ECA Update: June 20, 2013
Published: Thu, 06/20/13
Obama calls for reduction in nuclear arms in broad-brush Berlin speech Dan Roberts and Kate Connolly, The Guardian June 19, 2013 Barack Obama called for a renaissance in the shared liberal values that underpin western nations on Wednesday as he announced plans to cut nuclear weapons in a much-anticipated speech in Berlin that also acknowledged unease over privacy and drone strikes.
Speaking at the Brandenburg Gate, in the shadow of historic speeches by Presidents Kennedy and Reagan, Obama stuck to big themes but clearly sought to address concerns in Germany caused by recent revelations of internet surveillance and US drone warfare.
After quoting Immanuel Kant on freedom and his belief "in open societies that respect that sanctity of the individual", the president echoed calls he made during a recent speech in Washington for an ending of America's war on terror.
"Threats to freedom don't merely come from the outside; they can come from within, from our own fears. For over a decade, America has been at war, but much has changed ... no nation can maintain its freedom if it does not move beyond mindset of perpetual war."
The president called for tight controls on the "use of new technology like drones and balancing security with privacy" but said he was confident the US could strike the right balance.
Obama also insisted that US surveillance programmes were aimed at "threats to security, not the communications of ordinary persons" and said "they keep people safe in Europe as well as the US".
But he acknowledged there were legitimate concerns over privacy and other hot-button issues such as drones and Guantánamo.
"We must listen to voices that disagree with us, and have a open debate about how we use our powers and remember that government exists to serve the power of individual not the other way around ... that is what keeps us different to those on the other side of the wall. That's what keeps us true to our better history," said Obama.
Among the only firm policy statements was a comittment to cut US nuclear weapons arsenals by a third and seek fresh talks with Russia to reduce stocks further.
"We are on track to cut nuke warheads to lowest levels since 1950s ... but we have more work to do, so I am announcing [that] we can ensure security of US and allies by reducing our stored weapons by up to one third," said Obama. "I intend to start talks with Russia to move beyond cold war postures."
Speaking to an invited crowd of 6,000 guests, he also hinted at calls for greater German support for US intervention in countries such as Syria.
"We cannot dictate the pace of change in Arab world but we must reject the excuse that we can do nothing to support it," said Obama.
But much of the speech was couched in broad calls for a restoration of the western alliance that helped defeat communism, amid growing fears in Washington that support for Nato and US is waning in Europe.
"There can at times be a complacency among our western democracies," he said. "We face no concrete walls ... sometimes there can be a sense that the great challenges have somehow passed and that brings with it a temptation to turn inward."
Receiving a cheer for taking his jacket off in sweltering heat and reprising John F Kennedy's "Ich bin ein Berliner" line, Obama called on German people to remember what they shared with America.
"Our alliance is the foundation of global security and our trade the engine of the global economy," said the president.
GOP slams Obama nuke announcement Jeremy Herb, The Hill June 19, 2013 Republicans were furious at President Obama's announcement Wednesday that he will ask Congress to reduce the U.S. nuclear stockpile by a third.
GOP lawmakers slammed Obama's comments in his speech at Berlin's Brandenburg Gate, warning that the president's proposal amounted to unilateral disarmament and would make it more difficult to negotiate with Russia.
Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) called the move "misguided and dangerous."
"What Obama sees as compromise, [Vladimir] Putin sees as weakness," Ayotte said. "The U.S. should negotiate with the Kremlin from a position of strength."
Sen. James Inhofe (Okla.), the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that "now is not to the time to pursue further strategic nuclear force reductions."
"A country whose conventional military strength has been weakened due to budget cuts ought not to consider further nuclear force reductions while turmoil in the world is growing," Inhofe said.
Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), former Armed Services Strategic Forces subcommittee chairman, complained that Obama had given the speech in a foreign country to "appease a foreign audience."
"The president seems only concerned with winning the approval of nations like Russia, who will applaud a weakened United States," Turner said. "The president is undertaking these unilateral cuts on his own because he knows it would never earn congressional approval or the support of the American people he has pledged to defend."
In his speech, Obama said that reducing the number of strategic nuclear weapons to about 1,000 could still ensure the security of the U.S. and its allies. A similar move from Russia, he said, would help "move beyond Cold War postures."
"So long as nuclear weapons exist, we are not truly safe," Obama told a crowd of thousands gathered on the east side of the gate that once separated East Berlin from West.
Republican complaints about Obama's desire to reduce the U.S. nuclear stockpiles date back to the New START treaty with Russia, negotiated in the president's first term.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said it "strains credulity" that the president would seek a new round of arms control with the Russians while Moscow is "cheating on a major existing nuclear arms control treaty."
As part of the deal to win congressional approval, Obama agreed to modernize the current U.S. nuclear stockpile, which Republicans say the president has failed to follow through on.
"While the administration has assured me that no further reductions will occur outside of treaty negotiations and the advice and consent of the Senate, the president's announcement without first fulfilling commitments on modernization could amount to unilateral disarmament," said Sen. Bob Corker (Tenn.), the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Obama's announcement won praise from Democrats like House Armed Services ranking member Adam Smith (Wash.), who has fought Republicans in the committee over spending more on nuclear weapons and missile defense.
"The president's announcement today will allow the United States to lead the way on nuclear weapons reductions in a manner that strengthens our national security," Smith said. "The president clearly understands that a strong nuclear deterrent remains essential. We have, and would retain, the ability to destroy the world many times over."
Moniz taps veteran environmentalist as chief of staff Al Kamen, The Washington Post June 19, 2013 Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz has tapped highly regarded environmentalist Kevin Knobloch, most recently president of the advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists, to be his chief of staff.
Knobloch had also been the organization's legislative director for arms control and national security and had worked on the Hill in the '80s as legislative director for former Democratic senator Tim Wirth of Colorado and legislative assistant and press secretary for former New York Democratic representative Ted Weiss.
DOE Secretary promises Hanford cleanup plan by end of summer Gery Chittim, KING 5 News June 19, 2013 New Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz promised a new plan to clean up Hanford by the end of this summer.
During his first official visit to Hanford since being confirmed a month ago, Moniz met with reporters in a cramped hallway for 15 minutes before beginning his tour.
He said his plan would address the many technical challenges at the nation's most contaminated site, including leaking nuclear waste storage tanks and a stalled facility designed to convert the waste into stable glass logs that can be safely stored.
In response to questions about continued problems with contractors and whistle blowers, the secretary said he planned to hold contractors across the facility more accountable for their work.
He said he would meet with whistleblowers to get a firsthand account of what problems they face when pointing out problems.
Moniz said funding is not easy during the current economic situation, but said now was not the time to ease up on efforts to get Hanford's waste treatment facility up and running.
He said a lot of progress has been made at the reservation but we are now getting down to the toughest problems.
No reporters were allowed to accompany him on his tour and the department said there would be no media conference afterward.
EPA report critical of Wash. oversight at Hanford Associated Press June 18, 2013 YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) -- A new report released Tuesday faults Washington state for lax oversight at the nation's most contaminated nuclear site, saying the state employs too few inspectors and gives advance notice of inspections to the federal agency charged with managing the cleanup.
The report by the Environmental Protection Agency sharply criticizes the state at a time when the U.S. Department of Energy, which manages the cleanup at south-central Washington's Hanford Nuclear Reservation, has been the target of intense criticism of its own amid delays, rising costs and complaints of mismanagement.
The report was released by the watchdog group Hanford Challenge.
The report resulted from a 2011 EPA audit conducted every four years of the state's enforcement of clean air, water and hazardous waste laws.
Modified contracts caps construction costs, revises completion date for SRS salt waste facility Rob Pavey, The Augusta Chronicle June 18, 2013 The contractor building an important facility to process Cold War waste from Savannah River Site's underground storage tanks has agreed to a modified contract that caps future construction costs and revises the completion date to Dec. 31, 2016.
The $1.4 billion Salt Waste Processing Facility, which is 72 percent complete, was supposed to commence operations in 2009, then 2011 and then delayed again until 2015 - a date the U.S. Department of Energy acknowledged in January was "no longer achievable."
Under the terms of the modification, Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group Inc. agreed to cap future costs at $540 million - and aim for a projected completion cost of $530 million - and will pursue incentives to reduce costs and meet the new completion date on time.
Incentives include an agreement that the parties will share cost under-runs for the final completion cost, with a maximum incentive for Parsons of $30 million.
Parsons would pay half of any additional cost overruns that exceed $530 million but are less than $550 million. Cost overruns beyond $550 million are solely Parsons' responsibility.
The agreement includes a schedule incentive in which Parsons could earn up to $2 million a month for earlier completion but would pay DOE $2 million for each month past the 2016 deadline.
Of the 36 million gallons of radioactive Cold War nuclear waste once stored in SRS tanks, 33 million gallons were liquid and salt cake forms suitable to enter the salt waste facility, which will separate high-activity radionuclides from low-activity salt waste.
After separation, the high-activity salt waste will be encapsulated in glass at the Defense Waste Processing Facility and stored nearby until disposal in a geologic repository.
The Salt Waste Processing Facility will replace interim facilities at the site. The existing Saltstone Facility opened in 1990 and was modified last year to improve efficiency and prepare it for new roles after the modern plant is completed.
Levin pessimistic about July floor debate for Defense bill Jeremy Herb, The Hill June 18, 2013 Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) did not sound optimistic Tuesday that the Defense authorization bill would get on the floor soon after the July 4 recess.
"I'm hoping obviously for July, but I'm not sure that's realistic," Levin told reporters.
After July, Congress will go on a month-long recess in August, which would then push consideration of the sweeping Pentagon policy bill back until after Labor Day.
The House passed its version of the Defense authorization bill last week.
The timing of the Defense authorization bill, considered a "must-pass" piece of legislation, is frequently questionable in the Senate after it passes the committee, whether because of contentious provisions, the Senate's slow-moving calendar or that it's an election year.
The past two years, the authorization bill has slipped to November and December in the Senate, sparking concerns that the bill's streak of passing 51 straight years could be broken.
Levin said that he didn't anticipate the delay would be that long this year. "I'm not talking anything that bad," he said Tuesday.
Part of the reason it's difficult for the bill to get on the calendar is it often takes several days to debate and always receives hundreds of amendments.
House Armed Services Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) sought to put pressure on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) last week, calling on Reid to immediately bring the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to the floor because of the sexual assault reforms included.
"The sexual assault reforms we propose will make a real difference for victims and will make needed cultural change," McKeon said. "There is no reason to make these victims wait for vital reform and I urge Senator Reid to bring the NDAA to the Senate floor immediately."
Reid is focused this month on getting the immigration bill passed in the Senate, making it highly unlikely he'll take off several days to do the Defense bill
Alexander Ties Filibuster Debate to Yucca Mountain Niels Lesniewski, CQ Roll Call June 18, 2013 "A vote to end the filibuster is a vote to complete Yucca Mountain."
Those were the words from Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander this morning linking the "nuclear option" debate to Majority Leader Harry Reid's long-standing battle against a nuclear waste repository being built in his home state of Nevada.
In a floor speech, Alexander - the top Republican on the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee -- pointed out that some proposals from the Republican side of the aisle would pass the Senate if only a mere majority was required, including possible legislation to direct the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to issue a permit to open the nuclear waste facility in Nevada.
Of course, Reid would do anything in his power to prevent that, and he has done so in the past. He's long been the leading critic of that proposal. He has repeatedly declared the project dead, and he's worked to ensure the effort doesn't receive any appropriations.
"If short-sighted Democrats turn the Senate into a place where a majority can do anything it wants, soon a majority of 51 Republicans will find a way to do anything we want," Alexander said.
Advocates of what Reid is currently pondering note that the proposal would only apply to executive and judicial nominations that have, in the view of Democrats, faced an unprecedented blockade.
Reid has threatened to change Senate precedent with a simple majority vote and prevent filibusters of President Barack Obama's choices for the federal bench and the executive branch. Republicans insist that the rules allow them to block such rules changes unless Reid can muster 67 votes.
Democrats have responded to daily remarks by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in which he points out the small number of nominations actually pending for floor consideration on the Senate's executive calendar by pointing to the longer trend in nominations, under which Obama is experiencing a higher rate of judicial vacancies and seeing fewer federal appeals court judges confirmed. But there are many factors behind that, only some of which relate to actions by Republican senators.
McConnell responded to Alexander during a floor colloquy saying that if he became majority leader of the chamber, he would be hard pressed to argue against further rules changes.
McConnell said that "repealing Obamacare" and allowing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be among his first priorities. He also suggested a measure to repeal the estate tax.
"These are the kinds of priorities ... that our members feel strongly about," McConnell said, effectively throwing down the gauntlet about what he would do with a GOP majority.
"I'd be hard pressed ... precedent having been set, why should we confine it to nominations?" said McConnell.
House GOP readies bill to affirm Yucca as sole nuclear waste site Zack Colman, The Hill June 19, 2013 House Republicans will unveil legislation that affirms Yucca Mountain as the nation's sole repository for spent nuclear fuel, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) told The Hill.
"We're working on that," Upton said. "Stay tuned."
The bill is likely to highlight the divide between the House and Senate on what to do with the Nevada site.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) staunchly opposes the Yucca project, and a bipartisan group in his chamber is crafting a bill that would allow the storage of nuclear waste at other sites.
"It doesn't leave a lot of room for negotiation," said Geoff Fettus, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council who has followed the issue closely.
"I don't see much opportunity for compromise on that point," added Jack Spencer, senior research fellow for nuclear policy with The Heritage Foundation.
Reid backed President Obama's 2010 decision to pull the plug on federal reviews of the Yucca site. Republicans say that decision violated a 1982 federal law that says only Yucca could store nuclear waste, and has been the subject of a court fight.
A Senate Democratic leadership aide said Reid is pleased with the Senate progress on its bill, but noted any legislation can't be a backdoor avenue for restarting Yucca.
There's a long way to go, however, before that becomes a concern.
"At the appropriate time the House and Senate will have to resolve the differences between the bills. But I think the first hurdle is just getting them past both chambers," Robert Dillon, spokesman for Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ranking member Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), told The Hill.
Energy leaders in the House and the Senate had met in March to talk nuclear waste, though they have not met since, Murkowski told reporters in the Capitol on Tuesday.
Murkowski, who is one of the four lawmakers working on the Senate bill, said she's "encouraged" by the progress but cautioned that senators are "still working it."
A draft of the Senate bill released in April enabled the transfer of spent fuel currently housed at commercial reactors to intermediate storage facilities, so long as the federal government is actively looking for a permanent repository.
That option doesn't sit well with House Republicans. Their prospective bill would specify that Yucca is the only destination for nuclear waste.
"Chairman Upton has talked to me about maybe we're going to have to be a little more offensive as far as legislation just to send a signal," said Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), the chairman of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee that oversees nuclear waste issues.
While saying he doesn't see a need for legislation, Shimkus said a bill could prod a federal court to decide whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) must complete its review of the Energy Department's application to use Yucca as a permanent waste site.
Petitioners want the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to force the NRC to complete its review. They say halting the process -- former NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko said the agency ran out of money -- ran afoul of the 1982 federal nuclear waste law.
The federal court issued a stay last August to see whether Congress would send a signal -- say, by giving the NRC more funding -- before making a final decision.
But Congress didn't drop anything extra in the NRC's piggy bank, leaving the federal case in a holding pattern.
A legislative push -- such as one to authorize more funding for Yucca -- might be the type of action the court needs to see to make a ruling, Shimkus suggested.
"I think we're in a pretty good place right now, in all honesty. We just have got to get the court to render this decision, and then we can move forward from there," Shimkus said.
|
|
