Mu2e WGM 2/22/2011 R. Ray Mu2e Project manager

CD-1 Our sole focus is on CD-1 and in particular, the Director’s Review scheduled for April 3-5. To be ready for the review we must complete the following:  Cost and Schedule, BOEs  CDR  Other Project Documentation  Development of cost range  Respond to recommendations from Independent Design Review  Prepare presentation materials A lot of work still remains to be ready. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM2

Cost & Schedule Development R. Ray - Mu2e WGM3 WBS & WBS Dictionary Resources: Labor hours Materials FY12$ Schedule: Activities Durations Predecessors WBS & WBS Dictionary Resources: Labor hours Materials FY12$ Schedule: Activities Durations Predecessors Resources Activities, Durations Burdened/ Escalated Cost

Cost, Schedule, BOEs Likely to come down to the wire. Change of resource names set us back. Still trying to catch up on BOEs. Costs entered into P6 in $FY12. Labor entered in hours. 1 FTE = 1768 hrs. Off project tasks will be tracked in Mu2e schedule using milestones. Calorimeter scope divided between INFN and DOE (~85/15)  DOE pays for ~20% of crystals, FEE and calibration system.  Track INFN work using milestones  Most likely cost is the cost for the DOE scope (fully loaded including contingency)  Low end of the range is 0  High end of the range is full cost to build the calorimeter in the US. Initial set of milestones identified and split into tiers. Still have to look at the distribution in time and will likely identify a few more. Still need Milestone Dictionary. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM4

CDR Requirements (from DOE O 413.3b) A Conceptual Design Report (CDR) shall be developed that includes: A clear and concise description of the alternatives analyzed, the basis for the alternative selected, how the alternative meets the approved mission need the functions and requirements that define the alternative and demonstrate the capability for success,  Programmatic requirements discussed in Acquisition Strategy and referenced in CDR chapter 2.  Description of how design flows from Mission Need to requirements documents and the alternative analysis  Discussion of alternative analysis, selection and satisfaction of requirements in subsystem chapters. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM5 Mission Need Statement Mu2e Scientific Proposal Subsystem Definition Requirements Evaluate Alternatives Set of Selected Alternatives Design Reviews Simulations

CDR Requirements Facility performance requirements  Included in the Conventional Construction chapter Planning standards and life-cycle cost assumptions.  Mu2e-doc-524. Recently updated for new scope. Summarized in CDR. Includes power, cryogens, maintenance, D&D. The CDR should also clearly and concisely describe the KPPs that will form the basis of the PB at CD-2.  Included in PEP and CDR o Capability to slow extract 8 GeV protons from the Debuncher Ring and transport them through the Muon Campus External Beamline to the Mu2e Production Target. o Solenoid system has been cooled down, powered and demonstrated to run at nominal field strength. o Tracks from cosmic ray muons have been observed in the detector and recorded by the data acquisition system. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM6

CDR Mature draft was shown to the IDR team in May. Significant scope changes result in necessary changes to CDR in many places.  Solenoid and Accelerator chapters essentially being re-written  Significant changes to conventional construction  Smaller number of changes to other sections Solenoid fields have changed a little, so we are re-running backgrounds and sensitivities. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM7

CDR Scope Description R. Ray - Mu2e WGM8 New front end of the CDR describes the scope of the Mu2e project and the scope of off project contributions that are required by Mu2e

CD-1 Requirements Approve an Acquisition Strategy with endorsement from OECM  Draft sent to Headquarters for comment Approve a preliminary Project Execution Plan (PEP)  Draft set to Headquarters for comment Establish and charter an Integrated Project Team  Established over a year ago. Meets regularly. Comply with the One-for-One Replacement legislation  Space offset received in 2009 (Mu2e-doc-1051). Enough for Mu2e but not enough for Muon Campus. Planned demolition before Mu2e construction begins will make up for shortfall. Identify general Safeguards and Security requirements for the recommended alternative.  Security Vulnerability Assessment document (Mu2e-doc-676). o Theft, vandalism, computer security are the primary issues. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM9

CD-1 Requirements Document High Performance and Sustainable Building provisions and Sustainable Environmental Stewardship considerations in the Conceptual Design Report, Acquisition Strategy, and/or PEP, as appropriate.  Strategy described in PEP and CDR. Because facility will generally be unoccupied we don’t have to comply with LEED Gold standard. Will instead comply with LEED Guiding Principles. Conduct a Design Review of the conceptual design with reviewers external to the project.  IDR completed in May. Subsystems with significant technical changes due to scope reduction will be reviewed for technical feasibility as part of Directors Review in April. Complete a Conceptual Design Report.  Nearly there. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM10

CD-1 Requirements - Risk Develop a Risk Management Plan (RMP) and complete an initial risk assessment of a recommended alternative.  Risk Management Plan completed over a year ago. Detailed Risk registry exists. Undergoing final update before review. Includes information that will be used to generate cost range. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM11 From DOE Risk Management Guide - DOE G

CD-1 Requirements - Safety An Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) must be in place to ensure that potential hazards are identified and appropriately addressed throughout the project (refer to DOE P 450.4). It will be used to systematically integrate safety into management and work processes at all levels.  Project ES&H coordinator appointed.  Oversight by Divisions & Sections  Safety integrated into Lab management at all levels. o Project embedded in Lab’s line Management Prepare a Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report  Done. Updated for new scope. Under review by FSO. Establish a Quality Assurance Program  Mu2e-doc-677  Custom QA/QC plan tailored to each L2 subsystem discussed in CDR subsystem chapters R. Ray - Mu2e WGM12

Fermilab Integrated Safety Management for Mu2e Project R. Ray - Mu2e WGM13 Define Work Scope Provide Feedback Perform Work Within Controls Develop & Implement Hazard Controls Analyze Hazards Encompasses R&D, safety, environment, security, quality, cyber security Makes ES&H and quality intrinsic to every job and project NEPA process for Mu2e addresses potential impacts of project execution and subsequent operation Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report catalogues hazards in all phases of project, and provides a solid basis for project design, planning, and execution

Additional Documents R. Ray - Mu2e WGM14

Cost Range We will use our Risk/Opportunity register to generate a cost range R. Ray - Mu2e WGM15 High End = Most likely cost +Cost Low End = Most likely cost + Cost This approach approved by Lehman’s Office However, we have many more threats than opportunities, so most likely cost will be closer to low end than high end in this approach. Need to work harder to identify more opportunities Most likely cost = base + contingency

Examples From the Mu2e Risk Registry Potential Problem:  Tevatron HTS leads in storage do not work Cause:  HTS leads, in storage for the past 10 years, no longer function Consequence:  Worst case, would be if the power leads failed to perform. In which case the leads would have be redesigned and fabricated Mitigation:  We will test all of the leads early to assure that the leads in fact do work. Probability/Impact/Risk  Low/High/High Cost Impact:  $1M R. Ray - Mu2e WGM16

Examples R. Ray - Mu2e WGM17 From the Mu2e Risk Registry Potential Opportunity:  DOE advances project funding profile, providing money sooner than anticipated. Cause:  Decision by DOE based on requirement to manage their entire program in response to funding changes, changes in priority, delays in other projects, etc. Consequence/Benefit:  Overall schedule is accelerated, which has the potential to reduce costs and add flexibility to the project. Mitigation:  Always have a plan for advancing the schedule if money is available sooner. Probability/Impact/Risk  Moderate/Moderate/Moderate Cost Impact:  Burn rate is about $800k/month. Assume a 3 month schedule advance.  $2400k

Schedule to get to CD-1 R. Ray - Mu2e WGM18 We are here Materials posted by March 16

RLS Schedule R. Ray - Mu2e WGM19