Below we've provided some comments that have been made about SREL to the press and in response to the queries of concerned citizens.
what
you might be told |
a
potential reply |
| SREL has not been responsive to DOE needs on the Savannah River Site. | SREL has negotiated in good faith with DOE-Savannah River managers and contractor personnel to determine what research will best benefit the SRS. These research projects were agreed upon by all parties. In fact, SREL's proposed research was in the areas of Ecological Risks and Effects, Remediation and Restoration, and Environmental Characterization, as directed by SRS Manager Allison (see 1 July 2005 letter). This is the only written direction SREL has received regarding the Lab's research for DOE on the SRS. |
| Changing federal priorities have led to SREL’s budget situation, which effectively precludes further funding of the Lab by DOE. | The funding to pay for the research programs agreed upon by SREL and SRS personnel is available at the SRS. DOE-SR has been prevented by DOE officials in Washington, DC from providing this funding to SREL. |
| SREL did not propose any research that was “mission critical” to DOE. | All of the research proposed by SREL was in response to SRS needs, and was agreed upon by DOE-SR and SRS contractor personnel. In fact, SREL’s proposed research would help address at least 15 out of 27 “knowledge gaps” identified in the April 2007 draft DOE-EM Engineering & Technology Roadmap document. (see below for more details). Also, SREL has never been provided with a definition of “mission critical” as it was applied to this review process. |
| SREL’s research did not pass a “technical scientific review” conducted by DOE. | SREL was not allowed to submit research proposals for review; instead only 1-2 sentence descriptions of each proposed research project were allowed. SREL was never provided with the criteria that would be used to review the projects, or with a timeframe for the review. After providing several versions of the proposal list, SREL was finally told only a few weeks ago that none of the research would be funded. SREL still has not been provided with written review comments, and SREL has no idea who actually conducted the review. |
| SREL’s proposed research was evaluated on both its scientific merit and its ability to further DOE’s mission of reducing high-level nuclear materials and waste at the SRS. | SREL’s proposed research projects were agreed upon by SRS personnel and are needed for site needs. No written review comments have been provided to SREL (as is standard in any true peer review process), so there is no way to determine why SREL’s proposed projects were deemed not “mission critical.” |
| We have seen very little evidence that the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory leadership has attempted to obtain funding from other sources beyond what they already have from DOE. | In FY2006-2007, SREL researchers submitted just over $15 million in proposals to a variety of agencies, industries, and private foundations (including the National Science Foundation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Institutes of Health, and the Department of Defense). SREL consistently receives more than $2 million each year in research funding from organizations other than DOE. However, while these grants help fund SREL personnel and operations, they do not provide enough funding to completely pay SREL infrastructure and support personnel costs. DOE would be hard pressed to find another organization of SREL's size that has a stronger record of contracts and grant submissions and actively funded contracts and grants. |
