Report to the
LCLS Facilities Advisory Committee
LCLS Project Management
M. Reichanadter / SLAC
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Overview
Funding / Cost Status
FY07 CR and funding uncertainties have impacted the project.
Overall ~2 month delay. Hold on procurements ~six weeks.
Redirect resources to evaluate reduced funding options.
DOE-BES Directed Baseline Change.
July ‘Lehman’ Review – EIR to validate new baseline.
Schedule Status
Technical systems making steady progress.
Milestone performance ~OK. Dip in recent performance (CR).
Injector complete in March! Late on Injector installation.
Construction in full swing!
Start delayed due to high subcontract bids, tunneling coordination.
Schedule is CP. Updated Co- and Beneficial milestones.
Some issues with Turner activities. Coordination, safety.
Most of on-site Turner team have been replaced.
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Overview
Management Status
Procurement performance ~OK with dedicated cell.
Consultants (Miller/Dee), COR/FCO expediter and BOA’s
~95% of civil construction under contract.
Remaining technical procurements largely commodities
and installation contracts.
Integration management team in place (RM Boyce)
Organization
Injector complete. Good time to re-org.
Stronger emphasis on functions (Engr, Controls, Main & Ops,
Commissioning, improved integration with Lab operations)
Preparing for EVM Certification (Surveillance audit, LBL)
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS showing steady progress overall
LCLS Project Performance (TEC = $315M)
• 46% TEC comp
• 43% TPC comp
350,000
300,000
$249.6M
250,000
AYK$
BCWS (TEC)
200,000
• SPI = 0.91
• CPI = 0.92
BCWP (TEC)
ACWP (TEC)
150,000
BAC
• Project burn rate
~$7-8M per/mo
BA
100,000
OBL-S (TEC)
50,000
• Labor burn rate
~$2.5M/mo
• ~175 SLAC FTE’s
0
09
bFe 8
-0
ct
O
08
nJu
08
bFe 7
-0
ct
O
07
nJu
07
bFe
6
-0
ct
O
06
nJu
06
bFe
5
-0
ct
O
05
nJu 5
0
bFe
4
-0
ct
O
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
4
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Project Performance
LCLS Cost/Schedule Performance - February 2007 (AYK$)
Work
Accomplished
% Complete
Total Budget at
Completion
1.1 Project Management
14,432
80.1%
18,013
1.2 Injector
16,196
96.6%
16,760
1.3 Linac
9,783
54.6%
17,932
1.4 Undulator
23,712
62.7%
37,833
1.5 X-ray Transport
10,776
47.8%
22,531
1.6 X-ray Endstations
1,665
17.4%
9,580
1.9 Conventional Facilities
39,572
31.5%
125,535
1.X Controls
1 LCLS Total Base Cost
13,263
129,398
43.0%
46.4%
30,865
279,049
WBS
2 LCLS Other Project Cost
LCLS Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
315,000
Available Contingency
35,951
% Contingency on ETC
24.0%
13,805
24.4%
• Injector
construction
completed in
March.
Commissioning
underway.
56,689
LCLS Total Other Project Costs (OPC)
64,000
Available Mgmt Reserve
7,311
% Mgmt Reserve on ETC
17.0%
LCLS Total Obligations = $173,402K
LCLS Total Project Cost (TPC)
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
143,203
42.7%
5
379,000
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Cost & Schedule Performance
LCLS Cost and Schedule Indices (TEC Only)
1.5
1.4
BCWP/BCWS (SPI)
1.3
BCWP/ACWP (CPI)
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
07
bFe
06
cDe
6
-0
ct
O
06
gAu
06
nJu
6
r- 0
Ap
06
bFe
05
cDe
5
-0
ct
O
05
gAu
05
nJu
5
r- 0
Ap
05
bFe
04
cDe
4
-0
ct
O
• CPI trend: Low-Green. Some benign (Inj / Und Spares), but there are real cost
overruns. (Injector Design/Install, RF, MMF, PO Staff).
• SPI Trend: Low-Green. CR impacting SPI and CPI (recent downward trend).
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
6
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Contingency Performance
% Contingency AvaIlable
(on remaining work)
• Steady, consistent rise
in project % complete.
50%
45%
% Complete
40%
Cont/ETC
• % complete trend
expected to increase
with CF work ramping
up.
35%
30%
25%
• CF contingency (FCO)
versus earned-value is
a modest ~7%.
20%
15%
10%
• Contingency based on
BAC ‘Cost to Go’.
5%
0%
07
bFe 6
0
cDe 6
-0
ct
O 6
0
gAu 6
0
nJu 6
r- 0
Ap 6
0
bFe 5
0
cDe 5
-0
ct
O 5
0
gAu 5
0
nJu 5
r- 0
Ap 5
0
bFe 4
0
cDe 4
-0
ct
O
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
7
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Estimate at Complete
At Completion
WBS
Budget at
Completion ($K)
Estimate at
Completion ($K)
Variance ($K)
1.1 Project Management
18,013
18,858
844
1.2 Injector
16,760
20,385
3,626
1.3 Linac
17,932
21,112
3,180
1.4 Undulator
37,833
40,209
2,376
1.5 X-ray Transport
22,531
23,714
1,183
9,580
9,456
-124
125,535
126,536
1,001
30,865
32,658
1,792
1 LCLS Total Base Cost
279,049
292,927
13,878
LCLS Total Estimated Cost
315,000
315,000
35,951
22,073
1.6 X-ray Endstations
1.9 Conventional Facilities
1.X LCLS Controls
Contingency
AYK$
Remaining Work (EAC - BCWP)
Contingency Based on EAC
151,434
Outstanding Phase-funded Awards
Outstanding Phase-funded CF Awards (Includes A/E,
CM/GC and Trade Subcontracts)
82,615
65,766
9,865
15.0%
Outstanding Phase-funded Technical Awards
16,849
842
5.0%
Remaining Uncommitted Work
68,819
11,365
16.5%
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
8
•EAC includes
all remaining
work, overruns,
potential credits
/ liens and
corrections for
mischarges.
•EAC degraded
due to funding
uncertainties
over the past
three months.
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
6-mo Back/Forward L3 Milestones
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
9
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Schedule
LCLS Integrated Schedule
Turner Contract Schedule Approved.
100% Resource/Cost Loaded (>95% using trade input)
Early-occupancy” dates acceptable and folded into LCLS P3 schedule.
CP - Und Hall E.O. – install – FEL commission – Photons in FEH
Total project float to CD-4; 131 working days (~6-1/2months)
Working to recover recent procurement delays for upcoming shutodwn
Near CP – Undulator vacuum system, Undulator testing
Schedule Issues
Construction schedule is critical path.
Delays in civil construction (tunneling coordination, utilities, weather)
Track Turner EV in LCLS PMCS, site walk validation, OAC meetings
Equipment installation schedule is critical path. (RM Boyce talk)
BTH-NEH equipment installation must be well-planned
CR uncertainty required a hold procurements in Project Office.
Installation reviews for FY07 shutdown and BTH-NEH installation.
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
10
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Procurement planning in decent shape
Major LCLS Procurements to be Awarded (~$31.0M)
•Procurement cell
(8 staff)
12%
19%
Controls
10%
Laser
3%
Linac
UN (ANL)
9%
12%
XT (LLNL)
XES
CF
13%
D-B Install
22%
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
11
•Tracking APPs,
FCOs, CORs, and
Crit. Proc.
•LCLS-BSD-SSO
meet regularly for
good coordination.
•B. Miller reducing
on-site presence
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Technical specs continue to mature
LCLS Specs
• Open ICD’s
•XTOD-LUSI
•XES-LUSI
•XES-CT
• Most open
requirements
are in photon
area.
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
12
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Risk registry identifies key project risks
Project System
Total Risks
Identified
Risks Retired
Risks Open
Management
24
20
4
Injector
13
13
0
Linac
Undulator
5
29
5
26
0
3
X-Ray, Transport, Optics
& Diagnostics
14
11
3
User Requirements, Mirror Design and
Procurements
X-Ray Endstations
Conventional Facilities
5
30
3
20
2
10
120
98
22
Procurement and Scope Uncertainties
Tunneling, Linac Legacies, Utilities, CF and
UTR Staffing, Turner Management and Legal
Total
Comments
Contingency, Cost Control, Installation,
Integration, Controls Management
Design, Procure, Construct phase is 100%
Complete.
Undulator Motion, Vacuum Chamber, RF BPMs
• The Risk Registry is now ‘owned’ by the LCLS System Managers.
•Better uniformity in assessing risks across the project
•Greater visibility with senior management (reviewed monthly)
•Better execution of resources (FTE’s & $$$) to handle the risks.
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
13
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Project Management Issues
Turner CM/GC contract
Still have open issues with Turner. Additional partnering
sessions may improve relations.
Stay up with FCO’s, RFI’s and trade correspondence
Directed Baseline Change
FY07 ~$114M (peak funding year), ~$8M less than
planned
Restore funding in FY2009. Key goals:
Maintain civil construction, technical procurements under contract.
Maintain core staff an ANL, LLNL and SLAC
Full Injector – BC1 commissioning plans
CD-4a ~Mar-Jun 2009 soft X-ray science in Near Hall
CD-4b ~Mar2010 hard X-ray science in Far Hall
Rebaseline cover extended schedule, escalation, army costs
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
14
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
‘Top-down’ projection of revised baseline
LCLS Rebaseline Funding Profile
AYM$
(TPC = $406M, TEC = $338M, OPC = $68M)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
FY10 funding
TEC = $7.4M Complete Install, Constr staff, PO
Pre-Ops = $12.5M, XT, XE, FEH Commission,
Physics Support, Pow er, etc.
Ops = $13.0M, supports 6-mo NEH and FEH
Operations, 1000 hours operations
FY09 funding
TEC = $30.5M XT, XE Proc + Install, Constr staff,
PO
Pre-Ops = $16.0M, BTH-NEH Commission,
Physics Support, Pow er, etc.
Ops = $9.0M, supports ~6-mo NEH Science, ~500
hours operations
Ops
OPC
TEC
FY11 funding
Ops = $27.3M, Full
LCLS operations
Prior Yr
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
FY07
FY08
FY09
15
FY10
FY11
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Project Management Issues
Estimate At Complete shows contingency tight.
~16.5% on commitments to go.
Track performance on commitments and FCO’s.
Timely closing of control accounts on labor.
Hire Deputy Controls Manager ASAP
Recent offer did not converge. Still interviewing.
EVM Certification
Surveillance review Feb12 with J. O’Hearn (LBNL).
Scheduling OECM visit for certification in near future.
End game planning
Installation / Integration must be well-planned
Rebaseline will optimize segue into operations.
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
16
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Summary
LCLS continues to make steady progress
TPC/TEC 46%/43% complete. Milestone performance is good.
~All beam path civil contracts awarded or in hand. CLOC removed.
Cost and schedule contingencies adequate for stage of the project.
Contingency on EAC will be managed carefully.
Remaining cost risk related to schedule, labor overruns or FCO’s
Staffing in all areas is adequate (except Controls Manager).
Critical path and obligation planning understood, being optimized.
Turner management and safety performance is primary
concern.
Project staff making plans for presenting a revised cost and
schedule baseline to address reduction in FY07 funding.
April 16-17, 2007
LCLS FAC Meeting
17
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu