Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson for the EDM Project for presentation to

1. Collaboration Business Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson for the EDM Project for presentation to The nEDM Collaboration Duke University, Durham, NC May 20, 2008

2. Outline • Changes at LANL • Highlights of the reworked WBS • Budgetary information • An August agency review? • Preliminary engineering review • The next collaboration meeting

3. He actually does something besides push paper

4. My apprenticeship as a technician is going well

5. Jan, thanks for putting in leg holes

6. “Drill Man” – Is that a superhero?

7. Changes at LANL • Mark Makela – New staff • Christopher Mauger - New staff • Raul Hennings-Yeoman – New postdoc • Another postdoc offer on the street • A personal matter

8. Highlights of the Reworked WBS • Job is not finished yet, so any release is unofficial • Inter-subsystem links simplified • Format of most subsystems approved by the project office and consistent • Project is likely stretched out once the funding constraints are incorporated • There are about 300 fewer activities, i.e. reduced by 500 and increased by 200 • It will be the starting point for the schedule that will be baselined at CD-2

9. Institutional Costs Needed • The PI at each institution will need to provide the cost information for labor and procurements, i.e. their business model • Martin wants formulae for every relevant case

10. LANL Business Model Examples Total cost= (1+G&A1)*(1+NMGRT)*(1+Over1+Over2)*SLR(salary) where G&A1 = General and Administrative for operations NMGRT = New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax Over1 = Internal overhead for management Over2 = Nuclear physics program tax SLR(salary) = Standard labor rate that includes salary and fringe benefits from a table Total productive hours in a work year based on a 5 day work week ------------------------------ Total cost= (1+G&A2)*(1+NMGRT)*Catalog_Price where G&A2 = General and Administrative for capital procurements

11. The Path to CD-2/CD-3A

12. Budgetary Information

13. CE Budget Profiles ($k)

14. An August Agency Review? • Martin considers an August Agency Review as the best way to keep us from passing the CD-2/3a readiness review in December • The agencies have not repeated the request, and Martin is keeping his head down • It will all depend on what we hear the rest of today and what the executive committee recommends

15. An August Agency Review? • Funding agencies will decide in the Spring (late April?) whether to hold an August review depending on what I report on R&D progress • A guess at what evidence will satisfy them • 3He relaxation time at Duke/NCSU taking data • 3He relaxation time at Illinois taking data • Light collection with preliminary results • 3He transport calculations show practicality of the multi-temperature scheme – an experimental design if necessary • HV at 500 mK taking data • 4He evaporative purification taking data • 3He injection prepared (waiting) for dual-use cryostat • Full valve test taking data

16. LLP Preliminary Engineering Review • The charge and general organization was set out by Martin at the last collaboration meeting • June 30, 2008 at ORNL • Committee and agenda should be finalized on Thursday • Vince is working on the logistics

17. Review of the FNPB-UCN Building • 30% Design Review was held at ORNL on March 17, 2008 • Our suggestions are being take into account • 90% Design Review is coming on June 2, 2008 • Visit to ORNL was also used to brief the ORNL safety people who will participate in our LLP preliminary design review

18. Status of Dispersing Funds • About 15 actions since February • Complicated by the NSFDOE transfer • Only one waiting on nEDM collaborators • About half of the contracts have been awarded and only a few are very far away • LANL and university procurement officers are about equally guilty for the long delays • Martin does not quite have the latest, but I can discuss the status of each action with the PI’s • Martin will make one more attempt to streamline the process

19. The Next Collaboration Meetings • August • In the beginning of the CD-2 readiness-review push • Simon Fraser if there is no August review or LANL if there is an August Review and rehearsals are needed – Martin will contact Mike Hayden • November or December • Prior to the CD-2 readiness review if we go forward • Either at LANL or at a Washington, DC area hotel depending on the funding agencies if we go forward • If in Washington, a local organizer will be needed • Rehearsals will be needed • Collaboration should want to hear the plans and results

20. Engineering and Safety Reviews • Preliminary engineering review of FNPB-UCN building in early April combined with briefing of ORNL safety people • Preliminary design review of the main cryostat in ~June • Final design review of the main cryostat ~September • Preliminary design review of full project ~September

21. Engineering and Safety Reviews • P-Cryogenics – 4 h in June • F-Cryogenics – 4 h • P-Beam/Shielding – 2 h • P-3He services – 4 h • P-Central detector – 4 h • P-Magnets – 4 h • P-Computing/electronics – 2 h • P-Infrastructure – 2 h • i.e. 3-4 days at ORNL in September

22. Engineering and Safety Reviews Committee Paul Huffman (chair) Martin Cooper (ex-officio) Steve Lamoreaux Vince Cianciolo JLab specialist in cryogenics 2 engineers from subsystems not being reviewed (rotating) A very experienced machinist from … (ORNL?) ORNL safety people 1-2 collaboration volunteers optional A written report from the committee is necessary Jan sets the agenda with advice from Martin and Paul Possible talks by subsystem managers, work package leaders, and design engineers

23. Engineering and Safety Reviews Material to be covered Specifications and goals A breakdown of the subsystem into subassemblies Assembly drawings of all subassemblies (the model) Finite element analyses where appropriate Other simulations where appropriate to back up specs Heat transfer and dissipation where appropriate Justification of tolerances Compatibility with neighboring parts Compatibility with other subsystems Accounting for CTE’s of dissimilar materials were needed Meeting materials specs for n-activation, n-absorption, n- and 3He-depolarization, magnetism, electrical conductivity, etc. Safety issues Value engineering (cost minimization) Assembly scenarios Required tests Service and repair scenarios