Conventional Facilities (CF) WBS 1.9
ETC and Methodology
David Saenz
CF Systems Manager
System Function & Requirements
WBS 1.9
Estimate To Complete
Milestones
Organization
Risks
Start Up Planning
Summary
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
1
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Systems Function & Requirements
Physics Requirement Document
Used to convey the essential
physics requirements to CF
CF engineers utilize this document
as the basis of the design
Example: “UH shall extend 175
meters in the direction of the beam.”
“Air temp at 20°C”
Engineering Specifications
Document
Room Data Sheets used as a
supplement to the PRD, and
provides specific details of an item
in order that an AE firm can meet
the design criteria
Example: equip power loads, utility
flow reqt’s, i.e. temp, pressure, etc
Interface Control Document
Defines treaty points and areas of
responsibility to interface systems
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
2
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
WBS 1.9
WBS 1.9.1 – Systems Management & Integration
Provide overall project management
Implement and integrate
Design, construction, commissioning, and close-out for all phases of the
project related to conventional facilities
WBS 1.9.2 – Title I & Title II
Engineering support to include
Drawings and specifications
“Issue for Bid” construction documents
“Issue for Construction” drawings and specifications
Engineering Studies
Constructability Reviews
Value Engineering
Cost Estimates
Commissioning Plans
Development of Schedules
Contract Administration
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
3
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
WBS 1.9
WBS 1.9.3 – Construction
Construction activities to cover the receipt, inspection,
assembly of the project conventional facilities. Including
obtaining permits, safety plan, quality control, SWPPP,
site preparations, building demolition, building
construction, tunnels, shielding, laser rooms, hutches,
cooling systems, electrical systems, cable trays,
ventilation systems, HVAC systems, drainage systems
and utility systems, interiors, commissioning, testing,
punch-list, as-built drawings, operation and
maintenance manuals.
At the completion of Title III, the project is ready for
occupancy by operations staff.
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
4
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
SLAC Site Plan
Main Gate
B028 – Office
Remodel
B751 – Office
Remodel
Bldg #081 - MMF
Sector 24
Sector 20
Upstream
LCLS General
Work Boundary
Work to go
Work completed
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
Research Yard Headwall
5
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Beam Transport Hall –
63% complete 227m
long above grade facility to
transport the electron beam
through the existing RSY
Work In Progress
Undulator Hall – 61%
complete 175m long
underground tunnel housing
undulators and ancillary
equipment
Near Experimental Hall 62% complete
underground facility whose
primary function is to house 3
experimental hutches, prep
and shops
Far Experimental Hall –
33% complete
underground single 46’
cavern to house 3
experimental hutches and
prep space
Electron Beam Dump –
54% complete 40m long
underground facility used to
separate the electron and xray beams
Front End Enclosure –
38% complete 40m long
underground facility to house
various diagnostic equipment
in support of the photon
beam
X-Ray Transport &
Diagnostics Tunnel –
11% complete 210m long
underground tunnel used to
transport photon beams from
NEH to FEH
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
6
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
7
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
8
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
9
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
WBS ETC
•1.9.1 Systems Mgmt &
Integration - $9.6M
•2.9 Conventional
Facility
Commissioning
$1.5M
•1.9.2 Title I/Title II - $0M
•1.9.3 Construction - $63.6M
•TCCo Trades - $52.3M
•Non TCCo Trades $11.3M
•90% of total CF construction procurements have been
awarded
•Scope, schedule and budget is well understood
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
10
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Estimate To Complete
Systems are well defined as accelerator housing construction trade packages
have been awarded
10% contingency assigned to work (in-progress) already awarded
61% physically complete for TCCo trade subcontractors (month ending Sept data)
Remaining WBS elements yet to be awarded (non-TCCo trades) include
appropriate contingency ranging from 30% - 60%
1.9.3.3 - Construction BTH West
1.9.3.4 - Design/Construction IC/PS Electrical Branch Feeders
1.9.3.14 - Design/Construction FEH Hutches
1.9.3.18 - Construction Natural Gas Line
1.9.3.19 - Design/Construction B028 Office Remodel
1.9.3.19 - Design/Construction B751 Office Remodel
Basis of Estimate criteria used to generate remaining cost include design
maturity and judgment factor applied to activities as assigned by the System
Manager
Methodologies used for estimating purposes include
Construction database used by Jacobs Engineering on-site estimator
Vendor quotes based on preliminary layouts
Engineering estimates based on similar projects
Relevant experience from 2006/2007 previously completed projects
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
11
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Level 3 Milestones
Sufficient L3 milestones exist and are properly distributed to monitor performance thru completion
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
12
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
CF Organization
Jess Albino – CF Assoc Director
David Saenz – CF Systems Manager/CAM
WBS 1.9, 2.9
Anita Malahowski – CF Cost/Schedule
Analyst
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
13
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Risks
Major risks are identified and entered into the Risk
Registry
CF Management team reviews and updates the Risk
Registry at minimum on a monthly basis
Risks are assessed and maintained by the System Manager
Activity specific risks are managed daily and owned
by the CF System Manager
Low risks are built into bottoms up contingency analysis
Should use of contingency be required, CF Manager
requests funds from CCB
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
14
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Risk Samples
R-1.9-028 In-Place Utility Protection
Lab operational utilities disrupted as a result of construction
activities
>$100K but < $1M, 2 weeks to repair
Mitigation
Potholing
Excavation permit process
Relocate utilities thru formal design process
Protection of exposed utilities
R-1.9-043 Construction Stand-down
Safety incident occurring that would require a stand-down
>$1M but <$5M, 1 month schedule impact
Mitigation
Workers provided with toolbox/tailgate meetings
Workers review Job Safety Analysis (JSA) prior to engaging activities
TCCo appoints safety coaches across the trades
TCCo Safety manager routinely walks the site with trades
Review lessons-learned
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
15
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Start-Up Planning
CF Commissioning of MEP
Systems
Commissioning Plan defined by
JE (Engineer of Record)
Commissioning Plan managed
by 3rd party subcontractor,
independent of trades and
Turner, hired by LCLS
Budget established at $300K
5 CxA bidders invited
4 bids received and all within
budget
Technical evaluation is
complete
Weighted point score
Award is imminent
CxA will be assigned to work
with trades, SLAC maintenance
staff and LCLS CF Engineering
group
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
16
CxA will provide oversight for
electrical, hvac, plumbing,
piping, fire protection, fire
alarm, elevator and crane
systems
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu
Summary
CF WBS (scope, schedule and budget) is well understood
Earned value continues to progress
Overall CF WBS risks going forward are minimal
90% of CF construction procurements are awarded to date
Remaining procurements are tracked with Advanced Procurement
Plan and CF Master Schedule to ensure delivery of remaining
projects on schedule
Impact from continuing resolution
Delayed build-out of Far Experimental Hall and Office Remodels
Increased project staff costs
Early and Beneficial Occupancy milestones are preserved
Outlook for meeting CD-4 is excellent!
Oct 9-11, 2007
EIR Review CF
17
David Saenz
saenzd@slac.stanford.edu