Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting Fermilab R&D Meeting Vic Kuchler Conventional Facilities Update October 26, 2005 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 1 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting Milestone One: Snowmass 2005 Conference Successfully Initiate the Global Conventional Facilities and Siting Effort and Complete the Comparative Site Assessment Matrix Format Milestone Two: December, 2005 Identify Regional Sample Sites for Inclusion into the Baseline Configuration Document Milestone Three: December, 2006 Complete Conventional Facilities and Siting Portion of the Reference Design Document 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 2 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Organizational Overview • With the Establishment of the Global Design Effort (GDE), Work on the ILC has been Organized into Seven Working Groups and Six Global Groups • Each Individual Group has a Designated Representative from Each of the Three Regions, Asian Region, European Region and the Americas Region • Global Group 4 is the Conventional Facilities and Siting Group Represented by: • Atsushi Enomoto – Asian Region • Jean-Luc Baldy – European Region • Vic Kuchler – Americas Region 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 3 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Global Group 4 Goals Developed at Snowmass • Review, Discuss and Amend the Site Assessment Matrix into a Final Working Document • Agree Upon and Regular Means of Communication for the Conventional Facilities and Siting Work • Identify Points of Contact with Each Working and Global Group as Needed • Determine a Working Schedule for Completion of Baseline Configuration Document (BCD - Dec 2005) and Reference Design Document (RDR – Dec 2006) • Discuss Website and Document Management System for the Control of CFS Information • Determine Format for CFS Portion of the BCD 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 4 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Progress To Date • The Site Assessment Matrix has been Established and is Currently Being Used by all Regions to Identify a Regional Sample Site for the Baseline Configuration Document • A Regular Video Conference has been Established Between All Three Regions to Coordinate the Conventional Facilities and Siting Work • Points of Contact have been Identified with Each of the Working/Global Groups • The Schedule and Format for the Baseline Configuration Document as well as the Website Conventions have been/will be Established by the GDE for all Working and Global Groups 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 5 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Working Group Points of Contact • WG 1 – Low Emittance Transport Beam Dynamics • Daniel Schulte (CERN) - Jean-Luc Baldy (CERN) • WG 2 – Linac Design • Hitoshi Hayano (KEK) - Atsushi Enomoto (KEK) • WG 3A – Sources • John Shepard (SLAC) - Vic Kuchler (FNAL) • WG 3B – Damping Rings • Andy Wolski (LBNL) - Tom Lackowski (FNAL) • WG 4 – Beam Delivery System • Andrei Seryi (SLAC) - Fred Asiri (SLAC) • WG 5 – Superconducting Cavities and Couplers • No Point of Contact at this Time • WG 6 – Communications • Judy Jackson (FNAL) - Vic Kuchler (FNAL) 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 6 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Global Group Points of Contact • GG 1 – Parameters • Kaoru Yokoya (KEK) - Atsushi Enomoto (KEK) • Nick Walker (DESY) - Jean-Luc Baldy (CERN) • Tor Raubenheimer (SLAC) - Fred Asiri (SLAC) • GG 2 – Instrumentation and Controls • No Point of Contact at this Time • GG 3 – Operations and Availability • Tom Himel (SLAC) - Emil Huedem (FNAL) • GG 5 – Cost and Engineering • Tetsuo Shidara (KEK) - Atsushi Enomoto (KEK) • Wilhelm Bialowons (DESY) - Jean-Luc Baldy (CERN) • Peter Garbincius (FNAL) - Tom Lackowski (FNAL) • GG 6 – Physics Options • No Point of Contact at this Time 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 7 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Moving Toward the Sample Sites • Each Region is Reviewing Various Candidate Sites Using the Site Assessment Matrix as a Tool to Eventually Identify Each Regional Sample Site for Inclusion into the BCD • The Matrix is Divided into 9 Major Headings with 99 Individual Items of Assessment • Sample Site Selection Will Necessarily Include a Degree of Judgment and Subjectivity as part of the Analysis • The Asian Region is Currently Reviewing 4-5 Candidate Sites • The European Region is Currently Reviewing 2 Candidate Sites • The Americas Region is Currently Reviewing 5 Candidate Sites 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 8 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Site Assessment Matrix Major Headings • Site Impacts on Critical Science parameters • Scientific/Institutional support Base • Land Acquisition • Environmental impacts • Construction Cost Impacts • Operational Cost Impacts • Environment, Safety and Health Issues • Regional Support Infrastructure • Risk Factors 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 9 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 10 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting Cut and Cover (Near Surface) Sites – Site A 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 11 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting Cut and Cover (Near Surface) Sites – Site E 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 12 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Cut and Cover Site Considerations • Perceived to be Less Expensive but this has not been Clearly Demonstrated by Work to Date • Neither Site has Uniform Depth for Excavation Which Precludes Saving from Uniform Construction Methods • Neither Earth Curved or Laser Straight Alignment Show Any Advantage and Both Could Be Problematic • Surface Disruption and Surface Building Presence is Extensive with Respect to Roadways, Drainage Patterns, Rail Lines, Utility Corridors, Current Land Usage, Berms, etc. • Requires Extensive Land Acquisition • May Not be Environmentally Viable • Precludes an Alignment Centered on the Fermilab Site 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 13 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting Deep Tunnel Sites - Site A 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 14 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting Deep Tunnel Sites - Site B 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 15 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Deep Tunnel Site Considerations • Uniform Construction Methods Can Be Used Throughout the Project • Both Earth Curved or Laser Straight Alignments Could Be Accommodated • Surface Disruption and Land Acquisition are Minimized Compared to a Cut and Cover Solution • A Deep Tunnel Configuration is Less Susceptible to Surface Background Noise and Ground Motion • Relatively Uniform Environmental Impact • Could Readily Take Advantage of Existing Fermilab Site With Respect to Land and Infrastructure 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 16 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting • Near-Term Schedule • 11.4.05 – Draft BCD Documentation Due • 12.7/9.05 – GDE Meeting at INFN, Frascati, Italy with Regional Sample Sites Identified • BCD Accepted as Baseline and Configuration Management System is in Place • 1.06 – Begin Work on Reference Design Report • 3.06 – GDE Meeting in Bangalore, India • Continue Working to Complete RDR • 12.06 – Reference Design Document Complete 10.26.05 V. Kuchler 17 of 17

Global Group 4 – Conventional Facilities and Siting