Access to the CLF’s facilities is determined by three Facility Access Panels (FAPs):
- High Power Laser FAP
- Artemis FAP
- Octopus and Ultra FAP
They consist of 8 to 10 members per panel, with at least two experts from the UK research community, up to four international experts and at least one non-facility research scientist on each panel. Each FAP convenes once or twice a year to peer review all proposals submitted during calls for access.
The remit of the FAPs is to:
- recommend to the Director of the CLF a balanced science programme based upon the criteria of scientific excellence, alignment with UKRI, STFC and CLF strategies and timeliness (all within the bounds of technical feasibility and safety implications) and, as appropriate, the potential economic impact
- assess the appropriateness of the number of weeks requested for the experiments proposed
- identify after each proposal round scientific trends and facility development issues (including software development) which are of relevance to the CLF instrument suite and to report those through the FAP chairperson
The work of the FAPs is covered by the Code of Practice adopted by STFC to embrace the Seven Principles of Public Life. In particular, panel members should declare all conflicts of interest. Where relevant, members are expected to leave the room during consideration of these proposals, and also if proposals from their own departments are being considered. The FAP Chair is responsible for deciding on potential conflicts of interest where these are raised.
All papers relating to the proposal review are treated as confidential and are not discussed outside the meeting. Panel discussions and the results of the peer review are also kept confidential.
The CLF FAPs peer-review all submitted proposals and agree an overall grade for each one:
- proposals are scored out of 7
- a score of 5 and above is classed as Excellent
Excellent scores are awarded to proposals where the work is at the leading edge internationally, addresses all of the assessment criteria, meeting the majority of them to an exceptional level, and that is likely to have a significant impact on the field.
The CLF is, however, oversubscribed, with many more proposals received and weeks requested than can be accepted and allocated.
