1. M. Brooks, LANL 1 Intro Goals: Status reports on each topic, to bring all collaborators up-to-date on work To-Dos for upcoming review, and following review, articulated by each speaker. Discussion of these to-dos (are they correct, who will be doing them, can they be finished in time) Schedule: PM stated late-April/early May is current suggested time-frame for DOE review Mid-April deadline for TDR? Construction start: Jehanne said we could expect to be advised of this before the review

2. M. Brooks, LANL 2 Summary of March 2006 Review comments Well articulated physics justification: (response was good, initial presentation needed work). Details on systematics with c/b separation; how does FVTX help W physics. Multiple rounds for FPHX development (to address unforseen problems) FPHX initial design should be completed before next review Final wedge design should be completed before next review Formal management plan (to address concerns over external contractors) Clear fab and assembly plan, complete manpower, times included Mechanical support and cooling design should be advanced before next review Complete testing plan should be incorporated into schedule Clear milestones presented Good progress on all these fronts, to-dos should be addressed today

3. M. Brooks, LANL 3 Summary of February 2007 Review comments Physics writeup in proposal could be better articulated – agreed, needs re-write rather than successive edits Thorough system-level electrical design needs to be completed – grounding, cross-talk, noise pickup… Absence of electronics design engineer “glaring omission” – some ? From me: combination of Eric M. plus engineers already working on project Need to decide on one readout plan – agreed Design components to allow diagnostics capabilities at all levels Rad-hardness, b-field immunity of electronics components demonstrated soon (in-situ tests suggested for rad-hard) Think cost and especially schedule contingency is probably too small, especially if take into account suggestions throughout the review Urgency on Lvl-1 – Not completely clear what this meant. After some questioning, they said the urgency was to find funding (not necessarily to do any particular studies of performance)