LCLS BCR Overview and EIR LOIs
Mark Reichanadter
LCLS Deputy Project Director
Project Progress / Status
Revised Project Baseline Overview
EIR Lines of Inquiry (LOIs)
Summary
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Progress to Date
LCLS Status on Approved Baseline (May05)
TPC $379M (TEC $315M, OPC $64M)
% Comp (Jun07): Planned: 60.1% Actual: 51.5%
LCLS Status @ Level 2
Injector TEC & OPC essentially complete.
Linac recovering from CR effects. Installing equipment.
Undulator accepting deliverables. Prep for installation
XTOD has a mature design. Procurements underway.
XES in design, planning procurements
Conventional Facilities in construction
Injector S20 Facilities, MMF in operations
Most remaining civil work under contract
FEH Hutches, Office space renovation still in design
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
2
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS Progress on Approved Baseline
LCLS Project Performance (TEC)
• TEC SPI = 0.85
• TEC CPI = 0.90
350,000
300,000
AYK$
250,000
BCWS (TEC)
BCWP (TEC)
200,000
ACWP (TEC)
BAC
150,000
BA
100,000
OBL-S (TEC)
EAC
• EAC up-trend
BCWP downtrend, due to CR
• $ total burn rate
~$7-8M per/mo
• SLAC labor portion
burns ~ $2.5M/mo
50,000
0
09
bFe 8
-0
ct
O
08
nJu 8
0
bFe
7
-0
ct
O
07
nJu 7
0
bFe 6
-0
ct
O
06
nJu 6
0
bFe 5
-0
ct
O
05
nJu 5
0
bFe 4
-0
ct
O
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
3
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
LCLS TEC Earned Value (through Jun07)
Cum Work Scheduled (BCWS)
Cum Work Performed (BCWP)
Cum Actual Costs (ACWP)
Estimate at Complete (EAC)
% Contingency on EAC
$183.8M
$157.0M
$174.1M
$302.3M
10.9%
•% contingency/ETC dropped from ~22% to 10.9% since Oct06 due to CR
and funding uncertainties. Project team working on unplanned work (CR
scenarios, replanning project, review preparation, etc.)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
4
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
CR Funding Uncertainty Time-Line
LCLS CD-2 Funding Profile
120
Continuing
Resolution
100
80
60
LCLS funded incrementally at
~$86M level.
FY07 planned funding $122M
40
20
Funding
Uncertainty
A S O N D
2006
Possible year-long CR
No funding restoration
until FY09
Hold on all LCLS
Procurements
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
J
0
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
F M A M
2007
J
J
FY07
FY08
A
Funds arrive at ANL
Budget passed. LCLS
funded at $114M level
5
DOE directs LCLS to
revise baseline plan.
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
FY09
S
FY10
CR Impacts and Mitigation Actions
Impact:
FY07 funding uncertainties for six months
$8M FY07 funding reduction, no restoration until FY09
Mitigation:
Directed to develop revised plan with reduced FY07
funding profile.
Defer selected procurements from FY07 to FY09.
Accelerate shutdown procurements to recover schedule
Cost: $41.0M
Project extended by 16 months
Staffing costs, no changes to scope
Project is funding limited in FY08
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
6
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Mitigation – Defer Procurements and Replan
Beam Transport Hall
Undulator Hall
Near Experimental Hall
Far Experimental Hall
X-Ray Transport Tunnel
Defer Photon equipment
and FEH hutches until FY09
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
7
CD-4 LCLS Operations
in FEH - July 2010
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Revised Baseline Plan
Revise LCLS baseline to deliver technical scope
on cost and on schedule
Address effects of the CR and FY07 funding reduction
Shift photon and FEH procurements from FY07 to FY09
Update remaining work (ETC) using current estimates
No changes in scope or technical capabilities
Update overhead rates and escalation
Update OPC to reflect LCLS transition to operations
Update cost/schedule contingencies and risk planning
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
8
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Revised Baseline Plan Development
Status baseline Primavera (P3) for M/E June 2007.
Update FY07 funding. Replan remaining work.
Review WBS Dictionary, update as necessary.
Update costs and schedule estimates for ETC.
Update schedule logic, durations and optimize float
Review/adjust obligations plan to fit funding, resources
Identify critical paths, update milestones as necessary
Re-assess contingency at the task level
Re-assess risks, handling plans and impacts.
Establish funding levels for FY09 and FY10
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
9
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Bottoms-Up Contingency Assessment
Factor
Design Maturity (Labor-Related Costs)
1.45
The task/item is a conceptual design and/or advances the state of the art.
1.35
The task/item is a new design and/or requires some R&D (not beyond state of
the art).
1.25
The task/item is a new design, not exotic, being estimated with no prior
experience.
1.15
The task/item is a new design, not exotic, being estimated with prior
experience.
1.10
The task/item is a modification of an existing design.
1.0
The task/item is fully invoiced/completed.
Factor
Design Maturity (Material & Subcontract Costs)
1.35
The task/item has only a conceptual design or scaled from analogous system.
1.25
The task/item has an engineering estimate with sketches only.
1.15
The task/item has an engineering estimate with engineering drawings.
1.10
The task/item has a budgetary quote or is an off-the shelf item.
1.0
The task/item is fully invoiced/completed.
Judgment Factor (Additional External Factors)
(Ranges from 1.0 to 1.1, but can be higher under unusual conditions)
Schedule Risks:
Technical Risks:
Other Risks:
Does the task/item land on or impact the critical path?
Is the task/item a new design or beyond the state of the art and/or
critical to the LCLS?
Are there out-year inflation risks? Are you a buyer in a tight
supply economy? Are there exposures to foreign
currencies/markets? Is there only one qualified (or strongly
preferred) supplier? Does the item require specialty resources?
Any other unusual circumstances?
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
10
•Contingency assessed on the
base cost by CAMs at lowest
activity.
•Design Maturity
•Judgment Factor
•For more info on cost and
schedule estimating, see PMD
1.1-020, and PMD 1.1-021
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Revised ETC, BAC @ L2
WBS
ACWP through Remaining Work
Jun07
(ETC)
%
Complete
Budget at
Completion
1.1 Project Management
16.69
5.41
76%
22.10
1.2 Injector
20.07
0.10
99%
20.17
1.3 Linac
15.01
12.89
54%
27.90
1.4 Undulator
29.49
14.56
67%
44.05
1.5 X-ray Transport
13.86
10.70
56%
24.56
1.6 X-ray Endstations
1.77
6.69
21%
8.46
1.9 Conventional Facilities
59.09
73.29
45%
132.38
1.X Controls
1 LCLS Total Base Cost
18.17
174.15
22.07
145.72
45%
54%
40.24
319.87
2 LCLS Other Project Cost
LCLS Total Project Cost (TPC)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
LCLS Total Estimated Cost (TEC)
352.00
Available Contingency
32.13
% Contingency on Cost to Go (ETC)
22.1%
17.11
42.89
28.5%
60.00
LCLS Total Other Project Costs (OPC)
68.00
Available Mgmt Reserve
8.00
% Mgmt Reserve on ETC
18.7%
191.26
188.61
11
45.5%
420.00
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
BASIS OF ESTIMATE LCLS PROJECT: TEC
Basis of Estimate on Remaining Work (TEC)
Catalog/Construction
Database
0%
Significant portion of ETC
is contracts in hand.
Reduce cost risk.
Engineering Estimates
(Similar Items or
Procedures)
29%
Under Contract/Bids in
Hand
45%
Vendor Quote Estimate
(Dwgs/Sketches/Specs)
9%
Engineering Estimate
(Analysis)
5%
Expert Opinion (Allowance)
0%
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
Engineering Estimates
(Dwgs, Sketches/Specs)
12%
12
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Updated L2 milestones
L2 milestones have 2 months float to ‘early finish’ date to allow
some replanning discretion in response to changing conditions.
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
13
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Revised TEC Funding & Obligations
LCLS TEC Funding and Commitments
400
350
300
(AY$M)
250
BCWS
200
Commitments
DOE Funding
150
100
50
0
FY07
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
FY08
FY09
14
FY10
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
EIR Lines of Inquiry
Work Breakdown Structure
LCLS is organized into fully integrated (design through
commissioning) L2 systems
Controls embedded in technical systems.
No significant change to WBS Structure or Dictionary
due to CR effects.
Breakout Session (Fornek)
Resource-Loaded Schedule
P3 file provided in advance documentation.
Presentation (Mast)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
15
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
EIR Lines of Inquiry
Key Technical, Cost, Schedule and Programmatic
Assumptions
See documentation provided
Breakout Session (Mast/Reichanadter)
Critical Path
101 days (~5months) of float to CD-4
3 shortest (critical) paths are provided in advance
documentation
Breakout Session (Mast/Chan)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
16
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
EIR Lines of Inquiry
Start-Up Test (Commissioning) Plan
LCLS uses a broad, global start-up plan as a blueprint
to commission the LCLS.
Detailed commissioning plans are prepared, reviewed
(externally) and approved by SLAC and DOE
management.
DOE Accelerator Safety Order requirements are
addressed in detailed commissioning plans
Injector Commissioning Complete
Linac ARR due in late FY08
BTH–FEH ARR due in Spring 09
Breakout Session (Saenz/Schultz/Arthur)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
17
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
EIR Lines of Inquiry
System Functions and Requirements (SFRs)
Technical specifications are arranged in a hierarchical
fashion from the LCLS GRD
GRD, PRDs, ESD, ICD, RDSs
Documents are added/ revised as the design evolves.
Technical specifications are under revision control and
configuration management
No significant change to SFRs due to CR
Breakout Talk (Marsh/Reichanadter)
Integrated Project Team
See responses provided in Advance Questions
Breakout Session
(Lee/Joma/Brown/Galayda/Reichanadter)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
18
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
EIR Lines of Inquiry
Risk Management
System Managers ‘own’ and manage project risks
Add/close risks, evaluate handling plans, assess impacts
Review monthly with senior management team.
Residual risk impacts are evaluated as part of the overall
contingency analysis
As the project has evolved, risk management has
adapted to an punch list of actionable items.
Presentation (Galayda), Breakout Session (ALL)
Project Execution Plan (PEP)
See documentation provided
Breakout Session (Lee/Joma)
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
19
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu
Summary
FY07 CR significantly impacted the LCLS project.
2 quarter CR during project’s peak funding year
FY07 funding reduction with earliest restoration in FY09
Directed change to revise cost and schedule baseline
LCLS has prepared a revised ETC addressing the
FY07 funding and CR effects
Reschedule FY07 procurements to FY09
Delay CD-4 (16mo extension to project). TPC = $420M
Revised ETC will allow the project to complete its
commitments to DOE
No changes to scope or technical capabilities
Cost/schedule contingency adequate to complete project
October 9-11, 2007
LCLS EIR
20
Mark Reichanadter
reich@slac.stanford.edu