The Air Force presently deploys 450 Minuteman III ICBMs in fixed, land- based launch facilities (or “silos”), located on three bases that encompass vast regions of the United States. Three missile wings—the 90th Missile Wing, 91st Missile Wing, and 341st Missile Wing, which fall under the command of Air Force Global Strike Command—operate the ICBM force. Each ICBM carries up to three W78 warheads, or a single W87 warhead. In fiscal year 2007, the Air Force began deploying W87 warheads, while reducing the number of deployed W78 warheads. To support U.S. Strategic Command’s operational requirements, the Air Force maintains nearly all of the ICBMs on alert at any given time. DOD has not finalized the force structure and warhead requirements for the Minuteman III under the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). DOD last reported on its plans to implement the treaty in May 2012, when it informed Congress that the Air Force would deploy up to 420 Minuteman III ICBMs by 2018,Based on the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review Report, the Air Force plans to retain the ability to redeploy additional warheads on the Minuteman III in case technical problems occur with other strategic delivery systems or warheads. In April 2013, DOD informed Congress that the decision on how to meet the New START limits will be finalized before the beginning of fiscal year 2015. each carrying only a single warhead. Like the Air Force, the Navy also maintains and operates nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. Nuclear-armed Trident II SLBMs are deployed on 14 Ohio-class fleet ballistic missile submarines, 12 of which are operational at any given time, while 2 are in overhaul. Each submarine currently carries 24 SLBMs, and each SLBM carries either multiple W76-0/1 warheads or W88 warheads. NNSA is refurbishing the W76 warhead, and plans to upgrade key nonnuclear components of the W88 warhead beginning in fiscal year 2019. Unlike the Air Force, not all of the Navy’s ballistic missile force structure is on alert at any given time. Since 1994, the United States has retained a stockpile of nondeployed weapons, called the hedge, in order to mitigate risks posed by unforeseen technical problems with deployed weapons, or posed by changes in the international security environment. As of September 2012, the Air Force maintained both W78 warheads and W87 warheads in the hedge, and the Navy maintained W76-0/1 warheads in the hedge. All of the Navy’s W88 warheads are either operationally deployed or retained as spares to be used when deployed weapons are withdrawn for maintenance. Air Force and Navy warheads were designed with unique aeroshells, which differ in size, weight, and payload capacities. The W78 warhead is encased in the Air Force Mk12A aeroshell, and the W87 warhead is encased in the Mk21 aeroshell. The W88 warhead is encased in the Navy’s Mk5 aeroshell, which, while smaller than the Mk21, is comparable to the Mk21 in volume and payload capacity. A number of DOD and DOE organizations oversee the nuclear weapons enterprise, which includes the military forces, military and civilian organizations, nuclear weapons design laboratories, and nuclear weapons production plants that support DOD’s nuclear deterrence mission: DOD and DOE, specifically NNSA, share responsibility under the Phase 6.X process for nuclear weapons refurbishments and life- extension programs. In addition to the W78/88-1 life-extension program, NNSA is producing W76-1 warheads for the Navy, and plans to begin producing B61-12 gravity bombs for the Air Force in fiscal year 2019. NNSA also plans to initiate a life-extension program for a cruise missile warhead, with production beginning in 2024. The Air Force and Navy develop strategic delivery systems such as ICBMs and SLBMs, and provide personnel, training, and equipment for nuclear operations. In addition to the effort to replace the Minuteman III ICBM, the Air Force plans to replace the nuclear-armed air-launched cruise missile and develop a new, nuclear- capable bomber. The Navy is acquiring a replacement for the Ohio- class submarine, and plans to replace the Trident II SLBM in the 2040s. Air Force Global Strike Command provides operational ICBM forces and is responsible for preparing the Minuteman III follow-on study, and the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center oversees Minuteman III sustainment activities. The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center also chairs the W78/88-1 Project Officers Group. Navy Strategic Systems Programs is the Navy’s technical authority for nuclear weapons systems and strategic forces; engages in activities for Navy SLBMs and warhead requirements and modernization; and chairs the project officers groups for Navy warheads. Strategic Systems Programs cochairs the W78/88-1 Project Officers Group with the Air Force. The Commander of U.S. Strategic Command, following guidance and direction provided by the President, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, develops an operational plan and identifies targets for nuclear forces. NNSA’s Office of Defense Programs plans and coordinates NNSA activities to maintain the nuclear weapons stockpile. A national complex of three nuclear weapons design laboratories, four production plants, and the Nevada National Security Site carry out the Office of Defense Programs’ mission. NNSA plans to modernize its plutonium and uranium processing capabilities at Los Alamos, New Mexico, and Oak Ridge, Tennessee, respectively. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, in California, Los Alamos National Laboratory, in New Mexico, and Sandia National Laboratories, in New Mexico and California, are involved in the warhead feasibility study. The Nuclear Weapons Council is the joint DOD and DOE activity responsible for matters related to executive-level management of the nuclear weapons stockpile. Established by statute in 1986, the council facilitates cooperation and coordination between the two departments to evaluate, maintain, and ensure the safety, security, and control of the nuclear weapons stockpile. Among its responsibilities, the Nuclear Weapons Council prepares the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum on behalf of the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, which is transmitted to the President and, if approved, serves as the basis for the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Plan. In November 2012, to synchronize NNSA nuclear weapons life-extension programs, DOD platform modernization programs, and NNSA plans for recapitalizing key nuclear weapons production infrastructure, the Nuclear Weapons Council adopted a long-term baseline plan for the nuclear weapons enterprise. The council’s baseline plan featured the development of interoperable warheads, beginning with the W78/88-1 life-extension program. DOD has identified capability requirements and potential basing options for the Minuteman III follow-on ICBM; however, neither the Air Force nor NNSA are required to estimate the total system costs for both the missile and warhead for the Nuclear Weapons Council to review; moreover, the Air Force does not identify the council as a stakeholder to synchronize the Minuteman III follow-on study with the W78/88-1 life-extension program. The potential options under consideration in the Minuteman III follow-on study include maintaining the existing Minuteman III, upgrading the Minuteman III, and developing a new missile on mobile launchers. Although the Nuclear Weapons Council is responsible for coordinating budget matters pertaining to nuclear weapons programs between DOD and DOE, and is engaging in an effort to broadly synchronize warhead life-extension programs with delivery system modernization efforts, it has not requested that either the Air Force or NNSA estimate the total system costs of the missile and warhead. Moreover, neither the Air Force nor NNSA are required to prepare cost estimates that identify the total system costs for both the Minuteman III follow-on system and the W78/88-1 warhead for the Nuclear Weapons Council’s review. Furthermore, the Air Force has not identified the council as a stakeholder to provide guidance on synchronizing the Minuteman III follow-on study with the W78/88-1 life- extension program, even though it is responsible for coordinating the programming of nuclear weapons programs between DOD and NNSA, such as a nuclear weapon life-extension program. Without timely and relevant information on the projected costs and findings of the Minuteman III follow-on study, the Nuclear Weapons Council may be unable to provide guidance to the Air Force on the study, or consider the study’s implications and potential effects on other nuclear weapons modernization efforts as it revises its baseline plan. DOD has identified capability requirements and alternative basing options to be analyzed in the Minuteman III follow-on study, consistent with the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review Report. With this review, DOD was directed to study potential alternatives for the Minuteman III, with the objective of defining a cost-effective approach that supports continued reductions in U.S. nuclear weapons while maintaining stable deterrence. To prepare the initial capabilities document, the Air Force examined a range of potential scenarios involving nuclear combat between 2025 and 2075, and concluded that ICBMs provide a stabilizing influence through dispersed basing, alert posture, and high day-to-day readiness. However, the initial capabilities document also found that while the Minuteman III currently provides a robust deterrent, it is an aging weapon system that requires enhancement, recapitalization, replacement, or development of a new capability. The Air Force’s list of ICBM capability requirements is presented in table 1.