Title 50, War and National DefenseRelease 119-73not60

§2523c Major Warhead Refurbishment Program

Title 50 › Chapter 42— ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE PROVISIONS › Subchapter II— NUCLEAR WEAPONS STOCKPILE MATTERS › Part A— Stockpile Stewardship and Weapons Production › § 2523c

Last updated Apr 5, 2026|Official source

Summary

Starting in fiscal year 2015 and every year after, the Secretary of Energy must send the congressional defense committees a report for each major warhead refurbishment program that reaches Phase 6.3. Each report must say what other options were looked at before Phase 6.3, compare costs and benefits and the trade-offs among cost, schedule, and performance, identify costs and risks for key technologies (maturity, integration, manufacturing, and demonstration needs), identify costs and risks for required capital assets and infrastructure, compare risks/costs/schedules for any military safety, security, or maintainability requirement (including consolidation or integration) against at least one other feasible option the Nuclear Weapons Council finds appropriate, and include a life‑cycle cost estimate for the chosen option with its cost, scope, and schedule assumptions.

Full Legal Text

Title 50, §2523c

War and National Defense, Source: USLM XML via OLRC

In fiscal year 2015 and subsequent fiscal years, the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the congressional defense committees (as defined in U.S.C. 101(a)(16) 11 So in original. Probably should be “10 U.S.C. 101(a)(16)”.) a report, on each major warhead refurbishment program that reaches the Phase 6.3 milestone, that provides an analysis of alternatives. Such report shall include—
(1)a full description of alternatives considered prior to the award of Phase 6.3;
(2)a comparison of the costs and benefits of each of those alternatives, to include an analysis of trade-offs among cost, schedule, and performance objectives against each alternative considered;
(3)identification of the cost and risk of critical technology elements associated with each alternative, including technology maturity, integration risk, manufacturing feasibility, and demonstration needs;
(4)identification of the cost and risk of additional capital asset and infrastructure capabilities required to support production and certification of each alternative;
(5)a comparative analysis of the risks, costs, and scheduling needs for any military requirement intended to enhance warhead safety, security, or maintainability, including any requirement to consolidate and/or integrate warhead systems or mods as compared to at least one other feasible refurbishment alternative the Nuclear Weapons Council considers appropriate; and
(6)a life-cycle cost estimate for the alternative selected that details the overall cost, scope, and schedule planning assumptions.

Legislative History

Notes & Related Subsidiaries

Editorial Notes

Codification Section was enacted as part of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, and also as part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, and not as part of the Atomic Energy Defense Act which comprises this chapter.

Reference

Citations & Metadata

Citation

50 U.S.C. § 2523c

Title 50, War and National Defense

Last Updated

Apr 5, 2026

Release point: 119-73not60