U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade Level 2 and Deputies-NSF only Management Mailing List

[Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>]

Thanks Mark.

On 9/11/19 8:30 PM, mark oreglia wrote:
> See attached slides
>
> On 9/11/2019 6:55 PM, Gustaaf Brooijmans wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Just to be clear, the questions with input needed from the L2s/system 
> > teams are:
> >
> > 1. if you haven't done so yet, please provide an earliest/latest 
> > decision point to Hal to update our table
> >
> > 3. Please provide an ordered table to me
> >
> > 4. Each L2, please send me and Hal the item you're most worried about, 
> > and we'll downselect
> >
> > 7. LAr to provide 1-2 slides
> >
> > 8.  LAr and muon to provide a few sentences each
> >
> > 9.  Mike, please provide a phrasing that's not too contradicting
> >
> > 10. Each L2 provide 2 slides: one with top 5 items, one with DD for 
> > one of them
> >
> > 11.  Mark K: please provide a slide
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gustaaf
> >
> > On 9/11/19 5:36 PM, Michael Tuts wrote:
> > > Probably homework assignments are obvious…enjoy
> > >
> > > *From:* Tony Beasley <tbeasley AT nrao.edu>
> > > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 11, 2019 5:26 PM
> > > *To:* Michael Tuts <tuts AT pmtuts.net>; Mark Coles (mcoles AT nsf.gov) 
> > > <mcoles AT nsf.gov>
> > > *Subject:* Homework - Day 1
> > >
> > > Dear Mike,
> > >
> > > Please find some questions from the Panel to be addressed at 8:30am 
> > > tomorrow. Expect a short paragraph, verbal description or diagram in 
> > > most cases.
> > >
> > > thanks… Tony
> > >
> > >  1. Descope/upscope items - please provide both preferred/scheduled and
> > >     need-by dates...
> > >  2. Please provide a schedule of expiration of descope options
> > >     throughout project. please focus on dates...
> > >  3. Provide top 5 risks in rank order (worst->least) for each major
> > >     subsystem. The risk register is dense .. would like to see the major
> > >     concerns.
> > >  4. Hank Evans: please provide a rank-ordered list of remaining work
> > >     packages (in the pre-MREFC project) - what are you most concerned
> > >     about? Please mention your “plan B's”.
> > >  5. Please provide the total project BOE distribution - pie chart 
> > > format.
> > >  6. Columbia mgt decision to implement 30 subawards generates a cost
> > >     impact ~$186k ...   was this to support EV reporting?   What did the
> > >     project gain from this change?
> > >
> > >  7. What risks are being carried forward by the project by the
> > >     (aggressive?) scheduled downselect of the ADC in December? e.g.
> > >     radiation tolerance of the ADC ASIC version 3? Please clarify
> > >     statement on radiation tolerance of commercial ADC option.
> > >  8. What is the schedule risk of the late delivery of the production
> > >     version of lpGBT?
> > >
> > >  9. Please restate/clarify Scientific travel – where is it covered in
> > >     the MREFC award?  Suggest: please produce List of significant things
> > >     not in there yet.... don't let us find them.
> > >
> > > 10. For each subsystem - what are the (5) major technical requirements,
> > >     and what is your assessment of your ability to meet them (and what
> > >     is the basis of that assessment?). Please trace one major
> > >     science/technical specification from the international ATLAS
> > >     specification, through your US ATLAS specification set, indicate
> > >     where addressed in design, and demonstrate how you intend to assess
> > >     compliance.
> > > 11. Please describe the connections between the EPO manager, the L2
> > >     managers, and the EPO proponents at the partner universities. How is
> > >     communication/coordination occuring between these groups? How
> > >     specifically will the project take advantage of community
> > >     initiatives like QUARKNET? Give examples of joint activities being
> > >     considered.
> > > 12. How exposed is the US project to CERN Project Management
> > >     uncertainties in schedule? If CERN schedule drifts across many
> > >     subsystems, could the US project be negatively impacted beyond
> > >     current expectations?
> > > ///