The supercollider: The pre-texas days: A personal recollection of its birth and berkeley years

Reviews of Accelerator Science and Technology

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 259-302

  Wojcicki, Stanley ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accelerator; Cdg; Collider; Ssc; Superconducting magnets; Superconductivity

Indexed keywords

COLLIDING BEAM ACCELERATORS; PARTICLE ACCELERATORS; SITE SELECTION; SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETS; SUPERCONDUCTIVITY;

CONSTRUCTION FUNDS; HADRON COLLIDERS; MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE; SUPERCOLLIDER; SUPERCONDUCTING SUPER-COLLIDER;

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS;

EID: 84973434238     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1142/9789812835215_0012     Document Type: Chapter

References (184)

1. The account of the SSC’s Texas days will appear in the Reviews of Accelerator Science and Technology, Vol. 2 (2009).
2. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, The Superconducting Super Collider’s frontier outpost, 1983-1988, Minerva 38, 271 (2000).
3. [3] J. Irvine et al., Phys. Today 39, 27 (1986).
4. [4] L. Hoddeson, The first large-scale application of superconductivity: the Fermilab Energy Doubler, 1972-1983, Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 8/1, 25 (1987).
5. [5] R. P. Crease, Quenched! The ISABELLE saga, in Physics in Perspective 7/3 (2005), part I, pp. 330-376; and part II, pp. 404-452.
6. [6] R. P. Crease, Report of the 1977 Subpanel on New Facilities of the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel, ERDA 77-71, Jun. 1977. The initial BNL proposal, considered and approved by the 1975 Subpanel, was for 200 GeV in each beam. It was subsequently modified in light of scientific and technological developments.
7. R. P. Crease, Phys. Today 34, 17 (1981).
8. P. David, Nature 303, 465 (1993).
9. G. Keyworth, editorial in Science 219, 801 (1983).
10. G. Keyworth, Report of the Subpanel on Long Range Planning for the US High Energy Physics Program of the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel (DOE-RE-0128, Jan. 1982), App. 65.
11. G. Keyworth, Report of the Subpanel on Long Range Planning for the US High Energy Physics Program of the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel (DOE-RE-0128, Jan. 1982), App. 65.
12. G. Keyworth, Report of the Subpanel on Long Range Planning for the US High Energy Physics Program of the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel (DOE-RE-0128, Jan. 1982), Phys. Today 35, 51 (1982).
13. G. Keyworth, Proc. Workshop on Possibilities and Limitations of Accelerators and Detectors (Batavia, Illinois; Oct. 15-21, 1978), ed.
14. D. Edwards.Proc. 2nd ICFA Workshop on Possibilities and Limitations of Accelerators and Detectors (Les Diablerets, Switzerland), CERN Report RD/450-1 (1979), ed.
15. U. Amaldi.For a comprehensive discussion on the history of the VBA, see A. Kolb and L. Hoddeson, The mirage of the world accelerator for world peace and the origins of the SSC, Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 24, 101 (1993).
16. U. Amaldi. Proc. 1982 DPF Summer Study on Elementary Particle Physics and Future Facilities (June 23-July 16, 1982, Snowmass, Colorado), eds.
17. R. Donaldson, R. Gustafson and F. Paige; Phys. Today 36, 19 (1983).
18. M. Tigner, in Proc. 1982 DPF Summer Study on Elementary Particle Physics and Future Facilities (June 28-July 16, 1982, Snowmass, Colorado), eds. R. Donaldson, R. Gustafson and F. Paige, pp. 50-53.
19. M. Tigner, Report of the 1983 HEPAP Subpanel on New Facilities for the US High Energy Physics Program (DOE/ER-0169, July. 1983), App. 65.
20. M. Tigner, Report of the 1983 HEPAP Subpanel on New Facilities for the US High Energy Physics Program (DOE/ER-0169, July. 1983), App. 66
21. M. M. Waldrop, Science 220, 809 (1983).
22. S. Wojcicki to members of 1983 HEPAP Subpanel on New Facilities after the Organizational Subpanel meeting in Feb. (undated)
23. S. Wojcicki “Dear Colleague” letter from S. Wojcicki to DPF membership (Mar. 11, 1983).
24. S. Wojcicki Proposal for a Dedicated Collider at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (May 1983).
25. P. Reardon’s letter to S. Wojcicki, May 17, 1983, on the occasion of the Subpanel’s meeting at BNL, and the enclosure “Sandatron possibilities at BNL.” The estimated additional cost for a 15 on 15TeV collider was US$883 million ± 250 million.
26. B. Richter, presentation to the 1983 Subpanel at its meeting at SLAC, May 20, 1983. The statement was made based on a very preliminary study (~10 people for a few weeks), that a 2TeV e+e~ collider could be built using existing technology (20MeV/m gradient) for US$3.29 billion, with power consumption of 400 MW. This did not include RandD, detectors, contingency or escalation.
27. B. Richter, Report of the 20 TeV Hadron Collider Technical Workshop (Cornell, Mar. 28-Apr. 2, 1983).
28. B. Richter, Phys. Today 36, 17 (1983).
29. UA1 Collab. (G. Arnison et al.), Phys. Lett.B 122 103 (1983).
30. UA2 Collab. (G. Banner et al.), Phys. Lett.B 122, 476 (1983).
31. UA1 Collab. (G. Arnison et al.), Phys. Lett.B 126, 398 (1983).
32. J. Adams to Subpanel members: Some remarks about new facilities for high-energy particle physics research in the USA (Apr. 22, 1983).
33. J. Adams Europe 3, US not even z-zero, New York Times editorial (Jun. 6, 1983).
34. J. Adams Report of the 1983 HEPAP Subpanel on New Facilities for the US High Energy Physics Program (DOE/ER-0169, July. 1983), pp. 5-14.
35. J. Adams Report of the 1983 HEPAP Subpanel on New Facilities for the US High Energy Physics Program (DOE/ER-0169, July. 1983), p. 67.
36. W. Sullivan, Panel of experts deadlocked on next U.S. atom smashers, New York Times (Jul. 2, 1983).
37. Cable from L. Lederman to chairs of physics departments in the US (Jul. 3, 1983).
38. Cable from L. Phys. Today 36, 17 (1983).
39. Cable from L. Cover letter from J. Sandweiss to A. Trivel-piece, Report of the 1983 HEPAP Subpanel on New Facilities for the US High Energy Physics Program (DOE/ER-0169, July. 1983), App. 65., pp. 1-3.
40. M. M. Waldrop, Science 221, 1038 (1983).
41. M. M. Waldrop, Remarks by D. Pewitt to the Third US Summer School on High Energy Particle Accelerators at Brookhaven National Laboratory (Jul. 15, 1983).
42. M. M. Waldrop, Letter from A. Trivelpiece to J. Sandweiss (Aug. 11, 1983).
43. M. M. Waldrop, Letter from W. K. H. Panofsky to J. Sandweiss (Sep. 9, 1983).
44. M. M. Waldrop, Transcript of hearing before the Subcommittee on Energy Development and Applications of the Committee on Science and Technology, US House of Representatives (Oct. 19, 1983).
45. M. M. Waldrop, Phys. Today 36, 41 (1983).
46. M. M. Waldrop, Report of the Reference Designs Study Group on the Superconducting Super Collider, DOE/ER-0213, May 8, 1984.
47. DOE Independent Cost Estimating (ICE) staff obtained estimates that were higher by US$531 million, US$403 million and US$1060 million for the three designs; Phys. Today 37, 17 (1984).
48. M. M. Waldrop, Proc. Ann Arbor Workshop on Accelerator Physics Issues for a Superconducting Super Collider, UM HE84-1 (Ann Arbor, Michigan, Dec. 12-17, 1983), ed. M. Tigner. J. E. Pilcher and A. R. White (eds.), Pbar-p Options for the Supercollider (University of Chicago, 1984).
49. M. M. Waldrop, Summary Report of the PSSC Discussion Group Meeting, eds. P. Hale and B. Winstein (FNAL, 1984).
50. M. M. Waldrop, Proc. 1984 Summer Study on the Design and Utilization of the Superconducting Super Collider (June 23-July 13, 1984, Snowmass, Colorado), eds.
51. R. Donaldson and J. Morfin, E. Eichten et al. Rev. Mod. Phys. 56, 579 (1984).
52. R. Donaldson and J. Morfin, E. Eichten also an addendum in Proc. 1984 Summer Study on the Design and Utilization of the Superconducting Super Collider (June 23-July 13, 1984, Snowmass, Colorado), eds. R. Donaldson and J. Morfin, pp. 99-103.
53. M. M. Waldrop, Letter from H. G. Stever, President of URA, to D. F. Hodel, Secretary of the US Department of Energy (Jul. 14, 1983).
54. M. M. Waldrop, Minutes of the SSC RandD and Conceptual Design Board Meeting (Mar. 23, 1984; Washington, DC).
55. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 37, 69 (1984).
56. I. Goodwin, Memorandum of Understanding between LBL, the host, and URA with regard to location and support of the SSC Design Center (Sep. 1984).
57. I. Goodwin, Report of the DOE Review Committee on the Reference Design Study for the SSC (DOE/ER Report; May 18, 1984).
58. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 37, 21 (1984).
59. I. Goodwin, Minutes of the Board of Overseers Meeting, at Brookhaven National Laboratory (Sep. 10-11, 1984).
60. I. Goodwin, A more detailed listing of Phase 1 Milestones is given in the first issue of the SSC Newslett. (Nov. 12, 1984).
61. R. Palmer and A. V. Tollestrup, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 34, 247 (1984).
62. R. Palmer and A. V. Tollestrup, Phys. Today 37, 17 (1984).
63. R. Wilson, in Proc. 1982 DPF Summer Study on Elementary Particle Physics and Future Facilities, (June 28-July 16, 1982, Snowmass, Colorado), eds. R. Donaldson, R. Gustafson and F. Paige, pp. 330-334.
64. R. Wilson, Phys. Today 38, 63 (1985).
65. D. Larbalestier, G. Fisk, B. Montgomery and D. Hawksworth, Phys. Today 39, 24 (1986).
66. R. Talman, in Proc. 1984 Summer Study on the Design and Utilization of the Superconducting Super Collider (June 28-July 13, 1984, Snow-mass, Colorado), eds. R. Donaldson and J. Morfin, pp. 349-352.
67. R. Talman, SSC Aperture Estimates for Cost Comparisons (SSC-SR-1012, Aug. 1985).
68. L. Jones, in Proc. 1982 DPF Summer Study on Elementary Particle Physics and Future Facilities, (June 28-July 16, 1982, Snowmass, Colorado, 1982), eds. R. Donaldson, R. Gustafson and F. Paige, pp. 345-346.
69. L. Jones, Aperture Estimates. Presentation to the SSC MSAP by A. W. Chao on Aug. 26, 1985.
70. L. Jones, Magnet Technical Review Panel Report (SSC-SR-1010, Jul. 1985).
71. L. Jones, The selection process and the recommendation are discussed in detail in M. Tigner’s memo to file, dated Sep. 13, 1986, App. C, in Report of the HEPAP Subpanel on Review of Recent Information on Superferric Magnets (DOE/ER-0272, May 1986).
72. B. Schwarzschild, Phys. Today 38, 58 (1985).
73. B. Schwarzschild, Letter from F. R. Huson and P. M. McIntyre to W. Wallenmeyer dated Apr. 7, 1986, and attached as App. D in Report of the HEPAP Subpanel on Review of Recent Information on Superferric Magnets (DOE/ER-0272, May 1986).
74. B. Schwarzschild, Report of the HEPAP Subpanel on Review of Recent Information on Superferric Magnets (DOE/ER-0272, May 1986).
75. B. Goss-Levi and B. Schwarzschild, Phys. Today 41, 17 (1988).
76. B. Schwarzschild, Phys. Today 38, 53 (1985).
77. US National Committee on Tunneling Technology, Contracting Practices for the Underground Construction of the Superconducting Super Collider (National Academy Press, Washington, DC 1989).
78. US National Committee on Tunneling Technology, Conceptual Design of the Superconducting Super Collider by the SSC Central Design Group (SSC-SR-2020, Mar. 1986).
79. US National Committee on Tunneling Technology, An Assessment of the Antiproton-Proton Option for the SSC (SSC-SR-1022, May 1986).
80. US National Committee on Tunneling Technology, Report of the DOE Review Committee on the Conceptual Design of the Superconducting Super Collider (DOE/ER-0267, May 1986).
81. US National Committee on Tunneling Technology, Detector cost and off-line computing advisory panels created, The Lattice (Mar./Apr. 1986), p. 5.
82. Cost Estimate of the Initial SSC Experimental Equipment (SSC-SR-1023, June 1986).
83. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Report of the Research Briefing Panel on Scientific Opportunities and the Super Collider (National Academy Press, 1985).
84. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, SSC users organization established, The Lattice(Aug./Sep. 1987), pp. 5-6.
85. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Proc. 1986 Summer Study on the Physics of the Superconducting Supercollider (Snowmass, Colorado, Jun. 23-Jul. 11, 1986), eds. R. Donaldson and J. Marx.
86. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Proc. Workshop on Experiments, Detectors, and Experimental Areas for the Supercollider (Berkeley, California, July 7-17, 1987), eds. R. Donaldson and M. G. D. Gilchriese.
87. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Proc. Summer Study on High Energy Physics in the 1990’s (Jun./Jul. 1988), ed. Sharon Jensen (World Scientific).
88. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, SSC establishes detector RandD coordinating office, The Lattice (Mar./Apr. 1987), p. 4.
89. R. Huson, L. M. Lederman and R. Schwitters, in Proc. 1982 DPF Summer Study on Elementary Particle Physics and Future Facilities, (June 28-July 16, 1982, Snowmass, Colorado, 1982), eds. R. Donaldson, R. Gustafson and F. Paige, pp. 361-368.
90. R. Huson, L. M. Lederman and R. Schwitters, Detector research and development and computing. Presentation by M. G. D. Gilchriese at the DOE/SSC Annual Review (Jan. 30-Feb. 1, 1989).
91. R. Huson, L. M. Lederman and R. Schwitters, Appraising the Ring: Statements in Support of the Superconducting Super Collider. compiled and introduced by L. M. Lederman and C. Quigg (Universities Research Association, 1988).
92. R. Huson, L. M. Lederman and R. Schwitters, SSC videotape documentary available, The Lattice(Jun./Aug. 1988), p. 7.
93. R. Huson, L. M. Lederman and R. Schwitters, An article on the SSC even appeared on Jul. 23, 1985, in American Way, the in-flight magazine of the American Airlines.
94. Colorado hosts SSC symposium, The Lattice (Jan./Feb. 1988), p. 4.
95. Colorado hosts SSC symposium, “First SSC Industrial Symposium, Feb. 8-10, The Lattice (Sept.-Dec. 1988), p. 2.
96. Colorado hosts SSC symposium, Proc. Int. Industrial Symposium on the Supercollider (Feb. 8-10, 1989), ed. M. McAshan (Plenum, 1989).
97. M. Bianchi-Streit et al., CERN 84-14 (Dec. 11, 1984).
98. D. C. Mowery and W. E. Steinmueller, Economic payoffs from basic research: an examination of high energy physics (Feb. 5, 1986).
99. P. A. David, D. C. Mowery and W. E. Steinmueller (1992), Economics of Innovation and, New Technology 2(1), 73 (1991).
100. D. Dickson, Science 220, 1252 (1983).
101. D. Dickson, Science 224, 1317 (1984).
102. G. Flugge, Particle Physics Facilities from the User’s Point of View: The Role of ECFA and ICFA, Large Facilities in Physics, eds., M. Jacob and H. Schopper (World Scientific, 1995), pp. 79-98.
103. G. Brianti et al., Summary Report of Workshop on the Feasibility of Hadron Colliders in the LEP Tunnel (CERN/LEP, Mar. 21-27, 1984).
104. D. Dickson, Science 224, 1216 (1984).
105. H. Schopper’s Testimony at the hearing of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee on Apr. 7, 1987.
106. V. Soergel’s Prepared testimony at the hearing of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee on Apr. 7, 1987.
107. M. M. Waldrop, Science 225, 490 (1984).
108. M. Crawford, Science 238, 16 (1987).
109. M. Waldrop, Nature 232, 571 (1986); this letter was organized by V. Fazio and R. Packard, representatives from California.
110. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 40, 55 (1986).
111. C. Norman, Science 232, 705 (1986).
112. C. Norman, Los Angeles Times editorial (Jan. 21, 1987).
113. R. Pear, Plan offered for vast atom smasher, The New York Times (Jan. 19, 1987).
114. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 40, 47 (1987).
115. I. Goodwin, George Will’s syndicated column “The Super Collider” (Feb. 15, 1988).
116. I. Goodwin, Invitation for Site Proposal for the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) (DOE/ER-0315, Apr. 1987).
117. C. D. May, States politicking in race for atom smasher, The New York Times (Apr. 27, 1987).
118. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 41, 47 (1987).
119. I. Goodwin, The list of members is given in the Academy’s report Siting the Superconducting Super Collider(National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1988).
120. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 41, 52 (1987).
121. I. Goodwin, Siting the Superconducting Super Collider (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1988).
122. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 42, 69 (1988).
123. I. Goodwin, SSC at Fermilab means $3.28 billion saving. SSC for Fermilab Newsletter, Spring 1988.
124. I. Goodwin, SSC Site Evaluations: A Report by the SSC Site Task Force (DOE/ER-0392, Nov. 1988).
125. I. Goodwin, Determination of the Best Qualified Sites for DOE’s Super Collider (GAO/RCED-89-18, Jan. 1989).
126. I. Goodwin, Secretary Herrington’s Preferred Site Selection statement dated Nov. 10, 1988.
127. M. Crawford, Science 242, 1004 (1988).
128. M. Crawford, IT’S HERE, Waxahachie Daily Light (Nov. 10, 1988).
129. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 43, 95 (1989).
130. M. D. Lemonick, A controversial prize for Texas, Time (Nov. 28, 1988).
131. P. WeingartenC, ollider, fire ants head for collision, Chicago Tribune (Dec. 18, 1988).
132. P. Weingarten The Texas efforts to land the SSC are thoroughly described in: P. T. Flawn, The Story of the Texas National Research Laboratory Commission and the Superconducting uper Collider (University of Texas at Austin, 2003).
133. P. Weingarten Additional Views of Hon. Sherwood Boehlert, appended to the SSC Authorization Act of 1987, HR3228.
134. P. Weingarten The superconducting magnet program during this time frame is discussed extensively in: B. Goss-Levi and B. Schwarzschild, Phys. Today 41, 17 (1988).
135. A. Chao et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2752 (1988).
136. D. Dickson, Science 236, 246 (1987).
137. M. Crawford, Science 237, 22 (1987).
138. J. Walsh, Science 235, 1458 (1987).
139. M. Crawford, Science 244, 24 (1989).
140. D. Thomsen, Science News 132, 374 (1987).
141. D. Thomsen, Schopper’s testimony, presented at the hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology House (Apr. 7, 1987).
142. D. Thomsen, Phys. Today 38, 67 (1985).
143. D. Dickson, Science 235, 1567 (1987).
144. W. Sweet, Phys. Today 40, 71 (1987).
145. C. Sutton, New Scientist 30 (1987).
146. J. G. Bednorz and K. A. Muller, Z. Phys. B 64, 189 (1986).
147. M. K. Wu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 908 (1987).
148. A. Khurana, Phys. Today 41, 17 (1987).
149. W. Sullivan, Team reports breakthrough in con ductivity of electricity, The New York Times (Febr. 16, 1987).
150. W. Sullivan, Science 236, 247 (1987).
151. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 41, 50 (1987).
152. J. Gleick, Advances pose obstacles to atom smasher plan, The New York Times (Apr. 14, 1987).
153. J. Gleick, New superconductors examined for SSC, The Lattice (Jun./Jul. 1987), pp. 3-4.
154. J. Krumhansl, prepared testimony for the hearing before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee on Apr. 7, 1987.
155. J. Krumhansl, letter to Secretary John S. Herrington, dated Feb. 19, 1987; quoted in Phys. Today 41, 50 (1987).
156. P. Anderson, prepared testimony for the hearing before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee on Apr. 7, 1987.
157. P. Anderson, Report of the Research Briefing Panel on High-Temperature Superconductivity, National Academy Press, Washington, D. C. 1987
158. cSuperconducting Magnet Applications in Particle Physics (DOE/ER-0358, Dec. 1987).
159. R. Pool, Science 243, 162 (1989).
160. R. Pool, Science 244, 914 (1989).
161. R. Pool, Science 245, 1331 (1989).
162. R. Pool, Super hasty on the supercollider, The New York Times editorial, Apr. 28, 1988.
163. R. Pool, Risks and Benefits of Building the Super Collider; A Special Study by the Congressional Budget Office (Washington, DC, Oct. 1988).
164. Department of Energy, Congressional Budget Office Report on the Superconducting Super Collider, Febr. 1989.
165. E. Marshall, Science 230, 1249 (1985).
166. B. Culliton, Science 235, 840, (1987).
167. B. Culliton, Superconducting Super Collider Authorization Act of 1987, HR3228.
168. B. Culliton, Energy and Water Development Appropriation Bill, 1988, (Sep. 16, 1987).
169. B. Culliton, Proposal to Serve as Contractor for the Construction and Operation of the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory. Submitted by URA (Mar. 2,1987).
170. B. Culliton, Jun. 1, 167, 1988, letter from Boyce McDaniel, for the SSC Board of Overseers, to Joseph Sal-gado, Undersecretary of Energy, DOE, and Sal-gado’s response of Jul. 22, 1988.
171. B. Culliton, Request for Proposals DE-RP02-88ER40486 for the Selection of a Management and Operating Contractor for the Establishment, Management, and Initial Operation of the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory, US DOE, Chicago Operations Office.
172. I. Goodwin, Phys. Today 42, 49 (1988).
173. I. Goodwin, Letter from Boyce McDaniel, chair of BOO, to John Marburger, chair of the URA Board of Trustees, dated Oct. 26, 1988, and the enclosed attachments.
174. I. Goodwin, Proposal for the Selection of a Management and Operating Contractor for the Establishment, Management, and Initial Operation of the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory. Submitted by URA, Washington, DC (Nov. 4, 1988).
175. I. Goodwin, For more detailed discussion of these negotiations, see: L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, The Superconducting Super Colliders frontier outpost, 1983-1988, Minerva 38, 271 (2000).
176. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, The Superconducting Super Colliders frontier outpost, 1983-1988, Minerva 38, 271 (2000).
177. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Aug. 11, 1988, letter from Marilyn Lloyd, chair of the House Subcommittee on Energy, Research and Development, to Joseph Salgado, Undersecretary, DOE; an article in the Aug. 15, 1988, issue of Inside Energy, titled “DOE announcement on MandO contract for collider seen favoring URA,” discussed the concerns along those lines both in Congress and among some of the potential industrial bidders.
178. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Proposal for the Selection of a Management and Operating Contractor for the Establishment, Management, and Initial Operation of the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory. Submitted by URA, Washington, DC (Nov. 4, 1988), Vol. 1, pp. 4.1-3.
179. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of the URA Board of Trustees, Sep. 1, 1998.
180. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Minutes of the Meeting of the SSC Board of Overseers, May 7-8, 1988, O’Hare Hilton, Chicago, Illinois.
181. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Minutes of the Meeting of the SSC Board of Overseers, Aug. 19-20, 1988, O’Hare Hilton, Chicago, Illinois.
182. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Minutes of the Search Committee Meeting, Aug. 28, 1988.
183. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Minutes of the Search Committee Meeting, Aug. 30, 1988.
184. L. Hoddeson and A. Kolb, Proposal for the Selection of a Management and Operating Contractor for the Establishment, Management, and Initial Operation of the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory. Submitted by URA, Washington, DC (Nov. 4, 1988), Vol. 1, 4.1-3.