1. AS Webex meeting – January 27, 2010
AAP Review Marc Ross
AS Webex meeting – January 27, 2010

2. Background: Please read:
‘Initial comments on last week's AAP Review of SB2009’ (sent by PM Wednesday 13 Jan) and
(last week’s Newsline Director’s corner) and
(last week’s Newsline Research Director’s corner).

3. AAP
AAP is intended to provide critical review of technical, management and strategic activities to the Project Director. Their report is due to Barry in a week or so. They met last Friday.
We launched ‘SB2009’ to achieve cost constraint – capital construction cost – against an anticipated rise in high-tech component costs. Goal set by Project Director and Regional Directors: No increase in Value Estimate in 2012.
AAP expected many 0.1% cost reduction activities – consistent with the original short-lived ‘2007 EDR’ plan. 
‘engineering-driven’
We don’t have resources for this and do not expect what is needed to appear in TDP2. SB2009 consists of several few % cost reductions – the best possible path.

4. AAP (2): recommended greater conservatism v/v technical risk
An expanded cost assessment that includes projected operations costs for a given integrated luminosity (per 2004 scope document)
recommended more strict interpretation of scope – luminosity vs E.
Aside: I believe the LOI preparation process provided a more precise understanding of scope

5. Single Tunnel – cost reduction with little impact on scope
Our priority: safety and availability
R & D on HLRF – to be developed and
acceptance during TDP2.
Two systems, which provide ‘site’ flexibility,
a very important approach, recommended at Dubna, 2008.
Energy overhead, radiation, installation, commissioning mentioned

6. Low Power operation Positron – low energy operation
what R & D is required to allow it ‘to be adopted when / if needed’?
Impact on scope – but largest SB2009 cost saving
Ring studies
 Positron – low energy operation
Scope interpretation: Contiguous operation from 200 to 500 GeV.  
Technically conservative choice: Quarter wave transformer vs Flux concentrator à complication of SB2009; unrelated to cost-reduction
Apply this change to RDR design…

7. Cost Constraint How much cost increase must we be able to offset?
SRF is by far the largest R & D activity. To be a central topic at Beijing.
 XFEL costs, design gradient changes, mass-production schemes, regional industrial basis – all will impact TDP2 SRF cost estimate
SB2009 savings roughly equivalent to a doubling of the cryomodule cost wrt RDR.