Siting the Superconducting Super Collider (1988)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Appendix C September 17 Letter from James F. Decker to Edward A. Frieman 44

45 Department of Energy Washington. DC ?0585 Septenber 17, 1987 Dr. Edward Frieman Chairman Super Collider Site Evaluation Committee National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20418 Dear Dr. Frieman: The Department of Energy (DOE) has completed its review of the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) site proposals against the qualification criteria included in the Invitation for Site Proposals for the SSC (Invitation). The Invitation required that proposals either not meeting the qualification criteria or which are so grossly or obviously deficient as to be totally unacceptable will not be evaluated. Proposers were asked to demonstrate, certify, or both that the following criteria are met in the proposal: 1. Location entirely in the United States of America. 2. Land size and configuration to accommodate the SSC facility as specified in this Invitation, including Figure 1-2 and Table B-l. 3. Absence of cost to the Government for land acquisition. 4. Capability of providing at least 250 MW of electrical power with at least 500 gpm of industrial water or 200 MW of power with 2,200 gpm of industrial water, or an appropriate interpolated combination. 5. Absence of known unacceptable environmental impacts from siting, constructing, operating, and decommissioning the SSC. Reasonable mitigation measures may be taken into consideration. Forty-three (43) proposals were submitted by the 2:00 p.m. deadline September 2, 1987. The DOE has determined that the thirty-six (36) proposals identified in Attachment 1 are qualified and are referred to the National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering (NAS/NAE) for evaluation. Seven (7) proposals listed in Attachment 2 are disqualified. Celebrating the U.S. Constitution Bicentennial — 1787-1987

46 We recognize and sincerely appreciate the NAS/NAE's assistance in the evaluation of the SSC site proposals. Please remind your committee and staff of the sensitive nature of the evaluation process and the need to keep your deliberations confidential. Sincerely, ames F. Decker 'Acting Director Office of Energy Research R. Kasper, NAS/NAE W. Spindel, NAS/NAE SSEC Members

47 t OOOOOJ^OO/OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO a, a. aj a. > a. ojQjttJ*'*'*'*'i'*'**'*'*'4''^*'*'*'*'6'*' 4_> *_> 4-> 4-J 4-> O4-•4->4-'*^*J4->4-'4->«-'4-'*J*J *J.*J *J4-I*JW*J*J«->*J*J ,M> *j *_i -- oj 4-i ai4-'*j*'*JifcJ«-i*J4-1'fcJ*J4-'4-'*J*rf*J*J*J.fc'*J*J*J orn orn O O O O c o ec a. uj o C Sg IS C 4-> ^J M C L — *' U — a, c a- >, *j E — .._ *_* S.-^uni10 c:>, *s in a. • 3 X C. « A> — •0 "' > i§ffii=l^i|fi!ffj| CD CD Vi — C <• 9 «n ct V t/ > •a e Oi -5, " C — I. in e p C (Q — tft 5 C > e o o 01 (- Q.-D ^- OJ |g -•— u O is> o« O o Oi £ 13 «5 *J ° C 3 £ c- ->- a. -it T: T ^z -~ c -^- c<O4-> a; 3 T ^ UJ Z ^ X^^>* 6x«fl-SoCC*30(-^X— Ul« — >tfti4->*j>— io *' OJ O i- i- 0i O — •— ^ .

48 ! O> U L. « *J — O L. 3 O»- H9 10 Wl *•> O —I it OJ — — X c u> •*-> o a; • o — m c z 13 — L. C JC -O Q.— U «*- >> — O o; c >— < . CD 4-1 Oj QJ U 3 LkJ (- O <O QC • OJ TO I « -*J • • t~ c- <; _j to o i 10 01 >> *J O — UJ :8 3 O U — _ CM I/> 10 •-> C 01 « O 01 <-> QJ •*• 4^ *^ 4J C I C i- o re 10 L. Ol — 4-> 4-> OJ !£ 5 L. L . OJ Ol a o B* ii So ee a en e o I 10 X 1 «-> QJ : => Z l o z 01 44 I/)