AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting 16 Dec 2004 Useful Links: RSVP Project : C-AD AGS Project: Office Agenda Review updates (pile) Status of cost scrubbing and resource loaded schedules (must be ~complete by 15 Jan, in time for the LOG review), in addition to what has been done, SHOW ROAD MAP TO COMPLETION! - (Brown,Pendzick,Phillips and Pearson) Beam development plan, Case 1 and 2 update (Ahrens)

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review - Update Committee Report is on the web at: I haven’t received guidance from the RSVP Project Office concerning this document…read it and stay tuned

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review - Update Some Comments from the report – Executive Summary The Committee concluded that the proposed scope of new work accounting for the increased budget requests was reasonable and clearly desirable. Only in the area of Beam Development was the Committee able to suggest a significant potential cost saving, namely reducing the planned time of this activity from five to two years, which the Upgrade team agreed was worth examining. The Committee further recommends that all elements of the plan be subjected to future reviews to scrub technical content, costs and schedules. Since overall project cost remains a major issue and threat to the project, the AGS Upgrade and Experimental Project Teams are challenged to collaborate on finding imaginative solutions to cost reduction.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review Recommendations – Booster/AGS Technical Issues Perform a detailed survey of cable trays and cables, etc. to assess conditions that must be repaired for safety reasons. Refine cost estimates accordingly. Assess risks of repair activities causing safety problems with “at risk” but still serviceable cables. Design plan to minimize costs of repairs while maintaining safety. Consider the impact of limiting upgrades of those items specifically designed to make RSVP more convenient to operate, as opposed to unable to operate. Assess cost benefits in areas of controls, improvement of PFN kickers etc. Assess impact on RHIC if magnet/ coil replacement plan is limited in scope. Compare with present status of backup and likely downtime if a magnet fails during present operation. Many magnets do not have backups. Work out ALARA repair scenarios for present vs. more highly activated conditions. For the RF and Feedback systems, refine the conceptual designs with appropriate experienced RF engineering, generate resource-loaded schedules and revise cost estimates. Develop a contingency plan if the present plan fails to produce the required extinction performance.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review Recommendations – Switchyard and Experiment Beams Technical Issues Freeze production angle, beam aspect ratio as soon as possible so detailed design can begin. Continue design of Beam Development plan to optimize (minimize) cost impact. Continue developing requirements for experiment interfaces so detailed conceptual design and resource-loaded schedules can proceed.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review Recommendations – Costs Organize detailed Cost scrubbing reviews of all Booster, AGS and Switchyard major components as soon as feasible. Consider Table to suggest possible deferment or later staging of portions of proposed upgrade plan with possible later addition as needed during operations. Freeze detector locations, parameters, collimating devices as soon as possible to minimize engineering costs. Consider cost models constraining RSVP to (i) only RHIC operation; (ii) inside or outside RHIC operation to finish total experimental schedule as rapidly as possible. Consider if KOPIO can be designed to use some or all of existing nearby pit. Explore if BNL laboratory funds may legitimately be used to offset some of the AGS/ Booster reliability improvements. Consider shortening the beamline commissioning (Beam Development) program if necessary at cost of lower quality beams during initial 1-2 years.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review Recommendations – Schedule Investigate ways to achieve an accelerated, significantly shorter commissioning and experimental operating schedule. Consider both Life-Cycle and Opportunity Costs. Investigate reducing the execution time of the AGS Upgrade by: –an accelerated development program, and –reducing scope wherever possible to minimize time to completion of installation and commissioning. Consider supporting planned incremental upgrades on an as-needed basis during future operational downtimes to reduce costs.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December Nov 04 AGS Review Recommendations – Management Complete drafts of the Project Execution and Project Management Plans including an accurate assessment of the key technical risks, realistic analyses of cost risks through detailed bottom-up modeling, realistic personnel planning across the board aided by resource-loaded schedules, and a critical evaluation of availability of personnel to match the needed ramp-up. b. Once the draft plans and supporting work are complete, the RSVP project managers should organize reviews to strongly focus on technical justification, cost and schedule scrubbing of overall system scope and key subsystem components, particularly those requiring R&D. c. RSVP management needs to challenge the entire RSVP Team to explore together imaginative ways to eliminate, reduce or defer construction costs. Some possibilities are: –Constrain proposed upgrades to items vital to meeting the RSVP minimum beam requirements and non-interference with RHIC. –Explore deferment of changes that are designed mainly to minimize MTTR for RHIC, such as stocking of magnet spares, replacement of controls systems, redesign of kicker magnet drivers, etc. to later “as needed” repairs or upgrades. –Explore a future operating fund set-aside for repairs on an as-needed basis. –Significantly reduce or eliminate Beam Development proposal designed to prepare beams for maximum levels on Day One of experimental engineering and data runs. –Explore global changes to plan to reduce life-cycle costs such as more rapid completion of MECO while initially delaying KOPIO; buying more running hours earlier to accelerate completion of MECO without beam sharing with KOPIO; buying more running hours later to accelerate KOPIO completion. –Consider capital costs, operating costs, Life-Cycle costs and (lost) Opportunity costs in all scenarios.

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 RSVP Cost and Schedule Review, 9 Dec 2004 Guidance, agenda and presentations can be found at: Attendees: Goldberg (NSF), Firestone, Willis, Kotcher, Kirk, Hebert, Marx, Pile, Littenberg, Bryman, Zeller, Molzon (telephone) An outcome of the meeting: Cost Roll-up of RSVP WBS 1.1 RSVP Project Office$ 20.5M WBS 1.2 K0PI0$106.9M WBS 1.3 MECO$~94.6M plus (several omissions not added in) WBS 1.4 AGS$ 69.2M (with 3 years beam development) TOTAL$292.1M plus… i.e. Costs are now an openly recognized problem for the NSF…..

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 RSVP Simulation and Background Review Committee –Ed Blucher, University of Chicago –Martin Cooper, Los Alamos –Cy Hoffman, Los Alamos –Patty McBride, Fermilab –Jack Ritchie (Chair), University of Texas, Austin –Mike Shupe, University of Arizona –Bob Tschirhart, Fermilab –Koji Yoshimura, Osaka University Charge and Agenda: Detailed agenda is in preparation RSVP Detector Capabilities, Simulations and Backgrounds Review (11-13 Jan 2005 at NYU) We are not directly involved – (Don, Wuzheng, Kevin, Kin (1 day) and I will attend as observers)

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 Resource Loaded Schedule Review (18-20 Jan 2005) Tom Kirk is responsible for the review and will be conducted a committee appointed by Tom, the Laboratory Oversight Group (LOG) Guidance from RSVP Project Office: “It will be a cost and schedule review, delving as deeply as possible into the justifications for each, documentation, etc.….charge and agenda should be out this week……a close look at the cost and schedule, their basis, and the backup documentation -- both in place, and in planning.” Subsystem Managers will be directly involved in this review!

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 Guidance – our plan (subject to change – we have not yet received guidance from Willis/Kotcher as result of the Oct MECO Magnet, 4-5 Nov AGS, and 9 Dec Cost and Schedule Reviews – changes since 18 Nov meeting is red) 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 (looking less and less likely) 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) unless short run(s) outside RHIC operations is (are) critically needed –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). All costs scrubbed and resource loaded schedules available for review for all major projects with DRAFT first pass at full integration into a master schedule – deadline, 15 Jan 05, needed for Kirk’s Jan LOG Review.. All experiment/AGS interface issues are not expected to be resolved by this date Use AGS Project Office account number for this work!

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 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 9Held 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 Resource Loaded Schedule Review for all of RSVP at BNL K0PI0 and MECO Experiment Simulations Review

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 Message from Steve Kane (today) “We have implemented web-based reporting to provide status tracking and simplify input. The new Reporting Center also provides an archive for the monthly reports. You can get to the reporting center via the RSVP Project Office web page, or you can go directly to the RSVP Reporting Center at The RSVP Reporting Center should be used for the December RSVP Monthly Report. The pages are intended to be self-explanatory, but please if you have questions or problems.” So… Al, Kevin, Dave and Charlie – enter your monthly reports directly into the system by the end of each month (I’m out of the loop! – except for editorial changes and Project Office input)

AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 16 December 2004 Next Meeting 30 Dec 2004 Agenda –Status of cost scrubbing and resource loaded schedules (must be ~complete by 15 Jan, in time for the LOG review), in addition to what has been done, SHOW ROAD MAP TO COMPLETION! - (Brown,Pendzick,Phillips and Pearson) –Beam development plan, Case 1 and 2 update (Ahrens)