From: Josh R Klein (jrk@mail.hep.utexas.edu)
Date: Mon Apr 17 2006 - 14:04:46 CDT
Ed,
This looks good to me. My one suggestion might be to include the actual quote
from the NuSAG report which suggests that more technical design and simulation
is needed to make a decision.
Josh
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 01:52:05PM -0500, Ed Blucher wrote:
> Mike and I discussed the letter draft he just distributed (attached
> here), and feel it is a better version to send to P5. Could you please
> make any remaining comments on this version? We'll incorporate comments
> we receive in the next couple of hours, and send the letter to P5 this
> evening. Thanks a lot.
>
> Ed and Mike
> Return-Path: <mworcest>
> Received: from franklin.nevis.columbia.edu (franklin.nevis.columbia.edu [129.236.252.8])
> by hep.uchicago.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3HIVKil005897
> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
> for <braidwood@hep.uchicago.edu>; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:31:20 -0500
> Received: from [128.59.171.54] (dyn-pupin-171-54.dyn.columbia.edu [128.59.171.54])
> (authenticated bits=0)
> by franklin.nevis.columbia.edu (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3HIVJks010458
> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
> for <braidwood@hep.uchicago.edu>; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:31:20 -0400
> Message-ID: <4443DEFC.7020401@nevis.columbia.edu>
> Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:31:24 -0400
> From: Mike Shaevitz <shaevitz@nevis.columbia.edu>
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: Braidwood Collaboration <braidwood@hep.uchicago.edu>
> Subject: Alternative letter to P5
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 129.236.252.8
>
> Hi,
> This is an alternative letter mainly written by Janet and
> Mike S. to send to P5.
> Mike and Ed
>
>
> Dear Members of P5,
>
> The Braidwood Collaboration was scheduled to present the
> proposal for our
> experiment to measure theta_13 at the P5 meeting on April
> 18. This talk was withdrawn
> because on April 13, the Braidwood Collaboration received
> the attached
> message from Robin Staffin at the Department of Energy
> stating that a decision had been made not to support the R&D
> for the Braidwood experiment.
> This preemptive decision was made without a proper technical
> and cost review of the experiments.
> In fact, the input from the NuSAG report put the
> Braidwood experiment at the same level or slightly in front
> of the Daya Bay experiment in several ways. As outlined in
> the message from Staffin, the DOE has made this decision
> with the hope that "with strong project planning and
> development, [Daya Bay] could be made technically feasible
> and affordable." Thus, the decision to terminate Braidwood
> was not based on a relative merit assessment of the two
> experiments. The NuSAG and P5
> committees were put in place to allow the scientific
> community to have input into the approval and
> prioritization of experiments like Braidwood. What has
> occurred shows that this input is not being used or needed
> by DOE management in developing our high energy physics program.
>
> Input from the scientific community is critical for the
> health of the
> high energy physics program. We
> ask that P5, in its role as the main advisory committee on
> the content of
> the U.S.
> high energy physics
> program, ensure that the competing reactor experiments
> are properly peer reviewed with respect to scientific merit
> and cost.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> The Braidwood Collabroation
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Tue Apr 18 2006 - 03:10:19 CDT