1 / 12

Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson and Contract Project Manager for the EDM Project

Collaboration Business. Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson and Contract Project Manager for the EDM Project for presentation to The EDM Collaboration Los Alamos, NM October 6, 2006. Outline. Election of New Collaborating Institution Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review

adia
Download Presentation

Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson and Contract Project Manager for the EDM Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Collaboration Business Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson and Contract Project Manager for the EDM Project for presentation to The EDM Collaboration Los Alamos, NM October 6, 2006

  2. Outline Election of New Collaborating Institution Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review Schedule for obtaining CD-1 Budgetary information for FY’07 Publications committee The Next Collaboration Meeting

  3. Election of New Collaborating Institution Mississippi State I have recently moved to Mississippi State University to a tenure track position. I think I mentioned it to you during the collaboration meeting at ORNL. The MEP group at MSU  includes Prof. Jim Dunne who is a cryo-target expert and is involved in experiments at JLab. I would like to continue working  on the nEDM experiment and Jim Dunne is also interested in joining  the collaboration. Specifically we are interested in taking up a few simulation tasks in addition to collaborating with Haiyan on the 3He lifetime and injection projects. I had talked to Chris Gould about this and we had identified some simulation tasks which would be ideally suited  for us. These include simulation of the 3He injection and transport.--Dipangkar

  4. Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review Technical Recommendations 3) The CPM should organize special task forces involving appropriate experts across the collaboration focused on the highest risk subsystems. Examples include the cryogenic valve issue, the HV system, and SQUIDs operating in the HV environment.* 9) Valve development should be treated as a high priority.* 21) Prior to CD-2, perform an analysis of the impact that pressurization of the measuring cell will have on other subsystems. 29) Prior to CD-2, develop a plan for the activities and goals of the performance tests for each subsystem and for the assembly.*

  5. Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review Project ManagementRecommendations 3) Generate an aggressive risk-based R&D plan for the remainder of the project that specifies priorities and deliverables and deliver to agencies by November 1, 2006.* 5) Progress on valve development should be a reported at the project quarterly reports to DOE. 6) Explore the involvement of other institutional collaborators in WBS element 1.6 to take on some of the responsibilities. 7) Prior to CD1, revisit the assembly and commissioning plans, including more robust and transparent cost comparisons, in the context of FNPB plans to acquire cryogenics expertise and after the logistics of the alternative plans have been further vetted, both by the project and TUNL administration.

  6. Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review Project ManagementRecommendations 12) Prior to CD-1, revisit bottoms-up contingency assessment with a more rigorous use of the risk-based contingency estimating methodology.* 13) In light of reported cost increases relative to CD0, repeat a bottoms-up cost analysis that identifies efforts taken to contain costs, prior to CD-1. Generate a profile of the upper TPC range, broken out into OPC and TEC, with planned CD dates.* 18) Should the TUNL option be exercised, a plan for implementing safety plans at TUNL should be generated prior to CD-2.

  7. Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review Technical Comments 1) Search for a theorist to make a calculation of the EDM of 3He. 5) Reevaluate the temperature inversion scheme for suppressing film flow in the purifier. 6) Consider the impact of condensed gases on the viability of containing film flow with Cs. 8) Demonstrate a successful transport of polarized 3He between volumes. 12) Consider the impact of the temporal stability of the magnetic fields on the SQUIDs. 19) Consider appointing a Czar of materials. 24) Adopt of a standard database to help facilitate sharing information and to make the data accessible for the duration of the project and experiment. 25) Consider finding a method to incorporate a blind analysis. 28) Consider the implementation of a systematic error log.

  8. Responding to the DOE CD-1 Review Project ManagementComments 9) Consider different escalation models. Although the DOE-OECM guidance may be reasonable for procurements, salary increases have usually exceeded this guidance.* 14) Find a different criterion to select risks for the risk log that highlights the most important ones.* 15) Align the probabilities of risk occurrence thresholds with other projects.* 17) Propagate the hazard analysis to all institutions. 19) Discuss with the collaboration the possibility of more senior investigators making the EDM project most of their research time. 20) Produce MOUs amongst the relevant institutions before CD-2. 26) Get LANL to waive the gross receipts tax on pass through funds. 27) Revisit the project complete plans (CD-4 deliverables) once the assembly plan at ORNL has been studied more carefully. 29) Rework the documents as necessary in accordance with the suggestions made at the review.*

  9. Schedule for Obtaining CD-1 10/7 Proposal for assembly at ORNL and CD-4 requirements 10/19 Negotiation with DOE on CD-4 requirements/project end 10/31 Subsystem managers update cost and schedule 11/15 Roll up new cost and schedule 11/15 LANL approval? 11/16 Inform DOE about new cost and schedule 12/1 New documents released to DOE Major: PPEP, Acquisition Strategy, Risk Assessment Minor: CDR (assembly), Hazard Analysis 12/11 CD-1 review at DOE headquarters – no agenda yet Involves: DOE incl. Colton, NSF, (technical advisors?) Cooper, Lamoreaux, Huffman, Beck, Filippone, Greene, selected subsystem managers 12/31 Possible CD-1 by Kovar if TPC under $20M

  10. Budgetary Information for FY’2007 Total DOE funding is $1300k. OPC is $430k Covers R&D plus project office to CD-1 Funds in hand but subject to continuing resolution Operations colored money TEC is $870k Capital colored money Only available after CD-1 and Energy & Water Bill Construction plus project office LANL LDRD $1300k Mostly salaries $200-400k for R&D for HV, measurement cells, purifier, SQUIDs, etc. NSF R&D?

  11. Publications Committee Talks Paper Review

  12. The Next Collaboration Meeting At Caltech in the winter. When?

More Related