From: Hans Jostlein (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Mar 15 2006 - 13:45:17 CST
Thanks, great paper.
I am a little nervous about two cost items:
a. the civil construction contingency for the underground part is probably
way too low
(see the NUMI re-baselining fiasco)
b. The veto cost may be low by a factor of two.
Double CHOOZ pays 2.2 M$ for their veto system which, is comparable to that
for one of our detectors
I don't know what the right answer is politically, of course.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Blucher" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:20 PM
Subject: draft Braidwood reponse to P5
> Dear Colleagues:
> We've attach a draft of our response to the P5 questions. The responses
> are due tomorrow (Thursday), so please send your comments as soon as
> possible (but no later than tomorrow morning).
> Ed and Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Mar 30 2006 - 03:10:13 CST