[Nuclear-data-miners] Data Mining Proposal

[Eliezer Piasetzky]

please see the enclosed
  best regards
     eli
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Sebastian Kuhn wrote:

> Dear Data Miners,
>
> it's been over a year since we submitted our proposal to the DOE, and 
> unfortunately, DOE has been unable to properly deal with it (sending it out 
> for reviews etc.). To add insult to injury, DOE rules apparently stipulate 
> that a proposal that hasn't been acted on (as opposed to rejected) must be 
> withdrawn by the proposing institution (ODU in this case). Anyway, here is 
> Brad Tippens' (the program manager at DOE) original email:
>
>>  Subject:  	RE: data mining Date: 	Tue, 7 Dec 2010 16:24:45 -0500
>>  From: 	Tippens, Brad <Brad.Tippens at science.doe.gov> To:
>>  Weinstein,
>>  Lawrence B. <lweinste at odu.edu>
>> 
>>
>>  Larry:
>> 
>>
>>  Since it has been more than a year since you submitted your proposal
>>  and our office has not acted on it, you should have your business
>>  office withdraw the proposal and then submit a new one.  You could
>>  take this opportunity to update the proposal in any way.  One way
>>  this could be done would be to include a table that identifies the
>>  fraction of research time each individual that is involve will be
>>  spending on this project. Once resubmitted, I will have it reviewed.
>> 
>>
>>  Brad
>
> So, the upshot is that we will have to resubmit the proposal to have it 
> reviewed - at least we have a promise that it WILL be reviewed. We should 
> probably change as little as possible, so we can turn it around quickly 
> (definitely before the end of the year). We (Larry and I) will get the 
> process started on our side (with our "business office"). In the meantime, 
> please look the proposal over and let us know whether there is anything you 
> think needs to be changed/strengthened to increase our chances. We will try 
> to summarize some of the more recent advances in the field (probably the 
> introduction), update references and "inflate" all costs. If there is 
> anything else you want us to change, let us know WITHIN ONE WEEK!
>
> MOST IMPORTANTLY: We need EACH of you to tell us
> a) Who from your institution STILL wants to be on the proposal
> b) What fraction of their FTE research time they plan to spend on the 
> activities addressed by the proposal, should it get funded. (This of course 
> can contain any activities related to the topics in the proposal that you are 
> already working on)
> Again, we need this information by the END OF NEXT WEEK!
>
> Thanks - Sebastian (also for Larry)
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: minimg_com.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 39424 bytes
Desc: a word file
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/nuclear-data-miners/attachments/20101209/433f65c0/attachment-0001.doc