DOE Budget Boosts Nuclear Weapons Spending, Trims Nonproliferation, Cleanup Programs

President Joe Biden’s proposed fiscal year 2025 (FY25) budget request includes a 3.6 percent boost in Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons programs to nearly $20 billion, an all-time high annual expenditure for the department in the 30-year, $1.5 trillion plan to modernize the nation’s strategic nuclear arsenal.

During a May 1 hearing before a House Energy and Commerce Committee panel, Republicans argued that more money must be committed to DOE and Pentagon nuclear weapons programs and that the nation’s strategic policy must be revised for the first time since the Cold War.

But there was little of that during an hour-long May 22 hearing on the DOE’s $51.42 billion and the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA’s) $25 billion FY25 budget requests before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Energy and Water Development Subcommittee.

In fact, Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said NNSA’s $25 billion plan, an increase of $865 million over this year’s budget, places too much emphasis on weapons development and not enough on nonproliferation and nuclear waste mitigation.

“I want to see a better balance than increasing nuclear weapon activities by 4 percent to nearly $20 billion while decreasing nuclear nonproliferation and clean-up by 4.5 percent and over 2 percent, respectively,” she said.

Related Stories

Ms. Murray was referring to an announcement by House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) that House Republicans will propose 6 percent slashes to nondefense FY25 budget requests contrary to 2023’s Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA), which caps “discretionary” FY25 spending hikes at 1 percent.

“Unfortunately, House Republicans are already once again planning to ignore the bipartisan deal they cut last year and are now pushing through drastic spending cuts … that are going nowhere” in the Senate, she said.

There’s legitimate concern “on both sides” about how FRA spending caps “will undermine our nation’s strength,” Ms. Murray said.

“I share those concerns and have made it clear that any additional resources must be provided equally between the defense and nondefense sides of the ledger” because “both play a vital role in securing our nation’s future,” she said, including nonproliferation and nuclear cleanup efforts such as those at Hanford, Washington.

While she said she disagrees with the allocation mix within NNSA’s $25 billion budget, Ms. Murray expressed confidence the Senate can “set partisanship aside” to settle “these issues in a productive way,” especially in addressing questions about the nation’s nuclear triad—land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and Air Force bombers.

‘Decision to Be Made’

Undersecretary of Energy for Nuclear Security and NNSA Administrator Jill Hruby said the spending plan includes $19.8 billion for weapons development. NNSA delivered 200 nuclear weapons to the DOD in 2023, its annual report notes.

NNSA’s proposed FY25 spending plan also earmarks $2.5 billion for nonproliferation programs and $2.1 billion for naval reactors.

The Biden administration’s proposed $892 billion defense budget earmarks $49.2 billion “to modernize and recapitalize all three legs of our nuclear triad.”

The Biden administration has committed $141 billion to the effort in the past three years, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin told the House Armed Services Committee in April.

However, NNSA and DOD spending plans incorporate none of the recommendations forwarded by the 12-member commission in its fall report, which called for accelerated replacement of aging nuclear weapons stockpiles, advancement of new technologies, and expanding space capabilities.

During a Nov. 15 hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, chair Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) said that among the differences between President Biden’s NPR and the report is the commission’s urgency in identifying Russia’s “alarming stockpile of nuclear weapons,” especially its investments in tactical nuclear weapons, which gives Russia “at least a 10-to-1 advantage over the U.S.”

Russia exploits this advantage with threats to use battlefield nuclear bombs, including recently against the UK and France for assisting Ukraine, and with field exercises—such as those underway now in Belarus—in which such weapons are moved, locked, and loaded by troops.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) said that with Russian President Vladimir Putin “rattling sabers about their nuclear weapons during the war in Ukraine and also the concern about weaponizing space with nuclear weapons,” there’s added anxiety with Russia withdrawing from New START arms control talks with the United States.

There’s no direct communication with Russia right now, Ms. Hruby said, but there’s plenty of discussion.

“The approach we’ve taken … is, since we’re not talking to our adversaries, let’s double down on talking to our allies and partners,” she said. “We’ve spent a lot of time in NATO and Asia, with our partners around the world. This environment is creating a great deal of cooperation. I say the nuclear IQ is higher than it’s been in a long time.”

DOE Secretary Jennifer Granholm defended the administration’s strategic spending, noting that since President Biden took office, weapons development has increased by 22 percent.

“The growing cooperation between Russia and China and Iran and North Korea has created a more dynamic, less predictable international environment, increased saber-rattling, and aggression against our allies and cyberattacks,” she said.

The proposed plan gives NNSA “the means to deliver and adapt in the face of these evolving threats,” Ms. Granholm said.

That’s certain to be debated in Congress this summer. The House Armed Services Committee is expected to soon call for significant boosts in nuclear weapons spending and for revisions outlined by the commission’s fall report.

Regarding the looming debate, Ms. Hruby said, “When it’s finished, there’s a decision to be made.”