Americas comments on Linear Collider organization after 2012 P. Grannis, for LCSGA – Aug. 24, 2011 ILCSC GDE

LCC ≡ Linear Collider Consortium Form LCC under ICFA, as ILCSC is now, to give it international recognition. LCC would play similar roles as ILCSC does now: Provide oversight of technical activities on the accelerators, detectors, physics specifications, and give input into plans for governance and siting. We envision the LCC composition to be similar to ILCSC with representation from major high energy physics labs, regional accelerator leaders and detector scientists. We would however advocate that the specific membership of the LCC be revisited. Directors Regional SG chairs Regional physics reps CERN Asia China Asia DESY Americas Russia Americas KEK Europe other ICFA Europe FNAL SLAC +Chair (non-laboratory) Now:

LCO ≡ Linear Collider Organization Report to LCC, as GDE does now Enlarge LCC scope to allow inclusion of CLIC when appropriate, and to bring the Detectors/Physics activities into a common organization. Director is aided by deputies for responsible for conducting the R&D programs of the ILC, Detectors (and in future, CLIC). Director has primary responsibility for  Coordinating the ILC, (CLIC) and Detector R&D activities  Establishing appropriate review bodies  Interacting with funding agencies and governments, and other labs and projects  Managing the processes related to evaluating physics goals and parameters, establishing models for LC governance, coordinating costing efforts, interfacing with other organizations in establishing a site selection process We advocate bringing Detectors/Physics into the LCO organization to better coordinate the accelerator/detector interface.

 Maintain and evolve the ILC TDR design under established change control mechanisms  Continue system tests underway or planned  Conduct R&D on topics related to an energy increase and to cost reductions  Develop value engineering and industrialization models Specific project R&D activities We foresee a dedicated ILC R&D leader, and if warranted in future, a parallel CLIC leader. ILC activities post 2012 This separation recognizes the different funding arrangements, collaborative structures and the fact that many technical issues differ between ILC and CLIC. We also recognize that many technical issues arise in common for the two facilties, and wish an organization that will formalize and support the already close cooperation between ILC and CLIC on these topics.

Implementation in the Americas There are many US and Canadian Labs engaged in aspects of ILC (CLIC) R&D. Each of these Labs has its own internal priorities related to differing scientific missions, and varying levels of commitment to the ILC. In the GDE era, the Americas benefited from a ‘virtual laboratory’ model. The Americas Regional Team (ART) prioritized the R&D needs, advocated with funding agencies, allocated the available funds to the laboratories according to the prioritized plan, and monitored the conduct of the R&D. The ART director also served on the GDE and its executive council. We propose to retain the ART virtual laboratory concept in the Americas On the detector side, the Americas Linear Collider Physics Group (ALCPG) guides detector R&D, advocates for funding and interfaces to the World Wide Study. There is currently a regional contact who reports to the ILCSC RD. The US is moving toward a more global and generic detector R&D program in which lepton colliders are a major part. As this re-organization takes place, we envision a person with specific responsibility for ILC (CLIC) detector R&D, who will serve as the primary point of contact between the LCO/Res. Director and the Americas detector work.

Thoughts on the LCO Director The ILC and CLIC will be in a holding period for several years while results from LHC emerge and are digested so as to inform the needed scope of a linear collider. For the ILC, the intensive technical design phase will be complete, although important R&D will need to continue on both accelerators and detectors. The interactions with governments and funding agencies will become more central following the TDR design and cost, and as we see the emerging physics landscape. We should not invent a structure that is too elaborate, but one that recognizes the distinct character of ILC and CLIC. We should recognize that, for many, linear collider work will not be the only task that individuals undertake. We will likely have to live with more part-time participants. The LCO director should have a broad view of linear collider physics, detector and accelerator issues, and should be capable of setting priorities in a changing environment. Interactions with global funding agencies will be an important component of the job. The director will be the spokesman for linear colliders in the broader scientific arena. We asked ourselves if individuals could be found who could lead LCO effectively in the interim period, and concluded that such people at least exist.