The House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee’s proposal to increase the authority of the National Nuclear Security Administration while revamping how the agency conducts oversight of its contractors is meeting opposition from the Project on Government Oversight, which suggested last week that the panel’s plan would “seriously undermine” the “health, safety, and financial accountability” of the weapons program. In legislation unveiled last week, the panel proposed a shift toward performance-based oversight while moving authority for non-nuclear work at the agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “The subcommittee cites the success of this model in the private sector, but avoids the facts that, unlike the private sector, nuclear weapons facilities are ultra-hazardous, have very large radioactive waste legacies, excess cancer and beryllium disease among its employees, a long history of safety problems, and contractor mismanagement enabled by self regulation,” POGO said in a recent blog post.
The panel’s bill would also force the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to consider cost as a part of its recommendations and share the recommendations with the Department of Energy and NNSA before they are released. Under the bill, the DNFSB, POGO said, would “effectively be required to negotiate its safety recommendations” which would “compromise the Board’s independence and undermine safety.” House leaders have said that the intent of the legislation is to make NNSA more efficient. “This isn’t about less oversight. It’s about doing the right kind of oversight,” a Congressional aide told NW&M Monitor. “It can be more effective. NNSA can really focus on the real issues that it’s facing instead of approving every piece of paper that moves.”
