Skip to primary navigation Skip to content
August 01, 2007

Subcommittees Question Looming Closure of Savannah River Ecology Lab

(Washington, DC) – In a second joint hearing, Members of two Science & Technology Subcommittees further examined the Department of Energy’s decision to end its funding for the Savannah River Ecology Lab (SREL), near Aiken, South Carolina.

During today’s hearing, Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee Chair Brad Miller (D-NC) and Energy and Environment Subcommittee Chair Nick Lampson (D-TX) heard testimony from several representatives from DOE about their decision, as well as representatives from the Lab.

"The Savannah River Ecology lab served the Department of Energy, the communities affected by the [Savannah River] site and the Nation for more than 50 years," said Miller. "It was, by any financial measure, a very inexpensive lab to operate. It would be hard to find a better return on investment anywhere in the federal science complex."

“There is simply no reason for DOE to discontinue funding for SREL. There are funds available. There is work to be done. SREL has the personnel and the experience to do the work,” said Lamspon. “The laboratory has the support of the scientific community broadly and of the local community who rely upon the independent voice that SREL represents.”

The mission of the lab is to study the effects of the Savannah River Nuclear Weapons facility on the surrounding environment. It has been recognized internationally as a leader in radiation ecology and a training ground for future scientists and engineers in the field. SREL, housed on the Savannah River nuclear site since 1951 and run by the University of Georgia, costs about $4 million a year to operate out of a $24.63 billion dollar per year DOE budget.

During budget negotiations in 2006, DOE reduced its funding for SREL from $4 million to $1.8 million for fiscal year 2007, a reduction that leaves the lab few options other than closure. While the University of Georgia was able to extend personnel salaries through June, a number of employees were still released, and the lab’s future now remains uncertain.

Chairmen Miller and Lampson began their inquiry into the matter with a letter to DOE Secretary Samuel Bodman on May 16.

"In letters to the Hill and statements to the press, the Department said that there was a rigorous peer review," said Miller. "That is demonstrably untrue. There was no merit review, technical review or scientific peer review."

For more information on today’s hearing, click here.

###

110.140

Related Subcommittees