Dr. Richard B. Berstein, member, U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Research Advisory Board's Chemistry Review Panel; and Professor of Chemistry, University of California, Los Angeles-Continued Prepared statement-Continued Appendix C. "Chemistry and the Department of Energy Mission," Appendix D. E.G. Jefferson, "America's Ultimate Christmas Cata- Panel 1 discussion.. Questions and answers for the record: Dr. Grunder. Dr. Browne... Dr. Shirley Page 299 303 304 324 331 340 345 350 Dr. Bernstein.. PANEL 2: HIGH ENERGY AND NUCLEAR PHYSICS FACILITIES Dr. Nicholas P. Samios, director, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, 351 Prepared statement 356 Dr. Leon M. Lederman, director, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, 366 Prepared statement 370 Dr. Burton Richter, director, Stanford Linear Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford, CA.... Appendix I. Short descriptions of detectors in the currently approved 407 Appendix II. Short descriptions of the CDF and D-Zero detectors .......... Dr. Richter.. 464 469 PANEL 3: MULTIPROGRAM ENERGY LABORATORY DIRECTORS Dr. Alan Schriesheim, Director, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL..... 474 479 Dr. Herman Postma, Director, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, 483 Prepared statement 487 Dr. Robert S. Hansen, director, Ames Laboratory, Iowa State University, Dr. Arthur G. Hansen, chancellor, the Texas A&M University System, 525 Dr. Robert M. Rosenzweig, president, Association of American Universi- Appendix 2: Energy Research Advisory Board reports: Review of the National Research Council Report "Major Facilities for Materials Research and Related Disciplines," prepared by the Materials Ad Hoc Review, a report of the Energy Research Advisory Board to the U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, DOE/S-0037, June 1985. 531 547 Page Appendix 2-Continued "Guidelines for DOE Long Term Civilian_Research and Development, Volume III, Basic Energy Sciences, High Energy and Nuclear Physics,' a report of the Energy Research Advisory Board to the U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, DOE/S-0045, December 1985. Appendix 3: Additional materials for the record: "Some Examples of Accomplishments under the Basic Energy Sciences "Preliminary Report on the Design of the Superconducting Super Col- Appendix 4: U.S. Department of Energy fiscal year 1987 congressional budget "Department of Energy Fiscal Year 1987 Congressional Budget Request Energy Supply Research and Development, volume 3, Supporting Research and Technical Analysis" 595 631 668 780 905 985 Program overview....... 985 Basic energy sciences... 988 Construction project data sheets.... 1108 "Department of Energy Fiscal Year 1987 Congressional Budget Request, General Science and Research, Volume 4" 1200 1987 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AUTHORIZATION WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 1986 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATIONS, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a.m., in room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Fuqua (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. FUQUA. The subcommittee will be in order. Today's hearing is the third in a series of four hearings to be held by the Subcommittee on Energy Development and Applications concerning the fiscal year 1987 authorization request for the Department of Energy's programs in basic research, conservation, and renewable energy and fossil energy. We will begin our consideration of these basic research programs in the Department of Energy for which the administration has requested nearly $1.3 billion. These programs include basic energy sciences, university research support and instrumentation, multiprogram energy laboratories-facilities support, and high energy and nuclear physics; and they support long-range frontier research performed at our national laboratories and universities. The fiscal year 1987 budget request for programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction is $146 million, about 12.7 percent above the current year's appropriated level. The administration's continued support for basic research is noted and applauded. Today we will hear from one of our colleagues who also has been a member of this committee, Congressman Herb Bateman, that wishes to make a short presentation. Congressman, we are very happy to have you back and glad to hear from you. STATEMENT OF HON. HERBERT H. BATEMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA Mr. BATEMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is indeed a pleasure to be back before this committee. May I add that my no longer being on it is not a matter entirely of my choosing. I miss it very much. Mr. Chairman, I have certainly been pleased with the strong support given by the subcommittee and the full Science and Technology Committee to the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility, or CEBAF, throughout its early stages of development. The (1) committee's strong early support for the effort has certainly proven correct. CEBAF is well on its way to providing the Nation's nuclear physics community with a unique, world-class research tool able to support the kind of leading edge in scientific research that is essential to the Nation's defense and economic health. CEBAF has acquired a new director of international standing,' Dr. Hermann Grunder, whom you will be hearing from today. He has put together a staff which has been hard at work conducting the preliminary research and development work for the accelerator. This work has already paid off in an advanced design which uses superconducting radio frequency technology to greatly increase the scientific capability of the accelerator without increasing the cost of the project. Mr. Chairman, even in these times of constrained Federal budgets, I know that this committee certainly has not forgotten that increases in our society's wealth and security come primarily through the increased productivity brought about through scientific advancement and that scientific advancement comes from new research on the frontiers of science. CEBAF has shown itself to be a model science facility in its use of the Federal funds granted it so far, in the quality of people who have become associated with it, the substantial financial and other support it has received and will continue to receive from the Commonwealth of Virginia and the city of Newport News, and the unanimous support it has achieved in the scientific community. I hope the subcommittee and the full Science and Technology Committee will not waiver in the fully justified, strong support that they have consistently given to CEBAF, and I thank the Chair and the committee very much for their indulgence. [The prepared statement of Mr. Bateman follows:] STATEMENT OF HON. HERBERT H. BATEMAN AT HEARING OF SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATIONS, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, MARCH 5, 1986 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your giving me this opportunity to participate in this hearing today. Mr. Chairman, as a former member of this subcommittee, I was pleased with the strong support given by this subcommittee and the full Science and Technology Committee to the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) in its early stages of development. The Committee's strong, early support for the effort has certainly been proved correct. CEBAF is well on its way to providing the nation's nuclear physics community with a unique, world-class research tool able to support the kind of leading edge scientific research that is essential to the Nation's defense and economic health. CEBAF has acquired a new director of international standing, Hermann Grunder, who you will be hearing from today. He has put together a staff which has been hard at work conducting the preliminary research and development work for the accelerator. This work has already paid off in an advanced design which uses superconducting radio frequency technology to greatly increase the scientific capability of the accelerator without increasing the cost of the project. Mr. Chairman, even in these times of constrained federal budgets, I know that this committee, certainly, has not forgotten that increases in our society's wealth and security come primarily through the increased productivity brought about through scientific advancement, and that scientific advancement comes from new research on the frontiers of science. CEBAF has shown itself to be a model science facility in its use of the federal funds granted it so far, in the quality of people who have become associated with it, the substantial financial and other support it has received and will continue to re |