Project Management W. J. Foyt

1. Project ManagementW. J. Foyt Project Scope Timeline Cost Estimate Risk/Contingency Staffing Project Controls Procurement CD-1 Documentation Issues Summary

2. Project Scope • Work breakdown structure – • WBS 1.1 Project Management • WBS 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 Diagnostics • WBS 1.6 Controls & Data Systems • WBS 2.0 Other Project Costs

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.

4. Project Scope • Key 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 systems • XPP 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 systems • XPP 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)

5. Timeline • Major events -

6. Cost Estimate

7. Cost Estimate • Funding profile – Obligation profile –

8. Cost Estimate • Details - • LUSI COST ESTIMATE $60,000.0 • DIRECT $30,586.0 • PROJ MGT $3,264.7 • XPP 7,914.6 • CXI 6,714.6 • XCS 5,826.6 • DIAGNOSTICS 2,329.7 • CTRLS & DATA SYS 4,535.8 • INDIRECT 8,120.0 • ESCALATION 3,218.8 • CONTINGENCY 13,175.2 • OPC 4,900.0

9. WBS 2.0 Other Project Costs = $4,900k Salary/Wage & Fringe 1,224k MS&T 670k Detector R&D 1,812k Indirect Costs 1,194k Cost Estimate

10. Cost Estimate • Methodology - • Costs collected at levels 3, 4 or 5 of the WBS • Labor by type in person weeks (44/yr) • Calculated to FY’07$ using modified LCLS rates • BNL detector estimates provided via MOU • LLNL provided particle injector estimate; MOU in process • Purchased materials & services entered by quantity & unit value • Excluding MOUs, quotes/catalog items represent >50% of estimate • Material burden factor (4.8%) • Indirect (G&A) 20% calculated on labor & travel • Contingency based on risk assessment at line item level • Escalation (FY ’07 base year): • Labor escalated @ 4.0% / year • Material escalated @ 2.3% / year

11. Cost Estimate • Cost estimate worksheet –

12. Risk / Contingency • LUSI risk analysis identifies potential risks by: • type - cost, schedule, technical • consequence - marginal, significant, or critical • likelihood - unlikely, likely, or very likely • Intersection of these elements categorizes the potential risk to the project as either low, medium, or high • Of 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.

13. Risk / Contingency • Risk Matrix utilized in estimate preparation–

14. Risk / Contingency • Application of Risk Matrix & contingency development–

15. Risk / Contingency • Contingency – 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.

16. Risk / Contingency • Project contingency –

17. Staffing

18. Project Controls LUSI utilizes existing LCLS EVMS, policies, procedures and project controls staff On-site EVMS training for Project staff planned 1st two instruments to be baselined in Dec.’07 Earned Value (EV) reporting begins in FY 08. BNL (Detectors) and LLNL (Injector) will report EV against approved baseline schedules

19. Project Controls • Managing 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 request • Extent of the problem • Proposed solution • Other solutions considered • Stakeholders review (System Managers, QA, ES&H, RM Coordinator) • Impact of the BCR • Will there be a technical impact • What resources are affected • Will this require a draw on contingency • What milestones, if any, are impacted • Integrated Schedule Analysis • Impact of not approving this BCR • Affected drawings, parts or requirements • LUSI BCR process detailed in PPEP (6.0)

20. Procurement LUSI is utilizing LCLS procurement cell Advanced 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 activity LUSI administration will monitor all phases of procurement

21. CD -1 Documentation • Documentation required for CD-1 approval – (documentation prepared for Jan. review updated to reflect action item)

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.

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.