Energy Department orders "special" investigation of plutonium pit problems
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Annelise Capossela/Axios
The U.S. has for almost a decade been on a cross-country nuclear weapons odyssey known as plutonium pit production.
- The project to pump out cores for nuclear warheads in South Carolina and New Mexico, as drawn up in 2018, is now years behind schedule and billions beyond budget estimates.
Why it matters: A memo this month from Energy Department leadership reignites questions about the future of the effort, which has become a punching bag for critics and a pea among the mattresses of nuclear modernization.
Driving the news: Deputy Energy Secretary James Danly earlier this month ordered a 120-day "special study" of the pit production endeavor overseen by the National Nuclear Security Administration.
- It includes a review of NNSA leadership and management practices; individual projects at Savannah River Site and Los Alamos National Laboratory; and contractual mechanisms "to hold contractors to account."
- Both the current leader and head of defense programs at NNSA are working in an acting capacity.
Threat level: Danly said he is "increasingly concerned" about NNSA's "ability to consistently deliver on nuclear weapons production capabilities."
- Further delays to pit production, he added, could "result in significant cost increases and risks to national security."
Between the lines: This is a marked departure in tone from the top.
- "We do think it's very serious, especially with this administration that is willing to make, as we've seen, drastic personnel decisions," Greg Mello with the Los Alamos Study Group told Axios.
- "Sooner or later, DOE is going to recognize that it can't build and operate two pit factories at once," he said. "That two-site plan costs four to six times more than was thought when the plan was first approved."
The intrigue: To run the investigation, Danly tapped the Office of Enterprise Assessments, an internal oversight group that typically probes cyber, site security and environmental concerns. That choice has drawn the curiosity of experts.
- "It is very interesting that they're doing this," Stephen Young with the Union of Concerned Scientists told Axios. "Who they chose to do it is also interesting."
Flashback: A two-pronged production plan was greenlit during the first Trump administration by Ellen Lord and Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, at the time the Pentagon's chief weapons buyer and the NNSA administrator, respectively.
- Biden administration Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and NNSA boss Jill Hruby also endorsed the tandem approach.
What they're saying: "The current plan for pit production is one of the most expensive endeavors that the U.S. has ever undertaken in its nuclear complex," Dylan Spaulding, also with the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Axios.
- "It's good that the DOE apparently recognizes how troubled this program really is," he said, "and this study is a chance for a much-needed change of course."
- "The important takeaway is that pit production, at scale, is simply not necessary right now," he added. "There are other options that don't detract from national security ... and that would help open doors for arms control and a more secure future."
The other side: The Energy Department did not respond to questions about the selection of the Office of Enterprise Assessments, the potential repercussions of its findings and the overall timing of the deep dive.
Zoom out: The combined 2025-34 nuke plans of the Defense and Energy departments amount to $946 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
- That includes big-ticket items like the fickle Sentinel missile, meant to replace Minuteman III.
Go deeper: Boeing nabs $2.8 billion nuke communications contract
