March 10, 2003

J-PARC One Year Progress

Shoji Nagamiya
KEK/JAERI

What is J-PARC?
(A brief reminder)

J-PARC Facility
Materials and Life Science
Experimental Facility

Nuclear and Particle
Experimental Facility

Nuclear
Transmutation

Neutrino to
Kamiokande

Linac(350m)

3 GeV Synchrotron(25 Hz, 1MW)

50 GeV Synchrotron(0.75 MW)

J-PARC = Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex

Phase 1 and Phase 2

Location of JAERI at TokaiKAMIOKA

JAERI

KEK

TsukubaTOKYO
NARITA

Tokai

Three Goals at this Facility

・Materials & Life Sciences at 3 GeV
・Nuclear & Particle Physics at 50 GeV・R&D toward Transmutation at 0.6 GeV

World’s Proton Accelerators
Proposed

10000

ESS
PSI

1000

(CW)

µA)
Current (µ

100

Under
construction

Materials-Life
Sciences

SNS This Project
3 GeV

Power

ISIS
TRIUMF

Nuclear-Particle
Physics

IPNS

This Project
50 GeVAGS
KEK-500MeV
Booster
CERN-PS

FNAL-MI

10

1

Existing

SPS
KEK12GeV PS

0.1

1 MW
0.1 MW

U70
Tevatron

0.01
0.1

1

10

100

Energy (GeV)

1000

10000

Overall Progress

H- Ion Source
70 mA の電流値を達成（spec=60mA）

RFQ and DTL

RFQ with π-mode stabilizing
loop

DTL with quadrupole magnet imbedded

Magnet for 3 GeV

Vacuum Chambers

Ti べロー(直径200,長さ650ｘ3mm）

Ceramic Tube・メタライズとロウ付けで接合
強度270MPaを達成
・セラミックダクトにTiフランジ接合に成功

50 GeV Magnet

Ground Breaking Ceremony
June, 2002

Expected View at the Completion

Linac Area (Left) and 3 GeV Area (Right)

50 GeV Area

Expected View at the Completion

Bridge and Road for Construction WorkWalking Road and Park for Local Village

２４５号から晴嵐の碑への道路
晴嵐の碑周辺の広場

Opening Ceremony

Visit by Minister Toyama
December 2002

Other ProgressOther One Year Progress (1)Q

Science Frontier 21 (created by Ibaraki Prefecture):– The first general report was published at the end of March, 2002. Inorder to develop science cities in the North Ibaraki area, three points
were emphasized: 1) promotion of industrial usage of neutrons, 2)internationalization of the Tokai village, and 3) the need of education
for young generations.
– The follow-up committee was created. This committee’s final
recommendation will be discussed at the end of March, 2003.
– The Ibaraki Prefecture is preparing a significant fund to support JPARC.

Q

Safety Issues:– A high-level committee for Safety was created under KEK and JAERI.
Two meetings were held, primarily to discuss radiation safety first.
– Rules in case of emergency were agreed between KEK and JAERI.
– Agreement between KEK and JAERi on the maintenance and supplies
on electricity was signed.

Other One Year Progress (2)Q

Communities:– Physical Society of Japan: Several special sessions in annual anddivisional meetings.
– Special sessions at communities of neutrons, muons, nuclear physics,
and particle physics. Discussions at the Atomic Energy Society
became active these days.

Q

Organization at the Operational Stage:– Discussion Points:• Needed budget and needed manpower for the operation of J-PARC• Basic structure of the organization• Relations to a) international communities, b) academic organizations
including both universities and institutions,and c) industries• Relation of the J-PARC organization to KEK and JAERI• How to establish Tokai branch at KEK?

– Two Task Forces were created at the Project Team and at the KEK.
Over ten meetings each were held from the summer 2002 to now.
– Also, the discussions at KEK’s council meetings were held several
times since the fall 2002.
– No final conclusions. Discussions will continue.

Manpower & Budget for Operations
Very Preliminary!
Manpower Survey
NeededAvailable Now

KEK
Researcher Technicians
133
72
87
43

KEK Total
205
130

JAERI
Researcher Technicians
JAERI Total
165
75
240
65
75
140

Total
445
270

Administration + Building Maintenance + Manpower from Companies are excluded.

Budget Survey
Electricity
Minimum Need

97.4

Unit = Oku Yen

MaintenanceExp't Fund

Travel

57.1

16.3

4.9

OutsideManpower
15.7

Others

Total

11.6

203

Other One Year Progress (3)Q

Other Notable Events of the Project:– Geographical studies, in particular, on the change of undergroundwater due to a large construction job have been started by an initiativeof the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology(AIST).
– Regular meetings are held between the project team and the local
inhabitants.
– Designing of planting tress at the construction site was started under
the guidance of an expert on forest.
– A new computer network was installed between KEK and JAERI. This
VLAN forms one domain specific to the project.
– The Opening Ceremony was held on October 28, 2002. The acronym
was announced in public on that date.
– Web page: http://j-parc.jp/– Many CDR’s are being created (accelerator, materials and life, nuclear
and particle, control, etc.)– LoI’s were called for in a) neutron instruments and b) nuclear andparticle physics experiments.

Necessary Arrangements to be Made Now
Reserved area for an
additional fast extraction
50 GeV
main ring

Fast extraction for neutrinos

Plan view

Beam transport
from 3 GeV to
exp’tal area

Tunnel for a future linac
50 GeV tunnel
Vertical View from the left

Neutrino
beam line
Vertical View from the left

Other One Year Progress (4)Q

KEK and JAERI:– KEK will be changed to an Agency in JFY2004.
– KEK Management will be changed from JFY2003 (Director General is
Yoji Totsuka, Director of IPNS is M. Kobayashi and Director of IMS is
A. Koma.).
– JAERI and JNC (Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute) will
merge together to form one agency in JFY2005, forming a hugeorganization.
– JAERI Management has also been changed in the middle of JFY2002(President is Shinzo Saito, Vice Presidents are T. Okazaki and S. Aoe).

Budget, Schedule, Organization

Construction Budget for Phase 1
BYen Integrated Expenses (incl. future plans)
160

Amount of PurchaseCommittement(incl. future plans)

KEK
JAERI

140

BYen

120

120

100

100

Flat Budget

80

100%

80

50%
60

60

40

40

20

20

0

0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year
Start

Now

Fiscal Year
Beam

Start

Now

Beam

Progress and Issues
Q

Good news:– At the end of the third year (JFY2003), about 70% contracts will becompleted.
– At JAERI the creation of the “Neutron Science Research Center” wasapproved, starting in JFY2003.

Q

Issues:– JAERI’s responsibility = 865 BYen (First 3 yr fund = 30%)
[Note that KEK’s responsibility = 471 Byen (First 3 yr fund = 46%) ]– Cost for Linac and 3 GeV (see the talk of Y. Yamazaki)

Q

JFY2003 Request:– Funding for “neutrino” was not approved for JFY2003.
• We will submit the proposal again for JFY2004.

Construction Schedule & Commissioning
Year

2001

Item

2002

20032006

Linac Bldg

PowerConstruction

Linac Accel

0.1%

1%

Installation Beam

t
Tes

Power

3GeV Bldg

Installation

Construction
3GeV

20042007
10％

0.1%

1%

Beam

Tes
t

9

〜100％

10％ 〜100％

Accel
Installation

3GeV T
B
3GeV Expg
Bld

3GeV Exp

Fac

Construction

Beam

Installation

Power

50GeV Bldg
Construction

Tes
t

Beam

0.1%

t
Tes

1%
10％ 〜100％

Installation Beam

Test

50GeV Accel
50GeV Exp
50GeV Exp

Bldg
Fac

Construction

Installation

Beam

Tes
t

d OpenTest Perio▲
Start Usage

Now

to

Users

20052008

Progress and Issues
Q

Good news:– Linac: 80% contracts completed.
– 50 GeV: 60% contracts completed.
– 3 GeV: 50% contracts completed.
– Materials & Life Experimental Facility: 40% contracts completed.
– Construction for 3 GeV and Linac areas are in progress (see pictures
presented before).

Q

Issues:– Remains of ancient salt farms were discovered in the area of 50-GeV
construction site.
– Extensive archeological studies of these remains will be performed
during JFY2003 and perhaps in JFY2004 as well.
→ introduces a delay of construction work by at least half a year.

Remains of Ancient Salt Farms

CoinsDiscovered
On March 6, 2003

Organization for Construction
JAERI President
S. Saito

KEK Director
H. Sugawara(every 3-4 mo.) Steering Committee
Y. Kimura & T. Okazaki

Safety Committee

March 5-6, 2002
March 10-11, 2003
Int. Advisory
Committee

Project Headquarters
Director: S. Nagamiya
Deputy Director: H. Yokomizo

Accelerator
TAC

May 21-23, 2002
March 8-9, 2003
October 28-30, 2002

User Consultative
Committee

October 3, 2002
February 26, 2003
February 8, 2002
June 11, 2002
January 22, 2003

February 7, 2003

Neutron Instruments Planning CommitteeComm. for Muon Science Experimental Facilities

NeutronSourceTAC

March 22, 2003

Comm. for Nuclear and Particle Physics Experimental Facilities

Coordination
Y. Oyama
M. Takasaki

Matrerials andLife sciences
Y. Ikeda

Transmutation
Experiments
H. Oigawa

Radiation Safety
N. Sasamoto
T. Shibata

Accelerator

Nuclear Particle
Physics Experiment
J. Imazato

Facility and Building
H. Naruse
T. Nanbu

Administration
N. Ogino
T. Sawada

Y. Yamazaki

April 22, 2002
July 24, 2002
February 3, 2003

Project Team

Control
J. Chiba

See the member list at the end of this fileProgress and Issues
Q

Good news:– Many needed committees have been created during the past one year.
– Out of 8 standing committees for the project, 6 committees include
members outside Japan.
– Neutron instrumentation: Call for LoI’s will be made every year. 18
LoI’s were submitted this year.
– Nuclear and Particle Physics: Call for LoI’s was made. 30 LoI’s were
submitted.

Q

Issues:– Although many committees for sciences were created, no equipment
budgets have been approved for any experiments.
– Travel budget is very limited to invite committee members, to affordcommunications between two institutions, etc.

Replies to Recommendations

Replies to Recommendations (1)Accelerator
Q

Recommendation #1: We recommend that Project Management
should develop a strategy for assuring that sufficient manpower isassigned to the accelerator project to assure successful completion.
– Efforts made to create new positions (about 10 positions) for
accelerators.
– A few people were converted from B-Factory to J-PARC.

Q

Recommendation #2: We recommend that availability/reliability
criteria be developed and formally communicated to the accelerator
design/construction team.
– The beam commissioning schedule is being created (see early figure
for the first-order scenario).
– Regular meetings with users are held to communicate between
accelerator physicists and the users.
– An issue discussed during the past one year was on the linac energy
and its influence on the beam power for experiments. Meetings havebeen held with the neutron community and nuclear/particle community.

Replies to Recommendations (2)Nuclear and Particle Physics
Q

Q

Recommendation #3: We recommend that the Super Kamiokande
detector be rebuilt as a matter of urgency to start this program assoon as beam is available from the 50 GeV accelerator.
Recommendation #4: We recommend that ways be studied to bringforward the high power operation of this accelerator and thedevelopment of the associated neutrino beamline.
– The four year budget proposal (JFY2003-2006) for neutrinos was
submitted from KEK as the first priority item of the project team. The
total budget is 16 BYen.
– Unfortunately, the request was not approved for JFY2003. We will try
for JFY2004 again.
– A strong endorsement from this IAC will help.
– Studies are in progress to attain a higher beam power (after thecompletion of Phase 1, though).

Replies to Recommendations (3)Nuclear and Particle Physics (continued)
Q

Q

Recommendation #5: Because of strong effort in current rare Kdecay searches, the Japanese scientific community can develop aworld leading program in this field. The committee endorsed thescience objectives as world class with the recommendation thatpriorities be set and international collaboration be encouraged tomaximize the cost-benefit ratio of the rather expensive investments
which are required for such searches.
Recommendation #6: The hypernuclear program would most benefit
from the very high intensity available at the Joint Project with theexisting suite of instruments already developed or possibly obtained
from other laboratories. It is recommended that a careful prioritizingof the initial physics objectives be undertaken.
– LoI’s were called. Currently many LoI’s for slow-extracted beams were
submitted. A committee was formed to evaluate these LoI’s.
– Based on the committee’s recommendations, the design of the beamline for Phase 1 will be decided. The committee report will also bereported to IAC.

Replies to Recommendations (4)Materials and Life Sciences
Q

Recommendation #7: The centerpiece of the material and life sciencefacility is the neutron spallation source associated with neutron
scattering facilities. We recommend that very high priority be
attached to the world class' construction of these facilities. The
associated muon facilities will give a great improvement in intensity
over the current KEK facility and will be outstanding after realisationof Phase II.
– Neutron science has a very high priority.
– Calls for LoI’s have been made during the past one year. The call will bemade every year.
– Construction budget for beamlines and and equipments has not beentaken care of.

Q

Recommendation #8: We believe that it is most important to stimulate
participation in this life science facility by active institutions in thisarea such as RIKEN to define a strong life science research program.
– Effort still needed for this recommendation.
– An effort to create a new graduate course at Ibaraki U. was initiated.

Replies to Recommendations (5)Materials and Life Sciences (continued)
Q

Recommendation #9: We understand that funds will have to befound and priorities set to allow a critical suite of new instruments tobe available on day one. We recommend that the Director develop
ways of doing this, in the budgetary context, during the coming year.
– A budget proposal of 2BYen was sent to the Government, but it was
not approved. A continuous effort will be made.
– Ibaraki Prefecture is considering the support for instrumentation.

Q

Recommendation #10: We recommend that proposals, selection
and design of dedicated muon facilities and/or experiments should
now be started by the Japanese and international experimental
community. The design of the proton target station should notpreclude the optimization of muon facilities.
– Committee for Muon Science Experimental Facilities was created.
Representatives from the world user communities attended at thiscommittee meeting.
– Additional efforts toward the muon facility are being discussed.

Replies to Recommendations (6)Nuclear Transmutation
Q

Recommendation #11: We believe that Japan has a unique
opportunity to play a major role in the demonstration of nuclear
waste transmutation with accelerator driven systems. We encourage
JAERI and KEK to further develop their contacts with foreign
research organizations and obtain their participation and support for
the TEF, particularly the TEF-P. We believe that given the concern
of Japanese citizens it is of strategical importance that an initialdesign and safety analysis activity for the TEF-P be funded in Phase
I of the project.
– ADS is one of three major goals of J-PARC.
– On March 24-25 a workshop is held in Tokyo by inviting many eminentscientists from the US, Europe, China and Korea. International
collaborations will be discussed there.
– R&D activities are in progress (see the presentation by H. Oigawa).

Replies to Recommendations (7)Budget and Organization
Q Recommendation #12: We believe that given the budgetary,

manpower and schedule constraints posed by the splitting of Phase I
and Phase II a clear prioritization of projects is necessary in the
coming year.
– Phase 1: Selected experiments both for a) neutron science and b)
slow-extracted beams in nuclear/particle physics have the highest
priorities.
• Issues, however, are that both experiments have not yet been funded. In
the worst case, the KEK’s equipments will be shipped to JAERI. Needefforts to obtain funding.
• Would like to explore possibilities to ship equipments from outside Japan.

– Neutrino proposal will be sent this year for JFY2004 (KEK).
– Another urgent item is the recovery of the Linac energy to the original
design goal (JAERI).
– Phase 2:
KEK: Neutron equipments, muon beamlines and equipments,
extension of the K-Hall, 50 GeV upgrade.
JAERI: ADS + Superconducting Linac

Replies to Recommendations (8)Budget and Organization (continued)
Q

Recommendation #13: We recommend a policy of "world classstandard" in the quality of the construction of the accelerators andthe initial suite of supporting instruments even if the number of
instruments or experiments has to be limited..
– Selecting the the best experiments is the first important task. The
relevant committees will select LoI’s.
– Finding the money is another important task. The Government
suggests to find other resources such as “Grant-in-Aid in Science”
money, etc.
– Traditionally, the experiments were supported in Japan (or at KEK) by
the operational budget.
– Creation of a budget framework to support experiments at accelerator
facilities is, however, the national issue.
– The Ibaraki Prefecture is preparing a significant money to support a few
beam lines and equipments for neutrons.

Replies to Recommendations (9)Budget and Organization (continued)
Q

Recommendation #14: We believe that the different workshops
organized to discuss international collaboration around this project
have already attracted the world attention. It is at the scientific andtechnical level that Japan has the best chances of success inattracting international support. We
Nuclear/Particle Facility LOI Authors
recommend that attraction of
Total #
international collaboration be one= 478of the priorities of the director.
– For neutrons: Much more efforts
are needed from now on.
– For nuclear and particle physics:
A workshop was organized in thefall of 2002. LoI’ were submitted
later by 478 physicists, with 2/3
from outside Japan.
– Asian participation is still an issue
for the future.

EuropeJapan

North America
AsiaReplies to Recommendations (10)Budget and Organization (continued)
Q

Recommendation #15: We recommend that the director of the
facility establish several PACs, one for each machine’s scientificprogram, and solicit program and beam priority advice separatelyfrom each of these committees. For issues and conflicts among the
programs of the individual machines, the director should rely on
advice from a high-level, facility-wide policy committee such as the
IAC.
– Three committees are now working. Each committee will selectscientific programs and initial construction items. Priority of the beam
will also be discussed.
– Since each committee has not reached any conclusions at thismoment, the conflict will be discussed at the next IAC.

Replies to Recommendations (11)Budget and Organization (continued)
Q

Recommendation #16: The Committee commends the Director forthe structure of project committees set up in the last year. These
have started to work effectively. Their integration into the
management of the science program after start up deserves somethought. We recommend that this matter be discussed at the next
meeting of the International Advisory Committee along with thedevelopment of the scientific user community. Input from the User
Consultative Committee would be desirable on this point.
– The User Consultative Committee had two meetings during the past
one year. The main effort there was to create the best organization toallow the maximum and convenient usage of the facility after its
completion. Task Force was created under this guideline.
– Useful comments on science priorities have also been obtained fromthis committee.

Replies to Recommendations (12)Budget and Organization (continued)
Q

Recommendation #17: We recommend that budgetary delegation
be given to the Director subject to half yearly review by the Steeringcommittee.
– Nice advice.

Q

Recommendation #18: Because of the importance of international
collaboration we recommend that international collaborativedelegation be given to the Director subject to half yearly review by
the Steering committee.
– Again, nice advice.

Memo on Issues

Issues (1)Q

Schedule, Budget and Manpower:– Construction of 50 GeV facilities will be delayed at least by half a year
due to discovery of ancient salt farms.
– Budget has a shortage for linac and 3 GeV.
– Per-year budget need a sharp increase in JFY2004 in particular at
JAERI (80 Oku to 200 Oku).

→ Need detailed discussion with the funding agency, including thefunding scenario, schedule, etc.
– Shortage of the manpower for construction (this is always an issue).
Q

Accelerator:– The change in the linac beam energy is the major concern. A decent
recovery scenario must be established.
• Director’s Ad Hoc Committee was created to review this point. Two tasks
were charged: 1) to decide what must be done now in order to avoid a long
shutdown in later years, and 2) to solicit the next major mile stone(s) forrecovery.

Issues (2)Q

Nuclear-Particle:– We would like to start “neutrino” in JFY2004.
– The present 12 GeV PS will be closed soon. The continuation of theactivities from the 12 GeV PS to the J-PARC 50 GeV is a concern.
• Experimental programs, movement of equipments from KEK to J-PARC.

Q

Neutrons:– Shortage of the beamline and equipment funds.

→ Need to explore new mechanisms in obtaining fund, in addition to thepresent budget route from the Government.
– Needs work to make it international.
Q

Muons:– What to do about muon beamlines and equipments?

Q

ADS:– Funding scenario must be worked out.

Issues (3)QOrganization at the Present Stage:– It takes time to reach an agreement between KEK and JAERI on many
issues. For example, it took half a year to complete the KEK-JAERI
agreement to form a committee for the project. Endless time is needed
to establish safety regulations. etc., etc.
– Much more frequent interactions between KEK and JAERI
headquarters are needed.
– Effects of changing into agency for both KEK and JAERI+JNC ???

Q

Organization at the Operational Stage:– The central argument on the organizational scheme at the operational
stage is if a strong leader for the J-PARC Center is required (or, if the
J-PARC Center must be established). In addition, even if the J-PARC
Center is established, what is the function of this Center? Does it coverresearch programs? Or, is the function limited to the machine
operation and safety alone?
– Opinions are currently split. Need continuous discussions.