The long-awaited review by the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies of the quality of the U. S. fusion science program (FPN99-18 and 42) has surfaced as an "Unedited Prepublication Copy," dated October 19, 2000 and released by the NRC on October 24. The report requests "Please do not quote the text, since the exact wording may be changed in the final edited report."

The study was performed by a panel chaired by Dr. Charles Kennel, Director of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, a highly respected plasma scientist in his own right and former deputy administrator of NASA.

The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate the quality of the fusion research program and to provide guidance for future program strategy aimed at strengthening the research component of the program. For the most part, the committee restricted its review to the magnetic confinement plasma science portion of the program and did not assess either the DOE Defense Program's inertial confinement fusion program or the technology portion of the program.

The committee concluded that the U.S. program has made remarkable strides over the years and has recently passed several important milestones, noting significant progress in understanding and controlling instabilities and turbulence leading to improved plasma confinement. The committee believes that many of the major experimental and theoretical tools that have been developed are now converging to produce a qualitative change in the approach to scientific discovery in the program. They state that the quality of U.S fusion plasma science is easily on a par with other leading areas of contemporary physical science.

The panel makes seven primary recommendations:

(1) that increasing scientific understanding of fusion-relevant plasmas should become a central goal of the U.S. program on a par with the goal of developing fusion energy and that decision making reflect these dual and related goals;

(2) that there be a systematic effort to reduce the scientific isolation of the fusion research community from the rest of the scientific community;

(3) that the institutional base of the U.S. program be broadened;

(4) that several new, openly competed centers devoted to exploring the frontiers of fusion science be established;

(5) that solid support within a broad scientific community for U.S. investment in a fusion burning experiment be developed;

(6) that the National Science Foundation should play a role in extending the reach of fusion science, as well as sponsoring general plasma science; and

(7) that there should be continuing broad assessments of the outlook for fusion energy and periodic external reviews of fusion energy science.

The report can be viewed at http://fire.pppl.gov