Homeland Security Digital Library

Homeland Security Digital Library

SEARCH THE HSDL

Advanced search Help

Searching for terms: EXACT: "Medalia, Jonathan E." in: author

Set an Alert to get future results

Results 1 - 30 (of 143) sorted by relevance sort by date

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated June 10, 2005]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; the last U.K. test, in 1991. Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991. Since 1997, the United States has held 21 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site, most recently on May 25, 2004, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia has reportedly held some since 1998, including several in 2000. In May 1998, India and Pakistan each announced several nuclear tests and declared themselves nuclear weapons states. Each declared a moratorium on further tests, but separately stated, in the summer of 2000, that the time was not right to sign the CTBT. […] Congress continues to consider the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2005-06-10
In Brief: U.S. Nuclear Weapon "Pit" Production: Background and Options [March 20, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"Congress is involved in the long-running and costly decision regarding the future production of 'pits'; a pit is a nuclear weapon's plutonium core. […] U.S. policy is to maintain existing nuclear weapons. To do this, the Department of Defense has stated that it needs DOE to have the capacity to produce 50-80 ppy [pits per year] by 2030. This report focuses on options to reach 80 ppy. A separate debate, not discussed here, is the validity of the requirement; a lower capacity would be simpler and less costly to attain. Pit production requires many tasks, but this report focuses on two: pit fabrication, which forms plutonium into precise shapes, and analytical chemistry (AC), which monitors the composition of each pit. Any feasible option requires sufficient 'space' (laboratory floor space) and 'Material At Risk' (MAR) allowance. Each building for plutonium work is permitted a specified amount of MAR, i.e., radioactive material (adjusted for radioactivity) that could be released by an event like an earthquake. […] This report shows that many options are available for making 80 ppy, but it cannot determine which, if any, could support that capacity because data do not exist on how much MAR and space are needed for AC and pit fabrication for 80 ppy. Likewise, there are little to no data on cost. However, the report raises questions that Congress may wish to have answered in order to decide how to proceed."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2014-03-20
U.S. Nuclear Weapon 'Pit' Production Options for Congress [February 21, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A 'pit' is the plutonium core of a nuclear weapon. Until 1989, the Rocky Flats Plant (CO) mass-produced pits. Since then, the United States has made at most 11 pits per year (ppy). U.S. policy is to maintain existing nuclear weapons. To do this, the Department of Defense states that it needs the Department of Energy (DOE), which maintains U.S. nuclear weapons, to produce 50-80 ppy by 2030. While some argue that few if any new pits are needed, at least for decades, this report focuses on options to reach 80 ppy. Pit production involves precisely forming plutonium--a hazardous, radioactive, physically quirky metal. Production requires supporting tasks, such as analytical chemistry (AC), which monitors the chemical composition of plutonium in each pit. With Rocky Flats closed, DOE established a small-scale pit manufacturing capability at PF-4, a building at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). DOE also proposed higher-capacity facilities; none came to fruition. In 2005, Congress rejected the Modern Pit Facility, viewing as excessive the capacity range DOE studied, 125-450 ppy. In 2012, the Administration 'deferred' construction of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Nuclear Facility (CMRRNF) on grounds of availability of interim alternatives and affordability."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2014-02-21
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [September 29, 2014]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, but there were no hearings on the treaty in the 111th or 112th Congresses, or so far in the 113th. As of September 2014, 183 states had signed the CTBT and 163, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. Eight conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently on September 27, 2013."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2014-09-29
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [December 7, 2011]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit but do not ban such tests. In 1996, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, but there have been no hearings on the treaty in the 111th or 112th Congresses. As of December 2011, 182 states had signed the CTBT and 156, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. Seven conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently on September 23, 2011. […] This report will be updated occasionally. This version reflects Indonesia's ratification of the treaty on December 6, 2011, and makes other updates throughout. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL34394, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments', by Jonathan Medalia, presents CTBT pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated 'Safeguards' and Net Assessments', by Jonathan Medalia, discusses safeguards-- unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties--and their relationship to the CTBT. CRS Report R41908, 'Energy and Water Development: FY2012 Appropriations', coordinated by Carl E. Behrens, provides details on stockpile stewardship."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2011-12-07
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [August 3, 2011]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit but do not ban such tests. In 1996, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, but there have been no hearings on the treaty in the 111th or 112th Congresses. As of August 2011, 182 states had signed the CTBT and 154, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 35 had ratified. Five conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently in 2009; another is scheduled for September 2011. […] This report will be updated occasionally. This version makes updates throughout. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL34394, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments', by Jonathan Medalia, presents CTBT pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated 'Safeguards' and Net Assessments', by Jonathan Medalia, discusses safeguards--unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties--and their relationship to the CTBT."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2011-08-03
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 C.F.R. 37, A New Rule to Protect Radioactive Material: Background, Summary, Views from the Field [December 14, 2012]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"This report analyzes 10 C.F.R. 37, a forthcoming rule promulgated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), 'Physical Protection of Byproduct Material.' 'Byproduct material' includes specified types of radioactive material other than uranium or plutonium. The rule regulates byproduct material of types and in quantities that could be used to make a 'dirty bomb.' Congress may find this analysis of interest for several reasons: Congress attaches great importance to protecting the United States against terrorist threats; the rule will affect the many industrial, research, and medical activities nationwide that use radioactive materials, thereby affecting many constituents and raising cost-benefit issues; and there is wide concern about regulation and radiation more generally."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2012-12-14
Comprehensive Nuclear- Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [August 3, 2012]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations (U.N.) General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, but there have been no hearings on the treaty in the 111th or 112th Congresses. As of July 2012, 183 states had signed the CTBT and 157, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. Seven conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently on September 23, 2011. […] This report will be updated occasionally. This version reflects the FY2013 budget request, a 2012 study claiming North Korea may have conducted nuclear tests in 2010, and a March 2012 report by the National Research Council on the treaty, and makes other updates. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL34394, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments', by Jonathan Medalia, presents CTBT pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated 'Safeguards' and Net Assessments', by Jonathan Medalia, discusses safeguards-- unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties--and their relationship to the CTBT. CRS Report R42498, 'Energy and Water Development: FY2013 Appropriations', coordinated by Carl E. Behrens, provides details on stockpile stewardship."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2012-08-03
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [October 5, 2011]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit but do not ban such tests. In 1996, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). […] As of October 2011, 182 states had signed the CTBT and 155, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 35 had ratified. Seven conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently on September 23, 2011. […] This report will be updated occasionally. This version reflects the September 2011 conference on facilitating CTBT entry into force, and makes other updates throughout. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL34394, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments, by Jonathan Medalia, presents CTBT pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated 'Safeguards' and Net Assessments,' by Jonathan Medalia, discusses safeguards-- unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties--and their relationship to the CTBT. CRS Report R41908, 'Energy and Water Development: FY2012 Appropriations,' coordinated by Carl E. Behrens, provides details on stockpile stewardship."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2011-10-05
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [January 2, 2013]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, but there were no hearings on the treaty in the 111th or 112th Congresses. As of December 2012, 183 states had signed the CTBT and 157, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. Seven conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently on September 23, 2011."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2013-01-02
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [November 16, 2010]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit but do not ban such tests. In 1996, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration has focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). There have been no hearings on CTBT in the 111th Congress, and it appears unlikely to be brought up in the lame duck session. As of November 2010, 182 states had signed the CTBT and 153, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 35 had ratified. Five conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently in 2009. [...] Congress addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. It considers the Stockpile Stewardship Program (listed as Weapons Activities), which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing; the FY2010 appropriation is $6.384 billion, and the FY2011 request is $7.009 billion. Congress considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor possible nuclear tests. The FY2010 appropriation was $30.0 million; the FY2011 request is $43 million. This report will be updated occasionally. This version makes numerous updates throughout."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2010-11-16
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [December 7, 2010]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit but do not ban such tests. In 1996, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration has focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). There have been no hearings on CTBT in the 111th Congress, and it appears unlikely to be brought up in the lame duck session. As of December 2010, 182 states had signed the CTBT and 153, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 35 had ratified. Five conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently in 2009. Nuclear testing has a long history, beginning in 1945. The Natural Resources Defense Council states that the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. (Of the U.K. tests, 24 were held jointly with the United States and are not included in the foregoing U.S. total.) The last U.S. test was held in 1992; Russia claims it has not tested since 1990. In 1998, India and Pakistan announced several nuclear tests. Each declared a test moratorium; neither has signed the CTBT."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2010-12-07
North Korea's 2009 Nuclear Test: Containment, Monitoring, Implications [November 24, 2010]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"On May 25, 2009, North Korea announced that it had conducted its second underground nuclear test. Unlike its first test, in 2006, there is no public record that the second one released radioactive materials indicative of a nuclear explosion. How could North Korea have contained these materials from the May 2009 event and what are the implications? As background, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) would ban all nuclear explosions. It was opened for signature in 1996. Entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, including the United States and North Korea. As of November 2010, 153 states, including 35 of the 44, had ratified. North Korea has not signed the CTBT. President Clinton signed it in 1996; in 1999, the Senate voted not to consent to its ratification. In 2009, President Obama pledged to press for its ratification. [...] Containment could be of value to North Korea. It could keep radioactive fallout from China, Japan, Russia, or South Korea, averting an irritant in relations with them. It could prevent intelligence services from gathering material that could reveal information about the weapon that was tested. It could permit North Korea to host nuclear tests by other nations, such as Iran; while such tests would be detected by seismic means, they could not be attributed to another nation using technical forensic means if effluents, especially particles, were contained. An issue for Congress is how containment could affect CTBT prospects. Supporters might argue that explosion-like seismic signals without detected radioactive material would lead to calls for an onsite inspection. Opponents might claim that only detection of radioactive material proves that a nuclear explosion occurred. Both would note inspections could not be required unless the treaty entered into force, supporters to point to a benefit of the treaty and opponents to note that North Korea could block inspections by not ratifying the treaty. Congress may wish to consider ways to improve monitoring capability, such as supporting further research on test signatures, improving monitoring system capability, and deploying more monitoring equipment. This update reflects developments in the North Korean uranium program and prospects for another nuclear test."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2010-11-24
In Brief: Options to Help Meet a Congressional Requirement for Nuclear Weapon 'Pit' Production [May 22, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A pit is the plutonium core of a thermonuclear weapon. Imploding it with conventional explosives provides the energy to detonate the rest of the weapon. The Rocky Flats Plant made up to 2,000 pits per year (ppy) through 1989; since then, the United States has made 29 pits for the stockpile. Yet the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act requires the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which manages the nuclear weapons program, to produce at a rate of 80 ppy for 90 days in 2027. How can that requirement be met? Pits are to be made at Los Alamos National Laboratory's main plutonium facility, PF-4. To manufacture pits, a facility must have enough laboratory floor space and a high enough limit for Material At Risk (MAR), the amount of radioactive material a worst-case accident could release. Producing 80 ppy requires enough 'margin,' the space or MAR available to produce pits minus space or MAR required for that production rate. While space and MAR available have been calculated, amounts required to produce 80 ppy have never been calculated rigorously, leaving space and MAR needs undefined. Although CRS [Congressional Research Service] cannot address whether certain options could meet the 2027 date because time to implement them cannot be determined, this report presents 16 options that seek to increase the feasibility of producing 80 ppy by 2027 […]."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2015-05-22
Energy and Water Development: FY2016 Appropriations for Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship [June 5, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The annual Energy and Water Development appropriations bill provides funding for civil works projects of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Energy (DOE), and several independent agencies. The DOE budget includes funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a separately organized agency within DOE. NNSA operates three programs: Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, which secures nuclear materials worldwide, conducts R&D into nonproliferation and verification, and operates the Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program; Naval Reactors, which 'is responsible for all U.S. Navy nuclear propulsion work'; and Weapons Activities. The latter is the subject of this report. It operates the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which maintains the U.S. nuclear gravity bombs and missile warheads and has science and infrastructure programs that support that mission. (The Department of Defense [DOD] operates the bombers and missiles that would deliver nuclear weapons; it is funded in the Department of Defense appropriations bill.) The Armed Services Committees authorize funds for DOD and NNSA programs. The FY2016 request proposed moving counterterrorism programs from Weapons Activities to Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation. On a basis comparable to the FY2016 budget structure, the FY2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R. 83/P.L. 113-235) provided $8,007.7 million for Weapons Activities. The FY2016 request was $8,846.9 million, a 10.5% increase over FY2015. The House Appropriations Committee recommended providing $8,713.0 million for FY2016. The House passed H.R. 2028, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016, by a vote of 240-177 on May 1."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2015-06-05
Energy and Water Development: FY2016 Appropriations for Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship [May 6, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The annual Energy and Water Development appropriations bill provides funding for civil works projects of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Energy (DOE), and several independent agencies. The DOE budget includes funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a separately organized agency within DOE. NNSA operates three programs: Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, which secures nuclear materials worldwide, conducts R&D into nonproliferation and verification, and operates the Nuclear Counterterrorism and Incident Response Program; Naval Reactors, which 'is responsible for all U.S. Navy nuclear propulsion work'; and Weapons Activities. The latter is the subject of this report. It operates the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which maintains the U.S. nuclear gravity bombs and missile warheads and has science and infrastructure programs that support that mission. (The Department of Defense [DOD] operates the bombers and missiles that would deliver nuclear weapons; it is funded in the Department of Defense appropriations bill.) The Armed Services Committees authorize funds for DOD and NNSA programs. The FY2016 request proposed moving counterterrorism programs from Weapons Activities to Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation. On a basis comparable to the FY2016 budget structure, the FY2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R. 83/P.L. 113-235) provided $8,007.7 million for Weapons Activities. The FY2016 request was $8,846.9 million, a 10.5% increase over FY2015. The House Appropriations Committee recommended providing $8,713.0 million for FY2016. The House passed H.R. 2028, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016, by a vote of 240-177 on May 1. The bill as passed by the House made no changes to the Weapons Activities section of the committee bill."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2015-05-06
Nuclear Weapon "Pit" Production: Options to Help Meet a Congressional Requirement [May 14, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A pit is the plutonium core of a thermonuclear weapon. Imploding it with conventional explosives provides the energy to detonate the rest of the weapon. The Rocky Flats Plant made up to 2,000 pits per year (ppy) through 1989; since then, the United States has made 29 pits for the stockpile. Yet the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act requires the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which manages the nuclear weapons program, to produce at a rate of 80 ppy for 90 days in 2027. How can that requirement be met? Pits are to be made at Los Alamos National Laboratory's main plutonium facility, PF-4. To manufacture pits, a facility must have enough laboratory floor space and a high enough limit for Material At Risk (MAR), the amount of radioactive material a worst-case accident could release. Producing 80 ppy requires enough 'margin,' the space or MAR available to produce pits minus space or MAR required for that production rate. While space and MAR available have been calculated, amounts required to produce 80 ppy have never been calculated rigorously, leaving space and MAR needs undefined. Further, the report cannot address whether certain options could meet the 2027 date because time to implement them cannot be determined."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2015-05-14
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [June 2, 2015]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, while the Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, it has not pressed for a vote on the treaty and there were no hearings on it in the 111th, 112th, or 113th Congresses, or so far in the 114th. This report will be updated occasionally. This update reflects the FY2016 budget request and developments through May 2015. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL34394, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments,' by Jonathan E. Medalia, presents pros and cons in detail. CRS Report R40612, Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Updated 'Safeguards' and 'Net Assessments,' by Jonathan E. Medalia, discusses safeguards--unilateral steps to maintain U.S. nuclear security consistent with nuclear testing treaties--and their relationship to the CTBT. CRS Report R43948, Energy and 'Water Development: FY2016 Appropriations for Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship,' by Jonathan E. Medalia, provides details on stockpile stewardship."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2015-06-02
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [June 10, 2013]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A ban on all nuclear tests is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties that entered into force between 1963 and 1990 limit, but do not ban, such tests. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which would ban all nuclear explosions. In 1997, President Clinton sent the CTBT to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. In a speech in Prague in April 2009, President Obama said, 'My administration will immediately and aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.' However, the Administration focused its efforts in 2010 on securing Senate advice and consent to ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). The Administration has indicated it wants to begin a CTBT 'education' campaign with a goal of securing Senate advice and consent to ratification, but there were no hearings on the treaty in the 111th or 112th Congresses, or so far in the 113th. As of June 2013, 183 states had signed the CTBT and 159, including Russia, had ratified it. However, entry into force requires ratification by 44 states specified in the treaty, of which 41 had signed the treaty and 36 had ratified. Seven conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force; the eighth is scheduled for September 27, 2013, in New York."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2013-06-10
Nuclear Weapons R&D Organizations in Nine Nations [May 1, 2013]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"Since 1945, seven nations--China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States--have developed and currently deploy nuclear weapons. North Korea tested a low-yield nuclear explosive device in October 2006, announced that it had conducted a second nuclear test in May 2009, and announced a third test on February 12, 2013. Israel is generally thought to possess nuclear weapons, although it maintains a policy of ambiguity on this matter. This report describes the organizations controlling research and development (R&D) on nuclear weapons (i.e., nuclear explosive devices, as distinct from the bombers and missiles that carry them) in these nations, and presents a brief history of the organizations controlling nuclear weapons R&D in the United States. It discusses whether these organizations are civilian or military, though in many nations the lines between civilian and military are blurred. This information may be of use to Members of Congress and their staff interested in nuclear weapons, nuclear proliferation, and arms control matters."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.; Belkin, Paul; Kan, Shirley . . .

2013-05-01
Nuclear Weapons R&D Organizations in Nine Nations [February 28, 2011]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"Seven nations--China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States--possess nuclear weapons. In addition, North Korea tested a nuclear explosive device in 2006 and announced that it had conducted another such test in 2009, and Israel is widely thought to have nuclear weapons. As an aid to Congress in understanding nuclear weapons, nuclear proliferation, and arms control matters, this report describes which agency is responsible for research and development (R&D) of nuclear weapons (i.e., nuclear explosive devices, as distinct from the bombers and missiles that deliver them) in these nations and whether these agencies are civilian or military. It also traces the history of such agencies in the United States from 1942 to the present. This report will be updated annually, or more often as developments warrant."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.; Belkin, Paul; Kan, Shirley . . .

2011-02-28
Nuclear Weapons R&D Organizations in Nine Nations [March 16, 2009]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"Seven nations--China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States--possess nuclear weapons. In addition, North Korea tested a nuclear explosive device, and Israel is widely thought to have nuclear weapons. As an aid to Congress in understanding nuclear weapons, nuclear proliferation, and arms control matters, this report describes which agency is responsible for research and development (R&D) of nuclear weapons (i.e., nuclear explosive devices, as distinct from the bombers and missiles that deliver them) in these nations and whether these agencies are civilian or military. It also traces the history of such agencies in the United States from 1942 to the present. This report may be updated annually."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.; Kan, Shirley; Kerr, Paul K. . . .

2009-03-16
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated August 16, 2006]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991. Since 1997, the United States has held 22 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site, most recently on February 23, 2006, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia has reportedly held some since 1998, including several in 2000. The U.N. General Assembly adopted the CTBT in 1996. As of August 16, 2006, 176 states had signed it; 135, including Russia, had ratified; 41 of the 44 that must ratify the treaty for it to enter into force had signed; and 34 of the 44 had ratified. Four conferences have been held to facilitate entry into force, most recently in 2005. […] In current practice, Congress addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. Congress considers the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2006-08-16
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated January 10, 2005]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; the last U.K. test, in 1991. Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991. An article of May 2002 reported 'intelligence indicating that Russia is preparing to resume nuclear tests.' Russia rejected the charge. Since 1997, the United States has held 21 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site, most recently on May 25, 2004, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia has reportedly held some since 1998, including several in 2000. In May 1998, India and Pakistan each announced several nuclear tests and declared themselves nuclear weapons states. Each declared a moratorium on further tests, but separately stated, in the summer of 2000, that the time was not right to sign the CTBT."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2005-01-10
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated January 23, 2006]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; the last U.K. test, in 1991. Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991. Since 1997, the United States has held 21 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site, most recently on May 25, 2004, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia has reportedly held some since 1998, including several in 2000. In May 1998, India and Pakistan each announced several nuclear tests and declared themselves nuclear weapons states. Each declared a moratorium on further tests, but separately stated, in the summer of 2000, that the time was not right to sign the CTBT. […] Congress continues to consider the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing. The appropriation for the program (Weapons Activities) was $5.429 billion for FY2002, $5.954 billion for FY2003, and $6.273 billion for FY2004. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 provided $6.526 billion for Weapons Activities and $19.0 million to fund the U.S. contribution to a global system for monitoring events that might violate the treaty."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2006-01-23
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated March 20, 2002]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; the last U.K. test, in 1991. Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991, though some suspect it may have conducted several low-yield tests since then. Since 1997, the United States has held 16 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site to study the behavior of plutonium under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts they do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining nuclear fission chain reaction. The most recent was held February 14, 2002. Russia has reportedly conducted some since 1998, including several in fall 2000. In May 1998, India and Pakistan each announced several nuclear tests and declared themselves nuclear weapons states. Each declared a moratorium on further tests, but separately stated, in the summer of 2000, that the time was not right to sign the CTBT."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2002-03-20
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated December 11, 2002]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; the last U.K. test, in 1991. Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991. An article of May 2002 reported 'intelligence indicating that Russia is preparing to resume nuclear tests.' Russia rejected the charge. Since 1997, the United States has held 19 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site -- most recently on September 26, 2002 -- to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia has reportedly held some since 1998, including several in 2000. In May 1998, India and Pakistan each announced several nuclear tests and declared themselves nuclear weapons states. Each declared a moratorium on further tests, but separately stated, in the summer of 2000, that the time was not right to sign the CTBT. […] Congress continues to consider the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing. The FY2002 budget request for the program (Weapons Activities) was $5.300 billion; the final appropriation was $5.429 billion. The FY2003 request is $5.869 billion; the authorization is $5.902 billion."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2002-12-11
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated March 11, 2005]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"A comprehensive test ban treaty, or CTBT, is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently limit testing to underground only, with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the United States conducted 1,030 nuclear tests, the Soviet Union 715, the United Kingdom 45, France 210, and China 45. The last U.S. test was held in 1992; the last U.K. test, in 1991. Russia claims it has not conducted nuclear tests since 1991. Since 1997, the United States has held 21 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site, most recently on May 25, 2004, to study how plutonium behaves under pressures generated by explosives. It asserts these experiments do not violate the CTBT because they cannot produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Russia has reportedly held some since 1998, including several in 2000. In May 1998, India and Pakistan each announced several nuclear tests and declared themselves nuclear weapons states. Each declared a moratorium on further tests, but separately stated, in the summer of 2000, that the time was not right to sign the CTBT. […] Congress continues to consider the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing. The appropriation for the program (Weapons Activities) was $5.429 billion for FY2002, $5.954 billion for FY2003, and $6.273 billion for FY2004. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 provided $6.526 billion for Weapons Activities and $19.0 million to fund the U.S. contribution to a global system for monitoring events that might violate the treaty."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2005-03-11
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Budget Request and Plan, FY2005-FY2009 [March 8, 2004]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"The FY2005 budget document for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) shows funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) increasing sharply after FY2005 as the weapon proceeds beyond the study phase. NNSA states that these developments are shown for budgeting purposes and do not represent an actual plan. It further states that the out-year figures are already out of date, but that no new figures are available. A feasibility and cost study of RNEP currently under way was projected to cost $45 million between FY2003 and FY2005, but is now projected to cost $71 million between FY2003 and FY2006. This report explains the budget request and plan, and will be updated as needed."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2004-03-08
Reliable Replacement Warhead Program: Background and Current Developments [Updated September 12, 2008]

Show summary Open resource [pdf] (open full abstract)
"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. 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 12 years without nuclear testing."

Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Medalia, Jonathan E.

2008-09-12

1 2 3 4 5