Revised Minutes (version 2) from the SLUO Exec Board meeting, 17 October 2003
Present from SLUO: Ray Cowan, Sridhara Dasu, Eduardo do Coute e Silva,
Gregory Dubois-Felsmann, Olga Iakovleva, Homer Neal (by conference phone), Eli
Rosenberg, Bruce Schumm, Gabriella Sciolla, Fran Spiller, Eric Torrence, and
Amanda Weinstein.
Apologies: Phil Burrows, Berrie Giebels, John Harton, Yury Kolomensky, Krishna
Kumar, and Gautier Hamel de Monchenault.
Visitors: Uwe Bergmann (SSRL UO Exec Board Chair) and Abi Soffer (YPP
representative).
1. Welcome of New Members
The meeting began at 9:00 AM with Eli’s welcome to the new Executive Board
members, Berrie Giebels (not present), Bruce Schumm, Eric Torrence, and Gregory
Dubois-Felsmann. There was some discussion regarding our usual yearly meeting
schedule (four "in-person" meetings, roughly quarterly, including the
institutional representatives meeting during the SLUO Annual Meeting in the
summer). This was contrasted with the FNAL UO Executive Board meetings which are
monthly. It was noted that SLAC pays travel costs for us to attend our meetings.
2. Information
As funding decreases, a higher level of cooperation among the several users
groups is occurring, particularly in seeking increases in funding for the DoE
Office of Science.
Steve Rock has written a letter asking SLUO for help with the End Station A
program. Three experiments have been approved but are not funded.
Visa problems are an issue at BNL and other sites. Fran and Gabriella are to
attend the annual meeting of User Facility Administrators, October 27-28, 2003,
at BNL, where the visa issue is on the agenda. It is desired to coordinate visa
issues between the sites.
The Scientific Policy Committee would like all users to work together. In the
case of SLUO and SSRLUO, it was noted that there is some overlap of interests
and needs, but perhaps not as much as expected. Different physics, different
experimental timescales, and different funding sources limit the effectiveness
of this idea. We can, however, cooperate more effectively on those issues we
have in common: housing, healthcare, restrictions affecting foreign visitors,
and ease of access to facilities.
3. Young Particle Physicists Report
Abi gave a detailed PowerPoint presentation covering several topics that YPP is
involved in, including a strong mentoring effort for high school students who
participate in research at SLAC.
After the YPP presentation, the discussion turned to our efforts to increase
awareness of need for increased support of basic sciences research, which
includes the Washington, DC, trip. It was noted that it is very important to be
aware of issues about the propriety of using federal resources to lobby the
federal government. For instance, never use SLAC email for this purpose. Some
universities may also not want their domain names to be used in email sent for
lobbying purposes. The best solution is to use personal home email.
4. Statements from Out-going Members
Sridhara recommends that a good fraction of the SLUO Exec Board make the
Washington trip. He also created the health insurance survey form, and showed it
at the meeting. Some suggestions were made and were incorporated into the form
by the end of the meeting.
At this point there was a lengthy discussion about the healthcare situation for
both domestic and foreign visitors. It was thought that it is very important for
us to explain why we are doing the survey (to help users get insurance, not to
force them to get it). Must foreign visitors satisfy any health insurance
requirements to obtain a visa? Can students have routine medical care performed
at SLAC medical? Can visitors buy into a SLAC and/or Stanford insurance program?
5. Election of New Chair & Coordinator of Committees
The tradition that the Coordinator of Committees typically is elected Chair the
following year was explained. The idea is that a new SLUO EC member is elected
Coordinator of Committees during his/her first year on the SLUO Exec Board; that
person is then expected to be elected as Chair during their second year, and
then during their third year serve as advisor to the new Chair.
This tradition was followed and Gabriella was elected Chair, succeeding Eli.
Gregory was elected the new Coordinator of Committees. Bruce was elected
Secretary/Treasurer.
It was noted that in the SLUO election last month, 243 votes were cast, 30 more
than the previous year.
6. Topics to Discuss with the Directorate
Topics listed were: the need for a review process for computing security
decisions made by SLAC Computing Services; the need for increased evening thru
midnight shuttle service from SLAC to nearby locations, to accommodate the shift
change; funding, including NLC; Steve Rock's request for help with funding the
ESA experiments; topics from Glen Crawford's slides as shown at HEPAP; the
results of the SLAC scenarios study; how to make all efforts at improving the
funding situation more effective and the DoE stance on outreach.
7. Directorate Visit & Lunch
Jonathan Dorfan, Persis Drell, Steve Williams, and Neal Calder arrived at noon.
There is no FY 2004 budget yet; Congress has enacted a continuing resolution
through November. The DoE is expected to receive funding at the value set in the
President's budget, which will be up $9.5 million from FY 2003. However, the
increase is already accounted for (restoring the 1.5% pay that was withheld in
2003 - $2M; 3.5% extra for benefits - $4M; PEP-II cut last year by $4M which
will be restored in FY2004).
A full run is planned for PEP-II through the end of July 2004 (39 weeks), a
total of 10 months (3 in 2003, 7 in 2004), plus a short down time at Christmas.
The startup in September was the fastest start ever on PEP-II.
GLAST has a fixed budget, fully funded. The three ESA experiments are stalled.
Unfortunately it will be impossible to continue the ESA program. It is important
for users to recognize that, due to budget restrictions, the lab had to make
very tough decisions to be able to preserve the main program, and they were
forced to turn down very good science.
Also we are affected by power rates and incur a penalty if we go above a certain
amount. ESA on top of PEP-II would reach it; this wasn't known at the time the
ESA experiments were accepted.
Advanced accelerator R&D is the future of the field. NLC funding is flat again
this year (FY 2004). A request to double funding has been made for FY 2005, but
the result is unknown. To some degree, the anemic economic recovery and the cost
of the war in Iraq weigh against the request.
The annual performance measurement was missed by a little. OMB has several
metrics used for this. However, the expectation is set before the budget is
known. OMB needs to lower expectations. Congress actually cares about the
precision of sin 2beta. According to the metrics, BaBar logged enough of the
delivered luminosity; the failure was only in the delivered total amount.
A meeting will be held in November at SLAC to open up the SLAC scenarios process
to the user community and staff before the final report is written. It is
thought that at least two hours in the auditorium will be needed, preferably
starting or ending with lunch. It needs to be held before December.
Quality of life issues were discussed next. The Guest House has been running
65-70% occupancy for the last three months. For it to be self-sustaining, it
must pay operating costs and repay $10.7M to the University over a 30 year
period. For the current fee schedule this means occupancy must be about 80% over
365 days, otherwise costs of rooms will have to increase. Users need to be
educated about the Guest House to encourage its use and to help them change
habits. SSRL has no beam until next spring, so they have fewer users on site.
They will use more rooms after SPEAR3 begins operation. There have been no
complaints about the Guest House; the quality of service is good. During big
meetings at SLAC, there have been times when it was full; however, there is
still a big portion of the community that is not using it.
Regarding the desire for additional Marguerite shuttle service in the evening,
up to and including the midnight shift change, SLUO is requested to establish
the need for it and to get ridership numbers. A partial alternative would be to
have a fleet of cars available at the Guest House that users could check out to
go out for the evening, etc. Although you can get to the Guest House from the
local airports by shuttle, there is little transportation available if you want
to go out to eat for dinner, etc, in the evening. Most people that stay are
renting cars. Public transportation (buses, Caltrain) is available for trips to
the airports but is inconvenient due to the number of transfers needed.
The plans for a public lecture series were discussed. SSRL and SLUO plan to
co-educate each other's user community, plus the general public, about the
physics they do. The key is to get the right speaker--not necessarily someone
who is close to the details, but rather a good communicator. Slides would also
be posted on the web and could be used in Washington visits. It was noted that
the Carreras lectures at CERN are well-attended, usually packed with over 400
people.
Regarding outreach, Neil Calder noted that www.interactions.org is an excellent
resource for outreach and educational efforts, and also that the Communications
Department on campus is willing to give training to SLAC speakers.
It was noted that the SLAC user community doesn't do well in terms of outreach
to Congress. Between SLAC and SSRL, there are users from every state in the
nation. We need to make visits to our local Congressional representatives and
ask them to support basic science. Two to three visits in one year will get
their attention. Also the APS has a very important feature on their website at
http://www.aps.org/public_affairs/ which allows the sending of email to your
representatives. The procedure is very simple and takes two or three minutes to
complete. It only takes about six letters to be effective. The Energy and Water
bill is coming up in Congress next week.
Computing security was discussed. The establishment of a review process for
computing security decisions was requested by Ray Cowan and Tony Johnson, SLUO's
computing security representatives to the SCS Computer Security Committee.
Decisions made could sometimes affect the user community in an adverse way and a
review process should be helpful in bringing to light the implications of such
decisions and in finding possible alternatives. Such review of course would not
restrict the making of any time-critical decisions of an immediate nature, but
would bring additional knowledgeable people to the table when discussing other
issues such as blocking ports, removing software or services, etc., that might
pose a risk down the road. It is thought that the Computer Coordinating
Committee (CCC) might be a suitable forum, with subsequent recommendations being
passed on to the Associate Directors Computing Committee (ADCC).
8. Sub-committees Formation & Assignments
Sub-committees were populated by various volunteers:
Washington, DC trip: Amanda, Bruce, Eli, Gabriella, Gregory (chair)
Quality of Life: Amanda, Bruce Eric, Eduardo (chair)
Public Meetings: Eli, Gabriella, Bruce (chair)
Outreach: Eric, Gabriella, Gregory, Ray (chair)
Visa Problems: Eric, Bruce (chair)
Gregory will contact the other members of SLUO who aren't present to get their
help on the committees.
9. Setting up Charge & Planning of Sub-committee Activities
Washington, DC trip: trip planning, preparation, and debriefing.
Quality of Life: perform health insurance survey; perform Guest House usage
survey; investigate evening shuttle/car fleet possibilities.
Public Meetings: plan for the SLUO Annual meeting in July; assist with the
upcoming SLAC Scenarios meeting in November.
Outreach: plan for the public lecture series with SSRL, especially regarding the
selection of three speakers for the year.
Visa Problems: investigate problems and help find solutions; coordinate with the
other labs and user organizations for this purpose.
10. Selection of SLUO Representatives for SLAC Committees
Ray will continue to attend SSRLUO EC meetings and report back to the SLUO EC.
He and Tony Johnson will continue as SLUO representatives to the SCS Computing
Security Committee. A representative needs to be selected for the SLAC operating
safety committee.
11. SLUO Office Report
Fran reported on the plans for the User Facility Administrators Group meeting to
be held at BNL October 27-28 2003. She will give a talk on similarities and
differences of databases used at the various facilities. An important issue is
SLAC’s implementation of FACTS (Foreign Access Central Tracking System) which is
required by DOE. A questionnaire is to be sent to the users (approval was
received yesterday).
12. AOB/Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 3:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Ray Cowan, SLUO EC Secretary/Treasurer.
posted December 5, 2003 by mcdunn