Question:

Answer:

Who will check it?

The Department will review in depth the SSC Laboratory baseline estimate through a committee established in the Office of Energy Research, which includes outside consultants, and through its Independent Cost Estimate group which is not located in the Office of Energy Research. In addition, the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP), a DOE Advisory Committee, will review the cost and methodology and provide an independent check of the above mentioned Departmental reviews.

Question 2:

Initially, DOE indicated that the project would have to be built for the original $5.9 billion total estimated cost.

Subsequently, DOE reversed this requirement and embraced the need for a cost increase. Explain why this decision was made.

Answer:

The Secretary was convinced by the evidence and persuasive
arguments of HEPAP that a $5.9 billion cap would not be wise.
No one wants to spend billions of dollars and build an
accelerator that doesn't work, or that operates in a marginal
fashion that impedes conducting the experiments for which it was
commissioned. The Secretary is convinced, on the basis of the
HEPAP Subpanel's recommendations, of the need to make the
recommended design changes to provide a flexible and reliable
facility at 20 TeV for high energy physics research for decades
to come.

The SSC represents this nation's commitment to excellence in
science and technology into the 21st century and must be

designed and built to produce the research capabilities
expected.

Question 3:

Answer:

DOE and Universities Research Associates previously had been quite confident that the $5.9 billion estimate would not increase. Are you confident that this new estimate won't be replaced with a higher value? Why or why not?

We are confident that we are doing everything possible to establish the proper cost estimate. The Secretary is committed to establishing the best estimate of cost for the SSC that is possible at this time. The Department will review and validate the estimate proposed by the SSC Laboratory; the HEPAP Subpanel independently will review both the Laboratory's estimate and the Department's validation of the cost, baseline design and

schedule. The estimate will include an allowance for

contingency for unforeseen technical risk and uncertainties in the cost to construct the facilities. We also will have tight management controls as we proceed with the project.

Question 4:

Is there an upper limit to the cost of the project that would trigger reconsideration of the project? What is that limit?

Answer:

There is a limit to the expenditure of funds in this period of
tight budgets and many demands but we do not know what it is.
In considering cost and benefits of the SSC project I am
particularly struck with the potential of this project to
contribute to science and our fundamental understanding of the
world around us. We cannot predict all the spin-offs and
benefits that will result from this project and will contribute
to our position as a world leader in technology and to our
economic competitiveness.

Question 5: Who is responsible for monitoring the costs of the project?

Answer:

The Secretary's memorandum of September 7, 1989, establishes the basic management organization, authorities and responsibilities for the SSC project. Specifically, the Secretary has set up a management organization that is unique in the Department, with the Project Manager on-site in Texas reporting directly to the Headquarters Program Manager, and separately to the Secretary. This clear line of responsibility, authority and reporting is designed to provide for early identification of problems and to ensure their resolution in a timely manner. The costs of the project will be monitored by the Project Manager and reported directly to the Program Manager and, as appropriate, to the Secretary.