Skip to main content

The Quality of Science and Engineering at the NNSA National Security Laboratories (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

1 Introduction
Pages 8-12

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 8...
... The conferees believe that an even handed, unbiased assessment of the quality of the scientific research and engineering at each of the three laboratories, with a clear understanding of the criteria used to measure quality and what factors influence quality would be useful in long-term planning for the operations of the laboratories. The study was divided into two consecutive phases; in phase I, a committee examined management issues, and in phase II a second committee assessed the quality of the science and 1 U.S.
Read the entire page →
From page 9...
... Therefore, after obtaining agreement from the study sponsors at NNSA and relevant congressional staff, the committee's efforts were focused on those areas of research, development, and engineering that are most closely aligned with the laboratories' unique primary mission -- that of maintaining the nuclear weapons deterrent. While the study committee examined how well some specific projects are executed, 3 it looked primarily at factors that could inhibit the quality of S&E.
Read the entire page →
From page 10...
... This included discussions with managers having broad responsibilities across major areas and numerous meetings with scientists and engineers conducting specific projects within those broad areas. CONDUCT OF THE STUDY To conduct this work, the NRC formed the Committee to Review the Quality of the Management and of the Science and Engineering Research at the Department of Energy's National Security Laboratories -- Phase II, whose members were carefully chosen to provide broad and deep applicable expertise and experience in the four topic areas.
Read the entire page →
From page 11...
... Third, the committee agreed that its assessment of these data would rely primarily on the collective experience, technical knowledge, and expertise of its members, whose backgrounds were carefully matched to the technical areas within which the activities of the laboratories are conducted. Because state-of-the-art work is best evaluated by peer judgment rather than by quantitative metrics, the committee applied a largely qualitative approach to the assessment.
Read the entire page →
From page 12...
... In addition, each chapter raises issues of importance to individual subject matter areas. Chapter 2 discusses the nuclear weapons design activities at the three national security laboratories, presents the study committee's assessment of the quality of the design work being conducted, and briefly discusses how that work draws from and is connected to the other major areas assessed in this report.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • science base
  • weapons design
  • laboratory staff
  • security laboratories
  • study teams

  • study sponsors
  • sandia national
  • relevant congressional
  • including research
  • rely primarily

  • quantitative metrics
  • specific projects
  • provides insight
  • extreme conditions
  • congressional staff

  • work draws
  • national nuclear
  • nnsa study
  • engineering laboratory
  • study identified

  • appropriate study
  • relevant national
  • nuclear security
  • understand nuclear
  • nuclear activities

  • study committees
  • unique national
  • committee chose
  • chapter raises
  • major management


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.