A representative from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) Tuesday said government urgency for plutonium pit production at the Department of Energy’s Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico is “unnecessary” —and increases risk to workers.
Dylan Spaulding, a senior scientist researching nuclear weapons production at the Union of Concerned Scientists, laid out his case in prepared comments for a hearing held by DOE and its semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). DOE and NNSA are drafting a site-wide environmental impact statement (SWEIS) as required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
Spaulding addressed two commonly used justifications for producing plutonium pits: the aging of the plutonium in the nuclear weapons stockpile, and “what is said to be an urgent need to bolster US nuclear deterrence.”
Based “on the available science,” plutonium in existing stockpile weapons would not be vulnerable to aging effects for decades, Spaulding said. He added that “even the oldest pits in the stockpile are expected to be viable into the 2040’s at least.”
Even if aging were a concern, pit production was not to “maintain the safety, security, or reliability of the existing US stockpile,” Spaulding said, but to “furnish the first new nuclear warhead to enter the stockpile since the end of the Cold War,” referring to the W87-1 that would go on the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile. He added that given the U.S. deploys 1,770 nuclear weapons and has 2,000 in strategic reserve, “new weapons are not an urgent requirement.”
“For these reasons, the current rush to produce pits is unnecessary,” Spaulding said. “The Lab’s plans outlined in the Environmental Impact Statement only serve to increase risk for workers and insufficiently consider protection of the public in the event of a severe accident.”
DOE and NNSA announced a 60-day public comment period, which would include four public hearings to receive comments on the draft, through March 11.
On Tuesday, there were two hearings out of the four that were held in Santa Fe, N.M., and broadcast virtually. The hearings started with presentations on the SWEIS from leadership from the lab, including field office manager Ted Wyka, and ended with comments from the public until time was up.
