Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Analysis of House Strategic Forces Subcommittee Markup: FY2008 Defense Authorization (H.R. 1585)

by Travis Sharp [contact information]

by Leonor Tomero [contact information]

May 4, 2007

On May 2, 2007, the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee completed its markup of H.R. 1585, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.^[1] The full-committee markup is scheduled for May 9 with House floor action coming as early as the week of May 14-18. The Senate Armed Services Committee has tentatively scheduled its Defense Authorization markup for the week of May 21-25.^[2]

The House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee draft bill was unanimously approved 11-0 and provides $51.4 billion for nuclear weapons, missile defense, and space programs for 2008. The subcommittee cut $1.3 billion from the Bush Administration's original $52.7 billion request.

HIGHLIGHTS^[3]

Reliable Replacement Warhead program (RRW) - Cuts $45 million from the Administration's $119 million request for RRW, leaving $74 million in the markup version. $20 million was cut from the National Nuclear Security Administration ($88.8 million Admin. request) and $25 million was cut from the Navy ($30 million Admin. request). All RRW funding is restricted to "Phase 2a design and cost study alternatives," explaining why the Navy's request, which was Phase 3, was reduced so drastically. Phase 3 would include initial fabrication of some components and is described in budget justification documents as "engineering development of ancillary reentry body types for RRW."^[4]

The markup includes a provision mandating that NNSA "assess the feasibility of reusing existing plutonium pits in the RRW program," language perhaps inspired by the JASON advisory group's conclusion that most plutonium "pits" remain viable for over 100 years, approximately three times the age of the oldest weapons in the U.S. nuclear stockpile.^[5]

In explaining the subcommittee's restrictions on RRW, Chairwoman Ellen Tauscher (D-CA-10) urged the Department of Energy and the NNSA to "walk before they run with modernization of the nuclear weapons stockpile and the weapons complex."^[6] Ranking Member Terry Everett (R-AL-2) suggested a commensurate "measured, knowledge-based approach."^[7]

Complex 2030 - Cuts $24.9 million, the entire amount requested by the Administration, from the proposed Consolidated Plutonium Center. This proposed facility is a prominent feature of Complex 2030, the National Nuclear Security Administration's plan to restructure the U.S. nuclear weapons complex.^[8]

Missile Defense - Cuts $764 million from the Administration's $8.9 billion request for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), leaving $9.5 billion for both MDA and non-MDA ballistic missile defense programs. The subcommittee's explanation was that funding should be redirected from "less mature, high-risk ballistic missile defense efforts" towards "missile defense programs that offer near-term warfighter benefits."^[9]

Of the programs being cut back because they are "high-risk," the most notable was a $160 million cut from the proposed third ground-based midcourse defense site in Europe ($310 million Admin. request). This could temporarily halt construction of 10 missile interceptor silos to be based in Poland but would permit work to go forward on radar equipment in the Czech Republic.^[10] Chairwoman Tauscher estimated that the European missile site's price tag could eventually reach $4 billion due to heavy infrastructural costs.^[11]

Additional missile defense cuts included: $400 million from the Airborne Laser program ($517 million Admin. request) in which aircraft would carry lasers that could shoot down missiles in their boost phase; $85 million from the Space Tracking and Surveillance System ($331 million Admin. request); $80 million from the Multiple Kill Vehicle ($271 million Admin. request); and $10 million from the proposed Space Test-Bed ($10 million Admin. request).

Increases were made in the following programs offering "near-term warfighter benefits": $66 million for the Navy's Aegis missile defenses ($1.05 billion Admin. request) and $12 million for more Patriot PAC-3 missiles ($933 million Admin. request).^[12]

Also included in the markup were provisions stipulating an independent study of the proposed European missile defense deployment, an independent study of the future role of the Missile Defense Agency, and a two-year extension of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) annual assessment of the Missile Defense Agency. Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ-2) said he was "very concerned about the deep cuts in missile defense" and expressed hope that the $764 million could be restored by the full committee.^[13] Tauscher emphasized a desire to "restore a sense of accountability and fiscal responsibility" to missile defense efforts.^[14]

Military Space Technologies - Cuts $200 million from the Advanced Infrared Satellite System, $150 million from the Global Positioning Systems (GPS) III, and $80 million from High Integrity GPS. After these cuts, $9.3 billion remains for military space programs in the markup. In order to, in Chairwoman Tauscher's words, "focus on near term war-fighter needs" and "address vulnerabilities in space situational awareness and satellite protection," the markup adds $130 million for space situational awareness capabilities (SSA); $100 million for a fourth Advanced Extremely High Frequency Satellite (AEHF); $100 million for a fourth Space Based Infrared Satellite System satellite (SBIRS); $63 million for modernized GPS equipment; $40 million for GPS II-F satellites 13 through 15; and $30 million for responsive space capabilities.^[15]

Provisions include a requirement that the Director of National Intelligence develop a "Space Protection Strategy" and a prohibition on DoD from eliminating the space-based Nuclear Detection System from future national security satellite architectures. According to Chairwoman Tauscher, these additions are critical "in light of the recent Chinese ASAT test."^[16]

Stockpile Stewardship (SSP) and Life Extension Programs (LEP) - Adds funding to the Stockpile Stewardship Program-which maintains the current nuclear arsenal without resorting to nuclear testing-including $25 million for improvements at the Pantex and Y-12 plants; $15.1 million for National Ignition campaign target design and assembly activities ($10.1 million Admin. request); $5 million for Advanced Simulation and Computing ($586 million Admin. request); and $4 million for the Enhanced Surveillance program. However, $4.2 million was cut from the B-61 Life Extension program ($63 million Admin. request) and further funding was delayed until evaluation was completed on RRW.^[17]

Conventional Trident Modernization (CTM) - Cuts an unspecified amount of funding from the Navy's Conventional Trident Modernization program and limits available funding to research and development only.^[18] Tauscher said that the program was being held up due to uncertainties over U.S. nuclear targeting doctrine and the possibility of misinterpretation of a conventional missile as a nuclear missile that could mistakenly trigger a retaliatory nuclear strike. The Navy requested $1.2 billion for its Trident program in FY2008, a figure that includes costs for CTM, program maintenance and support, and the D5 Missile Life Extension Program.^[19]

Nuclear Weapons Complex - Provides $5.4 billion for defense environmental cleanup programs as requested by the Administration. Provisions are also included directing NNSA to evaluate the "risks to the complex posed by physical and cyber security threats" and to evaluate options for potential changes to "the management of the workforce providing security for the nuclear weapons complex." The latter provision is possibly a reaction to recent security breaches at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.^[20]

U.S. Nuclear Force Posture - Establishes a "congressionally-appointed, bipartisan congressional commission to re-evaluate the U.S. strategic posture." Although the Administration has embarked on a program to begin developing new nuclear weapons and restructuring the U.S. nuclear complex, it hasn't conducted a thorough assessment of U.S. nuclear doctrine and policy since the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review.^[21] This blue-ribbon commission may provide the opportunity for a much-needed independent assessment of the role of nuclear weapons and their use in the coming decades. An April 2007 report by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a January 4, 2007 Wall Street Journal op-ed by George Shultz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger, and Sam Nunn also advocated a rethinking of U.S. nuclear policy.^[22] Chairwoman Tauscher explained that "This commission is designed to help frame the debate over the future direction of our nuclear weapons program and place it in the context of related strategic consideration."^[23] Also included in the markup is a provision directing NNSA to "evaluate the feasibility of accelerating warhead dismantlements."

*Travis Sharp, Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace Fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, assisted in preparing this analysis.

SOURCES

Bill text is available online.

CQ Today (May 2, 2007). Available by subscription only.

Budget details from the May 2, 2007 markup are contained in the opening statement by Chairwoman Ellen Tauscher. Available online.

See the Reliable Replacement Warhead RDTEN Project Justification (Exhibit R-2a), "R-1 Shopping List," Item no. 165, 18 of 20. Available online.

The JASON report is available online. JASON is an independent scientific advisory group that provides consulting services to the U.S. government on matters of defense, science, and technology.

Tauscher opening statement.

Everett opening statement. Available online.

For more information on the proposed Consolidated Plutonium Center and other features of Complex 2030, see Department of Energy, "Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplement to the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement-Complex 2030," October 19, 2006. Available online.

Tauscher opening statement.

See Walter Pincus, "Bipartisan Panel Will Review Nuclear Posture," Washington Post (May 3, 2007). Available online.

Megan Scully and Otto Kreisher, "House Panels Back Missile Defense Cuts, Larger Expansion of Army, Marine Corps," Congress Daily AM (May 3, 2007). Available by subscription only.

For background information on FY2008 requests, see Missile Defense Agency, "Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08) Budget Estimates," released January 31, 2007, available online. "The FY'08 Request for Ballistic Missile Defense," released February 5, 2007, available online; and George C. Marshall Institute, "FY 2008 Presidential Budget Request for National Space Activities," released March 2007, available online.

William Matthews, "U.S. House Panel Cuts Funds For Missile Defense, New Warhead," Defense News (May 2, 2007). Available online.

CQ Today (May 2, 2007). Available by subscription only.

Tauscher opening statement.

Ibid.

For background information on FY2008 requests, see Department of Energy, "FY 2008 Budget Request to Congress," released February 2007, available online; and Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, "Department of Energy Budget Requests for FY 2008 - Nuclear Non-Proliferation Highlights," released February 23, 2007, available online.

The exact amount of funding cut from Conventional Trident Modernization is not publicly known and the professional staff will not reveal the exact amount until the full committee considers the markup.

Department of Defense, "Program Acquisition Costs By Weapon System," DoD Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, released February 2007. Available online.

See, for example, Adam Zagorin, "A Breach in Nuclear Security," Time (April 19, 2007). Available online.

Department of Defense, "Nuclear Posture Review," submitted to Congress December 31, 2001. Excerpts available online.

See the American Association for the Advancement of Science, "The United States Nuclear Weapons Program," released April 2007, available online; and George Schulz, William Perry, Henry Kissinger, and Sam Nunn, "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons," Wall Street Journal (January 4, 2007), available online.

Pincus, "Bipartisan Panel Will Review Nuclear Posture," Washington Post (May 3, 2007).