Executive Session Director’s CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

1. Executive Session Director’s CD-1 Review of theAPUL Project July 16-17, 2009 Dean A. Hoffer

2. Agenda for Exec Session • Charge to Reviewers • Review Agenda • DOE O 413.3 Critical Decision Table • Document Requirements • Technical Design Review Guidance • Cost/Schedule Review Guidance • Reporting Structure • Reviewer Assignments • Cost / Contingency Table • Discussion Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

3. Charge Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

4. Charge (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

5. Charge Attachment #1 Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

6. Charge Attachment #1 (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

7. Agenda Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

8. Agenda (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

9. Agenda (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

10. DOE O 413.3Critical Decision Table Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

11. CD-1 Documentation • Acquisition Strategy • Preliminary Project Execution Plan (PEP) • Preliminary Project Management Plan (PMP) • Assumptions Document • Conceptual Design Report (CDR) • Baseline Range and Resource Loaded Schedule • Configuration Management Plan • Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report • Risk Management Plan and Risk Assessment • Value Management Documentation • Quality Assurance Program Documentation Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

12. Fermilab Project Management Documents • OPMO Procedures: http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OPMO/PolProc/home.htm • FRA Earned Value Management System Description • 12.PM-001 Project WBS, OBS, RAM • 12.PM-002 Control Accounts, Work Packages, Planning Packages • 12.PM-003 Work Authorization • 12.PM-004 Project Scheduling • 12.PM-005 Cost Estimating • 12.PM-006 Monthly Status and Reporting • 12.PM-007 Change Control • 12.PM-008 EVMS Surveillance & Maintenance Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

13. Two Parts to the Review • Technical - Independent Conceptual Design Review • Cost, Schedule and Project Management Review Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

14. Technical – Conceptual Design Review • Design Reviews are performed to determine if a product (drawings, analyses, or specifications) is correct and will perform its intended functions and meet requirements. • The Conceptual Design process requires a mission need as an input. Concepts for meeting the need are explored and alternatives considered to arrive at a set of alternatives that are technically viable, affordable and sustainable. Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

15. Cost/Schedule Review Guidance Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

16. Cost/Schedule Review Guidance (Continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

17. Cost/Schedule Review Guidance (Continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

18. Cost/Schedule Review Guidance (Continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

19. Cost/Schedule Review Guidance (Continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

20. Cost/Schedule Review Guidance (Continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

21. Subcommittee Assignments • SC1 – D1 Magnets • Jim Strait • Bob Kephart • Mike Harrison • SC2 – Cold Powering System • Claus Rode • ArkadiyKlebaner • Phil Martin • SC3 – Cost, Schedule and Project Management • Mike Lindgren • Fran Clark • Jeff Sims Note: Underlined names are subcommittee lead. Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

22. Reviewer Assignments Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

23. Reviewer Assignments (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

24. Reviewer Assignments (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

25. Reviewer Assignments (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

26. Reviewer Assignments (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

27. Reviewer Assignments (continued) Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

28. Reviewer Assignments for Breakouts Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

29. Reporting Structure • Review findings, comments, and recommendations should be presented in writing at a closeout with the APUL’s and Fermilab’smanagement. • Section for each “Level 2” WBS plus Cost, Schedule, Management sections. Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

30. Findings Comments Recommendations Findings are statements of fact that summarize noteworthy information presented during the review. Comments are judgment statements about the facts presented during the review. The reviewers' comments are based on their experiences and expertise. The comments are to be evaluated by the project team and actions taken as deemed appropriate. Recommendations are statements of actions that should be addressed by the project team. A response to the recommendation is expected and that the actions taken would be reported on during future reviews. Findings, Comments, and Recommendations Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

31. Examples of Findings, Comments, and Recommendations Finding • A plan for the MI upgrades was presented. The major elements of this plan consist of an upgrade of a MI quad power supply, which is nearly complete, and the addition of two more RF stations. The cavities to be installed currently exist as spares so there is no design and prototyping required. Comment • The project has decided to build the DCCT in-house. The committee supports this effort since the technology and design of this device is well developed and well known. Recommendation • Work with Fermilab management to acquire resources needed to complete the accelerator and beamline modifications. Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

32. Project’s Cost & Contingency Estimate Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

33. Reviewer Write-ups • Write-up template is posted on Director’s Review Webpage. http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OPMO/Projects/APUL/DirRev/2009/07_16/CloseoutPresentationsDRAPUL07-17-09.docx • Write-ups are to be sent to Terry Erickson at terickson@fnal.gov prior to 12:30 PM on Friday, July 17 for the Closeout Dry Run • A final report will be issued within 2 weeks after the closeout. Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project

34. Discussion • Questions and Answers Director's CD-1 Review of the APUL Project