Report to the
LCLS Facilities Advisory Committee
LCLS Project Management
M. Reichanadter / SLAC
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Outline
Status of the LCLS
Progress in the past six months
Project Management
Cost and Schedule Performance
Contingency Allocation
Organization and Integration
Plans for the next six months
Risks/challenges ahead
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
2
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Status
Cost Status
CF subcontracts substantially over LCLS estimates
Descope CLOC to stay within TPC
Schedule Status
Technical systems maintaining reasonable schedule progress
Milestone performance ~OK, but installation activities are behind.
Construction start delayed due to high subcontract bids
Working new schedule & CP. New Co- and Beneficial milestones.
Construction packages of LCLS beampath now awarded and
construction is underway!
Recent shutdown of Turner activities. Frequent cable discoveries.
Management Status
Procurements going reasonably well with the dedicated cell
Consultants (Miller/Dee), expediter and BOA’s are on board
Integration management team in place
Manage the technical / CF interfaces and facilitate installation
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
TEC Project Performance - July 2006
• LCLS showing
steady progress
overall.
LCLS Project Performance (TEC = $315MAY))
350,000
• 31% TEC comp
• 28% TPC comp
300,000
BCWS (TEC)
250,000
AYK$
BCWP (TEC)
ACWP (TEC)
200,000
BAC
150,000
BA
OBL-S (TEC)
100,000
EAC
50,000
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
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
4
• SPI = 0.93
• CPI = 0.95
• $ burn rate
~$5-6M per/mo
• Labor burn rate
~$2.5M/mo
• At SLAC ~165
FTE’s ~350 heads
on LCLS
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Project Performance – July 2006
LCLS Cost/Schedule Performance - July 2006 (AYK$)
Work
Accomplished
% Complete
Total Budget at
Completion
1.1 Project Management
16,428
65.8%
24,958
1.2 Injector
15,810
76.0%
20,795
1.3 Linac
7,912
32.1%
24,677
1.4 Undulator
16,719
40.7%
41,095
1.5 X-ray Transport
8,938
35.2%
25,367
1.6 X-ray Endstations
1,239
8.5%
14,555
1.9 Conventional Facilities
1 LCLS Total Base Cost
18,741
85,786
14.9%
30.9%
125,793
277,240
WBS
2 LCLS Other Project Cost
LCLS Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
315,000
Available Contingency
37,760
% Contingency on ETC
19.7%
8,992
15.7%
• Injector 95%
complete in
Jan07.
57,435
LCLS Total Other Project Costs (OPC)
64,000
Available Mgmt Reserve
6,565
% Mgmt Reserve on ETC
13.6%
LCLS Total Obligations = $106,483.6K
LCLS Total Project Cost (TPC)
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
94,778
28.3%
5
379,000
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
TEC Contingency Performance – July 2006
% Contingency AvaIlable
(on remaining work)
• ~$19M contingency
allocated in July.
•~$18M, CF Gp #1
•~$0.4M Linac ETC
•~$1.2M, XTOD ETC
•~$0.2M, XES ETC
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
% Complete
BCWP/BAC
Cont/(BACBCWP)
• All ETC’s updated
except CT & CF.
• Aug Pending BCR’s;
•CF ETC
•CT ETC
•Bid Group #2
15%
10%
5%
0%
6
06
nJu
LCLS FAC Meeting
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
October 12-13, 2006
• CLOC to be descoped
to maintain adequate
contingency.
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Major Schedule Variances
Linac System: SPI = 0.72, CPI = 1.09
Linac (and Injector) controls hardware current installation. Work
behind schedule but recovering. Linac Controls work, RF
waveguides and vacuum hardware for 2007 installation being
deferred to support immediate needs.
Undulator System: SPI = 0.85, CPI = 0.92
Single Undulator Test (SUT) system development at ANL developed
into a larger test than anticipated. SUT is nearing completion.
SLAC’s Magnetic Measurement Facility (MMF) is not yet prepared
for undulator segment tuning. The Undulator alignment monitoring
HLS behind on hardware procurements. Increased SLAC-LCLS
oversight to recover schedule.
XES Controls System: SPI = 0.72, CPI = 1.07
XES controls effort has been focused on preparations for Injector
installation and commissioning period. Replan future XES controls
work.
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
7
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Schedule Status
Old Schedule – Critical Path (CP) - Und B.O. – install – FEL commission.
Total float 213d to CD-4.
Near CP – Undulator vacuum system, Undulator testing,
New Schedule – Updating project schedule and CP with Turner BO
milestones.
Provides “Co-occupancy” Target dates allow installation prior to BO.
Estimate ~60 days loss of float resulting from evaluation of bids, additional value
engineering effort and possible options.
Near-term L3 milestone performance
6/2/06 – 1st Article Undulator 1 Rcvd @ SLAC. Done – 6/12/06
7/10/06 – Award CF subcontracts
Done, Group #1 packages out, Group #2 ~ready, NTP to Turner on Aug 1
7/28/06 – MMF Qualified & Ready to Measure Prod Undulators
~Aug 28. Benches are installed and measuring the first magnets.
8/21/06 – FY06 Shutdown: HW Reqd for Installation
Aug 16 Conducted Hardware Installation Readiness Review
Aug 30 Conducted Controls Installation Readiness Review
11/15/06 – Start Drive Laser Commissioning. On schedule
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
8
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Organization Chart
• Strengthened
Senior Mgmt
•APD-C
•APD-E (TBD)
•IMT
• Procurement
•Miller
•Dee
• Conv. Fac.
•Turner
•Jacobs T3
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
9
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Integration - IMT addresses the “5I’s”
LCLS establishes IMT
IMT under direction of RM Boyce
Described under PMD 1.1-028
Integration management
(gaps/conflicts)
Review and ownership of Interfaces
(ICD’s)
CF-Tech leads identified for
construction
Installation readiness & planning
Aug06 shutdown underway
APD Engineer – To facilitate LCLS
system engineering and inter-lab
integration
Interview process complete
LCLS Design Reviews - ~35-40 have
been conducted across the project to
mature the design, validate progress
and identify integration issues early.
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
10
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS design continues to mature
Requirements Document
Total No.
Documents
Number
Approved
Number in
Sign-Off
% Complete
Global Requirements Document
(GRD)
1
1
0
100
Physics Requirements Documents
(PRDs)
79
61
0
77
Engineering Specification
Documents (ESDs)
126
82
0
65
Management
Physics Liaison Support
Controls
Injector
Linac
Undulator
X-R Endstations
Conventional Facilities
XTOD
3
3
16
32
13
17
15
10
17
3
3
14
31
11
9
0
10
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
100
87
97
85
53
0
100
6
Room Data Sheets (RDSs)
51
51
0
100
Interface Control Documents (ICDs)
12
11
0
92
Injector
Linac
Undulator
X-R TOD
XES
3
4
1
2
2
3
4
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
100
100
100
100
50
269
206
0
~76
Total
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
11
Comments
Complete
LCLS Specs
• 77% PRD’s
• 65% ESD’s
• Most open
requirements are in
photon area. Need
to do better.
Complete
• 100% RDS’s
• 92% ICD’s
• IMT reviews ICD’s
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Risk Registry
Risk registry has been modified to provide a
more tactical plan (FAC recommendation)
System Managers identify and ‘own’ risk
Improves consistency on risk characterization
SM’s have authority and resources to prioritize risks.
Risks reviewed each month at senior mgmt meeting
Bulleted tasks identified to reduce risk
Status punch list each month
Avoid the broad, non-actionable risks
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
12
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Near-Term Project Objectives
Project Management
Hire APD-Engineering
Emphasize the IMT in resolving integration issues
Cost Management
Complete ETC’s and ensure remaining scope fits LCLS TPC
Schedule Management
Complete Injector / Linac shutdown effort safely
Injector (RF Gun – BC1)
Conduct Injector ARR and begin laser/injector commissioning
Deliver 50% of undulators to MMF ~ Dec06
Monitor MMF measurement throughput
Perform on civil construction, safe operations are a must to stay to
cost/schedule.
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
13
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Risks / Challenges Ahead
Execution Phase – Safety is primary concern
Fully staffed in ES&H, construction safety and oversight (UTR’s)
Regular job site inspections, enforced procedures
Aligned DOE, SLAC, Turner, Subcontractor team
Technical / Quality – Missing scope/gaps are a risk
Scrutinize ICD’s, LCLS / LUSI interface needs attention
Improve technical specs, continue emphasis on design reviews
Emphasize role and influence of IMT and APD-E
Schedule - Installation activities and coordination
IMT to facilitate installation planning
Need to get APD-E on board
Cost - Site conditions, field orders and staying to schedule
CLOC descoped to maintain adequate contingency
Recent bottoms-up ETC for the project
Strong procurement and negotiating team in place
October 12-13, 2006
LCLS FAC Meeting
14
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu