|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
NNSA Chief Outlines Schedule for Nuclear Goals
U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration chief Linton Brooks last week outlined several timelines for various activities related to adapting the U.S. nuclear arsenal to meet “new or emerging threats” or to repair design or maintenance problems should they occur (see GSN, March 23). In testimony before a Senate Armed Services subcommittee, Brooks said the agency hopes to be able to modify and deploy warheads found with “relatively minor” problems found in the U.S. nuclear stockpile within one year. He also described for the committee the office’s goals in preparing to adapt or begin initial production of nuclear weapons should Congress choose to do so. According to Brooks, the agency plans to achieve a capability to modify existing nuclear weapons within 18 months of approval; and to be able to design and begin initial production of a new warhead within three to four years of a congressional decision to do so. “While there are no current plans to develop new weapons, maintaining the capability is an important prerequisite to extensive reductions,” Brooks said. While there are also no plans to resume nuclear weapons testing, the agency is working to improve test readiness as “a prudent hedge” against possible stockpile problems that cannot be solved without testing, Brooks told the Strategic Forces Subcommittee. As a result, the department is working to achieve an 18-month underground “test readiness posture as directed by the Defense Authorization Act,” he said. Another NNSA goal is to “maintain sufficient production capacity to produce new warheads” without disrupting the refurbishing of existing nuclear weapons, Brooks said. He added that refurbishment demands are likely to “dominate” production capabilities until 2014. Brooks also said that it was “essential” to develop the Modern Pit Facility to produce plutonium triggers for nuclear weapons. Such triggers, also known as “pits” are necessary even if the United States “never produced another new weapon” because of the need to replace existing pits lost to aging, he said (U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee release, March 24).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
