The 170-page report concludes that "a burning plasma experiment is critically needed to advance fusion science," that "undertaking a burning plasma experiment cannot be done on a flat budget," and that "if negotiations proceed successfully, the fusion science program will move ahead with the ITER endeavor."

The panel, which was co-chaired by John Ahearne (Sigma-Xi) and Ray Fonck (U. Wisconsin) recommends that "the United States should participate in ITER," and that "if the ITER negotiations fail, the United States should continue, as soon as possible, to pursue the goal of conducting a burning plasma experiment with international partners."

The panel states "A strategically balanced U. S. fusion program should be developed that includes U. S. participation in ITER, a strong domestic fusion science and technology portfolio, an integrated theory and simulation program, and support for plasma science. As the ITER project develops, a substantial augmentation in fusion science program funding will be required in addition to the direct financial commitment to ITER construction."

The panel claims that "the addition of so major a new element as ITER" requires a new "prioritization process" to be "initiated by the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences to decide on the appropriate programmatic balance given the science opportunities identified and the budgetary situation of the time."

The report concludes "There are many unknowns as the fusion community embarks on this great scientific challenge. The elements required for the long-term health and vitality of this part of the U.S. research enterprise are not entirely clear, but this report strives to provide guidance for balancing the fusion program through elucidation of the key scientific, technical, and programmatic issues that need to be addressed in the coming years as it enters the burning plasma era. What is clear is that whichever strategy is adopted, it should be flexible, innovative, and inclusive in achieving the required balance for success."