6-27-07

Mr. William Ostendorff                                                                                                            

Principal Deputy Administrator for National Nuclear Security

1000 Independence Ave. S.W.

Washington, DC 20585

Mr. Ostendorff,

The retirement and career path issue for DOE protective forces mandated to meet 10 CFR 1046 physical and medical standards will always be a major problem until it is finally addressed. When DOE mandates protective force personnel to meet medical and fitness standards whether offensive or defensive a clear career path to include reasonable retirements must be in place. I have worked for over a decade to try and implement such a structure. To support such a structure DOE also needs Federal Law Enforcement elements like age entry and exit controls. Continuity of operations to allow a constant stable work force. We placed the cart before the horse and hoped that the contractors could make it work. Time eventually ran out and our protective force structure, morale, investment, has collapsed. It forced Labor to pursue aggressive avenues like Federalization to resolve the problem.

The House and Senate Armed Services Committees have requested sec. 3124 a general report in the Defense Authorization Bill. This report will provide congress the necessary data to make a decision on what avenues it must take to hopefully resolve problems in the DOE protective force structure. The one main ingredient that I see missing is Labor and DOE cooperative collective effort resolution. We discussed on a telephone conversation a possible national plan to resolve this obviously fractured pro force current model. The main elements I identified were a national pension plan to be applied to all DOE protective force officers mandated to meet DOE 10 CFR medical and fitness requirements. These standards are necessary if we are to be successful in protecting national defense resources. But not without a career path program. The only road map we have in comparative industry to follow is the Federal Law Enforcement model. The majority of Federal Law Enforcement Agencies do not meet the DOE stringent physical and medical standards. But certainly their model supports their mission much more successfully than the current DOE protective force structure. The NCSP retirement committee extracted items from the federal almanac those portions that support the type of Protective Force product DOE requires.  In a nutshell the basic ingredients necessary are a reasonable pension multiplier with a cola associated with it, entry age and exit controls. Retirement medical benefits and disability coverage's for personnel injured during their careers

 The NCSP is simply requesting a parity of benefits from the federal law enforcement sector that Mr. Podonsky speaking on behalf of the Secretary stated in a letter to me was possible. If DOE and Labor can work collectively with Congress to make this a reality without federalization we will support that process. I can speak with confidence it cannot be accomplished at the bargaining table not at Pantex anyway. The general report requested by congress will hopefully provide the data necessary to make the appropriate decision. We will need congressional support regardless of the final outcome. Timelines are critical our nation's enemies have not demonstrated any willingness for restraint.

In closing the other significant issue that must be corrected immediately is DOE and contractor interface. Multiple security degradations have been identified by the IG at many DOE sites to include Pantex. DOE spends tremendous amounts of money in award fees to contractors to ensure DOE security compliance. The Department of Energy is not getting their bang for their buck to say the least. The Dept. of Energy has to become more effective in providing oversight and enforcement control. Podonsky's independent oversight will never be successful unless his scope of operation is broadened  to include aggressive enforcement. Yourself, Secretary Bodman, Bill Desmond and Congress deserve much more than they are getting from the contractor. The NCSP will help assist the Dept of Energy to be successful in anyway possible to produce the best security our nation demands. We must however support and work together.

Sincerely,

Mike Stumbo

NCSP President