerns over safety at Pantex, Dr. Peter S. Winokur, chairman of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, addressed an array of National Nuclear Security Administration officials on Thursday and noted that, of all the facilities in the nuclear weapons complex, Pantex is the one he considered to be the gold standard for safety.
“And while questions continually came back to meeting production goals versus stressing safety, no one on the board asked the obvious one, raised in the public comments of the afternoon session by Scott Kovac of Nuclear Watch New Mexico. Kovac noted that the nine-page document listing the criteria for awarding the 2013 performance bonus did not list safety as a criteria. Nor did anyone ask if the perception that workers were unappreciated was triggered more by general economic conditions of high unemployment and a constant push for reductions in government spending in Washington, than by the actual relationship with managers.”

March 12, 2013

NNSA Defends Contract Extensions but Congressional Scrutiny Expected

Douglas P. Guarino, Global Security Newswire
“The National Nuclear Security Administration is defending itself against charges that it renewed lucrative deals for undeserving contractors, but the issue is likely to come up at congressional oversight hearings in the coming months, sources say.
“Nuclear Watch New Mexico said last week that earning at least 80 percent of an ‘at-risk incentive award fee is the threshold for eligibility for a one-year contract extension’ at NNSA sites. The firm that manages the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico ‘received only 68 percent of its possible at-risk award fee of $46.5 million for the last budget year, primarily because of cost overruns that ballooned a security project from $213 million to $254 million,’ according to a press release from the organization.
“Nonetheless, Neile Miller, then the agency’s top award determining official and now its acting chief, overrode a decision by NNSA site personnel and granted Los Alamos National Security a waiver that extends its contract through fiscal 2018, the group said.
“According to Nuclear Watch, a similar situation occurred regarding the contract of a consortium- consisting of Bechtel National, the University of California, Babcock and Wilcox, the Washington Division of URS and Battelle- that manages the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. Lawrence Livermore National Security earned 78 percent of its ‘available at-risk incentive fee, still short of the gateway of 80 percent,’ the group said.

page43image1559742352 page43image1559742640 page43image1559742928page43image1559743216 page43image1559743568

‘However, acting NNSA Administrator Neile Miller overrode that too, giving the lab contractor an extra $541,527 to help it meet the 80 percent mark and extending the management contract another year.’
“Nuclear Watch New Mexico cited the spiraling cost of the Los Alamos security system for its Technical Area 55 as one of a number of NNSA projects in which expenses have exceeded projections. The organization said that to avoid future cost overruns, the government should emphasize conservative life-extension programs for nuclear warheads that do not involve the creation of new military capabilities. In addition to costing more, introducing “untested changes to existing nuclear weapons” could “erode confidence in their reliability,” the group suggested. Congress should also “pull the plug on exorbitant failed projects” such as Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility and an unfinished plant for turning nuclear-weapon plutonium into reactor fuel at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, the group says.”

February 15, 2013

Nuclear Lab Remains Vulnerable to Cyberstrikes: DOE Inspector General

Chris Schneidmiller, Global Security Newswire
“Among the issues identified in the latest report . . . Computer network servers and systems featured ‚Äúeasily guessed log-in credentials or required no authentication. For example, 15 web applications and five servers were configured with default or blank passwords.”
“I’m concerned that sensitive data at LANL could be at risk, given the lab’s past security scandals and still unresolved cyber security issues,” Jay Coghlan, executive director of the watchdog organization Nuclear Watch New Mexico, stated by e-mail. “After all of the security problems and exploding cost overruns all across NNSA’s nuclear weapons complex, Congress should be mandating strict federal oversight and demanding greater return on taxpayers’ dollars from contractors by requiring them to meet specific performance goals.”

January 17, 2013

NNSA Override of recommendation raises questions

Watchdogs react to ‘waiver’ -By John Severance
Reaction has been a bit slow but watchdog groups are weighing in on the National Nuclear Security Administration’s decision that gave the Los Alamos National Security, LLC, a one-year contract extension through a one-time waiver. According to documents obtained by the Los Alamos Monitor, the lab originally was not awarded a one-year contract extension. But acting NNSA administrator Neile Miller reversed the recommendation.

Scott Kovac, Nuclear Watch NM Program director commented, “By getting these performance evaluations released publicly, Nuclear Watch expects that outraged taxpayers will demand more NNSA oversight and an end to the federal government paying the usual nuclear weapons contractors millions without enforcing performance accountability. Nuke Watch is going back to Congress to demand that it require measurable performance benchmarks before enriching the nuclear weapons contractors. In these tough economic times Americans should expect nothing less.”

 

Two Upcoming Events

Two upcoming events

Sunday Mornings @ The Travel Bug
April 22, Sunday, 11 am
839 Paseo de Peralta, Santa Fe

Jay Coghlan, Executive Director Of Nuclear Watch New Mexico
in Conversation with Michelle Victoria – NukeFreeNow on the work Jay has
done over the last 22 years on nuclear safety and what Michelle is planning
for the NukeFreeNow.
http://www.journeysantafe.com/travelbug.php
Travel Bug is an independent travel specialty store in Santa Fe, NM,
839 Paseo de Peralta 505-474-1457

And

CMRR Public Meeting
Wednesday, April 25 from 6:30 – 8:30
Fuller Lodge, Los Alamos

The Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMMR) Project is the
Lab’s $6 billion dream facility that would enable expanded production
capabilities for plutonium nuclear weapons components. The Obama
Administration has recently proposed deferring the project for 5 years,
which will likely lead to its termination.

This will be the 13th semi-annual public meeting required as part of a 2005
settlement between DOE/LANL and an network of community groups:
• Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety
• Embudo Valley Environmental Monitoring Group
• Loretto Community
• New Mexico Environmental Law Center
• Nuclear Watch New Mexico
• Peace Action New Mexico
• Tewa Women United

You are invited to come and be inspired as LANL CMRR project personnel give
updates on the project while our network of community groups give updates of
our concerns.

Defense Dept. Memo Criticizes Cost of Nuclear Weapons Labs While Los Alamos Director’s Salary Nearly Triples

Our colleagues and friends at the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) have released an explosive report based on a leaked Department of Defense memo concluding that “The Department of Energy’s network of privately-operated nuclear weapons laboratories are riddled with waste, redundancies and lackluster scientific standards.” POGO also found that “that seven of the top 15 officials at the three DOE nuclear labs make more than $700,000 per year, with one earning $1.7 million—more than the president of the United States and many government executives.”

Coincidentally, Nuclear Watch New Mexico had been independently compiling data on the salaries of the three laboratory directors, as presented in the table below. It shows that the salary of the Los Alamos Director has nearly tripled since for-profit management began in June 2006, even as the Lab is cutting some 600 jobs. As seen below, privatization of the nuclear weapons labs’ management contracts has resulted in directors’ salaries far above average in both the federal government and the private sector.

 

 

The DoD memo leaked by POGO contains the following admirable passage on good governance:
Diminishing Public Accountability. Without a strong yardstick, our government cannot govern well — not even if it retains the best and brightest on contract. The government’s own assets must capably bear the responsibility for decisions that affect national interests, and they must maintain public confidence by the manner in which those decisions are made.

In contrast, the directors of the three nuclear weapons labs (the Los Alamos, Sandia and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories) wear two hats, first as lab directors, but secondly as the presidents of the board of directors of the for-profit limited liability corporations (LLCs) that run the labs. That may be a questionable conflict of interests, in which the LLCs are enjoying record profits from issues that deeply “affect national interests” (i.e., nuclear weapons) while the salaries of their “CEOs” (the lab directors) are exploding.

Arguably the lab directors have not maintained public confidence in the decisions they make because of the general trend of increasingly withholding crucial public information. One example is the Performance Evaluation Reports that rate contractors’ performance and determines the amount of taxpayers’ money awarded to them. Those reports were publicly available until 2009 when the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) began to withhold them, and became recently available again only after NukeWatch NM sued for them under the Freedom of Information Act.

NNSA awarded the limited liability corporation that runs Los Alamos Lab $74.2 million for FY 2010, followed by $83.7 million in profit for FY 2011, a 13% increase in one year, and 10 times more than what the University of California (UC) use to be awarded when it was LANL’s sole nonprofit manager. Jay Coghlan, NukeWatch Director, commented, “In today’s political and economic climate citizens need to remain vigilant that for-profit corporate interests don’t corrupt serious national issues. This very much applies to how our nuclear weapons labs are run as well. We specifically call upon Los Alamos Lab to fully explain to northern New Mexicans why it needs to cut some 600 jobs while at the same time the for-profit management corporation is enjoying record profits and the Director’s salary has nearly tripled in six years.”

# # #

All data on nuclear weapons labs directors’ salaries are from:
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/pages/RecipientProjectSummary508.aspx?AwardIdSur=74953
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/pages/RecipientProjectSummary508.aspx?AwardIDSUR=115066&qtr=2011Q1
http://www.upte.org/LosAlamos/salaries/salaries.html

POGO’s press release “Leaked Defense Memo Criticizes the Department of Energy’s Push to Expand Nuclear Weapons Laboratories” is at http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/alerts/nuclear-security-safety/nss-nwc-20110418-nuclear-waste-dept-of-energy.html

POGO’s detailed letter to congressional committees on these issues is at http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/letters/nuclear-security-safety/nss-nwc-20120418-nuclear-weapons-labs.html

To read the leaked DoD memo, click here https://web.archive.org/web/20211025065956/http://pogoarchives.org/m/nss/new-missions-for-the-nuclear-weapons-labs-11-16-2011.pdf

551 W. Cordova Rd., #808, Santa Fe, NM 87505-4100 • Voice and fax: 505.989.7342
[email protected] • www.nukewatch.org • https://nukewatch.org/watchblog/
http://www.facebook.com/NukeWatch.NM

Love and Loss in the Jemez

We’re lucky in that it appears Los Alamos Lab has dodged the bullet with respect to the Las Conchas Fire, but I do want to say something about 100,000 acres of some of the most beautiful land in New Mexico burning up in the Jemez Mountains. I know it fairly well.

Back in the early 1980’s I would take my kids out on a full moon night in the winter after it snowed on Highway 4 near the Valle Grande and pull them on an upside down car hood chained to my pickup (not recommended, but they loved it). I use to rock climb a lot at the Las Conchas Canyon on the east fork of the Jemez River (near where the fire broke out), and down at the southern end of the fire at Cochiti Mesa and Eagle Canyon (the erosion in Eagle Canyon after the 1996 Dome Fire was shocking, a harbinger of what is to come with this fire). I remember taking my kids to the beautiful Santa Clara Canyon to the north, which the fire is now devastating (my heartfelt condolences to the Pueblo). My parents took photos of me and my two brothers when we were small in the late 1950’s sitting in a Bandelier National Monument “cavate” (a hole in the canyon volcanic tuff further carved out by the Anasazi to live in), posing as the three little monkeys who hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

As an adult I’ve been back country many times in Bandelier (now half burned), where on a map it looks like you walk say 5 miles but it will actually be eight by the time you climb up and down canyons. I know of a ponderosa pine in the Jemez where a buddy bigger than me (and I’m six feet) and I could not touch our fingers together while hugging its girth. I’m a tree hugger, but I also had chain saw thinning contracts all over the Jemez, including one on the south rim of the Frijoles Canyon above Bandelier (where thinning is sorely needed). I would occasionally run across unexcavated Anasazi pueblos and walls.

I’ve seen acres of trees in the Jemez covered with monarch butterflies during their migration to Mexico.

All this burned area is beautiful, beautiful country – beautiful forests, hoodoo rocks, clear streams, elk, bear, deer, eagles, hawks, peregrine falcons, ponderosa, pinon, alligator juniper in the south, blue spruce up high, New Mexico turquoise skies, deep snows in winter (in a good year) and hot springs.  These beautiful Jemez Mountains (not really peaks, but the more you know this land the more it grows on you). Are typically wetter than most of New Mexico, but this year so dry, and burning.

I pray that the trees, animals and the rains come back. But we humans must do our part, in the near term taking preventative measures against what could be devastating erosion now that the trees and grasses are gone. We need better forest management practices that allow fire to periodically sweep the forests (ponderosa pine evolved to adapt to and benefit from these low intensity fires), instead of suppressing them to the point where catastrophic crown fires break out. Longer term we need to begin to grapple effectively with global climate change, otherwise we may never get our Jemez forests back.

And we should comprehensively clean up Los Alamos Lab, because while it dodged the bullet this time, it may not the next time.

Beautiful, beautiful Jemez land, much of it gone – I love it and now I’m deeply missing it.

Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico
Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico

 

Still Time to Comment on LANL’s Burning Desire for Expanded Weapons Production

Ironically today (June 28) is the deadline for public comment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for concerned citizens to comment on a proposed ~$5 billion facility at the Los Alamos Lab ponderously called the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Project- Nuclear Facility. In short, it is a huge new plutonium facility that will provide materials characterization and analytical chemistry in direct support of production of the atomic cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons, commonly called the plutonium pits. The Nuclear Facility will be the keystone to an expanded complex at LANL’s Technical Area-55 that will quadruple production capacity from 20 to 80 pits per year.

I say ironically because of the fire that is now threatening the Lab. We need to begin questioning whether expanded nuclear weapons production at Los Alamos is feasible in a possibly long-term drought and climate warming punctuated with catastrophic forest fires. More broadly, as we face increasing budget and resource constraints, we need to decide whether our money and water go into expanded nuclear weapons production, or do they go into repairing schools and infrastructure for the common good of society?

 

The Risk to Waste Stored at Area G

We pride ourselves here at Nuclear Watch New Mexico on trying to stick to the facts as we best we know them and not being alarmist. That said, the Las Conchas Fire that has now crossed the Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (LANL’s) southwestern boundary is a real threat. For starters is the mind-blowing fact that in just 30 hours this fire has grown bigger than the notorious 2000 Cerro Grande Fire which burned ~48,000 acres (~5,000 acres within Lab boundaries), and traveled in a beeline 12 miles to get to the Lab. With forecasted days of strong winds and gusts and high temperatures it’s hard to say where this fire might go and what it might do. Pray for rain.

We are not so concerned about the hardened facilities at the Lab constructed of concrete and cleared of combustible materials (i.e., trees and brush) around their perimeters. We doubt that there would be any breech to their containment that would let contaminants escape (with one caveat below). But we do have concerns. One is the fact that over 6 decades the Lab has blown up a lot of uranium and depleted uranium in dynamic high explosives experiments in the general area in front of the fire. We don’t know to what extent the shrapnel or debris has been cleaned up and could possibly be aerosolized.

Another concern, given both the velocity and ferocity of the Las Conchas Fire, is whether any Lab facilities loose their power and back up generators failed to work for whatever reason. In that case containment systems could fail with unknown safety implications.

LANL TA-54 Material Disposal Area G
Domes at LANL's TA-54 Material Disposal Area G

But our biggest concern is whether the fire could reach the fabric buildings (essentially very large tents) at Technical Area-54’s Area G that store some 20,000 barrels of plutonium-contaminated wastes from nuclear weapons research and production. We recommend that the public use satellite-based fire detection data and fire intelligence information published by the US Forest Service to monitor the situation (see related post for instructions on how use it). From that we can “see” that the leading edge of the fire is a little more than three miles from Area G.

The good news is that the fire should slow down if and when it heads toward Area G because it will have to leave the mostly ponderosa forest into pinon and juniper country (which doesn’t crown fire like ponderosa). Also, the Lab has cleared trees and vegetation around Area G, and the fire would have to jump some major canyons just to get there.

So here’s hoping the fire doesn’t get anywhere close to Area G. But watch out if it does. The public should be concerned and really pay close attention. It might be a good time to take a road trip somewhere away from being downwind. This is one fire that cannot be underestimated.

 

Extensive B61 Life Extension Serves Lab’s Self-Interest More than Weapon’s Mission

To add to the uncertainty surrounding the pending B61 Life Extension Program:

The NNSA’s FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request says that among other things the scope of the B61 LEP will include “implementation and maturation of enhanced surety technologies into the nuclear explosive package,” a major rationale for the program to begin with. B61 surety is especially sensitive given their forward deployment in Europe.

During the last few months I have learned the following from anonymous congressional staff:

•           Prestigious consultants to the government (the JASONs) finished a study in January or February on the surety of US nuclear weapons. It is classified with no unclassified summary. One aim of the study (perhaps the aim) was to create baseline criteria for applying surety mechanisms to existing US nuclear weapons.

•           In that study the JASONs raised some concerns that NNSA-proposed enhanced surety technologies could impact nuclear weapons reliability. NNSA is now in the process of responding that its enhanced surety technologies are maturing.

•           Some congressional staff seriously doubts these new surety technologies will be mature enough for inclusion in the B61 LEP if it starts as scheduled in FY 2012 (which begins this October 1). If I understood correctly, these concerns revolve around multi-point safety and optical detonation. It’s not clear to me whether or not the JASONs share these particular concerns.

•           The JASONs are also in the process of preparing a separate cost benefit study on the proposed B61 LEP.

To be clear, I have no way of independently verifying the above, nor do I have a full (or even good) understanding of their implications. It is obvious that the B61 LEP is a very big deal to the nuclear weapons labs. For example, Sandia calls it “the largest effort in more than 30 years, the largest, probably, since the original development of the B61-3, 4, a full-up weapon development effort that began in the late 1970s and entered the stockpile in 1979.” (“Launching the B61 Life Extension Program,” Sandia Lab News, March 25, 2011).

NNSA and the nuclear weapons labs seem anxious to rush the B61 Life Extension Program now before the political momentum of increased nuclear weapons funding as a condition of New START ratification begins to recede. To the contrary, we should hit the pause button on the B61 LEP instead of automatically following the labs’ vested self-interests. In order to prudently conserve taxpayers’ dollars, the B61 LEP should be delayed for a few years while new surety technologies and other issues (such as continuing forward deployment in Europe) are sorted out.

 

Replacement of Neutron Generators is Routine

At a town hall meeting this week in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, near the proposed location of the new “UPF” nuclear weapons facility at the Y-12 National Security Complex, the state’s junior senator, Bob Corker quipped:

It’s just about the fact that our nuclear arsenal is absolutely obsolete. I saw neutron generators, literally, out in New Mexico that will quit working in the year 2015, which means it renders the weaponry totally obsolete.

Whew. Stunning.

Neutron generators are “limited life components” (LLCs). The NNSA FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request has this to say: Many age-related changes affecting various nuclear warhead components are predictable and well understood. Limited life component exchanges are performed routinely to replace these components periodically throughout the lifetime of the weapon. Components such as power sources, neutron generators and tritium reservoirs deteriorate predictably and must be replaced before their deterioration adversely affects function or personnel safety. Page 50, emphasis added.

Changing out neutron generators in fact appears so routine that it seems the military changes them out in the field. A July 1995 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (p. 78) mentions “On April 11, [1995] Sandia delivered 36 recertified neutron generators to the Navy…” Emphasis added.

NNSA says under FY 2010 Accomplishments for Stockpile Systems: “Delivered all scheduled LLCs (GTS [gas transfer systems, meaning tritium] reservoirs and neutron generators (NG)) and alteration kits to the DoD and Pantex to maintain the nuclear weapons stockpile.” NNSA FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request (CBR), p. 61, emphasis added.

Also of interest on the same page: “Selected a common NG for the B61 and B83 that will reduce development, production, and maintenance costs.”

Neutron generators are testable, and the testing devices themselves are being improved. “FY 2010 Accomplishments Stockpile Readiness Nonnuclear Readiness… Deployed Neutron Generator (NG) Testers, which assures neutron generator test capability by modernizing testers as required to support NG production and shelf-life programs.” NNSA FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request, p. 135.

A MC4380 Neutron Generator for the W76-1
Neutron Generator, Sandia Lab News, March 2011

In the current Life Extension Program W76-1’s are being outfitted with new-design neutron generators (the MC4380). Corker is seeing neutron generators in New Mexico because Sandia produces them and loads tritium into the neutron target tubes that are a critical part of neutron generators. Production of neutron generators is being both improved and expanded.

This from Sandia Labs “Labs Accomplishments:”

During FY10, Sandia shipped more than twice as many neutron generator assemblies (NGAs) to its NNSA and military customers than in any previous year. This totaled 850 NGAs and 340 packaging requirement kits. Record completion rates were achieved in four different production areas within the neutron generator supply chain, in concert with a shift to a common neutron generator subassembly that improved production efficiency. Sandia established a balanced supply chain capacity approach to help meet future NG directive schedule challenges with a diverse neutron generator product mix supporting numerous weapon systems.

http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/labs-accomplish/2011/lab_accomp-2011.pdf, p. 5

Neutron generators themselves are being continuously improved, for example:

In the early 1990s Sandia undertook to design a replacement neutron generator for the W76 nuclear warhead on the Mark 4 reentry body of the Navy’s Trident I system. There were several compelling reasons for doing so, including the need to increase the component’s design margins, simplify its manufacturability, augment its resistance to new profiles of hostile environments, and increase its life span.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/w76.htm

In 1999 the MC4380 Neutron Generator and its MC4378 Timer, MC4705 Voltage Bar, MC4148 Rod, MC4437 Current Stack, and MC4277 Neutron Tube were qualified for use in the Navy’s W76 weapon system. This culminated a multi-year development effort which included the transfer of production capability from the Pinellas Plant to Sandia. This is the first weaponized neutron generator to employ a focused ion-beam neutron tube for higher reliability, the first produced at Sandia, and the first Sandia component with radiation hardness requirements to be qualified without underground testing.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/w76.htm

The neutron generator business is very robust, and Corker’s claims of obsolescence are absurd.

 

 

 

Big Money for the B61’s New Ride

In a mid April report to Congress, the Pentagon stated lifetime cycle costs of the dual [nuclear] capable F-35 Joint Strike Fighter  will exceed $1 trillion. The F-35 will have a lot to do with future forward deployment in Europe (or not) of the proposed heavily modified B61-12 tactical nuclear bomb.

According to Inside Defense, problems with development and production aspects of the F-35 program will delay the deployment of the aircraft another two years and require an additional $7.2 to complete the development phase.

Ironically, Lockheed Martin is the lead contractor for the F-35. It is also the contractor that runs the Sandia National Laboratories, which is the lead lab for the B61 Life Extension Program (LEP). One of the main purposes of that LEP is transform the B61 “analog controlled” bomb into a “digitally controlled” bomb that mates with the advanced electronics and avionics of the F-35.

The B61 LEP will begin in FY 2012 with $223.6 million in funding. Total cost is currently estimated at ~$5 billion

The Corporate Folly of Nuclear Power

Meltdowns at the reactors are not the biggest threat, as horrific as they are. Instead the biggest threat is the spent fuel rod pools if they lose circulating water.

The reactors at Fukushima were designed by US General Electric, whose corporate slogan is “bringing good things to life.” The Fukushima reactors had their back up diesel generators at ground level, hence a few feet above sea level, and their spent fuel pools on the “top deck” of the reactor buildings, the equivalent of 3-4 stories up. When the earthquake knocked out the electric power required to circulate absolutely essential liquid coolant the diesel generators kicked in as designed. So far so good.

But then the diesel generators were wiped out 55 minutes later by the tsunami (duh!, the Fukushima nuclear power complex is right on the coast – didn’t the “experts” think of that?). The resulting lack of circulating water has precipitated this crisis that is now on the verge of being an unprecedented catastrophe. A spent fuel rod fire can release far more radioactivity than Chernobyl (see below).

The pathetic irony is that to prevent this catastrophe Tokyo Electric MUST get circulating water UP to the spent fuel rod pools because the diesel generators were swamped DOWN below. The placement of the generators and the waste pools relative to each other was exactly and tragically back *sswards. Do not trust “EXPERTS!,” meaning that citizen activism is always required. IT IS A MUST!

I shun hysteria, but this situation is way serious, it could really get out of control. Pray for the Japanese people, already the victims of history’s only two (so far) atomic attacks. If the fuel rods go count this as the 3rd attack, albeit self-inflicted. Nuclear operations require perfect human operation 24/7/eternity (i.e., as long as we run them). Humans are fallible, and nature can shrug us off like flies.

Get rid of nukes, period (except medicine). It takes only once on the balance sheet to wipe out any potential benefits, and indebt seven future generations environmentally, economically, politically and genetically all at the same time. It’s NOT worth it.

To end on a cheery note (not!): “As flies to wanton boys, are we to the gods. They kill us for their sport.” Shakespeare’s King Lear, 4. 1. The gods may do what they want, but don’t let international corporate nuclear power interests kill us. Fight back!

Mother Earth Gives Nuclear Renaissance a Black Eye

Our hearts and prayers go out go out to the people of Japan.

As Japan is faced with the possibility of nuclear meltdowns in five earthquake-damaged nuclear reactors, the U.S. and other countries are re-considering nuclear plans. While it is unlikely that radiation that has leaked or will leak from the Japanese reactor accidents will reach the United States.  This could change if there is an explosion and/or fire affecting one or more of the reactor cores or spent fuel pools. The accident at Chernobyl (25th anniversary is April 26th) affected the entire Northern Hemisphere because of a massive explosion in the core, and an out-of-control fire that burned for days.  This same scenario is unlikely in Japan. But reactors have been damaged beyond repair and old questions are being raised again.

In the U.S., Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Democratic Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts have made statements – “But I think we’ve got to kind of quietly put, quickly put, the brakes on until we can absorb what has happened in Japan as a result of the earthquake and the tsunami and then see what more, if anything, we can demand of the new power plants that are coming on line,” Lieberman stated. “Any plant that is being considered for a seismically vulnerable area in the United States should be reconsidered right now,” Markey said, adding that the Japanese earthquake registering 8.9 in magnitude was “a hundred times greater in intensity” than the level that U.S. plants are built to withstand.

Countries in Europe are pausing to re-consider, also. Japan’s nuclear emergency Monday prompted Germany and Switzerland to halt nuclear programmes as anxious Europe scrambled to review cross-border safety while safeguarding the powerful industry. More

Why were the Fukushima reactors at sea level? Japan’s nuclear accident exposes the dilemma of whether to build power plants on tsunami-prone coasts or inland sites where water supplies are unreliable, a problem likely to be aggravated by climate change, experts say. (More from Reuters)

What happened at the Fukushima plant? “Three of its six reactors were in operation when the earthquake hit. The reactors — which went into service between 1970 and 1979 — are designed to shut down automatically when a quake strikes, and emergency diesel generators began the task of pumping water around the reactors to cool them down. However, these stopped about an hour later. The failure of the back-up generators has been blamed on tsunami flooding by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).” More –

This event shows how Mother Earth can have her way with the best-made plans. The power company said that that 7.9 was the highest magnitude for which they tested the safety for their No. 1 and No. 2 nuclear power plants in Fukushima. The original magnitude was estimated to be 8.9, which would have been 10 ten times the magnitude 7.9 that the structures were tested for. The Japan Meteorological Agency up-rated Friday’s earthquake to 9.0 on the Richter scale, meaning that it was twice as powerful as initially thought. More

Here at home, we have no commercial reactors in New Mexico, but there are national nuclear weapons facilities, including Los Alamos National Laboratory, which currently has plans for a $5 billion addition to the Lab’s plutonium weapons production complex. This addition, called the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement project Nuclear Facility (CMRR-NF) is being designed to survive a 7.0 magnitude earthquake without releasing plutonium.  Much of the estimated cost is to seismically qualify the CMRR-NF to be built on the fault-ridden Pajarito Plateau. The plans call for a storage vault with the capacity of six metric tons of radioactive materials, such as plutonium.

Now would be a good time to re-consider any plans that make us feel invincible.