project management w. j. foyt

W. J. [email protected]

LUSI DOE Review July 23-24, 2007Project Mgt. Breakout 1

Project ManagementW. J. Foyt

Project ManagementW. J. Foyt

Jan ’07 Lehman Review Current Status -

OrganizationStaffingOPC Obligations vs. Funding

MIE Obligations vs. FundingProjected Obligations CD-1 to CD-3What If -

FY 2008 Continuing Resolution

Path to CD-2aCriteria for CD-2 ApprovalAction Items

Jan ’07 Lehman Review Current Status -

OrganizationStaffingOPC Obligations vs. Funding

MIE Obligations vs. FundingProjected Obligations CD-1 to CD-3What If -

FY 2008 Continuing Resolution

Path to CD-2aCriteria for CD-2 ApprovalAction Items



Jan ’07 Lehman ReviewJan ’07 Lehman Review

January review had 37 recommendations 35 of the 37 have been responded toRemaining two:

Prepare a detailed plan for accomplishing CD-2 pre-requisitesConduct a DOE Review to ensure readiness for CD-1 and to evaluate plans for accomplishing CD-2

January review had 37 recommendations 35 of the 37 have been responded toRemaining two:

Prepare a detailed plan for accomplishing CD-2 pre-requisitesConduct a DOE Review to ensure readiness for CD-1 and to evaluate plans for accomplishing CD-2



Current StatusCurrent Status

Organization-Organization-




Staffing –Management – all positions filled. LCLS matrixing staff in the areas of ES&H, Project Controls, QAScientific – all positions filledEngineering / 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 SLACTechnical Support - matrixed staff from SLAC

Staffing –Management – all positions filled. LCLS matrixing staff in the areas of ES&H, Project Controls, QAScientific – all positions filledEngineering / 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 SLACTechnical Support - matrixed staff from SLAC




Obligations vs. Funding (k$)–FY 2007 OPC Funding 1,500FY 2006 Carry forward 2,245Funding available 3,745

Obligations as of 6/30/07:Labor 1,221MS&T 282Detector R&D 1,144

Total 2,647

Balance 1,098*

* 488k of balance reserved for BNL

Obligations vs. Funding (k$)–FY 2007 OPC Funding 1,500FY 2006 Carry forward 2,245Funding available 3,745

Obligations as of 6/30/07:Labor 1,221MS&T 282Detector R&D 1,144

Total 2,647

Balance 1,098*

* 488k of balance reserved for BNL



MIE Obligations vs. FundingMIE Obligations vs. Funding



Obligations CD-1 to CD-3Obligations CD-1 to CD-3

Management / Engineering /Design:

Management / Engineering /Design:



What IfWhat If

A FY 2008 Continuing Resolution (CR):March plan permits minimal carry forwardAssume a 3 month CR1st 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.

A FY 2008 Continuing Resolution (CR):March plan permits minimal carry forwardAssume a 3 month CR1st 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.



What IfWhat If

Management of possible FY ’08 CR:Management of possible FY ’08 CR:



Path to CD-2Path to CD-2

Criteria for CD -2 Approval1) Resource loaded schedule2) TPC and project schedule3) WBS and dictionary4) Risk Management5) Prel. Design & Review6) System functions & req’ts7) Hazard analysis8) Value Mgt / Engineering9) Project Controls / EVMS10) Project Execution Plan11) Start-up test plan12) Acquisition Strategy13) Integrated Project Team14) QA Plan15) Security Vulnerability Assessment Report




1. 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. 20073rd instrument (XCS) to be baselined in Oct. 2009

1. 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. 20073rd instrument (XCS) to be baselined in Oct. 2009




2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule –a) 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.

2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule –a) 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.




2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)–b) DOE milestones –

Status: CD – 0 Aug. 2005

Plans: CD – 1 July 2007 CD – 2a Dec. 2007CD – 2b Oct. 2009CD – 3a July 2008CD – 3b Mar. 2010CD – 4a Feb. 2010CD – 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.

2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)–b) DOE milestones –

Status: CD – 0 Aug. 2005

Plans: CD – 1 July 2007 CD – 2a Dec. 2007CD – 2b Oct. 2009CD – 3a July 2008CD – 3b Mar. 2010CD – 4a Feb. 2010CD – 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.




2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)–c) 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.

2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)–c) 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.




2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)–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 pathCritical path for complete instrument to be developed

2. Total Project Cost and Project Schedule (cont’d)–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 pathCritical path for complete instrument to be developed




3. 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.

3. 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.




4) 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 Medium4 rated as Low

Plans: At baseline all project risks will be re-evaluated and updated as necessaryThe registry will be monitored monthly and updated at least quarterly.

4) 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 Medium4 rated as Low

Plans: At baseline all project risks will be re-evaluated and updated as necessaryThe registry will be monitored monthly and updated at least quarterly.




5. 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 & specificationsdetermine 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.

5. 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 & specificationsdetermine 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.




6. System Functions and Requirements –Status:

Draft Physics Requirements Documents (PRD) are ~25% completeDraft Interface Control Documents (ICD) are ~ 20% completePreparation of Engineering Specification Documents (ESD) in process

Plans: Finalize PRDsComplete ESDs and ensure all physics requirements have been met.Finalize Interface Control Documents (ICD)Verify by concept review process

6. System Functions and Requirements –Status:

Draft Physics Requirements Documents (PRD) are ~25% completeDraft Interface Control Documents (ICD) are ~ 20% completePreparation of Engineering Specification Documents (ESD) in process

Plans: Finalize PRDsComplete ESDs and ensure all physics requirements have been met.Finalize Interface Control Documents (ICD)Verify by concept review process




7. 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 baselineBased on the project’s preliminary design, the Preliminary Hazards Analysis Report (PHAR) will be updated to reflect new design information and if applicable, new hazardsRevised report will be approved by DOE-SSO.

7. 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 baselineBased on the project’s preliminary design, the Preliminary Hazards Analysis Report (PHAR) will be updated to reflect new design information and if applicable, new hazardsRevised report will be approved by DOE-SSO.




8. Value Management / Engineering – Status:

Executed LUSI Value Management PlanConducted with internal and external reviewers3 alternative solutions identifiedFinal report pending

Plans: LUSI Value Management principles will be applied to all LUSI engineering tasks

8. Value Management / Engineering – Status:

Executed LUSI Value Management PlanConducted with internal and external reviewers3 alternative solutions identifiedFinal report pending

Plans: LUSI Value Management principles will be applied to all LUSI engineering tasks




9. Project Controls / EVMS –Status:

Performance measured against resource loaded March planProject milestones and critical path identifiedLUSI 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.’07Earned Value (EV) reporting begins in FY 08.BNL (Detectors) and LLNL (Injector) plans to be baselined. EV to be reported against these plans.

9. Project Controls / EVMS –Status:

Performance measured against resource loaded March planProject milestones and critical path identifiedLUSI 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.’07Earned Value (EV) reporting begins in FY 08.BNL (Detectors) and LLNL (Injector) plans to be baselined. EV to be reported against these plans.




10.Project Execution Plan – Status:

DOE-SSO comments incorporatedDraft 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

10.Project Execution Plan – Status:






11.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

11.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




12.Acquisition Strategy – Status:



12.Acquisition Strategy – Status:






13.Integrated Project Team (IPT)– Status:

IPT identified in PPEP, section 3.0June 2007 updated to reflect LUSI Deputy Federal Project DirectorDOE-SSO weekly meetings with LUSI ManagementBi-weekly teleconference – DOE-HQ, DOE-SSO, LCLS Project Director, LUSI Management

Plans:Integrated Project Team will be adjusted as requiredFrequency of communications may be modified depending on criticality of issues

13.Integrated Project Team (IPT)– Status:

IPT identified in PPEP, section 3.0June 2007 updated to reflect LUSI Deputy Federal Project DirectorDOE-SSO weekly meetings with LUSI ManagementBi-weekly teleconference – DOE-HQ, DOE-SSO, LCLS Project Director, LUSI Management

Plans:Integrated Project Team will be adjusted as requiredFrequency of communications may be modified depending on criticality of issues




14.QA PlanStatus:

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 CoordinatorCoordinator to be involved in all design reviews

14.QA PlanStatus:

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 CoordinatorCoordinator to be involved in all design reviews




15.Security Vulnerability Assessment Report – Status:

Report issued in Dec. 2006

Plans:Report to be reviewed prior to baseline completion for any material changes.

15.Security Vulnerability Assessment Report – Status:

Report issued in Dec. 2006

Plans:Report to be reviewed prior to baseline completion for any material changes.




Actions items -Unit pricing for ~75% of material costs to be validatedRe-evaluate risk assessment (contingency) for major cost driversCertify labor ratesEscalation rates to be reviewedOn site training of staffEstablish procurement guidelines for BCWSBNL plan for XPP detector to be baselinedLLNL plan for particle injector to be baselinedReview schedule logic & certify critical pathReview/establish earning rules for BCWSSynchronize ACWP reporting for BNL and LLNLConfirm SLAC accounting feed to EVMSRefine EVMS processes and proceduresPreliminary baseline reconciled to funding profileVerify baseline costs = funding profileSubmit plan for baseline approval

Actions items -Unit pricing for ~75% of material costs to be validatedRe-evaluate risk assessment (contingency) for major cost driversCertify labor ratesEscalation rates to be reviewedOn site training of staffEstablish procurement guidelines for BCWSBNL plan for XPP detector to be baselinedLLNL plan for particle injector to be baselinedReview schedule logic & certify critical pathReview/establish earning rules for BCWSSynchronize ACWP reporting for BNL and LLNLConfirm SLAC accounting feed to EVMSRefine EVMS processes and proceduresPreliminary baseline reconciled to funding profileVerify baseline costs = funding profileSubmit plan for baseline approval