project mgt-707.ppt
TRANSCRIPT
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 1
Project ManagementW. J. Foyt
Project ScopeTimelineCost EstimateRisk/ContingencyStaffingProject Controls ProcurementCD-1 DocumentationIssuesSummary
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 2
Project Scope
Work breakdown structure –WBS 1.1 Project ManagementWBS 1.2 X-ray Pump/Probe (XPP)WBS 1.3 Coherent X-ray Imaging (CXI)WBS 1.4 X-ray Correlation Spectroscopy (XCS)WBS 1.5 DiagnosticsWBS 1.6 Controls & Data SystemsWBS 2.0 Other Project Costs
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 3
Project Scope
Scope definition –LUSI project consists of three x-ray instruments (XPP, CXI and XCS), associated diagnostics, controls & data systems and project management. Priority – CXI and XPP to be baselined (CD-2a) in Dec. 2007.These instruments to be capable of producing science when LCLS operational. This will be LUSI’s CD-4a.3rd instrument (XCS) to be baselined at CD-2b. 3 instruments to be complete at CD-4b.
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 4
Project ScopeKey performance parameters –
CD-4 will be staged: two partial instruments at CD-4a (Feb.’10), three complete instruments at CD-4b (Mar.’12)CD–4a:
CXI operational with detector, diagnostics, and controls & data systemsXPP operational with shared laser system, detector (1st article), diagnostics and controls & data systems
CD-4b:CXI operational with compressor, detector, particle injector and full diagnostics, and controls & data systemsXPP operational with dedicated laser, detector, off-set monochromator and full diagnostics and controls & data systems XCS operational with detector, optics, sample environment and full diagnostics and controls & data systems
Complete instrument parameter list in PPEP (5.1)
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 5
TimelineMajor events -
Aug. 2005 CD-0Feb. 2006 Detector MOU - BNLJuly 2007 CD-1Nov. 2007 Split & Delay MOU - DESYDec. 2007 CD-2aJan. 2008 Particle Inj. MOU - LLNLJuly 2008 CD-3aNov. 2008 Split & Delay Rec’dMay 2009 XPP Detector Rec’dOct. 2009 CD- 2bNov. 2009 Particle Inj. Rec’dFeb. 2010 CD-4aMar. 2010 CD-3bSept. 2011 XCS Detector Rec’dMar. 2012 CD-4b
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 7
Cost Estimate
Funding profile –
Obligation profile –
0.0
3,000.0
6,000.0
9,000.0
12,000.0
15,000.0
PY 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
CONTINGENCY
CONTROLS
DIAGNOSTICS
XCS
CXI
XPP
PROJ. MGT
OPC
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 8
Details -
Cost Estimate
LUSI COST ESTIMATE $60,000.0DIRECT $30,586.0
PROJ MGT $3,264.7XPP 7,914.6CXI 6,714.6XCS 5,826.6DIAGNOSTICS 2,329.7CTRLS & DATA SYS 4,535.8
INDIRECT 8,120.0ESCALATION 3,218.8CONTINGENCY 13,175.2OPC 4,900.0
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 9
Cost EstimateWBS 2.0 Other Project Costs =
$4,900kSalary/Wage & Fringe 1,224kMS&T 670kDetector R&D 1,812kIndirect Costs 1,194k
OPC4,900K$
MS&T
SALARY, WAGE & FRINGE
DETECTOR R&D
INDIRECT COSTS
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 10
Cost EstimateMethodology -
Costs collected at levels 3, 4 or 5 of the WBSLabor by type in person weeks (44/yr) Calculated to FY’07$ using modified LCLS ratesBNL detector estimates provided via MOULLNL provided particle injector estimate; MOU in processPurchased materials & services entered by quantity & unit value
Excluding MOUs, quotes/catalog items represent >50% of estimateMaterial burden factor (4.8%)Indirect (G&A) 20% calculated on labor & travelContingency based on risk assessment at line item levelEscalation (FY ’07 base year):
Labor escalated @ 4.0% / yearMaterial escalated @ 2.3% / year
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 11
Cost Estimate
Cost estimate worksheet –
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 12
Risk / ContingencyLUSI risk analysis identifies potential risks by:
type - cost, schedule, technicalconsequence - marginal, significant, or criticallikelihood - unlikely, likely, or very likelyIntersection of these elements categorizes the potential risk to the project as either low, medium, or highOf 19 potential risks identified and documented in Risk Registry, 2 are categorized as High:
Delay in FY funding (CR)Staffing difficulties
Risk Registry will be evaluated monthly or when an event requires re-assessment As project becomes mature risk assessment will be more quantitative including estimates of potential costs, schedule impacts, cost of implementing mitigation strategy, and the residual risk.
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 13
Risk / Contingency
Risk Matrix utilized in estimate preparation–RISK FACTOR (x only one) X RISK WEIGHT (x only one) X
Existing design & off-the-shelf hardware 1Minor modifications to an existing design 2Extensive modifications to an existing design 3New design, nothing exotic 4 Design or manufacturing 2New design, different from established designs or existing technology 6 Design & manufacturing 4New design, requires some R&D, but does not advance the state of the art 8New design, devlopment of new technology that advances the state of the art 10New design, way beyond the state of the art. 15
Off-the-shelf or catalog item 1Vendor quote from established drawings 2Vendor quote with some design sketches 3In-house estimate based on previous similar experience 4 Material cost or labor rate 1In-house estimate for item with minimal experience but related to exisiting capabilities 6 Material cost & labor rate 2In-house estimate for item with minimal experience & minimal in-house capability 8Top-down estimate from analogous programs 10Engineering judgement 15
No schedule impact on any other item 2 Same for all 1
Delays completion of noncritical path subsytem item 4 Same for all 1
Delays completion of critical path subsytem item 8 Same for all 1SCH
EDU
LETE
CHN
ICA
LCO
ST
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 14
Risk / Contingency
Application of Risk Matrix & contingency development–
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 15
Risk / ContingencyContingency – is developed utilizing a risk analysis at the lowest level of the WBS. An algorithm sums the technical, cost and schedule risk multiplied by the weight of the occurrence.
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 16
Risk / Contingency
Project contingency –
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 17
Staffing
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
PER
SON
YEA
RS
07 08 09 10 11 12FISCAL YEAR
LUSI PROJECT STAFFING
Technical Support Staff
Software Development
Engrg/Design/Drafting
Scientific
Management
Other Project Costs
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 18
Project Controls
LUSI utilizes existing LCLS EVMS, policies, procedures and project controls staff On-site EVMS training for Project staff planned1st two instruments to be baselined in Dec.’07Earned Value (EV) reporting begins in FY 08.BNL (Detectors) and LLNL (Injector) will report EV against approved baseline schedules
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 19
Project ControlsManaging the Baseline –
Prior to presenting a Baseline Change Request (BCR) to the Baseline Change Control Board (BCCB), the request will be reviewed by LUSI management. This review will include:
Background leading to the requestExtent of the problemProposed solutionOther solutions consideredStakeholders review (System Managers, QA, ES&H, RM Coordinator)Impact of the BCR
Will there be a technical impactWhat resources are affectedWill this require a draw on contingencyWhat milestones, if any, are impactedIntegrated Schedule Analysis
Impact of not approving this BCRAffected drawings, parts or requirements
LUSI BCR process detailed in PPEP (6.0)
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 20
Procurement
LUSI is utilizing LCLS procurement cellAdvanced Procurement Plans (APP) being developed for all procurements on the critical path or with an order value >25k$ APP provides rolling 6 month window of planned procurement activityLUSI administration will monitor all phases of procurement
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 21
CD -1 DocumentationDocumentation required for CD-1 approval –(documentation prepared for Jan. review updated to reflect action item)
Conceptual Design Report published July 2007
Design Review Report issued July 2007
Acquisition Strategy draft released June 2007
Prel. Project Execution Plan draft released June 2007
Risk Management Plan/Assessment issued June 2007
Prel. Security Vulnerability Assessment issued Dec. 2006
Prel. Hazard Analysis Report issued July 2007
Quality Assurance Program – LUSI Quality Implementing Procedure issued June 2007
Value Management Plan issued May 2007
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 22
Issues
A Continuing Resolution (CR) in FY ‘08 would impact schedule. With minimal carry forward and a projected burn rate of ~460k$/mo, LUSI could manage the 1st qtr of FY ’08 by withholding the balance of FY ’07 and delaying FY ’08 detector funding. Maintaining the detector schedule through 1st qtr would require an additional 650k$ in FY 07.Potential CRs in the out years should be manageable without significant impact to the project schedule due to the funding profile.
W.J. [email protected]
LUSI DOE Review July 23, 2007Project Management 23
Summary
Input from internal and external reviews have proven invaluable.Action item from Jan. 2007 review was resolved on schedule and plan is being worked to meet or exceed requirement.All recommendations from Jan. 2007 review have been responded to.LUSI staff has sharpened its plan and is prepared to deliver world class instruments on time and within budget.