The Department of Energy has nuclear weapons facilities in seven states including three laboratories, five component fabrication or materials production plants, one assembly and disassembly site, a geologic waste repository, and one testing facility.
A new report from the Congressional Research Service summarizes operations at each of the sites. See The U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex: Overview of Department of Energy Sites, September 6, 2018.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
FY2019 Appropriations for the Department of Energy, CRS Insight, updated September 12, 2018
Efforts to Preserve Economic Benefits of the Iran Nuclear Deal, CRS In Focus, updated September 7, 2018
The Nordic Countries and U.S. Relations, CRS In Focus, updated September 13, 2018
Labor Enforcement Issues in U.S. Free Trade Agreements, CRS In Focus, September 7, 2018
U.Shttps://sgp.fas.org/.-Taiwan Trade Relations, CRS In Focus, updated September 11, 2018
Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy, September 5, 2018
Costs of Government Interventions in Response to the Financial Crisis: A Retrospective, updated September 12, 2018
Tax Policy and Disaster Recovery, CRS In Focus, updated September 11, 2018
National Flood Insurance Program Borrowing Authority, CRS Insight, updated September 10, 2018
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Reinsurance, and Catastrophe Bonds, CRS Insight, September 11, 2018
Senate Confirmation Votes on U.S. Supreme Court Nominations: Overview, CRS Insight, September 13, 2018
Craft Alcoholic Beverage Industry: Overview and Regulation, CRS In Focus, September 7, 2018
3D-Printed Guns: An Overview of Recent Legal Developments, CRS Legal Sidebar, September 11, 2018
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.