Submitting a proposal is the first step to access beam time at SSRL. Proposals are peer reviewed and rated by the SSRL Proposal Review Panel (PRP) on a scale from 1 (highest) to 5 (lowest). Peer reviewers evaluate proposals based on scientific merit, particularly the intellectual impact of the work on the field and the value of using synchrotron radiation to accomplish the proposed work. To ensure consistency in the review process, reviewers use the following rating criteria:
1.0-1.9 Excellent: A well-chosen problem or important research that has a good chance of producing a major contribution to fundamental knowledge or an important technological development. Should be given highest priority for beam time. (The most compelling proposals with the greatest likelihood of a high profile publication should be rated 1.0-1.4. A rating of 1.5 or better is generally needed to access the most oversubscribed beam lines at SSRL.)
2.0-2.9 Very Good: A worthwhile problem or research that may lead to advances in fundamental knowledge or technology. Should receive beam time if at all possible.
3.0-3.9 Good: A reasonable problem, but less than forefront. Beam time should be considered only after the above two categories have received time.
4.0-4.9 Fair: Significant deficiencies appear in the proposal. Successful completion of the research is doubtful. Should probably not receive time.
5.0 Poor: Poorly written proposal or major scientific issues that should not receive beam time.
The PRP also considers the amount of total beam time requested and recommends beam time allocations. Successful proposals are eligble to request and may be awarded beam time on SSRL beam lines, with priority given to the highest rated proposals and those which demonstrate efficient and productive use of beam time within their beam time allocation. We have three proposal calls per year with one on-site PRP meeting at SSRL annually. Access Policy
The work of the PRP is accomplished with five subpanels:
- BIO - The biology panel reviews proposals for imaging, x-ray spectroscopic studies, small-angle x-ray scattering experiments, and crystallography of biologically important samples, including bioinorganic systems.
- CHEMCAT - The chemistry and catalysis panel reviews proposals for all aspects of chemistry and catalysis. The catalytic science covers heterogeneous, homogeneous and electro-catalysis from model systems to fully formulated catalysts, while the chemical science covers all areas of fundamental and applied chemistry. The techniques include x-ray absorption, x-ray emission, and ambient pressure photoemission spectroscopies, small angle and wide-angle x-ray scattering, imaging, and transmission x-ray microscopy. Often these studies are conducted in-situ and operando.
- MAT1 - The materials-1 panel reviews proposals for hard x-ray materials science, including soft materials, materials for energy generation and storage, structural studies, complex fluids, synthetic polymers, batteries, and organic electronics. Techniques include diffraction, scattering, small-angle x-ray scattering, microscopy or tomography, and any of the x-ray absorption or emission spectroscopies. Often these studies are conducted in-situ and operando.
- MAT2 - The materials-2 panel reviews proposals for solid state physics and materials science, including electronic structure of solids, surfaces and interfaces, using UV and soft x-ray sources at SSRL. Examples include angle-resolved and core-level photoelectron spectroscopies, x-ray absorption and x-ray magnetic dichroism, in-situ x-ray absorption, x-ray emission and photoemission.
- MEIS - The molecular environmental and interface science panel reviews proposals for imaging, spectroscopy, diffraction and scattering studies of natural samples and those that are designed to be environmentally and geologically relevant. Such samples are often characterized by their high degree of spatial, chemical and structural heterogeneity across a wide range of chemical concentrations. The MEIS panel considers materials of biogeochemical origin or transformation and investigations of microbiologic soil chemistry and geochemistry.
| BIO | CHEMCAT | MAT1 | MAT2 | MEIS |
|
Tina Iverson
Vanderbilt University, Pharmacology & Biochemistry Nashville, TN, USA |
Pierre Kennepohl (Chair) |
Michael Chabinyc (Chair)
UC Santa Barbara, Materials Santa Barbara, CA, USA |
John Freeland (Chair)
Argonne National Lab, Advanced Photon Source Argonne, IL, USA
|
Jeff Catalano
Washington University, Earth & Planetary Sciences St. Louis, MO, USA |
|
Kelly Lee
University of Washington, Medicinal Chemistry Seattle, WA, USA |
Florian Meirer Utrecht University, Inorganic Chemistry & Catalysis Utrecht, The Netherlands |
Peter Chupas
Argonne National Lab, Photon Sciences Argonne, IL, USA |
Victor Henrich
Yale University, Applied Physics New Haven, CT, USA |
Jon Chorover
University of Arizona, Soil Water & Env Sciences Tucson, AZ, USA |
|
Lawrence Que, Jr.
University of Minnesota, Department of Chemistry Minneapolis, MN, USA |
Janos Szanyi Pacific Northwest National Lab, Richland, WA, USA |
Tim Fister
Argonne National Lab, Chemical Science & Engineering Argonne, IL, USA |
Anthony Van Buuren
Lawrence Livermore National Lab, Nanoscale Integration Science & Technology Livermore, CA, USA |
Owen Duckworth
North Carolina State University, Soil Science Raleigh, NC, USA |
|
Martina Ralle
Oregon Health Sciences University, Molecular and Medical Genetics Portland, OR, USA |
Junko Yano Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, MBIB Berkeley, CA, USA |
Ben Ocko
Brookhaven National Lab, National Synchrotron Light Source II Upton, NY, USA |
|
Dean Hesterberg (Chair)
North Carolina State University, Soil Science Raleigh, NC, USA |
|
Ron Stenkamp (Chair)
University of Washington, Biological Structure Seattle, WA, USA |
Dilworth (Dula) Parkinson
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, Advanced Light Source Berkeley, CA, USA |
|
Ingrid Pickering
University of Saskatchewan, Molecular Environmental Science Saskatoon, Canada |
