U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science

U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee for the LHC ATLAS Detector Upgrade Project Brookhaven National Laboratory (review conducted at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory) August 28-29, 2013 Kurt Fisher Review Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/ Executive Session OFFICE OF SCIENCE DOE/SC EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, August 28, 2013Wilson Hall, the Comitium 8:00 a.m. Introduction and Overview K. Fisher 8:15 a.m. Program Office Perspective M. Procario/S. Rolli 8:30 a.m. Federal Project Director Perspective G. Penny 8:45 a.m. Questions Project and review information is available at: http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OPMO/Projects/USCMS/DOERev/20130826/review.html http://www.usatlas.bnl.gov/LHC_ATLAS-U/reviews/CD1_DOE_Review_Aug_2013/ User Name: review Password: 4atlasUG 2 OFFICE OF SCIENCE

DOE Organization Office of the Secretary Dr. Ernest J. Moniz Secretary Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Inspector General Loans Program Office Daniel B. Poneman, Deputy Secretary* Chief of Staff Office of the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Office of the Under Secretary for Science Neile L. Miller (Acting) Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Vacant Under Secretary for Science National Nuclear Security Administration Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management

Legacy Management Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs Deputy Administrator for Naval Reactors Deputy Under Secretary for Counter-terrorism & Counter-proliferation Associate Administrator for Defense Nuclear Security Associate Administrator for Emergency Operations Associate Administrator for External Affairs Associate Administrator for Infrastructure & Operations Associate Administrator for Management & Budget Associate Administrator For Acquisition & Project Management Associate Administrator for Safety & Health

Associate Administrator for Information Management & Chief Information Officer Office of Science Advanced Scientific Computing Research Basic Energy Sciences Biological and Environmental Research Fusion Energy Science Vacant Under Secretary Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy Assistant Secretary for Electrical Delivery and Energy Reliability Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Indian Energy Policy and Programs U.S. Energy Information Administration Bonneville Power Administration Southwestern Power Administration

Southeastern Power Administration Western Area Power Administration Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs General Counsel Chief Financial Officer Chief Human Capital Officer Economic Impact & Diversity Management Chief Information Officer Health Safety and Security Intelligence & Counterintelligence High Energy Physics Hearings and Appeals Public Affairs Nuclear Physics

Workforce Development For Teachers/Scientists Office of General Counsel Office of the Under Secretary *The Deputy Secretary also serves as the Chief Operating Officer. 21 May 2013 3 SC Organization OFFICE OF SCIENCE Office of the Director (SC-1) Patricia M. Dehmer (A) Deputy Director for Field Operations (SC-3) Joseph McBrearty Ames SO Cynthia Baebler Chicago Office Argonne SO Roxanne Purucker Joanna Livengood Berkeley SO Aundra Richards Brookhaven SO

Frank Crescenzo SC Integrated Support Center Fermi SO Michael Weis Oak Ridge SO Johnny Moore Princeton SO Maria Dikeakos Pacific NWest SO Roger Snyder Stanford SO Paul Golan Thomas Jeff. SO Joe Arango Oak Ridge Office Larry Kelly Office of Lab Policy & Evaluat. (SC-32) D. Streit Office of Safety, Security & Infra. (SC-31) D. Streit (A) Deputy Director for Science Programs (SC-2) Patricia M. Dehmer

Advanced Scientific Comp. Research (SC-21) Barbara Helland (A) Basic Energy Sciences (SC-22) Harriet Kung Biological & Environ. Research (SC-23) Sharlene Weatherwax Fusion Energy Sciences (SC-24) Edmund Synakowski High Energy Physics (SC-25) James Siegrist Nuclear Physics (SC-26) Timothy Hallman Workforce Development for Teachers/ Scientists (SC-27) P. Dehmer Office of Project Assessment (SC-28) Daniel Lehman Deputy Director for Resource Management (SC-4) Jeffrey Salmon Office of Budget (SC-41) Kathleen Klausing Office of Grants/ Cont.

Support (SC-43) Linda Shariati Office of SC Program Direction (SC-46) Daniel Division Office of Scientific and Tech. Info. (SC-44) Walt Warnick Office of Business Policy & Ops (SC-45) V. Kountouris SC Communications & Public Affairs (SC-47) Dolline Hatchett Human Resources & Admin. (SC-48) Cynthia Mays Small Business Innovation Research (SC-29) Manny Oliver (A) Acting 4/2013 4 Review Committee Participants OFFICE OF SCIENCE

Kurt Fisher, DOE/SC, Chairperson SC1 LArLiquid Argon Calorimeter Trigger Readout (WBS 1.1) Bill Wisniewski, SLAC Gina Rameika, FNAL SC4 Cost and Schedule Ethan Merrill, DOE/SC Steve Webster, DOE/FSO Observers Jim Siegrist, DOE/SC Mike Procario, DOE/SC Simona Rolli, DOE/SC Gail Penny, DOE/BHSO Lloyd Nelson, DOE/BHSO SC2 SC3 Muon New Small Wheel (WBS 1.2) * Phil Schlabach, FNAL Andrey Korytov, U. of Florida Trigger and Data Acquisition (WBS 1.3) * Myron Campbell, U. of Michigan Peter Wilson, FNAL Luciano Ristori, FNAL SC5 Project Management (WBS 1.4) * Mark Reichanadter, SLAC Michael Levi, LBNL Mark Palmer, FNAL LEGEND SC Subcommittee * Chairperson

Count: 13 (excluding observers) 5 Charge Questions OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1. Conceptual Design: Is the conceptual design sound and likely to meet the MIE projects technical performance requirements most efficiently and effectively? Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration? 2. Project Scope: Are the projects scope and specifications sufficiently defined to support preliminary cost and schedule estimates? 3. Cost and Schedule: Are the cost and schedule estimates credible and realistic for this stage of the project? Do they include adequate scope, cost and schedule contingency? 4. Management & ES&H: Is the project being appropriately managed at this stage? Does the proposed project team have adequate management experience, design skills, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline? Are ES&H aspects being properly addressed and are future plans sufficient given the projects current stage of development? 5. Documentation: Is the prerequisite documentation required for approval CD-1 complete? 6 OFFICE OF

Agenda SCIENCE Wednesday, August 28, 2013 Wilson Hall Comitium and One West 8:00 am 9:00 am 9:20 am 9 :3 0 a m 10:00 am 10:20 am 1 1 :0 0 a m 11:40 am 12:20 pm 1:00 pm 3:30 pm 4:00 pm 5:00 pm 6:30 pm DOE Executive SessionComitium (WH2SE) ..............................................Fisher ATLAS OverviewOne West (WH1W) ..........................................................TBD ATLAS Upgrade P r o j e c t O v e r v i e w a n d H i g h l i g h t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . K o t c h e r P r o je c t M a n a g e m e n t: R e s o u r c e s , P la n n in g a n d P r io r itie s .............................. T B D Break LArLiquid Argon Calorimeter (WBS 1.1) ........................................ Brooijmans n S W Muon N e w Small Wheel (WBS 1.2) .................................................... Taylor TDAQTrigger/Data Acquisition (WBS 1.3) ................................................. Evans Lunch Subcommittee Breakout Sessions Management, Cost and Schedule Comitium (WH2SE) LAr Black Hole (WH2NW) nSW Snake Pit (WH2SE) TDAQ Racetrack (WH7X) Break Subcommittee Executive Sessions DOE Full Committee Executive Session .........................................................Fisher

Adjourn 7 OFFICE OF Agenda (cont.) SCIENCE Thursday, August 29, 2013 8:00 am 11:00 am 11:30 am 12:30 pm 1:30 pm 3 :0 0 p m 4 :0 0 p m Subcommittee Breakout Sessions Break Subcommittee Breakout Sessions Lunch DOE Executive Session Dry Run ................................................................... Fisher C l o s e o u t P r e s e n t a t i o n t o A T L A S U p g r a d e P r o j e c t T e a m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fisher A d jo u rn 8 Report Outline/ Writing Assignments OFFICE OF SCIENCE Executive Summary .................................................................................................................Fisher 1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................Rolli 2. Technical Status (Charge Questions 1, 2, 5) 2.1 Liquid Argon Calorimeter Trigger Readout (WBS 1.1) ....................... Wisniewski*/SC 1 2.1.1 Findings 2.1.2 Comments 2.1.3 Recommendations

2.2 Muon New Small Wheel (WBS 1.2) ...................................................... Schlabach*/SC 2 2.3 Trigger and Data Acquisition (WBS 1.3) ................................................ Campbell*/SC 3 3. Cost and Schedule (Charge Questions 1, 2, 3, 5)................................................ Merrill*/SC 4 4. Project Management (Charge Question 2, 4, 5) ........................................ Reichanadter*/SC 5 *Lead SC Subcommittee 9 OFFICE OF SCIENCE Closeout Presentation and Final Report Procedures 10 Format: Closeout Presentation OFFICE OF SCIENCE (PowerPoint; No Smaller than 18 pt Font) 2.1 Use Section Number/Title corresponding to writing assignment list. List Review Subcommittee Members List Assigned Charge Questions and Review Committee Answers 2.1.1 Findings In bullet form, include an assessment of technical, cost, schedule, and management. 2.1.2 Comments In bullet form, list descriptive material assessing the findings and the conclusions based on the findings. This is narrative material and is often omitted as a separate heading and the narrative included either under Findings or Recommendations as appropriate. This heading

carries more emphasis than the Findings, but does not require an action as do the Recommendations. Do not number your comments. 2.1.3 Recommendations 1. Begin with action verb and identify a due date. 2. 11 Format: Final Report OFFICE OF SCIENCE (MSWord; 12 pt Font) 2.1 Use Section Number/Title corresponding to writing assignment list. 2.1.1 Findings Include an assessment of technical, cost, schedule, and management. Within the text of the Findings Section, include the answers to the review questions. 2.1.2 Comments Descriptive material assessing the findings and the conclusions based on the findings. This is narrative material and is often omitted as a separate heading and the narrative included either under Findings or Recommendations as appropriate. This heading carries more emphasis than the Findings, but does not require an action as do the Recommendations. Do not number your comments. 2.1.3 Recommendations 1. Begin with action verb and identify a due date. 2. 3. 12 Expectations

OFFICE OF SCIENCE Present closeout reports in PowerPoint. Forward your sections for each review report (in MSWord format) to Casey Clark, [email protected], by September 3, 8:00 a.m. (EDT). 13 OFFICE OF SCIENCE Closeout Report by the Review Committee for the LHC ATLAS Detector Upgrade Project Brookhaven National Laboratory (review conducted at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory) August 29, 2013 Kurt Fisher Review Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/ 14 2.1 LAr Calorimeter Trigger Readout B. Wisniewski, SLAC* / SC1 OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1. Conceptual Design: Is the conceptual design sound and likely to meet the MIE projects technical performance requirements most efficiently

and effectively? Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration? 2. Project Scope: Are the projects scope and specifications sufficiently defined to support preliminary cost and schedule estimates? 5. Documentation: Is the prerequisite documentation required for approval of CD-1 complete? Findings Comments Recommendations 15 2.2 Muon New Small Wheel P. Schlabach, FNAL* / SC2 OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1. Conceptual Design: Is the conceptual design sound and likely to meet the MIE projects technical performance requirements most efficiently and effectively? Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration? 2. Project Scope: Are the projects scope and specifications sufficiently defined to support preliminary cost and schedule estimates? 5. Documentation: Is the prerequisite documentation required for approval of CD-1 complete? Findings Comments Recommendations 16 2.3 Trigger and Data Acquisition M. Campbell, U. of Michigan* / SC3 OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1. Conceptual Design: Is the conceptual design sound and likely to meet the MIE projects technical performance requirements most efficiently

and effectively? Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration? 2. Project Scope: Are the projects scope and specifications sufficiently defined to support preliminary cost and schedule estimates? 5. Documentation: Is the prerequisite documentation required for approval of CD-1 complete? Findings Comments Recommendations 17 3. Cost and Schedule E. Merrill, DOE/SC* / SC4 OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1. Conceptual Design: Is the conceptual design sound and likely to meet the MIE projects technical performance requirements most efficiently and effectively? Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration? 2. Project Scope: Are the projects scope and specifications sufficiently defined to support preliminary cost and schedule estimates? 3. Cost and Schedule: Are the cost and schedule estimates credible and realistic for this stage of the project? Do they include adequate scope, cost and schedule contingency? 5. Documentation: Is the prerequisite documentation required for approval of CD-1 complete?

Findings Comments Recommendations 18 OFFICE OF Project Status E. Merrill, DOE/SC* / SC4 SCIENCE PROJECT STATUS Project Type CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 TPC Percent Complete TPC Cost to Date TPC Committed to Date TPC TEC Contingency Cost (w/Mgmt Reserve) Contingency Schedule on CD-4b CPI Cumulative SPI Cumulative MIE / Line Item / Cooperative Agreement Planned: Actual: Planned: Actual: Planned: Actual: Planned:

Actual: Planned: _____% Actual: _____% $ _____% to go ______months _____% 19 4. Project Management M. Reichanadter, SLAC* / SC5 OFFICE OF SCIENCE 2. Project Scope: Are the projects scope and specifications sufficiently defined to support preliminary cost and schedule estimates? 4. Managements and ES&H: Is the project being appropriately managed at this stage? Does the proposed project team have adequate management experience, design skills, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline? Are ES&H aspects being properly addressed and are future plans sufficient given the projects current stage of development? 5. Documentation: Is the prerequisite documentation required for approval of CD-1 complete? Findings Comments Recommendations 20

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • State Track: Reporting - Welcome to LIHEAP Performance Management

    State Track: Reporting - Welcome to LIHEAP Performance Management

    What is the purpose of this report? Serves as the grantee's application for funds. Provides information to the Federal Government and the public on how the grantee plans to use funds. How does this report contribute to program management? Grantee...
  • Template

    Template

    Tommy FlowersColossus (1943) Colossus was the world's first electronic digital computer that was at all programmable. Used for Code Breaking during WWII. Colossus. Used 2000+ state-of-the-art vacuum tubes . ... These are tales for another day!
  • I'm running across the UK for charity

    I'm running across the UK for charity

    Traditionally, adult higher education Computing pedagogy has isolated the student in a controlled environment during delivery, with application of their learning temporally distant from their professional practice
  • Applied Geometry

    Applied Geometry

    Geometry Lesson 1 - 6 Two-Dimensional Figures Objective: Identify and name polygons. Find perimeter, circumference, and area of two-dimensional figures. Polygon A closed figure formed by a finite number of coplanar segments called sides.
  • Grades of Meat

    Grades of Meat

    * 6.3 Chapter 6 | Meat, Poultry, and Seafood Definitions of Charcuterie and Garde Manger _____refers to specially prepared pork products, including sausage, smoked ham, bacon, pâté, and terrine. _____ _____is the department typically found in a classical brigade system...
  • Offering Memorandum WAGON WHEEL PLAZA 33301 Agua Dulce

    Offering Memorandum WAGON WHEEL PLAZA 33301 Agua Dulce

    This affluent equestrian community has only one shopping center, wagon wheel plaza. Wagon wheel plaza's highly successful tenants include a modern market with coffee house, butcher, produce and bakery. mexican restaurant maria bonitas is a regional chain catering to the...
  • Equity & Fixed Income Workshop August, 2010 Uma

    Equity & Fixed Income Workshop August, 2010 Uma

    Includes costs of production such as raw material, man power, energy and other resources and elements of cost critical to generate revenue ... Prospective P/E has more relevance in predicting price . Price Earnings and Growth . ... Debt and...
  • W‏ireless Sensor Boarding Card - lib.swpu.edu.cn

    W‏ireless Sensor Boarding Card - lib.swpu.edu.cn

    Comic Sans MS MS PGothic Wingdings Tahoma Arial Times New Roman MS PMincho SimSun Monotype Sorts Myriad Pro Blueprint 1_Blueprint 2_Blueprint 3_Blueprint Microsoft Office Excel 图表 幻灯片 1 IEEE Chengdu Section -- Facts and Visions Agenda All Started from Phil....