Future Nuclear Weapons Spending Contradicts Obama's World View

During the Asian summit meeting ending today, one of the subjects was how to secure loose nuclear materials. Although securing such materials is a very laudable undertaking, it will not take us to the nuclear weapons-free world that President Obama envisioned in a Middle East speech early in his presidency. I am indebted to the Peace Action New York State's fact sheets on nuclear weapons spending to show how far we are diverging from the vision that Obama presented.

CMRR
The Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) Project at Los Alamos National Laboratory is designed to replace the existing CMR building, which is designed to perform technical analyses on materials, particularly the plutonium used in U.S. nuclear weapons. President Obama zeroed it out of the FY 2013 budget.

CMRR will not help with warhead maintenance: seven of the eight warhead types in the stockpile are in or will soon undergo major Life Extension Programs (LEPs).

Not building the CMRR nuclear facility could save $3-5 billion. Not expanding pit production could save tens of billions more over the long term. Pits are the triggers to ignite the plutonium in a nuclear bomb.

The Project will not create any new jobs, because employees will be shifted over from the old facility.

MOX Fuel
The Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX plant) was originally designed to reduce quantities of excess U.S. and Russian weapons-grade plutonium. The centerpiece is the Savannah River site near Aiken, South Carolina.

The Department of Energy has stated that the current projected life-cycle costs of the program have increased to $7.1 billion.

There is currently no U.S. customer for MOX fuel. MOX increases proliferation dangers and is a more expensive option for disposing of plutonium than dry cask storage. The Global Threat Reduction Initiative is a more effective non-proliferation program.

LRPB
The U.S. currently has a fleet of nuclear-capable strategic bombers that will last well into the 2030s. Delaying the Long Range Penetrating Bomber (LRPB) for ten years would save at least $3.7 billion in research and development costs.Canceling it would save $50 billion in procurement costs alone. The five-year cost is $6.3 billion. The LRPB was not in the 2012 Aircraft Procurement Plan projecting ten years ahead. Its mission would be dropping nuclear gravity bombs.

There are now 76 B-52 Hs and 18 B-2s.Through 2016 the plan is to spend an additional $1.1 billion for the B-52s and $2.9 billion for the B-2s, and eventually purchase 80-100 LRPBs. $30 billion in procurement costs could be saved if the 30-year LRPB program was canceled.

SSBNCX
The Navy's nuclear-capable ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) fleet is currently comprised of 14 Ohio class submarines, of which 12 are operational and two are in refueling overhaul at any given time. The Ohio class submarines will be retired between 2027 and 2040.

The Navy has plans to build 12 new nuclear-capable submarines (SSBNCX) over the next 30 years as replacements. They are intended to be operational through 2070. There is $565 million in the FY2013 budget for the SSBNCX. According to the Ploughshares Fund, cutting procurement to eight subs would save $27 billion over ten years, or $123 billion over the 50-year life of the program. The SSBNCX will cost $347 billion over its lifetime.

Eight subs of the Ohio class can carry 192 Trident II D-5 missiles with 1,536 warheads; and eight of the new subs, with 16 tubes, could carry 128 missiles with 1,024 warheads.

The SSBNCX and the other future nuclear weapons spending contradicts President Obama's pledge to work toward a nuclear weapons-free world; also, the building programs violate the provision in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which requires signatory states to work toward the elimination of nuclear weapons.