“There will be no underground testing of RRW. Period,” said Thomas D'Agostino, acting administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration and acting undersecretary of nuclear security.
“That is a commitment that I and others in this administration have made repeatedly, including in testimony to Congress,” he said. “If we are told that we have to test RRW, then we will not move forward with this redesigned nuclear weapon.”
Some, including Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, had expressed concerns that the new warhead design, announced last Friday, would lead the nation to its first nuclear test since a moratorium on testing was put in place in 1992.
“I think we're going down the path of new nuclear weapons, which takes us down the path to new nuclear weapons testing," Matheson said last week.
D'Agostino said the national laboratories have certified that building the new warhead is “technically feasible without testing,” since the design was based on components that have already been tested, and a key criteria for the labs designing the weapon was to produce a warhead that could be certified for use without underground testing.
Robert Nelson, a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said that, in the past, new weapons have had to be tested to be certified as safe and reliable, but if it there is “even a hint it might need to be tested” Congress will put a stop to RRW.
“I think it's probably possible to design a weapon that, with the best judgment, does not need to be tested. [But] judgments can change over time,” Nelson said. “Our point of view is that it's not necessary and it's provocative to the rest of the world and damages our commitment [to non-proliferation].”
The issue of renewed nuclear testing is a sore spot in Utah, where thousands of residents suffer from cancer and other illnesses as a result of their exposure to radioactive fallout from Cold War-era tests.
Last month, the Defense Department canceled a conventional weapons test known as Divine Strake after a flood of local opposition, fearing the bomb test could resuspend radioactive debris at the Nevada Test Site.
The Bush administration's Nuclear Posture Review in 2001 called for a shortened time-frame to resume testing if a serious problem were found in the weapons stockpile. Congress agreed and urged reducing the time needed to prepare a test from two or three years to 18 months. However, Congress has since denied repeated administration requests for funds to move to the 18-month standard.
Matheson introduced legislation in the last two Congresses seeking to require the administration to get approval from Congress before resuming testing and requiring a broad environmental study.
Sens. Bob Bennett and Orrin Hatch introduced similar legislation in 2004 that also offered radiation monitoring equipment to any community that requested it.
Matheson plans to re-introduce his bill this year.
