50 USC § 2525 - Annual assessments and reports to the President and Congress regarding the condition of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile
(a)
Annual assessments required
For each nuclear weapon type in the stockpile of the United States, each official specified in subsection (b) on an annual basis shall, to the extent such official is directly responsible for the safety, reliability, performance, or military effectiveness of that nuclear weapon type, complete an assessment of the safety, reliability, performance, or military effectiveness (as the case may be) of that nuclear weapon type.
(c)
Dual validation teams in support of assessments
In support of the assessments required by subsection (a), the Administrator for Nuclear Security may establish teams, known as “dual validation teams”, to provide each national security laboratory responsible for weapons design with independent evaluations of the condition of each warhead for which such laboratory has lead responsibility. A dual validation team established by the Administrator shall—
(1)
be comprised of weapons experts from the laboratory that does not have lead responsibility for fielding the warhead being evaluated;
(d)
Use of teams of experts for assessments
The head of each national security laboratory shall establish and use one or more teams of experts, known as “red teams”, to assist in the assessments required by subsection (a). Each such team shall include experts from both of the other national security laboratories. Each such team for a national security laboratory shall—
(e)
Report on assessments
Not later than December 1 of each year, each official specified in subsection (b) shall submit to the Secretary concerned, and to the Nuclear Weapons Council, a report on the assessments that such official was required by subsection (a) to complete. The report shall include the following:
(2)
(A)
Such official’s determination as to whether or not one or more underground nuclear tests are necessary to resolve any issues identified in the assessments and, if so—
(3)
In the case of a report submitted by the head of a national security laboratory—
(A)
a concise statement regarding the adequacy of the science-based tools and methods being used to determine the matters covered by the assessments;
(B)
a concise statement regarding the adequacy of the tools and methods employed by the manufacturing infrastructure required by section
2532 of this title to identify and fix any inadequacy with respect to the matters covered by the assessments;
(4)
In the case of a report submitted by the Commander of the United States Strategic Command, a discussion of the relative merits of other nuclear weapon types (if any), or compensatory measures (if any) that could be taken, that could enable accomplishment of the missions of the nuclear weapon types to which the assessments relate, should such assessments identify any deficiency with respect to such nuclear weapon types.
(f)
Submittals to the President and Congress
(1)
Not later than March 1 of each year, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the President—
(A)
each report, without change, submitted to either Secretary under subsection (e) during the preceding year;
(B)
any comments that the Secretaries individually or jointly consider appropriate with respect to each such report;
(g)
Classified form
Each submittal under subsection (f) shall be in classified form only, with the classification level required for each portion of such submittal marked appropriately.
(h)
Definitions
In this section:
(1)
The term “national security laboratory” has the meaning given such term in section
2471 of this title.
[1] So in original. Probably should be capitalized.
(a)
Annual assessments required
For each nuclear weapon type in the stockpile of the United States, each official specified in subsection (b) on an annual basis shall, to the extent such official is directly responsible for the safety, reliability, performance, or military effectiveness of that nuclear weapon type, complete an assessment of the safety, reliability, performance, or military effectiveness (as the case may be) of that nuclear weapon type.
(c)
Dual validation teams in support of assessments
In support of the assessments required by subsection (a), the Administrator for Nuclear Security may establish teams, known as “dual validation teams”, to provide each national security laboratory responsible for weapons design with independent evaluations of the condition of each warhead for which such laboratory has lead responsibility. A dual validation team established by the Administrator shall—
(1)
be comprised of weapons experts from the laboratory that does not have lead responsibility for fielding the warhead being evaluated;
(d)
Use of teams of experts for assessments
The head of each national security laboratory shall establish and use one or more teams of experts, known as “red teams”, to assist in the assessments required by subsection (a). Each such team shall include experts from both of the other national security laboratories. Each such team for a national security laboratory shall—
(e)
Report on assessments
Not later than December 1 of each year, each official specified in subsection (b) shall submit to the Secretary concerned, and to the Nuclear Weapons Council, a report on the assessments that such official was required by subsection (a) to complete. The report shall include the following:
(2)
(A)
Such official’s determination as to whether or not one or more underground nuclear tests are necessary to resolve any issues identified in the assessments and, if so—
(3)
In the case of a report submitted by the head of a national security laboratory—
(A)
a concise statement regarding the adequacy of the science-based tools and methods being used to determine the matters covered by the assessments;
(B)
a concise statement regarding the adequacy of the tools and methods employed by the manufacturing infrastructure required by section
2532 of this title to identify and fix any inadequacy with respect to the matters covered by the assessments;
(4)
In the case of a report submitted by the Commander of the United States Strategic Command, a discussion of the relative merits of other nuclear weapon types (if any), or compensatory measures (if any) that could be taken, that could enable accomplishment of the missions of the nuclear weapon types to which the assessments relate, should such assessments identify any deficiency with respect to such nuclear weapon types.
(f)
Submittals to the President and Congress
(1)
Not later than March 1 of each year, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy shall submit to the President—
(A)
each report, without change, submitted to either Secretary under subsection (e) during the preceding year;
(B)
any comments that the Secretaries individually or jointly consider appropriate with respect to each such report;
(g)
Classified form
Each submittal under subsection (f) shall be in classified form only, with the classification level required for each portion of such submittal marked appropriately.
(h)
Definitions
In this section:
(1)
The term “national security laboratory” has the meaning given such term in section
2471 of this title.
(i)
First submissions
[1] So in original. Probably should be capitalized.
Source
(Pub. L. 107–314, div. D, title XLII, § 4205, formerly div. C, title XXXI, § 3141,Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2730; renumbered div. D, title XLII, § 4205, and amended Pub. L. 108–136, div. C, title XXXI, § 3141(e)(6),Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1759; Pub. L. 111–84, div. C, title XXXI, § 3114(a)(2)–(d), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2706, 2707.)
Codification
Section was formerly classified to section
7274s of Title
42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to renumbering by Pub. L. 108–136.
Amendments
2009—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(B), added subsec. (c). Former subsec. (c) redesignated (d).
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(A), redesignatedsubsec. (c) as (d). Former subsec. (d) redesignated (e).
Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(b), inserted “both” after “review” and “and any independent evaluations conducted by a dual validation team under subsection (c)” after “that laboratory”.
Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(A), redesignatedsubsec. (d) as (e). Former subsec. (e) redesignated (f).
Subsec. (e)(3)(C). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(d)(1), substituted “subsection (d)” for “subsection (c)”.
Subsec. (e)(3)(D). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(c), added subpar. (D).
Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(A), redesignatedsubsec. (e) as (f). Former subsec. (f) redesignated (g).
Subsec. (f)(1)(A). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(d)(2), substituted “subsection (e)” for “subsection (d)”.
Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(d)(3), substituted “subsection (f)” for “subsection (e)”.
Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(A), redesignatedsubsec. (f) as (g). Former subsec. (g) redesignated (h).
Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(A), redesignatedsubsec. (g) as (h). Former subsec. (h) redesignated (i).
Subsec. (i). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(a)(2)(A), redesignatedsubsec. (h) as (i).
Subsec. (i)(1). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(d)(4)(A), substituted “subsection (e)” for “subsection (d)”.
Subsec. (i)(2). Pub. L. 111–84, § 3114(d)(4)(B), substituted “subsection (f)” for “subsection (e)”.
2003—Subsec. (d)(3)(B). Pub. L. 108–136, § 3141(e)(6)(D), substituted “section
2532 of this title” for “section 3137 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (42 U.S.C. 2121 note)”.
The table below lists the classification updates, since Jan. 3, 2012, for this section. Updates to a broader range of sections may be found at the update page for containing chapter, title, etc.
The most recent Classification Table update that we have noticed was Thursday, June 27, 2013
An empty table indicates that we see no relevant changes listed in the classification tables. If you suspect that our system may be missing something, please double-check with the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.
| 50 USC | Description of Change | Session Year | Public Law | Statutes at Large |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| § 2525 | 2012 | 112-239 [Sec.] 3131(c) | 126 Stat. 2180 |
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.