The Department of Defense has created a new DoD Laboratory Network (pdf) to coordinate existing programs on the assessment of and response to the use of weapons of mass destruction.
The new Network is intended “to provide timely, high-quality, actionable results for early detection, confirmation, response, and effective consequence management of acts of terrorism or warfare involving CBRN [chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear] agents; infectious disease outbreaks; and other all-hazards agent events requiring a DoD integrated incident response.”
The initiative was set forth in DoD Instruction 6440.03, “DoD Laboratory Network (DLN),” June 10, 2011.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy has updated its “Minimum Security Standards for Safeguarding Biological Select Agents and Toxins,” OPNAV Instruction 5530.16A (pdf), 11 May 2011.
The Department of Defense has also issued new guidance on regulating access to classified nuclear weapons information, including the relatively new (2006) category known as “Sigma 20” information, which pertains to improvised nuclear devices. See “Access to and Dissemination of Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data,” DoD Instruction 5210.02 (pdf), 03 June 2011.
There is no question this is a Big Deal. If you are a university or research lab, or aspire to work in one, or are simply an enthusiast of federally-funded research, what’s next will matter.
The emerging federal metascience community is asking fascinating questions that are equally vital for democratic legitimacy: beyond “did this program work” to “how does the federal R&D enterprise itself work, and how could it work better?”
If you’re new to the climate intervention space, welcome! The TL;DR: if we can’t stop the most catastrophic impacts of climate change with current tools quickly enough, then we need a bigger toolbox.
After months of delay, the council tasked by President Trump to review the FEMA released its final report. Our disaster policy nerds have thoughts.