OFFICE OF SCIENCE DOE/SC CD-2/3b Review of the Muon to Electron Conversion Experiment (Mu2e) Project Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory February 4,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Kurt W. Fisher Review Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy 1 Closeout Report.
Advertisements

Curriculum Changes for Cognitive Science Approved by: Selmer Bringsjord _____________ Department Head Chair of School Curriculum Committee Dean of School.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Stephen W. Meador, Chairperson DOE/SC Review Committee Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy Review.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee of Critical Decision 1 for the Accelerator Project for Upgrade of the LHC (APUL) at Brookhaven National Laboratory January.
Executive Session Director’s CD-1 Follow-Up Review of the APUL Project November 2-3, 2009 Dean A. Hoffer.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the NuMi Off-Axis Neutrino Appearance (NO A) Experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory August 9, 2011.
1 Accredited Standards Committee C63 ® - EMC Subcommittee 5 – Immunity Stephen R Whitesell SC-5 Chair 11/13/2014.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Kin Chao, Chairperson DOE/SC Review Committee Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy Review Committee.
TITLE OF PROJECT PROPOSAL NUMBER Principal Investigator PI’s Organization ESTCP Selection Meeting DATE.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the LHC ATLAS Detector Upgrade Project Brookhaven National Laboratory (review conducted at Fermi National Accelerator.
First Executive Session Fermilab Director’s/DOE Fermi Site Office's Performance Management System Review of the NOvA Project June 19-20, 2007 Frank Gines.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review of Critical Decision 1 for the Large Liquid Argon Detector for Neutron Physics (MicroBooNE) at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.
ARIES-General Page 1 Summary of Findings of Lehman Committee to Assess ITER Costing L. Waganer The Boeing Company 8-10 January 2003 ARIES Meeting at UCSD.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review of Critical Decision 2 for the Large Liquid Argon Detector for Neutron Physics (MicroBooNE) at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.
L. Greiner 1IPHC meeting – September 5-6, 2011 STAR HFT Plans for the next year A short report on review results and plans for TPC – Time Projection.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the NuMi Off-Axis Neutrino Appearance (NO A) Experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory August 9, 2011.
Office of Sponsored Programs November  Focus on What is Important  Proposal Structure  Proposal Development Process  Proposal Review.
COURSE ADDITION CATALOG DESCRIPTION To include credit hours, type of course, term(s) offered, prerequisites and/or restrictions. (75 words maximum.) 4/1/091Course.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee (CD-1) for the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE) Project at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory October 30-November.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 3. Cost Estimate Gines, Fisher 2.Are the estimated cost and proposed schedule ranges realistic, consistent with the technical and budgetary.
Creating Pathways for Education, Career and Life Success Webinar: Developing a Pathways Plan January 18, 2013 Facilitated by Jeff Fantine, Consultant.
Executive Session Director’s CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project January 18, 2012 Dean Hoffer.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Stephen W. Meador, Chairperson DOE/SC Review Committee Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy Closeout.
Mu2e WGM R. Ray Mu2e Project Manager Sept. 14, 2012.
Executive Session Director’s CD-1 Review of the Mu2e Project April 3, 2012 Elaine McCluskey.
LBNE Working Group Meeting December 20, :00– 5:00 PM Snake Pit.
Executive Session Director’s CD-1 Review of the LBNE Project September 25, 2012 Jim Yeck.
Executive Session Director’s Progress Review of the NOvA Project August 4-5, 2010 Dean A. Hoffer.
Fermilab Presentation Greg Bock, Pepin Carolan, Mike Lindgren, Elaine McCluskey 2014 SC PM Workshop July 2014.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the LHC CMS Detector Upgrade Project Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory August 26-27, 2013 Kurt Fisher Review.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Stephen W. Meador, Chairperson DOE/SC Review Committee Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy Review.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures.
Critical Design Review (CDR)
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures.
LHC CMS Upgrade Project CD-1 Alternative Selection and Cost Range Steve Webster Federal Project Director August 26, 2013 CD-1 Executive Session.
DUSEL Beamline Working Group Meeting March 09, :00 AM – Snake Pit (WH2NE) By Dean Hoffer - OPMO.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the Muon to Electron Conversion (Mu2e) Experiment Project Fermilab June 5-7, 2012 Daniel R. Lehman Review Committee.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Report on the DOE/SC CD-3b Review of the Utilities Upgrade Project (UUP) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory August 11-12,
Management February 20, Annual Review of the Muon Accelerator Program (MAP) Subcommittee members: Ron Prwivo, Ron Lutha, and Jim Kerby.
Closeout Report on the Review Committee (CD-1) for the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE) Project at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory October.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the NuMi Off-Axis Neutrino Appearance (NO A) Experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory May 8, 2012.
Anthony Indelicato DOE-Princeton Site Office February 2014 Construction Progress Review for the NSTX Upgrade Project Construction Progress Review for the.
Anthony Indelicato DOE-Princeton Site Office October 2013 Construction Progress Review for the NSTX Upgrade Project Construction Progress Review for the.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE Closeout Report by the Review Committee for the LHC-CMS Detector Upgrade Project Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory August 27, 2013.
Office of Baseline Change Proposal (BCP) Approval or Brief Presented by: Draft version Jun 16, 2015.
DOE Review of LARP – Feb 17-18, 2014 DOE Critical Decision Process Ruben Carcagno February 17,
GAO’s Cost and Schedule Assessment Guides U.S. Government Accountability Office Applied Research and Methods Cost Engineering Sciences Jason T Lee, Assistant.
Anthony Indelicato DOE-Princeton Site Office December 2012 Construction Progress Review for the NSTX Upgrade Project Construction Progress Review for the.
Executive Session Director’s Conceptual Design Review of Mu2e Project May 3-5, 2011 Jim Yeck.
Executive Session Director’s Conceptual Design Review of Muon g-2 Project June 5-7, 2013 Jon Kotcher.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE DOE/SC CD-3c Review of the Muon to Electron Conversion Experiment (Mu2e) Project Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory June 14-16, 2016.
TSG-S OMA (Open Mobile Alliance) Ad-Hoc Report Richard Robinson Chair - 3GPP2 TSG-S SC B.
ITS PMO Framework Enhancing Stakeholder Engagement & Cross Functional Transparency Jimmy Goyal June
Performance Management 2016 Conducting Performance Evaluations Office of Human Resources.
Need More Money? Grant Writing 101
Academic Year UNC Asheville
Commercial Operations Sub-Committee Update to TAC
Reporting the Course level RWR Assessment data
Welcome New IRB Members!
Professor Salary Incentive Program
RCSA Funding Proposal.
IEEE Task Group G Adopted Agenda for January 2001 Session
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS
<Project Name> Milestone Summary Report
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
Unit 5: Planning Process, IAP, and Operations Briefs
Unit 5: Planning Process, IAP, and Operations Briefs
Presentation transcript:

OFFICE OF SCIENCE DOE/SC CD-2/3b Review of the Muon to Electron Conversion Experiment (Mu2e) Project Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory February 4, 2015 Kurt Fisher Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 2 DOE EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, February 4, 2015—Comitium, Wilson Hall 8:00 a.m.DOE Executive SessionK. Fisher 8:10 a.m.Program PerspectiveT. Lavine 8:15 a.m. Federal Project Director Perspective P. Carolan 8:25 a.m. Questions 8:30 a.m.Adjourn DOE Executive Session Project and review information is available at: Username: reviewer Password: mu2ereviewer

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee Participants 3 Kurt Fisher, DOE/SC, Chairperson

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 4 DOE Organization

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 5 SC Organization

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 6 Charge Questions 1.Have the Project and the Laboratory responded satisfactorily to the recommendations of the previous DOE review? 2.Is the detailed design sufficiently mature and appropriately reviewed so that the project can continue, as planned, with the procurement and fabrication work that will be approved by CD-3b? 3.Are there any outstanding issues that need to be addressed?

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 7 Agenda

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 8 Report Outline/Writing Assignments

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 9 Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 10 Format: Closeout Presentation For Critical Decision reviews, include a specific recommendation addressing how the Committee judged the readiness for the CD, i.e.: The project is ready to proceed to CD-2; or The project is ready to proceed to CD-2, after addressing the following recommendations

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 11 Format: Final Report Please Note: Recommendations are approved by the full committee and presented at the review closeout briefing. Recommendations SHOULD NOT be changed or altered from the closeout report to the Final Report. (Use MS Word / 12pt Font) 2.1Use Section Number/Title corresponding to writing assignment list Findings – What the project told us Include a brief narrative description of technical, cost, schedule, management information provided by the project. Each subcommittee will emphasize their area of responsibility Comments – What we think about what the project told us Descriptive material assessing the findings and making observations and conclusions based on the findings. The committee’s answer to the charge questions should be contained within the text of the Comments Section. Do not number your comments Recommendations – What we think the project needs to do 1.Beginning with an action verb, provide a brief, concise, and clear statement with a due date. 2. Cost and schedule subcommittee should provide attachments for approved project cost breakdown and schedule. Management subcommittee should provide attachment for approved project organization and names of personnel.

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 12 Expectations Present closeout reports in PowerPoint. Forward your sections for each review report (in MSWord format) to Casey Clark, by Monday, February 9, 8:00 a.m. (EST).

OFFICE OF SCIENCE 13 Closeout Report on the DOE/SC CD-2/3b Review of the Muon to Electron Conversion Experiment (Mu2e) Project Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory February 4, 2015 Kurt Fisher Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Technical S. Gourlay, LBNL / Subcommittee 1 Findings Comments Recommendations 1.Have the Project and the Laboratory responded satisfactorily to the recommendations of the previous DOE review? 2.Is the detailed design sufficiently mature and appropriately reviewed so that the project can continue, as planned, with the procurement and fabrication work that will be approved by CD-3b? 3.Are there any outstanding issues that need to be addressed?

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Cost and Schedule J. Gao, DOE/ASO / Subcommittee 2 1.Have the Project and the Laboratory responded satisfactorily to the recommendations of the previous DOE review? 2.Is the detailed design sufficiently mature and appropriately reviewed so that the project can continue, as planned, with the procurement and fabrication work that will be approved by CD-3b? 3.Are there any outstanding issues that need to be addressed? Findings Comments Recommendations

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Cost and Schedule J. Gao, DOE/ASO / Subcommittee 2 PROJECT STATUS Project TypeMIE / Line Item / Cooperative Agreement CD-1Planned:Actual: CD-2Planned:Actual: CD-3Planned:Actual: CD-4Planned:Actual: TPC Percent CompletePlanned: _____%Actual: _____% TPC Cost to Date TPC Committed to Date TPC TEC Contingency Cost (w/Mgmt Reserve)$_____% to go Contingency Schedule on CD-4b______months_____% CPI Cumulative SPI Cumulative

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Management D. Green, Fermilab / Subcommittee 3 1.Have the Project and the Laboratory responded satisfactorily to the recommendations of the previous DOE review? 2.Is the detailed design sufficiently mature and appropriately reviewed so that the project can continue, as planned, with the procurement and fabrication work that will be approved by CD-3b? 3.Are there any outstanding issues that need to be addressed? Findings Comments Recommendations