Present:
B. Barish, B. Foster, M. Nozaki, T. Raubenheimer, K. Yokoya, M. Hronek (sec)

Absent:
N. Walker, G. Dugan

Public Minutes 27-JUL-06; comments to Max in 24 hrs than post

Announcements: none

Actions Items: Skip this week.

GDE presentation to the ILCSC

• Not many problematic questions, mostly clarifications. No costing questions.
• Big point was should costs be confidential until reviewed in the spring?
  • Positive response to the action of having a spring cost review
  • It will be a unified and international review
• Should we sponsor another ILC school – yes but when?
  • It should be combined with regional schools
  • 1 st attempt should be with the USPAS

Process Discussion

• Are we doing as well as can?
• Most sensitive issue right now 14 mrad change
  • Concern with the physics community
• our process cannot be distorted
• we need to be able to defend our decisions

Cost Distribution

• Restrictions may be limiting
  • PG need help – he is making a list, soon to be sent out
  • We need other people involved. We have good people and they can get involved but they will need access to the costs.
  • Scope issues are good
  • How can change/modify the process in order to get help
  • PG to bring names/additions to the EC and the EC must clear them quickly.

Post RDR

• After the RDR, this will be a new territory
• We need to motivate towards construction phase
• Important: conceptual to engineering design, we need more people, more discipline and project management.
• Move to new name -- EDR (Engineering Design Report)
• We don’t want to be seen as a DOE type design or any other gov region
• We will the define the phase of that part of the project
• Not a lot of good models out there , but there our a few. We need to do our homework and study some examples on how to proceed.
  • Examples
    • ALMA
      • Regional organization
      • Run by several organizations, ESP, NSF, BRO
      • Look at org and communications with gov.
        • BF comment: Spoke with Richard Wade. ALMA a disaster. Maybe we can learn what NOT to do.
    • ITER
      • Some similarities, but they are not as globally broad
      • Project side is similar
      • Main difference is just a few countries and is a top-down project
      • 10 year preliminary tech design,R&D
    • Square Kilometer Array (SKA)
      • US side disorganized
      • They do have the equivalent of the GDE
      • 2M Euro budget year
      • International collaboration but not as global as GDE
• We should use these projects and others; do the homework through the fall.
• Define next few years to move as project, but stay clear of governments. We don’t want that to dominate.
• BF to get small document together by KEK. Are there any Japanese projects for study?
• This is now an action item.

Next meeting – August 10.