House Begins Consideration of DOE FY 1995 Appropriations
In her first appearance before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development on March 10, DOE’s Director of Energy Research, Martha Krebs, presented her office’s fiscal year 1995 budget request. These programs include Basic Energy Sciences, Fusion Energy, the Advanced Neutron Source (ANS), and General Science, comprising High Energy and Nuclear Physics, and termination of the SSC.
In light of Congress’s preoccupation with jobs and technology commercialization for economic growth, Krebs stressed that her office’s often esoteric research programs “respond to the needs of real people.” In particular, she discussed the purpose of the proposed Advanced Neutron Source by giving examples of neutron-scattering applications such as stress analysis in automotive gears, and improved polymers and paints. She reported to the subcommittee, which has a strong interest in cancer research, that technology developed in DOE’s Human Genome initiative was instrumental recently in localizing the gene for colon cancer. Krebs also noted that user facilities operated by the Office of Energy Research support over 4,000 university researchers.
Asked by subcommittee chairman Tom Bevill (D-Alabama) why her budget would remain relatively flat when the Administration’s budget request “has significant increases for science programs” in general, Krebs reminded him that the overall DOE budget was being reduced. She called her budget “an attempt to minimize the pain, and maximize future impact.”
Many members of the subcommitte, which had supported the SSC, raised questions about the consequences of its cancellation, both for the High Energy Physics community in general, and for individual scientists. While Krebs did not have data on the impact to SSC employees, she reported that Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary had requested a subpanel of the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP) to make recommendations on the future of High Energy Physics research in the U.S. Their preliminary results are due later this spring. Krebs expected that the report would include a recommendation for U.S. participation in the European Community’s proposed Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN.
Ranking Republican John Myers (R-Indiana) cautioned Krebs of parallels between the SSC and the proposed ANS. He called the neutron source “a tremendous expense,” and warned that, whereas the B-Factory could be completed fairly quickly (with completion estimated for 1999), any major construction project that would take more than two or three years was likely to “get into trouble.” Krebs confirmed that the ANS was projected to cost $2.9 billion, with completion scheduled for 2003.
In another recent hearing on the DOE budget request, Sen. J. Bennett Johnston’s (D-Louisiana) Committee on Energy and Natural Resources heard from Secretary O’Leary on February 23. While much of the discussion revolved around DOE’s shift of priorities away from coal and nuclear power to renewables and efficiency, O’Leary was also cautioned on the prospects of success for the ANS. Johnston warned that it was “fairly unrealistic” to propose “brand new mortgages...after we just went through all that pain and suffering with the SSC.” Johnston also threatened that he would be “strongly opposed to the new Tokamak Physics Experiment (TPX) until the Administration commits to go forward with ITER [the follow-on step to the TPX in the fusion energy program.]”
O’Leary also withstood criticism from Sen. Dale Bumpers (D-Arkansas) regarding the generosity of the benefits package for SSC employees. Bumpers called it “easily the most grandiose package of severance pay in the history of the federal government,” but O’Leary said, having talked to the employees and understanding the special circumstances they faced, that she had “made the right decision.”
For readers wishing to make their voices heard on these issues, now is the time to write or call your senator or representative. Please refer to FYI #39 for advice on communicating with Congress.
