Fusion Energy Sciences
Overview
The mission of the Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program is to expand the fundamental understanding of matter at very hightemperatures and densities and to build the scientific foundation needed to develop a fusion energy source. This isaccomplished through the study of plasma, the fourth state of matter, and how it interacts with its surroundings.
Plasma science is wide-ranging, since 99% of the visible universe is composed of plasmas of various types. Hightemperature fusion plasmas at hundreds of millions of degrees occur in national security applications, albeit for very shorttimes. The same fusion plasmas could be exploited in the laboratory in a controlled fashion to become the basis for a futureclean nuclear power source, which will provide domestic energy independence and security. This is a large driver for the FES
subprograms focused on the scientific study of “burning plasma.” In the burning plasma state of matter, the nuclear fusion
process itself provides the dominant heat source for sustaining the plasma temperature. Such a self-heated plasma cancontinue to undergo fusion reactions that produce energy, without requiring the input of heating power from the outside,and thus resulting in large net energy yield.
In the FES program, foundational science for burning plasmas is obtained by investigating the behavior of laboratory fusion
plasmas confined with strong magnetic fields. The DIII-D National Fusion Facility and the National Spherical Torus
Experiment-Upgrade (NSTX-U) are world-leading Office of Science (SC) user facilities for experimental research available toand used by scientists from national laboratories, universities, and industry research groups. Complementing theseexperimental activities is a significant effort in fusion theory and simulation to predict and interpret the complex behaviorof plasmas as self-organized systems. As part of this effort, FES supports several Scientific Discovery through Advanced
Computing (SciDAC) centers in partnership with the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program office.
FES also investigates the behavior of plasmas that are confined near steady state. U.S. scientists take advantage ofinternational partnerships to conduct research on superconducting tokamaks and stellarators with long-duration
capabilities. In addition, the development of novel materials, a research area of high interest to many scientific fields, isespecially important for fusion energy sciences since fusion plasmas create an environment of high-energy neutrons andhuge heat fluxes that impinge on and damage the material structures containing the plasmas.
The frontier scientific area of the actual creation of strongly self-heated fusion burning plasmas will allow the discovery andstudy of new scientific phenomena relevant to fusion as a future energy source.
The FES program also supports discovery plasma science in research areas such as plasma astrophysics, high energy density
laboratory plasmas (HEDLP), and low temperature plasmas. Some of this research is carried out through partnerships with
the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Also, U.S. scientists areworld leaders in the invention and development of new high-resolution plasma measurement techniques. A recent report afrom the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) describes how plasma science advances have led to manyspinoff applications and enabling technologies with considerable economic and societal impact for the American quality oflife.
The FES program addresses several of the Administration’s research and development budget priorities. Research in fusion
has the potential to contribute to American energy dominance by making available to the American people a robust baseload electricity clean energy technology that relies on widely available and virtually inexhaustible fuel sources. Research inplasma science, within and beyond fusion, will contribute to American prosperity through the tremendous potential forspinoff applications as well as targeted investments in early-stage low temperature plasma research that can lead to thedevelopment of transformative technologies. Investments in our major fusion facilities and smaller-scale experiments will
help maintain and modernize our research infrastructure for continuing to conduct world-leading research. Establishedpartnerships within and outside DOE maximize leverage and increase the cost effectiveness of FES research activities.
Finally, the unique scientific challenges and rigor of fusion and plasma physics research lead to the development of a well-ahttps://science.energy.gov/~/media/fes/fesac/pdf/2015/2101507/FINAL_FES_NonFusionAppReport_090215.pdf

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences149

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

trained STEM-focused workforce, which will contribute to maintaining and advancing U.S. competitiveness and worldleadership in key areas of future technological and economic importance, as well as national security.
Highlights of the FY 2019 Request
Strategic choices in this Request are informed by the priorities described in “The Office of Science’s Fusion Energy Sciences
Program: A Ten-Year Perspective” (submitted to Congress in 2015), the research opportunities identified in a series ofcommunity engagement workshops held in 2015 a, and the FY 2017 FESAC investigation on the potential for transformative
developments in fusion science and technology. Priorities include keeping SC fusion user facilities world-leading, investingin high performance computing and preparing for Exascale, supporting high-impact research in fusion materials,
strengthening partnerships for access to international facilities with unique capabilities, learning how to predict and control
transient events in fusion plasmas, and continuing stewardship of discovery plasma science (e.g., via intermediate-scale
basic facilities). Furthermore, research priorities for burning plasma science in FY 2019 are to be informed by the FY 2018
report of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) burning plasma study commissioned by FES.
Key points in the FY 2019 Request include:
Modernizing and Managing Research Infrastructure•

DIII-D facility enhancements—DIII-D will focus on completion of facility modifications and enhancements thatbegan in FY 2018, which will maintain the world-leading status of the DIII-D tokamak. The time required for thefacility enhancements will allow 12 weeks of research operation.

•

Continued support for NSTX-U program research and recovery activities—The NSTX-U facility is down for recovery
and repair, which will continue in FY 2019. The FY 2019 NSTX-U Operations budget will support high-priority
activities to implement repairs and corrective actions required to obtain robust, reliable research operations. The
Request for NSTX-U Research will fund the continued analysis of high-impact data, a focused effort on physics
topics that directly support the recovery of robust NSTX-U plasma operations, and enhanced collaborative researchat other facilities to support NSTX-U research program priorities.

•

Major Item of Equipment (MIE) project for world-leading fusion materials research—Following the approval of the
Linear Divertor Simulator Mission Need (CD-0) and down-selection of alternatives in FY 2018, FES will pursue theMaterials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX) as an MIE project. MPEX will be able to address critical fusionmaterials science questions on the path toward proving the scientific viability of fusion power. It will provide aworld-leading, highly cost-effective experimental device with superior capability, high throughput, and versatility.

•

Fusion nuclear science―FES will initiate a study to evaluate options for a neutron source that will test materials in
fusion-relevant environments.

•

High energy density laboratory plasmas―FES will initiate a study to evaluate options for an upgrade to the Matterin Extreme Conditions (MEC) instrument on the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) facility at SLAC National
Accelerator Laboratory.

•

Continued U.S. hardware development and delivery to ITER—The U.S. Contributions to ITER (U.S. ITER) First Plasma
subproject will continue in the design, fabrication, and delivery of U.S. hardware contributions in support of themulti-billion-dollar international ITER project. The primary focus will be on the continued design and fabrication of
the highest priority, in-kind contributions

Innovative Research Partnership Models• Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing—SciDAC will address high-priority research on tokamak
disruptions and large-scale fusion data analysis challenges, and continue development of an integrated wholedevice modeling capability in partnership with the ASCR program.
• Long-pulse tokamak and stellarator research—Long-pulse tokamak research will provide research opportunities for
U.S. scientists on superconducting tokamaks with world-leading capabilities. In addition, there will be research
opportunities for U.S. collaborations in the deuterium–tritium (DT) experimental campaign on the Joint Europeanahttps://science.energy.gov/fes/community-resources/workshop-reports/

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

150

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

•

Torus (JET). Long-pulse stellarator research will enable U.S. teams to take full advantage of U.S. hardware
investments on Wendelstein 7-X (W7-X) and enhance the scientific output on this device.
Discovery plasma science—Basic plasma research is partially carried out in partnership with NSF and NNSA.
Research and operations will be focused on the intermediate-scale plasma science facilities selected in FY 2017 andon HEDLP research on the MEC instrument, an end station at LCLS, stewarded by the SC Basic Energy Sciences(BES) program.

American Prosperity• Discovery plasma science—Activities will continue in low temperature plasma research and HEDLP research, withconnections and spinoffs to U.S. industry.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences151

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Funding ($K)
FY 2017 Enacted a
Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
Advanced Tokamak
Spherical Tokamak
Theory & Simulation
GPE/GPP/Infrastructure
Total, Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Long Pulse: Tokamak
Long Pulse: Stellarators
Materials & Fusion Nuclear Science
Total, Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Discovery Plasma Science
Plasma Science Frontiers
Measurement Innovation
SBIR/STTR & Other
Total, Discovery Plasma Science
Subtotal, Fusion Energy Sciences
Construction
14-SC-60 U.S. Contributions to ITER
Total, Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2018 Annualized
CR b

FY 2019 Request

FY 2019 Request vsFY 2017 Enacted

90,23876,78940,0005,000
212,027—————

90,35063,00036,0001,000
190,350+112-13,789-4,000-4,000-21,677

10,0007,569
24,00041,569

—
—
—
—

9,000
7,000
22,50038,500-1,000-569-1,500-3,06952,40910,255
13,74076,404330,000————
327,759

24,500011,65036,150265,000-27,909-10,255-2,090-40,254-65,000

50,000380,000

49,660377,41975,000340,000+25,000-40,000

SBIR/STTR:
 FY 2017 Enacted: SBIR: $8,814,000; STTR: $1,239,000
 FY 2019 Request: SBIR $8,323,000; and STTR $1,170,000

a The FY 2017 Enacted level includes SBIR and STTR.
b A full-year 2018 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018

(Division D of P.L. 115-56, as amended). The amounts included for 2018 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution. (These amounts are shown only at the Congressional control level andabove; below that level, a dash (—) is shown).

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences152

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Explanation of Major Changes ($K)
FY 2019 Request
vs FY 2017
EnactedBurning Plasma Science: Foundations: DIII-D will emphasize completion of facility improvements that began in FY 2018, followed by 12 weeks ofresearch operation. Funding for the NSTX-U program will support continued repair activities for the facility and enhanced collaborative research atother facilities to support NSTX-U research program priorities. SciDAC continues to make progress toward whole-device modeling, strengthening
research on plasma disruptions and addressing large-scale data analysis challenges. Funding is provided for General Plant Projects/General Purpose
Equipment (GPP/GPE), which supports Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) infrastructure improvements, repair, and maintenance.

-21,677

Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse: Efforts are focused on highest-priority international collaboration activities, both for tokamaks andstellarators. Materials research and fusion nuclear science research programs are focused on highest priorities. Funding will be initiated for the
Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX) Major Item of Equipment (MIE) project, which was identified as a priority in the community
workshop on Plasma Materials Interactions.

-3,069

Discovery Plasma Science: Research and operations of intermediate-scale scientific user facilities in General Plasma Science are emphasized. For
High Energy Density Laboratory Plasmas, the focus remains on supporting research utilizing the Matter in Extreme Conditions instrument of the
LCLS user facility at SLAC. No funding is requested for Exploratory Magnetized Plasma research and Measurement Innovation.

-40,254

Construction: The U.S. Contributions to ITER project will continue design, fabrication, and delivery of key First Plasma hardware components.

+25,000

Total Funding Change, Fusion Energy Sciences-40,000

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences153

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Basic and Applied R&D Coordination
FES participates in coordinated intra- and inter-agency initiatives within DOE and with other federal agencies on science andtechnology issues related to fusion and plasma science. Within SC, FES operates the MEC instrument at the SLAC LCLS user
facility operated by BES, and supports high-performance computing research with ASCR. Within DOE, FES operates a joint
program with NNSA in HEDLP physics. FESAC provides technical and programmatic advice to FES and NNSA for the joint
HEDLP program. Outside DOE, FES carries out a discovery-driven plasma science research program in partnership with NSF,
with research extending to a wide range of natural phenomena, including the origin of magnetic fields in the universe andthe nature of plasma turbulence. The joint programs with NNSA and NSF involve coordination of solicitations, peer reviews,
and workshops.
Program Accomplishments
Heating the core of fusion reactors leads to sheared rotation that can improve plasma performance – New measurements
and simulations of plasma rotation at the DIII-D tokamak facility at General Atomics (GA) show that self-organized “intrinsic
rotation” in tokamaks is generated by turbulence. Such self-organized flow can be beneficial for fusion reactor performance
because it suppresses turbulent energy loss and magnetohydrodynamic instabilities. The experimental measurements showthat simply heating the plasma core can cause it to generate a sheared flow. The computer modeling provides aquantitative understanding of the amount of sheared flow that can be generated with the use of this self-generated
intrinsic torque.
Plasma instabilities can be eliminated when the heating power is increased – Alpha particles born from fusion reactions
drive plasma instabilities that can cause reactors to lose heat, reducing their efficiency. Results from the NSTX-U facility at
PPPL show for the first time that additional neutral beam heating can suppress plasma instabilities known as global Alfvén
eigenmodes (GAE). Eliminating the GAE instabilities may be a key first step toward achieving high plasma performance in acompact spherical tokamak. The ability to predict and control these instabilities is also important for burning plasmas andfuture fusion reactors, which are heated by a large population of fusion-generated alpha particles and neutral beam ions.
Massively parallel simulations shed light on long-standing magnetic confinement challenge – Efficient operation of tokamak
magnetic confinement fusion devices relies on attainment of the high-confinement mode (H-mode), which reduces theenergy leakage from the confinement region by at least a factor of two through suppression of turbulence at the plasmaedge. While the transition to H-mode has been known for at least 35 years and has been reproduced on all the world’s
tokamaks, a predictive understanding of this phenomenon has proved elusive. Recently, massively parallel simulations
performed by scientists in the SciDAC Edge Physics Simulation Center (a partnership with ASCR) have, for the first time,modeled this transition with the use of a first-principles plasma turbulence simulation code and SC leadership computing
resources. The simulations took three days and used 90% of the capacity of the Titan supercomputer at the Oak Ridge
Leadership Computing Facility.
Proto-MPEX points the way to world-leading capability for plasma-material interactions research – The Prototype Material
Plasma Exposure eXperiment (Proto-MPEX) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) successfully demonstrated a novel
plasma generator aimed at enabling new experimental capabilities that are needed for plasma-material interaction
research. Proto-MPEX allows the study of materials exposed to the extreme plasma conditions expected in future fusion
devices. Its versatile design, based on a high-density radio frequency helicon plasma source coupled with separate ion andelectron heating schemes, allows for independent control of vital plasma parameters such as density, electron
temperature, and ion temperature. Although currently limited to low power and short pulse, Proto-MPEX has
demonstrated the feasibility of the source concept and led to high confidence in the construction of a new world-leading
experimental capability.
New approach could solve a significant challenge in the design of stellarator coils – New research has shown that themathematical optimization methods used to compute the three-dimensional electromagnetic coil shapes for stellarators
can be modified to increase the space between the coils and smooth their sharp bends, while preserving the speed andreliability of the optimization. This new method will enable stellarator designs that have smoother coil shapes andincreased inter-coil spacing, which could be more feasible to construct and maintain.
U.S. international collaboration makes excellent start in optimizing the use of lithium to control fusion plasmas – For fusion
to generate substantial energy, the ultra-hot plasma that fuels fusion reactions must remain stable and be kept from
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences154

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

cooling. U.S. researchers have recently shown that lithium is effective in both respects in experiments on the Experimental
Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) in Hefei, China. The recent scientific effort deployed three different lithium
delivery systems in EAST. Each lithium delivery technology performed as designed and enabled improved modes ofoperation, including tokamak operation with external control of periodic edge instabilities, as well as control over theelemental composition of the surrounding edge plasma. These results motivate continued effort to develop sophisticatedboundary control solutions that use lithium.
Laboratory experiments explain the kink behavior of the Crab Nebula Jet – Using the high-power Omega laser at the
University of Rochester’s Laboratory for Laser Energetics, U.S. scientists conducted experiments to understand the
dynamics of the Crab Nebula jet evolution. Fusion protons from deuterium/helium-3 implosion were used to obtain spatial
visualization and detailed measurements of the electromagnetic fields. The data shows that the toroidal magnetic field,
embedded in the supersonic jet, triggers plasma instabilities and results in considerable deflections throughout the jet
propagation, mimicking the kinks in the Crab Nebula jet.
First-ever measurement of the optical spectrum of anti-hydrogen – The study of anti-hydrogen is important because any
measurable difference between its spectra and that of normal hydrogen will break basic principles of physics and help
explain the puzzling matter-antimatter imbalance in the universe. However, anti-hydrogen atoms have to be synthesizedfrom non-neutral anti-proton and positron plasmas, which is extremely challenging. Using techniques from plasma physics
research, U.S. scientists in the international ALPHA team have successfully trapped nearly 500 antihydrogen atoms at theLarge Hadron Collider of the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN). By illuminating these trapped antihydrogen atoms with two different wavelengths of laser light, the physicists were able to measure the optical spectrum ofanti-hydrogen for the first time ever. Their results, which showed that the anti-atoms interact with light at nearly the same
wavelength as for normal-matter hydrogen, received attention in the popular media.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences155

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences156

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

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

Research at major experimental facilities aimed at resolving fundamental advanced tokamak and spherical tokamak
science issues.
Research on small-scale magnetic confinement experiments to elucidate physics principles underlying toroidal
confinement and to validate theoretical models and simulation codes.
Theoretical work on the fundamental description of magnetically confined plasmas and the development of advanced
simulation codes on current and emerging high-performance computers.
Research on technologies needed to support the continued improvement of the experimental program and facilities.
Support for infrastructure improvements at PPPL.

Research in the Burning Plasma Science: Foundations area in FY 2019 will focus on high-priority challenges andopportunities in the areas of transients in tokamaks, plasma-material interactions, and integrated modeling, as identified byrecent research needs workshops and other community-led studies.
Advanced Tokamak
The DIII-D user facility at General Atomics in San Diego, California, is the largest magnetic fusion research experiment in the
U.S. and can magnetically confine plasmas at temperatures relevant to burning plasma conditions. Its extensive set of
diagnostic systems, many unique in the world, and its extraordinary flexibility to explore various operating regimes make ita world-leading tokamak research facility. Researchers from the U.S. and abroad perform experiments on DIII-D for studying
stability, confinement, and other properties of fusion-grade plasmas under a wide variety of conditions. The DIII-D researchgoal is to establish the broad scientific basis to optimize the tokamak approach to magnetic confinement fusion. Much ofthis research concentrates on developing the advanced tokamak concept, in which active control techniques are used tomanipulate and optimize the plasma to obtain conditions scalable to robust operating points and high fusion gain for futureenergy-producing fusion reactors.
The Enabling Research and Development (R&D) element develops the technology to enhance the capabilities for existingand next-generation fusion research facilities, enabling these facilities to achieve higher levels of performance and flexibility
needed to explore new science regimes.
Research on versatile university-led small-scale advanced tokamak projects is complementary to the efforts at the majoruser facilities, providing cost-effective development of new techniques and exploration of new concepts. Recent efforts arefocused on improving fusion plasma control physics for advanced tokamaks through application of modern digital tokamak
control theory and validation of fundamental plasma stability theory.
Spherical Tokamak
The NSTX-U user facility at PPPL has been designed to explore the physics of plasmas confined in a spherical tokamak (ST)
configuration, characterized by a compact (apple-like) shape. If the predicted ST energy confinement improvements were
to be experimentally realized in NSTX-U, then the ST might provide a more compact fusion reactor than other geometries.
Following an extensive series of reviews (e.g., design validation and verification, extent of condition) in FY 2017 andFY 2018, NSTX-U activities will focus high-priority activities to implement repairs and corrective actions required to obtainrobust, reliable research operations.
Small-scale ST plasma research involves focused experiments to provide data in regimes of relevance to the ST magnetic
confinement program. This effort can help confirm theoretical models and simulation codes in support of the FES goal todevelop an experimentally validated predictive capability for magnetically confined fusion plasmas. This activity also
involves high-risk, but high-payoff, experimental efforts useful to advancing ST science.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

157

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Theory and Simulation
The Theory and Simulation activity is a key component of the FES program’s strategy to develop the predictive capability
needed for a sustainable fusion energy source. It also represents a world-leading U.S. strength and competitive advantage
in fusion research. Its long-term goal is to enable a transformation in predictive power based on fundamental science andhigh-performance computing to minimize risk in future development steps and shorten the path toward the realization offusion energy. This activity includes two main interrelated but distinct elements: Theory and SciDAC.
The Theory element is focused on advancing the scientific understanding of the fundamental physical processes governing
the behavior of magnetically confined plasmas. The research supported ranges from foundational analytic theory to midand large-scale computational work using high-performance computing resources. In addition to its scientific discovery
mission, the Theory activity provides the scientific grounding for the physics models implemented in the advanced
simulation codes developed under the SciDAC activity described below and also supports validation efforts at major
experiments.
The FES SciDAC element, a component of the SC-wide SciDAC program, is aimed at accelerating scientific discovery in fusion
plasma science by capitalizing on SC investments in leadership-class computing systems and associated advances incomputational science. The portfolio that emerged from the FY 2017 SC-wide SciDAC-4 re-competition consists of eightmulti-institutional interdisciplinary partnerships, with seven jointly supported by FES and ASCR, and addresses the highpriority research directions identified in recent community workshops. The new portfolio emphasizes increased integration
and whole-device modeling, as well as synergy with the fusion-relevant projects of the SC Exascale Computing Project (SCECP) to increase the readiness of the fusion community for the upcoming Exascale era.
Additional objectives of this element include the evaluation of the potential of emerging computational approaches, such asmachine learning, to advance its mission and address the growing large-scale fusion data analysis challenges.
GPE/GPP/InfrastructureThis activity supports repairs of critical general infrastructure (e.g., utilities, roofs, roads, facilities) at the PPPL site.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

158

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Foundations
Activities and Explanation of Changes
Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted
Advanced Tokamak $90,238,000$90,350,000+$112,000
DIII-D Research $40,500,000$40,500,000$0DIII-D Operations $46,600,000$47,000,000+$400,000
Operations funding supported 17.6 weeks of research Operations funding will support 12 weeks of research Priority and balance of effort will be shifted fromoperations at the DIII-D facility. Research wasat the DIII-D facility and the completion of a neutral
research operations toward completion of the facility
conducted to prepare for burning plasmas in ITER,
beam modification to add bi-directional off-axis
improvements begun in FY 2018.
determine the optimal path to steady-state tokamak
injection capability. Research will continue toplasmas, and develop the plasma material interaction determine the optimal path to steady-state tokamak
boundary solutions necessary for future devices.
plasmas, explore techniques to avoid and mitigate
Specific research goals involved testing the predictive transients in tokamaks, and develop the plasmamodels of fast ion transport by multiple Alfvén
material interaction boundary solutions necessary for
eigenmodes, studying the physical processes that
future devices. Experiments will exploit additional
determine the edge pedestal density structure, andheating and current drive systems added in FY 2018.
examining the impurity generation and transport from The new neutral beam capability will be utilized tothe high-Z coated tiles. Targeted enhancements to the examine the physics of self-driven tokamak plasmas.
facility involved completion and commissioning of an Specific research goals will be aimed at further
additional high-power microwave heating system, as
integrating the core and edge conditions in highwell as continued work on improving the neutral
performance plasmas and studying the role of neutralbeam heating control system and designing thefueling and transport in determining the edge
modifications necessary for a second off-axis, co- and pedestal structure.
counter-directed neutral beam.
Enabling R&D $2,165,000$2,000,000-$165,000
Support continued to be provided for research in
Research will continue in superconducting magnet
Research efforts in heating, fueling, and magnet
superconducting magnet technology and plasma
technology and plasma fueling and heating
technology will be focused on the highest priorities.
fueling and heating technologies required to enhance technologies required to enhance the performancethe performance for existing and future magnetic
for existing and future magnetic confinement fusion
confinement fusion devices.
devices.
FY 2017 Enacted

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2019 Request

159

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted
Small-scale Experimental Research $973,000$850,000-$123,000
Research continued to provide experimental data in
Versatile university-led experiments will be focused
After the completion of diagnostic and control system
regimes relevant to mainline tokamak confinementon improving fusion plasma control physics forenhancements in FY 2018, the emphasis will be on
and experimental validation of models and codes.
advanced tokamaks.
research operations.
Spherical Tokamak $76,789,000$63,000,000-$13,789,000
NSTX-U Research $32,000,000$27,000,000-$5,000,000
NSTX-U Operations $42,090,000$34,000,000-$8,090,000
Operations funding supported the recovery activities
The NSTX-U Operations budget will support highPriority and balance of effort will be shifted fromfor the NSTX-U facility. Research focused on the study priority activities to implement repairs and corrective research operations toward repair and recovery ofof ST confinement improvements observed during the actions required to obtain robust, reliable research
the facility.
FY 2016 experimental run campaign. Modeling andoperations. The NSTX-U Research budget will fundmeasurement data allowed elucidation of the detailed the continued analysis of high-impact data, a focused
physical mechanisms responsible for these
effort on physics topics that directly support theconfinement improvements. In the absence of plasma recovery of robust NSTX-U plasma operations, andoperations at the NSTX-U facility, researchers carriedenhanced collaborative research at other facilities toout experiments on domestic and international
support NSTX-U research program priorities.
spherical tokamaks, and continued analysis andpublication of data obtained in FY 2016.
Small-scale Experimental Research $2,699,000$2,000,000-$699,000
Research continued to provide experimental data inExperimental studies of plasmas surrounded by liquid After the completion of minor facility enhancements
regimes relevant to mainline spherical torus
lithium material surfaces, which was identified as ain FY 2018, activities in this category will focus onconfinement and experimental validation of models
priority research direction in the recent plasmaresearch operations.
and codes.
materials interactions workshop, will continue. Also,
techniques to operate spherical tokamaks without
the use of a central solenoid will continue to beexperimentally tested.
Theory & Simulation $40,000,000$36,000,000-$4,000,000
Theory $22,000,000$18,000,000-$4,000,000
Theory continued to support theoretical andTheory will continue to focus on providing thePriority will be given to addressing the needs of thecomputational research addressing fundamental
scientific grounding for the physical models
advanced simulation efforts.
questions of magnetic confinement science. Emphasis implemented in the large-scale simulation codes
was placed on projects maximizing synergy with thedeveloped under SciDAC and addressing foundational
FES SciDAC portfolio and addressing the
problems in the science of magnetic confinement, as
recommendations from the 2015 community
identified in recent community workshops.
workshops.
FY 2017 Enacted

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2019 Request

160

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2019 Request

SciDAC $18,000,000
The entire FES SciDAC portfolio was recompeted aspart of the SC-wide SciDAC-4 review. The selected
partnerships continued to focus on integrated
simulations and whole device modeling, addressing
the leading-priority research directions identified in
the 2015 community workshops.

$18,000,000
The SciDAC portfolio will continue to emphasize highpriority areas such as plasma disruptions, boundary
physics, and plasma-materials interactions. The
activities of all the partnerships will be coordinatedto accelerate progress toward whole-device
modeling. Synergy with whole-device modelingactivities supported by the DOE Exascale Computing
Project will be strengthened.
$1,000,000
Funding will support Princeton Plasma Physics
Laboratory (PPPL) infrastructure improvements,
repair, and maintenance.

GPE/GPP/Infrastructure $5,000,000
Funding provided support for general infrastructure
improvements for the PPPL site consistent with the
PPPL Campus Modernization Plan, based upon an
analysis of safety requirements, equipment reliability,
and research-related infrastructure needs.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences161

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted$0Studies will continue on highest-priority issues. In
addition, research will address large-scale fusion data
challenges.

-$4,000,000
The focus will be on highest-priority infrastructureneeds.

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

162

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Description
The Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse subprogram explores new and unique scientific regimes that can be achieved
primarily with long-duration superconducting international machines, and addresses the development of the materials andtechnologies required to withstand and sustain a burning plasma. The key objectives of this area are to utilize these newcapabilities to accelerate our scientific understanding of how to control and operate a burning plasma, as well as to develop
the basis for a future fusion nuclear science facility. This subprogram includes long-pulse international tokamak andstellarator research and fusion nuclear science and materials research.
Long Pulse: Tokamak
Multi-institutional U.S. research teams will continue their successful work on advancing the physics and technology basis forlong-pulse burning plasma operation via bilateral research on U.S. and international fusion facilities. Research on overseas
superconducting tokamaks, conducted onsite and also via fully remote facility operation, leverages progress made indomestic devices and allows the U.S. fusion program to gain the knowledge needed to operate long-duration plasma
discharges in future fusion energy devices. These efforts will be augmented by research on overseas non-superconducting
tokamaks and spherical tokamaks with unique capabilities.
Long Pulse: Stellarator
Stellarators offer the promise of steady-state confinement regimes without transient events such as harmful disruptions.
The three-dimensional (3-D) shaping of the plasma in a stellarator provides for a broader range in design flexibility than isachievable in a 2-D system. The participation of U.S. researchers on W7-X in Germany provides an opportunity to develop
and assess 3-D divertor configurations for long-pulse, high-performance stellarators. The U.S. plans to develop control
schemes to maintain plasmas with stable operational boundaries, including the challenges of control with superconducting
coils and issues of the diagnosis-control cycle in long-pulse conditions. U.S. researchers will play key roles in developing theoperational scenarios and hardware configuration for high-power, steady-state operation, an accomplishment that will
advance the performance/pulse length frontier for fusion. The strong U.S. contributions during the W7-X construction
phase have earned the U.S. formal partnership status. Accordingly, the U.S. is participating fully in W7-X research andaccess to data.
U.S. domestic compact stellarator research is focused on optimization of the stellarator concept through quasi-symmetricshaping of the toroidal magnetic field. A conventional stellarator lacks axial symmetry, resulting in reduced confinement ofenergetic ions, which are needed to heat the plasma. Quasi-symmetric shaping, invented in the U.S., offers an improved
solution for stable, well confined, steady-state stellarator plasma confinement.
Materials and Fusion Nuclear Science
The Materials and Fusion Nuclear Science activity seeks to address the large scientific and technical gaps that exist between
current-generation fusion experiments and future fusion reactors. Traditional materials used in present-day experiments
will not be acceptable in an intense fusion nuclear environment, and the development of components for fusion power
plants must be significantly improved in order to adequately provide the multiple functions of heat extraction, tritium
breeding, and particle control. The scientific challenge is understanding the complex fusion environment, which combines
extremely strong nuclear heating and damage, high temperatures, fluid-solid interactions, high tritium concentrations, andhigh magnetic fields, as well as large variations of these parameters from the first wall to the vacuum vessel, and the impact
on materials and component performance. To help develop solutions for this complex scientific challenge, newexperimental capabilities along with game-changing types of research will be required. Facilities with these experimental
capabilities will need to duplicate or effectively simulate various aspects of the harsh fusion environment. Theseexperimental capabilities should also lead to the development of new materials, which could be used in other applications
besides fusion.
A high-priority objective for the fusion materials science effort is to continue pursuing the design and fabrication of the newworld-leading experimental device, the Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX) at ORNL, which will allow for
dedicated studies of reactor-relevant heat and particle loads on neutron-irradiated materials. The overall motivation is to
Science/Fusion Energy Sciences163

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

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

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences164

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Burning Plasma Science: Long Pulse
Activities and Explanation of Changes
FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2019 Request

Long Pulse: Tokamak $10,000,000
Multi-institutional U.S. research teams continued to
conduct high-impact research on the international
superconducting long-pulse tokamaks, taking
advantage of their upgraded capabilities.

$9,000,000
Research on the EAST and KSTAR superconducting
tokamaks will continue to establish the physics bases
and control tools for steady-state plasma scenarios,
disruption avoidance and mitigation, and control ofplasma-material interfaces. Also, a multi-institutional
U.S. team will continue to develop diagnostics for the
new Japanese superconducting tokamak JT-60SA. On
the Joint European Torus, U.S. scientists will finish
testing their shattered pellet disruption mitigation
system and then collaborate on optimization of burning
plasma scenarios with deuterium and tritium fuels.
$7,000,000$4,500,000
U.S. scientists will use data from the first major
experimental campaign on W7-X to strengthen thebasis for long-pulse operation with pellet fueling, test
the innovative island divertor concept, investigate
impurity recycling, study the effect of the U.S.-provided
trim coils on fast-ion confinement and on modulationof divertor heat loads, and determine the effect of theradial electric field on impurity transport.

Long Pulse: Stellarators $7,569,000
Superconducting Stellarator Research $5,000,000
U.S. scientists participated in W7-X research on
topics important for understanding the physics oflong-pulse plasma confinement in 3-D magnetic
configurations. Topics included error fields,
magnetic island physics, energetic-particle
transport, impurity studies, plasma-materialinteractions, core plasma transport, and plasma
control. The U.S. team collaborated in the
preparation of equipment and plasma scenarios forlong-pulse operation.
Compact Stellarator Research $2,569,000
Research continued on experiments that areproviding data in regimes relevant to mainline
stellarator confinement and experimental validationof models and codes.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences$2,500,000
Research will provide experimental data in regimes of
relevance to the mainline stellarator magnetic
confinement efforts and help confirm theoreticalmodels and simulation codes in support of the goal todevelop an experimentally-validated predictive
capability for magnetically confined fusion plasmas.

165

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted-$1,000,000
Sustained funding enables continued exploitation ofunique international capabilities by multi-institutional
teams from the U.S.

-$569,000-$500,000
Sustained funding enables continued exploitation of
the unique capabilities of the W7-X facility by a multiinstitutional team from the U.S.

-$69,000
Research efforts are continued on highest-priority
activities.

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017 Enacted
Materials & Fusion Nuclear Science $24,000,000
Fusion Nuclear Science $10,252,000
Utilization of existing experimental capabilities anddevelopment of new ones to conduct research in
the areas of plasma-facing materials and plasmamaterial interactions were a key emphasis. In
addition, research on understanding tritium
retention, permeation and processing, neutronics,
and material-corrosion issues for blankets andscoping studies on future fusion facilities
continued.
Materials Research $13,748,000
The program emphasized the utilization of existing
experimental capabilities and development of newones to conduct research in the area of material
response to simulated fusion neutron irradiation.
There was a continued focus on research toward
structural materials that can withstand high levelsof damage, increasing the ductility of tungsten, andmodeling of helium damage in numerous materials.
Projects $0

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2019 Request

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted-$1,500,000-$1,752,000
Research efforts are focused on highest-priority
activities.

$22,500,000$8,500,000
Research will continue to focus on the priority areas ofplasma-facing components, safety, tritium fuel cycle,
and breeder blanket technologies. Opportunities will
be considered for high-priority research on liquid metal
plasma-facing components in response to the outcomeof the systems-level study conducted during theprevious two years. In addition, a study will be initiatedto evaluate options for a neutron source to test
materials in fusion-relevant environments.
$12,000,000-$1,748,000
Research efforts will continue to focus on the
Research efforts are focused on supporting thedevelopment of materials that can withstand theinitiation of design and fabrication activities for MPEX.
extreme fusion environment expected in future fusion
reactors.

$2,000,000
A new MIE project, the Materials Plasma Exposure
eXperiment (MPEX) at ORNL will develop a worldleading capability for reactor-relevant plasma
exposures of neutron irradiated materials. Detailed
project engineering and design efforts and some longlead procurements will be performed.

166+$2,000,000
The Request initiates funding for the MPEX MIE.

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

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

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

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences167

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

SBIR/STTR & Other
Funding for SBIR/STTR is included in this activity. Other items that are supported include research at Historically Black
Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); the U.S. Burning Plasma Organization (USBPO), a national organization that coordinates
research in burning plasma science; peer reviews for solicitations across the program; and FESAC.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences168

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Discovery Plasma Science
Activities and Explanation of Changes
FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2019 Request

Plasma Science Frontiers $52,409,000
General Plasma Science $24,000,000
Core research areas of this activity continued, with aprogram focus on intermediate-scale plasma scienceuser facilities, as well as research in areas identified in
the 2015 Frontiers of Plasma Science Workshops
Report.

$24,500,000$14,000,000
Core research areas of this activity will continue, withfocus on intermediate-scale plasma sciencecollaborative user facilities that address questions
related to plasma dynamo, magnetic reconnection,
particle acceleration, turbulence, and magnetic selforganization.
High Energy Density Laboratory Plasmas $18,000,000 $10,500,000
Research emphasized utilizing the MEC at LCLS,
Research will emphasize utilizing the MEC at LCLS for
including continued support for the MEC beam-line
warm dense matter studies. Support will continue forscience team, the experimental and theoretical HEDLP the MEC beam-line science team and theresearch groups at SLAC, and enhanced support ofexperimental HEDLP research groups at SLAC. A study
external HED science users of the MEC instrument.
will be initiated to evaluate options for a MEC
upgrade. Modest support is provided to makemedium-scale HEDLP facilities accessible to university
researchers.
Exploratory Magnetized Plasma $10,409,000$0Research efforts focused on discovery at the frontier
No funding is requested.
of laboratory magnetized-plasma physics,
emphasizing high-priority research as identified by theplasma science frontiers workshops held in FY 2015.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

169

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted-$27,909,000-$10,000,000
Basic plasma science research on the intermediatescale plasma science collaborative user facilities will
be emphasized.

-$7,500,000
Support will be focused on research and operations
for the MEC.

-$10,409,000
Due to higher priority activities, no funding isrequested.

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017 Enacted
Measurement Innovation $10,255,000
Measurement Innovation research activities
continued with special emphasis on diagnostics forplasma transient instabilities, plasma-materials
interactions, modeling validation, and basic plasma
science identified in the 2015 community workshops.
SBIR/STTR & Other $13,740,000
Funding continued to support USBPO activities,
HBCUs, peer reviews for solicitations, and FESAC.
SBIR/STTR funding is statutorily set at 3.65 percent of
noncapital funding in FY 2017.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2019 Request$0
No funding is requested.

$11,650,000
Support will continue for USBPO activities, HBCUs,
peer reviews for solicitations, and FESAC. SBIR/STTR
funding is statutorily set at 3.65 percent of noncapitalfunding in FY 2019.

170

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted-$10,255,000
Due to higher priority activities, no funding isrequested.

-$2,090,000
The SBIR/STTR funding will be consistent with the FES
total budget.

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Construction
Description
The ITER facility, currently under construction in St. Paul-lez-Durance, France, aims to provide access to burning plasmas with fusion power output approaching reactor
levels of hundreds of megawatts, for hundreds of seconds. Construction of ITER is a collaboration among the United States, European Union, Russia, Japan, India,
Republic of Korea, and China, governed by an international agreement (the “ITER Joint Implementing Agreement”), through which the U.S. contributes in-kindhardware components, personnel, and direct monetary funding to the ITER Organization (IO).
Activities and Explanation of Changes
FY 2017 Enacted
U.S. Contributions to ITER $50,000,000
Funding was provided for the U.S. Contributions to
ITER project to support continued progress on criticalin-kind hardware contributions, including central
solenoid superconducting magnet modules andstructures, toroidal field magnet conductor,
steady-state electrical network components,
diagnostics development, tokamak cooling water
system, and vacuum system.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2019 Request$75,000,000
The primary focus will be on First Plasma hardware
including continued design and fabrication of thehighest priority, in kind deliverables.

171

Explanation of Change
FY 2019 Request vs FY 2017 Enacted+$25,000,000
Funding will sustain progress on highest-priority First
Plasma hardware contributions.

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Performance Measures
In accordance with the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, the Department sets targets for, and tracks progress toward, achieving performance goals for each program.
FY 2017

FY 2018

FY 2019

Performance Goal (Measure)

FES Facility Based Experiments - Experiments conducted on major fusion facilities [DIII-D National Fusion Facility (DIII-D)
and National Spherical Torus Experiment Upgrade (NSTX)-U] leading toward predictive capability for burning plasmas andconfiguration optimization

TargetConduct research to examine the effect Conduct research to test predictive
Conduct research to understand the roleof configuration on operating space for models of fast ion transport by multiple of neutral fueling and transport indissipative divertors. Handling plasma
Alfvén eigenmodes. Fusion alphas anddetermining the pedestal structure. The
power and particle exhaust in theinjected energetic neutral particle beams edge pedestal is a key component indivertor region is a critical issue for future provide an important source of heating achieving overall high confinement in aburning plasma devices. The very narrow and current drive in advanced tokamak magnetic fusion device. Therefore,edge power exhaust channel projected operating scenarios and burning plasma obtaining a physics understanding andfor tokamak devices that operate at high regimes. Alfven eigenmode instabilities predictive capability for the pedestal
poloidal magnetic field is of particular
can cause the redistribution or loss ofheight and structure is a major goal ofconcern. Increased and controlled
fast ions and driven currents, as well as fusion research and requires advances indivertor radiation, coupled withpotentially decreasing fusion
the understanding of the separate
optimization of the divertor
performance and leading to localized
structure of density and temperature
configuration, are envisioned as thelosses. Measured fast ion fluxes in DIII-D profiles in the pedestal region. A key
leading approaches to reducing peakand NSTX-U plasmas with different levels challenge is to understand theheat flux on the divertor targets andof Alfven eigenmode activity will be used importance of particle sources inincreasing the operating window for
to determine the threshold for significant determining the density pedestal anddissipative divertors. Data obtained from fast ion transport, assess mechanisms
project to burning plasma scenarios.
DIII-D and NSTX-U and archived fromand models for such transport, andExperiments on DIII-D and archived data
Alcator C-Mod will be used to assess the quantify the impact on beam powerfrom C-Mod, DIII-D, and NSTX will be
impact of edge magnetic configurations deposition and current drive.
used to test how fueling, reduced
and divertor geometries on dissipative Measurements will be compared withrecycling, and transport affect the density
regimes, as well as their effect on thetheoretical predictions, including
pedestal structure. The role of divertor
width of the power exhaust channel, thus quantitative fluctuation data and fast ion geometry and its effect upon theproviding essential data to test anddensity, in order to validate models and pedestal structure will also bevalidate leading boundary plasma
improve understanding of underlying
investigated. U.S. researchers involved inmodels.
mechanisms. Model predictions will
collaborative activities on other relevant

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences172

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017

ResultFY 2018
guide the development of attractive
operating regimes.

Met

TBD

FY 2019experiments may also contribute to thiseffort.
TBD

Endpoint Target

Magnetic fields are the principal means of confining the hot ionized gas of a plasma long enough to make practical fusionenergy. The detailed shape of these magnetic containers leads to many variations in how the plasma pressure is sustained
within the magnetic bottle and the degree of control that experimenters can exercise over the plasma stability. These factors,
in turn, influence the functional and economic credibility of the eventual realization of a fusion power reactor. The key totheir success is a detailed physics understanding of the confinement characteristics of the plasmas in these magnetic
configurations. The major fusion facilities can produce plasmas that provide a wide range of magnetic fields, plasma currents,
and plasma shapes. By using a variety of plasma control tools, appropriate materials, and having the diagnostics needed tomeasure critical physics parameters, scientists will be able to develop optimum scenarios for achieving high performance
plasmas in future burning plasma devices and, ultimately, in power plants.

Performance Goal (Measure)

FES Facility Operations - Average achieved operation time of FES user facilities as a percentage of total scheduled annual
operation timeTarget≥ 90 %≥ 90 %≥ 90 %

Result

Met

TBD

TBD

Endpoint Target

Many of the research projects that are undertaken at the Office of Science’s scientific user facilities take a great deal of time,money, and effort to prepare and regularly have a very short window of opportunity to run. If the facility is not operating as
expected the experiment could be ruined or critically setback. In addition, taxpayers have invested millions or even hundredsof millions of dollars in these facilities. The greater the period of reliable operations, the greater the return on the taxpayers’
investment.

Performance Goal (Measure)

FES Theory and Simulation - Performance of simulations with high physics fidelity codes to address and resolve criticalchallenges in the plasma science of magnetic confinement

TargetLower hybrid current drive (LHCD) will be The interaction of the boundary plasma Understanding the relevant turbulent
indispensable for driving off-axis current with the material surfaces in magnetically transport mechanisms at the edge of aduring long-pulse operation of future
confined plasmas is among the mosthigh-performance tokamak is essential
burning plasma experiments, since it
critical problems in fusion energy science. for predicting and optimizing the H-mode
offers important leverage for controlling In FY 2018, perform high-performancepedestal structure in future burning
damaging transients caused bycomputational simulations with coupled plasma devices. Global electromagnetic
magnetohydrodynamic instabilities.
boundary plasma physics and materials gyrokinetic simulations will be performed
However, the experimentally
surface models to predict the fuelbased on representative experimental

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences173

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019demonstrated high efficiency of LHCD is recycling and tritium retention of thepedestal scenarios in order to clarify
incompletely understood. In FY 2017,
divertor for deuterium-tritium burning which instabilities are most important for
massively parallel, high-resolution
plasma conditions, accounting foreach of the particle and heat transport
simulations with 480 radial elements and erosion, re-deposition and impurity
channels. Edge transport modeling will
4095 poloidal modes will be performed transport in the plasma boundary, and an be performed in order to estimate andusing full-wave radiofrequency fieldinitial evaluation of the influence ofbound the particle and heat sources—
solvers and particle Fokker-Planck codes material deposition on the recycling and e.g., the ionization density source and theto elucidate the roles of toroidicity and retention.
atomic energy loss channels due tofull-wave effects. The simulation
ionization, charge exchange, andpredictions will be compared withradiation. Comparisons will be made withexperimental data from thedata from the DIII-D, JET, C-Mod andsuperconducting EAST tokamak.
NSTX or MAST experiments.
ResultEndpoint Target

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences

Met

TBD

TBD

Advanced simulations based on high physics fidelity models offer the promise of advancing scientific discovery in the plasma
science of magnetic fusion by exploiting the Office of Science high performance computing resources and associatedadvances in computational science. These simulations are able to address the multiphysics and multiscale challenges of theburning plasma state and contribute to the FES goal of advancing the fundamental science of magnetically confined plasmas
to develop the predictive capability needed for a sustainable fusion energy source.

174

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Fusion Energy Sciences
Capital Summary ($K)
FY 2019 Request

FY 2019 Request
vs FY 2017
Enacted

—
—
—

4,600
321
4,921

+3,629-3,214
+415

0
971
971

—
—
—

2,000
2,600
4,600

+2,000+1,629+3,629

3,535

—

321

-3,214

Total

Prior Years

FY 2017 Enacted

n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a

971
3,535
4,506

Capital Equipment
Major items of equipment b
Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment(MPEX)
Total Non-MIE Capital Equipment
Total, Capital equipment

40,000–60,000
n/a
n/a

0
n/a
n/a

General Plant Projects
General Plant Projects under $5 million TEC

n/a

n/a

Capital Operating Expenses Summary
Capital equipment
General plant projects (GPP)
Total, Capital Operating Expenses

FY 2018
Annualized CR a

Major Items of Equipment Descriptions
Materials Plasma Exposure eXperiment (MPEX): FES has conducted substantial research and development over the past five years to identify and develop an innovative
linear, high intensity plasma source capable of producing the extreme plasma parameters required to simulate a burning plasma environment. FES is now building on
this research to develop a first of a kind, world-leading, experimental capability which will be used to explore materials solutions to the daunting plasma materials
interactions challenge. MPEX, which will be located at ORNL, will allow dedicated studies of reactor-relevant heat and particle loads on neutron-irradiated materials.
The overall motivation is to gain entry into a new class of fusion materials science wherein the combined effects of fusion-relevant heat, particle, and neutron fluxes canbe studied for the first time anywhere in the world. The preliminary total project cost range is estimated to be $40–60M.

a

A full-year 2018 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018
(Division D of P.L. 115-56, as amended). The amounts included for 2018 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution. (These amounts are shown only at the Congressional control level andabove; below that level, a dash (—) is shown).
bEach MIE located at a DOE facility Total Estimated Cost (TEC) >$5M and each MIE not located at a DOE facility TEC > $2M.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences175

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

Construction Projects Summary ($K)

14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER
Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
Other Project Cost (OPC)
Total, Project Cost (TPC), 14-SC-60

Total

Prior Years

FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2018
Annualized CR

FY 2019 Request

FY 2019 Request
vs FY 2017
Enacted

TBD
TBD
TBD

1,057,244
80,641
1,137,885

50,000050,00049,660—49,66075,000075,000+25,000
0+25,000

Funding Summary ($K)

Research
Scientific user facility operations
Major Item of Equipment
Other (GPP, GPE, and Infrastructure)
Construction
Total, Fusion Energy Sciences

FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2018 Annualized CR a

FY 2019 Request

236,310
88,6900
5,000
50,000380,000————
49,660377,419

181,000
81,0002,000
1,000
75,000340,000

FY 2019 Request vsFY 2017 Enacted-55,310-7,690+2,000-4,000+25,000-40,000a

A full-year 2018 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018
(Division D of P.L. 115-56, as amended). The amounts included for 2018 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution. (These amounts are shown only at the Congressional control level andabove; below that level, a dash (—) is shown).

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences176

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

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

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

FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2018 Annualized CR a

FY 2019 Request

FY 2019 Request vsFY 2017 Enacted$87,100
603
704
680
1,000b
70.4%
N/A

—
—
—
—
—
—
—

$87,500
640
N/A
480
480 b
100.0%
N/A

+$400
+37
N/A
-200
-520
+29.6%N/Aa

A full-year 2018 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018
(Division D of P.L. 115-56, as amended). The amounts included for 2018 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution. (These amounts are shown only at the Congressional control level andabove; below that level, a dash (—) is shown).
b

Optimal hours in FY 2017 and FY 2019 are less than the standard 1,000 hours due to a planned outage for facility modifications and enhancements.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences177

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2018 Annualized CR a

FY 2019 Request

National Spherical Torus Experiment—Upgrade
Number of Users
Achieved operating hours
Planned operating hours
Optimal hours
Percent optimal hours
Unscheduled downtime hours$74,090
292
N/A
0
0
N/A
N/A

—
—
—
—
—
—
—

$61,000
307
N/A
0
0
N/A
N/A

FY 2019 Request vsFY 2017 Enacted-$13,090
+15
N/A
0
0
N/A
N/A

Total Facilities
Number of Users
Achieved operating hours
Planned operating hours
Optimal hours
Percent of optimal hours b
Unscheduled downtime hours$161,190
895
704
680
1,000
70.4%
N/A

—
—
—
—
—
—
—

$148,500
947
N/A
480
480
100.0%
N/A-$12,690
+52
N/A
-200
-520
0.0%
N/A

FY 2017 Enacted

FY 2018 Annualized CRa

FY 2019 Request

765
96
239
1,161

—
—
—
—

597
76
197
895

a

Scientific Employment

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

FY 2019 Request vsFY 2017 Enacted
-168
-20
-42
-266

a

A full-year 2018 appropriation for this account was not enacted at the time the budget was prepared; therefore, the budget assumes this account is operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018
(Division D of P.L. 115-56, as amended). The amounts included for 2018 reflect the annualized level provided by the continuing resolution. (These amounts are shown only at the Congressional control level andabove; below that level, a dash (—) is shown).
b

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

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

178

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

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

Significant Changes and Summary

Significant Changes
This Construction Project Data Sheet (CPDS) is an update of the FY 2018 CPDS and does not include a new start for FY 2019.
The DOE Order 413.3B approved Critical Decision (CD) CD-1, “Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range,” was approvedon January 25, 2008, with a preliminary cost range of $1.45–$2.2 billion. Since 2008, the estimated cost range for the
project increased such that the upper bound of the approved CD-1 cost range increased by more than 50%, triggering theneed for a reassessment of the project cost range and re-approval by the Project Management Executive (PME). The PME
for the U.S. ITER project is the Deputy Secretary of Energy. The cost range reassessment was completed in November 2016
and it was then subsequently approved by the PME on January 13, 2017. The CD-1 Revised cost range is now $4.7B to$6.5B.
As outlined in the May 2016 Secretary of Energy’s Report to Congress, DOE was to baseline the “First Plasma” portion of the
U.S. ITER project. As such, DOE has divided the U.S. ITER project hardware scope into two distinct subprojects, which
represent the two phases of the project; First Plasma (FP) subproject (SP-1) and Post-First Plasma subproject (SP-2). The FP
subproject scope consists of: 1) completing the design for all twelve systems the U.S. is contributing to ITER; 2) complete
fabrication and delivery of the Toroidal Field (TF) superconductor; the Steady-State Electrical Network (SSEN), and theCentral Solenoid (CS) superconducting magnet modules, assembly tooling, and associated structures; and 3) partial
fabrication and delivery of seven other subsystems: Tokamak Cooling Water, Roughing Pumps, Vacuum Auxiliary, Pellet
Injection, Ion Cyclotron Heating, Electron Cyclotron Heating, and two of seven Diagnostics. A review of CD-2, “Approve
Performance Baseline” for the SP-1 was completed in November 2016 and then subsequently approved by the PME on
January 13, 2017, with a total project cost of $2.5B, and a CD-4, “Project Completion” date of December 2027. In addition,
the PME also approved CD-3, “Approve the Start of Construction” for the SP-1 on January 13, 2017. This CPDS focuses on
the First Plasma subproject activities. Funding for the SP-2 will not be requested until FY 2020.
Establishment of an approved baseline for SP-2 will follow once the Administration has made a determination as towhether the U.S. will continue its participation in ITER. No procurements for SP-2 scope are anticipated until at the earliest
FY 2021. Outyear numbers for this datasheet are shown as TBD. In addition to SP-1 and SP-2, and U.S. monetary resources(i.e., cash contributions) to support the ITER Organization (IO) construction-phase activities comprise the third and final
element of the U.S. ITER project scope. The source of funds for all three project elements is the annual U.S. Contributions
to ITER Congressional Line-Item appropriations.
Summary
SP-1 is more than 50% complete, as are the fabrication and delivery of two of the twelve subsystems the U.S. is to provide
to ITER, specifically the Toroidal Field coil superconductor, and the Steady-State Electrical Network. The FY 2019 Request
will focus on the continued design and fabrication of the highest priority, in kind deliverables. ITER is a major fusion
research facility being constructed in St. Paul-lez-Durance, France by an international partnership of seven governments.
Since it will not result in a facility owned by the U.S. or located in the U.S., the U.S. Contributions to ITER (U.S. ITER) project
is not classified as a Capital Asset project, but is classified as a Major System Project. The U.S. ITER project is a U.S.
Department of Energy project to provide the U.S. share of ITER construction (in-kind hardware i.e., subsystems, equipment,
and components, as well as monetary resources to support the IO in France). Sections of this CPDS have been tailoredaccordingly to reflect the nature of this project.

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

179

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

The U.S. ITER project is managed as a DOE Office of Science (SC) project through the U.S. ITER Project Office (USIPO). The
USIPO is managed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, in partnership with Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory and theSavannah River National Laboratory. The project began as a Major Item of Equipment (MIE) in FY 2006, and was changed toa Congressional control point Line-Item beginning in FY 2014. As with all SC projects, the principles of DOE Order 413.3B
are applied in the effective management of the project, including critical decision milestones and their supporting
prerequisite activities. Requirements for project documentation, monitoring and reporting, change control, and regular
independent project reviews (IPRs) are being applied with the same degree of rigor as other SC line-item projects. Progress
and performance are reported regularly in monthly performance metrics and project status reports.
Fabrication is underway in three of the U.S. hardware systems (CS magnet modules, structures, and assembly tooling)
Tokamak Cooling Water System [TCWS] and Vacuum Auxiliary Systems [VAS]). The U.S. ITER project has subcontracted with
General Atomics (GA) for the fabrication of the world’s largest pulsed superconducting magnets for the ITER CS magnet
system. CS magnet module fabrication includes six production and one spare. From 2006 through 2017, the U.S. ITER
project has awarded and obligated over $957 million to U.S. industry, universities, and DOE laboratories.
The U.S ITER Federal Project Director with certification level 3 has been assigned to this Project and has approved this CPDS.
2.

Critical Milestone History(fiscal quarter or date)
CD-0

FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012FY 2013

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

Conceptual
DesignComplete

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

CD-1

CD-2

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

TBD
TBD
4Q FY 2008
4Q FY 2010
4Q FY 2011
4Q FY 2011
3Q FY 2012
TBD hFinal Design
Complete

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

CD-3

D&D
Complete

CD-4

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

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

TBD
2017
2017
2018
2019
2024
2028
2033

a Electron Cyclotron Heating (ECH) Transmission lines (TL) (06/22/2009); Tokamak Cooling Water System (07/21/2009); CS Modules,

Structures, and Assembly Tooling (AT) (09/30/2009).
b Ion Cyclotron Heating Transmission Lines (ICH) (10/14/2009); Tokamak Exhaust Processing (TEP) (05/17/2010); Diagnostics: Residual Gas
Analyzer (RGA) (07/14/2010), Upper Visible Infrared Cameras (VIR) (07/27/2010).
c Vacuum Auxiliary System (VAS) – Main Piping (12/13/2010); Diagnostics Low-Field-Side Reflectometer (LFS) (05/30/2011).
d Cooling Water Drain Tanks (04/12/2011).
e Diagnostics: Upper Port (10/03/2011), Electron Cyclotron Emission (ECE) (12/06/2011), Equatorial Port E-9 and Toroidal Interferometer
Polarimeter (TIP) (01/02/2012), Equatorial Port E-3 (07/10/2012).
f Steady State Electrical Network (05/02/2012).
g VAS Supply (11/13/2012); Disruption Mitigation (12/11/2012); Pellet Injection (04/29/2013); Diagnostics: Motional Stark EffectPolarimeter (MSE) (05/29/2013), Core Imaging X-ray Spectrometer (CIXS) (06/01/2013).
h The CD-2 date will be determined upon acceptable resolution of issues related to development of a high-confidence ITER Project
Schedule and establishment of an approved funding profile.
i RGA Divertor Sampling Tube (07/28/14); CS AT, Early Items (09/17/14).

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER180

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

(fiscal quarter or date)
Conceptual
DesignComplete

CD-0
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016 b
FY 2017 c

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

CD-1

CD-2

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

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

Final Design
Complete
12/10/2013 a

CD-3

D&D
Complete

CD-4

TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

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

2034
2036
TBD
TBD

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

FY 2018
FY 2019d

7/5/2005
7/5/2005

CD-2/3CD-1 Cost Range
Update
1/13/17
1/13/17

SP-1
1/13/17
1/13/17

CD-4
SP-2
2019
TBD

SP-1
1Q2027
1Q2027SP-2
2034-2038
2034-2038

3. Project Cost History
At the time of CD-1 approval in January 2008, the preliminary cost range was $1.45–$2.2 billion. Until recently, however, it
has not been possible to confidently baseline the project due to past delays in the international ITER construction schedule.
Various factors (e.g., schedule delays, design and scope changes, funding constraints, regulatory requirements, risk
mitigations, and project management and leadership issues in the ITER Organization) have affected the project cost. In
response to a 2013 Congressional request, a DOE Office of Science IPR Committee assessed the project and determinedthat the existing cost range estimate of $4.0 to $6.5B would likely encompass the final TPC. This range, recommended in2013, was included in subsequent Presidents Budget Requests and in the May 2016 DOE “Report on the Continued U.S.
Participation in the ITER Project” to Congress. In preparation for baselining SP-1, based on the results of the IPR, a decision
was made to update the lower end of this range to reflect updated cost estimates resulting in the current approved CD-1R
range of $4.7 to $6.5B. This updated CD-1R range incorporates increases in the projects hardware estimate that haveoccurred since August 2013. The SP-1 TPC has been baselined at $2.5B.
4.

Project Scope and Justification

Introduction
ITER is an international partnership among seven Member governments (China, the European Union, India, Japan, theRepublic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and the United States) aimed at demonstrating the scientific and technologicalfeasibility of fusion energy for peaceful purposes. The Agreement on the Establishment of the ITER International Fusion
Energy Organization for the Joint Implementation of the ITER Project (ITER Agreement), signed on November 21, 2006,
provides the legal framework for the four phases of the program: construction, operation, deactivation, anda CS Modules and Structures (11/18/2013); VAS Main Piping B-2, L-1, L-2 (12/10/2013).
b CS AT Remaining Items (12/02/2015).
c Roughing Pumps (03/2017); VAS 03 Supply (06/2017); Roughing Pumps I&C (06/2017); VAS 03 Supply I&C (04/2017); CS AT Bus Bar

Alignment and Coaxial Heater (04/2017); VAS Main Piping L3/L4 (03/2017); VAS 02 CGVS (&C Part 1 (06/2017).
d VAS 02 Supply Part 1 (05/2018); ICH RF Building and I&C (11/2017); TCWS Captive Piping and First Plasma (10/2017); ICH RF components

supporting INDA/IO testing (01/2018).

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

181

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

decommissioning. Through participation in the agreement, the European Union, as the host, will bear five-elevenths(45.45%) of the ITER facility’s construction cost, while the other six Members, including the U.S., will each support oneeleventh (9.09%) of the ITER facilities cost. Operation, deactivation, and decommissioning of the facility are to be fundedthrough a different cost-sharing formula in which the U.S. will contribute a 13% share, which is not a part of the U.S. ITER
project funding. Responsibility for ITER integration, management, design, licensing, installation, and operation rests with
the IO, which is an international legal entity located in France.
Scope
U.S. Contributions to ITER – Construction Project Scope
The overall U.S. ITER project includes three major elements:
 Hardware components, built under the responsibility of the U.S., then shipped to the ITER site for IO assembly,
installation, and operation.
 Funding to the IO to support common expenses, including ITER research and development (R&D), IO staff andinfrastructure, IO-provided hardware, on-site assembly/installation/testing of all ITER components, and IO Central
Reserve.
 Other project costs, including R&D and conceptual design related activities.
The U.S. is to contribute the following hardware to ITER:
 Tokamak Cooling Water System (TCWS): manages the thermal energy generated during the operation of the tokamak.
 15% of ITER Diagnostics: provides the measurements necessary to control, evaluate, and optimize plasma performanceand to further the understanding of plasma physics.
 Disruption Mitigation (DM) Systems: limits the impact of plasma disruptions to the tokamak vacuum vessel, blankets,and other components.
 Electron Cyclotron Heating (ECH) Transmission Lines: brings additional power to the plasma and deposits power in
specific areas of the plasma to minimize instabilities and optimize performance.
 Tokamak Exhaust Processing (TEP) System: separates hydrogen isotopes from tokamak exhaust.
 Tokamak Fueling System (Pellet Injection): injects fusion fuels in the form of deuterium-tritium ice pellets into thevacuum chamber.
 Ion Cyclotron Heating (ICH) Transmission Lines: bring additional power to the plasma.
 Central Solenoid (CS) Magnet System: confines, shapes and controls the plasma inside the vacuum vessel. All CS
workscope is SP-1.
 8% of Toroidal Field (TF) Conductor: component of the TF magnet that confines, shapes, and controls the plasma. All TF
work scope was completed in FY 2017.
 75% of the Steady-State Electrical Network (SSEN): supplies the electricity needed to operate the entire plant, including
offices and the operational facilities. All SSEN work scope was completed in FY 2017.
 Vacuum Auxiliary System (VAS): creates and maintains low gas densities in the vacuum vessel and connected vacuum
components.
 Roughing Pumps: evacuate the tokamak, cryostat, and auxiliary vacuum chambers prior to and during operations.
Justification
The purpose of ITER is to investigate and conduct research in the so-called “burning plasma” regime—a performance region
that exists beyond the current experimental state of the art. Creating a self-sustaining burning plasma will provide essential
scientific knowledge necessary for practical fusion power. There are two parts of this need that will be achieved by ITER.
The first part is to investigate the fusion process in the form of a "burning plasma," in which the heat generated by thefusion process exceeds that supplied from external sources (i.e., self-heating). The second part of this need is to sustain theburning plasma for a long duration (e.g., several hundred to a few thousand seconds), during which time equilibrium

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

182

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

conditions can be achieved within the plasma and adjacent structures. ITER is the necessary next step to establish theconfidence in proceeding with development of a demonstration fusion power plant.
Although not classified as a Capital Asset, the U.S. ITER project is being conducted in accordance with the project
management principles of DOE Order 413.3B, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER183

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

5.

Financial Schedule(dollars in thousands)
Appropriations
Obligations
Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
Hardware
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012 b
FY 2013
FY 2014 c
FY 2015
FY 2016 d
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
Subtotal
Total, Hardware
Cash Contributions e
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012FY 2013
FY 2014b
FY 2015
FY 2016 f
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
Subtotal
Total, Cash Contributions
Total, TEC

Costs a13,754
34,58825,50085,401
85,26663,87591,441
107,635
161,605
128,682
115,000
50,00063,00075,0001,100,747
TBD

13,754
34,58825,50085,401
85,26663,87591,407
107,669
161,605
128,682
115,000
50,00063,00075,0001,100,747
TBD

6,169
24,23824,122
26,27846,052
84,321
99,215110,074
153,368
105,908
106,519
123,117
116,366
75,0001,100,747
TBD

2,112
7,412
2,644
23,59929,734
3,125
13,214
13,80532,895
15,957000
0144,497
TBD
TBD

2,112
7,412
2,644
23,59929,734
3,125
13,214
13,80532,895
15,957000
0144,497
TBD
TBD

2,112
7,412
2,644
23,59929,734
3,125
13,214
13,80532,895
15,957000
0144,497
TBD
TBD

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

b Prior actuals adjusted to incorporate project funds utilized at PPPL and DOE. Obligation adjusted to reflect year-end PPPL settlement
funding.
c Appropriations prior to FY 2014 reflect major item of equipment funding. Starting in FY 2014, this project is funded as a Congressional
control point.
d FY 2016 funding for taxes and tax support is included in the FY 2017 Hardware funding amount.
e Includes cash payments, secondees, taxes and tax support.
f No FY 2016 funding is provided to support the ITER organization.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER184

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

(dollars in thousands)
Appropriations
Obligations
Other project costs (OPC)FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012 a
FY 2013
FY 2014 b
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
Subtotal
Total, OPC
Total Project Costs (TPC)FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012a
FY 2013
FY 2014b
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
Subtotal
Total, TPC
6.

Costs a3,449
18,000-2,07415,00020,00013,000
345
2,560
5,000
5,361
0
0
0
0
80,641TBD

3,449
18,000-2,07415,00020,00013,000
345
2,560
5,000
5,361
0
0
0
0
80,641
TBD

1,110
7,607
7,513
5,072
7,754
10,032
22,336
5,984
2,717
5,500
3,958
1,058
0
0
80,641
TBD

19,31560,00026,070124,000
135,000
80,000105,000
124,000
199,500
150,000
115,000
50,00063,00075,0001,325,885
TBD

19,31560,00026,070124,000
135,000
80,000104,966
124,034
199,500
150,000
115,000
50,00063,00075,0001,325,885
TBD

9,391
39,25734,27954,94983,54097,478
134,765
129,863
188,980
127,365
110,477
124,175
116,366
75,0001,325,885
TBD

Details of the 2018 Project Cost Estimate

The project has an approved updated Critical Decision-1 Cost Range and DOE has chosen to divide the project hardware
scope into two distinct subprojects (First Plasm subproject (SP-1) and Post- First Plasma subproject SP-2). The baseline for
SP-1 was approved in January 2017. Baselining of SP-2 will follow Administration has made a decision on whether the U.S.
will continue its participation in ITER. No procurements for SP-2 scope are anticipated until FY 2021 at the earliest. An IPR of
U.S. ITER was conducted on November 14-17, 2016, to consider the project’s readiness for CD-2 (Performance Baseline) andCD-3 (Begin/Continue Fabrication) for SP-1 as well as the proposed updated CD-1 Cost Range. Outcomes from the IPR
indicated that the project was ready for approval of SP-1 CD-2/3 following a reassessment of contingency to account for riska Prior actuals adjusted to incorporate project funds utilized at PPPL and DOE. Obligation adjusted to reflect year-end PPPL settlement funding.

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

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER185

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

in the areas of escalation and currency exchange. This recommendation has been addressed. In addition, the IPR
committee found no compelling reason to deviate from the cost range identified in the May 2016 Report to Congress($4.0B to $6.5B) and recommended that this range be adopted and approved as the Updated CD-1 cost range. However, as
noted above, in preparation for baselining SP-1 and based on the outcome of the IPR, a decision was made to update thelower end of this range to reflect updated cost estimates resulting in the current approved CD-1R range of $4.7 to 6.5B.
7.

Schedule of Appropriation Requests

FY 2006

FT 2007

FY 2008

FY 2009 a

FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012 b

FY 2013 c

FY 2014 d

FY 2015

TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC

Prior
Years
1,038,000
84,0001,122,000
1,047,051
44,949
1,092,000
1,048,230
43,7701,092,000
266,366
38,075
304,441
294,366
70,019364,385
379,366
65,019444,385
394,566
75,019469,585
617,261
82,124
699,385
581,868
73,159655,027
603,105
70,280673,385

FY 201400030,000030,00030,000030,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
225,0000
225,000
194,500
5,000
199,500

FY 2015
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
144,6395,361
150,000

FY 2016
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

FY 2017
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

FY 2018
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

FY 2019 Outyears
Total0
0 1,038,000
0084,0000
0 1,122,0000
0 1,077,051
0044,9490
0 1,122,0000
0 1,078,230
0043,7700
0 1,122,000
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD

a The Prior Years column for FY 2009 through FY 2012 reflects the total of appropriations and funding requests only through the year ofthat row. Thus, for example, in the FY 2010 row, it reflects only funding from FY 2006 to FY 2012.

b The FY 2012 request was submitted before a full-year appropriation for FY 2011 was in place, and so FY 2011 was TBD at that time.

Hence, the Prior Years column for FY 2012 reflects appropriations for FY 2006 through FY 2010 plus the FY 2012 request.

c The FY 2013 amount shown in the FY 2014 request reflected a short-term continuing resolution level annualized to a full year and basedon the FY 2012 funding level for ITER.
d Prior to FY 2015, the requests were for a major item of equipment broken out by TEC, OPC, and TPC.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER186

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

FY 2016

FY 2017

FY 2018

FY 2019

TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC
TEC
OPC
TPC

Prior
Years
603,105
70,280673,385
603,105
70,280673,385
603,105
70,280673,385
603,105
70,280673,385

FY 2014
194,500
5,000
199,500
194,500
5,000
199,500
194,500
5,000
199,500
194,500
5,000
199,500

FY 2015
144,6395,361
150,000
144,6395,361
150,000
144,6395,361
150,000
144,6395,361
150,000

FY 2016150,0000
150,000
115,0000
115,000
115,0000
115,000
115,0000
115,000

FY 2017
TBD
TBD
TBD
125,0000
125,000
50,000050,00050,000050,000FY 2018
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
63,000063,00063,000063,000FY 2019 Outyears
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
75,000TBD
0TBD
75,000
TBD

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

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

12/2025
15–25
TBD

9. D&D Funding Requirements
Since ITER is being constructed in France by a coalition of countries and will not be a DOE asset, the “one-for-one”
requirement is not applicable to this project.
The U.S. Contributions to ITER Decommissioning are assumed to begin when operations commence and continue for aperiod of 20 years. The U.S. is responsible for 13 percent of the total decommissioning cost.
The U.S. Contributions to ITER Deactivation are assumed to begin 20 years after commissioning and continue for a period of
5 years. The U.S. is responsible for 13 percent of the total deactivation cost.
10. Acquisition Approach for U.S. Hardware Contributions
The U.S. ITER Project Office (USIPO) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, with its two partner laboratories (Princeton Plasma
Physics Laboratory and Savannah River National Laboratory), will procure and deliver in-kind hardware in accordance with
the Procurement Arrangements established with the international IO. The USIPO will subcontract with a variety of researchand industry sources for design and fabrication of its ITER components, ensuring that designs are developed that permit
fabrication, to the maximum extent possible, under fixed-price subcontracts (or fixed-price arrangement documents with
the IO) based on performance specifications, or more rarely, on build-to-print designs. USIPO will use cost-reimbursement
type subcontracts only when the work scope precludes accurate and reasonable cost contingencies being gauged andestablished beforehand. USIPO will utilize best value, competitive source selection procedures to the maximum extent
possible, including foreign firms on the tender/bid list where appropriate. Such procedures shall allow for cost and technicaltrade-offs during source selection. For the large-dollar-value subcontracts (and critical path subcontracts as appropriate),
USIPO will utilize unique subcontract provisions to incentivize cost control and schedule performance. In addition, where it
is cost effective and it reduces risk, the USIPO will participate in common procurements led by the IO, or request the IO toperform activities that are the responsibility of the U.S.

Science/Fusion Energy Sciences/
14-SC-60, U.S. Contributions to ITER187

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification

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

188

FY 2019 Congressional Budget Justification