1. Tor Raubenheimer and Steve Lidia
NAPAC’19 SPCC1 Telecom
Tor Raubenheimer and Steve Lidia

2. Outline Issues NAPAC goals NAPAC’19 Venue MC definitions  agreement
SPC membership  status, role of the SPC
Program layout, parallel sessions, talk durations, closing session
PAC’11 synoptic table
NAPAC’13 synoptic table
NAPAC’16 synoptic table
IPAC’18 synoptic table
Proposal for NAPAC’19 layout  discussion
MC allocations and synoptic table  suggestions – iterate by
Future meetings

3. NAPAC’19 SPCC Membership
MC1 – Colliders W. Fischer (BNL) / M. Bai (GSI) MC2 – Photon sources and Electron acc D. Ratner (SLAC) / Y-H Chin (KEK) MC3 – Advanced Acc C. Schroeder (LBNL) / P. Muggli (MPI) MC4 – Hadron Acc. S. Cousineau (ORNL) / S. Nagaitsev (FNAL) MC5 – Beam Dynamics P. Piot (NIU) / K. Ohmi (KEK) MC6 – Accelerator Systems J. Byrd (ANL) / P. Musumeci (UCLA) MC7 – Acc Technology P. Ostroumov (FRIB) / B. Laxdal (TRIUMF) MC8 – Industrial Acc. And Applications M. Spata (JLAB) / A. Faus-Golfe (LAL) Short Courses and Tutorials S. Lund (MSU) / A. Gold (SLAC)

4. NAPAC’19 SPCC Tasks Meeting #1 – Telcom Meeting #2 – TBD at MSU
Review NAPAC’19 goals; approve MC; approve synoptic table
Meeting #2 – TBD at MSU
Select invited oral parallel program
Suggest plenary talks
Review tutorial and short course suggestions
Meeting #3 – TBD at MSU
Select contributed program
IPAC’18 SPC1 Tor Raubenheimer, January, 2017

5. NAPAC Goals
NAPAC is a US domestic conference aimed at students, postdocs, technicians, engineers, and early career scientists who may have limited approval for foreign travel. The character of the meeting is different from IPAC with attendance of ~500 people and ~100 students.
Goals:
Provide a broad view of AS&T with updates current advances
Provide opportunity for early career members of the field to discuss their work and engage with more senior researchers
Provide educational opportunities new members of the field
Provide an opportunity to develop new contacts and strengthen existing collaborations 

6. NAPAC2019 Organizers Conference Chair: Yoshishige Yamazaki, MSU
Program Chair: Tor Raubenheimer, SLAC
Local Organizing Committee Chair:
Steven Lidia, MSU
Scientific Secretariat/Proceedings Editor:
Amy McCausey, MSU
NAPAC’19 website:
MSU successfully hosted LINAC2016 (9/25-9/30): Over 400 participants, 31 exhibitors, Over 40 student award competitors
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

7. Welcome to Lansing, MI L. Superior L. Huron L. Michigan L. Ontario
L. Erie
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

8. Venue Choice: Lansing, MI Lansing Center / Radisson Hotel
Over 120,000 square feet of complimentary meeting and exhibit space
State-of-the-art AV services
Radisson Hotel
230 sleeping rooms at federal per diem rate ($96/night in 2016)
Connected to Lansing Center via covered walkway
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

9. Lansing, MI Lansing Center / Radisson Hotel
Dates August 28-September 8, 2019
Advantages
Overnight rate = federal per diem
Complimentary airport shuttle
Complimentary conference space (provided by convention & visitors bureau)
Proximity to MSU/FRIB
Along public transportation route
Many restaurants within walking distance of conference center
Disadvantages
Hotel only has 230 rooms, additional lodging about 2.5 miles away
(Very convenient bus system provides frequent commuting every 5 or 10 minutes along the main avenue between the lodging area and the conference center. The bus system is used for commuting and shopping by most of 45,000 MSU students)
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

10. Lansing Center [1] From Radisson Main Concourse Exhibition
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

11. Lansing Center [2]
Plenary
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

12. Lansing Center [3]
Social Events
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

13. Adjacent Hotel
S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting

14. Main Classifications
PAC’11 and NAPAC’13 had different sets of MC’s NAPAC’16 closely modeled the IPAC Main Classifications IPAC’17 and IPAC’18 changed the MC’s slightly IPAC’19 did not make any further changes: and-sub-classifications/ Suggestion: adopt the IPAC’19 MC list without changes
MC1: Circular and Linear Colliders
MC5: Beam Dynamics and EM Fields
MC2: Photon Sources and Electron Acc.
MC6: Beam Instrumentation, Controls, Feedback and Operational Aspects
MC3: Novel Particle Sources and Acc. Techniques
MC7: Accelerator Technology
MC4: Hadron Accelerators
MC8: Applications of Accelerators, Tech. Transfer and Industrial Relations

15. SPC Membership (1/4) MC MC Lead Last Name First Name Affiliation
MC1
Lead
Bai
Mei
GSI
Fischer
Wolfram
BNL
Willeke
Ferdinand
Benedikt
Michael
CERN
Biagini
Marica
INFN
Ohnishi
Yukiyoshi
KEK
Satogata
Todd
JLAB
Pilat
Fulvia
ORNL
Qin
Qing
IHEP
Shiltsev
Vladimir
FNAL
MC2
Chin
Yong Ho
Ratner
Daniel
SLAC
Decking
Winnie
DESY
Krafft
Geoff
Hettel
Robert
ANL
Hoffstaetter
Georg
Cornell
Kang
Heung-Sik
PAL
Raimondi
Pantaleo
ESRF
Reiche
Sven
PSI
Steier
Christoph
LBNL
Tanaka
Hitoshi
RIKEN
Couprie
Marie-Emmanuelle
SOLEIL
Shaftan
Timur
Zhao
Zhentang
SINAP
Zholents
Alexander

16. SPC Membership (2/4) MC MC Lead Last Name First Name Affiliation
MC3
Lead
Muggli
Patric
MPI
Schroeder
Carl
LBNL
Assmann
Ralph
DESY
Carlsten
Bruce
LANL
Hogan
Mark
SLAC
Joshi
Chan
UCLA
Lebedev
Valeri
FNAL
Albert
Felicie
LLNL
Power
John
ANL
Koyama
Kazuyoshi
KEK
MC4
Cousineau
Sara
ORNL
Nagaitsev
Sergei
Galambos
Koseki
Tadashi
Henderson
Stuart
Machicoane
Guillaume
FRIB
McGinnis
David
ESS
Rodriguez
Jose Alberto
CERN
Steck
Markus
FAIR
Syphers
Michael
NIU
Tang
Jingyu
IHEP
Trubnikov
Grigory
JINR
Wei
Jie
Zwaska
Robert

17. SPC Membership (3/4) MC MC Lead Last Name First Name Affiliation
MC5
Lead
Ohmi
Kazuhito
KEK
Piot
Philippe
NIU
Blaskiewicz
Mike
BNL
Borland
Michael
ANL
Buffat
Xavier
CERN
Levichev
Eugene
BINP
Meot
Francois
Ryne
Robert
LBNL
Stupakov
Gennady
SLAC
Valishev
Alex
FNAL
Vay
Jean-Luc
Zimmermann
Frank
MC6
Byrd
John
Musumeci
Pietro
UCLA
Aleksandrov
Alexander
ORNL
Decker
Glenn
Edelen
Auralee
Hurh
Patrick
Llewellyn
LANL
Minty
Michiko
Mokhov
Nikolai
Murokh
Radiabeam
Ratti
Wang
Dong
SINAP
Zobov
Mikhail
INFN

18. SPC Membership (4/4) MC MC Lead Last Name First Name Affiliation
MC7
Lead
Laxdall
Bob
TRIUMF
Ostroumov
Peter
FRIB
Champion
Mark
ORNL
Chen
Yu-Jiuan
LLNL
Delayen
Jean
ODU
Kamigaito
Osamu
RIKEN
Koeth
Tim
UMD
Napoly
Oliver
CEA
Padamsee
Hasan
Cornell
Martinello
Martina
FNAL
Ross
Marc
SLAC
Sabbi
Gianluca
LBNL
Solyak
Nikolay
Pile
Geoff
ANL
MC8
Faus-Golfe
Angeles
LAL
Spata
Mike
JLAB
Biedron
Sandra
UNM
Boucher
Salime
Radiabeam
Colby
Eric
DOE
Derenchuk
Laddie
ProNova Solutions
Grimm
Terry
Niowave, Inc
Johnson
Roland
Muons Inc
Kephart
Robert
Moscatello di Giacomo
Marie Hélène
GANIL
Naulleau
Patrick
Singh
Pitamber
BARC
Tremaine
Aaron
White
Marion

19. SPC Approximate Demographics
Institutions:
FNAL 10
SLAC 9
ANL 8
LBNL 7
BNL 6
ORNL 5
FRIB 4
JLAB 3
Cornell 2
LANL
LLNL
NIU
Radiabeam
UCLA
DOE 1
Muons Inc
Niowave, Inc
ODU
ProNova Solutions
UMD
UNM
Institutions:
KEK 5
CERN 4
DESY 2
FAIR / GSI
IHEP
INFN
RIKEN
SINAP
BARC 1
BINP
CEA
ESRF
ESS
GANIL
JINR
LAL
MPI
PAL
PSI
SOLEIL
TRIUMF
Total
105
Total SPC
105
Female
12.38%
Foreign
31.43%
About 80 accepted thus far

20. Goals for the Program (NAPAC’19)
The goal is too reflect:
The R&D on accelerators (desirable to focus on new developments)
The projects under planning/construction
The operating facilities in the field
The program must be balanced and include:
Want to provide opportunities for early career members to present
Balance the selection of speakers: senior people and young scientists; originality of work; previous speaking opportunities; representation of regions, countries, labs, gender
Need to think about ways to engage the attendees and provide opportunities for discussion and connections

21. NAPAC’13 and NAPAC’16 Issues
NAPAC’13 (Alex Chao):
What we did not anticipate fully is an apparent lukewarm enthusiasm of the community to this particular conference. Symptoms:
Low turn out; Partial attendances to save travel costs
Large fraction of attendants are speakers
Much-more-than-usual difficulty in finding session chairs
More-than-usual last-minute emergency changes on speakers & session chairs
NAPAC’16 (Vladimir Shiltsev):
Went well, except for last-minute cancellations.
We took a risk inviting some people, e.g., China. Invited 5-6, 3 dropped out.
Should start ~ a month earlier than we did, especially for countries that require a U.S. visa.
Oral presentations: 19% overseas; 13% women; 18% early career

22. PAC’11 Synoptic Table

23. PAC’11 Characteristics – New York Marriott
Four oral periods per day with two parallel sessions from 9 am till 5:30 pm Maximum two parallel sessions of talks; posters overlap parallel talks Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday after lunch 1.5 hour lunch breaks 49 hours of parallel session Talks 30 min invited or 15 min contributed Four 1-hour tutorial sessions Posters during parallel session talks Awards session 1.5 hours 961 Registrants – large for NAPAC

24. NAPAC’13 Synoptic Table

25. NAPAC’13 Characteristics – Pasadena
4 periods per day from 9 am till 6 pm; 3 oral and posters from 4:30 – 6pm Maximum two parallel sessions of talks; no overlap with posters Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday after lunch 1.5 hour lunch breaks 2.5 long post-lunch oral session 44 hours of parallel session Talks 30 min invited or 15 min contributed Four 1hour tutorial sessions Awards session 2 hours MC8 / MC9 were separated into Medical and Industrial accelerators 535 Registrants (60 students) – typical for NAPAC – with 467 papers

26. NAPAC’16 Synoptic Table

27. NAPAC’16 Characteristics – Chicago
4 oral periods per day from 8:30 am till 5:30 pm Maximum two parallel sessions of talks; posters overlap parallel talks Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday after lunch 1.5 hour lunch breaks 46 hours of parallel session Talks 30 min invited or 15 min contributed Four 1.5-hour tutorial sessions plus 3 short course on Sunday Awards session 1.5 hours Student poster session on Sunday with 60 posters ~520 Registrants (~100 students) – typical for NAPAC – with 467 papers

28. IPAC’18 Synoptic Table

29. IPAC’18 Characteristics – Vancouver
4 periods per day from 9 am till 6 pm; 3 for oral and one for posters Maximum three parallel sessions of talks; posters overlap parallel talks Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday before lunch 1.5 hour lunch breaks 43.5 hours of parallel session Talks 30 min invited or 20 min contributed Separate tutorial on Saturday/Sunday Awards session 2 hours Student poster session on Sunday with 60 posters ~1250 Registrants (~200 students) – typical for IPAC – with 1581 papers

30. Meeting Characteristic Summary Table
PAC’11
NAPAC’13
NAPAC’16
IPAC’18
Time
8:30 - 5:30 pm
8:30 – 6 pm
8:30 - 5:30pm
9:00 – 6 pm
Sessions
1 / 2 / 2 / 1.5
1.5 / 2 / 2.5 / 1.5
2 / 1.5 / 1.5 / 1.5
1.5 / 1.5 / 2 / 2
Layout
2 parallel poster overlap
2 parallel post separate
2 parallel post overlap
3 parallel post separate
Plenary time
2 hrs
2.5 hrs
5 hrs
Parallel time
49 hrs
44 hrs
46 hrs
43.5 hrs
Talk length
30 / 15 min
30 / 20 min
Tutorial
4 x 1 hr
4 x 1.5 hrs
none
Awards time
1.5 hrs
Registrants
~960
~540
~520
~1350

31. Short Course and Tutorials
PAC’11, NAPAC’13, and NAPAC‘16 included 4 short morning tutorials to introduce topics for new members NAPAC’16 included three 4-hour IEEE short courses on Sunday for people coming to the conference. The short courses ended in time for the student poster session Sunday afternoon. IPAC’18 also arranged a tutorial session on Saturday and Sunday before the conference.

32. Tutorials NAPAC’13 (1 hour talks): NAPAC’16 (1.5 hour talks):
Progress Toward High-energy, High-current ERLs, Christopher Mayes (Cornell)
Physics of Polarized Protons in Accelerators, Mei Bai (GSI)
Genetic Algorithms and their Applications in Accelerator Physics, Alicia Hofler (Jlab)
Femtosecond Timing and Synchronization of Laser Systems for Accelerators, Josef Frisch (SLAC)
NAPAC’16 (1.5 hour talks):
Risk Management of Complex Systems, John Thomas (MIT)
Superconducting Accelerator Magnets, Soren Prestemon (LBNL)
RF Superconductivity, Jean Delayen (ODU)
A Discussion on Phase Space and Beam Emittance, Rui Li (JLab)

33. IEEE Short Courses
NAPAC’16 (8:30 am – noon, Sunday before conference):
Short Course 1: High-power proton beams and applications Instructors: Prof. Michael Syphers (NIU) and Dr. Stuart Henderson (ANL)
Short Course 2: Third-and-a-half and fourth generation light sources Instructors: Prof. Kwang-Je Kim (U. Chicago) and Dr. Fernando Sannibale (LBNL)
Short Course 3: Manipulation of electron beam phase space Instructors: Dr. Yine Sun (ANL) and Dr. Gennady Stupakov (SLAC)
IPAC’18 (all day Saturday and Sunday morning before conference):
Eight ~2hr lectures broadly covering the field of AS&T

34. Decisions
Duration: 9 hrs (e.g. 9 am – 6 pm) ; 9.5 hours (e.g. 8:30 – 6 pm) Finish: before / after lunch on Friday? Layout: 2 versus 3 parallel? separate versus combined poster ( hrs from oral)? Tutorials: none; 4 x 1hr; 4 x 1.5 hr? Talk times: 30 / 15 or 30 / 20?

35. Examples of Possible Layouts (1/2)
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
9:00
Plenary
Parallel/Tutorial
Po s t e r
9:30
10:00
10:30
Coffee
11:00
Parallel
Closing
11:30
12:00
12:30
Lunch
13:00
13:30
14:00
Student poster
14:30
3 hrs plenary
15:00
6 hrs tutorial
15:30
34 hrs 2x parallel
16:00
Separate poster
16:30
Poster
Awards
6 poster sessions
17:00
17:30
34 hrs parallel versus 44 – 46 hrs at NAPAC’13 & 16
Move closing to pm; start at 8:30; combine poster w/ oral

36. Examples of Possible Layouts (2/2)
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
9:00
Plenary
Parallel/Tutorial
Po s t e r
9:30
10:00
10:30
Coffee
11:00
Parallel
Closing
11:30
12:00
12:30
Lunch
13:00
13:30
14:00
Student poster
14:30
4.5 hrs plenary
15:00
6 hrs tutorial
15:30
39 hrs 2x parallel
16:00
Awards
Combined poster
16:30
6 poster sessions
17:00
17:30
39-40 hrs parallel versus 44 – 46 hrs at NAPAC’13 & 16; More time
by moving closing to pm; shorten plenary; shorten awards; start at 8:30; ….

37. Industrial Exhibitors and Receptions
Industrial exhibits would be set up Monday AM and stay through Wednesday evening coming down Wednesday or Thursday AM
Need more thought about how to encourage people to flow through exhibits; refreshments co-located or similar approach will help
IPAC’16 had a fun reception in the exhibits – not sure who hosted
Three scheduled receptions and the banquet:
Sunday – Welcome reception
Monday – Chairman’s reception
Wednesday – Women in Science & Engineering (WISE) reception
Thursday – Banquet

38. IPAC Abstract Submissions versus MC

39. Division of Main Classifications
NAPAC'13
NAPAC'16
IPAC'18
MC1 5
11.4%
4.5
9.8%
10.3%
MC2 4
9.1%
10.9%
6.5
14.9%
MC3
3.5
8.0%
MC4
10.2%
11.5%
MC5 6
13.6%
14.1%
13.8%
MC6
MC7
7.5
17.0%
8.5
18.5% 7
16.1%
MC8
19.3%
5.5
12.0%
total 44 46
43.5

40. SPCC Meeting Dates

41. Comments & Questions