Invitation and Guidance for Community Input
FESAC Transformative Enabling Capabilities (TEC) Subcommittee
4/21/17
Executive Summary
The Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) Transformative Enabling
Capabilities (TEC) subcommittee welcomes the submission of white papers and talk requests(see below) that describe concepts and technologies that can bring fusion power closer to reality.
For full impact, all talk requests should be accompanied by white papers. While we recommendthat all white papers be accompanied by talk requests, white papers will be considered in theabsence of a companion talk. Every effort will be made to honor all talk requests responsive tothe charge, subject to practical time constraints.
Background
The FESAC was recently charged “to identify the most promising transformative enabling
capabilities for the U.S. to pursue that could promote efficient advance toward fusion energy,building on burning plasma science and technology.”
The charge lists sample focus areas including ”liquid metals, additive manufacturing, highcritical-temperature superconductors, exascale computing, materials by design, machinelearning and artificial intelligence, and novel measurements.” Note that these are onlyexamples. The committee will be accepting community input on any ”promising transformative
enabling capabilities” that promote efficient advance toward fusion energy associated with thesubject mater being investigate by the TEC subcommittees listed below as designated by theirtitles. The full charge can be found at:https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/fesac/pdf/2017/Charge_Letter_FESAC_Feb_2017.pdf
Note that this activity is an assessment of (multiple) technical capabilities, and not an evaluationof confinement devices. According to the charge “Identification of R&D that may have generalimpact that both includes and extends beyond” tokamak and stellarator concepts “is welcome.
However an assessment of various types of confinement devices is not to be performed.”
The TEC subcommittee (R. Maingi, Chair, and A. Lumsdaine, Vice-Chair, full membershiplisted in Appendix 1) has been broken up into three sub-panels corresponding to different areasof technology application:• Plasma Diagnostics, Actuators, and Control (lead: A. White)• Plasma Materials Interaction (lead: J.P. Allain)• Reactor and Balance of Plant (lead: C. Greenfield)
Community Input Meetings
In order to facilitate broad input, three meetings where the community can present to the FESAC
subcommittee are planned:• May 30-June 1, 2017 (Washington DC area): Community input meeting for Plasma
Diagnostics, Actuators, and Control sub-panel, and also for Reactor and Balance of Plant
sub-panel; workshop starts at 9 AM on 5/30 and ends by 6 PM on 6/1.
1June 20-22, 2017 (Chicago or Washington DC area): Community input meeting for
Plasma-Materials Interaction sub-panel; workshop starts at 1 PM on 6/20 and ends by 6
PM on 6/22.
• July 19-21, 2017 (PPPL, Princeton NJ): Final workshop for all three sub-panels;
additional community input time, if necessary; workshop starts at 1 PM on 7/19 and ends
by 6 PM on 7/21.
Details on the locations for these workshops will be forthcoming in the next few weeks. Allpresenters are strongly encouraged to attend one of the first two workshops.
•White paper and talk request submission details and guidelines
White papers should be submitted to the FESAC TEC home page at the following web site:
https://www.burningplasma.org/activities/?article=FESAC%20TEC%20Panel%20Public%20Info%20Home%20Page

with cc to the Chair (Rajesh Maingi, rmaingi@pppl.gov) and the Vice-Chair (Arnold Lumsdaine,lumsdainea@ornl.gov) by May 16 for the May 30 meeting, and by June 6 for the June 20meeting.
Talk requests with prospective titles should be submitted to rmaingi@pppl.gov andlumsdainea@ornl.gov at the earliest convenience, but no later than May 16 for the May 30
meeting, and by June 6 for the June 20 meeting. It is assumed that all talk requests will befollowed up with white paper submissions. Any talk requests not accommodated in the first two
meetings will be considered for the third meeting, July 19-21. Final talks should be submitted tothe same BPO website above, using the proper radio button link, with cc to the Chair (RajeshMaingi, rmaingi@pppl.gov) and the Vice-Chair (Arnold Lumsdaine, lumsdainea@ornl.gov).
Please use the naming convention <author>_FESAC_TEC2017_<paper or talk>.pdf.
White papers are limited to 4 pages, and should include the components listed below. We willattempt to accommodate all requests for presentations that are responsive to our charge, subject
to our time constraints. Our intention is to plan for a 15 minute talk with 15 minutes of Q/A fromthe FESAC subcommittee, but these may be shortened in order to provide additional presentation
slots. If there are more requests than we can accommodate, even with shorter time slots, they will
be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. Please use the white paper template, linked to theFESAC TEC home page above, as a guideline, noting that not all questions will be relevant for
all proposed technologies.
1. Description of the technology
2. Application of the technology for fusion energy, e.g. in a fusion power plant
3. Expected performance of the technology – what is the critical variable (or variables) that
determines or controls the output of the technology?
4. Design variables – what are the parameters that can be controlled in order to optimize theperformance of the technology?
5. Risks and uncertainties with the technology development and performance
6. Current maturity of the technology, using e.g. Technical Readiness Levels (TRL – seeAppendix 2 for DoE TRL guidelines)
7. Required development for the technology
Initially, white papers will only be reviewed by the subcommittee and not publically available.
White papers will later be posted on the web site, if permission is granted by the primary authors.
Please address questions to Rajesh Maingi (rmaingi@pppl.gov) or Arnie Lumsdaine(lumsdainea@ornl.gov).
2

Appendix 1: FESAC TEC subcommittee membership
Rajesh Maingi (PPPL) – Chair
Arnold Lumsdaine (ORNL) – Vice-Chair
Don Rej (LANL) & S. Knowlton (Auburn – emeritus) – FESAC ex-officio members
Sam Barish (FES) – FES liaison
A. Plasma Diagnostics, Actuators, and Control (Physics and computation)• Anne White (MIT) – sub-panel lead
• Luis Chacon (LANL)• Steve Gourlay (LBNL)• Bill Heidbrink (UCI)• David Humphreys (GA)• Val Izzo (UCSD)
B. Plasma Materials Interaction (Material science and engineering)• Jean-Paul Allain (U. Illinois) – sub-panel lead
• Doug Crawford (ORNL)• Oliver Schmitz (UW-M)• Chris Spadaccini (LLNL)• Zhehui (Jeff) Wang (LANL)• Brian Wirth (UT-K)
C. Reactor and Balance of Plant (Mechanical, electrical, and nuclear engineering)• Chuck Greenfield (GA) – sub-panel lead
• Paul Fessler (DTE Energy)• Jerry Hughes (MIT)• Harry McLean (LLNL)• Jon Menard (PPPL)• Brad Merrill (INL)

3

Appendix 2: DoE Technical Readiness Level Guidelines
https://www.directives.doe.gov/directives-documents/400-series/0413.3-EGuide-04a4

FESAC TEC white papers guidance and template - 4/17/17
Title for New Technology
I.M. Expert1, C.S. Techie2, U.R. Supporter2
1Institution #1
2
Institution #2
Email: IMexpert@myuniversity.edu
The white paper is limited to four pages (8.5x11 inch page with 1 inch margin, no smaller than
11 point font, Times New Roman or equivalent recommended), exclusive of references. The
white paper should address the points listed below. Each of these major points should beaddressed, but how each point is specifically addressed will vary depending on the technology,
and may not match the specific questions.
1. Technology to be assessed
2. Application of the technology (note – while the application presented may be useful for avariety of different machines, it must be applicable to a tokamak or stellarator concept).
3. Critical variable(s) – variable that determines or controls the output of the technology• What is the goal for transformative technology – anticipated value or range of values
for critical variable that needs to be achieved?
• What is the range that is achievable for current state of technology?
4. Design variables – parameters that can be controlled in order to optimize the critical variable.
These could be qualitative.
• Give a description of values that are currently achievable, and a description of whatneeds to be explored in order to achieve transformation.
5. Risks and uncertainties• What are the inherent constraints on the technology (such as, limits that are based onphysical laws)? What are the uncertainties in the calculations of steps 3 & 4?
• What are the engineering questions and issues (manufacturability, go / no go issues,etc.). Are there any inherent safety issues?
• Are there institutional, regulatory, or societal obstacles to the development or use ofthis technology? Is there resistance to the use of this technology in the scientificcommunity, or in the relevant industries?
6. Maturity• What is the current technical readiness level for the application? What progress has
been made in this technology in the last 20 years and what is the projecteddevelopment rate?
7. Technology development for fusion applications• How many simultaneous innovations are required for this technology to achieve thegoal? What is required to bring this technology to TRL3 or TRL6?
• What is the time horizon for this technology to achieve the goal for the application?
• What resources, public and private, are currently available to develop thistechnology? Will developments in this technology from other sources be useful forthe requirements of the application?
• (How) are other nations, through government or private sources, developing thistechnology? Are there gaps in global development that represent possible opportunityfor US investment?
5