OFFICE OF
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 19

Daniel R. Lehman Review Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/ PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 87 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

OFFICE OF SCIENCE. Review Committee for the NuMi Off-Axis Neutrino Appearance (NO  A) Experiment at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory May 8, 2012. Daniel R. Lehman Review Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/.

Download Presentation

Daniel R. Lehman Review Committee Chair Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Daniel r lehman review committee chair office of science u s department of energy http www science doe gov opa

OFFICE OFSCIENCE

Review Committee

for the

NuMi Off-Axis Neutrino Appearance (NO A) Experiment

at the

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

May 8, 2012

Daniel R. Lehman

Review Committee Chair

Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy

http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/


Doe review of no a

DOE Review of NOA

OFFICE OFSCIENCE

DOE EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA

Tuesday, May 8, 2012—Wilson Hall, The Comitium

7:30 a.m.DOE Executive SessionD. Lehman

7:35 a.m.SC PerspectiveT. Lavine

7:45 a.m.Site Office PerspectiveP. Carolan

7:55 a.m.Questions/DiscussionD. Lehman

8:00 a.m.Adjourn

Project and review information is available at:

http://www-nova.fnal.gov/reviews_summer_2012/doe_rev_may_8.html

username: review password: rev06


Review committee participants

OFFICE OFSCIENCE

  • Department of EnergyReview Committee

  • Daniel R. Lehman, DOE, ChairpersonSubcommittee 1: Accelerator and Beamlines

  • *Pat den Hartog

  • Subcommittee 2: Detector

  • * Bill Wisniewski, SLAC

  • Subcommittee 3: Electronics

  • *Peter Denes, LBNL

  • Subcommittee 4: Cost and Schedule

  • Observers*Ethan Merrill, DOE/SC

  • Ted Lavine, DOE/SCRichard Elliott, DOE/OECM

  • Eli Rosenberg, DOE/SC

  • Pepin Carolan, DOE/FSOSubcommittee 5: Management

  • Brian Huizenga, OECM*Kurt Fisher, DOE/SC

  • * Lead

Review Committee Participants


Doe organizational chart

DOE Organizational Chart

OFFICE OFSCIENCE


Daniel r lehman review committee chair office of science u s department of energy http www science doe gov opa

OFFICE OFSCIENCE

SC Organizational Chart

Office of the Director (SC-1)

William F. Brinkman

Office of Science

Deputy Director

for Field Operations (SC-3)

Joseph McBrearty

Deputy Director

for Science Programs (SC-2)

Patricia Dehmer

Deputy Director

for Resource Management (SC-4)

Jeffrey Salmon

Office of

Lab Policy & Evaluat.

(SC-32)

D. Streit

Workforce Development for Teachers/ Scientists

(SC-27)

P. Dehmer (A)

Ames SO

Cynthia Baebler

Advanced Scientific

Comp. Research (SC-21)

Daniel Hitchcock

Chicago Office

Roxanne Purucker

Office of Budget

(SC-41)

Kathleen Klausing

Office of Business Policy & Ops

(SC-45)

V. Kountouris

Argonne SO

Joanna Livengood

Basic Energy

Sciences (SC-22)

Harriet Kung

Office of Grants/ Cont. Support (SC-43)

Linda Shariati

Berkeley SO

Aundra Richards

Office of

Safety, Security & Infra.

(SC-31)

M. Jones

SC

Integrated

Support

Center

Brookhaven SO

Michael Holland

Office of Project Assessment

(SC-28)

Daniel Lehman

SC Communications & Public Affairs

(SC-4)

DollineHatchett

Biological & Environ. Research (SC-23)

Sharlene Weatherwax

Office of SC Program Direction (SC-46)

Rebecca Kelley

Fermi SO

Michael Weis

Fusion Energy

Sciences (SC-24)

Edmund Synakowski

Oak Ridge Office

J. Eschenberg (A)

Office of Scientific and Tech. Info. (SC-44)

Walt Warnick

Human Resources & Admin.

(SC-45.3)

Cynthia Mays

Oak Ridge SO

Johnny Moore

Small Business

Innovation

Research

(SC-29)

Manny Oliver

Princeton SO

Maria Dikeakos

High Energy

Physics (SC-25)

James Siegrist

Pacific NWest SO

Roger Snyder

Nuclear Physics

(SC-26)

Timothy Hallman

Stanford SO

Paul Golan

(A) Acting

Thomas Jeff. SO

Joe Arango

2/2012


Charge questions

Charge Questions

OFFICE OFSCIENCE

  • Technical: Are the accomplishments to-date and remaining activities as planned sufficient to meet baseline scope objectives?

  • Baseline Cost and Schedule: Is project's plan and performance consistent with the approved baseline? Are remaining costs and schedule contingency adequate for the risks?

  • Management: Are the management resources adequate to deliver the project within specifications, budget and schedule, including management and mitigation of remaining technical, cost and schedule risks?

  • Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous independent project review?


Draft agenda

Draft Agenda

OFFICE OFSCIENCE

  • Tuesday, May 8, 2012—Fermilab, Wilson Hall, The Comitium

  • 7:30 amDOE Executive SessionD. Lehman

  • 8:00 amWelcomeP. Oddone

  • 8:05 amProject Summary AssessmentJ. Cooper

    • •Technical Status

    • •Cost, Schedule, EVM and Milestone Performance

    • •Contingency Assessment

    • •Response to Recommendations from Previous Review

  • 9:15 a.m.Break

  • 9:30 amAccelerator and NuMI UpgradesP. Derwent

    • •FY2012 Shutdown—Status of installation readiness, plan and progress

  • 10:30 amDetector Module ProductionK. Heller

  • 10:50 amFar Detector Assembly Status & ScheduleP. Lukens

  • 11:10 am Detector Electronics/DAQL. Mualem

    • •APD/Other Electronics/DAQ issues, status and plans

  • 11:40 amFar Detector Outfitting Status & ScheduleR. Tesarek

  • 12:00 pmLunch

  • 12:30 pmDOE Executive Session, Close-Out preparationD. Lehman

  • 2:00 pm Closeout

  • 3:00 pmAdjourn


  • Report outline writing assignments

    Report Outline/Writing Assignments

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Executive SummaryFisher

    1.IntroductionLavine

    2.Technical (Charge Questions 1, 4)

    2.1Accelerator and Beamlinesden Hartog*/SC1

    2.1.1Findings

    2.1.2Comments

    2.1.3Recommendations

    2.2DetectorWisniewski*/SC2

    2.3ElectronicsDenes*/SC3

    3.Cost and Schedule (Charge Questions 2, 4)Merrill*/SC4

    Management (Charge Questions 3, 4)Fisher*/SC5


    Closeout presentation and final report procedures

    Closeout Presentationand Final ReportProcedures

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE


    Format closeout presentation

    Format: Closeout Presentation

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    • (Use PowerPoint / No Smaller than 18 pt Font)

    • 2.1Use Section Number/Title corresponding to writing assignment list.

    • List Review Subcommittee Members

    • List Assigned Charge Questions and Review Committee Answers

    • 2.1.1Findings

    • In bullet form, include an assessment of technical, cost, schedule, and management.

    • 2.1.2Comments

    • In bullet form, list descriptive material assessing the findings and the conclusions based on the findings. This is narrative material and is often omitted as a separate heading and the narrative included either under Findings or Recommendations as appropriate. This heading carries more emphasis than the Findings, but does not require an action as do the Recommendations. Do not number your comments.

    • 2.1.3Recommendations

    • Begin with action verb and identify a due date.

    • 2.


    Format final report

    Format:Final Report

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    • (Use MS Word / 12pt Font)

    • 2.1 Use Section Number/Title corresponding to writing assignment list.

    • 2.1.1Findings

    • Include an assessment of technical, cost, schedule, and management. Within the text of the Findings Section, include the answers to the review questions.

    • 2.1.2Comments

    • Descriptive material assessing the findings and the conclusions based on the findings. This is narrative material and is often omitted as a separate heading and the narrative included either under Findings or Recommendations as appropriate. This heading carries more emphasis than the Findings, but does not require an action as do the Recommendations. Do not number your comments.

    • 2.1.3Recommendations

    • Begin with action verb and identify a due date.

    • 2.

    • 3.


    Expectations

    Expectations

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    • Present closeout reports in PowerPoint.

    • Forward your sections for each review report (in MSWord format) to Casey Clark, [email protected],

      by May 14, 8:00 a.m. (EDT).


    Daniel r lehman review committee chair office of science u s department of energy http www science doe gov opa

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Closeout Report on the

    Review Committee

    for the

    NuMi Off-Axis Neutrino Appearance (NO A) Experiment

    at the

    Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

    May 8, 2012

    Example

    Daniel R. Lehman

    Review Committee Chair

    Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy

    http://www.science.doe.gov/opa/


    2 1 accelerator and beamlines den hartog anl

    2.1 Accelerator and Beamlines den Hartog, ANL

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Technical: Are the accomplishments to-date and remaining activities as planned sufficient to meet baseline scope objectives?

    Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous independent project review?

    ■Findings

    ■ Comments

    ■ Recommendations


    2 2 detector wisniewski slac

    2.2 DetectorWisniewski, SLAC

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Technical: Are accomplishments to-date and remaining activities planned sufficient to meet baseline scope objectives?

    Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous independent project review?

    ■Findings

    ■ Comments

    ■ Recommendations


    2 3 electronics denes lbnl

    2.3 ElectronicsDenes, LBNL

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Technical: Are accomplishments to-date and remaining activities planned sufficient to meet baseline scope objectives?

    Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous independent project review?

    ■Findings

    ■ Comments

    ■ Recommendations


    3 cost and schedule merrill doe sc elliott doe oecm

    3. Cost and ScheduleMerrill, DOE/SC/Elliott, DOE/OECM

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Baseline Cost and Schedule: Is project's plan and performance consistent with the approved baseline? Are remaining costs and schedule contingency adequate for the risks?

    Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous independent project review?

    ■Findings

    ■ Comments

    ■ Recommendations


    Project status merrill doe sc elliott doe oecm

    Project Status Merrill, DOE/SC/Elliott, DOE/OECM

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE


    4 management fisher doe sc

    4. Management *Fisher, DOE/SC

    OFFICE OFSCIENCE

    Management: Are the management resources adequate to deliver the project within specifications, budget and schedule, including management and mitigation of remaining technical, cost and schedule risks?

    Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous independent project review?

    ■Findings

    ■ Comments

    ■ Recommendations


  • Login