"The purpose of this study is to outline the difficulties that are involved in locating and neutralizing deeply buried facilities, and suggest alternate methods and technologies, other than nuclear weapons or advanced conventional weapons, for holding these targets at risk. This study describes deeply buried facilities and their typical functions, assesses their vulnerability, and presents ideas for neutralizing these facilities with non-conventional means. The broad objective of this study is to ensure that U.S. national and military objectives can be achieved in contingencies that involve deeply buried facilities."--Page iii

Underground facilities are used extensively by many nations to conceal and protect strategic military functions and weapons' stockpiles. Because of their depth and hardened status, however, many of these strategic hard and deeply buried targets could only be put at risk by conventional or nuclear earth penetrating weapons (EPW). Recently, an engineering feasibility study, the robust nuclear earth penetrator program, was started by DOE and DOD to determine if a more effective EPW could be designed using major components of existing nuclear weapons. This activity has created some controversy about, among other things, the level of collateral damage that would ensue if such a weapon were used. To help clarify this issue, the Congress, in P.L. 107-314, directed the Secretary of Defense to request from the NRC a study of the anticipated health and environmental effects of nuclear earth-penetrators and other weapons and the effect of both conventional and nuclear weapons against the storage of biological and chemical weapons. This report provides the results of those analyses. Based on detailed numerical calculations, the report presents a series of findings comparing the effectiveness and expected collateral damage of nuclear EPW and surface nuclear weapons under a variety of conditions.

On The Road Again or Red Light, Green Light: Transportation-Related Cultural Resources Management in Washington and Oregon, Scott Williams and Carolyn McAleer, editors Introduction, Scott Williams and Carolyn McAleer, editors Archaeology of the Malheur River Corridor, East Central Oregon, Thomas J. Connolly and Dennis L. Jenkins A Good Place to Camp is a Good Place to Camp: Nine Thousand Years at the Williams Creek Site on the North Umpqua River, Brian O'Neill and Debra Barner Early to Late Holocene Occupation at the Gee Creek Archaeological Sites in the Uplands of the Portland Basin, Michele L. Punke, Terry L. Ozbun, and Jo Reese Tracking the Kerry Line: Evidence from a Logging Railroad Camp in the Nehalem Valley, Oregon, Thomas J. Connolly, Richard L. Bland, and Ward Tonsfeldt Waiting for the End of the World: A Prototype Fallout Shelter Under I-5 in North Seattle, Craig Holstine You Say Design/Build, I Say Oh No! Odot’s U.S. 20: Pioneer Mountain―Eddyville Project, Kurt Roede Urban Archaeology, Good Faith Efforts, and the $12,000 Shovel Test Pit: A Cost Benefit Analysis of Deep Testing Methods for WSDOT Mega Projects, Kevin M. Bartoy The Inadequacy of ¼ Inch Mesh Screen in Archaeology, Terry L. Ozbun

This book is a systematic effort by leading international scholars to map the trends in major-power warfare and explore whether it is waxing or waning. The main point of departure is that major-power war as a historical institution is in decline. This does not mean, though, that wars between states are in general disappearing. While there is some convergence in the conclusions by individual authors, they are by no means unanimous about the trend. The articles explore different causes and correlates of the declining trend in major-power warfare, including the impact of the international structure, nuclear weapons, international law, multilateral institutions, sovereignty and value changes.