Fusion Energy Sciences
Overview
The mission of the Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program is to expand the fundamental understanding of matter at very hightemperatures and densities and to build the scientific foundation needed to develop a fusion energy source. This isaccomplished through the study of plasma, the fourth state of matter, and how it interacts with its surroundings.
Plasma science is wide-ranging, with various types comprising 99% of the visible universe. It is the state of matter in the
sun’s center, corona, and solar flares. Plasma dynamics are at the heart of the formation of galactic jets and accretion ofstellar material around black holes. On Earth it is the substance of lightning and flames. Plasma physics describes theprocesses giving rise to the aurora that illuminates the far northern and southern nighttime skies. Practical applications ofplasmas are found in various forms of lighting and semiconductor manufacturing. High-temperature fusion plasmas at
hundreds of millions of degrees occur in national security applications, albeit for very short times. The same fusion plasmas
may be exploited in the laboratory in a controlled fashion to become the basis for a future clean nuclear power source,which could provide domestic energy independence and security. This is a large driver for the FES subprograms focused on
the scientific study of “burning plasma.” In the burning plasma state of matter, the nuclear fusion process itself provides thedominant heat source for sustaining the plasma temperature. Such a self-heated plasma can continue to undergo fusion
reactions that produce energy, without requiring the input of heating power from the outside, and thus resulting in a large
net energy yield.
In the FES program, foundational science for burning plasmas is obtained by investigating the behavior of laboratory fusion
plasmas confined with strong magnetic fields. The DIII-D National Fusion Facility and the National Spherical Torus
Experiment-Upgrade (NSTX-U), the latter of which is currently down for recovery and repair, are world-leading Office of
Science (SC) user facilities for experimental research available to and used by scientists from national laboratories,
universities, and industry research groups.
Complementing these experimental activities is a significant effort in fusion theory and simulation to predict and interpretthe complex behavior of plasmas as self-organized systems. As part of this effort, FES supports several Scientific Discovery
through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) centers, in partnership with the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR)
program office. The FES program also investigates the behavior of plasmas that are confined near steady state. U.S.
scientists take advantage of international partnerships to conduct research on superconducting tokamaks and stellaratorswith long-duration capabilities. In addition, the development of novel materials, a research area of high interest to many
scientific fields, is especially important for fusion energy sciences since fusion plasmas create an environment of highenergy neutrons and huge heat fluxes that impinge on and damage the material structures containing the plasmas.
The frontier scientific area of the actual creation of strongly self-heated fusion burning plasmas, which will be enabled by
the ITER facility, will allow the discovery and study of new scientific phenomena relevant to fusion as a future energy
source.
The FES program also supports discovery plasma science in research areas such as plasma astrophysics, high-energy-density
laboratory plasmas (HEDLP), and low-temperature plasmas. Some of this research is carried out through partnerships with
the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Also, U.S. scientists areworld leaders in the invention and development of new high-resolution plasma measurement techniques. Advances inplasma science have led to many spinoff applications and enabling technologies with considerable economic and societal
impact for the American quality of life.
The FES program addresses several of the Administration’s research and development (R&D) budget priorities a. Research infusion has the potential to contribute to American energy dominance by making available to the American people a clean
energy technology that relies on widely available and virtually inexhaustible fuel sources. Research in plasma science,
within and beyond fusion, will contribute to American prosperity through the tremendous potential for spinoff applications(described in a 2015 report by the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee [FESAC] b) as well as targeted investments(e.g., in early-stage low temperature plasma research) that can lead to the development of transformative technologies.
a https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/M-18-22.pdf

b https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/fesac/pdf/2015/2101507/FINAL_FES_NonFusionAppReport_090215.pdf

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

157

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Investments in our major fusion facilities and smaller-scale experiments will help maintain and modernize our research
infrastructure for continuing to conduct world-leading research. Established partnerships within and outside DOE maximize
leverage and increase the cost effectiveness of FES research activities. Also, FES partnerships with industry will propagatescientific discoveries that could transition into the private sector. Investments in transformational technologies such asmachine learning, quantum information science (QIS), microelectronics, and high-performance strategic computing could
accelerate progress in several mission areas. Finally, the unique scientific challenges and rigor of fusion and plasma physics
research lead to the development of a well-trained STEM workforce, which will contribute to maintaining and advancing
U.S. competitiveness and world-leadership in key areas of future technological and economic importance, as well as
national security.
Highlights of the FY 2020 Request
The FY 2020 Request is $402,750,000. Strategic choices in this Request are informed by the priorities described in “The
Office of Science’s Fusion Energy Sciences Program: A Ten-Year Perspective,” a the research opportunities identified in aseries of community engagement workshops held in 2015 b, and the FY 2017 FESAC report on the potential fortransformative developments in fusion science and technology c. Priorities include keeping SC fusion user facilities worldleading, investing in high-performance computing and preparing for exascale, exploring the potential of QIS and machinelearning, supporting high-impact research in fusion materials, strengthening partnerships for access to international
facilities with unique capabilities, learning how to predict and control transient events in fusion plasmas, continuing
stewardship of discovery plasma science (e.g., via intermediate-scale facilities), and initiating private-public partnerships.
Furthermore, research priorities for burning plasma science in FY 2020 will be informed by the 2018 report d of the National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine burning plasma study commissioned by FES.
Key elements in the FY 2020 Request include:
Research
 DIII-D research – DIII-D research will utilize the facility enhancements implemented during the FY 2018–2019 Long Torus
Opening. Research goals will aim at resolving predictive burning plasma physics, validation of impurity transportmodels, and integration of core and edge plasma solutions.
 NSTX-U research – The NSTX-U research budget will fund a focused effort on physics topics that directly support therecovery of robust NSTX-U plasma operations, as well as collaborative research at other facilities to support NSTX-U
research program priorities.
 Partnerships with private fusion efforts – Private-public collaborations will leverage opportunities in critical fusion
research areas (e.g., diagnostics, theory and simulation, materials science, and magnet technology).
 Enabling technology and discovery plasma science – Research on high-temperature superconductors, additive
manufacturing, low-temperature plasmas (relevant to microelectronics), and high-energy-density plasmas lead toconnections with and spinoffs for U.S. industry.
 Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing – SciDAC projects will address high-priority research on tokamak
disruptions and large-scale fusion data analysis challenges, including machine learning and QIS, and also continue
development of an integrated whole-device modeling capability, in partnership with the ASCR program.
 Long-pulse tokamak and stellarator research – Long-pulse tokamak research enables U.S. scientists to work onsuperconducting tokamaks with world-leading capabilities. In addition, there will be research opportunities for U.S.
collaborations in the deuterium–tritium (DT) experimental campaign on the Joint European Torus (JET). Long-pulse
stellarator research will allow U.S. teams to take full advantage of U.S. hardware investments on Wendelstein 7-X (W7X) and enhance the scientific output on this device.
 Fusion nuclear science – FES will continue to evaluate options for a neutron source that will test materials in fusionrelevant environments.
 Discovery plasma science – Basic plasma research is partially carried out in partnership with NSF and NNSA. Researchand operations will focus on the intermediate-scale plasma science facilities and on HEDLP research on the Matter in
Extreme Conditions (MEC) instrument, an end station on the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) facility at SLAC Nationalahttps://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/pdf/workshop-reports/2016/FES_A_Ten-Year_Perspective_2015-2025.pdf

b https://science.energy.gov/fes/community-resources/workshop-reports/c https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/fesac/pdf/2018/TEC_Report_15Feb2018.pdf

d https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25331/final-report-of-the-committee-on-a-strategic-plan-for-us-burning-plasma-research

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

158

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC), stewarded by the SC Basic Energy Sciences (BES) program, and on LaserNetUS, a newnational consortium of laser facilities for enhanced user access.
Facility Operations
 DIII-D operations – The funding will allow 13 weeks of facility operations, along with machine and infrastructure
refurbishments and improvements needed for new research capabilities.
 NSTX-U recovery activities – The NSTX-U facility is down for recovery and repair, which will continue through FY 2020.
The NSTX-U Operations budget will support high-priority activities to implement repairs and corrective actions required
to achieve research operations, as well as to increase machine reliability.
 Major Item of Equipment (MIE) project for world-leading fusion materials research – The Materials Plasma Exposure
eXperiment (MPEX) MIE project will be a world-leading facility for steady-state, high-heat-flux testing of fusionmaterials and will be a great resource for advancing the FES strategic priority in materials research. The project is
expected to be baselined in FY 2020. The FY 2020 funding will maintain the required detailed design and R&D activities
and allow for initiation of long-lead major procurements for the device.
Projects
 Continued U.S. hardware development and delivery to ITER – The FY 2020 Request will support the continued design
and fabrication of the highest-priority “in-kind” hardware systems. This includes continued fabrication of the Central
Solenoid magnet system, which consists of seven superconducting modules, structural components, and assembly
tooling. The U.S. will deliver the first Central Solenoid magnet module to the ITER site and also continue design andfabrication efforts for other hardware systems.
 High energy density laboratory plasmas – FES will initiate a line-item construction project for a significant upgrade to
the MEC instrument on the LCLS facility at SLAC.
Other GPP/GPE – Funding is provided for General Plant Projects/General Purpose Equipment, to support Princeton Plasma
Physics Laboratory (PPPL) infrastructure improvements and repairs as well as support a study of FES infrastructureneeds at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL).
FES supports the following FY 2020 Administration Priorities.
FY 2020 Administration Priorities ($K)(dollars in thousands)
Quantum
Artificial
information Science
Intelligence (AI)
(QIS)
7,000
7,520

Fusion Energy Sciences

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

159

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Funding ($K)(dollars in thousands)

FY 2018 Enacted

FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted

Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
Advanced Tokamak
Spherical Tokamak
Theory & Simulation
GPE/GPP/Infrastructure
Total, Burning Plasma Science: Foundations

121,115
93,55050,00013,000277,665

130,500
96,00050,000
10,204
286,704

88,50067,50044,0001,000
201,000-42,000-28,500-6,000-9,204-85,704

Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Long Pulse: Tokamak
Long Pulse: Stellarators
Materials & Fusion Nuclear Science
Total, Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse

15,00010,06927,17752,246

14,0008,500
38,746
61,2469,000
8,500
32,50050,000-5,000—-6,246-11,246

Discovery Plasma Science
Plasma Science Frontiers
Measurement Innovation
SBIR/STTR & Other
Total, Discovery Plasma Science
Subtotal, Fusion Energy Sciences

54,0007,000
19,20080,200410,11152,0508,000
24,00084,050432,000

25,0004,000
14,75043,750294,750-27,050-4,000-9,250-40,300-137,250

Construction
20-SC-61 Matter in Extreme Conditions Petawatt Upgrade
14-SC-60 U.S. Contributions to ITER
Total, Construction
Total, Fusion Energy Sciences—
122,000
122,000
532,111—132,000
132,000
564,000

1,000
107,000
108,000
402,750+1,000-25,000-24,000-161,250

SBIR/STTR Funding: FY 2018 Enacted: SBIR $11,598,000 and STTR $1,631,000
 FY 2019 Enacted: SBIR $12,992,000 and STTR $1,827,000
 FY 2020 Request: SBIR $8,899,000 and STTR $1,252,000

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences160

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Explanation of Major Changes ($K)

Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
The Request for DIII-D prioritizes funding to ensure scientific utilization of the significant facility enhancements implemented during the
FY 2018 – FY 2019 Long Torus Opening, with 13 weeks of research operation. Funding for the NSTX-U program will support the ongoingrecovery activities and maintain collaborative research at other facilities to support NSTX-U research program priorities. SciDAC continues tomake progress toward whole-device modeling; this subprogram will also explore the potential of transformative approaches to fusion science,such as machine learning and QIS. Enabling R&D will focus attention on high-temperature superconductor development. Funding is provided
for General Plant Projects/General Purpose Equipment (GPP/GPE), to support critical infrastructure improvements and repairs at PPPL, as well
as a study of FES infrastructure needs at ORNL.

(dollars in thousands)
FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted-85,704

Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
The Request will continue to provide support for high-priority international collaboration activities, both for tokamaks and stellarators.
Materials research and fusion nuclear science research programs are focused on high priorities, such as advanced plasma-facing andstructural materials. The Request supports design and R&D activities for the MPEX MIE project, expected to be baselined in FY 2020, andinitiates long-lead major procurements.

-11,246

Discovery Plasma Science
For General Plasma Science, the Request emphasizes research and operations of intermediate-scale scientific user facilities and participationin the NSF-DOE Partnership. For High Energy Density Laboratory Plasmas, the focus remains on supporting research utilizing the Matter in
Extreme Conditions instrument of the LCLS user facility at SLAC, supporting research on medium-scale laser facilities through the new
LaserNetUS network, and exploring research opportunities of QIS.

-40,300

Construction
FES will initiate a line-item construction project for a significant upgrade to the MEC instrument. The U.S. Contributions to ITER project willcontinue design, fabrication, and delivery of highest-priority First Plasma hardware.

-24,000

Total, Fusion Energy Sciences-161,250

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences161

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Basic and Applied R&D Coordination
FES participates in coordinated intra- and inter-agency initiatives within DOE and with other federal agencies on science andtechnology issues related to fusion and plasma science. Within SC, FES operates the MEC instrument at the SLAC LCLS user
facility operated by BES, and supports high-performance computing research with ASCR. Within DOE, FES operates a joint
program with NNSA in HEDLP physics. FESAC provides technical and programmatic advice to FES and NNSA for the joint
HEDLP program. Outside DOE, FES carries out a discovery-driven plasma science research program in partnership with NSF,
with research extending to a wide range of natural phenomena, including the origin of magnetic fields in the universe andthe nature of plasma turbulence. The joint programs with NNSA and NSF involve coordination of solicitations, peer reviews,
and workshops.
Program Accomplishments
Doubled efficiency of sustaining plasma pressure in spherical tokamaks. Spherical tokamaks are able to support high plasmapressures, relative to the pressure of the applied confining magnetic field. Recent experiments on the Pegasus sphericaltokamak at the University of Wisconsin-Madison were able to achieve a 100% value for the beta parameter (the ratio ofplasma pressure to applied magnetic pressure); the previous record for achieved beta was ~35%. Beta is an important
metric in fusion science, since fusion power output increases quadratically as the value for beta goes up. The beta value
represents the efficiency with which the applied magnetic field in any fusion system is utilized.
Addressing the transients challenge for tokamak fusion. DIII-D has made significant advances in the mitigation andavoidance of large-scale transient events ("disruptions") that can abruptly terminate a fusion plasma. This includes testing a
new shell-pellet concept that uses a thin-walled, hollow, pea-sized diamond “pellet” filled with metallic dust to suppress thehigh-energy runaway electrons that are often generated during a disruption and that can damage the vacuum vessel. The
experiments showed successful delivery of the dust into the current channel formed by these runaway electrons. Computer
algorithms informed by modern machine-learning techniques are being developed to provide supervisory logic forcomprehensive disruption avoidance and machine protection.
Massively parallel supercomputer simulations shed light on the behavior of magnetic islands. Magnetic islands, which arebubble-like structures that form in magnetically confined fusion plasmas, can grow and lead to plasma disruptions, which
are among the critical challenges confronting future fusion reactors. Simulation research supported by the Scientific
Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) program and carried out on the Cori supercomputer at the National
Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) showed that―contrary to long-held assumptions—the plasma profile
inside the island can maintain a radial structure and the plasma flow can be strongly sheared, which is known to have abeneficial effect on plasma transport. These findings will improve the ability to predict and avoid the onset of thedeleterious plasma disruptions.
Optimal magnetic fields stabilize dangerous instabilities in tokamak plasmas. Researchers have succeeded in developing a
breakthrough predictive method for improving the operation of tokamaks using magnetic fields. In tokamaks, magnetic
field perturbations are often used to avoid undesirable plasma instabilities; however, other unwanted side effects may
occur, such as excessive leakage of heat. The research showed how to use plasma simulations and an efficient numericalmethod to identify the most effective fields, while keeping certain components of the field below critical thresholds. The
modeling motivated experimental studies on the Korean superconducting tokamak KSTAR that validated the new methods,
which are now being applied to ITER and future fusion facility designs.
U.S.-provided trim coils improve performance of Wendelstein 7-X stellarator. The recent second round of W7-X experiments
demonstrated the ability of the five large copper magnetic trim coils and their sophisticated control system to measure andcorrect deviations of the magnetic fields from their designated configuration. Any deviation of these “error fields” cancause divertor plates to overheat and limit the performance of the plasma. Controlling such fields at the edge of the plasma
enabled W7-X to produce plasma discharges lasting up to 30 seconds. Complementary experiments confirmed predictions
about the power needed by the trim coils to correct the deviations—only 10% of the full power of the coils, which is atestament to the precision with which W7-X was constructed.
First-of-a-kind fusion materials irradiation experiment completed. The U.S. and Japan “PHENIX” collaboration has
successfully completed an extensive, first-of-a-kind irradiation campaign to study the feasibility of tungsten-based plasmafacing materials for future fusion devices. This campaign utilized novel gadolinium shield technologies to achieve realistic
displacement damage to transmutation ratios in the High Flux Isotope Reactor facility at ORNL. This was the first-everScience/Fusion Energy Sciences
FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification
162

exploration of fusion-relevant neutron damage in tungsten. The full disassembly of the irradiation experiment wascompleted on cost and schedule, and extensive post-irradiation examination has been initiated, after five years ofexperimentation. The information gleaned from this experiment is expected to provide lasting guidance for theinternational fusion materials community.
New discovery reveals how solar-wind electrons are heated in the Earth's magnetic shield. Analyses of observational datafrom the NASA Magnetospheric Multiscale spacecraft demonstrated that the solar-wind electron stream is accelerated,upon interacting with Earth’s magnetic field, to such high speeds that the streaming breaks down and is transformed into
heat. The discovery reveals a never-before-seen picture about how solar-wind electrons are heated when reaching Earth's
magnetic shield. These ground-breaking results will stimulate further theories, simulations, and laboratory experiments toresolve a longstanding question about collisionless heating at shocks. The discovery has broad applicability to theunderstanding of shocks and particle acceleration in solar flares and supernovae, as well as to astrophysics in general.
Turning plastic into diamonds. Scientists at SLAC have successful produced the “diamond rain” that forms in the interior oficy giant planets. In these laboratory experiments, the environment inside these planets was recreated at the MEC
instrument by the irradiation of plastic targets with a high-power optical laser. Nearly every carbon atom of the original
plastic was incorporated into small diamond structures up to a few nanometers in size. This study predicts that on Uranus
and Neptune, diamonds would become much larger, maybe millions of carats in weight.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences163

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

164

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
Description
The Burning Plasma Science: Foundations subprogram advances the predictive understanding of plasma confinement,
dynamics, and interactions with surrounding materials.
Among the activities supported by this subprogram are:






Research at major experimental facilities aimed at resolving fundamental advanced tokamak and spherical tokamak
science issues.
Research on small-scale magnetic confinement experiments to elucidate physics principles underlying toroidal
confinement and to validate theoretical models and simulation codes.
Theoretical work on the fundamental description of magnetically confined plasmas and the development of advanced
simulation codes on current and emerging high-performance computers.
Research on technologies needed to support the continued improvement of the experimental program and facilities.
Support for infrastructure improvements at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) and other possible DOE
laboratories where fusion research is ongoing.

Research in the Burning Plasma Science: Foundations area in FY 2020 will focus on high-priority scientific issues andopportunities in the areas of transients in tokamaks, plasma-material interactions, and whole-device modeling, as identified
by research needs workshops and other community-led studies. It will also support new approaches with transformational
potential to advance the FES mission, such as machine learning and QIS.
Advanced Tokamak
The DIII-D user facility at General Atomics in San Diego, California, is the largest magnetic fusion research experiment in the
U.S. and can magnetically confine plasmas at temperatures relevant to burning plasma conditions. Its extensive set of
diagnostic systems, many unique in the world, and its extraordinary flexibility to explore various operating regimes make ita world-leading tokamak research facility. Researchers from the U.S. and abroad perform experiments on DIII-D for studying
stability, confinement, and other properties of fusion-grade plasmas under a wide variety of conditions. The DIII-D researchgoal is to establish the broad scientific basis to optimize the tokamak approach to magnetic confinement fusion. Much ofthis research concentrates on developing the advanced tokamak concept, in which active control techniques are used tomanipulate and optimize the plasma to obtain conditions scalable to robust operating points and high fusion gain for futureenergy-producing fusion reactors.
The Enabling Research and Development (R&D) element develops the technology to enhance the capabilities for existingand next-generation fusion research facilities, enabling these facilities to achieve higher levels of performance and flexibility
needed to explore new science regimes. The Request will also allow for partnership opportunities with the private sector on
enabling technology research issues.
Versatile university-led small-scale advanced tokamak research is complementary to the efforts at the major user facilities,
providing cost-effective development of new techniques and exploration of new concepts. These activities are often thefirst step in a multi-stage approach toward the extension of the scientific basis for advanced tokamaks or the maturation of
new experimental techniques. Recent efforts are focused on improving fusion plasma control physics for advanced
tokamaks through application of modern digital tokamak control theory and validation of fundamental plasma stability
theory.
Spherical Tokamak
The NSTX-U user facility at PPPL has been designed to explore the physics of plasmas confined in a spherical tokamak (ST)
configuration, characterized by a compact (apple-like) shape. If the predicted ST energy confinement improvements areexperimentally realized in NSTX-U, then the ST might provide a more compact fusion reactor than other plasma
confinement geometries. In FY 2020, NSTX-U recovery activities will focus on the continued execution of facility repairs andcorrective actions required to resume reliable plasma operations.
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences165

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Small-scale ST plasma research involves focused experiments to provide data in regimes of relevance to the ST magnetic
confinement program. These efforts can help confirm theoretical models and simulation codes in support of the FES goal todevelop an experimentally validated predictive capability for magnetically confined fusion plasmas. This activity also
involves high-risk, but high-payoff, experimental efforts useful to advancing ST science.
Theory and Simulation
The Theory and Simulation activity is a key component of the FES program’s strategy to develop the predictive capability
needed for a sustainable fusion energy source. It also represents a world-leading U.S. strength and competitive advantage
in fusion research. Its long-term goal is to enable a transformation in predictive power based on fundamental science andhigh-performance computing to minimize risk in future development steps and shorten the path toward the realization offusion energy. This activity includes two main interrelated but distinct elements: Theory and SciDAC.
The Theory element is focused on advancing the scientific understanding of the fundamental physical processes governing
the behavior of magnetically confined plasmas. The research ranges from foundational analytic theory to mid- and largescale computational work with the use of high-performance computing resources. In addition to its scientific discovery
mission, the Theory element provides the scientific grounding for the physics models implemented in the advanced
simulation codes developed under the SciDAC activity described below and also supports validation efforts at major
experiments.
The FES SciDAC element, a component of the SC-wide SciDAC program, is aimed at accelerating scientific discovery in fusion
plasma science by capitalizing on SC investments in leadership-class computing systems and associated advances incomputational science The portfolio that emerged from the FY 2017 SC-wide SciDAC-4 re-competition consists of eightmulti-institutional interdisciplinary partnerships, seven of which are jointly supported by FES and ASCR while one issupported entirely by FES, and addresses the high-priority research directions identified in recent community workshops. A
ninth project focused on the critical area of avoidance and mitigation of runaway electrons was added in FY 2018, following
a competitive review. The new portfolio emphasizes increased integration and whole-device modeling, as well as synergy
with the fusion-relevant projects of the SC Exascale Computing Project (SC-ECP) to increase the readiness of the fusion
community for the upcoming Exascale era.
Additional objectives of this element include the support of emerging computational approaches, such as machine learningand other data-centric technologies, and the support of longer-term transformative research opportunities such as
computing aspects of QIS, as identified in the 2018 FES Roundtable on QIS a. The Request will also allow for partnership
opportunities with the private sector in theory and simulation research areas.
GPE/GPP/InfrastructureThis activity supports critical general infrastructure (e.g., utilities, roofs, roads, facilities, environmental monitoring, andequipment) at the PPPL site and other DOE laboratories where fusion research is ongoing.

a https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/pdf/workshop-reports/FES-QIS_report_final-2018-Sept14.pdf

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

166

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
Activities and Explanation of Changes
FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

Burning Plasma Science: Foundations $286,704,000
Advanced Tokamak$130,500,000
DIII-D Research$46,000,000
DIII-D Operations$75,500,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget continues numerous
enhancements/improvements to the DIII-D facility, toinclude the neutral beam modification to add bidirectional off-axis injection capability; and supports
12 weeks of operations. Research continues todetermine the optimal path to steady-state tokamak
plasmas, explore techniques to avoid and mitigatetransients in tokamaks, and develop the plasmamaterial interaction boundary solutions necessary for
future devices. Experiments exploit additional heating
and current drive systems added in FY 2018.
Researchers utilize the new neutral beam capability to
examine the physics of self-driven tokamak plasmas.
Specific research goals include further integration of
the core and edge conditions in high-performance
plasmas and studying the role of neutral fueling andtransport in determining the edge pedestal structure.

$201,000,000$88,500,000$40,500,000$44,000,000
At the Request level, operations funding will support
13 weeks of research at the DIII-D facility. Facility
improvements to increase auxiliary heating power,
current drive, and 3D magnetic field shaping
capabilities will be supported. Research will utilize
new heating and current drive systems to accesssteady-state tokamak plasma scenarios at highpressure and low rotation, further refine techniquesto avoid and mitigate transients in tokamaks, andexploit new diagnostics to improve theunderstanding of divertor material erosion andtransport. Specific research goals will aim at
resolution of predictive burning plasma physics,
validation of impurity transport models, andintegration of core and edge plasma solutions thatextrapolate to future fusion reactors.

Enabling R&D$7,000,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget continues research insuperconducting magnet technology and plasma
fueling and heating technologies required to enhance
the performance for existing and future magnetic
confinement fusion devices.
Small-scale Experimental Research$2,000,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget allows versatile
university-led experiments to focus on improving
fusion plasma control physics for advanced tokamaks.

$3,000,000
The Request supports continuing research in hightemperature superconducting magnet technology
and in plasma fueling and heating technologies. The
Request will allow for exploration of partnership
opportunities with the private sector.
$1,000,000
At the Request level, university-led experiments willcontinue to develop innovative strategies to improve
the performance of advanced tokamaks.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

167

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted-$85,704,000-$42,000,000-$5,500,000-$31,500,000
Research efforts will focus on highest-priority scienceissues, including funding for key facility collaboratorsand off-site users. Operations will support criticalmachine improvements to maintain DIII-D worldleading status.

-$4,000,000
Research efforts will continue to emphasize highpriority R&D. Efforts will be made to enhanceresearch into high-temperature superconducting
magnet technology.
-$1,000,000
Highest-priority experimental research and model
validation efforts will continue.
FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted

Spherical Tokamak$96,000,000
NSTX-U Research$25,000,000
NSTX-U Operations$68,000,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget supports NSTX-U
operations of high-priority activities to implement
repairs and corrective actions required to obtainrobust, reliable research operations. Researchsupports the continued analysis of high-impact data, afocused effort on physics topics that directly support
the recovery of robust plasma operations, andenhanced collaborative research at other facilities tosupport NSTX-U research program priorities.

$67,500,000-$28,500,000$27,000,000+$2,000,000$38,500,000-$29,500,000
At the Request level, operations will support recovery Operations will support continued critical recovery
procurements and construction activities that are
activities. Research efforts will focus on high-priority
necessary to realize robust research operations.
science issues in preparation for return to operations.
Research will support analysis and modeling efforts atother facilities to support NSTX-U research program
priorities and the installation of high-priority
diagnostic instruments on the device.

Small-scale Experimental Research$3,000,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget supports experimental
studies of plasmas surrounded by liquid lithium
material surfaces, which was identified as a priority
research direction in the recent plasma-materials
interactions workshop, continues. In addition,techniques to operate spherical tokamaks without theuse of a central solenoid continue to beexperimentally tested.

$2,000,000-$1,000,000
At the Request level, studies and experiments will
Highest-priority experimental research and model
focus on exploring operational scenarios without avalidation efforts will continue.
central solenoid and model validation and detailed
core turbulent transport mechanisms that elucidate
experimental observations of improved confinement
when the plasma is surrounded by liquid lithium.

Theory & Simulation$50,000,000
Theory$25,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, theory continues tofocus on providing the scientific grounding for thephysical models implemented in the large-scale
simulation codes developed under SciDAC andaddressing foundational problems in the science ofmagnetic confinement, as identified in recent
community workshops.

$44,000,000-$6,000,000$18,000,000-$7,000,000
At the Request level, theory will continue to address Research efforts will focus on the highest-priority
foundational problems in the science of magnetic
activities.
confinement. Emphasis will be placed on researchthat maximizes synergy with large-scale simulation
efforts and addresses recommendations from
community workshops. The Request will allow forpartnership opportunities with the private sector.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences168

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted
SciDAC$25,000,000$26,000,000+$1,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, the SciDAC portfolio
At the Request level, the nine FES SciDAC
The Request will maintain the existing portfolio at thecontinues to emphasize high-priority areas such as
partnerships will continue to address challenges insame level of effort. Research efforts focusing on
plasma disruptions (including runaway electron
burning plasma science, with emphasis on integration emerging technologies with transformational
effects), boundary physics, and plasma-materials
and whole-device modeling, as well as Exascalepotential, such as machine learning /artificial
interactions. The activities of all the partnerships arereadiness. Progress in plasma disruptions will
intelligence and computing aspects of QIS, will becoordinated to accelerate progress toward wholeaccelerate following the addition of a partnershipstrengthened.
device modeling. Synergy with whole-device modeling focusing on runaway electron physics in FY 2018.
activities supported by the DOE Exascale Computing
Validation of the simulation codes against
Project is strengthened.
experimental data will also be emphasized. Research
efforts focusing on emerging technologies withtransformational potential, such as machine learningand computing aspects of QIS, will continue.
FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

GPE/GPP/Infrastructure$10,204,000$1,000,000-$9,204,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget supports Princeton
The Request will support PPPL infrastructure
The focus will be on highest-priority infrastructure
Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) infrastructure
improvements, repair, monitoring, and maintenance. needs and improvements.
improvements, repair, and maintenance.
Funding will also support a study of FES infrastructureneeds at ORNL.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences169

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

170

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Description
The Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse subprogram explores new and unique scientific regimes that can be achieved
primarily with long-duration superconducting international machines, and addresses the development of the materials andtechnologies required to withstand and sustain a burning plasma. The key objectives of this area are to utilize these newcapabilities to accelerate our scientific understanding of how to control and operate a burning plasma, as well as to develop
the basis for a future fusion nuclear science facility. This subprogram includes long-pulse international tokamak andstellarator research and fusion nuclear science and materials research.
Long Pulse: Tokamak
Multi-institutional U.S. research teams will continue their successful work on advancing the physics and technology basis forlong-pulse burning plasma operation via bilateral research on U.S. and international fusion facilities. Research on overseas
superconducting tokamaks, conducted onsite and also via fully remote facility operation, leverages progress made indomestic devices and allows the U.S. fusion program to gain the knowledge needed to operate long-duration plasma
discharges in future fusion energy devices. These efforts will be augmented by research on non-superconducting overseas
tokamaks and spherical tokamaks with unique capabilities.
Long Pulse: Stellarator
Stellarators offer the promise of steady-state confinement regimes without transient events such as harmful disruptions.
The three-dimensional (3-D) shaping of the plasma in a stellarator provides for a broader range in design flexibility than isachievable in a 2-D system. The participation of U.S. researchers on W7-X in Germany provides an opportunity to develop
and assess 3-D divertor configurations for long-pulse, high-performance stellarators, including the provision of a pellet
fueling injector for quasi-steady-state plasma experiments. The U.S. plans to develop control schemes to maintain plasmas
with stable operational boundaries, including the challenges of control with superconducting coils and issues of thediagnosis-control cycle in long-pulse conditions. U.S. researchers will play key roles in developing the operational scenariosand hardware configuration for high-power, steady-state operation, an accomplishment that will advance theperformance/pulse length frontier for fusion. The strong U.S. contributions during the W7-X construction phase haveearned the U.S. formal partnership status. Accordingly, the U.S. is participating fully in W7-X research and access to data.
U.S. domestic compact stellarator research is focused on improvement of the stellarator magnetic confinement concept
through quasi-symmetric shaping of the toroidal magnetic field. A conventional stellarator lacks axial symmetry, resulting in
reduced confinement of energetic ions, which are needed to heat the plasma. Quasi-symmetric shaping, invented in the
U.S., offers an improved solution for stable, well confined, steady-state stellarator plasmas.
Materials and Fusion Nuclear Science
The Materials and Fusion Nuclear Science activity seeks to address the large scientific and technical gaps that exist between
current-generation fusion experiments and future fusion reactors. Traditional materials used in present-day experiments
will not be acceptable in an intense fusion nuclear environment, and the development of new materials and components
suitable for fusion power plants is necessary in order to adequately provide the multiple functions of heat extraction,
tritium breeding, and particle control. The scientific challenge is understanding the complex fusion environment, which
combines extremely strong nuclear heating and damage, high temperatures, fluid-solid interactions, high tritium
concentrations, and strong magnetic fields, as well as large variations of these parameters from the first wall to the vacuum
vessel, and the impact of this extreme environment on materials and component performance. To help develop solutions
for this complex scientific challenge, new experimental capabilities along with game-changing types of research will be
required. Facilities with these experimental capabilities will need to replicate or effectively simulate various aspects of theharsh fusion environment. These experimental capabilities can lead to an increased understanding of materials and could
aid in the development of new materials for use in fusion as well as other extreme environments. The Request described
below will also allow for partnership opportunities with the private sector on fusion materials research.
The highest-priority objective for the fusion materials science effort is to continue pursuing the design and fabrication of
the new world-leading experimental device, the Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX) at ORNL, which will enable
dedicated studies of reactor-relevant heat and particle loads on neutron-irradiated materials. The overall motivation is to
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

171

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

gain entry into a new class of fusion materials science wherein the combined effects of fusion-relevant heat and particle
fluxes on materials can be studied for the first time anywhere in the world.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences172

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Activities and Explanation of Changes
Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse $61,246,000$50,000,000-$11,246,000
Long Pulse: Tokamak$14,000,000$9,000,000-$5,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, research on the
In the Request, research on overseas superconducting High-priority research activities by U.S. multiEAST and KSTAR superconducting tokamaks
tokamaks will continue to integrate new diagnostics
institutional teams will be maintained in areas criticalcontinues to establish the physics bases and control and control tools to improve the performance andto the advancement of long-pulse, steady-state plasma
tools for steady-state plasma scenarios, disruption
duration of a wide range of steady-state, long-pulse
operation.
avoidance and mitigation, and control of plasmaplasma scenarios in collaboration with international
material interfaces. On the Joint European Torus,
partners. Research goals will support the pursuit ofU.S. scientists are commissioning a shattered pellet robust disruption and runaway mitigation solutions,disruption mitigation system and collaborating on
validation of theoretical tools for plasma scenario
optimization of burning plasma scenarios with
development and optimization, and refinement of
deuterium and tritium fuels.
power exhaust control solutions that are consistent
with transient-free plasma operation.
FY 2019 EnactedLong Pulse: Stellarators$8,500,000
Superconducting Stellarator
Research$5,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, U.S. scientists areusing data from the first major experimental
campaign on W7-X to strengthen the basis for longpulse operation with pellet fueling, testing theinnovative island divertor concept, investigating
impurity recycling, studying the effect of the U.S.provided trim coils on fast-ion confinement and on
modulation of divertor heat loads, and determining
the effect of the radial electric field on impurity
transport.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2020 Request$8,500,000$—$6,000,000
In the Request, on W7-X, U.S. scientists will build andinstall a continuous high-speed pellet system to provide
fueling for quasi-steady-state plasma experiments;
develop a complete set of powder droppers for boron
powder injection to enable steady-state wallconditioning; examine the effect of plasma turbulence
and coherent modes on energy and particle transport;
and explore edge radiative cooling with an island
divertor, including 3D equilibrium effects.

+$1,000,000
Research activities by U.S. multi-institutional teams will
be enhanced, including deployment and utilization of
U.S. experimental hardware on international stellarator
facilities.

173

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted
Compact Stellarator Research$3,500,000$2,500,000-$1,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, research is
In the Request, research will continue on experiments The highest-priority research activities will be
providing experimental data in regimes of relevance that are providing data in regimes relevant to mainline supported.
to the mainline stellarator magnetic confinement
stellarator confinement and experimental validation ofefforts and helping confirm theoretical models and models and codes.
simulation codes in support of the goal to develop
an experimentally-validated predictive capability formagnetically confined fusion plasmas.
FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

Materials & Fusion Nuclear Science$38,746,000
Fusion Nuclear Science$14,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, research efforts
continue to focus on the priority areas of plasmafacing components, safety, tritium fuel cycle, andbreeder blanket technologies. In addition, a study is
being initiated to evaluate options for a neutron
source to test materials in fusion-relevant
environments.

$32,500,000$8,500,000
In the Request, research will continue to focus on thepriority areas of plasma-facing components, safety,
tritium fuel cycle, and breeder blanket technologies.
Opportunities will be considered for expanding into
high-priority research area of novel technologies fortritium fuel cycle control, as identified by the recent
FESAC report on Transformative Enabling Capabilities.
In addition, FES will continue to evaluate options for anear-term fusion-relevant neutron source.

-$6,246,000-$5,500,000
Research efforts will be focused on the highest-priority
activities, including novel technologies for the tritium
fuel cycle and evaluation of near-term fusion-relevant
neutron sources.

Materials Research$10,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, research efforts
continue to focus on the development of materials
that can withstand the extreme fusion environment
expected in future fusion reactors.

$12,000,000
In the Request, research efforts will continue to focus
on the development of materials that can withstandthe extreme fusion environment. Opportunities will beconsidered for expanding into high-priority research in
the area of advanced materials and manufacturing, as
identified by the recent FESAC report on
Transformative Enabling Capabilities. a+$2,000,000
Research efforts will focus on highest-priority activities
and expansion into advanced materials andmanufacturing. The Request will also allow forpartnership opportunities with the private sector.

a https://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/fesac/pdf/2018/TEC_Report_1Feb20181.pdf

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences174

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted
Projects$14,746,000$12,000,000-$2,746,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, a new MIE project, The Request will support MPEX project engineering
Critical design activities for the MPEX MIE project will
the Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX) design and also preparation for baseline approval andcontinue.
at ORNL, will develop a world-leading capability for long-lead procurements.
reactor-relevant plasma exposures of neutronirradiated materials. Funding is provided for projectengineering and design efforts and some long-leadprocurements.
FY 2019 Enacted

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2020 Request

175

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

176

Fusion Energy Sciences
Discovery Plasma Science
Description
The Discovery Plasma Science subprogram supports research that explores the fundamental properties and complex
behavior of matter in the plasma state to improve the understanding required to control and manipulate plasmas for abroad range of applications. Plasma science is not only fundamental to understanding the nature of visible matter
throughout the universe, but also to achieving the eventual production and control of fusion energy. Discoveries in plasma
science are leading to an ever-increasing array of practical applications, such as synthesis of nanomaterials and artificial
diamonds, fabrication of micro- and opto-electronic devices, energy-efficient lighting, low-heat chemical-free sterilization
processes, tissue healing, combustion enhancement, and satellite communication.
The Discovery Plasma Science subprogram is organized into two principal activities: Plasma Science Frontiers andMeasurement Innovation.
Plasma Science Frontiers
The Plasma Science Frontiers (PSF) activities involve research in largely unexplored areas of plasma science, with a
combination of theory, computer modeling, and experimentation. These frontiers encompass extremes of the plasma state,
ranging from the very small (several atom systems) to the extremely large (plasma structure spanning light years in length),from the very fast (attosecond processes) to the very slow (hours), from the diffuse (interstellar medium) to the extremely
dense (diamond compressed to tens of gigabar pressures), and from the ultra-cold (tens of micro-kelvin degrees) to theextremely hot (stellar core). Advancing the science of these unexplored areas creates opportunities for new andunexpected discoveries with potential to be translated into practical applications. These activities are carried out on smalland mid-scale experimental collaborative research facilities.
The PSF portfolio includes coordinated research activities in the following three areas:General Plasma Science – Research at the frontiers of basic and low temperature plasma science, including dynamical
processes in laboratory, space, and astrophysical plasmas, such as magnetic reconnection, dynamo, shocks, turbulence
cascade, structures, waves, flows and their interactions; behavior of dusty plasmas, non-neutral, single-component
matter or antimatter plasmas, and ultra-cold neutral plasmas; plasma chemistry and processes in low-temperatureplasma, interfacial plasma, synthesis of nanomaterials, and interaction of plasma with surfaces, materials orbiomaterials.
High Energy Density Laboratory Plasmas – Research directed at exploring the behavior of matter at extreme conditionsof temperature, density, and pressure, including laboratory astrophysics and planetary science, structure and dynamicof matter at the atomic scale, laser-plasma interactions and relativistic optics, magnetohydrodynamics and magnetizedplasmas, and plasma atomic physics and radiation transport. Additionally, this portfolio will support HEDLP QIS priority
research opportunities outlined in the 2018 Report of the Fusion Energy Sciences Roundtable on Quantum Information
Science.
Exploratory Magnetized Plasma – Basic research involving the creation, control, and manipulation of magneticallyconfined plasmas to increase our understanding of terrestrial, space, and astrophysical phenomena or applications.

The PSF activity stewards world-class plasma science experiments and collaborative research facilities at small andintermediate scales. These platforms not only facilitate addressing frontier plasma science questions but also provide
critical data for the verification and validation of plasma science simulation codes. This effort maintains strong partnerships
with NSF and NNSA.
Measurement Innovation
The Measurement Innovation activity supports the development of world-leading transformative and innovative diagnostic
techniques and their application to new, unexplored, or unfamiliar plasma regimes or scenarios. The challenge is to develop
diagnostics with the high spatial, spectral, and temporal resolution necessary to validate plasma physics models used to
predict the behavior of fusion plasmas. Advanced diagnostic capabilities successfully developed through this activity are
migrated to domestic and international facilities as part of the Burning Plasma Science: Foundations and Burning Plasma
Science: Long Pulse subprograms. The utilization of mature diagnostics systems is then supported via the research
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences177

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

programs at major fusion facilities. The Request will also allow for partnership opportunities with the private sector on
fusion diagnostics issues.
SBIR/STTR & Other
Funding for SBIR/STTR is included in this activity. Other items that are supported include research at Historically Black
Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); the U.S. Burning Plasma Organization (USBPO), a national organization that coordinates
research in burning plasma science; peer reviews for solicitations across the program; outreach programs; and support for
the FESAC.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences178

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Discovery Plasma Science
Activities and Explanation of Changes
FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

Discovery Plasma Science$84,050,000
Plasma Science Frontiers$52,050,000
General Plasma Science$31,050,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, core research areas ofthis activity continue to address questions related toplasma dynamo, magnetic reconnection, particle
acceleration, turbulence, and magnetic selforganization. New efforts in low-temperature plasma
are being competitively selected.

$43,750,000$25,000,000$13,000,000
In the Request, core research areas of this activity willcontinue, with a focus on basic plasma science andlow-temperature plasma collaborative researchfacilities, including support for users of these facilities.

High Energy Density Laboratory
Plasmas$18,400,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, research emphasizes
utilizing the MEC at LCLS for warm dense matterstudies. Support continues for the MEC beam-linescience team and the experimental HEDLP researchgroups at SLAC. With the approval of a Critical
Decision-0 for Mission Need, a study is initiated toevaluate options for a MEC upgrade. Modest support
is provided to make medium-scale HEDLP facilities
accessible to university researchers.

$12,000,000-$6,400,000
In the Request, research will emphasize utilizing the
Research efforts will focus on highest-priority science
MEC at LCLS. Support will continue for the MEC beam- activities.
line science team and the LaserNetUS initiative.
Application of HEDLP to advance QIS will besupported.

Exploratory Magnetized Plasma$1,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, core research areas of No funding is requested.
this activity continue.

$—

Projects$1,600,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget provides OPC funding for No funding is requested.
the Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC) Petawatt
Upgrade project.

$—

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted-$40,300,000-$27,050,000-$18,050,000
Research efforts will focus on highest-priority
scientific activities in both basic plasma science andlow-temperature plasmas.

-$1,000,000
No funding is requested.
-$1,600,000
No funding is requested.

179

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted
Measurement Innovation$8,000,000$4,000,000-$4,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, Measurement
In the Request, Measurement Innovation will support Research efforts will focus on the highest-priority
Innovation is funding new transformative andthe development of transformative and innovative
activities.
innovative diagnostics for plasma transient
diagnostics for plasma transient instabilities, plasmainstabilities, plasma-materials interactions, modeling materials interactions, modeling validation, and basic
validation, and basic plasma science identified in the plasma science identified in the community
community workshops.
workshops. The Request will allow for partnershipcollaboration opportunities with the private sector.
FY 2019 Enacted

SBIR/STTR & Other$24,000,000
The FY 2019 Enacted budget continues support for
USBPO activities, HBCUs, peer reviews forsolicitations, and FESAC. SBIR/STTR funding isstatutorily set at 3.65 percent of noncapital funding in
FY 2019.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2020 Request$14,750,000-$9,250,000
The Request will continue support for USBPOThe SBIR/STTR funding will be consistent with the FES
activities, HBCUs, peer reviews for solicitations,
total budget.
outreach programs, and FESAC. SBIR/STTR funding isstatutorily set at 3.65 percent of noncapital funding in
FY 2020.

180

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Construction
Description
This subprogram supports all line-item construction for the entire FES program. All Total Estimated Costs (TEC) are fundedin this subprogram.
Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC) Petawatt Upgrade
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) 2017 report “Opportunities in Intense Ultrafast
Lasers: Reaching for the Brightest Light a” recommended that “The Department of Energy should plan for at least one largescale open-access high-intensity laser facility that leverages other major science infrastructure in the Department of Energy
complex”. This project is a new start in FY 2020 and will be an upgrade to MEC. The MEC Petawatt Upgrade is aimed atproviding an experimental collaborative National User Facility for High-Energy-Density Science that will help address thisNAS recommendation as well as helping the U.S. regain leadership in this important field of study. MEC is an experimental
research end-station that utilizes the SLAC’s Linac Coherent Light Source. The project received CD-0, “Approve Mission
Need” on January, 4, 2019. The FY 2020 Request will support conceptual design of the MEC Petawatt Upgrade. The
estimated total project cost is $50 million to $200 million.
ITER
The ITER facility, currently under construction in St. Paul-lez-Durance, France, and nearly 60% complete for First Plasma,
aims to provide fusion power output approaching reactor levels of hundreds of megawatts, for hundreds of seconds.
Construction of ITER is a collaboration among the United States, European Union, Russia, Japan, India, Republic of Korea,
and China, governed by an international agreement (the “ITER Joint Implementing Agreement”), through which the U.S.
contributes in-kind-hardware components, personnel, and also a financial contribution, e.g. for the installation andassembly of the components provided by the U.S. and other Members to the ITER Organization (IO). An independent review
of CD-2, “Approve Performance Baseline” for the First Plasma (FP) subproject was completed in November 2016 and thensubsequently approved by the Project Management Executive (PME) on January 13, 2017, with a total project cost of $2.5
billion.
The U.S. in-kind contribution represents 9% of the overall cost, but will allow access to 100% of the science and engineering
associated with what will be the largest magnetically confined burning plasma experiment ever created. Recent advances invalidated theory indicate that ITER will outperform its currently stated performance, including higher fusion power gain,
longer plasma duration, demonstration of advanced operating scenarios, and improvements in divertor power handling.

a https://www.nap.edu/read/24939/chapter/1

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences181

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Construction
Activities and Explanation of Changes
FY 2019 Enacted
Construction
Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC)
Petawatt Upgrade

FY 2020 Request$132,000,000$—$108,000,000

Explanation of Change
FY 2020 Request vs FY 2019 Enacted-$24,000,000$1,000,000+$1,000,000
The Request will initiate design activities for this
The Request supports the initiation of a line-item
project, which is a new start.
construction project for an upgrade to MEC.

U.S. Contributions to ITER
$132,000,000$107,000,000-$25,000,000
In the FY 2019 Enacted budget, the primary focus is
The Request will support the continued design andWork will focus on the highest-priority First Plasma
on First Plasma hardware, including continued design fabrication of the highest priority “in-kind” hardware hardware activities.
and fabrication of the highest-priority in-kindsystems.
deliverables. A financial contribution is provided.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

182

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Capital Summary ($K)(dollars in thousands)
Capital Operating Expenses Summary
Capital Equipment
Minor Construction Activities
General Plant Projects (GPP)
Total, Capital Operating Expenses

FY 2018 Enacted FY 2019 Enacted FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted

Total

Prior Years

N/A

N/A

10,49016,87416,300

-574

N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A

12,19022,6809,134
26,008380
16,680-8,754-9,328

Capital Equipment ($K)(dollars in thousands)

Capital Equipment
Major Items of Equipment a
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment(MPEX)
Total Non-MIE Capital Equipment
Total, Capital Equipment

FY 2018 Enacted FY 2019 Enacted FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted

Total

Prior Years

40,000–60,000——

14,746

12,000-2,746

N/A
N/A

N/A
N/A

10,49010,4902,128
16,8744,300
16,3002,172-574

Minor Construction Activities ($K)(dollars in thousands)

General Plant Projects
Total GPPs less than $5M b

Total

Prior Years

N/A

N/A

FY 2018 Enacted FY 2019 Enacted FY 2020 Request
12,1909,134

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted

380-8,754a Each MIE located at a DOE facility Total Estimated Cost (TEC) >$5M and each MIE not located at a DOE facility TEC >$2M.

b GPP activities less than $5M include design and construction for additions and/or improvements to land, buildings, replacements or additions to roads, and general area improvements.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

183

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Major Items of Equipment Description(s)Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse MIE:
Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX): FES has conducted substantial research and development over the past five
years to identify and develop an innovative linear, high-intensity plasma source capable of producing the extreme plasma
parameters required to simulate a burning plasma environment. FES is now building on this research to develop a first-of-akind, world-leading experimental capability that will be used to explore solutions to the daunting plasma-materials
interactions challenge. MPEX, which will be located at ORNL, will allow dedicated studies of reactor-relevant heat andparticle loads on neutron-irradiated materials. The overall motivation is to gain entry into a new class of fusion materials
science wherein the combined effects of fusion-relevant heat, particle, and neutron fluxes can be studied for the first time
anywhere in the world. The project is expected to be baselined in FY 2020. The proposed funding will maintain the required
design and R&D activities and allow for initiation of long-lead major procurements for the device. (TPC $40–$60 million)

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences184

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Construction Projects Summary ($K)(dollars in thousands)
FY 2018 Enacted

FY 2019 Enacted FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted

Total

Prior Years

20-SC-61, Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC)
Petawatt Upgrade
TEC
OPC
TPC

TBD
TBD
TBD

—
—
—

—
—
—

—
1,600
1,600

1,000
—
1,000

+1,000-1,600-600

14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER
TEC
OPC
TPC

TBD
TBD
TBD

1,117,617
70,302
1,187,919

122,000—
122,000

132,000—
132,000

107,000—
107,000-25,000—-25,000

Total, Construction
TEC
OPC
TPC

TBD
TBD
TBD

1,117,617
70,302
1,187,919

122,000—
122,000

132,000
1,600
133,600

108,000—
108,000-24,000-1,600-25,600

Funding Summary ($K)(dollars in thousands)

Research
Facility Operations
Projects
Other (GPP, GPE, and Infrastructure)
Total, Fusion Energy Sciences

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2018 Enacted

FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

272,447
124,664
122,000
13,000532,111

261,950
143,500
148,346
10,204564,000

199,250
82,500120,000
1,000
402,750

185

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted-62,700-61,000-28,346-9,204-161,250

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Scientific User Facility Operations and Research ($K)
The treatment of user facilities is distinguished between two types: TYPE A facilities that offer users resources dependent on a single, large-scale machine;
TYPE B facilities that offer users a suite of resources that is not dependent on a single, large-scale machine.
Definitions:
Achieved Operating Hours – The amount of time (in hours) the facility was available for users.
Planned Operating Hours – For Past Fiscal Year (PY), the amount of time (in hours) the facility was planned to be available for users.
 For Current Fiscal Year (CY), the amount of time (in hours) the facility is planned to be available for users.
 For the Budget Fiscal Year (BY), based on the proposed budget request the amount of time (in hours) the facility is anticipated to be available for users.
Optimal Hours – The amount of time (in hours) a facility will be available to satisfy the needs of the user community if unconstrained by funding levels.
Percent of Optimal Hours – An indication of utilization effectiveness in the context of available funding; it is not a direct indication of scientific or facility productivity.
 For BY and CY, Planned Operating Hours divided by Optimal Hours expressed as a percentage.
 For PY, Achieved Operating Hours divided by Optimal Hours.
Unscheduled Downtime Hours – The amount of time (in hours) the facility was unavailable to users due to unscheduled events. NOTE: For type “A” facilities, zero
Unscheduled Downtime Hours indicates Achieved Operating Hours equals Planned Operating Hours.
(dollars in thousands)

TYPE A FACILITIESDIII-D National Fusion Facility
Number of Users
Achieved operating hours
Planned operating hours
Optimal hours
Percent optimal hours
Unscheduled downtime hours

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2018 Enacted

FY 2018 Current

FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted$114,915
603
N/A
720
720
100%
N/A

$111,180
673
812
720
720
112.8%
N/A$121,500
673
N/A
480
480
100%
N/A

$84,500
600
N/A
520
800
65.0%
N/A

-37,000
-73
N/A
+40
+320
-35%
N/A

186

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

(dollars in thousands)
National Spherical Torus
Experiment—Upgrade
Number of Users
Achieved operating hours
Planned operating hours
Optimal hours
Percent optimal hours
Unscheduled downtime hours
Total Facilities
Number of Users
Achieved operating hours
Planned operating hours
Optimal hours
Percent of optimal hours b
Unscheduled downtime hours

FY 2018 Enacted

FY 2018 Current

FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted$90,050$88,590$93,000$65,500-$27,500

390
N/A
—
—
N/A
N/A

248
N/A
—
—
N/A
N/A

385
N/A
—
—
N/A
N/A

307 a
N/A
—
—
N/A
N/A

-78
N/A
—
—
N/A
N/A

$204,965
993
N/A
720
720
100%
N/A

$199,770
921
812
720
720
112.8%
N/A$214,500
1,058
N/A
480
480
100%
N/A

$150,000
907
N/A
520
800
65.0%
N/A

-$64,500
-151
N/A
+40
+320
-35%
N/A

Scientific Employment

Number of permanent Ph.D.’s (FTEs)
Number of postdoctoral associates (FTEs)
Number of graduate students (FTEs)
Other c

FY 2018 Enacted

FY 2019 Enacted

FY 2020 Request

933
116
311
1,393

931
115
310
1,390

618
77
206
923

FY 2020 Request vsFY 2019 Enacted
-313
-38
-104
-467

a While the facility is down, users are still accessing data from previous operational runs to evaluate what is seen in NSTX-U as compared to other devices both domestically and internationally.
b

For total facilities only, this is a “funding weighted” calculation FOR ONLY TYPE A facilities:c Includes technicians, engineers, computer professionals, and other support staff.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences∑𝑛𝑛
1 [(%𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑛𝑛)×(𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑛𝑛 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜)]
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜

187

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

18820-SC-61, Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC) Petawatt Upgrade
SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory
Project is for Design and Construction
1.

Summary, Significant Changes, and Schedule and Cost History

Summary
The FY 2020 Request for the Matter in Extreme Conditions (MEC) Petawatt Upgrade project is $1,000,000. The MEC is anexperimental research end-station that utilizes the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) Office of Science (SC) User Facility at
the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. The estimated total project range is $50 million to $200 million. SC plans for the
MEC Petawatt Upgrade project to achieve CD-1, “Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range” in FY 2020.
Significant Changes
This project is a new start in FY 2020 and will be an upgrade to MEC. The project achieved CD-0, “Approve Mission Need”
on January, 4, 2019. Other Project Costs funding in FY 2019 will support conceptual design of the MEC Petawatt Upgrade
and is expected to continue into FY 2020. When the project achieves CD-1, “Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range”,
which is expected in early FY 2020, SC will then initiate TEC design efforts. A Federal Project Director will be assigned to the
MEC Petawatt Upgrade project prior to CD-2 approval (“Approved Performance Baseline”).
Critical Milestone History
FiscalYear

CD-0

FY 2020

1/4/2019

Conceptual
DesignComplete
3Q FY 2019

CD-1

CD-2

1Q FY 2020

TBD

Final
DesignComplete
TBD

CD-3

D&D
Complete

CD-4

TBD

TBD

TBD

OPC, D&D

OPC, Total

TPC

—

1,600

2,600

CD-0 – Approve Mission Need for a construction project with a conceptual scope and cost range
Conceptual Design Complete – Actual date the conceptual design was or will be completed (if applicable)
CD-1 – Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range
CD-2 – Approve Performance Baseline
Final Design Complete – Estimated/Actual date the project design will be/was complete (d)CD-3 – Approve Start of Construction
D&D Complete – Completion of D&D workCD-4 – Approve Start of Operations or Project Closeout

Project Cost History
FiscalYear
FY 20202.

TEC, Design
1,000

TEC,
Construction—(dollars in thousands)
OPC, Except
TEC, Total
D&D
1,000
1,600

Project Scope and Justification

Scope
The scope of the MEC Petawatt Upgrade is still being formulated. At a minimum, it will include the design and procurementof a petawatt-class laser system and the design, construction, and installation of a new shield wall.
Justification
The FES mission is to build the scientific foundations needed to develop a fusion energy source and to expand thefundamental understanding of matter at very high temperatures and densities. To meet this mission, there is a scientificneed for a petawatt or greater laser facility that is currently not available in the U.S. The National Academies of Science,
Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) 2017 study titled “Opportunities in Intense Ultrafast Lasers: Reaching for the Brightest
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/20-SC-61, Matterin Extreme Conditions Petawatt Upgrade189

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justificiation

Light a” found that about 80 percent to 90 percent of the high-intensity laser systems are overseas, and all of the highest
powered lasers currently in construction or already built are overseas as well. The report noted that the U.S. is losing
ground in a second laser revolution of highly-intense, ultrafast lasers that have broad applications in manufacturing,
medicine, and national security. The report makes five recommendations that would improve the nation’s position in thefield, including a recommendation for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to plan for at least one large-scale, open-access,high-intensity laser facility that leverages other major science infrastructures in the DOE complex.
The NAS report focuses on highly-intense, pulsed petawatt-class lasers (1 petawatt is equal to 1 million billion watts). Suchlaser beams can drive nuclear reactions, heat and compress matter to mimic conditions found in stars, and create electronpositron plasmas. In addition to curiosity-driven science, petawatt-class lasers can generate particle beams with potential
applications in cancer radiation therapy, intense neutron and gamma ray beams for homeland security applications,directed energy for Department of Defense (DOD) applications, and extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUV) radiation.
Co-location of high-intensity lasers with existing infrastructure such as particle accelerators has been recognized as a key
advantage of the U.S. laboratories over the Extreme Light Infrastructure (ELI) concept in Europe. A laser facility with highpower, high-intensity beam parameters that is co-located with hard X-ray laser probing capabilities (i.e. with an X-ray
wavelength that allows atomic resolution) will provide the required diagnostic capabilities for fusion discovery science andrelated fields. This co-location enables novel pump-probe experiments with the potential to dramatically improve ourunderstanding of the ultrafast response of materials in extreme conditions, e.g., found in the environment of fusion
plasmas, astrophysical objects, and highly stressed engineering materials. Recent research on ultrafast pump-probe
experiments using the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) at the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory has demonstrated
exquisite ultrafast measurements of the material structural response to radiation, but higher flux sources of deuterons,
neutrons, and gamma rays are needed to properly emulate the environment and physics processes that occur in materials
next to fusion plasmas. This strategy holds the potential to validate inter-atomic potentials in molecular dynamics
simulations of materials to enable long-term predictions of the material behavior in fusion facilities.
FES is seeking to develop a new, world-class petawatt laser capability to address the FES mission and the recommendations
from the NAS report.
The project will be conducted in accordance with the project management requirements in DOE O 413.3B, Program andProject Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets.
Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)
The Threshold KPPs, represent the minimum acceptable performance that the project must achieve. Achievement of theThreshold KPPs will be a prerequisite for approval of CD-4, Project Completion. The Objective KPPs represent the desired
project performance.
Performance Measure
TBD
3.

Threshold
TBD

Objective
TBD

Financial Schedule(dollars in thousands)
BudgetAuthority(Appropriations)
Obligations
Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
DesignFY 2020

a

1,000

1,000

Costs

1,000

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24939/opportunities-in-intense-ultrafast-lasers-reaching-for-the-brightest-light

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/20-SC-61, Matterin Extreme Conditions Petawatt Upgrade190

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justificiation

(dollars in thousands)

Total, Design
Construction
FY 2020
Total, Construction
Total Estimated Costs (TEC)FY 2020
Total, TEC
Other Project Costs (OPC)FY 2019
FY 2020
Total, OPC
Total Project Costs (TPC)FY 2020
Total, TPC
4.

BudgetAuthority(Appropriations)
TBD

Obligations
TBD

Costs
TBD

—
TBD

—
TBD

—
TBD

1,000
TBD

1,000
TBD

1,000
TBD

1,600
—
TBD

1,600
—
TBD

1,600
—
TBD

2,600
TBD

2,600
TBD

2,600
TBD

Details of Project Cost Estimate(dollars in thousands)
Current Total
Estimate

Previous Total
Estimate

Original
Validated
Baseline

TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD

Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
DesignDesignContingency
Total, Design
Construction
Site Work
Equipment
Construction
Other, as needed
Contingency
Total, Construction
Other TEC
Cold Startup
Contingency
Total, Other TEC
Total, TEC
Contingency, TEC
Other Project Costs (OPC)
OPC except D&D
R&D
Conceptual Planning
Conceptual Design

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/20-SC-61, Matterin Extreme Conditions Petawatt Upgrade191

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justificiation

(dollars in thousands)
Current Total
Estimate

Previous Total
Estimate

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

Other OPC Costs
Contingency
Total, OPC
Contingency, OPC
Total Project Costs
Total Contingency (TEC+OPC)
5.

Schedule of Appropriation Requests
RequestFY 2020

6.

Type
TEC
OPC
TPC

Prior
N/A
N/A
N/A

(dollars in thousands)
FY 2019
FY 2020
Outyears
—
1,000
TBD
1,600
—
TBD
1,600
1,000
TBD

Total
TBD
TBD
TBD

Related Operations and Maintenance Funding Requirements
Start of Operation or Beneficial Occupancy (fiscal quarter or date)
Expected Useful Life (number of years)
Expected Future Start of D&D of this capital asset (fiscal quarter)

Operations and Maintenance7.

Original
Validated
Baseline
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

Related Funding Requirements(dollars in thousands)
Annual Costs
Previous Total
Current Total
Estimate
Estimate
TBD
TBD

1Q FY 2026
TBD
1Q FY 2045

Life Cycle Costs
Previous Total
Current Total
Estimate
Estimate
TBD
TBD

D&D Information

The new area being constructed for this project is under analysis at this time.

New area being constructed by this project at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory ...................................
Area of D&D in this project at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory .............................................................
Area at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory to be transferred, sold, and/or D&D outside the project,including area previously “banked”..................................................................................................................
Area of D&D in this project at other sites ........................................................................................................
Area at other sites to be transferred, sold, and/or D&D outside the project, including area previously“banked”...........................................................................................................................................................
Total area eliminated .......................................................................................................................................
8.

Square Feet
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

Acquisition Approach

An Acquisition Strategy has not yet been formulated, but will be completed prior to seeking Critical Decision 2 approval.
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/20-SC-61, Matterin Extreme Conditions Petawatt Upgrade192

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justificiation

14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER (U.S. ITER)
1.

Summary, Significant Changes, and Schedule and Cost History

Summary
The FY 2020 Request for the U.S. ITER project is $107,000,000. ITER is a major fusion research facility being constructed inSaint-Paul-lez-Durance, France by an international partnership of seven Members or Domestic Agencies: U.S., China,
European Union, India, the Republic of Korea, Japan, and the Russian Federation, that comprise 34 countries. Since it will
not result in a facility owned by the U.S. or located in the U.S., the U.S. ITER project is not classified as a Capital Asset
Project, but is classified as a Major System Project. It is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) project to provide the U.S. shareof ITER construction, classified as in-kind hardware (i.e., subsystems, equipment, and components), as well as financial
resources to support the ITER Organization (IO), as delineated in the Joint Implementation Agreement (JIA). Sections of thisConstruction Project Data Sheet (CPDS) have been tailored accordingly to reflect the unique nature of the U.S. ITER project.
Critical Decision (CD) CD-0, “Approve Mission Need” was signed on July 5, 2005. CD-1, “Approve Alternative Selection andCost Range,” was approved on January 25, 2008, with a preliminary cost range of $1.45 billion to $2.2 billion. Since 2008,
the estimated cost range for the project increased such that the upper bound of the approved CD-1 cost range increased bymore than 50%, triggering the need for a reassessment of the project cost range and re-approval by the ProjectManagement Executive (PME). The PME for the U.S. ITER project is the Deputy Secretary of Energy. The cost range
reassessment was completed in November 2016 and was subsequently approved by the PME on January 13, 2017. The CD1 Revised cost range is now $4.7 billion to $6.5 billion.
As outlined in the May 2016 Secretary of Energy’s Report to Congress, DOE was to baseline the “First Plasma” portion of the
U.S. ITER project. As such, DOE has divided the U.S. ITER project hardware scope into two distinct subprojects, which
represent the two phases of the project: First Plasma (FP) subproject (SP-1), and Post-First Plasma subproject (SP-2). The FP
subproject scope consists of: 1) completing the design for all twelve systems the U.S. is contributing to ITER; 2) completing
fabrication and delivery of the Toroidal Field (TF) superconductor; completing fabrication and delivery of the Steady-StateElectrical Network (SSEN), and the Central Solenoid (CS) superconducting magnet modules, assembly tooling, andassociated structures; and 3) completing the partial fabrication of and delivering seven other subsystems: Tokamak Cooling
Water, Roughing Pumps, Vacuum Auxiliary, Pellet Injection, Ion Cyclotron Heating, Electron Cyclotron Heating, and two ofseven Diagnostics. An independent review of CD-2, “Approve Performance Baseline” for the SP-1 was completed in
November 2016 and then subsequently approved by the PME on January 13, 2017, with a total project cost of $2.5 billion,
and a CD-4, “Project Completion” date of December 2027. In addition, the PME also approved CD-3, “Approve the Start ofConstruction” for the SP-1 on January 13, 2017. This CPDS focuses on the First Plasma subproject activities.
Subproject 2 (SP-2) is the second element of the U.S. ITER project, and includes the remainder of U.S. hardware
contributions for Post-First Plasma operations leading up to Deuterium-Tritium Operations. SP-2 is planned to be baselined
at a future timeframe (e.g., FY 2021/2022).
The financial contributions to the IO operational costs during construction are shared among the seven Members, pursuant
to the ITER JIA, and is the third element of the U.S. ITER Total Project Cost.
The U.S. ITER project is managed as a DOE Office of Science (SC) project through the U.S. ITER Project Office (USIPO). The
USIPO is managed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), in partnership with Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory(PPPL) and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). The project began as a Major Item of Equipment (MIE) in
FY 2006, and was changed to a Congressional control point Line-Item construction project in FY 2014. The principles andpractices of DOE Order 413.3B are applied in the effective management of the U.S. ITER project, including Critical Decision
approvals; establishment of Key Performance Parameters; and the application of Earned Value Management. SC applies therequirements for project documentation, monitoring and reporting, change control, and regular independent projectreviews (IPRs) with the same degree of rigor as other SC line-item projects. The USIPO regularly reports progress andperformance in monthly performance metrics and project status reports.
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER193

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

The U.S ITER Federal Project Director with certification level 3 has been assigned to this Project and has approved this CPDS.
Significant Changes
This CPDS is an update of the FY 2019 CPDS and does not include a new start for FY 2020. The First Plasma subproject (SP1), which includes fabrication and delivery of all hardware required for First Plasma and the completion of design for all U.S.
hardware contributions, is more than 56% complete.
The FY 2020 Request will support the continued design and fabrication of the highest priority “in-kind” hardware systems.
This includes continued fabrication of the Central Solenoid (CS) magnet system, which consists of seven superconducting
magnet modules, structural components, and assembly tooling. In FY 2020, the U.S. will deliver the first CS magnet module(Module 1) to the ITER site, as well as continue design and fabrication efforts associated with other “in-kind” hardware
systems. The U.S. ITER project has obligated $980 million through the end of FY 2018 to U.S. industry, universities, and DOE
laboratories.
Critical Milestone History
FiscalYear

CD-0

FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016 k
FY 2017 l

7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005

Conceptual
DesignComplete

09/30/2009 a
07/27/2010 b
05/30/2011 c
07/10/2012 e
12/11/2012 g

CD-1

CD-2

TBD
TBD
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008
1/25/2008

TBD
TBD
4Q FY 2008
4Q FY 2010
4Q FY 2011
4Q FY 2011
3Q FY 2012
TBD h
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

CD-0 – Approve Mission Need
CD-1 – Approve Alternative Selection, and Cost Range
CD-2 – Approve Performance Baseline
CD-3 – Approve Start of Fabrication
CD-4 – Approve Project Completion

Final Design
Complete

04/12/2011 d
05/02/2012 f
04/10/2013 i
12/10/2013 j

CD-3

D&D
Complete

CD-4

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

TBD
2017
2017
2018
2019
2024
2028
2033
2034
2036
TBD
TBD

a Electron Cyclotron Heating (ECH) Transmission lines (TL) (06/22/2009); Tokamak Cooling Water System (07/21/2009); CS Modules, Structures, andAssembly Tooling (AT) (09/30/2009).

b Ion Cyclotron Heating Transmission Lines (ICH) (10/14/2009); Tokamak Exhaust Processing (TEP) (05/17/2010); Diagnostics: Residual Gas Analyzer (RGA)(07/14/2010), Upper Visible Infrared Cameras (VIR) (07/27/2010).

c Vacuum Auxiliary System (VAS) – Main Piping (12/13/2010); Diagnostics Low-Field-Side Reflectometer (LFS) (05/30/2011).
d Cooling Water Drain Tanks (04/12/2011).

e Diagnostics: Upper Port (10/03/2011), Electron Cyclotron Emission (ECE) (12/06/2011), Equatorial Port E-9 and Toroidal Interferometer Polarimeter (TIP)(01/02/2012), Equatorial Port E-3 (07/10/2012).

f Steady State Electrical Network (05/02/2012).

g VAS Supply (11/13/2012); Disruption Mitigation (12/11/2012); Pellet Injection (04/29/2013); Diagnostics: Motional Stark Effect Polarimeter (MSE)(05/29/2013), Core Imaging X-ray Spectrometer (CIXS) (06/01/2013).
h The CD-2 date will be determined upon acceptable resolution of issues related to development of a high-confidence ITER Project Schedule andestablishment of an approved funding profile.
i RGA Divertor Sampling Tube (07/28/14); CS AT, Early Items (09/17/14).
j CS Modules and Structures (11/18/2013); VAS Main Piping B-2, L-1, L-2 (12/10/2013).
k CS AT Remaining Items (12/02/2015).
l Roughing Pumps (03/2017); VAS 03 Supply (07/2017); Roughing Pumps I&C (04/2017); VAS 03 Supply I&C (07/2017); CS AT Bus Bar Alignment and Coaxial
Heater (04/2017); VAS Main Piping L3/L4 (03/2017); VAS 02 CGVS (&C Part 1 (06/2017).

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER

194

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Fiscal Year
FY 2018 a
FY 2019
FY 2020

Performance
Baseline
Validation
7/5/2005
7/5/2005
7/5/2005

CD-2/3CD-1 Cost
Range Update

SP-1

1/13/17
1/13/17
1/13/17

1/13/17
1/13/17
1/13/17

CD-4
SP-2
2019
2019
2021/2022

SP-1

SP-2

1Q FY 2027
1Q FY 2027
1Q FY 2028

2034–2038
2034–2038
2034–2038

Project Cost History
At the time of CD-1 approval in January 2008, the preliminary cost range was $1.45 to $2.2 billion. Until recently, however,it has not been possible to confidently baseline the project due to past delays in the international ITER construction
schedule. Various factors (e.g., schedule delays, design and scope changes, funding constraints, regulatory requirements,
risk mitigations, and poor project management and leadership issues in the ITER Organization) have affected the project
cost and schedule. In response to a 2013 Congressional request, a DOE Office of Science IPR Committee assessed the
project and determined that the existing cost range estimate of $4.0 to $6.5 billion would likely encompass the final total
TPC. This range, recommended in 2013, was included in subsequent President’s Budget Requests. In May 2016, DOE
provided a “Report on the Continued U.S. Participation in the ITER Project” to Congress, which stated that the First Plasma
part of the U.S. ITER project would be baselined in FY 2017. In preparation for baselining SP-1, based on the results of the
IPR, a decision was made by the acting SC-1 to update the lower end of this range to reflect updated cost estimates
resulting in the current approved CD-1R range of $4.7 to $6.5 billion. This updated CD-1R range incorporates increases in
the projects hardware estimate that have occurred since August 2013. The SP-1 TPC has been baselined at $2.5 billion.
Subproject 1 (First Plasma Hardware for US ITER)
FiscalYear
FY 2017 b
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 20202.

TEC, Design
696,025
696,025
696,025
696,025

TEC,
Construction
1,723,334
1,723,334
1,723,334
1,733,673

TEC, Total
2,419,359
2,419,359
2,419,359
2,429,698

OPC, Except
D&D
80,64180,64180,64170,302

OPC, D&D

OPC, Total

TPC

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

80,64180,64180,64170,3022,500,000
2,500,000
2,500,000
2,500,000

Project Scope and Justification

Introduction
ITER is an international partnership among seven Members (China, the European Union, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea,
the Russian Federation, and the U.S.) aimed at demonstrating the scientific and technological feasibility of fusion energy forpeaceful purposes. The Agreement on the Establishment of the ITER International Fusion Energy Organization for the Joint
Implementation of the ITER Project (ITER Agreement), signed on November 21, 2006, provides the legal framework for thefour phases of the program: construction, operation, deactivation, and decommissioning. Through participation in theagreement, the European Union, as the host, will bear five-elevenths (45.45%) of the ITER facility’s construction cost, while
the other six Members, including the U.S., will each support one-eleventh (9.09%) of the ITER facilities cost. Operation,
deactivation, and decommissioning of the facility are to be funded through a different cost-sharing formula in which the
U.S. will contribute a 13% share, which is not a part of the U.S. ITER project funding. Responsibility for ITER integration,
management, design, licensing, installation, and operation rests with the IO, which is an international legal entity located in
France.

VAS 02 Supply Part 1 (05/2018); ICH RF Building and I&C (11/2017); TCWS Captive Piping and First Plasma (11/2017); ICH RF components supporting
INDA/IO testing (01/2018).
b Prior to FY2017 the TPC for U.S. ITER was reported as “TBD”; estimates reported beginning in FY 2017 represent the validated baseline values for
Subproject 1 First Plasma Hardware. These values for the SP-1 baseline have not been updated to reflect impacts from FY 2017 and FY 2018 funding
reductions and allocations.
aScience/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER195

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

ScopeU.S. Contributions to ITER – Construction Project Scope
The overall U.S. ITER project includes three major elements:
 Hardware components, built under the responsibility of the U.S., then shipped to the ITER site for IO assembly,
installation, and operation.
 Funding to the IO to support common expenses, including ITER research and development (R&D), IO staff andinfrastructure, IO-provided hardware, on-site assembly/installation/testing of all ITER components, and IO Central
Reserve.
 Other project costs, including R&D and conceptual design related activities.
The U.S. is to contribute the hardware to ITER, the technical components of which are split between SP-1 (First Plasma) andSP-2 (Post-First Plasma). The percentage of hardware components to be delivered in each system for SP-1 are indicated foreach system:
 Tokamak Cooling Water System (TCWS): manages the thermal energy generated during the operation of the tokamak.
(58% of system for SP-1)
 15% of ITER Diagnostics: provides the measurements necessary to control, evaluate, and optimize plasma performanceand to further the understanding of plasma physics. (6% for SP-1)
 Disruption Mitigation (DM) Systems: limits the impact of plasma disruptions to the tokamak vacuum vessel, blankets,and other components. All of DM design is done in SP-1.
 Electron Cyclotron Heating (ECH) Transmission Lines: brings additional power to the plasma and deposits power in
specific areas of the plasma to minimize instabilities and optimize performance. (55% for SP-1)
 Tokamak Exhaust Processing (TEP) System: separates hydrogen isotopes from tokamak exhaust. (All of TEP design isdone in SP-1)
 Tokamak Fueling System (Pellet Injection): injects fusion fuels in the form of deuterium-tritium ice pellets into thevacuum chamber. (9% for SP-1)
 Ion Cyclotron Heating (ICH) Transmission Lines: bring additional power to the plasma. (15% for SP-1)
 Central Solenoid (CS) Magnet System: confines, shapes and controls the plasma inside the vacuum vessel. All CS
workscope is SP-1.
 8% of Toroidal Field (TF) Conductor: component of the TF magnet that confines, shapes, and controls the plasma. All TF
work scope was completed in FY 2017.
 75% of the Steady-State Electrical Network (SSEN): supplies the electricity needed to operate the entire plant, including
offices and the operational facilities. All SSEN work scope was completed in FY 2017.
 Vacuum Auxiliary System (VAS): creates and maintains low gas densities in the vacuum vessel and connected vacuum
components. (85% for SP-1)
 Roughing Pumps: evacuate the tokamak, cryostat, and auxiliary vacuum chambers prior to and during operations. (56%for SP-1)
Justification
The purpose of ITER is to investigate and conduct research in the so-called “burning plasma” regime—a performance region
that exists beyond the current experimental state of the art. Creating a self-sustaining burning plasma will provide essential
scientific knowledge necessary for practical fusion power. There are two parts of this need that will be achieved by ITER.
The first part is to investigate the fusion process in the form of a "burning plasma," in which the heat generated by thefusion process exceeds that supplied from external sources (i.e., self-heating). The second part of this need is to sustain theburning plasma for a long duration (e.g., several hundred to a few thousand seconds), during which time equilibrium
conditions can be achieved within the plasma and adjacent structures. ITER is the necessary next step to establish theconfidence in proceeding with development of a demonstration fusion power plant.
Although not classified as a Capital Asset, the U.S. ITER project is being conducted in accordance with the project
management principles of DOE Order 413.3B, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER196

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)
The U.S. ITER project will not deliver an integrated operating facility, but rather in-kind hardware contributions, which
represent a portion of the subsystems for the international ITER facility. Therefore, typical KPPs are not practical for thistype of project. The U.S. ITER project defines project completion as delivery and IO acceptance of the U.S. in-kind hardware.
For SP-1, in some cases (e.g., Tokamak Exhaust Processing and Disruption Mitigation), only the completion of the design isrequired, which requires IO approval of the final designs. Below is the list of SP-1 deliverables that were approved when the
SP-1 baseline was approved.
System/Subsystem
Central Solenoid
Magnet System
Toroidal Field Magnet
Conductor
Steady State Electrical
Network
Tokamak Cooling
Water System
Diagnostics

Electron Cyclotron Heating
Transmission Lines
Ion Cyclotron Heating
Transmission Lines
Pellet Injection System
Vacuum Roughing
Pumps
Vacuum Auxiliary
Systems
Tokamak Exhaust
Processing System
Disruption Mitigation
SystemTable 1. SP-1 In-Kind Hardware Description
Description
Provide 7 (including spare) independent coil packs made of superconducting niobium-tin
providing 13 Tesla at 45 kA, the vertical pre- compression structure, and assembly
tooling.
Provide 9 active lengths (~765m), 1 dummy length (~765m) for winding trials and 2 active
lengths (~100m each) for superconducting qualification.
Provide components for a large AC power distribution system (transformers, switches,
circuit breakers, etc.) at high-voltage (400kV) and medium-voltage (22kV) levels.
Provide Final Designs for major industrial components (heat exchangers, pumps, valves,pressurizers, etc.) capable of removing 1 GW of heat. Among those components, alsofabricate and deliver certain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for 4 diagnostic port plugs and 7 instrumentation systems (Core
Imaging X-ray Spectrometer, Electron Cyclotron Emission Radiometer, Low Field Side
Reflectometer, Motional Stark Effect Polarimeter, Residual Gas Analyzer, Toroidal
Interferometer/Polarimeter, and Upper IR/Visible Cameras). Among those components,
also fabricate and deliver certain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for approximately 4 km of aluminum waveguide lines (24 lines)
capable of transmitting up to 1.5 MW per line. Among those components, also fabricate
and deliver certain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for approximately 1.5 km of coaxial transmission lines (8 lines)
capable of transmitting up to 6 MW per line. Among those components, also fabricate
and deliver certain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for injector system capable of delivering deuterium/tritium fuelpellets up to 16 times per second. Among those components, also fabricate and delivercertain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for a matrix of pump trains consisting of approximately 400 vacuum
pumps. Among those components, also fabricate and deliver certain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for vacuum system components (valves, pipe manifolds, auxiliary
pumps, etc.) and approximately 6 km of vacuum piping. Among those components, alsofabricate and deliver certain IO-designated items.
Provide Final Designs for an exhaust separation system for hydrogen isotopes andnon-hydrogen gases.
Provide design, and research and development (R&D) (up to a limit of $25M* a) for a system
to mitigate plasma disruptions that could cause damage to the tokamak inner walls andcomponents.

a Any additional costs would be funded by the ITER organization.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER197

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

3.

Financial Schedule(dollars in thousands)
Budget Authority(Appropriations)

Total Estimated Cost (TEC) a
Hardware
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012 b
FY 2013
FY 2014 c
FY 2015
FY 2016 d
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020
Subtotal
Total, Hardware
Cash Contributions e
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012 f
FY 2013
FY 2014c
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020
Subtotal
Total, Cash Contributions
Hardware and Cash Contributions
FY 2006
FY 2007

Obligations

Costs

13,75436,58823,50085,401
85,26663,87591,453
107,635
166,605
134,043
115,000
50,000122,000
117,000
107,000
1,319,120
TBD

13,75436,58823,50085,401
85,26663,87591,441
107,669
166,605
134,043
115,000
50,000122,000
117,000
107,000
1,319,142
TBD

6,169
24,23824,121
26,27846,052
84,321
99,249110,074
153,995
114,129
106,519
123,117
98,185
107,435
117,182
1,241,064
TBD

2,112
7,412
2,644
23,59929,734
3,125
13,214
13,80532,895
15,957———
15,000—159,497
TBD

2,112
7,412
2,644
23,59929,734
3,125
13,214
13,80532,895
15,957———
15,000—159,497
TBD

2,112
7,412
2,644
23,59929,734
3,125
13,214
13,80532,895
15,957———
15,000—159,497
TBD

15,86644,00015,86644,0008,281
31,650Costs through FY 2017 reflect actual costs; costs for FY 2019 and the outyears are estimates.
Prior actuals adjusted to incorporate project funds utilized at PPPL and DOE. Obligation adjusted to reflect year-end PPPL settlement funding.
c Appropriations prior to FY 2014 reflect major item of equipment funding. Starting in FY 2014, this project is funded as a Congressional control point.
d FY 2016 funding for taxes and tax support is included in the FY 2017 Hardware funding amount.
e Includes cash payments, secondees, taxes and tax support.
f
Prior actuals adjusted to incorporate project funds utilized at PPPL and DOE. Obligation adjusted to reflect year-end PPPL settlement funding.
abScience/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER198

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020
Subtotal
Total, TEC
Other Project Costs (OPC) a
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012 b
FY 2013
FY 2014 c
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
Subtotal
Total, OPC
Total Project Costs (TPC) d
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012b
FY 2013
FY 2014c
FY 2015
FY 2016(dollars in thousands)
Budget Authority(Appropriations)26,144
109,000
115,000
67,000104,667
121,440
199,500
150,000
115,000
50,000122,000
132,000
107,000
1,478,617
TBD

Obligations
26,144
109,000
115,000
67,000104,655
121,474
199,500
150,000
115,000
50,000122,000
132,000
107,000
1,478,639
TBD

Costs
26,76549,87775,78687,446112,463
123,879
186,890130,086
106,519
123,117
98,185
122,435
117,182
1,400,561
TBD

3,449
16,000-74
15,00020,00013,000
333
2,560
—
—
34
—
—
70,302TBD

3,449
16,000-74
15,00020,00013,000
311
2,560
—
—
34
-50
—
70,230
TBD

1,110
7,606
7,513
5,072
7,754
10,032
22,302
5,984
2,090
600
–
58
2
70,123
TBD

19,31560,00026,070124,000
135,000
80,000105,000
124,000
199,500
150,000
115,034

19,31560,00026,070124,000
135,000
80,000104,966
124,034
199,500
150,000
115,034

9,391
39,25634,27854,94983,54097,478
134,765
129,863
188,980
130,686
106,519a Costs through FY 2017 reflect actual costs; costs for FY 2018 and the outyears are estimates.

b Prior actuals adjusted to incorporate project funds utilized at PPPL and DOE. Obligation adjusted to reflect year-end PPPL settlement funding.

c Appropriations prior to FY 2014 reflect major item of equipment funding. Starting in FY 2014, this project is funded as a Congressional control point.
d

Costs through FY 2017 reflect actual costs; costs for FY 2018 and the outyears are estimates.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER199

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020
Subtotal
Total, TPC
4.

(dollars in thousands)
Budget Authority(Appropriations)
50,000122,000
132,000
107,000
1,548,919
TBD

Obligations
49,950122,000
132,000
107,000
1,548,869
TBD

Costs
123,175
98,187
122,435
117,182
1,470,684
TBD

Details of Project Cost Estimate

The project has an approved updated CD-1 Cost Range, and DOE has chosen to divide the project hardware scope into two
distinct subprojects (FP SP-1, and Post-FP SP-2). The baseline for SP-1 was approved in January 2017. Baselining of SP-2 will
follow when the Administration has made a decision about whether the U.S. commitment to ITER. No procurements for SP2 scope are anticipated until FY 2022 at the earliest. An IPR of U.S. ITER was conducted on November 14-17, 2016, toconsider the project’s readiness for CD-2 (Performance Baseline) and CD-3 (Begin/Continue Fabrication) for SP-1, as well as
for the proposed updated CD-1 Cost Range. Outcomes from the IPR indicated that the project was ready for approval of SP1 CD-2/3 following a reassessment of contingency to account for risk in the areas of escalation and currency exchange. This
recommendation has been addressed. In addition, the IPR committee found no compelling reason to deviate from the cost
range identified in the May 2016 Report to Congress ($4.0 to $6.5 billion) and recommended that this range be adopted
and approved as the Updated CD-1 cost range. However, as noted above, in preparation for baselining SP-1 and based on
the outcome of the IPR, a decision was made to update the lower end of this range to reflect updated cost estimates
resulting in the current approved CD-1R range of $4.7 billion to $6.5 billion.
Subproject – 1 First Plasma Hardware Only
(dollars in thousands)
Original
Validated
Baseline

Current Total
Estimate a

Previous Total
Estimate

Design573,660

573,660

Contingency

122,365——

696,025—

696,025

Equipment

1,362,521—

1,362,521

Contingency

371,152—

371,152

Total, Construction

1,733,673—

1,733,673

2,429,698—

2,429,698

493,517—493,51770,302—70,30270,302—70,302

Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
DesignTotal, Design

122,365

Construction

Total Estimated Cost
Contingency, TEC
Other Project Cost (OPC)
OPC except D&D
Other OPC Costs
Total, OPC

a The estimate value reflected here has not been adjusted to reflect the FY 2017 and FY 2018 appropriations.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER200

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Subproject – 1 First Plasma Hardware Only
(dollars in thousands)

Total Project Cost a
Total, Contingency (TEC+OPC)
5.

Current Total
Estimate a

Previous Total
Estimate

Original
Validated
Baseline

2,500,000—

2,500,000

493,517—493,517

Schedule of Appropriation Requests

Request TypeTEC
FY 2006 OPC
TPC
TEC
FT 2007 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2008 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2009 b OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2010 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2011 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2012 c OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2013 d OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2014 e OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2015 OPC
TPC

Prior
1,038,000
84,0001,122,000
1,077,051
44,9491,122,000
1,078,230
43,7701,122,000
266,366
38,075
304,441
294,366
70,019364,385
379,366
65,019444,385
394,366
75,019469,385
617,261
82,124
699,385
806,868
73,159880,027
942,578
80,341
1,022,919

FY 2018
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

FY 2019
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

(dollars in thousands)
FY 2020
FY 2021
FY 2022
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

FY 2023 Outyears
Total—— 1,038,000——
84,000—— 1,122,000—— 1,077,051——
44,949—— 1,122,000—— 1,078,230——
43,770—— 1,122,000
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD
—
—
TBD

a
The TPC reported here is only for Subproject 1 (and does not include Subproject 2 or cash contributions estimates), prior to FY 2017 the Total Project Cost
for US ITER was identified as “TBD”.
b The Prior Years column for FY 2009 through FY 2012 reflects the total of appropriations and funding requests only through the year of that row. Thus, forexample, in the FY 2010 row, it reflects only funding from FY 2006 to FY 2012.
c
The FY 2012 request was submitted before a full-year appropriation for FY 2011 was in place, and so FY 2011 was TBD at that time. Hence, the Prior Yearscolumn for FY 2012 reflects appropriations for FY 2006 through FY 2010 plus the FY 2012 request.
d The FY 2013 amount shown in the FY 2014 request reflected a short-term continuing resolution level annualized to a full year and based on the FY 2012
funding level for ITER.
e
Prior to FY 2015, the requests were for a major item of equipment broken out by TEC, OPC, and TPC.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER201

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

Request TypeTEC
FY 2016 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2017 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2018 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2019 OPC
TPC
TEC
FY 2020 OPC
TPC
6.

Prior
1,092,544
80,341
1,172,885
1,182,578
80,341
1,262,919
1,107,244
80,641
1,187,885
1,107,244
80,641
1,187,885
1,117,617
70,302
1,187,919

FY 2018——————
63,000—63,00063,000—63,000122,000—
122,000

FY 2019
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
75,000—75,000132,000—
132,000(dollars in thousands)
FY 2020
FY 2021
FY 2022
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
107,000—————
107,000——

FY 2023 Outyears
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

Total
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

Related Operations and Maintenance Funding Requirements

The U.S. Contributions to ITER operations is assumed to begin with initial integrated commissioning activities and continue
for a period of 15 to 25 years. The fiscal year in which commissioning activities begin depends on the international ITER
project schedule which currently indicates 2025.
Start of Operation or Beneficial Occupancy (fiscal quarter or date)
Expected Useful Life (number of years)
Expected Future start of D&D for new construction (fiscal quarter)
7.

12/2025
15–25
TBD

D&D Information

Since ITER is being constructed in France by a coalition of countries and will not be a DOE asset, the “one-for-one”
requirement is not applicable to this project.
The U.S. Contributions to ITER Decommissioning are assumed to begin when operations commence and continue for aperiod of 20 years. The U.S. is responsible for 13 percent of the total decommissioning cost.
The U.S. Contributions to ITER Deactivation are assumed to begin 20 years after commissioning and continue for a period of
5 years. The U.S. is responsible for 13 percent of the total deactivation cost.
8.

Acquisition Approach

The U.S. ITER Project Office (USIPO) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, with its two partner laboratories (Princeton Plasma
Physics Laboratory and Savannah River National Laboratory), will procure and deliver in-kind hardware in accordance with
the Procurement Arrangements established with the international IO. The USIPO will subcontract with a variety of researchand industry sources for design and fabrication of its ITER components, ensuring that designs are developed that permit
fabrication, to the maximum extent possible, under fixed-price subcontracts (or fixed-price arrangement documents with
the IO) based on performance specifications, or more rarely, on build-to-print designs. USIPO will use cost-reimbursement
type subcontracts only when the work scope precludes accurate and reasonable cost contingencies being gauged andestablished beforehand. USIPO will utilize best value, competitive source selection procedures to the maximum extent
possible, including foreign firms on the tender/bid list where appropriate. Such procedures shall allow for cost and technical

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER202

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

trade-offs during source selection. For the large-dollar-value subcontracts (and critical path subcontracts as appropriate),
USIPO will utilize unique subcontract provisions to incentivize cost control and schedule performance. In addition, where it
is cost effective and it reduces risk, the USIPO will participate in common procurements led by the IO, or request the IO toperform activities that are the responsibility of the U.S.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER203

FY 2020 Congressional Budget Justification

204