Efforts to more uniformly manage protective forces have focused on either reforming the current contracting approach or creating a federal protective force (federalization). Either approach might provide for managing protective forces more uniformly and could result in effective security if well-managed. Although DOE rejected federalization as an option in 2009 because it believed that the transition would be costly and would yield little, if any, increase in security effectiveness, the department recognized that the current contracting approach could be improved by greater standardization and by addressing personnel system issues.
*****
So why is it that we federalize airport security, yet privatize nuclear security? I think this GAO report pretty much answers that question as to what direction they think security should go for nuclear facilities. The folks at DoE and GAO probably had visions of TSA style security as soon as someone brought up the federalization of nuclear facilities, and that probably shut down the idea right then and there. lol
Any way, I thought they had some interesting conclusions in the report. Harden up the forces and make them more like the military (training and such), provide one set of standards and pay for all the sites (no brainer there), and insure the contractors are getting taken care of for retirement stuff (so they have incentive to do well, and stay with the program). Sounds good, and I hope this is implemented. –Matt
—————————————————————-
Nuclear Security: DOE Needs to Address Protective Forces’ Personnel System Issues
GAO-10-275 January 29, 2010
Summary
The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks raised concerns about the security of Department of Energy’s (DOE) sites with weapons-grade nuclear material, known as Category I Special Nuclear Material (SNM). To better protect these sites against attacks, DOE has sought to transform its protective forces protecting SNM into a Tactical Response Force (TRF) with training and capabilities similar to the U.S. military. DOE also has considered whether the current system of separate contracts for protective forces at each site provides sufficiently uniform, high-quality performance across its sites. Section 3124 of PL 110-181, the fiscal year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, directed GAO to review protective forces at DOE sites that possess Category I SNM. Among other things, GAO (1) analyzed information on the management and compensation of protective forces, (2) examined the implementation of TRF, and (3) assessed DOE’s two options to more uniformly manage DOE protective forces.