Hello spin planners--I discussed the executive summary with Tom Kirk,
and he has chosen to keep the personal approach that I mentioned
at the last telephone meeting: the document will be submitted by
Tom to DOE.  In particular, he was against using a cover letter to
do this because he would like to make the BNL position clear to
any reader.  His version of the executive summary is attached--
the word file is just the summary, and the pdf file shows his edits,
along with moving the history that had been in the executive summary
to an introduction of the document.

I have just sent the word file to DOE to ask their advice on its
coverage.  I also said that we expect to complete the document
the week of Feb. 7-11 (Tom had told them 1-2 weeks late).

Basically, Tom's edits introduce an advocacy into the executive
summary, versus taking a "factual" approach.  His added statements
are completely supportive of the 10 physics weeks/year plan.

					Gerry


-----Original Message-----
From: Gerry Bunce [mailto:bunce@bnl.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 1:46 PM
To: Brad Tippens; Gulshan Rai
Cc: Gerry Bunce; Tom Kirk; Tom Ludlam; Derek Lowenstein; Thomas Roser;
Sam Aronson; Tim Hallman; William A. Zajc
Subject: draft of executive summary for RHIC spin plan


Hello Gulshan and Brad--I have attached a draft of the executive
summary for the RHIC spin plan that we are developing.
We would appreciate your comments--are we covering what you would
like to see?
We have on the web the work toward making the plan including
an outline and partial draft (the executive summary that you will
find there is longer--we have decided to move some history to
the introduction):
http://spin.riken.bnl.gov/rsc/
Any suggestions or comments are very welcome.
Please note that the attached is a draft.  As Tom Kirk sent to
you, we expect that we will complete the document the week of
Feb. 7-11.
					Gerry