The State of the Laboratory -- 1983

In past reports on the state of the laboratory, you have heard me express confidence in the quality of the work being done at the laboratory. Today, I will not only express verbally my confidence in the quality of the work, but demonstrate it.

I just got back from a two-week trip to Egypt. I thought I might be suffering from jet-lag, but I followed Charlie Ehret's jet-lag diet, a result of the research done here at Argonne. So if I pass out, you'll know the quality of research is going down. If I can finish this, you'll know my confidence is well placed. I found myself in good company using Charlie's diet. President Reagan used the diet on his trip to the Far East.

Seriously, my confidence in the laboratory's programs is based on more than the jet-lag diet. The outlook for the laboratory is more promising than at any time since I have been here. I would like to give you some of the reasons why I feel that way.

An important factor is the quality of the people we've been able to attract in key leadership positions that are so important to any large organization. After what may turn out to be the longest talent search in the history of the laboratory we finally recruited an associated laboratory director for Biological and Environmental Research -- Dr. Harvey Drucker.

Another new addition to the site -- a person who is not on the Argonne staff, but who is very important to the laboratory -- is the manager of the Chicago Operations Office of the Department of Energy. We lost Bob Bauer and were sorry to see him go, but we are very pleased to have Hilary Rauch join us.

Perhaps most satisfying to me has been the arrival of Alan Schriesheim as our new senior deputy laboratory director. Argonne has achieved a distinction in being able to recruit to a national laboratory for the first time ever, a former director of a major corporate research center. In addition to his professional background, Alan brings a personal style, an exceptional scientific talent, and proven management experience which we can use and which we welcome.

Alan Schriesheim: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to each one of you. The warmth and thoughtfulness with which I've been received at Argonne has been a pleasure.

Obviously you know more about the lab than I do. This is one reason why I've really tried to get out and meet as many of you as I can. What can I tell you about this new position, which is as recent an addition to Argonne as I am? A lot of you may ask, why a senior deputy director after 35 years without one? The answer goes back to some basic changes that have been made at Argonne recently. When the University of Chicago became the sole contractor, the responsibilities of the lab director expanded. As you all know, Walter became the vice president for research at the university. This added responsibility, and the absolutely essential requirement to increase Argonne representation in Washington, in industry, and with academia led very logically to the position of senior deputy director.

Initially, my focus will be internal. I expect to advance Argonne's interests with the various bodies that I discussed -- government, academia, and industry. I think I'll bring something to Argonne because I grew up in Exxon and the experience should provide a synergistic mix with the things I'll learn here at Argonne.

A lot of people have asked me what the difference is between a national laboratory and a major industrial research laboratory. Frankly, I'm not sure that I see a lot of difference. In a large corporation, you deal with a corporate bureaucracy. At Argonne, of course, you deal with a government bureaucracy. Believe me, the similarities are more numerous than the differences.

Of course, in either the public or private sector there are important differences in attitude and approach between scientists and engineers. Exxon and Argonne are quite similar in the mix of scientists and engineers. I've been fortunate enough to have managed both. I understand both cultures and the agonies involved in meshing them. It's sort of what I call the "one plus one equals three" phenomenon, rather than the "one plus one equals one and a half." If we can do the former, it's great; if you do the latter, you pretty soon know that you're running into trouble.

What underlies a research and engineering organization, whether it's industrial or academic or a national lab, is a spirit of excellence. You can tell whether an organization has that spirit of excellence. It doesn't take long for someone who is experienced to get the feel of the climate and the culture. The spirit of excellence permeates the whole organization. Machinists, secretaries, scientists, engineers -- each one of them gets involved. That's one real advantage that Argonne has.

I believe that we can build a better future for Argonne by quality work through quality people. Consistently, I've found that life in an organization is difficult when you're at a status quo or when you're declining. I'd much rather suffer the agonies of growing than I would the agonies of shrinking. Growth is what makes an organization vital. Obviously, I'd like that to happen here.

It follows naturally that change is necessary and it should be welcomed. Managing change is always difficult for all of us. I believe that the change should be done in a collegial style. You shouldn't look at me as advocating revolution, but rather evolution. I am not dogmatic. I don't believe in change by decree or by edict.

You'll find very quickly that I believe in delegating responsibility to as far down the chain as possible. I believe in the intrinsic competence of individuals until they prove themselves otherwise, and I'd like to be treated that way myself. It doesn't mean that I never make a mistake. The only way not to make a mistake is not to take a risk. I don't believe in that and I don't believe in dealing with a risk-free organization. That just isn't a good way to live.

If you don't remember anything else of what I have said today, please remember that I am available. I am accessible to help you and to back you up. At the same time, I need your help and information. I am sincerely excited and pleased at the prospect of working with all of you. I think we're going to have some fun around here.

Walter Massey: Let me add that any matter that can be brought to me can be brought to Alan and vice-versa. Whoever is here and is available can handle any topic. He is the chief operating officer for the laboratory, and will be deeply involved in the day-to-day operations of the lab. We intend to be partners in conducting Argonne's external relations.

To say that I feel confident has to be put in some context. All is not rosy, of course, and never will be. There will always be problems to overcome, obstacles in our way, and problems with which we have to deal. But there are some positive signs. This is the first year since I have been here that we did not start out the fiscal year allowing for the possibility of a major reduction in funding or a major reduction in force. Each year, I've had to say we've had contingency plans because we have not had a budget.

At this date for the previous three years, we were literally in suspense financially because either the president's budget had not been passed by Congress, or Congress had not completed all of its work in packaging the particular appropriations bills that apply to the laboratory. This year we have received our major appropriations bills.

Funding outlook

What does it look like for the lab overall? Our best guess is that we will have about a two percent increase in dollar funding for operations over that of last year. We are beginning to see some steadying. That is why I feel some confidence that at least this continual erosion at the massive rates we have experienced has come to a halt. However, a two percent increase will not keep us even with inflation. The degree to which programs suffer attrition will depend on the difference between the two percent increase in funding and the inflation rate.

Additionally, all programs at the laboratory are not funded at the same level. Some programs have received increases that go above two percent and some have received less.

There are sources of funding other than the operations budget. One very important one is the multi-program general purpose facilities funding. We have confidence that it is going to increase rather generously after a period in the late `70s and early `80s when we had only modest increases.

This funding is very important. It allows us to maintain the basic infrastructure of the laboratory, to build support buildings, to keep the site and support for the research enterprises in a healthy condition. Over the past five years, Argonne has suffered in comparison with the other national laboratories by not having a significant share of this kind of general purpose funding.

Putting these two together, what will employment look like in 1984? Although the budget appears to increase slightly by about two percent, we project that lab-wide employment may drop by about 50 to 75 FTEs. This is well within the range of normal retirements and attrition at the laboratory.

We do not enter this year expecting any major force reductions. Again, however, this does not apply to every program. In some areas there may be modest decreases. In other areas, there will be increases that will call for hiring. In fact, even during 1983, when our total employment dropped because of natural turnover, we hired more than 500 new people. It is important in any organization, especially a research organization, to have an infusion of new people, while maintaining the base that we depend on so highly.

So, all is not rosy, but I think we are turning the corner. Over the next few years, I see this modest increase becoming greater, if we can prepare ourselves to take advantage of this turnaround in national funding, and what I believe will be an increased reliance on research and development.

I see signs of change within the laboratory and in the perception of people who are outside on how they see us. For three years we have been fighting a defensive battle against budget cuts, against manpower cuts, and against criticism of the mission of the laboratory as published in a number of review reports.

I see that as behind us now. We are reaching a period where we can begin to look to the future. We have to look to improving performance in every area, even where we are already very good.

Changing for the good

The more obvious ones are the change in the contract. We now have an institution -- the University of Chicago -- which will take sole responsibility for the laboratory's operation for the Department of Energy. As part of that responsibility, the university has seen the necessity to bring to Argonne a larger group of individuals to help us manage the laboratory, give us advice and provide assistance in dealing with external communities. That has been accomplished through the new Board of Governors. We are the only national laboratory to have our own board. These are people who are committed not just to critique us, but to help us. I can assure you that they have already been of assistance to the laboratory.

As part of the board we have a Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee made up of board members and some of the most prominent scientists and engineers in the country. Those people give us healthy criticism and advice, but will also be emissaries for Argonne to the larger scientific and technical community.

It may be seen to be symbolic, but I assure you that it is important that for the first time in 17 years we have a five-year contract to operate this laboratory. The lack of a five-year contract has been seen in the larger community as an on-going probationary period. Again, that's behind us.

Some obvious signs around the lab are in the areas of physical plant. After about 15 years without a major new building we have completed a new administration building, which has really made the operation of the laboratory more efficient. For the first time in the history of the lab, it has brought together all the senior management and support staff.

The Quonset huts and other temporary building, which have given us the appearance along Cass Avenue of an abandoned World War II army camp, are finally coming down. These buildings have sentimental value for a lot of us, but when Building 2 is demolished in December, I intend to be there cheering.

Organizational improvements

I've stressed before that a major effort for Argonne is to build on what we have in the area of materials science and technology. The creation of the new Materials Science and Technology Division has been a first step in that direction. After a year of operation, the outside review committee, which is a hard-nosed one, said,

"The committee applauds the moves represented by the organization of the Materials Science and Technology Division. The result has been the establishment of one of the largest, highest quality, broadest-gauged, centrally managed materials science and technology organizations in the world."

I am convinced that we will see a turnaround in attention given by the federal government to this area. To prepare ourselves for that we have organized a new Division of Environmental Research. The plans in that area are not as far along as in materials sciences, but the appointments of Harvey Drucker and Phil Gustafson are attempts to build a research base that will allow for some expansion.

I've also seen signs of improvement in the support areas. The Personnel Division's new plan to provide more flexibility in choosing investment and payout options for retirement has been a success. The personnel office is now working on other kinds of changes in our benefit packages that will allow the individual employee to make more decisions about their own futures, and give you better options and choices.

We've tried to improve our strategic planning. This is something that may not appear to affect most of you directly, but I can assure you that in troubled times and good times, it is very important that the laboratory understand its mission and have a good appreciation of what its future possibilities are. That is coming out of the strategic planning process. When these plans are at a stage where they can be simplified and written in a more concise language, we intend to communicate them to the laboratory as a whole.

The role of the national laboratories has come under increased scrutiny over the past two or three years. All of the reports have reached basically the same conclusion -- that the laboratories are national assets, that they need to be strengthened, and that they need to be preserved. But they have also criticized us, I think justifiably, in some areas.

One of those has been the paucity of serious research interaction with private industry. We've had a long tradition of working with universities and a selected history, in some areas, of working with industry. We have to broaden our base of participation with industry. There are three major efforts now going on which I think will lead to that kind of strengthening of relationships.

We have developed an Electrochemical Industrial Associates Program in the Electrochemical Technology Program of the Chemical Technology Division and will bring industry in that area. We are now trying to develop a broad-based materials research institute or consortium in conjunction with industry and universities in the area that will allow broader industrial participation. And in the fossil fuels area, we are developing a center for research in high-sulfur or Midwest basin coal.

These latter two efforts are less developed than the one in electrochemistry but they are all ongoing activities that will allow more broad-based participation by private industry in the research of the laboratory.

Loss of the GEM project

That effort was not a total loss. In fact, in the long run it may turn out to be very good. It strengthened our liaison with a number of important groups that the laboratory needs -- Congress, the Illinois state government, state governments of other midwestern states, the local communities and universities. The outpouring of support from all of these constituencies of Argonne was truly overwhelming. Had we decided to continue to push it, we would have had the support of those groups.

As you know, we withdrew. I still think that was the right move. It avoided Argonne becoming a scapegoat in this, and I think that our primary goal is to support high-quality science in the United States. We would rather do it here, but if we can't do it here, we certainly don't want to be in the position of preventing it from being done.

In a letter to Senator Percy, Secretary Hodel said,

"Throughout all of our discussions, supporters of the Argonne proposal recognized that the national need for a high-energy, continuous beam electron accelerator superseded questions of location. This speaks well of the scientific importance of the electron accelerator project and of the integrity and dedication to excellence of the Argonne National Laboratory staff. Even through Argonne may have lost this particular scientific competition, the laboratory remains one of our excellent research institutions. The Department of Energy is very interested in the vigor and long-term viability of Argonne, and every effort will be made to see that Argonne National Laboratory is best used to serve this nation's need for basic and applied research."

Argonne's recent accomplishments

One of the symbolic excellent activities now taking place at the laboratory is the Intense Pulsed Neutron Source. Last month was the time IPNS was originally set to cease operation. Some of you will recall two years ago there was a review of neutron scattering in the United States -- the Brinkman report -- which called for phasing out the IPNS machine at Argonne over a two-year period. Well, instead of being shut down it is now going strong and has achieved worldwide recognition. That has turned out to be a star activity in the whole realm of neutron scattering, and generally, condensed matter research. That has been a really significant turnaround. We now expect IPNS to operate at least through 1987, and we have developed a plan for an even larger neutron scattering machine, which we hope can be built around IPNS.

We have continued to carry out excellent research in the area of high-energy and nuclear physics. I won't mention today the ATLAS project, which is making excellent progress, as it has been since it started. The high-energy physicists are involved in very innovative experiments, one which does not call for the use of accelerators, since we don't have a major high-energy accelerator.

One is the project to look for nucleon decay in Minnesota's Soudan Mine. The design and building of a major new 1,000-ton detector has been led by a team headed by Dave Ayers of our High Energy Physics Division.

In an area far removed from high energy physics -- chemistry -- is the development of a premium coal sample program to characterize samples of coal so that researchers all over the world can be assured that similar samples with similar characteristics can be used in coal chemistry. The problem of characterizing these samples has thwarted research developments in this field for a number of years. Karl Vorres, a new addition to the Argonne staff, is heading up that program.

This fiscal year we will pass two significant anniversaries in the breeder program, the largest and longest program at the laboratory. It will be the 25th anniversary of the first criticality of the TREAT facility in Idaho where we study effects of power surges on breeder fuels, components and materials. It also will be the 20th anniversary of the first electricity generated by Experimental Breeder Reactor II. Considering that critics of nuclear power are still concerned about the long-term viability of light-water reactors, let alone breeders, I think the 20th anniversary of EBR-II will be a significant event not only for Argonne but for the nation.

The laboratory's fusion research is one area in which we expect and hope to have a major role over the next decade. When that program nationally enters an engineering phase, Argonne will expect to play a major role based on our previous experience. This year, there were some significant achievements in that area. The feasibility of extracting tritium from liquid lithium at concentrations of less than one part per million in tritium breeding blankets was shown to be viable by a group headed up by Rob Clemmer.

In the area of solar energy, we have suffered significant decline, but Norm Sather has managed to maintain a high-quality research program while reducing the base there, and to look for innovative ways of redirecting research in that area.

As I said, I could mention of number of things, such as Marty Wambsganss' work in Components Technology, the acid rain project headed by Patricia Irving, but I won't go into all of those in any detail. Suffice it to say this has been a very good year.

Outlook for the coming year

I don't know what will happen, but there seems to be at least two points of view. One is that those who killed Clinch River will now devote increased energy to reducing or killing the base breeder program. The base research program is what we depend on for our funding.

On the other hand, there are those who believe that much of the criticism that the press and Congress directed at CRBR might be removed now that is out of the way, and one might generate support from those people who are not anti-nuclear, not anti-breeder, but who felt Clinch River was outmoded, ill-conceived or too expensive. Certainly, we are going to do everything we can to improve the chances of the second scenario being the one that becomes operative. If support for a long-term base program in the breeder area is forthcoming, Argonne stands to profit from it. Argonne has been working with other laboratories and industry to put together plans for a base breeder program without a demonstration project, and we are prepared to present those plans to the Department of Energy and Congress.

We'll look at some new initiatives. I mentioned a possible increase in neutron scattering and expanding IPNS. The Department of Energy is encouraging the national laboratories to diversify in modest ways, based on funding, by working with industry and with other federal agencies. Eric Beckjord and Bob Herriford, our new assistant director for Administrative Services, have been working closely with representatives of the Department of Defense to try to identify areas of funding in that agency that might be compatible with research at Argonne.

Basically, I think the outlook for the laboratory is good. I don't ever expect it to be the case where the picture is rosy and we have unlimited growth. But if we are good and very careful and thoughtful, we can pick those areas that build on our strengths, that meet national needs and that are complimentary to other institutions. Then we can look forward to some modest growth.

Most important to our past record of achievement and to our confidence in the future is the attitude and the intellectual toughness of the Argonne staff. The recent years have been difficult ones, and they have been demanding ones. The response of all the Argonne employees has been truly superior. I am personally proud to work with all of you and I am continually grateful for your continuing support.