doe independent project review - fermilab ipr... · strategy, particle physics project...
TRANSCRIPT
1
DOE Independent Project Review
Long Baseline Neutrino Facility/
Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment
(LBNF/DUNE) Project
DOE Executive Session3/20/2018
Pepin CarolanFederal Project Director
DOE Fermi Site Office
Outline
• Introduction
• Project Background
• LBNF/DUNE Overview
• Project Scope
• Project Management Organization
• Funding, Cost & Schedule
• Recent Progress & Challenges
• FPD Assessment
2
Introduction• Neutrinos most ubiquitous matter particle in the universe, yet
least understood. Transformative discovery opportunities:
– Origin of matter: matter/antimatter asymmetry, precision
oscillation physics
– Supernovae: neutron star & black hole formation
– Nucleon Decay: unified theory of energy and matter
• Convergence of global HEP science community:
– 2012-2014, Community deliberations: Snowmass, European
Strategy, Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5)
– 2014, P5 Plan – Strategic Plan for U.S. Particle Physics in global
context, which recommended
• new international collaboration be formed to design, execute a highly capable
Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF) hosted by the U.S
• meet minimum specified requirements in beam power, detector mass and
exposure
• LBNF is highest priority project in its timeframe
– Early 2015, DUNE collaboration forms3
Project Background
• 2010, CD-0 approved; 2012, CD-1 approved (LBNE)
• 2012-2015, Global community deliberations and DUNE formation
• 2015, Fermilab working with DUNE collaboration organizes to host an
international megascience project that meets P5 requirements
• Nov. 5, 2015, Revised CD-1 approved for LBNF/DUNE Project
– Cost range of $1,260 -$1,860 M
– Tailoring Strategy includes CD-3a for initial far site construction, CD-2/3b for
baseline/far site construction and later CD-3 to start near site construction
• Sept. 1, 2016, CD-3a approved to authorize start of initial far site
construction for the LBNF/DUNE Project
• International Planning proceeding, key partnerships in place
– CERN is a major partner on facility infrastructure, detector prototyping, facilitating
European engagement (2015: DOE-CERN-NSF co-operation agreement)
– Strong leadership, early support from several countries for DUNE (2017: US-UK
science and technology agreement; IHEP/China committed to corrector magnets;
Brazil, India, Italy, Switzerland considering in-kind contributions)
4
5
LBNF/DUNE Overview
Far Site- SURF in Lead, SD Near Site- Fermilab (FNAL) in Batavia, IL
• LBNF: DOE project with contributions from non-DOE partners. Provides facility infrastructure at two locations to support the experiment:▪ Near site: Fermilab, Batavia, IL – facilities to create neutrino beam
▪ Far site: Sanford Underground Research Facility, Lead, SD – facilities to support DUNE detectors
• DUNE: Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment ▪ Near and far site detectors: U.S. as partner in international project
LBNF/DUNE Overview
• In DOE system, LBNF/DUNE is a single project, with
two parts:
i. LBNF: DOE FNAL Project w/international contributions
ii. DUNE-US: DOE contributions to international DUNE
Project
• One funding profile, one Program Manager, one FPD
• Int’l DUNE Project managed by DUNE collaboration w/
multiple international partners—LHC model for
CMS/ATLAS
6
Project Scope- LBNF Near Site
7
• Conventional facilities for beamline, near
detector
• Proton beamline, neutrino beamline, target,
horns, decay pipe, absorber designed for
1.2 MW, upgradable to 2.4 MW
– includes some international contribution
• Design optimized to increase physics reach
Project Scope- LBNF Far Site
8
Far Site Conventional Facilities
Construction (FSCF):
• Infrastructure & Utilities
(Surface/Shaft/4850L)
• 4850L underground excavation
• All FSCF scope is DOE funded
• CD-3a scope entirely within FSCF
• Construction Manager/General
Contractor (CM/GC) to manage
construction:
➢ collaboration during final design
➢ manage logistics
Far Site Cryogenic Infrastructure• Cryostats installed in caverns; Utilities/Cryo Support systems (surface and underground), Argon
• Includes international contributions
Far Site Conventional Facilities and Cryogenic Infrastructure enable DUNE
detector installation, commissioning and operation
Cryostat 1
Cryostat 4
Cryostat 3
Cryostat 2
Central utility cavern
Project Scope- DUNE
9
• Far Site: Four 10-kton fiducial mass Liquid Argon
detectors, single phase(SP)/dual phase(DP)
– 9 international Consortias formed to construct Time Projection Chambers,
photon detection, electronics, DAQ, HV, Controls/instrumentation systems
• ProtoDUNE: prototyping activities at multiple sites/CERN to develop and
scale SP & DP technologies
• DUNE-US: Contributions to ProtoDUNE-SP; targeting APAs & Cold
Electronics for two Far Detectors; engineering, integration and
installation support for Far and Near detectors
• Near Detector concept being refined, opportunity for new
collaborators/nations/ resources
- Anode Plane Assemblies (APA)
- Cathode Plane Assemblies/Field Cage
S
I
N
G
L
E
P
H
A
S
E
Experiment-Facility
Interface Group *
LBNF Project Director
LBNF Project Manager
Project Management Executive
Office of High Energy Physics
Associate Director
LBNF/DUNE Program Manager
Fermi Site Office
LBNF/DUNE Federal Project Director
International Neutrino Council
DOE
FNAL
IPT
*DOE FPD serves as ex-officio EFIG member
DOE Project Management Organization
10
DOE Project Management Executive:
DOE-US, S-4 (CD-1, 2, 3a)
DOE-SC-1 (CD-3,4)
AD-OHEP/IAC Chair: Jim Siegrist
LBNF/DUNE Program Manager:
Mike Procario (Deputy Bill Wisniewski)
LBNF/DUNE Federal Project Director:
Pepin Carolan (Deputy Adam Bihary)
FNAL Director: Nigel Lockyer
FNAL Deputy Directors:
Joe Lykken & Chris Mossey
LBNF Project Director: Chris Mossey
LBNF Project Manager: Elaine McCluskey
DUNE Technical Coordinator/
DUNE-US Project Director: Eric James
DUNE-US Project Manager: Jolie Macier
DUNE Management
(Co-Spokespersons, Technical &
Resource Coordinators) manages
International DUNE Project
with FNAL (Host Lab) Oversight
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
DUNE-US Project Director
DUNE-US Project Manager
Lab Director
SPAC LBNC NCG RRB
DOE LBNF/DUNE Funding Guidance
• Profile ramps more slowly than anticipated at CD-3a, increases TPC– Delays Start of detector #1 installation, operation ~1yr; neutrino “beam ready” ~2.5yrs
• Strategy implemented to prioritize Far Site work, extends Far Site
completion to minimize Near Site delay (agreed by FNAL, LBNF, DUNE)
– Adds management/escalation costs
– Challenge to maintain contingency to address risks
• Project has weathered continuing resolutions (“helped” by carryover and
some large procurements pushed back in schedule)
• President’s Budget Request (PBR), DOE, Congressional support strong
– FY17 approp. $5M> PBR; FY18 approp. anticipated to be greater; FY19 PBR at guidance
Guidance
at CD-3A
Approval
Prior
Years
FY
2017
FY
2018
FY
2019
FY
2020
FY
2021
FY
2022
FY
2023
FY
2024
FY
2025
FY
2026 Total
OPC 85 2 3 3 93
TEC 62 45 95 145.1 170 183 202 200 180 147 13.9 1443
TPC 147 45 95 145.1 170 183 204 200 180 150 16.9 1536
Updated
Guidance
(Oct
2017)
Prior
Years
FY
2017*
FY
2018**
FY
2019
FY
2020
FY
2021
FY
2022
FY
2023
FY
2024
FY
2025
FY
2026
FY
2027 Total
OPC 85 0.1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 101
TEC 62 50 54.9 113 123 130 162 175 196 210 170 17 1463
TPC 147 50 55 115 125 132 164 177 198 212 172 17 1564
DOE Cost Estimate
12
• DOE TPC: $1.5 billion
• $22% Contingency on
DOE BAC cost to go
($1,134,029 BAC to go)
- changes due to “directed”
(funding) + requirements/scope
/design progression and risks
realized have used contingency
- pending changes reduce
available contingency more
- updated risk analysis increases
contingency need
• CD-3a authorization is
$308 million- contingency also impacted,
now at 21% of BAC costs to go
LBNF/DUNE WBS Title DOE Total $K
LBNF Project
Project Office 122,840
Far Site Facilities (CD-3a scope within here) 501,483
Near Site Facilities 449,707
LBNF DOE Project Cost Subtotal 1,074,030
DUNE-US Project
Project Office 33,176
Far Detector 94,824
Near Detector 5,669
DUNE-US Project Cost Subtotal 133,669
LBNF/DUNE Conceptual Design 107,638
LBNF/DUNE Total (BAC) 1,315,337
Contingency (Based on BAC) 248,663
LBNF/DUNE DOE Total Project Cost (TPC) 1,564,000
January 2018 status, based on current funding guidance
Note: Total Contribution to LBNF/DUNE
includes DOE TPC + non-DOE contributions
LBNF/DUNE Progress Since 2017 IPR
14
• SURF Site Prep Ross Shaft refurbishment completed to 4850L (prior to stop-work)
• CD-3a baselined scope began with rock pipe conveyor design/fab contract
• Far Site CM/GC Contract awarded and developing pre-excavation bid packages;
ARUP (A/E) contract transferred from SDSTAFRA for final design
• DOE Senior Realty Officer support for LBNF/DUNE investment in non-Federal
property (SURF); FRA-FSO Integrated Real Estate Team formed
• Cryogenic infrastructure (LN2, LAr) design and acquisition planning progressing;
CERN finalized cryostat warm design, started membrane cryostat design; interfaces
with conventional, detector, FNAL/CERN actively managed; protoDUNE experience
informing cryogenics/cryostat design
• Near site: finalized optimized beamline conceptual design;
• DUNE-US: contributed to ProtoDUNE-SP effort (on-site CERN, US, other sites);
detector component designs completed and production/installation nearly complete
• DUNE Collaboration has continued to grow, exceeding 1,000 collaborators and
has stood-up Consortia to define deliverables and responsibilities for international
project; DUNE Technical Coordination organization evolving to manage interfaces
• Far Site logistics planning has advanced (transport, storage, test facilities) and
FNAL established Host Lab working groups and new “South Dakota Division”
Challenges
15
• ES&H/Construction Readiness/Governance: series of reviews underway at
SURF with SDSTA, FSO, HEP, SC following unplanned Ross work platform
stoppage/drop (preceded by other incidents); reviews to assure readiness to
resume Ross refurbishment, ultimately support start of excavation; FSO DOE
Facility Rep providing on-site SURF ESH oversight
• Procurement volume, complexity and capacity: absorbed schedule delays,
replanning effort; FNAL/LBNF hiring to expand capacity, FNAL improving
processes and senior engagement; FSO and HCA engagement to facilitate
review processes; FSO also hiring (replacement) dedicated LBNF/DUNE C.O.
• Managing multiple activities, participants, risks to execute Far Site
construction: completing site prep/reliability scope; bid/award CM/GC sub-
contracts; contractor relationships with KAJV, SDSTA (ensuring performance);
construction management, oversight and logistics
• Maintaining progress in other project areas: Cryogenics, LN2, LAr acquisition
planning; advancing near site/beamline preliminary design; defining DUNE-US
scope in coordination with DUNE international management
• Increasing international partnerships and contributions: DUNE, FNAL, LBNF
• Contingency situation: result of funding, change requests, risks realized,
updated risk analysis and increased contingency need
Federal Project Director Assessment
16
• Project working very hard to overcome challenges to progress
Far Site work and prepare for increasing future demands
(procurement, systems engineering, logistics)
• FNAL has stepped up support to LBNF/DUNE, coordination with
DOE/FSO and SC in key areas (procurement, ESH oversight,
SURF governance, legal, property, international)
• DUNE Consortia and ProtoDUNE performance key to completing
TDR, enabling DUNE-US to define baseline for CD-2/3b
• Resources and adequate contingency are critical to maintain
momentum, execute plan and progress along path to CD-2/3b– FY18 and FY19 appropriation levels key to support “launch”
– Need to identify some combination of: additional cost savings (no silver
bullets?), possible scope contingency (appears to be none), validating
risk and contingency needs, additional contingency through funding
Environment Safety & Health
18
• ES&H Management implemented through:
‒ Integrated ESH Management Plan
‒ Planning and Design: Management structure and organization;
Design process and studies
‒ Reviews and Assessment: Regular technical reviews + special safety
reviews; NEPA process; Hazard analysis
‒ Work planning and control receiving additional attention at SURF
• Far Site Conventional Facilities ESH planning emphasizes: clear
responsibilities, flow-down and understanding of requirements,
hazard analysis and work controls, management and oversight
• ProtoDUNE meeting CERN and Institutional ESH requirements,
with LBNF/DUNE review and oversight (design and production
readiness reviews, site visits, hazard analysis documentation)
• U.S. & International Codes & Standards equivalency process
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
19
• Far Site Facilities
– Far Site Conventional Facilities (FSCF)
– Cryogenics Infrastructure
• Near Site Facilities
– Near Site Conventional Facilities
– Beamline
• Far Detector
– Far Detector (Detector 1&2
components, integration/engineering,
installation/commissioning)
– ProtoDUNE (single phase components,
integration, installation, testing)
• Near Detector
CD-3A Scope
21
Cryostat 1
Cryostat 4
Cryostat 3
Cryostat 2
Central utility cavern
Excavated Rock
Handling System
Ross Headframe
and Crusher Bldg
Cryogenic
Compressor
Bldg
Ross Dry
Ross
Substation
12kV Power Feed andTransformer Upgrade
RossHoistBldg
Pre-Excavation
• Rock disposal system
• Ventilation rehabilitation
• Electrical services to
shaft, early utilities,
power/comm/water
• Concrete delivery system
Excavation
• Cavern for two of four detector
chambers (chambers 1-2)
• Central Utility Cavern (CUC)
• Drifts and ramps for access,
egress, ventilation, cavern
excavation
Building & Site Infrastructure
• Cryogenic Building, gas piping
• Site utilities, chambers 1-2 , CUC
outfitting
Critical Decision ScheduleCritical Decision Milestone Schedule
(*=early date)CD-0 Approve Mission Need 1/8/2010 (Actual)
CD-1 Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range 12/10/2012 (Actual)
CD-1 Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range (Refresh) 11/5/2015 (Actual)
CD-3a Approve Initial LBNF Far Site Construction 9/1/2016 (Actual)
CD-2 Approve Performance Baseline 1st Quarter, FY2020 *CD-3b Approve Start of Construction: Remaining LBNF Far Site, DUNE 1st Quarter, FY2020 *CD-3 Approve Start of Construction: Near Site 2nd Quarter, FY2022 *CD-4 Approve Project Completion 4th Quarter, FY2033
• 42 months float proposed to CD-4 (29% of remaining duration)
• Far Site critical path defined by early science goals and is an
important driver of the Tailoring Strategy
• CD-3a authorization, prior to CD-2, allows time needed to complete
sequential pre-excavation, excavation, and cryogenic system
installation required to enable start of first DUNE detector module
installation
Cavern Excavation Cryogenics Infrastructure Detector Fill & CommissionDetector Install
Risk Management
• Mature risk management process in place; robust
risk identification, assessment and mitigation– Project-wide risk registry tracks 161 risks, managed through regular
Project Risk Management Board meetings (15 retired since ‘17 IPR)
– Periodic risk workshops and updates, most recent December ‘17
• Key risk areas – FSCF/CD-3a: Escalation rate greater than predicted; Specialized
construction labor is unavailable; accident stops work; unavailability
of SURF or FRA supplied system or space (30 risks affect CD-3a)
– Delayed procurements: SURF reliability, FSCF bid packages, Cryo
(LN2 design/fab), NSCF (A/E, CM/GC)
– Overall: funding uncertainty; beamline technical; construction;
detector technical; vendor; interface and logistics; market and
economic; labor resource; external international
23
Preliminary Key Performance Parameters
• Apply to DOE scope; defined for LBNF, DUNE-US
• Threshold KPPs for key components/systems, aimed
at P5 minimum to proceed– Beamline: hardware commissionedprotons on target
– Conventional Facilities: caverns for 4x10-kton modules
– Cryogenics: components installed/tested for 2x10-kton modules
– Far Detector: components installed for 2x10-kton modules w/
cosmic ray interactions detected
• Objective KPPs aimed at full LBNF/DUNE vision– system enhancements to neutrino beamline
– additional DOE contributions to 3rd, 4th 10-kton modules
24
International Cost Estimate
25
• “CORE” costing adopted for international partners
– Includes M&S costs for component production, assembly, installation and
commissioning
– Does not include costs for R&D, design, management or institutional costs
(infrastructure or labor); institutional labor hours are included; no escalation or
contingency
• Total cost estimate developed in CORE accounting by WBS for entire
international LBNF/DUNE Project
– Total CORE cost in Dollars and in Hours
– Enables initial allocation among partners by WBS items
– As with LHC, international partners will be relied upon to deliver (no U.S. cost
contingency established to cover international commitments)
• Standard DOE Total Project Cost (M&S/Labor, indirects, escalation,
contingency) estimated for all DOE contributions to LBNF/DUNE Project
• Working toward a plan with:
– ~25% of LBNF as a non-DOE contribution (in-kind to a DOE Project)
– ~25% of DUNE as a DOE contribution (US-DOE contribution to Int’l Project)