project management w j foyt n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Project Management W. J. Foyt PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Project Management W. J. Foyt

play fullscreen
1 / 29
Download Presentation

Project Management W. J. Foyt - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

alec
139 Views
Download Presentation

Project Management W. J. Foyt

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Project ManagementW. J. Foyt • Jan ’07 Lehman Review • Current Status - • Organization • Staffing • OPC Obligations vs. Funding • MIE Obligations vs. Funding • Projected Obligations CD-1 to CD-3 • What If - • FY 2008 Continuing Resolution • Path to CD-2a • Criteria for CD-2 Approval • Action Items

  2. Jan ’07 Lehman Review • January review had 37 recommendations • 35 of the 37 have been responded to • Remaining two: • Prepare a detailed plan for accomplishing CD-2 pre-requisites • Conduct a DOE Review to ensure readiness for CD-1 and to evaluate plans for accomplishing CD-2

  3. Current Status • Organization-

  4. Current Status • Staffing – • Management – all positions filled. LCLS matrixing staff in the areas of ES&H, Project Controls, QA • Scientific – all positions filled • Engineering / Design / Drafting • ME– 3 openings. Offer extended to two, recruiting continues for remaining position. • Design / Drafting –matrixed staff from SLAC • Software Development – matrixed staff from SLAC • Technical Support - matrixed staff from SLAC

  5. Current Status • Obligations vs. Funding (k$)– FY 2007 OPC Funding 1,500 FY 2006 Carry forward 2,245 Funding available 3,745 Obligations as of 6/30/07: Labor 1,221 MS&T 282 Detector R&D 1,144 Total 2,647 Balance 1,098* * 488k of balance reserved for BNL

  6. MIE Obligations vs. Funding

  7. Obligations CD-1 to CD-3 • Management / Engineering /Design:

  8. What If • A FY 2008 Continuing Resolution (CR): • March plan permits minimal carry forward • Assume a 3 month CR • 1st qtr FY ‘08 projected burn rate 1380k$ • Projected shortfall ~700k$ • Managing shortfall would require delaying XPP detector ~5 months. • Maintaining detector schedule would require an additional 650k$ in FY 07.

  9. What If • Management of possible FY ’08 CR:

  10. Path to CD-2 • Criteria for CD -2 Approval • Resource loaded schedule • TPC and project schedule • WBS and dictionary • Risk Management • Prel. Design & Review • System functions & req’ts • Hazard analysis • Value Mgt / Engineering • Project Controls / EVMS • Project Execution Plan • Start-up test plan • Acquisition Strategy • Integrated Project Team • QA Plan • Security Vulnerability Assessment Report

  11. Path to CD-2 • Resource loaded schedule – • Status: • Project measuring performance against Mar.1, 2007 plan • Plan is resource loaded but not baselined • Plan reflects two instruments (XPP & CXI) which are to produce science when LCLS is operational • Plan is consistent with the project’s cost estimate • Plans: • XPP and CXI will be baselined and presented for CD-2a approval in Dec. 2007 • 3rd instrument (XCS) to be baselined in Oct. 2009

  12. Path to CD-2 • Total Project Cost and Project Schedule – • The project’s cost plan of 60M$ is consistent with funding profile: • Status: • Plans: • Tentative plans to modify FY ’11 and ‘12 profile by -/+500k should have minimal impact on overall schedule.

  13. Path to CD-2 • Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)– • DOE milestones – • Status: • CD – 0 Aug. 2005 • Plans: • CD – 1 July 2007 • CD – 2a Dec. 2007 • CD – 2b Oct. 2009 • CD – 3a July 2008 • CD – 3b Mar. 2010 • CD – 4a Feb. 2010 • CD – 4b Mar. 2012 With the exception of CD-1 and CD-2, the above dates are DOE approval dates. Submission of the CD package for approval is planned 6 weeks prior.

  14. Path to CD-2 • Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)– • Project Milestones – • Status: • Preliminary level 2 and 3 milestones identified as part of project’s P3 schedule. • Plans: • Level 2 and 3 milestones being refined and dictionary prepared. • During baseline Level 4 milestones will be identified and added to dictionary.

  15. Path to CD-2 • Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)– • Critical path - • Status: • The critical path has been identified for the March 1 plan portion of the 1st two instruments. • Plans: • Review schedule logic and validate critical path • Critical path for complete instrument to be developed

  16. Path to CD-2 • Work Breakdown Structure and Dictionary - • Status: • WBS incorporates all of the project work and is consistent with the resource loaded schedule. • Dictionary defines elements down to level 5. • Plans: • WBS will be updated during baseline as required.

  17. Path to CD-2 • Risk Management – • Status: • 19 potential risks summarized as the ‘Risk Registry’ • Each has been quantified and possible mitigation plans identified. • 2 rated as High: • R-2 Delay in DOE yearly funding for the project (continuing resolution) • R-12 Delay in adding appropriate staff could hamper design activities • 13 rated as Medium • 4 rated as Low • Plans: • At baseline all project risks will be re-evaluated and updated as necessary • The registry will be monitored monthly and updated at least quarterly.

  18. Path to CD-2 • Preliminary Design and Review – • Status: • The Conceptual Design Report, basis for preliminary design, is complete. • No design reviews have been held • Plans: • Complete Preliminary Design • Reviews will: • evaluate the adequacy & completeness of drawings & specifications • determine consistency with system functions & reqts. • ensure all safety aspects have been addressed • if necessary, revise cost estimate to meet preliminary design and incorporate into baseline.

  19. Path to CD-2 • System Functions and Requirements – • Status: • Draft Physics Requirements Documents (PRD) are ~25% complete • Draft Interface Control Documents (ICD) are ~ 20% complete • Preparation of Engineering Specification Documents (ESD) in process • Plans: • Finalize PRDs • Complete ESDs and ensure all physics requirements have been met. • Finalize Interface Control Documents (ICD) • Verify by concept review process

  20. Path to CD-2 • Hazard Analysis - • Status: • Preliminary Hazards Analysis Report (PHAR) modified and re-issued in July 2007 • Plans: • ES&H personnel will ensure that all scope, schedule and costs necessary for safety are incorporated into the baseline • Based on the project’s preliminary design, the Preliminary Hazards Analysis Report (PHAR) will be updated to reflect new design information and if applicable, new hazards • Revised report will be approved by DOE-SSO.

  21. Path to CD-2 • Value Management / Engineering – • Status: • Executed LUSI Value Management Plan • Conducted with internal and external reviewers • 3 alternative solutions identified • Final report pending • Plans: • LUSI Value Management principles will be applied to all LUSI engineering tasks

  22. Path to CD-2 • Project Controls / EVMS – • Status: • Performance measured against resource loaded March plan • Project milestones and critical path identified • LUSI utilizes existing LCLS EVMS, policies, procedures and project controls staff • LCLS Project Controls analyst matrixed to LUSI • Plans: • On site EVMS training to be provided to Project staff • 1st two instruments baselined in Dec.’07 • Earned Value (EV) reporting begins in FY 08. • BNL (Detectors) and LLNL (Injector) plans to be baselined. EV to be reported against these plans.

  23. Path to CD-2 • Project Execution Plan – • Status: • DOE-SSO comments incorporated • Draft forward to DOE-HQ for review/comments • Plans: • Update to incorporate DOE-HQ comments, reflect any changes from CD-1 Review and forward for approval

  24. Path to CD-2 • Start-up Test Plan – • Status: • Outline of Plan in development • Plans: • Start-up Test Plan will be closely coordinated with LCLS’s transition to Operations plan

  25. Path to CD-2 • Acquisition Strategy – • Status: • DOE-SSO comments incorporated • Draft forward to DOE-HQ for review/comments • Plans: • Update to incorporate DOE-HQ comments, reflect any changes from CD-1 Review and forward for approval

  26. Path to CD-2 • Integrated Project Team (IPT)– • Status: • IPT identified in PPEP, section 3.0 • June 2007 updated to reflect LUSI Deputy Federal Project Director • DOE-SSO weekly meetings with LUSI Management • Bi-weekly teleconference – DOE-HQ, DOE-SSO, LCLS Project Director, LUSI Management • Plans: • Integrated Project Team will be adjusted as required • Frequency of communications may be modified depending on criticality of issues

  27. Path to CD-2 • QA Plan • Status: • LCLS QA Coordinator, matrixed to LUSI, developed Quality Implementation Plan (QIP) specific to project. • QA coordinator reports directly to LUSI Project Director and ensures compliance to plan. • QA coordinator attends all design reviews. • Plans: • QIP will be monitored by QA Coordinator • Coordinator to be involved in all design reviews

  28. Path to CD-2 • Security Vulnerability Assessment Report – • Status: • Report issued in Dec. 2006 • Plans: • Report to be reviewed prior to baseline completion for any material changes.

  29. Path to CD-2 • Actions items - • Unit pricing for ~75% of material costs to be validated • Re-evaluate risk assessment (contingency) for major cost drivers • Certify labor rates • Escalation rates to be reviewed • On site training of staff • Establish procurement guidelines for BCWS • BNL plan for XPP detector to be baselined • LLNL plan for particle injector to be baselined • Review schedule logic & certify critical path • Review/establish earning rules for BCWS • Synchronize ACWP reporting for BNL and LLNL • Confirm SLAC accounting feed to EVMS • Refine EVMS processes and procedures • Preliminary baseline reconciled to funding profile • Verify baseline costs = funding profile • Submit plan for baseline approval