Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Directors”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 541 records · Page 30
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2013

Support of US CLIVAR Project Office 2012

Director of JOSS, supervised the U.S. CLIVAR Project Office Director and helped direct the officer to enhance the goals and objectives of the U.S. CLIVAR Project and budget. Financial Manager of JOSS, worked to complete proposals and monitor compliance with award requirements and funding limitations and ensure the U.S. CLIVAR Project Office complied with UCAR policies and procedures. Project Coordinator administered the funding for the U.S. CLIVAR Project Office and was responsible for coordinating special projects that required additional support from JOSS technical staff. These projects included activities such as website updates, technology upgrades, production of printed reports, and development of graphic elements like logos. Web Developer worked both on web development and graphic work and the work consisted of the following: Maintaining the site ? installing updates to Drupal CMS (Content Management System). Creating new templates for webpages and styling them with CSS and JavaScript/jQuery code. Fixing the styling on webpages that the content contributor/manager (Jenn Mays) created and has had trouble with. Creating new web forms for abstract uploading, subscriptions, and meeting registrations. Created 4 webpages for the ?ASP: Key Uncertainties in the Global Carbon-Cycle? meeting. Developed a document review form, instruction webpages, login redirect, dynamic table with form submissions for the US CLIVAR SSC Science Plan Document Review. This was open to the public from June 12, 2013 until July 10, 2013. During this time the user accounts had to be checked (daily) that were created by the public, to delete any spam ones. Graphics work: preparing images for general use on webpages, webpage banners, and for meeting name badges, creating a US CLIVAR letterhead, redesigning the US AMOC logo. System Administrator spent time working on the migration of the US CLIVAR site from the USGCRP office to UCAR here Boulder. This was done to increase the general speed of the site & to allow the web developer to work in it more efficiently. Main tasks were to Archive the old Site, create new development site for web developer, and move web address to new website when web developer was finished with development. There are no patients or equipment related to this proposals

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2014

National Ignition Facility, High-Energy-Density and Inertial Confinement Fusion, Peer-Review Panel (PRP) Final Report

The National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is operated as a National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) user facility in accordance with Department of Energy (DOE) best practices, including peer-reviewed experiments, regular external reviews of performance, and the use of a management structure that facilitates user and stakeholder feedback. NIF facility time is managed using processes similar to those in other DOE science facilities and is tailored to meet the mix of missions and customers that NIF supports. The NIF Governance Plan describes the process for allocating facility time on NIF and for creating the shot schedule. It also includes the flow of responsibility from entity to entity. The plan works to ensure that NIF meets its mission goals using the principles of scientific peer review, including transparency and cooperation among the sponsor, the NIF staff, and the various user communities. The NIF Governance Plan, dated September 28, 2012, was accepted and signed by LLNL Director Parney Albright, NIF Director Ed Moses, and Don Cook and Thomas D’Agostino of NNSA. Figure 1 shows the organizational structure for NIF Governance.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2014

NIF Operations Management Plan, August 2011

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL) National Ignition Facility (NIF) is a key component of the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) Stockpile Stewardship Program, whose purpose is to maintain the safety, reliability, and effectiveness of our nation’s nuclear stockpile without underground nuclear testing. The NIF is crucial to the Stockpile Stewardship Program because it is the only facility that can create the conditions of extreme temperature and pressure—conditions that exist only in stars or in exploding nuclear weapons—that are relevant to understanding how our modern nuclear weapons operate. As such, the NIF’s primary mission is to attain fusion ignition in the laboratory. Fusion ignition not only supports Stockpile Stewardship needs, but also provides the basis for future decisions about fusion’s potential as a long-term energy source. Additionally, NIF provides scientists with access to high-energy-density regimes that can yield new insight and understanding in the areas of astrophysics, hydrodynamics, material properties, plasma physics, and radiative properties. The use of the NIF to support the Stockpile Stewardship Program and the advancement of basic high-energy-density science understanding is planned and managed through program-level execution plans and NIF directorate-level management teams. An example of a plan is the National Ignition Campaign Execution Plan. The NIF Operations Management Plan provides an overview of the NIF Operations organization and describes how the NIF is supported by the LLNL infrastructure and how it is safely and responsibly managed and operated. Detailed information on NIF management of the organization is found in a series of supporting plans, policies, and procedures. A list of related acronyms can be found in Appendix A of this document. The purpose of this document is to provide a roadmap of how the NIF Operations organization functions. It provides a guide to understanding the requirements, document flow down, organizational vision and mission, performance metrics, and interrelationship of the NIF Operations organization with other directorate and laboratory organizations. This document also provides a listing of roles and responsibilities, core processes, procedures, authority matrices, change control boards, and other information necessary for successfully functioning in the NIF Operations organization. This document, the NIF Shot Operations Plan, and the NIF Maintenance Plan together represent the primary documents satisfying our Conduct of Operations compliance requirement.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2015

Bridging the PSI Knowledge Gap: A Multi-Scale Approach

Plasma-surface interactions (PSI) pose an immense scientific hurdle in magnetic confinement fusion and our present understanding of PSI in confinement environments is highly inadequate; indeed, a recent Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee report found that 4 out of the 5 top five fusion knowledge gaps were related to PSI. The time is appropriate to develop a concentrated and synergistic science effort that would expand, exploit and integrate the wealth of laboratory ion-beam and plasma research, as well as exciting new computational tools, towards the goal of bridging the PSI knowledge gap. This effort would broadly advance plasma and material sciences, while providing critical knowledge towards progress in fusion PSI. This project involves the development of a Science Center focused on a new approach to PSI science; an approach that both exploits access to state-of-the-art PSI experiments and modeling, as well as confinement devices. The organizing principle is to develop synergistic experimental and modeling tools that treat the truly coupled multi-scale aspect of the PSI issues in confinement devices. This is motivated by the simple observation that while typical lab experiments and models allow independent manipulation of controlling variables, the confinement PSI environment is essentially self-determined with few outside controls. This means that processes that may be treated independently in laboratory experiments, because they involve vastly different physical and time scales, will now affect one another in the confinement environment. Also, lab experiments cannot simultaneously match all exposure conditions found in confinement devices typically forcing a linear extrapolation of lab results. At the same time programmatic limitations prevent confinement experiments alone from answering many key PSI questions. The resolution to this problem is to usefully exploit access to PSI science in lab devices, while retooling our thinking from a linear and de-coupled extrapolation to a multi-scale, coupled approach. The PSI Plasma Center consisted of three equal co-centers; one located at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, one at UC San Diego Center for Energy Research and one at the UC Berkeley Department of Nuclear Engineering, which moved to the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) with Professor Brian Wirth in July 2010. The Center had three co-directors: Prof. Dennis Whyte led the MIT co-center, the UCSD co-center was led by Dr. Russell Doerner, and Prof. Brian Wirth led the UCB/UTK center. The directors have extensive experience in PSI and material research, and have been internationally recognized in the magnetic fusion, materials and plasma research fields. The co-centers feature keystone PSI experimental and modeling facilities dedicated to PSI science: the DIONISOS/CLASS facility at MIT, the PISCES facility at UCSD, and the state-of-the-art numerical modeling capabilities at UCB/UTK. A collaborative partner in the center is Sandia National Laboratory at Livermore (SNL/CA), which has extensive capabilities with low energy ion beams and surface diagnostics, as well as supporting plasma facilities, including the Tritium Plasma Experiment, all of which significantly augment the Center. Interpretive, continuum material models are available through SNL/CA, UCSD and MIT. The participating institutions of MIT, UCSD, UCB/UTK, SNL/CA and LLNL brought a formidable array of experimental tools and personnel abilities into the PSI Plasma Center. Our work has focused on modeling activities associated with plasma surface interactions that are involved in effects of He and H plasma bombardment on tungsten surfaces. This involved performing computational material modeling of the surface evolution during plasma bombardment using molecular dynamics modeling. The principal outcomes of the research efforts within the combined experimental – modeling PSI center are to provide a knowledgebase of the mechanisms of surface degradation, and the influence of the surface on plasma conditions.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2015

Neutron Characterization of Additively Manufactured Components. Workshop Report

Additive manufacturing (AM) is a collection of promising manufacturing methods that industry is beginning to explore and adopt. Macroscopically complicated and near net shape components are being built using AM, but how the material behaves in service is a big question for industry. Consequently, AM components/materials need further research into exactly what is made and how it will behave in service. This one and a half day workshop included a series of invited presentations from academia, industry and national laboratories (see Appendix A for the workshop agenda and list of talks). The workshop was welcomed by Alan Tennant, Chief Scientist, Neutron Sciences Directorate, ORNL, and opened remotely by Rob Ivestor, Deputy Director, Advanced Manufacturing Office-DOE, who declared AM adoptees as titans who will be able to create customized 3-D structures with 1 million to 1 billion micro welds with locally tailored microstructures. Further he stated that characterization with neutrons is key to be able to bring critical insight/information into the AM process/property/behavior relationship. Subsequently, the presentations spanned a slice of the current state of the art AM techniques and many of the most relevant characterization techniques using neutrons. After the talks, a panel discussion was held; workshop participants (see Appendix B for a list of attendees) providing questions and the panel answers. The main purpose of the panel discussion was to build consensus regarding the critical research needs in AM that can be addressed with neutrons. These needs were placed into three categories: modes of access for neutrons, new capabilities needed, new AM material issues and neutrons. Recommendations from the workshop were determined based on the panel discussion.

Watkins, Thomas R.↗
DOE OSTI2016

2014 Fermilab Laboratory Directoed Research \& Development Annual Report

After initiation by the Fermilab Laboratory Director, a team from the senior Laboratory leadership and a Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Advisory Committee developed an implementation plan for LDRD at Fermilab for the first time. This implementation was captured in the approved Fermilab 2014 LDRD Program Plan and followed directions and guidance from the Department of Energy (DOE) order, DOE O 413.2B, a “Roles, Responsibilities, and Guidelines, …” document, and examples of best practices at other DOE Office of Science Laboratories. At Fermilab, a FY14 midyear Call for Proposals was issued. A LDRD Selection Committee evaluated those proposals that were received and provided a recommendation to the Laboratory Director who approved seven LDRD projects. This Annual Report focuses on the status of those seven projects and provides an overview of the current status of LDRD at Fermilab. The seven FY14 LDRD approved projects had a date of initiation late in FY14 such that this report reflects approximately six months of effort approximately through January 2015. The progress of these seven projects, the subsequent award of six additional new projects beginning in FY15, and preparations for the issuance of the FY16 Call for Proposals indicates that LDRD is now integrated into the overall annual program at Fermilab. All indications are that LDRD is improving the scientific and technical vitality of the Laboratory and providing new, novel, or cutting edge projects carried out at the forefront of science and technology and aligned with the mission and strategic visions of Fermilab and the Department of Energy.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Investigations into the metabolic diversity of microorganisms as part of microbial diversity

DOE funds supported a key portion of the MBL Microbial Diversity (Woods Hole) program across 6 complete summers. The initial 4 years of the funded period were overseen by two co-Directors, Daniel Buckley (Cornell) and Steve Zinder (Cornell), who then completed their term. The final 2 summers were overseen by 2 new co-Directors, Jared R. Leadbetter (Caltech) and Dianne Newman (Caltech). The 6 funded summer iterations of the course included the incorporation of new themes such as single cell approaches applied to natural microbial communities (cell separation and sorting, genome amplification from single cells, and the use of Nano-SIMS to examine assimilation of carbon and nitrogen from isotopically labeled substrates into single cells), genetics and genomics on bacteria freshly isolated during the course of the programs, quantitative systems biology, and modern quantitative light microscopy.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

States of Cybersecurity: Electricity Distribution System Discussions

State and local entities that oversee the reliable, affordable provision of electricity are faced with growing and evolving threats from cybersecurity risks to our nation's electricity distribution system. All-hazards system resilience is a shared responsibility among electric utilities and their regulators or policy-setting boards of directors. Cybersecurity presents new challenges and should be a focus for states, local governments, and Native American tribes that are developing energy-assurance plans to protect critical infrastructure. This research sought to investigate the implementation of governance and policy at the distribution utility level that facilitates cybersecurity preparedness to inform the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis; states; local governments; and other stakeholders on the challenges, gaps, and opportunities that may exist for future analysis. The need is urgent to identify the challenges and inconsistencies in how cybersecurity practices are being applied across the United States to inform the development of best practices, mitigations, and future research and development investments in securing the electricity infrastructure. By examining the current practices and applications of cybersecurity preparedness, this report seeks to identify the challenges and persistent gaps between policy and execution and reflect the underlying motivations of distinct utility structures as they play out at the local level. This study aims to create an initial baseline of cybersecurity preparedness within the distribution electricity sector. The focus of this study is on distribution utilities not bound by the cybersecurity guidelines of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) to examine the range of mechanisms taken by state regulators, city councils that own municipal utilities, and boards of directors of rural cooperatives.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Norris Bradbury Tribute by J. Robert Oppenheimer

Stored on a reel of microfilm are three faint and barely readable letters written on the occasion of Norris Bradbury’s fifteen-year anniversary as Director of the (then) Los Alamos Science Laboratory. The first letter, written by Los Alamos Public Relations Officer John V. Young, asks Oppenheimer to send a “congratulatory message to be read at a ceremony honoring Bradbury’s tenure as Laboratory Director. The second letter is Oppenheimer’s response to Young, and the third is Oppenheimer’s congratulatory message to Bradbury. The three letters are transcribed below.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Management of the Cs/Sr Capsule Project at the Hanford Site. Technology Readiness Assessment Report

The Federal Project Director (FPD) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office (RL) Waste Management and D&D Division (WMD) requested a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) for the Management of the Cesium/Strontium Capsule Storage Project (MCSCP) at the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) on the Hanford Site in Washington State. The MCSCP CD-1 TRA was performed by a team selected in collaboration between the Office of Environmental Management (EM) Chief Engineer (EM-3.3) and RL, WMD FPD. The TRA Team included subject matter and technical experts having experience in cask storage, process engineering, and system design who were independent of the MCSCP, and the team was led by the Director of Operations and Processes from the EM Chief Engineer's Office (EM-3.32). Movement of the Cs/Sr capsules to dry storage, based on information from the conceptual design, involves (1) capsule packaging, (2) capsule transfer, and (3) capsule storage. The project has developed a conceptual process, described in 30059-R-02, "NAC Conceptual Design Report for the Management of the Cesium and Strontium Capsules Project", which identifies the five major activities in the process to complete the transfer from storage pool to pad-mounted cask storage. The process, shown schematically in Figure 1, is comprised of the following process steps: (1) loading capsules into the UCS; (2) UCS processing; (3) UCS insertion into the TSC Basket; (4) cask transport from WESF to CSA and (5) extended storage at the CSA.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Computing Properties of Hadrons, Nuclei and Nuclear Matter from Quantum Chromodynamics (LQCD)

Building on the success of two preceding generations of Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) projects, this grant supported the MIT component (P.I. John Negele) of a multi-institutional SciDAC-3 project that also included Brookhaven National Laboratory, the lead laboratory with P. I. Frithjof Karsch serving as Project Director, Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility with P. I. David Richards serving as Co-director, University of Washington with P. I. Martin Savage, University of North Carolina with P. I. Rob Fowler, and College of William and Mary with P. I. Andreas Stathopoulos. Nationally, this multi-institutional project coordinated the software development effort that the nuclear physics lattice QCD community needs to ensure that lattice calculations can make optimal use of forthcoming leadership-class and dedicated hardware, including that at the national laboratories, and to exploit future computational resources in the Exascale era.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Testimony to the House Science Space and Technology Committee.

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and distinguished members of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, I thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the role of science, engineering, and research at Sandia National Laboratories, one of the nation’s premiere national labs and the nation’s largest Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) laboratory. I am Dr. Susan Seestrom, Sandia’s Associate Laboratories Director for Advanced Science & Technology (AST) and Chief Research Officer (CRO). As CRO I am responsible for research strategy, Laboratory Directed Research & Development (LDRD), partnerships strategy, and technology transfer. As director and line manager for AST I manage capabilities and mission delivery across a variety of the physical and mathematical sciences and engineering disciplines, such as pulsed power, radiation effects, major environmental testing, high performance computing, and modeling and simulation.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program - FY 2017 ORNL Annual Summary of Completed Projects

This report includes summaries of all ORNL LDRD research activities completed by September 30, 2017. It is sent to the ORNL Technical Officer for export control review and classification review prior to being delivered to the Office of Scientific and Technical Information. LDRD is a relatively small but vital program whose purpose is to meet the DOE mission. It allows ORNL and other DOE laboratories to improve their distinctive capabilities and to enhance their ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D for DOE and SPP sponsors. R&D projects funded through LDRD support the following general goals: maintain the scientific and technical vitality of the Laboratory; enhance the Laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; foster creativity and stimulate exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; serve as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and support high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. ORNL has established a program with three components to meet its LDRD objectives and to fulfill the particular needs of the Laboratory: the Director’s R&D Fund, the Seed Money Fund, and the Distinguished Fellowship Fund (Householder, Russell, Weinberg, and Wigner Fellowships). As outlined in Table 1, these three funds are complementary. The Director’s R&D Fund develops new capabilities in support of the Laboratory initiatives, the Seed Money Fund is open to all innovative ideas that have the potential for enhancing the Laboratory’s core scientific and technical competencies, and the Distinguished Fellowship Fund allows the Laboratory to hire exceptional early career scientists to refresh its scientific and technical capabilities. Provision for multiple routes of access to ORNL LDRD funds maximizes the likelihood that novel ideas with scientific and technological merit will be recognized and supported.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2019

RIKEN/RBRC Scientific Review Committee Meeting (Vol. 132)

The RIKEN BNL Research Center (RBRC) was established in April 1997 at Brookhaven National Laboratory*. It is funded by RIKEN, "Rikagaku Kenkyusho", of Japan and the U. S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science. The Memorandum of Understanding between RIKEN and BNL, initiated in 1997, has been renewed in 2002, 2007, 2012 and 2018. The Center is dedicated to the study of strong interactions, including spin physics, lattice QCD, and RHIC physics through the nurturing of a new generation of young physicists. The RBRC has an active workshop program on strong interaction physics with each workshop focused on a specific physics problem. For most of these workshops, the talks are made available on the RBRC website. To date there are over 116 proceedings volumes available. In 2017 RBRC celebrated its 20th anniversary since its inauguration in 1997. This was also the year of the 100th anniversary of RIKEN. The RBRC is well matured and moves into the new generation with dismantling of the PHENIX detector and construction of the new sPHENIX detector at RHIC. We are on track with growth plans in place. On April 1st 2017, Hideto En’yo, Director of RIKEN Nishina Center for Accelerator-Based Science, was named Acting Director of the RBRC, preceded by Samuel Aronson, Nicholas Samios and Tsung-Dao Lee.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2017

Fermilab STI [Slides]

Papers: Review and Release -Well-controlled Review and Release system run by Technical Publications Office (TPO) and Directorate; Scientists receive awareness training on their responsibilities for paper submission and copyright forms; Papers are submitted to TPO by authors; All papers are reviewed by Export Control and Patent teams - Based on abstract submission; Request full-text if necessary - Typically 1-day turn-around; Technical review - Done internally by large collaborations and theorists - Done by Directorate-assigned reviewers for other papers; Paper then ready for release.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2021

National Security & International Studies (Q1 FY2021 Newsletter)

Happy New Year to everyone. Activity in the office continues to be at a high pace with the addition of the Strategic Analyses and Assessments (SAA) Office from ALDX, and the Mission Integration (MI) Office (formerly known as Nuclear and Military [NMA] Office) from DDW. We are working closely to optimize the impact of our combined offices. In this issue of our newsletter, we will highlight programs from the SAA Office portfolio, delve into our interactions with the Project on Nuclear Issues (PONI) program from CSIS, introduce you to new staff in NSIS and review a new joint postdoc program with the UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation and the Center for Global Security Research at LLNL. I also encourage you to take a look at the new NSIS website for more information on the office. Finally, the NSIS office will soon be kicking off a webinar series on starting with topics of interest to the Director’s Strategic Resilience Initiative and will grow beyond that. Stay tuned for more information. --John Scott, Acting Office Director, NSIS

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Riz Ali bio

Rizwan Ali is the Director of the National Security Research Center (NSRC), Los Alamos National Laboratory's classified library. As the Director, he sets the strategic direction for one of the largest libraries in the United States.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Technical Issues in the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Ratification Debate: A 20 Year Retrospective

Two decades after the U.S. Senate declined in 1999 to give its consent to ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the treaty remains in legal and political limbo. Legally, the treaty cannot enter into force without U.S. ratification. However, the Senate’s rejection does not strip the treaty of its force as an element of customary international law or alter the will of other signatories to see it enter into force. Politically, the debate over the virtues and flaws of the treaty remains as strong as ever, with some CTBT advocates pushing energetically for U.S. re-review while some opponents seek ways to “un-sign” the treaty. Meanwhile, despite the Senate’s rejection of the treaty, the United States acts in a manner consistent with its main obligations by maintaining a moratorium on explosive nuclear testing and providing financial support (as well as technical expertise) to the CTBT Organization (CTBTO)—in particular the CTBTO’s International Monitoring System (IMS). The CTBT may well remain in such limbo for a long time to come, unless some catalytic event comes along to re-shape national perceptions and priorities, one way or the other. The treaty’s future, whatever it might be, will be determined in part by how much perspectives might have changed in light of interim developments. Our purpose is to shed light on some of those developments and to assess their relevance. The 1999 ratification debate addressed a large number of issues. Rejection was driven by various policy and technical judgments. The purpose of this paper is to re-examine those technical judgments in light of what has been learned over the following two decades. On some technical matters, there was explicit recognition of extant uncertainties, as well as a conviction and hope that time would dispel them. To be doubly clear, our purpose is not to recommend a way forward on CTBT ratification. The policy judgments of 1999 and 2020 are beyond the scope of this paper. This technical re-examination proceeds as follows. It begins with a short background section to introduce the key technical matters in discussion in the U.S. ratification process. Then it moves systematically through each of those topics with a review of relevant background information, a discussion of key points in debate, an analysis of subsequent experience, and a current assessment. The historical analysis draws on many sources including the primary documents of the Congressional debate, the official article-by-article interpretation by the Department of State, and the statements of key players in the process. We also relied on key technical reports and publications by subject matter experts that have addressed in more detail many of the issues in our focus. These sources include the 2002 and 2012 reports of the National Academy of Sciences as well as publications by senior technical staff of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) who were actively involved in the ratification debate, including then-Laboratory Director Bruce Tarter. We also conducted several interviews with government officials from the 1990s, past laboratory directors, and other members of the scientific community. But, except where individuals are specifically cited by name, the judgments offered here are our own and should not be attributed to any other individual or to LLNL as such.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗