The National Council of Security Police formally outlined its opposition to a House bill that would have the military protect the nation’s weapons complex in a letter to lawmakers yesterday, suggesting strengthened federal oversight and more funding as a better way of beefing up security. In its letter to Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), the author of the legislation, and other lawmakers, the umbrella organization representing guards across the weapons complex highlighted several issues with the proposed legislation, including challenges in housing soldiers at weapons complex sites, issues with training and clearing enlisted men and women, and complications with the 1879 Posse Comitatus law that restricts the military’s ability to be used for civilian law enforcement. “The Act embodies the long-standing principle in Anglo-American law that there should be a total separation of military from civil law enforcement,” NCSP Vice President Leo Salazar, the Business Agent for the Pantex Guards Union, said in the letter.
Salazar also noted that many current guards and protective force managers have military backgrounds. “We already operate within the military model,” Salazar said. “The real issue is oversight that limits the Department of Energy (DOE) of having enforcement ability towards the contractors. There have been identified shortfalls within security for many years, but no authority to enforce only to identify the weakness. If Congress would give the authority to enforce requirements, that in itself would make a huge difference.” In particular, Salazar suggested eliminating zero-based security reviews and “deep dive budget cuts” that he said have “degraded” security. He advocated for the creation of a panel consisting of experts from DOE/NNSA, DOE’s Inspector General, management and operating contractors, and the NCSP that would develop a plan to improve the protection of the weapons complex.
Partner Content