E n v i r o n m e n t a l ▼ News T wo potential casua lties of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) proposed fiscal year 2006 (FY ’06) budget are funding for the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SREL) and research into surficial science—a new area of study for DOE that focuses on ra- dionuclide behavior and has been deemed important by sci- entists inside and outside the agency. Both cuts are raising concerns from envi- ronmental scientists as well as policy makers. “SREL is a valuable na- tional resource and, in my opinion, one of the premier ecological research organi- zations in the world,” says Brian Looney, an advisory scien tist with t he Savannah River National Laboratory, a separate facility. SREL scientists have “an incredi- ble record of pioneering re- search and are recognized by the frequent use of their research [books and pa- pers] in the ecology class- rooms of universities everywhere,” he adds. If DOE’s FY ’06 budget is approved by Congress, it would end nearly 54 years of federal funding that began with the Atomic Energy Commission, which eventually was subsumed by DOE. Funding SREL makes good sense as part of DOE’s research portfolio because the Savannah River site has contamination in the surface waters, which is unique in terms of DOE’ s problem areas , adds Jim Tiedje, a distinguished professor of crop and soil sciences and of micro- biology and molecular genetics at Michigan State University. The decision to eliminate SREL emerged from the 10% hit imposed on the Biological and Environmen- tal Research (BER) section of DOE’s Office of Science. “Our budget has been flat, which means that our budget has been decreasing when you factor in the cost of living,” ex - plains Aristides Patrinos, BER’s di- rector. We’ re not left w ith any f at whatsoever. We are now trimmi ng meat and bone.” SREL is operated by the Uni- versity of Georgia, which requires DOE’s support to keep the lab run- ning, s ays SREL’s dire ctor, Paul Bertsch. Bertsch and Patrinos agree that SREL’s funding problems are part of the fallout of DOE’s shifting pri- orities. DOE’s Office of Environ- mental Management funded SREL from its founding in 1989 until FY ’03, paying for research into phy- toremediation, bioremediation, and in situ stabilization. But when Environmental Management’s mis- sion was revised to concentrate on accelerating cleanups of con- taminated, Cold-War-era weapons sites (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36 , 136A–137 A), responsibil ity for funding the lab was tra nsferred to BER. SREL was then faced with the task of restructuring its programs so that they aligned “with t he very narrowly focused mission of [BER’s] Environmental Remediation Sci- ence division,” Bertsch explains. Nevertheless, SREL was “very wil ling and f lexible to make tra n- sitions and shifts” to ac- commodate BER’s needs, Patrinos says. Both Patri- nos and Bertsch say that SREL came out “very well” in the two BER-sponsored peer reviews. DOE’ s FY ’06 budget a lso has no funding for surf icial science, which focuses on the behavior of radionu- clide con taminants at and near the surface, Patrinos says. BER had been gearing up to broaden its research portfolio by studying surfi- cial contaminants, and the Tims Branch–Steed Pond system at the Savannah River site was a top candi- date for SREL funding. Sed- iments in the river system, which is subject to episodes of both flooding and dry ing, remain contaminated with ~70% of the 48.4 tons of ura- nium left over from fuel fabrication operations in the 1950s and 1960s, according to SREL. The sediments are also contaminated with nickel, cadmium, copper, chromium, and lead, Bertsch points out. Surficial contaminants actu- ally pose a more immediate risk than t he subsurface contamina- tion that DOE has focused on fund- ing, Bertsch contends. The topic fits well with the emerging area of coupled hydrobiogeochemical pro- cesses, he explains. “Processes controlling radio- nuclide fate are highly dependent Budget cuts raise questions about U.S. DOE priori ties The Tims Branch–Steed Pond system at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River reservation is a top candidate for DOE research into the effects of surficial contamination, which puts wildlife at risk. However, DOE’s FY ‘06 budget has no funding for the Savannah River Ecology Laborator y or surficial science. T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F G E O R G I A S A V A N N A H R I V E R E C O L O G Y L A B O R A T O R Y 216A ■ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / MAY 15, 2005 © 2005 American Chemical Society
