Security overhaul ordered at nuclear facilities

WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham ordered a broad overhaul of security at the nation's nuclear weapons laboratories Tuesday in response to security lapses ranging from missing computers to misuse of credit cards to reports of sleeping guards.

The order came as a congressional report said that security upgrades required by the heightened terrorist threat since Sept. 11, 2001, won't be fully in place and tested at the department's nuclear weapons facilities for two to five years.

"In light of recent security incidents at the labs ... improved security must be aggressive and far reaching," said Abraham.

He said he was directing the National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees nuclear weapons programs, "to put in place any immediate changes" deemed necessary to prevent future security problems.

All three of the major nuclear weapons labs -- Sandia and Los Alamos in New Mexico and Lawrence Livermore in California -- have been afflicted by security embarrassments in recent months.

"Security is lax. Our nuclear secrets are not safe," Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told a House hearing Tuesday.

He described a long list of security flaps at the weapons labs, including lost keys to secure areas, guards found sleeping, stolen laptop computers, and a case where two vials of plutonium oxide were missing for two years without being reported.

In another incident, a van was stolen from a secure area of the Sandia lab, driven through a fence and later found in a commercial parking lot. The incident was treated as "a routine auto theft" although no one knows what might have been inside the van. A classified computer was also missing from the same area, he Grassley said, citing information from a whistle-blower.

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., chairman of the House Government Reform subcommittee on security, blamed "lax management and stubborn cultural antipathy" at the research labs, despite heightened concern about terrorists obtaining nuclear material since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in New York and at the Pentagon.

"The stern new realities" since those attacks "have been far too slow to penetrate the hardened bureaucratic maze of DOE offices, contractors and (weapons) sites," said Shays.

Linton Brooks, head of NNSA, a semiautonomous agency with the Energy Department that was created several years ago to increase security oversight, said he was concerned about a "lax" attitude and "cultural problems" that led to the recent incidents. Still, he said, none raised a national security concern except the incident involving the vials of plutonium. He called that a "bookkeeping problem."

He announced that two retired admirals, both former commanders of the U.S. Strategic Command, will review aspects of the security situation at the weapons complexes, including the research laboratories and manpower needs.

Retired Adm. Richard W. Mies will look into physical security at the complexes and recommend improvements. Retired Adm. Hank Chiles, who formerly headed a commission that examined recruiting problems among nuclear weapons scientists, will review security staffing.

Abraham, in a statement issued hours after the hearing, said the department "views security as the critical responsibility of the national laboratories and we treat any lapse or failure as significant." He directed Brooks "to launch a comprehensive security overhaul."

A report by the General Accounting Office, Congress' investigative arm, said management problems, "confusion about roles and responsibilities" and staffing shortages make if difficult for the Energy Department "to effectively oversee security activities" of the private contractors running the weapons facilities.

The GAO also said that the Energy Department only last month produced the so-called Design Basis Threat document, that lays out the specific terrorist threat the nuclear facilities must be prepared to defend against in light of the Sept. 11 attacks.

And, said the GAO, the department is not expected to have security measures to meet that level of threat in place for another two to five years. Brooks said he didn't believe it would take that long.

Rep. Todd Platts, R-Pa., said he could not understand "the reasons for the delay given the seriousness of the threat."