1 / 5

Brinkman Report: Setting Priorities for Large Facility Projects Sponsored by the NSF

Brinkman Report: Setting Priorities for Large Facility Projects Sponsored by the NSF. Key Issues Raised in Report Transparency of process (next slide) Involvement of community (next slide) Roadmap (spurred by Orbach’s 20-year plan)

andrew
Download Presentation

Brinkman Report: Setting Priorities for Large Facility Projects Sponsored by the NSF

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. Brinkman Report: Setting Priorities for Large Facility Projects Sponsored by the NSF Key Issues Raised in Report • Transparency of process (next slide) • Involvement of community (next slide) • Roadmap (spurred by Orbach’s 20-year plan) • NSF is not DOE (integration of R&E, community-driven, university-based, transformational, riskier, cuts across more communities) • Need to maintain flexibility and responsiveness to community • Role of Deputy Director of BFA for Large Facilities • “oversight of process” • Oversight • Direct oversight within Directorates/Divisions (full time program officer) • Role of NSB • Validation of process, input on process • Design & development funds (~10% of construction) • Responsibility of Divisions/Directorates

  2. Department of Energy • Office of Science (OS) provides 60% of the support for basic research in the Physical Sciences (3.4B$) • 10 National Laboratories + support for university groups • Facilities Plan • 53 considered, 23 in list • Developed with help of OS’s 6 Assoc Directors and 6 Advisory Cmtes • Final priorities determined by OS Director Orbach

  3. The MREFC Approval Process • Divisonal/Directorate Review • Review by NSF MREFC • Committee Review by Director’s Review Board • Approved by Director for consideration by the NSB • Approved by the NSB for inclusion in “the queue” • Approved by Director and NSB for inclusion in NSF’s budget request to the President • Approved for inclusion in the President’s budget request (currently working on FY06) • Congress appropriates Funds • NSF (Director and NSB) approves award when appropriated funds are available

  4. Did not address: lifecycle costs Operations & maintenance (~10% / yr) Major upgrades (~50%??) eg, AdvLIGO Research (+5% / yr) Over the lifetime these amount to several times the construction costs and currently must come from Division/Directorates

  5. NSF Response • Current process largely addresses points raised, two main items need attention • Transparency (need to articulate process) • Roadmap (need something that works for NSF) • Congress is anxious to hear NSF and NSB Responses • Both NSF and NSB working on response(s) to Congress for early Fall

More Related