AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting, 18 Nov 2004 Useful Links: RSVP Project : C-AD AGS Project: Office Agenda: AGS Review close-out, probable outcome from AGS review, meco magnet review actions, next significant events, ACCESS data base status (P. Pile) How we get from here to there - fully loaded Project schedules (A. Pendzick/D. Phillips)

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 AGS WBS Review, 4-5 Nov 2004 RSVP AGS Review Committee: R. Larsen, S. Ecklund, J. Seeman, A. Marchionni, E. Metral, G. McMichael, R. Pasquinelli Slides to follow are from close-out (R. Larsen) Close-out slides are archived on web: presentations.htm

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 General Comments The Committee was pleased to see the level of work represented by the presentations, which were clear and well integrated. Most detailed planning & cost work accomplished since July Some aspects of content need further development.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Implementation Plan & Resource Loaded Schedules The implementation plan for Booster, AGS and Switchyard was well detailed. The plans for experimental beams and Beam Development have questions concerning the experimental interfaces and schedule. Some resource analysis was shown, but resource loaded schedules are not yet developed.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Non-RSVP Elements These elements appear to have been identified and excluded appropriately. Manpower support for operations requires integration with the existing RHIC matrix, which will be augmented with levels of manpower appropriate to the incremental RSVP levels.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Technical, Schedule & Cost Risks The bulk of the Booster, AGS and Switchyard upgrades are low technical risk. Achieving higher levels of intensity and cleaner extinction between pulses through additional RF magnets are critical to the experiments; these have been modeled but not been demonstrated and are higher technical risk. Changes in the experiments may pose additional technical risks beyond the control of the AGS team.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Schedule Risk The risks were discussed during various presentations. The schedule risks for the bulk of AGS upgrades appears to be mostly in ramping up to needed manpower levels and finding appropriate people for temporary work, esp. engineers. The start date of 2006 appears aggressive considering the unknowns of total project cost and funding. The Beam Development schedule is a draft and will be reexamined to attempt to reduce duration from five to three years. The overall schedule integrated with the experiments needs to be developed. The delivery of critical experimental components poses risks beyond the control of the AGS Upgrade team.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Cost Risk Cost risks were not presented as a separate analysis by the team, but in subsequent presentations. The contingency levels of most estimates averaged less than 25% which indicates high confidence factor. This is appropriate for most parts of the AGS complex since the upgrade includes few technical uncertainties. Uncertainties of experiments can pose serious risk: –KOPIO production angle, pit size –MECO production solenoid, target etc. Overall cost growth in estimates is causing serious concern within the funding agency.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Cost Growth The cost estimate has grown since January 2004 by $30M to a final total of $84M of which $32M is attributed to Beam Development. The latter is in reality Pre-Ops as opposed to construction and did not change since January. Therefore the construction segment appears to have more than doubled. Reasons: –Magnet/PS/controls upgrades to reduce risk to RHIC –ES&H requirements for caps over high-activation areas –Growth in experimental beams costs –Addition of Project Office

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Operations Plan, Resource- Loaded Schedule, Conflicts The plan was presented along with an incremental total manpower analysis. The resources were averaged and not leveled in detail. Conflicts with RHIC requirements have to be worked out in detail. Concerns about difficulties of finding skilled people & matrix management. Potential impacts on costs and schedules.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Management Plans Integration, Communication major factors There is recent precedent at BNL for similar management issues, e.g. SNS and ATLAS. Lines of authority appear well understood though inherently complicated by dual lines of authority up the chain. Standing management meetings either exist already or will be set up alongside the current RHIC management structure. Operations will be well integrated with RHIC through liaisons, daily & weekly meetings.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Explore Reductions in Scope, etc. This was attempted throughout the meeting: –Delete one of the experiments: Unacceptable. Experiments have been sold as a package. –Defer AGS upgrades: Bad strategy poses high risk to RHIC and would miss existing low activation “window of opportunity” in AGS. –Reduce or eliminate Beam Development program: Possible cost reduction of ~14M$ without much compromise to program, if any, appears feasible. Team will investigate. –Additional cost reductions should be sought through “scrubbing” technical component design and costs, labor costs, system design improvements in both AGS and experiments.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Conclusion The Committee is very pleased that a large effort over the past four months has shown impressive progress and dividends in the planning process. We look forward to seeing continued progress in planning and development, and ultimate success in securing full funding and staffing. Thanks to all the presenters for their diligent efforts in helping meet our Charge. Keep up the good work!

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Recommendations Continue refining estimates with Lehman-like documentation (resource loaded & leveled schedules, cost books etc.) for future review. Schedule future cost scrubbing reviews of both AGS and experimental programs. Continue aggressive cost-reduction plan, such as design improvements to replacement components, reducing/eliminating Beam Development program, beam operations manpower levels etc Continue identifying, mitigating technical, schedule and cost risks. Probable Guidance we’ll get from Willis/Kotcher

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Preliminary Guidance – our plan (subject to change – we have not yet received guidance from Willis/Kotcher as result of 4-5 Nov AGS Review) Continue cost scrubbing and schedule development Highest priority to AGS/BOOSTER WBS –Cost scrubbing, what can we postpone until operations phase? etc… –Schedule – in particular a plan to get the AGS/BOOSTER in shape for high intensity beam development --- by beginning of 3 rd year of construction? –Beam development plan that fits within constant effort RHIC budget scenario with 2 beams – i.e. figure on 80 hrs/week and 15 weeks/year Case 1: Beam development during entire 5 year construction period Case 2: Beam development beginning 3 rd year of construction The construction plan should be developed consistent with no beam development in first two years of the project (Case 2 above) –D-line decommissioned –C-Line available beginning of 3 rd year for tests –there’s a risk (small) that we may have to revert back to the original plan (Case 1).

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Update on MECO Magnet Issues Still no formal guidance as result of the Oct MECO Magnet Review A plan to implement some of the panel recommendations is, however, being developed.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November DRAFT--

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November DRAFT-- RSVP FY05 Supplemental Request: MECO Magnet

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 MilestoneDateStatus, Comments Discussion of Baseline Expectations, Timeline with Experiments September 13Held MECO Magnet ReviewSun-Tue, Oct 10-12Held AGS ReviewThu-Fri, Nov 4-5Held Internal discussion of resource-loaded schedules (RLS) for all projects Thu, Dec 10?Includes PO, NSF PM, ALD + experiments. Anticipate one full day. Date TBF. Simulations & Backgrounds ReviewTue-Thu, Jan 11-13Set, reviewers assembled, held at NYU Initial review of RLS for all projectsTue-Thu, Jan 18-20Reviewed by LOG. Dates TBF. Reviews of other sub-projectsWeeks of Jan 24 – Feb 21Series of LOG-based reviews of RSVP sub-systems Draft versions of PMP, PEP, Conceptual Design Report completed Mon, Feb 14 Operations ReviewWeek of Mar 7 Project startup pre-reviewWeek of Mar 15Comprehensive preparatory review of full project, proposal Project startup reviewWeek of Apr 18Final project startup review, iteration of above. NSF review. Finalize documentation for May submission to NSF Week of Apr 25 Product submitted to NSF/NSBMon, May 2 next significant events AGS/Booster cost and schedule ~complete Case1 and Case2 beam development plans ~complete DRAFT Resource Loaded Schedule available Experiment WBS’s work-in- progress Roadmap to Resource Loaded Schedule understood, some cost scrubbing

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 RSVP AGS Cost – Status as of 11/18/04

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Darlene has information from the latest spreadsheets (V22) in entered into the ACCESS data base Changes to your WBS spreadsheets should go directly to Darlene –finish your WBS Dictionaries! Enter on same spreadsheet as costs –Send revised (available cost scrubbing) estimates by 7 Dec, in time for the 9 Dec “Internal Discussions” –Highlight changes for easy recognition and summarize changes (with date) on the “Change” spreadsheet Darlene will then send spreadsheets to me and a new version will be published

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 18 November 2004 Next Meeting 2 Dec 2004 Agenda –Update on AGS/BOOSTER WBS cost scrubbing (Brown) –Update on beam development plan (Leif) –Status of resource loaded schedules (Pendzick)