brookhaven science associates national synchrotron light source ii project management jim yeck...
TRANSCRIPT
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
National Synchrotron Light Source II
Project ManagementJim Yeck
Deputy Director (Project Management)
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Baseline Development Strategy
• Emphasis on schedule and critical path activities
• Initial schedule development not constrained by funding• Conventional facilities are on the critical path until 2011
• Tight cost baseline with substantial contingency • Strictly controlled and administered cost baseline• ~35% contingency at CD-1, preliminary baseline
• Provision for scope adjustments based on experience prior to CD-2, project baseline
• Some scope restoration possible under normal market conditions• Scope reductions (scope contingency of a few %) also possible
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Project Contingency as % of BAC for TEC
-2%
8%
18%
28%
38%
48%
58%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
% Project Completion
% C
onti
ngen
cy
SNS
LCLS
CFN
CINT
CNM
CNMS
Foundry
SPEAR 3
NuMI
LHC Acclerator
U.S. ATLAS
U.S. CMS
LAT
ITER
NCSX
PSF
CDF
D-Zero
% at Baseline
NSLS-II = 35%
DOE - Science Experience
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Work Breakdown Structure
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Project Scope Refinement
• Lattice design, circumference, and footprint fixed following a detailed review in May 2006
• Required to meet performance goals approved at CD-0• Ring circumference is the most significant cost driver
• Adopted fixed cost approach for experimental facilities• Trust fund includes contingency and is as spent dollars
• Conventional facilities scope is a variable • Many scope reductions taken to achieve current cost goals• Requires a flexible implementation plan
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Milestones
Date Milestone ActivityAug. 2005 CD0 Approve Mission Need; Commence Conceptual Design
Jan. 2006 Initiate EA, AE/CM Selection Process
Aug. 2006 Submit Acquisition Strategy
Oct. 2006 Approve Acquisition Strategy; Approve EA/Issue FONSI; Advisory Committee Reviews
Nov. 2006 Complete CDR, Preliminary Cost Estimate and Schedules
Dec. 2006 DOE CD1 Review (“Lehman Review”)
Jan. 2007 CD1 Approve Alternate Selection and Cost Range; Commence Title I Design
Dec. 2007 CD2/CD3a Approve Performance Baseline; Commence Title II Design; Long Lead Procurements
Oct. 2008 CD3b Approve Start of Construction
2009 Construction Underway, Critical Path = Conventional Facilities
2011 Installation and Subsystem Integration.
Jul. 2012 CD4a Storage Ring Operational (Beam Stored), Conventional Construction Complete
Jul. 2013 CD4b Project Complete, Approve Start of Operations
Summary Schedule
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
DOE Funding Profile
(in $ millions)
FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Totals
Other Project Costs 1 4.8 25 20 5 4 10 20 46.2 136Project Engineering and Design 20 42.5 2.5 65
Long-Lead Procurement 10 10
Construction 127 165 150 100 47 589Totals 1 4.8 45 72.5 134.5 169 160 120 93.2 800
Note: Funding in FY05-FY07 is actual. The funding profile for FY08 and later is notional and will depend on the annual appropriation process.
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Funding vs. Present Cost Profile
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0
FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Fiscal Year
Fu
nd
ing
(A
Y M
$)
Original DOEFunding Profile
Revised DOEFunding Profile
Current Profile
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Possible Funding & Cost Profiles
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0
FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Fiscal Year
Fu
nd
ing
(A
Y M
$)
Original DOEFunding Profile
Present DOEFunding Profile
Profile Target
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Target TPC and Operating Funds
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0
FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Fiscal Year
Fu
nd
ing
(A
Y M
$)
Operating Funds
TPC
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Next Steps
• Finalize scope, cost estimate, and contingency estimates• Scope definition and WBS dictionary clarification• Bottoms-up risk assessment and contingency estimates• Clarify understanding of BNL responsibilities
• Complete schedule development• Reduce FY08 and FY09 funding requirements• Improve schedule logic and general technical realism
• Consider advice of NSLS-II advisory committees and prepare risk and “what if” analyses
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Project Issues Discussion (1)
• Funding Profile
• Strategies for securing a favorable construction funding profile
• Schedule Float• Identifying appropriate control milestones, including phased CD’s
• Staffing Plans• Ensuring that staffing plans are compatible with the project goals
• Scope Contingency and Scope Restoration• Securing support for managing scope changes as part of the baseline expectations
BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
Project Issues Discussion (2)
• Managing Conventional Facilities
• Largest cost element, potentially volatility in market conditions, and very high level of external scrutiny expected
• NSLS-II - NSLS Relationship and Transition Plans• Staffing, potential dark period, and reuse of NSLS beamlines
• Conservative DOE Milestones• Need to work to an aggressive schedule and still select DOE control milestones that are likely to be achieved