    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                          FROM TRANSFORMATIVE SCIENCE
                        TO TECHNOLOGICAL BREAKTHROUGHS:
                          DOE'S NATIONAL LABORATORIES

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                             SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
                                 AND TECHNOLOGY

                                     OF THE

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 12, 2025

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 119-2

                                   __________

     Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

     [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov

                                    __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    58-902PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2025

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                       HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chairman

    RANDY WEBER, Texas                   ZOE LOFGREN, California, Ranking
    JIM BAIRD, Indiana                       Member
    DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
    JAY OBERNOLTE, California            HALEY STEVENS, Michigan
    CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee         DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
    DARRELL ISSA, California             ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
    CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina
    SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida              EMILIA SYKES, Ohio
    MAX MILLER, Ohio                     MAXWELL FROST, Florida
    RICH McCORMICK, Georgia              GABE AMO, Rhode Island
    MIKE COLLINS, Georgia                SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM, Virginia
    VINCE FONG, California               LUZ RIVAS, California
    DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina         SYLVESTER TURNER, Texas
    KEITH SELF, Texas                    SARAH McBRIDE, Delaware
    PAT HARRIGAN, North Carolina         LAURA GILLEN, New York
    SHERI BIGGS, South Carolina          GEORGE WHITESIDES, California,
    JEFF HURD, Colorado                       Vice Ranking Member
    MIKE HARIDOPOLOS, Florida            LAURA FRIEDMAN, California
    MIKE KENNEDY, Utah                   APRIL McCLAIN DELANEY, Maryland
    NICK BEGICH, Alaska                  JOSH RILEY, New York
    VACANT
                                     ------

                             Subcommittee on Energy

                       HON. RANDY WEBER, Texas, Chairman
    JIM BAIRD, Indiana                   DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina,
    CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee             Ranking Member
    CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
    PAT HARRIGAN, North Carolina         SYLVESTER TURNER, Texas
    SHERI BIGGS, South Carolina          LAURA FRIEDMAN, California
    JEFF HURD, Colorado                  JOSH RILEY, New York
    NICK BEGICH, Alaska                  VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                               February 12, 2025

                                                                       Page

    Hearing Charter..................................................     2

                               Opening Statements

    Statement by Representative Randy Weber, Chairman, Subcommittee
      on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
      House of Representatives.......................................     8
        Written Statement............................................     9

    Statement by Representative Deborah Ross, Ranking Member,
      Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and
      Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................    10
        Written Statement............................................    11

    Written statement by Representative Brian Babin, Chairman,
      Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
      Representatives................................................    12

    Statement by Representative Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member,
      Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
      Representatives................................................    13
        Written Statement............................................    14

                                   Witnesses:

    Dr. John Wagner, Director, Idaho National Laboratory
        Oral Statement...............................................    15
        Written Statement............................................    18

    Dr. Thom Mason, Director, Los Alamos National Laboratory
        Oral Statement...............................................    28
        Written Statement............................................    30

    Dr. Paul Kearns, Director, Argonne National Laboratory
        Oral Statement...............................................    37
        Written Statement............................................    39

    Dr. Kimberly Budil, Director, Lawrence Livermore National
      Laboratory
        Oral Statement...............................................    51
        Written Statement............................................    53

    Discussion.......................................................    63

                 Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

    Dr. Paul Kearns, Director, Argonne National Laboratory...........    88

                Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record

    Letter submitted by Representative Randy Weber, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, Space, and
      Technology, U.S. House of Representatives
        Partnership for AI Infrastructure............................    92

                          FROM TRANSFORMATIVE SCIENCE
                        TO TECHNOLOGICAL BREAKTHROUGHS:
                          DOE'S NATIONAL LABORATORIES

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2025

                      House of Representatives,
                                Subcommittee on Energy,
                   Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
                                                       Washington, D.C.

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
    room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Randy Weber
    [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Weber. The Subcommittee on Energy will come to
    order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare
    recesses of the Subcommittee at any time.
        Welcome to today's hearing entitled ``From Transformative
    Science to Technological Breakthroughs: DOE's National
    Laboratories.'' I recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening
    statement.
        So good morning, y'all. Today, the Energy Subcommittee will
    be examining the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)'s National
    Laboratories and their role in advancing scientific
    discoveries, as well as developing innovative technologies. Our
    discussion will explore several topics, including research,
    security, DOE's world-leading user facilities, as well as
    emerging technologies.
        Since its early formation in World War II, the National
    Laboratories have consistently been at the forefront of
    scientific achievement. As the largest Federal recipient of
    basic research funding in the physical sciences, the National
    Labs and their 28 user facilities have taken on the most
    fundamental challenges in the fields of computer science, high-
    energy physics, fusion energy, as well as materials science.
        Despite these challenges, the labs have made significant
    scientific breakthroughs, which include sequencing the first
    human genome, mapping the universe, achieving fusion ignition,
    and discovering 22 of the elements on the periodic table. These
    achievements have been instrumental to U.S. technological
    leadership, creating new industries, as well as products.
        In tandem, through public-private partnerships, the
    National Labs play a major role in transforming our energy
    sector. For instance, the National Energy Technology Lab, known
    as NETL, worked with industry to develop hydraulic fracturing
    technology. Before its widespread use in the late 2000's, the
    United States was actually in a dire energy state, relying on
    foreign powers to supply natural gas.
        As a result, the United States built LNG (liquefied natural
    gas) terminals, including one in Freeport, Texas--my district--
    to import trillions of cubic feet of natural gas. Due to NETL's
    collaborative work with industry, however, the United States
    repurposed these same terminals to export LNG to our allies,
    while reducing the cost of energy at home. This showcases the
    importance of public-private partnerships and their ability to
    ensure our national security and our energy independence.
        Likewise, the National Laboratories are involved in the
    development of next-generation energy technologies, for
    example, such as advanced nuclear energy. For over the last 20
    years, researchers at Oak Ridge (ORNL) and Idaho National Labs
    (INL) have made significant improvements to TRISO fuel, which
    is a fabricated fuel using Gen IV reactors. Partly due to the
    lab's work, TRISO fuel has been adopted by some of the leading
    advanced reactor companies, including X-energy, a recipient of
    the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP). X-energy
    plans to use this fabricated fuel for its XE-100 reactor, which
    will provide power and heat to Dow's industrial production
    facility in Seadrift, Texas, just south of my district.
    Moreover, the lab's work in fabricated fuels, along with their
    ability to supply HALEU (high-assay low-enriched uranium),
    which will bring forth a new nuclear renaissance.
        With our focus on National Laboratories, I would be remiss
    if I didn't bring up the CHIPS and Science Act. Back in the
    117th Congress, I, as the Energy Subcommittee Ranking Member,
    along with the House Science Committee Members, worked across
    the aisle to produce the Department of Energy's Science for the
    Future Act, which included my bill, the Computing Advancements
    for Materials Science, CAMS, Act. This large, comprehensive
    House product ultimately became the basic text to the CHIPS, as
    well as the Science Act, which reauthorized the Office of
    Science's basic research programs, authorized upgrades and
    experimental facilities such as the Electron Ion Collider at
    Brookhaven National Laboratory, and directed DOE to implement
    new research security provisions.
        Despite the wideset support for this bill, Congress has yet
    to appropriate to the levels authorized in the CHIPS and
    Science Act. This failure is partly due to the Biden
    Administration's prioritization of new and untested
    demonstration and deployment programs. While the IIJA
    (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) and the IRA (Inflation
    Reduction Act) invested close to 100 billion for over 70 new
    programs, the Office of Science and its labs received only 2
    billion, which is a paltry 2 percent of funding outside of the
    traditional appropriation process. This doesn't include the
    Biden Administration's risky loan office, which doled out tens
    of billions to its politically connected clean energy friends.
        In 2017, I led a joint Subcommittee hearing titled, quote,
    ``Risky Business: The DOE Loan Guarantee Program,'' end quote,
    where I highlighted in my opening statement that the Ivanpah
    solar project would come at the cost of the ratepayers if the--
    quote, ``if the project fails and goes into default,'' end
    quote. With the recent announcement by PG&E ending its
    relationship with Ivanpah, it seems that my prediction was
    correct. It has--looks like it's coming true.
        Moreover, I hope that the Trump Administration will work
    with Congress to fully fund the basic science programs at
    levels consistent with CHIPS and Science and reprioritize the
    Department to focus on basic research and its labs. This will
    ensure U.S. competitiveness and technological prowess in the
    21st century.
        I'd like to thank in advance our witnesses today for their
    testimony, and I look forward to our conversation here today.
        [The prepared statement of Chairman Weber follows:]

        Good Morning, today the Energy Subcommittee will be
    examining the U.S. Department of Energy's National Laboratories
    and their role in advancing scientific discoveries as well as
    developing innovative technologies. Our discussion will explore
    several topics including research security, DOE's world leading
    user facilities, and emerging technologies.
        Since its early formation in World War II, the National
    Laboratories have consistently been at the forefront of
    scientific achievement. As the largest federal recipient of
    basic research funding in the physical sciences, the National
    Labs and their 28 user facilities have taken on the most
    fundamental challenges in the fields of computer science, high
    energy physics, fusion energy, and material science. Our labs
    met those challenges and made significant scientific
    breakthroughs, including sequencing the first human genome,
    mapping the universe, achieving fusion ignition, and
    discovering 22 of the elements on the periodic table. These
    achievements were instrumental to U.S. technological leadership
    creating new industries and products.
        In tandem, through public private partnerships, the
    National Labs play a major role in transforming our energy
    sector. For instance, the National Energy Technology
    Laboratory, known as NETL, worked with industry to develop
    hydraulic fracturing technology. Before its widespread use in
    the late 2000s, the United States was in a dire energy state
    relying on foreign powers to supply natural gas. As a result,
    the US built LNG terminals, including one in Freeport Texas, to
    import trillions of cubic feet of natural gas. Due to NETL's
    collaborative work with industry, the United States repurposed
    those same terminals to export LNG to our allies while reducing
    the cost of energy at home. This showcases the importance of
    public private partnerships and their ability to ensure our
    national security and energy security.
        Likewise, the National Laboratories are involved in the
    development of next-generation energy technologies such as
    advanced nuclear energy. For over the last twenty years,
    researchers at Oak Ridge and Idaho National Labs have made
    significant improvements to TRISO fuel, which is a fabricated
    fuel used in GEN IV reactors. Partly due to the labs' work,
    TRISO fuel has been adopted by some of the leading advanced
    reactor companies including X-Energy, a recipient of the
    Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program. X-Energy plans to use
    this fabricated fuel for its XE-100 reactor, which will provide
    power and heat to Dow's industrial production facility in
    Seadrift Texas, just south of my district. Moreover, the labs
    work in fabricated fuels along with their ability to supply
    High-Assey Low-Enriched Uranium, or ``HALEU'' could bring forth
    a new nuclear renaissance.
        With our focus on the National Laboratories, I would be
    remiss if I didn't bring up the CHIPS and Science Act. Back in
    the 117th Congress, I, as the Energy Subcommittee Ranking
    Member, along with House Science Committee members worked
    across the aisle to produce the Department of Energy Science
    for the Future Act, which included my bill, the Computing
    Advancements for Materials Science (CAMS) Act. This large
    comprehensive House product ultimately became the base text to
    the CHIPS and Science Act, which reauthorized the Office of
    Science's basic research programs, authorized upgrades and
    experimental facilities such as the Electron Ion Collider at
    Brookhaven National Laboratory, and directed DOE to implement
    new research security provisions.
        Despite the widespread support for this bill, Congress has
    yet to appropriate to the levels authorized in the CHIPS and
    Science Act. This failure is partly due to the Biden
    administration's prioritization of new and untested
    demonstration and deployment programs carried out in the IIJA
    and IRA.
        This doesn't include the Biden Administration's risky loan
    office, which doled out tens of billions to its politically-
    connected clean energy friends. In 2017, I led a joint
    subcommittee hearing titled ``Risky Business: The DOE Loan
    Guarantee Program'' where I highlighted in my opening statement
    that the Ivanpah solar project would come at the cost of the
    ratepayers if the ``project fails and goes into default.'' With
    the recent announcement by PG&E ending its relationship with
    Ivanpah, it seems that my prediction was correct.
        Moreover, I hope that the Trump Administration will work
    with Congress to reprioritize the Department to focus on basic
    research and its labs; this will ensure U.S. competitiveness
    and technological prowess in the 21st century.
        I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony,
    and I look forward to our conversation here today.

        Chairman Weber. I now recognize the Ranking Member, the
    Representative North Carolina, for her opening statement.
        Ms. Ross. Well, good morning, and thank you so much to
    Chairman Weber for convening this hearing today to discuss the
    importance of the national laboratory network to preserving our
    Nation's leading edge in science and developing the energy
    solutions and workforce of tomorrow. I want to thank our
    distinguished witnesses for being here to share your testimony
    and insights on this topic.
        As a nation, we have entered a pivotal stage where we have
    not one, but several emerging clean energy technologies that
    have the potential to reshape and improve our economy. We have
    advanced and modular nuclear demonstration reactors being
    designed and built right now that, when completed, will give
    investors the confidence they need to make them the backbone of
    our electrical grid and improve reliability.
        We have fusion, right, Representative Lofgren? The holy
    grail of energy, making strides in defining--in being able to
    be realized in years rather than decades. We have energy
    storage technologies making leaps in performance and safety,
    which, when paired with new smart grid technologies, will make
    intermittency concerns with renewable energy a thing of the
    past. These energy technologies are poised not only to
    decarbonize the electrical grid, but to make it more resilient,
    reliable, and secure in times of climate disasters.
        In my home State of North Carolina, we are seeing
    hurricanes becoming increasingly stronger in the wake of
    climate change, and we need our grid infrastructure to improve
    accordingly. And clearly, we have also seen this in Texas,
    California, and throughout our country.
        We also need to continue to support partnerships that share
    advanced computing resources between the national laboratories
    and NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) that
    will enable more accurate forecasting of weather and climate
    events, allowing first responders to prepare ahead of time, and
    potentially save lives and property.
        And, as I've come to understand, at the forefront of all of
    these technologies and partnerships is the Department of
    Energy's national laboratory network. I'm looking forward to
    hearing from our expert witnesses on the valuable work the
    national laboratories are doing, how they are improving the
    security of our communities, and what Congress can do to
    support their work.
        That said, I'm also deeply concerned about the impact of
    the Administration's blanket freeze on Federal funding provided
    by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in flagrant violation of
    several recent court orders. It is undermining the ability of
    these labs, in partnership with the private sector, to
    strengthen our grid and prevent future severe impacts on our
    communities. So I'll be digging into that as well.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Ross follows:]

        Good morning and thank you, Chairman Weber, for convening
    this hearing today to discuss the importance of the national
    laboratory network to preserving our nation's leading edge in
    science, and in developing the energy solutions and workforce
    of tomorrow. I also want to thank our distinguished witnesses
    for being here to share your testimony and insights on this
    topic.
        As a nation, we have entered a pivotal stage where we have
    not one, but several emerging clean energy technologies that
    have the potential to reshape and improve our economy. We have
    advanced and modular nuclear demonstration reactors being
    designed and built right now that, when completed, will give
    investors the confidence needed to make them the backbone of
    our electrical grid. We have fusion, the holy grail of energy,
    making strides now defined in years, not decades. And we have
    energy storage technologies making leaps in performance and
    safety, which, when paired with new smart grid technologies,
    will make intermittency concerns with renewable energy a thing
    of the past.
        These energy technologies are poised to not only
    decarbonize the electrical grid, but to make it more resilient,
    reliable, and secure in times of climate disasters. In my home
    state of North Carolina, we are seeing hurricanes becoming
    increasingly stronger in the wake of climate change, and we
    need our grid infrastructure to improve accordingly. We also
    need to continue to support partnerships that share advanced
    computing resources between the national laboratories and the
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that would
    enable more accurate forecasting of weather and climate events,
    allowing first responders to prepare ahead of time, and
    potentially save lives.
        And as I have come to understand, at the forefront of all
    these technologies and partnerships, is the Department of
    Energy's national laboratory network. I am looking forward to
    hearing from our expert witnesses on the valuable work the
    national laboratories are doing, how they are improving the
    security of our communities, and what Congress can do to help.
        That said, I am also deeply concerned about the impacts
    that this Administration's blanket freeze on federal funding
    provided by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law--in flagrant
    violation of several recent court orders--is undermining the
    ability of these labs in partnership with the private sector to
    strengthen our grid and prevent future severe impacts on our
    communities. So, I will be digging into that as well.
        With that, I thank you Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

        Ms. Ross. Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to ask unanimous
    consent to waive onto the Committee Representative Bill Foster
    for the purpose of asking questions of the witnesses during
    this hearing.
        Chairman Weber. Without objection, so ordered.
        Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. Thank you, Ranking Member Ross.
        Without objection, Chairman Babin's opening statement will
    be included in the record.
        [The prepared statement of Chairman Babin follows:]

        Good morning everyone. I want to thank my great friend from
    Texas, Chairman Weber, and the Energy Subcommittee for holding
    their first hearing this Congress on the importance of theU.S.
    Department of Energy's National Laboratories.
        As another friend, former Texas Governor and U.S. Energy
    Secretary Rick Perry, once said, DOE's 17 National Labs are the
    ``crown jewels'' of American science--I couldn't agree more.
        I'm grateful we have four esteemed Lab Directors here
    today, and I'm eager to dive into and hear more about the
    often-overlooked issue of maintaining the ``crown jewel''
    status of our National Labs.
        Many people often focus on topline research spending or
    shiny new facilities, and while still important, they forget
    that some of these labs date back to World War II. As a result,
    essential systems like electrical and water infrastructure are
    well beyond their expected lifespan.
        It is crucial for the federal government to balance the
    development of new facilities with the maintenance of legacy
    infrastructure to ensure American preeminence in the coming
    decades. It is equally important to appropriately prioritize
    high-risk, high-reward basic research that does not crowd-out
    private sector investments, rather than favoring special
    interest groups.
        Without appropriately balancing these efforts, there could
    be major impacts on the overall quality of science conducted at
    the laboratories and the ability to recruit the best and
    brightest talent.
        Speaking of recruiting--it's becoming just as big of a
    challenge as funding and scientific complexity. This is largely
    due to the growing capabilities of our global competitors. Make
    no mistake: the United States is challenged by the Chinese
    Communist Party (CCP) across multiple emerging sectors,
    including space, nuclear fusion, quantum, and artificial
    intelligence.
        They are significantly increasing their spending to attract
    a growing share of the world's top researchers within their
    borders. This is a clear attempt to outmaneuver the U.S. and
    lead in technological innovation.
        Let me be clear: the CCP represents a significant threat to
    our American way of life, focused on intimidation and
    suppression instead of collaboration and freedom. Our nation
    has always taken pride in and prioritized an open and
    cooperative research environment. I hope to learn more today
    about how the National Laboratories are striking the right
    balance on research security.
        It is imperative that they ensure that key U.S.
    technologies are protected while also engaging with the hard-
    working scientific community, who are vital for out-innovating
    our competitors.
        We are also witnessing remarkable advancements in several
    emerging technologies that are shaping our future. The steps
    taken by the SST Committee this Congress will significantly
    impact the development of these technologies in large part by
    the National Labs, ensuring their successful rollout by the
    private sector.
        I know Idaho National Lab, represented by one of our
    Directors here this morning, is working closely with a number
    of small modular reactor startup companies with the hopes of
    revolutionizing how we see the nuclear industry.
        I also understand that Lawrence Livermore is collaborating
    with the growing commercial fusion sector, which hopes to
    deliver power to the grid in the next decade. These
    technological advancements are vital to powering the artificial
    intelligence expansion currently happening across the globe.
        Once again, I cannot overstate the importance of the work
    our National Laboratories do to safeguard our national security
    and strengthen America's economic competitiveness and energy
    security.
        I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony,
    and I look forward to the important conversation about to take
    place.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

        Chairman Weber. I now recognize the Ranking Member of the
    Full Committee for a statement.
        Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you, and good morning, Chairman
    Weber and Ranking Member Ross, and thank you to the witnesses
    who got here through a snowstorm. We appreciate the effort that
    you've taken to be here today.
        The Department of Energy, as we know, oversees 17 world-
    class national laboratories and an array of programs focused on
    ensuring U.S. leadership in clean energy industries of the
    future and keeping our Nation on the forefront of scientific
    discovery. The Department also has the solemn responsibility of
    stewarding and ensuring the reliability of our nuclear weapons
    stockpile.
        Often for broad bipartisan hearings like this, where a
    major focus is on introducing our Committee's many new Members
    to the full range of exciting facilities and projects that the
    Department oversees, here is where I'd pivot to a favorite
    subject of mine that the Ranking Member just referenced, and
    that's fusion energy. We'll certainly get to that. And I'm very
    appreciative that we have the Director from Lawrence Livermore
    National Lab with the NIF (National Ignition Facility) facility
    here today.
        I'm deeply disturbed, I will say, by the actions of the
    current Administration and its severe impacts on the entire
    research enterprise, including national labs. Funds
    appropriated by Congress to accelerate the development and
    deployment of a broad range of technologies have been
    arbitrarily and indefinitely frozen, and the new Director of
    the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
    threatened to make a large portion of these so-called pauses
    permanent by violating the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, and
    even more alarmingly, the power of the purse vested to Congress
    in Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
        I'm also concerned about the assault on diversity in
    science. I remember last year's Chairman of the Committee in
    response to an amendment about broadening the scope, saying
    those good old boys in rural Oklahoma never get a chance to
    compete, we can't leave behind any bright mind in America. And
    it's worth remembering that not everybody has the same level of
    wealth and access to get in and compete. This is all about
    competition and merit and opportunity.
        Lastly, I want to say that it is really unconscionable that
    the critical missions of the Department of Energy could now be
    catastrophically undermined by an ill-informed, unelected
    billionaire and his deeply inexperienced minions. We know that
    the new Secretary of Energy personally granted access to DOE's
    IT (information technology) system to personnel associated with
    the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE,
    over the objections of DOE's own Offices of General Counsel and
    the Chief Information Officer. They objected in part because a
    23-year-old member of DOGE had not undergone the standard
    background check normally required to gain access to this
    highly sensitive data. The risk is further heightened due to
    the enormous financial conflicts of interest that Mr. Musk, as
    CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of Tesla, has with DOE.
        This is why Ranking Members Deborah Ross, Emilia Sykes, and
    I recently sent a letter to the Secretary requesting a full
    account of DOGE's activities at the Department and the specific
    access that had been provided to proprietary as well as
    classified data. This breach is all the more galling given that
    Tesla itself received a $465 million loan from the DOE Loan
    Program Office in 2010 that played a crucial role in the
    company's rise as a global leader in electric vehicles. There
    appears to be no end of the hypocrisy that these folks are
    willing to engage in.
        All this said, I recognize that the witnesses before us
    today are certainly not responsible for the radical actions of
    this new Administration, even if they have been forced to
    address and mitigate their consequences as best they can. So I
    truly look forward to this discussion to better understand
    these impacts and to chart a better path forward for our
    country's best and brightest minds.
        I look forward to hearing from the panel about recent
    advancements in the fusion industry. I do want to celebrate
    that this Committee has always operated in a bipartisan manner.
    That goes back decades. And I'm cheered by Chairman Weber's
    call that the science in CHIPS and Science be fully funded up
    to the authorized level. That is an important statement, Mr.
    Chairman.
        And with that, I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:]

        Good morning and thank you, Chairman Weber and Ranking
    Member Ross, for holding this important hearing today. And
    thank you to this excellent panel of witnesses for being here
    this morning. The Department of Energy oversees 17 world-class
    national laboratories and an array of programs focused on
    ensuring U.S. leadership in the clean energy industries of the
    future, and on keeping our nation at the forefront of
    scientific discovery. The Department also has the solemn
    responsibility of stewarding and ensuring the reliability of
    our nuclear weapons stockpile.
        Often for broad, bipartisan hearings like this where a
    major focus is on introducing our Committee's many new Members
    to the full range of exciting facilities and projects that the
    Department oversees, here is where I'd pivot to a favorite
    subject of mine, and that's fusion energy. And we'll certainly
    get to that. However, these are not normal times.
        I am deeply disturbed by the actions of this Administration
    and its severe impacts on our nation's entire research
    enterprise, including the national labs. Funds appropriated by
    Congress to accelerate the development and deployment of a
    broad range of clean energy technologies have been arbitrarily
    and indefinitely frozen. And the new Director of the White
    House's Office of Management and Budget has threatened to make
    a large portion of these ``pauses'' permanent by violating the
    Impoundment Control Act of 1974 and, even more alarmingly, the
    power of the purse vested to Congress in Article 1 of the U.S.
    Constitution.
        The widespread assault on any federally supported
    individual or program involved in enhancing the diversity,
    equity, inclusion (DEI), and accessibility of our research
    enterprise is also frankly staggering. I want to be very clear
    about this. The talking point from the President, on down to
    justify these draconian actions is that we need revert to an
    entirely merit-based system. Well, I couldn't agree more that
    that should be our shared goal. But what the Administration is
    willfully failing to even try to understand is that while every
    American should have an equal opportunity to succeed, not every
    American is born into the same level of wealth and access. The
    Labs' broadening participation programs were never about
    undermining merit. They were about creating pathways for all
    Americans. If we continue to leave half or more of our nation's
    brainpower behind, we will never compete with China. Further,
    in most cases these efforts are required by statute.
        Lastly, I must say that it is unconscionable that the
    critical missions of the Department of Energy could now be
    catastrophically undermined by an ill-informed, unelected
    billionaire and his deeply inexperienced minions. We know that
    the new Secretary of Energy personally granted access to DOE's
    IT system to personnel associated with the so-called
    ``Department of Government Efficiency,'' or DOGE, over the
    objections of DOE's own offices of General Counsel and the
    Chief Information Officer.
        They objected in part because a 23-year-old member of DOGE
    had not undergone the standard background check normally
    required to gain access to this highly sensitive data. The risk
    is further heightened due to the enormous financial conflicts-
    of-interest that Elon Musk, as CEO of Tesla, has with DOE. This
    is why Ranking Members Deborah Ross, Emilia Sykes, and I
    recently sent a letter to the Secretary requesting a full
    account of DOGE's activities at the Department and the specific
    access that they have been provided to proprietary and
    classified data.
        This breach is all the more galling given that Tesla itself
    received a $465 million loan from the DOE Loan Program Office
    in 2010 that played a crucial role in the company's rise as a
    global leader in electric vehicles. There appears to be no end
    to the hypocrisy that these folks are willing to engage in.
        All this said, I recognize that the witnesses before us
    today are certainly not responsible for the radical actions of
    this new Administration, even if they have been forced to
    address and mitigate their consequences as best they can. So, I
    truly look forward to this discussion to better understand
    these impacts, and to chart a better path forward for our
    country's best and brightest minds. And yes, I look forward to
    hearing from the panel about recent advancements in fusion
    energy development.
        With that I yield back.

        Chairman Weber. Thank you, Ranking Member Lofgren.
        I'll now introduce our witnesses. Our first witness today
    is Dr. John Wagner, the Director of Idaho National Laboratory.
    Our next witness is Dr. Thom Mason, the Director at Los Alamos
    National Laboratory. Our third witness is Dr. Paul Kearns, the
    Director at Argonne National Laboratory. And our final and--
    some would argue--best witness is Dr. Kimberly Budil, the
    Director at Lawrence Liverpool National Laboratory.
        I now recognize Dr. Wagner for 5 minutes.

                     TESTIMONY OF DR. JOHN WAGNER,

                  DIRECTOR, IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY

        Dr. Wagner. Thank you. Chairman Weber, Subcommittee Ranking
    Member Ross, and Ranking Member Lofgren, it's a pleasure to be
    here. Thank you for having me in this discussion today. My name
    is John Wagner. I'm the Director at the Idaho National
    Laboratory, the Nation's center for nuclear energy research and
    development (R&D). I also serve as the Chair of the National
    Directors--National Laboratory Directors Council.
        I considered it to be a true honor to be a part of a system
    tasked with finding solutions to our Nation's greatest energy
    and security challenges. On a personal note, my first
    professional experiences as a college student was during
    internships in the summertime at Oak Ridge National Laboratory
    and Los Alamos National Laboratory. These experiences opened my
    eyes to amazing possibilities and had a profound impact on my
    career and on my life.
        After beginning in the private sector, I worked at Oak
    Ridge National Laboratory for nearly 17 years before my
    passions for nuclear energy brought me to Idaho in 2016 as the
    Chief Scientist of the Materials and Fuels Complex, and later
    became Lab Director in 2020. As Energy Secretary Chris Wright
    recently wrote, ``DOE's R&D enterprise is the envy of the
    world.'' Originating during the Manhattan Project, our national
    labs have achieved breakthroughs that have literally changed
    the path of human history and ensured American scientific and
    technical leadership.
        Mastery of today's new technologies is vital for our future
    global leadership. We must, as a nation, understand and be
    first in finding answers to questions that will determine how
    future generations live. Questions such as, how do we leverage
    our abundant energy resources for our power prosperity? How do
    we innovate to ensure durable, stable energy dominance through
    fission, fusion, and other technologies? How do we harness AI
    (artificial intelligence), exascale computing, quantum
    computing to provide breakthroughs and solutions to benefit
    American people and American industry? How do we ensure
    domestic production of strategic and critical minerals and
    materials to secure our supply chain? How do we secure our grid
    and other critical infrastructure for the reliable delivery of
    necessary energy and water? And how do we ensure U.S. national
    security at home and abroad? The experts at our national
    laboratories are hard at work finding these solutions to these
    pressing challenges.
        At the same time, they're constantly looking ahead over the
    horizon to be prepared for future challenges. Our labs design
    and operate unique facilities and unparalleled scientific
    instruments that enable a greater understanding of the origin
    of the universe, fundamental properties of materials, behaviors
    of biological systems, and development and delivery of
    pharmaceuticals, and so much more.
        Within the DOE national laboratory system, there are three
    applied energy laboratories. Idaho National Laboratory is one
    of them, also the National Energy Technology Laboratory and the
    National Renewable Energy Laboratory. These applied energy
    laboratories, working together, play a crucial role in driving
    energy innovation for the Nation.
        At INL, we have made historic contributions to our Nation's
    energy and national security. Notable achievements include
    first demonstration of nuclear power, which now provides nearly
    10 percent of the electricity around the world and nearly 20
    percent of the U.S. electricity, and also in the development of
    nuclear propulsion, which has played a key role in establishing
    U.S. Naval military dominance.
        Today, INL is helping maintain and extend the lives of
    America's nuclear reactor fleet, while working with industry to
    demonstrate and deploy the next generation of nuclear power.
    Long-time nuclear leaders like Westinghouse, General Electric,
    Holtec, Southern Company, and a long list have joined with a
    growing number of nuclear startups like TerraPower, X-energy,
    Oklo, Kairos, Radiant, Lightbridge, and many others--sorry, I'm
    not going to be able to mention all of them--collaborating with
    the laboratories on innovative reactor designs, fuel
    development, and associated technologies to address and
    expanding completion--or expanding variety of energy use cases.
        Our advanced reactor testbeds are nearing completion, and
    in the next few years, will enable multiple private sector
    reactor demonstrations, derisking these technologies to support
    commercial adoption and deployment. We see an example of this
    as U.S.-based refinery and chemical production companies are
    funding engineering evaluations for power, steam, heat, and
    hydrogen production from existing nuclear power plants, as well
    as advanced reactors. In support of these emerging
    technologies, U.S.-based Bloom Energy, FuelCell Energy, General
    Electric, and others are using the capabilities at Idaho
    National Laboratory to demonstrate high-temperature
    electrolysis to produce hydrogen and oxygen.
        But every DOE lab has exciting stories to tell, stories of
    harnessing research and development for the benefit of the
    American people and our industries. I believe that our 17
    national laboratories are a primary difference-maker, our
    Nation's ace in the hole if you will, that will enable us to
    win the competition between nations, enhance our standing as a
    world leader in energy and technological innovation, and ensure
    our economic prosperity.
        In closing, I appreciate very much the opportunity to be a
    part of this discussion, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Wagner follows:]
       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Weber. Thank you, sir.
        Dr. Mason, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

                      TESTIMONY OF DR. THOM MASON,

                DIRECTOR, LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY

        Dr. Mason. Chairman Weber, Ranking Member Ross, and Members
    of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'm
    Thom Mason, the Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory. For
    more than 80 years, our lab, which is one of the 17 DOE
    national labs, played a critical role in advancing scientific
    discovery, technology development that strengthens U.S.
    security, economic competitiveness, and energy leadership.
        Today, I will focus on three key areas: national security
    challenges in a rapidly evolving world, the role of artificial
    intelligence in defense and scientific advancement, and the
    need for infrastructure investment to sustain innovation.
        Over the past 30-plus years, the geopolitical landscape has
    shifted from a bipolar cold war structure to a post-cold war
    environment where the United States was the sole superpower to
    the tripolar dynamic we see today with United States, China,
    and Russia compounded by independent and surrogate actors. This
    has created new challenges that demands technological
    innovation to maintain strategic stability.
        A critical component of national security is energy
    security. The United States must invest in nuclear power as a
    stable energy source that reduces reliance on foreign supply
    chains, and Los Alamos is at the forefront of advancing reactor
    technologies in partnership with Idaho and fuel innovations
    that can support both national security and economic growth.
        Today, however, in many areas, private sector investment in
    R&D is exceeding government investment, and that requires the
    labs to strengthen public-private partnerships to ensure that
    advancements align with national interests. Probably artificial
    intelligence is the best illustration of this dynamic. From a
    national security perspective, artificial intelligence is
    transforming global power dynamics faster than any other
    technology.
        While the United States leads in areas of AI development,
    this lead is narrowing as China increases government investment
    in AI-driven defense and surveillance systems, which have the
    potential to undermine our legacy deterrent. AI is a force
    multiplier for national security, and Los Alamos is leveraging
    artificial intelligence to improve weapons simulations, to
    enhance deterrence, to strengthen cybersecurity against
    emerging threats, and optimize defense supply chains to ensure
    resilience.
        However, our current AI efforts are not operating at the
    necessary scale. A national AI initiative is needed to apply
    the most advanced AI tools to national security challenges, to
    invest in classified AI infrastructure and high-performance
    computing and to maintain U.S. leadership in AI-driven
    deterrence strategies. The Nation that first scales AI for
    national security will shape global stability for decades.
        Turning now to infrastructure, regrettably, aging research
    infrastructure does threaten innovation. At Los Alamos, many of
    our facilities essential for national security are outdated and
    in urgent need of recapitalization. The Los Alamos Neutron
    Science Center, or LANSCE, is vital for nuclear certification,
    as well as medical isotope production, and it's more than 50
    years old and requires modernization to maintain reliability.
    The LANSCE Modernization Project, which was recently approved
    for critical decision zero mission need is crucial for
    restoring full capability.
        Similarly, our Explosive Research Complex, which supports
    national defense and warfighter safety, faces structural
    deficiencies that hinder critical research. These facilities
    must be updated to sustain scientific and defense innovation.
    The data from our experimental facilities is the raw material
    for training artificial intelligence, so investing in modern
    infrastructure is not just a scientific priority, it's a
    national security imperative.
        Rapid technological advancements have also made
    technological surprise a growing concern. Unlike past areas
    where research could be tightly controlled, AI and emerging
    technologies are advancing, often in open-source environments,
    making them more difficult to monitor. To counter these risks,
    the United States must develop classified AI testbeds at the
    national labs to assess emerging technologies, leverage AI-
    driven intelligence to track adversarial advancements, and
    strengthen our collaboration with allies to maintain a
    strategic edge. The best way to prevent technological surprise
    is to lead in innovation and deployment. We must get there
    first.
        Because private industry leads in AI and quantum computing
    and other disruptive technologies, the national labs must
    collaborate closely with industry to accelerate advancements
    and ensure they align with our public needs. At Los Alamos,
    we've already partnered with leaders like OpenAI and NVIDIA and
    can leverage the success of DOE's recently successfully
    concluded Exascale Computing Project to integrate AI into
    national security applications. Expanding these collaborations
    will accelerate scientific breakthroughs in national security
    applications, it will ensure that U.S. AI models drive
    innovation rather than foreign competitors, and it will keep us
    at the forefront of technological leadership across a broad
    range of scientific and engineering disciplines. Strong
    partnerships between national labs and private industry will
    drive American leadership in science, technology, and defense.
        To ensure the United States remains the global leader in
    science security, we must take decisive action in three areas:
    launching a national AI initiative to maintain U.S. leadership
    in AI-driven security, investing in modern scientific
    infrastructure to sustain innovation, and expand public-private
    partnerships to accelerate technology development. This
    Committee plays a pivotal role in ensuring the United States
    does not fall behind. I urge you to support these investments
    in science, technology, and national security to secure our
    future.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Mason follows:]
       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Weber. Thank you, sir.
        Dr. Kearns, you're now recognized for, I guess, 5 minutes.

                     TESTIMONY OF DR. PAUL KEARNS,

                 DIRECTOR, ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

        Dr. Kearns. Chairman Weber, Ranking Members Ross and
    Lofgren, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you, really, for
    the opportunity to appear before you today. It's my honor to
    discuss the Department of Energy's National Laboratories and
    the drive to innovation and science at scale which underpins
    the economy and our national security. I am Paul Kearns. I'm a
    Director of Argonne National Laboratory, which is stewarded by
    the Department of Energy's Office of Science, the largest
    funder of physical sciences across the Federal Government.
        From advancing discoveries in materials science, biology,
    high-energy physics, and nuclear research, to driving
    innovations in fusion energy, isotope production, and
    computational science, the Office of Science fuels research
    that spans all 17 of the national laboratories, engaging--
    engages over 300 universities and higher learning institutions,
    and impacts every State in the union, plus Puerto Rico and
    Washington, D.C.
        The Office of Science national laboratories featuring--
    feature leading-edge scientific facilities that are essential
    to the innovation ecosystem. They provide critical scientific
    capabilities that propel discovery and American innovation
    through partnerships with industry and academia. These
    facilities empower multidisciplinary teams to advance bold and
    innovative scientific and technological endeavors. They are
    also instrumental in attracting and retaining a talented
    workforce, vital for Argonne's success, and they offer staff
    opportunities to pursue meaningful careers working on matters
    of global scale and consequence.
        Last year was a transformational year at Argonne, where we
    completed the upgrade of two of the Office of Science
    facilities, the Advanced Photon Source (APS), which provides
    very high-energy X-rays that researchers use to study complex
    materials and systems, NRR, one of the Nation's first exascale
    supercomputers capable of performing a billion billion
    calculations per second.
        These facilities are complex engineering marvels. The $850
    million upgrade to the Advanced Photon Source replaced the
    facility's 30-year-old electron storage ring, 1 kilometer in
    circumference, with a state-of-the-art machine increasing X-ray
    brightness by up to 500 times. Aurora joins Frontier at Oak
    Ridge and El Capitan at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
    as the three fastest supercomputers in the world. These
    supercomputers dramatically accelerate research. Cosmological
    simulations that took years can now be done in months. And
    months of drug discovery are now reduced to days.
        Last year's Nobel Prize Award in chemistry was a testament
    to the important contributions of the Office of Science
    facilities they're making to break through fundamental science.
    The light sources at Argonne, Brookhaven, Lawrence Berkeley,
    and SLAC National Laboratories identified 1/3 of the 180,000
    protein structures in the Protein Data Bank that three Nobel
    Laureates trained AI models on to successfully predict the
    three-dimensional shape of proteins. Knowing the three-
    dimensional shape of proteins is essential to designing new
    drugs because it is the protein's shape that defines which and
    how other molecules will bind to it. This achievement has been
    heralded as perhaps the very first time AI significantly
    advanced the frontiers of humanity's scientific knowledge and
    will make a significant contribution to the development of a
    vast new set of drug candidates for cancer and other diseases.
        To continue Nobel-level scientific contributions, we must
    reinvest in laboratory infrastructure and facilities that drive
    discovery, innovation, and development of the industries of
    tomorrow. The facilities' capabilities and resident--expertise
    resident in the national laboratories are vital to expanding
    America's leadership in critical and emerging technologies such
    as artificial intelligence, quantum information science, and
    microelectronics, and to establishing the United States as the
    pace setter in the race of nations vying for supremacy in
    science and technology (S&T).
        Adversaries like China are making significant investments
    in these industries. Our technological edge of today is not
    guaranteed. To maintain U.S. leadership and best position
    ourselves in this evolving geopolitical landscape, we must lean
    into our core strength in research and development, leverage
    our unique scientific assets, and bolster our partnerships.
        One of the most significant roles of the national
    laboratories is their ability to develop strategic partnerships
    with industry and academia and to convene stakeholders to
    address complex challenges and opportunities. I could cite many
    examples, but a few that come to mind for me are Argonne-led
    collaboration with the Greater Houston Partnership, which is
    working with regional companies like Chevron and ExxonMobil,
    bringing in the laboratory's expertise in advanced
    manufacturing and lifecycle analysis to really help the
    opportunities and the challenges such as those associated with
    low carbon systems for base chemicals. We're also working with
    industry leaders that John mentioned earlier, Oklo and
    TerraPower, using Argonne's deep capabilities and advanced
    reactor technologies and the nuclear fuel cycle really to
    accelerate the commercialization of next-generation
    technologies.
        Our country stands at a pivotal moment. Innovations of
    today will see transformational breakthroughs that will enable
    our future prosperity. Now is not the time to hold back. With
    renewed investments in the infrastructure and expertise of the
    laboratories, the United States can contribute to lead in
    emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing, and
    advanced manufacturing. By accelerating and scaling our
    fundamental R&D infrastructure and strategic partnerships, the
    United States can secure its position as global science and
    technology leaders of the future.
        Thank you for your continued support and the opportunity to
    testify today. I do look forward to the questions as well.
    Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Kearns follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Weber. Thank you, sir.
        Doctor, is it Budil or----
        Dr. Budil. Budil.
        Chairman Weber. Budil, Dr. Budil, you're recognized for 5
    minutes.

                    TESTIMONY OF DR. KIMBERLY BUDIL,

            DIRECTOR, LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY

        Dr. Budil. Thank you. Chairman Weber, Ranking Members Ross
    and Lofgren, Members of the Subcommittee, good morning and
    thank you for having me here today. I'm honored to speak to you
    on behalf of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a DOE
    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) lab, and proud
    member of the DOE's network of national labs.
        More than three decades ago, I arrived at Livermore as a
    physics graduate student, seeking to do cutting-edge laser
    experiments for my research. What followed was a remarkable
    opportunity to become part of an amazing multidisciplinary team
    dedicated to pursuing world-class science and technology to
    advance U.S. national security and global stability. That
    commitment to service to the Nation is what animates our
    exceptional workforce of nearly 9,000 employees and inspires me
    every day.
        Today, we find ourselves at a critical time in history with
    an evolving global security environment that presents
    unprecedented challenges. Sustaining U.S. leadership in this
    complex world requires a new approach. Speed and innovation
    must be our focus, a sentiment reinforced by our new Secretary
    of Energy. We must become more agile and adaptable, not only
    through S&T innovation, but also through taking bold, well-
    considered technical risks, seizing opportunities, and
    streamlining business practices.
        This is also a strategic moment for NNSA and its national
    security laboratories. The need to modernize the nuclear
    deterrent is urgent. We face many challenges, particularly in
    aging and inadequate infrastructure, but it's also an
    opportunity to use our powerful S&T tools to go faster, develop
    new materials, pioneer new manufacturing approaches, reimagine
    the design-to-production lifecycle, and deliver new
    capabilities to meet emerging needs.
        Modernization efforts are underway, and we're building
    strong partnerships across NNSA and with partners in the other
    labs and in industry to introduce innovative manufacturing
    technologies. We propose to create a complex at Lawrence
    Livermore called VIPRE where advanced materials and
    manufacturing methods will be developed, prototyped, scaled up,
    and quickly transferred to industry partners.
        Two of NNSA's flagship and world-leading capabilities are
    located at Lawrence Livermore. The recently dedicated El
    Capitan supercomputer, which debuted at No. 1 on the top 500
    list, and the National Ignition Facility both exemplify the
    importance of sustained, multiyear congressional support for
    investing in the core competencies and capabilities of the
    National Laboratories. El Capitan is a remarkable machine. It
    provides a 20-fold increase over our last computer and is made
    even more powerful when coupled with AI and machine learning.
    It's ideal for our modeling and simulation efforts, but it also
    has 44,000 GPUs (graphics processing units), making it an ideal
    machine for AI investigations.
        With strong industry partnerships and continued support,
    we're poised to take full advantage of this rapidly evolving
    field to accelerate both product delivery and scientific
    discovery. Achievement of fusion ignition and energy gain at
    NIF in December 2022 was a historic event 60 years in the
    making. This success was only possible with that sustained
    support over decades. But fusion ignition is not an end point.
    It's the beginning of our pursuit of high yield for nuclear
    deterrence, energy security, and scientific discovery, and
    continued investment will be critical to our success going
    forward.
        After 15 years of service and more than 4,500 experiments,
    the National Ignition Facility urgently needs refurbishment.
    NIF sustainment, which is now underway, is an essential
    investment, along with the Enhanced Yield Capability project,
    which was recently granted Critical Decision Zero (CD-0) or
    Mission Need by NNSA to increase NIF's laser energy, a critical
    step toward a future high-yield facility. As we learned in the
    pursuit of ignition, a little bit of energy goes a long way in
    these experiments.
        As a national security laboratory, Livermore contributes to
    a wide range of important missions for other agencies:
    biodefense research to accelerate development of medical
    countermeasures; partnerships with other labs and with industry
    to computationally design new cancer therapeutics; novel laser
    research, laying the foundations for next-generation microchips
    or the next generation of EUV (extreme ultraviolet) lithography
    developed at the labs; and developing novel optics to create a
    new class of space-based platforms. These and other projects
    truly exemplify our motto, ``Science and Technology on a
    Mission.''
        Thank you again for offering me the opportunity to share
    how Livermore's multidisciplinary workforce is contributing to
    U.S. security, scientific advancement, and global technological
    leadership, and thank you for your continued support for our
    important work. I look forward to today's discussion.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Budil follows:]
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Weber. I thank the witnesses for their testimony.
    I now recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.
        This will be a question for each of you. Last month,
    President Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) ``Unleashing
    American Energy,'' which pauses funding allocated through the
    IRA and IIJA. On January 27, OMB released a memo to temporarily
    pause new awards, disbursements of Federal funds under all open
    awards, and open notices of funding opportunities. Although two
    district court judges issued temporary restraining orders,
    would any of your labs have been impacted by the EO or memo if
    implemented as it specifically relates to DOE-related work? And
    before you answer, to be clear, I'm not asking about lab-
    related work from other agencies or departments.
        Dr. Wagner, we'll start with you.
        Dr. Wagner. Following some time to implement, we have not
    been impacted.
        Chairman Weber. Short and sweet. Dr. Mason?
        Dr. Mason. Yes, if you're excluding other agencies, then
    the impacts are rather limited. We've identified $200,000 of
    current funding, and there is some additional funding that was
    in the pipeline award that's not yet been received that could
    potentially be impacted in the future.
        Chairman Weber. OK. Dr. Kearns?
        Dr. Kearns. Impacts at Argonne are more severe. About $37
    million in research activities have been suspended or put on
    hold. That represents the work of some 140 staff. Not all our
    staffs are fully funded by the activity, so it equates to about
    40 FTEs (full-time equivalents).
        Chairman Weber. Thank you. Dr. Budil?
        Dr. Budil. So we had one project funded under the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act supporting grid
    resiliency activities, so this is a $7 million project where
    the funds were unallocated on January 28.
        Chairman Weber. Thank you. And, Dr. Wagner, I'm going to
    come back to you. Under the Nuclear Fuel Security Act, Congress
    mandated that DOE provide developers of advanced nuclear
    reactors no less than 3 metric tons of HALEU by September 30,
    2024. Today, it's February the 12th, 2025, and my understanding
    is that DOE has not released a single kilogram of HALEU. Is
    that correct?
        Dr. Wagner. I would really defer to the Department of
    Energy to answer that question, but I think it's probably
    correct.
        Chairman Weber. Dr. Mason, do you think that's correct too?
        Dr. Mason. We have a partnership with Kairos that's looking
    at that HALEU fuel, and I have not yet heard from Kairos
    whether or not they have had an impact on their planned supply.
        Chairman Weber. Dr. Kearns?
        Dr. Kearns. I don't have any additional information.
        Chairman Weber. Dr. Budil, no? OK.
        Dr. Budil. Nothing additional.
        Chairman Weber. X-energy, an ARDP recipient, is building
    its XE-100 reactor at Dow's facility in Seadrift, Texas, which
    is roughly, probably, I don't know, 100, 150 miles south of my
    district. So my question for each of you is how important is
    HALEU to the success of the ARDP and Gen IV reactors broadly?
    I'm going to go in reverse. Dr. Budil, I'll start with you.
        Dr. Budil. I'm probably not the right expert to answer the
    question since we have very limited involvement with nuclear
    fission.
        Chairman Weber. We'll go back this way. Dr. Kearns?
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, HALEU is certainly important, really, to
    the development of advanced reactors, so many of the vendors
    that we're working with do have plants to power the reactors
    using HALEU, so critically important.
        Chairman Weber. Dr. Mason?
        Dr. Mason. As I mentioned, we have an activity with Kairos,
    which is one of the SMR (small modular reactor) startup
    companies, and the particulars of that involve the fabrication
    of the TRISO HALEU fuel that would be used for their very first
    test reactor that's being built in Oak Ridge. They have built a
    fabrication facility in Albuquerque adjacent to Kirtland Air
    Force Base, where they've been prototyping the fabrication of
    these TRISO pellets. But in order to work with HALEU, which is
    necessary for their reactor design, which involves TRISO
    pellets and molten salt coolant, they needed a facility that
    could handle that sort of material. And actually, at Los
    Alamos, we have the capability to work with special nuclear
    material. It's not our intention to get into the fuel
    fabrication business long term, but it helps solve the chicken-
    and-egg problem, which is critical to this technology.
        Chairman Weber. But you are--it sounds like you are
    confident they're going to be able to get this done?
        Dr. Mason. Yes, it's a very promising thing. And once the
    technology has been demonstrated in the test reactor, then I
    think a commercial supply would be stood up to supply the
    ongoing needs, so we're just helping the transition to reality.
        Chairman Weber. Dr. Wagner, do you concur with that?
        Dr. Wagner. Yes, I concur with that. I'd just say that the
    high-assay LEU, or HALEU, is essential to almost all of the
    advanced reactor concepts. The supply of that material is
    incredibly important, and the timely supply of that material is
    important. We are working with the Department of Energy. They
    are working to make material available at Idaho National
    Laboratory. We do have some stocks of high-assay LEU that we
    are working with the Department to make available to private
    sector companies, Kairos, Oklo, and many others.
        Chairman Weber. OK. Thank you for that.
        I now recognize Ranking Member Ross for her opening--for
    her questions.
        Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you all heard in my
    opening statement, grid resilience and reliability is a key
    priority, I think, not just of mine in North Carolina, but this
    entire country. And so I'd like to ask a few more questions,
    Dr. Budil, about the $7 million that you have yet to receive.
    My understanding is that that was in partnership with the
    private sector to support a project focused on reliability and
    resilience. I'd love to hear more about the project and its
    status and whether you've been given any explanation for why
    it's--the funding has ceased.
        Dr. Budil. Thank you for the question. So the project
    involves utilization of a special laboratory we have at
    Lawrence Livermore called Skyfall. Skyfall is a cyber physical
    testbed so we can use our high-performance computing to run
    models of the grid operating and then put real hardware from
    grid systems in line with those models. And that's a way for us
    to run scenarios where there might be a cyber attack or other
    operational upsets and understand how the equipment will
    respond to that. So this is a really important partnership for
    us, working with utilities and private sector companies, so
    that they can understand, in a real-world environment, how
    their different types of technology they're introducing into
    the grid will operate in that system.
        So I think this is critically important work. It's a great
    partnership between us and the private sector, and it really
    does give them access to a different capability because of this
    high-performance computing backbone where we can put a very
    realistic scenario together.
        It's also a place where we train a great deal of workforce
    on questions like cyber resiliency. So we run a cyber program
    where we bring in teams of students and teach them about
    cybersecurity of complex systems like the grid, and they
    actually do an exercise where they work as ethical hackers to
    take the system down. We have a little town that we've built
    that they do team challenges against so this is a way for them
    to gain real-world experience. Most of these students don't
    come from computer science background, so this is really their
    first experience of cybersecurity. So that nexus of real
    hardware, large-scale models of grid, and an understanding of
    the threat space, and then the workforce training pipeline, I
    think, are all critical to ensuring the next generation of
    technologies are deployed securely.
        Ms. Ross. Well, I think you're going to love a bill that we
    got through with bipartisan support on the House side the last
    time that deals with more funding for cybersecurity in DOE, and
    we're going to reintroduce it.
        I also understand that Livermore had a partnership with the
    State Department to focus on cooperative threat reduction, and
    this ongoing effort has just been terminated by the new
    Administration. Could you give us any more details on that?
        Dr. Budil. So this is about a $1 million effort as part of
    a program through Brookhaven National Lab's Nonproliferation
    and National Security Department to do cooperative threat
    reduction work where we have a long legacy doing things like
    capacity building, international support for things like
    nuclear forensics, and understanding, you know, how to manage
    interdicted nuclear materials should they arise. It's about $1
    million project, and as far as I know, to date, it's paused. We
    don't know if it will be restarted at a later time.
        Ms. Ross. Well, hopefully we can work on both of those
    things in a bipartisan way.
        Several of you have talked about the importance of AI for
    our energy leadership, and I don't know who would be the best
    person to answer this question. We only have a minute left. But
    can you describe how meeting the demand for critical AI
    infrastructure can help support both the scientific enterprise
    and the public interest? Maybe Dr. Mason first since you
    emphasized AI in your response.
        Dr. Mason. Yes, AI and electricity go together for sure.
    And in fact, the AI demands are kind of baseload demand. It's
    always on. You always need to be running, and so that has
    implications in terms of the type of electrical supply. But our
    ability to support that at the scale that's needed is going to
    be challenged just because the rate at which we ramp up
    electrical production is very different than the rate at which
    AI is ramping up as a discipline, and so I think, as a nation,
    we are going to be challenged to respond quickly enough to
    maintain the very tenuous lead that we have in this field.
        Ms. Ross. OK. With the last 9 seconds, anybody have
    anything to add to that?
        Dr. Budil. I'll just say that AI is really transforming
    everything we think about science, how we use data, how we do
    experiments, even how we think about developing new
    technologies because AI with advanced manufacturing allows you
    to make things you couldn't even conceive of before.
        Ms. Ross. Thank you, and I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. I thank the gentlelady.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr.
    Fleischmann, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
    having this hearing.
        To each and every one of the witnesses, thank you. I've
    visited many of your labs. I've worked with you all, I guess,
    over the past 14 years, now 15 years. In short, our National
    Labs are a national treasure. It's probably the most
    enlightening experience I've had as a Member of Congress and
    now as a senior appropriator chairing the Energy and Water
    Subcommittee, which funds the Department of Energy, but could
    not be more pleased and thankful for your opening statements
    and the questions.
        I wanted to ask each and every one of you your thoughts
    about this. My district is home to the Oak Ridge National Lab--
    actually, Oak Ridge Reservation. We have the NNSA facility
    there, Y-12 building, UPF (uranium processing facility).
    Nuclear cleanup is near and dear to my heart. At many of your
    reservations, I know Idaho has done a great job over the years,
    Los Alamos. I chair seven or eight nuclear-related caucuses, so
    this is what I do in Congress, and each and every one of you
    all have been my partners.
        This Committee has long recognized the value of public-
    private partnerships--in fact, I think some of you alluded to
    this in your comments--that boost our Nation's competitiveness
    on a global scale. So I'm going to ask each and every one of
    you all, can you explain the benefits and share any examples of
    industry collaboration leading to the commercialization of
    transformative technological achievements? For example, in my
    district, X-energy, which the Chair has already referenced,
    developed their TRISO fuel at ORNL and is now building a
    commercial facility to produce it at scale.
        Dr. Wagner, two companies working at INL are currently
    conducting a feasibility study to co-locate their fuel
    fabrication facilities and are exploring collaboration on
    reprocessing and recycling technologies, which is also near and
    dear to my heart.
        Can you all comment on the benefit of industry
    collaboration and the pathways to commercialization? And I
    guess I'll just start with Dr. Wagner and go through. Thank
    you.
        Dr. Wagner. Thank you, Congressman. And I'd like to start
    by thanking you for your support of the national laboratories
    in general and for nuclear energy in particular. You've been a
    great advocate for the--both of those areas and much, much
    more.
        So you already are quite familiar with a lot of the public-
    private partnerships and the important aspects of going, but
    I'd like to maybe just quickly talk about a couple. You
    mentioned TRISO fuel. It was the laboratories that came
    together with the Department of Energy more than a decade ago
    to figure out how to fabricate and then evaluate the
    performance of the fabricated TRISO fuel and graphite
    associated with those reactor types, working together with
    private industry and ultimately issuing a topical safety
    analysis report through the Electric Power Research Institute
    to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that formed a baseline
    then for all of these reactor developers to work from, so
    really kick starting that fuel form in terms of the
    availability for private developers to use that.
        Today, one of the things that we're really doing closely
    with multiple private companies is providing testbeds for full
    system reactor demonstrations that will derisk, as I said,
    their technologies and enable their path to commercial
    deployment. These things are not possible in facilities other
    than facilities like the Department of Energy national
    laboratories.
        Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir. Dr. Mason?
        Dr. Mason. So I guess maybe I'll highlight the importance
    of public-private partnerships in artificial intelligence. The
    United States is fortunate that we have private sector actors
    who are making massive investments in developing these
    capabilities. In fact, that's one of our big strategic
    advantages. When you look at what's going on in China, there
    are investments on a similar scale. And of course, in the
    Chinese system, there is no clear distinction between
    government investments and private investments and national
    security investments.
        That's why it's essential that we are able to leverage the
    tremendous innovation that's happening in our private sector
    for our national security needs. We have been working with many
    of the AI companies, OpenAI, Anthropic. We've been using Lava,
    the Meta open-source AI, but I wanted to highlight two
    partnerships in particular. One is with NVIDIA, the chipmaker.
    Last year, we took delivery of a wonderful new machine called
    Venado that we agreed to purchase 4 years ago. It's a good
    thing we made the deal with NVIDIA 4 years ago because I don't
    think we could get it now. And recently, we reached an
    agreement with OpenAI to field their raw model weights on that
    machine in a classified environment in service of all three of
    the NNSA labs, Livermore, Sandia, and Los Alamos.
        And this is an example where we can take advantage of the
    huge investment that OpenAI developed--expended in developing
    their advanced models, but do it in a classified environment
    for our national security applications. You know, there may not
    be as big a financial model to incentivize the private sector
    to do that sort of work, and that's why we need to work to
    align our interests and hopefully drive forward the science and
    technology as well.
        Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I think I've
    exceeded my time in all due respect to our witnesses, who I
    know very well and respect, but I certainly want to yield back.
    I know our colleagues all want to speak.
        Chairman Weber. Well, I wasn't going to point that out, but
    the gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognize the Ranking Member, Ms. Lofgren,
    for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Lofgren. I would just like to note that the Chair of
    the Appropriations Subcommittee gets extra time.
        Chairman Weber. The gentlelady yields her time--no, no, no.
        Ms. Lofgren. First I--you know, I want to thank this really
    wonderful panel of witnesses, and--not only for being here, but
    for the work you do each and every day that advances science
    and helps protect our Nation.
        Dr. Budil, I--you know, I want to congratulate you again on
    the--NIF's stunning achievements. It's fabulous. DOE Office of
    Science selected Livermore to lead a multi-institutional
    endeavor called the STARFIRE Hub focusing on exploring and
    developing immense potential of inertial fusion energy
    technologies. Can you give us more details of the STARFIRE Hub
    to date and also what private fusion companies you've been
    working with and what unique capabilities they're bringing to
    the effort?
        Dr. Budil. Yes, thank you for the question, Representative
    Lofgren. The STARFIRE Hub is a really exciting opportunity for
    us to lean into our opportunity to build an inertial fusion
    energy ecosystem, so this allows us to work with the many
    players emerging in the private fusion industry to begin to
    build programs to develop workforce that will support that
    industry and to begin work on some of the important technical
    challenges that stand between these companies and commercial
    deployment of fusion energy.
        So in the inertial fusion energy realm, we're a smaller
    fraction of the fusion industry in the United States but still
    growing day by day. We have CRADAs, cooperative research and
    development agreements, with most of the companies in this
    arena, so that includes companies like Xcimer, Focused Energy,
    Pacific Fusion, and several new ones coming on the scene as
    time goes by. And in each of those cases, these companies are
    critically dependent on our capabilities and our workforce.
        In particular, for inertial confinement fusion, the only
    facility where the physics of the igniting target can be
    studied is the National Ignition Facility at Livermore. So in
    each case, these companies are critically dependent on our
    research teams. We're also home to the most advanced modeling
    and simulation tools to enable them to design their new schemes
    for approaching a commercial scheme for fusion energy. So it's
    a small effort, you know, $15 million to $17 million, but very
    important as a community-building effort in the beginning.
        I'll just note, for the broader fusion ecosystem, this need
    for investment in public research infrastructure is also
    critically important. And all of the fusion companies, magnetic
    and inertial alike, are counting on the infrastructure at the
    national laboratories to really fill critical technical gaps
    for their schemes going forward.
        Ms. Lofgren. I'd just note, I mean, there's probably more
    private sector money going into fusion now than public, but
    there's some things only we can fund, the basic research that's
    going to be beneficial to every single company that's exploring
    opportunities.
        I would note that China is currently building a NIF replica
    that's bigger than what we have, and meanwhile, we have needs
    just to keep up with what we've got.
        I note that the--in the December releases for fusion from
    the Office of Science, there was an award using AI to address
    questions as to materials science for first-wall fusion issues.
    What else needs to be done in terms of testbeds, which--I mean,
    the fusion scientists did an outline of what we should do. We
    haven't funded it, but China has fully funded it. What do we
    need to do to beat them to the punch on this and to be
    successful in our quest for fusion?
        Dr. Budil. So I think ramping up the effort at the
    facilities that we currently have in the national laboratories
    to do things like understand the performance of first-wall
    materials and other critical componentry in high-radiation
    environments. These companies need us to help them with the
    tritium fuel cycle, so each of these reactor concepts that uses
    tritium requires a closed fuel cycle concept. Only the National
    Labs really have the infrastructure to advance that.
        There are other types of materials and systems integration
    questions which are difficult to answer without the
    infrastructure at scale that we have. So the fusion labs--
    Princeton, Lawrence Livermore, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
    Idaho--have a critical role to play, really, in providing that
    infrastructure.
        There are a set of new facilities that have been proposed
    by Fusion Energy Sciences in the Office of Science that would
    play a critical role in advancing the cause, but I fear that
    the timescale to develop new facilities means that we need to
    invest more in existing facilities to really try to fill these
    gaps.
        Ms. Lofgren. I'm not chairing an Appropriations
    Subcommittee, so I will yield back my time since I'm over.
        Chairman Weber. The gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes Lieutenant Colonel Representative
    Biggs from South Carolina for her 5 minutes of questioning.
    Welcome.
        Mrs. Biggs. Thank you, Chairman Weber, for holding this
    important hearing today with the National Laboratories. And I
    would like to thank the Directors of Idaho, of Los Alamos, of
    Livermore, and of Argonne National Labs for joining us.
        And I want to bring attention to our friends, my friends at
    the Savannah River National Laboratory. So the security of our
    power grid is paramount. The modern world is more
    interconnected now than ever before, and with this comes the
    risk of cyber attacks from non-State actors and foreign
    adversaries alike. Savannah River National Laboratory, through
    its Global Security Directorate, supports the United States'
    national security community by focusing its efforts on power
    grid security, electronic warfare, and wireless test and
    evaluation processes.
        So my question is for each of you. Because of President
    Trump's America First agenda, the United States is ready, once
    again, to strive for energy independence and dominance. We must
    ensure that our energy infrastructure is secure and that it is
    resilient in face of today's threat environment, especially
    from the growing perils of cyber attacks. What are your labs
    doing to address the challenges to energy resilience, and what
    partnerships do you see as critical to the success to reach
    this goal?
        Dr. Wagner. May I start?
        Mrs. Biggs. Please.
        Dr. Wagner. Thank you for the question. So at Idaho
    National Laboratory, in addition to our energy mission, we do a
    lot of work in critical infrastructure security, primarily
    cybersecurity for physical control systems, as well as physical
    security of those systems, partnering with Savannah River and
    other laboratories. We do a lot of work for the Department of
    Energy's CESER office--that's Cybersecurity, Energy Security,
    and Emergency Response--as well as the Department of Homeland
    Security's CISA. That's critical--or Cybersecurity
    Infrastructure Security Agency.
        So what we do then is we've developed--we've done a lot of
    things. As you probably are aware, there's a lot of control
    systems in our infrastructure that were put in place before we
    understood the cybersecurity risks, so we do vulnerability
    assessments to understand where those are, how to address them,
    working with the control system and the critical infrastructure
    owners to address those risks.
        We also have developed methodologies to address
    consequence-based cybersecurity measures, such that, as we
    deploy new critical infrastructure, that we deploy it in a more
    cyber-secure way from the very beginning, multiple tools as
    well as training for the different owners of these critical
    infrastructures relative to their vulnerabilities. And lastly--
    I wanted to give time for my colleagues--we are working hard on
    more firm energy sources to shore up the reliability of our
    grid as well. Thank you.
        Mrs. Biggs. Great. Thank you.
        Dr. Mason. I can maybe illustrate with an example something
    that relates to your question. At Los Alamos, we've been
    collaborating with our colleagues at Oak Ridge National Lab,
    looking at the application of quantum encryption to the
    controls that support electric grid operation. We've been doing
    this in partnership with EPB, the Chattanooga utility that,
    several years ago, implemented a fiber network across all of
    their grid. And so they're an excellent partner for looking at
    what the future of the grid looks like where you have internet-
    enabled fiber optical connections between the various circuits
    that switch things on and off, which could be a source of
    disruption if a malign actor gained access. And so by applying
    quantum encryption, we have communications protocols that are
    much more resistant to external attack, and so this EPB
    partnership allows us to basically operate testbed for future,
    more secure grid security.
        Mrs. Biggs. Thank you.
        Dr. Kearns. There are four, four examples I would cite from
    Argonne. Argonne also does quite a bit of work in the
    cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection for not
    only the Department of Energy, but for other Federal agencies.
    A great example is really critical infrastructure
    interdependency, looking at, if you will, the impact of
    disruptions to our national gas supply to the electricity
    availability and transmission broadly across the country.
        Another one is securing massive edge assets, and this,
    again, is looking at assets at the edge of the grid, if you
    will. It might be gas turbines, it might be combined heat and
    power, it might be distributed storage, it might be buildings
    themselves, and the list goes on. It's really the backbone, if
    you will, of the power grid.
        The third one is supplying--securing the supply chain.
    Certainly, security at multiple levels is critically important,
    talk about materials and components in terms of really enabling
    the power system.
        And the last one is extreme event assessment and
    mitigation, really understanding the impacts, if you will, of
    extreme weather and how to respond quickly--prepare for and
    respond quickly to those events.
        Mrs. Biggs. Great. I'm sorry, but my time has expired, and
    out of respect for my colleagues, I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. Well, the gentlelady would like to yield
    back, but Dr. Budil, would you like to weigh in before we do
    that? I thought you looked anxious.
        Dr. Budil. Well, that's--how you decide where we sit
    depends on how much you get to talk. But the----
        Chairman Weber. It's the same way around our dinner table
    just so you know.
        Dr. Budil. Exactly. We have many of the same efforts I
    mentioned already, our Skyfall lab, where we're really trying
    to understand these cyber-physical systems. Because of our work
    in national security, we have very strong capabilities in risk
    assessment and risk analysis. We understand the threat space
    very well and can bring that, again, in our partnerships with
    the private sector to critical civilian infrastructure like the
    grid, but we also have many partnerships looking at the
    intersection between civilian infrastructure and things like
    military installations, really trying to understand how to make
    those facilities resilient and ensure that critical
    capabilities like that always have secure access to energy in
    their environment. So thank you, sir.
        Chairman Weber. Now the gentlelady South Carolina yields
    back. Just remember, you owe me.
        Chairman Weber. The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady
    from Oregon for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you, Chair Weber and Ranking Member
    Ross, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
        This is quite timely to have this conversation in the midst
    of unprecedented attacks on our research enterprise. Reports
    suggest President Trump is looking to cut the NSF (National
    Science Foundation) budget by 2/3. Blanket attacks on diversity
    have thrown existing research grants into question and caused
    panic and confusion amongst researchers. Elon Musk's henchmen
    are running amok at NOAA, threatening critical systems like the
    National Weather Service that researchers and the public rely
    on. Inflation Reduction Act funding has been frozen, and Musk's
    employees now apparently have access to DOE IT systems. And
    finally, in my backyard, the Oregon NIH (National Institutes of
    Health) has announced indirect funding cuts that will cost
    Oregon institutions tens of millions of dollars and hamstring
    critical biomedical research at the Oregon Health and Science
    University.
        So I just want to be crystal clear. If the Administration
    continues down this path, lifesaving discoveries will fail to
    materialize, young Americans will have fewer economic
    opportunities, and our Nation will be weaker and less
    competitive on a world stage. All of this is a frightening
    state of affairs, as we watch China propel its AI development.
    So has any one of you been contacted by the Department of
    Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and if so, in what capacity or
    for what purpose?
        Dr. Kearns. I'll jump in first. No, there's been no contact
    at Argonne.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you.
        Dr. Budil. Yes, we've not had any contact at our laboratory
    either.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you.
        Dr. Wagner. The same, no contact.
        Dr. Mason. No contact at Los Alamos.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you. Should anyone from DOGE seek access
    to your internal systems or proprietary data, how would you
    respond?
        Dr. Mason. I mean, we take direction from the Department of
    Energy, so, you know, if contract direction was given and all
    the necessary requirements were met in terms of security and so
    forth, then we would certainly comply with that direction.
        Ms. Salinas. If I could follow up on that question, what if
    you were asked to forgo the security requirements?
        Dr. Mason. The way the labs work is as contractors, we have
    a set of requirements that flow from the Department of Energy
    in the form of DOE orders. Those orders are in our contract. We
    are required to comply with them. If the orders were removed
    from our contract or waived, then that might provide a
    mechanism. But as of the moment, all the security orders are
    still in place, and we are required by contract to comply with
    them.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you. So I imagine we might need
    litigation if contracts were not changed to take effect to
    override those security mechanisms. Is that correct?
        Dr. Mason. I don't know about litigation, but certainly, it
    requires contracting officer direction to change any of those
    things.
        Ms. Salinas. OK. Thank you. The national labs engage in
    far-reaching partnerships with researchers at academic
    institutions across the country, and in Oregon, these include
    Oregon Tech students working on clean energy solutions with the
    National Renewable Energy Lab, Oregon State driving quantum
    advances with Argonne, and the University of Oregon working
    with the Pacific Northwest National Lab to pursue discoveries
    in materials sciences, just to touch on a few.
        Have any of you proactively directed any university
    partners to amend or altogether stop research activities in
    response to the Administration's orders on DEI or any other
    executive order?
        Dr. Kearns. No, not at Argonne.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you.
        Dr. Wagner. I don't believe we have it either.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you.
        Dr. Budil. No.
        Dr. Mason. No.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you. Have any of you heard from
    university partners with concerns about their ability to
    continue research partnerships?
        Dr. Budil. No.
        Ms. Salinas. Thank you.
        Dr. Kearns. No.
        Dr. Mason. No.
        Dr. Wagner. And no.
        Ms. Salinas. Great, thank you. I will yield back my time.
        Chairman Weber. The gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes Representative Harrigan from North
    Carolina for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Harrigan. Chairman Weber and Ranking Member Ross, thank
    you very much for holding this hearing today, and to our
    witnesses, thanks so much for your testimony, really appreciate
    it. I would agree with the gentleman from Tennessee who said
    earlier that our National Labs are indeed national treasures.
    And as the American taxpayer invests their national treasures
    into our national treasures, your labs, we expect to have great
    and incredible outcomes from those investments. And I think in
    many cases, we do, but this Committee has heard in Full
    Committee setting testimony that we are behind in research and
    development and a portion of that difference that we've seen
    can be attributed to intellectual property theft.
        And I'm just curious, as I read through your testimonies
    and have listened to you today, you all control collectively
    tens of thousands of employees. You have thousands of visiting
    researchers. How many of those employees and/or visiting
    researchers are citizens of the PRC (People's Republic of
    China)?
        Dr. Wagner. So at Idaho National Laboratory, we have
    approximately 50 foreign nationals from China.
        Dr. Mason. As of right now at Los Alamos, there are about
    100 citizens out of about 18,000 total people working at the
    lab--about 100 citizens of the so-called countries of risk:
    China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. Obviously, with the new
    language in the National Defense Authorization Act, we are
    working through a process to come into compliance with that by
    the April end date, and so that number is going down.
        Dr. Budil. So at Lawrence Livermore, citizens of China who
    are not yet legal permanent residents of United States, we have
    just short of 60 people, and we're working to come into
    compliance with the requirements of the National Defense
    Authorization Act. And I just noted in my testimony, this is on
    top of the significant systems we have in place to manage our
    research environment and ensure that we protect sensitive
    technology information, important research facilities, and
    access to our people on a daily basis.
        Dr. Kearns. At Argonne, Argonne is an Office of Science
    laboratory. The number of foreign nationals is much higher at
    the laboratory. Of the nearly 4,000 total employees, the total
    foreign nationals across Argonne's activities is approximately
    700. Several of those do come from the People's Republic of
    China.
        Mr. Harrigan. When you say several, are you talking about
    three of the thousand or more than that?
        Dr. Kearns. I'm talking a few hundred.
        Mr. Harrigan. A few hundred----
        Dr. Kearns. Yes.
        Mr. Harrigan [continuing]. OK. Have either of you--any of
    you, have you had any confirmed cases of espionage at your labs
    dealing with these individuals?
        Dr. Mason. In terms of the people currently at the lab, no.
    Obviously, over the course of history at Los Alamos going back
    to Klaus Fuchs in the 1940's, yes, there have been instances of
    espionage, which, I would note, generally relates to access to
    classified information, which is something that is denied to
    any foreign national at Los Alamos.
        Dr. Kearns. None at Argonne. We do operate under what we
    call the managed research environment, which really provides
    really a close look at all we do in terms of engagement with
    foreign nationals, including vetting those that want to come to
    the laboratory to access our facilities or collaborate. We also
    make sure that we are extra careful in terms of scrubbing and
    reviewing any potential partnership opportunities, any
    partnership activities that we might do with a foreign company,
    so no.
        Dr. Budil. Yes, I'll confirm nothing in even remotely
    recent history at our laboratory. Again, we've been in
    existence since 1952 working in sensitive areas. In addition to
    the things we've said to date about the managed research
    environment, we also have operated across that time with very
    strict controls around classified research, which is segregated
    both physically and by other controls, and no foreign nationals
    have access to that research or those networks.
        Dr. Wagner. I'd say at Idaho National Laboratory, just like
    the other national laboratories, there's a great level of
    interest from foreign countries in the work that we do. We have
    a number of safeguards that Director Kearns mentioned in terms
    of managing those risks, and we do not have any confirmed cases
    of espionage. But I would say that's largely probably because
    we work very hard to keep an eye and put safeguards in place
    before such things would occur.
        Mr. Harrigan. Thank you all very much for your testimony.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr.
    Turner, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Turner. Thank you, Chairman Weber and Ranking Member
    Ross. Let me thank you all for what you do. I want to also just
    highlight the importance of the research work you all are doing
    with the grid. I know in Houston in February 2021 it was
    weather-related, but it literally shut down the city and, in
    fact, affected even our water systems. So when you talk about
    weather cybersecurity, we know how detrimental it can be if we
    don't build in resilience and reliability.
        And then Mr.--Dr. Kearns, I want to thank you all for your
    collaboration with the Greater Houston Partnership with
    ExxonMobil and Chevron. Can you just elaborate a little bit
    more on what y'all are doing to establish a lower carbon
    system?
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, thank you for the question. The
    partnership really is relatively new, established about a year
    ago, really with great engagement from over 20 industry members
    in the Houston area. We're in the process of working with a few
    of the other laboratories, including the National Renewable
    Energy Laboratory and NETL, the National Energy Technology
    Laboratory, to really settle on a plan of attack, along with
    the industry members there in the greater Houston area.
        So, right now, we're working to scope this study and really
    kind of understanding how we can be best available and able to
    really help the greater community there in the Houston area as
    they look at low carbon options for base chemical production.
        Mr. Turner. Well, let me applaud that collaboration.
        And you all have also mentioned the public-private
    relationships, and, Dr. Kearns, you mentioned the engagement
    with more than 300 universities. Let me just ask, are any of
    those historically Black colleges and universities, HBCUs?
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, yes. Howard University, since we're here
    in the district, comes quickly to mind, but many others,
    including our North Carolina A&T, for example, working together
    in terms of some of our work associated with environmental
    monitoring activities, and it's been an area that we've really
    been deliberate about in terms of engaging--providing
    opportunities for really all, so thank you.
        Mr. Turner. OK. And then let me just ask in general. I know
    that there are some offices that have had to be closed because
    of the conversation, the Executive orders on diversity, equity,
    and inclusion. I think recently you had to close an office. Is
    that correct?
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, at Argonne, we closed the Diversity,
    Equity, and Inclusion Office. We no longer have a Chief
    Diversity Officer. We've discontinued our Diversity, Equity,
    and Inclusion Councils at the laboratory, so many changes have
    occurred, you know, to be in compliance with the new
    directives. Much of that activity was driven by a requirement
    in our contract to develop a DEI plan. That requirement's been
    eliminated as well by the Department.
        Mr. Turner. And also, can you tell us--elaborate the impact
    of having to close that Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
    Office?
        Dr. Kearns. I think in terms of impact, certainly, there
    were individuals employed there that are no longer employed
    there. We've had to really kind of understand their strengths
    and look for other opportunities for them at the laboratory.
    Fortunately, we have what we call the Argonne Leadership
    Institute, which is really focused on the development of all
    our employees at the laboratory in terms of their training,
    thinking about career ladders, what opportunities they see,
    opportunities for them to engage broadly to really strengthen
    their base. And so that's really been what we've talked about
    in terms of not only past activities, but future activities. At
    Argonne, we have a set of what we call the core values. It's
    impact, safety, respect, integrity, and teamwork. That's really
    what we're using to engage with the Argonne workforce broadly
    as we move forward.
        Mr. Turner. And, Dr. Wagner, have you all been impacted by
    the Executive orders dealing with diversity, equity, and
    inclusion?
        Dr. Wagner. So we have not had any employees, you know,
    removed or eliminated, and so while we have changed some things
    in terms of what we say and how we talk about things, we have
    not had any further impacts than that.
        Mr. Turner. OK. And Dr. Mason?
        Dr. Mason. Similarly, we've made some changes in our
    organizational structure consistent with the contract guidance
    that we received. However, we have--the lab has been growing,
    and we have other needs in human resources, so we've been able
    to accommodate the affected employees and have also made the
    necessary adjustments to both comply with the order, but
    maintain our commitment to maintaining--to having a workplace
    that is free from discrimination and is respectful of everyone
    and the contributions that they bring.
        Mr. Turner. And, Dr. Budil, unfortunately, my time is out,
    and your seating is--we'll have to work on that.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. Well, before you do, let's yield the
    gentlelady some time.
        Dr. Budil. Our situation is similar to what's described by
    the other labs. We did have an office that we closed. Those
    people--small team of people--spent most of their time really
    working on workforce engagement and building that sense of
    community and team that's so critical to doing big team science
    the way we do, and so we have restructured our program and
    directed them to other activities. So that's the main impact
    for us.
        And I'll just say that the critical importance of bringing
    together a broad range of ideas, of backgrounds, of experiences
    is really how we drive excellence in our laboratories, so we're
    very strongly focused on continuing that focus on excellence.
        Mr. Turner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Weber. The gentlelady and the gentleman yields
    back.
        I now recognize the gentleman, Mr. Baird, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Baird. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and
    appreciate all of our witnesses being here today. I'm always
    fascinated with the various kinds of basic research that you
    do. A lot of times, that's a precursor to industry doing
    theirs.
        But, Dr. Kearns, you're probably the closest to our
    district in west central Indiana. In fact, last time I saw you,
    we were at a joint meeting at Purdue University. And I want to
    make sure you understood that Purdue University, right, was
    the--anyway--so anyway, you know, since that lab is so close,
    and I believe the projects really reflect the leading edge on
    quantum science in the Midwest has developed. And in fact, our
    Nation's sole quantum corridor runs from Chicago to Ohio, as
    you're well aware, with most of that corridor in northern
    Indiana.
        So during this Committee's prior markup of the National
    Quantum Initiative Reauthorization Act, I offered an amendment
    to direct the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee to
    study the creation of a national quantum corridor connecting
    our National Labs, our universities, and our military bases
    across the country with the speed and power of a quantum
    computer. So do you think we're headed in the right direction
    with that quantum corridor? And, if so, how can we best secure
    that corridor against any breaches in research in your opinion?
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, thank you very much for the question. I do
    appreciate the Subcommittee and the Committee's support of the
    National Quantum Initiative, really, in its renewal if you will
    in that regard, I think many good things have happened under
    the National Quantum Initiative. One that's particularly
    important to Argonne has been the stand up of the National
    Quantum Research Centers. We operate what's called Q-Next,
    really focused on quantum interconnects.
        You know, the fascinating thing to me about this is really
    the strong interest from industry in many aspects, really, of
    quantum information science that we have from industry. We have
    11 industrial partners as part of that center. The laboratory
    has had to devote 1 day a week for conversation with other
    industrial--potential other industrial partners that want to
    come to Argonne and talk about quantum science and their own
    ideas and how they might partner with us and other national
    laboratories. I think that's great.
        In terms of pulling things together, you know, I think the
    Department of Energy, again, through the Office of Science and
    the National Quantum Research Centers--there are five of them--
    it's really created a very dynamic ecosystem. I think,
    initially, the first 5 years has really been focused on
    developing capabilities and building partnerships as we look
    really to moving forward, as suggested by the National Quantum
    Initiative, it's really about further activation of the
    ecosystem that's been established. Many of the, I would say,
    geographic regions of the country have developed quantum
    networks, quantum testbeds, if you will, for quantum
    communications. And there's always interest in thinking about
    linking systems. Can we join our efforts together in terms of
    that national quantum network that you spoke of?
        The big challenge, technology is not just there yet, and so
    it's really important that we continue to invest both in the
    fundamentals and the engineering aspects associated with
    quantum information science.
        Mr. Baird. You know, right along with that, it's amazing to
    me how much energy these data centers take. I've had energy
    suppliers indicate to me it's going to quadruple their demand
    for electricity.
        But anyway, I'm going to go to everyone for this question.
    You know, I mentioned Purdue University, and we've been working
    on the small modular reactors in a nuclear study, and we're
    working with Duke Energy to study the feasibility of using the
    SMR to power an entire college campus. And recently, the
    reactor at Purdue was fully digitized and started back up.
        So can you elaborate on the challenges that that kind of
    transition and taking it from analog to digital and the
    consequences of that related to the SMRs? And we got 46
    seconds, so I'm going to start----
        Dr. Wagner. So I'll be very quick, but there are increased
    risk in cybersecurity and transfer--transitioning from analog
    to digital. And researchers around the laboratory complex at
    multiple laboratories have been working with utilities and the
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission to address those considerations.
    And actually there's progress been made on a utility in the
    United States to do that as a frontrunner pilot to addressing
    that--those concerns. And I do see that going in that direction
    in the future.
        Mr. Baird. We got 12 seconds for three of you. You got 4
    seconds apiece.
        Dr. Mason. I would just note that, actually, this is an
    area where DOE did pave the way because the High Flux Isotope
    Reactor at Oak Ridge reached the digital controls well in
    advance of industry. And that, I think, perspective informs
    some of the work that my colleague discussed.
        Mr. Baird. Mr. Chairman, could I ask for a couple more
    seconds to get----
        Chairman Weber. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Baird. I'd like to get--thank you.
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, certainly, as has already been commented
    on, it's underway. I think it's important that we really stay
    really engaged and really look at the opportunities with open
    eyes and be as smart as we possibly can to make sure that we're
    at the cutting edge in terms of the transition.
        Dr. Budil. Agreed. And I think Thom's point about
    highlighting the role that we can play in partnership in the
    public sector. We have facilities and experience in many of
    these areas that could really help accelerate this transition
    for industry.
        Mr. Baird. Thank all of you, and I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. The gentleman yields back.
        The gentleman recognizes the Representative from
    California, Representative Friedman.
        Ms. Friedman. Thank you, Chair Babin and Ranking Member
    Lofgren. For the record, I firmly believe in continued Federal
    funding into basic research, and I am deeply alarmed by Musk
    and President Trump's basic freezing of all Federal funding
    that has very much damaged American scientific leadership. And
    we've heard today about what cuts are doing to your
    institutions. There is massive return on investment from these
    research dollars, as we know, and I think it's idiotic to
    indiscriminately cut funding when we get such a massive return
    for those dollars. Even beyond nuclear energy, which we've
    heard a bit about today, this is key for our national security.
        And the value of those investments can be seen very clearly
    in California, where we're proud of our scientific leadership.
    We have a long history of being both a national and global
    leader in science and have set the standard for groundbreaking
    research, from aerospace to advanced computing to climate
    change research and clean energy. And that work continues today
    with new technologies like artificial intelligence. We're home
    to leading universities and research institutions that attract
    the best and brightest from around the world, and we are proud
    that our children have access to those great institutions as
    they look for opportunities as they grow.
        We have collaborations between our national labs and
    leading universities that have fostered a real culture of
    innovation in California. In fact, right outside my district,
    Cal Tech's Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis has
    brought together 100 world-class scientists and engineers from
    Cal Tech to partner with Lawrence Livermore National
    Laboratory. Those lab-driven advancements translate to high-
    quality jobs, the kind of jobs that people want for upward
    mobility, and they grow our local economies in California and
    beyond.
        But we have huge challenges in California. We recognize
    that manmade climate change has led to huge challenges just in
    our State. We are grappling with droughts and huge swings in
    weather, and we know that the megafires that we have seen in
    the last 10 years are a direct result of that climate change.
    And, at the same time, our new--our President is saying that we
    should ``drill, baby drill.''
        Now, we know what burning fossil fuels means in California,
    where we have the worst air quality in the Nation, especially
    in the Central Valley, and we are suffering in Los Angeles from
    devastating fires that were certainly fueled by drought, made
    much worse by climate change.
        Director Budil, I am wondering how your research is
    figuring into the clean energy solutions that are not only
    creating great jobs in California but will help us lead the
    world out of the climate change impacts that are being felt,
    not just in California, not just in the United States, but all
    over the globe. And we know that other governments will--are
    looking desperately for solutions, and I think it's pretty
    clear that whoever--whatever country comes up with the
    solutions that will help us escape climate change are going--is
    going to have the world's leading economy because that
    technology is so highly sought after.
        So what are you doing and what do you see on the horizon
    for those clean energy solutions?
        Dr. Budil. Thank you for the question. I divide my answer
    into two parts. In the near term, our researchers have been
    working hard to manage carbon in our environment, so how to
    make fossil fuel burning technologies cleaner, how to capture
    and store carbon, how to utilize oil and gas infrastructure
    after it's been expended for some of these efforts. And we have
    been a big part--the labs have been a big part of building the
    national--natural gas economy in the United States. So I think
    that adaptation of those technologies in a way that makes them
    sustainable in the near term is critically important.
        For the future, we are right at the heart of building this
    future fusion economy, and the United States has an
    extraordinary opportunity to lead on this front. We have many
    of the leading facilities in the world and the only facility in
    the world that's ever achieved energy gain in a fusion
    experiment. So that moves fusion technology from the realm of
    fantasy technology into perhaps a relatively nearer-term
    solution for large-scale baseload energy development with a new
    technology.
        So we're working very hard to buildup the ecosystem that
    goes along with that and addressing the R&D challenges that
    still remain to making fusion energy commercially viable,
    working with companies to understand the gaps they have, and
    then directing our research to rapidly fill those gaps--again,
    materials, tritium fuel cycle being two notable ones--and
    advancing the state-of-the-art in key technologies for things
    like inertial fusion energy where advanced laser technology,
    high-repetition rate experiments, and higher gain target
    designs, which we can work on at our National Ignition
    Facility, will be central to success.
        Ms. Friedman. Thank you, and I yield back.
        Chairman Weber. The gentlelady yields back.
        The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York,
    Representative Riley.
        Mr. Riley. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
    you to all the witnesses here. I really appreciate hearing
    about all the incredible work you're doing on everything from
    fusion to machine learning, all these things that we really
    need to do to stay competitive in our global economy. It's
    really, really important stuff.
        I wanted to use my time today to talk about something
    different that's really immediate and hitting close to home in
    upstate New York and something that I want to ask for your help
    with, and that is the opioid epidemic. It's just ripping
    through towns across upstate New York. In west Endicott, where
    I'm from, we've lost some of my high school classmates or their
    parents because of overdoses and addiction. In Sullivan County,
    we're losing two people per month because of overdoses, and
    we're having 10 overdoses per month, so two deaths and 10
    overdoses per month in just Sullivan County. Greene County in
    my district, we've got the second highest overdose rate in the
    State. I was at a diner in Catskill in the fall, and it was one
    of the issues that came up over and over again. We're losing
    kids and parents and friends and neighbors.
        And I think there's a lot of reasons for this. A big part
    of it is, frankly, we've just got a wide-open border when it
    comes to fentanyl trafficking. So you've got China sending
    these ingredients to Mexico, and then the cartels are making
    fentanyl, and then they're smuggling it into America, where
    it's killing our people, and it's got to stop. It's got to
    stop. And I think we really need the help of the best and the
    brightest scientists in this country to do it.
        We need better technology at the border to stop the
    fentanyl trafficking and to detect the fentanyl. It seems like
    the sort of thing that if we were able to harness the best and
    the brightest scientists in this country, we could find a way
    to detect fentanyl as it's coming to the border. I know that
    there's already some work being done with our national labs in
    partnership with the Department of Homeland Security on this.
        I put to you all, as some of the leading scientific voices
    in this country, how can we start detecting this fentanyl? What
    do you need from Congress in terms of if we have to give you
    the mission, if we have to have--what do we need to do to
    galvanize some folks to put some of our best and brightest
    minds on this issue?
        Dr. Mason. I actually have something that might be of
    interest to you, but I'm not able to discuss it in an open
    forum.
        Mr. Riley. I understand. I would--that sounds even more
    interesting now that you put it that way. And because it's a
    response to my question but also it sounds--now, it sounds even
    cooler. So let's find a time. I'm going to drop off my card
    with you, and let's talk about that.
        Dr. Budil. So we have something that we can tell you about,
    which is a development of a new countermeasure to counter the
    effect of fentanyl on those who might come in contact with it,
    perhaps not an overdose, but, for example, first responders who
    go out into the field. So using the combination of our
    experimental and computational capabilities, we were able to
    develop a therapeutic that counters the toxic effects of
    fentanyl that could be used for that purpose.
        Mr. Riley. Incredible. Yes, that's exactly the type of work
    I think we need.
        Anybody else have suggestions on this? One of the things
    I'd like to work with you all on and work with the
    Administration on is whether there's a way--I mean, you guys
    are just doing incredible stuff, like amazing breakthroughs,
    and I just think that we have the best scientists and
    researchers in this country, and we have this immediate problem
    that is literally killing my constituents. And what I want to
    do is take all of your talents and your skills and put folks to
    work on this mission of detecting this stuff before it gets
    into the country. We've got to get the border secure. We've got
    to do it, and to do that, we need better technology. And to get
    better technology, we've got to have our scientists working on
    it. So I want to support you in supporting that kind of work.
        And, Dr. Mason, we'll talk after about the super-secret,
    cool stuff that you guys are doing.
        Thank you, and I'll yield back my time.
        Chairman Weber. The gentleman yields back.
        The Chair and recognizes Dr. Foster for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Foster. Well, thank you. And I guess since we were just
    talking about fentanyl, I can't resist pointing out that
    Argonne National Lab, one--research performed at Argonne won
    the Nobel Prize for the study of the G protein-coupled
    receptor. And this is the actual mechanism when the opioid
    molecule hits the receptor in your brain that causes the addict
    to become addicted. This can be directly imaged and has been at
    the Argonne APS. They can see exactly what happens when the--
    well, the fentanyl and--it's everything that happens after that
    to the fentanyl molecule hits the brain and how that works.
        And when you get that kind of understanding, we are now
    rolling out medically assisted treatments that directly crowbar
    that receptor so that when the--you know, when the opioid
    molecule arrives, you actually don't--you don't feel it. And so
    it is this kind of research over decades that really--you know
    there are many lines of defense we need against fentanyl and
    the damage it's doing. The last best line of defense is the
    human brain. And if we can find simple ways to crowbar the
    response of the human brain to fentanyl, you won't need border
    security or anything else because no one will be--we won't have
    addicts desperate to buy the fentanyl. And so I'm just really
    proud that that's happened in my district. It was Argonne
    National Lab and the APS.
        That's--you know, as I mentioned, I--you know, I have
    Argonne in my district, and that was a really, really
    impressive line of research. And I hope--you know, I hope that
    all of the labs will really survive this review that's coming
    up with flying colors because for years prior to COVID, I was
    the Chair of the National Labs Caucus where I got to drag
    Members of Congress to the national labs. And when they
    arrived, they'd--I have no idea this neat stuff is happening.
    And then they were big advocates for preserving the--and
    expanding the budget of the national labs.
        And so at some point, now that COVID is over, I think we'll
    resurrect that because it's really--you know, it's really
    breathtaking, what's happening. And a lot of it--the labs serve
    as a very powerful flywheel because things tend to go in and
    out of fashion. You know, and fusion--you know, fusion's gone
    in and out of fashion and--in different forms several times
    during my career in science. And it's--and so it's really nice
    that the national labs have a capacity that is there in good
    times and bad. And to make that happen, you have to have
    Congress and the Department of Energy that understands the
    permanent value of keeping the team together, even when, you
    know, it's not popular.
        And that's why I think it's really going to be an all-
    hands-on-deck moment to preserve the budgets of these so you
    don't see layoffs just because you can during bad times on the
    budgets here. So I think that's--let's see. I have now used up
    like way too much of my time and things--let's see. Is there--a
    little bit--you know, there's a really valuable thing the
    national labs do, which is to curate datasets. You know, I
    think that was mentioned, the protein folding problem datasets.
    That was generated, you know, in large part, well, at Argonne
    and other labs, and that gets curated at national facilities.
    Sometimes that's necessary because of national security
    reasons. Other times, when they're--you know, when there are
    medical privacy reasons that there's been a role for
    laboratories to keep those secret and yet appropriately
    accessible to researchers. And, you know, it's a tough thing,
    and the labs have the background to do that.
        Director Kearns, can you say a little bit about what
    Argonne's been doing in terms of just curating datasets and
    providing compute for, you know, researchers?
        Dr. Kearns. Yes, thank you very much. It's a critical
    matter for sure. It is something that not only Argonne but
    several of the other laboratories have strengthened as well.
        Thank you for mentioning the Advanced Photon Source, a
    tremendous opportunity here to work with the broader scientific
    community, over 7,000 users on an annual basis. I mentioned
    earlier that we've just completed the upgrade, which will make
    it--I think create even more demand for the science that one
    will be able to do there.
        It does generate a tremendous amount of data, and we're
    working hard to really understand how best to really help the
    researchers take that data and really use it to provide needed
    information to further their experiments and so critical in
    that way.
        We also have the honor, really, of having a leadership
    computing facility at Argonne, Aurora I mentioned earlier,
    exascale system. Certainly, one of the key aspects in terms of
    really having that kind of compute capability is really being
    able to store and work with large amounts of data. All of the
    exascale systems across the Department, all three of them have
    really been built with, certainly, modeling, simulation, data
    science, and AI in mind. I think Kim mentioned earlier that El
    Capitan has over 40,000, I think, GPUs. Argonne's Intel-built
    system at Aurora has about 60,000 GPUs, so really fantastic in
    terms of----
        Mr. Foster. So I'm afraid my time is now up, and so--but I
    just want to thank the Chair and the staff for letting me----
        Chairman Weber. Well----
        Mr. Foster [continuing]. Come back here. I miss this----
        Chairman Weber [continuing]. Mr. Foster, if you need to
    move on with two more questions for the other witnesses, we
    don't want to feel--them to feel left out.
        Mr. Foster. Well, I know I could ask about scientific
    breakeven versus economic breakeven, but I guess I won't go
    there right now.
        Chairman Weber. I'm getting the--so the gentleman yields
    back.
        The Chair now recognizes Chairman of the Full Committee,
    Dr. Babin.
        Chairman Babin. Thank you, Chairman Weber, appreciate it.
    And I want to say thank you to our witnesses here for being
    here today with your valuable introspection and expertise and
    knowledge.
        I'm going to ask this of all of you witnesses if you don't
    mind, and I would ask you, please be brief because I have other
    questions I want to ask.
        When we talk about the importance of maintaining critical
    infrastructure facilities and workforce to support our basic
    research, it's important to understand the context of where
    funding went recently. Over the last 5 years, the Department of
    Energy recently close to $100 billion--received close to $100
    billion in supplemental appropriations from the IIJA, the IRA,
    which established over 70-plus new programs. Of the $97 billion
    appropriated to DOE, what percentage and amount went to the
    National Laboratories out of that $97 billion? And how much did
    each of your labs receive from these supplemental
    appropriations? Please answer very, very briefly. How much did
    you get out of the $97 billion?
        Dr. Wagner. So I cannot speak to the percentage that went
    to the Department of Energy laboratories. I can get back to you
    with that information.
        Chairman Babin. Please do.
        Dr. Wagner. For Idaho National Laboratory, we received $150
    million, and we use those dollars toward modernization of
    facilities at our Materials and Fuels Complex----
        Chairman Babin. OK.
        Dr. Wagner [continuing]. And Advanced Test Reactor.
        Chairman Babin. Thank you. Yes, sir?
        Dr. Mason. Los Alamos received $200,000.
        Chairman Babin. So $150 million, $200,000. Next, please?
        Dr. Kearns. Sixty million dollars really devoted primarily
    to helping us with the exascale computer at the laboratory,
    Aurora, and also some work in terms of heat recovery systems at
    the Advanced Photon Source.
        Chairman Babin. Got you. Thank you.
        And Dr. Budil?
        Dr. Budil. So we had a $7 million project that was recently
    de-obligated from the lab.
        Chairman Babin. OK. Thank you very much.
        And then, Dr. Wagner, Abilene Christian University in Texas
    received its NRC permit for the construction of the first
    liquid salt fueled reactor and--at Abilene Christian University
    in my State of Texas. However, the project is currently facing
    issues with procuring HALEU fuel for its reactor. How can
    Congress help accelerate this procurement process, and what is
    the current status of the Experimental Breeder Reactor II, EBR-
    II, spent fuel being converted into HALEU? If you could answer
    that, I would appreciate it.
        Dr. Wagner. Yes, I'll try to be quick. Congress has already
    done quite a bit to try to establish the capabilities
    domestically to produce high-assay LEU or HALEU fuel----
        Chairman Babin. Right.
        Dr. Wagner [continuing]. Including $700 million in the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and, more recently, $2.7 billion
    to establish domestic capability. I don't know what Congress
    can do relative to the procurement aspect. That's something the
    Department of Energy is pursuing.
        On EBR-II, we are reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from the
    Experimental Breeder Reactor II. That was a high-enriched
    uranium fuel. We recover that material, we down-blend it to
    high-assay LEU, and we are making that--we will work with the
    Department to make that available to private companies and
    perhaps Abilene Christian.
        As of now, we are on our path to reprocessing all that
    material that will result in about 9.2 metric tons of high-
    assay LEU by the end of this decade. We're about halfway
    through that material.
        Chairman Babin. That's great. It's kind of disconcerting to
    the university to have gotten their permit but not able to be
    able to obtain fuel.
        OK. As I wrap up, I'd like to address one thing that was
    brought up today that caught my attention. My colleagues have
    mentioned that the Trump Administration's spending pause is
    unprecedented. I'd politely remind my colleagues that the
    previous Administration delayed allocation of funding from the
    IIJA, the IRA and CHIPS and Science laws to add non-statutory
    conditions like union requirements, unnecessary environmental
    reviews, and DEI conditions, not to mention the fact that the
    Biden Administration actually canceled and redirected funding
    for our border wall, which Congress had voted on, signed into
    law, even to the point of selling off the materials of the
    border wall that was unused for 10 cents on the dollar.
        Unlike the previous Administration, if funding is required
    to be disbursed by a specific time, this Administration said
    that it would do so. If the law allows discretion, the
    President has the authority to review this funding. Given the
    billions of dollars that went out the door at the end of the
    last Administration--specifically, the Loan Program Office at
    Department of Energy that gave out over 50 billion in loan
    guarantees in just the last 5 days of the Biden
    Administration's term, some of those very risky--asking
    questions about funding that was described by previous
    Administration officials as throwing gold bars off the Titanic
    might be a good idea.
        And so with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
        Chairman Weber. The Chairman yields back.
        The Chair would like to enter into the record a letter from
    the Partnership for AI Infrastructure. Without objection, so
    ordered.
        I thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony and the
    Members for their questions. The record will remain open for 10
    days for additional comments and written questions for the
    Members. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:53 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                   Appendix I

                                  ----------

                       Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  Appendix II

                       Additional Material for the Record

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]