Download Locations:
Summary:
Most current U.S. nuclear warheads were built in the 1970s and 1980s and are being retained longer than was planned. Yet they deteriorate and must be maintained. To correct problems, a Life Extension Program (LEP) replaces components. Modifying some components would require a nuclear test, but a test moratorium is in effect. Therefore, LEP rebuilds these components as closely as possible to original specifications. Using this approach, the Secretaries of Defense and Energy have certified stockpile safety and reliability for the past 11 years without nuclear testing. In the FY2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress provided $9 million to initiate the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program. The program will study trading off key Cold War features such as high yield and low weight to gain features more valuable now, such as lower cost, greater ease of manufacture, and a further increase in use control. It plans to make these improvements by designing replacement warheads that would not add military capability. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which operates the U.S. nuclear weapons program, views RRW as part of a comprehensive plan that would also modernize the nuclear weapons complex (the Complex), avoid nuclear testing, and reduce non-deployed weapons. The Nuclear Weapons Council, a joint NNSA-Department of Defense organization that coordinates nuclear weapons matters, is conducting a competition for an RRW design; the winning design is likely to be selected in December 2006. The FY2006 appropriation was $25.0 million; the FY2007 request is $27.7 million; and the FY2008 request is $88.8 million for NNSA and $30.0 million for the Navy. NNSA argues that it will be increasingly difficult to certify current warheads using LEP because small changes will weaken the link to past nuclear tests, perhaps requiring nuclear testing, while RRW will lead to new-design replacement warheads that will be easier to manufacture and certify without nuclear testing. Critics believe LEP and related programs can maintain the stockpile indefinitely. They worry that RRWs, not having a nuclear test pedigree, may make a return to testing more likely. They question cost savings; even if RRW could lower operations and maintenance cost, its investment cost would be high. They note that there are no military requirements for new weapons. Still others feel that neither LEP nor RRW can provide high confidence over the long term, and would resume nuclear testing. Congress and the Administration, however, both prefer to avoid a return to testing. At issue for the 110th Congress is how best to maintain the nuclear stockpile indefinitely, whether to cancel RRW in favor of LEP or to continue RRW, and how to proceed in the latter case. This report provides background and tracks legislation. It will be updated frequently. CRS Report RL33748, Nuclear Warheads: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program and the Life Extension Program, by Jonathan Medalia, provides detailed analysis of these two programs and arguments for and against each.
