Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs

Presentation Transcript

Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs Stockpile Planning for the Future Mr. Steve Henry Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters

PORTSMOUTH FERNALD Stockpile Planning: The Historical Approach Largely target construct Heavy dependence in light of a vast stockpile to oversee geo-political and specialized hazard Infrastructure with little ability past keeping up legacy weapons Legacy stockpile Infrastructure Cost This approach proceeds with the Cold War attitude of "quality in numbers", instead of an emphasis on general capacities

Clear Objectives Exist for the Future Nuclear Weapons Stockpile "I am focused on accomplishing a sound obstacle with the most minimal conceivable number of atomic weapons steady with our national security needs… " - Pres. Shrubbery May 2001 Reliable, secure, and safe stockpile Responsive atomic weapon framework Sustain certainty for the long haul Continue ban on atomic testing The present approach for the stockpile and foundation does not satisfactorily give a way ahead that meets the President's direction A New Approach is Needed to Meet DoD's Future Stockpile Needs

Objectives of a New Approach Initiate a quick transform from the present way of keeping up complex Cold War-time outlines uncertainly Provide adaptability in the stockpile and capacity to adjust to changing needs Sustain basic aptitudes to configuration, guarantee, and create atomic warheads Free-up limit and assets to empower change to a responsive, practical framework Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) Concepts May Provide a Way to Achieve These Objectives

The New Approach and Potential Implementation If RRW demonstrates possible, we ought to have an approach to empower a wide change in our atomic undertaking Enhance wellbeing, security, and control on weapons Demonstrate our capacity to plan and confirm without atomic testing Reduce the size and cost of the atomic foundation Potential to dismantle a bigger number of resigned weapons Current Plan New Approach Stockpile Wxx Life Extension (LEP) Wxx RRWs Wxx Life Extension

Our New Approach Must Meet National Security Objectives Supports guard arrangement objectives of: Assuring partners and companions of US common security responsibilities Dissuading potential aggressors from arranging/procuring WMD Deterring potential aggressors from utilizing WMD Defending against or overcoming an assailant Enables stockpile decreases Consistent with U.S. non-multiplication activities

It Must Also Preserve Essential National Capability Sustains and practices national capacity for atomic warhead configuration, designing, and generation aptitudes Fosters logical and specialized abilities to diminish specialized shock Enables a framework that is receptive to changing national security needs Facilitates atomic occurrence/crisis reaction capacities

Managing Risk: Today versus 2030+ Legacy foundation with restricted capacity Heavy dependence on support stockpile for hazard administration Today 2030+ Responsive and proficient framework with improved ability Reduced dependence on fence stockpile for hazard administration We require a more adjusted approach between stockpile size and framework responsiveness

Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Transformation TODAY (2005) 2010 2020 2030+ LONG TERM VISION DoD Weapons Weapon frameworks outlined and handled amid Cold War Warheads (8-9 sorts) All Cold War-time legacy warheads Plan to renovate uncertainly Infrastructure Make segments to repair warheads Some segments costly, hard to fabricate Risk Management High dependence on move down Warheads All non-revamped legacy warheads resigned 2-4 sorts of RRWs Responsive Infrastructure Streamlined Steady-state creation of warheads for arrangement Risk Management Low dependence on non-conveyed move down warheads High dependence on responsive framework TRANSFORM: Target Based To Enterprise Based Deterrent

Nuclear Weapons Stockpile and Infrastructure Transformation TODAY (2005) 2010 2020 2030+ LONG TERM VISION DoD Weapons Weapon frameworks planned and handled amid Cold War Warheads (8-9 sorts) All Cold War-time legacy warheads Plan to restore inconclusively Infrastructure Make segments to revamp warheads Some segments costly, hard to make Risk Management High dependence on go down warheads Develop and field RRW warheads Develop minimal effort warhead move down alternatives Continue life augmentation restorations; assess amount required Conduct stockpile change examines Evaluate tradeoffs of an all-RRW stockpile versus blended stockpile Re-scope warhead life expansion needs Develop warheads for cutting edge conveyance frameworks Complete stockpile change arranges Warheads All non-renovated legacy warheads resigned 2-4 sorts of RRWs Responsive Infrastructure Streamlined Steady-state generation of warheads for sending Risk Management Low dependence on non-sent go down warheads High dependence on responsive framework

Summary The current atomic undertaking is unsustainable in the long haul If RRW demonstrates plausible, we could have an approach to empower a wide change in our atomic endeavor Enhance wellbeing, security, and control on weapons Demonstrate our certainty to make and affirm without atomic testing Reduce the size and cost of the atomic foundation Potential to dismantle a bigger number of resigned weapons We have to work with the NNSA and Congress on stockpile and framework change RRW Can Enable Transformation of the Stockpile and Infrastructure