ACTION ITEMS

1. ACTION ITEMS Peter Wanderer APUL WGM January 27, 2010

2. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM DOE CD-1 REVIEW P. Wanderer

3. Technical Recommendations CERN specification document for the cold powering should be approved by May 1. Response: Now under “config mgmt”/review. Estimate approved ~ Feb 28. Explore avenues prior to CD-2 for reducing the risk associated with string test occurring so late in the project. Response: nearly all the things learned in the string test will be learned on the CERN test stand. Anything learned later in the string test is much more likely to be related to the cryostatting process than the process of creating the combined cold mass (CCM). Therefore, we will evaluate delaying construction of the production CCM until after the test of the prototype on the CERN test stand. Schedule: Feb. 28. P. Wanderer 3

4. Technical Recommendations Develop a clear strategy to select coil end options by May 1. Response: to be discussed at Webex meeting in the next hour. Prior to CD-2, ensure that there is adequate planning for magnet re-work and optimization. At least one cycle of re-work should be included in the baseline schedule. Response: this info will be put into Primavera by Feb. 28; checking will follow. P. Wanderer 4

5. Cost Recommendations Basis of Estimate documentation needs to be improved in preparation for CD-2.. Response: will do. • To facilitate transparency, direct costs should be used in the backup documentation [unit costs were direct; total costs included OH] • Traceability should flow down to lowest level • Basis of estimate documentation needs to be consistent across the subprojects [AY$ vs. FY09$] • Vendor quotes should be current [yoke steel] P. Wanderer 5

6. Cost Recommendations • Improve Documentation • PPEP and/or PMP need to be modified to show change control thresholds accurately and to correct other inconsistencies. This should be done prior to CD-1 approval. Response: Nearly complete. • Tailor EVMS by keeping control accounts at a higher level, consistent with the project TPC and complexity. Response: under discussion – will decide by 2/28 P. Wanderer 6

7. SCHEDULE, FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Simplify funding process – MIE/OPC Response: will do – end OPC Jan. 31? CD-4A needs to be more clearly defined – Delivery or acceptance? Response: CERN expects to follow model of US-LHC project, which had an acceptance procedure that was focused on determining whether damage had occurred during transit. Increase funding range to a ceiling of $32M. P. Wanderer 7

8. Establish an MOU or equivalent with CERN that clearly associates APUL with the Mission Need and better defines the scope of the project by May 1. Response: Work on the draft Implementing Arrangement is underway. Need to allow time for signatures, review by CERN and Fermilab legal staffs. Integrate CERN LHC milestones into the APUL schedule prior to CD2. Response: by Feb. 28. Update the PPEP with the appropriate line management concurrence prior to CD1. Response: Underway, nearly complete. MANAGEMENT, ES&H RECOMMENDATIONS P. Wanderer

9. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM NOVEMBER DIRECTOR’S REVIEW Work completed except for items which are needed prior to CD-2. P. Wanderer

10. Dipoles • All recommendations complete except for #8. This recommendation calls for APUL to perform a complete thermal analysis. I plan to review the CERN analysis with Dariusz Bocian (LARP) to see what cross-checks can be readily done. P. Wanderer

11. Cold Powering • Assemble copper mockup of full cable, L > 10 m, to use for testing bending forces, installation. Response: bundle exists, testing in Jan.-Feb. • Develop test setup for top end of current lead … voltage standoff. Response: expect complete March. • Analyze DFX lead pipe anchor scheme re: pressure loading. Response: expect complete May. • Develop system test plan. Response: expect complete March. P. Wanderer