1 / 18

Introduction FY09 Linac Ops Review

Introduction FY09 Linac Ops Review. Persis S. Drell Director SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. Outline. What did we tell you at the last Linac Ops review? The transformation of SLAC Where we are now. Laboratory Organization. From 2006 Linac Ops Review.

mroush
Download Presentation

Introduction FY09 Linac Ops Review

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. IntroductionFY09 Linac Ops Review Persis S. Drell Director SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

  2. Outline • What did we tell you at the last Linac Ops review? • The transformation of SLAC • Where we are now FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 2

  3. Laboratory Organization From 2006 Linac Ops Review FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 3

  4. Context of 2006—”Managing Uncertainty” From 2006 Linac Ops Review • Areas of certainty: • SPEAR3 Operations • LCLS Commissioning and Operations • Science programs in PPA at same level of support • GLAST, ATLAS, Accelerator research, BaBar data analysis, EXO 200 • Science programs in photon science at increased level of support • LUSI, PULSE, X-LAM,… • Areas of uncertainty: • Scope of growth in ILC effort • New PPA projects: LSST, EXO, SNAP,… • SABER • Scope of LCLS upgrades FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 4

  5. Summary From 2006 Linac Ops Review • The laboratory is evolving—rapidly • Reorienting towards future • This is not easy! • Evolution of manpower • Working well at level of individuals • Sufficient flexibility being preserved to mitigate downside scenarios • Managing transition to FY09 • Preparation for this review an essential step: developing operations scenario for the lab for 2009 FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 5

  6. 2008 Budget • Omnibus spending bill hit SLAC very hard • Early shut down of B-factory • Used linac ops planning in targeting staff reductions • Total staff reduction: 13% FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 6

  7. A Laboratory in Transition • Major transition of scientific portfolio • Staged transition of responsibility for linac operations from HEP to BES • Transition to multi-program environment • ‘One Lab’ TOTAL BES HEP FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 7

  8. 2004: HEP BES FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 8

  9. 2009: HEP BES FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 9

  10. Current Reality—Transition not yet complete • Focus on: • Rebuilding much of the laboratory from the ground up in mission support areas • Delivering LCLS and LUSI on time and on budget • Developing long range vision for the laboratory FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 10

  11. Progress to Date • Organization • Reorganize to ensure accountability at highest level • Safety • Emphasize line management accountability • Revamp business processes for greater efficiency and transparency • Activity based budgeting for all departments • Building G&A from ground up • Defining core capabilities LCLS will need • Focus on optimum support of operations and capabilities needed for future upgrades FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 11

  12. FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 12

  13. Where we still have work to do • Mission support functions are still in transition from old ‘HEP’ landlord model • Activity based budgeting for the first time • “Org burden” needs crisper definition • We are working to create the ‘management model’ for the lab • Will get us away from legacy landlord issues and attitude • Will resolve issues of ‘org burden’, G&A, infrastructure maintenance, legacy issues FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 13

  14. We Will be Transparent on Where We Are • Org burden in ETS departments is too large (~25%) • Currently bridging functions that will be needed in operations • Need improved rigor in activity based (bottom up) budgeting • Plan to reduce to reasonable level over 2 years • G&A not optimized for multi program laboratory • We are maintaining core capabilities and competencies needed to optimize LCLS operations and future upgrades • Uncertainty in HEP program affects this FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 14

  15. Org Burden Example • Metrology • Capability essential for accelerator operations • LCLS supports the capability • Artificially ‘cheap’ for other users (PPA, SSRL) • In past, LCLS benefitted from this model when HEP supported the capability • Long term future need more transparent, full cost accounting methodologies FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 15

  16. G&A • Currently high as rebuild M&O functions at lab • “Swallowing the elephant” • Not optimized (first year of transparency) • Activity based next year • See Sandy’s talk FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 16

  17. Assets Needed for Future Upgrades • Have included maintenance of first 2/3 of Linac • Optimal technical strategy for potential future upgrades • Not the cheapest strategy • Lowest risk • Highest return on investment for Office of Science • Technical capability in ETS departments • Klystron---gun development • PCD---power supply and modulator upgrades FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 17

  18. Summary • Laboratory Still in Transition • Site is changing and management model still being defined • First real attack on G&A planning • More work to go • Protecting Core Capabilities and Competencies to Optimize Future LCLS Program FY09 Linac Ops Review Page 18

More Related