DOE Review of the LCLS Project Management Mark

DOE Review of the LCLS Project Management Mark Reichanadter LCLS Deputy Project Director SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 1 1 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Review Documentation LCLS Project Review information: Presentations and project documentation on LCLS website Thumb drives, hardcopies of presentations and documentation. Project Documentation: WBS and WBS Dictionary Milestones and Milestone Dictionary Cost To Go Estimates – Fully burdened and escalated. Includes contingency assessment at lowest level. March 2009 Monthly Report & February 2009 Risk Registry Response to Recommendations from May 2008 Review Questions? Contact: Helen O’Donnell X 3368, heleno@slac. stanford. edu Daphne Mitchell X 5377, dmitchell@slac. stanford. edu LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 2 2 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Outline Project Status Funding, Obligations & Costs Cost and Schedule Performance Contingency & EAC Milestones & Critical Path Procurement Status Risk Management Transition to Operations Summary LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 3 3 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Project Status LCLS Baseline Performance (through Mar 09) TPC = $420 M (TEC = $352 M, OPC = $68 M) CD-4 = July 2010 TPC >88% Complete, TEC >91% Complete Contingency on TEC = $10. 9 M 37. 5% on remaining work Management Reserve on OPC = $4. 3 M 27. 7% on remaining work Added scope to enhance LCLS science program FEE diag. , SXR Integ/Install, H 6 design & construct CDR for NEH Annex, Expanded Space Renovation Using EAC to assess additional upscopes LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 4 4 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Project Status Technical Systems nearing completion Injector, Linac, Undulator and E-Beam Cntrls complete. XTOD, XES and Photon Controls in installation phase Civil Construction nearing completion Turner Construction 100% complete and demobilized Few remaining change orders to negotiate FEH Hutches and Space Renovation remain FEL Commissioning is main emphasis FEE installation is on critical path AMO install/commission leads to early LCLS science LCLS Project transitioning to LCLS Operations Facilities – IJ, Linac, BTH, UH, NEH, XT, FEH, MMF Systems – Injector, Linac, Undulator, E-Beam Controls LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 5 5 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

TEC (Line Item) Progress • FY 08 budget challenge is behind us. • Add’l budget under a CR allowed early award of FY 09 procurements • Still on track , though tight for early science in FY 09. LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 6 6 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Project Performance LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 7 7 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Project Performance TPC - $420 M Work Scheduled (BCWS) Work Performed (BCWP) Actual Costs (cum) (ACWP) Obligations (cum) $369. 3 M $359. 9 M $360. 8 M $367. 2 M TEC - $352 M Est at Complete (EAC) $345. 0 M EAC includes variances and Pending BCRs PBCRs - Wire Scanners, Controls & Cabling Remaining Work (ETC) $ 29. 4 M LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 8 8 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Earned Value Performance LCLS TPC CPI = 1. 00, SPI = 0. 97 LCLS TEC CPI = 0. 99, SPI = 0. 98 SV = ($7. 9 M) Installation of FEE and AMO Instrument Construction of FEH Hutches and Space Renovation CV = ($3. 6 M) Installation of FEE and AMO Instrument Photon and CF Managers will address variance corrective actions LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 9 9 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Estimate at Complete LCLS EAC for TEC $345. 0 M Remaining Work (ETC) Remaining Contingency $29. 4 M $ 7. 0 M % Contingency (Cost to Go) % Contingency (Comm to Go) 23. 9% 27. 5% Adding scope to optimize science. Reserve adequate contingency to address remaining risks to project. LCLS EAC for OPC $62. 0 M Remaining Work (ETC) Remaining Mgmt Reserve % Mgmt Reserve (Cost to Go) $16. 7 M $ 6. 0 M 36. 0% Increasing Mgmt Reserve due to lower than anticipated commissioning costs, so far… LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 10 10 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Remaining Work (TEC) $29. 4 M PM 1, 413 UN 95 XTOD 4, 240 XES 4, 241 CF 14, 997 Controls 4, 430 12. 4% 12. 0% 14. 2% 61. 4% LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 11 11 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Contingency Assessment • Assessment is a bottoms-up, risk-based estimate of “potential need” by each CAM LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 12 12 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

DOE (Level 2) Milestone Performance Projected CD-4 date is driven by a planned shutdown in early 2010 LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 13 13 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Critical Path(s) Critical Path (CP) to CD-4 Photons detected in the FEH Shutdown – FEL commission – Photons in FEH = 76 days FEH PPS System = 98 days FEE Installation = 121 days Space Renovation BO March 30 BO = ~80 days Final LCLS procurement. LCLS Early Science AMO install - AMO commissioning – Early science ~September 1, 2009. Not a risk to CD-4 LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 14 14 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Procurements LCLS using co-located procurement “cell” 2 Buyers (technical components) 1 Contract Administrator (mostly Turner contract) 1 Construction Buyer (Davis-Bacon contracts) 1 Term Negotiator (price and change negotiations) Procurements remaining >$100 K Demand on SLAC Purchasing Dept. still high LCLS “Cell” also supports LUSI MIE SLAC authority is $1 M without DOE approval SLAC ARRA projects increasing demand LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 15 15 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Project Risks & Mitigations Safety – Particularly construction and installation Full ES&H staff, const safety and oversight (UTR’s) Regular inspections, stand-downs, daily tool box Cost – Contingency Perform monthly analysis on EAC and ‘burn rate’ Nov 08 – Reassessed of all remaining work Set aside in baseline for legitimate outcome of claims Cost – Control (Owner-directed changes) Regular walk-arounds with IMT and LUSI teams Adhere to BCR, FCO and DCR processes Schedule – Installation and Construction IMT facilitates integration and identify gaps/conflicts Weekly installation meetings + readiness reviews There’s more…. LCLS risks are identified/managed using Risk Registry. LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 16 16 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Lessons Learned LCLS implementing a systematic process to capture Lessons Learned from the LCLS Project Database (Share. Point) used to capture and retrieve all Lesson Learned Categories established ES&H CF Design & Construction Management & Communications Procurement Commissioning & Transition to Operations Technical System Design, Fabrication, Installation & Integration Identify Best Practices & Opportunities for Improvement Living document with further revisions expected LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 17 17 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

LCLS Transition to Ops SLAC Transitioning from HEP to BES Apr 08 – PEP-II /Ba. Bar Program Complete Sep 08 – ASD transferred from PPA to LCLS SLAC business processes upgrading to support multiprogram lab LCLS Transitioning from Construction to Science LCLS Directorate reorganized to include LCLS Operations, LCLS Construction and LUSI MIE Injector, Linac, Undulator, MMF, most LCLS conventional facilities transitioned to LCLS Operations Sep 06 & Feb 09 – Linac Operations budget reviews Activity-based budget and tracking system in place Experimental Operations ramping up FY 09 – AMO, FY 10 – SXR, XPP, FY 11/FY 12 – CXI, XCS, MEC LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 18 18 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

LCLS Funding w/Ops & MIE Significant acceleration of Science with full FY 09 funding of operations and LUSI MIE LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 19 19 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu

Summary Project is ~90% complete, into the endgame Earned value progressing steadily C&S contingencies adequate to manage remaining risk Initial turn-on of FEL went exceptionally well Additional scope enhancements will be added if justified and contingencies allow. Transition to science and operations is progressing Maintaining schedule for early science with AMO Full LUSI and Linac Ops funding is a big help CD-4 is 14 months away Keep eye on the (CD-4) ball Photons in Far Experimental Hall Completion of Space Renovation LCLS Project Management May 2009 DOE Review 20 20 Mark Reichanadter reich@slac. stanford. edu