Nuclear Proliferation and Arms Control Monitoring, Detection, and Verification


Book Description

At the request of Congress, this report presents findings and recommendations related to governance of the U.S. government's monitoring, detection, and verification (MDV) enterprise and offers findings and recommendations related to technical MDV capabilities and research, development, test, and evaluation efforts, focused in particular on the nuclear fuel cycle, nuclear test explosions, and arms control.










Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Preventing and Defending Against Clandestine Nuclear Attack


Book Description

The DSB addressed this threat in previous studies conducted in 1997 (also chaired by Richard Wagner) and 1999/2000 (chaired by Roger Hagengruber). Much has changed since then. The 11 Sept. 2001 attacks demonstrated the intent of terrorists to inflict massive damage. Nuclear proliferation has proceeded apace, with North Korea and Iran achieving nuclear weapon capability or coming closer to it, and it could spread further. The United States is engaged in a war against terrorism, and DoD is beginning to devote significant effort to combating WMD. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been established. Thinking about the threat of clandestine nuclear attack has changed, and some efforts to explore defenses have begun. However, one thing has not changed: little has actually been done against the threat of clandestine nuclear attack. The DSB Summer Study on Transnational Threats (1997) first developed the ambitious idea of a very large, multi-element, global, layered civil/military system of systems of scope sufficient to have some prospect of effectively thwarting this threat. There was little resonance with this vision (outside of the Task Forces in 1997 and 2000), but since then, and especially since the attacks of 11 Sept. 2001, it has begun to be discussed more widely. This report will revisit such a national/global system, largely as context for the main focus of the Task Force: DoD's roles and capabilities. Following briefings from many government agencies and subject matter experts, the Task Force arrived at its basic findings and recommendations in early 2003. Since then, those results have been discussed in over 40 meetings within DoD and elsewhere, leading to certain refinements. This report reflects the outcomes of that process and weaves together viewgraphs used in the discussions with elaborating text.




Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Technology Capabilities of Non-DoD Providers


Book Description

This report is a product of the Defense Science Board (DSB). The DSB is a Federal Advisory Committee established to provide independent advice to the Secretary of Defense. Statements, opinions, conclusions, and recommendations in this report do not necessarily represent the official position of the Department of Defense. Attached is the report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Capabilities of Non-DoD Providers of Science and Technology, Systems Engineering and Test and Evaluation. This Study was requested by the Under Secretary of Defense (AT & L) in the Fall of 1998. The Terms of deterence directed that the Task Force make recommendations on: Non-DoD sources of Science and Technology and Systems Engineering - Processes tor out-sourcing of Science and Technology and System Engineering.




Defense Science Board Task Force report on aerial refueling requirements


Book Description

Aerial refueling capabilities are an essential enabler of U.S. power projection and other critic at national missions. OPERATIONS ENDURING and IRAQI FREEDOM (OEF and OIF) could not have happened without these aerial refueling capabilities. Aerial refueling makes possible rapid deployment of forces to contingencies and the elective employment of those forces in the contingencies. In OIF there were over 8500 aerial refueling sorties flown and about 450 million pounds of fuel off loaded. In addition, aerial refueling remains a critical element in supporting the bomber leg of U.S. nuclear forces and other special national security missions. The task force was charged to evaluate current aerial refueling capability and to identify and evaluate alternative means of meeting future aerial refueling requirements.







Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication


Book Description

The Defense Science Board Summer Study on the Transition to and from Hostilities was formed in early 2004 (the terms of reference are contained in Appendix A) and culminated in the production of a final report and summary briefing in August of 2004. The DSB Task Force on Strategic Communication conducted its deliberations within the overall Summer Study schedule and revisited a topic that was addressed in October 2001.1 Task Force members and Government advisors are identified in Appendix B. The current Strategic Communication Task Force re-examined the purposes of strategic communication and the salience of recommendations in the earlier study. It then considered the following questions: (1) What are the consequences of changes in the strategic communication environment? (2) What Presidential direction and strategic communication means are required? (3) What should be done about public diplomacy and open military information operations? The Task Force met with representatives from the National Security Council (NSC), White House Office of Global Communications, Department of State (DOS), Department of Defense (DOD), Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), and the private sector (the schedule of meetings, briefings and discussions is contained in Appendix C). Based on extensive interaction with a broad range of sectors in the government, commercial, and academic worlds, as well as a series of highly interactive internal debates, we have reached the following conclusions and recommendations.




Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Employment of the National Ignition Facility: Volume 1


Book Description

The DSB Task Force was asked to: ̂ Assess the proposed ignition and "non-ignition" high energy density experimental physics programs at the National Ignition Facility (NIF). ̂ Assess the program's executabitity, particularly with respect to the availability of NIF and supporting technologies. ̂ Assess the overall balance and priority of activities within the proposed plan and the degree to which the proposed program of NIF experiments supports the near- and long-term goats of stockpile stewardship. ̂ Assess the extent to which the major stakeholders in NIF are effectively integrated into the plan The National Ignition Facility and planned programs of high energy density work build on a 30-year program expanding understanding of astrophysics, weapons physics, and other scientific areas of interest. The NIF adds new regimes in pressure, temperature, and density that will, given success in achieving ignition, provide visibility into the physical phenomena at the heart of nuclear explosions, astrophysics, and other very high energy density plasmas. Hence the NIF capability to produce thermonuclear burn will provide the much-needed understanding of the most important remaining question in weapons physics.




Capabilities for Joint Analysis in the Department of Defense


Book Description

This report stems from a congressional request for an independent report about the U.S. Department of Defense s capabilities for joint analysis and ways to improve them. Congressional concerns largely involved the activity called support for strategic analysis (SSA) and whether to revise it. The report recommends making fundamental revisions to the overall planning construct to which SSA contributes."