National Academies Press: OpenBook

Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories (2015)

Chapter: Appendix C: Authorizing Language for the Study

« Previous: Appendix B: Information-Gathering Meetings of the Committee
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Authorizing Language for the Study." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21806.
×

C


Authorizing Language for the Study

Public Law No: 112-239, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, Sec. 3144:

SEC. 3144. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY ON PEER REVIEW AND DESIGN COMPETITION RELATED TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

(a) STUDY.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator for Nuclear Security shall enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study of peer review and design competition related to nuclear weapons.

(b) ELEMENTS.—The study required by subsection (a) shall include an assessment of—

(1) the quality and effectiveness of peer review of designs, development plans, engineering and scientific activities, and priorities related to both nuclear and non-nuclear aspects of nuclear weapons;

(2) incentives for effective peer review;

(3) the potential effectiveness, efficiency, and cost of alternative methods of conducting peer review and design competition related to both nuclear and non-nuclear aspects of nuclear weapons, as compared to current methods;

(4) the known instances where current peer review practices and design competition succeeded or failed to find problems or potential problems; and

(5) such other matters related to peer review and design competition related to nuclear weapons as the Administrator considers appropriate.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Authorizing Language for the Study." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21806.
×

(c) COOPERATION AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND PERSONNEL.—

The Administrator shall ensure that the National Academy of Sciences receives full and timely cooperation, including full access to information and personnel, from the National Nuclear Security Administration and the management and operating contractors of the Administration for the purposes of conducting the study under subsection (a).

(d) REPORT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The National Academy of Sciences shall submit to the Administrator a report containing the results of the study conducted under subsection (a) and any recommendations resulting from the study.

(2) SUBMITTAL TO CONGRESS.—Not later than September 30, 2014, the Administrator shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the Senate the report submitted under paragraph (1) and any comments or recommendations of the Administrator with respect to the report.

(3) FORM.—The report submitted under paragraph (1) shall be in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

Following the first meeting of the study, discussions regarding element (5) of the study charge led to it being replaced with the wording shown in Chapter 1: “how peer review practices related to both nuclear and non-nuclear aspects of nuclear weapons should be adjusted as the three NNSA laboratories transition to a broader national security mission.”

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Authorizing Language for the Study." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21806.
×
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Authorizing Language for the Study." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21806.
×
Page 70
Next: Appendix D: Acronyms »
Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories Get This Book
×
 Peer Review and Design Competition in the NNSA National Security Laboratories
Buy Paperback | $40.00 Buy Ebook | $32.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is responsible for providing and maintaining the capabilities necessary to sustain a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile for the nation and its allies. Major responsibility for meeting the NNSA missions falls to the three NNSA laboratories: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). The NNSA National Security Laboratories contribute to that goal by maintaining the skills and capabilities necessary for stewardship of a reliable nuclear stockpile and also by maintaining a high level of technical credibility, which is a component of the nuclear deterrent.

Since 1992 it has been U.S. policy not to conduct explosion tests of nuclear weapons. The resulting technical challenges have been substantial. Whereas a nuclear test was in some sense the ultimate "peer review" of the performance of a particular NEP design, the cessation of nuclear testing necessitated a much greater reliance on both intralab and interlab expert peer review to identify potential problems with weapon designs and define the solution space. This report assesses the quality and effectiveness of peer review of designs, development plans, engineering and scientific activities, and priorities related to both nuclear and non-nuclear aspects of nuclear weapons, as well as incentives for effective peer review. It also explores how the evolving mission of the NNSA laboratories might impact peer review processes at the laboratories that relate to nuclear weapons.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!