TL: Greenpeace Statement on US DOE Budget Request for 1991 (GP) SO: Stephen Schwartz, Greenpeace USA DT: April 3, 1990 Keywords: nuclear weapons us doe statements greenpeace gp funding governments / STATEMENT OF STEPHEN I. SCHWARTZ LEGISLATIVE COORDINATOR, NUCLEAR CAMPAIGNS GREENPEACE, U.S.A. BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S FISCAL YEAR 1991 BUDGET REQUEST APRIL 3, 1990 SUMMARY It is time for a thorough reordering of the Department of Energy's budgetary priorities. Here are 8 steps that this subcommittee and Congress can take to help DOE restructure the nuclear weapons production complex in the 1990's: 1. Don't treat the current shutdown as a crisis because it impedes further warhead production. 2. Build a system of checks and balances into the Nuclear Weapons Council to ensure that DOE is not merely filling warhead orders for the Department of Defense. 3. Stop production this fiscal year of 6 nuclear bombs and warheads currently in Phase 6: 4. Cancel the next generation of nuclear war-fighting weapons, specifically: 5. Don't permit the DOD to exploit loopholes in a START agreement by building thousands of air delivered bombs and warheads that are not accountable under the agreed upon rules. 6. Reorient DOE funds away from weapons production and toward time critical cleanup activities and basic energy research and development. 7. Halt DOE's planned resumption of highly enriched uranium metal production at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. 8. Defer all funds requested in FY 1991 for construction of new weapons facilities including new production reactors, materials processing facilities, and research and development projects. [][][] Good afternoon and thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify today before this subcommittee. My name is Stephen Schwartz and I am the Legislative Coordinator for Nuclear Campaigns with Greenpeace U.S.A. I testify today on behalf of the 1.7 million supporters of Greenpeace U.S.A. Greenpeace is also an international organization with offices in 22 countries, a newly-opened office in Moscow, and 4 million supporters worldwide. This afternoon I would like to discuss the Department of Energy's (DOE) ailing nuclear weapons production complex and what this subcommittee, and Congress as a whole, can do to reverse a rapidly deteriorating situation. As we sit here today, the DOE is unable to produce new raw materials -- plutonium and tritium -- for the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Fabrication of plutonium triggers at the Rocky Flats Plant has stopped. Within a short period of time, warhead production at Pantex will cease completely. On March 5 Secretary of Energy James Watkins, sitting in this very room, testified that the shutdown at Rocky Flats would prevent DOE from meeting its requirements under the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum. While it is routine for DOE to fail to meet its inflated production goals, this is the first time since the end of World War II that warhead production will completely halt due to systemic health, safety and environmental problems at the nuclear weapons complex. Here are several suggestions on how to deal with this unprecedented situation. First, DOE and DOD must stop using the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum as a nuclear wish list. The dramatic changes in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union require a comprehensive review of present and future defense needs. For example, the Administration is asking for funds this year for three new tactical nuclear systems for fighting a nuclear war in Europe -- the Follow-on-to-Lance, the SRAM-T, and the W82 warhead for the 155 millimeter artillery shell. The West Germans and others within NATO have understandably derided these proposals but, recent reports in the press notwithstanding, their development continues. We estimate that if these weapons arecanceled more than $2 billion could be saved over the next several years. Second, canceling or reducing strategic systems will also impact estimated future warhead production needs. Reducing the planned buy of 132 B-2 bombers to 30 or even 15 will drastically reduce the numbers of SRAM-II (entering pre-production in FY 1991) and B83 bombs (in full production at about 200 per year) scheduled to be purchased, creating potential savings of over $2 billion dollars. This would further relieve the stress and strain on the production complex. Third, Congress must review DOE's increasingly expensive modernization plans. At Rocky Flats DOE is proposing to spend, at latest estimate, between $500 and $600 million to build a new plutonium recycling facility as part of the Plutonium Recovery and Modification Project (PRMP). At the same time it has proposed phasing out operations at the plant. Despite a recent National Academy of Sciences report which found that, "The current supply of plutonium and the current capacity to process both virgin and recycled plutonium from retired weapons or scrap are adequate to meet the demand for maintaining a stockpile similar to the current one," DOE plans to build PRMP to process even more plutonium. It is time for a thorough reordering of the DOE's priorities. It is no longer justifiable, on any grounds, to continue nuclear warhead production. When most of the DOE's production plants are unable to meet the standards applied to commercial nuclear facilities, when there are rampant violations of state and federal environmental laws across the complex, we must ask what possible threat justifies their continued unsafe operation. And despite Secretary Watkins' efforts, extremely dangerous problems and practices continue to surface, including the revelation last week that some 62 pounds of plutonium, or roughly 15 bombs' worth, is stuck in air ducts at Rocky Flats because, we are told, workers blatantly disregarded the rules and punched holes in clogged air filters to allow the production line to keep moving. Here, then, are 8 steps that you can take to help DOE restructure the production complex in the 1990's: 1. Don't treat the current shutdown as a crisis because it impedes further warhead production. The Savannah River reactors have been shut for nearly 2 years, yet in that time not one inch of soil has been lost to Soviet aggression. Use this time, instead, to review actual stockpile needs and assess whether the 13 separate systems currently in development, with 6 scheduled for full production in FY 1991, are really necessary. Fiscal reality and continuing production problems dictate that despite planned weapons modernization programs the arsenal will continue to shrink throughout the decade as more warheads are retired than are built. In fact, since 1967 the United States has unilaterally reduced its arsenal by over 11,000 weapons. Stopping the production of new weapons is not the same as unilaterally disarming. 2. Build a system of checks and balances into the Nuclear Weapons Council to ensure that DOE is not merely filling warhead orders for the Department of Defense. The armed services are used to getting a free ride from DOE since they bear none of the costs of warhead production. Indeed, despite retiring most of its tactical nuclear weapons, the Navy plans on buying the B90 Nuclear Depth/Strike Bomb because, as a Navy official told one of our researchers, it's free. DOE has a responsibility to its workers and the general public to halt weapons activities or prevent their resumption when such activities present health, safety or environmental dangers. 3. Stop production this fiscal year of 6 nuclear bombs and warheads currently in Phase 6 production: the B61, the B83, the W82 Artillery Fired Atomic Projectile, the W80-0 and W80-1 for the sea and air-launched cruise missile, and the W88/Trident II. There are already 1,500 B61's and 1,200 B83's so stopping production now would have no effect on the ability of the U.S. to defend itself. Further, a sharp reduction in the total number of B-2 bombers lessens the need for more B83's and B61's. The W82, scheduled to enter full production this past February, is politically undeployable in Europe and a recent military assessment by the Joint Chiefs' on NATO and Warsaw Pact forces in Europe makes the W82 indefensible on military grounds. There are also 325 nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missiles (TLAM-Ns) and, although the Navy has expressed a desire to purchase a total of 758, its interest seems to be waning (40 percent of the missiles are not due to be procured until next year). The TLAM-N program could cease at approximately 400-450 warheads if funds are cut this year. DOE has produced 400 W88/Trident II warheads, 192 of which are currently deployed aboard the USS Tennessee. But there are also over 3,100 Trident I warheads deployed on Poseidon and Trident submarines. We urge you to cancel the W88/Trident II and ask the Navy to make due with the W76/Trident I warhead, which it is currently planning to load on approximately half of the Trident II missiles. 4. Cancel the next generation of nuclear war-fighting weapons, specifically the B90 Nuclear Depth/Strike Bomb, the Earth Penetrating Warhead, SRAM-II, and developmental high-power microwave weapons. All these systems are scheduled to enter Phase 4 or 5 in FY 1991. Integrating these weapons into the SIOP (Single Integrated Operational Plan) would contradict longstanding war-fighting policy and would needlessly exacerbate tensions between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Former high ranking officials such as Admiral William Crowe and John Lehman have recently stated that the concept of a nuclear war at sea is one whose time has past. The B90, therefore, is a weapon without a mission; its cancelation this year would save $1 billion. 5. Don't permit the DOD to exploit loopholes in a START agreement by building thousands of air delivered nuclear bombs and warheads that are not accountable under the agreed upon rules. Such actions contravene the purpose of arms control and will needlessly strain the already crippled bomb factories. 6. Reorient DOE funds away from weapons production and toward time critical cleanup activities and basic energy research and development. DOE's FY 1991 budget requests $8.5 billion for production activities, a hefty 9 percent increase, while cleanup functions at the Hanford Reservation and elsewhere are underfunded by billions of dollars. It is contradictory to call for real decreases in the defense budget and at the same time accelerate nuclear warhead production. The current budget allows severe contamination problems to continue unabated and needlessly angers state officials and local residents. Why, for example, is there a need for two nuclear weapons laboratories? Consolidating the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories would save approximately $1 billion which could be channeled into more urgent programs. 7. Halt DOE's planned resumption of uranium metal production at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. The U.S. has not produced highly enriched uranium (HEU) for nuclear weapons since 1964 yet now, as the cold war ends, DOE plans to transfer several thousand kilograms of HEU produced for the naval reactor program to weapons use. Before the HEU can be used in weapons it must be converted to a metal form at Oak Ridge. Like plutonium, HEU is recyclable. DOE currently maintains a surplus of the material. Accelerating the scheduled retirement of 700 uranium-rich W33 atomic projectiles would delay the need for new production. A START treaty would result in a huge surplus of between 50 and 60 thousand kilograms of HEU, making further production unnecessary. 8. In recognition of the significant easing of international tensions and of other pressing budgetary needs, defer all funds requested for FY 1991 for the construction of new weapons facilities including new production reactors, materials processing facilities, and research and development projects. The time has come to recognize that further production of nuclear weapons is doing more to hurt the people in this country than to help them. And despite a recent statement by Vice Admiral Roger Bacon, commander of the Atlantic submarine fleet, that Trident submarines and missiles will act "...as a defense against terrorism, drug trading and other global conflicts," the fact is that no one feels threatened by our nuclear weapons except, ironically, those people who work in or live near the DOE factories that created and perpetuate the arsenal. ---------- END [Greenbase Inventory May 21, 1990 ]