Pentagon Weighs Enlarging Nuclear Surveillance Program

Aliya Sternstein, Nextgov.Com
See more stories about...
Aliya Sternstein, Nextgov.com
Aug. 20, 2013, 5:02 a.m.

WASH­ING­TON — The De­fense De­part­ment is mulling an ex­pan­sion of a sys­tem that es­sen­tially eaves­drops on the en­vir­on­ment for in­dic­a­tions of for­eign nuc­le­ar tests.

The Air Force Tech­nic­al Ap­plic­a­tions Cen­ter’s atom­ic mon­it­or­ing sys­tem di­gests seis­mic, in­fra­son­ic, and hy­droacous­tic data to help veri­fy blasts. A po­ten­tial new con­tract would “provide the plat­form for fu­ture sys­tem growth and en­hance­ments,” ac­cord­ing to an in­dustry so­li­cit­a­tion is­sued on Wed­nes­day.

The sys­tem, housed at Patrick Air Force Base in Flor­ida, was launched in 1999 to check in­ter­na­tion­al com­pli­ance with nuc­le­ar test ban treat­ies.

The im­petus for the pro­posed en­large­ment of the pro­gram could be nuc­le­ar threats from “Ir­an and North Korea, tech­no­lo­gic­al op­por­tun­ity, an agency want­ing to im­prove its cap­ab­il­it­ies, or all three,” spec­u­lated Jef­frey Richel­son, seni­or fel­low with George Wash­ing­ton Uni­versity’s Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Archive.

The goals out­lined in last week’s pro­pos­al sug­gest a de­sire for big data ana­lys­is fea­tures that can identi­fy more subtle signs of nuc­le­ar activ­ity.

The fo­cus of the ef­fort is “to fine-tune the cur­rent sys­tem by op­tim­iz­a­tion of soft­ware al­gorithms through sci­entif­ic and en­gin­eer­ing stud­ies,” the so­li­cit­a­tion states. The up­grades are aimed at im­prov­ing “data ac­quis­i­tion, de­tec­tion, as­so­ci­ation, loc­a­tion, mag­nitude/yield es­tim­a­tion, event iden­ti­fic­a­tion, event re­port­ing, data dis­tri­bu­tion, and data archiv­ing cap­ab­il­it­ies to meet cur­rent and fu­ture treaty mon­it­or­ing needs.”

Past nuc­le­ar sur­veil­lance re­ports gen­er­ated by the Flor­ida Air Force cen­ter have triggered both false alarms and val­id alerts.

In 1997, the Clin­ton ad­min­is­tra­tion drew cri­ti­cism for leak­ing to the press what turned out to be er­ro­neous as­sess­ments in­dic­at­ing a Rus­si­an nuc­le­ar test. Shortly after the gaffe, Columbia Uni­versity seis­mo­lo­gist Lynn R. Sykes, who served on the Air Force cen­ter’s ad­vis­ory pan­el in the 1970s, urged more care­ful scru­tiny be­fore ac­cus­a­tions are pre­ma­turely shared with the me­dia. “A few key people with­in the gov­ern­ment were re­spons­ible for leak­ing mis­lead­ing and out­dated in­form­a­tion to the press about the event,” Sykes wrote in a re­view of the epis­ode. Fur­ther ana­lys­is de­term­ined that the Aug. 16, 1997, event was an earth­quake and not a clandes­tine nuc­le­ar ex­plo­sion.

In Oc­to­ber 2006, the cen­ter de­tec­ted an event thought to be as­so­ci­ated with a pur­por­ted North Korean nuc­le­ar test, and later con­firmed that the in­cid­ent, in fact, was nuc­le­ar in nature, ac­cord­ing to Air Force of­fi­cials. The cur­rent sys­tem is de­signed to speed Top Secret as­sess­ments to the rel­ev­ant na­tion­al se­cur­ity agen­cies once a for­eign nuc­le­ar test is pin­pointed.

Re­prin­ted with per­mis­sion from Nex­t­gov.com. The ori­gin­al story can be found here.

What We're Following See More »
1.5 MILLION MORE TUNED IN FOR TRUMP
More People Watched Trump’s Acceptance Speech
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

Hillary Clinton hopes that television ratings for the candidates' acceptance speeches at their respective conventions aren't foreshadowing of similar results at the polls in November. Preliminary results from the networks and cable channels show that 34.9 million people tuned in for Donald Trump's acceptance speech while 33.3 million watched Clinton accept the Democratic nomination. However, it is still possible that the numbers are closer than these ratings suggest: the numbers don't include ratings from PBS or CSPAN, which tend to attract more Democratic viewers.

Source:
×