Facilities for the Future of Science
Science:

ITER

UltraScale Scientific
Computing Capability

Joint Dark Energy Mission

Linac Coherent Light Source

Protein Production and Tags

Rare Isotope Accelerator

Characterization and Imaging
Molecular Machines

CEBAF 12 GeV Upgrade

ESnet Upgrade

NERSC UpgradeTransmission Electron
Achromatic Microscope

BTeV

Linear Collider

Analysis and Modeling of
Cellular Systems

A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Spallation Neutron Source
2-4 MW Upgrade

Spallation Neutron Source
Second Target Station

Whole Proteome Analysis

Double Beta Decay
Underground Detector

Next-Step Spherical Torus

RHIC II

National Synchroton
Light Source Upgrade

Super Neutrino Beam

Advanced Light Source Upgrade

Advanced Photon
Source Upgrade

eRHIC

Fusion Energy Contingency

HFIR Second Cold Sourceand Guide Hall

Integrated Beam Experiment

Facilities for the Future of Science:
A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearContents

2

A Message from the Secretary
Steward of the World’s Finest Suite of Scientific Facilities and Instruments
Introduction
Prioritization Process
A Benchmark for the Future
The Twenty-Year Facilities Outlook—A Prioritized List

3
5
8
9
10
11

Facility Summaries
Near-Term Priorities
Near-Term
Priority: 1
ITER
Priority: 2
UltraScale Scientific Computing Capability (USSCC)
Priority: Tie for 3
Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM)
Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS)
Protein Production and Tags
Rare Isotope Accelerator (RIA)
Priority: Tie for 7
Characterization and Imaging of Molecular Machines
Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) 12 GeV Upgrade
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Upgrade
National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) UpgradeTransmission Electron Achromatic Microscope (TEAM)
Priority: 12
BTeV

14
14
14
15
16
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23

Mid-T
erm Priorities
Mid-Term
Priority: 13
Linear Collider
Priority: Tie for 14 Analysis and Modeling of Cellular Systems
Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) 2-4MW Upgrade
Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) Second Target Station
Whole Proteome Analysis
Priority: Tie for 18 Double Beta Decay Underground Detector
Next-Step Spherical Torus (NSST) Experiment
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) II

24
24
24
25
26
27
27
28
29

Far-T
erm Priorities
Far-Term
Priority: Tie for 21 National Synchrotron Light Source (NSLS) Upgrade
Super Neutrino Beam
Priority: Tie for 23 Advanced Light Source (ALS) Upgrade
Advanced Photon Source (APS) Upgrade
eRHIC
Fusion Energy Contingency
High-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) Second Cold Source and Guide Hall
Integrated Beam Experiment (IBX)

30
30
30
31
32
32
33
34
35

Appendix: Sample Charge Letter to Advisory Committees
Office of Science Advisory Committees
OfficeAbout DOE’s Office of Science
Office of Science Contacts

36
38
42
43

A Message from the Secretary
Throughout its history, the Department of Energy’s Office of Science has
designed, constructed, and operated many of the Nation’s most advanced,
large-scale research and development user facilities, of importance to allareas of science. These state-of-the-art facilities are shared with the science
community worldwide and contain technologies and instrumentation thatare available nowhere else. Each year, these facilities are used by more than
18,000 researchers from universities, other government agencies, private
industry, and foreign nations.
Located at national laboratories and universities around the country, thesefacilities include the world’s first linear collider, synchrotron light sources, thesuperconducting Tevatron high-energy particle accelerator, the Relativistic
Heavy Ion Collider, neutron scattering facilities, a Tokamak fusion test reactor,
supercomputers, and high-speed computer networks.
In Congressional testimony he presented in July 2003, Dr. Hermann A.
Grunder, Director of the Argonne National Laboratory, explained theimportance of these Department of Energy facilities:—Secretary of Energy
Spencer Abraham
Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

These user facilities provide resources … that speed up experiments
by orders of magnitude and open up otherwise inaccessible facets ofnature to scientific inquiry. Many of the important discoveries made in
the physical sciences in the second half of the twentieth century weremade at—or were made possible by—user facilities. Moreover, mostof these user facilities, which were justified and built to serve one
scientific field in the physical sciences, have made significant contributions
to knowledge and technology in many other fields, including biology
and medicine.

“These Department ofEnergy facilities areused by more than
18,000 researchers
from universities, othergovernment agencies,
private industry, andforeign nations.”3

Today, for example, the Department of Energy isbuilding the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS), in
Oak Ridge, Tennessee. When the SNS is completed
in 2006, the facility may yield such advances as
lubricants for tomorrow’s more efficient car engines;
superconducting wires and stronger magnets thatwill lower power costs; and stronger, lighter materials for improved products.
But the SNS also is the last, large-scale Departmentof Energy user facility under construction. And
that raises the question that Facilities for the Future of
Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook addresses: Whatfacilities are needed next for scientific discovery?

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

The process we have followed to produce thisdocument has been transparent and interdisciplinary.
The Spallation Neutron Source, currently being built at Oak Ridge National
It anticipates the large-scale facilities that scientists
Laboratory, will provide the most intense pulsed neutron beams in thewill require across all fields of science supported
world for scientific research and industrial development. Construction willby the Department of Energy over the next two
be completed in 2006.
decades, and it is informed by the counsel of the six
Office of Science Advisory Committees. I am confident that the Department of Energy, the scientific community, the American public, and theworld will reap enormous benefits when the 28 new user facilities identified
finally are constructed and in operation.

“These additional world-class
DOE Office of Science user
facilities and upgrades tocurrent facilities will lead tomore world-class science,
which will lead to further
world-class R&D, which willlead to greater technologicalinnovation and many otheradvances, which will leadto continued U.S. economic
competitiveness.”—Secretary of Energy
Spencer Abraham

Estimates are that fully half of the growth in the U.S. economy in the last
50 years was due to Federal funding of scientific and technological innovation. American taxpayers have received great value for their investment in
the basic research sponsored by DOE’s Office of Science and other Federalscience agencies.
As the steward of America’s national laboratories, the Department ofEnergy has a special responsibility to plan for and propose Office of
Science investments for the future that will serve to advance the national,
energy, and economic security of the United States.
These additional world-class Office of Science user facilities and upgrades
to current facilities will lead to more world-class science, which will lead tofurther world-class R&D, which will lead to greater technological innovationand many other advances, which will lead to continued U.S. economic
competitiveness.
That is why I am proud to present Facilities for the Future of Science:
A Twenty-Year Outlook.

Spencer Abraham
Secretary of Energy
November 2003
4

Steward of the World’s Finest Suiteof Scientific Facilities and Instruments
The Department of Energy’s Officeof Science is heir to the revolutionary workof Albert Einstein, Enrico Fermi, andE. O. Lawrence.
DOE Science makes history every day
because we sustain their tradition of
innovative basic scientific researchthat improves people’s lives.
We manage 10 of America’s
national laboratories, the backbone of American science. We
also build and operate the world’s
finest suite of scientific facilities andinstruments that researchers depend on toextend the frontiers of science. (Our current
major user facilities are listed below and at thebottom of the next two pages.)

DOE Office of Science Laboratories

At these facilities and laboratories—and at universities in virtually every state—DOE’s Office of Science
supports basic research in such diverse fields as materials sciences, chemistry, high energy and nuclear
physics, fusion energy, biology, advanced computation, and environmental sciences.

FeynmannComputer Center

Advanced Light Source

Combustion Research Facility

DOE Office of Science
User Facilities

Advanced Scientific
Computing Research! Advanced Light Source (ALS)The following is a list of the current
major user facilities maintained andoperated by DOE’s Office of
Science. The facilities are listed byprogram offices.

! Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)

High-Flux Neutron Sources

For more information about
all these facilities, please go to
the Office of Science website,www.science.doe.gov, and choose“National Labs and User Facilities”
on the top navigation bar.

! National Energy Research Scientific
Computing (NERSC) Center

Basic Energy Sciences
Synchrotron Radiation
Light Sources! National Synchrotron Light Source(NSLS)! Stanford Synchrotron Radiation
Laboratory (SSRL)! Advanced Photon Source (APS)! High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR)
Center for Neutron Scattering! Intense Pulsed Neutron Source(IPNS)

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

NERSC! Manuel Lujan Jr. Neutron Scattering
Center5

DOE’s Office of Science maintains our Nation’s scientific infrastructure and ensures U.S. world
leadership across a broad range of scientific disciplines. The Office of Science funds basic
research in support of the Department’s missions of national, economic, and energy security,
scientific and technological innovation, and environmental clean up.
Over the years, DOE Office of Science research investments have yielded a wealthof dividends.
Since the 1940s, DOE has supported the work of more than 70 Nobel Prizewinners, testimony to the high quality and impact of the work we underwrite.
Research funded by DOE’s Office of Science also has produced many key
scientific breakthroughs and contributed to our Nation’s well-being.
DOE’s Office of Science:! Sponsored research leading to Nobel Prize-winning insights into the fundamental nature of matter andenergy—and the discovery of a new form of carbon that is spurring a revolution in carbon chemistry;! Initiated the Human Genome Project and developed DNA sequencing and computational technologies
that made it possible to finish the “book of life” in April 2003;! Launched the Climate Change Research Program;! Enhanced national and homeland security by developing several technologies that detect nuclear weapons,
explosives, narcotics, and chemical and biological agents; andFacilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year! Helped develop new tools for the non-invasive diagnosis and treatment of disease, including PET scans,
MRIs and nuclear medicine cancer therapies.
Virtually all these advances and benefits have been made possible by the DOE Office of Science’s majoruser facilities.

Joint Genome InstituteEnvironmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory

NSTX

Electron Beam Microcharacterization
Centers

Specialized SinglePurpose Centers

Biological andEnvironmental Research! Center for Microanalysis of Materials(CMM)! Combustion Research Facility (CRF)! William R. Wiley Environmental
Molecular Sciences Laboratory(EMSL)! Electron Microscopy Center (EMC)for Materials Research! National Center for Electron
Microscopy (NCEM)! Shared Research Equipment (SHaRE)
Program6

Alcator C-Mod! Materials Preparation Center (MPC)! James R. Macdonald Laboratory(JMRL)! Pulse Radiolysis Facility! Joint Genome Institute (JGI)! Atmospheric Radiation
Measurement (ARM)! Free Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE)! Structural Biology Center (SBC)

Tevatro! Restoring U.S. leadership in scientific computation;! Helping to train a scientifically literate workforce for the
21st Century;! Pioneering nanoscale science, the study of matter at theatomic scale;! Employing genetic techniques to harness microbes that can
eat pollution, create hydrogen, and absorb carbon dioxide;! Working to solve the mysteries of “dark energy,” apparently
responsible for the astounding recent finding that the expansionof the universe is accelerating;! Promoting the availability of fusion power—and representing
the U.S. in the ITER talks to pursue the promise of fusion as aninexhaustible, safe, and environmentally attractive energy source;and! Using advances in materials sciences to help blind people regainsight with an artificial retina—technology that may be adapted
the help persons with spinal cord injuries, Parkinson’s disease,deafness, and almost any disease associated with the body’s
electrical system.
Working at DOE’s labs and using our world-class facilities, men and women with extraordinary talent anddedication have done great science leading to great public benefits.
Investments in new and upgraded scientific facilities and instruments will continue to pay off for us all.

BaBar Detector

Fusion Energy Sciences! DIII-D Tokamak Facility! Alcator C-Mod! National Spherical Torus
Experiment (NSTX)High Energy Physics! Tevatron Collider! Main Injector! Booster Neutrino Experiment(BooNE)

Holifield
Radioactive Ion
Beam Facility

CEBAF! Neutrinos at the Main Injector(NuMI)RHIC! Bates Linear Accelerator Center! B-Factory! Holifield Radioactive Ion Beam
Facility (HRIBF)! Next Linear Collider Test Accelerator(NLCTA )! Argonne Tandem Linear
Accelerator System (ATLAS)! Final Focus Test Beam (FFTB)! Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory (TUNL)! Accelerator Test Facility (ATF)

Nuclear Physics! Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider(RHIC)! Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF)! Texas A&M Cyclotron Institute

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Yearon Collider

Today DOE’s Office of Science is pursuing several important andpromising research opportunities:! University of Washington Tandem
Van de Graaff! The Yale University Tandem
Van de Graaff

7

Introduction
There can be no doubt that a modern and effective research infrastructure is critical tomaintaining U.S. leadership in science and engineering. New tools have opened vast
research frontiers and fueled technological innovation in fields such as biotechnology,
nanotechnology, and communications. The degree to which infrastructure is regarded as
central to experimental research is indicated by the number of Nobel Prizes awarded
for the development of new instrument technology. During the past twenty years, eight
Nobel prizes in physics were awarded for technologies such as the electron and scanningtunneling microscope, laser and neutron spectrography, particle detectors, and the integrated circuit.
— National Science Board, December 2002

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

The health and vitality of U.S. science and technology depends upon the availability of the most advanced research facilities. The U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) leads the world in the conception, design, construction, and operationof these large-scale devices. These machines have enabled U.S. researchers tomake some of history’s important scientific discoveries, with spin-off technological advances leading to entirely new industries.

8

Klystron Gallery at the Officeof Science’s Stanford Linear
Accelerator Center (SLAC):
The world’s largest electron
microscope and oneof the longest
buildings on
Earth.

More than 18,000 researchers and their students from universities, other government agencies (including National Science Foundation and National Institutesof Health), private industry, and abroad use DOE facilities each year. Almost
half (49 percent) are scientists from universities, 21 percent are from DOE
laboratories, another 21 percent are from foreign research institutions, 5 percent
are from industry, and 2 percent are from other U.S. Government agencies.
These users are both growing in number and diversifying. Light sources, giant
machines that serve as “microscopes” allowing scientists to investigate materials
at the atomic level, for example, were until very recently the province of chemical and materials science specialists. Today, these facilities support a full spectrum of scientific endeavor, serving
20 times as many users from the life
sciences community as they did in 1990.
This represents a full 40 percent of the total
user community at these facilities.
The opportunities available to U.S. scientists fromsome of our most powerful large-scale facilities
arose from a plan developed by Dr. Alvin W.
Trivelpiece, who led DOE’s science office from1981 to 1987. The last facility resulting from that plan,
the Spallation Neutron Source, will be finished in 2006,
some 20 years after its introduction.
DOE has picked up where the Trivelpiece plan left off by
issuing a Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook thatprovides a prioritized list of major scientific facilities for the next
20 years. The Twenty-Year Outlook benefitted from discussions with
the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Officeof Management and Budget, and members of Congress, and from the assistanceof the U.S. scientific community as represented through the Office of Science
Advisory Committees.
The breadth of science supported by the Office of Science is as large as science
itself, spanning high energy and nuclear physics, condensed matter science, fusionenergy, biology and environmental science, and advanced scientific computation.
Choosing major facilities is one of the most important activities of the DOE’s
Office of Science. It requires prioritization across fields of science, a difficult
and unusual process. The set of facilities must be phased to conform to scientificopportunities, and to a responsible funding strategy. The largest facilities will beinternational in character, requiring both planning and funding from other countries and organizations, together with the U.S.

Prioritization Process
The DOE’s Office of Science began to prioritize future major facilities in the fallof 2002. The Associate Directors of the Office of Science(1) were asked
to list major facilities required for world scientific leadership in their respective
programs out to 2023. In order to impose some fiscal discipline on this exercise,each Associate Director was given a funding “envelope” under which they wereto include their estimated research budgets as well as the major facility planning,
construction, and operating costs.(2)Forty-six facilities were identified and phased to conform to perceived scientificopportunities over this 20-year period. Internal hearings were held, with each
Associate Director describing the nature of the recommended facilities, together
with the scientific rationale behind their choices. This process was completed in
December 2002.

(1) The Office of Science has an Associate Director for each of its scientific programs: Advanced
Scientific Computing Research, Biological and Environmental Research, Basic Energy Sciences,
Fusion Energy Sciences, High Energy Physics, and Nuclear Physics.
(2) These envelopes were constructed from the “Biggert Bill” authorization levels for the Office of
Science for FY 2004 through FY 2008 (since replaced by H.R. 6 and S. 14), and then a four
percent increase in authorization level each subsequent year until 2023. The Office of Science
understands that construction of the facilities listed within the envelopes will depend on manyfactors, including funding being available as needed with all technology hurdles surmounted asplanned. Nevertheless, the envelopes, and the facilities listed within them, are consistent with a
far-reaching vision of how and when the Office of Science could contribute to DOE’s missions
and the Nation.

Nanomachines: Computer simulationof a buckyball piston. The Basic Energy
Sciences program applies some of its
facilities to the challenges of science atthe nanoscale.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

The program prioritizations by the Associate Directors were then submitted
in mid-January 2003 to the respective program’s Advisory Committee, with arequest for an analysis of the relative scientific opportunities associated with eachof the facilities proposed by their respective Associate Director, and with any
additions they felt important that may have been omitted (a sample Advisory
Committee charge letter is attached as Appendix A). In some cases, theCommittees were requested specifically to work together to capture theinterdisciplinary needs that might be missed if a Committee focused too
narrowly on its own traditional discipline. The Office of Science Advisory
Committees are chartered to bring to each program the full breadth ofperspectives of the U.S. scientific community. Of the 118 people that sit onthese Advisory Committees, 64 percent are from universities, 15 percent from
DOE laboratories, 10 percent from industry, 3 percent from other government
agencies, and 8 percent from other types of institutions.

9!
Importance of Science

Category A
Highest Scientific
Importance
Near-term
Readiness forConstruction!
!

Category B
Highest Scientific
ImportanceMid-term
Readiness forConstruction

Category D
Secondary Scientific
ImportanceVarying Readinessfor Construction
Category E
Hard to Assess
Scientific ImportanceVarying Readinessfor Construction

Readiness for Construction

Office of Science Facilities Matrix

Category C
Highest Scientific
ImportanceFar-term
Readiness forConstruction!
!
!

The Advisory Committees recommended 53 major
facilities for construction, and assessed each according
to two criteria: scientific importance and readiness forconstruction. Against the first criteria, the Committees
divided their facilities into three categories: highest
scientific importance, secondary scientific importance,and hard-to-assess scientific importance. The Committees also categorized the facilities into “near-term,”“mid-term,” and “far-term” according to theirreadiness for construction.
The results were plotted in a matrix illustrated at left.
“Highest scientific importance” was divided into categories A, B, and C, depending upon readiness forconstruction. “Secondary scientific importance” waslabeled as category D, and “hard-to assess scientificimportance” as category E.

With this input from the Advisory Committees, the challenge remained to prioritize the facilities across scientific disciplines(3). The Director of the Office of
Science addressed this challenge by prioritizing the 53 facilities according to his
assessment of their scientific promise and their fit with the Department’s missions. The costs associated with the Office of Science’s base research programsand the other responsibilities were added, and the entirety was made to fit
under an aggressive funding envelope (see footnote 2) extended through 2023.
Twenty-eight projects qualified.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

A Benchmark for the Future

10

The Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook represents asnapshot—the DOE Office of Science’s best guess today at how the futureof science and the need for scientific facilities will unfold over the next two
decades. We know, however, that science changes. Discoveries will alter thecourse of research and so the facilities needed in the future.
For this reason, the Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook should
be assessed periodically in light of the evolving state of science and technology.
The Twenty-Year Outlook will also serve as a benchmark, enabling an evaluationof facilities proposed in the future against those on this list. Future revisions
should maintain the funding envelope used to guide this list, enforcing fiscal
discipline upon discussions and requiring the elimination of facilities inorder to accommodate more important or exciting prospects.

(3) While prioritizing scientific programs and/or facilities within disciplines can be difficult, it isdone regularly throughout the Federal Government and by numerous scientific and technicaladvisory committees. Prioritizing openly across disciplines, however, is notoriously difficultand has been done rarely. Physicist William Brinkman recently testified before the House
Committee on Science to the effect that while such prioritizations are possible, they are necessarily based on intuition and therefore subjective. David Goldston, staff director for theCommittee, responded that the Committee understood this and it was the reason that theCommittee wanted “someone else” to do the prioritization.

The DOE’s Office of Science recognizes that the breadth and scope of thevision encompassed by these 28 facilities reflects a most aggressive andoptimistic view of the future of the Office. Nevertheless, we believe that itis necessary to have and discuss such a vision. Despite the many uncertainties,
it is important for organizations to have a clear understanding of their goals
and a path toward reaching those goals.
As stewards of the public’s dollars, it is our responsibility to announce candidly
how we would propose to spend those resources in the future. The public also
has a right to expect that its government makes its decisions on such importantand costly investments as future scientific facilities in the open with a transparent
process. The Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook offers sucha vision of the future, and it does so by openly announcing the hard choicesthat need to be made to sustain science.
The Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s Task Force on the Future of
Science Programs at the Department of Energy, which was chaired by
Dr. Charles M. Vest, President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
praised the idea of a 20-year DOE Office of Science facilities plan in areport issued in the fall of 2003:
We believe that the 20-year vision of future scientific facilities currently
being developed in the Office of Science is outstanding and could havea far-reaching, positive effect on the Nation’s leadership in science.

Harvesting Hydrogen fromMicroalgae: DOE’s Office of Science,
working in partnership with the Officeof Energy Efficiency, has unlocked thesecret to increasing the hydrogen yieldof a certain type of green microalgae thatshows promise of producing hydrogencheaply, easily, and cleanly.

The Twenty-Y
ear Facilities Outlook—A Prioritized List
wenty-YearThe 28 facilities are listed by priority on the following pages. Some are noted
individually; however others, for which the advice of the Advisory Committees
was insufficient to discriminate among relative priority, are presented in“bands.” In addition, the facilities are roughly grouped into near-term priorities, mid-term priorities, and far-term priorities (and color-coded red, blue,and green, respectively) according to the anticipated R&D timeframe of thescientific opportunities they would address.
Each facility listing is accompanied by a “peak of cost profile,” which indicatesthe onset, years of peak construction expenditure, and completion of the facility. Because many of the facilities are still in early stages of conceptualization,
the timing of their construction and completion is subject to the myriad considerations that come into play when moving forward with a new facility. Furthermore, it should be remembered that construction of these cost profiles
was guided by an ideal funding scenario (see footnote 2).
Summaries and illustrations of the 28 facilities are provided on thefollowing pages.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearOf the 53 facilities initially proposed by the Advisory Committees, 28 madethe list of most important facilities that will be needed over the next 20 years
to support the Nation’s research needs in areas that have been the traditional
responsibility of the DOE.

11

12
CEBAF 12 GeV UpgradeTransmission Electron
Achromatic Microscope

Characterization and Imaging
Molecular Machines

NERSC Upgrade

BTeV

ESnet Upgrade

Rare Isotope Accelerator

Joint Dark Energy Mission

Analysis and Modeling of
Cellular Systems

Protein Production and Tags

Linac Coherent Light Source

Linear Collider

UltraScale Scientific
Computing Capability

ITER

HFIR Second Cold Sourceand Guide Hall

Advanced Photon
Source Upgrade

eRHIC

Fusion Energy Contingency

Advanced Light Source Upgrade

RHIC II

Whole Proteome Analysis

Integrated Beam Experiment

Super Neutrino Beam

Next-Step Spherical Torus

Double Beta Decay
Underground Detector

National Synchroton
Light Source Upgrade

Spallation Neutron Source
Second Target Station

Spallation Neutron Source
2-4 MW Upgrade

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearNear-Term

Mid-Term

Far-Term

Characterization and Imaging

CEBAF Upgrade

NP

BER

NP

Integrated Beam Experiment

FES

Programs:
ASCR = Advanced Scientific Computing Research
BES= Basic Energy Sciences
BER= Biological and Environmental Research

Mid-term

HFIR Second Cold Source and Guide Hall

BES

Near-termeRHIC

Fusion Energy Contingency

Advanced Photon Source Upgrade

BES

FES

Advanced Light Source Upgrade

NP

Super Neutrino Beam

BES

RHIC IINP

National Synchrotron Light Source Upgrade

Next Step Spherical Tokamak

FES

HEP

Double Beta Decay Underground Detector

NP

BES

SNS Second Target Station
Whole Proteome Analysis

BES
BER

Peak Cost

Tie for23

Tie for21

Tie for18

Tie for14

Analysis and Modeling of Cellular Systems

SNS 2-4 MW Upgrade

BES

Linear Collider

BER

HEP

BTeV

HEP

Transmission Electron Achromatic Microscope

13

BES

ASCR Esnet Upgrade
ASCR NERSC Upgrade

Protein Production and Tags

Rare Isotope Accelerator

BER

Linac Coherent Light Source

Joint Dark Energy Mission

BES

HEP

12

Tie for7

Tie for
3

ASCR UltraScale Scientific Computing Capability

2

ITER

FES

Facility1

Priority Program

U.S. Department of Energy
Today

FES
HEP
NP

=
=
=

Fusion Energy Sciences
High Energy Physics
Nuclear Physics

Far-term

Office of Science
OfficeFacilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

13

20-Y
ear Facility Outlook
20-YearPeak of Cost Profile
20 Years fromTodayFacility Summaries
Near-Term Priorities
Near-Term
Priority: 1ITER
The Facility: ITER is an international collaboration to build the first fusion
science experiment capable of producing a self-sustaining fusion reaction, calleda “burning plasma.” It is the next essential and critical step on the path towarddemonstrating the scientific and technological feasibility of fusion energy.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: Fusion is the power source of the sun and the stars. It occurs
when the lightest atom, hydrogen, is heated to very high temperatures forminga special gas called “plasma.” In this plasma, hydrogen atoms combine, or“fuse,” to form a heavier atom, helium. In the process of fusing, some matteris converted directly into large amounts of energy. The ability to contain thisreaction, and harness the energy from it, are among the important goals of
fusion research.

14

What’s New: Recent advances in computer modeling and in our understanding of the physics of fusion give us confidence that we can now build ITER
successfully. The unique features of the facility will be its ability to operate forlong durations (hundreds of seconds
and possibly several thousands) and at
power levels (around 500 MW) sufficient to demonstrate the physics of theburning plasma in a power-plant-likeenvironment. ITER will also serve as atest-bed for additional fusion powerplant technologies.
Applications: ITER is the next big step
toward making fusion energy a reality.
Fusion energy is particularly attractive
as a future energy source because it isenvironmentally benign (it produces no
air pollution and no carbon dioxide, andit does not create long-lived radioactive
waste); its fuels are easily extracted fromordinary water and from lithium, anabundant element; and it can be generated on demand and in sufficient capacity
to power large cities and industries.
ITER

Priority: 2
UltraScale Scientific Computing Capability(USSCC)The Facility: The USSCC, located at multiple sites, will
increase by a factor of 100 the computing capability available to support open (as opposed to classified) scientificresearch—reducing from years to days the time required
to simulate complex systems, such as the chemistry of a
combustion engine, or weather and climate—andproviding much finer resolution.
Background: Recently, with the start-up of its new
supercomputer known as the Earth Simulator, theJapanese introduced the world to a new era in scientific computation. The Earth Simulator has thecomputing power of the 20 fastest U.S. computerscombined and a peak speed of 40 teraflops—threetimes faster than the theoretical peak performanceof any U.S. machine.

Scientific computing at DOE Office of Sciencelabs and user facilities enable scientists touse quantum calculations to understand the combustion process, model
thermal reactions, analyze climate change data, reveal chemicalmechanisms of catalysts, and study the collapse of a supernova.

Applications: The computing capability represented by the USSCC could
have a significant economic impact, on the order of billions of dollars, oncommercial product design, development, and marketing. Currently, many
U.S. industries are forced to build prototypes for new designs that are expensive and cause significant manufacturing delays. USSCC’s speed and capabilities
would allow for “virtual prototypes,” which would greatly shorten time tomarket and save significant investment costs. As an example, consider thecomparison between manufactured prototyping and simulations for General
Electric’s jet engines: what currently takes GE several years and millions ofdollars in design, re-design, and manufacturing of prototypes could be accomplished in less than a day on a machine like the USSCC. General Motors, inanother example, also saves hundreds of millions of dollars using its in-housecomputing capability, but believes that it cannot meet the steady demand forsafer, more fuel-efficient, and cleaner cars, without substantial increases incomputing capabilities that will not be achieved through existing computerarchitectures and technologies.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

What’s New: The USSCC will involve long-term relationships with U.S. computer vendors and an integrated
program of hardware and software investments designed
to optimize computer performance for scientific and commercial problems bycreating a better balance of memory size, processor speed, and interconnection
rates. Most existing supercomputers have been designed with the consumer
market in mind; USSCC’s new configurations will build on accomplishmentsof the Earth Simulator to develop computing capability specifically designed
for science and industrial applications. These facilities will operate like Officeof Science light sources: available to all, subject to proposal peer review.

15

Priority: Tie for 3
Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM)
The Facility: JDEM is a space-based probe, developed inpartnership with NASA, designed to help understand the recently
discovered mysterious “dark energy” which makes up
more than 70 percent of the universe, and evidently causes
its accelerating expansion.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearThe Joint Dark Energy Mission’s space-based probe will study
the accelerating universe.

16

Background: A slowing expansion of the universe following the Big Bang—like the ripples from a pebble hitting
the water slowing as they move out—was widely predictedby physicists. Beginning in the 1990’s, scientists set out tomeasure this deceleration by using ground-based observations of a class of supernova explosions which can serve
as a benchmark (or “standard candles”) on which to basetheir measurements. To world-wide surprise, they foundthat rather than slowing, the expansion of the universe is
speeding up. This discovery suggested the existence of apreviously unknown energy, now called “dark energy,”
pushing space apart. The accelerating expansion of theuniverse was deemed “Breakthrough of the Year” by
Science magazine in 1998.

What’s New: JDEM will be the first dedicated space-based tool for the studyof the accelerating universe. By being above the atmosphere and capable ofviewing a wide angle of the sky, it will be able to collect and analyze information on the largest number of supernovas yet identified, over a wide range of
distances, and thus “see” a far longer period in the evolution of the universe.
It is designed to measure precisely the history of the accelerations anddecelerations of the expansion of the universe from the current epoch backto approximately 10 billion years ago, when the universe was only one third
its present age.
Applications: The evidence for cosmic acceleration is shaking the foundationsof fundamental physics. Further study will address profound issues at the heartof both cosmology and high energy physics and will be essential for our
understanding of the physical laws and contents of the universe.

Priority: Tie for 3
Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS)The Facility: The LCLS will provide laser-like radiation 10 billion times
greater in power and brightness than any existing x-ray light source, enabling
the study of matter and chemical reactions at speeds and levels of detail way
beyond what is currently possible.
Background: X-rays are used to examine all kinds of materials, from ourbones and heart, to petroleum products, to high explosives and the components of nuclear weapons. However, there are substantial limitations to these
existing x-rays: we can only create images of those molecules that can be growninto crystals (which eliminates many proteins, for example), and we cannot
measure changes in molecules as they take place—in the tens and hundreds offemtoseconds—which is the very heartof chemistry.
What’s New: The LCLS will be theworld’s first x-ray-free electron laser
operating in the 1.5-15 angstrom range. It
will have properties vastly exceeding current
synchrotron sources in three key areas: peakbrightness (10 billion times greater than current synchrotrons), coherence (complete,rather than the limited spatial coherence currently available), and short pulse duration (atleast 100 times shorter than is currently available). With the LCLS, we will be able toimage complex protein structures fromsingle molecules, create real-time images ofchemical reactions, and much more.
Applications: The leap in x-ray source capabilities provided by the LCLS will open
entirely new realms of scientific endeavor in the chemical, materials, and biological sciences. Existing synchrotron light sources have been used for a very
diverse array of applications: to determine the structures of thousands of proteins to help understand our living world, to provide petroleum companies
with information about the three-dimensional properties of molecules in their
manufacturing processes to increase efficiency, and to develop magnetic media
with more storage capacity.

The Facility: The Protein Production
and Tags facility will use highly automated processes to mass-produce
and characterize tens of thousandsof proteins per year, create “tags”
to identify these proteins, and makethese products available to researchers
nationwide.
Background: The deluge of data andrelated technologies generated by the
Human Genome Project and othergenomic research is creating a broadarray of commercial and scientificopportunities. The next bottleneck inturning this information into practicalsolutions for energy, medical, environmental, and other challenges is the lackof ready access to the thousandsof proteins coded for by DNA.
Researchers from across the country

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Priority: Tie for 3
Protein Production and Tags

The Linac Coherent Light Source will be
the world’s first x-ray-free electron laser,
opening new realms of scientific researchin chemical, materials, and biologicalsciences.

17and from many different government agencies will benefit from the development of a reliable, inexpensive, high-quality technique for making these materials for their experiments.
What’s New: This biological research facility will be the first of its kind.
It will develop highly automated processes to mass-produce and characterize
proteins directly from microbial genome data and create affinity reagents(chemical “tags”) to identify, capture, and monitor the proteins from living systems. Given that each microbe makes several thousand proteins, and thousandsof microbes need to be studied, researchers need the ability to produce andcharacterize tens of thousands of proteins and nearly one hundred thousand“tags” per year. Using current methods, doing this for even a single microbe
is virtually impossible.
Applications: Understanding exactly how microbes perform specialized
functions is central to applying the recent spectacular advances in biology andgenetics to DOE’s missions: for example, to harness microbes to eat radioactively contaminated waste, create hydrogen for a new energy source, andabsorb carbon dioxide. The possibilities are tremendous. In the future, we may
see communities of microbes absorbing the pollutants from the smokestacks
of coal fired power plants—making coal as clean a fuel source as hydropower.

Priority: Tie for 3
Rare Isotope Accelerator (RIA)
The Facility: The Rare Isotope Accelerator (RIA) will be the world’s mostpowerful research facility dedicated to producing and exploring new rare isotopes that are not found naturally on earth.
Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: Physicists study how isotopes (versions of atoms withdifferent numbers of neutrons in their nucleus) decay to understand how
everything from the cosmos to the atom was formed. Most isotopes exist
for months, days, or hours and are accessible to study with existing machines. “Rare” isotopes, however, live
for only thousandths of a second, but
are central to the origin of the chemical elements, fuel the stars, and energize our sun to sustain life on Earth.

18

Isotope Accelerator Concept

What’s New: RIA will involve thedevelopment of new accelerator technology to create beams of unstable(rare) isotopes that are 10 to 100 times
more powerful than those available
today. It will have the capability to
specify, control, and vary precisely the
number of protons and neutrons inatomic nuclei, and thus study not only
the properties of individual nuclei, butalso the evolution of these properties
across the nuclear chart.

Applications: Construction of RIA will establish U.S. leadership in this scientificarena. It will allow physicists to explore the structure and forces that make up
the nucleus of atoms; learn how the chemical elements that make up the world
around us were created; test current theories about the fundamental structure ofmatter; improve our ability to model the explosions of nuclear weapons, andplay a role in developing new nuclear medicines and techniques. One of every
three hospitalized patients in the U.S., for example, undergoes a procedure involving nuclear medicine—spin-offs of earlier government
investments in nuclear physics.

Priority: Tie for 7
Characterization andImaging of Molecular
Machines
The Facility: The facility for Characterization and Imaging of Molecular
Machines will build on capabilities
provided by the Protein Production
and Tags facility to provide researcherswith the ability to isolate, characterize,
and create images of the thousands ofmolecular machines that perform theessential functions inside a cell.

What’s New: This biological user facility will provide the research community
with the world’s largest assembly of sophisticated analytic and imaging instrumentation, combined with state-of-the-art computational tools, to enable users
to isolate, identify, characterize, and image the molecular machines present inselected microbes under highly controlled conditions. The facility’s high-throughput capabilities will analyze thousands of molecular machines in the time it now
takes to do a few.
Applications: The success of the Human Genome Project taught us that
achieving great economies of scale, such as those represented by this facility,
vastly reduces the cost of research and therefore makes the field accessible tohundreds of researchers for whom it would otherwise be too expensive or
cumbersome. This, as has also been demonstrated, dramatically increases thepace of scientific discovery and the rate at which practical use is made ofthese discoveries.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: Cells, including
microbes, function by combining
proteins and other molecules into“molecular machines.” Currently, only
a handful of these molecular machines
have been isolated or characterized. Providing the research community with themeans to learn how these machines function will be critical to our ability to use
microbes to address many environmental, energy, and national security needs.

19Priority: Tie for 7
Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator
Facility ((CE
CE
BAF) 12 GeV U
CEBAF)
Uppgrade
The Facility: The upgrade to the Continuous Electron Beam
Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) at Thomas Jefferson Laboratory
is a cost-effective way to double the energy of the existing
beam, and thus provide the capability to study the structure of
protons and neutrons in the atom with much greater precision
than is currently possible.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: “Quarks” are the particles that unite to form
protons and neutrons, which, with electrons, combine toform the atoms that make up all the matter that we are familThe Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility upgrade will iar with. As yet, scientists are unable to explain the properties
double the energy of its electron beam and add advancedof these entities—why, for example, we do not seem to becomputing power to provide much more precise data on theable to “see” individual quarks in isolation (they change theirstructure of protons and neutrons.
natures when separated from each other) or understand thefull range of possibilities of how quarks can combine together to make up
matter.

20

What’s New: The CEBAF Upgrade will take advantage of recent advancesin computing power, combined with a doubling of the existing energy of theelectron beam, to create a 12 giga-volt electron beam capable of providing
much more precise data on the structure of protons and neutrons. Specifically,
the upgrade will enable scientists to address one of the great mysteries ofmodern physics – the mechanism that “confines” quarks together. New
supercomputing studies indicate that force fields called “flux-tubes” may be
responsible, and that exciting these should lead to the creation of neverbefore-seen particles.
Applications: The CEBAF Upgrade will provide a world-class, unique facility
for the study of the largely unexplored frontier in our understanding of thecomposition of nuclear matter, thus maintaining U.S. leadership in this scientificarena. Spin-off applications of the knowledge gained at this facility may
include such diverse technologies as vastly more effective MRIs, allowing
doctors to create images of patients’ lungs as they breathe, and free-electron
lasers, currently being studied by the Navy as long-range, portable weaponssystems for ships.

Priority: Tie for 7
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Upgrade
The Facility: The ESnet upgrade will enhance the network services available
to support SC researchers and laboratories and maintain their access to all
major DOE research facilities and computing resources, as well as fast interconnections to more than 100 other networks.
Background: The Energy Sciences Network, or ESnet, provides a highspeed, effective, and reliable communications network infrastructure thatenables thousands of Department of Energy, university and industry scientists
and collaborators worldwide to make effective use of unique DOE researchfacilities and computing resources,
independent of time and geographic
location. User demand to ESnet has
grown by a factor of more than
10,000 since its inception in the mid
1980s—a 100 percent increase every
year since 1990.
What’s New: Future projections
suggest sustained annual growth curvesof upwards of 300 percent per year
as research becomes more computingintensive. The ESnet upgrade will
include the purchase, lease, andmanagement of equipment, communication lines, services, and othercomponents necessary to keep pacewith this demand.
Applications: ESnet brings the power and capabilities of all of DOE’s
scientific facilities to scientists’ desktops—allowing researchers to access premierexperimental tools from the comfort of their own offices. It also greatly
increases the number of researchers that can gain access to DOE facilities,
speeding the pace of scientific discovery and making optimal use of ourFederal investment.

The Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)upgrade will enhance existing network
services and add fast interconnections
to 100 other networks.

The Facility: This upgrade will ensure that NERSC, DOE’s
premier scientific computing facility for unclassified research,continues to provide high-performance computing resources
to support the requirements of scientific discovery.
Background: NERSC provides high-performance computing tools and expertise that enable computational scienceon a grand scale: it supports large, interdisciplinary teams
The NERSC upgrade will use grid technology to meet theof researchers to attack fundamental problems in science andexpanding needs of an integrated science environment.
engineering that require massive calculations and have broad
scientific and economic impact. NERSC will continue toprovide the core scientific computing needed by the research community, andthat will complement the “grand challenge” approach pursued under the
UltraScale Scientific Computing Capability.
What’s New: The NERSC upgrade will use grid technology to deploy acapability designed to meet the needs of an integrated science environment
combining experiment, simulation, and theory by facilitating access to computing and data resources, as well as to large DOE experimental instruments.
NERSC will concentrate its resources on supporting scientific challenge teams,
with the goal of bridging the software gap between currently achievable andpeak performance on the new terascale platforms.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Priority: Tie for 7
National Energy Research Scientific
Computing Center (NERSC) Upgrade

21

FEG
Monochromator
Condenser
C s and C 5 corrector
Objective lensand stage gap
5mm, + 40 o tilt
C s and C c corrector
Energy filter
Projectors
Fast CCD system

Applications: Over the last 25 years, NERSC has built an outstanding reputation for providing both high-end computer systems and comprehensive scientific client services to more than 2000 scientists from DOE laboratories andmajor U.S. universities each year. These researchers are using NERSC capabilities to further an amazing variety of scientific inquiries—from the discovery of
the accelerating universe; to work on custom-designed catalysts for applicationin pollution prevention technologies, fuel cells, and industrial processes to moreaccurate climate models that take into account feedback effects of climatechange on the absorption of carbon by the ocean and the land masses.

Priority: Tie for 7
Tranmission Electron Achromatic Microscope (TEAM)The Facility: TEAM will be the first of a new generation of electron microscopes that, by correcting for distortions in focus inherent to all current electron
microscopes, will give much clearer images and allow the use of much larger
experimental chambers.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearNew materials: Nanotubes

22

Background: Electron microscopes are used to see finer details of the inner
structure of materials than are accessible with ordinary light microscopes.
However, existing electron microscopes are limited because they suffer frominherent aberrations which diminish the resolution of the image. One ofthese limitations is that only very small samples can be used, which precludes
using the microscope to study how materials evolve or respond in changing
environments.
What’s New: TEAM will be the first of a new generation of intermediatevoltage electron microscopes capable of developing a much more fundamental
understanding of materials by achieving resolution near 0.05 microns. TEAM
will provide the U.S. with world-class electron microscopy capability, and very
high-resolution imaging.

Phase transformations:
Quasicrystals

Defects: Strength of crystals
The Transmission Electron Achromatic
Microscope (top) will allow scientists tostudy the formation, growth, and defects
of materials (as shown in the examples).

Applications: The TEAM microscope will allow scientists to study how
atoms combine to form materials, how materials grow, and how they respondto a variety of external factors. These constitute many of the most practicalthings that we need to know about materials, and will improve designs foreverything from better, lighter, more efficient automobiles, to stronger
buildings and new ways of harvesting energy.

Priority: 12
BT
eV
BTeV
The Facility: BTeV (“B-particle physics at the
TeVatron”) is an experiment designed to use theTevatron proton-antiproton collider at the Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory (currently the world’s
most powerful accelerator) to make very precise measurements of several aspects of fundamental particle
behavior that may help explain why so little antimatter
exists in the universe.
Background: At some point very, very early in theevolution of the universe the initial quantities of matterand anti-matter became lopsided, or “asymmetrical,”resulting in the matter-based universe we now know.
The BTeV detector will use the Tevatron collider at Fermi National
One of the best ways to study this phenomenon is
Accelerator Laboratory to make precise measurements of fundamental
by making precise measurements of very infrequent
particle behavior, which may help explain why there is so little
events—in this case rarely observed decay patterns of
antimatter in the universe.
certain types of subatomic particles from a family called“B-particles.” Because these events are so extremely rare, many, many B-particles must be created to capture enough information for a single experiment.

Applications: Understanding why and how the universe became asymmetricalis one of the most outstanding, fundamental questions in the study of elementary particle physics today, and has profound implications for understanding
how the whole universe evolved from its simple initial state to the complex
patterns we see today.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

What’s New: BTeV will use state-of-the-art detector technologies and thevery high particle production rates at Fermilab’s Tevatron to obtain the large
samples of B-particles needed to make the necessary measurements. Measurements from existing electron accelerators can account for approximately
1 percent of the “asymmetry” needed to explain what we observe in thecosmos; BTeV will provide a new and unique tool with which to search forsources of the other 99 percent.

23

Mid-Term Priorities
Mid-Term
Priority: 13
Linear Collider
The Facility: The Linear Collider will allow physicists to make the world’s most precise measurements of nature’s most fundamental particles andforces at energies comparable to those of theLarge Hadron Collider (LHC) now under construction in Switzerland.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

The Linear Collider is designed to extend the study of particle physics.

24

Background: The Standard Model of particle
physics, developed over the last 50 years and recognized as one of the great scientific achievements,
has been tremendously effective in predicting the
behavior of all the interactions of subatomic particles except those due to gravity, and in describing
the varieties of particles that combine to makeeveryday matter. The next step—incorporating atheory of gravity and understanding why fundamental particles have mass—will require particle
accelerators that function at the trillion-electron
volt (“TeV”) level.

What’s New: The LHC now under construction at CERN in Switzerland will
open exploration of the TeV energy level. The Linear Collider, also to be aninternational effort, will distinguish itself by its ability to perform unique, precise
measurements at this energy because it will collide individual fundamental particles rather than complex clusters of particles. The precision afforded by the
Linear Collider will enable new phenomena discovered at the LHC to be more
fully explored, in addition to providing its own discoveries.
Applications: High-energy physics has always been a frontier discipline inscience, driving technological innovation (the World Wide Web was created toshare data from accelerator experiments, as an example) and pushing the limitsof what we know in the disparate but interconnected worlds of cosmology
and elementary particles. The Linear Collider could be considered the high-techequivalent of a frontier outpost at the edge of a new world.

Priority: Tie for 14
Analysis and Modeling of Cellular Systems
The Facility: The facility for Analysis and Modeling of Cellular Systems will
combine advanced computational, analytical, and experimental capabilities tostudy how multi-cellular systems, including microbial communities, function at
the molecular level.
Background: Microbes are the most abundant form of life on earth.
They have adapted to extreme conditions—thriving, for example, in highlyradioactive and toxic environments
or in extreme heat. This offers clues
about how to use these microbes toaddress practical problems such as
the clean-up of contaminated land or
water. However, microbes in nature
do not act as individuals, but rather
as part of complex communities, so
we need to study these communities
as a whole.
What’s New: New capabilities
provided by this facility will include(1) controlled experimental systems
for microbial community growth;(2) efficient processes for analysis
and/or characterization of microbialcommunity function; (3) sophisticatedtools for studying the interactions
and/or communication of microbialcommunity members; (4) computational tools for complex microbial community modeling.

Priority: Tie for 14
Spallation Neutron Source (SNS)2-4MW Upgrade
The Facility: The SNS upgrade will more thandouble its power, enabling the addition of approximately 20 to 24 more instruments
and doubling the number of researchers who can use the facility.
Background: Because of their special properties, neutrons have uniqueapplications as probes in many fields
of science and technology. For example, virtually everything we know
about the fundamental structure ofmagnetic materials—which lie at the

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Applications: Microbial communities offer tremendous potential to address
DOE needs in environmental remediation and energy production in entirely
new and more effective ways. In the past, microbes have been used to produce nontoxic chemicals and enzymes to reduce the cost and improve theefficiency of industrial processes; microbial enzymes have been used to bleachpaper pulp, stone wash denim, remove lipstick from glassware, break down
starch in brewing and coagulate milk protein for cheese production. New
applications include the use of microbial communities to digest radioactive
waste and to create hydrogen, a clean fuel for a new economy.

SNS Power Upgrade: The linac tunnel is sized for 9 additional “cryomodules” (top).
Augmenting Klystron Gallery is required (bottom).
25

heart of today’s motors, generators, telecommunications, video, and audio technologies—has been learned through neutron scattering.
What’s New: The SNS, the most powerful neutron source in the world, wasdesigned from the outset to accommodate a power upgrade that would support a second neutron beam, target station, and associated suite of instruments.
Increasing the SNS power level from 1 MW to 2-4 MW will increase the rangeof materials for which measurements using a single pulse becomes feasible, andwill enable the future construction and operation of a second target station specifically designed to study soft matter, such as polymers and biological material.
Applications: As the needs of our high-technology society have advanced, so
have our demands for stronger, lighter, and cheaper materials. More than ever,
x-ray and neutron sources are used to understand and “engineer” such materials
at the atomic level. Jets, credit cards, pocket calculators, compact discs, computer disks, magnetic recording tapes, shatter-proof windshields, and satellite
weather information for forecasts have all been improved by neutronscattering research.

Priority: Tie for 14
Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) Second Target Station

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearThe Facility: The second target station at the
SNS will provide a long wavelength neutron
source optimized for the study of large structures
such as polymers, and biological materials including
cell walls and membranes.

26

Background: Neutrons are non-destructive highly
penetrating probes useful for studying the structureof many types of materials. Unlike x-rays, theseuncharged particles are especially sensitive tohydrogen and other light atoms that are major
components of biological materials. Slower,
so-called “cold neutrons” are particularly wellsuited to the study of biological matter because
their wavelengths are comparable to thesize of proteins and other important biologicalmolecules.
The SNS was designed from the outset to allow operations with two target
stations. At the present pace, all of the High Power Target Station (HPTS)
beamlines will be allocated by approximately 2006 and built out by 2013.

What’s New: When completed in 2006, the SNS
will be ten times more powerful than the best spallation neutron source now in existence. The designof the SNS provided for the construction of two
differently optimized target stations. The high frequency (60-Hz) target station
now under construction is optimized for experiments in condensed matterphysics, materials sciences, magnetic materials, and engineering. The second target station will operate at a significantly lower frequency (10 Hz) that will enablestudies of fundamental neutron physics, chemical spectroscopy, protein folding
dynamics, and polymer dynamics, among many other topics.
Applications: Growing numbers of industrial and university researchers
are using neutron sources for the development of everything from fiber andcomposite materials to the creation of microscopic machines, to improvements
in high-capacity magnetic data storage. The “cold neutron research” enabled by
the SNS second target station will support major discoveries in earth sciences,environmental chemistry, catalysis science, structural biology, and the design ofpharmaceuticals for diagnosis and cure of major diseases.

Priority: Tie for 14
Whole Proteome Analysis
The Facility: The Whole Proteome
Analysis facility will provide researcherswith the ability to investigate how
microbes adapt to changes in theirenvironment by turning certain portionsof their genome “on” and “off.”
Background: The entire complementof proteins a microbe makes under
different environmental conditions iscalled its proteome. A microbe does
not make all the proteins encoded in its
genome all the time; rather it makes
only the set required at a given moment—to reproduce, for example, or
survive in contaminated environments.
By knowing which part of a microbe’s
proteome is “turned on” in certain conditions, scientists can learn how to best
use them to address practical needs.

Applications: The applications of microbial biotechnology cross boundaries
from medicine and food to energy and environmental resources. Just as thetechnology and resources developed by the Human Genome Project are already having a major impact on the U.S. economy (sales of DNA-based products and technologies in the biotechnology industry are projected to exceed$45 billion by 2009), this new capability will open the door to the study of thepractical applications of microbes—another potentially huge industry—and asource of solutions to environmental and energy challenges.

Priority: Tie for 18
Double Beta Decay Underground Detector
The Facility: The underground double beta decay detector will enablemeasurements of individual neutrino mass and determination of whether theneutrino and its anti-particle are identical.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

What’s New: Currently, there is no way to determine in a reasonable amountof time what part of a microbe’s genome becomes active in different conditions and environments. Because this facility will be able to generate thousandsof measurements for broad classes of microbes under many different conditions, it will enable scientists to do in a few days what would otherwise takemany months, and it will transform how scientists are able to study microbes ascomplete biological systems.

27

Background: The National Science Foundation ispursuing possible construction of a deep undergroundlaboratory in the United States, and the Department ofEnergy is working with the NSF to identify a new generation of experiments that will explore an exciting frontier at the interface of physics and astronomy. One of
the most promising experimental approaches is the studyof neutrino-less double beta decay of certain nuclei.
What’s New: Currently, scientists are only able to measure the disparity between the masses of different typesof neutrinos—not the masses themselves. The underground double-beta decay detector will be 100 times
more sensitive than any previous such facility, allowing
Artist’s conception of one particular neutrino-less double beta decay
physicists to measure individual neutrino masses andexperiment—the Majorana.
determine whether the neutrino and its anti-particle are
identical. If they are found to be identical, it will be clear evidence that some
portions of our most fundamental theories of physics are inadequate.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Applications: Recent studies in Japan and Canada have provided clear
evidence that neutrinos have mass. This significant discovery contradicts somepredictions of the Standard Model of physics (the name given to the current
theory of fundamental particles and how they interact). The predicted abundance of neutrinos in the universe and the discovery that they have mass implies
that cosmic neutrinos account for as much mass as do stars. Knowing neutrino
masses will provide clues to where to look for evidence that the basic forcesof the universe become unified in a single force; help explain how neutrinos
shaped the evolution of the universe; and give insight into how the elements inthe periodic table were made inside stars and supernovas.

28

Priority: Tie for 18
Next-Step Spherical Torus (NSST) Experiment
The Facility: The NSST will be designed to test the sphericaltorus, an innovative concept for magnetically confining a fusion
reaction, in an experiment large enough to understand how it
would perform in a self-sustaining fusion reaction.
Background: One approach to creating energy fromfusion—long sought as an abundant, environmentally benign
energy source—depends on being able to create a containerthat will confine the fusion fuel and maintain it at very hightemperatures (hundreds of millions of degrees). Magnetic
fields are used to trap the superheated fuel in the center of thecontainer so that it cannot touch the walls and cool off. The
efficiency of the fusion reaction is related to the shape of thecontainer; the early donut-shaped tokamak may be evolving
toward the more elongated and spherical torus.

The NSST experiment will test the performance of the sphericaltorus in a self-sustaining fusion reaction.

What’s New: The spherical torus has recently emerged as themost promising concept for confining a self-sustaining fusion
reaction, or “burning plasma.” Two proof-of-principle level
experiments, the National Spherical Torus Experiment at

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory and the Mega Ampere Spherical Tokamak at Culham, England, have produced excellent research results in small-scale
experiments. If progress continues as anticipated, it will justify testing thespherical torus in experiments large enough to simulate near-fusion physics,
just short of the burning plasma.
Applications: This experiment will contribute substantially to our understanding of the physics of fusion reactions, and will provide the data needed for thedesign and construction of future fusion energy plants, including those that will
follow in the footsteps of ITER.

Priority: Tie for 18
RHIC II
The Facility: This upgrade will
provide a 10-fold increase in the luminosity (collision rate) of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC),
enabling scientists to create and study
atomic particle collision events that
happen only rarely, and to explore
states of matter believed to haveexisted during the first moments
after the Big Bang.
The RHIC II electron cooling system will enable RHIC to increase its collision rate 10-fold andWhat’s New: New electron cooling techniques will enable RHIC II toincrease its collision rate 10-fold and maintain this collision rate for far longer
periods of time, thus enabling scientists to collect 10 years’ worth of experimental data in a single year. Ultimately, research at RHIC II may allow scientists
to characterize the phase changes of nuclear matter in terms analogous to thoseused to describe the behavior of every day matter (temperature and pressure).
This would be an extraordinary step forward in our understanding of therelationship between the most fundamental constituents of matter and thematter that we see in the world around us.
Applications: Every day each of us relies on modern technology developed
from a basic understanding of the microscopic structure and properties ofmatter. Examples include personal computers based on state-of-the-art
electronics; medical tools that image, help diagnose, and treat disease without
surgery; and telecommunications technology that allow us to talk to friends
and colleagues around the world from a device smaller than the size of ahuman hand.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: At the first moments
maintain this collision rate for long periods of time.
of the creation of the universe all themost fundamental particles that make up matter may have existed in a very hot,diffuse and dissolved state called quark-gluon plasma. From this, it is believedthat the universe underwent changes analogous to what happens when steamcools to liquid water, and then cools into solid ice. No researchers have yet
demonstrated they have created quark-gluon plasma, but scientists at RHIC
believe they are closing in on this important discovery. RHIC is designed torecreate a bit of the quark-gluon plasma by colliding heavy ions, such as gold.

29

Far-Term Priorities
Far-Term
Priority: Tie for 21
National Synchrotron Light Source Complex
Upgrade - NSLS II
The Facility: The NSLS upgrade will create
and install the next generation design for a synchrotron light source storage ring notable for its flexibility to accommodate radically new types ofexperimental capabilities.
Background: Synchrotrons produce light by accelerating electrons into circular paths called storagerings. As the electrons turn, photons (little packets)
The NSLS II, the first of the next generation synchrotrons, will be brighter,more stable, easier to use, and will accommodate many new types ofof light are given off and travel down pipes called
experiments.
beamlines to work areas where scientists run theirexperiments. When this light is aimed at the very small sample under investigation, a complex image of the sample’s interaction with light is created on a
detector. This image is sent to a computer, which is used to analyze the sample’s
molecular structure and properties.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

What’s New: The NSLS Upgrade will be the first of the next generation ofsynchrotrons. The new design will include a 3-GeV, 500 mA highly optimized
storage ring and a broad range of enhanced capabilities: higher average continuous brightness, extreme stability, easy tunability, higher peak brightness, andultrashort pulses.

30

Applications: The NSLS at Brookhaven National Laboratory serves 2500
national laboratory, industrial, and academic users per year—a full 40 percentof the total user community for DOE synchrotrons—and is an essential scientific tool for scientists and scientific institutions throughout the northeastern
U.S. and beyond. The NSLS facility was designed in the late 1970s; for the
research of its formidable user community to continue to flourish, the NSLS
must be updated and so continue to provide world-class capabilities.

Priority: Tie for 21
Super Neutrino Beam
The Facility: The Super Neutrino Beam will allow more comprehensive
studies of neutrino properties by producing a neutrino beam 10 times more
intense than those available with current accelerators.
Background: Neutrinos are the most poorly understood of the elementary
particles but may be the most important for answering fundamental questions
ranging from why there is any matter in the universe at all, to how all particles
and forces in the universe “unify” into a simple picture. Because neutrinos
rarely interact with matter (many billions pass through each of us every second),
the ability to generate controlled beams containing large numbers of neutrinos
greatly increases the ability to study them.

What’s New: The Super Neutrino Beam will be poweredby a new, megawatt class “proton driver” which will beable to provide an intense, well-controlled neutrino beam—with 10 times more neutrinos per second than are available
from any existing facility—to detectors hundreds or
thousands of miles distant.
Applications: The 2002 Nobel Prize in physics was sharedby two scientists—one American and one Japanese—for theirpath-breaking measurements of solar and atmospheric neutrinos. Their research strongly suggested that neutrinos havemass and oscillate among three types as they travel throughspace. These oscillations have recently been confirmed, andthe properties and behavior of neutrinos are now ripe formeasurement. The results will have profound implications
for our understanding of the fundamental properties ofmatter and the evolution of the early universe.

Priority: Tie for 23
Advanced Light Source Upgrade

The Super Neutrino Beam will provide 10 times moreneutrinos per second than any existing facility—to detectors
hundreds or thousands of miles away. This new facility willbuild on current experiments such as the KEK to Kamiokande(K2K) long baseline neutrino oscillation experiment in Japan,
shown above, which sends neutrinos along a beamline from
KEK (High Energy Accelerator Research Organization) to theSuper Kamiokande detector 250 km (~155 miles) away.

The Facility: The ALS upgrade will allow the facility to expand to accommodate new instruments to explore the traditionally difficult spectral region at theborder between optics and electronics (called the “terahertz-gap”), and remaina preeminent scientific tool for the U.S. research community.

What’s New: The upgrade provides forthe installation of a full complement of
power boosters (called insertion devices,or “undulators” and “wigglers”) in the
ALS storage ring; the replacement of
three sectors of conventional bend magnets with superconducting bend magnets;
and full instrumentation of the insertion
devices and superbend beamlines. This
will increase the brightness of the ALS inthe soft x-ray region 10 to 100 times, andalso extend the high energy range of the
facility to between 10-keV and 20-keV.
Applications: Research at the ALS will
be applicable to an exceptionally wide
range of areas—from semiconductors to

The ALS upgrade will increase its brightness by 10 to 100 times and also extend the highenergy range of the facility, making it applicable to an even broader range of research areas
such as semiconductors, magnetic materials for computer storage, molecular-scale combustion
reactions, and pharmaceutical drug development.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: The ALS at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is one of
the world’s brightest sources of soft X-rays (ideal for probing the secrets ofmatter at the level of individual atoms) and ultraviolet light. It supports morethan 2000 scientists each year. However, since it began operation a decade ago,
light source technology has evolved significantly; substantial improvements inbrightness and current will be required to maintain the ALS as the preeminent
research tool that it is.

31

magnetic materials used in computer storage disks, to molecules undergoing
rapid reactions in combustion and other industrially important processes, tostructures within biological cells that determine how well drugs can fightdisease-causing agents such as viruses.

Priority: Tie for 23
Advanced Photon Source (APS) Upgrade

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearThe Facility: The Advanced Photon Source(APS) upgrade will create a “super storage ring”
of electrons that will greatly enhance the brilliance of the facility, increasing the power of thedevice and enabling scientists to work on verysmall sample crystals. Small samples are important: many current experiments are limited by
the fact that the subject materials will not growinto large enough crystals for study.

32

Background: The APS at Argonne National
Laboratory was commissioned in 1996. It currently provides the brightest x-ray beams available in the Western Hemisphere for a wide
range of research from materials science tostructural biology. The 1,104-meter circumference storage ring of the APS, which is large
The APS upgrade will greatly enhance the brilliance and power of the facility toenable scientists to study very small sample crystals—important for nanoscienceenough to house a baseball park in its center,
research.
produces, accelerates, and stores a beam ofsubatomic particles that is the source of the x-ray beams that feed numerous
experimental stations. The APS will support more than 4000 users on
70 beamlines.
What’s New: This eventual APS upgrade will replace and upgrade major
components of the accelerator to further increase performance in the hard
x-ray region of the spectrum, most notably x-ray photon correlation spectroscopy, coherent imaging, inelastic scattering, and x-ray nanoprobe microscopes.
The upgrade will be necessary to keep the APS among the best of the hard
x-ray facilities, and ensure that its performance and scientific output continue
to be ground-breaking.
Applications: Using high-brilliance x-ray beams from the APS, membersof the international synchrotron-radiation research community have achievedmajor advances in basic and applied research in the fields of materials science;
biological science; physics; chemistry; environmental, geophysical, and planetaryscience; archeology; and innovative x-ray instrumentation.

Priority: Tie for 23
eRHIC
The Facility: An electron accelerator ring added to the existing Relativistic
Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) would create the world’s first electron-heavy ion
collider (eRHIC). The facility will enable scientists to learn things about thestructure of protons, and the subatomic particles that bind them, that they
could learn in no other way.

Background: Current theory holds that atoms
are composed of protons and neutrons, which
in turn are composed of particles called quarks,
held together by gluons. Both quarks and gluons are little understood. While most existing
and contemplated nuclear physics facilities aredesigned for the study of quarks, eRHIC isintended to create and study gluons, which bindsubatomic particles.
What’s New: The addition of a polarized
Adding an electron accelerator ring to the existing RHIC at Brookhaven National
electron source and 10 GeV energy electron
Laboratory will create eRHIC, the world’s first electron-heavy ion collider, whichring to the current RHIC facility will enablein turn will create enormous numbers of gluons for scientists to study.
eRHIC to create enormous numbers ofgluons—in effect a saturated “gluonic” state of matter—giving scientists a
unique opportunity and approach to probe the substructure of particles.
Applications: Einstein’s famous equation, E=mc2, predicts that small amountsof mass can be transformed into large amounts of energy, and that the reverseis also possible. Although we have demonstrated this prediction and its practical applications (nuclear weapons, among other things, are based on this principle), the truth is that we do not yet understand how the process works—theunderlying mechanisms by which mass is transformed into energy and viceversa. eRHIC will allow scientists to tackle this very fundamental
question in physics.

Priority: Tie for 23
Fusion Energy Contingency

Background: Neutrons created during the course of fusion
reactions interact with the metals used to build the current
generation of fusion containment devices, causing brittleness,swelling and deformation, and induced radioactivity. Somesteel alloys have been identified thatappear to be less susceptible to the induced
R = 1.2m
radioactivity, but how they will hold up in a
a = 0.8m
power plant is unknown. This is but one of thematerials and component design challenges that
The Component Test Facility will qualify materials and components for use
must be addressed before fusion is a commercial
in fusion demos.
energy source.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearThe Facility: The fusion energy contingency includes funds
set aside in anticipation of a successful outcome of the ITER
project. If ITER construction and operation goes forward asplanned, additional facilities to develop and test power plantcomponents and materials will be needed to complete theprocess of making fusion energy a viable commercial energy
resource by mid-century.

What’s New: To be determined as ITER progresses.
33

Applications: Research facilities supported by the fusion energy contingency
will have immediate, practical application in making the first generation offusion power plants a reality.

Priority: Tie for 23
High-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) Second Cold Sourceand Guide HallThe Facility: Construction of the cold
source and guide hall at HFIR will complete
the facility, more than doubling its capabilities, and accommodating new instrumentsthat will position HFIR among the world’s
premiere research facilities for the analysisof large structures (e.g., proteins) and newmaterials only available in small quantities.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Background: A major direction in neutron
scattering research is the study of large-scale
structures and dynamics typical of soft
materials, biological systems, and self-organized electronic and magnetic phenomena—
all of which are more effectively studied
using so-called “cold neutrons.” Europe has
five such sources, most of which are oversubscribed, and is constructing two more.
The U.S. currently has only one cold guidehall in operation, with another moderate
power source nearing completion at HFIR.

34

What’s New: The second cold source andguide hall will take advantage of the large
diameter and high brightness of the HB-2
beam port at HFIR to develop the world’s
most intense cold neutron facility. It will
include a new guide hall, an initial suite offive instruments (up to 10 eventually), anduser offices and support space. These additions will complement the proposed Long
Wavelength Target Station at the Spallation
Neutron Source and provide the world’s
foremost cold neutron research capability.

The High Flux Isotope Reactor at Oak Ridge National Laboratory has been one of
the world’s most powerful research reactors since 1966. This illustration is a floor
plan (top) and artist’s conception of the HFIR Guide Hall (bottom).

Applications: The resulting impact
on science would be enormous: it willallow for the study of new materials
only available in small quantities, such ascorrelated systems (e.g., superconductors),

nano-fabricated specimens (e.g., ultra-thin films), biological samples, pharmaceuticals, and weakly scattering systems (e.g., dilute bio-solutions). Currently
available facilities are simply inadequate to address these and many other issues
in materials and biological science.

Priority: Tie for 23
Integrated Beam
Experiment (IBX)The Facility: The IBX will be an intermediate-scale experiment to understandhow to generate and transmit the focused,high energy ion beam needed to power
an inertial fusion energy reaction.

An IBX capability for
integrated acceleration
compression and focusing on highcurrent, space-charge-dominatedbeams would be unique—not available
in any existing accelerator in the world.

Background: To explore the feasibilityof economical fusion power plants, theDepartment of Energy is pursuing twoalternative approaches to creating fusion energy. One involves confining thereaction with magnetic fields (as would be done at ITER); the other uses a very
focused, high-energy pulse of radiation to compress and ignite a small capsuleof fusion fuel. This second approach is called inertial fusion energy.
What’s New: The IBX will involve the design and construction of a linear
accelerator, superconducting quadrupole magnets, and focusing system thatcan generate very stable and intense ion beams, accelerate and compress them,
guide them to travel in parallel without interacting, and yet be able to focus
them on a very small fuel target. Understanding how best to integrate thedesign factors to create such a beam is the major goal of the IBX.
Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Applications: The scientific research in IBX, coupled with research from the
DOE National Nuclear Security Administration’s National Ignition Facility, will
provide new insight into the possible advantages of using inertial fusion energy
techniques as an alternative to magnetic confinement to generate fusion energy.

35Appendix
Sample Charge Letter
to Advisory Committees
December 18, 2002

Dr. Keith O. Hodgson
Director
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory
Department of Chemistry
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305

Dear Dr. Hodgson:

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearFor more than a half-century, the Department of Energy’s Office of Sciencehas envisioned, designed, constructed, and operated many of the premiere scientific research facilities in the world. More than 17,000 researchers and theirstudents from universities, other government agencies, private industry, andfrom abroad use Office of Science facilities each year—and this number is
growing. For example, the light sources built and operated by DOE now
serve more than three times the total number of users, and twenty times as
many users from the life sciences, as they did in 1990.

36

Creating these facilities for the benefit of science is at the core of our mission
and is part of our unique contribution to our Nation’s scientific strength. It is
important that we continue to do what we do best: build facilities that create
institutional capacity for strengthening multidisciplinary science, provide worldclass research tools that attract the best minds, create new capabilities for
exploring the frontiers of the natural and physical sciences, and stimulatescientific discovery through computer simulation of complex systems.
To this end, I am asking all the Office of Science’s Advisory Committees tojoin me in taking a new look at our scientific horizon, and to discuss with mewhat new or upgraded facilities will best serve our purposes over a timeframeof the next twenty years. More specifically, I charge the committees to establish
a subcommittee to:
A. Consider what new or upgraded facilities in your discipline will be necessary to position the Office of Biological and Environmental Researchat the forefront of scientific discovery. Please start by reviewing theattached list of facilities, assembled by Dr. Aristides Patrinos and his
team, subtracting or adding as you feel appropriate, with prudence as
to cost and timeframe. For this exercise please consider only facilities/
upgrades requiring a minimum investment of $50 million.

B. Provide me with a report that discusses each of these facilities in termsof two criteria:
1. The importance of the science that the facility would support. Pleaseconsider, for example: the extent to which the proposed facility
would answer the most important scientific questions; whether
there are other ways or other facilities that would be able to answer these questions; whether the facility would contribute to manyor few areas of research; whether construction of the facility will
create new synergies within a field or among fields of research;
and what level of demand exists within the scientific community
for the facility. In your report, please categorize the facilities inthree tiers, such as “absolutely central,” “important,” and “don’tknow enough yet,” according to the potential importance of theircontribution. Please do not rank order the facilities.
2. The readiness of the facility for construction. Please think about
questions such as: whether the concept of the facility has been formally studied in any way; the level of confidence that the technicalchallenges involved in building the facility can be met; the sufficiency of R&D performed to date to assure technical feasibilityof the facility; and the extent to which the cost to build and operate the facility is understood. Group the facilities into three tiers
according to their readiness, using categories such as “ready to initiate construction,” “significant scientific/engineering challenges toresolve before initiating construction,” and “mission and technicalrequirements not yet fully defined.”

I look forward to hearing your findings and discussing these with you in the
future. I would appreciate at least a preliminary report by March, 2003.

Sincerely,

Dr. Raymond L. Orbach
Director
Office of Science

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Many additional criteria, such as expected funding levels, are important when
considering a possible portfolio of future facilities; however for the moment
I ask that you focus your thoughts on the two criteria discussed above.

37

DOE Office of Science
Advisory Committees(as of February/March 2003)
Following are the rosters of the
DOE Office of Science’s six program offices’ advisory committees
as they were constituted when, as
requested, they recommended major facilities for construction to the
Director of the Office of Science
early in 2003:
Advanced Scientific Computing
Advisory Committee (ASCAC)

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Chair:
Dr. Margaret H. WrightComputer Science Department
Courant Institute of Mathematical
Sciences
New York University
New York, NY

38

Dr. Gregory J. McRae
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Department of Chemical
Engineering
Cambridge, MA
Dr. Karen R. Sollins
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Cambridge, MA
Dr. Ellen B. Stechel
Ford Motor Company
Powertrain Operations and Engine
Engineering
Dearborn, MI
Dr. Stephen Wolff
Cisco Systems
Washington, DC
Basic Energy Sciences Advisory
Committee (BESAC)

Co-Chair:Dr. John W. D. Connolly
Center for Computational Sciences
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY

Chair:
Dr. Geraldine L. RichmondDepartment of Chemistry
University of Oregon
Eugene, OR

Dr. Jill P. Dahlburg
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington, DC

Vice Chair:Dr. Mostafa El-Sayed
Director, Laser Dynamics
Laboratory
School of Chemistry andBiochemistry
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA

Dr. Roscoe C. Giles
Associate Professor
Center for Computational Science
Boston University
Boston, MA
Ms. Helene E. Kulsrud
Center for Communications
Research
Princeton, NJ
Dr. William A. Lester, Jr.
Department of Chemistry
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
Dr. Juan Mesa
Computing Research Division
Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory
Berkeley, CA

Dr. Patricia Dove
Department of Geological Sciences
Virginia Polytechnic Institute andState University
Blacksburg, VA
Dr. George Flynn
Higgins Professor
Department of Chemistry
Columbia University
New York, NY
Dr. Wayne Goodman
Department of Chemistry
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
Dr. Laura Greene
Department of Physics
University of Illinois
Urbana, IL
Dr. Eric Isaacs
Director, Semiconductor Physics
Research
Bell Laboratories
Lucent Technologies
Murray Hill, NJ
Dr. John C. Hemminger
Professor of Chemistry
Department of Chemistry
University of California, Irvine
Irvine, CA
Dr. Anthony Johnson
Department of Physics
New Jersey Institute of Technology
Newark, NJ

Vice Chair:
Dr. C. Bradley Moore
Vice President for Research andProfessor of Chemistry
Ohio State University
Columbus, OH

Dr. Walter Kohn
Department of Physics
University of California, Santa
BarbaraSanta Barbara, CA

Dr. Nora Berrah
Department of Physics
Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, MI

Dr. Gabrielle Long
Ceramics Division
National Institute of Standards andTechnology
Gaithersburg, MD

Dr. Collin Broholm
Department of Physics andAstronomy
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD

Dr. Anne Mayes
Professor of Polymer Physics
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Cambridge, MA

Dr. Philip Bucksbaum
Department of Physics
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI

Dr. William McCurdy, Jr.
Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory
Berkeley, CA

Dr. Daniel Morse
Molecular Genetics andBiochemistry
University of California, Santa
BarbaraSanta Barbara, CA

Dr. Mary J. Wirth
C. Eugene Bennett Professor
Department of Chemistry andBiochemistry
University of Delaware
Newark, DE

Dr. Martin Moskovits
Dean, Mathematical, Life andPhysical Sciences
College of Letters and Sciences
University of California, Santa
BarbaraSanta Barbara, CA

Biological and Environmental
Research Advisory Committee(BERAC)

Dr. Cherry Murray
Bell Laboratories
Lucent Technologies
Murray Hill, NJ
Dr. Ward Plummer
Distinguished Professor of Physics
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN
Dr. John Richards
Professor of Organic Chemistry
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, CA
Dr. Richard Smalley
Department of Chemistry
Rice University
Houston, TX

Dr. Samuel Stupp
Materials Science and Engineeringand ChemistryNorthwestern University
Evanston, IL 60208
Dr. Kathleen Taylor
Birmingham, MI
Dr. Rudolf Tromp
IBM Research DivisionThomas J. Watson Research Center
Yorktown Heights, NY
Dr. R. Stanley Williams
HP Fellow and Director
Quantum Science Research
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
Palo Alto, CA

Dr. S. James Adelstein
Harvard Medical School
Boston, MA
Dr. John F. Ahearne
Sigma Xi, The Scientific ResearchSociety
Research Triangle Park, NC
Dr. Eugene W. Bierly
Director for Education andResearch
American Geophysical Union
Washington, DC
Dr. Michelle S. Broido
Associate Vice Chancellor for Basic
Biomedical Research andDirector, Office of Research,
Health Sciences
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA
Dr. David R. Burgess
Department of Biology
Boston College
Chestnut Hill, MA
Dr. Carlos J. Bustamante
Department of Molecular and Cell
Biology and Department of
Physics
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
Dr. Charles DeLisi
College of Engineering
Boston University
Boston, MA
Mr. Robert W. Fri
Bethesda, MD

Dr. Jonathan Greer
Department of Structural Biology
Abbott Laboratories
Abbott Park, IL
Dr. Richard E. Hallgren
Executive Director
American Meteorological Society
Washington, DC
Dr. Willard W. Harrison
Professor of Chemistry
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL
Dr. Leroy E. Hood
President, Institute for Systems
BiologySeattle, WA
Steven M. Larson, M.D.
Chief, Nuclear Medicine Service
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer
CenterNew York, NY
Roger O. McClellan, DVM
Advisor, Toxicology and Human
Health Risk Analysis
Albuquerque, NM
Dr. Jill P. Mesirov
Whitehead Institute
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Center for Genome Research
Cambridge, MA
Dr. James W. Mitchell
Director, Materials and Ecology
Research
Bell Laboratories
Lucent Technologies
Murray Hill, NJ
Dr. Louis F. Pitelka
Director and Professor
Appalachian Laboratory
Frostburg, MD
Dr. Janet L. Smith
Department of Biological Sciences
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Dr. Joachim Stohr
Deputy Director
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation
Laboratory
Stanford, CA

Chair:
Dr. Keith O. Hodgson
Director, Stanford Synchrotron
Radiation Laboratory
Department of Chemistry
Stanford University
Stanford, CA

Dr. Raymond F. Gesteland
Department of Human Genetics
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT

39

Dr. Lisa Stubbs
Human Genome Center
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory
Livermore, CA

Dr. Martin J. Greenwald
Plasma Science and Fusion Center
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Cambridge, MA

Dr. Edward Thomas, Jr.
Auburn University
Physics Department
Auburn University
Auburn, AL

Dr. James M. Tiedje
Director, The Center for Microbial
Ecology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI

Dr. Joseph J. Hoagland
Public Power InstituteTennessee Valley Authority
Muscle Shoals, AL

High Energy Physics Advisory Panel

Nora D. Volkow, M.D.
Medical Department
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, NY
Dr. Warren M. Washington
National Center for AtmosphericResearch
Boulder, CO
Dr. Barbara J. Wold
Division of Biology
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, CA
Fusion Energy Sciences
Advisory Committee

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Chair:
Dr. Richard D. Hazeltine
Institute for Fusion Studies
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX

40Vice Chair:
Dr. Charles C. Baker
Virtual Laboratory for Technology
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, CA
Dr. Riccardo Betti
Department of Physics andAstronomy
University of Rochester
Rochester, NY
Dr. Jill P. Dahlburg
Fusion Group
General Atomics
San Diego, CA
Dr. Jeffrey P. Freidberg
Plasma Science and Fusion Center
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Cambridge, MA

Dr. Joseph A. Johnson, III
Florida A&M University
Tallahassee, FL
Dr. Rulon K. Linford
Office of the President
University of California
Oakland, CA
Dr. Kathryn McCarthy
Idaho National Engineering andEnvironmental Laboratory
Fusion Safety Program
Bechtel B&W Idaho, LLC
Idaho Falls, ID
Dr. George Morales
Physics and Astronomy Department
University of California, Los
AngelesLos Angeles, CA
Dr. Gerald A. Navratil
Department of Applied Physics
Columbia University
New York, NY
Dr. Cynthia K. Phillips
Princeton Plasma Physics
Laboratory
Princeton, NJ
Dr. Marshall N. Rosenbluth(deceased September 28, 2003)
General Atomics
Fusion GroupSan Diego, CA
Dr. Ned R. Sauthoff
Princeton Plasma Physics
Laboratory
Princeton, NJ
Dr. John Sheffield
Joint Institute for Energy andEnvironment
Knoxville, TN

Chair:
Dr. Frederick J. Gilman
Department of Physics
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA
Dr. Paul R. Avery
Department of Physics
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL
Dr. Jonathan A. Bagger
Department of Physics andAstronomy
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD
Dr. Keith Baker
Physics Department
Hampton University
Hampton, VA
Dr. Joel Butler
Particle Physics Division
Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory
Batavia, IL
Dr. Ronald C. Davidson
Astrophysical Sciences Program in
Plasma Physics
Princeton University and Deputy
Director of Theory Group
Princeton Plasma Physics
Laboratory
Princeton, NJ
Dr. David G. Hitlin
Lauritsen Laboratory
California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, CA
Dr. Young-Kee Kim
Department of Physics
University of Chicago
Chicago, IL
Dr. Paul G. Langacker
Department of Physics andAstronomy
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA

Dr. Jolie A. Cizewski
Department of Physics andAstronomy
Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ

Dr. Witold Nazarewicz
Department of Physics andAstronomy
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN

Dr. Kees W. de Jager
Thomas Jefferson National
Accelerator Facility
Newport News, VA

Dr. Vijay R. Panharipande
Department of Physics
University of Illinois
Urbana, IL

Dr. Stuart Freedman
Department of Physics
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA

Dr. Winston Roberts
Department of Physics
Old Dominion University
Norfolk, VA

Dr. J. Ritchie Patterson
Newman Laboratory
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY

Dr. Alejandro Garcia
Department of Physics
University of Washington
Seattle, WA

Dr. Richard K. Seto
Department of Physics
University of California, Riverside
Riverside, CA

Dr. Stephen G. Peggs
Collider-Accelerator Department
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, NY

Dr. Charles Glashausser
Physics Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL

Dr. Natalie A. Roe
Department of Physics
Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory
Berkeley, CA

Dr. Robert V. F. Janssens
Physics Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL

Bradley M. Sherrill
National Superconducting
Cyclotron Lab
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI

Dr. Angel M. Lopez
Physics Department
University of Puerto Rico
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico
Dr. Vera G. Luth
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Stanford, CA
Dr. Rene Ong
Department of Physics andAstronomy
University of California, Los
AngelesLos Angeles, CA

Dr. John T. Seeman
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Stanford, CA
Dr. Stanley G. Wojcicki
Department of Physics
Stanford University
Stanford, CA
NSF/DOE Nuclear Science Advisory
Committee (NSAC)

Chair:
Dr. Richard F. Casten
A.W. Wright Nuclear Structure Lab
Yale University
New Haven, CT
Dr. Ricardo Alarcon
Department of Physics andAstronomy
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ

Dr. Krishna S. Kumar
Nuclear Physics Group
Deptartment of Physics andAstronomy
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, MA
Dr. June Matthews
Laboratory for Nuclear Science
Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
Cambridge, MA
Dr. Larry D. McLerranPhysics Department, Nuclear
TheoryBrookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, NY
Dr. Alice C. Mignerey
Department of Chemistry
University of MarylandCollege Park, MD
Dr. Joel M. Moss
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Los Alamos, NM

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Dr. Randal Ruchti
Department of Physics
University of Notre Dame
Notre Dame, IN

Dr. Suresh C. Srivastava
Medical Department
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, NY

41

About DOE’s Office of Science
The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science is the single largest
supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States,
providing more than 40 percent of total funding for this vital area ofnational importance. It oversees—and is the principal Federal funding
agency of—the Nation’s research programs in high-energy physics, nuclear
physics, and fusion energy sciences.

Brookhaven National Laboratory’s

The Office of Science sponsors fundamental research programs in basic
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider
energy sciences, biological and environmental sciences, and computational
science. In addition, the Office of Science is the Federal Government’s largest single funder of materials andchemical sciences, and it supports unique and vital parts of U.S. research in climate change, geophysics, genomics,
life sciences, and science education.
The Office of Science manages this research portfolio through six interdisciplinary program offices: Advanced
Scientific Computing Research, Basic Energy Sciences, Biological and Environmental Research, Fusion Energy
Sciences, High Energy Physics, and Nuclear Physics. In addition, the Office of Science sponsors a range of scienceeducation initiatives through its Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists program.
The Office of Science makes extensive use of peer review and Federal advisorycommittees to develop general directions for research investments, to identify priorities, and to determine the very best scientific proposals to support.

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-YearThe Office of Science also manages 10 world-class laboratories, which often are
called the “crown jewels” of our national research infrastructure. The national
laboratory system, created over a half-century ago, is the most comprehensive
research system of its kind in the world.

42

Five are multi-program facilities: Argonne National Laboratory, Brookhaven
National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National
Thomas Jefferson National
Laboratory, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. The other five are singleAccelerator Facility
program national laboratories: Ames Laboratory, Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory, Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, and Stanford
Linear Accelerator Center.
The Office of Science oversees the construction and operation of some of the Nation’s
most advanced R&D user facilities, located at national laboratories and universities.
These include particle and nuclear physics accelerators, synchrotron light sources,
neutron scattering facilities, supercomputers and high-speed computer networks. Eachyear these facilities are used by more than 18,000 researchers from universities, othergovernment agencies, and private industry.
The Office of Science is a principal supporter of graduate students and postdoctoral
researchers early in their careers. About 50 percent of its research funding goes tosupport research at 250 colleges, universities, and institutes nationwide.
The Office of Science also reaches out to America’s youth in grades K-12 and theirteachers to help improve students’ knowledge of science and mathematics and theirunderstanding of global energy and environmental challenges.

Microbiologists at the PacificNorthwest National Laboratory

To attract and encourage students to choose an education in the sciences and engineering, the Office of Science also
supports the National Science Bowl, an educational competition for high school students involving all branches ofscience. Each year, over 12,000 students participate in the contest, and some 300 finalists typically prepare formonths to attend the national event in Washington, D.C.

Office of Science Contacts
Dr. Raymond L. Orbach, Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-1, Forrestal Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20585-1290
Phone: 202-586-5430 Fax: 202-586-4120
ray.orbach@science.doe.gov
www.science.doe.gov
Dr. Milton D. Johnson, Deputy Director
Dr. James F. Decker, Principal Deputy Director
for Operations
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-1, Forrestal Building
SC-1, Forrestal Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
Washington, DC 20585-1290
202-586-5434 Fax: 202-586-4120
202-586-5440 Fax: 202-586-4120
james.decker@science.doe.gov
milton.johnson@science.doe.gov

Program Offices
High Energy Physics

Dr. C. Edward Oliver, Associate Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-30, Germantown Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
301-903-7486 Fax: 301-903-4846
ed.oliver@science.doe.gov
www.sc.doe.gov/ascr

Dr. Robin Staffin, Associate Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-20, Germantown Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
301-903-3624 Fax: 301-903-5079
robin.staffin@science.doe.gov
http://doe-hep.hep.net/home.html

Basic Energy Sciences

Nuclear Physics

Dr. Patricia M. Dehmer, Associate Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-10, Germantown Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
301-903-3081 Fax: 301-903-6594
patricia.dehmer@science.doe.gov
www.sc.doe.gov/bes

Dr. Dennis G. Kovar, Associate Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-23, Germantown Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
301-903-3613 Fax: 301-903-3833
dennis.kovar@science.doe.gov
http://www.sc.doe.gov/production/henp/np/

Biological and Environmental Research

Workforce Development for
Teachers and Scientists

Dr. Ari Patrinos, Associate Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-70, Germantown Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
301-903-3251 Fax: 301-903-5051
ari.patrinos@science.doe.gov
www.sc.doe.gov/ober/
ober_top.html

Fusion Energy Sciences
Dr. Anne Davies, Associate Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-50, Germantown Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
301-903-4941 Fax: 301-903-8584
anne.davies@science.doe.gov
www.ofes.science.doe.gov

Dr. Peter Faletra, Assistant Director
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy
SC-1, Forrestal Building
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20585-1290
202-586-6549 Fax: 202-586-8054
peter.faletra@science.doe.gov
www.scied.science.doe.gov

Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Advanced Scientific Computing Research

43Facilities for the Future of Science
Science:

ITER

UltraScale Scientific
Computing Capability

Joint Dark Energy Mission

Linac Coherent Light Source

Protein Production and Tags

Rare Isotope Accelerator

Characterization and Imaging
Molecular Machines

CEBAF 12 GeV Upgrade

ESnet Upgrade

NERSC UpgradeTransmission Electron
Achromatic Microscope

BTeV

Linear Collider

Analysis and Modeling of
Cellular Systems

A Twenty-Y
ear Outlook
wenty-Year

Spallation Neutron Source
2-4 MW Upgrade

Spallation Neutron Source
Second Target Station

Whole Proteome Analysis

Double Beta Decay
Underground Detector

Next-Step Spherical Torus

RHIC II

National Synchroton
Light Source Upgrade

Super Neutrino Beam

Advanced Light Source Upgrade

Advanced Photon
Source Upgrade

eRHIC

Fusion Energy Contingency

HFIR Second Cold Sourceand Guide Hall

Integrated Beam Experiment

These facilities and upgrades will revolutionize
science—and societysociety.. They are needed toextend the frontiers of science, to pursue
opportunities of enormous importance, andto maintain U.S. science primacy in the world.
Investment in these facilities will yield
extraordinary scientific breakthroughs—
and vital societal and economic benefits.
—Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham