NOνA NOνA Bylaws Committee Interim Report May 16, 2004 Dave Ayres for the Bylaws Committee Committee Members Dave Ayres (Chair) Debbie Harris Sacha Kopp Scott Menary Jeff Nelson Mark Thomson

NOνA NOνA Collaboration Meeting May 16, 2004 D. Ayres Page 2 Bylaws Committee Charge, Input, Meetings Charge The committee is charged with formulating a preliminary plan for the collaboration organization to be discussed at the May meeting, with proposed detailed bylaws to be presented at and voted on at the following meeting. Looked at examples from other collaborations: MINOS, CLEO, BaBar, CDF, D0, SNO… Telephone Meetings on April 26 and May 10, plus discussion Worked through three drafts, culminating in the current version

NOνA NOνA Collaboration Meeting May 16, 2004 D. Ayres Page 3 Basic Features of Draft Institutional Board: One member from every institution, except Fermilab has 2 «Eventually treat small institutions differently «Chair elected for 1 year term «Runs collaboration-wide elections for CoSpokespersons and Executive Committee «Decides membership issues and Bylaws Amendments Two CoSpokespersons (with no Deputy) «Elected for interleaved 2-year terms «Responsible for scientific, financial and organizational policy Executive Committee: 7 elected members, including 1 “young member,” plus CoSpokespersons and IB Chair «7 members elected for interleaved 2-year terms «Advises CoSpokespersons on policy issues «Decides publication policy, appoints Speakers’ Bureau Elections: by “instant runoff method” «Voters list candidates in order of preference; iterate count until one gets majority «Voters chosen by each institutions according to qualification guidelines Authorship policy: to be decided later, by IB

NOνA NOνA Collaboration Meeting May 16, 2004 D. Ayres Page 4 Possible Bylaws Issues Should the initial Bylaws distinguish between small and large institutions for purposes of IB voting, or should we leave this for the IB to decide later? «Draft says IB does it later. Should the Bylaws have explicit rules about conflict of interest restrictions on CoSpokespersons and Executive Committee members? « Draft does not mention conflict of interest issues. How should the Bylaws define “senior membership” in the Collaboration? «Draft says that senior members, who want to join after their institution has been admitted, must be individually approved by the IB. «Draft defines senior members as those with permanent appointments or appointments that are expected to be renewed indefinitely. Should the Bylaws provide for Collaboration-wide election of important leadership positions (e.g., Analysis Coordinators) other than CoSpokesperson and EC members? «Draft says that CoSpokespersons and the EC will create such positions, and make appointments, after soliciting advice from the Collaboration.