Executive Session Director’s CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project January 18, 2012 Dean Hoffer

Executive Session Director’s CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project

January 18, 2012Dean Hoffer

Director's CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project

218-Jan-2012

Agenda for Exec Session• Charge to Review Team• Review Agenda• Reviewer Writing and Breakout

Assignments• Document Requirements• Breakout Guidance• Reporting Structure• Discussion

3

Charge

The technical scope of this review is to assess the status of MicroBooNE’s final design work. The review Committee is to validate the progress on final design and assess their plans to complete any remaining design work. This assessment includes confirming that appropriate resources are available to complete the final design as planned

18-Jan-2012 Director's CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project


4

Charge (Continued)

The Cost, Schedule, and Management areas are to be reviewed in addition to the technical scope of final design. The MicroBooNE Project’s Total Project Cost was approved at $19.9M. The Committee is to evaluate the current schedule and determine if the Project’s scope of work can be accomplished by the CD-4 date and within the approved TPC. This include taking in consideration of the risks associate with the project. The Committee is to assess that the Project Team is in place to implement full construction and that ES&H has been adequately addressed.

18-Jan-2012


5

Charge (Continued)

Additionally, the review team is to assess the Project’s monthly process for statusing progress of cost/schedule against plan and reporting to DOE and Lab Management.

The review committee is asked to address the following questions to assess the Project’s progress:18-Jan-2012


6

Charge (Continued)

1. Is the final design sufficiently mature so that the project can initiate procurements and start construction? For those elements of the design that are still not finalized, has the project convincingly shown that there are no major issues that need to be addressed and that they are on a clear path to a final design?

2. Is the Project’s resource loaded schedule being maintained per the approved project processes?

3. Is CD-4 achievable with the Project’s risks and within the DOE approved Total Project Cost?

18-Jan-2012


7

Charge (Continued)

4. Has the Project updated required project management documents per DOE Order 413.3B for CD-3b start Full Construction?

5. Are the Project organization and staffing levels, for both current and planned, adequate to manage the work to get to CD-4?

6. Are the ES&H aspects being properly addressed given the project’s current stage of development?

18-Jan-2012

8

Charge (Continued)

7. Is the Project’s monthly progressing process and reporting properly functioning and meeting the needs of the Lab’s management and DOE?

8. Has the Project properly addressed the recommendations from the prior Director’s and DOE Reviews?

9. Is the MicroBooNE Project ready for a DOE CD-3b review?

18-Jan-2012 Director's CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project


9

Charge (Continued)

Additionally the committee is to review and comment on the Project’s response and actions taken on the recommendations from the prior Director’s and DOE Reviews. Finally, the committee should present answers to the above questions and present findings, comments, and recommendations at a closeout meeting with MicroBooNE’s and Fermilab’s management. A written report will be provided soon after the review.

18-Jan-2012


10

Agenda

18-Jan-2012

WEDNESDAY, JAN 18, 2012 EXECUTIVE SESSION – Hornets’ Nest (WH8XO) 8:00 – 8:30 AM 30 Executive Session MORNING PLENARY SESSION – Hornets’ Nest (WH8XO) 8:30 – 8:40 AM 10 Welcome P. Oddone 8:40 – 9:10 AM 30 Project Overview and Status G. Rameika 9:10 – 9:40 AM 30 Detector Systems Overview C. Thorn 9:40 – 10:10 AM 30 Infrastructure Systems Overview C. James 10:10 – 10:25 AM 15 BREAK PARALLEL BREAKOUT SESSIONS 10:25 – 12:30 AM 125

Session 1: Cryostat and Cryogenics – Hornets’ Nest (WH8XO) B. Rebel Session 2: Active Detectors (TPC & PMTs) – One North (WH1N) B. Fleming Session 3: FE Electronics, Readout DAQ – Snake Pit (WH2NE) H. Chen Session 4: Project Management – Comitium (WH2SE) G. Rameika 12:30 – 1:30 PM 60 LUNCH


11

Agenda continued

18-Jan-2012

AFTERNOON PLENARY SESSION – Hornets’ Nest (WH8XO) 1:30 – 3:00 PM Detector Assembly 30 Overview of Activities at DAB J. Raaf 20 Cryostat Delivery and Preparation S. Duffin 20 Electronics Installation and Checkout H. Chen 20 Cryostat Preparation and Transport J. Voirin 3:00 – 3:15 PM 15 BREAK 3:15 – 3:35 PM 20 Status of LArTF Construction D. Bogert 3:35 – 4:05 PM Detector Installation Planning 15 Cryogenics System Installation J. Kilmer 15 Electronics Systems Installation L. Bagby 4:05 – 4:20 PM 15 Update on ES&H and Risk Mitigation Plans C. James 4:20 – 4:30 PM 10 MicroBooNE QA Program A. Prakash 4:30 – 6:30 PM 120 Executive Session - Hornets’ Nest (WH8XO)


12

Agenda continued

18-Jan-2012

Final Revised 17-Jan-2012 THURSDAY, JAN 19, 2012 – ALL MEETINGS IN THE HORNETS’ NEST (WH8XO) 8:00 – 9:00 AM 60 MicroBooNE’s Answer to Questions from Day 1, if needed 9:00 – 11:00 AM 120 Executive Session and Continue Report Writing 11:00 – 2:00 PM 180 Dry Run with Working Lunch 2:00 – 3:00 PM 60 Closeout 3:00 PM Adjourn


13

Reviewer Writing Assignments

18-Jan-2012*Underlined names are the primary writer.

Executive Summary Dean Hoffer 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Cryostat/Cryogenics Mike Sarychev

Barry Norris 3.0 Active Detector (TPC & PMTs) Bob Wagner

Mike Crisler 4.0 Electronics/Readout/DAQ Peter Shanahan

Gustavo Cancelo 5.0 Detector Assembly/Installation Joe Howell

Mike Crisler Gustavo Cancelo Barry Norris

6.0 Project Management 6.1 Cost Debbie Harrris/ Marc

Kaducak All

6.2 Schedule Marc Kaducak All

6.3 Management Debbie Harris Suzanne Saxer

6.4 Monthly Reporting Cycle Suzanne Saxer 6.4 ES&H Mike Andrews


14

Reviewer Writing Assignments (Continued)

18-Jan-2012

*Underlined names are the primary writer.

7.0 Charge Questions 7.1 Is the final design sufficiently mature so that the project can initiate procurements and start construction? For those elements of the design that are still not finalized, has the project convincingly shown that there are no major issues that need to be addressed and that they are on a clear path to a final design?

Mike Crisler/ Barry Norris All

7.2 Is the Project’s resource loaded schedule being maintained per the approved project processes?

Marc Kaducak All

7.3 Is CD-4 achievable with the Project’s risks and within the DOE approved Total Project Cost?

Marc Kaducak All

7.4 Has the Project updated required project management documents per DOE Order 413.3B for CD-3b start Full Construction?

Debbie Harris All

7.5 Are the Project organization and staffing levels, for both current and planned, adequate to manage the work to get to CD-4?

Debbie Harris All


15

Reviewer Writing Assignments (Continued)

18-Jan-2012

*Underlined names are the primary writer.

7.6 Are the ES&H aspects being properly addressed given the project’s current stage of development?

Mike Andrews All

7.7 Is the Project’s monthly progressing process and reporting properly functioning and meeting the needs of the Lab’s management and DOE?

Suzanne Saxer All

7.8 Has the Project properly addressed the recommendations from the prior Director’s and DOE Reviews?

Marc Kaducak All

7.9 Is the MicroBooNE Project ready for a DOE CD-3b review? Dean Hoffer All


16

Reviewer Breakout Assignments

18-Jan-2012

DRAFT 19-Dec-2011

Wednesday, Dec 18 Session 1: Cryostat and Cryogenics – Hornets’ Nest (WH8XO) Barry Norris

Mike Sarychev Session 2: Active Detectors (TPC & PMTs) – One North (WH1N) Michael Crisler

Bob Wagner Session 3: Electronics, Readout DAQ – Snake Pit (WH2NE) Gustavo Cancelo

Peter Shanahan Session 4: Management – Comitium (WH2SE) Mike Andrews

Debbie Harris Marc Kaducak Suzanne Saxer Dean Hoffer

NOTE: Joe Howell to determine if attending Sessions 1, 2, or 3


17

CD-3b Documentation• Acquisition Strategy• Final Project Execution Plan (PEP)• Final Project Management Plan (PMP)• Updated Assumptions Document• Technical Design Report (TDR)• Final Design Requirements for Long Lead Procurements (CD-3a Items)• Baseline Cost & Schedule and • Resource Loaded Schedule and Bases of Estimate (BOEs)• Configuration Management Plan• Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report• Risk Management Plan, Risk Register, Risk Assessment, Risk Mitigation

Plans• Value Management Documentation• Quality Assurance Plan

18-Jan-2012


18

Breakout Session Focus

• Subproject Risks– Have the risks been identified, analyzed, and mitigation plans &

costs been established– Has the L2 been involved in the process and own their risks

• Subproject Schedule– Do the L2s know and own their part of the schedule and own it– Is the schedule realistic for the scope of work– Do the L2s know the critical path for their work and where they

are at related to the project’s critical path

18-Jan-2012


19

Breakout Session Focus (continued)

• Subproject Costs– Are there BOEs for the entire scope of the subproject and do the

estimates appear to be realistic and achievable– Has cost estimate uncertainty been developed and appropriate for

the scope of work and phase of the project

• Materials to be Fabricated or Procured (CD-3b items)– Do final design specifications/requirements/drawings exist– Are packages prepared to the degree appropriate to order materials

and initiate construction as scheduled– If design is not final, then is the schedule completion of final

design realistic and achievable

18-Jan-2012


20

Breakout Session Focus (continued)

• Progressing /Reporting /Change Control– Is monthly progress reporting performed and what is the process– Does the process include schedule updates and a narrative

description of progress– Does the L2s understand their role in the change control process

and what is currently being used

18-Jan-2012


21

Reporting Structure• Results of the review are to be documented as findings, comments, and recommendations.

• Answer the charge questions. Answers should be short and precise.

• Any additional actions required to be completed by the project team to acceptably address the review charge are to be documented as Recommendations

• Answers to the questions and any recommendations are to be presented in writing at a closeout with MicroBooNE’s and Fermilab’s management.

18-Jan-2012


22

Findings, Comments, and Recommendations

• Findings

• Comments

• Recommendations

• Findings are statements of fact that summarize noteworthy information presented during the review.

• Comments are judgment statements about the facts presented during the review. The reviewers' comments are based on their experiences and expertise.

• The comments are to be evaluated by the project team and actions taken as deemed appropriate.

• Recommendations are statements of actions that should be addressed by the project team.

• A response to the recommendation is expected and that the actions taken would be reported on during future reviews.

18-Jan-2012


23

Reviewer Write-ups

• Write-up template (Review Closeout Presentation Format) is posted on Director’s Review Webpage. http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OPMO/Projects/MBooNE/DirRev/2012/01_18/review.htm

• Write-ups are to be sent to Terry Erickson at [email protected] prior to 10:30 AM on Thursday, Jan 19 for the Closeout Dry Run starting at 11:00 AM

• A final report will be issued no later than 2 weeks after the closeout. DOE Review scheduled for Feb 29/Mar 1

18-Jan-2012


24

Discussion

18-Jan-2012

• Questions and Answers

Documents

Executive Session Director’s CD-3b Review of the MicroBooNE Project January 18, 2012 Dean Hoffer