Last week, the Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) & the US Navy announced they have settled on a design for a "new generation of atomic warheads." Should the new design - dubbed the "Reliable Replacement Warhead" - go into production, it would be the first new nuclear weapon built by the United States since the end of the Cold War.

The new weapon design, touted as "critical to sustaining long-term confidence in our nuclear deterrent," is the result of the Bush administration's 2001 Nuclear Posture Review & is a departure from the policies of previous administrations, which put stockpiles through a "life-extension process every 20 to 30 years."

The NNSA is expected to "define a cost schedule & a production plan" over the next 10 months, though the Bush administration has already included US$88 million for the new weapon in its 2008 budget request & the program would require significant upgrades to the nation's nuclear weapons production facilities. Democrat Congressman Peter J. Visclosky, who chairs the subcommittee in charge of funds for upgrading the weapons production facilities, has criticized the Bush administration for failing to present a "clear, coherent national policy to justify the new warhead."

In addition, the previous chair of the same committee, Republican Congressman David L. Hobson, also denied the administration's request for funding for the development of a nuclear "bunker buster" weapon. Instead, he encouraged the creation of a program to upgrade the reliability of the nation's current nuclear arsenal.

As the Washington Post reports, "the Bush administration turned this into a program to develop a new nuclear warhead."

Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein is "100 percent opposed" to the production of the Reliable Replacement Weapon. "You are essentially creating a new nuclear weapon. And it's just a matter of time before other nations do the same thing," she said.