Nuclear Security Poor, Lawmaker Says

The Energy Department has cut security forces at nuclear weapon installations and other sensitive facilities by nearly 40% in the last decade, leaving them vulnerable to terrorists, a veteran Democratic lawmaker charges in a report to be released today.

The report by Rep. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts found that the number of uniformed security guards within the department’s complexes nationwide--including nuclear weapon labs, test sites, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and other facilities--had dropped from 5,640 in 1992 to 3,500 in 2001. In addition, Markey found that security support staff at the installations had dropped to 762 from 1,451 a decade earlier.

Markey also said the department was slow to plan for security and that its computer systems had been potentially compromised by a number of serious cyber-attacks.

A 13-term congressman who is a longtime foe of the nuclear power industry and a critic of U.S. nuclear programs, Markey released the report after the department responded in detail to concerns he raised after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The 22-page report includes unclassified portions of roughly 250 pages of material the department gave to Markey in May, plus some information he received in two briefings.

The report’s release follows a decision by President Bush last week to kill $5.1 billion in funding that Congress had approved for homeland security and other uses--including about $139 million earmarked for national nuclear security. The department itself had sought increased security funding this year, but the White House largely rejected that request.

Assailing Bush’s stance, Markey said: “The president is playing a dangerous game when he vetoes critical security resources.” He maintained that terrorists could infiltrate vulnerable installations and potentially detonate a “dirty” bomb or the equivalent of a crude nuclear device.

“Osama bin Laden and his associates have made clear that nuclear facilities are at the top of their terrorist targets,” Markey said in an interview Monday.

The administration agreed that nuclear security should be a priority but dismissed Markey’s criticism.

“Our weapons complex remains safe and secure, and the protection systems at our sites are robust, reliable and responsive to evolving security challenges,” Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham wrote to Markey.

Markey is co-chairman of a congressional nonproliferation task force and a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

While today’s report is entirely Markey’s, Congress has made nuclear security a bipartisan priority in recent years. After security lapses were exposed at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and elsewhere, Congress in 2000 created the National Nuclear Security Administration within the Energy Department to strengthen protection against espionage and terrorism. And last month, responding in part to the Sept. 11 attacks, lawmakers approved significant funding increases for energy security as part of a $29-billion emergency spending bill.

In his report, Markey notes reductions in the security forces at several leading facilities from 1992 to 2001. At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Northern California, for example, the number of armed guards dropped to 124 from 141. At Los Alamos, it dropped to 255 from 322. At a nuclear site in Rocky Flats, Colo., it dropped to 154 from 380.

And, at nonnuclear facilities in Louisiana and Texas, armed guards protecting the Strategic Petroleum Reserve were reduced to 113 from 233.

In all, five of 30 department installations nationwide had no armed guards during the reporting period, Markey found, while 17 had reductions in armed guards. While some of the sites added unarmed guards during that time, the guard force overall dropped 38%.

Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, an agency within the department, called Markey’s report “old news” Monday and added: “Something is trying to be sensationalized that isn’t there.” Although he provided no specifics, he said the government had taken measures since Sept. 11 to bolster nuclear security, including budgeting an additional $106 million in December and adding guards at sensitive sites.

Wilkes also said that the shifts in security personnel had occurred mainly during the Clinton administration. He attributed them, in part, to changing missions at many of the facilities.

In other findings, Markey charged that the department:

* Has been slow to assess new threats to its installations after Sept. 11, following procedures that could lead to a two-year delay in implementing protective measures.

* Has found security flaws through training exercises that included mock terrorist attacks. In one episode in 1998 in Rocky Flats, Markey said, the department acknowledged that mock terrorists “were able to use speed, firepower and concealment smoke to penetrate the facility.”

* Has been the target of successful cyber-attacks. However, the department reported that the number of computer intrusions dropped from 130 in 1999 to 64 in 2001.