[BDXlist] Fwd: [EXTERNAL] Declination of Proposal 0000248053 Submitted to the Office of High Energy Physics

[Elton Smith]

Dear collaborators,

We received news today from DOE that the proposal for funding the BDX
design was declined. We have not yet had time to digest the details of the review and will be considering what steps are needed to move forward.

There were 4 reviewers and their responses are
available on the DOE/proposal web site. At first glance the
comments were quite positive, although they did identified some items
that needed more attention. I extracted the individual reviewer
summaries as well as the panel summary, which are copied below. The
panel summary concludes with "This is a good proposal and should be
supported if funds are available," but apparently funds were limiting.

We will ask JLab management for advice and we welcome any thoughts on what to do next.

Cheers, Elton

Reviewer 1 Summary
-----------------
The proposed experiment would be the
latest in a long line of beam-dump searches for low-mass dark matter.
While this means the underlying method is not particularly innovative,
the experiment has very likelihood of achieving valid and valuable
results.  The proposed experiment is complementary and synergistic to
other planned searches, and the versatile nature of the measurements
will entail world-leading results in a wide variety of dark matter
theoretical frameworks.  The proposal takes full advantage of JLab
Hall-A beam-dump facility infrastructure, and the experiment's ability
to run parasitically to the rest of the Hall A activities is a major
strength.

Reviewer 2 Summary
------------------
Overall this is an excellent proposal for an experiment that is strongly
aligned with the topic area of the FOA. The scientific reach of the
experiment will be quite goo compared to contemporary experiments such
as Belle II and parasitic data from neutrino experiments.  The proposal
to utilize a relatively simple detector that is largely recycled from
BaBar vs building a new and complex detector system is laudable at this
point in the LDM search.  A more fine-tuned and dedicated experimental
approach may be warranted in the future as exclusion limits drive the
science to need more capable detectors for background rejection, but
that is not the case at this point in time and a "quick and simple"
experiment such as the one proposed here can make significant headway in
the near term.

The work plan is sound and the team is well qualified with one exception
- the absence of a seasoned O413.3b project manager or project controls
person on the team.  This is the one area where the team needs to be
expanded to be successful.  Even though this is intended to be a small
project that is below the thresholds for that style of management,
having a professional project controls person is invaluable to managing
even a small construction project successfully.  I would recommend
adding an experienced project controls person only as adding an
additional PM would be overkill for this small an effort.  Incorporating
project controls at this stage of the project development is essential
to long term success.

Reviewer 3 Summary
------------------
This is a very appealing experiment, which will be able to set limits on
certain models of dark matter interactions with Standard Model matter. I
am very eager to see the results. I do not think this proposal to do
engineering for the experimental hall is what the FOA was looking for.
That is, the experiment will still be interesting after this work, but
we will have no new methods to discover dark matter.

If the point of this FOA is to fund new possible ways of searching for
dark matter, I do not think this proposal qualifies. However, I find the
proposal to build the BDX very compelling.

Reviewer 4 Summary
------------------
The strength of the proposal is in the excellent use of DOE’s lab infrastructure and unique
electron-beam capabilities,  as well as the relatively low and
identified risks. The weakness is typical of most DM proposals, probing
a small fraction of almost infinite DM model space,  with a very small
chance of discovery. But for a relatively small cost, BDX will likely
provide the best sensitivity in this region of parameter space.

Panel Summary
-------------
Most panel members saw the science case for BDX, an electron beam-dump
experiment which has been provisionally approved at JLab, as solid for a
wide range of DM models.  While the work proposed under this FOA (mostly
civil engineering) is not particularly exciting, most members viewed it
as highly logical, in view of the potential for shielding and housing
issues to cause  large cost overruns if not properly addressed.  BDX
employs well-established techniques, and panel members judged that it
provides good science value and makes excellent use of existing
infrastructure.  The re-use of the CsI crystals from the BaBar
calorimeter, and the parasitic running with the flagship project MOLLER,
were particularly noted.

This is a good proposal and should be supported if funds are available.
There were some concerns regarding whether the potential small project
would be a priority for being part of the HEP program.



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[EXTERNAL] Declination of Proposal 0000248053 Submitted to the
Office of High Energy Physics
Date: 	28 Oct 2019 11:08:22 -0400
From: 	Glen Crawford <glen.crawford at science.doe.gov>
To: 	Elton Smith <elton at jlab.org>
CC: 	Deborah Dowd <dowd at jlab.org>



10/28/2019

Dr. Elton Smith
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (TJNAF)
Newport News, VA 23606-4468

Dear Dr. Elton Smith,

We regret to inform you that the proposal entitled, "Design and
execution plans of Beam-Dump eXperiment (BDX) at Jefferson Lab,"
submitted in response to LAB 19-2112: Dark Matter New Initiatives, is
hereby declined. Award or declination decisions are made based on input
from reviewers, consideration of program policy factors, and the
availability of funds.

The Principal Investigator may access the merit reviews for this
proposal. If the PI has previously viewed this proposal in PAMS, log
into the Portfolio Analysis and Management System (PAMS)
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pamspublic.science.energy.gov_webPAMSEPSExternal_Interface_Common_AccessControl_login.aspx&d=DwMFAg&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=c-_tH8evYLC4MjBfbp0hiQ&m=N2nSD8bpnLOuNYm5mql-04xCE1xezv1KaO5ePnwn8K8&s=D9SnnauX19IDol0W6ETBS7Lrdd1FVSRTAC8gaWsRdw4&e=>
and click the "View My Proposals" link on the Proposals tab. To see the
merit reviews, select "Reviews" from the "Views" dropdown in the options
column next to the proposal. To access your previously submitted
Grants.gov proposal(s), the PI must follow the instructions at
https://science.osti.gov/~/media/grants/pdf/pams/01_Access_Proposal.pdf
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__science.osti.gov_-7E_media_grants_pdf_pams_01-5FAccess-5FProposal.pdf&d=DwMFAg&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=c-_tH8evYLC4MjBfbp0hiQ&m=N2nSD8bpnLOuNYm5mql-04xCE1xezv1KaO5ePnwn8K8&s=XXwygGmVGeGwQLeRTdQhpwVficnXSvJ08EsKXfL6zLA&e=>.

We appreciate your interest in the Office of High Energy Physics and the
amount of effort required to prepare your proposal. We wish you well in
your future research endeavors.

Sincerely,

Glen Crawford
Director, Research & Technology Division
Office of High Energy Physics
glen.crawford at science.doe.gov
Office of Science
Department of Energy

Program Manager (Primary): Turner, Kathleen
Program Manager(s) (Secondary): Linder, Eric