Fact Sheet: U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs

January 5th, 2010.

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

Please click here for a chart of current modernization programs.

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

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

For example, in a December 15, 2009, letter to President Barack Obama, a group of 40 Republican Senators and one Independent stated that “we don’t believe further [nuclear arsenal] reductions can be in the national security interest of the U.S. in the absence of a significant program to modernize our nuclear deterrent.”ⁱⁱ And, in the words of Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, "Every nuclear weapons power--with the exception of the United States--is currently modernizing its nuclear weapons and weapons delivery systems."ⁱⁱⁱ

As this fact sheet demonstrates, such concerns are misplaced.  A robust program to refurbish U.S. nuclear warheads and modernize strategic delivery systems is already well underway:

• Nuclear Warheads:  The U.S. stockpile of nuclear warheads is continually refurbished through the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) Life Extension Program (LEP).  New warhead types have not been introduced since U.S. nuclear testing ended in 1992, but existing warhead types are certified annually to be safe and reliable.  The JASON panel of independent scientists recently found “no evidence” that extending the lives of existing U.S. nuclear warheads leads to reduced confidence that the weapons will work.  The panel concluded in its September 2009 report that “Lifetimes of today's nuclear warheads could be extended for decades, with no anticipated loss in confidence.”^iv Contrary to the assertions of some, the United States does not need to resume nuclear test explosions nor does it need to build new “replacement” warhead designs to maintain the reliability and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear stockpile.
• Production Complex:  The nuclear weapons production complex is being modernized as well, with new facilities planned and funded.  For example, a new plutonium research and “pit” production facility, the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement, is planned for Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, and the new Uranium Processing Facility is planned for the Y-12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn.
• Strategic Delivery Systems: U.S. nuclear delivery systems are undergoing continual modernization, including rebuilds of the Minuteman III ICBM and Trident II SLBM.  The service lives of Trident Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines are being extended, and a new submarine platform is in development, the SSBN-X.  The B-2 strategic bomber, a relatively new system, is being upgraded, as is the B-52H bomber.

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

1.    Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs)

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

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

The Air Force is also upgrading the Minuteman’s nuclear warheads by replacing older W78 warheads with newer and more powerful W87 warheads, formerly deployed on the now-retired MX Peacekeeper ICBMs.  The W87 entered the stockpile in 1986, making it one of the newest warheads in the arsenal with the most modern safety and security features, including insensitive high explosive and a fire-resistant pit design, which help to minimize the possibility of plutonium dispersal in the event of an accident.  The W87 warhead was refurbished under NNSA’s Life Extension Program (LEP) in 2004, extending the service life of the warhead past 2025.  Beyond that, there is no evidence to suggest that the W87—or any warhead, for that matter—cannot be refurbished indefinitely.  The Air Force and Navy are also exploring a joint LEP to field a common, refurbished warhead to replace the W78 and W88 (see SLBMs, below).^vi

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

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

The Ohio-class SSBNs were first deployed in 1981, and the Navy plans to replace them starting in 2027 with a new class of ballistic missile submarine, tentatively known as SSBN-X.^vii In its 2010 budget request, the Obama administration requested $700 million for research and development for the SSBN-X.^viii

Each Trident submarine serves as a launch platform for up to 24 SLBMs with up to eight warheads on each missile. First deployed in 1990, today's force of Trident II D5 missiles has been routinely tested and evaluated and is being modernized to last until 2042.^ix The Trident II D5 life extension program is underway to modernize key components, notably the electronics. In 2007 the Navy awarded an $849 million contract to Lockheed Martin for modernizing the Trident II D5.^x In 2008, 12 life-extended variants of the D5 were purchased; 24 D5s will be produced each year through 2012 for a total of 108 missiles at a total cost of $15 billion.  The first modified D5s are scheduled for deployment in 2013, and the new missiles will arm SSBNs through 2042.

The D5 SLBMs are armed with approximately 768 W76 and 384 W88 warheads. In 2009, NNSA began delivery of the W76-1, a refurbished version of the W76 that extends its service life for an additional 20-60 years.^xi According to NNSA, the W76 LEP is refurbishing the nuclear explosive package, the arming, firing, and fusing system, the gas transfer system, and associated cables, elastomers, valves, pads, cushions, foam supports, telemetries, and other miscellaneous parts.^xii This $6 billion-program will run through 2022, delivering about 2,000 W76-1 warheads.^xiii

The W88 entered the stockpile in 1989, making it the newest warhead in the arsenal, and plans are being made for refurbishment through the LEP.  The W88 was the last U.S. warhead produced before the Rocky Flats Plants--which made plutonium “pits”-- was shut down in 1989.  NNSA reestablished pit production capacity at Los Alamos National Laboratory with the first “certifiable” pit in 2003, and new production resumed in 2007.^xiv A new plutonium research and pit production facility, the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement, is planned for Los Alamos.

With the rebuilt Trident D5 missile to be in service to 2042, the W76-1 life extension to 2030-2070, the relatively new W88, and a new class of SSBNs to be delivered around 2025 and lasting to 2070, the U.S. Navy’s Trident Fleet will be kept robust and modern well into the 21st century.

3.    Strategic Bombers

The United States Air Force currently deploys 20 B-2 Spirit bombers at Whiteman AFB, Mo., and 85 B-52H bombers at Minot AFB, N.D. and Barksdale AFB, La. These bombers are capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear munitions; 16 B-2s and 44 B-52Hs are reportedly assigned primarily to nuclear missions.

The Air Force continually modernizes the B-2 fleet, first operational in 1997, by improving radar cross section, avionics, and high frequency satellite communication capabilities for nuclear command and control.”^xv

The B-2 carries the B61-7, B61-11 and B83 strategic bombs.  The NNSA’s Life Extension Program recently extended the life of the B61-7 and B61-11 for an additional 20 years by refurbishing the bomb’s secondary stage (canned subassembly) and replacing the associated seals, foam supports, cables and connectors, washers, o-rings, and limited life components.  The B83 was first produced in 1983, making it one of the newest weapons in the stockpile, and a LEP is planned for 2010-2017.  The B83 has the most modern safety and security features, including insensitive high explosive and a fire-resistant pit.

The B-52H fleet, first deployed in 1961, has an on-going modification program, incorporating the global positioning system, heavy stores adapter beams, and a full array of advance weapons. These updates will enable the B-52s to operate beyond the year 2040.^xvi

The B-52H carries the air-launched cruise missile (ALCM), first deployed in 1981.  A Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) is in place to extend ALCM to 2030.^xvii Each ALCM carries a W80-1 warhead, first produced in 1982, which is scheduled for life-extension in 2013-2017.

Additionally, the fiscal year 2011 budget and five-year defense plan may include funding for a new long-range bomber, to be developed by 2018. It is still unclear whether the bomber will be nuclear-capable. The effort is likely to cost at least $10 billion in development costs alone.^xviii

U.S. Nuclear Modernization Programs

---

Research assistance provided by Volha Charnysh, New Voices Nonproliferation Fellow

ENDNOTES

i The Departments of Defense and Energy spent $29.093 billion on nuclear forces in FY2008. Stephen I. Schwartz and Deepti Choubey, “Nuclear Security Spending: Assessing Costs, Examining Priorities,” Carnegie Endowment Report, January 2009, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/?fa=view&id=22601.
ii Letter to President Barack Obama, Dec. 15, 2009.
iii Jon Kyl, “Next US president should modernize nuclear arsenal,” Financial Times, July 1 2008, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4315d404-4708-11dd-876a-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1.
iv Lifetime Extension Program (LEP) Executive Summary, JSR-09-334E, The MITRE Corp., JASON Program Office, September 9, 2009, p. 2.
v “Many More Minutes,” Air Force Magazine, November 17, 2009, http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Features/modernization/Pages/box111609minutes.aspx.

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

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

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

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

x GlobalSecurity.org, “Trident II D-5 Fleet Ballistic Missile: Recent Developments,” http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/d-5-recent.htm.

xi Bill Murphy, “Sandia technology comprehensively supports CTBT,” Sandia Lab News, December 4, 2009, http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/091204.html#three.

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

xiii Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen, “US nuclear forces, 2009,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March/April 2009, p. 63, www.thebulletin.org/files/065002008.pdf.

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

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

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

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

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