daniel r. lehman review committee chair office of science, u.s. department of energy

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE

Review of Critical Decision 1 for the

Large Liquid Argon Detector for Neutron Physics (MicroBooNE)

atFermi National Accelerator Laboratory

March 2-3, 2010

Daniel R. LehmanReview Committee Chair

Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energyhttp://www.science.doe.gov/opa/

http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/

2

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEDOE Review of MicroBooNE

DOE EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA

Tuesday, March 2, 2010—Wilson Hall, Hornet’s Nest (WH8X0)

8:00 a.m. Introduction and Overview D. Lehman8:10 a.m. HEP Perspective T. Lavine8:20 a.m. Federal Project Director Perspective P.

Philp8:30 a.m. Questions

http://www-microboone.fnal.gov/project/cd1_doe/index.htmlusername – reviewer; password – ureview

http://www-microboone.fnal.gov/project/cd1_doe/index.html

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEReview Committee Participants

Daniel Lehman, SC, Chairperson, U.S. Department of Energy

*Lead

Observers Mike Procario, DOE/SC Ted Lavine, DOE/SC Eli Rosenberg, DOE/SC Mark Bollinger, DOE/FSO Paul Philp, DOE/FSO Steve Webster, DOE/FSO Jim Reidy, NSF

Review Committee Subcommittee 1- Cryostat and Cryo-system Joel Fuerst, ANL* Bruce Strauss, DOE/SC Subcommittee 2- Detector and Electronics Bill Wisniewski, SLAC* Ryszard Stroynowski, SMU Subsommittee 3- Infrastructure and Installation Jeff Sims, ANL* Bill Edwards, LBNL Subcomittee 4- Management, Cost, Schedule, ES&H, QA Gil Gilchriese, LBNL* Kurt Fisher, DOE/SC Frank Gines, ANL

4

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEDepartment of Energy

Office of the SecretaryDr. Steven Chu, Secretary

Deputy Secretary* Daniel B. Poneman

Federal EnergyRegulatory

Commission

Office of the Under Secretary

for Nuclear Security/Administrator for National Nuclear

Security AdministrationThomas P. D’Agostino

Chief of Staff

*The Deputy Secretary also serves as the Chief Operating Officer. Jun 09

Assistant Secretaryfor Policy and

International Affairs

GeneralCounsel

Chief FinancialOfficer

Chief InformationOfficer

Chief Human Capital Officer

Management

Energy InformationAdministration

Assistant Secretaryfor Congressional and

Intergov’t Affairs

Health, Safetyand Security

Economic ImpactAnd Diversity

InspectorGeneral

Hearings andAppeals

Intelligence andCounter Intelligence

Public Affairs

Bonneville PowerAdministration

Southwestern PowerAdministration

Southeastern PowerAdministration

Western Area PowerAdministration

Deputy Administratorfor Defense Programs

Deputy Administratorfor Defense Nuclear

Nonproliferation

Deputy Administratorfor Naval Reactors

Deputy Under Secretaryfor Counter-terrorism

Associate Administratorfor Defense Nuclear

Security

Associate Administratorfor Emergency

Operations

Associate Administratorfor Infrastructureand Environment


for Science

Steven E. Koonin

Office of Science

Advanced ScientificComputing Research

Basic Energy Sciences

Biological andEnvironmental Research

Fusion Energy Science

High Energy Physics

Nuclear Physics


Kristina M. Johnson

Assistant Secretaryfor Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy

Assistant Secretaryfor Environmental

Management

Assistant Secretaryfor Fossil Energy

Assistant Secretaryfor Nuclear Energy

CivilianRadioactive Waste

Management

Electricity Deliveryand Energy Reliability

Legacy Management

Associate Administratorfor Management

and Administration

Workforce DevelopmentFor Teachers/Scientists

Department Staff and Support Offices

Advanced ResearchProjects Agency-Energy

5

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEOffice of Science

Office of the Director (SC-1)William F. Brinkman

Adv. ScientificComp. Research (SC-21)

Michael Strayer

Workforce Development for Teachers/

Scientists (SC-27)

Wm. ValdezBasic Energy

Sciences (SC-22)Harriet Kung

Fusion EnergySciences (SC-24)

Edmund Synakowski

High EnergyPhysics (SC-25)

Dennis Kovar

Biological & Environ. Research (SC-23)Anna Palmisano

Nuclear Physics(SC-26)

Timothy Hallmon (A) Acting

Deputy Directorfor Science Programs (SC-2)

Patricia Dehmer

Deputy Directorfor Resource Management (SC-4)

Jeffrey Salmon

Deputy Directorfor Field Operations (SC-3)

George Malosh

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 Project Direction (SC-46)

Vicki Barden

Office of Grants/ Cont. Support (SC-43)

Martin Rubenstein

Office of Business Policy

and Ops (SC-45)

Thomas Phan

Business Mgmt. Sys. & Serv.

(SC-45.1)Thomas Phan (A)

Human Capital Resources(SC-45.2)

Thomas Phan (A)

Ames SOCynthia Baebler

Thomas Jeff. SOJames Turi

Stanford SOPaul Golan

Pacific NWest SOMichael Weis

Princeton SOJerry Faul

Oak Ridge SOJohnny Moore

Fermi SOM. Bollinger (A)

Brookhaven SOMichael Holland

Berkeley SOAundra Richards

Argonne SOJ. Livengood (A)

Chicago Office

Roxanne Purucker

Oak Ridge OfficeGerald Boyd

SCIntegratedSupportCenter

Office of Lab

Policy & Evaluat.(SC-32)D. Streit

Office of Safety,

Security and Infra.(SC-31)M. Jones

6

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEAgenda

Tuesday, March 2, 2010—Wilson Hall, Hornet’s Nest (WH8X0) 8:00 a.m. DOE Executive Session ........................................................................D. Lehman Charge and Procedures .........................................................................D. Lehman High Energy Physics Perspective ...................................... M. Procario, T. Lavine Project Overview ....................................................................................... P. Philp 8:45 a.m. Welcome ................................................................................................... G. Bock 8:50 a.m. Physics Overview..................................................................................B. Fleming 9:10 a.m. Detector Overview ............................................................................... R. Johnson 9:30 a.m. Project Overview ..................................................................................... C. James 10:20 a.m. Break - Outside Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO) 10:35 a.m. Cryogenics, WBS 1.2 ............................................................................... J. Kilmer 10:55 a.m. Cryostat, WBS 1.3 .................................................................................... C.Thorn 11:15 a.m. TPC, WBS 1.4.......................................................................................B. Fleming 11:35 a.m. Readout and DAQ, WBS 1.5 .............................................................. L. Camilleri 12:00 p.m. Lunch (WH2XO) Plenary continues in Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO) 1:00 p.m. Experimental Infrastructure, WBS 1.6 .................................................... D. Bogert 1:20 p.m. System Installation, WBS 1.7 ...................................................................J. Voirin 1:40 p.m. PMT System, WBS 1.8 ................................................................ V. Papavassiliou Breakout Sessions 2:00 p.m. Session 1: WBS 1.2 and 1.3, Cryogenics and Cryostat - Theory (WH3NW) Session 2: WBS 1.4, 1.5, and 1.8: TPC, Readout and DAQ, PMTs - Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO) Session 3: WBS 1.6 and 1.7, Infrastructure and Installation - One North (WH1N) Session 4: WBS 1.1 Project Management, Cost and Schedule - Comitium (WH2SE) 3:30 p.m. Break - Outside Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO) 5:00 p.m. Executive Session – Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO)

7

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEAgenda cont.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 Breakout Sessions 8:00 a.m. Session 1: WBS 1.2 and 1.3, Cryogenics and Cryostat - Theory (WH3NW)

Session 2: WBS 1.4, 1.5, and 1.8: TPC, Readout and DAQ, PMTs - Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO)

Session 3: WBS 1.6 and 1.7, Infrastructure and Installation - One North (WH1N) Session 4: WBS 1.1 Project Management, Cost and Schedule - Comitium (WH2SE) 10:00 a.m. Executive Session – Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO) 1:30 p.m. Closeout – Hornet’s Nest (WH8XO) 2:30 p.m. Adjourn

8

OFFICE OF

SCIENCECharge Questions

1. Does the conceptual design and planned implementation satisfy the performance specifications required to meet the project objectives?

2. Are the estimated cost and proposed schedule ranges realistic, consistent with the technical and budgetary objectives, and justified by the supporting documentation? Has all the work been appropriately identified, estimated and scheduled, including the work associated with performing the preliminary design, final design and value engineering?

3. Does the proposed project team have adequate management experience, design skills and laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline?

4. Are ES&H aspects being properly addressed at the project’s current stage of development?

5. Is the DOE project scope well defined within the DOE and NSF funded collaboration? Are all the other parts of the project uncerstood to be the responsibility of the other collaborators?

6. Is the documentation required by DOE O413.3A in order and ready for approval of the Critical Decision 1?

9

OFFICE OF

SCIENCECD Requirements

Actions A

uthorized by Critical D

ecision (CD

) Approval

CD

-0 C

D-1

CD

-2 C

D-3

CD

-4 Proceed w

ith C

onceptual Design

Request PED

funding Start m

onthly PAR

S &

Quarterly Project

Performance

reporting

A

llow Expenditure of PED

Funds for prelim

inary design

Approval of long-lead

procurement if necessary

Establish Performance

Baseline

Continue design

Request construction

funding

Approve

expenditure of funds for construction

Allow

start of operations or project com

pletion

Non-N

uclear Facilities--Prerequisite Activities for C

Ds

Review

of Mission

Need Statem

ent (M

SN) by O

ffice of Program

Analysis &

Evaluation (C

F-20) for $100M

or greater. Perform

Mission

Need Independent

Project Review

(IPR)

for Major System

(M

S) projects (>=$750K

) Perform

Pre-conceptual Planning

Evaluate Information

Technology (IT) projects w

ith D

epartmental

Enterprise A

rchitecture fram

ework

R

eview of A

cquisition Strategy (A

S) (OEC

M review

for M

S project)

Review

of Conceptual D

esign o R

equirements A

nalysis o R

isk Analysis

o Alternative A

nalysis o V

alue Managem

ent determ

ination

Assess R

equirements

Analysis, R

isk Analysis,

Alternative A

nalysis, & V

alue M

anagement.

A

ppoint FPD

Establish &

charter Integrated Project Team

Ensure compliance w

ith One-

for-One R

eplacement

requirement for building

square footage

Ensure Integrated Safety M

anagement Im

plementation

Ensure consideration for H

igh Perform

ance Sustainable B

uilding

Assess if Q

A Program

is acceptable

Perform

Baseline

External Independent R

eview (EIR

) &

validation by OEC

M for

$100M or greater.

Perform Independent C

ost R

eview or Independent

Cost Estim

ates for MS

project as part of EIR

Program

IPR for $20M

to less than $100M

Review

of Preliminary

Design

Establish com

pliant project EV

MS for $20M

or m

ore, & O

ECM

certifiable EV

MS for

project TPC w

ith $50M

or more

C

onduct Value

Engineering (as applicable)

Incorporate H

igh Perform

ance Sustainable B

uilding provisions into design

D

etermine if Q

A Program

is acceptable

Perform

Executability EIR

by O

ECM

for MS

projects

Perform IPR

for N

on-MS projects

by Program (SC

)

V

erify Key Perform

ance Param

eter or Com

pletion C

riteria achieved

Perform R

eadiness A

ssessment or O

perational R

eadiness Review

Revise environm

ental m

anagement system

. Post C

D-4 C

loseout

Perform Final A

dministrative

& Financial C

loseout

Conduct Post Im

plementation

Review

for IT projects

Hazard C

ategory 1, 2, and 3 Nuclear Facilities--A

dditional Prerequisite Activities/D

ocuments for C

Ds

Perform Technical IPR

Prepare Conceptual Safety

Design R

eport (SDR

)

Prepare a Preliminary Safety

Validation R

eport (PSVR

)

Prepare Prelim

inary SDR

Prepare a PSVR

based on updated design

Prepare Prelim

inary D

ocumented

Safety Analysis

Report (SA

R)

Prepare SER

Prepare D

ocumented SA

R

with Technical Safety

Requirem

ents

Prepare SER

Prerequisite D

ocuments

M

NS

Tailoring Strategy

A

cquisition Strategy

Conceptual D

esign Report

R

isk Managem

ent Plan

Risk A

ssessment

Prelim

inary PEP,

Preliminary H

azard Analysis

(HA

),

Preliminary Security

Vulnerability A

ssessment

Report (SV

AR

)

Initial Cyber Security Plan for

IT projects.

QA

Program D

ocumentation

Perform

ance Baseline

Prelim

inary Design

U

pdated Risk

Assessm

ent

Updated PEP

U

pdated HA

(Approved

at Field Level)

Updated Prelim

inary SV

AR

NEPA

Docum

entation

Updated Initial C

yber Security Plan for IT projects

Final D

esign

Updated C

D-2

documents

U

pdated QA

Program

An A

pproved C

onstruction Project Safety &

H

ealth Plan

Updated C

yber Security Plan for IT projects

C

heckout, Testing &

Com

missioning Plan

Project Transition/ C

loseout Plan

Transition-to-O

perations Plan

Finalized QA

Plan, SVA

R,

HA

Report, C

onstruction Project Safety &

Health Plan,

Finalized C

yber Security Plan for IT projects &

completed

Certification &

Accreditation,

as required Post C

D-4 C

loseout

Final Project Closeout R

eport

Lessons Learned Report

R

equired Operational

Docum

entation

Budget R

elated Docum

ents

After C

D-0 approval, Exhibit 300 for Projects =>$20M

: Annual subm

ission initiated during the federal budget cycle when funds are requested.

Project D

ata Sheets: Annual subm

ission initiated during the federal budget cycle when TEC

funds are requested. Preconceptual

Planning C

onceptual Design

Preliminary

Design

Final D

esign

Construction

Operations

CD

-0 A

pprove Mission N

eed

CD

-1 A

pprove Alternative

Selection & C

ost R

ange

CD

-2 A

pprove Performance

Baseline

CD

-3 A

pprove Start of C

onstruction

CD

-4 A

pprove Start of Operations or Project

Com

pletion

AS-A

cquisition Strategy

MN

S-Mission N

eed Statement

SAR

-Safety Analysis R

eport EIR

-External Independent Review

M

S-Major System

s

SD

R-Safety D

esign Report

EVM

S-Earned Value M

gmt. System

O

ECM

-Office of Engr. &

Const. M

gmt.

SER-Safety Evaluation R

eport H

A-H

azard Analysis

QA

-Quality A

ssurance

SVA

R-Security V

ulnerability Assess. R

eport IPR

-Internal Project Review

PSVR

- Prelim. Safety V

alidation Report TPC

-Total Project Cost

10

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEReport Outline/ Writing Assignments

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................Fisher 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... Lavine 2. Technical Status (Charge Questions 1, 5, 6)

2.1 Cryostat and Cryo-System ......................................................................... *Fuerst/Strauss 2.1.1 Findings 2.1.2 Comments 2.1.3 Recommendations 2.2 Detector and Electronics .......................................................... Wisniewski*/Stroynowski 2.3 Infrastructure and Installation ................................................................... Sims*/Edwards

3. Cost Estimate (Charge Questions 2, 6) ............................................................... Gines*/Fisher 4. Schedule and Funding (Charge Questions 2, 6).................................................. Gines*/Fisher 5. Management and ES&H (Charge Questions 3, 4, 5, 6) .....................Gilchriese*/Fisher/Gines

*Lead

11

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEMicroBooNECost Sheet

Base Base To Date (note*)

Base To Go

(BCWS) (1/31/2010) (1/31/2010) Total Base (BCWS)

Base To Date 1/31/2010 Base To Go Total Delta

MIE (TEC) $K $K $K % $K $K $K $K $K % $K $K $K

1.1 Project Management $1,284 $0 $1,284 20% $260 $1,544 $0 $0 -$1,544

1.2 Cryogenic System $2,875 $0 $2,875 33% $958 $3,833 $0 $0 -$3,833

1.3 Cryostat $1,110 $0 $1,110 38% $423 $1,534 $0 $0 -$1,534

1.4 TPC $1,924 $0 $1,924 33% $628 $2,552 $0 $0 -$2,552

1.5 Digitization and DAQ $1,162 $0 $1,162 39% $451 $1,612 $0 $0 -$1,612

1.6 Experiment Infrastructure $2,437 $0 $2,437 40% $975 $3,412 $0 $0 -$3,412

1.7 Installation $598 $0 $598 40% $237 $835 $0 $0 -$835

Sub-Totals (TEC) $11,390 $0 $11,390 35% $3,932 $15,322 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$15,322

Allotted Project Contingency (~30% of TEC) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Un-allocated TEC (contingency) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Estimated Cost (TEC) $11,390 $0 $11,390 35% $3,932 $15,322 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Other Project Costs (OPC) $2,711 $382 $2,329 32% $752 $3,463 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Project Cost (TPC) $14,101 $382 $13,719 34% $4,684 $18,785 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

MicroBooNE Bottoms Up Contingency Analysis -

FNALWBS

CommentsBudgeted Contingency

% Contingency / Base To Go

Budgeted Contingency

% Contingency / Base To Go

Project Estimate DOE Review Estimate

12

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE

Closeout Presentation

and Final Report

Procedures

13

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEFormat: Closeout Presentation

(No Smaller than 18 pt Font)

2.1 [Use number and title corresponding to writing assignment list.]

List Review Subcommittee Members

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.

14

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEFormat: Final Report

2.1 [Use number and title corresponding to writing assignment list.]

2.1.1 Findings

Include an assessment of technical, cost, schedule, and management.

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.

15

OFFICE OF

SCIENCEExpectations

Present closeout reports in PowerPoint. Forward your sections for each review report

(in MSWord format) to Casey Clark, [email protected], by March 8, 8:00 a.m. (EST).

mailto:[email protected]

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE

Review of Critical Decision 1 for the

Large Liquid Argon Detector for Neutron Physics (MicroBooNE)

atFermi National Accelerator Laboratory

March 3, 2010

Daniel R. LehmanReview Committee Chair

Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energyhttp://www.science.doe.gov/opa/

http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/

17

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE2.1 Cryostat and Cryo-SystemFuerst, Strauss




Findings Comments Recommendations

18

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE2.2 Detector and ElectronicsWisniewski, Stroynowski





19

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE2.3 Infrastructure and InstallationSims, Edwards





20

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE3. Cost EstimateGines, Fisher




21

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE4. Schedule and FundingGines, Fisher




22

OFFICE OF

SCIENCE5. Management and ES&HGilchriese, Fisher, Gines

3. Does the proposed project team have adequate management experience, design skills and laboratory support to produce a credible technical, cost and schedule baseline?

4. Are ES&H/QA aspects being properly addressed at the project’s current stage of development?




daniel r. lehman review committee chair office of science, u.s. department of energy

Documents

support sc

research sc

ops sc

director sc

valdezbasic energysciences

teachers scientists

secretary deputy secretary

secretary kristina