C hange C ontrol B oard

1. Change Control Board Nobu Toge (KEK) GDE Meeting, Dec. 2005 at Frascati Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

2. CCB Members C. Pagani G. Blair D. Schulte T. Markiewicz S. Mishra W. Funk K. Kubo M. Kuriki N. Toge We can be reached via email address: ML-CCB at lcdev.kek.jp Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

3. Ref: BCD and ACD • BCD – A forward-looking configuration which we are reasonably confident can achieve the required performance and can be used to give a reasonably accurate cost estimate by mid/end-2006 ( RDR). • ACD – A technology or concept which may provide a significant cost reduction, increase in performance (or both), but which will not be mature enough to be considered baseline by mid-end 2006. • Note: Alternatives will be part of the RDR. Alternatives are equally important. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

4. Mission Statement (from BB) • The Change Control Board is responsible for maintaining the baseline configuration as defined in the Baseline Configuration Document. • The first action of the CCB will be to finalize the BCD and put it under configuration control. • In addition to maintaining the baseline, the CCB will assess R&D projects defined in the BCD that potentially can lead to improvements over the baseline in cost or performance. • The CCB will define what needs to be demonstrated in these R&D projects, in order to be considered for a CCB action to replace the baseline. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

5. Mission Statement (from BB, cont.) • The CCB will work with the GDE EC to formalize levels for taking change control actions. • Major changes in the baseline defined as changing costs by more than $100M or make significant changes in performance, schedule or risk will be recommended to the Director and GDE EC for final approval. • For all other changes, the CCB will be the final authority. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

6. CCB Action 1 Draft – Complete the BCD • CCB will be the responsible body for – • Releasing a starter-set for the online contents of the BCD. • Producing a print-ready set (PDF etc) for the 100p+ document. • This does NOT mean the CCB (re)writes BCD. This means … • CCB will organize the efforts of multiple parties on the following – • Critical reading to ensure the consistency and numerical accuracies. • Improving the BCD readability (eg. More tables, figures, diagrams to better visualize the BCD contents . • Commission the document management part of EDMS, if not the engineering CAD par. • MSWord’ing or LaTeX’ing for the print-ready version.. • Goal • Be done (i.e. “good enough BCD”) by the Bangalore meeting. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

7. CCB Action 2 Draft – Assessment of R&D programs which lead to improved cost or performance • Here we are talking about R&D programs for AC. • CCB will • Scan through the BCD, work with sister Boards and AG/GGs, and of course EC, and create a list of R&D programs that can be identified as such. CCB will define what needs to be demonstrated therein. • And release this list (with their descriptions, milestones and possible performance/cost gains, in some standardized format, of course), along with the starter BCD. • Goal • Be done by the Bangalore meeting. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

8. CCB Action 2’ Draft – Assessment of R&D Programs for the “BC” • CCB • Is Interested in identification of, and progress to be made in, the R&D programs that are required for producing the solid technical ground for the BC. • Wishes to keep in close touch with RDB and DCB, which CCB assumes to be the primary responsible bodies. • Will have to reassess, with EC, the adequacy of the BC, in case the BC R&D activity reveals significant challenges in the future in ways that we are not envisaging as of now. • Goal • Establish a nerve link with RDB and DCB today, and develop an understanding on how the relevant Boards and EC, would work together in a ~1 month time scale. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

9. ExamplesJust some examples, not intending to spotlight some of our colleagues’ efforts: • Electron source – Who will demonstrate (the serious feasibility of) 3000 bunches of NNNN electrons with P % polarization by when? • Positron source – Who will demonstrate (the serious feasibility of) BBBB bunches of NNNN positrons from EEEE photons of GGGG GeV through undulators when? • MBK – Who will establish xxxx hrs OPS lifetime of NNN units of 10MW MBK by when? • Cavities – Who will establish yyy +/- zzz % performance yield with NNN cavities at GGG MV/m by when? • Cryostats – Who will confirm mechanical and electrical stability of NNN cavities over LLLL hours in 10Hz operation at GGG MV/m with full active tuning? • They all talk to the credibility of the BC and AC (depending on the parameters, of course), or more specifically, to the assessment of the cost, performance and availability. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

10. CCB Action 3 Draft – Figure out the Specifics of the CC process • CCB will • Consult the EC and also the two sister boards aiming at resolving the following two subjects concerning the Change Control (CC) process. • “Mechanics” of how CC actually works. • “Value system” (how to compare and value the performance, reliability, “cost” as deemed in each region etc) in which CC actually works. • And implement + document them. • Maybe specific instances come before we establish the guidelines. In that case we will make sure to record “how we made judgment” in each instance, and self-evaluate how we are consistently acting as we proceed. • Goal: • Draft CC procedure to circulate within ~ 1 week. • To be in a reasonably good shape by the Bangalore meeting. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

11. CCB Remarks on the Draft Action Items (1) • Is it what CCB is expected to do for you? • BB says yes. OK, we feel that it is pretty hefty. • CCB acknowledges that a close contact with the EC and the sister boards is a must, and will see to it that we act accordingly. • There may be something that CCB will do to you. • CCB is very likely to come back to EC with requests for additional resources. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

12. CCB Remarks on the Draft Action Items (2) • BCD had better be stable enough for at least during the initial ~1 year • Frequent conceptual revisions of the HW systems descriptions will significantly perturb the engineering and cost studies. • Simple numerical revisions of the number of components to build, etc can be easily managed by Excel, though. • Therefore, it looks to us that we have to • Converge on a good-enough BCD/ACD fast enough, • If we are in doubt, revise BCD sooner rather than later (for instance, now). • And once we commit ourselves to it, STICK TO IT (design, prototype, test, validate, improve etc), till the reality tells us to do otherwise. Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4

13. Suggested Schedule for BCD • Dec.9 : Create a contact sheet (CCB vs World). • Dec.16: Read BCD • Dec. 23: Create suggestions for improvements, with attention to • Logical consistency and numerical accuracy • Reader-friendly presentation of parameter tables • Ease of grasping why we chose this BCD • Dec.31: Requests for Improvements to Area people • Jan.15: Responses back from Area people. • Jan. 25: CCB proof reading • Early Feb: Request for Comments • Mid-Feb – Early March: Freeze and release, including – PDF Toge CCB - Draft v.0.4