RE: DOE Neutrino R&D Funds

From: Hahn, Richard (
Date: Wed Jan 11 2006 - 09:22:22 CST

        Some comments:
        1) I strongly agree that we should submit an updated EOI, to
stress the advances the Braidwood collaboration has made since the
September 2004 budget submissions to NSF and DOE. Let's not be shy about
our accomplishments.
        2) Since FermiLab is "rumored" to want the total pot of $8M
anyway, I think we should be ambitious and increase our funding request
from the modest ~$1M number from last year.
        3) In this regard, we should rethink our earlier decision of
using our base programs to do the R&D, and asking only for funding for
materials, equipment, and engineering support. We have lost more than
one year while the theta-13 evaluation process has been going on. Adding
scientific personnel to our effort could help us to speed up our R&D
work and recoup some of the lost time. My BNL Group certainly needs
bolstering in that regard.
        4) I believe that HEP asked for the EOIs by Jan. 23, the Monday
after our Jan. 20 meeting. Can we get an extension from HEP of the
submission date by a few days? If not, we had better have the EOI in
fairly final form when we meet at FermiLab. I'll be there to participate
in the discussions.
        5) I suggest that you make the EOI the first item on our Jan. 20
agenda, to allow ample time for us to polish and amend the draft
document. Submitting a strong request to DOE may be the most important
task confronting us now, because if we don't succeed in getting a slice
of the R&D funding pie, we will have problems...
        6) After finishing the EOI at the Jan. 20 meeting, we can go on
to discussions of new technical developments in the collaboration. If
need be, we could always break for dinner and come back for a few more
hours of discussion. I plan to travel to FermiLab on Friday morning, and
to stay overnight, traveling home on Saturday morning.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Blucher []
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 9:30 PM
Subject: DOE Neutrino R&D Funds

Dear Colleagues:

The DOE has called for submission of expressions
of interest for R&D activities that will further
progress on neutrino initiatives. Here's an
excerpt of the DOE note:

"The requests should address the key scientific
areas identified by the recent APS
multi-divisional study on opportunities in
neutrino physics, "The Neutrino Matrix." The
request should contain the title of the specific
program area (double beta decay, neutrino mixing
matrix parameters and mass hierarchy, or solar
neutrino energy spectrum), a brief justification
(benefits and progress to be gained if provided,
impacts if not provided), and a budget requested
including info on salaries, equipment, supplies, etc."

These EOIs should be no more than 5 pages and will
be followed by a request for full proposals.

We contacted Randy Johnson, who is the program
officer overseeing this program, to understand how
this new program relates to our pending R&D and
Engineering proposal.

Here's what he had to say.

1. Our 2004 proposal is still active and depends
on the NuSAG report.

2. They would like a single EOI from the Braidwood
Collaboration, which can refer to the 2004
proposal. We need to submit this EOI to be
included in the discussion of this year's R&D funds.

3. A total of 8 million dollars are available for
the combined lab and university program, of which
FNAL expects $8M.

We believe the best strategy is to submit an EOI
that summarizes and refers to our 2004 proposal. A
more modest request will not accomplish our goal
of completing the work necessary to write a full
proposal. We can update the argument that the viability of
the site has been established (bore holes, Exelon
cooperation, etc.), and that the next task is to
do the detailed engineering necessary to get a
true cost estimate, which can then be fully reviewed.
This EOI can largely be assembled from documents we have
already written, including updated sensitivities
given to NuSAG.

We will circulate a draft EOI during the next few
days, and have a full discussion at our
collaboration meeting on Jan. 20. Please send us
any comments/suggestions.

Mike and Ed

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 19 2006 - 03:10:17 CST