July 7, 2004, No. 92 During a brief exchange on the Senate floor during
consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act, reassurance
was sought and provided that future nuclear weapons testing requires
the permission of Congress. The exchange occurred on June 23 between
Robert Bennett (R-Utah), Jon Kyl (R-Arizona), and Carl Levin (D-Michigan).
Utah is downwind of the Nevada Test Site, and some of Bennett's constituents
are worried that the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) project
would require resumption of testing. The website for Bennett's office
has a section devoted to nuclear testing which includes newspaper articles
and excerpts from a March 23 appropriations hearing transcript.
At this hearing, Bennett pressed the Administrator of the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Linton F. Brooks, about whether
the Bush Administration anticipates "testing at any foreseeable
time in the future." Brooks replied "we do not now foresee,"
and reiterated that Congress would have to fund such testing. The current
NNSA appropriations bill allocates $24.9 million for Nevada Test Site
readiness. The accompanying report states, "The conferees remind
the Administration that Congressional authorization must be obtained
before proceeding with specific activities that support the resumption
of testing." Brooks confirmed the need for congressional approval,
but added, "If I find a problem that can only be verified through
testing, I would not hesitate to recommend to the secretary and he would
not hesitate to recommend to the president that we test. I have no reason
to believe I'm going to find that problem. But it is a hedge against
the possibility of finding that problem that we have asked for the money
to ensure that we are ready if that contingency occurs. We have no reason
to believe it's going to occur." Later, Bennett met with Brooks
and also with Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz about nuclear
weapons testing. Both subsequently sent letters to Bennett reiterating
their positions about future testing (see below.)
To further reinforce the requirement for congressional authorization
for testing, Bennett engaged Kyl and Levin in a colloquy on the Senate
floor on June 23. A colloquy is establishes a legislative record. Bennett
first asked Kyl "if he agrees that under current law, a vote from
Congress would have to occur before a test could be conducted on RNEP?"
Kyl replied, "yes, I agree that Congress would have to vote before
a test could be conducted." Bennett asked the same question of
Levin, the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
who replied that, "Yes. I, too, agree that Congress would have
to vote before a test could be conducted."
Bennett had originally planned to offer an amendment to the defense
authorization bill reiterating the need for congressional authorization
to resume testing. He decided not to, stating, "I have been dissuaded
from offering that amendment by the arguments of some of my friends
who insist it is unnecessary because it would be simply a statement
of existing law. I wanted to be sure that was the case, and therefore
I sought assurances from both the Department of Energy and the Department
of Defense." Selections from the Brooks and Wolfowitz letters,
which Bennet placed in the June 23 Congressional Record (p. S7275) follow:
- June 15 letter from NNSA Administrator Brooks to Senator Bennett:
"First, let me state unequivocally this Administration
has no current plans or requirements to conduct an underground nuclear
test. The Stockpile Stewardship Program is working today to ensure
that America's nuclear deterrent is safe, secure and reliable. Currently
there are no issues of sufficient concern to warrant a nuclear test.
I certainly understand the concerns you and your constituents in Utah
have with nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site. However, I believe
it is critical to maintain a readiness capability at the NTS to conduct
such a test in the future if called for by the President of the United
States, in order to ensure the safety and/or reliability of a weapon
system. Therefore, I believe it is important for us to work together
to ensure that the NNSA test readiness program continues to make safety
a top priority.
"Furthermore, I know you are concerned that the ongoing
RNEP study could lead to the resumption of underground nuclear testing.
The RNEP study will not require an underground nuclear test. Should
the President support, and Congress approve, full-scale engineering
development of RNEP, the Administration does not intend to conduct
a nuclear test. From the beginning, we have operated under the assumption
that resuming testing to certify RNEP is not an option and for that
reason, more than any other, the RNEP study is only looking at two
existing weapon systems, the B-61 and the B-83. Both are well-proven
systems with an extensive test pedigree from the 1970s and 80s. I
would be happy to work with you and the Senate Armed Services Committee
to address your concerns on this sensitive matter."
- June 23 letter from Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz
to Bennett:
"I understand that you have concerns about the Department's
plans to study options for a Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP)
that would give the United States the capability to threaten hardened,
deeply buried targets in hostile nations. Specifically, you have raised
concerns that the development of such a system could require the resumption
of underground nuclear testing.
"I want to assure you that the Administration has no
plans to conduct an underground nuclear test associated with the development
of RNEP. As National Nuclear Security Administration Administrator
Linton Brooks recently wrote to you, ‘the RNEP study is only
looking at two existing weapon systems, the B-61 and B-83. Both are
well-proven systems with an extensive test pedigree from the 1970s
and 80s.'
"If RNEP were to move from its current study phase to
development, such plans would be part of the Administration's annual
budget request to Congress. The Administration's intentions concerning
underground nuclear testing during RNEP development, if different
from our current intentions, would be explicit in that request. Congress
would have the opportunity at that time to debate and pass judgment
on those plans."
Richard M. Jones
Media and Government Relations Division
American Institute of Physics
fyi@aip.org
301-209-3095
Enlarge text
Shrink text
Print
E-mail
Digg this
Del.icio.us
Furl