BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

National Synchrotron Light Source II

Project ManagementJim Yeck

Deputy Director (Project Management)

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Baseline Development Strategy

• Emphasis on schedule and critical path activities

• Initial schedule development not constrained by funding• Conventional facilities are on the critical path until 2011

• Tight cost baseline with substantial contingency • Strictly controlled and administered cost baseline• ~35% contingency at CD-1, preliminary baseline

• Provision for scope adjustments based on experience prior to CD-2, project baseline

• Some scope restoration possible under normal market conditions• Scope reductions (scope contingency of a few %) also possible

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Project Contingency as % of BAC for TEC

-2%

8%

18%

28%

38%

48%

58%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% Project Completion

% C

onti

ngen

cy

SNS

LCLS

CFN

CINT

CNM

CNMS

Foundry

SPEAR 3

NuMI

LHC Acclerator

U.S. ATLAS

U.S. CMS

LAT

ITER

NCSX

PSF

CDF

D-Zero

% at Baseline

NSLS-II = 35%

DOE - Science Experience

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Work Breakdown Structure

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Project Scope Refinement

• Lattice design, circumference, and footprint fixed following a detailed review in May 2006

• Required to meet performance goals approved at CD-0• Ring circumference is the most significant cost driver

• Adopted fixed cost approach for experimental facilities• Trust fund includes contingency and is as spent dollars

• Conventional facilities scope is a variable • Many scope reductions taken to achieve current cost goals• Requires a flexible implementation plan

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Milestones

Date Milestone ActivityAug. 2005 CD0 Approve Mission Need; Commence Conceptual Design

Jan. 2006 Initiate EA, AE/CM Selection Process

Aug. 2006 Submit Acquisition Strategy

Oct. 2006 Approve Acquisition Strategy; Approve EA/Issue FONSI; Advisory Committee Reviews

Nov. 2006 Complete CDR, Preliminary Cost Estimate and Schedules

Dec. 2006 DOE CD1 Review (“Lehman Review”)

Jan. 2007 CD1 Approve Alternate Selection and Cost Range; Commence Title I Design

Dec. 2007 CD2/CD3a Approve Performance Baseline; Commence Title II Design; Long Lead Procurements

Oct. 2008 CD3b Approve Start of Construction

2009 Construction Underway, Critical Path = Conventional Facilities

2011 Installation and Subsystem Integration.

Jul. 2012 CD4a Storage Ring Operational (Beam Stored), Conventional Construction Complete

Jul. 2013 CD4b Project Complete, Approve Start of Operations

Summary Schedule

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

DOE Funding Profile

(in $ millions)

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Totals

Other Project Costs 1 4.8 25 20 5 4 10 20 46.2 136Project Engineering and Design 20 42.5 2.5 65

Long-Lead Procurement 10 10

Construction 127 165 150 100 47 589Totals 1 4.8 45 72.5 134.5 169 160 120 93.2 800

Note: Funding in FY05-FY07 is actual. The funding profile for FY08 and later is notional and will depend on the annual appropriation process.

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Funding vs. Present Cost Profile

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

200.0

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Fiscal Year

Fu

nd

ing

(A

Y M

$)

Original DOEFunding Profile

Revised DOEFunding Profile

Current Profile

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Possible Funding & Cost Profiles

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

200.0

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Fiscal Year

Fu

nd

ing

(A

Y M

$)

Original DOEFunding Profile

Present DOEFunding Profile

Profile Target

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Target TPC and Operating Funds

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

200.0

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Fiscal Year

Fu

nd

ing

(A

Y M

$)

Operating Funds

TPC

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Next Steps

• Finalize scope, cost estimate, and contingency estimates• Scope definition and WBS dictionary clarification• Bottoms-up risk assessment and contingency estimates• Clarify understanding of BNL responsibilities

• Complete schedule development• Reduce FY08 and FY09 funding requirements• Improve schedule logic and general technical realism

• Consider advice of NSLS-II advisory committees and prepare risk and “what if” analyses

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Project Issues Discussion (1)

• Funding Profile

• Strategies for securing a favorable construction funding profile

• Schedule Float• Identifying appropriate control milestones, including phased CD’s

• Staffing Plans• Ensuring that staffing plans are compatible with the project goals

• Scope Contingency and Scope Restoration• Securing support for managing scope changes as part of the baseline expectations

BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

Project Issues Discussion (2)

• Managing Conventional Facilities

• Largest cost element, potentially volatility in market conditions, and very high level of external scrutiny expected

• NSLS-II - NSLS Relationship and Transition Plans• Staffing, potential dark period, and reuse of NSLS beamlines

• Conservative DOE Milestones• Need to work to an aggressive schedule and still select DOE control milestones that are likely to be achieved