PAC 47 Charge Robert Mc Keown PAC 47

PAC 47 Charge Robert Mc. Keown PAC 47 July 29, 2019

APPROVED EXPERIMENTS Topic Hall A Hall B Hall C Hall D Other Total The Hadron spectra as probes of QCD 0 2 1 3 0 6 6 3 3 1 0 13 2 3 7 0 0 12 The 3 D structure of the hadrons 5 9 6 0 0 20 Hadrons and cold nuclear matter 8 5 7 0 1 21 Low-energy tests of the Standard Model and Fundamental Symmetries 3 1 0 1 2 7 Total 24 23 24 5 3 79 Total Experiments Completed 7. 0 8. 0 4. 9 1. 2 0 21. 1 Total Experiments Remaining 17. 0 15. 0 19. 1 3. 8 3. 0 57. 9 The transverse structure of the hadrons The longitudinal structure of the hadrons 2

Approved Experiments – PAC Days Topic Hall A Hall B Hall C Hall D Other Total The Hadron spectra as probes of QCD 0 219 11 540 0 770 150. 5 85 110 25 0 370. 5 65 230 211 0 0 506 The 3 D structure of the hadrons 409 872 197 0 0 1478 Hadrons and cold nuclear matter Low-energy tests of the Standard Model and Fundamental Symmetries Total Days 220 275 205 0 14 714 547 180 0 79 60 866 1392 1861 734 644 74 4704. 5 917. 5 1861 734 644 28 4184. 5 1392 1026 691 444 74 3626. 5 917. 5 1026 691 444 28 3106. 5 191 118. 0 138 0 623. 5 835 306 28 2483 The transverse structure of the hadrons The longitudinal structure of the hadrons Total Days - Without So. LID Total Approved Run Group Days (includes MIE) Total Approved Run Group Days (without So. LID) Total Days Completed Total Days Remaining 176. 5 741 A Decade of Experiments! 3 573

PAC 47 5 new proposals 3 run group additions 7 letters of intent Charge: Review new proposals, previously conditionally approved proposals, and letters of intent for experiments that will utilize the 12 Ge. V upgrade of CEBAF and provide advice on their scientific merit, technical feasibility and resource requirements. Identify proposals with high-quality physics that, represent high quality physics within the range of scientific importance represented by the previously approved 12 Ge. V proposals and recommend for approval. Also provide a recommendation on scientific rating and beam time allocation for proposals newly recommended for approval. Identify other proposals with physics that have the potential for falling into this category pending clarification of scientific and/or technical issues and recommend for conditional approval. Provide comments on technical and scientific issues that should be addressed by the proponents prior to review at a future PAC. 4

CONDITIONAL APPROVAL Two types: C 1 – Approval pending technical review, no need to return to PAC C 2 – Approval pending further review by future PAC 5

PROPOSALS WITH PARALLEL RUNNING • Parallel running procedure – Intent is to encourage new proposals of “run groups” – Summary only of additions to existing run group (PAC to comment) 6

JEOPARDY Policy Finalized after discussion with UGBOD in September 2016 Rationale • Use normal yearly PAC for ~4 years to address all presently approved proposals that have not been scheduled, plus new proposals in the next few years. Estimate ~5 -10 proposals per meeting • Will start in 2019 to reach steady state in 2024 proposals that have been approved for 4 years or more but are not scheduled will be considered in Jeopardy. 7

JEOPARDY CONSIDERATIONS 1) Is there any new information that would affect the scientific importance or impact of the Experiment since it was originally proposed? 2) If the Experiment has already received a portion of its allocated beam time, the spokespersons should provide an analysis of existing data to demonstrate that the results are impactful, and that the additional time will provide substantial further impact. 3) Should the remaining beam time allocation and experiment grade be reconsidered? 8

POLICY ON EQUIPMENT AVAILABILITY Categories for resource availability: – Stage I: resources need to be identified/obtained – Stage II: resources are essentially available This will be considered a Laboratory issue (not for PAC). 9

HIGH IMPACT For newly approved Stage II proposals, PAC should consider if any of these should be included in the “High Impact” category to receive priority for scheduling in the early (first 3 -5 years) running. (Since we are in the 2 nd full year – do we continue this process? ) 10

PAC REPORT Draft report text must be complete before closeout on Thursday. We will review all the draft text Thursday morning before the closeout. Susan Brown will assemble the draft text into a report for a final round of edits by email during 2 weeks following the PAC meeting. 11

ROLE OF USER CHAIR ON PAC • Monitor communications between PAC and spokespersons – identify issues. • Monitor PAC meeting proceedings for conflicts of interest. • Monitor PAC meeting proceedings to identify issues of fairness and ethical behavior. • Participate in all scientific discussions to provide additional expertise (except where there is a conflict of interest) 12

COMMUNICATION WITH PAC Communication with PAC members should be limited to: • Submission of proposal before the deadline • Presentation/discussion at PAC meeting, must be inperson (not remote connection) • Responses from spokespersons and/or contact person to inquiries from PAC for further information or clarification Note: TAC and Theory reports are not public documents – please do not distribute beyond your collaboration. 13

NEW PROPOSALS FOR PAC 47 002, 003, 004, would be Stage II if approved 001, 005 would be Stage I if approved 14

PARALLEL RUNNING ADDITIONS These run in parallel with previously approved or conditionally approved proposals. So they are considered already approved (or conditional) and are presented by collaborations – the PAC will provide a written comment for each of these in the report. 15

LETTERS OF INTENT 50 Letters of intent will be given the same “rights” to their scientific ideas as are currently afforded to deferred experiments: LOI has established a claim to a physics measurement that lasts for the next two successive PAC meetings. 16

JEOPARDY 17