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 Summary Schedule

13

(CD-3 NS moved later) (CD-4 moved later, float revised)

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

Backup

17

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

Project Organization

20

LBNF DUNE-US

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)