Welcome and Introductions
David Bidwell of The Perspectives Group, facilitator for the task force, welcomed members to the final meeting of the Fermilab Task Force on Public Participation. Members and other attendees introduced themselves.

Fermilab Director Mike Witherell thanked the group for their high quality work and introduced Pier Oddone. In November, Fermilab announced that Pier would become its next director in July 2005. Pier also thanked the group for their work and expressed his support for developing a public participation policy at Fermilab. Pier stated that Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, where he currently works, has had mixed success in working with the local public. He praised the draft recommendations of the task force for their reasonableness. In response to a question by a task force member, Pier explained that the directorial appointment by Universities Research Association is for five years. He noted, however, that the 2006 management contract for Fermilab would be opened for bids in the coming year.

NuMi Project Manager Greg Bock spoke to the group regarding public notification for the startup of the NuMi/MINOS project. He announced that based on advice from the task force, an internal team was formed at Fermilab to determine how to best communicate with members of the public living along the neutrino beam line, which will stretch underground from Fermilab to Northern Minnesota.

Greg explained that Fermilab would send information about the project to newspapers in communities along the beam route, providing the public with basic information, a web site address at which they can obtain additional information, and a contact number to call with questions. Regulatory agencies will also receive the information, so they can answer questions they receive regarding the project. Greg asked the task force members to send Judy Jackson questions or concerns that they think the public would have regarding the project. He also asked if any task force members would review the draft materials and offer suggestions. Tom Cuculich, John Fildes, Craig Jones, and Barbara Zeitz volunteered to review the materials.

Judy Jackson updated the group on efforts to integrate public participation into plans for developing an International Linear Collider (ILC). Judy announced that at a recent meeting in Japan, the ILC consortium agreed to add a sixth work group, focused on public communications, to their current activities. Judy explained that many of the European countries seem to understand the importance of public participation, but the concept is still new to representatives from Asian countries. She hopes to continue to advocate for public participation during the next ILC meeting, which will be held in Colorado in August 2005.

Developing a Public Participation Policy
Judy explained the process that will be used to develop a public participation policy for Fermilab. First, Judy will work with Mike Witherell and Pier Oddone to assess the task force's recommendations. Then, the recommendations will be discussed with other Fermilab managers, increasingly bringing more people into the conversation. Pier will be at Fermilab fulltime starting in April, and Judy thinks it will be important to have him involved in setting the final policy. Therefore, it's likely that the task force members will not receive final feedback on their recommendations until June 2005. At that time, Judy would like to bring the group back together to get a report on the laboratory's progress.

David reminded the group that it takes time to change an organization's culture. He added that he has already seen Fermilab making some changes in how they operate as a result of the task force's input.

Discussion of Draft Report
The majority of the task force meeting was devoted to discussing the draft report of the task force's recommendations.

A task force member suggested the report should include signatures of the members, stating it would add to the strength of the report as a consensus document. Following a discussion, the task force determined that a list of task force participants would be sufficient. In addition, John Fildes and Tom Cuculich volunteered to work on a formal transmittal letter, which could be signed by task force members at an anticipated celebration to be held after the first of the year.

David explained that most of the comments he received about the draft report concerned the scope of the recommendations. He pointed out additions to the document that stressed the task force's understanding that many Fermilab decisions would not warrant public participation and that the task force does not expect Fermilab to relinquish its decision-making authority to the public. The group further discussed the questions of when the public should be involved in decision making for a project and what are the right processes for involving the public in conceptual stages of a project. The task force agreed that determining when and how to provide public participation opportunities would always require judgment by Fermilab managers, which is why it is important to foster an institutional culture that values public input. The group also acknowledged the importance of having someone who is knowledgeable about public concerns, and is not part of a project team, approve public participation plans for a project.

The task force addressed two potential additions to the draft list of public participation principles. The group agreed to add a new principle that Fermilab decision-making processes would exhibit transparency—that stakeholders receive information on how a decision would be made, technical and regulatory constraints, and what opportunities the public would have to provide input. The task force decided that a principle stating Fermilab would meet or exceed regulatory requirements for public participation was unnecessary.

The group also discussed whether local units of government should be included in the report's list of local stakeholders. Some members of the task force stated that governmental entities already have avenues to provide input on decisions, while others stated that local government should participate in public processes. Still others pointed out that it would not be possible to exclude units of government from public participation activities. The task force agreed to include local units of government in the list.

A group member requested that ecological services, such as contributions to air and water quality, and the inspirational qualities of nature be added to the section of the proposed vision that lists local benefits of Fermilab. The other members agreed.

Approval of the Recommendations
David asked the task force members if they could support the recommendations presented in the draft report as amended. Each member in attendance voiced support for the document and agreed it should be submitted to Fermilab.

David promised to contact the task force members not in attendance and confirm their support of the
document before adding their names to the final version.

Next Steps
The revisions approved during the meeting will be made to the report and shared with the group. Then, The Perspectives Group will format the document and send the final report to the task force members and Fermilab. It will also be posted to the task force web site, www.fermilab.org.

Judy announced that Fermilab would invite the task force members back to the laboratory for a celebration, probably in mid-February. She suggested a dinner at the on-site gourmet restaurant.

David thanked the group for their participation and commitment to working together to find consensus. He stated the task force was a pleasure to work with. Task force members also expressed appreciation to their fellow members, the facilitator, and Fermilab.