OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee (CD-1) for the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE) Project...
-
Upload
wendy-webster -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of OFFICE OF SCIENCE Review Committee (CD-1) for the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE) Project...
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
Review Committee (CD-1)for the
Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment(LBNE) Project
at
Fermi National Accelerator LaboratoryOctober 30-November 1, 2012
Daniel R. LehmanReview Committee Chair
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energyhttp://www.science.doe.gov/opa/
2
DOE Review of LBNE
DOE EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA
Tuesday, October 30, 2012—Comitium
08:00 a.m. DOE Executive Session D. Lehman08:15 a.m. HEP Perspective M. Procario/T. Lavine08:25 a.m. FSO Perspective P. Carolan08:35 a.m. Questions08:45 a.m. Adjourn
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
LBNE website:https://sharepoint.fnal.gov/project/lbne/reviews/CD1-DOE-Review-Oct-2012/SitePages/Home.aspx
username: review password:rev2pass
DOE Organization Chart
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
3
Office of the SecretaryDr. Steven Chu, Secretary
Deputy Secretary* Daniel B. Poneman
Associate Deputy SecretaryMelvin G. Williams, Jr.
Office of the Under Secretary
for Nuclear Security
Thomas P. D’AgostinoUnder Secretary
For Nuclear Security
*The Deputy Secretary also serves as the Chief Operating Officer.
25 Jul 12
U.S. Energy InformationAdministration
Bonneville PowerAdministration
Southwestern PowerAdministration
Southeastern PowerAdministration
Western Area PowerAdministration
Intelligence andCounterintelligence
Assistant Secretary forPolicy and International
Affairs
Assistant Secretary forCongressional and
Intergovernmental Affairs
General Counsel
Chief FinancialOfficer
Chief Human CapitalOfficer
Chief InformationOfficer
Public Affairs
Economic ImpactAnd Diversity
Deputy Administratorfor Defense Programs
Deputy Under Secretaryfor Counter-terrorism
Associate Administratorfor Emergency
Operations
Associate Administratorfor Acquisition &
Project Management
Deputy Administratorfor Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation
Deputy Administratorfor Naval Reactors
Associate Administratorfor Defense Nuclear
Security
Office of the Under Secretary
for Science
VacantUnder Secretary
for Science
Office of Science
Advanced ScientificComputing Research
Basic Energy Sciences
Biological andEnvironmental Research
Fusion Energy Science
High Energy Physics
Nuclear Physics
Office of the Under Secretary
VacantUnder Secretary
Associate Administratorfor External Affairs
Workforce DevelopmentFor Teachers/Scientists
Management
Health Safety andSecurity
Hearings and Appeals
Advanced ResearchProjects Agency-Energy
Loans ProgramOffice
American Recovery &Reinvestment Act Office
Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission
Inspector General
Assistant Secretaryfor Environmental
Management
Assistant Secretaryfor
Fossil Energy
Legacy Management
Indian EnergyPolicy and Programs
Assistant Secretaryfor Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy
Assistant Secretaryfor Electrical Delivery and
Energy Reliability
Assistant Secretaryfor
Nuclear Energy
Associate Administratorfor Info. Management
& CIO
Associate Administratorfor Management &
Budget
Associate Administratorfor Safety & Health
Technology TransferCoordinator
Chief of Staff
National NuclearSecurity Administration
Office ofGeneral Counsel
4
OFFICE OF
SCIENCESC Organization Chart
Office of the Director (SC-1)William F. Brinkman
Advanced ScientificComp. Research (SC-21)
Daniel Hitchcock (A)
Workforce Development for Teachers/
Scientists (SC-27)
P. Dehmer (A)Basic Energy
Sciences (SC-22)Harriet Kung
Fusion EnergySciences (SC-24)
Edmund Synakowski
High EnergyPhysics (SC-25)James Siegrist
Biological & Environ. Research (SC-23)
Sharlene Weatherwax
Nuclear Physics(SC-26)
Timothy Hallman (A) Acting
7/2012
Deputy Directorfor Science Programs (SC-2)
Patricia Dehmer
Deputy Directorfor Resource Management (SC-4)
Jeffrey Salmon
Deputy Directorfor Field Operations (SC-3)
Joseph McBrearty
Office of Project
Assessment (SC-28)Daniel
Lehman
Office of Budget (SC-41)
Kathleen Klausing
Office of Scientific and Tech. Info. (SC-44)
Walt Warnick
Office of SC Program Direction (SC-46)
Daniel Division
Office of Grants/ Cont. Support (SC-43)Linda Shariati
Office of Business Policy
& Ops (SC-45)Vasilios
Kountouris
SC Communications & Public Affairs
(SC-4)Dolline Hatchett
Ames SOCynthia Baebler
Thomas Jeff. SOJoe Arango
Stanford SOPaul Golan
Pacific NWest SORoger Snyder
Princeton SOMaria Dikeakos
Oak Ridge SOJohnny Moore
Fermi SOMichael Weis
Brookhaven SOMichael Holland
Berkeley SOAundra Richards
Argonne SOJoanna Livengood
SCIntegratedSupportCenter
Office of Lab Policy & Evaluat.
(SC-32)J. LaBarge
(A)
Office of Safety,
Security & Infra.(SC-31)
M. Jones
Human Resources & Admin.(SC-45.3)
Cynthia Mays
Small BusinessInnovationResearch(SC-29)
Manny Oliver
Oak Ridge Office
Larry C. Kelly
Chicago Office
Roxanne Purucker
5
OFFICE OF
SCIENCEReview Committee Participants
Daniel R. Lehman, Chairman
SC1 SC2 SC3Beamline Detectors Conventional
* Tom Roser, BNL * Bill Wisniewski, SLAC * Marty Fallier, BNLKevin Jones, ORNL Richard Loveless, U of Wisconsin Brad Bull, MSU/FRIBPhil Pile, BNL David Nygren, LBNL Bob Law, SLAC
SC4 SC5 SC6Environment, Safety and Health Cost and Schedule Management
* Ian Evans, SLAC * Barbara Thibadeau, ORNL/SNS * Aesook Byon, BNLFrank Kornegay Rick Blaisdell, DOE/APM Thomas Glasmacher, MSU/FRIB
Kin Chao, DOE/SC Evelyn Landini, DOE/BHSOKurt Fisher, DOE/SC Ron Lutha, DOE/ASOBrian Huizenga, DOE/APM Steve Meador, DOE/SC
LEGEND
Jim Siegrist, DOE/SC Mike Weis, DOE/FSO SC SubcommitteeMike Procario, DOE/SC Jerry Kao, DOE/ASO * ChairpersonTed Lavine, DOE/SC Hemant Patel, DOE/BSO [ ] Part-time Subcommittee MemberJohn Kogut, DOE/SC Glenn Kubiak, LBNLAlan Stone, DOE/SC COUNT: 22 (excluding observers)Pepin Carolan, DOE/FSOSteve Webster, DOE/FSO
Observers
6
Charge Questions
1. Does the conceptual design provide increased research capabilities envisioned in the mission need? Does the conceptual design satisfy the performance requirements recently recommended by the LBNE reconfiguration steering committee?
2. Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration?
3. Does the proposed project team and staffing plan offer adequate management experience, technical expertise, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline required for CD-2?
4. Are ES&H aspects being properly addressed and are future plans sufficient given the project's current stage of development?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
7
Agenda
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
Tuesday, October 30, 2012—Comitium, WH2SE 8:00 am DOE Executive Session D. Lehman 9:00 am Welcome/Plenary Sessions – One West (WH1W) P. Oddone
9:10 am Project Overview J. Strait 9:40 am Project Design Cost and Schedule E. McClusky10:10 am Break10:25 am Conventional Facilities Overview T. Lundin10:50 am SURF Working w/LBNE M. Headley11:00 am Beamline Overview V. Papadimitriou11:25 am Far Detector Overview J. Stewart 11:50 am Near Detector Complex Overview C. Mauger12:00 pm Lunch 1:00 pm Parallel Subcommittee Breakout Sessions (see attached schedule) 4:30 pm Subcommittee Executive Sessions – in Parallel Breakout Session Rooms 5:00 pm DOE Executive Session D. Lehman 6:30 pm Adjourn
8
Agenda
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:00 am Parallel Subcommittee Breakout Sessions 9:30 am Break—Outside Comitium 9:45 am Subcommittee Breakout Sessions12:00 pm Subcommittee Executive Sessions – Working Lunch—WH2XO 1:00 pm Response to Day 1 reviewer questions/questions from morning
breakout—Comitium 2:00 pm Subcommittee Working Session—Comitium 2:45 pm Break—Outside Comitium 3:00 pm DOE Full Committee Executive Session D. Lehman
Thursday, November 1, 2012 8:00 am Subcommittee Working Session—Comitium10:00 am Break—Outside Comitium10:15 am DOE Committee Executive Session Dry Run D. Lehman 12:00 pm Working Lunch 1:00 pm DOE Summary and Closeout—One West D. Lehman 2:00 pm Adjourn
9
Report Outline/ Writing Assignments
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
Executive SummaryMeador
1. IntroductionProcario
2. Technical Systems – Instruments (Charge Questions 1, 2, 3, 5) 2.1 BeamlineRoser*/SC1
2.1.1 Findings2.1.2 Comments2.1.3 Recommendations
2.2 DetectorsWisnieski*/SC2
3. Conventional Facilities (Charge Questions 1, 2, 3, 5) Fallier*/SC3
4. Environment, Safety and Health (Charge Questions 4, 5) Evans*/SC4
5. Cost and Schedule (Charge Questions 2, 3, 5) Thibadeau*/SC5
6. Management (Charge Questions 3, 5) Byon*/SC6
11
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.
12
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.
13
Present closeout reports in PowerPoint.
Forward your sections for each review report (in MSWord format) to Casey Clark, [email protected],
by November 5, 8:00 a.m. (EST).
OFFICE OF
SCIENCEExpectations
Closeout Report on the Review Committee (CD-1)
for the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment
(LBNE) Projectat
Fermi National Accelerator LaboratoryOctober 30-November 1, 2012
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
Daniel R. LehmanReview Committee Chair
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energyhttp://www.science.doe.gov/opa/
15
1. Does the conceptual design provide increased research capabilities envisioned in the mission need? Does the conceptual design satisfy the performance requirements recently recommended by the LBNE reconfiguration steering committee?
2. Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration?
3. Does the proposed project team and staffing plan offer adequate management experience, technical expertise, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline required for CD-2?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
Findings Comments Recommendations
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE2.1 BeamlineRoser, BNL*/SC1
16
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE2.2 DetectorsWisnieski, SLAC*/SC2
1. Does the conceptual design provide increased research capabilities envisioned in the mission need? Does the conceptual design satisfy the performance requirements recently recommended by the LBNE reconfiguration steering committee?
2. Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration?
3. Does the proposed project team and staffing plan offer adequate management experience, technical expertise, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline required for CD-2?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
Findings Comments Recommendations
17
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE3. Conventional FacilitiesFallier, BNL*/SC3
1. Does the conceptual design provide increased research capabilities envisioned in the mission need? Does the conceptual design satisfy the performance requirements recently recommended by the LBNE reconfiguration steering committee?
2. Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration?
3. Does the proposed project team and staffing plan offer adequate management experience, technical expertise, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline required for CD-2?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
Findings Comments Recommendations
18
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE4. Environment, Safety and HealthEvans, SLAC*/SC4
4. Are ES&H aspects being properly addressed and are future plans sufficient given the project's current stage of development?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
Findings Comments Recommendations
19
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE5. Cost and ScheduleThibadeau, ORNL*/SC5
2. Do the conceptual design report and supporting documentation adequately justify the stated cost range and project duration?
3. Does the proposed project team and staffing plan offer adequate management experience, technical expertise, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline required for CD-2?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
Findings Comments Recommendations
20
OFFICE OF
SCIENCEProject Status ChartThibadeau, ORNL*/SC5
PROJECT STATUSProject Type MIE / Line Item / Cooperative Agreement
CD-1 Planned: Actual:
CD-2 Planned: Actual:
CD-3 Planned: Actual:
CD-4 Planned: Actual:
TPC Percent Complete Planned: _____% Actual: _____%
TPC Cost to Date
TPC Committed to Date
TPC
TEC Contingency Cost (w/Mgmt Reserve) $ _____% to goContingency Schedule on CD-4b ______months _____%
CPI Cumulative SPI Cumulative
21
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE6. ManagementByon, BNL*/SC6
3. Does the proposed project team and staffing plan offer adequate management experience, technical expertise, and Laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline required for CD-2?
5. Have all prerequisite requirements for CD-1 approval been satisfied? Is the project ready for CD-1 approval?
Findings Comments Recommendations