Journal of Fusion Energy, Vol. 15, Nos. 3/4, 1996 Report of the FESAC Inertial Fusion Energy Review Panel John Sheffield (Chairman), ~ Mohamed Abdou, 2 Richard Briggs, 3 James Callen, 4 John Clarke, 5a3 Harold Forsen, 6,13 Katharine Gebbie, 7,13 Ingo Hoffman, s John Lindl, 9 Earl Marmar, ~~ William Nevins, 9 Marshall Rosenbluth, H,~3 William Tang, 12 and Ernest Valeo 12 Dr. Robert W. Conn, Chair Fusion Energy Advisory Committee School of Engineering University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, California 92093-0403 Dear Dr. Conn: April 8, 1996 This letter forwards the charge that follows up on a specific recommendation made by your Committee in its report, "A Restructured Fusion Energy Sciences Pro- gram." The report calls for a programmatic review to assist the Department in setting technical priorities for the Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) Program. Inertial fusion has been reviewed often in the past decade, including the Fusion Policy Advisory Commit- tee in 1990, the Fusion Energy Advisory Committee (FEAC) in 1993, as well as two reviews by the National Academy of Sciences during the 1980s. Questions of scientific merit and appropriate energy relevance have been addressed positively by the previous reviews. For the near term, however, we would like you to provide us with an assessment of the content of an inertial fusion energy program that advances the scientific elements of t Oak Ridge National Laboratory. -" University of California Los Angeles. 3 Science Applications International Co. 4 University of Wisconsin. 5 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 6 Bechtel (retired). 7 National Institutes of Science and Technology. s Gesellschaft fuer Schwerionenforsehung, Darmstadt, Germany. 9 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Ro Massachusetts Institute of Technology. " University of California, San Diego. n Princeton Plasma Physics laboratory. t3Members of FESAC. 281 the program and is consistent with the Fusion Energy Sciences Program, and budget projections over the next several years. Please consider augmenting the expertise of FEAC with appropriate individuals from inertial fusion pro- grams that are active in this country, as well as foreign participants that would be helpful. I would like to have your recommendations regard- ing this program by July 1996. The Department is appreciative of the time and en- ergy provided by the members of FEAC in this contin- uing effort to improve and orient the fusion energy sciences program to the needs of the times. I will look forward to hearing the Committee's recommendations on this matter. Sincerely, Martha A. Krebs Director Office of Energy Research Charge to the Fusion Energy Advisory Committee for an Inertial Fusion Energy Review Since 1990, the fusion program has had a mandate to pursue two independent approaches to fusion energy development, magnetic and inertial confinement fusion. In magnetic fusion, our strategy is to continue to use international collaboration, especially participation in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, to pursue fusion energy science and technology. In inertial fusion, our strategy has been to assume the target phys- ics is the highest priority activity and would be devel- oped as a part of the weapons research program; and, 0164-0313/96/1200-0281509.50/0 9 1996Plenum Publishing Corporation