Information concerning FY04 DOE proposal for university-based Linear
Collider R&D:

Both DOE and NSF have indicated there will be continued support in FY04
for university based efforts on machine and detector R&D for the
Linear Collider. DOE plans to support R&D at the $500k level for
detector projects, and at the $400-800k level for accelerator R&D. NSF hopes
to increase its FY03 funding (~$150k) considerably.

We will need your subproposals, whether new or renewal, by September 30.
(This schedule allows the combined proposal document to be delivered to the
review committees in early November. It is possible that the reviewers won't
need the proposal until later in the month. If this proves to be the case we
may be able to
relax the schedule by a couple of weeks. We'll keep you posted; please
don't assume that an extension of the deadline is a sure thing!)

The procedure this year will be similar to last year's, but with some
important differences:

1. Proponents are encouraged to outline up to a three year R&D program with
a constant funding profile for the out years, if the project naturally
extends over multiple years;

2. Proponents who have already received funds in FY03 should include reports
of progress in their proposals;

3. Proposals should be approximately six pages in length. Please bear in
mind that the review panels will be reading a large number of proposals! You
may want to include more detail (in your progress report, for example) than
space allows. In this case, please include additional information in an
appendix at the end of your proposal. We will include it with the combined
document, but you should not assumme that the Gordon and Holtkamp committee
members will have time to read it. References to documents posted on the web
can also be used to present additional information.

4. Dave Sutter has asked that accelerator proposals address the present
uncertainty in funding level this way:

*  Write a three-year proposal which requests the same amount of funding for
each year
*  If it can be done sensibly, have your proposal present two different
project scenarios, corresponding to a more generous and less generous
funding level.

The UCLC proposal to NSF, which has already been updated by UCLC, will be
integrated into the proposal document for completeness.

More information is available on the LCRD web page at

http://www.hep.uiuc.edu/LCRD/

best regards,

    Dan Amidei, Dave Finley, George Gollin, Tom Himel,
    John Jaros, Usha Mallik, SlawekTkaczyk.