[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]