HiGrade WP2 & WP4 Coordination & Governance Brian Foster (Hamburg/DESY/Oxford & GDE) HiGrade Meeting LAL/Orsay 12/10/11.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Module N° 4 – ICAO SSP framework
Advertisements

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Data Services Task Team Proposal Discussion at WGISS #25 February, 2008 Lyndon R. Oleson U.S. Geological.
1 Budgets and Budgetary Control Prepared and Presented By Gladstone K. Hlalakuhle.
UNSW Strategic Educational Development Grants
CFS TIME SCHEDULE EDR - CFS Europe – Kick-Off Meetings Kick-Off Meetings, CERN, 3, 4, 5 September ILC PROJECT ENGINEERING DESIGN REPORT CFS Europe.
Chapter 7: Key Process Areas for Level 2: Repeatable - Arvind Kabir Yateesh.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
Proposal for a Constitution for MICE A Plan for Discussion P Dornan G Gregoire Y Nagashima A Sessler.
Peter Defranceschi ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability An Introduction European Commission GPP Training Toolkit.
OSIAM4HE Proposed org structure Authored by the strategy and organization team.
1 Our Expertise and Commitment – Driving your Success An Introduction to Transformation Offering November 18, 2013 Offices in Boston, New York and Northern.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Outline Learning Objectives The Mission Report Purpose and objectives What is not needed? Evolution of the.
Module N° 8 – SSP implementation plan. SSP – A structured approach Module 2 Basic safety management concepts Module 2 Basic safety management concepts.
EU actions on Web- Accessibility Funka Accessibility Days
CHAPTER#08 MANAGEMENT OF TECHNICAL PROPOSALS AND SPECIFICATIONS Lecture No. 08 Course: Engineering Management 19 april 2013 MED DEPARTMENT, U.E.T TAXILA.
Draft Collaboration Model for HLLHC-DS HLLHC-DS Meeting 20th July 2010.
Nick Walker, Brian Foster LAL, Orsay WP2: Coordination with the GDE.
LCFOA Meeting at SLAC Linear Collider Forum of the Americas 1 LINEAR COLLIDER FORUM OF THE AMERICAS CONVENTIONAL FACILITIES OVERVIEW Victor R. Kuchler.
Integrated Risk Management Charles Yoe, PhD Institute for Water Resources 2009.
April_2010 Partnering initiatives at country level Proposed partnering process to build a national stop tuberculosis (TB) partnership.
Atsuto Suzuki. 1. Toward ILC Construction : Japanese Activities 1. Toward ILC Construction : Japanese Activities.
International Accelerator Facility for Beams of Ions and Antiprotons at Darmstadt CBM Collaboration meeting Status Interim MoU J. Eschke, GSI.
Business plan Name: Date: Author: Version:. business plan This section is usually the first in your business plan but can be finalized when the other.
CLIC Implementation Studies Ph. Lebrun & J. Osborne CERN CLIC Collaboration Meeting addressing the Work Packages CERN, 3-4 November 2011.
24-Aug-11 ILCSC -Mumbai Global Design Effort 1 ILC: Future after 2012 preserving GDE assets post-TDR pre-construction program.
CLIC-ILC WG Oxford, Jan 10 Slide 1 CLIC – ILC General Issues WG, Update BackgroundChargeStatusPlans.
Report from ILCSC Shin-ichi Kurokawa KEK ILCSC Chair GDE meeting at Frascati December 7, 2005.
Slide 1 Recognition of Professional Qualifications in the European Single Market for Services Henri Olivier FEE Secretary General FEE (Fédération des Experts.
The fourth Baseline Technical Review (BTR) - Conventional Facilities and Siting March 2012 All changes made to the CFS 2007 Reference Design during.
Activities and news Last meeting: 2015 CERN budget allocations as expected, now distributed on accounts Annual report done, and MTP (Medium Term Plan)
West Contra Costa USD Presentation to the Facilities Subcommittee November 13, 2012.
Welcome and Presentation of Charge Steve Holmes Accelerator Advisory Committee ( May 10-12, 2005.
1 Global Design Effort: Controls & LLRF Controls & LLRF Working Group: Tuesday Session (29 May 07) John Carwardine Kay Rehlich.
1 Response to Financial and Fiscal Commission Submission for The Division of Revenue 2010/2011 Presentation to Select Committee on Finance 06 August 2009.
International Accounting Standards An older set of standards stating how particular types of transactions and other events should be reflected in financial.
Global Design Effort - CFS DESY Accelerator Design and Integration Meeting 1 ACCELERATOR INTEGRATION AND DESIGN MEETING CONVENTIONAL FACILITIES.
1 Future Circular Collider Study Preparatory Collaboration Board Meeting September 2014 R-D Heuer Global Future Circular Collider (FCC) Study Goals and.
How the NCSX Project Does Business
Preparation Plan. Objectives Describe the role and importance of a preparation plan. Describe the key contents of a preparation plan. Identify and discuss.
Detector Cooperation with CLIC PAC Pohang meeting November 3, 2009 F. Richard LAL/Orsay 11/03/20091.
UPDATE ON GAVI ALLIANCE, THE GLOBAL FUND AND WORLD BANK COLLABORATIVE EFFORT FOR MORE EFFECTIVE HSS SEPTEMBER, 2009 Exploring a potential common platform.
CLIC project 2012 The Conceptual Design Report for CLIC completed – presented in SPC, ECFA and numerous meetings and conferences, also providing basis.
ILC 2007 Global Design Effort 1 Planning Damping Rings Activities in the Engineering Design Phase Andy Wolski Cockcroft Institute/University of Liverpool.
The ILC Outlook Barry Barish HEP 2005 Joint ECFA-EPS Lisbon, Portugal 23-July-05.
GEO Implementation Mechanisms Giovanni Rum, GEO Secretariat GEO Work Programme Symposium Geneva, 2-4 May 2016.
CLIC Organogram CLIC Collab. Board L.Rivkin MoU with annexes describing coll. efforts (note: in reality more complicated) CLIC SC (Stapnes) Repr. from.
CIL vs S106 The Regulation 123 list. The levy cannot be expected to pay for all of the infrastructure required: – 10-30% – Consider CIL as just one part.
CFS / Global – 09 June, 2010 PM Report: SB2009: –4 two-day workshops form the core of ‘TOP LEVEL CHANGE CONTROL’ –  as advised by AAP, PAC and etc –Written.
Main Linac Technology (MLT) Meeting To be held through WebEx July 13, 2007.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
ILC MAC April 07 Global Design Effort 1 European Regional R&D plan Brian Foster (Oxford & GDE) MAC Meeting.
Info-Tech Research Group1 Info-Tech Research Group, Inc. Is a global leader in providing IT research and advice. Info-Tech’s products and services combine.
AUDIT STAFF TRAINING WORKSHOP 13 TH – 14 TH NOVEMBER 2014, HILTON HOTEL NAIROBI AUDIT PLANNING 1.
CMGT 410 aid Education Begins/cmgt410aid.com
Report on plan to produce an Engineering Design Report
Global Climate Change Alliance: Intra-ACP Programme
Conventional Facilities and Siting Global Group (CFS) SLAC Update December 10, 2007 Acknowledgment: Jerry Aarons, Clay Corvin, and Esther Kweon Fred Asiri.
CMGT 410 Education for Service-- snaptutorial.com.
CMGT 410 HOMEWORK Perfect Education/ cmgt410homework.com.
CMGT 410 Teaching Effectively-- snaptutorial.com.
Guidance notes for Project Manager
The Strategic Information Technology Formulation
Yasuhiro Okada, Executive Director, KEK
SRH & HIV Linkages Agenda
Project Management Process Groups
The EDR phase Discussion Session
GPP Training Toolkit An Introduction European Commission
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
SWA Progress Review Initial Framing
Concept paper on the assessment of WFD River Basin Management Plans
Presentation transcript:

HiGrade WP2 & WP4 Coordination & Governance Brian Foster (Hamburg/DESY/Oxford & GDE) HiGrade Meeting LAL/Orsay 12/10/11

Now we have some clarity on post-2012 plans, I am about to start visiting funding authorities to get their support for European involvement. Tomorrow I meet head of IN2P3, J. Martino and his team including E. Auge. I will make a presentation on ILC plans to plenary ECFA in November. WP2 activity B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 Global Design Effort 2

Major European event of the year was joint ILC-CLIC ILCWS in Granada last month. Great success with 366 registrants (479 last year in CERN). Lots of evidence of collaboration between CLIC and ILC communities to produce a linear collider community. JF will report on this to the next ECFA meeting at CERN. WP2 activity B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 Global Design Effort 3

Work in the past year has been exclusively concentrated on the writing of the Project Implementation Planning (PIP) document. This contains the Governance work discussed at last year’s meeting and as presented at ICHEP Paris. In fact further work arising from the PIP has changed one of two aspects of the previous document, which I will comment on as they arise. WP4 activity B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 Global Design Effort 4

A complication in drawing up the PIP has been the existence of the Comprehensive Planning Guidance Document (CPDG). This is more comprehensive than the PIP, and certainly than the Paris governance report. However there is large overlap and since the CPDG was drawn up ~ independent of PIP and in parallel, there are potential contradictions and differences of emphasis that need to be addressed. WP4 activity B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 Global Design Effort 5

In fact, this reconciliation is currently in progress – I have a version which tries to combine the documents, but this hasn’t yet been through PIP Editorial Board (MH, BF, EP), so is very preliminary. Nevertheless, I outline here the current state of the joint document with health warning that this is certainly not yet agreed. WP4 activity B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 Global Design Effort 6

Report to ICHEP Paris B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 7 Global Design Effort

PIP Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 8 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities

PIP Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 9 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities (written by BB) (essentially the Paris document)

Governance B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 10 Global Design Effort One or two changes since Paris. Further work with ITER led us to understand that what ITER defined as Common Fund was much more limited than what we had assumed. Therefore our conclusion that we needed more was not really justifiable – so related statement in Paris document has been watered down and “ > 20%” omitted.

PIP Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 11 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities (written by BB) (essentially the Paris document) (modified to emphasise benefits to host)

PIP Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 12 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities (written by BB) (essentially the Paris document) (written by NW; “juste retour” modified) (modified to emphasise benefits to host)

“In kind” B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 13 Global Design Effort Additional funding model, “in-kind” modified by “juste retour” inserted. More explanation of what was meant by “juste retour” added

“In kind” B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 14 Global Design Effort Better value for money for the project, as well as improved management oversight and control, could be achieved by modifying the in-kind scheme to introduce the flexibility of a total cash model driven by market forces while retaining the ability for countries to provide parts of the project as deliverables in-kind in a modified “juste retour”. Section 2.14 discussed the mechanism by which WBS items could be allocated to bidders. Member states should be strongly urged to make bids for all WBS packages for which they have the technical competence to deliver, totaling well beyond their intended financial contribution. The project management can then allocate packages so as to maximize the value for money, and minimize the risk, for the project, up to the maximum contribution offered by each member state. If a country is particularly keen to be allocated a given package, it may even be willing to bid less than the nominal value in the formal cost estimate, thereby reducing the cost of the project. This introduces an element of market competition into a substantially in-kind model. It may help to understand this proposal to note that, In the limit that all countries only bid for the minimum number of projects to saturate their agreed financial contribution, this model reduces to the standard in-kind procedure; in the limit that all member states bid for all parts of the project, it is essentially a cash model with complete “juste retour”.

PIP Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 15 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities (written by BB) (essentially the Paris document) (written by NW; “juste retour” modified) (modified to emphasise benefits to host)

CPDG Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 16 Global Design Effort Table of Contents Preamble1 0.CPDG Principles (IL0)4 1.Top-level Management (IL-1, GD-0)8 1.1Assessment of possible model examples Institutional models from legal and procurement perspectives Representative models for the ILC Model 3: ITER-like model Model 4: Multinational Laboratory model14 1.2Desired process for establishing top-level management structure21 1.3Issues that require consensus by research community before formal intergovernmental level process starts Legal aspects21 1.5Possible timeline for organizational evolution21 2.Siting - Site Selection Process (IL-2)22 2.1Critical considerations22 2.2Possible scenario toward site selection23 3.Sharing Models (GD-1)34 4.Management Models on Accelerator and Facilities (GD-2)35 5.Siting - Technical (GD-3)36 6.Accelerator Construction Process - Design Preparation Stage (GD-4)37 7.Accelerator Construction Process - Construction Stage (GD-5)38 8.Accelerator Construction Process - Conventional Facilities (GD-6)39 9.Management Model on Detectors and Experiments (RD-1)40 10.Siting - Living Environment (RD-2)41 11.Detector Construction Process - Design and Preparation Stage (RD-3)42 12.Detector Construction Process - Construction Stage (RD-4)43 13.Detector Construction Process - Conventional Facilities (RD-5)44 Appendix A: CPDG Outline45 Appendix B: Comparison of Organizational Models49

PIP+CPDG B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 17 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Introduction & General Principles Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities (§0, §1 of CPDG)

PIP + CPDG B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 18 Global Design Effort Contents Executive Summary Introduction & General Principles Governance Funding Models Project Management Host Responsibilities Siting Issues In-Kind Contribution Models Industrialisation and Mass Production of the SCRF Linac Components Project Schedule Future Technical Activities (§0, §1 of CPDG) (“MoU model” (appendix) + personnel policy added)

PIP + CPDG B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 19 Global Design Effort Appendix 1 – MoU model (model 4/5 of CPDG)

CPDG Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 20 Global Design Effort Table of Contents Preamble1 0.CPDG Principles (IL0)4 1.Top-level Management (IL-1, GD-0)8 1.1Assessment of possible model examples Institutional models from legal and procurement perspectives Representative models for the ILC Model 3: ITER-like model Model 4: Multinational Laboratory model14 1.2Desired process for establishing top-level management structure21 1.3Issues that require consensus by research community before formal intergovernmental level process starts Legal aspects21 1.5Possible timeline for organizational evolution21 2.Siting - Site Selection Process (IL-2)22 2.1Critical considerations22 2.2Possible scenario toward site selection23 3.Sharing Models (GD-1)34 4.Management Models on Accelerator and Facilities (GD-2)35 5.Siting - Technical (GD-3)36 6.Accelerator Construction Process - Design Preparation Stage (GD-4)37 7.Accelerator Construction Process - Construction Stage (GD-5)38 8.Accelerator Construction Process - Conventional Facilities (GD-6)39 9.Management Model on Detectors and Experiments (RD-1)40 10.Siting - Living Environment (RD-2)41 11.Detector Construction Process - Design and Preparation Stage (RD-3)42 12.Detector Construction Process - Construction Stage (RD-4)43 13.Detector Construction Process - Conventional Facilities (RD-5)44 Appendix A: CPDG Outline45 Appendix B: Comparison of Organizational Models49

Recent developments/future work Sets out time-lines and work packages in which to accomplish steps necessary to realise ILC. B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 21 Global Design Effort

Transition document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 22 Global Design Effort

CPDG Document B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 23 Global Design Effort Table of Contents Preamble1 0.CPDG Principles (IL0)4 1.Top-level Management (IL-1, GD-0)8 1.1Assessment of possible model examples Institutional models from legal and procurement perspectives Representative models for the ILC Model 3: ITER-like model Model 4: Multinational Laboratory model14 1.2Desired process for establishing top-level management structure21 1.3Issues that require consensus by research community before formal intergovernmental level process starts Legal aspects21 1.5Possible timeline for organizational evolution21 2.Siting - Site Selection Process (IL-2)22 2.1Critical considerations22 2.2Possible scenario toward site selection23 3.Sharing Models (GD-1)34 4.Management Models on Accelerator and Facilities (GD-2)35 5.Siting - Technical (GD-3)36 6.Accelerator Construction Process - Design Preparation Stage (GD-4)37 7.Accelerator Construction Process - Construction Stage (GD-5)38 8.Accelerator Construction Process - Conventional Facilities (GD-6)39 9.Management Model on Detectors and Experiments (RD-1)40 10.Siting - Living Environment (RD-2)41 11.Detector Construction Process - Design and Preparation Stage (RD-3)42 12.Detector Construction Process - Construction Stage (RD-4)43 13.Detector Construction Process - Conventional Facilities (RD-5)44 Appendix A: CPDG Outline45 Appendix B: Comparison of Organizational Models49

Summary Paris document forms basis of PIP. Small changes and additions from discussions throughout the year. B. Foster - ILC-HiGrade - 11/10 Rather larger mods take account of desire of ILCSC to have a single public document concerning project planning. Still in middle of process, but general acceptance from JB & AS hopeful sign. 24 Global Design Effort European contribution continues to be coherent and strong – substantially through XFEL – costings, technical, etc. On target for final document ILC-HiGrade deliverable end 2011.