• Type III relevance work involves developing 

 deeper understanding of phenomena of 

 known importance — such as hydrogen embrit- 

 tlement of metals or the bases for extrapolat- 

 ing animal data to man. 



• Type IV relevance work strives for advance- 

 ment of a broad area of science judged likely 

 to enhance the effectiveness of other parts of 

 national energy R&D efforts. Examples in- 

 clude investigation of the basic structure and 

 functions of key organ systems for which ra- 

 pid cell replacement is required for body func- 

 tions, or, in the physical sciences, studies of 

 the reactive scattering of crossed molecular 

 beams. 



• Type V relevance work involves studies with 

 the potential for modifying the structure of a 

 discipline. The establishment (jointly with 

 NSF) of a "national resource for computation 

 in chemistry" may stimulate advances replac- 

 ing current ways of thinking about chemical 

 structure and reactivity. If this should hap- 

 pen, the relevance would not be confined to 

 energy-associated concerns, but the impor- 

 tance to energy R&D would be pervasive and 

 profound. 



The basic energy sciences and general life sci- 

 ences programs carry out research of each of these 

 five types of relevance as illustrated by the exam- 

 ples cited. The balance among them is clearly an 

 important consideration in program design. During 

 ERDA's first two years, management attention has 

 tended to focus on balance along a different dimen- 

 sion; the relationships with specific energy technol- 

 ogies. For work with types I, II, IV and V, analy- 

 ses by energy technology have proved highly dissat- 

 isfying. The research with types I and 11 relevance 

 can often be more appropriately classified as ap- 

 plied rather than basic. The bulk of it is carried out 

 as an integral part of programs devoted to specific 

 energy technologies and their environmental ac- 

 ceptability. 



Technology-Oriented Basic Research 



The group of efforts described earlier as technol- 

 ogy-oriented basic research includes the variety of 

 basic research embedded in ERDA's divisions con- 

 cerned with energy technologies and national secu- 

 rity. The role has special features for the most 

 technically ambitious efforts, where practical 

 objectives may be 20 years from full realization. 

 Distinction between basic and applied research 

 becomes especially difficult. ERDA's fusion ener- 

 gy programs illustrate the major characteristics of 

 these types of efforts. 



The Division of Laser Fusion is exploring meth- 

 ods for very rapid implosion of capsules containing 

 the isotopes of hydrogen. Inertial confinement can 



1 66 ENERGY RESEARCH a DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION 



lead to fusion of the nuclei and release of a large 

 amount of energy. The role of the research in this 

 program is simply to discover ways of getting the 

 job done. It includes aggressive efforts related to 

 new laser systems and to pellet design and fabrica- 

 tion. 



The research seeking fusion by inertial confine- 

 ment presses into uncharted areas of science. 

 Where it helps chart new areas, it could be called 

 fundamental. Presumably little or none of it meets 

 the test imposed under the NSF "Federal Funds" 

 definition of basic research, since the investigators 

 are expected to keep applicability firmly in mind. 

 ERDA also carries out studies concerned with fu- 

 sion achieved by magnetic confinement. The pro- 

 gram is substantially larger than the one concerned 

 with inertial confinement. The goals are extremely 

 demanding of scientific, as well as technological, 

 sophistication. Our internal survey counted only 

 1.5 percent of the research under the Division of 

 Magnetic Fusion Energy as basic. The point bear- 

 ing on the role of basic research in ERDA is not 

 one simply of semantic difficulties. The significant 

 point is that a number of the tasks ERDA is pursu- 

 ing have been viewed from their beginning as de- 

 manding pioneering research as an integral part of 

 the approach to the task. This view strongly influ- 

 ences the weapons R&D efforts under ERDA's 

 Division of Military Application (DMA). 



Research funded by the DMA is carried out pri- 

 marily at three major ERDA laboratories: Los 

 Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Lawrence Liver- 

 more Laboratory, and Sandia Laboratories. The 

 laboratory management is composed in large part 

 of scientists who have done outstanding research 

 in their own specialties. They are delegated sub- 

 stantial control over the mix between discipline- 

 and project-oriented efforts, as well as primary 

 responsibility for assuring close integration of 

 these efforts at the working level. The research 

 traditions are strong and elitist. The scope of the 

 scientific efforts is broad. The staffs supported 

 through DMA include many distinguished nuclear 

 physicists, hydrodynamicists, astrophysicists, 

 inorganic and physical chemists, metallurgists, 

 ceramicists, and mathematicians. For perhaps a 

 quarter of these staffs, the publication rate for arti- 

 cles in the open scientific literature is nearly the 

 same as that for scientists funded under the basic 

 energy sciences and general life sciences pro- 

 grams. Also, facilities provided by DMA and tech- 

 niques developed under its sponsorship have fre- 

 quently proved of great value for basic research in 

 areas — such as biophysics — supported by other 

 divisions. Our internal survey i.idicated that about 

 2.5 percent of DMA's weapons research, develop- 

 ment, and testing efforts might be considered ba- 

 sic/fundamental research but, using the NSF defi- 



