1 / 25

NSLS-II Project Status

NSLS-II Project Status. Steve Dierker Associate Laboratory Director for Light Sources NSLS-II Project Director Accelerator Systems Advisory Committee July 17, 2008. Key Project Milestones. Aug 2005 CD-0 , Approve Mission Need (Complete)

hayes-serrano
Download Presentation

NSLS-II Project Status

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NSLS-II Project Status Steve Dierker Associate Laboratory Director for Light Sources NSLS-II Project Director Accelerator Systems Advisory Committee July 17, 2008

  2. Key Project Milestones Aug 2005 CD-0, Approve Mission Need(Complete) Jul 2007 CD-1, Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range(Complete) Jan 2008 CD-2, Approve Performance Baseline(Complete) Dec 2008 CD-3, Approve Start of Construction Feb 2009 Contract Award for Ring Building Aug 2009 Contract Award for Storage Ring Magnets Mar 2010 Contract Award for Booster System Feb 2011 1st Pentant Ring Building Beneficial Occupancy; Begin Accelerator Installation Feb 2012 Beneficial Occupancy of Experimental Floor Oct 2013 Start Accelerator Commissioning Jun 2014 Early Project Completion; Ring Available to Beamlines Jun 2015 CD-4, Approve Start of Operations

  3. CD-2 IPR/EIR/ICR Findings and Resolutions • SC Independent Project Review – Nov 6-9, 2007 • 36 technical experts and scientists; technical, cost, schedule and management • Ready for CD-2 following evaluation of contingency allocation • Increased TPC from $896M to $912M; assigned contingency for OPC • OECM External Independent Review/Indep. Cost Review – Nov 5-9, 2007 • 10 project management experts; 18 lines of inquiry with expanded cost review • Deliverables and Key Performance Parameters (KPP’S) at CD-4 • Modified KPPs and described baseline scope delivered at CD-4 • Risk assessment, bases for cost contingency, documentation • Improved risk management; addressed documentation issues • Actions to address all major findings, findings, and observations either completed or underway • ESAAB for CD-2 on Dec 11, 2007 • CD-2 approved on Jan 18, 2008

  4. Key Milestones Completed Since CD-2 • Initiate Conventional Facilities Final Design Dec 1, 2007 • Beamline Develop. & Scien. Strategic Planning Workshops 1st Qtr 2008 • SC Mini-Review Feb 26 • Accelerator Systems Design 40% Complete Feb 28 • GC and Subcontractor Information Meeting Mar 20 • Letters of Interest for Beamline Advisory Teams Mar 30 • Award Sextupole/Quadrupole Magnet Prototype May 15 • CF 50% Final Design Complete May 21 • SC Status Review June 17-18

  5. Key Near-Term Milestones • EVMS Certification Review July 30-31 • 100% Title II Design Submission Aug 25 • Construction Readiness Design Review Sep 3-5 • Ring Building RFP Released to Industry Sep 26 • Begin Site Preparation Oct 1 • IPR for CD-3 Sep 30-Oct 3 • EIR for CD-3 Oct 20-24 • Ring Building Proposals Opened Nov 21 • CD-3, Approve Start of Construction Dec • Contract Award for Ring Building Feb 20, 2009 • GC Notice to Proceed Apr 15

  6. Schedule Baseline

  7. Current Level 2 Cost Baseline

  8. FY08 Funding Reduced from $65M to $49.7M • FY08 Changes • Deferred $11M in contingency • Deferred $3M from Accelerator Systems – (Magnet Measurement Lab & Linac Front End) • Deferred $0.4M from Conventional Facilities – (Site prep costs) • Reduced $0.4M from Project Management – Delayed hiring • Reduced $0.5M from Experimental Facilities – Delayed hiring • FY09 Changes • Restored $11M to contingency • Restored $3M to Accelerator Systems • Restored $0.4M to Conventional Facilities • Added $0.9M to Management Reserve • Will be able to achieve CD-3 on original schedule • No impact on TPC or CD-4 as long as funding is restored in FY09

  9. Funding Profile with Operations & MIE TEC = $791M TPC = $912M Note: Operations & MIE funding are not part of TPC

  10. Baseline Management Since CD-2 • Approved scope changes • Have only approved scope changes, and allocated contingency, for programmatic needs that impact conventional facilities design and so must be done now: • Widen ring building by 3 m 6,429k • Increase storage ring height in tunnel from 1.0 m to 1.2 m 760k • Total contingency allocated $7,189k • Modest cost growth due to design maturity and unit cost increases • Currently reviewing and updating Estimate At Completion (EAC) for CD-3

  11. Performance Baseline

  12. Contingency

  13. Potential Scope Contingency Bottom Line Estimate ($) Accelerator Systems $ 6 - 10 M Conventional Facilities $ 29 M Experimental Facilities $ 5 M Total $40 - 44 M

  14. Cost & Schedule Performance PV = Planned Value or Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) EV = Earned Value or Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP) AC = Actual Cost or Actual Cost of Work Performed (ACWP)

  15. Overall Cost and Schedule Assessment • Earned value tracking underway and becoming a meaningful tool for measuring progress and identifying issues • Actual costs are in line with expectations • Planning to fully utilize available FY2008 funding • Conventional facilities final design work, the dominant schedule driver, is on track • RFP for the ring building will be issued by the end of September • Accelerator design work is keeping pace with CF requirements • Excellent progress on beamline selection and team formation

  16. Design Refinements Since CD-2 • Design refinements have resulted from Value Engineering and additional design detail • Beam height in tunnel increased from 1.0 m to 1.2 m and girders redesigned for new height • More room for insertion devices; responds to CD-2 IPR recommendation • Chilled and process water system revised • More centralized, fewer components, less space, more maintainable • Experimental Floor radial width (from ratchet wall to aisle) increased from 11.6 m to 14.6 m • Increases maximum beamline length from 60 m to 66 m and provides increased transverse experimental floor space • Bypass corridor for long beamlines redesigned • Improved accessibility • LOB final design deferred to FY10 • Maximizes flexibility in design; doesn’t delay construction of LOBs, which was always scheduled for FY11

  17. Site Plan

  18. CD-3 Design Maturity Conventional Facilities - Completing Final Design prior to CD-3 reviews in Sept./Oct. (excluding LOBs for beamline support) Accelerator Systems Final Design Strategy Complete final design for systems required to start civil construction and to place final design/build contracts for a few accelerator systems Final design for injector, booster, and storage ring RF transmitters and cavities completed by fabrication vendors Final design deferred for those systems only needed immediately prior to project completion or benefiting from technology advances Strategy makes optimum use of the long civil construction period and enables resource leveling of staff Experimental Facilities Beamline design work completed after beamline selection

  19. Final Design Plans • Projected Design % Complete Based on Value of NSLS-II Subsystems • 75% Complete Prior to CD-3 and Technical Risk Related to Key Performance Parameters Retired

  20. Construction Readiness Design Review Review will be held on September 3 - 5, Chaired by Greg Bock, FNAL Requirements for CD-3 approval Conventional Facilities: Is the final design complete and ready to proceed with construction? Are the bid packages sufficiently clear, well defined , and ready for bidding? Accelerator Systems and Experimental Facilities: Are the designs or specifications well enough advanced to proceed with conventional construction? Construction Readiness Design Review will assess if we are ready for CD-3 Review general progress since CD-2 Assess readiness for construction start of conventional facilities Assess design status and identify any remaining major design issues that must be mitigated prior to CD-3 approval

  21. NSLS-II Project Organization

  22. Recent Project Management Hires Deputy Project Director Aesook Byon (Effective Sep 1) ES&H Manager Steve Hoey (Effective May 12) Experimental Facilities Division Director Qun Shen (Effective July 14) • Jim Yeck will become Assistant Project Director for Conventional Construction effective September 1

  23. NSLS-II Staff

  24. Summary • Conventional facilities final design is the most critical activity for this year and is a prerequisite for the CD-3 review process • RFP w/ drawings and specifications will be released by September 26 • Bid pricing known by the end of November • The design of NSLS-II accelerator systems is progressing on schedule relative to the performance baseline • Beamline selection on schedule • Project organization well established and staff buildup on track • Project management systems are in place and working • NSLS-II will be ready for the CD-3 reviews starting in early September

  25. Charge to the Committee • Is the NSLS-II Accelerator Systems R&D program sufficiently advanced to support the remaining design work? • Is the maturity of the design and development of the accelerator system consistent with the Final Design Plan and are the interfaces with the NSLS-II building and other conventional facilities sufficiently well defined for start of construction of the ring building? • Is the storage ring magnet system, including the planned linear and non-linear correction systems, adequate to achieve the required accelerator performance? • Do the design choices of the injector system support the anticipated storage ring performance parameters and is the preliminary layout sufficiently well defined to start the turn-key procurement process in 2009? • Alignment and stability R&D will be completed soon. Are the proposed procedures sufficient to guarantee that the tight alignment tolerances will be routinely achieved during the installation process? • Are the planned diagnostic systems sufficient and adequate to allow for efficient commissioning and accelerator tune-up? • Comment on the status of cryogenics system, electrical and mechanical utilities.

More Related