1. Mu2e WGM 11/16/2011 R. Ray Mu2e Project manager

2. Review of the past few months In September it became apparent that the cost of Mu2e was well in excess of what was considered acceptable. The accelerator costs were up significantly, but other subsystems were also up. The Lab appointed a task force to figure out how to deliver protons for significantly less money.  E. Prebys, I. Kourbanis, J. Morgan, V. Nagaslaev, V. Shiltsev, S. Werkema, C. Ankenbrandt  The task force was wildly successful We have been de-scoping and simplifying other systems to further reduce the cost. We have worked with g-2 to identify common elements to package as AIPs and GPPs R. Ray - Mu2e WGM2

3. New Project Scope Original scheme delivered 25 kW proton beam (6 Booster batches) to the Mu2e detector from the Booster using the Recycler Ring, Accumulator Ring and the Debuncher Ring. In the new scheme, a single booster batch is injected into the Recycler, where it is divided into four 2.5 MHz bunches. These are transferred one at a time to the Debuncher, where they are captured and slow extracted. Nearly identical to g-2 requirements in Muon Campus location.  We resonantly extract from the Debuncher while g-2 uses a simple kicker. Bypassing the Accumulator eliminates kickers and 2 RF systems and allows us to us to reuse Accumulator components for the external beamline. This scheme can deliver 1 or 2 Booster Batches per Supercycle (1/6 or 1/3 the original beam power) for essentially the same cost. The cost of shielding is likely higher for 2 Booster Batches however. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM3

4. Accelerator Components R. Ray - Mu2e WGM4 Recycler Injection Kicker – Provided by NOvA Extraction kicker required by Mu2e and g-2 – Significantly cheaper due to relaxed requirements associated with fewer Booster Batches. New 2.5 MHz RF system using recycled MI RF. Required by Mu2e and g- 2. New Debuncher Injection Kicker required by Mu2e and g-2. Mu2e resonant extraction System/ g-2 Extraction Kicker External Beamline to Muon Campus Abort Kicker – Required for Mu2e. Power supply shared with g-2 Extraction Kicker.

5. Muon Campus R. Ray - Mu2e WGM5 Mu2e g-2

6. ~60/40 of Base Cost Solenoids/Infrastructure Solenoids R. Ray - Mu2e WGM6 Power Supply/Quench Protection Cryoplant Field Mapping Ancillary Equipment Installation and commissioning Production Solenoid (PS) Transport Solenoid (TS) Detector Solenoid (DS) Cryogenic Distribution Insulating Vacuum PS IRON DS IRON

7. Solenoid Cost Savings We have identified significant cost savings in the solenoid system  Eliminate some R&D  Eliminate PS and TS iron yokes  Move cryo off-Project  Reduce PS field from 5T to 4.4T (reduces stopped muon yield by ~10%)  Simplify DS design (single layer coil, modular design)  Simplify TS design (5 cryostats  2) Not all savings realized yet. Still some work to do. Have to redo some background estimates that could be impacted by relaxing some solenoid field specs. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM7

8. Other Subsystems Significant savings have also been realized in other systems  DAQ (application of free scientific effort, where appropriate and scaling down system capability to account for less beam power)  Conventional Construction o Not as deep, smaller footprint.  Muon beamline o Get rid of doped plastic neutron absorber lining inside of DS. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM8

9. Status of Mu2e Cost R. Ray - Mu2e WGM9

10. Needed for Mu2e and g-2 R. Ray - Mu2e WGM10 Over $10M threshold. Have to understand costs better but may have to package this into two AIPs Still a work in progress!

11. AIPs and GPPs These are supposed to be self-contained, so they include design, fabrication, installation, QA/QC and Project Management costs.  Impacts timing. Have to get some money in time to do design work. Don’t know if same rules for costing scientists apply here. Conceptual Design work largely done and already paid for by the Mu2e Project. Assume it has to stay there. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM11

12. Timing Common elements are all used by g-2. g-2 schedule is not compatible with Mu2e CD process, so most of these items could not be funded on the Mu2e Project in any case, without delaying g-2. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM12

13. Approximate Cost of the Muon Program  Mu2e$213M  g-2 MIE$22M  AIP1$11.2M  AIP2$9M  Muon Campus Beamline Enclosure (GPP)$9M  Muon Campus Cryo Facility (GPP)$9M  g-2 ring disassembly and move$6.6M  g-2 Building (GPP)$7.4M Total$287M R. Ray - Mu2e WGM13

14. Other Activities Doug Led an effort to review our Requirements Documents  Separate needs from wants  Re-evaluate for lower beam power. Doug organized an effort to scrub the BOEs.  Effort ongoing.  Unlikely to find significant cost savings but will improve the quality of the estimate R. Ray - Mu2e WGM14

15. Moving Forward We have been told that this plan is acceptable, so we are working to get back on track for a CD-1 Review as soon as we can be ready. Complete work on modified scope New background and sensitivity estimates based on new configuration and beam power. Update CDR Update WBS, BOEs, cost & schedule. Director’s Review Lehman Review R. Ray - Mu2e WGM15

16. CDR Biggest change is in the Accelerator and Solenoid Chapters  Have to capture scope change and determine format for describing AIPs/GPPs. Smaller modifications required for other chapters.  Summary chapters  Background and sensitivity chapter  DAQ  Conventional Construction  Muon Beamline R. Ray - Mu2e WGM16

17. Director’s Review Shooting for 2d half of March All material ready beginning of March. Primarily Cost, Schedule and Management review.  Technical component to Accelerator and Solenoid sessions because of significant changes. R. Ray - Mu2e WGM17

18. Schedule to CD-1 R. Ray - Mu2e WGM18

19. Overall Schedule R. Ray - Mu2e WGM19