IARC Requirements and Status

1. IARC Requirements and Status Oct 5, 2009 R Kephart

2. The Illinois Capital bill is law • It contains $ 20 M for the IARC building as a grant from DCEO to be funded with sale of bonds • Less than the $ 35 M request, unlikely to get more from the State  try to make a viable plan with $ 20 M • The Legal office and Finance office are in contact with ANL. We intend to mirror the process they have followed for other projects funded by the State. • Norm Peterson at ANL suggest our next step be the preparation of a “Statement of Work” for DCEO including the conceptual design, cost estimate, and funding profile. Norm tells us we should do that ASAP to get to the front of the line for funding via bond sales. • John Barr from DCEO has provided what should be in the package we submit

3. DCEO • I would advise you to develop a high level project plan that can be shared with DCEO management and the Governor's Office to get the process started. I would suggest the following: • 1) Project Executive Summary • 2) Project Impact -Federal and private sector research funding (leverage) -IL Technology Infrastructure Resource -Construction / Permanente R&D Jobs • 3) Project Budget • 4) Project Timeline • 5) Any Other Issues/Benefits • Once we have conceptual agreement regarding the project parameters then we can work with you to develop a comprehensive project Scope of Work and Budget for the project. I would be happy to be a point of contact to get the ball moving. Please let me know if you have any questions or need more information at this point. Thank you. John Barr Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity 100 West Randolph, Suite 3-400 Chicago, IL 60601 312-814-2259

4. IARC Primary Goals • IARC is funded via grant from Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity. • Basic goal is to make Northern Illinois a center for accelerator development and initiate/promote/support related industry in Illinois. • IARC to provide SRF infrastructure, office space, and support facilities that will increase the probability that new accelerators like Project X and ILC are sited at Fermilab and allow industry to more easily work with us. • IARC was also sold as a mechanism to support training of scientists and engineers in accelerator physics and related technology via work with local universities. • We must maintain these basic goals.

5. Possible Secondary Goals • Office space for TD/AD/APC • Home for Proj X, or Illinois Accel institute? • Infrastructure to support construction of Px, incl specialized infra for a CW linac • Additional lab conference rooms • Public Outreach: Green building; prominent; visually appealing • Consolidate central FNAL campus

6. NIU Connection • Jerry Blazey ( NIU) talked to Mike Fortner. Believes we can get state funds for 1-3 full time positions paid for by the state with operating funds. • Phillipe Piot has $ 750 K to develop advanced sources but so far has not been able to interest ANL in hosting this effort. Thinks it should go to A0, then IARC. • Engage IIT, NIU and perhaps U of C, Northwestern, and/or U of I Champaign to create an accelerator education program in IARC (role for APC ?) • New FNAL-NIU joint appointment = Roman Pachal (sp?) replaced Court Bohn. Thinks we should enlist his help • Consider hosting the Illinois Accelerator Institute http://www.illinoisacceleratorinstitute.org/a joint FNAL-ANL venture in IARC. (Rog Gerig is ANL contact)

7. Explored 11 different locations • Went through these in meeting with Pier, Young-Kee, FESS in August • Agreed to focus on two general locations • To the West of Wilson hall (stand alone IARC that must fit within $ 20 M budget) • Variants that assume re-use of the CDF building to provide IARC high bay and assembly space (some or all of CDF)

8. IARC Sites Examined 10 a,b 11 a,b

9. Sketch up models • Examined each location • Compared what you can afford for $ 20 M for a “stand alone” IARC complex near WH vs an IARC building assuming re-use of the CDF building • Met again with Pier, Young-Kee, and AD’s Sept 12 to discuss pro’s-con’s of these solutions

10. Stand alone

11. Reuse CDF CDF ~20,000 sq ft high bay, ~ 25 offices, ~600010000 sq ft low bay tech space, conf rooms,deep pit, 1.5 MW installed power, ICW, LCW, cryogenic refrigerator, etc

12. IARC bldg combined with CDF • Meets/exceeds the goals of IARC • Provides a powerful addition to the lab industrial complex and the lab in general • Useful to host Px, APC, portions of AD (e.g. electrical group) or many other future projects • Helps tie the campus together • Provides needed high quality office space • Could “look” like FNAL yet makes a dramatic modern architectural statement

13. Next Steps • Sept 21 Director decided we should proceed with a draft SOW assuming IARC on West side of CDF. • Guidance from Director • Include value added by re-use of some or all of CDF building ($ 30 M?) • Assume additional FNAL “start up funds” ~ $ 550 K will be available • Assumes $ 5 M for parking lots, roads, utilities, etc. funded as GPP project to maximize funds for actual IARC building construction • Assumes FNAL decommissions CDF and refurbishes bldg as required • Working on writing the Statement of Work to request the DCEO grant. • Draft from Kephart, & FESS, with comments from Chrisman, Congers, Leonard incorporated. • Current draft to Pier and Young-Kee for comment • Still needs some numbers filled in by FESS • Need to give draft to DOE next then DCEO for comment • Goal is to submit to DCEO ASAP for funding in spring 2010

14. IARC for SOW