Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Medalia, Jonathan E." in: author
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).
-
Energy and Water Development Appropriations: Nuclear Weapons Activities [Updated January 6, 2020]
From the Summary: "NNSA [National Nuclear Security Administration] operates three programs: Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, [...] Naval Reactors, [...] and Weapons Activities. The last is the subject of this report. The Weapons Activities account supports programs that maintain U.S. nuclear missile warheads and gravity bombs and the infrastructure programs that support that mission. Specifically, according to DOE's [Department of Energy] budget documentation, these programs 'support the maintenance and refurbishment of nuclear weapons to continue sustained confidence in their safety, reliability, and performance; continued investment in scientific, engineering, and manufacturing capabilities to enable certification of the enduring nuclear weapons stockpile; and manufacture of nuclear weapons components.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Woolf, Amy F.; Medalia, Jonathan E.
2020-01-06
-
U.S. Nuclear Weapon 'Pit' Production Options for Congress [February 21, 2014]
"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
-
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated December 19, 2007]
"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 tested since 1990. In 1998, India and Pakistan announced several nuclear tests and declared that they were nuclear weapon states; each declared a moratorium on further tests, but neither has signed the CTBT. North Korea, which has not signed the treaty, conducted a nuclear test on October 9, 2006. At present, 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 (listed as Weapons Activities), which seeks to maintain nuclear weapons without testing. The FY2007 operating plan for it contains $6.276 billion; the FY2008 request is $6.511 billion. Congress considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor events that might violate the CTBT. The United States paid $10.0 million for FY2007; the FY2008 request is $18.0 million. The United States had lost its voting rights in the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization Preparatory Commission because it had not paid enough of its dues, but paid another $3.5 million around the beginning of October 2007, restoring its voting rights."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-12-19
-
North Korea's 2009 Nuclear Test: Containment, Monitoring, Implications [November 24, 2010]
"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
-
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [Updated January 6, 2010]
"A comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty (CTBT) is the oldest item on the nuclear arms control agenda. Three treaties currently bar all but underground tests with a maximum force equal to 150,000 tons of TNT. The Natural Resources Defense Council states 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 tested since 1990. In 1998, India and Pakistan announced several nuclear tests. Each declared a test moratorium; neither has signed the CTBT. North Korea conducted a nuclear test in 2006. Since 1997, the United States has held 23 'subcritical experiments' at the Nevada Test Site 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 reportedly held some since 1998. [...] 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. Congress considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor possible nuclear tests. The FY2010 appropriation is $30.0 million. This report will be updated. For a detailed presentation of pros and cons, see CRS Report RL34394, 'Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Issues and Arguments', by Jonathan Medalia."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2010-01-06
-
North Korea's 2009 Nuclear Test: Containment, Monitoring, Implications [April 2, 2010]
"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. [...] The treaty establishes a verification mechanism, including an International Monitoring System (IMS) to detect nuclear tests. Three IMS technologies detect waves that pass through the oceans (hydroacoustic), Earth (seismic), or atmosphere (infrasound); a fourth detects radioactive material from a nuclear test. Scientists concur that only the latter proves that an explosion was nuclear. Some believe that deep burial and other means can contain radioactive effluents. Another view is that containment is an art as much as a science. [...] 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 that 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 also wish to consider options to improve monitoring capability, such as supporting further research on test signatures, improving the capability of monitoring systems, and deploying more monitoring equipment. This report may be updated, especially if North Korea conducts another test."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2010-04-02
-
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [December 7, 2010]
"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
-
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [November 16, 2010]
"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 [January 2, 2013]
"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 [February 12, 2013]
"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 February 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, most recently on September 23, 2011."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2013-02-12
-
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments [June 10, 2013]
"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: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated August 16, 2006]
"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]
"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 Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban: Chronology Starting September 1992 [Updated August 31, 2005]
"The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans 'any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.' It was opened for signature in September 1996. In September 1997, President Clinton submitted it to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. The Bush Administration has not requested Senate consideration of the treaty. This report details actions on nuclear testing and the treaty starting with the most recent U.S. test in September 1992. It complements CRS Issue Brief IB92099, 'Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Nuclear Testing,' which discusses earlier history, issues, and current developments, and CRS Report RS20351, 'Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Pro and Con,' which presents arguments for and against the treaty. This report will be updated; see the issue brief for interim updates."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2005-08-31
-
Nuclear Weapons R&D Organizations in Nine Nations [February 22, 2013]
"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.; Mix, Derek E.; Belkin, Paul . . .
2013-02-22
-
Nuclear Weapon Initiatives: Low-Yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness [Updated March 8, 2004]
"The Bush Administration completed its congressionally-mandated Nuclear Posture Review in December 2001. The review led to major changes in U.S. nuclear policy. It found that the Cold War relationship with Russia was "very inappropriate" and that this nation must be able to deal with new threats. It planned to retain Cold War-era nuclear weapons, which would suffice for many contingencies, though at reduced numbers. To complement these weapons so as to improve U.S. ability to deal with new, more dispersed threats in various countries, the Administration sought to explore additional nuclear capabilities...These initiatives are controversial. Supporters claim that the first three initiatives would enhance deterrence, thereby reducing the risk of war, and that some weapons that might result from the initiatives could enable the United States to destroy key targets in nations that may pose a threat. Critics are concerned that these initiatives would lead to nuclear testing, increase the risk of nuclear proliferation, and make U.S. use of nuclear weapons more likely...This report provides the policy context for the four initiatives. For each, it then presents a description, history, FY2004 legislative actions, the FY2005 request (for all but low-yield R&D), and issues for Congress. It is designed for those who want a detailed introduction to the debate, those seeking arguments and counterarguments, and those looking for answers to specific questions. It will track congressional and executive actions on these initiatives through updates as developments warrant." -- Summary
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2004-03-08
-
Nuclear Weapon Initiatives: Low-Yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness [Updated December 11, 2003]
"The Bush Administration completed its congressionally-mandated Nuclear Posture Review in December 2001. The review led to major changes in U.S. nuclear policy. It found that the Cold War relationship with Russia was "very inappropriate" and that this nation must be able to deal with new threats. It planned to retain Cold War-era nuclear weapons, which would suffice for many contingencies, though at reduced numbers. To complement these weapons so as to improve U.S. ability to deal with new, more dispersed threats in various countries, the Administration sought to explore additional nuclear capabilities. Accordingly, the FY2004 request included four nuclear weapon initiatives: (1) rescinding the ban that Congress imposed in 1993 on R&D on low-yield nuclear weapons; (2) $6 million for the Advanced Concepts Initiative to begin certain studies of weapon-related science and technology; (3) $15 million to continue a study of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, in which an existing bomb would be converted into a weapon able to penetrate into the ground before detonating to improve its ability to destroy buried targets; and (4) $25 million to enable the United States to conduct a nuclear test within 18 months of a presidential order to test, and for related purposes, as compared with the current 24-36 month time that was set shortly after the end of the Cold War. This report provides the policy context for the four initiatives. For each, it then presents a description, history, FY2004 legislative actions, and issues for Congress. It is designed for those who want a detailed introduction to the debate, those seeking arguments and counterarguments, and those looking for answers to specific questions. It will track congressional and executive actions on these initiatives through updates as developments warrant." -- summary
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2003-12-11
-
Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program [Updated June 3, 2005]
"Most current U.S. nuclear warheads were built in the 1980s, and are being retained longer than was planned. Yet warheads deteriorate with age, and must be maintained. The current approach monitors them for signs of aging. When problems are found, a Life Extension Program (LEP) rebuilds components. While some can be made to new specifications, a nuclear test moratorium bars that approach for critical components that would require a nuclear test. Instead, LEP rebuilds them as closely as possible to original specifications. Using this approach, the Secretaries of Defense and Energy have certified stockpile safety and reliability for the past nine years without nuclear testing. In the FY2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress initiated the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program by providing $9 million for it. The program will study developing replacement components for existing weapons, trading off features important in the Cold War, such as high yield and low weight, to gain features more valuable now, such as lower cost, elimination of some hazardous materials, greater ease of manufacture, greater ease of certification without nuclear testing, and increased long-term confidence in the stockpile. It would modify components to make these improvements; in contrast, LEP makes changes mainly to maintain existing weapons. Representative David Hobson, RRW's prime sponsor, views it as part of a comprehensive plan for the U.S. nuclear weapons enterprise that would also modernize the nuclear weapons complex, avoid new weapons and nuclear testing, and permit a reduction in non-deployed weapons. The FY2006 request is $9.4 million."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2005-06-03
-
Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program [Updated June 23, 2005]
"In the FY2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress initiated the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program by providing $9 million for it. The program will study developing replacement components for existing weapons, trading off features important in the Cold War, such as high yield and low weight, to gain features more valuable now, such as lower cost, elimination of some hazardous materials, greater ease of manufacture, greater ease of certification without nuclear testing, and increased long-term confidence in the stockpile. It would modify components to make these improvements; in contrast, LEP makes changes mainly to maintain existing weapons. Representative David Hobson, RRW's prime sponsor, views it as part of a comprehensive plan for the U.S. nuclear weapons enterprise that would also modernize the nuclear weapons complex, avoid new weapons and nuclear testing, and permit a reduction in non-deployed weapons. The FY2006 request is $9.4 million."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2005-06-23
-
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated June 21, 2006]
"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...In January 2002 the Administration, in briefings on the Nuclear Posture Review, indicated that it continues to oppose the CTBT, continues to adhere to the test moratorium, is considering modifying existing warheads for use against hard and deeply-buried targets, has not ruled out resumed testing, and has no plans to test. These positions remain current. It also indicated plans to reduce the time between a decision to conduct a nuclear test and the test itself, which is being done. Critics raised concerns about the implications of these policies for testing and new weapons. Congress addresses nuclear weapon issues in the annual National Defense Authorization Act and the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2006-06-21
-
Nuclear Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban: Chronology Starting September 1992 [Updated June 9, 2005]
"The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) 'bans any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.' It was opened for signature in September 1996. In September 1997, President Clinton submitted it to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. The Bush Administration has not requested Senate consideration of the treaty. This report details actions on nuclear testing and the treaty starting with the most recent U.S. test in September 1992. It complements CRS Issue Brief IB92099, 'Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Nuclear Testing,' which discusses earlier history, issues, and current developments, and CRS Report RS20351, 'Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Pro and Con,' which presents arguments for and against the treaty. This report will be updated; see the issue brief for interim updates."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2005-06-09
-
Nuclear Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban: Chronology Starting September 1992 [Updated November 9, 2004]
"The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans 'any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.' It was opened for signature in September 1996. In September 1997, President Clinton submitted it to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. The Bush Administration has not requested Senate consideration of the treaty. This report details actions on nuclear testing and the treaty starting with the most recent U.S. test in September 1992. It complements CRS Issue Brief IB92099, Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Nuclear Testing, which discusses earlier history, issues, and current developments, and CRS Report RS20351, Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Pro and Con, which presents arguments for and against the treaty."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2004-11-09
-
Nuclear Weapons R&D Organizations in Nine Nations [May 1, 2013]
"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: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated May 24, 2007]
"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 1990. North Korea announced on October 9, 2006, that it had conducted a nuclear test…In 2002, the Administration said it continues to oppose the CTBT, continues to adhere to the test moratorium, has not ruled out resumed testing, and has no plans to test. These positions remain current. It indicated plans to reduce the time between a decision to conduct a nuclear test and the test itself, which has been done. Critics raised concerns about the implications of these policies for testing and new weapons. At present, 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. Appropriations for it (listed as Weapons Activities) were FY2003, $5.954 billion; FY2004, $6.447 billion; FY2005, $6.626 billion; and FY2006, $6.370 billion. The FY2007 operating plan contains $6.408 billion, and the FY2008 request is $6.511 billion. Congress also considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor events that might violate the CTBT. Appropriations were $18.8 million for FY2005 and $14.2 million for FY2006; the request is $19.8 million for FY2007 and $18.0 million for FY2008."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-05-24
-
Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program [Updated February 8, 2007]
"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) replaces components. Modifying some components would require a nuclear test, but a test moratorium is in effect. Therefore, LEP rebuilds these components as closely as possible to original specifications. Using this approach, the Secretaries of Defense and Energy have certified stockpile safety and reliability for the past 11 years without nuclear testing. At issue for the 110th Congress is how best to maintain the nuclear stockpile indefinitely, whether to cancel RRW in favor of LEP or to continue RRW, and how to proceed in the latter case."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-02-08
-
Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [Updated May 3, 2007]
"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 1990. North Korea announced on October 9, 2006, that it had conducted a nuclear test…In 2002, the Administration said it continues to oppose the CTBT, continues to adhere to the test moratorium, has not ruled out resumed testing, and has no plans to test. These positions remain current. It indicated plans to reduce the time between a decision to conduct a nuclear test and the test itself, which has been done. Critics raised concerns about the implications of these policies for testing and new weapons. At present, 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. Appropriations for it (listed as Weapons Activities) were FY2003, $5.954 billion; FY2004, $6.447 billion; FY2005, $6.626 billion; and FY2006, $6.370 billion. The FY2007 operating plan contains $6.408 billion, and the FY2008 request is $6.511 billion. Congress also considers a U.S. contribution to a global system to monitor events that might violate the CTBT. Appropriations were $18.8 million for FY2005 and $14.2 million for FY2006; the request is $19.8 million for FY2007 and $18.0 million for FY2008."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-05-03
-
Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program [Updated December 14, 2006]
"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) replaces components. Modifying some components would require a nuclear test, but a test moratorium is in effect. Therefore, LEP rebuilds these components as closely as possible to original specifications. Using this approach, the Secretaries of Defense and Energy have certified stockpile safety and reliability for the past 11 years without nuclear testing. In the FY2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress provided $9 million to initiate the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program. The program will study trading off key Cold War features such as high yield and low weight to gain features more valuable now, such as lower cost, greater ease of manufacture, and a further increase in use control. It plans to make these improvements by designing replacement warheads that would not add military capability. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which operates the U.S. nuclear weapons program, views RRW as part of a comprehensive plan that would also modernize the nuclear weapons complex (the Complex), avoid nuclear testing, and reduce non-deployed weapons. The Nuclear Weapons Council, a joint NNSA-Department of Defense organization that coordinates nuclear weapons matters, is conducting a competition for an RRW design; the winning design is likely to be selected in December 2006. The FY2006 appropriation was $25.0 million; the FY2007 request is $27.7 million."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2006-12-14
-
Nuclear Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban: Chronology Starting September 1992 [June 13, 2007]
"The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) bans 'any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.' It was opened for signature in September 1996. In September 1997, President Clinton submitted it to the Senate, which rejected it in October 1999. The Bush Administration has not requested Senate consideration of the treaty. This report details actions on nuclear testing and the treaty starting with the most recent U.S. test in September 1992. It complements CRS Report RL33548, 'Nuclear Weapons: Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty', which discusses earlier history, issues, and current developments; and CRS Report RS20351, 'Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty: Pro and Con'. This report will be updated; see CRS Report RL33548 for interim updates."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-06-13
-
Nuclear Warheads: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program and the Life Extension Program [Updated December 3, 2007]
"Current U.S. nuclear warheads were deployed during the Cold War. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) maintains them with a Life Extension Program (LEP). NNSA questions if LEP can maintain them indefinitely on grounds that an accretion of minor changes introduced in replacement components will inevitably reduce confidence in warhead safety and reliability over the long term. Congress mandated the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program in 2004 'to improve the reliability, longevity, and certifiability of existing weapons and their components.' Since then, Congress has specified more goals for the program, such as increasing safety, reducing the need for nuclear testing, designing for ease of manufacture, and reducing cost. RRW has become the principal program for designing new warheads to replace current ones. The program's first step was a design competition. The winning design was selected in March 2007. If the program continues, NNSA would advance the design of the first RRW, assess its technical feasibility, and estimate cost and schedule in FY2008; start engineering development by FY2010; and produce the first deployable RRW between FY2012 and FY2016. Congressional actions on the FY2008 national defense authorization bills (H.R. 1585, S. 1547) and energy and water appropriations bills (H.R. 2641, S. 1751) have called this schedule into question. For details, see CRS Report RL32929, The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program: Background and Current Developments, which provides background and tracks legislation and developments. Each year, Congress would decide whether to fund the program as requested, modify it, or cancel it, and whether to continue or halt LEP."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-12-03
-
Nuclear Warheads: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program and the Life Extension Program [Updated July 16, 2007]
"Current U.S. nuclear warheads were deployed during the Cold War. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) maintains them with a Life Extension Program (LEP). NNSA questions if LEP can maintain them indefinitely on grounds that an accretion of minor changes introduced in replacement components will inevitably reduce confidence in warhead safety and reliability over the long term. Congress mandated the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program in 2004 'to improve the reliability, longevity, and certifiability of existing weapons and their components.' Since then, Congress has specified more goals for the program, such as increasing safety, reducing the need for nuclear testing, designing for ease of manufacture, and reducing cost. RRW has become the principal program for designing new warheads to replace current ones. The program's first step was a design competition. The winning design was selected in March 2007. If the program continues, NNSA would advance the design of the first RRW, assess its technical feasibility, and estimate cost and schedule in FY2008; start engineering development by FY2010; and produce the first deployable RRW between FY2012 and FY2016. Congressional actions on the FY2008 national defense authorization bills (H.R. 1585, S. 1547) and energy and water appropriations bills (H.R. 2641, S. 1751) have called this schedule into question. For details, see CRS Report RL32929, The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program: Background and Current Developments, which provides background and tracks legislation and developments. Each year, Congress would decide whether to fund the program as requested, modify it, or cancel it, and whether to continue or halt LEP."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Medalia, Jonathan E.
2007-07-16
