A history of the origins and development of the American atomic bomb program during WWII. Begins with the scientific developments of the pre-war years. Details the role of the U.S. government in conducting a secret, nationwide enterprise that took science from the laboratory and into combat with an entirely new type of weapon. Concludes with a discussion of the immediate postwar period, the debate over the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, and the founding of the Atomic Energy Commission. Chapters: the Einstein letter; physics background, 1919-1939; early government support; the atomic bomb and American strategy; and the Manhattan district in peacetime. Illustrated.

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.

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.

A history of the Nuclear Weapons Complex (NWC), a nationwide group of gov't.-owned and contractor-operated labs. and production plants. The NWC evolved to meet our nat. security requirements, which were driven by WW2 and the Cold War, and also shaped by the need to incorp. new technol. into the nuclear weapons (NW) stockpile and to maintain this stockpile after the Cold War was over. This book explains the basic principles on which NW operate, along with the major technol. changes that were incorp. to improve the performance, safety, and security of U.S. NW. Contains info. on other topics: Nazi Germany's atomic bomb program, espionage during the Manhattan project, NW accidents, and worldwide nuclear tests. Glossary. Color and B&W photos.

In the fall of 2010, the Office of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Secretary for Science asked for a National Research Council (NRC) committee to investigate the prospects for generating power using inertial confinement fusion (ICF) concepts, acknowledging that a key test of viability for this concept-ignition -could be demonstrated at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in the relatively near term. The committee was asked to provide an unclassified report. However, DOE indicated that to fully assess this topic, the committee's deliberations would have to be informed by the results of some classified experiments and information, particularly in the area of ICF targets and nonproliferation. Thus, the Panel on the Assessment of Inertial Confinement Fusion Targets ("the panel") was assembled, composed of experts able to access the needed information. The panel was charged with advising the Committee on the Prospects for Inertial Confinement Fusion Energy Systems on these issues, both by internal discussion and by this unclassified report. A Panel on Fusion Target Physics ("the panel") will serve as a technical resource to the Committee on Inertial Confinement Energy Systems ("the Committee") and will prepare a report that describes the R&D challenges to providing suitable targets, on the basis of parameters established and provided to the Panel by the Committee. The Panel on Fusion Target Physics will prepare a report that will assess the current performance of fusion targets associated with various ICF concepts in order to understand: 1. The spectrum output; 2. The illumination geometry; 3. The high-gain geometry; and 4. The robustness of the target design. The panel addressed the potential impacts of the use and development of current concepts for Inertial Fusion Energy on the proliferation of nuclear weapons information and technology, as appropriate. The Panel examined technology options, but does not provide recommendations specific to any currently operating or proposed ICF facility.

Descriptions of many SAMSHA's major grants and contract programs funded in 2007.