THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY_______________________________________________________________________________RESEARCH SCHOOL OF CHEMISTRYPHYSICAL AND THEORETICALCANBERRA ACT 0200 AUSTRALIATELEPHONE: +61 2 6125 3578
FACSIMILE:PROFESSOR J W WHITE CMG, FAA, FRS+61 2 6125 4903

EMAIL: jww@rsc.anu.edu.au

14 April 2004
Professor Shoji Nagamiya
Director J-PARC Project1-1 Oho, Tsukba-shi
305-0801
JAPAN

Dear Professor Nagamiya,
In submitting this report of the International Advisory Committee from its March 2004 meeting wewould, above all, like to thank you and all of the people working for the J-PARC project for thequality of the preparation of our meeting and the openness to our questions and needs as we wrote
this report. The Committee is very impressed with the progress being made on J-PARC and thiscovering letter is merely to draw your attention to key points in our report which follows. The key
points as required by the Committee are:
• Maintaining a budget stability across the defined time frame of the project into theoperating phase. The IAC strongly believes that the next two or three years of funding will be
important for the highest success of the J-PARC project.
• Ensuring “balance” across the broad J-PARK program. To achieve these priorities will haveto be set in the current budgetary profile to allow essential “underlying” work to be best done to thebenefit of condensed matter and life sciences, transmutation science and technology and hadron
physics.
Site Wide Organisational, User, Interface And Operating Issues
There are overarching matters relevant to the subprograms of J-PARC whose early consideration
and resolution will help the project:• The IAC advises that it would be prudent to create as soon as possible a proposal for
coordination, collecting and overviewing the requests from the users or user communities at all
beam facilities.
• A clear access strategy to J-PARC should be set as soon as possible. This should ensure as
wide as possible national and international participation in the construction and eventual operation
phases of J-PARC.
• Outline decisions should be made on governance and operation of J-PARC as an operating
facility, by the partner organisations to further clarify the arrangements for participation in the
project at all stages.

-2The Executive Summary enlarges slightly on these points which are fully developed in the sections
relevant to the parts of the whole project for which we would hope a ‘balance’ of funding andparticipation will be achieved in a projected time scale we see as particularly important maintenanceof the budget profile for the next three years.
Yours sincerely

John White
Chairman, International Advisory Committee

THE INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

ON THE J-PARC PROJECTREPORT MARCH 2004

Meeting March 8-9 2004

Tokai, Japan

-2-

CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 3
ACCELERATOR PROGRAM ....................................................................................... 7
PROJECTED PERFORMANCE WITH A 181 MEV LINAC ...................................................... 7
LINAC ENERGY RECOVERY PLAN ..................................................................................... 8
HUMAN RESOURCES ......................................................................................................... 8
AVAILABILITY CRITERIA .................................................................................................. 8
NUCLEAR AND PARTICLE PHYSICS ....................................................................... 9
HADRON BEAM LINE ........................................................................................................ 9
NEUTRINO BEAM LINE ................................................................................................... 10
CONDENSED MATTER AND LIFE SCIENCES...................................................... 11
TRANSMUTATION/ADS ............................................................................................. 15
APPENDIX I ................................................................................................................... 17
AGENDA FOR THE 3RD INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING ..................... 17
APPENDIX II.................................................................................................................. 19
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ................................................................................................... 19

-3-

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The International Advisory Committee, (IAC), to the Director of the J-PARC joint
project of the Japanese Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) and the High Energy
Accelerator Research Organisation (KEK) met on March 8-9, 2004 at JAERI, Tokai andinspected the construction site at Tokai.
In November 2003 the committee held an “out of sequence” meeting by e-mailcorrespondence, at the request of the Director, Professor Nagamiya. The neutrino
program had been assigned a rating of C (poor) by the Japanese Coordinating Committee
for Science and Technology - meaning that it might be lost from the program. This “outof sequence” meeting, after broad consultation, formulated an interim advice on 13
November and then a final advice (on 2 December 2003) assigning relative priorities (inPhase I of the project). Neutrino science was given first priority and the accelerator
energy recovery project to 400MeV injection energy second priority. Subsequent to thesemeetings the Japanese Government decided to bring forward the funding of the neutrino
program from Phase II to Phase I.
The Accelerator Technical Advisory Committee (A-TAC) met in March 2004 just before
the IAC. Its interim report covering both the effects on performance of the wholeaccelerator system, with 181 MeV injection, and the steps needed to achieve recovery assoon as possible to 400MeV injection, was available to the IAC. The Neutron TechnicalAdvisory Committee met in October 2003 and the Muon Science Experimental Facilities
Advisory Committee (MUSAC) in February 2004. Reports from these committees andthe Nuclear and Particle Physics Advisory Committee were presented at the 9 March IAC.
The agenda of this meeting is attached at Appendix I.
The IAC thanks the Director and the project team for the detailed information anddiscussion provided at the IAC meeting about these developments. The distribution of
papers before the meeting was of great help to the meeting and the Director and hiscolleagues are thanked for this innovation.
At its 2002 meeting the IAC said of the project;“The Committee advises that with this project Japan has the opportunity to
be a world leader in a number of fields. The committee furthermore
recommends a policy of "world class standard" in the quality of theconstruction of the accelerators and the initial suite of supporting
instruments even if the number of instruments or experiments has to belimited. Our advice to the Director is that he ensure that from day one of
the facility's operation the most novel aspects of the programme attract theworld's attention to and involvement in the project from the importance ofthe results produced”.

-4-

These comments remain true in 2004 and the IAC re-endorses the recommendations tothis effect made in 2002 and 2003. Bringing forward the neutrino program should givenew insights into fundamental physics through fullest possible support to current
Japanese excellence in this area. The challenge is for a “leap forward” unsurpassed
elsewhere in the world.
The focus of attention of the IAC’s attention in 2004 was drawn to four important issues
which should be resolved, at least in part, during the next year. These are:•
Maintaining a budget stability across the defined time frame of the project
into the operating phase. The IAC strongly believes that the next two or three years offunding will be important for the highest success of the J-PARC project.
Recommendation 1: The IAC recommends that Phase I of the project befinished as quickly as possible taking into account the priorities set out
below. To this end it is imperative that the most recent budget profile does
not change appreciably. Certainty about the project profile, in the project
team and the scientific community is now very important.
•
Ensuring “balance” and budget stability across the broad J-PARK program.
To achieve these priorities will have to be set in the current budgetary profile to allow
essential “underlying” work to be best done to the benefit of condensed matter and life
sciences, transmutation science and technology and hadron physics.
Recommendation 2: The IAC reaffirms its advice the neutrino program bea leading feature of Phase I of J-PARC.
Recommendation 3: We couple this with a call now for prioritization of“ balance” in the wider program. Only this will ensure the success of thebroad aims above. Although noting some excellent initiatives by JAERI and
KEK we call for measures to attract more funding to the wider program.
Recovery of the injection energy to 400MeV will be the most important step to support
these programs but assured staffing levels and instrument construction funding are alsoessential.:
Recommendation 4: The potential negative impact on J-PARC performancefrom the lower Linac energy is still a risk for the J-PARC program. The
IAC recommends that the 400 MeV linac capability be restored by JFY2010 at the latest and that plans are made to continue Linac development
towards 600 MeV.
Recommendation 5: J-PARC Management develop a plan for assuring thatsufficient manpower is assigned to the accelerator project to support
successful completion. In developing such a plan, the management should
consider the size of the staff that will be required to complete construction,

-5-

to commission the accelerator complex, and to support the accelerator
facility during its operational phase, including associated R&D.
Management may also consider the opportunities presented to train new
people in the technologies of accelerators.
Recommendation 6: The IAC reiterates its recommendation from last yearthat availability/reliability criteria be developed and formally communicatedto the accelerator and target teams. Many existing neutron and lightsources have demonstrated facilitating availability better than 95% - afeature very important for use by a large number of users.
Site Wide Organisational, User, Interface And Operating Issues
Here we draw together overarching recommendations relevant to the subprograms of JPARC. The IAC advises that it would be prudent to create as soon as possible a proposal
for coordination, collecting and overviewing the requests from the users or user
communities at all beam facilities. This will allow a “proton economics” (proton beam
distribution) plan to be proposed and identify areas of potential conflict. The IAC will be
prepared to comment on the Director’s coordination proposals especially in regard tobalance between various facilities of J-PARC.
•
A clear access strategy to J-PARC should be set as soon as possible. Thisshould ensure as wide as possible national and international participation in theconstruction and eventual operation phases of J-PARC. The strategy should be available
within the year, on an attractive and maintained web site. The IAC suggests that theadvisory structures be integrated into this strategy. For example, the IAC notes theencouragement to the neutron science component of J-PARC from the creation of the
Neutron Scattering Centre and the substantial start on instrument construction throughadditional funding by JAERI and the Ibaraki Prefecture. The possible additions of more
funding and in kind contributions from KEK should be quickly settled.
Recommendation 7: The IAC recommends that the Director of J-PARC
develop proposals for central coordination of all aspects of the program at
the project level. These proposals might include the operational requests
from future users or user communities, the oversight on all beam facilities
and have a scope such that potential conflicts can be identified and abalanced proton economics proposed which could then be reviewed fromtime to time as part of the IAC process.
Recommendation 8: The IAC recommends that the Director of J-PARC
develop with the partners JAERI and KEK a draft operational structure
and a user access plan for J-PARC. This is to ensure attraction of the best
scientists in Japan and world wide to J-PARC. This is a top priority forJapan’s national interest.
The elements of this operational structure and a user access plan should bemade available as soon as possible on an up to date and attractive web site.

-6-

Recommendation 9: The IAC recommends that J-PARC management
develop a site wide policy for establishing such Partnership Research
Initiatives Agreements which will bring new resources to the J-PARC
experimental program.
Outline decisions should be made on governance and operation of J-PARC as
an operating facility, by the partner organisations to further clarify the arrangements forparticipation in the project at all stages.
•

Recommendation 10: Part of the attractiveness of J-PARC for international
investors will be assurance that the operating budget will be satisfactory.
The IAC recommends that discussions to provide sufficient budget for thefacility begin forthwith.
Recommendation 11: The IAC reaffirms the importance of J-PARC
transmutation technology development. The other facilities at J-PARC andthe nuclear site offer unique possibilities for understanding nuclear energy
technology particularly in materials science. We reiterate therecommendation that this program should occur in an international context
and in the context of a clear understanding of the ADS system role in thelarger P/T and nuclear fuel cycle context.
The basis of these recommendations is developed in the report sections related to thecomponents of the J-PARC project. Further detailed recommendations on thecomponents themselves are given in the text.

-7-

ACCELERATOR PROGRAM
The J-PARC Project encompasses the construction of a state-of-the-art proton accelerator
complex consisting of a 400 MeV linac, a 3 GeV rapid cycling synchrotron (RCS), and a
50 GeV “Main Ring” (MR) synchrotron. The two synchrotrons are designed to deliver
extremely high average power: 1 MW from the 3 GeV RCS and 0.75W from the MR(operating at 40 GeV in Phase 1 of the project). Since last year’s IAC meeting the linac
energy goal for Phase 1 of the project has been formally reduced to 181 MeV toaccommodate incorporation of the neutrino facility originally foreseen in Phase 2. In
association with this scope change, established performance goals in Phase 1 have been
lowered to 0.6 MW from the 3 GeV RCS and 0.72 MW from the MR. These capabilities
remain beyond those of any other accelerators operating elsewhere in the world today.
Nonetheless, it is the IAC’s judgement that the J-PARC complex is highly unlikely toachieve its original performance goals with the linac energy limited to 181 MeV. Thus,
restoration of the linac energy to 400 MeV remains a priority for immediate
implementation following Phase 1.
The status of the design and construction activities related to the accelerator complex was
reviewed by the Accelerator Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) at a meeting heldon March 5-6, 2004, immediately in advance of the IAC meeting. A summary of thefindings of that review was reported to the IAC during its meeting. Significant progresshas been made on the project over the last year. The most relevant points are:Performance criteria are established and designs are now complete for all accelerators in
the complex based on the new Phase 1 linac energy of 181 MeV. Performance criteria arelower than the original project goals.
The funding profile has been delayed by one year. Completion of Phase 1, exclusive of
the neutrino facility, now extends through JFY2007.
A sensible linac energy restoration plan has been established, but funding has not yet
been committed to execute this plan.
Nearly all components have moved beyond the design stage and are in fabrication.
Procurements have been initiated and approximately 80% of the technical components
are now on order.
Civil construction is proceeding rapidly on the Tokai site.
The staffing level on the accelerator team has remained approximately fixed over the lastyear.
Projected Performance with a 181 MeV Linac
The adopted change in the initial operating energy of the linac is the most critical new
development. The J-PARC project team estimates the impact on performance is areduction of beam power delivered from the 3 GeV RCS to 0.6 MW when not supporting
simultaneous MR operations, and 0.5 MW when simultaneous fast spill (neutrino)
operations are required. A modified MR operating scheme is designed to recover nearly
all of the lost performance, 0.72 MW, but uncertainties exist in this projection related tothe strong space-charge forces at injection over the extended injection time. The best-casescenario for the recovery plan is initiation of 400 MeV linac operations in 2011.

-8-

Linac Energy Recovery Plan
A strategy for recovering the 400 MeV linac energy has been formulated. This strategy isbased on fabrication of annular coupled structures (ACS) over the period JFY2008-2010,
i.e. following completion of Phase 1, with installation, commissioning, and initiation ofoperations in the first half of JFY2011. It is the view of the ATAC that the proposedenergy restoration plan would restore full capability of J-PARC with minimal
compromise in the scientific goals. However, the IAC notes that the funding required tosupport the recovery plan (85 Oku yen) is not yet committed.
It is the IAC’s judgment that the J-PARC complex is unlikely to achieve the performancegoals for which it was designed with the linac energy limited to 181 MeV. Therefore thecommittee recommends that the 400 MeV linac capability be restored by JFY2011 at thelatest and that plans be made to continue Linac development towards 600 MeV.
Human Resources
A staff of approximately 130 people is working on the accelerator facilities within the JPARC project. While this staff is extremely dedicated and skilled, the IAC feels, as it didlast year, that the overall staffing level is modest for such an ambitious and complex
facility. The committee is gratified to hear that increased staff have been pledged bylaboratory management, however we feel that there may exist additional experienced
accelerator expertise within the laboratories that could be brought to bear on the J-PARC
project as other programs wind down.
Recommendation: J-PARC Management develop a plan for assuring that sufficient
manpower is assigned to the accelerator project to support successful completion. In
developing such a plan, the management should consider the size of the staff that will
be required to complete construction, to commission the accelerator complex, and tosupport the accelerator facility during its operational phase, including associated R&D.
Management may also consider the opportunities presented to train new people in thetechnologies of accelerators.
Availability Criteria
Based on achieved availability (defined as actual/scheduled operational time) in existingneutron and light source facilities, the IAC believes that the users of the J-PARC facility
will expect an extremely reliable operation, approaching 95%. However, it still does notappear that availability/reliability criteria have been relayed to the accelerator group nor
are formally reflected in their planning. The availability of a facility includes not only
“mean-time between failures” but also includes “the time required to repair or replace”
failed hardware. Therefore depending on the facility availability goals, it is customary tobuild in spares parts and/or redundancies in hardware system in order to minimize repair
time during the design period of the project. Such design activities would have impact on
the project budget. The IAC reiterates its recommendation from last year thatavailability/reliability criteria be developed and formally communicated to theaccelerated and target teams. Many existing neutron and light sources have demonstrated
facility availability better than 95% - a feature very important when there is a large
number of users.

-9-

Recommendation: The IAC reiterates its recommendation from last year thatavailability/reliability criteria be developed and formally communicated to theaccelerator and target teams. Many existing neutron and light sources havedemonstrated facilitating availability better than 95% - a feature very important for use
by a large number of users.

NUCLEAR AND PARTICLE PHYSICSThe IAC heard a complete presentation of the intended Nuclear and Particle Physics
Program by the J-PARC project managers and a report from the Nuclear and Particle
Physics Committee chaired by Prof. T. Yamanaka of Osaka University. Below, wereport the content of these presentations and the associated issues raised in thepresentations. Here, we note the emergence of an important issue that affects all program
users other than those in the neutrino program. This issue can be epitomized by theobservation that looming budgetary difficulties for the overall J-PARC Project, especiallythe portion provided by JAERI in JFY 2005, may put into jeopardy, many parts of the
program of nuclear and particle physics. This potential funding problem may be
exacerbated by the fact that support of the nuclear and particle physics experimental
detectors is to be provided outside the J-PARC project scope.
In this context, we note the recent one-year delay in the overall schedule for theexperimental program that was driven by budgetary circumstances in the Japanese
Government. We commend the Government for holding the funding-driven delay to a
one-year period and emphasize the importance of making very strong efforts to prevent
further slippage to reoccur in future years.
Hadron Beam Line
Major advances have been made during the past year in the preparation of theexperimental program in nuclear and particle (NP) physics. This involves two aspects: i)technical layout and design of the general target area, of the beam lines, and of tentative
experimental apparatus, and ii) the implementation of the first steps in the process toselect and define the experimental program.
In the first area, the Committee heard a presentation detailing the status and plans for the
NP Hall, which is the experimental hall for experiments with high-intensity (up to 15
micro-amperes), 50 GeV proton beams. Due to the lowered linac energy and the resulting
consequences on overall accelerator performance in Phase I, the actual parameters for the
NP program will initially be limited to 30 GeV for slow extracted beams (40 GeV for fast
extraction), 9 micro-amperes, and total beam power of 270 kW. However, even underthese conditions the accelerator capabilities will be unparalleled worldwide and will
provide for a forefront research program.
In fact the beam parameters are such that they pose severe new challenges for radiation
hardness in beam line and instrumentation design, and for power handling aspects in both- 10 -

target and beam dump construction. Major effort was devoted during the past year
towards design of the NP hall with regard to these aspects and to develop the Phase-I
technical layout. Many of these design tasks are near completion and provide a solid
basis for planning of the experimental program. Construction of the NP-Hall will be suchthat first beam can be accepted in 2008.
The Committee was impressed by the progress made and found the overall concept
convincing. Of course, no detailed technical assessment was possible given the limited
time available during this review. It is obvious that many detailed questions have to be
discussed and determined in collaboration with the experimental groups and in view of
the instrumentation to be placed into the NP Hall. In this context it seems to be prudent tofind a good compromise between the need from civil construction to install permanent
structures and shielding now, and the need from experiments for flexibility to optimize
experimentation and science output. This is the one concern that the Committee would
like to express.
Overall though, the Committee feels that the steps taken towards the NP program in sucha limited time are impressive. A process is in place to identify the program. Progress in
the last year has been substantial. There is good international interest. This promises a
forefront science utilization of the opportunities offered by the J-Parc facility.
In summary, the key issues to be addressed in the near future are the detailed matching of
NP Hall layout and experimental requirements before irreversible civil construction iscarried out, the establishment of the PAC and proposal review, an assessment of the'proton economy' in defining the program, clarification of scenarios such as concurrent
use of the same target by several experiments, and – most of all – addressing the funding(or lack thereof) for beam lines and experimental equipment.
Neutrino Beam LineWe heard a report on progress in the Neutrino Beam Program from Prof. T. Kobayashi,
who reported the recent successful addition of the Neutrino Beam to the Phase I of the JPARC Project. The beam will be constructed over the period JFY 2004- 2008 andoperations are expected to commence in JFY 2009. The proposed neutrino physics
program will provide an important next step in the understanding of neutrino mass andoscillation and, if the schedule is held as proposed and the requisite number of protons
per year is supplied for the neutrino beam, this program will be the first in the world toprovide these new results. There is also envisioned by the neutrino physics proponents, afollow-on neutrino physics program utilizing a larger version of the existing Super
Kamiokande Detector, called Hyper Kamiokande, that envisions further advances inneutrino physics such as CP-violation in the neutrino sector that could be opened up by alarger detector in the 1-Megaton class. Such a detector will also have capability infurther enabling a search for nucleon decay, a process that is also expected to occur atlevels potentially reachable by the Hyper Kamiokande Detector program.
The IAC was very pleased by the funding and priority decisions made that allowed thisimportant international particle physics experiment to proceed on a timely schedule.

- 11 -CONDENSED MATTER AND LIFE SCIENCES
The condensed matter and life sciences program at J-PARC has equal importance to theneutrino and other programmes for adding renown to Japanese and international science.
A major difference is that these programmes may attract, at fruition, thousands of visiting
scientists from all over the world each year - who will bring to Japan novel ideas and newscientific perspectives. Japanese science, for example, using neutrons, is already of thehighest repute. Its broad scope underpinning the understanding of technologicallyimportant materials such as those showing unusual magnetism and/or superconductivity,
polymers, dielectrics, thin films are of importance to the economy. The novelty of the
instruments proposed and the great intensity of the neutron beams also offer newopportunities in the life sciences. In particular diffraction from protein and other crystalsof moderate complexity will be feasible and help to understand enzymes reactions. For
biological materials in solution and biological assemblies both elastic and inelastic
scattering methods could achieve new prominence. The early submission of letter ofintent and the competitive process now in progress for the initial group of instruments as
welcomed by the IAC.
J-PARC will realize the foreseen OECD megascience forum plan of one major neutron
source in USA, Europe and the Asia- Pacific regions for the first decade of the 21 century.
The intended 1MW operation will parallel that of the SNS in the USA and the possible
European Spallation Source – still under discussion. The IAC has given muchconsideration about how to realise these benefits given budgetary constraints. The need to
do so – as with other parts of the program is why we have called for prioritization in thenext year and clarity as soon as possible on the access arrangements and operatingproceedures. We see this as an essential step in attracting the extra finance and manpower
needed at this time.
To achieve the goal of equal status with the other OECD spallation sources restoration of
the accelerator energy with the least possible delay is essential, but so are other matters.
These involve the major tasks of target design to eventually accept the 1MW beam,moderator design to convert the produced neutrons and the construction of beam
instruments for neutron scattering and muon science, of such quality as to use the beams
provided. The IAC heard excellent presentations from the neutron project teams who arefacing these major challenges – but their resources appear to be stretched despite thestrongest commitment from the teams. The substance of recommendations 1, 2, 3 and 4
relate to these matters.
The IAC was encouraged to hear of the extra funds for instrumentation and personnel tobe provided by JAERI through the formation – with the JR-III reactor – of a Neutron
Scattering Centre headed by Professor Fujii, on the Tokai site. Along with the extra
funds from the Ibraki prefecture, the blockage in instrument construction, perceived lastyear, has been removed. The outline designs for the first nine instruments are interesting
and the process for their selection from letters of intent to formation of construction
teams is commendable. Within the funding profile it would be desirable to do more so

- 12 -

that even with the initial lower power operation in 2009 ground breaking science will bedone from day 1.
The chief concerns of the IAC rest with the target, moderator and detector development
as well as the means to attract additional funding from now on to operation. Despitemuch success, these technical programs need to maintain strong local momentum andinternational collaboration to achieve the projected performance. The N-TAC
committee’s report was available to the IAC and emphasizes these points.
The concepts for the Muon Science Laboratory (MSL) are now on a firm footing andmany components are ready for tendering as soon as budgets will be released. The
facility has been scaled down to one production target with a capability for four muonchannels. Initially only two channels will be available. The production target module,
proton beam transport and associated support services are at the detailing stage. The
current plans are based on established technologies and are being reviewed for
operational constraints (alignment, replacement, repairs, etc). The muon facilities arebeing integrated with the neutron source ones allowing more synergies between the two
communities.
The muon user communities are starting to develop the new kind of spectrometers that
could make full use of the intense pulsed muon beam intensities that will be available at
J-PARC. An important development has been the recent creation of a new muon groupwhich will be part of the Material Science effort of JAERI. The funding for
instrumentation at the end of the muon beamlines is similarly problematic to that for theneutron instrument. Innovative schemes are proposed to attract external funding
resources (see Partnership Research Initiatives below).
Site Wide Organisational, User, Interface and Operating Issues
Equally important as the technical matters (above), options for the governance of the
facility should be worked out between the partners as soon as possible. This should bedone in the context of decisions about the ongoing commitment of the partners to the“Operational Phase” of the project. The IAC considers that, for example, the operating
conditions - at least for the neutron and muon sectors - should be the same as those atother “big science” facilities which attract a multitude of projects for “small science”.
These considerations involve zero cost for the provision of the neutron beams and theoperation of the instruments and their ancillaries. An additional essential thing is toengage the broad scientific community as soon as possible through workshops in selectedareas for current and potential users.
Recommendation : The IAC recommends that the Director of J-PARC develop with thepartners JAERI and KEK an operational structure and a user access plan for J-PARC.
This is to ensure attraction of the best scientists in Japan and world wide to J-PARC.
This is a top priority for Japan’s national interest
The elements of this operational structure and a user access plan should be madeavailable as soon as possible on an up to date and attractive web site.

- 13 -

Suggested components of this include free beam time for non commercial users,
collaborative access team benefits for groups establishing large instruments, a policy
on visitors, and on Memoranda of Understanding with collaborating institutions
nationally and internationally.
A general issue, obvious for the Nuclear and Particle Physics Program, relates to theprocess by which experiments are considered by the PAC and approved by the J-PARC
management. We note that there are issues here, not only of funding adequacy, but also
in the general area of the availability and allocation of primary beam protons, especiallygiven the proton-hungry nature of the nuclear and particle physics program being
contemplated for the J-PARC physics program. Before a workable plan can be arrived at
a plan for the time evolution of available proton fluxes must be made and used bymanagement to plan the macroscopic evolution of the nuclear and particle physics
program. The “proton economics” issue is manifest in the prospective neutrino program
but will no doubt emerge in many of the experiments, not least of which are the rare kaon
and muon experiments. Towards this end, we offer the recommendations below. The
response to the call for LoI's in Nuclear and Particle physics was quite good, with 30
letters submitted. Also, the range of programs proposed covers important areas of current
research in this field.
Closely related is the issue of space planning. The proposed layout of the NP Hall is thebasis of the technical design activities described above. This is a good process in the viewof the IAC. But it was not completely clear to what extent and at what level thementioned feedback with the LoI groups is indeed happening and at what technical detailthis discussion is carried out. The IAC makes the rather obvious comment that thisinteraction be intensified in the next planning steps, involving the call for proposals andthe formation of a Program Advisory Committee (PAC).
Recommendation: J-PARC management should seek to establish reliable pathways forapproval, scheduling and funding of the highest-rated Nuclear and Particle Physics
proposals at the earliest practical time following their approval by the PAC andLaboratory. In this program planning, it will be necessary for J-PARC management tohave a global plan for the distribution of available primary beam protons (“proton
ecomonics”) for the approved experiments over the course of operating time.
In addition to the general user program, active participation of major research groupings(eg in polymer or life sciences, muon science) in Participating Research Initiative
Agreements (PRIAs) as mentioned above for the nuclear and particle physics component
program might be an option. The PRIA process is a mechanism to allow users tocontribute equipment to J-PARC, based on external funding (external to J-PARC
accessible funding sources) in exchange for some preferential access to beam time.
Conditions for considering such arrangements:• It must enhance significantly the J-PARC scientific program.
• It must be based on excellence of scientific prospects from the proposed instrument.
• It must be consistent with J-PARC overall plan- 14 -••

It must bring new resources in terms of capital, operating and staffing funding.
It must be controlled very tightly by contractual commitments.

Possible funds from the KEK to enhance the instrument program could be used to“leverage” contributions form national and international participants for example. The
acceptance of PRIA operation would need a clear definition of their privileges and theduration of those privileges at the outset.
Recommendation: The IAC recommends that J-PARC management develop a site wide
policy for establishing such Partnership Research Initiatives Agreements which willbring new resources to the J-PARC experimental program.
The IAC considers that such initiative could produce a win-win situation in thedevelopment of the J-PARC scientific program. The IAC would advise that significant
open user access be preserved on such facilities and that some in-house group support bemade an integral part of such agreements. The IAC warns against agreements that would
create a strong in-house dominance or would carve out a “reserved” wide scientificterritory by restricting access to resources. A peer evaluation process is proposed whichshould have a strong influence on the decision to create a new PRI or to extend an
existing PRI.
From the above processes, the benefit to Japan of the inflow of ideas should be the sameas that which has already been realized at major centres such as the Institut Laue
Langevin at Grenoble, the ISIS spallation source (UK) and the SNS at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory in the USA – where all of the above principles have been in action
for years or will apply. From the point of view of terminology the J-PARC neutron,
muon and life sciences program should be designated as a National Facility.
Coordination of the large and small bids for access to the facility and their cost to theproton economy might best be done through a project wide coordination process. This
process should be outlined at the earliest possible time by the director and the partners tohave maximum effect on access and a planned process of attracting additional funding.
The involvement of the user advisory structure and specialist committees such as the
Nuclear and Particle Physics advisory committees is desirable and the arrangements forachieving this should form part of the proposal from the director. The International
Advisory Committee would be willing to comment on this.
Recommendation: The IAC recommends that the Director of J-PARC develop
proposals for central coordination of all aspects of the program. These proposals
might include the operational requests from future users or user communities, theoversight on all beam facilities and have a scope such that potential conflicts can be
identified and a balanced proton economics proposed which could then be reviewed
from time to time as part of the IAC process.
Recommendation : Part of the attractiveness of J-PARC for international investors will beassurance that the operating budget will be satisfactory. The IAC recommends that
discussions to provide sufficient budget for the facility begin forthwith.

- 15 -

TRANSMUTATION/ADS
The IAC notes a major contradiction concerning the Transmutation/ADS component of
JPARC — it has high visibility but little or no priority in planning and development of
J-PARC. We base this observation on the following:
Visibility - Transmutation is presented as one of the three major focus areas of
J-PARC. Its importance can be traced to initial JAERI goals concerning development
and use of accelerator-based systems in the national OMEGA program.
Priority – At the same time, J-PARC major development activities associated withtransmutation (the Transmutation Experimental Facility (TEF) and extension of the linac
to 600 MEV (via use of superconducting technology)) were not included in Phase 1 but
were assigned a Phase 2 priority. Furthermore, recent actions derived from overall JPARC funding pressures have placed the Transmutation element of
J-PARC in further danger – specifically the current linac energy of 180 MeV makes
creation of a viable neutron source required for TEF unlikely since neutron production by
spallation requires proton energies in the hundreds of MeV range. To reestablish theviability of the Transmutation program, timely restoration of the linac proton energy to
400 MeV is needed. Concrete planning and preparation to extend the linac to 600 MeV
should also occur. Phase 2 program, to which transmutation/ADS is assigned, should be
realized without delay. This is extremely important because transmutation/ADS is one of
the major programs of J-PARC.
As described in the previous IAC recommendations, the Transmutation Experimental
Facility in the J-PARC project should be discussed and developed in the context of theJapanese policy on nuclear fuel cycle, radioactive waste disposal andPartitioning/Transmutation (PT) technology. The unification of JAERI and JNC should
be taken into consideration in such discussion. Considering the importance of high-level
radioactive waste management, development of ADS technology is an important mission
in the unified organization as a nuclear energy research institute. IAC would like toencourage discussion between JAERI and JNC about the role and the importance of theTransmutation Experimental Facility in their R&D roadmap of nuclear fuel cycle
technology. Moreover, the IAC recognizes that the discussion to revise the long-term
nuclear program in Japan, which has started since the beginning of this year, is a good
opportunity to clearly define the role of the Transmutation Experimental Facility in thecontext of the Japanese policy on nuclear energy.
The J-PARC Transmutation/ADS program is one of several international programs
focused on development and demonstration of ADS technologies and systems inadvanced nuclear fuel cycles. Such activities play a particularly strong role in European
Union R and D plans, as evidenced by the MEGAPIE program at the Paul Scherer
Institute, the TRADE project (Italy, Carlo Rubbia) and the MYRRAH project (Belgium).
All these efforts envision ADS research, development, and demonstration activities on
significant technical scales. The proposed J-PARC Transmutation/ADS program would
compare favorably with such efforts if development time schedules can be met. Under- 16 -

any circumstance, both the J-PARC ADS program and international ADS efforts would
be strengthened by close coordination.
Finally J-PARC as a whole potentially represents a unique resource in R and D applicable
to nuclear energy and advanced nuclear fuel cycle technology development. In addition
to the role that the Transmutation program plays in such activities, J-PARC’s neutron
scattering capabilities could be important as well. Fundamental understanding ofmaterials properties in radiation environments is an area where the experimental
capabilities of JPARC could be effectively utilized. Materials performance, both innuclear fuels and structural materials areas, is key to the successful development andoperation of nuclear system technology. Participation of JPARC users from theuniversity community in such research and development could also expand the pool ofyoung researchers interested in nuclear energy and advanced nuclear fuel cycle
technology development.
Based on these observations and discussion, the IAC reaffirms its position as to theimportance of JPARC Transmutation and ADS program activities and recommends aseries of actions to strengthen both the program and its priorities within JPARC andnational nuclear development environments.
Recommendations: The Committee strongly endorses the need and role for P/Ttechnologies in JPARC development and recommends the following actions tostrengthen P/T efforts:
1) Define a clear JPARC strategy to utilize its R&D capabilities relevant toadvanced nuclear technology development (neutron scattering, TEF, etc.).
2) Develop efficient joint JAERI/JNC planning on P/T to define the JPARC-ADS
role in P/T and to develop information for the AEC nuclear energy review. In
particular, the IAC recommends that the Project team aggressively work with
JNC researchers and management to establish the importance of JPARC R&D
towards Transmutation/ADS and to promote collaborative research on this
aspect of the program.
3) Develop major collaborations with EU and other ADS efforts to position
JPARC-TEF in a worldwide ADS development.
4) Develop strong support from university groups for future nuclear energy
technology development with the goal of attracting young, innovativetechnologists.
5) Integrate TEF into future reactor system R&D, (neutron kinetics, transmutation
efficiency, materials performance).
6) Develop a budget profile required for credible ADS/TEF program
implementation.

- 17 -

APPENDIX IAgenda for the 3rd International Advisory Committee Meeting
J-PARC

Date:
Place:March 8 (Mon) and March 9 (Tue), 2004
JAERI-Tokai

March 7 (Sun)18:00 – 19:30

Informal Welcome Reception (place TBA)

March 8 (Mon)
9:00 – 9:20

Executive Session (Committee + Nagamiya + Yokomizo)
Change of comm. members, Points of advice,
Agenda, etc.

9:20 – 9:40
9:40 – 10:00

JAERI and J-PARC
KEK and J-PARC

10:00 – 11:00

One year progress

S. Tanaka
Y. Totsuka
S. Nagamiya/ H. Yokomizo

Budget, Interim Review, Construction, Schedule,
Organization, Activities at Committees,
Actions for the last year’s recommendation items
11:00 – 11:20

Coffee Break

11:20 – 12:20

Accelerator
Progress, Status
A-TAC report

Y. Yamazaki
S. Holmes

12:20 – 13:20

Lunch

13:20 – 14:20

Neutron sciences
One-year progress +N-TAC
Committee report

Y. Ikeda
Y. Fujii

Muon
One-year progress
Committee report

Y. Miyake
J. –M. Poutissou

14:20 – 14:50

- 18 -

14:50 – 15:10

Coffee Break

15:10 – 16:40

Nuclear and Particle Physics
One-year progress
Neutrino Program
Committee Report

J. Imazato
T. Kobayashi
T. Yamanaka

16:40 – 17:10

Nuclear Transmutation

H. Oigawa

17:10 – 18:00

Executive session

18:00 –

Dinner Party

March 9 (Tue)9:00 – 10:00
10:00 – 12:00

Executive Session (Committee + Needed Persons)Working hours
Open Discussion, Report writing, Up to chairperson

12:00 – 12:30

Summary Session

12:30 – 13:30

Lunch

14:00 – 15:00

Tour of the Site (optional)

- 19 -

APPENDIX II
Committee Members
The members of the Committee were:
ARTHUR, Edward

Senior Scientist, Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA.
earthur@lanl.gov
CHEN, Jia'er
President, National Natural Science Foundation, China.
chenjer@mail.nsfc.gov.cn
CHO, Yanglai
Technical Director, Spallation Neutron Source, USA.
choy@sns.gov
FROIS, Bernard
Director the Department Energy,Transports, Environment
and Natural Resources, Ministry of Research, France.
bernard.frois@technologie.gouv.fr
FUKUYAMA, Hidetoshi
Professor, Tohoku University, fukuyama@imr.tohoku.ac.jp
HENNING, Walter
Director , GSI, Darmstadt, Germany
W.Henning@gsi.de
HOLMES, Steve
Associate Director, Fermilab, USA.
holmes@fnal.gov
KIRK, Tom
Associate Director, Brookhaven National Laboratory, USA.,tkirk@bnl.gov
KONDO, Shunsuke
Professor, Department of Engineering Science,
The University of Tokyo, Japan.
kondo@sk.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp
PETITJEAN, Claude
Deputy Head, Laboratory of Particle Physics, Paul
Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.
claude.petitjean@psi.ch
POUTISSOU, Jean-Michel Associate Director, TRIUMF, Vancouver, Canada.
jmp@triumf.ca
SUZUKI, Atsuto
Dean, School of Science, Tohoku University,
Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578, Japan.
suzukia@awa.tohoku.ac.jp
TANAKA, Satoru,
Professor, University of Tokyo, s-tanaka@q.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp
TAYLOR, Andrew
Director, ISIS, UK.
Andrew.Taylor@rl.ac.uk
WHITE, J.W.
Professor, Australian National University,
Canberra, Australia, Chairman, National Committee
for Crystallography, (Chairman)
jww@rsc.anu.edu.au