World March 26, 2026

Nominee for U.S. Strategic Command Says Current Warhead Assessments Show No Need for Testing

Admiral Richard Correll backs Energy Department and Pentagon certification while officials study how to execute a presidential directive on testing

By Priya Menon
Nominee for U.S. Strategic Command Says Current Warhead Assessments Show No Need for Testing

Admiral Richard Correll, nominated to lead U.S. Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he supports the latest Energy Department and Pentagon finding that the U.S. nuclear arsenal is safe and reliable and that there is no current requirement to resume nuclear warhead tests. His remarks come as officials consider how to implement an October directive from the president to conduct nuclear weapons tests.

Key Points

  • Admiral Richard Correll, nominated to lead U.S. Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee he sees no military need to resume nuclear warhead testing.
  • The Energy Department and Pentagon annually certify the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear arsenal; Correll supported the most recent 2025-2026 certification.
  • Officials are assessing how to implement an October presidential directive to conduct nuclear weapons tests; the last U.S. nuclear warhead test took place in 1992.
  • Sectors impacted include defense (military readiness and defense contractors) and government energy/nuclear labs involved in stockpile stewardship.

WASHINGTON, March 26 - The Navy admiral nominated to take charge of U.S. nuclear forces affirmed that he sees no military need to resume nuclear warhead testing, citing the annual safety and reliability certifications produced by the Energy Department and the Pentagon.

Admiral Richard Correll made the remarks while testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing to become chief of U.S. Strategic Command. Senators asked whether, in his view, there was a current military requirement to conduct nuclear warhead tests - the last of which occurred in 1992.

Correll voiced support for the most recent interagency certification for 2025-2026, noting that the Energy Department and the Pentagon "indicated we have the capabilities and sufficient testing to satisfy ourselves on the reliability and efficacy of our nuclear warheads."

"But we monitor that very closely and I will continue to provide my best military advice."

His testimony arrives as administration officials deliberate on how to carry out a presidential directive issued in October that calls for conducting nuclear weapons tests. Correll emphasized reliance on the regular assessments by the Energy Department and the Pentagon as the basis for his judgment about the current state of the arsenal.

The exchange at the confirmation hearing underscores a practical tension: senior military leaders and civilian agencies responsible for the stockpile report ongoing confidence in warhead performance based on existing evaluation methods, while policymakers have ordered a review of testing options.

Correll did not offer new technical details about the assessments themselves, instead reiterating the departments' recent conclusion that current capabilities and testing regimes suffice to assess warhead reliability and efficacy. He also reaffirmed that oversight and monitoring would remain central to his approach if confirmed.

The hearing centered on the question of whether there is a present military justification for resuming explosive testing of nuclear warheads, and Correll's answer aligned with the most recent formal certification from the responsible departments. At the same time, officials continue to examine how to implement the October directive calling for tests.

His confirmation process and further policy decisions will likely determine whether the status quo is maintained or if testing resumes after decades without explosive warhead tests.

Risks

  • Uncertainty over implementation of the October presidential directive to conduct nuclear weapons tests - impacts defense policy and defense-sector planning.
  • Potential divergence between policymaker directives and military or agency assessments, creating operational or procurement uncertainty for defense and national labs.

More from World

WHO Shifts Emergency Medical Supply Routes from Dubai as Regional Fighting Disrupts Transport Mar 26, 2026 Canada Urges G7 Partners to Back New Multilateral Defence Bank to Finance Small Arms Suppliers Mar 26, 2026 Stalled Negotiations as Washington, Tehran and Jerusalem Set Out Maximal Conditions for an End to Hostilities Mar 26, 2026 German outrage over AI-generated sexual images drives calls for tougher digital-violence laws Mar 26, 2026 France Invites India, South Korea, Brazil and Kenya to G7 Summit as China Stays Away Mar 26, 2026