skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Pulsed Power Peer Review Committee Report

Abstract

In 1993, the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA, PL 103-62) was enacted. GPRA, which applies to all federal programs, has three components: strategic plans, annual performance plans, and metrics to show how well annual plans are being followed. As part of meeting the GRPA requirement in FY2002, a 15-member external review committee chaired by Dr. Alvin Trivelpiece (the Trivelpiece Committee) was convened by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) on May 7-9, 2002 to review Sandia National Laboratories' Pulsed Power Programs as a component of the Performance Appraisal Process negotiated with the National Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of Energy (NNSA/DOE). The scope of the review included activities in high energy density physics (HEDP), inertial confinement fusion (ICF), radiation/weapon physics, the petawatt laser initiative (PW) and fast ignition, equation-of-state studies, radiation effects science and lethality, x-ray radiography, ZR development, basic research and pulsed power technology research and development, as well as electromagnetics and work for others. In his charge to the Committee, Dr. Jeffrey P. Quintenz, Director of Pulsed Power Sciences (Org. 1600) asked that the evaluation and feedback be based on three criteria: (1) quality of technical activities in science, technology, and engineering, (2) programmatic performance, management, and planning,more » and (3) relevance to national needs and agency missions. In addition, the director posed specific programmatic questions. The accompanying report, produced as a SAND document, is the report of the Committee's finding.« less

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), Albuquerque, NM, and Livermore, CA
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
805839
Report Number(s):
SAND2002-3317
TRN: US200716%%494
DOE Contract Number:  
AC04-94AL85000
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY; ENERGY DENSITY; FEEDBACK; IGNITION; INERTIAL CONFINEMENT; LASERS; METRICS; PETAWATT POWER RANGE; PHYSICS; PLANNING; RADIATION EFFECTS; SAND; SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES; SECURITY; X-RAY RADIOGRAPHY

Citation Formats

BLOOMQUIST, DOUGLAS D. Pulsed Power Peer Review Committee Report. United States: N. p., 2002. Web. doi:10.2172/805839.
BLOOMQUIST, DOUGLAS D. Pulsed Power Peer Review Committee Report. United States. doi:10.2172/805839.
BLOOMQUIST, DOUGLAS D. Tue . "Pulsed Power Peer Review Committee Report". United States. doi:10.2172/805839. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/805839.
@article{osti_805839,
title = {Pulsed Power Peer Review Committee Report},
author = {BLOOMQUIST, DOUGLAS D},
abstractNote = {In 1993, the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA, PL 103-62) was enacted. GPRA, which applies to all federal programs, has three components: strategic plans, annual performance plans, and metrics to show how well annual plans are being followed. As part of meeting the GRPA requirement in FY2002, a 15-member external review committee chaired by Dr. Alvin Trivelpiece (the Trivelpiece Committee) was convened by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) on May 7-9, 2002 to review Sandia National Laboratories' Pulsed Power Programs as a component of the Performance Appraisal Process negotiated with the National Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of Energy (NNSA/DOE). The scope of the review included activities in high energy density physics (HEDP), inertial confinement fusion (ICF), radiation/weapon physics, the petawatt laser initiative (PW) and fast ignition, equation-of-state studies, radiation effects science and lethality, x-ray radiography, ZR development, basic research and pulsed power technology research and development, as well as electromagnetics and work for others. In his charge to the Committee, Dr. Jeffrey P. Quintenz, Director of Pulsed Power Sciences (Org. 1600) asked that the evaluation and feedback be based on three criteria: (1) quality of technical activities in science, technology, and engineering, (2) programmatic performance, management, and planning, and (3) relevance to national needs and agency missions. In addition, the director posed specific programmatic questions. The accompanying report, produced as a SAND document, is the report of the Committee's finding.},
doi = {10.2172/805839},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {2002},
month = {10}
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share: