How to submit a proposal

Step 1: Identify the facility where the experiment can be performed

Step 2: Contact the facility to begin a discussion

Using the appropriate emails below, state the area of research you are interested in and any other pertinent information and the director or staff member will get in touch with you.

DIII-D

• • • • orlov@fusion.gat.com

BaPSF

• • • • vincena@physics.ucla.edu

WiPPL

• • • • joseph.olson@wisc.edu (BRB)

      • nhurst@wisc.edu (MST)

MPRL

• • • •  szc0199@auburn.edu

PHASMA

• earl.scime@mail.wvu.edu

Step 3: Complete a Record of Discussion (ROD)

Facility staff would like to engage in a conversation aimed at producing a submission of the highest quality. Discussions will include the feasibility of the experiment, equipment required, estimated time and so on.  Download the 2025 Record of Discussion form (Doc, PDF) to use a basis for this discussion. This document will be included as part of your final proposal submission. 

The initial email and resulting conversation can occur anytime of the year.

Step 4: Prepare your proposal document

You may use the provided 2025 proposal template (LaTeX/Overleaf) as a guide or create your own following the guidelines below:

The length of the narrative portion of the proposal (i.e., excluding cover page) should not exceed five U.S. letter-size pages, including figures and references, with a minimum of 11-point main font size. The cover page should include the title of the proposal, the abstract, and the names and institutions of the proposers. This is to easily remove identifying information for the anonymous review process. Please also avoid using your and your collaborators’ names in the proposal narrative to allow for a fair, anonymous review process.

Step 5: Submit your proposal package

The completed proposal package should be sent by email to Steve Vincena (vincena@physics.ucla.edu) with "Joint call for runtime proposals package" as the subject. 

The package must include the Record of Discussion (filled and signed by both the proposer and the facility representatives) and the proposal document.

Please contact Dr. Vincena if you do not receive an email confirming receipt of your proposal within one working day of submission. 

The deadline for submitting the proposals is September 19, 2025.

Step 6: Wait for review process to complete

Proposals will be reviewed based on the Intellectual Merit in advancing the frontiers of plasma physics which spans a broad range of applications such as solar physics, astrophysics, magnetosphere, magnetic confinement, implosion, low temperature, and industrial plasmas. Proposals will also be considered in terms of Technical Approach, and team and facility readiness as evaluated through a Record of Discussion between the proposer and the appropriate facility. Reviewers will be asked to provide scores for these criteria as follows...

1. Intellectual Merit: What are the prospects for fundamental advances, new approaches, understanding, or valuable results? What is the uniqueness, originality, and scientific merit compared with other efforts? What would be the impact on the field if successful?

2. Technical Approach: How well developed is the idea? Is it logical and/or feasible and/or innovative? Is it well thought out? What is the likelihood of achieving valid conclusions or success? Are potential problems recognized and alternative strategies considered?

3. Record of Discussion (ROD):  Records of discussion between the facility and proposal team will indicate facility resources required.  The Director of each facility will determine the best person(s) in their facility as a point of contact for the ROD. Key questions are the feasibility of the project, equipment required, and the  level of technical support needed from the facility. How well prepared are the proposal PI and team? 

Review panels for each facility consisting of plasma science experts from the community will review all proposals in an anonymized process. All proposals and RODs will be stripped of any information that could identify the proposer and team personnel prior to peer review.  Scores for each of the criteria above and reviewer comments will be collated and sent to the appropriate facilities. The allocation of runtime for each facility will be determined by individual facility Directors and staff. Final decision letters along with reviews (also anonymous) will be sent out to individual proposers.  Proposals can be no longer than 5 pages excluding the title page, abstract, record of discussion, and references.

Review panel meetings are expected to take place in November 2025. An email will be sent out to all proposers when this process has been completed and the final review report has been passed on to the facilities. 

Step 7: Be notified of final decisions

This call is a service designed to gather peer-review feedback on a number of important criteria to be passed on to each of the participating magnetized plasma facilities. The final allocation of runtime for each facility will be determined by the facility director and staff and may not weigh each of the criteria outlined in Step 6 equally. You may contact the facilities to determine what considerations will be made for final decisions. 

Final decision letters will be sent out to individual proposers by the facilities with the relevant panel review comments and scores. We will be in communication with the facilities throughout the process so they are prepared when the MagNetUS proposal review panel has concluded and these decision letters can be sent out in a timely manner.