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

Guest: Nobu Toge

Open Session:

Nobu Toge – Update and status report on the CCB

CCB Status and observations:

• 12 Change Requests (CR) have been processed, and one on the Main Linac is under review
• CR on “positron insert” worked by RDR scientist collaborating with CCB chair to develop a joint request. This may be a model for complex CR’s. However, Nobu worried that he might have been too proactive, considering his role as chair of the CCB. Is this a proper style of work for the CCB chair? To what extent does Nobu have to be neutral?
• CR on “gamma-gamma” was returned with comments from the CCB. Reason: system wide review and approval needed for gamma-gamma at ILC first. Broader issue of resources was discussed. The “options,” like gamma gama should be discussed by the EC.

Remarks on Procedures

• CCB has to develop a better classification scheme for CR’s, refinded for alternative configurations
• Need to create a basis (preferably quantitative)for decisions, incorporating cost and merits.
• Amendments to the procedures are under discussion.
• CCB prefers to receive CRs before major engineering work done, rather than doing ex post facto approvals. In that case, have to consider the need for follow-up, i.e. after work is done, need to check if performance improvements and expected cost effects actually resulted. And who does it?

Oversight/acitivities towards configuration changes.

• There needs to be consistency between the BCD and RDR, and this consistency restoration should be done before not too long..
• Need guidance (EC/RDR Mgmt) for it.
• Additional major configuration changes may be introduced after Valencia
• Should there be a central body of management to coordinate and schedule the work toward this type of configuration changes

Info Sharing and Board Operations

• Relevancy of ‘cost deltas’ to be chaired by CCB for upcoming CR’s
  • One avenue: Help to be offered by cost engineers (possible “pilot”), info to come from TS through AG/GG
• How is the status of the R&D progress reviewed?
  • One avenue: Help offered from the RDB, data to come from TS through AG/GG
  • Need adequate sets of experts to review and oversight the R&D progress
• Possible organizational solutions
  • Contact points and operational rules should be better defined. Identify the authority and responsibility for each of the parties involved.
  • Or, possible complete reorganization?

Comments:

• We haven’t discussed how to get to the TDR. Resources will have to be increased. ILSCS and FALC have been alerted – identify what we need.
• Organization after the TDR? If we are not overwhelmed we should dialogue how to alter things for the TDR
• We may go to a traditional organization on top of the board structure.
• Effort for the RDR was monumental, more help and organization will be needed for the TDR – SOON

CLOSED SESSION:

Session was short due to time problems, as the telephone connections to Japan were delayed and we chose not to shorten the CCB presentation by Toge..

Approved Minutes – 24 hours for revisions than post.

Announcements –

• A group of Congresspersons of Japan's Liberal Democratic Party has been formed to promote the International Linear Collider project. The group chaired by Mr. Kaoru Yosano started with about 30 members. It should be an encouraging step forward to accelerate the official commitment of our funding agency to the project.
• This is very good news for the Japanese efforts toward the ILC

EDMS

• • CERN Report not yet released
  • Meeting with the CERN Director is scheduled for late June

Vancouver

• Still need info from AS/TS
• EC to meet on Thursday morning and again on Friday with cost engineers and BB for progress on costs
• EC will also meet each day at lunch for daily progress of meeting

Next weeks meeting will be in 15-JUN-06. Guest will be Weiren Chou. He will report on Linear Collider Accelerator School.