US Project Plan for MICE Mark Palmer Peter Garbincius, Alan Bross, Rich Krull Fermilab November 24, 2014

Outline Current Status of the MAP Effort Updated Project Plan to Complete the MICE Cooling Demonstration –Scope –Historical Comments –Important Definitions for Numbers Shown –Risks –Cost and Effort –Schedule Responses to Actions from Previous Review (RLSR & MPB Actions) –Responses –Comments & Lessons Learned Conclusion November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)2

CURRENT STATUS OF THE MAP EFFORT November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)3

Program Mission The mission of the Muon Accelerator Program (MAP) is to develop and demonstrate the concepts and critical technologies required to produce, capture, condition, accelerate, and store intense beams of muons for Muon Colliders and Neutrino Factories. The goal of MAP is to deliver results that will permit the high-energy physics community to make an informed choice of the optimal path to a high-energy lepton collider and/or a next-generation neutrino beam facility. Coordination with the parallel Muon Collider Physics and Detector Study and with the International Design Study of a Neutrino Factory will ensure MAP responsiveness to physics requirements. How we are executing this mission? By supporting the development of muon accelerator technologies for the full range of capabilities described: –Short baseline neutrino factory: nuSTORM design, costing and proposal – a design for which no new technology requirements exist –Long baseline neutrino factory: IDS-NF design – aimed at optimal physics reach Staged complex at Fermilab – aimed at a realistic (ie, staged) deployment of NF capabilities  NuMAX concept –Starting with a 1 MW proton driver and no ionization cooling… –Collider options: From a Higgs Factory to A multi-TeV Collider (extending up to energy ranges that may be required by LHC results) Again utilizing a staged complex at Fermilab… November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)4

MAP Goals Within the 6-year time frame: To deliver results that will permit the high-energy physics community to make an informed choice of the optimal path to a high-energy lepton collider and/or a next-generation neutrino beam facility As well as… To explore the path towards a facility that can provide cutting edge performance at both the Intensity Frontier and the Energy Frontier To validate the concepts that would enable the Fermilab accelerator complex to support these goals November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)5

The MAP Timeline (Selected Events) May 2008P5 Report August 2010DOE Review: MAP Proposal March 2011Approval of national program (responding to P5): US MAP January 2012Director Appointed August 2012DOE Review: MAP Project-like reorganization R&D Status and plans March 2013DOE Review: MAP Progress on reorganization monitored April 2014MICE Project Board Review First fully integrated Step VI RLS from US US budget guidance raised to enable MICE Step VI February 2014DOE Review: MAP Program Execution Plan endorsed (including MICE Step VI) Proposed Budget Profile endorsed Plan for Feasibility Evaluation endorsed April 2014MICE Project Board & RLSR Review Revised downward budget guidance from DOE forces consideration of Step V conclusion May 2014New P5 Report “Reassess the Muon Accelerator Program…” May 2014DOE Review Requested: US MAP Reassessment August 2014DOE Review: MAP & MICE August-September Year MAP Ramp-Down Plan Approved by DOE $9M in FY15; $6M in FY16; $3M in FY17 Preliminary Project Plan (Heavily re-worked!) IS NOW BEING EXECUTED! Includes: Conclusion of MICE effort, AND RAPID RAMP-DOWN (~1 year) of all other MAP efforts November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)6

August `14 DOE Review of MAP Ken has already described the outcomes of the August review called by DOE-OHEP –Committee not supportive of Step V Conclusion because (my paraphrasing): US support would completely disappear during execution (option for follow-on support from GARD and/or NSF not guaranteed) –NOTE: US experimental support ONLY guaranteed for duration of Step IV (through US FY16) Remaining risks felt to be too large to guarantee successful integration of Step V configuration –An alternative plan was proposed when it became clear that we could not make Step V converge within the budget constraints specified by DOE and the conditions specified by the committee An Aside: I would like to offer my compliments to the MICE team that enabled a coherent and flexible response to this issue on a <24 hour timescale –MIPO: Roy Preece, Alan Grant, Peter Garbincius –MICE Experiment: Dan Kaplan, Victoria Blackmore, Chris Rogers, Jaroslaw Pasternak –MICE Spokesperson/Deputy: Ken Long, Alan Bross –MAP/MICE Report (of September 25) to DOE has been circulated to committee showing the outline of that simplified ionization cooling demonstration Review web-site: (access code: muons14) November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)7

MAP – Current Status FY14: –Well over half of MAP effort directed towards the cooling demonstration and cooling channel design activities FY15: –MAP is presently executing it’s 3-yr ramp-down plan for MICE support –Reduced risks and scope enable a ~1 year ramp-down of a subset of key non-MICE activities Preserve as best as possible the research careers of many young researchers Complete documentation and preserve the results of the broader MAP effort November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)8

UPDATED US PROJECT PLAN November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)9

MICE-US Construction Project Scope Step IV –Spectrometer Solenoids (2) – Delivered to RAL –LiH Absorber – Delivered RAL –Partial Return Yoke - In Fabrication –Installation and Commissioning Spectrometer Solenoids Fiber Trackers PRY Cooling Demonstration –RF Test and Characterization Program in MTA –2 Single-Cavity RF Modules –Final Step PRY –[NO RFCC MODULE] –Installation and Commissioning Reconfigured Step IV Hardware RF Systems Extended PRY November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)10

Important Definitions The current “MAP Ramp-Down Plan” includes: –Final year FY15 of Design & Simulation  Advanced Concepts for μ and ν Sources MAP Ramp-Down Item (1 year duration) – MTA Support 1.5 years of MTA support (thru March, 2015) Required period (including contingency) to complete MICE RF system testing program MAP Ramp-Down: Parasitic completion of other RF experimental work (1.5 years – note that this utilizes fully overlapping team) – Complete MICE Construction thru Final Step – Support US Experimenters on MICE through US FY17 In principle, allows the core cooling demonstration to be completed Possibility to request additional funding at that time? – Project Management Support November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)11 In following budget tables this component is not included

Comments on RLS Re-work Final Step definition is yet again a complete re-plan for both US and UK –August 2014 – Rough Estimate (1-day) –September 2014 – Review of Durations and Resources –October -November 2014 – Eliminate conflicts Typically due to the “cloning” problem Review of interactions in schedule Review project elements with lead labs Overall –Iterative schedule variance for major deliverables has been O(1month) in 3-year plan –Budget estimates appear stable overall Continue to review specific budget items A few outliers, but so far no particularly problematic issues identified Present budgets include contingency and risk. Approximately 10% of project budget unallocated –Will absorb any oversights generated due to the radical reconfiguration of the plan –If not required for that purpose, these funds are designated to expand experimental support for MICE completion –Risk Items are now better defined and generally with lower likelihood and impact November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)12

U.S. MICE Risk History At last MICE RLS Review in April 2014 –13 active RISKs  $ 8.4 M * 50% Prob  $ 4.2 M –Note: As of summer 2014, actual accrual rate was 41% for the R&D risks  consistent with our expectations Since April, our target has evolved from Step V to Final Step –Major risks, e.g. Coupling Coil, simply disappear –R&D RISKs  Principally construction RISKs –Now 9 active RISKs  $ 1.7 M * wgt  $ 0.6 M With variable probability weights –Final Step Risks are now much more consistent with expectations for a standard construction project See: RLSR document – Final (Nov 10, 2014) –Page 9 –Table 8 on page 12 November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)13

MAP_RevisedRiskRegister_Expedited_Plan_R8.pdf M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014) November, 2014 – 9 active RISKs 14 November 24, 2014

U.S. MICE Budget Planning History November 2013: –Expected US DOE Support for $16M/yr (starting in FY15) –Invest $5M/yr in US MICE Construction April 2014: –US DOE MAP  $12M/yr –Can support US MICE Construction at $4M/yr US NSF for MICE Experimental Support at Universities –Requested ~ $1M/yr –Proposal has now been rejected (post-P5) (Note: Another bid is being planned for Feb 2015 FOA) May 2014: –P5 recommends Ramp-down August 2014: –Outcome of Review  DOE plan for full MAP –US FY15 ($9M)  FY16 ($6M)  FY 17($3M) November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)15

Base Cost * $ 18.9 M → total Contingency * $ 6.8 M →* $ 25.7 M ½ R&D Risk $ 5.7 M →* $ 31.4 M M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014) ← saturate at $ 5 M/yr For Reference (MICE Construction ONLY): November 2013 Plan at $ 5 M/yr 16 November 24, 2014

M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014) April 2014 Expedited Plan: RFCC#1 & PRY to RAL in FY 17 finishing installation, commissioning, and integration in FY18 17 November 24, 2014

New US MICE Funding Scenario November 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)18 November 24, 2014 Includes all MAP categories directed at MICE Completion Includes ALL Contingency and Risk Does NOT include: MAP D&S ramp-down costs in FY15 ~1.7M unallocated funds in present budget profile

November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)19 Modified Budget Definition starting in FY15 to explicitly include: Program Management, MTA Test of MICE Cavity, MICE Experimental Support Nominal US-DOE MICE Budget Profile to Final Step MICE-US Construction Actuals

Nominal US-DOE MICE Budget Profile to Final Step 65% 52% 85% 100% %: Effective Fraction of Annual MAP Budget Directly Supporting MICE Modified Budget Definition in ALL YEARS to explicitly include: Program Management, MTA Test of MICE Cavity, MICE Experimental Support NOTE: ~$1.7M in funding not yet allocated (~10% planning reserve)

Experimental Effort Plan presently guarantees at least 5.4 FTEs of US (DOE-funded) experimental support through conclusion of US FY17 –Consistent with having Final Step operational in mid-FY17 (i.e., CY17 Q2) –Critical issue is the basic measurement to demonstrate the basic cooling process We hope (but cannot guarantee) that the US experimental team can be augmented somewhat –With presently unallocated funds Best that could be attained for is the addition of 3-4 FTEs to the US effort –A new bid to NSF November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)21

Schedule Step IV –Key US Deliverables at RAL PID Hardware Tracker Hardware Spectrometer Solenoids LiH Absorber –Critical path remains the US-provided PRY See following section Cooling Demonstration –US deliverable schedules should provide key hardware nearly ½ year in advance of “need by” dates in UK installation schedule A much more typical construction project –Incorporate all prototyping lessons learned in final designs –Execute fabrication and assembly plan for already prototyped hardware –MTA effort presently underway addresses the only remaining (and much less serious) R&D risks With most critical results expected by mid-2015 November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)22

Schedule – Key Milestones (L3) Stars indicate major arrival of major US deliverables at RAL Lead institutions for each deliverable identified Monthly status process underway for US project November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)23

RESPONSES TO RECOMMENDATIONS & ACTION ITEMS FROM PREVIOUS REVIEW November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)24

RLSR April 2014 RLSR Action Item The project is required to undertake a full cost-risk-benefit analysis of the proposed expedited STEP V schedule for the next meeting. Response: A full analysis of Step V options to conclude with MICE Step V were presented at the August 2014 DOE Review of the Muon Accelerator Program (access code: muons14) –Full participation by MICE Management Team –We were not supported for completion of the planned Step V at that point – in particular due to: Concerns about maintaining a viable collaboration beyond 2017 Concerns about managing the remaining R&D risk to reach a operations-ready RFCC on that timescale –This has lead to the new plan being presented here –If any committee members would like to access to the detailed materials for that review, please let us know November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)25

RLSR & MPB April 2014 RLSR Project Recommendation #1 It is vitally important that the level 1 milestone, the completion of the installation for STEP IV that is currently scheduled for March 4th 2015 is met and the project team must ensure that everything is done to ensure this is achieved. April 2014 MPB Action Item #1 The director of the MAP program should ask the DOE office of HEP to intervene to expedite the remaining procurement for the Partial Return Yoke fabrication. The timely delivery and installation of the PRY is critical to meeting the Step IV schedule. Response: See the following pages November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)26

PRY Status as of April 2014 September 2013 –Expert (external) Review of Partial Return Yoke (PRY) Option: Endorsed –Moved to complete full engineering design BNL to be lead US institution –Updated schedule and budget requirements Long lead item: Steel Plate Key Items: –Steel order to be let by early in 2014 –Detailed engineering drawings and machining procurement to follow shortly thereafter November 2013 –Preliminary cost and schedule presented to RLSR/MPB –Began vendor discussion for early procurement of steel plate meeting the necessary magnetic requirements Preferred supplier: JFE (Japan) March 2013 –Procurement Process Steel plate procurement –Appeared to be bogged down at BNL »Challenging interactions with procurement staff –Order pulled and moved to FNAL in order to expedite Allow BNL to focus on remaining procurement (Frame fabrication, plate machining, and fit-up) –Optimal to leave this at BNL since detailed oversight of machining and fit-up required April 2013 –Steel Plate procurement process underway at FNAL –Clear signs of unresponsiveness in ongoing procurement process at BNL Even after follow-up by BNL management chain –Leading to RLSR/MPB recommendations/action item… November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)27

Procurement Process Since April 2014 May 2, 2014 memo from MAP Director to DOE-OHEP to contact BNL –Followed up May 12 by M. Procario, Director Facilities Division, DOE-OHEP May-early June 2014 –BNL Procurement moved forward with the order –However… MAP not allowed to answer vendor questions Vendors dropped out Low bid returned was at twice the cost of the budgetary estimates we had received from initial discussions with key vendors Procurement lead not helpful when contacted directly by MAP Director on process –On Steel Plate front Final contract sent to JFE on May 15 (note: requisition submitted on March 25)  8.5 week process Corresponds to 3-4 months delay beyond all RLS estimates (incl. contingency) June 15, 2014 –MAP Director has follow-up with BNL Deputy Director of Operations (J. Anderson) –Notified that, with help of BNL CFO, a critical procurement plan in place –By June 20 Vendors back on board Bid received which was consistent with original budgetary estimates –By June 25 Contract sent to selected vendor November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)28

The Saga Continues November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)29 Buffalo area highways during November Storm Picture from our trucker – stuck 20 miles from Tonawanda facility during storm October Typhoon in Japan Typhoon #1 Impacts Steel Departure Typhoon #2 Disrupts Arctic Air Pattern

Comments & Lessons Learned As of April MPB review –For all intents and purposes, the US RLS dates for PRY production were not recoverable –We have aggressively explored expediting the intermediate delivery and fabrication process However, no major time savers have yet appeared Our vendor is parallelizing all remaining fabrication steps to the extent possible, but cannot (yet) guarantee a new finish date –We have now set aside $100K of our FY15 budget (beyond baseline budget) to expedite shipping Plan to air ship items remaining on the critical path as they are ready Also working with the UK team to streamline the integration process at RAL –Present schedule indicates what we believe is realistic given the overall status as of early November I and the US team take full responsibility for the Step IV PRY status –We made a serious miscalculation in a key process (Procurement) For the Final Step PRY Implementation –BNL Design & Engineering Team unchanged (experienced, excellent work) Will not, however, utilize BNL procurement All orders will now be handled by Fermilab –Large steel orders will be oversized and early All information required for Final Step PRY plate should be available on or before Jan 7, 2015 Pre-order will be let immediately afterwards –Timeline and process fully validated by Step IV experience November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)30

CONCLUSION November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)31

Closing Comments New route to the Ionization Cooling Demonstration –From the US perspective, this plan provides a route to the core demonstration that is required if high brightness muon beam applications are ever to come into use for High Energy Physics applications –Perhaps most importantly, it will provide those results in a more timely fashion than we had previously been discussing Construction Project –UK and US project integration is now reaching maturity Joint execution is becoming more effective As evidenced by the ability to react to the recent major upheavals –Risks under better control –Better confidence in our ability to execute A great deal of hardware is on the floor with the remainder to follow shortly Let’s jointly make muon accelerator capabilities an option for the future November 24, 2014 M. A. Palmer | MICE Review (RAL, November 24-25, 2014)32