RECENT UPDATES
FOLLOW-ON SUPPLEMENTAL Sample Comment on the Draft Plutonium Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)
This is a sample supplemental comment for the draft Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). Plutonium pits are the fissile cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. For legal and procedural reasons, this comment should be accepted despite being filed after the official comment period ended on July 16, 2026. This is justified by the fact that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has withheld and is still withholding crucial documents needed for well-informed comment. Please download, edit, and send in your supplemental comment to PitPEIS@nnsa.doe.gov today (and please CC info@pitpeis.com)! We must stand up against NNSA’s lack of transparency.
NEW 2026 JASON Plutonium Aging Executive Summary
“The Pu in the stockpile appears to be aging slowly. The degradation issues that have been observed do not call into question present weapons performance.”
Today, August 6, 2026, is the 81st Anniversary of the U.S. Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima.
Recommended Reading: John Hersey and the horrors of Hiroshima
The American journalist’s account of the Hiroshima bombing and its aftermath, told through the eyes of Japanese survivors, forced the world to reckon with the terrifying power of nuclear weapons.
Iain MacGregor August 5, 2026 engelsbergideas.com
The New START treaty – enforced since 2011 and the last remaining arms‑control agreement between the United States and Russia – expired in February 2026 with nothing to replace it. The final legal barrier limiting the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals was removed, ushering in what analysts describe as a period of Great Power uncertainty. China, meanwhile, is rapidly expanding and modernising its nuclear forces, with its stockpile more than doubling in just five years and further growth expected throughout the decade.
In the Middle East, the erosion of nuclear restraint has accelerated sharply. Recent US-Israeli attacks have pushed Iran closer than ever to abandoning the Nuclear Non‑Proliferation Treaty (NPT): Tehran still possesses enough enriched uranium to place it within short technical reach of multiple nuclear warheads, while senior political and security figures openly debate withdrawal from the NPT as a defensive necessity rather than a diplomatic taboo. The precedent – of a major regional power crossing the nuclear threshold outside any arms‑control framework – would reverberate far beyond the region.
North Korea, emboldened by global fragmentation, insists that its arsenal is ‘irreversible’. Across Europe and Asia, public opinion in countries such as Poland, Turkey and South Korea is shifting toward domestic nuclear capability as confidence in US security guarantees becomes frayed. The precarious equilibrium of the non‑proliferation era is cracking just when the living memory of the bomb’s human cost has never been more vital.
In such a landscape, the work of remembering what nuclear weapons do – not in theory, but to human bodies and cities – becomes urgent again. Eighty years ago, one American writer succeeded in forcing the world to confront this reality. His name was John Hersey, and the story he told in August 1946 in the New Yorker magazine, about the world’s first nuclear strike against the Japanese port city of Hiroshima the previous year, remains one of the clearest moral documents of the atomic age…
Ian MacGregor outlines precisely above the current state and reality of the new nuclear arms race we are now in, more dangerous than the first.
“Rationality will not save us… this is very important: at the end we lucked out. It was luck that prevented nuclear war.” Robert McNamara
A World Without Nuclear Weapons: Trinity Test Commemoration Recording July 19, 2026
From Reflection to Action: An Interfaith Remembrance of the Trinity Test with Archbishop John Wester, Archdiocese of Santa Fe
Event Speakers Include:
- Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch New Mexico
- Tina Cordova, Co-Founder, Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium
- Dr. Michael Ketterer, Professor Emeritus, Northern Arizona University
- Keynote: Secretary James C. Kenney, New Mexico Environment Dept.
Note: You may have already seen this event as a livestream on YouTube. This recording is a significantly improved version with enhanced audio, where you can hear most all of the speakers loudly and clearly.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: July 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Budget: The House of Representatives passed a fiscal 2027 continuing resolution to keep the government running through Dec. 4 (the new fiscal year begins Oct 1). The White House Office of Management and Budget is requesting a series of anomalies, or exceptions, to the CR rule that funding be limited to the levels of the prior fiscal year. One anomaly is for the new Trump-class battleship.
For the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA): it’s the Electrical Power Capacity Upgrade (the new powerline across the Caja del Rio); enhanced subcritical tests at the Nevada National Security Site; and, most dangerous of all, allowing the NNSA to reprogram funding by itself within its Total Weapons Activities budget category.
The Senate is basically doing the same, plus an anomaly for ‘‘21– D–401 Hoisting Capability Project’’ at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. WIPP has been operationally shut down for a few months now due to a burnt-out hoist motor.
The House and Senate must resolve their relatively minor differences and get Trump’s signature before October 1 to prevent a government shutdown.
Regular authorization (the annual Defense Authorization Act) and appropriations are unlikely to move until mid-term elections (~86 days to go).
Plutonium pit production:
- exchangemonitor.com/williams-nnsa-accelerating-plutonium-pit-production-toward-2028-goal/ August 06, 2026 Williams: NNSA accelerating plutonium pit production toward 2028 goal – OMAHA, Neb. – Brandon Williams, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), said here Thursday Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico is accelerating plutonium pit production, with the site targeting 100 pits by December 2028.
- We filed suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for DOE’s “Special Study.” See https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/Nuclear-Weapons-Watchdog-Sues-for-Pit-Production-Special-Study.pdf
- The South Carolina Environmental Law Project sent a letter to DOE/NNSA demanding 3 crucial documents: the “Special Study,” the unclassified summary of the new JASON pit life study, and LANL’s new Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis. See our press release at https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Plaintiffs-Demand-Release-of-Critical-Documents-and-Extension-of-Public-Comment-Period-on-Expanded-Plutonium-Bomb-Core-Production.pdf
- The Pit Production PEIS comment period ended July 16 (81st anniversary of the Trinity Test). We submitted 64-page comments plus exhibits, see nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Formal-Comments-on-the-Pit-Production-Programmatic-Environmental-Impact-Statement.pdf NNSA ignored our demand for a comment period time extension because of the withheld documents.
- We received an unredacted version of the new JASON pit life study (see https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/2026-JASON-Plutonium-Aging-Executive-Summary.pdf). “High Level Finding:… “The Pu in the stockpile appears to be aging slowly. The degradation issues that have been observed do not call into question present weapons performance.” We had received one title page and 2 completely blank narrative pages the day before the PEIS comment period expired.
Other/Related
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2026/08/why-hill-republicans-are-competing-for-nuclear-waste-01015140 Why some Republicans want to bring nuclear waste home – For decades, politicians have treated nuclear waste as politically radioactive. Now, Republicans are competing to bring it home. The Department of Energy announced last week that it had signed memorandums of agreement with Utah, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Idaho to explore creating facilities to support the full nuclear fuel cycle — from enrichment of uranium and fabricating fuel to disposing of waste. Rather than resisting an initiative that could bring more nuclear waste to their states, some Republicans are actively courting the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses, arguing they could anchor advanced nuclear industries and bring billions of dollars in investment.
*Also mixed in with AI and data centers, for which Small Modular Reactors might supply power.
Accelerating Arms Race:
- nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-drafting-new-us-nuclear-strategy-case-regional-war-china-russ-rcna587370 Pentagon drafting a new U.S. nuclear strategy in case of regional war with China or Russia, sources say – The Defense Department’s policy chief is drafting a new U.S. nuclear strategy that emphasizes the possible use of shorter-range tactical weapons in case of a regional war with China or Russia, according to five people familiar with the plans. The new strategy, which is classified, challenges the approach to nuclear weapons that has been settled policy for decades… Colby has long pushed for an emphasis on tactical weapons, arguing that America’s adversaries would simply not believe the U.S. would seriously contemplate launching long-range weapons aimed at wiping out an enemy’s nuclear forces — as is the emphasis of the
- united24media.com/world/nato-weighs-nuclear-expansion-as-poland-finland-lithuania-emerge-as-options-21249NATO Weighs Nuclear Expansion as Poland, Finland, Lithuania Emerge as Options – NATO is currently examining options to position additional American nuclear capabilities across Europe as a response to threats posed by Russia. Poland, Finland, and Lithuania are under consideration as potential host countries, according to Süddeutschen Zeitung on July 31. The discussions include Poland aiming to join the Nuclear Sharing program, Finland lifting its long-standing prohibition on nuclear weapons transit and import, and the Lithuanian parliament reviewing legislation to remove its constitutional ban on nuclear deployments.
- https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/07/saudi-us-nuclear-deal-abraham-accords-123-agreement – What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal – Peaceful nuclear cooperation agreements, known colloquially as 123 agreements (after the relevant section in the U.S. Atomic Energy Act), rarely make headlines, but this one stands out. Although the administration has not yet released the full text, the agreement reportedly will not require Riyadh to categorically forgo fuel cycle activities that would be conducive to a nuclear weapons program (namely enrichment and reprocessing) or to accept the highest standard of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, known as the Additional Protocol, or AP.
Sample Comments for the Draft Plutonium Pit Production Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)
Why should you comment? This process produces valuable information, increases government accountability and transparency, and creates a legal administrative record that has led to important litigation in the past. The Trump administration is severely limiting and removing key opportunities for public comment and objection. Significantly, there is no other legally required opportunity that enables the public to comment on the “modernization” program to keep nuclear weapons forever.
BACKGROUND: The Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is aggressively expanding the production of plutonium pits, the radioactive cores or “triggers” of nuclear weapons. The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico has been capable of producing plutonium pits since 1996, and until 2018 production was capped at no more than 20 pits per year. NNSA now plans to produce up to 205 pits every year for the new arms race, with at least 80 pits per year made at LANL and at least 125 per year at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina.
Grassroots activist organizations Nuclear Watch New Mexico of Santa Fe, NM; Savannah River Site Watch of Columbia, SC; the Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition of coastal Georgia, and Tri-Valley CARES of Livermore, CA successfully sued the NNSA over its failure to complete a required nationwide “programmatic environmental impact statement” (PEIS) for its plan to massively expand plutonium pits production. A draft of this PEIS was released in April 2026, kicking off in-person hearings in Livermore, CA, Santa Fe, NM, Aiken, SC, Kansas City, MO, and Washington, DC, as well as a 90-day public comment period ending July 16, 2026. This provides a unique and critical opportunity for public scrutiny of and formal comment on the government’s plans to make new nuclear bombs for a new arms race!
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: June 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
Budget: Record $1 trillion military budget. Now Trump wants a reconciliation bill that adds $350 billion. He also wants the “Save America” voter suppression Act attached to it which is bound to be ruled not proper by the Senate parliamentarian (reconciliation bills are supposed to deal only with the budget). This could lead to a crisis of some kind.
Favorable polling for Trump is going down with the war in Iran and economic impacts. Will voter suppression will be the only thing that keeps Republicans in control of Congress?
There is also talk of $80 billion supplemental appropriation for the war in Iran.
Defense Authorization Act:
- Passed by House, Senate is considering.
- Hard line House congressional Trumpers want the Save America Act attached to the DAA. That would kill its passage in the Senate and probably won’t happen.
- Proposed 180 pits per year by 2050.
- Numerically expands the US nuclear weapons stockpile to deal with the alleged China threat. This will probably result in MIRVing of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) and more warheads on already MIRVed sub-launched warheads.
- Proposes to more closely integrate US and Israeli military and guarantee $3 billion per year to Israeli military.
Overall trend very bad. Welcome to the new nuclear arms race.
Nuclear Weapons Issues & The Accelerating Arms Race: May 2026
Nuclear Weapons:
https://www.twz.com/nuclear/new-nuclear-bunker-buster-bomb-plans-revealed
New Nuclear Bunker Buster Bomb Plans Revealed The Department of Energy is seeking millions of dollars for work in part on a new bunker-busting nuclear weapon called the Nuclear Deterrent System-Air-delivered (NDS-A) in its latest budget request… Beyond that it will be air-delivered, there are also no details currently available publicly about the weapon’s design, including whether it will be based on something already in the stockpile.
See the graph below found on the Kansas City National Security Complex website. There are three future new-design nuclear weapons on the right above the W93 (“F” is all 3 cases means “Future”). These new-design nuclear weapons presumably will have new-design pits like the W93.
Quotes
Defense Bills Would Create Separate Fund for New Ohio-Class Nuclear Submarines
Far-reaching implications
“The creation of a National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund to pay for an Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine replacement could significantly alter the typically underfunded Navy shipbuilding account, while also establishing a precedent that other military services may attempt to leverage in years to come.”
Justifying Nuclear Weapons
“Both Russia and the United States are now officially and publicly using the other side as a justification for nuclear weapons modernization programs”
– Hans Kristensen, from The Intercept, 2/23/16
U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in Nuclear Arms
“What few Americans realize is that the U.S. is completely rebuilding the production side of its nuclear weapons complex, with new multi-billion dollar factories expected to operate until ~2075. The aim of the for-profit nuclear weapons establishment is a never-ending cycle of exorbitant Life Extension Programs for existing nuclear weapons. These programs will not only extend their service lives for up to six decades but also endow them with new military capabilities, despite denials at the highest levels of government…”
-Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch NM comment on NY Times Article U.S. Ramping Up Major Renewal in Nuclear Arms
This White House has Caved to the Nuclear Priesthood
“The United States can deter any country from using nuclear weapons against America and its treaty allies with a nuclear force that is far smaller, less destabilizing, and less expensive than the one the Pentagon is planning to build.
This White House has caved to the nuclear priesthood in the bureaucracy. Instead of staying on nuclear autopilot, the next administration needs to fundamentally rethink the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy, the costs of implementing the current strategic force modernization program, and the alternatives that could provide greater stability and less risk of nuclear conflict at a much lower cost.”
-Richard Sokolsky, Gordon Adams, Carnegie Endowment, January 18, 2016
For more click here.
Bad Idea. Don’t Do It.
“Let me be crystal clear: There is no such thing as ‘limited use’ nuclear weapons, and for a Pentagon advisory board to promote their development is absolutely unacceptable. This is even more problematic given President Trump’s comments in support of a nuclear arms race.
As Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work testified in 2015, ‘Anyone who thinks they can control escalation through the use of nuclear weapons is literally playing with fire. Escalation is escalation, and nuclear use would be the ultimate escalation.’
Nuclear weapons present us with a paradox: We spend billions of dollars building and maintaining them in the hope that we never have to use them. The sole purpose of nuclear weapons must be to deter their use by others. Designing new low-yield nuclear weapons for limited strikes dangerously lowers the threshold for their use. Such a recommendation undermines the stability created by deterrence, thereby increasing the likelihood of sparking an unwinnable nuclear war.”
-Senator Dianne Feinstein, (D.CA) Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chair
No To a New Generation of ICBMs
“As long as we have ICBMs, there will be the possibility of the President launching them in response to a false alarm. Since the ICBMs are known in fixed locations, they can be attacked and we presume that any nuclear attack on the United States would include attacks against those ICBMs. And therefore, we have a policy called launch-on-warning which means if we have a warning of an attack, then the President would be notified and he has the option of launching those ICBMs before the attack actually reaches its targets.
Now the danger with that, of course, is that if the warning of attack is wrong, if it’s a false alarm, and the President actually launches the ICBMs, he will have no way of calling them back or destroying them in-flight if, in fact, the alarm is a false alarm.So the problem with the ICBMs fundamentally is that if we get a false alarm and the President launches the ICBMs, we will have started a nuclear war capable of ending civilization based on a mistake, based on an accident, based on a false reading. That is not very likely to happen- it’s a low probability- but a low probability with a very, very high consequence. So that’s my concern with the ICBM program and it’s a fundamental concern; as long as we have ICBMs, there will be the possibility of the President launching them in response to a false alarm.”
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)There’s one role- and only one role- for nuclear weapons, and that’s deterrence. We cannot, must not, will not ever countenance their actual use. There’s no such thing as limited nuclear war, and for the Pentagon’s advisory board to even suggest such a thing is deeply troubling.
– Senator Diana Feinstein