Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Project Offices

A project management office (PMO), also referred to as a project office, is a centralized organizational unit responsible for defining, maintaining, and enforcing project management standards, methodologies, tools, and processes to ensure projects align with strategic objectives and deliver value.^[1]^[2] PMOs vary in structure and authority, ranging from supportive roles that provide templates and best practices to directive models that assume control over project execution and resource allocation.^[3]^[4] Established functions typically include governance, portfolio prioritization, risk oversight, and performance reporting, which collectively aim to increase project success rates—defined by on-time, on-budget delivery—often by 20-30% in mature implementations.^[5]^[6] PMOs emerged prominently in the late 20th century as organizations grappled with increasing project complexity and failure rates exceeding 30% in some sectors, prompting a need for standardized approaches beyond ad-hoc management. Key achievements include enhanced resource efficiency, better strategic alignment, and competitive advantages through repeatable processes, as evidenced by organizations reporting improved portfolio performance after PMO adoption.^[7]^[8] However, defining characteristics also encompass challenges such as implementation resistance due to perceived bureaucracy or varying maturity levels, where immature PMOs may focus narrowly on compliance rather than value creation, leading to debates on their necessity in agile or decentralized environments.^[9]^[10] Despite such variances, robust PMOs have become integral in industries like IT, construction, and finance, supporting enterprise-wide project portfolios.^[11]

Historical Context

Cold War Strategic Imperatives

During the Cold War, the United States faced the existential threat of a Soviet nuclear first strike capable of decapitating national command authority through intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) with flight times as short as 15-30 minutes, necessitating hardened, redundant command-and-control (C2) systems to preserve deterrence and enable retaliation.^[12] This imperative stemmed from the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, where survivability of leadership and communications was essential to avoid unilateral disarmament or governance collapse, as articulated in National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) 261 issued on September 23, 1963, which prioritized projects like FOUR LEAVES—encompassing the AT&T Project Offices—for highest resource allocation under the Defense Production Act of 1955.^[12] Elements of the National Military Command System, approved in February 1962, further underscored the need for dispersed, blast-resistant facilities to maintain operational continuity amid escalating tensions post-Cuban Missile Crisis.^[12] Project Offices addressed the causal vulnerability of above-ground telecommunications infrastructure to electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and blast effects, ensuring that government relocation sites could interconnect via troposcatter radio links for real-time coordination of nuclear forces and civil authority.^[13] These facilities embodied the strategic realism of prioritizing empirical survivability over centralized networks, reflecting declassified assessments that conventional commercial systems would fail under nuclear conditions, thus requiring private-sector integration with federal continuity-of-government (COG) plans to sustain presidential emergency facilities and alternate command posts.^[14] By 1964-1965, when construction peaked, the sites formed a mid-Atlantic arc designed to support high-priority AUTOVON circuits secondary to primary COG missions, countering the Soviet Union's growing second-strike capabilities.^[13] The broader geopolitical context amplified these imperatives: U.S. intelligence on Soviet ICBM deployments, such as the SS-7 and SS-8 missiles operational by the early 1960s, heightened fears of a disarming strike, prompting investments in underground hardening to achieve "launch on warning" postures without risking command paralysis.^[15] This approach privileged causal chains of threat assessment—Soviet parity in strategic forces demanding U.S. asymmetry in resilience—over optimistic assumptions of mutual restraint, as evidenced by the integration of Project Offices into classified relocation architectures linking sites like Mount Weather and Raven Rock.^[16] While some analyses speculate on personnel sheltering roles, primary documentation emphasizes communications redundancy as the core function, aligning with the era's focus on empirical testing of nuclear effects at sites like the Nevada Test Site.^[14]

Origins of Government-AT&T Partnership

The partnership between the U.S. government and AT&T for hardened communications infrastructure originated from AT&T's position as the near-monopoly provider of long-distance telephone services, which the government relied upon for military and emergency communications since the early 20th century.^[17] This relationship intensified during the Cold War, as nuclear threats necessitated survivable networks capable of withstanding blasts and electromagnetic pulses; AT&T's Long Lines division engineered microwave relay systems and switching facilities with redundancy and hardening in mind to support such requirements.) By the 1950s, collaboration extended to classified projects, including Bell Labs' contributions to defense technologies, laying the groundwork for joint efforts in nuclear-resilient telecom.^[17] The specific impetus for Project Offices emerged in the early 1960s amid escalating nuclear risks, exemplified by the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, which underscored vulnerabilities in existing infrastructure.^[18] The Defense Communications Agency (DCA), established in 1962 to manage military networks, contracted AT&T to develop the Automatic Voice Network (AUTOVON), a priority-based voice system activated in 1964 for command-and-control operations.^[18] This marked a formalized partnership for blast-resistant facilities, with AT&T purchasing sites like the 191-acre Big Hole property in Chatham County, North Carolina, in 1962 to host underground toll switching centers designed to ensure "continuance of government" signaling post-attack.^[18] Close planning cooperation between AT&T engineers and government agencies produced standards for these structures, prioritizing EMP shielding and structural integrity over commercial norms.^[18] By the mid-1960s, this collaboration yielded five nuclear-hardened Project Offices across sparsely populated mid-Atlantic regions, built under classified DCA directives to integrate with broader continuity-of-government plans.^[19] AT&T's execution stemmed from its expertise in nationwide infrastructure, while government funding and specifications addressed strategic gaps in civilian networks ill-equipped for wartime survival.^[19] The facilities supported AUTOVON's evolution into a global system handling millions of daily calls by the 1980s, reflecting the partnership's focus on causal reliability in high-threat scenarios rather than peacetime efficiency.^[18]

Purpose and Design Objectives

Ensuring Communication Survivability

Project Offices were engineered as a network of hardened facilities to maintain essential government and military communications amid nuclear warfare, prioritizing redundancy and resilience against blast, radiation, and electromagnetic effects. These sites supported the Automatic Voice Network (AUTOVON), a dedicated defense telecommunication system, by serving as switching centers capable of routing priority traffic even if surface infrastructure was destroyed.^[18]^[20] Construction adhered to National Security Action Memorandum 261 (NSAM-261), issued September 23, 1963, granting DX priority status for rapid national defense projects in response to Soviet intercontinental ballistic missile threats with minimal warning times. This enabled AT&T to build five mid-Atlantic bunkers, including deep relocation sites and relay stations, equipped with troposcatter radio systems for beyond-line-of-sight transmission, which offered diversity over vulnerable microwave or cable routes.^[12]^[12] Physical survivability relied on underground placement and reinforced structures; for instance, the Big Hole facility in Chatham County, North Carolina, excavated between 1962 and 1966 at a cost of $7 million, featured a 100,000-square-foot bunker with shock-absorbing suspension for equipment, 1.5-foot-thick copper-sheathed walls to mitigate EMP, and air filtration systems to sustain operations post-detonation. Similar hardening at sites like Peters Mountain, Virginia, included blast-resistant enclosures tested to endure nuclear overpressures, ensuring functionality for command/control links to assets such as the National Emergency Airborne Command Post.^[18]^[20]^[12] Operational resilience incorporated self-contained diesel generators for power independence, decontamination chambers, and stockpiles supporting 30 personnel for up to three weeks, allowing crews to activate backup routing and process high-volume traffic—such as 1.1 million daily calls by the late 1980s—without external dependencies. Geographic dispersion across facilities minimized cascading failures, with inter-site relays via hardened microwave and cable paths providing multiple failover options aligned with Continuity of Government protocols.^[18]^[12]

Alignment with Continuity of Government Plans

The Project Offices facilities were engineered to support the United States' Continuity of Government (COG) plans, which originated in the 1950s and were significantly refined following the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis to ensure executive, legislative, and judicial functions could persist amid nuclear attack or other existential threats.^[12] These plans emphasized dispersed, hardened infrastructure for command, control, and communications (C3), with AT&T's Project Offices providing key nodes for survivable telecommunications that could link relocated government entities across the mid-Atlantic region.^[21] The five sites—located in North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland—featured underground, blast-resistant structures housing switching equipment and troposcatter antennas capable of beyond-line-of-sight transmission, enabling resilient data relay even if primary urban networks were obliterated.^[22] This alignment manifested through direct integration with federal relocation protocols, such as those tied to congressional bunkers like the Greenbrier facility in West Virginia, where dedicated lines from Project Offices ensured connectivity to alternate command posts.^[23] AT&T's Potomac District, a specialized unit for national security projects rather than geographic operations, managed these sites under classified government directives, prioritizing electromagnetic pulse (EMP) hardening and autonomous power generation to maintain operations for extended periods without external support.^[13] Unlike commercial AT&T infrastructure, these facilities were not part of public networks like AUTOVON but served exclusive COG roles, including potential housing for hundreds of personnel in department-store-sized bunkers designed to withstand indirect nuclear effects.^[16] Post-Cold War declassifications and site analyses confirm the facilities' role in broader survivability strategies, though their exact operational linkages remain partially obscured due to ongoing classification; for instance, four of the five sites retain some active use, underscoring enduring alignment with updated COG frameworks post-9/11.^[24] Independent evaluations, such as those by the Center for Land Use Interpretation, highlight how the troposcatter systems—using large concrete parabolic dishes—facilitated scatter propagation over hundreds of miles, a technology selected for its low vulnerability to jamming or interception in wartime scenarios.^[25] This design philosophy reflected causal priorities of redundancy and decentralization, directly countering Soviet nuclear targeting doctrines that prioritized decapitation strikes on centralized U.S. communications hubs.^[12]

Development and Construction

Planning Phase and Site Selection

The planning phase for Project Offices facilities commenced in the late 1950s and early 1960s, as AT&T collaborated with the U.S. Department of Defense to develop hardened infrastructure for national security communications amid intensifying Cold War nuclear threats. This effort built on existing Long Lines systems, focusing on integrating survivable switching capabilities for military and government networks, including the Switched Circuit Automatic Network (SCAN), which became operational in December 1961 as a precursor to AUTOVON.^[26] Facilities were engineered to withstand nuclear blasts, aligning with broader continuity of government (COG) requirements for post-attack command and control.^[20] Site selection prioritized locations in the mid-Atlantic region that balanced strategic accessibility with low vulnerability to direct attack. Criteria included proximity to key defense installations, such as Site R (the Alternate Joint Communications Center), and integration with primary communication backbones like coaxial cable routes from Airmont, New York, to Mojave, California.^[26] Remote, mountainous areas were favored for their geological stability, enabling deep underground construction with natural overburden for blast protection, while supporting antenna systems for microwave and troposcatter relays. For instance, property for the MD-1 site was acquired on July 7, 1960, specifically for its position along a major cable route and nearness to emergency preparedness facilities.^[26] The Big Hole site in Chatham County, North Carolina—the southernmost facility—was selected despite its distance from Washington, D.C., likely due to suitable bedrock for excavation and connectivity via expensive dedicated relays, such as the Buckingham Relay Site in Virginia.^[21] This configuration ensured redundant coverage across the region, with five sites overall providing dispersed, hardened nodes to maintain essential voice and data links during crises. Construction timelines followed rapidly, with initial underground structures at some locations breaking ground in 1960 and becoming operational by 1961.^[26] ^[20]

Engineering and Hardening Techniques

The Project Offices facilities were constructed as deeply buried, reinforced concrete bunkers to enhance survivability against nuclear blasts, radiation, and fallout. Engineering designs specified thick concrete walls and roofs capable of resisting overpressures from indirect nuclear detonations, with structures engineered to remain intact and operational barring a direct hit by a warhead.^[18] These underground configurations, excavated into stable geological formations, provided natural overburden for additional shielding while minimizing surface signatures.^[24] Hardening techniques extended to internal components, where communications switching gear and ancillary systems were installed on shock-mounted platforms to isolate them from ground-transmitted vibrations and seismic effects induced by nearby explosions.^[27] Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) protection was achieved through conductive shielding, such as integrated metal mesh or Faraday cage principles, aligned with contemporaneous military standards for electronic safeguarding.^[28] ^[29] Redundant power infrastructure, including on-site diesel generators and battery banks, supported autonomous operation for extended periods without external grid reliance.^[30] Surface elements, including troposcatter antennas for long-haul microwave relay, were mounted on reinforced concrete pedestals or towers engineered for blast resistance, ensuring signal continuity in degraded environments.^[13] Overall, these measures reflected AT&T's integration of civil engineering with defense specifications from the mid-1960s, prioritizing causal durability through layered physical and electronic protections over superficial resilience.^[19]

Key Facilities

Big Hole Site

The Big Hole Site, located in Chatham County, North Carolina, approximately 10 miles south of Chapel Hill near Pittsboro, served as one of five key underground facilities constructed by AT&T under Project Offices during the Cold War era.^[21] This site was engineered to provide hardened, survivable communications infrastructure capable of withstanding nuclear blasts and electromagnetic pulses, supporting military command and control through tropospheric scatter (tropo scatter) technology.^[31] The facility's above-ground components include two prominent tropo scatter antennas visible in satellite imagery, while the bulk of its structure extends underground, earning its local moniker from the massive excavation pit—described by residents as the largest hole they had ever seen—dug during initial construction in the early 1960s.^[24]^[18] Construction of the Big Hole Site began around 1959-1960 as part of AT&T's collaboration with the U.S. government to ensure telecommunications resilience amid escalating nuclear threats.^[32] The underground complex reportedly spans 13 stories in depth, comprising reinforced concrete structures designed for blast resistance, with extensive ventilation, power generation, and cabling systems to maintain operations in isolation.^[18] Local accounts detail the excavation process involving heavy machinery that created a pit large enough to dominate the rural landscape, after which the site was backfilled and capped with a secure, windowless building serving as the primary entrance.^[23] Staffing included civilian AT&T personnel trained in maintaining tropo scatter equipment, which relayed microwave signals over long distances via atmospheric reflection, bypassing vulnerable ground lines.^[33] Operationally, the Big Hole Site integrated into broader networks like AUTOVON for priority government and military voice and data transmission, with redundancies ensuring failover during crises.^[23] Its remote woodland location provided natural concealment and separation from urban targets, aligning with survivability doctrines that prioritized dispersed, hardened nodes.^[22] The facility remained active through the Cold War, supporting continuity of government plans by linking to other Project Offices sites via tropo links and underground cables.^[24] By the late 2000s, amid post-Cold War reductions in hardened infrastructure needs, the Big Hole Site was decommissioned, with operations ceasing around 2008.^[34] The site, now surrounded by suburban development including upscale neighborhoods, retains heavy security fencing and restricted access, preventing public entry or detailed external surveys.^[34] Current ownership traces to AT&T or successor entities, with no confirmed reuse, though local speculation persists regarding potential reactivation for modern threats; however, official records indicate disuse, reflecting shifts toward satellite and fiber-optic alternatives less reliant on physical bunkers.^[22] Environmental and structural integrity concerns from decades of dormancy further complicate any revival efforts.^[31]

Peters Mountain Site

The Peters Mountain Site, located on Peters Mountain approximately 15 miles north of Charlottesville, Virginia, at an elevation of about 2,800 feet, functioned as a key hardened relay station in AT&T's tropospheric scatter (troposcatter) network. Constructed between 1959 and 1962 as one of five Project Offices, it featured underground bunkers designed to withstand nuclear blasts and electromagnetic pulses, with reinforced concrete structures housing switching equipment, diesel generators, and ventilation systems for extended autonomous operation.^[35]^[36] The site included four large fixed concrete parabolic antennas—each roughly 30 feet in diameter—for troposcatter transmission, enabling beyond-line-of-sight relay of microwave signals over hundreds of miles by scattering radio waves off the troposphere.^[35] Operational by the mid-1960s, the facility supported the AUTOVON military telephone network and broader continuity-of-government communications by linking to sites such as the Hagerstown Facility via dedicated troposcatter paths, providing redundant, high-capacity voice and data relay hardened against Soviet nuclear threats.^[36]^[37] Normally staffed by 30 AT&T technicians trained in emergency protocols, it could expand to 90 personnel during crises, with on-site supplies for 30 days of self-sufficiency including water reservoirs and fuel stores.^[12] Secrecy oaths bound employees, limiting public knowledge and fueling local speculation about its exact role in national defense infrastructure.^[38] Troposcatter operations ceased by the 1990s with advancements in fiber optics and satellite technology, but the site remains active for microwave and cellular relay functions, including FCC-licensed towers for 800 MHz propagation.^[36] Major renovations from 2007 to 2014 modernized subsurface infrastructure, reportedly at a cost of $61 million, enhancing resilience without altering its core hardened design.^[39] Access is restricted, with perimeter fencing and surveillance maintaining security amid surrounding dense woodland.^[35]

Short Hill Mountain Site

The Short Hill Mountain Site is an AT&T underground communications facility located on the eastern slope of Short Hill Mountain in Loudoun County, Virginia, near Lovettsville and Harpers Ferry.^[25] Constructed in the 1960s during the Cold War, it formed part of a network of five hardened Project Offices in the mid-Atlantic region designed to maintain essential telecommunications amid nuclear threats.^[25] ^[40] Engineering efforts involved extensive blasting and excavation to create an underground bunker spanning several thousand square feet, featuring a drive-in entrance, decontamination chamber, and security stations.^[25] ^[40] The site incorporated microwave and satellite antennas, along with large concrete parabolic tropospheric scatter antennas that were removed in recent years, to facilitate resilient signal relay.^[25] Its hardened design prioritized survivability against blast and electromagnetic pulse effects, aligning with AT&T's role in supporting military and government networks such as AUTOVON.^[25] ^[40] Primarily serving as a secure relay and switching node, the facility contributed to national continuity of government plans by ensuring post-attack command communications.^[25] Suspicions persist that it included provisions for housing government personnel during emergencies, though AT&T has not confirmed such capabilities beyond core telecommunications functions.^[25] Access protocols enforced strict secrecy, including background checks for visitors, reflecting its strategic sensitivity.^[40] One of four Project Offices remaining operational in limited capacity post-Cold War, the site drew controversy in 2016 when AT&T proposed "Project Aurelia," a 3.5-acre, 35-foot-tall expansion with eight 4-megawatt diesel generators and 230,000 gallons of fuel storage.^[25] ^[40] Local opposition cited environmental risks, zoning violations, and unresolved questions about its exact purpose, leading to the proposal's withdrawal on June 13, 2016.^[40] AT&T invoked confidentiality in declining further disclosures, sustaining perceptions of opacity tied to its historical government ties.^[40]

Hagerstown Facility (HGTWMDQ0010)

The Hagerstown Facility, designated HGTWMDQ0010 under its CLLI code, is an underground, hardened AT&T communications station located atop a mountaintop in the Bear Pond Mountains of Maryland, northwest of Hagerstown and approximately 39.71°N, 77.97°W, near the Pennsylvania border.^[41]^[42] As the northernmost of five mid-Atlantic "Project Office" sites constructed by AT&T during the 1960s, it formed part of a chain of troposcatter terminals designed for resilient long-haul microwave transmission.^[41] The facility, also known as HAG2 or Hagerstown 2, entered service in 1963, emphasizing nuclear survivability through earth-covered bunkering and reinforced infrastructure.^[37] Construction featured a drive-through entrance with decontamination capabilities, blast-resistant microwave dish antennas mounted on concrete-backed reflectors for high-power troposcatter operations, and an overall nuclear-hardened design to withstand electromagnetic pulse and overpressure effects.^[41] Supporting AT&T's Long Lines network, the site integrated with AUTOVON, the Department of Defense's dedicated telephone switching system, enabling secure voice and data relay for military command.^[41] Additional elements included a helipad for rapid access and enhanced perimeter security, reflecting its role in classified federal resilience programs.^[41] In alignment with Cold War-era Continuity of Government objectives, HGTWMDQ0010 likely served as a backup node for executive and military relocation, providing hardened connectivity amid threats of Soviet nuclear strikes.^[41] Its troposcatter technology allowed beyond-line-of-sight propagation over hundreds of miles, bypassing vulnerable ground lines, while the bunkered layout minimized detection and damage.^[41] Documentation from infrastructure surveys confirms operational continuity into the early 21st century, with AT&T maintaining restricted access to prevent unauthorized entry.^[41]^[42] Post-Cold War, the facility's enduring secrecy underscores its specialized function, though public details remain limited to declassified telecommunications histories.^[41]

Operational Capabilities

Technological Infrastructure

The technological infrastructure of Project Offices centered on hardened communications systems designed for survivability in nuclear conflict, primarily featuring troposcatter radio networks for over-the-horizon microwave transmission. These facilities, constructed by AT&T in the early 1960s, incorporated large concrete parabolic reflectors to support high-powered troposcatter signals, enabling reliable long-distance relay between the five mid-Atlantic sites without direct line-of-sight dependencies. ^[14] ^[34] The troposcatter technology exploited atmospheric scattering of microwave signals in the troposphere, providing robust bandwidth for voice, data, and command communications even under wartime degradation of ground-based infrastructure. ^[41] Complementing the primary troposcatter arrays were blast-resistant terrestrial microwave dish antennas, engineered to withstand nuclear overpressure and electromagnetic pulse effects, ensuring continuity of point-to-point links. ^[41] Underground switching equipment housed within the bunkers supported the Department of Defense's AUTOVON secure telephone network, facilitating encrypted voice circuits and priority routing for military and government users. ^[41] These systems were integrated into a classified continuity-of-government framework, with the facilities' design emphasizing redundancy and isolation from surface vulnerabilities, though operational details remain limited due to historical secrecy classifications. ^[24] Power and environmental controls, while not publicly detailed, relied on facility-embedded generators and life-support systems to sustain operations for extended periods, aligning with the bunkers' earth-covered, blast-hardened enclosures that protected internal electronics from radiation and shock waves. ^[41] The overall architecture prioritized causal resilience, with troposcatter paths forming a networked backbone that could dynamically reroute signals amid disruptions, as evidenced by path diagrams linking sites like Big Hole and Hagerstown. ^[14] Post-Cold War evaluations confirm the infrastructure's efficacy for its era, though it lacked modern fiber-optic scalability. ^[34]

Security and Staffing Protocols

Security protocols for Project Offices facilities prioritized the protection of hardened communication nodes integral to U.S. government continuity planning during potential nuclear conflicts. These measures surpassed standard AT&T site protections, featuring reinforced underground bunkers with blast-resistant designs and restricted entry points, such as drive-in portals accessible only via secured roads.^[41] Access required government-issued security clearances, ensuring that only vetted personnel could enter, a stipulation tied to the sites' dual commercial-military role.^[41] ^[20] Staffing protocols emphasized reliability and resilience, drawing from AT&T's technical workforce supplemented by federal continuity requirements. Personnel, primarily telecommunications engineers and maintenance specialists, underwent selection processes favoring those with high-level clearances—often Top Secret or equivalent—and training in situational awareness for crisis operations.^[43] Facilities operated with small, rotating crews to sustain 24/7 relay functions, minimizing on-site presence in non-emergency periods while enabling rapid augmentation for government officials during activations.^[21] Sites like Peters Mountain, operational since the mid-1960s, received 2007 upgrades to equipment that supported modernized staffing configurations without altering core protocols.^[36] In practice, this model aligned with broader continuity of operations plans, where essential functions relied on pre-qualified teams capable of self-sustaining for extended durations.^[43]

Decommissioning and Post-Cold War Status

Factors Leading to Closure

The decommissioning of Project Offices facilities occurred primarily in the late 1980s through the early 2000s, coinciding with broader transitions in U.S. national security infrastructure. The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 markedly reduced the perceived immediacy of large-scale nuclear conflict, diminishing the operational rationale for maintaining extensive networks of hardened communication bunkers originally designed to ensure government continuity amid mutual assured destruction scenarios. These sites, integral to AT&T's Long Lines microwave relay system for relaying emergency signals, faced scaled-back federal priorities as Continuity of Government (COG) planning evolved toward more distributed and less site-specific strategies. Technological advancements further accelerated obsolescence. The Long Lines network, reliant on line-of-sight microwave transmission towers and underground repeaters, was supplanted by fiber-optic cables—which offered vastly higher bandwidth and reliability without the vulnerabilities of elevated antennas—and satellite systems by the mid-1990s.^[44] Bell Labs' own innovations in optical fiber, commercialized in the 1980s, enabled competitors like Sprint to bypass traditional microwave infrastructure, eroding the monopoly-driven maintenance of these specialized facilities.^[44] For instance, the Big Hole site in Chatham County, North Carolina, saw equipment removal by 2008, reflecting the network's overall fade into disuse as modern telecommunications rendered its blast-resistant vaults redundant.^[34] Economic pressures compounded these shifts. Post-Cold War defense budgets, constrained by dividend payments and fiscal austerity under administrations from Reagan through Clinton, prioritized active threats over legacy bunkers with annual upkeep costs in the millions per site for climate control, security, and minimal staffing.^[45] The 1984 AT&T divestiture fragmented the company's integrated operations, transferring many Long Lines assets to regional Bell operating companies ill-equipped or unwilling to sustain government-leased, low-utilization hardened sites without Cold War-era subsidies. Sites like Peters Mountain and Short Hill Mountain, while retaining some communications functions into the 2000s, underwent partial mothballing or repurposing attempts amid these cost-driven rationalizations, with full closures often tied to expired leases or asset sales.^[35]^[25]

Current Accessibility and Reuse Attempts

The Project Offices facilities, owned by AT&T, maintain restricted access protocols consistent with their historical role in secure communications infrastructure, limiting public entry to authorized personnel only.^[21]^[41] Sites such as HGTWMDQ0010 in Hagerstown, Maryland, explicitly prohibit unofficial visitors under AT&T Corporate Security guidelines, featuring secure perimeters, underground structures, and features like helipads and microwave antennas that underscore ongoing operational sensitivity.^[41] Similarly, the Peters Mountain site north of Charlottesville, Virginia, remains an active AT&T property with no public access provisions, its drive-in entrance to the underground bunker reserved for maintenance or emergency use.^[35] Partial decommissioning has occurred at select locations post-Cold War, with equipment removal signaling reduced reliance on original Cold War-era tropospheric scatter systems. At the Chatham Big Hole site south of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, AT&T extracted internal equipment by summer 2008, though the facility stays under company ownership without transfer to other entities.^[21] The Short Hill Mountain site near Harpers Ferry, Virginia, saw its large concrete parabolic antennas dismantled in recent years, yet it continues limited use among the four operational Project Offices.^[25] Reuse efforts have been minimal and largely unsuccessful, reflecting the sites' specialized hardening against nuclear threats and integration into continuity-of-government networks. In 2016, AT&T proposed constructing a 160,000-square-foot above-ground building adjacent to the Short Hill Mountain underground facility, but the plan was shelved amid local opposition over environmental impacts and unclear operational needs.^[25] No comparable repurposing initiatives, such as commercial leasing or public conversion, have advanced at other sites like HGTWMDQ0010, which sustains classified support for federal emergency relocation.^[41] Overall, retention by AT&T prioritizes potential reactivation over redevelopment, with no verified sales or adaptive uses as of 2025.^[35]^[42]

Myths, Legends, and Misconceptions

Origins of Secrecy-Fueled Narratives

The classified construction of Project Offices during the early 1960s, under contracts with the U.S. government and executed by AT&T, inherently limited public disclosure to maintain operational security amid heightened Cold War tensions. These mountaintop facilities, designed for resilient troposcatter and microwave communications to support Continuity of Government (COG) functions, were often disguised as routine telecommunications infrastructure, fostering initial local suspicions without verifiable details. For instance, the Hagerstown facility (HGTWMDQ0010) in Maryland, activated in 1963 as the northernmost link in a chain of five such sites, featured underground components visible only to authorized personnel, prompting unconfirmed rumors among nearby residents of hidden military bunkers rather than their actual role in relay communications.^[41]^[42] Secrecy protocols, including restricted access roads and nondescript surface structures, amplified narrative formation as incomplete sightings—such as earth-moving equipment and antenna arrays—circulated via word-of-mouth in rural Virginia and Maryland communities. At Short Hill Mountain, the eastern slope installation's covert build in the mid-1960s drew early speculation of espionage-related purposes, exacerbated by AT&T's refusal to elaborate beyond "telephone transmission" euphemisms, which locals interpreted as cover for elite survival shelters. Similarly, Peters Mountain's Appalachian site, resembling a standard AT&T station but housing secure federal links, contributed to broader folklore of an interconnected "underground network" for doomsday scenarios, despite evidence indicating capacities limited to hundreds rather than thousands.^[40]^[35]^[16] Declassification fragments and post-Cold War FOIA releases in the 1990s onward inadvertently seeded exaggerated interpretations, as partial revelations about COG infrastructure merged with public fascination for nuclear survivalism. Media accounts, such as those detailing renovations for elite continuity, blurred factual relay roles with mythic portrayals of vast, self-sustaining havens, originating distrust in official narratives and spawning online theories of perpetual secret usage. Local opposition to 2016 redevelopment proposals at Short Hill, rooted in historical opacity, exemplifies how initial veil-lifting perpetuated cycles of conjecture over empirical function.^[46]^[12]^[47]

Factual Debunking of Exaggerated Claims

Claims that Project Offices, including the Short Hill Mountain Site and Hagerstown Facility (HGTWMDQ0010), served as primary relocation bunkers for high-level government officials during nuclear war lack supporting evidence and misrepresent their documented role as hardened communications relays. These facilities, constructed by AT&T in the mid-1960s, featured underground vaults housing troposcatter antennas and microwave equipment designed to maintain federal voice and data links in post-attack scenarios, with capacities limited to operational staff rather than large-scale habitation.^[14] Engineering specifications emphasized equipment survivability, including shock-mounted interiors and diesel fuel storage up to 500,000 gallons for generators, but architectural plans and declassified descriptions confirm no extensive living quarters or self-sustaining infrastructure for non-essential personnel.^[39] Speculation portraying these sites as command centers or "underground cities" for continuity-of-government operations exaggerates their scope, as primary COG sites like Mount Weather were separately designated for executive relocation with far greater capacity. Project Offices functioned within the AT&T Long Lines network to relay signals between surviving nodes, not to host decision-making bodies; for instance, HGTWMDQ0010, operational from 1963 until its closure in 1977, supported regional microwave chains without integrated command facilities.^[41] Similarly, the Short Hill Mountain facility relied on parabolic troposcatter dishes for beyond-line-of-sight transmission, a technology phased out by the 1980s in favor of satellite and fiber optics, rendering claims of ongoing "black ops" hubs inconsistent with technological obsolescence and public permit applications for modern upgrades.^[25] Assertions linking Project Offices to extraterrestrial or paranormal activities, such as UFO sightings or unexplained seismic events, stem from anecdotal local reports without verifiable data, often conflating routine maintenance noises or troposcatter signal tests with anomalous phenomena. Federal records attribute site secrecy to Cold War protocols protecting communications infrastructure, not concealment of non-terrestrial elements; access restrictions at decommissioned sites like HGTWMDQ0010 persist due to private ownership and terrain hazards rather than active cover-ups.^[42] Post-Cold War repurposing attempts, including AT&T's 2016 proposal for a 160,000-square-foot data center at Short Hill—which was suspended amid local opposition—further demonstrate transparency incompatible with enduring conspiracy narratives.^[25] Contemporary claims of these facilities as core NSA surveillance nodes overstate their original design while ignoring evolved network architectures. Although AT&T has provided data access to intelligence agencies at select Long Lines sites under legal warrants, Project Offices were engineered for wartime redundancy, not mass interception; modern spying relies on internet backbone taps at urban switching centers, not remote mountaintop relics.^[48] Decommissioning evidence, such as HGTWMDQ0010's 1977 shutdown, underscores their limited lifespan beyond the troposcatter era, debunking notions of perpetual, hidden utility.^[49]

Strategic Legacy and Evaluations

Contributions to National Defense Realism

The AT&T Project Offices, five nuclear-hardened facilities constructed in the mid-1960s under the auspices of Project FOUR LEAVES as authorized by National Security Action Memorandum 261 issued by President Kennedy on an unspecified date in the early 1960s, served as critical backup nodes for the Department of Defense's AUTOVON secure telephone network.^[12]^[50] These sites, buried in reinforced bunkers in remote, sparsely populated areas of the mid-Atlantic and surrounding regions—including the "Big Hole" facility near Chatham—they utilized REL 2600 troposcatter radio equipment to enable long-distance, line-of-sight communications resilient to electromagnetic pulse and blast effects from nuclear detonations.^[51]^[52] By ensuring redundant, survivable transmission paths, the Project Offices mitigated the vulnerability of surface-level infrastructure to Soviet first-strike capabilities, thereby upholding the operational integrity of U.S. military command structures during existential threats.^[51] This infrastructure directly advanced national defense realism by prioritizing empirical threat assessments and causal mechanisms of nuclear warfare over optimistic assumptions of mutual restraint, embodying a strategy grounded in the anarchic nature of great-power competition where states must prepare for worst-case scenarios to preserve sovereignty.^[53] The facilities' design reflected a commitment to material power enhancements—specifically, assured continuity of government and retaliatory forces—that underpinned the credibility of mutual assured destruction, deterring aggression through demonstrated resolve and capability rather than diplomatic appeals alone.^[51] In operational terms, their troposcatter systems supported DX-priority restoration of essential circuits, allowing sustained coordination among nuclear forces and civilian leadership, which aligned with realist imperatives for balancing power via robust, independent defensive assets amid bipolar rivalry.^[12] Post-Cold War evaluations have affirmed their legacy in fostering a pragmatic defense posture, as the emphasis on hardened, dispersed communications influenced subsequent U.S. strategies for resilient networks against peer adversaries, validating the realist focus on enduring geopolitical uncertainties over transient alliances or arms control regimes.^[19] While some sites, such as the Spears Mountain relay in Virginia, were decommissioned and repurposed by the late 20th century, the enduring design principles—evident in the continued partial use of four facilities—underscore their role in shifting defense planning toward verifiable survivability metrics rather than untested vulnerabilities.^[12]^[24]

Critiques of Cost and Efficacy

Critiques of defense project offices have centered on their role in perpetuating cost overruns and schedule delays in major acquisition programs. Government Accountability Office (GAO) analyses have repeatedly highlighted how these offices, responsible for overseeing weapon system development, contribute to escalating expenses through fragmented decision-making and inadequate oversight, with total overruns on selected programs exceeding hundreds of billions of dollars since the 1990s.^[54] ^[55] For example, in fiscal year 2023 assessments, GAO found that most Department of Defense (DOD) programs under project office management failed to align with baseline cost and timeline estimates, often due to immature technologies and shifting requirements imposed mid-development.^[56] These inefficiencies stem from bureaucratic structures within project offices, including excessive layering of approvals and reliance on traditional contracting that discourages innovation and cost control.^[57] GAO reports from 2025 noted persistent structural issues, such as siloed information sharing among offices, which hinder timely corrections and amplify financial waste—problems traceable to Cold War-era expansions when project offices ballooned to manage complex systems like intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarines.^[58] Critics, including congressional oversight bodies, argue this model prioritizes incrementalism over efficiency, leading to opportunity costs where funds diverted to overruns reduce investments in maintenance or emerging threats.^[59] On efficacy, evaluations question whether project offices deliver warfighting capabilities commensurate with their expenditures. While early special project offices, such as the Navy's for the Polaris missile in the 1950s–1960s, achieved rapid deployment through streamlined authority, later iterations suffered from diluted focus and inter-service rivalries, resulting in systems that underperformed in operational testing or required costly retrofits.^[60] Post-Cold War GAO reviews revealed that many programs sustained during the era yielded marginal strategic gains relative to budgets, with decommissioning of redundant assets underscoring inefficiencies in long-term planning—such as overbuilt nuclear infrastructure that became liabilities after 1991.^[61] Independent analyses, like those from the Project On Government Oversight, attribute this to risk-averse cultures in project offices, where avoiding failure trumps cost-effective outcomes, ultimately eroding deterrence value amid fiscal constraints.^[62] Despite reforms, such as adopting other transaction authorities for flexibility, core critiques persist: project offices often amplify rather than mitigate the inherent uncertainties of defense R&D, yielding lower productivity returns than comparable civilian sectors.^[63]

References

[1]
The PMO - PMI
It functions at the portfolio level and directs and manages projects and programs ensuring they are aligned to the organizational strategy and will deliver ...
[2]
What is a PMO (Project Management Office)? - TechTarget
Oct 9, 2024 · A project management office (PMO) defines and ... The project office serves as a source of information on project management frameworks.
[3]
The Functions of Project Management Offices (PMOs) | PMI
The definition of a PMO may vary in name and by function, but it essentially centralizes, coordinates and oversees the management of projects and programs.
[4]
What is a project management office (PMO)? The key to ... - CIO
Oct 2, 2023 · A project management office (PMO) is a group, or functional unit, that sets, maintains, and enforces the practices, policies, and standards for structuring and ...
[5]
Project management office versus project support office - PMI
The PMO is an entity that assists the executive management of a business organization to translate the strategy into the portfolio. It helps in selecting or ...
[6]
Program Management Office - Promote Project Oriented Culture - PMI
Jan 30, 2007 · The PMO, also called the Project Office, Project Support Office ... (defined as projects completed on time and within budget) increased ...
[7]
Building a PMO from the ground up: Three stories, one result - PMI
Oct 25, 2014 · The PMO is defined as “an organizational structure that may be used to standardize the portfolio, program, or project-related governance ...
[8]
What is a PMO? - APM
The PMO may be a project management office, programme management office or portfolio management office, depending on what is being supported. Whether projects, ...
[9]
Which PMO Is Right for Your Organization? - PMI
Jan 4, 2023 · Building a project management office (PMO) can bolster an organization's power to deliver initiatives with strategic value.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition<|separator|>
[10]
What is PMO? Definition, Types and It's Role | IPM
A Project Management Office (PMO) is a department that maintains project management standards. It helps project managers find the proper methods, processes, ...
[11]
Project Management Office (PMO) Guide - ProjectManager
Curious about PMO? Learn what a project management office really does, and ... project office has to persuade all stakeholders of the benefits it brings.What Is a PMO? · Who Can Be Part of a Project... · Benefits of Establishing a...
[12]
A jaunt into Cold War history - Sand, software and sound
Jul 24, 2017 · Thus, I've come to believe that FOUR LEAVES refers to the AT&T “Project Offices” as described in Mr. Grass's book. In addition to AUTOVON, AT&T ...
[13]
AT&T Troposcatter Relay Station Buckingham County, Virginia
Most likely, these facilities supported a highly-classified federal Continuity of Government (CoG) program. ... Return to... AT&T Project Offices ...
[14]
AT&T "Project Offices"
**Summary of AT&T Project Offices Facilities (Engineering and Hardening Features):**
[15]
[PDF] UNDERSTANDING STRATEGIC INTERACTION IN THE SECOND ...
The imperative of deterring nuclear war grounded U.S. Cold War strategy, even as the U.S. ... survivability of command posts and in redundant communications ...
[16]
This is where the government will hide during a nuclear war
Jun 10, 2017 · He focuses on the Cold War-era government bunkers ... AT&T “Project Offices” that are actually key hubs for government continuity planning.
[17]
AT&T and the government have been 'friends' for a really long time
Aug 18, 2015 · In 1913, AT&T and the federal government struck an agreement in which the Feds agreed to not break up AT&T, as it had with Standard Oil and ...Missing: origins facilities
[18]
Big Hole, Deep Secret - INDY Week
Dec 13, 2000 · Beneath the Chatham County countryside lies AT&T's covert military site, the most intriguing local landmark you're not allowed to visit.
[19]
A Secret Landscape: The Cold War Infrastructure of the Nation's ...
Jul 7, 2014 · The AT&T "Project Offices". Five nuclear-hardened, secure communications stations built by AT&T in the mid-1960s in sparsely-populated areas ...<|separator|>
[20]
AT&T [VA-1] - Cold War Infrastructure
Aug 29, 2006 · [VA-1] is one of five "Project Offices" built by AT&T in the 1960s in the mid-Atlantic region. The station is hardened against nuclear blasts.
[21]
AT&T Chatham Big Hole Site - The Center for Land Use Interpretation
This AT&T site south of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, was built by AT&T in the 1960s. The station is part of the company's communications infrastructure.Missing: Cold War
[22]
Is there more to Big Hole? - INDY Week
Jul 13, 2022 · The site dates back to the 1960s when AT&T built five central facilities as part of the Project Offices program. ... continuity of government” ( ...
[23]
The Broadside (Transcript): The mystery of the Big Hole | WUNC
May 8, 2025 · Anisa Khalifa: There's a mystery buried deep under the earth in the North Carolina Piedmont. It's made of concrete cables and some conspiracies.<|control11|><|separator|>
[24]
Going Deep - The Center for Land Use Interpretation
Many of these were hardened concrete structures to help vital communication equipment survive a nuclear attack. ... Another AT&T Project Office site is known as ...Missing: survivability | Show results with:survivability
[25]
AT&T Short Hill Mountain Site - The Center for Land Use Interpretation
Four of the five Project Office sites are still in use in some form. At this site, in 2016, AT&T was proposing to build a 160,000 square foot building next to ...Missing: Hole Peters Hagerstown COG
[26]
AT&T [MD-1] - Long-Lines.Net
Jul 15, 2004 · [MD-1] was a manned station, and during at least some of the Cold War years had sleeping accommodations, a kitchen, and food, water, and medical ...
[27]
FEATURED 3 Early Presidential Emergency Facilities (PEF) (1965 ...
Jul 8, 2025 · Sites like Cactus, Crystal, Creed, Cartwheel, Corkscrew, Cowpuncher, and Cannonball were critical Continuity of Government sites during the Cold ...
[28]
Cold War Relic, ATT long lines microwave site Kingston, NY
Jul 16, 2009 · Beginning in the late 1980s, competing local and long-distance telephone companies began installing fiber optic cables between company offices.
[29]
Construction of the AT&T Long Lines "Cheshire" underground site
Jul 31, 2024 · Project Offices are an interesting related rabbit hole to pursue ... Cold War? Things like Operation Looking Glass, keeping a staffed ...
[30]
AT&T Nuclear Bomb Shelter - Abandoned Florida
Feb 15, 2016 · Constructed in 1967, this bomb shelter was built by AT&T in the event of a nuclear disaster to house five people to maintain communications.
[31]
The mystery of the Big Hole - WUNC
May 8, 2025 · Built decades ago, the strange, windowless building is only the tip of an iceberg; below it is a massive bunker designed to withstand a nuclear holocaust.Missing: Cold War
[32]
Secret Doomsday Bunker - HistoryNet
Nov 30, 2011 · In 1959, construction began with the digging of what local residents dubbed “the big hole.” Indeed, it was the biggest hole they'd ever seen, ...
[33]
The mystery of the Big Hole - YouTube
May 8, 2025 · ... AT&T employee at the Project Office site in Chatham County Links: • You can find a transcript of the episode here (https://www.wunc.org/2...) ...Missing: Cold War
[34]
Mysterious Cold War bunker closes | Charlotte Observer
Aug 10, 2008 · Unlike the more common AT&T communications bunkers, the Project Offices were apparently designed to shelter high-level government and ...
[35]
AT&T Peters Mountain Road Site, Virginia
This AT&T site atop a mountain north of Charlottesville, Virginia was built by AT&T in the 1960s. The station is part of the company's communications ...Missing: Cold War
[36]
AT&T "Peters Mountain" Project Office - Wikimapia
The site is still owned and operated by AT&T and was extensively upgraded as recently as 2007 with modern communications equipment. www.coldwar-c4i.net/ ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[37]
AT&T "Hagerstown 2" Project Office - Wikimapia
... (AUTOVON) communications network via a troposcatter link to the Peters Mountain relay site to the S. Through co-located microwave transmitters, this site ...
[38]
Unsettling mysterious property on top of Peters Mountain in ... - Reddit
Jul 15, 2022 · ... Peters-Mountain-Project-Office · u/zuniac5 avatar · zuniac5. • 3y ago ... There is an almost identical AT&T installation on Short Hill Mountain in ...TIL of room 641A- a secret room in an AT&T building that ...Charlottesville has a lot of mystery buildingsMore results from www.reddit.com
[39]
coldwarcomms@groups.io | The secret at Short Hill: One year later
May 12, 2020 · ... communications, computer processing and storage. The amount of ... Peters Mountain Site are facts, since 2007— B200701545AC dated 07/03 ...
[40]
What's up there? There's more than meets the eye to Short Hill ...
Jun 16, 2016 · At the height of the Cold War, communications contractor AT&T constructed a secret, underground installation at the top of Short Hill Mountain.Missing: Hole Peters Hagerstown COG<|separator|>
[41]
AT&T "Project Office" HGTWMDQ0010 - Cold War Infrastructure
Return to... AT&T Project Offices main page · Cold War infrastructure main page. Updated on January 19, 2006 at 19:37 by Albert LaFrance.Missing: government | Show results with:government
[42]
HGTWMDQ0010 AT&T Site - The Center for Land Use Interpretation
HGTWMDQ0010 AT&T Site, Maryland. An underground mountaintop AT&T location, one of several Project Office sites, used for secure federal communication systems.Missing: Hagerstown | Show results with:Hagerstown
[43]
[PDF] Federal Continuity Directive 2 - FEMA
Jun 13, 2017 · Listed below are examples of staffing requirements: 1. Twelve (12) staff with Top Secret security clearances and situational awareness training.Missing: protocols underground
[44]
Horns Across America: The AT&T Long Lines Network | Hackaday
Jul 10, 2017 · Planned and built during some of the chilliest days of the Cold War, these facilities were seen as vital parts of the national infrastructure, ...<|separator|>
[45]
Statement regarding GSA's disposal of non-core assets
Mar 4, 2025 · GSA will consider non-core assets for divestment from government ownership in an orderly fashion to ensure taxpayers no longer pay for empty and underutilized ...
[46]
AT&T suspends plans for secret construction on Short Hill Mountain ...
Jun 20, 2016 · AT&T suspends plans for secret construction on Short Hill Mountain, VA. But mystery remains as to whether it wanted to build a data center. June ...
[47]
The federal government is setting up to protect the elite from nuclear ...
Jun 19, 2017 · The US government has begun to renovate and strengthen secret bunkers across the country to protect high-ranking government officials from a nuclear attack.
[48]
The NSA's Hidden Spy Hubs in Eight U.S. Cities - The Intercept
Jun 25, 2018 · Fortress-like AT&T buildings across the U.S. are central to an NSA program that has monitored billions of communications, documents reveal.
[49]
coldwarcomms@groups.io | Hagerstown MW Tower?
A little to the northwest there is a structure that looks for all the world to be a microwave silo. There is a trail connecting the two sites.
[50]
NSAM 261 Four Leaves - Page 2 - JFK Assassination Debate
Jan 2, 2009 · President Kennedy assigns the highest national priority to Project FOUR LEAVES to develop and produce a military communications system. Could ...
[51]
AT&T "Project Offices" - Cold War Infrastructure
Oct 26, 2007 · Note: AT&T Corporate Security has requested that the names and exact locations of active AT&T network facilities not be published. Accordingly, ...Missing: planning phase selection
[52]
https://groups.io/g/coldwarcomms/topic/what_s_up_w_big_hole/53542711
[53]
[PDF] REARMING FOR THE COLD WAR 1945-1960 - OSD Historical Office
... project offices (initially for high-priority programs such as the B–47 and B–52) in which the project officers for development and production shared ...
[54]
Defense Acquisition Reform: Persistent Challenges Require New ...
Jun 11, 2025 · Despite recent reforms, DOD remains plagued by escalating costs, prolonged development cycles, and structural inefficiencies that impede its ...Missing: project | Show results with:project
[55]
Patching the Pentagon's Procurement Problem - War on the Rocks
Sep 24, 2015 · Matters are not helped by cost overruns and schedule slippages. Equipment is often procured too slowly, at too great a cost, and might not ...
[56]
Weapon Systems Annual Assessment: Programs Are Not ...
Jun 8, 2023 · This report, GAO's 21st annual assessment, responds to a statutory provision for GAO to review selected DOD acquisition programs and efforts.<|separator|>
[57]
Acquisition Reform: DOD Should Streamline Its Decision-Making ...
Feb 24, 2015 · Acquisition Reform: DOD Should Streamline Its Decision-Making Process for Weapon Systems to Reduce Inefficiencies ... GAO-15-192 Published: Feb 24 ...
[58]
[PDF] DEFENSE ACQUISITION REFORM Persistent Challenges Require ...
Jun 11, 2025 · DOD remains plagued by escalating costs, prolonged development cycles, and structural inefficiencies that impede its ability to procure and ...
[59]
https://nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2012/9/1/2012september-pentagon-procurement-reforms-face-slim-chance-of-success
[60]
[PDF] PROVIDING MEANS OF WAR - OSD Historical Office
Mar 15, 2005 · organizational structures (initially called weapon system project offices in the. Air Force and special project offices in the navy). The ...
[61]
[PDF] GAO-24-107173, CONTAMINATED EXCESS FACILITIES
Sep 24, 2024 · 13 NNSA may decontaminate and decommission its own contaminated excess facilities if the effort is within certain estimated project cost limits.
[62]
New Documents Raise Questions About Increased Nuclear Spending
May 15, 2018 · Many of the issues NNSA faces again and again—massive cost overruns on large scale projects, delays, and largely avoidable mistakes—are the ...
[63]
The Intellectual Spoils of War? Defense R&D, Productivity, and ...
We examine the impact of government funding for R&D—and defense-related R&D in particular—on privately conducted R&D and its ultimate effect on productivity ...