THE INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

ON THE J-PARC PROJECTREPORT 30 MARCH 2006

Meeting 27 -28 February 2006

Tokai, Japan

-2-

CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 3
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

5STATE OF THE J-PARC PROJECT

7

Organizational Structure
J-PARC Center
Technical Coordination
Delegated Authority of the Director

7
7
8
9

Operations Budget
J-PARC - A User Oriented Research Center
Beam Resource Management
Program Advisory Committees
User Infrastructure
User Access Charges

10
11
11
12
12
12

DETAILED REVIEW OF THE PROGRAM ...................................................... 14
Accelerator Program
Accelerator Status and Recommendations
RF Accelerating Cavities for the RCS and MR
RCS and MR Performance Goals
Accelerator Installation and Commissioning Planning
Schedule to Complete

Materials And Life Sciences
Neutron Scattering
Muon Science
Nuclear And Particle Physics
Neutrinos
Hadron program

14
14
14
14
15
15

16
16
17
18
18
20

Nuclear Transmutation...................................................................................... 21
APPENDIX I Agenda For The 5th International Advisory Committee Meeting 22
APPENDIX II Committee Membership................................................................ 24

-3-

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The International Advisory Committee (IAC) for the J-PARC joint project of theJapanese Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and the High Energy Accelerator
Research Organisation (KEK) met between 26 and 28 February 2006 at JAEA,
Tokai and toured the construction site of J-PARC.
The IAC had reports from the Accelerator Technical Advisory Committee (A-TAC),
which met the previous week at Tokai and the Neutron Technical Advisory
Committee (N-TAC), which met at Tokai 14-16 November 2005. The present
report is also informed by reports from the Muon Science Experimental Facilities
Advisory Committee (MUSAC) meeting at KEK 25-26 February 2006. The agendaof the IAC meeting is attached as Appendix I and the membership at Appendix II.
The IAC notes the integration of JAERI and JNC into the Japan Atomic Energy Agency(JAEA), wishes the new organization well and looks forward to fruitfulcollaboration with JAEA at Tokai, to bring the J-PARC project to a foremost
position in world science and technology. We note also the changes in the
Directorate of KEK and particularly acknowledge the very positive interactions of
the project with that excellent organization and its Director Professor Totsuka. The
continuing programs in accelerator science at KEK will be of enduring importanceto J-PARC and we look forward to continuing close cooperation as J-PARC
develops.
Our warmest congratulations to both JAEA and KEK on the timely establishment of the
J-PARC Center. The autonomy given to this "child" of the two organizations will
be a measure of their confidence in it and its success. We make recommendationsin this report for J-PARC Center development as commissioning starts andtransition into the operation phase.
The IAC thanks the J-PARC Director, Professor Nagamiya, and the project team for thedetailed information and discussion at the IAC meeting. The distribution of papers
before the meeting was of great help. The Director and his colleagues are thanked
for this. Because of our growing familiarity with the project, the early flow of
information by electronic means can benefit the IAC meeting process. As a next
step we suggest that the style of the IAC meeting itself might change.
Approximately equal time for presentations of key points in the already studied
reports, and discussion with presenters is suggested. The IAC notes with approval
the extent to which its recommendations for IAC 2005 have been taken up by the
project team and the individual project leaders – as reflected in their presentations.
The progress made in 2005 with the construction of the buildings, the accelerators and theassociated target systems is impressive. The IAC congratulates the project team andthe Directors of KEK and JAEA on the work done. The IAC detects a great boost
to morale in the project from the successful approaches to government by JAEA,
KEK and MEXT to find sufficient funds for the 2005-2006 budget. The next two

-4-

years will be critical in maintaining this momentum into the early operation part ofPhase I to commission the accelerators and other components. It is inevitable that
there will be technical and organizational challenges and the strength of the JPARC Center management and the flexibility of its funding will be a key
importance. This matter is addressed in the report.
The J-PARC Center will blend the cultures of two distinguished Japanese research
institutions with that of national and international colleagues. This has occurred inother parts of the world - for example the Institut Laue Langevin Grenoble. With
appropriate organizational arrangements and support to the J-PARC Center fromthe JAEA and KEK partners as well as the influx of talented users, this may lead, as
elsewhere, to outcomes of the highest quality. Now is the time for J-PARC Center
to define itself as a user oriented center, but one where scientists and technologistsof the highest quality are recruited to do, also, their own work. This suggested
vision for J-PARC Center is developed in the report from discussions at the current
meeting based on the outlines given in our 2005 report.
We have given much thought to the transition to the operational phase of J-PARC Center.
We are glad that an international committee was established to review thebudgetary needs in this respect and have considered its report. The report gives
about the expected level needed to run an international center of excellence but thedetails will become clearer as the center develops. The early operations consist oftrials on the accelerator, target and instrument components. As these come in fromexternal sources, technical questions will arise. Construction merges into early
operation and diagnostics. The question of how to provide an operating budget
commensurate with the quality of the infrastructure being created is of importanceat this time. The IAC urges JAEA, KEK and MEXT to use all means to ensure
successful completion of the Phase I project and a smooth change over to operation.
Success in this endeavour will require a clear understanding between the J-PARC
Center Director, JAEA and KEK regarding the responsibilities and delegations of
the Director. He must be able to draw effectively on their joint resources to support
the J-PARC mission.
In this report the principal recommendations have been numbered and brought to the
Executive Summary. There are a number of important process recommendations –left un-numbered in the text.

-5-

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONSThe IAC notes with respect the great efforts of the JAEA and KEK partners andproject team to bring new funds to meet the "alarming budget shortfalls"
mentioned in our 2005 IAC report. This has produced remarkable momentum to
the J-PARC project in 2005. We spoke, in 2005, of the importance of the "next two
critical years" and we reiterate this point.
1. We recommend that the momentum and high morale created by all the actionsof 2005 be sustained by a strong budget allocation for 2007-2008 to bring the
project to operation in 2008-2009. We have identified technical, financial, andorganizational challenges in this last part of the PHASE I construction as wellas the commissioning of facilities for operation. We give completion of Phase I
construction and the transition to operations as the highest priority.
2.

In its orientation to achieve the successful completion of Phase 1 as its highest
priority the J-PARC organization needs to establish the clearest lines of
responsibility and authority for the project completion, the commissioning
activity, and the initiation of operations. This will also require a clear
understanding between the J-PARC Center Director and the sponsoring
institutions as to how the J-PARC Director can most effectively draw on the
resources of JAEA and KEK to support this mission.

3. The IAC recommends that the J-PARC Center organization be extended andcarefully defined in the area of project-wide technical coordination. The
Technical Coordinator should have sufficient knowledge of status and risk
factors across the whole effort, so as to be able to advise the Center Directorate
on choices and trade-offs necessary to complete and commission J-PARC in themost timely and effective way.
4. We recommend that JAEA and KEK enhance the delegated authority of the JPARC Center so that it will blend the creative cultures of JAEA and KEK in the
project for construction, maintenance, research and to develop a strong userorientation. The blending of the cultures will be perfected by the commissioning
and early operational stages if the authority is there.
5. We recommend speedy agreement between all parties on an operations andcommissioning budget as an essential component of 2007-2008 budget and as
the first step towards a smooth transition to the operations budget of Phase I in
2009. As a basis for this, we have analysed and accept the recommendations of
the independent international committee on the J-PARC operations budget.
6. We recommend that the vision of the J-PARC Centre be that of a center of
excellence in quantum beam science for a broad user community and an "in-6-house" scientific community of such quality as to achieve international respect
for their science.
7. Full realization of the capabilities of the J-PARC facility cannot be achieved
with the current 181 MeV linac energy. We recommend that the 400 MeV linac
capability be restored as the immediate priority following successful completionof the Phase I construction project and the transition to initial operations.

-7-

STATE OF THE J-PARC PROJECT
From the printed material distributed beforehand and the presentations during the IAC'sreview the Committee has gained a strong impression of the commitment of staff in JPARC and of the great progress made in 2005 for construction. Detailed comments on
various parts of project are given in subsequent sections on the accelerator program, thecondensed matter and life sciences program, nuclear and particle physics as well astransmutation/ADS.
During 2006-2007 and strongly in 2007-2008 commissioning of accelerators, targets andsome instruments will occur. As some of these components of the project are "state of theart" using new technologies, introduced to achieve the highest performance, there is anexperimental aspect to the commissioning process.
Commissioning is a critical phase for any project and especially so for one as large andcomplex as J-PARC. The transition from construction to commissioning (as well as thetransition to operations) must be very well coordinated across the whole facility. Amongother challenges, the transition will be constrained – maybe even over constrained – by
the availability of resources of all types: manpower (especially technical experts), funds
and time. Also, during this period the “flavor” of funding will be changing from
Construction to Operations. Here also, the management leaders, fully informed about
available resources, may need to make technical trade-offs and priority decisions.
In the event of irremediable budget short falls and the necessary prioritization that should
follow, the Director and the J-PARC management should determine what would be cut
from the 2007-2008 program. There will be elements of the commissioning process and alogical sequence to achieve pre-operational success in vital components of the accelerator
system and targets. These and the "improvements" suggested by the experimental part ofthe commissioning process will have to be prioritized. Agreement with all involved
parties as soon as possible on a smooth transition in to an operating budget for 2008-2009
will itself be a priority into 2007-2008.
We recommend that the momentum and high morale created by all the actions of2005 be sustained by a strong budget allocation for 2007-2008 to bring the projectto operation in 2008-2009. We have identified technical, financial, andorganizational challenges in this last part of the PHASE I construction andcommissioning the facilities for operation. We give completion of Phase I
construction and the transition to operations as the highest priority.

Organizational Structure(a)J-PARC Center

The J-PARC organization has taken an important step forward through creation of JPARC Center. This approach recognizes the desirability of establishing a single
organization with responsibility to complete construction the J-PARC facility, and to-8-oversee commissioning and subsequent operations. The proper functioning of thisorganization requires the strong backing of the sponsoring institutions, JAEA and KEK,
where most of the resources lie. However, as noted in last year’s report, the IAC feelsthat to be effective, the J-PARC Center Director should be the decision-maker andresponsible officer for all aspects of the Center operation and for the approval andexecution of the J-PARC program. As such, the new organization structure needs toevolve to reflect the fact that the highest priority over the next three years is the
successful completion of the Phase 1 project. This includes the commissioning activities
that will assure all the accelerators and experimental facilities are working efficiently
together.
Recommendation: In its orientation to achieve the successful completion of
Phase I as its highest priority the J-PARC organization needs to establish theclearest lines of responsibility and authority for the project completion, thecommissioning activity, and the initiation of operations. This will also require aclear understanding between the J-PARC Center director and the sponsoring
institutions as to how the J-PARC Director can most effectively draw on the
resources of JAEA and KEK to support this mission.
On a related subject, the IAC heard a report on the view from KEK, from its Director,
Prof. Totsuka. KEK has proven its outstanding ability to construct and operate worldclass, large scale accelerator facilities as for example, KEKB. In order to commission JPARC successfully as soon as possible and prepare for future intensity improvements,
this expertise will continue to be necessary. In consequence, the IAC observes that it isnecessary to maintain a thriving program at KEK to retain this manpower.

(b)Technical Coordination

The construction project is entering a vital transition, namely from completion of thePhase I construction to the beginning of commissioning the facility. It is important thatthe construction, which the IAC recognizes has been very well executed, be finished onschedule. A number technical problems, fiscal constraints and schedule slippage in subprojects of the construction have arisen. While none of these look to be overwhelming forthe project, the IAC is concerned that, in their aggregate, they could pose significant risk
to timely completion of the project if not managed properly. Continuing provision ofstrong financial and human resources support as well as tough priority decisions mayneed to be made by project leadership. To do so, management must possess fullknowledge of available resources and of the “critical path” to completion.
The IAC felt that the Organization of the J-PARC Center as presented by its Director, S.
Nagamiya, contained the management elements necessary for success during thecommissioning. Although designed for Operations, the Organization Chart recognizes theneed for Coordination. The “Coordination” box should be labeled “Project Technical
Coordination” and later “Commissioning Technical Coordination.” However, thecoordination function really belongs with the Center Directorate, and should not be seen

-9-

as co-equal with the “subprojects” which lie below the Director on the chart. One
solution may be that a Technical Coordinator should sit between the Director and thesubprojects as a part of line management or in a separate box, which reports to the
Director, perhaps as chair of a Technical Coordination Committee. The important thing isthat the Center recognizes the need for high-level technical coordination and that the
Director takes ultimate responsibility for the decision-making process, which will makeboth Project completion and Commissioning successful.
In order for technical coordination to work, the coordinator needs sufficient informationfrom the subprojects. It is not enough to know that “subproject X needs an unspecified
number of additional engineers in order to finish on schedule.” The coordinator must be
empowered by the Director to get the information necessary to determine the resources
needed over time.
When J-PARC is operational, the same type of coordination will be needed in order tomake a sensible plan that encompasses not only operations but also linac energy
restoration and Phase II construction.
Recommendation: The IAC strongly recommends that the J-PARC Centerorganization be extended and carefully defined in the area of project-wide
technical coordination. The Technical Coordinator should have sufficientknowledge of status and risk factors across the whole effort, so as to be able
to advise the Center Directorate on choices and trade-offs necessary tocomplete and commission J-PARC in the most timely and effective way.

(c)

Delegated Authority of the Director

As the project enters commissioning and operation there will be a need for enhanced
flexibility in decision making on the priorities established internally as well as externally.
The IAC considers that it is essential for this decision making to be speedy and coherent
with the evolution towards the operation of Phase 1. The opportunity exists for thepartners and the Director to grow J-PARC structures, vision and operational culture in a
way that will blend the qualities of staff coming from JAEA and KEK with those of theuser community and new staff. This can be done in a consultative way with the user
community and Program Advisory Committees now forming. It is now timely toanticipate the expected flow of national and international users and the style of operationneeded to ensure a growing facilitation of the attractiveness and prowess of J-PARC
Center.
Recommendation: We recommend that JAEA and KEK enhancethe delegated authority of the J-PARC Center so that it will blend
the creative cultures of JAEA and KEK in the project for
construction, maintenance, research and to develop a strong userorientation. The blending of the cultures will be perfected by thecommissioning and early operational stages if the authority is there.

- 10 -OPERATIONS BUDGET
During the last year a detailed proposal for the operations budget of J-PARC center wasassembled. This proposal was reviewed by an external review committee, consisting ofexperts in this field from the US, Europe and Japan. The strength and weaknesses of the
proposal were clearly identified by the committee and J-PARC management has alreadyaddressed and implemented many of the suggestions. The IAC agrees with the analysis of
the international committee on the operation budget that the proposed budget of 190 O
Yen is appropriate for the initial operation of the J-PARC Center.
In response to the request to reduce this budget by 15-20%, we suggest that a detailed list
be assembled of experimental capabilities and/or accelerator performance improvementsthat would be lost or delayed (and to what extend) as the budget is incrementally reduced
by 5% steps. This list should help all affected partners, JAEA, KEK, MEXT and J-PARC
center to balance cost and benefit.
The 2007-2008 budget covers a period of time where testing of components andsubsystems with beam may reveal weaknesses that will have to be eliminated before
going into high reliability operation. Therefore it is very important to generate a preoperations budget for ’06, ’07 and ’08 that will allow J-PARC management to deal withthese issues. Spares, general material and supplies, consumables, utility costs andadditional man power where necessary, will have to be funded to be able to finish andsuccessfully commission the accelerator complex in time. While initial attempts havebeen made to secure this budget, the numbers presented to the committee seem notsufficient, certainly for 2007, and we suggest to plan a smooth transition from the present
level of operations funding of 10.0 Oku Yen[nh1] to 190 Oku Yen in 2009 as theconstruction budget winds down.
We recommend speedy agreement between all parties on an operations andcommissioning budget as an essential component of 2007-2008 budget and as
the first step towards a smooth transition to the operations budget of Phase I in
2009. As a basis for this, we have analysed and accept the recommendations of
the independent international committee on the J-PARC operations budget.
Finalizing this discussion as soon as possible is of outmost importance from our point ofview since it provides planning security for the J-PARC center.
It is very encouraging that the strong support for J-PARC center has manifested itself inthe ’06 budget. With approximately 280 Oku Yen J-PARC should be able to quickly
finish up the contracts and installation of components. In 2007-2008 the budget stillneeds to be very significant and we urge the partners to give J-PARC a continuing
support to guarantee timely success of the project.

- 11 -

J-PARC - A User Oriented Research Center
As J-PARC approaches its operational phase it is not too early to begin the definition ofthe "vision" for the center. In addition to the major experiments in neutrinos, nuclear
physics and transmutation, the materials and life sciences component will attract initiallyhundreds and eventually thousands of users each year. This is the situation in other major
neutron and muon institutes and provision of accommodation and services for these users
will be a vital part of J-PARC's success in "small science". The creation of a culture of"service" to these users by the scientific, engineering and technical staff, whilst at thesame time encouraging members of the J-PARC staff to perform their own research at thehighest level internationally, is an important challenge for the J-PARC management andthe partners. We have spoken of a blending of cultures before. This will be one area ofimportance in that process.
We recommend that the vision of the J-PARC Centre be that of a center of
excellence in quantum beam science for a broad user community and an "inhouse" scientific community of such quality as to achieve international respect for
their science.

Beam Resource Management
In last year’s report we suggested to summarize in a separate document written by JPARC management how beam power, availability and beam time would develop in thefirst few years after finishing the construction of Phase I. This document will clarify tothe user community what can be reasonably expected in the first years of operation andhelp J-PARC leadership to manage these expectations.
Recommendation: The IAC reiterates the suggestion that a Beam Resource
Management Plan be created and hopes to see this document at its next meeting.
Program Advisory Committees
To advise the Director and give substance to the user orientation of J-PARC, the IAC isclear that Program Advisory Committees (PACs) must be established as soon as possible.
These should suggest how experimental proposals for individual areas of research are to
be reviewed and are needed for neutrons, muons, nuclear and particle physics. In
connection with this process and ultimately to manage the user interaction with J-PARC,
the IAC's experience suggests an immediate start of discussions for establishing the JPARC Users Office.
Recommendation: The IAC recommends that the plans for linking J-PARC tothe user community be established, in the form of PACs and the J-PARC Users
Office.

- 12 -

User Infrastructure
Once fully in operation, J-PARC will be a thriving center for a large variety of sciences.
Thousands of users, national and international, will be using the facilities and it is very
important to start planning for their support early on. Offices, computer support,materials and supplies, sample preparation laboratories, workshops and finally user
housing are some of the most important issues that will need to be addressed.
The committee was very interested in the data storage and retrieval systems proposed.
The IAC heard about this in the neutron area but it applies to all areas. Much ingenuity is
being shown, to allow direct interaction during experimentation with the extensive andrapidly acquired data sets. This is essential since, in the neutron and muon areas, the JPARC facility will allow real time measurements on evolving systems rather than simply
sets of preconceived measurements.
Much more work and resources will be needed in this area and early attention to the way
in which data can be accessed remotely is essential. Some of the data flows will be likethose at synchrotrons and there, standard practice is to allow external control andinspection of data from remote sites. The protocols for this access should be establishedas soon as possible. For this access, J-PARC will have to think such data inspection frominternational sources as well as national. The current restrictions, for example for email,at the JAEA site will need to be reviewed and appropriate protection as well as accessinstalled.
Substantial costs are associated with installation of this infrastructure and they have to becovered out of the operations budget.
Recommendation: The IAC recommends that a comprehensive User
Infrastructure Plan be developed to address these issues one by one as moreusers enter the site and would like to hear about this plan during our next
meeting.

User Access Charges
The IAC had the benefit of and analysis of policy on access charges and payment oftravel and accommodation costs for users at major facilities in Europe and USA. There iscommon agreement that these charges were appropriate for industrial use - especiallywhen publication of results was to be withheld. For national users (Universities andInstitutes where open publications was the rule) there was wide agreement that the
charges should be zero and, for some major national and international facilities the travel
and accommodation charges of users from member countries are paid (at least in part).
Recommendation: The IAC recommends that access charging and user support
are important issues for the success of major international facilities. The great- 13 -

benefit of drawing in a wide community of users (and their ideas) from the startof J-PARC compared to the cost of facilitating access needs to be considered.

- 14 -DETAILED REVIEW OF THE PROGRAMACCELERATOR PROGRAM
Accelerator Status and Recommendations
The J-PARC project is now well advanced, both in terms of civil construction andfabrication of accelerator components. The installation phase has begun and will befollowed by beam commissioning, starting in the linac, at the end of 2006. The IAC
received the report from the Accelerator Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC)
describing excellent progress on the accelerator construction over the last year,
accompanied by a number of technical issues that have become evident as accelerator
components are assembled and tested. The IAC has accepted and endorses this report.
Issues identified by the ATAC for special attention by management include:•

Performance of rf accelerating cavities for the RCS and 50 GeV MR•

RCS and Main Ring performance with the 181 MeV linac•

The budget and schedule to completion•

Installation and commissioning planning, including the transition tooperations

RF Accelerating Cavities for the Rapid Cycling Synchrotron (RCS) and Main Ring(MR)
The development of accelerating cavities for the RCs and MR has experienced
difficulties related to the performance of the Finemet cores. Several cores have failed
after relatively short periods of testing at high power. These failures are understood as
being related to the fabrication process of the cores. The ATAC identified these issues asa serious problem that could jeopardize the successful completion of the project. The
ATAC report offers a recommendation, based on the priority of maintaining the
installation and commissioning schedule. The IAC endorses the ATAC recommendation.
RCS and MR Performance Goals
The J-PARC project was established with Phase 1 performance goals of 1 MW beam
power at 3 GeV in the RCS and 0.75 MW at 40 GeV from the MR. The decision was
taken in late 2003 to reduce the linac energy from 400 MeV to 181 MeV in Phase 1. Thisdecision was taken in order to provide funds for the priority decision to incorporate theneutrino beam line into Phase 1 of the project. It has been anticipated that the linac
energy will be restored to 400 MeV over the period 2008-2010. The cost of therestoration is estimated at 85 O¥. This funding is not yet secured.
The reduction in linac energy has major implications for the performance of both the
RCS and the MR. Mitigation of these effects and evaluation of likely performance in thepresence of reduced linac energy was a major topic of discussion in the 2004 and 2005

- 15 -ATAC meetings. Established performance goals during the 181 MeV era are now 0.6
MW in the RCS and 0.45 MW in the MR. The RCS goal involves extrapolations basedon simulations in the presence of strong space-charge forces at injection and allowancefor higher beam losses than originally planned for. While simulations have beensignificantly advanced over the last several years, they are still not adequately
comprehensive to provide confidence in the RCS goal. It has been the judgment of the
ATAC that while these goals should be retained, the higher confidence level goals are
0.33 MW and 0.45 MW in the RCS and MR respectively. The ATAC reiterated thisassessment at its February 2006 meeting. A number of technical issues relating to these
performance extrapolations are contained within the ATAC reports and will not be
repeated here. However, among the options available for restoration of full performancein the RCS and the MR the ATAC feels that restoration of the full 400 MeV linac energy
is the most straightforward approach and encompasses the least performance risk.
Recommendation: Full realization of the capabilities of the J-PARC facility cannot be
achieved with the current 181 MeV linac energy. We recommend that the 400 MeV
linac capability be restored as the immediate priority following successful completionof the Phase I construction project and the transition to initial operations.

Accelerator Installation and Commissioning Planning
The ATAC was presented with a preliminary integrated plan for the installation,commissioning, and transition to operations of the J-PARC accelerator complex.
Installation is well advanced in the linac and MR, and will start in the RCS in a few
weeks. The ATAC found that planning for installation, commissioning, and the initial
operations phase is advanced relative to a year ago. A first pass at the evolution of beam
power in both the RCS and MR during the initial operational period has been developed.
The ATAC regards the present level of planning as a reasonable start. However, they
advocate further steps including integration of plans across machine boundaries,
identification of resource requirements, and identification of applications program needs
during the commissioning period. The ATAC believes that this task can only be
accomplished by establishing a single commissioning team, lead by a full time dedicatedleader with the responsibility and authority for commissioning the accelerator complex.
Recommendation: Establish a commissioning team to coordinate planning andexecution of commissioning activities across the entire complex.
This recommendation of A-TAC is picked up in our main Recommendations 2 and 3
above.
Schedule to Complete
The overall accelerator construction and commissioning schedule has slipped by roughly
6 months in the last year. This is due primarily to the JFY2005 funding shortfall, but

- 16 -

technical issues are also contributing. It is clear there is little-to-no margin on completing
Phase 1 in JFY2007.
The J-PARC staffing level, and in some instances financial resources, appears marginalfor meeting project goals across all machines. The symptoms are that technicaldevelopment is occurring at the last moment in several systems (rf, pulsed devices, andcollimators) and at the same time installation and preparation for commissioning is
occupying a greater share of people's time. The level of activity is expected to increase as
installation is completed and beam commissioning is initiated shortly. The ATAC
believes the project requires additional people with experience in installation,commissioning, and operations assigned during the upcoming year. The assessment
received from the machine group leaders totals roughly 20 people. Migration of KEK
staff out of the PS program, along with some reassignment of staff from KEK-B, hasstarted. This is a welcomed sign.
Recommendation: The IAC recommends that the J-PARC Directorate do everything
possible, including increasing staff support, to hold the schedule, but don’t assume
undue risk in the process.

MATERIALS AND LIFE SCIENCES
This area of the future program of J-PARC is the most likely to produce the largest
number of users of the facility per annum from national and international scientificcommunities as well as industry. The success in this area is vital to the future of a broad
range of materials and life science and will depend not only on the "leading edge" natureof the facilities and instruments at J-PARC but on the close engagement and flow of ideas
between the center and the user community in commissioning and during operations. The
scientific renown will ultimately depend on the "freshness" of the ideas brought into thecenter and sustained by it.
Neutron Scattering
The IAC had a very good impression of progress in the materials and life sciences area ofthe project. The target system for production of neutrons is at the leading edge oftechnology in this area and the construction of its target station and associate facilities has
been reviewed in November 2005 by the Neutron Technical Advisory Committee (NTAC) who had many very important recommendations as the developments proceed. A
similar report on the muon project was also received by the IAC from its meeting in
February 2006. For both neutrons and muons there are very important challenges - someof technical origin and some produced from budgetary constraints.
The IAC was impressed by the response of the communities to these challenges - manyof the questions of N-TAC having been responded to and others under active
investigation. In the neutron area what most impressed the IAC was the novelty of the- 17 -

instrument portfolio proposed around the neutron target. (Front cover of this report) The
work of the project scientists and the Instrument Advisory Committee has produced
instrument designs and proposals that are innovative and in many areas go beyond thoseavailable elsewhere in the world at this time. This is a very good sign for future
developments. Important also has been the support from the Ibaraki prefecture and JAEA
to allow four of these new designs to be built in the first round of instruments. The IAC
regrets that initially at least some of the remaining beamlines will have to rely on
recycling components from KENS. State of the art instrumentation is required if J-PARC
is to realize its full potential. It is encouraged that new KEK instruments be built at an
early stage.
Impressive also, were the technical developments by the project team, based on thenation-wide collaboration of the NOP project. These have allowed new instrumental
concepts to be proposed - "super mirrors" whose reflectivity is appreciable at four times
the angle of conventional nickel mirrors, detectors with very high neutron counting rates
and instrument geometries of clever conception will make the best use of the highbrightness of the neutron target when at full power.

Muon Science
The Muon Science Advisory C committee (MUSAC) met at KEK on February 25th and26th to review the progress in the construction of the J-PARC Muon facility and tocomment on the 24 letters of Intent received earlier from potential users. On the technicalside major advances were noted. The extensive shielding is in place and a very
comprehensive alignment procedure is being implemented to insure proper installation of
the components of the primary proton transport system and of the secondary muonchannels as well as anticipating future access and removal of components for servicing.
The recommendations of the Dec 04 technical panel, which were mainly concerned withthe long term maintenance issues, have been implemented.
The primary beamline elements are all on order so are the muon production target vessel
and its target. However infrastructure components related to the proton beamline have notbeen taken into account in the funding and must be covered within already scarce
resources. The main concern is the availability of funds for transferring the KEK
superconducting decay muon channel and refurbishing it for installation on day one on
the southwest port.
Another concern was raised when it was revealed that the requested 100 nsec proton
pulse width would possibly seriously compromise the full beam power available forneutron users. Any degradation of the proton beam pulse width beyond 100nsec would
have serious consequences for all muon users in terms of time resolution and make themuon source less and less attractive compared to the ISIS-RAL source for example. Since
this was raised as a flag by the accelerator team it is important to study the space charge
effect causing this degradation and mitigate it during the commissioning period.

- 18 -

The committee reviewed some of the Letters of intent received and identified the core
projects that would contribute to enhancing the bare initial channel. A number of initialprograms could use the decay channel from KEK on day one while a number of very
innovative idea were presented to develop unique capabilities at J-PARC in terms ofultra slow muon beams or pencil beams which would open very important scientificfields in surface or interface physics , molecular and biophysics etc. The committee
considers that these initiatives should be encouraged so that the J-PARC muon facilities
be positioned to offer the Japanese and the word communities with unique instruments.
The committee also noted the pledges for involvement of new University based group inparticular in the chemistry community and of important industrial users (The Toyotagroup).
Enormous progress has been made on the facility development and a dedicatedcommitment of the KEK construction team is evident. One is entering a delicate phase
when, with the shutdown of the µSR program at KEK, a significant gap in physics
capability exists. University users will have to rely on sources abroad to keep an active
physics program for their students. On the other hand installation tasks are very
demanding as well and could use more manpower. It is important to identify the realtiming for restoration of a muon physics program in Japan to allow concrete planning.
This is especially important for university groups and industrial groups relying on muonsources. At the moment the shortage of funds for installation and the uncertainty on therealization of the first muon beam at t=0 doesn’t allow for clear statements to be made.
This is most unfortunate and should be addressed so that a firm commitment can be given
to users.

NUCLEAR AND PARTICLE PHYSICSThe IAC was presented with excellent information on the status and progress of thenuclear and particle physics experimental program, including neutrino and hadroncomponents and plans for the formation of a Program Advisory Committee (PAC) for
this science. These are discussed in turn below.

Neutrinos
The neutrino experiment at JPARC, T2K consists of 189 physicists from eleven countries.
In 2005, extensive progress in the construction of the neutrino beam line, the design ofnear neutrino detectors and full restoration of Super-Kamiokande has been made. Largeforeign contributions are expected in most parts of the project. For the neutrino beam line,
the pion decay volume was partially completed and the tunnel construction of the primarybeam line has started. Productions and tests of major devices have begun. A highlight in2005 is the start of the mass-production of superconducting combined-function magnets,
the major components of the beam line. The first magnet was successfully produced andwas excited up to 105% of the nominal current for 50GeV operation. The start time of theconstruction of the target station was moved by one year forward to 2006, so that thebeam line can be completed by March 2009. A conceptual design of the near neutrino

- 19 -

detectors has finished, and the shared responsibilities of the detector construction to eachcountry are defined. The budget requests in most collaborative countries have been
submitted. A near neutrino detector uses a large dipole magnet which was the magnet
used by the UA1 experiment at CERN. The rebuilding of Super-Kamiokande is also
ongoing and Super-Kamiokande-III will start operation in June, 2006.
T2K: Dr. T. Nakaya presented the T2K collaboration and program in a very concise anduseful form, indicating both the competition and complementarity of T2K with othercurrent- and next-generation neutrino measurements worldwide. Dr. Nakaya took proper
notice of the need to compare T2K with the global activity in this important area, where
Japan has had enormous international impact.
T2K’s Phase-I physics goals are to observe νµ Æ νe in a narrow band beam and with thisdata to determine θ13. This poorly measured mixing angle is a key measurement in theunderstanding of flavor mixing in the lepton sector and knowing its magnitude,
ultimately with sensitivity down to θ13 ~ 0.01, will enable the neutrino community to set
the direction of a future international program to look for CP violation in the lepton
sector. T2K’s expected sensitivity is expected to be in the range 0.3×10-2 ≤ θ13 ≤ 3×10-2,
depending on δ, the magnitude of the CP-violating phase. Competitive with, and to somedegree complementary to, T2K are the NOνA νe appearance experiment at Fermilab andone or more reactor-based θ13 experiments looking at⎯νe disappearance.
T2K will also add significantly to the world’s knowledge of ∆m232 and sin22θ23 via νµ Æ
νx disappearance. The goals for precision in these mixing parameters are δ(∆m232) ~ 10-4
and δ(sin22θ23) ~ 0.01. The plan is to begin the experiment in early 2009, which requires
the neutrino line and the near detector be completed, commissioned and tested by 2008.
Although most parts of the T2K project are going well, T2K has the following problems.
The most critical one is the low beam power of J-PARC expected at the initial stage sinceT2K faces severe international competition from the neutrino experiment at Fermilab,
NOvA, and a couple of reactor neutrino experiments planned in the world. The highbeam-power of J-PARC by using any optional scenarios and techniques such as more
protons from RCS to MR, doubling the harmonics (bunches) of MR and a longer running
time even with lower proton energy are necessary as well as the prompt start of theexperiment in April 2009.
Dr. T. Kobayashi presented a detailed report on the construction status of the J-PARC
neutrino beam line. He reported significant progress and, in particular that the potential
crisis described to the IAC last year (on the target station construction schedule) had been
averted. However, he also reported that further negotiation would be needed on thecommissioning schedule of the accelerators and the hadron facility vs. the construction
schedule of the neutrino line. This is felt by the IAC to be an example of the need fortechnical coordination across the whole project (see Recommendations 2 and 3 above).
Significant progress was reported by Dr. Kobayashi to the IAC on the design, production
and testing of components and the decay volume, and this information was also warmly

- 20 -

received. The entire staff of the neutrino beam line effort is to be congratulated on its
excellent progress and performance. This staff presently comprises about 40 FTEs andwas said to be short-handed in the areas of engineering (presently 13 FTEs) and in Data
Acquisition, Controls and Electronics, where there is apparently no one assigned atpresent. It was somewhat disturbing to learn that this shortfall could not be quantified,and it was said that the project could hire the needed extra staff. This would seem to
imply an unknown cost/schedule risk to this very high priority component of J-PARC.
This also relates to the IAC’s desire to see the implementation of project-wide technicalcoordination.
Hadron Program:Drs. J. Imazato and K.-H. Tanaka made presentations to the IAC, summarizing the status
and progress on the beam lines + spectrometers and on the facility construction,
respectively. The presentations were thorough and informative, conveying significant
progress since last year. Several issues are worthy of note.
• The Hadron Experimental Facility scientific program is diverse and compelling. The
specifics need to be confirmed by the approval process, but the IAC supports the
program, which emphasizes fundamental research in kaon physics, hadron physics
and strangeness nuclear physics.
• The Hadron Program is a small user of beam power and so can be productive rightfrom the start of operations. Its early incarnation is based on detectors that have seen
service at other facilities, including the KEK PS and possibly the BNL AGS; this is
another point favoring the early phase of the program at the start of operations.
• Realization of the program requires endorsement of detailed proposals by the PAC
and is constrained by the availability of funds.
• The beam line design for the A-line servicing the hadron program is based largely on“recycled” magnets and power supplies, with the coils of some – especially at thefront end of the line – being replaced with new, radiation-hard MIC coils. This work
is proceeding very well, as is R&D and design on beam monitors, beam separatorsand the beam dump.
The IAC learned that, in addition to funds and approvals for the experimental program,the hadron community would greatly benefit from early implementation of a test beamfacility. This beam, using a 0.5% “T0 target” servicing a separate experimental hall, is
not funded at present. It is certainly the case that the world-wide effort in nuclear andparticle physics is lacking sufficient test beams of high quality, intensity and energy. The
IAC was told that, absent the needed funding, the leaders of the hadron program wereconsidering a “poor man’s” test beam looking at the T1 target, with significantly worse
performance. The IAC questions the priority of such a low-quality beam, relative to theinstallation of the experiments themselves, which are also funding-constrained at present.

- 21 -NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATIONThe nuclear transmutation programme was presented by H. Oigawa. In its previous report
the IAC has reaffirmed the importance and the priority of ADS technology development
at J-PARC for the development of nuclear energy and the management of nuclear waste.
The objective is to study in depth transmutation to reduce the radiotoxicity, volume andheat of high level nuclear waste that has to be put in a final repository.
The committee has appreciated the comprehensive review on international ADS
transmutation projects. The importance of ADS research isassessed by the high priority given by the European Framework Programme to the
EUROTRANS integrated project proposed by a large collaboration of 17 countries
together with 10 industry partners, 18 national research centres and 14 universities. From
this presentation, the committee believes that J-PARC is the most advanced facility for
ADS research, but needs increased support. The proposed experimental programme will
provide important information on the potential of ADS for nuclear waste management
and advanced materials. This information will be complementary to the research on thetransmutation of actinides to be carried out at Monju in a fast sodium reactor. Japan
would be thus the world leader in the research on the transmutation of nuclear waste
using the full potential and the synergies of the new JAEA organisation.
The development of a new generation of nuclear reactors and the management of highlevel radioactive waste are now the focus of major R&D efforts in Japan within the
Generation IV international collaboration. Advanced isotope separation combined totransmutation in these new reactors will play a central role and provide significant
advances in nuclear waste management. But this will require intense research efforts
worldwide, it is expected that R&D will take about 20 years. Thus, it is essential for the
nuclear industry to develop, in addition to the expertise in the design of new Generation
IV reactors, an adequate basis in experiment, theory and testing to support the advanced
design concepts that will be used.
The committee essentially agrees with the conclusions presented by H. Oigawa. The JPARC transmutation programme should be integrated in an international roadmap. The
user community should be developed in Japan and in other countries in particular in Asia.
As partitioning and transmutation technology is being recognized as an ultimate goal of
the nuclear fuel cycle and the waste management in the world, IAC endorses theuniqueness of the Transmutation Experimental Facility (TEF) and its possibility to
become a Center of Excellence for the transmutation technology by both ADS and FBR.
IAC recommends JAEA management to discuss the integrated plan for the research anddevelopment of the transmutation technology by both ADS and FBR by taking accountthe potential capability of TEF/J-PARC in such an integrated plan.

- 22 -

APPENDIX IAgenda for the 5th International Advisory Committee Meeting
J-PARC
February 27 (Mon)8:50 – 9:10
Executive Session (Committee + Nagamiya + Oyama)
Change of comm. members, Points of advice,
Agenda, etc.
9:10 – 9:30
9:30 – 9:50
9:50 – 10:10

JAEA and J-PARC
KEK and J-PARC
Coffee Break

10.10Status of J-PARC

Y. Tonozuka
Y. Totsuka

S. Nagamiya / Y. Oyama
Progress of Construction, Budget, Schedule,
Organization, Operational Budget, Activities by Committees,
Actions for the last year’s recommendation items, etc.

11:10 – 12:10

Accelerator Progress, Status
A-TAC report

12:45 – 13:45

Lunch

H. Kamiya / Y. Yamazaki
S. Holmes

13.45 - 14.00 Closed session - common points for our recommendations
14:00 – 14:20
14:36 – 15:.36

15:5 – 16:05
16.05- 16.20
16.25 -16.30
16.40- 17-00
17.01- 17.15
17:15 – 17:45

Report from the Review Committee for Operational Budget
Y. ChoMaterials and Life Experimental Facilities
One Year Progress (50)
Y. Ikeda
Progress plus N-TAC Report
M.Arai
Neutron Committee (10)
K. Yamada

17:30 – 18:30

Coffee BreakOne Year Progress for Muons (20)
Y. Miyake
Muon Committee (10)J. –M. Poutissou
Neutrino Experimental Area (40)
T. Nakaya (Kyoto)
Neutrino beamline construction.
T. Kobayashi
Promotion Policy for R&D and Utilization of Quantum Beams
N. Saito (MEXT)
Executive Session

18:30 –

Dinner Party

- 23 -

February 28 (Tue)08.15 - 08.45 Closed session
08.45 – 9.30
Nuclear and Particle Physics Experimental Facilities
Hadron Experimental Area (40)
09.30 - 0943
Construction report
09.44-- 10.00 Formation of PAC (10)J. Imazato
K.H.Tanaka
T. Nagae

10.00 - 10.15– Nuclear Transmutation

H. Oigawa

10:30 -

10:45

Coffee Break

11.00 – 12:30

Tour of the Site

12:30 – 13:30

Lunch (could be a working lunch)

13:30 – 14:00

Network and Computing

14:00 – 14:30

Open Discussion, Report writing (Up to chairperson)

14:45 – 15.15

Summary Session

S. Kawabata

- 24 -

APPENDIX II
Committee Members
ARONSON, Sam <Brookhaven National Laboratory, USA.
samaronson@bnl.gov

CHEN, Jia'er

President, National Natural Science Foundation, China.
chenje@pku.edu.cn

FROIS, Bernard

Director, New Energy technologies, CEA, Paris, France
bernard.frois@cea.fr

FUKUYAMA, Hidetoshi
HENNING, Walter

Professor, Tohoku University, fukuyama@imr.tohoku.ac.jp
Director, GSI, Darmstadt, Germany
henning@gsi.de
Spallation Neutron Source, Oak Ridge National laboratory,
USA holtkamp@sns.gov

HOLTKAMP, Norbert

HOLMES, Steve

Associate Director, Fermilab, USA. holmes@fnal.gov

CAPIELLO, Michael

Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, MST-8, LANL, Los
Alamos, NM mcappiello@lanl.gov

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 Yoichiro:

Director, Institute for Cosmic Ray Research,
University of Tokyo. suzuki@icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp

TANAKA, Satoru,

Professor, University of Tokyo, s-tanaka@q.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

TAYLOR, Andrew

Director, ISIS, UK. adt@isise.rl.ac.uk

WHITE, John W.(Chairman) Professor, Australian National University,
Canberra, Australia, jww@rsc.anu.edu.au