1 / 35

LUSI WBS 1.1

This outline discusses the performance risks and contingency usage in the LUSI project, including procurement challenges, accounting complexity, staffing availability, change control delays, and more.

jkaiser
Download Presentation

LUSI WBS 1.1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LUSI WBS 1.1 Tom Fornek Project Manager April 20-22, 2009

  2. Outline WBS 1.1 Performance Risks and Contingency Usage Re-baseline Plans Other Topics

  3. Cost & Schedule Performance – WBS 1.1

  4. Cost & Schedule Performance – WBS 1.1 A large invoice was paid in Jan for several months of support

  5. CPR

  6. ARRA Risks • Ability to place procurements in a timely manner • Procurement talk this breakout • Foreign Procurements • Strict “Buy American” Policy • Use standard appropriation for foreign buys • Accounting and Reporting Complexity • LUSI has set-up duplicate accounts • Allows tracking ARRA funds separately from standard FY09 appropriation • Staffing Availability • LUSI has been aggressively seeking staff • Project is in reasonable shape • Change Control Delays • LUSI has processed 21 BCRs to date • Process for major changes takes some time, but is not onerous • Technical decisions reviewed by the Technical Configuration Control Committee • John Arthur, Jerry Hastings, John Galayda, Tom Rabedeau

  7. Standard/ARRA Accounts

  8. Standard/ARRA Schedule Items Detailed Schedules Available in Back-up Information

  9. Re-baseline Plans • LUSI split the scope for XPP and CXI into “Early Science” scope and CD-4 required scope to match funding profile and satisfy thirst for early science in the CD-2 Baseline • This was not done for XCS • ARRA funds don’t help much for the “Early Science” scope of XPP and CXI since we were already trying to deliver this scope as early as possible • ARRA funds do allow advancing the CD-4 version of XPP and CXI • We are not planning on changing the “Early Science” scope or milestones for XPP or CXI but: • The instruments at “Early Science” will include more components due to early funding • We now plan to split the scope of XCS to provide an “Early Science” version of the instrument • This provides an XCS instrument one year earlier • Not yet in the revised ARRA baseline

  10. Early Science / CD-4 Deliverables These Items were scheduled early to have a functional instrument early within funding constraints These Items were delayed due to funding constraints – ARRA funding allows advancement CONTINGENCY ARRA TYPICAL TWO-PHASE APPROACH TO INSTRUMENT DELIVERY

  11. LUSI Cost Baseline Effect of Reduced Escalation Effect & Early Completion

  12. Contingency Usage

  13. Contingency

  14. BUDGET

  15. ARRA Milestones LUSI still needs to complete the ARRA schedule and incorporate any comments from this review. These dates will also be affected by future scope additions.

  16. Schedule Advancement • XCS “Early Science” allows for a functioning XCS instrument one year earlier than original schedule • These dates are based on a draft of a revised schedule. Once we finalize the ARRA plans and incorporate any review comments, we will process a BCR to change the schedule.

  17. Re-baseline Plans • LUSI has started the re-baseline process • This is a Level 2 baseline change since we are leaving CD-4 as is or moving it forward • We will incorporate a new L2 milestone for an “Early Science” version of the XCS instrument • We will incorporate a new L2 milestone for Project Ready for CD-4 • A draft PEP revision has been prepared • After this review, LUSI will incorporate our plans plus review comments into baseline

  18. Impact of Stimulus funding • Major Benefits of Stimulus Funding • XCS instrument one year earlier • Complete the current CD-4 version of XPP early • Complete the current CD-4 version of CXI early • Allow procurement of all remaining components earlier than planned • Retire funding risks • Reduce escalation

  19. Summary • LUSI Total Project Cost remains at $60M • Procurements occur earlier – Total Procurements the same • Total FTEs remain the same – Personnel needed earlier • Roll-off earlier too • Instrument “Early Science” dates not affected much – Yet! • LUSI will be making an on-going effort to improve “Early Science” dates • Improve deliveries • Refine “Early Science” scope • Biggest gains are • XCS one year earlier • $1M+ gain from less escalation

  20. Other Topics • Lessons Learned • Engineering and Management • EIR Lines of Inquiry

  21. Lessons Learned - SNS • LUSI has reviewed the SNS Instrument Beamline Construction Lessons Learned – Many items were already incorporated • System Integration • Design • Procurement • Scheduling • Construction • Project Management • LCLS has started a Beamline Lessons Learned Document

  22. Lessons Learned (1) • System Integration • Design Criteria • Baseline Scope Review • Design Guide • Naming • P&ID • Radiation Shielding Configuration • CD-4 Parameters Drawing • Subject Matter Experts involved early in design • Integration of electrical systems • System Integration Review • Plan for Instrument Operation Early • PPS Beam Sweep Plan early • Plan for Shielding Configuration Control • Complete Shielding Early • Confirm “As-built” conditions early

  23. Lessons Learned (2) • Design • Shielding • Keep SLAC RP involved – Follow LCLS procedures • Documentation • Don’t wait for “just in time delivery” – strains resources • Integration of PPS and non-PPS cabling • Mechanical Interferences • We are working on processes to minimize this • Vacuum Compatibility • LCLS standards exist • Ergonomic Features • Scientists and Engineers are very involved – experienced • Motional Control • Crane Design • Extra Vessel Penetrations

  24. Lessons Learned (3) • Procurement • Involve Procurement Early • Advanced Procurement Plans • Also plan for advanced procurements in PEP • Scheduling • PPS and Detectors • Allow appropriate installation time • Component Delivery History • Huber goniometers • Motion Control Testing

  25. Lessons Learned – (4) • Construction • Survey and Alignment • Involve Survey and Alignment early • Oxygen Deficiency (ODH) Detectors • Install when clean conditions exist • Project Management • Advance Procurement Approvals • IRR Procedures and Approach to IRR • Project Close-out • Takes longer than expected • LCLS Photon Systems • Scope Definition and Tracking needs more attention • Affects interfaces – Who is doing what

  26. Engineering and Management (1) • WBS 1.1 • Full-time Project Mgr this FY , ½ Time thereafter • ½ Time Deputy • Full-time Admin this FY, ½ time thereafter • ¼ time ES&H • 2 FTE Equivalent PMCS • WBS 1.2 • 1 Full-time Lead Engineer/CAM • 2 Full-time Design Engineers/Designers (Down to 1 by Sept) • Post CD-2 6.4 total FTE-Years (Mgmt+Des+Eng) • WBS 1.3 (Most complex instrument) • 1 Full-time Lead Engineer/CAM • 2.5 Full-time Design Engineers • 2 Full-time Designers • Post CD-2 16.5 total FTE-Years (Mgmt+Des+Eng)

  27. Engineering and Management (2) • WBS 1.4 • 1 Full-time Lead Engineer/CAM • 3.5 Full-time Design Engineers/Designers • Post CD-2 11.4 total FTE-Years (Mgmt+Des+Eng) • WBS 1.5 Diagnostic & Common Optics • 1 Full-time CAM • 2.5 Full-time Design Engineers • 2 Full-time Designers • Post CD-2 9 total FTE-Years (Mgmt+Des+Eng) • WBS 1.6 Controls • 1 Part-time CAM • 3 Full-time Design Engineers • Post CD-2 9.7 total FTE-Years (Mgmt+Des+Eng)

  28. Engineering and Management (3) • More of the instrument concept development included in the TPC • LUSI has spent a considerable amount of time looking at the justifiable percentage of labor split between LUSI, EPD and XFD • LCLS Directorate is covering reasonable amounts of QA, ES&H and Finance • EFD covers engineer’s training time • XFD covers 75% of scientist’s time • Almost all instrument design is first of a kind • Leads to high engineering/design costs • Very little inherited design • Other facilities or Labs can build on the design effort of operating groups or just purchase existing designs – LUSI can’t do very much of this • Cost of Living in California increases Personnel costs • Purchases are nation-wide so these are not affected much • Detector effort is labor intensive • LUSI covering the PMCS and integration for detector effort at BNL

  29. MGMT & ENG COMPARISON

  30. EIR Lines of Inquiry

  31. Scope of EIR in Support of CD-3 • Established Perfomance Baseline • We are re-planning to accommodate ARRA funds • Updated Project Execution Plan • Updates in process pending comments from this review • ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998 Compliant EVMS • SLAC EVMS certified • Independent Project Review/Cost Review • EIR lines of inquiry will be partially addressed by this status review

  32. DOE 413.3A CD3 Requirements • The Quality Assurance Program must fully address all applicable Quality Assurance Criteria as defined in 10 CFR 830 Subpart A and DOE O 414.1C. • SLAC Document PM-391-000-01-R0 released in July ’07. Consistent with DOE Order 414.1C and the SLAC Office of Assurance “Quality Implemention Procedure Requirements “SLAC-I-770-0A17S-001-R000”

  33. DOE 413.3A CD3 Requirements • Prepare Final Instrument Designs • Completed for XPP, DCO, CDA (CXI and XCS in June) • Conduct a Final Instrument Design Review • Completed for XPP, DCO, CDA (CXI and XCS in June) • Update Hazards Analysis Report • Completed (PM-391-001-34 R1) • Update the Preliminary Security Vulnerability Assessment Report. • CD-1 report still valid

  34. CD-3 Scope of EIR

  35. EIR Lines of Inquiry

More Related