Fact Sheet: U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs

April 27, 2010.

Press Contact: Tom Z. Collina, Research Director, (202) 463-8270 x104.

Please click here for a chart of current modernization programs.

The United States military maintains a modern arsenal of over 2,000 strategic nuclear warheads deployed on Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs), Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs), and Strategic Bombers. The Departments of Defense and Energy currently spend approximately $30 billion per year to maintain and upgrade these systems.ⁱ

For Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, the Obama administration is requesting $7 billion, a 10 percent increase, in funding for weapons activities in the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which oversees the U.S. nuclear stockpile and production complex. ⁱⁱ The administration plans to spend an additional $5 billion on NNSA nuclear weapons activities over the next five years.

The U.S. military is in the process of rebuilding, or modernizing, most of its existing strategic delivery systems and the warheads they carry to last for the next 20-30 years or more. These systems are in many cases being completely rebuilt with essentially all new parts, although they are not technically “new” systems. This distinction between “rebuilt” and “new” has led some to reach the mistaken conclusion that the U.S. strategic weapon systems are not being “modernized.”

For example, in a Dec. 15, 2009 letter to President Barack Obama, a group of 40 Republican Senators and one Independent stated that “we don’t believe further [nuclear arsenal] reductions can be in the national security interest of the U.S. in the absence of a significant program to modernize our nuclear deterrent.”ⁱⁱⁱ

The FY 2010 Defense Authorization Bill (Section 1251) requires the Obama administration to submit a report to congress when the New START treaty is submitted (expected early May) on administration plans to "enhance the safety, security, and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile of the United States; modernize the nuclear weapons complex; and maintain the delivery platforms for nuclear weapons."

As this fact sheet demonstrates, the United States already has, as the 41 Senators put it, "a significant program to modernize our nuclear deterrent." A robust program to enhance the U.S. nuclear stockpile, modernize the weapons complex, and maintain delivery systems is well underway, including:

• Enhanced Nuclear Warheads: The U.S. stockpile of nuclear warheads and bombs is continually refurbished through NNSA’s Life Extension Program (LEP). Existing warheads are certified annually to be safe and reliable. The JASON panel of independent scientists recently found “no evidence” that extending the lives of existing U.S. nuclear warheads would lead to reduced confidence that the weapons will work. The panel concluded in its September 2009 report that “Lifetimes of today's nuclear warheads could be extended for decades, with no anticipated loss in confidence.”^iv Defense Secretary Gates wrote April 6 that the NNSA budget increases and the LEP "represent a credible modernization plan necessary to sustain the nuclear infrastructure and support our nation's deterrent." The United States does not need to resume nuclear test explosions, nor does it need to build new “replacement” warhead designs to maintain the reliability and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear stockpile.
• Modernized Production Complex: The nuclear weapons production complex is being modernized as well, with new facilities planned and funded. The FY 2011 NNSA budget request includes large increases for the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) plutonium facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, N.M., which would see its budget increased from $97 million in FY 2010 to $225 million in FY 2011. The Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) at Oak Ridge, Tenn., would increase from $94 million to $115 million.
• Maintained Strategic Delivery Systems: U.S. nuclear delivery systems are undergoing continual modernization, including complete rebuilds of the Minuteman III ICBM and Trident II SLBM. The service lives of Trident Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines are being extended. Additionally, a new submarine, the SSBN-X, is undergoing development in an effort that is expected to cost $85 billion. The B-2 strategic bomber, a relatively new system, is being upgraded, as is the B-52H bomber. The Air Force is also planning to replace the Air-Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM).

The following is a status update of existing programs to enhance the nuclear stockpile and maintain the delivery systems that make up each element of the U.S. nuclear triad:

1. Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs)

The United States Air Force currently deploys 450 Minuteman III ICBMs located at F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyo.; Malmstrom AFB, Mont.; and Minot AFB, N.D.

Today's Minuteman weapon system is the product of almost 40 years of continuous enhancement. A seven billion-dollar life extension program is underway to keep the ICBMs safe, secure and reliable through 2020, and Air Force Gen. Kevin Chilton, head of U.S. Strategic Command, has said Minuteman III can serve until 2030.^v This program includes: remanufacture of all three solid-propellant rocket motors; replacement of standby power systems; repair of launch facilities; and installation of updated, survivable communications equipment and additional security enhancements. The modernization program has resulted in an essentially “new” missile, expanded targeting options, and improved accuracy and survivability. The Air Force is currently exploring whether to extend life service of the Minuteman III missile to 2050 or to field a new system.

The Air Force is also upgrading the Minuteman’s nuclear warheads by partially replacing older W78 warheads with newer and more powerful W87 warheads, formerly deployed on the now-retired MX Peacekeeper ICBMs. The W87 entered the U.S. stockpile in 1986, making it one of the newest warheads in the arsenal with the most modern safety and security features, including insensitive high explosive and a fire-resistant pit design, which can help to minimize the possibility of plutonium dispersal in the event of an accident. Under the 2004 LEP, the W87 warhead was refurbished to extend its service life past 2025, and NNSA is requesting $63 million for additional work on this warhead in FY 2011.

There is no evidence to suggest that the W87—or any current U.S. nuclear warhead, for that matter,—cannot be refurbished indefinitely. The Air Force and Navy are also exploring a joint LEP to field a common, refurbished warhead to replace the W78 and W88 (see SLBMs, below).vi NNSA is requesting $26 million for a W78 LEP study in FY 2011 and almost $1 billion over the next five years.

2. Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs) and Submarines

The United States Navy currently deploys 288 Trident D5 SLBMs on 14 Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) located at Bangor, Wash.; Kings Bay, Ga.; and at sea.

The Ohio-class SSBNs were first deployed in 1981. The Navy plans to replace them starting in 2027 with a new class of ballistic missile submarine, tentatively known as SSBN-X.^vii For FY 2011-2015, the budget projection for SSBN-X research and development is $3.7 billion. The Navy ultimately wants 12 boats at a cost of about $7 billion each, for a total cost of about $85 billion.^viii

Each Trident submarine serves as a launch platform for up to 24 SLBMs carrying up to eight warheads each. First deployed in 1990, the force of Trident II D5 missiles has been routinely tested and evaluated. It is currently being modernized to last until 2042.^ix The Trident II D5 LEP is underway to modernize key components, notably the electronics. The FY 2011 budget request for the D5 Missile LEP is $1.1 billion. In 2008, 12 life-extended variants of the D5 were purchased; 24 D5s will be produced each year through 2012 for a total of 108 missiles at a total cost of $15 billion. The first modified D5s are scheduled for deployment in 2013, and the new missiles will arm SSBNs through 2042.

The D5 SLBMs are armed with approximately 768 W76 and 384 W88 warheads. In 2009, NNSA began delivery of the W76-1, a refurbished version of the W76 that extends its service life for additional 30 years. According to NNSA, the W76 LEP is refurbishing the nuclear explosive package, the arming, firing, and fusing system, the gas transfer system, and associated cables, elastomers, valves, pads, cushions, foam supports, telemetries, and other miscellaneous parts.^x This $4 billion-program will run through 2021, delivering up to 2,000 W76-1 warheads.^xi NNSA has requested $249 million for FY 2011 and more than $1.2 billion over the next five years.

The W88 entered the stockpile in 1989, making it the newest warhead in the arsenal, and NNSA is requesting $46 million for work on the W88 in FY 2011. The W88 was the last U.S. warhead produced before the Rocky Flats Plants--which made plutonium “pits”-- was shut down in 1989. NNSA re-established pit production capacity at Los Alamos National Laboratory with the first “certifiable” pit in 2003, and new production resumed in 2007.^xii A new plutonium research and pit production facility, the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR), is planned for Los Alamos. NNSA is requesting $255 million for CMRR in FY 2011a nd plans to complete construction in 2022. The facility will enable it to produce 50-80 pits per year.

With the rebuilt Trident D5 missile in service to 2042, the W76-1's life extended to 2040-50, the relatively new W88 in service, and a new class of SSBNs delivered around 2025 and lasting to 2070, the U.S. Navy’s Trident Fleet will be kept robust and modern well into the 21st century.

3. Strategic Bombers

The United States Air Force currently deploys 18 B-2 Spirit bombers at Whiteman AFB, Mo., and 76 B-52H bombers at Minot AFB, N.D. and Barksdale AFB, La, that can be equipped for nuclear missions.

The Air Force continually modernizes the B-2 fleet, first operational in 1997, and according to the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) the Pentagon will invest over $1 billion over the next five years on upgrades to its survivability and "mission effectiveness." The B-2 carries the B61-7, B61-11 and B83 strategic bombs. The NNSA’s Life Extension Program recently extended the life of the B61-7 and B61-11 for an additional 20 years by refurbishing the bomb’s secondary stage (canned subassembly) and replacing the associated seals, foam supports, cables and connectors, washers, o-rings, and limited life components. A more extensive B61 LEP will be studied, for which NNSA is requesting $252 million in FY 2011 and almost $2 billion over the next five years. The B83 was first produced in 1983, making it one of the newest weapons in the stockpile. The B83 has the most modern safety and security features, including insensitive high explosive and a fire-resistant pit. NNSA is requesting $39 million for work on the B83 in FY 2011.

The B-52H fleet, first deployed in 1961, has an on-going modification program, incorporating the global positioning system, heavy stores adapter beams, and a full array of advance weapons. Current initiatives also include installing the 1760 bus for increased smart weapon capability as well as implementing the Strategic Radar Replacement and the Extremely High Frequency programs.^xiv The NPR states that some B-52Hs will be converted to a conventional-only role.

The B-52H carries the air-launched cruise missile (ALCM), first deployed in 1981. A LEP is in place to extend ALCM to 2030.^xv The Air Force plans to spend $1.3 billion on a new ACLM (the so-called Long-Range Stand-Off Vehicle) that will replace the current ALCM by 2030. In FY 2011, $3.63 million was requested to complete the ongoing technical studies.^xvi Each ALCM carries a W80-1 warhead, first produced in 1982. NNSA is requesting $34 million for work on the W80 in FY 2011.

Additionally, the FY 2011 budget request and five-year defense plan includes funding for a new generation long-range bomber, to be developed by 2018. It is still unclear whether the bomber will be nuclear-capable. The Air Force expects to fund the new bomber at nearly $200 million in FY 2011, with program expenditures totaling $1.7 billion through 2015.^xvii The program is likely to cost at least $10 billion in development costs alone.^xviii

U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs

---

Research assistance provided by Volha Charnysh, New Voices Nonproliferation Fellow

ENDNOTES

i The Departments of Defense and Energy spent $29.093 billion on nuclear forces in FY2008. Stephen I. Schwartz and Deepti Choubey, “Nuclear Security Spending: Assessing Costs, Examining Priorities,” Carnegie Endowment Report, January 2009, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/?fa=view&id=22601.

ii Summary of the DoD Fiscal 2011 Budget Proposal, Feb. 1, 2010, http://www.defense.gov/news/FINAL%20PRESS%20RELEASE%20v3%20%201.pdf.

iii Letter to President Barack Obama, Dec. 15, 2009.

iv Lifetime Extension Program (LEP) Executive Summary, JSR-09-334E, The MITRE Corp., JASON Program Office, September 9, 2009, p. 2.

v Kevin P. Chilton, Statement Before The House Committee On Armed Services, Subcommittee On Strategic Forces, Mar. 16, 2010, http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/StratForces031610/Chilton_Testimony.pdf. Also see “Many More Minutes,” Air Force Magazine, November 17, 2009, http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Features/modernization/Pages/box111609minutes.aspx.

vi Elaine M. Grossman, “Pentagon Eyes Shared Modernization Package for Navy, Air Force Warheads,” Global Security Newswire, December 24, 2009, http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20091224_5161.php.

vii Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen, “Nuclear Notebook: US nuclear forces, 2009,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March/April 2009, p. 64, www.thebulletin.org/files/065002008.pdf.

viii Kingston Reif, “Nuclear weapons: The modernization myth,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Web Edition, December 8, 2009, http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/nuclear-weapons-the-modernization-myth.

ix Dana J. Johnson, Christopher J. Bowie, and Robert P. Haffa, “Triad, Dyad, Monad? Shaping the US Nuclear Force for the Future,” Mitchell Institute for Airpower Studies, December 2009, p. 18.

x National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), “Life Extension Programs,” http://nnsa.energy.gov/defense_programs/life_extension_programs.htm.

xi Report to Congress on Annual Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels for FY 2011.” Director, Warfare Integration (OPNAV N8F), Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, February 2010, http://www.militarytimes.com/static/projects/pages/2011shipbuilding.pdf.

xii Los Alamos Study Group, “Plutonium Pit Production — LANL's Pivotal New Mission,” http://www.lasg.org/campaigns/PUPitProd.htm.

xiii US Air Force, Fiscal Year 2010 Air Force Posture Statement, May 19, 2009, http://www.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090522-062.pdf.

xiv US Air Force, “B-52 Stratofortress,” October 2009, http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=83.

xv Dana J. Johnson, Christopher J. Bowie, and Robert P. Haffa, “Triad, Dyad, Monad? Shaping the US Nuclear Force for the Future,” Mitchell Institute for Airpower Studies, December 2009, p. 18.

xvi Elaine M. Grossman, “Pentagon Eyes More Than $800 Million for New Nuclear Cruise Missile,” Global Security Newswire, March 9, 2010, http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/nw_20100309_8124.php.

xvii Summary of the DoD Fiscal 2011 Budget Proposal.

xviii Global Security Newswire, “Pentagon Could Seek Funding for New Bomber,” December 18, 2009, http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20091218_7525.php.