Story Tools
 E-mail Story
 Print Friendly

Send E-mail
To John Fleck


BY Recent stories
by John Fleck

$$ NewsLibrary Archives search for
John Fleck
'95-now

Reprint story













LANL

  • Beating Not Tied to LANL, Police Say (06-10-05)

  • Accounts of Man's Beating Differ (06-10-05)

  • Strip Club Stories Vary For Auditor (06-08-05)

  • Lab Whistle-Blower Beaten (06-07-05)

  • LANL Worker, Blogger Retiring (06-03-05)

  • Preserving Homestead Heritage (05-29-05)

  • Lockheed Adds Partners to LANL Bid (05-28-05)

  • Gov. Urges LANL Employees to Hang On (05-28-05)

  • UC to Fight for Lab Contract (05-27-05)

  • UC Moves Closer to a Bid for LANL (05-26-05)

  • LANL, UC-San Diego Join Forces for Degree (05-23-05)

  • LANL Critic Whistled Before (02-13-05)

  • Lab Auditor Claims Retaliation (02-10-05)

  • LANL Sees Budget Hike; Sandia Funds Drop (02-10-05)

  • LANL Boss, Security Under Attack (02-09-05)

  • Guest Opinion: LANL Workers Will Get Benefits (02-06-05)

  • Missing Journals Had Column Critical of LANL (02-05-05)

  • Lab Gets Funds To Go 'Medialess' (02-02-05)

  • Blog a Forum for LANL Workers (01-31-05)

  • Comments on Draft Lab Contract Go to Agency (01-30-05)

  • 'Missing LANL Disks Weren't (01-29-05)

  • Beryllium Found at Lab (01-21-05)

  • Lawmakers Echo LANL Employees' Concerns (01-25-05)

  • Regular Activities To Resume at LANL (01-22-05)

  • UC May Have LANL Bid Partner (01-21-05)

  • DOE Nominee Wants Lab Benefits To Stay (01-20-05)

  • Anti-Nuke Groups May Bid on LANL Contract (01-20-05)

  • LANL Workers Threaten Exodus (01-18-05)

  • Lab Employees Organize (01-18-05)

  • Lab Waste Flows Restricted (01-15-05)

  • Chancellor To Recommend UT Not Pursue Contract (01-14-05)

  • Shutdown Cost Review Sought (01-12-05)

  • Lab's Management Criteria Change (01-10-05)

  • LANL Impact Under DOE Review (01-08-05)

  • LANL May Lose Task to Sandia Labs (01-08-05)

  • More Time Given for Comments on Management Criteria (01-07-05)

  • FBI Completes Investigation of Missing Disks (01-07-05)

  • Bingaman Wants Comments Deadline Extended (01-06-05)

  • Lab Awards Nearly $800,000 in Contracts (01-02-05)

  • Lab's Nuke Waste Transfer on Track (12-27-04)

  • LANL Disputes DOE Report on Particle Accelerator (12-26-04)

  • Lab Facility's Future Uncertain With Move of Nukes (12-26-04)

  • Lab Managers Wanted Fraud Report Held, Official Says (10-16-04)

  • LANL Employees' Jobs Guaranteed (10-02-04)

  • Nanos Creating a Climate of Fear (08-11-04 guest commentary)

  • LANL Retirees Voice Anger, Anguish (08-08-04)

  • LANL Improvements Can't Wait (07-25-04 guest commentary)

  • LANL Restrictions Now Nationwide (07-24-04)

  • Lab Worker Aided FBI in Theft Case (05-30-04)

  • Scientist Wants To Rank LANL Waste (05-09-04)

  • Paying Too Much for a Bad Machine (04-18-04 guest commentary)

  • Lab's Temps To Go Permanent (03-17-04)

  • LANL's Nuke Site Standing Solidified (03-14-04)

  • Group: Suit Causes Labs To Cut Support (02-12-04)

  • Lab Says Spending Controlled (01-25-04)

  • LANL Losing Cleanup Funds (01-22-04)

  • LANL Needs To Face Reforms (01-18-04 guest commentary)

  • LANL Sued on Pay Rates (01-07-04)

  • DOE To Take Bids for LANL Contract (04-30-03)

  • LANL Zinged on Computer Security (04-29-03)

  • Gov., Senators Urge Delay of LANL-U.C. Decision (04-26-03)

  • Domenici Backs Bidding for LANL Contract (04-23-03)

  • DOE Slams Lab Report on 2001 Accident (03-26-03)

  • Ex-Lab Official Stunned by Move (03-25-03)

  • LANL Audits Chief Leaving (03-14-03)

  • LANL Officials Defend Firings (03-13-03)

  • LANL No 'Den of Thieves,' Ex-Official Says (03-13-03)

  • LANL Security Chief, Deputy To Leave Lab (03-11-03)

  • Several Lab Workers Say They Were Slandered in Testimony (03-08-03)

  • LANL Managers Brace for Congressional Grilling (03-07-03)

  • Keep UC Running LANL, Richardson Says (03-01-03)

  • LANL Deputy Did Not Resign (02-28-03)

  • Testimony on LANL Called Outrageous (02-27-03)

  • Clock Running Out for LANL (02-23-03)

  • Secret Witness To Be at LANL Hearing (02-20-03)

  • LANL Petitioners Support UC Management (02-19-03)

  • Lab Employees Want UC To Stay (02-15-03)

  • 96% of Lab Purchases Reconciled, UC Auditor Says (02-11-03)

  • 2 Get New LANL Jobs (02-06-03)

  • Lab Fraud Put U.S. at Risk, Officials Say

  • DOE Report Slams Lab Managers (01-31-03)

  • DOE Report on Lab Fair, Congressional Delegates Say (01-31-03)

  • DOE Calls Firing of Whistleblowers "Incomprehensible" (01-30-03)

  • DOE Denies Retribution in Suspension of LANL Nuke Safety Officer (01-30-03)

  • Lab Vendors Losing Sales (01-29-03)

  • LANL Wants To Gain Employees' Trust (01-28-03)

  • 2 LANL Workers To Stay in Jobs (01-25-03)

  • California Lab Faces Scrutiny Amid LANL Problems (01-24-03)

  • LANL Business Division Restructured (01-24-03)

  • Lab Boss Backs Rehiring Sleuths (01-21-03)

  • University Rehires LANL Sleuths (01-18-03)

  • LANL Says it May Have Lost Hard Drive (01-17-03)

  • LANL Boss To 'Drain the Swamp' (01-16-03)

  • LANL's Head of Audits Reassigned (01-11-03)

  • No Pay Cuts Came With Lab Demotions (01-10-03)

  • University of Calif. Names Lab Oversight VP (01-09-03)

  • LANL Security Managers Demoted (01-08-03)

  • 'Lab Could've Been Heroes,' Fired Security Worker Says (01-05-03)

  • Many LANL Purchases Unreconciled (01-04-03)

  • LANL Shakeup -- Top 2 Managers Quit (01-03-03)

  • Director's Tenure Was Turbulent (01-03-03)

  • LANL Changes Draw Congressional Reaction (01-02-03)

  • LANL Director Browne Resigns (01-02-03)

  • Text of John Browne's Resignation Letter (01-02-03)

  • U.S. Senator Sets Sights on LANL (12-12-02)

  • Lab E-Mail Backtracks Order To Provide Documents (12-12-02)

  • Lab Told To Clean Up Its Act (12-11-02)

  • LANL Wants Copies of Probe Papers (12-10-02)

  • U.S. House Latest To Probe LANL (12-09-02)

  • Tracking Lab Property Not Easy (12-08-02)

  • Labor Dept. Finds for Mid-'90s Lab Whistle-Blower (12-06-02)

  • Lab Says It's Out to Find Fraud (12-05-02)

  • Charges Not New to LANL (12-04-02)

  • University Won't 'Tolerate' LANL Theft (11-23-02)

  • Lab Staff Lax on Purchase Reports (11-22-02)

  • Another $723,000 in Items Missing (11-21-02)

  • DOE Team Arrives To Probe Lab Problems (11-19-02)

  • $3 Million of LANL Items 'Lost' (11-17-02)

  • Missing LANL Items High-Tech Devices (11-17-02)

  • LANL Official Announces Resignation (11-09-02)

  • LANL Probe Targets Workers (11-06-02)

  • Official LANL site


    More News military


  •           Front Page  news  military




    Scientist Says Nuke Warhead Isn't Reliable

    By John Fleck
    Journal Staff Writer
        Los Alamos nuclear weapon designers, in a fierce competition in the 1970s with rivals at Lawrence Livermore in California, cut corners in the design of a key U.S. weapon, leaving it unreliable today, according to a retired weapons physicist.
        The problem with the W76 submarine missile warhead has left the United States with a nuclear arsenal made up in significant part with weapons that could explode with far less force than intended, according to Richard Morse, who was a theoretical physicist at the lab at the time.
        "We're vulnerable as hell," Morse said.
        Officials at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the National Nuclear Security Administration, as well as independent nuclear weapons experts with access to classified nuclear test data, deny there is a problem with the W76.
        They say testing of the final W76 design, in some cases conducted after Morse left Los Alamos to serve on the faculty of the University of Arizona, show the design is sound.
        "It works," said retired Sandia National Laboratories vice president Bob Peurifoy, who served on a panel in the mid-'90s that reviewed test data on the W76 and other weapons in the U.S. nuclear stockpile. "The U.S. nuclear stockpile is healthy."
        The 69-year-old Morse has raised the issue in classified discussions within the nuclear weapons community for more than a year.
        He said in an interview this week that he decided to go public because he believes the government's unwillingness to address the issue threatens national security.
        The number of W76s in the U.S. nuclear stockpile is classified, but estimates by members of the arms control community suggest it is more than 2,000, more than any other nuclear weapon in the arsenal.
        If the problem Morse claims is real, it would appear to reduce the W76's ability to do the job for which it was designed— destroying fortified enemy missile silos.
        Morse, who holds the prestigious title of fellow in the American Physical Society, said he believes the only way to fix the problem is to remove the W76 from the U.S. nuclear stockpile and replace it on submarine missiles with a smaller number of W88 warheads, a more recent design that he said does not exhibit the same problem.
        Morse said the problem originated in a competition between Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory nuclear design teams to win the contract to design a new warhead for the U.S. Navy.
        Competition between the two labs in the past is legendary. Massachusetts Institute of Technology anthropologist Hugh Gusterson, who has studied lab culture, said a Livermore scientist once told him, "Remember the Russians are the competition, but Los Alamos is the enemy."
        The Navy in the mid-1970s needed a new warhead that was to be extremely light, so more of them could be carried aboard a single missile. To meet the goal, according to Morse, Los Alamos designers beat the Livermore team by making the weapon's radiation case extremely thin.
        Morse said the W76 was designed to have a yield equivalent to 100,000 tons of TNT, but actual performance is likely to be far less.
        Morse said the problem first showed up in underground nuclear test blasts as early as 1969. There were "many developmental tests" done to see if the type of lightweight design could be made to work, and "many if not most of these were not successful," Morse said in a written account of the issue provided to the Journal.
        Government officials defend the design. "The laboratory is very confident in the performance of the Los Alamos-designed W76," said lab spokesman Jim Danneskiold in a written statement.
        Danneskiold called the test record of the W76 "one of the most extensive of the weapon systems now in the US inventory."
        Anson Franklin, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, noted that the weapon's reliability has also been certified by Lawrence Livermore scientists.
        Morse contends that uncertainty about the W76 continued among weapons scientists well after the weapon was last tested in 1981. The scientists planned to conduct an additional underground test blast to resolve questions about thin case performance, but the test was canceled when the United States imposed a testing moratorium in 1992, according to Morse.
        Everet Beckner, deputy chief of the National Nuclear Security Administration's nuclear weapons program, acknowledged in a letter to Morse last fall that, if the problem is real, it has "national security implications for the United States."
        "When someone raises questions, we listen to them," Beckner said in an interview in July.
        Beckner said a classified meeting with Morse and other concerned scientists conducted in Los Alamos in March did nothing to change his conclusion that the W76 is sound.
        "No valid additional concerns were raised about the system to which there were not technical answers," Beckner said.