Requirements - National Security

1. Scope

1.1 Purpose

Define comprehensive, measurable requirements for a U.S. National Security system that protects the nation, preserves constitutional government, maintains defense and homeland readiness, strengthens resilience, and protects the American people.

These requirements remain in the requirements-engineering phase. Metrics, scoring, rollups, issue grades, member grades, report cards, leaderboards, legislative mapping, and public action tools remain disabled until later review and approval.

1.2 System Overview

The National Security system is treated as a whole-of-nation system integrating military readiness, homeland security, intelligence, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, transportation security, border and port security, emergency preparedness, industrial-base resilience, alliance coordination, public evidence, oversight, and legal / civil-liberty safeguards.

2. Applicable Documents

U.S. National Defense Strategy and related Department of Defense readiness, acquisition, and industrial-base references.
DHS, CISA, TSA, CBP, USCG, FEMA, FAA, BTS, PHMSA, and other federal homeland-security and critical-infrastructure references.
ODNI, FBI, GAO, CRS, CBO, OMB, NNSA, NATO, State Department, NIST, and other primary or high-quality oversight sources as applicable.
SMART-D requirements discipline: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound, and Distinct.
MIL-HDBK-520A-style requirements engineering principles adapted for civic review use.

3. System Definition

3.1 Operational Concept

The National Security system shall operate as an integrated public-interest system that deters threats, detects threats, defends against attacks, sustains essential functions under stress, recovers rapidly, protects constitutional rights, and maintains public trust.

3.2 System Functions

Deter, detect, defend, sustain, recover, and improve.
Protect the population, constitutional government, critical systems, national borders, transportation networks, supply chains, military readiness, and alliance commitments.
Use measurable requirements and clearly identified source data before any scoring or report-card use is enabled.

4. Requirements

The list below is grouped by SMART-D reviewer-detail page. Each Requirement ID links to the detailed SMART requirements page in 001 - SMART Requirements.

Color Rule: Red text = bad current value, bad trend, missing critical data, or unfavorable gap. Green text = favorable value or improving trend. Amber text = context-dependent, incomplete, or source-method review needed. Neutral black text = descriptive value that is not inherently good or bad.

Reviewer Feedback Dashboard (Reviewer / Administrator / ADM comments)

Loading grouped SMART-D requirements from local detail pages...

5. Verification Approach

Verification is review-only at this phase. Each requirement should be reviewed for specificity, measurability, attainability, relevance, time boundary, distinctness, source quality, current-value support, trend support, automation feasibility, and guardrails.

6. Key Performance Indicator Families

Border, port, maritime, aviation, and transportation-security performance.
Military readiness, force preparedness, nuclear deterrence, space resilience, and alliance capacity.
Cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, homeland defense, continuity, civil defense, and emergency preparedness.
Defense industrial base, acquisition performance, supply-chain resilience, technology risk, and emerging weapons governance.
Public evidence, oversight, legal compliance, civil-liberty protection, and source transparency.

7. Traceability Method

Each requirement shall remain traceable to a national-security problem, a measurable metric or candidate metric, a preferred source, a current-value method, a trend method, a comparator or benchmark where useful, and a defined target/timeframe. Traceability to legislation, member report cards, and public scoring is intentionally deferred.

8. Benchmark Alignment

Benchmarking may use U.S. primary sources first and carefully caveated international comparators where appropriate, including NATO, Finland total-defense sources, Switzerland civil-resilience references, Singapore port/cyber practices, allied defense-spending data, and other reputable comparator sources. Comparator values are not automatically U.S. targets unless the detail page states why the comparison is valid.

--- END ---