1
12 May 2014 AWLC2014@Fermilab LCB Chair The University of Tokyo Sachio Komamiya
LCB
5 members X 3 regions + chair = 16 members + secretary
Members:
Chair Sachio Komamiya (The University of Tokyo)
Americas Jonathan Bagger (TRIUMF)
Nigel Lockyer (Fermilab Director)
David MacFarlane (SLAC)
Lia Merminga (TRIUMF)
Hugh Montgomery (Jefferson Lab)
Asia Jie Gao (IHEP, Beijing)
Rohini Godbole (Indian Institute of Science)
Sunkee Kim (RISP)
Atsuto Suzuki (KEK Director)
Yifang Wang (IHEP Director)
Europe Rolf Heuer (CERN Director-General)
Joachim Mnich (DESY Director of Particle Physics)
Francois Le Diberder (IN2P3)
Victor Mateev (JINR Director)
Lenny Rivkin (PSI)
Secretary Roy Rubinstein
3
→LCB
→LCC
CLIC
We are enduring the pains of childbirth to launch the project
We need to see more clear vision towards the construction
2014
EDR
P5 Report
Road Map
4
Common strategy on ILC from the three regions
European Strategy on HEP
Asian Statement on ILC
Snowmass process ⇒ P5 recommendation
May 22-23
HEPAP meeting
After the Higgs discovery
CLIC and ILC are not competitive projects
5
LCB Launching the project
Now, launching the project has the highest priority.
~approval of the international project by governments
We need to believe that we can launch the project.
We need vision and hard work to materialize our belief.
The consistent picture of the project has to be jointly
owned.
The roadmap should be stable but should be evolved.
Big milestones have to be set up and reached.
6
LCB How we start the international negotiations ?
ILC should be a truly international project.
Japanese government is worrying that,
once Japan agrees to be a host, then most of the budget must be covered by Japan.
Hard negotiations must be started as soon as possible.
Before starting the negotiations, informal contacts between high level officers of the
major stakeholders must be done. Actually, these have been already started.
The next step is that the scientists (LCC) make possible combinations of packages out
of the subsystems and components.
The ILC is suited for in-kind procurement. For example, the main linac SCRF system
can be divided into several pieces. Accelerator physicists experienced on procurement
must work out in this process.
Then the big negotiations must be done with ILC items packaged with political items
between governments.
7
LCB Very Important Issues in launching the project
(1) Definition of the Project with Physics Objectives
Time line of the whole project
Staging strategy
Energy upgrade plan
(2) Construction cost refinement (based on the TDR)
Operation cost
(3) Human resources estimation (physicists, engineers,
technicians) Construction, installation, and operation
stages
Efforts for cost and labor reduction have to be
continued.
8
LCB Clean up issues pointed out by the Science
Council of Japan (SCJ)
SCJ Recommendation
9
SCJ Recommendation
10
LCB Big science issues of ILC physics
Higgs Boson is a window of the new physics. But ILC physics is
not only the precise measurement of the Higgs Boson properties.
Find the direction towards beyond the Standard Model:
Full elucidation of the Higgs Boson
Physics of the Grand Unification Scale
SUSY and SUSY breaking
Inflation and phase transition of the universe
Physics of space-time and vacuum
Vacuum stability
Missing of the gravity interaction in the Standard Model and
Physics at the Planck scale
Quantum gravity Superstring ?
11
SCJ Recommendation
Decision must be done by the Government and not SCJ
12
Common7%
ElectronSource3%
PositronSource4%
DampingRings6%
RTML8%
MainLinac66%
BDS4%
IR2%
CFS-Civilconstruction 10%
CFS-other 6%
L-bandCavitiesandCryomodules 32%
L-bandHLRF 9%
Cryogenics 7%
Controls 2%
TOTALMainLinac 66%
By accelerator
system
CFS-Civilconstruc on
18%
CFS-other11%
L-bandCavi esand
Cryomodules35%
L-bandHLRF10%
Cryogenics8%
Installa on1%
MagnetsandPowerSupplies
6%
ControlsandCompu ng
Infrastructrure6%
Instrumenta on1%
DumpsandCollimators
1%
Vacuum1%
NonL-bandRF1%
Areasystemspecific
1%
Close Inspections of the Cost and Labor
Estimations in TDR assuming the host by LCC
13
LCB activities after LCWS13
(1) Subcommittees of LCB
1) ILC Lab. governance and management structure
2) Roadmap towards the international agreement
(2) PAC
(3) MoU for the LCC
(4) To further activate the LCB, telephone
meetings are planned every month.
14
Brian Foster Oxford University / DESY
Satoru Yamashita ICEPP, the University of Tokyo
Dean Karlen University of Victoria
D. K. Srivastava Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, Kolkata
Colin Carlile. ESS in Sweden
Jonathan Dorfan and Neil Calder OIST
Vera Luth SLAC
Exofficio Sachio Komamiya (LCB), Lyn Evans (LCC)
The first fuze meeting was held on 25/3/2014. The first face-to-
face meeting will be at the Fermilab AWLC. Most of the
meetings can be remote.
LCB set up two Subcommittees
1) Subcommittee to study and produce recommendation of the
structure of the ILC Lab (Governance, Project Management etc.)
Members are selected by Laboratory directors or ‘vice directors’
CERN, DESY, IHEP, KEK, SLAC, Fermilab
15
LCB Subcommittee on ILC Laboratory Organization and Management
Mandate
The Subcommittee is to produce recommendations on the organization and
management of the proposed ILC Lab in Japan. Among the items to consider for this
global project are: governance; organization; management structure; legal framework;
staff composition; relationship between world HEP labs and the ILC Lab; and the role of
the host nation.
The subcommittee can use as a starting point the GDE Project Implementation
Planning (PIP) document
http://ilc-edmsdirect.desy.de/ilcedmsdirect/file.jsp?edmsid=D00000000979545
produced prior to the recent interest shown for an ILC site located in Japan; this study
considered many of the relevant issues. The Comprehensive Project Design Guidance
(CPDG),
http://cpdg.kek.jp *
which has a more detailed consideration of a more limited set of issues, may also be a
useful reference.
A final report should be submitted by the Subcommittee to the LCB’s 26 February 2015
meeting; an interim report can be submitted earlier if a consensus is reached on
significant issues.
16
Important matters for the final form of the LC Lab
(a) Legal framework
The framework will evolve from that based on MoU
to that on International Treaty.
(Experience of XFEL: It was not easy to reach an
agreement even for a limited-liability company.)
(b) Procurement
Although based on In-kind, significantly large
Common Fund is needed
(ITER: almost all in-kind, LHC: 80% by the Host)
(c) Staff composition
Basically seconded staffs from many labs.
It is essential to have full time core members in the
Central Team employed by the Common Fund.
(d) Organization
Director General, Directorate,
Council, User’s Committee
(e) Role of host
Short term agility and long time stability are needed for the organization
17
2) Subcommittee to propose an international agreement for the ILC project
Exchange information on political developments impacting the ILC project in order to move the project forward.
Propose arrangements to lead towards international approval of the ILC project by considering the specific circumstances in each region/country.
KEK-DG distributes updated information of the ILC project in
Japan for every month, and the discussion will be over
telephones.
Members: Laboratory directors or members of directorate
Atsuto Suzuki
Yifang Wang
Rolf Heuer
Joachim Mnich
Nigel Lockyer
Jonathan Bagger
Exofficio: LCC director Lyn Evans
18
PAC (Project Advisory Committee) The PAC will assess and / or comment (for ILC and CLIC):
• The overall physics, technical design, cost, and schedule
• The detector progress
• Civil construction and the preparatory activities
• The financial contributions and management as far as
accelerator/detector design, R&D and the site
preparation activities
•Schedule
Members are selected.
The first PAC meeting must be held within this year.
19
Chair Norbert Holtkamp
Deputy Chair Michel Davier
Accelerator and
Project
Hans Weise (DESY) Linac Construction
Robert Orr (Tronto) Cavity R&D
Mark Palmer (FNAL) Large Science Facilties
Philippe Lebrun (CERN) PM / Cost
Osamu Kamigaito (RFBF Riken) Facility construction
Moo Hyun Cho (PAL Korea) Linac Technology
Eisuke Tada (JAEA/ITER) PM / Integration
Shinichi Akutagawa
(Kobe University)
Construction Management
Norihito Ohuchi (KEK)
NOT AVAILABLE
SC-RF/ Cryomodule product.
Experiments
Joe Lykken (FNAL) Physics
Peter Jenni (CERN/ATLAS)
Detector/Physics
Tomio Kobayashi (ICEPP,Tokyo) Detector/ Experiments
Hesheng Chen (IHEP, Beijing) Detector/Experiemnts
PAC (Project Advisory Committee)
Members
LCC requested to postpone the
First meeting.
I will discuss with PAC chair and LCC
directorate on the meeting.
Within this year PAC has to have
The first meeting
20
MoU for LCC
The almost final MoU is ready
The known members to write his/her signature for the MoU
CERN DG Rolf Heuer
KEK DG Atsuto Suzuki
DESY Chair Board of the Directorium Helmut Dosch
Director of Particle and Astroparticle Physics Joachim Mnich
Nikhef Director Frank Linde
RISP Director Sunkee Kim
TRIUMF CEO/CAO Jim Hanlon
DoE cannot write signatures for multi-lateral MoU but they promised to contribute
to the Common Fund.
In addition to the above members I am asking LCB members
Russia, China, India, France, Switzerland, …, who is going to write the signature.
Countries without LCB members (UK, …) I am asking privately.
First, known members give signatures, and then extend to other members.
(The same procedure was taken for the GDE MoU)
21
22
Summary
Since three regions have the common strategy for the ILC,
now, launching the project has the highest priority.
~Approval of the international project by governments
Even if we cannot secure large budget for now for the
Engineering Designing and R&D, we need to start where we
have to: Close examination of the cost and the labor estimations
in TDR assuming the host.
Two subcommittees are set up (1) LCB Subcommittee on ILC Laboratory Organization and Management (2) Subcommittee to propose an international agreement for the ILC project (Major Lab directors)
PAC will be held within this year.