Download Free A Review Of The Department Of Energy Classification Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online A Review Of The Department Of Energy Classification and write the review.

With the end of the Cold War, the Department of Energy is engaged in a review of its policies regarding the classification of information. In 1994, the Secretary of Energy requested the assistance of the National Research Council in an effort to "lift the veil of Cold War secrecy." This book recommends fundamental principles to guide declassification policy. It also offers specific suggestions of ways to improve public access while protecting truly sensitive information.
This report examines the role of rare earth metals and other materials in the clean energy economy. It was prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) based on data collected and research performed during 2010. In the report, DoE describes plans to: (1) develop its first integrated research agenda addressing critical materials, building on three technical workshops convened by the DoE during November and December 2010; (2) strengthen its capacity for information-gathering on this topic; and (3) work closely with international partners, including Japan and Europe, to reduce vulnerability to supply disruptions and address critical material needs. Charts and tables. This is a print on demand report.
With the end of the Cold War, the Department of Energy is engaged in a review of its policies regarding the classification of information. In 1994, the Secretary of Energy requested the assistance of the National Research Council in an effort to "lift the veil of Cold War secrecy." This book recommends fundamental principles to guide declassification policy. It also offers specific suggestions of ways to improve public access while protecting truly sensitive information.
Beginning with the development of the atomic bomb during World War II, the United States continued to build nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. Thousands of people mined and milled uranium, conducted research on nuclear warfare, or worked in nuclear munitions factories around the country from the 1940s through the 1980s. Such work continues today, albeit to a smaller extent. The Department of Energy (DOE) is now responsible for overseeing those sites and facilities, many of which were, and continue to be, run by government contractors. The materials used at those sites were varied and ranged from the benign to the toxic and highly radioactive. Workers at DOE facilities often did not know the identity of the materials with which they worked and often were unaware of health risks related to their use. In many instances, the work was considered top secret, and employees were cautioned not to reveal any work-related information to family or others. Workers could be exposed to both radioactive and nonradioactive toxic substances for weeks or even years. Consequently, some of the workers have developed health problems and continue to have concerns about potential health effects of their exposures to occupational hazards during their employment in the nuclear weapons industry. In response to the concerns expressed by workers and their representatives, DOL asked the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to review the SEM database and its use of a particular database, Haz-Map, as the source of its toxic substance-occupational disease links. Accordingly, this IOM consensus report reflects careful consideration of its charge by the committee, and describes the strengths and shortcomings of both. To complete its task, IOM formed an ad hoc committee of experts in occupational medicine, toxicology, epidemiology, industrial hygiene, public health, and biostatistics to conduct an 18-month study to review the scientific rigor of the SEM database. The committee held two public meetings at which it heard from DOL Division of Energy Employee Occupational Illness Compensation (DEEOIC) representatives, the DOL contractor that developed the SEM database, the developer of the Haz-Map database, DOE worker advocacy groups, and several individual workers. The committee also submitted written questions to DOL to seek clarification of specific issues and received written responses from DEEOIC. The committee's report considers both the strengths and weaknesses of the SEM and the Haz-Map databases, recognizing that the latter was developed first and for a different purpose. The committee then discusses its findings and recommends improvements that could be made in both databases with a focus on enhancing the usability of SEM for both DOL claims examiners and for former DOE workers and their representatives. Review of the Department of Labor's Site Exposure Matrix Database summarizes the committee's findings.
In 2018, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine issued an Interim Report evaluating the general viability of the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration's (DOE-NNSA's) conceptual plans for disposing of 34 metric tons (MT) of surplus plutonium in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), a deep geologic repository near Carlsbad, New Mexico. It provided a preliminary assessment of the general viability of DOE-NNSA's conceptual plans, focused on some of the barriers to their implementation. This final report addresses the remaining issues and echoes the recommendations from the interim study.
Human Reliability Program (US Department of Energy Regulation) (DOE) (2018 Edition) The Law Library presents the complete text of the Human Reliability Program (US Department of Energy Regulation) (DOE) (2018 Edition). Updated as of May 29, 2018 DOE is amending its regulation concerning the Human Reliability Program (HRP). This regulation provides the policies and procedures to ensure that individuals who occupy positions affording unescorted access to certain nuclear materials, nuclear explosive devices, facilities and programs meet the highest standards of reliability and physical and mental suitability. The revisions include some clarification of the procedures and burden of proof applicable in certification review hearings, the addition and modification of certain definitions, and a clear statement that a security concern can be reviewed pursuant to the HRP regulation in addition to the DOE regulations for determining eligibility for access to classified matter or special nuclear material. These revisions are intended to provide better guidance to HRP-certified individuals and to ensure consistency in HRP decision making. This book contains: - The complete text of the Human Reliability Program (US Department of Energy Regulation) (DOE) (2018 Edition) - A table of contents with the page number of each section
Countering Cyber Sabotage: Introducing Consequence-Driven, Cyber-Informed Engineering (CCE) introduces a new methodology to help critical infrastructure owners, operators and their security practitioners make demonstrable improvements in securing their most important functions and processes. Current best practice approaches to cyber defense struggle to stop targeted attackers from creating potentially catastrophic results. From a national security perspective, it is not just the damage to the military, the economy, or essential critical infrastructure companies that is a concern. It is the cumulative, downstream effects from potential regional blackouts, military mission kills, transportation stoppages, water delivery or treatment issues, and so on. CCE is a validation that engineering first principles can be applied to the most important cybersecurity challenges and in so doing, protect organizations in ways current approaches do not. The most pressing threat is cyber-enabled sabotage, and CCE begins with the assumption that well-resourced, adaptive adversaries are already in and have been for some time, undetected and perhaps undetectable. Chapter 1 recaps the current and near-future states of digital technologies in critical infrastructure and the implications of our near-total dependence on them. Chapters 2 and 3 describe the origins of the methodology and set the stage for the more in-depth examination that follows. Chapter 4 describes how to prepare for an engagement, and chapters 5-8 address each of the four phases. The CCE phase chapters take the reader on a more granular walkthrough of the methodology with examples from the field, phase objectives, and the steps to take in each phase. Concluding chapter 9 covers training options and looks towards a future where these concepts are scaled more broadly.