August 17, 2013
The ILC site evaluation committee of Japan has assessed the two candidate sites
based on technical and socio-environmental criteria and unanimously concluded asfollows:
The Kitakami site is evaluated to be the best domestic candidate site for the ILC.
In addition, the committee strongly recommends the central campus of theKitakami site to have a good environment for living and research and to be locatednear the Shinkansen line for convenient access to Sendai and Tokyo.

(Signatures)
Kiyotomo Kawagoe
Akira Sugiyama
Atsuto Suzuki
Tohru TakahashiShinya Narita
Masanobu Miyahara
Satoru Yamashita
Hitoshi Yamamoto1Forewords
Many people in both regions of the Sefuri and Kitakami sites have dedicated alarge amount of effort and understanding to the international project - the ILC.
They have provided us with the maximum support in preparing materials for thesite evaluation. We would like to express our deepest gratitude for them.
In addition, the members of the technical and socio-environmental expert panels
have provided us with intensive discussions and knowledge on wide range of fields
in spite of their own heavy schedules. We are enormously indebted to them.
In the discussions of the committee on the routes of the accelerator and on the main
campuses of the two sites, there appear numerous proper names such as concrete
place names, and in order to carry through the scientific and academic evaluationalso, we could not sufficiently inform interested parties about the interim status of
the evaluation. We beg your understanding on this matter.

Main Issues
Both the Kitakami and Sefuri sites have very good geology that satisfies theminimum conditions for constructing the ILC. In addition, we have alreadyreceived a wide range of supports based on sufficient understandings of the ILC as
an international project. In each region, a future plan of development with the ILC
at its core has been proposed, and one can hope for a co-prosperity of the ILC andthe surrounding area. The two sites have been selected out of more than ten
original candidate sites, and they have both been assessed to be good. The ILC site
evaluation committee performed the final down selection process based on scientificand academic merits.
Both sites satisfy the minimum necessary criteria in both technical andsocio-environmental terms. There are, however various factors to increase risk orcost. We have thus considered a variety of issues ranging from normally expected
ones to those for which great difficulties are foreseen. The evaluation wasconducted on the technical issues in constructing the accelerator itself and on thesocio-environmental issues of the main campus and surrounding area according to
the guideline described in a separate document.
For the evaluation, each region submitted two representative routes that areconsidered best and multiple candidate sites for the main campus. First, each routeand main campus site was verified to satisfy the minimum necessary conditions.
We have then evaluated each candidate in terms of the evaluation items in the list;
namely, factors that can lead to large risks in actual construction and operation andin research and living, issues that can cause increase in cost or schedule, special
technical merits, and conveniences in access and living. If a technical risk is2

identified on a route, for example, we have investigated possibilities to avoid suchrisk by readjustment of the route.
The summaries of evaluations in the technical and socio-environmental issues aregiven below. More detailed descriptions are attached at the end of this document.
(not included here.) Note that we have removed proper names that can lead toidentification of narrow regions

Result of evaluations
Technical issues
In securing the straight line of 50 km length required by the international design
team, the Kitakami site has a large edge over the Sefuri site in terms of technicalaspects such as permit and authorization, risks in construction and operation, as
well as schedule and cost.
In concrete terms, superiority for the Kitakami site is recognized in relative
location of the route and large faults that are considered active or suspected to beactive, constraints caused by man-made objects such as large dams and old mines,
difficulties in underground usage, lengths of access tunnels constrained by terrains,and method of drainage of water which becomes critical when the electrical poweris lost. Issues that could lead to particularly serious difficulties for the Sefuri site
are that the route passes under or near a dam lake, and that the route passes
under a city zone. Also, the lengths of access tunnels are longer for the Sefuri sitethan for the Kitakami site leading to a large merit for the latter in terms of cost,schedule, and drainage.
The issues specific to the Kitakami site are earthquake, displacement motion after
the Great East Japan Earthquake, and effects of snowfall. As for earthquake, thesame earthquake-safe design for the worst case imaginable is required anywhere inJapan. This is an issue to be paid attention in the final international design. Since
the Kitakami site is far from expected epicenters and since the tremor issignificantly damped underground, however, the expected tremor is well within arange for which earthquake-safe design is possible. The displacement motion ofground after the Great East Japan Earthquake is a slow movement of a very wide
area of plate, and thus no serious trouble is expected for the control and operationof equipments.
As for the snowfall, the site is not a region known for particularly heavy snow, andno great problems in construction are foreseen.

3

Socio-environmental issues
In socio-environmental aspects, while both the Kitakami and Sefuri sites havemerits and demerits, no large risks are found that could cause serious problem forsiting.
Regarding the socio-environmental infrastructures, one of the two campus
candidates proposed for the Sefuri site is particularly excellent in convenience ofaccess and social life. On the other hand, the Kitakami site has merits inexpandability of the main campus and conveniences of Shinkansen as well asartery roads alongside large commercial establishments.
As for accepting foreigners, the region around the city of Fukuoka is one of the mostwell equipped in Japan and in no way inferior to Tokyo. Even in Tsukuba orKashiwa in the suburbs of Tokyo, however, support for foreigners who stay for along period of time is far from sufficient. In addition, the international schools inFukuoka or in Sendai do not have enough capacity. Thus, in each region, a great
progress in internationalization should still be made in partnership with localefforts.
In socio-environmental issues, convenience and cost of living tend not to go together.
In each region, it is difficult to obtain expandability to surrounding area andnatural environment and at the same time secure convenience in life and culturalfacilities. Except for one candidate campus site for which access from the living
area is problematic, each of the Kitakami and Sefuri sites should be able to realizea sufficiently good research environment by solving problems one by one.

Based on the above assessments, we have unanimously reached the conclusion asstated.

4

Reference: Scores
As explained in the section ‘guideline for evalutaion’ (a separate document), we
have performed numerical evaluations on a trial basis. The results are shown
below for reference.
* The numbers reflects the evaluation after satisfying minimum requirements.
* Used the AHP method.
Technical evaluation (total scores)score (absolute)score (relative)
Kitakami
68
63
Sefuri46
37
Socio-environmental evaluation (total scores)score (absolute)
Kitakami campus (A)60
Kitakami campus (B)51
Sefuri campus (A)63
Sefuri campus (B)555