From: Raymond Stefanski (stefanski@fnal.gov)
Date: Wed Mar 15 2006 - 13:15:58 CST
I've briefly looked over the P5 response. Just a couple of comments:
1. The cost estimate doesn't include overheads. Work done at any of the national labs will carry an overhead charge.
2. The cost estimate is over a year old, but doesn't include an increase due to inflation, which is typically assumed to be about 3% per year.
3. I checked with Steve Dixon on the status of the work in FESS, but they would not be able to complete the conceptual design any time in April. We need some of the engineering money to finish the civil design work, and it will take longer than a few months. Outstanding issues still involve the transport recommendation/study by Belding, and generating a new cost estimate by Hilton(?spelling?) engineering. We especially want to be certain that the FESS estimates do not double count cost that are already included in the Hilton costs. We also need to incorporate the veto design into the civil plans.
4. Aside from a meeting held with Jon and Hans in January, there has been no activity here.
Ray Stefanski
Fermilab, MS122
P.O. Box 500
Batavia, Il 60510
Phone: 630.8403872
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Blucher <blucher@hep.uchicago.edu>
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:20 pm
Subject: draft Braidwood reponse to P5
> Dear Colleagues:
>
> We've attach a draft of our response to the P5 questions. The
> responses
> are due tomorrow (Thursday), so please send your comments as soon
> as
> possible (but no later than tomorrow morning).
>
> Thanks.
>
> Ed and Mike
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Mar 16 2006 - 03:10:18 CST