From: Hutch Neilson [hneilson@pppl.gov]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 12:25 AM
To: Mike Zarnstorff; Wayne Reiersen; Bob Simmons; Larry Dudek; Ron Strykowsky; Brad Nelson; John Schmidt; Hutch Neilson; Jim Lyon
Subject: Summary of NCSX SIT Meeting of 12/15/03
 Summary of NCSX System Inegration Team (SIT) Meeting of Monday, December 15, 2003

1.   Recent DOE guidance on project baseline  (Hutch)
There were several discussions with OFES during the preceding week concerning the NCSX project scope, funding profile, and definition of CD-4.  There will be further discussions within the government during the current week, but the current expectation is as follows:

• Project funding guidance profile will be flat at the FY-04 level through project completion.
• CD-4 requirements include room temperature power tests with the cryostat off (as planned), and in addition room temperature field mapping for engineering verification, installation of the cryostat, and coil tests and first plasma generation with the coils at cryogenic temperatures.
• The TEC will increase to $88.2M, an increase of $7.2M over the PDR estimate. The increase is due to PDR/PBR recommendations (+$2M), the additional CD-4 tasks (+$1.6M), and the flattened profile (+$3.6M).
• The first plasma date will be delayed to March, 2009, a delay of 18 months relative to the PDR schedule.  The stretchout is due to PDR/PBR recommendations (+2 months), the additional CD-4 tasks (+4 months), and the flattened profile (+12 months).
  

The implications of reduced funding is that we will have reduced financial flexibility for the critical fabrication activities.

2.  FY-04 Schedule Risks
We have made significant progress on critical schedule risks and come to closure on some pending decisions:

• We are retaining the current vacuum vessel segmentation scheme. Art Brooks is tweaking the geometry to try to increase plasma-wall spacing within the existing segmentation and assembly constraints. ACTION: Wayne follow up with Art on status.
• We accept the PDR recommendation to provide the capability to bake the vacuum vessel at 350 C because it reduces costs and operation risks associated with the PFCs.  Budgetary estimates for the high-temperature heat treat have been requested from the suppliers, but our engineering estimate is $75-100K.  An upper bound estimate for the additional tubing that may be required is $100k, so the cost would be up to $200k. Goranson to refine estimates and provided requested input to the PDR-->CD2 ECP.
• The port geometry is converging. A solution has been found for accommodating the ICRF feeds. Interferences involving the NBI port ducts and MC clamps have yet to be resolved.
• Tom Brown’s MCWF model has succeeded in modeling all 3 shapes and assembling them without interferences. The 1/4-inch shim gap between sectors still needs to be incorporated. The model has been adopted as the basis for design development.
  

3. Technical Risks
Wayne led a discussion of critical technical issues and updated a tracking list which has been developed. The updated list was issued by Wayne on Dec. 16.  One risk in particular has been highlighted recently as needing greater attention:

• Conductor testing and R&D. We do not yet have an adequate plan to develop the reference material properties and design criteria and resolve cure strain inconsistencies. ACTION: Brad, develop the SOW for the R&D program.
  

4.  Final Design Activities

• Brad reported that a complete drawing list is being developed with Tom Brown, identifying all parts and the complete set of drawings and specifications needed to document the design for implementation. The Pro/Intralink data base is being used, with placeholders inserted for drawings not yet developed that need to be developed.
• Wayne has issued a call for input to a procurement plan that is being developed to provide a complete schedule and description of all planned procurements.
  

5.  CD-2 preparations

• GRD: follow-up issues are being addressed by Nelson, Zarnstorff, and Reiersen. Neilson will review the GRD for possible changes resulting from recent DOE directions and PDR/PBR recommendations.
• Review inputs and project comments on the Project Execution Plan (PEP) are being incorporated by Simmons.
• The PDR and PBR disposition plans are out for review.  The decisions on the major items affecting cost and schedule have largely been made. Pamela Hampton is following up with responsible individuals to obtain missing responses.
• The EIR disposition plan is being updated (expanded) based on the draft EIR report received Dec. 5.  John Schmidt and Bob Simmons are working on resolution of the issues with input from WBS managers as needed.
• Simmons issued a call for input to the PDR --> CD2 ECP on Dec. 16.  The ECP will incorporate the impacts of review responses and revised DOE guidance on funding profiles and CD-4 requirements. The 350C vacuum vessel bakeout requirement will be incorporated.  Project-initiated changes resulting from the WAF planning and updating processes will, as a rule, not be incorporated into this ECP but swept up at the next Lehman review. Exceptions will be considered case-by-case. They may entail calls on contingency.
  

6.  Next SIT Meeting: Monday, December 22, 2003 at 11:00 a.m.

Summary by:
Hutch Neilson