US LUAJuly 2009 News Archive
July 28, 2009
FYI #99: House Debate on DOE Funding Bill
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 99: July 28, 2009
Web version: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/099.html
Excerpts from the House Debate on the FY 2010 DOE Funding Bill
During House consideration of the FY 2010 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Bill earlier this month Members discussed
funding for the DOE Office of Science; the Thomas Jefferson
Laboratory upgrade; the Energy Innovation Hubs; funding for
Laboratory Directed Research and Development; and LANSCE, the Los
Alamos Neutron Science Center. Selections from the floor debate
follow:
OFFICE OF SCIENCE FUNDING:
Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL):
“I rise today in support of the fiscal year 2010 Energy and Water
Appropriations bill. I want to commend Chairman [Ed] Pastor and
[Subcommittee] Ranking Member [Rodney] Frelinghuysen and their
subcommittee for putting together a balanced bill that clearly
recognizes the importance of scientific research and energy security
to our Nation’s competitiveness.
“There are several provisions of this bill I’m proud to support.
Chief among those is the increase for the Department of Energy’s
Office of Science. I, along with 70 of my colleagues, asked
appropriators for an increase consistent with the President’s
request to double the investment in the basic sciences within the
next decade. The committee provided for $170 million more than the
fiscal year 2009. This funding is critical to our basic research
infrastructure and national laboratory work, like that of Argonne in
my district.
“The innovations and solutions that will enable us to overcome many
of our greatest challenges from our economic crisis, environmental
concerns, dependence on foreign energy, and escalating health care
costs all start with basic research investments. Economic experts
have concluded that science-driven technology has accounted for more
than 50 percent of the growth of the U.S. economy during the last
half century.
“In recent years, Congress has come to recognize that science will
be the foundation to address those needs and keep America globally
competitive. As evidenced by the American COMPETES Act in 2007, both
Democrats and Republicans support efforts to increase basic research
in the physical sciences to meet the needs of our growing
population. I will insert a copy of our letter in the
[Congressional] Record.” (For more on this letter, see
http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/044.html.)
THOMAS JEFFERSON NATIONAL LABORATORY UPGRADE:
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA):
“I, along with my colleague from Virginia [Rep. Robert Wittman
(R-VA)], would like to briefly discuss the importance of fully
funding the Thomas Jefferson Lab’s 12 GeV Upgrade.
“This important project received accelerated funding in the Recovery
Act. It is vital that this project receive the administration’s full
request of $22 million in this bill. If full funding is not in place
for the upcoming fiscal year due to stringent controls in how
Recovery Act funds are spent, there is little flexibility for the
lab to meet their construction project without costly scheduling
delays or potential elimination of physics-related work. I would
hope that the gentleman from Arizona [Rep. Pastor] will work with me
and Mr. Wittman to ensure that this project is funded at the
administration’s request for fiscal year 2010.”
Rep. Wittman:
“I rise in support and to echo the remarks of my colleague from
Virginia [Rep. Scott]. The Thomas Jefferson Lab is a world leader in
nuclear physics research and education. The lab is currently in the
midst of a major upgrade to their accelerator facility. Fully
funding the accelerator upgrade will significantly expand the
facility’s research potential and will lead to a greater
understanding of atomic particles, the building blocks of all
matter. Research at Jefferson Lab will continue to expand our
knowledge of nuclear physics that lead to many exciting scientific
advances. I respectfully request that the gentleman from Arizona
would work to fully fund this important project at Jefferson Lab.”
Rep. Pastor:
“I thank the gentleman for bringing this important issue to us.
You have made a case that the administration request for $22 million
for the continuous electron beam accelerator facility is merited.
You have my personal commitment to work with you and Mr. Wittman
going forward to see that this project receives the funding it needs
and deserves.”
Rep. Scott:
“I thank you for your commitment and thank you for your willingness
to work on this important issue and thank my colleague from Virginia
for his support and look forward to working with you in [the House
and Senate final appropriations] conference.”
ENERGY INNOVATION HUBS:
Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO):
“I, along with my colleague Mr. [Rep. Russ] Carnahan [D-MO] rise to
enter into a [prearranged conversational] colloquy.
“Mr. Pastor, several weeks ago the House Sustainable Energy and
Environment Coalition met with the Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu.
He shared his vision of eight energy innovation hubs that would
deliver transformational energy technologies. This bill only funds
one of those important hubs.
“When these hubs were first discussed with the committee, DOE’s
action plan was not fully developed. Since that time, they have made
necessary revisions to develop the concept. While we support funding
only proposals that are fully developed, we hope that you will work
with the members of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition
and the Department of Energy to continue working to fund this
initiative as this process continues.”
Rep. Carnahan:
“As co-chair of the Congressional High Performance Building Caucus,
I know firsthand that improvements to our built environment are some
of the lowest hanging fruit in terms of energy efficiency gains.
“In the long term, we would work with you, Mr. Chairman, to see that
all eight energy innovation hubs are fully funded. In the short
term, as we enter into [the final appropriations] conference with
the Senate, we would like to work with you to ensure that the Fuels
from Sunlight Hub and the Energy Efficient Building Systems Hub are
fully funded. I submit for the [Congressional] Record letters from
Members and organizations who also support funding of the energy
efficient building systems. I thank you, Mr. Pastor, for your
willingness to address this issue, and I look forward to working
with you.”
Rep. Pastor:
“First of all, you are both correct in that when the [Energy]Secretary appeared before the subcommittee, this is and was
presented as a work in progress. And knowing that we are going to
proceed forward with the administration and with the Secretary, we
thought that it was in the best interest to fund one hub. [see
http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/095.html] And as the Secretary and the
administration goes forward in developing these hubs, we look
forward to working with you.”
“So we look forward to working with you and Mr. Carnahan because
it’s an idea that obviously will expand, will grow, and we want to
make sure that the committee, the subcommittee has the opportunity
to work with the Secretary to see its development. So we look
forward to working with you.”
LABORATORY DIRECTED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (LDRD):
Rep. Martin Heinrich (D-NM):
“I offer this amendment [to the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Bill] in strong support of research and development
at our national laboratories. Specifically, my amendment provides a
1 percent increase in the Laboratory Directed Research and
Development, which is commonly referred to as LDRD. LDRD increases
the ability of laboratories to retain expertise and pursue
innovative projects by providing additional discretion for
Department of Energy laboratories to select research activities.
These high-risk, high-reward projects yield cutting-edge
advancements in science and technology and produce some of our most
successful research and development initiatives. These are projects
with an immediate relevance and a direct impact on national security
and our goal of energy independence.
“Many LDRD projects have formed the basis of some of the national
labs’ most successful research initiatives. For example, at Sandia
National Laboratories in my district, an LDRD researcher developed
the chemistry for a decontamination foam that is used by our
military to protect us against chemical and biological attacks. In
fact, this was the foam that was used to decontaminate the Senate
Hart Office Building after the anthrax attacks of 2001. We know all
too well that those who wish our country harm are constantly
adapting their methods, making these LDRD projects vitally important
to our national security.
“LDRD is equally relevant to our goal of energy independence. An
LDRD project developed a manufacturing process that will
substantially reduce the cost of highly efficient LED light bulbs.
These LED light bulbs have the potential to decrease electricity
consumed in lighting by a full 50 percent by 2025. This will
translate into meaningful cuts in utility bills for our working
families and real savings for our small businesses. Energy
independence is a critical element of our national security, and LED
efficiency will significantly reduce our demand for energy. These
advancements represent just two examples of the multiple innovative
science and technology achievements made through LDRD initiatives.
“Under the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations bill, our labs were granted
authority to use up to 8 percent of their budgets for LDRD
initiatives, yet the [FY 2009] bill before we today would reduce
that amount for 2010 to only 6 percent. My amendment would allow our
labs to dedicate up to 7 percent of their budgets to LDRD. It is
important to note that my amendment does not require any additional
spending, as the LDRD funding percentage is derived from the labs’
overall funding level, nor does my amendment cut any other program.
Simply put, my amendment encourages innovative research and
development that will promote our national security and help us to
reach our goal of energy independence. I urge my colleagues to
support this amendment.”
Rep. Pastor:
“First of all, I’d like to thank the gentleman from New Mexico for
yielding to me and to inform him that we will support the amendment
as offered. However, I have some concerns about increasing the
percentage of laboratory directed research at this time. I hope that
this increase in lab directed research and development will, in this
tight budget environment, produce a net increase in the national
security output of the laboratories. I look forward to working with
you to ensure this increase is tightly mission-oriented and will be
compatible with meeting other challenges of the laboratories. With
that, I will inform you that we are supporting this amendment.”
Subcommittee Ranking Member Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ):
“I would like to associate my comments with Chairman Pastor. These
are tight budget times, and I think we worked hard to provide the
right balance for priorities on our Energy and Water bill. Many of
us would have liked much more, shall we say, money spent on the
safety and security of our nuclear weapons stockpile; but quite
honestly, that was not to be. We all had to compromise, and this
package is a fair, balanced one.
“A few comments about the LDRD, the Lab Directed R&D programs. These
programs often allow our laboratories to skirt congressional
priorities laid out in our legislation. Historically these funds
have been used by labs to perform research and development on issues
that at times are not at all germane to the Department of Energy. I
have seen it firsthand. At the same time, these programs can be most
innovative and give our researchers creative opportunities for work.
So I don’t oppose the amendment. But I want to make it clear that
all members of the committee, I am sure, will be watching very
carefully to ensure that these funds are used to support the mission
of the department.”
Rep. Heinrich:
“I want to add real quickly that the gentleman mentioned our nuclear
stockpile. One of the other LDRD programs that I think was
particularly important was the creation and assembly of safety
devices for our [nuclear] stockpile, like the gel mylar capacitors
that are used in the W76-1. I think the bottom line is that these
programs represent some of the most cutting-edge research that we
do. They are critical to our national security. They are critical to
our energy independence, and I would urge the support of my
colleagues.”
The House approved the amendment by a vote of 424 yes votes, 1
present, and 14 not voting.
LANSCE, THE LOS ALAMOS NEUTRON SCIENCE CENTER:
The Administration requested no funding for LANSCE. The House bill
provided no funding.
Rep. Ben Lujan (D-NM)
“I would first like to commend my good friend from Arizona (Rep.
Pastor) for the strong commitment this bill shows toward shoring up
both science and the national security of this country. The strong
support for the Office of Science will be well received in my home
State of New Mexico.
“I’m seeking the commitment of the gentleman from Arizona to work
with me on refurbishing LANSCE, the Los Alamos Neutron Science
Center. This facility plays a crucial role in providing
one-of-a-kind experimental capabilities to further the lab’s science
mission. In addition, it’s a key draw for new scientific talent in
Los Alamos National Laboratory and high-tech research into northern
New Mexico. The capabilities resident within the LANSCE facility
cannot be duplicated in a cost-effective manner anywhere else in the
country. The investment in the capabilities the refurbishment will
sustain will pay for itself many times
over.”
Rep. Pastor:
“First of all, I want to thank you for raising this important issue,
and you have my personal commitment to work with you as we go
forward to find a solution that best serves the national security.
We’re well aware of the capabilities and the value of Los Alamos
National Laboratories.”
Rep. Lujan:
“Again, I would like to commend my friend, the gentleman from
Arizona for this legislation, and I thank him for his willingness to
work with me on this important issue.”
July 23, 2009
Save the Date: USLUO Annual Meeting
The next Users Meeting is scheduled for September 25-26, 2009 at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.
July 22, 2009
Nominations open for USLUO Executive Committee
The nomination period is open for six positions to serve on the
Executive Committee. Nominations, including self-nominations, may be
made to usluo-elections@usluo.org. The schedule is:
July 22 – August 14 — Nominations
August 21 – September 11 — Vote
September 18 — New members announced
July 17, 2009
NUFO: FYI from the AIP on DOE Science Programs
The NUFO Steering Committee wanted to share the message below with itsmembers.
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News Number 92: July 14, 2009 Web version: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/092.html
New Director of the DOE Office of Science Addresses Advisory Committee
William Brinkman, the new Director of the
Department of Energy’s Office of Science had been in his new position
for about two weeks when he appeared before the Basic Energy Sciences
Advisory Committee on July 9. Brinkman spoke to the committee for
about 40 minutes, describing DOE’s science programs, the FY 2010
request, and his perspectives on several key issues. His presentation
focused on the Office of Science’s three overarching themes: science
for national needs, science for discovery, and national scientific user
facilities. Among the topics he discussed were:
USER FACILITIES:
When commenting on DOE’s user facilities,
Brinkman said Fermilab’s Tevatron will be kept in operation until the
Large Hadron Collider “really starts doing things.” In discussing
ITER, he told the committee that it was both a fusion experiment and an
experiment in international partnerships. Brinkman described his pride
in the large numbers of users for the department’s scientific
facilities – especially the light sources. He wants to increase the
number of users of the department’s nanoscale facilities.
OUTLOOK ON FY 2010 AND 2011 BUDGET REQUESTS:
“A good substantial increase” is how Brinkman
described the FY 2010 request. He told the committee he did not know
what the outlook was for the FY 2011 Office of Science budget request,
adding that President Obama has pledged to double its funding. DOE
support for education programs should increase.
ENERGY INNOVATION HUBS:
House and Senate appropriators did not provide
funding in their versions of the FY 2010 bills to launch all eight
Energy Innovation Hubs. Brinkman predicted that the program would
start slowly, and grow in future years.
NUCLEAR ENERGY:
Regarding nuclear energy, Brinkman spoke of
the need to consider the entire fuel cycle, and of the “very big
challenge” in arriving at a solution for nuclear waste.
BALANCING SPENDING:
Brinkman said there was “a fairly decent
balance between energy and research,” adding that the 40 percent now
spent on research was “fairly reasonable.” More thought needs to be
given, he told the committee, to strengthening science for national
needs.
ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE:
Brinkman described how the public’s attitude
has evolved, with many people now firmly in support of doing something
about energy problems, and the need to transition from carbon-based
sources.
Doing so would reduce the need to find ways to control greenhouse gas emissions.
BASIC RESEARCH:
Brinkman’s final
comments concerned the importance of basic research. A major challenge
to the research community will be responding to national needs for new
energy technologies, while ensuring the continuation of basic
research. We “do not want to kill off” basic research in the search
for new energy technologies, he told the committee, saying that it was
DOE’s responsibility to support basic research.
July 17, 2009
AAAS Leadership Seminar in Science and Technology Policy
AAAS is pleased to announce its 2009 Leadership Seminar in Science and Technology Policy, scheduled for November 16-20. The
Seminar, a condensed version of the widely-hailed orientation program
for AAAS S&T Policy Fellows, will include sessions on how policy is
made in areas ranging from genetics to energy policy, on federal
budgeting for R&D, on how scientists can be effective in
interacting with Congress, on science and regulation, and many other
topics. Speakers include leading personalities in science and
technology policy. The Seminar is designed for anyone who needs or
wants to know how S&T policy is made — scientists and engineers,
managers and administrators in all sectors, association officials,
government agency program managers, embassy science diplomats, and
others.
To be held at AAAS headquarters in downtown Washington, DC, the
Seminar will run from 11 a.m. on Monday, November 16, to noon
on Friday, the 20th. Applicants will be admitted on a rolling, space
available basis, and will be notified by e-mail within three weeks of
receipt of the application. The selection committee selects a diverse
class to optimize the learning experience and the exchange of ideas.
The deadline for applications is September 15. Please apply early.
Since participation is limited to approximately 30-35 people, spaces
will fill up quickly.
The 2009 application and preliminary program are available at http://www.aaas.org/spp/leadership. To
apply, please print out and fax back the application page with credit
card information, or call or e-mail to let us know that a check is in
the mail. Your check will not be processed or your credit card charged
until after you have been admitted.
July 15, 2009
FYI – The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News – Number 93
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 93: July 15, 2009
Web version: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/093.html
FY 2010 House Appropriations Bill – DOE Office of Science
The House is now considering its version of the FY 2010 Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Bill. Approved by the full House
Appropriations Committee a week ago, the report accompanying the
House bill, S. 1436, was just released. This report provides
funding and policy recommendations for the Department of Energy’s
Office of Science.
The Senate Appropriations Committee has passed its version of this
legislation and issued a committee report. Excerpts from this
report regarding the Office of Science can be viewed at
http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/089.html
The full text of House Report 111-203 can be found by going to
http://thomas.loc.gov/ Under “Other Legislative Activity” at the
bottom of the center column, search “Committee Reports.”
Excerpts from this report follow, with funding comparisons based on
the current budget:
OFFICE OF SCIENCE:
The current budget is $4,757.6 million.
The Administration requested $4,941.7 million, an increase of 3.9
percent or $184.1 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $4,898.8 million, an
increase of 3.0 percent or $141.2 million.
The House appropriations bill recommends $4,943.6 million, an
increase of 3.9 percent or $186.0 million.
There were no policy or funding recommendations in the report
language.
HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS:
The current budget is $795.8 million.
The Administration requested $819.0 million, an increase of 2.9
percent or $23.3 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $813.0 million, an
increase of 2.2 percent or $17.2 million.
The House appropriations bill recommends $819.0 million, the same as
the budget request.
There were no policy or funding recommendations in the report
language.
NUCLEAR PHYSICS:
The current budget is $512.1 million.
The Administration requested $552.0 million, an increase of 7.8
percent or $39.9 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $540.0 million, an
increase of 5.5 percent or $27.9 million.
The House appropriations bill recommends $536.5 million, an increase
of 4.8 percent or $24.4 million.
The committee report stated:
“The Committee recommends $111,816,000 for Low Energy Nuclear
Physics, $5,000,000 below the request. From within these funds, the
Committee recommends $12,000,000, $3,000,000 above the request, for
the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams.
“The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the 12GeV continuous
electron beam facility upgrade at the Thomas Jefferson Laboratory,
$10,000,000 below the request in light of reduced requirements for
the project.
“The Committee recommends $29,200,000, $10,000,000 above the
request, for Isotope Development and Production for Research and
Applications, University Operations. The Committee is aware that
several universities, including the University of California at
Davis and Idaho State University, operate facilities with the
potential to make important contributions to the nation’s supply of
medical isotopes. The Committee directs the Department to work with
the academic community to most cost-effectively increase the
availability of medical isotopes.”
BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH:
The current budget is $601.5 million.
The Administration requested $604.2 million, an increase of 0.4
percent or $2.6 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $604.2 million, the
Administration request.
The House appropriations bill recommends $597.2 million, a decrease
of 0.7 percent or $4.3 million.
There were no policy or funding recommendations in the report
language.
BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES:
The current budget is $1,572.0 million.
The Administration requested $1,685.5 million, an increase of 7.2
percent or $113.5 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $1,653.5 million, an
increase of 5.2 percent or $81.5 million.
The House appropriations bill recommends $1,675.0 million, an
increase of 6.6 percent or $103.0 million.
The committee report stated:
“Within this sum, the Committee recommends $35,000,000 for one
Energy Innovation Hub as described in the Research and Development
Initiatives section of this report.
“The Committee recommends $365,112,000 for Materials Sciences and
Engineering Research, including $10,020,000, $1,500,000 above the
request, for EPSCOR, and $320,857,000 for Chemical Sciences,
Geosciences, and Energy Biosciences.
“The Committee recommends $834,791,000, $23,000,000 above the
request, for Scientific User Facilities. From within these funds,
the Committee recommends $198,872,000, $15,000,000 above the
request, for the Spallation Neutron Source, and $68,841,000,
$8,000,000 above the request, for the High Flux Isotope Reactor,
both at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.”
FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES:
The current budget is $402.6 million.
The Administration requested $421.0 million, an increase of 4.6
percent or $18.5 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $416.0 million, an
increase of 3.3 percent or $13.4 million.
The House appropriations bill recommends $441.0 million, an increase
of 9.5 percent or $38.4 million.
The committee report stated:
“From within these funds, the Committee recommends $20,000,000 for
the laser fusion program at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL),
which has been funded in previous years from the accounts under the
National Nuclear Security Administration. NRL has identified a path
to inertial fusion energy that could substantially reduce the cost
and the time to develop a practical fusion power source, based on
krypton-fluoride (KrF) lasers and high-performance directly driven
targets. NRL researchers and their collaborators have developed a
staged plan to systematically develop the needed science and
technologies for the energy application. The Committee directs the
Department of Energy to evaluate the potential of the KrF laser for
commercial fusion and the merits of the staged development plan. The
Office of Nuclear Energy shall take the lead in this evaluation,
working with the Office of Science, and report to the Committee not
later than August 31, 2009, on its findings.”
ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING:
The current budget is $368.8 million.
The Administration requested $409.0 million, an increase of 10.9
percent or $40.2 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $399.0 million, an
increase of 8.2 percent or $30.2 million.
The House appropriations bill recommends $409.0 million, the
Administration’s request.
There were no policy or funding recommendations in the report
language.
SCIENCE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT:
The current budget is $13.6 million.
The Administration requested $20.7 million, an increase of 52.2
percent or $7.1 million.
The Senate appropriations bill recommends $20.7 million, the
Administration request.
The House appropriations bill also recommends $20.7 million, the
Administration request.
The committee report stated:
“By utilizing the Department’s intellectual and physical assets to
provide teachers with the opportunity to become teacher-scientists
rather than teachers who happen to teach science, this program can
significantly enhance the ability of teachers to involve their
students in doing science rather than just reading about and
reproducing well-established principles.”
ARPA-E
The Administration requested $10.0 million for the Advanced Research
Projects Agency – Energy, the first budget request for ARPA-E.
The Senate appropriations bill provided no funding, without comment.
House appropriators did not provide funding, the committee report
stating:
“The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided $400 million
for the establishment of the Advanced Research Projects
Agency–Energy (ARPA-E). The Committee believes that, in addition to
the fiscal year 2009 appropriation of $15,000,000 (for program
direction), this funding will allow ARPA-E to fund its first round
of projects beginning in fiscal year 2010 and provides an
appropriate foundation of project funding as ARPA-E ramps-up to full
operation. The decision not to provide any additional funding for
ARPA-E in fiscal year 2010 beyond the funding already provided does
not in any way suggest a lack of commitment to this new program by
the Committee. The Committee looks forward to ARPA-E becoming fully
operational in fiscal year 2010 and beginning its important work of
developing innovative and transformational energy technologies.
“The initial staffing and leadership of ARPA-E will be critical to
its long-term success. While the Committee commends the Department
for moving quickly on the establishment of ARPA-E, there is concern
that the timeline dictated by the agency’s Funding Opportunity
Announcement may outpace the selection of the Program Managers and a
Director or an acting Director, as intended in the America COMPETES
Act. The Committee encourages the Secretary to use all existing
authorities to aggressively recruit staff that will be uniquely
qualified to both make project funding decisions and create a
distinct organizational culture for ARPA-E.”
July 15, 2009
News on the LHC
The foreseen shutdown work on the LHC is proceeding well, including the
powering tests with the new quench protection system. However, during
the past week vacuum leaks have been found in two “cold” sectors of the
LHC. The leaks were found in sectors 8-1 and 2-3 while they were being
prepared for the electrical tests on the copper stabilizers at around 80
K. In both cases the leak is at one end of the sector, where the
electrical feedbox, DFBA, joins Q7, the final magnet in the sector.
Unfortunately, the repair necessitates a partial warm-up of both
sectors. This involves the end sub-sector being warmed to room
temperature, while the adjacent sub-sector “floats” in temperature and
the remainder of the sector is kept at 80 K. As the leak is from the
helium circuit to the insulating vacuum, the repair work will have no
impact on the vacuum in the beam pipe. However the intervention will
have an impact on the schedule for the restart. It is now foreseen that
the LHC will be closed up and ready for beam injection by mid-November.
July 14, 2009
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 92
FYI
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy News
Number 92: July 14, 2009
Web version: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/092.html
New Director of the DOE Office of Science Addresses Advisory
Committee
William Brinkman, the new Director of the Department of Energy’s
Office of Science had been in his new position for about two weeks
when he appeared before the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee
on July 9. Brinkman spoke to the committee for about 40 minutes,
describing DOE’s science programs, the FY 2010 request, and his
perspectives on several key issues. His presentation focused on the
Office of Science’s three overarching themes: science for national
needs, science for discovery, and national scientific user
facilities. Among the topics he discussed were:
USER FACILITIES:
When commenting on DOE’s user facilities, Brinkman said Fermilab’s
Tevatron will be kept in operation until the Large Hadron Collider
“really starts doing things.” In discussing ITER, he told the
committee that it was both a fusion experiment and an experiment in
international partnerships. Brinkman described his pride in the
large numbers of users for the department’s scientific facilities –
especially the light sources. He wants to increase the number of
users of the department’s nanoscale facilities.
OUTLOOK ON FY 2010 AND 2011 BUDGET REQUESTS:
“A good substantial increase” is how Brinkman described the FY 2010
request. He told the committee he did not know what the outlook was
for the FY 2011 Office of Science budget request, adding that
President Obama has pledged to double its funding. DOE support for
education programs should increase.
ENERGY INNOVATION HUBS:
House and Senate appropriators did not provide funding in their
versions of the FY 2010 bills to launch all eight Energy Innovation
Hubs. Brinkman predicted that the program would start slowly, and
grow in future years.
NUCLEAR ENERGY:
Regarding nuclear energy, Brinkman spoke of the need to consider the
entire fuel cycle, and of the “very big challenge” in arriving at a
solution for nuclear waste.
BALANCING SPENDING:
Brinkman said there was “a fairly decent balance between energy and
research,” adding that the 40 percent now spent on research was
“fairly reasonable.” More thought needs to be given, he told the
committee, to strengthening science for national needs.
ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE:
Brinkman described how the public’s attitude has evolved, with many
people now firmly in support of doing something about energy
problems, and the need to transition from carbon-based sources.
Doing so would reduce the need to find ways to control greenhouse
gas emissions.
BASIC RESEARCH:
Brinkman’s final comments concerned the importance of basic
research. A major challenge to the research community will be
responding to national needs for new energy technologies, while
ensuring the continuation of basic research. We “do not want to
kill off” basic research in the search for new energy technologies,
he told the committee, saying that it was DOE’s responsibility to
support basic research.
July 13, 2009
Funding opportunity for young investigators in particle physics – Universities and Labs
You may well be aware of this already, but in
case not, we should get the word out to young faculty about research
funding opportunity through DOE Office of Early Career Research.
Covers many fields including HEP/EPP. And can provide support for
University and Laboratory young researchers. Deadlines are short. A
letter of intent is needed to be submitted in addition to proposal.
http://www.sc.doe.gov/grants/FAPN09-26.html
http://www.sc.doe.gov/grants/LAB09_26.html
July 7, 2009
American Institute of Physics FYI This Month June 2009
FYI THIS MONTH: JUNE – 2009
HIGHLIGHTS OF DEVELOPMENTS IN WASHINGTON IMPACTING THE PHYSICS
COMMUNITY FROM FYI, THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS BULLETIN OF
SCIENCE POLICY NEWS
Richard M. Jones fyithismonth@aip.org
To read the cited FYIs, see the FYI archive
at: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2009/
WORRIES ABOUT NASA’S BUDGET: House and Senate authorizers and
appropriators worry that the agency receives insufficient funding.
(#70)
OBAMA AND STEM EDUCATION: The American Institute of Physics (AIP),
four of its Member Societies, and 63 other scientific and education
organizations urged President Obama to increase federal investment
in science education. (#71)
SENATE APPROPRIATORS UNHAPPY WITH NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION REQUEST: “It’s hard to imagine so little is truly in
need of change over the coming year,” said Byron Dorgan (D-ND),
reflecting the views of many of his committee colleagues. (#72)
ENERGY SECRETARY STEPHEN CHU: When appearing before House
appropriators, Chu testified about DOE’s science programs.
Appropriators’ questions centered on economic stimulus money, Yucca
Mountain and waste recycling, hydrogen fuel cells, and carbon
sequestration. (#73)
DOE OFFICE OF SCIENCE DEVELOPMENTS: Updates on new director,
senators supporting FY 2010 request, and state funding. (#74)
FY 2010 APPROPRIATIONS BILLS: National Science Foundation (#75, #81,
#84), National Institute of Standards and Technology (#76, #81),
NASA (#77, #81), USGS (#82), House passage (#79), White House Views.
(#81)
VISAS: AIP, five of its Member Societies, and 25 other organizations
urged the Administration to make visa reforms. (#78)
AUGUSTINE SPACE FLIGHT COMMITTEE: The first public meeting was held
in Washington, with the much-anticipated final report on the future
of NASA’s manned space flight program due by August. (#80)
July 3, 2009
Medicare Coverage for American Citizens Abroad
American Citizens Abroad is supporting the effort of Americans for Medicare
in Mexico, A.C. with this important initiative, to expand Medicare coverage
to *eligible *retirees living abroad. The background information is below,
and a sample letter is attached – it only takes a few minutes to do. This
could turn out to be a *cost savings measure *for the Medicare program, so
I urge you to write today – and pass it on to friends. Thanks! L
President Obamas health care reform effort is being crafted now. His agenda
includes a number of important goals including: affordable health care for *
all* Americans, lower cost health care with improved outcomes, and a more
fair system that focuses on wellness rather than just treating illness.
*To get these needed reforms
WE NEED YOUR HELP!*
*We urge you to write to your Senators and Congressmen TODAY to support this
initiative!*
1. Download and open the attached Excel file to see the Congressional
offices already visited.
2. Look for your elected Representative and Senators, then write to all 3
of them using the attached sample letter. Modify as needed.
*OR*
Call the staff person who is listed to let them know you support
this. Remind them that this proposal was delivered both via email and in
person within the past 2 months. Tell them to read it if they havent.
*They need to hear from* Y*ou* *to understand how important this issue is -*
*
and they have constituents living in Mexico whose votes COUNT!*
*Your elected officials not on the attached list?* That means we havent
had a chance to visit their office yet, but we will soon! Our next lobbying
trip to Washington DC is scheduled for early July. But dont let that stop
you from contacting them – you can find them here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
*Dont be shy about writing your own letter!
*Tell your own story. Just remember to keep it to a page in length, and
make sure your purpose is stated clearly in the first paragraph:
I urge Senator____ to support a Medicare Demonstration Project in Mexico,
in order to save Medicare program costs and provide seniors living in Mexico
with the benefits for which they have paid
*
If you have trouble using any of these files, or would like help writing a
letter please send us an email at info.aca@gmail.com – one of our volunteers
will answer your request.*
*Some Background*
Demonstration Projects are the limited-scale experiments that Medicare
undertakes to test innovations in Medicare Program design. Demonstration
Projects are aimed at reducing costs, improving health outcomes, increasing
Program efficiency, or decreasing bureaucracy and streamlining
administration. Medicare does not make large Program changes without first
conducting a Demonstration Project.
Medicare legislation provides authorization for Demonstration Projects to be
developed and implemented within the U.S., but not in foreign countries.
Congressional authorization and waivers of a number of provisions in the
Medicare legislation will be required in order to implement a Demonstration
Project for seniors living in Mexico.
At Americans for Medicare in Mexico, A.C., we believe that a Demonstration
Project for Medicare in Mexico will prove to be successful on a number of
levels:
1. Medicare Program savings will result, thanks to significantly lower
health care costs in Mexico.
2. Improved health outcomes for seniors living in Mexico, who are likely
to access care earlier when symptoms arise, and to have more frequent
preventive examinations and care, thanks to having coverage where they live.
3. Stimulate and enhance improvements already underway in certain sectors
of the Mexican health provider industry.
Now is the best opportunity ever to bring Medicare services to eligible
retirees living in Mexico. This is due to a confluence of political and
economic events in the United States and Mexico. The current focus on
healthcare reform in the U.S. provides an opportunity to promote Medicare
Demonstration Projects generally, as the need to find Medicare Program cost
savings becomes more urgent each year. A Medicare Demonstration Project in
Mexico will save the Medicare Trust Fund a large sum, thanks to much lower
cost for health services in Mexico.
According to most estimates, there are up to 200,000 American seniors, 60+
years young, living in Mexico either full or part time. These individuals
are mostly retired, and have worked in the U.S. for an average 31 years,
paying into the Medicare system. Because they live in Mexico, they either
do not have access to the services for which they have paid, or they must
travel back to the U.S. for covered medical care.
And in fact, a survey on the issue found that while most expat seniors
living in Mexico pay out-of-pocket for doctor visits, labs, and
prescriptions, *64% either have, or would travel back to the U.S. for a
serious illness requiring hospitalization or extended care*
not because of
concern about the care available in Mexico, but because they have coverage
in the U.S. If they had coverage for preventive care and doctor visits in
Mexico (Medicare Part B), at least some of that high-cost hospitalization
would be avoided
saving even more money, and improving health outcomes.
Many seniors choose Mexico in part for the lower cost of living
the median
household income for this group is only about $35,000. That amount doesnt
go far in most US cities, but you can live reasonably well in Mexico on that
amount.
Imagine having a serious illness, a limited budget, and having to travel to
the U.S. to receive covered care. Thats the reality for many expat seniors
in Mexico.
*Please write today*. Eligible seniors living in Mexico need your support.
Its fair, will improve health for a vulnerable population, and it will save
our government money. What could be better legislation?
Paul D. Crist
Email: paulcrist@hotel-mercurio.com
Telephones:
Mexico Office: +(521) 322-222-4793 (try these numbers first)
Mexico Cell: +(521) 322-294-1820
Toll Free from U.S. to Mexico Office: (866) 388-2689
Washington DC Office: 202-367-3324
Founder & President,
Americans for Medicare in Mexico, A.C. – Working to bring Medicare benefits
to eligible seniors living in Mexico
www.MedicareInMexico.org <http://www.medicareinmexico.org/>
Americans for Medicare in Mexico, A.C. (AMMAC) is a legally constituted
Mexican non-profit organization dedicated to bringing Medicare coverage to
eligible seniors living in Mexico. AMMAC is working to bring together the
people, organizations, expertise, and resources necessary to promote and
attain U.S. Congressional authorization for a Demonstration Project for
Medicare in Mexico.*
American Citizens Abroad (ACA)
The Voice of Americans Overseas
5 Rue Liotard
1202 Geneva, Switzerland
Founded in 1978, ACA is a non-profit, non-partisan, volunteer association
whose mission is to defend the rights of Americans living overseas. ACA
works to represent overseas Americans interests before the Executive Branch
of the U.S. Government, the US Congress, the Federal Judiciary, and in the
press. Headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland with offices in Washington D.C,
the association draws on more than three decades of rich experience and
knowledge of laws affecting Americans living overseas. To learn more about
ACA please visit our website, www.americansabroad.org
July 2, 2009
Presentations from Council Week and LHC Status
Thursday 2 July 2009, 15:30, Main
Auditorium
Introduction: Outcome of the Council
week, R. Heuer
LHC Status, S. Myers
Abstract:
The status of the
LHC will be presented. This will include the repair of sector 34, the
ongoing consolidation work in the other sectors, and the progress with
the new Quench Protection System. The results of recent resistance
measurements of the copper stabilizers will be presented.
The plans for
powering the LHC and the tunnel access restrictions will also be
discussed. Finally the planning for the start-up and the programme for
future operational consolidation work will be detailed.
http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=62277