In the mid-1980s, the plasma physics volume of the series Physics Through the 1990s (National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1986) signaled problems for plasma science in the United States, particularly with regard to the basic aspects of the science. In the years that followed, there developed a widespread feeling in the plasma science community that something systematic needed to be done to address these issues. Out of this concern, the Plasma Science Committee of the Board on Physics and Astronomy was created in 1988. Following its establishment, plans were begun to undertake this study. With funding from the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the Office of Naval Research, the Panel on Opportunities in Plasma Science and Technology was appointed in May 1992, and the study began.

Approximately half of the 13-member panel consisted of experts in the many facets of plasma science considered in this report and half of scientists outside the field, with one of the co-chairs selected as a person with experience in science policy. Three of the members are from industry; one is from a government laboratory and one from an independent research society; and the remaining eight are from academe.

The task statement to the panel requested that this study examine virtually all aspects of plasma science and technology in the United States, assess the health of basic plasma science as a research enterprise, and identify and address key issues in the field. Specifically, the panel was charged with the task of conducting an assessment of plasma science that included beams, accelerators, and coherent radiation sources; single-species plasmas and atomic traps; basic plasma science in magnetic confinement and inertial fusion devices; space plasma

physics; astrophysics; low-temperature plasmas; and theoretical and computational plasma science. It was directed to address the following:

1. Assess the health of basic plasma science in the United States as a research enterprise: (a) Identify and describe selected scientific opportunities. (b) Identify and describe selected technological opportunities. (c) Assess and prioritize new opportunities for research using the criteria of intellectual challenge, prospects for illumination of classic research questions, connection with other fields of science, and potential for applications. (d) Assess applications using the criteria of potential for contributing to industrial competitiveness, national defense, human health, and other aspects of human welfare.

2. Identify and address the issues in the field, including the following: (a) Evaluate the quality and size of the educational programs in plasma science in light of the nation's future needs. (b) Assess the institutional infrastructure in which plasma science is conducted, and identify changes that would improve the research and educational effort. (c) Characterize the basic experimental facilities needed to increase scientific productivity. (d) Develop a research strategy that is responsive to the issues. (e) Compare the U.S. program with those of Japan and Western Europe, and identify opportunities for international cooperation. (f) Identify the interactions and synergism with other areas of physics, chemistry, mathematics, and astronomy. (g) Assess the linkage of theory and experiment. (h) Assess manpower requirements and the prospects for meeting them. (i) Identify the users of plasma science and their needs.

3. Make recommendations to federal agencies and to the community that address these issues.

During the course of the study, the panel held three two-day meetings and two lengthy teleconferences. As part of the process, the panel took steps to solicit input from the plasma science community. Letters were sent to 200 scientists and engineers, requesting their input on the issues raised in the charge to the panel. This list was selected from the list of Fellows of the Plasma Physics Division of the American Physical Society (90), and it also included others suggested by members of the panel (65) and by grant officers involved in funding plasma science (45). The letters went to university faculty and staff (90), industrial scientists (25), staff at national laboratories (50), and others (5). A separate, more specialized survey was sent to 33 experimentalists engaged in basic plasma physics research. Input was also solicited by announcements of the panel's work that appeared in the newsletters of the American Geophysical Union, the American Physical Society, the Plasma Physics Division of the American Physical Society, the Committee on Plasma Science of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the University Fusion Associates. Town meetings were held at American Physical Society Plasma Physics Division meetings and the Gaseous Electronics Conference. There is general agreement from these

sources on the themes expressed in this report: There is concern about the decline in basic plasma science, particularly in the area of basic plasma experimentation and other small-scale research efforts, and basic plasma science is perceived to lack a "home" in the federal agencies.

Also during the course of the study, the panel heard presentations from grant officers involved in funding plasma science from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the Office of Naval Research.

The task statement requested that the panel assess specific areas of plasma science, such as beams, accelerators, and coherent radiation sources (called topical areas in the report), and broad areas of plasma science, including fundamental plasma experiments, theoretical and computational plasma physics, and education in plasma science. At the first meeting of the panel, these areas were renamed slightly and the topical area of low-temperature plasmas was added, since it had been omitted from the task statement through an oversight. The resulting seven topical areas are assessed in Part II of the report, and the three broad areas of plasma science are assessed in Part III. Part IV consists of some concluding remarks.

During the course of the study, the panel had numerous discussions about the desirability of establishing organizational units specifically devoted to plasma science in the relevant federal agencies. Many members of the plasma science community who were consulted strongly advocated the establishment of such homes, believing that they are needed if basic plasma science is to be given the focused attention and increased support that the panel recommends. While this subject is beyond the scope of the panel's work, the panel suggests that the federal government might give this issue further consideration.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government.

The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an advisor to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

In preparing this report, the Panel on Opportunities in Plasma Science and Technology has benefited greatly from the assistance of many members of the plasma science community. We are particularly indebted to the former chairs of the Plasma Science Committee of the Board on Physics and Astronomy, C.F. Kennel and F.W. Perkins, and the present chair, Ravi Sudan, for their advice and help. The other members of the Plasma Science Committee also provided valuable advice during the course of the study.

The panel would like to acknowledge the following colleagues for the extensive advice and assistance they provided in assembling the broad range of material covered in this report and for critical reading of various portions of it: Jonathan Arons, University of California, Berkeley; Ira B. Bernstein, Yale University; John Bollinger, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, Colorado; Keith H. Burrell, GA Technologies, Inc.; Vincent S. Chan, GA Technologies, Inc.; Xing Chen, Science Research Laboratory, Inc.; Samuel A. Cohen, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; Bruce Danly, Plasma Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Luiz Da Silva, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Patrick Diamond, University of California, San Diego; Paul Drake, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; C. Fred Driscoll, University of California, San Diego; Eduardo Epperlein, University of Rochester Laboratory for Laser Energetics; Joel Fajans, University of California, Berkeley; Walter Gekelman, University of California, Los Angeles; Brian Gilchrist, University of Michigan; Martin Goldman, University of Colorado; Tamas I. Gombosi, University of Michigan; Daniel Goodman, Science Research Laboratory, Inc.; Richard A. Gottscho, AT&T Bell Laboratories; Roy W. Gould, California Institute of Technology; Hans Griem, University of Maryland; Larry R. Grisham, Princeton

Plasma Physics Laboratory; Richard Hazeltine, University of Texas; Noah Hershkowitz, University of Wisconsin; Chuck Hooper, University of Florida; Mary Hudson, Dartmouth College; Chandrashekhar Joshi, University of California, Los Angeles; Robert Kessler, Textron Defense Systems; William Kruer, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Stephen Lane, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Richard Lee, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Bruce Lipschultz, Plasma Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; James F. Lyon, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; James Maggs, University of California, Los Angeles; Earl S. Marmar, Plasma Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Dennis Mathews, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Jakob Maya, Matsushita Electrical Works, R&D Laboratory; Kevin M. McGuire, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; George Morales, University of California, Los Angeles; Andrew Nagy, University of Michigan; Torsten Neubert, University of Michigan; Francis W. Perkins, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; Arthur V. Phelps, JILA, University of Colorado (retired); Stewart C. Prager, University of Wisconsin; Juan Ramirez, Sandia National Laboratories; Barrett Ripin, American Physical Society; Gerald L. Rogoff, Sylvania, Inc.; Louis Rosocha, Los Alamos National Laboratory; Norman Rostoker, University of California, Los Angeles; Andrew Schmitt, Naval Research Laboratory; Wolf Seka, University of Rochester Laboratory for Laser Energetics; Gary Selwyn, Los Alamos National Laboratory; Frederick Skiff, University of Maryland; Reiner Stenzel, University of California, Los Angeles; Raul Stern, University of Colorado, Boulder; Ravindra Sudan, Cornell University; Roscoe White, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; Scott Wilks, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; David Wineland, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, Colorado; Masaaki Yamada, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; Michael C. Zarnstorff, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory.