An Overview of Conventional Facilities (Civil Construction)

1. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 An Overview of Conventional Facilities (Civil Construction) U. S. ILC Civil studies and cost issues for Snowmass Fred Asiri

2. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Overview • Introduction • Goals/Tasks • Primary • Secondary • Accomplishments • Plans • Near-Term • Long-Term Fred Asiri

3. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Introduction • SLAC Conventional Facilities (CF) group consists of three (3) FTE (4 FTE until recently). • We are complementary to Fermi lab CF group. • All are experienced licensed professionals in their respective fields • ILC/U.S. Conventional Facilities efforts at SLAC continue in full collaboration with Fermi lab colleagues. • A weekly video meeting is held every Tuesdays, to increase interaction and consistency in the overall work efforts. • Collaborated with colleagues at KEK and Europe. • Visited their sites and participated in many international conferences and work shops in order to coordinate our efforts. Fred Asiri

4. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Goals/Tasks: • Primary: • Continue general development of concepts, sites, costs, and schedules for ILC conventional facilities. • Identify and perform civil engineering option studies. • Perform baseline site characterizations for U.S. sample site. • Prepare clear scope descriptions, technical requirements and needs, as well as option studies to initiate U.S. CDR. • Secondary: • Support ILC R&D with related facilities • Support ILC Working Groups • Support and participate in ESH activities at SLAC Fred Asiri

5. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Accomplishments: • Primary Tasks: • Prepared “Conventional Facilities Design Summaries and Drawings” and option studies for Superconducting (SC) and Normal conducting (NC) for the U.S. Linear Collider Steering Group (LCSG). • This activity comprised of about 50 full size drawings and 100 pages of text and included cost-estimate studies. • Assessed Dekalb-IL and Logan Ridge-CA sites for SC and NC machine configurations. • Performed option studies for one tunnel vs. two tunnels • Performed vibration characterizations of the Logan Ridge-CA site for NC machine, as well as parametric evaluation for the Dekalb-IL site. Fred Asiri

6. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Plan “through Calendar Year 2006”: • Three milestones are envisioned for the U.S. Civil Design Effort. • Milestone No. 1 - Snowmass Conference – August 2005 • Investigate prospective sites at or near Fermi Lab that have been identified for their topographic or geologic advantages. • Develop a reference site by utilizing available data from a real site with ideal attributes for comparison. • Prepare a matrix tool in order to identify and assess the salient features of the prospective and reference sites. • Collaborate with colleagues at KEK and DESY for inclusion of their site assessment criteria into the comparative matrix. • Identify and assess civil design solution for alternative machine configuration and options. • Present a complete and collaborative sets of data for the assessment of ILC sample sites, as well as for civil option studies at Snowmass. Fred Asiri

7. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 B.C. (TRIUMF) Proposed ILC Alignment (30 miles long) Fred Asiri-7

8. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Conventional Facilities Site Considerations “Draft” • Purpose; To develop suitable criteria to assess the identified sample regional sites in order to chose a sample regional site for preparation of CDR. • Following is a top level list of criteria that have been considered: • Site Impacts on critical Science Parameters • Scientific/Institutional Support Base • Land Acquisition • Environmental Impacts • Construction Cost Impacts • Operation Cost Impacts • Environmental, Safety & Health • Regional Infrastructure Support • Risk Factors Fred Asiri

9. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Civil Option Studies Considered “Draft” • To present a detailed assessment of major trade-off choices in order to reach decision at Snowmass or soon after (in time ) for preparation of CDR. • Following is a partial list trade-off choices that have been considered: • Provision for extension for upgrade to 1 TeV • Linac tunnel depth • Tunnel vertical profile • Linac tunnel and service tunnel arrangement • Damping ring style • Damping ring construction • Crossing angles and dumps • Number of IR’s (one vs. two) • Dual IR issues Fred Asiri

10. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Milestone No. 2 – December 2005 • Refine and complete the assessments of all the identified Northern Illinois site. • Down select to one factual well documented sample site. • Compare the sample site with the reference site in details. • Clearly define and explain trade-offs and alternatives. • Prepare an assessment report covering the above. • This report will be reviewed with DOE for determining the U.S. regional sample site. • The chosen U.S. regional sample site along with the other international regional sample sites will be used for the CDR. Fred Asiri

11. DOE Annual Review -June 15,2005 Civil studies & cost issues for Snowmass • Milestone No. 3 – December 2006 • Combine with the machine and detector configuration and parameters to formulate a complete sets of requirement. • Characterize clearly major options for the trade-off studies. • Develop the U.S. sample site CF of the CDR including the detailed evaluation of the trade-off studies. • This CDR is not envisioned to be in accordance with the DOE Project Management Order at this time. • DOE Rule of Thumb is 1% of Civil Cost Estimate for Conceptual Design Report. • For a ~$1B Construction Project that Represents a CDR Cost of $10M. • Hence the Need for Definition of the Deliverable Fred Asiri