Preferred Plan for Expanded Plutonium Pit Production at LANL

According to the preferred alternative for expanded plutonium pit production at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), the Northern New Mexico nuclear weapons facility would get nearly everything it wanted when the Bush Administration also proposed expansion in the early 2000s.  That proposal was called “The Bombplex” and was defeated by strong public opposition.  The current preferred alternative, No. 2c, would use the existing Plutonium Facility as a bridge unit until proposed construction of underground modules is completed.  Nevertheless, the same volcanic geology remains on the Pajarito Plateau resulting in the high likelihood of seismic events and post-seismic fires with significant consequences.  Despite proposed engineering fixes, the high risk remains with serious consequences to all life, including those living downwind and downstream, tourists, animals, water, land and air.

When a new administration enters the White House it reviews, and inevitably changes, the previous administration’s Nuclear Posture Review.  In 2018, the Nuclear Posture Review emphasized the need for “an effective, responsive, and resilient nuclear weapons infrastructure” that can “adapt flexibly to shifting requirements.”  https://media.defense.gov/2018/Feb/02/2001872886/-1/-1/1/2018-NUCLEAR-POSTURE-REVIEW-FINAL-REPORT.PDF

The Pentagon stated it needed 80 plutonium pits per year.  Plutonium pits are the triggers for nuclear weapons.  The Department of Energy (DOE), and its semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), suggested four alternatives to meet the need.  One is to modify the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the DOE’s Savannah River Site to manufacture 50 pits per year. Two alternatives include Savannah River manufacturing 50 pits, and LANL manufacturing 30.  Another is for LANL to manufacture all 80.

Other problems include the estimated $30 billion life cycle price tag.  Senate and House members on both sides of the aisle have bristled at the cost in recent congressional hearings.  A 2018 engineering assessment by Parsons suggests that keeping the pit production exclusively at LANL could save $15 billion.  https://nukewatch.org/new-and-updated-item/nnsa-downplays-study-that-says-agency-cant-make-50-nuke-cores-per-year-by-2030-in-s-c/

This week the Institute for Defense released its congressionally-mandated review of the four alternatives.  It found that all of the alternatives have cost and schedule risks.  It concluded that the two-site plan is possibly achievable, which will require management focus, time, and resources.  https://nukewatch.org/new-and-updated-item/6129/

Jay Coghlan, of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said, “NNSA’s plans for expanded plutonium pit production is a house of cards waiting to fall down. First, we have an agency with a long track record of cost overruns and schedule slippages. Added to this is the lack of true mission need.”

He continued, “Plutonium pit production is not being expanded to maintain stockpile safety and reliability. Instead it’s all about provocative new nuclear weapons designs that can’t be tested, or alternatively will push the U.S. back into testing with serious proliferation consequences.”  https://nukewatch.org/

Tags: 30/50 pits per year, 80 pits per year, Bombplex, Bush Administration, Institute for Defense, Jay Coghlan, LANL, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, National Nuclear Security Administration, NNSA, Nuclear Posture Review, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, Parsons, Pentagon, PF-4, Plutonium Facility, post-seismic fires, Savannah River Site, seismic, volcanic geology