U.S. is planning to build more nuclear weapons, and conduct underground testings in violation of the Comprehensive nuclear Test Ban Treaty
Arash
April 15, 2006
U.S. Prepares to Overhaul Arsenal of Nuclear Warheads
By Walter Pincus
By the end of the year, the U.S. government plans to select the design of a new
generation of nuclear warheads that would be more dependable and possibly able to be
disarmed in the event they fell into terrorist hands, according to the head of the
National Nuclear Security Administration
(http://www.nnsa.doe.gov/lintonfbrooksbio.htm).
The new nuclear warheads would be based on nuclear technology that has already been
tested, which means they could be produced more than a decade from now to gradually
replace at lower numbers the existing U.S. stockpile of about 6000 warheads without
additional underground testing, said Linton F. Brooks
(http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1056), administrator of the NNSA, which
oversees the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, and other government officials.
The nuclear warhead redesign is part of a larger, multibillion-dollar program to
refurbish the nation's nuclear-weapons stockpile and to consolidate nuclear plants
and facilities in nearly a dozen states, including California, Florida, Texas,
Tennessee and New Mexico.
The next-generation nuclear warheads will be larger and more stable than the existing
ones but slightly less powerful, according to government officials. They might
contain "use controls" that would enable the military to disable the weapons by
remote control if they are stolen by terrorists.
Linton Brooks said in an interview Thursday that, by November, his agency will choose
between two competing designs submitted by teams at the Los Alamos
(http://www.lanl.gov) and Lawrence Livermore (http://www.llnl.gov) national
laboratories.
Linton Brooks said the November timetable for the submission of the design plans
would give his agency time to develop preliminary cost estimates that could be
included in the administration's fiscal 2008 budget, to be submitted to Congress
early next year.
The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program (http://www.nukewatch.org/facts/), as it is
called, was first proposed two years ago by Representative David L. Hobson (R-Ohio).
It has been adopted as part of a major restructuring of the U.S. nuclear weapons
complex being proposed by the Bush administration in light of the findings of its
2002 Nuclear Posture Review, NPR-2000 (http://www.wslfweb.org/nukes/npr.htm).
The new warheads envisioned as part of the RRW are expected to be larger and heavier
than those now deployed and in reserve, which originated from the Cold War years,
when they needed to be light but still carry the maximum explosive yield for knocking
out reinforced Soviet missile silos, submarine pens and underground command posts.
But this is just the beginning of a decades-long process of replacing the stockpile
with smaller warheads. Even if the government meets its year-end deadline for
choosing a feasible design for engineering development and production, Congress will
still have to debate and approve the choice. After that, it would probably take
almost 10 more years before the first new warheads appeared.
Though most U.S. nuclear weapons contain permissive action links, or "PALS", which
need to be activated before they can be used, Linton Brooks said that technological
advances might provide security measures that are far superior.
"We want them to take advantage of 'use control' and are looking forward to get those
designs", Brooks said. But he declined to discuss details.
Last week, Thomas P. D'Agostino, the NNSA's new deputy administrator for defense
programs, told a House Armed Services subcommittee that the government has already
added a number of safety features that would disarm a missile warhead in the event of
a theft.
"If somebody should happen to lose control of a weapon itself, it would essentially
not be a weapon because of the types of technology features we've inserted",
D'Agostino said.
Officials say that plans for consolidating and downsizing nuclear weapons plants
throughout the country are long overdue. Many of the buildings used for developing
and assembling the weapons are almost 50 years old.
At the same time, there are plans to reduce the nuclear stockpile by as much as
half -- to 3000 or 4000 warheads -- by 2012.
The competition between Los Alamos and Livermore replicates what happened beginning
in the 1950s as each laboratory developed different nuclear warheads for the Air
Force, the Navy and the Army. "The process is providing a unique opportunity to train
the next generation of nuclear weapons designers and engineers", D'Agostino said last
week.
During the Cold War years, from the 1960s through the 1980s, the U.S. nuclear weapons
complex constantly designed, developed, produced and tested different warheads
depending on military needs, D'Agostino said.
Beginning in the 1990s, as the Cold War ended and a test ban pact between the United
States and the Soviet Union was reached, a decision was made to halt U.S. development
of new warheads and, instead, to shift to supervising the already enormous stockpile,
to make sure that those deployed were still reliable and to begin dismantling those
that were no longer needed.
The notion at that time, during the administrations of Presidents George H.W. Bush
and Bill Clinton, was that the stockpile would go through a life-extension process
every 20 to 30 years. The current Bush administration's Nuclear Posture Review
changed that.
Instead of just extending the life of older nuclear warheads with new but similar
parts, the aim now is to make totally new components that are more robust, easier to
manufacture, safer and more secure, while at the same time not requiring new
underground testing [in violation of the Comprehensive nuclear Test Ban Treaty
(http://www.ctbto.org)].
By constantly upgrading the parts, D'Agostino said, a second goal will be
accomplished. By 2030, he said, the "weapons design community that was revitalized by
the RRW program will be able to adapt an existing weapon within 18 months, and
design, develop and begin production of a new design within four years of a decision
to enter engineering development".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401705_pf.html
Related article:
--------------------
NNSA official lays out the future of the nuclear weapons complex
http://www.nnsa.doe.gov/docs/newsreleases/2006/PR_2006-04-05_NA-06-09.htm
Statement of D’Agostino, before the House Armed Services Strategic Forces
Subcommittee
http://www.nnsa.doe.gov/docs/congressional/2006/2006-04-05_HASC_Transformation_Hearing_Statement_(DAgostino).pdf
[PDF-45KB]
The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
http://www.ctbto.org
The Text of the Treaty (CTBT)
http://www.ctbto.org/treaty/treatytext.tt.html
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty / Test Moratorium
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/ctbt/
Photos: Krakatau nuclear test
http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/photos/subcritical.aspx
Video: Krakatau nuclear test
http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/films/other.aspx?ID=152
Gallery of U.S. Nuclear Tests
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/
Nevada Nuclear Test Site
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/facility/nts.htm
Ballistic Submarines (SSBN)
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server.php?show=nav.2420
Trident D-5 Ballistic Missile
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/d-5.htm
British nuclear policy
http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/UK_Policy/main.htm
The Current British Arsenal
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/UKArsenalRecent.html
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (UK)
http://www.cnduk.org
U.S. nuclear forces, 2006
http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=jf06norris
British nuclear forces, 2005
http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=nd05norris
Background on US-UK nuclear weapons collaboration under the Mutual Defence Agreement
http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/MDAReport.pdf
Background on the CTBT, a resource page from BASIC
http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/CTBT/main.htm
“Does the U.S. Science-Based Stockpile Stewardship Program Pose a Proliferation
Threat?”, in-depth article by the Natural Resources Defense Council, 1998.
http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/athreat.asp
U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground: Basin for Bio-testing
http://www.greens.org/s-r/34/34-05.html
Dig Up Dugway
http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/dud/index.html
Dugway Proving Ground conducted nine open-air experiments on hazards of M-55
disposal, decontamination operations nerve agents GB and VX.
http://home.comcast.net/~kknowlto/testlist.htm
U.S. nerve gas leak 1968
http://lists.jammed.com/IWAR/1998/01/0004.html
Skull Valley chemical leak in 1968 from the Dugway base
http://www.geocities.com/cbellnt/skullvalley.html
Family hopes story will stop dangerous tests
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,590045514,00.html
Nevada tests worry Utahns
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595065623,00.html
Bills could restrict information access
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635180035,00.html
Is U.S. Preparing to Break Out of the Nuclear Weapons Testing Moratorium?
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0630-03.htm
Chemical Weapons Testing Created Controversy at Dugway
http://historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/utah_today/chemicalweaponscreatedcontroversyatdugway.html
Anthrax Letters: Made in the USA
http://rwor.org/a/v23/1140-1147/1145/anthrax%201145.htm
Nerve agents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent
Britain's secret nuclear blueprint
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/fa33b3845ed79be0
U.S. and Britain conducted the 22nd underground nuclear explosion, in full violation
of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/151341cfb6372100
Britain participated in the U.S. underground nuclear explosion in violation of the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.iranian/msg/303e9d2f711b924f