1 / 6

GDE/O site recommendation WG

GDE/O site recommendation WG. 16 November 2004 ILCSC at KEK Sachio Komamiya Graduate School of Science, University of Tokyo. Members. R. Eichler (Chair) S. Bertolucci J. Brau A.J.S. Smith D.D. Bhawalkar S. Komamiya. Candidate GDE/O sites. SLAC KEK LBNL FNL DESY Cornell

tamra
Download Presentation

GDE/O site recommendation WG

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GDE/O site recommendation WG 16 November 2004 ILCSC at KEK Sachio Komamiya Graduate School of Science, University of Tokyo

  2. Members R. Eichler (Chair) S. Bertolucci J. Brau A.J.S. Smith D.D. Bhawalkar S. Komamiya

  3. Candidate GDE/O sites • SLAC • KEK • LBNL • FNL • DESY • Cornell • CCLRC • BNL • TRIUMF

  4. Services Desired of the host(Based on 26th March 2004 ; The GDO for LC Required and Desired Features of the Host Institution for the GDO central team) Liaison person Space (and its maintenance) Administration services Financial agent Procurement Personnel services Environment Safety and health Procuring local housing Travel arrangements Visa and working permits Non-salaried visiting positions Telephone and telefax services on a free-for-service bases Overhead burden Location Computing Design services Engineering and consulting

  5. Questions from the Chair • 1. Do all sites fulfill the requirements to host the central team? • 2. Is information missing or unclear in some of the proposals? • 3. How would we weight the different proposals? Is it possible to give a ranking of the proposals? If yes, what are the criteria?

  6. The first telephone discussions 5th /6th November 2004 All the members were attended. The chairman is inquiring each laboratory information which are still missing. The second telephone conference will be planned after collecting these information

More Related