• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Subcommittee Chair Ellen Tauscher Strategic Forces Subcommittee Hearing on the Department of Energy Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Request for Atomic Energy Defense Activities

March 12, 2008

"Good morning. This hearing of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee will come to order. Today, we will consider the Department of Energy's Fiscal Year 2009 budget request for Atomic Energy Defense Activities.

"Let me begin by welcoming our distinguished witnesses:

"I want to thank our witnesses for appearing before the subcommittee. General Smolen, I believe this is your first appearance before the committee, and we welcome you.

"The Fiscal Year 2009 budget request for the Department of Energy is just over 25 billion dollars. The Armed Services Committee annually authorizes about two-thirds of this total for Atomic Energy Defense Activities.

"For FY 2009, the request of 15.9 billion dollars for these programs is 770 million more than was appropriated in FY 2008.

"This committee and I are strong supporters of the critical missions embodied in your respective program areas: maintaining and ensuring the reliability, safety and security of our nuclear deterrent; conducting the scientific research and production activities necessary to support that deterrent; keeping our nuclear weapons and the weapons complex safe from physical and other threats; leading the government's international nuclear non-proliferation efforts; and cleaning up the environmental legacy of decades of nuclear stockpile work.

"We are eager to hear your testimony on the Fiscal Year 2009 budget request. I am especially interested in your thoughts about five issues:

"First, does the budget include the right investments in the Stockpile Stewardship Program?

"While the Reliable Replacement Warhead proposal was slowed in fiscal year 2008, we must continue efforts to strengthen the Stewardship Program. That means both the scientific tools that are coming on line, such as the second axis at DARHT, the National Ignition Facility and the world class scientists and engineers that deploy those tools to execute the Stewardship mission. And we expect a steadfast and sustained commitment to fulfill the requirements to initiate the ignition campaign in 2010 and provide full funding to do so.

"In that context, what is the current path forward for the RRW proposal, and when will you deliver to Congress the long-promised 'White Paper' on nuclear weapons policy? How do these plans affect Complex Transformation?

"Second - and I asked this a year ago - does the budget properly balance various safety and security priorities? Can the NNSA bring the Complex into compliance with the 2005 DBT standards while addressing rapidly escalating cyber security threats?

"Third, does the budget support the various commitments the federal government has made within the cleanup program?

"Fourth, does the budget adequately support consolidation of special nuclear materials? How do consolidation plans affect the broad areas of stockpile stewardship, complex modernization, nonproliferation, safety and security, and environmental cleanup?

"Finally, I would like to know why the defense nuclear nonproliferation budget is cut below the FY 2008 funded level in a number of areas, including verification research and development, and nonproliferation and international security.

"These programs are some of the best national security investments this nation makes, and anything less than robust funding is difficult to understand.

"These are the kinds of concerns we hope you will address in your statements and during our discussion that will follow your testimony.

"With that, let me turn to my good friend, our Ranking Member Mr. Everett, for any comments he may have."