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 A: Statement of Work for the Committee The National Academies of Sciences and Engineering (Acad- emies) shall assist the Department of Energy (DOE) in the Su- perconducting Super Collider (SSC) site evaluation process by eval- uating the suitability of proposed sites for the SSC facility. Time is of the essence. The Presidents of the Academies will jointly ap- point a Site Evaluation Committee (Committee) reporting directly to the Academies' Governing Board of the National Research Coun- cil. The Committee shall consist of about 15 distinguished scientists, engineers, and other individuals and will be appointed giving due consideration to potential real or apparent conflicts of interest and geographical distribution. The Academies shall: 1. Consult with DOE officials as those officials determine the evaluation criteria, subcriteria, and considerations to be announced in the DOE Invitation for Site Proposals as well as broad indica- tions of the relative importance of those criteria, subcriteria, and considerations. (In the absence of Committee members, Academies' officials shall carry out the consultation.) The Committee shall estab- lish (prior to receipt of proposals) techniques, processes, and special analyses to be employed in evaluating proposals using the DOE- announced criteria and subcriteria and their relative importance. The Committee's evaluation, to be developed in the light of past 39
40 experience with large science research laboratories, will stress those items within the DOE-announced criteria and subcriteria and their relative importance, that are likely to be most critical in determining scientific productivity of the SSC laboratory. 2. Restrict its attention to those sites referred to it by DOE for consideration and evaluation. 3. Perform, or cause to be performed, special analyses, as deemed appropriate, of required site characteristics. 4. Develop a process that will assure expeditious evaluations resulting in the identification of a small number of best qualified sites from among those considered, i.e., a Best Qualified List (BQL). 5. Obtain clarifications, if determined to be appropriate, from any site proposer. Proposers may not modify their proposals dur- ing, or as a result of, any such clarifications. Further, designated DOE personnel will be invited to be present during the Committee's meetings with proposers. 6. Prepare a final report to the DOE Director of Energy Re- search no later than three (3) months after the DOE formally pro- vides the Academies with the proposals to be evaluated. The report shall describe the evaluation process; the rationale employed, includ- ing emphasis, in the development of the BQL; and assessments of those sites included in the BQL. The BQL shall not be prioritized. 7. Until release of the Academies' final report after the DOE announces the preferred site, maintain the confidentiality of DOE provided sensitive material which has not been made public by the Government, as well as the Academies' proceedings and results, from all but DOE officials designated by the Director of Energy Research. If DOE has given the Academies access to proprietary informa- tion (labeled as such) owned by or in the possession of DOE, the Academies will protect such information from unauthorized disclo- sure to the extent permitted by law so long as the information remains proprietary. (The term "proprietary information" means trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.) 8. At their option, release their recommended list of best qual- ified sites, after the list is determined and provided to DOE and release is coordinated with DOE. The report of the Academies shall include a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposals included in the recommended BQL. To insure the integrity of the DOE competitive selections process and prevent the details of pro- posals still under consideration from being made public during the
41 process, the report shall not be made public until DOE announces the preferred site. 9. Be prepared to respond to DOE regarding substantive ques- tions about its recommendations; after release of the Academies' report to the public, the Committee shall be prepared and respond to substantive questions from others. 10. Interact closely with DOE without compromising the real or perceived independence of the Academies' evaluation effort. The Academies will routinely inform DOE in advance of all Committee meetings. DOE designated personnel will be invited to all Com- mittee meetings, except Executive Sessions deemed necessary by the Academies. DOE shall provide information and analyses to the Committee when necessary.
