SINCE my name has been mentioned in Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy`s article ( April 8) and in the HEC`s response (April 10) to that, I wish to clarify the position I had taken as director-general of the National Centre for Physics. First, my letter, as quoted by the HEC has an important omission “In the meeting it was felt that one needs to identify more users for this facility within Pakistan besides the ones who presented their proposals for the usage of Pelletron in the symposium”.

This, in fact, is the crux of the matter. Nobody, including Dr Hoodbhoy, was against buying the accelerator per se. But what we were concerned about was whether one can make a sensible programme for its use.

It is important to know that the Pelletron, whose earlier version was the Van de Graaf, is now mainly used as a service facility for research in materials science, isotope analysis, etc. It is not used for research in nuclear physics any more.

Therefore, one should know about its potential users and their needs. This is why NCP organised a one-day symposium on Sept 8, 2005. Although I am quoted as saying that we should try and do our best to find users, I was not involved in the subsequent implementation and running of the project.

Now that the Pelletron is being installed, the question arises as to whether the concerns shown by us in the meeting, held over 30 months ago, have been addressed. In fact, this was the main point of Dr Hoodbhoy`s article. Perhaps the HEC should ask the persons involved in the project to clarify this.

Finally, the amount quoted by Dr Hoodbhoy is correct since one should include the cost of the associated laboratory (165+ 75 + 164 ), which then adds up to about 400 million.

RIAZUDDIN
Islamabad