RL32929
The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program: Background and Current Developments
September 18, 2007

Download Locations:

Federation of American Scientists

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), part of a larger Stockpile Stewardship Program (SSP), replaces components. Modifying some components would require a nuclear test, but the United States has observed a test moratorium since 1992, because Congress and the Administration prefer to avoid a return to testing, so LEP rebuilds these components as closely as possible to original specifications. With this approach, the Secretaries of Defense and Energy have certified stockpile safety and reliability for the past 11 years without nuclear testing. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) operates the nuclear weapons program; it sees RRW as part of a plan that would also modernize the nuclear weapons complex, avoid nuclear testing, and reduce non-deployed weapons. For FY2005, Congress provided $9.0 million, which was not requested, to start the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program. In action on subsequent requests, the FY2006 RRW appropriation was $24.8 million, the FY2007 operating plan has $35.8 million, and the FY2008 request is $88.8 million for NNSA and $30.0 million for the Navy. H.R. 1585, the FY2008 defense authorization bill, as passed by the House, reduces NNSA's request by $20.0 million and the Navy request by $25.0 million. As passed by the House, H.R. 2641, the FY2008 energy-water appropriations bill, and H.R. 3222, the FY2008 defense appropriations bill, zeroed NNSA and Navy RRW funds, respectively. The Senate Armed Services Committee recommended reducing the Navy RRW request by $15.0 million. It said NNSA's RRW request included $238.1 million, and recommended reducing that by $43.0 million. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended reducing NNSA's request by $22.8 million in S. 1751, the energy-water bill, and reducing the Navy request by $15.0 million in H.R. 3222, the defense bill. Several committees would keep RRW in Phase 2A (design definition and cost study) in FY2008. NNSA argues it will become harder to certify current warheads with LEP because small changes may undermine confidence in warheads, perhaps leading to nuclear testing, whereas new-design replacement warheads created by the RRW program will be easier to certify without testing. Critics believe LEP and SSP can maintain the stockpile indefinitely. They worry that untested RRWs may make testing more likely and question cost savings, given high investment cost. They note that there are no military requirements for new weapons. Others feel that neither LEP nor RRW can provide high confidence over the long term, and would resume testing. Another point of view is that either LEP or RRW will work without nuclear testing. Issues facing the 110th Congress include how best to maintain the nuclear stockpile, whether to continue RRW or cancel it in favor of LEP, and how RRW might link to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and nuclear nonproliferation. This report provides background and tracks legislation. It will be updated often. CRS Report RL33748, Nuclear Warheads: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program and the Life Extension Program, compares these two programs in detail.