MANAGEMENT OF THE ATST CONSTRUCTION, …The NSO is operated by AURA under a cooperative agreement with the NSF. AURA, through the NSO Director, is accountable for the performance of

IV. Management of the ATST Advanced Technology Solar Telescope Construction Phase Proposal

IV. Management of the ATST Page 129 of 174

MANAGEMENT OF THE ATST CONSTRUCTION, INTEGRATION AND COMMISSIONING

1 INTRODUCTION ATST uses a straightforward project structure where a variety of partner, community, and funding-agency concerns must be considered. We are staffed with an excellent team of managers, scientists and engineers experienced in modern solar instrumentation, solar adaptive optics, and eight-meter-class state-of-the-art active telescopes. Our organization, experience, and methods to be employed for the successful completion of ATST are described in the following sections. 2 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE ATST PROJECT The ATST project is established within the National Solar Observatory and is structured to include partner contributions. Through a combination of new hires and staff re-assignments, NSO has formed a dedicated project office to provide central management in leading the ATST Design and Development (D&D) phase. This same project office will be responsible for the construction phase. Task leaders have been assigned to each Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) element for both the D&D phase and the construction phase, including the responsibility for coordinating project efforts with partners and subcontractors at a variety of locations. The relationship of the ATST project to NSO, AURA and the NSF is shown in Figure 2.1. Backgrounds of the PI, Co-PIs, Project Manager and Project Scientist are included in the Biographical Sketches section. 2.1 INSTITUTIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The NSF provides the funding agency oversight for ATST. As funding partners are established, coordination of financial transactions, management oversight, and reporting to funding partners will be coordinated with the NSF. Annual funding and contractual obligations flow from the NSF to AURA as specified in the cooperative agreement. The NSO is operated by AURA under a cooperative agreement with the NSF. AURA, through the NSO Director, is accountable for the performance of the ATST project. The NSO Director acts as the ATST Project Director in an organizational relationship, which is identical to the operation of NSO user facilities and current on-going observatory projects. NSO has the responsibility of staffing the project, providing institutional support to the project, coordinating any contributions from partners with the NSF, and ensuring adequate oversight of the execution and performance of the project. The Co-PI team provides regular advice to the director to review overall direction and major decisions.

Figure 2.1. ATST’s relationship to NSO, AURA and the NSF. Potential funding agency relationships, oversight and advisory roles are also shown.



Figure 2.2. ATST Project Team organization.

Specific tasks related to site testing, telescope development and instrument definition are undertaken at the partner institutions. Instruments are being pursued to meet the ATST science goals through cooperation of partners, Co-PI institutes, and NSO staff. The PI and Co-PIs will select the final suite of instruments through a recommendation of the ATST Science Working Group (ASWG) led by the Project Scientist. 2.2 OVERSIGHT OF THE ATST PROJECT The ATST is a broad-based community project that exploits the strengths of its partner organizations. Advisory groups at each level provide oversight of the ATST project (Figure 2.1). The AURA President and Board of Directors regularly receive advice from the Solar Observatory Council (SOC), which oversees NSO’s management of its programs. The SOC includes community members from the U.S. and international groups. The ATST Advisory Committee, consisting of the Co-PIs and selected community representatives, provides advice to the Director for overall direction of the project to ensure continuing community involvement. The Project Scientist has formed the ATST Science Working Group (ASWG) that has developed the science requirements and provides input, advice and support for scientific considerations, including assessing the impact of design trades with consideration of the scientific goals of ATST. The Project Manager has formed the ATST Design Review Committee for formal design review assessment during the D&D phase. This group is expected to be involved during construction to review system-level progress, integration, and commissioning planning as needed. For review on a more frequent basis, the Project Manager will form a Change Control Board (CCB), which will help manage the configuration control function of the systems engineering group in assessing the impact of proposed changes. They will review and recommend approval or denial of change requests to the Project Manager or his designee. Changes that impact top-level requirements will require agreement with the Project Scientist. 2.3 PROJECT TEAM ORGANIZATION The ATST project organization is given in Figure 2.2. The people listed were either hired or assigned to the project during the current D&D phase. A complete listing of current and expected construction project personnel is given in Table 5.2. The NSO Director is responsible to the AURA Board of Directors for conducting all activities within the NSO, including the ATST project. The Project Scientist, Thomas Rimmele, working with the collaborators, has appointed the members of the ASWG. The ASWG consists of partner and community representatives with experience in theory, instrumentation, solar telescope design, and use. International and U.S. interests are represented. The Project Scientist is responsible for the definition and documentation of the science objectives, requirements, and priorities. As chair of the ASWG, he acts as the science advocate to the NSO Director. The



Project Scientist works with the Project Manager in deriving and clarifying engineering requirements based on science objectives, requirements and priorities. He works with the engineering team to help understand, quantify, and resolve any technical issues that may affect the scientific goals. The Project Manager, Jim Oschmann, is responsible for completing the project within the budget and schedule approved by the NSO Director. He has formed the project office and technical team currently involved in the Design and Development phase. Individual members of the team have been assigned lead roles to keep the major elements of the project on schedule and on budget. Team meetings are held on a bi-weekly basis. Regular internal and external reviews are held to ensure progress as scheduled. Review teams have included software, hardware and scientific personnel from the earliest stages of the project. The Conceptual Design Review (CoDR) Committee Report for this major design review, which was quite successful, can be found at the ATST web site (http://atst.nso.edu/meetings/codr/). There were many excellent suggestions that the project is using to refine the current design efforts. The Project Manager and the majority of the central project staff are located at the NSO in Tucson, AZ. The Director, Project Scientist, AO team and AFRL-contributed thermal engineer are located at the NSO in Sunspot, NM. Scientific staffs from both NSO sites have been involved in instrument, site testing, and ASWG activities. The Project Scientist and Project Manager coordinate their efforts to ensure that scientific, technical, budget, and schedule objectives are balanced and work closely to resolve issues that affect science objectives. The Director resolves issues where management and scientific objectives may be in conflict.

Air Force Research Laboratory National Solar Observatory* California Institute of Technology New Jersey Institute of Technology* California State University, Northridge Princeton University Colorado Research Associates Southwest Research Institute Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Stanford University High Altitude Observatory* University of California, Los Angeles Lockheed Martin University of California, San Diego Michigan State University University of Chicago* Montana State University University of Colorado NASA Goddard Space Flight Center University of Hawaii* NASA Marshall Space Flight Center University of Rochester *Denotes PI and Co-PI institutions

Collaborator ATST Activities

High Altitude Observatory

• Visible Spectropolarimeter

U of Hawaii

• Near IR Spectropolarimeter

• Occulting disk • Sky Brightness

Monitors • Site Survey support

NJIT • Near IR Tunable

Filter • Site Survey support

U of Chicago • Site Survey Engineer

UCSD • Stray Light Study

AFRL** • Thermal Engineer

Lockheed Martin

• Wide band optical filter system

NASA Goddard** • Thermal IR camera

NASA Marshall**

• Visible Tunable Filter (w/NSO)

Other Partners

• Various committees, workshops and advice

**Partner contributed effort

Figure 2.3. (Left) List of 22 current ATST Collaborators and their geographic location. The development of International partners is currently underway. (Right) Work packages.



Partners (Figure 2.3, left) are involved through several mechanisms. Members from partner or potential partner organizations are involved with the AURA/NSO SOC, the ASWG, and the Design Review Committee. Some project team members are involved through sub-awards for instrumentation and contracts for facility subsystems (Figure 2.3, right). Experienced Central Team: The ATST project staff is a tightly focused team who are highly experienced in areas ranging from large nighttime telescopes to new state-of-the-art solar instrumentation. Previous engineering and management staff experience, totaling over 300 years, includes major projects such as the Gemini 8-Meter Telescopes Project, SOLIS, GONG, Dunn and Big Bear Solar Telescope Adaptive Optics programs and others (Table 2.1). This is in addition to the PI, Co-PI, Project Scientist, science staff, and partner experience, which includes recent ground and space instrumentation.

ATST has directly benefited from the geographic diversification during the D&D phase. Unique skills located at particular sites and institutions, as well as rapid access to diverse facilities needed for technology development and testing, have helped drive the considerable progress to-date and ensured strong, continuing involvement by partner institutions. For example, ATST has benefited from the development of high-order solar adaptive optics techniques at NSO/Sacramento Peak using the Dunn Solar Telescope in collaborations with NJIT/BBSO, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and Kiepenheuer-Institut für Sonnenphysik (KIS). Similarly, site-testing instrumentation was developed at the NSO and HAO from in-house funding while the continuing development of IR technologies and IR instrument prototyping required for the ATST takes advantage of programs at the University of Hawaii and the McMath-Pierce solar telescope on Kitt Peak. 3 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AND TRANSITIONS The ATST project is structured in three phases: 1) Design and Development; 2) Construction; and 3) Operations. The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) was set up to encompass all three phases, as shown in Figure 4.1. While currently in the funded D&D phase, we have completed a successful Conceptual Design Review (CoDR) and are working towards the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) to be held in late

Table 2.1 ATST Central Engineering and Management Staff Years of Experience (excluding ATST D&D)

ATST Team Member Area of ExpertiseLarge Telescope

Projects Solar ProjectsRelated Industry

Experience Total(Gemini, SOAR, Other) (AO, GONG, SOLIS, Other) (Optics, Aerospace, etc.) Years

Jim Oschmann Project Management, Optics, Systems 9 10 19

Jennifer Purcell Project Support, Administration 6 6

Ron Price Opto-mechanical Engineering, Large Optics 9 20 29

Eric Downey Mechanical Design 5 15 20Ruth Kneale Documentation Control, Project

Support, Web Master 11 11

Jeff Barr Architecture, Civil Engineering 11 2 13Jerry Duffek Mechanical Design,

Instrumentation 22 8 30

Rob Hubbard Systems Engineering, Optics, Scattered Light, Instrumentation 2 18 5 25

Mark Warner Mechanical Engineering, FEA 7 4 6 17Bret Goodrich Software Engineering and

Controls 5 9 3 17

Steve Wampler Software Engineering, Communications, Data Handling 7 4 21 32

Lonnie Cole Electronics Engineering, Controls, Cameras and Data Acquisition 17 4 21

Jeremy Wagner Project Management, Systems, Instrumentation 21 21

Nathan Dalrymple (AFRL) Thermal Analysis and Modeling 10 10Steve Hegwer Adaptive Optics, Systems,

Instrumentation 24 24

Kit Richards Electronics Engineering, Adaptive Optics, Cameras and Data Acquisition Systems

7 25 32

Total 94 114 119 327



2004. The CoDR Committee Report and our responses can be found at the ATST web site (http://atst.nso.edu/meetings/codr/). Most suggestions are being aggressively pursued as part of our preliminary design work. In 2005, the D&D phase will prepare for a seamless transition to the construction phase of the project, beginning in 2006. 3.1 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION PREPARATION ACTIVITIES The priorities for design completion are based upon the critical-path analysis of our current project schedule (D&D and Construction phases), which identifies key areas that are near the critical path including site development, support building, enclosure, telescope structure, and optical assemblies. For these time critical areas, we intend to complete the designs to the appropriate level for industrial bidding. The selection process will be completed, negotiated, and ready to commit once the final approval for construction is received and funds become available. This will allow an efficient start to the construction phase. If we are able to purchase the primary mirror blank as a long-lead item, any one of these will easily become a critical-path activity. We intend to compete the major contracts prior to the start of construction in order to lower both financial and schedule risks. We will have completed all high-risk, long-lead and performance-critical design and evaluation tasks for each of these areas and included the results in system-level bottom-up verification of performance. Our successful Conceptual Design Review has demonstrated the validity of our approach of using previous efforts to define large-aperture solar telescopes and new technologies proven with the latest nighttime telescopes. Having attended the Conceptual Design Review in 2003, the ASWG, Design Review Committee, and members of the partnership and NSF representatives will also attend the systems Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and the Final Design Review (FDR). The FDR will be the milestone and will require successful completion prior to final approval for the construction phase by the NSF and partners. Final cleanup and revision activities are expected to follow the FDR. Construction drawings for critical path activities to commence in 2006 will have a priority for the final D&D-phase work. Summary of D&D Phase Deliverables The primary deliverables of the ATST design and development phase are:

• A fully developed science requirements document. • Design requirements documents with traceable flow down of requirements from science to

technical. • Detailed telescope system design. • Interface control documents. • Major construction contracts ready for approval. • Management plan for construction including final baseline project plan, configuration control

plans and related management and systems tools. • Draft plan for operations. • Draft scientific data management plan. • A site for construction of the ATST with all use permits in place. • Negotiated partnership agreements with international partners and/or US agencies

The first four items are well underway, with the first three complete at the conceptual level. All major interface control documents have been identified and organized.



3.2 ATST CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Fabrication and Site Construction: The development and execution of procurements for major subsystems will be time-phased to meet integration-schedule and development rates. Performance and concept-based contracts will be used with vendors to perform detailed design/build/deliver/install services when appropriate and cost-effective. The following related activities give a sample of key construction activities:

• Initiate production of ATST subsystems. Begin manufacture of long-lead items at times appropriate to the overall integration schedule. This includes the primary mirror, site work, buildings, enclosures, primary mirror assembly, enclosure, and the telescope structure.

• Compete contracts for subsystems and awards. Add contractors not competed during the D&D phase to the project team and manage the fabrication effort for all areas. Conduct reviews by the project team, science committee, advisors, and consultants as required.

• Manage contractors. Ensure time/rate of completion and exercise cost control. Ensure that quality is commensurate with specifications.

• Solicit and evaluate scientific instrument proposals. Proposals may come from within ATST or from outside. ATST partner organizations will continue to be encouraged to develop many of the focal plane instrumentation packages. As appropriate, we will use a combination of competition and directed sub-awards based upon partner expertise, unique qualifications, and the variety of potential sources for this critical work. Potential sub-awards identified to date include the Visible Spectropolarimeter being designed by HAO, and the Near IR Spectropolarimeter being designed by the University of Hawaii. Other areas currently in work include a Near IR Tunable Filter being designed by NJIT, a Visible Tunable Filter being designed jointly by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center and the NSO team, and a broad band filter system being designed by Lockheed Martin. Once the complete designs are ready and acceptable proposals are received which meet the management criteria described in Section 7.5, final awards will be considered.

• Develop science instrumentation. Pursue in-house and monitor and review awarded development of science instruments.

• Test subsystems at manufacturers. Ensure performance of subsystems on-site via low- and mid-level testing at contractors’ facilities before shipping. This includes factory acceptance testing applied to both contractors and partners. ATST sign-off required prior to shipment.

• Formulate detailed integration plans. Develop commissioning and operations plan; identify staffing and funding; develop transition strategies for the future.

Construction Integration, Test and Commissioning: The operations plan will be further developed during the remainder of the D&D phase and submitted at the FDR. Finalization of these plans, to the extent required to ramp up facilities and staff during the construction phase, is crucial for a smooth transition to operations, particularly in support of Integration, Test and Commissioning activities. The following list highlights the key aspects of these plans, beginning with the formation of the long-term staff and facilities.

• Form initial operations staff. We will ramp-up hiring of integration/operations personnel during this phase. The staff is expected to be a combination of ATST project staff, experienced NSO telescope operations and support staff, and new hires. The balance between these areas has yet to be determined but will be formed in such a way as to allow for a smooth transition to the operation of ATST and retention of “corporate knowledge.” The variation in staff type and source must be balanced with the need for experienced people from a solar operations view, and the requirement for transition of project staff and new hires in order to handle the new and unique systems. This will result in a balanced staff and efficient operations. This process begins after site construction is well underway to avoid uncertainty of location. The location could



influence the availability of qualified local hires and the desirability of relocation for current staff or non-local hires.

• Install ATST subsystems. As appropriate, manufacturers under ATST management will install appropriate subsystems. ATST staff will install other subsystems.

• Debug systems. Achieve proper operation of subsystems as installed in the time-phased integration plan. Ensure that subsystem performance meets requirements. Our goal is to have final acceptance testing of contractor and partner supplied subsystems on the telescope.

• Optimize performance. Make the necessary software and hardware adjustments required to optimize the quality and efficiency of operations.

• Perform baseline testing. Characterize performance of the ATST relative to established specifications, including final acceptance testing for the system or subsystems

• Install scientific instrumentation. Integrate instruments with the telescope and optimize the entire system to provide desired scientific performance.

• Establish initial operational conditions. Establish personnel and procedures in order to achieve initial operations with desired efficiency, quality, and reliability.

Careful planning and execution during this time frame are critical to the successful, efficient, early scientific operation of ATST. We intend to dedicate one year to properly commission the facilities and several months per instrument prior to extensive scientific observations. The commissioning will require observational verification of the key performance aspects. Time has been dedicated in the schedule based upon similar complex systems that have been recently commissioned for nighttime astronomy such as Gemini, Subaru, and VLT. 4 PROJECT CONTROL AND THE WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE ATST uses proven methods to plan, monitor, and control the project. It begins with defining how we will track progress and control direction, followed by the division of work defined to allow adequate insight. 4.1 MANAGEMENT CONTROLS ATST project management employs proven cost and schedule control system methods to track and control the design and development phase effort, and will continue to do so during the construction phase. Development of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) was the first step in the development of the project schedule. The WBS breaks the work down into categories and subcategories that allow the estimation and tracking of individual elements of the project effort. By utilizing the project schedule and the WBS with quantifiable milestones, progress and expenditures can be tracked to individual tasks by comparing the percent complete and the to-date costs in the form of project-level earned value reporting. This allows timely identification of tasks that are at risk so that action can be taken. The earned value method as required by the Office of Management and Budget in its Planning, Budgeting, and Acquisitions of Capital Assets, Circular A-11, Part 3, will be used as a tool to track and measure project progress. Earned value can be an objective analysis of a project’s cost and schedule progress compared to the project’s baseline cost, schedule and scope. Tracking cost and schedule variances enables us to assess overall project performance and, when there are budget overruns or schedule slips, to implement corrective actions. Earned Value uses three metrics: Planned Value (PV) which is the budgeted cost of the scheduled work, Earned Value (EV) which is the budgeted cost of the performed work, and Actual Cost (AC) to calculate Schedule (EV-PV) and Cost (EV-AC) variances. Results that are negative indicate that a project is over budget and/or behind schedule. Conversely, results that are positive indicate a project that is under budget and/or ahead of schedule. The Schedule Performance Index (SPI=EV/PV), and Cost Performance Index (CPI=EV/AC) provide a top-level metric of progress in fractional form. The schedule to complete (from project start) is the project duration



divided by the SPI. The cost at completion is estimated by dividing the project total budget ($161M) by the CPI. SPI and CPI ratios greater than one indicate the project is under budget and ahead of schedule. In our reporting, we will notify the NSF Program Officer of project-level cost and schedule variances on a quarterly basis. Variances in excess of negative 10% or more will be accompanied by an explanation and a proposed plan for maintaining the cost and schedule (e.g., use contingency, de-scope). Progress status of the project is assessed monthly. This, along with the bi-weekly team meetings, allows early identification of problems for critical item tracking. Cost data is gathered bi-weekly from the NOAO accounting system. The accounting charge numbers used on the project reflect the WBS index numbers for ease of tracking non-payroll commitments, expenditures and labor charges. The current WBS details plans to the fifth level and is expected to be two-to-three levels deeper upon construction start, particularly for major subcontracts and instrumentation. Cost tracking will be done to the seventh or eighth level of the WBS, as applicable, particularly for large contracts and instrumentation. Each major contractor will be required to report tracking information in a form and at a level of sufficiently fine detail to allow us to fold it into our earned value analysis. This contract work package tracking data, along with measurable milestones with associated payments, will allow us to accurately report the overall project system-level earned value. Cost and performance reports are generated and monitored. The accounting system generates custom reports of labor dollars and hours, as well as capital commitments and expenditures. The Project Manager then generates summary progress reports. The project management staff includes a full-time scheduler and accountant to ensure the detailed tracking required to support the earned value analysis, project status updates, schedule updates, and budget/plan scenario analysis to solve problems. The cost status section of the report compares both monthly and cumulative actual expenditures to budget. Microsoft Project is used as the standard scheduling and tracking tool. The monthly reports include a section on vendor management and contract progress tracking. 4.2 WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is summarized in Figure 4.1 and given in detail in Appendix 2. It was developed by the ATST team to reflect our best estimate of how the work should be performed and broken down into manageable contracts for testable units, with a goal of minimizing the number of

Figure 4.1. Work Breakdown Structure Summary



Figure 4.2. ATST Construction Schedule

interfaces. The WBS is the framework for project controls. The project schedule and detailed costing are based upon this WBS. A single person is assigned responsibility for the delivery of each element. This is used in concert with the N2 diagram to identify interface relationships and documentation. This will form the basis of our integration plans that need to be developed early during the construction phase. The WBS element descriptions can also be found in Appendix 2. 4.3 SCHEDULE The development of the construction project’s spending and commitment profile was based upon the current construction schedule. The summary Construction Schedule (Figure 4.2) was developed from and follows the project’s WBS, including our initial integration, testing and commissioning activities. We have assumed the earliest possible dates for most non-critical path items in order to conserve as much schedule contingency as possible. The exact order of non-critical path item-starts will depend upon the near-critical path analysis at the start of construction.

The construction project ends upon complete commissioning of the first suite of scientific instruments. Initial scientific operations with these instruments are ramped up during the instrument commissioning activities in a time-phased manner. See Appendix 3 for the detailed schedule. The project critical path will be discussed in the risk management section.



5 BUDGET The costs for the ATST construction phase are based on the WBS down to five levels of detail, depending upon the complexity and availability of comparable existing systems. The construction phase will cover eight fiscal years, beginning in the first half of FY 2006 and ending in the last half of FY 2013. The majority of the work will be subcontracted competitively to industry and to qualified partners with unique expertise. ATST personnel manage all activities centrally. Costs for construction of the ATST are estimated as a bottom-up exercise, starting with the major procurements and fabrication items listed in the WBS. Project personnel expenses, subcontracts, and integration, test and commissioning are also included. The cost estimates are based on a combination of sources. Contracted design evaluation and feasibility studies were performed during the Design and Development Phase (Table 5.1). Independent verification of the costs was developed via a series of in-house take-off type estimates. All costs were compared to recent telescope projects that were similar in scale and complexity to the ATST telescope assembly and enclosure such as SOAR and Gemini.

5.1 SPEND AND COMMITMENT PROFILE To determine the spending and commitment profiles we are seeking, the schedule previously given in Figure 4.2 was used to time phase the money required. The need for money approved at the beginning of large contracts, even though the actual outflow of cash is spread over the duration of such contracts, drives the commitment profile. See Table 5.2 for the staffing plan to support this schedule. All estimates were made in FY 2003 U.S. dollars and inflated accordingly at 4% per annum over the construction phase timeline shown in Figure 5.1. Labor costs include benefits at 35%. The detailed WBS, including cost detail, is contained in Appendix 2. Further cost details are available upon request. Proprietary, detailed vendor cost basis for enclosure, telescope mount, primary mirror, primary and secondary assemblies exist from sources given in Table 5.1. Figure 5.1 shows the anticipated commitment and spend profiles for the ATST construction project. The contingency spend profile is included, as it is a key aspect of managing risk, and totals $25.5M USD.

Table 5.1 D&D Phase Design Evaluation and Feasibility StudiesItem Vendor Studies and Estimates

Site development and construction M3 Engineering Primary mirror blank costs Corning and Schott Primary mirror polishing Goodrich, Sagem, Brashears, UofA,

Rayleigh Telescope mount assembly VertexRSI, TTL, EOS Technologies Primary & secondary assemblies Goodrich, Sagem, VertexRSI, EOS

Technologies Enclosure AMEC, VertexRSI, M3 Engineering Instruments ATST partner estimates



Table 5.2. Project Staffing Plan Project Staffing (FTEs) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Totals

1.2.1 Project Management Project Manager 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 6.75

Deputy Project Manager 1 1 1 1 0.5 4.5 Scheduler 1 1 1 1 0.5 4.5

Contracts Officer 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.25 4.75 Accounting 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.25 5.25

Administrative Assistant 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 0.25 7 1.2.2 Systems

Systems Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 6.75 Documentation Coordinator 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 6.75

1.2.3 Fabrication 1.2.3.1 Telescope Assembly

Mechanical Engineer 1 1 1 1 4 Opt-mechanical Engineer 1 1 1 1 4

Engineer 1 1 0.5 2.5 Engineer 1 1 0.5 2.5 Drafting 1 1 1 1 1 5 Drafting 1 1 1 1 1 5

Technician 1 1 1 3 Technician 1 1 1 3

1.2.3.2 Wavefront Sensing Electronic Engineer 0.75 1 0.5 2.25 Software Engineer 0.75 1 0.5 2.25

Optical Engineer 0.25 1 0.25 1.5 Mechanical Engineer 0.25 1 0.25 1.5 Electronic Technician 0.25 1 1 2.25

Instrument Technician 1 1 2 Miscellaneous 0.2 1 1 2.2

1.2.3.3 Instrumentation Instrument Engineer 1 1 1 3 Instrument Engineer 1 1 1 1 0.75 4.75

Instrument Technician 1 1 1 0.75 3.75 1.2.3.4 High-Level Software & Controls

Software Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 6.75 Software Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 6.75 Software Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 6.75 1.2.3.5 Enclosure

Engineer 1 1 1 3 Technician 1 1 1 0.75 3.75

1.2.3.6 Support Facilities Engineer 1 1 1 3

Technician 0.5 1 1 0.75 3.25 1.2.3.7 Remote Operations Facility

Civil / Architecture Engineer 1 1 1 3 1.2.4 Integration, Test & Commissioning

Engineer 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Engineer 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Engineer 0.5 1 1 0.75 0.25 3.5 Engineer 0.5 1 1 0.75 0.25 3.5 Engineer 1 1 0.75 0.25 3

Science/Operator 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Science/Operator 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Science/Operator 1 0.75 0.25 2 Science/Operator 1 0.75 0.25 2 Science/Operator 1 0.75 0.25 2

Technician 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Technician 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Technician 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Technician 1 1 0.75 0.25 3 Technician 1 1 0.75 0.25 3

1.2.5 Science Support Project Scientist 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.75 0 6.75

Adaptive Optics Scientist 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.75 0.75 0.75 0 4.25 Instrument Scientist 1 1 1 1 0.75 0 4.75

1.2.6 Operations Phase Preparation Business Manager 0.5 1 1 0.25 2.75

Operations Scientist 0.5 1 0.25 1.75 1.2.7 Education and Public Outreach Not funded in Construction Project 1.2.8 Support Services To be split out of other costs

Required Project FTE: 19 27.45 31 31 31.25 31.75 24 4.75 200.2



5.2 COST BREAKDOWN The WBS cost centers, shown in Figure 5.2, include:

1.2.1 Project Management Expenses

1.2.2 Systems Engineering 1.2.3 Fabrication 1.2.4 Integration, Testing, and

Commissioning 1.2.5 Science Support 1.2.6 Operations Phase

Preparation 1.2.7 Education and Public

Outreach (Budget is part of a separate supplemental proposal)

1.2.8 Support Services Overhead Expenses

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total

spend profile 35$ 34$ 31$ 22$ 18$ 12$ 8$ 1$ 161.4$ cum spend profile 35$ 69$ 101$ 122$ 140$ 152$ 161$ 161$ 161.4$ commit profile 61$ 26$ 26$ 19$ 12$ 10$ 7$ 1$ 161.4$ cum commit profile 61$ 87$ 113$ 132$ 144$ 154$ 161$ 161$ 161.4$ cum contingency profile 8$ 12$ 15$ 20$ 21$ 24$ 25$ 25$ 25.5$

Cumulative Totals With Inflation @ 4%

-

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Fiscal Year

$Mcum commit profilecum spend profilecum contingency profile

Figure 5.1. Spend and Commitment Profiles

Figure 5.2. Construction Cost Breakdown



Project Management Expenses: The construction costs for the project encompass four major subcategories: (1) project personnel costs including overheads; (2) miscellaneous construction equipment; (3) completion of D&D effort; and (4) contingency. Of these, the largest contributor is the Project Personnel category. Costing for this portion of the budget was made via assumptions about personnel requirements for managing ATST activities. This includes contracts, accounting, administrative, staff and others as shown in Appendix 2. Average wages for staff were assigned, and 35% general benefits were added. Travel expenses, computers and supplies, and relocation to the site were also factored into these amounts. Contingency, estimated on a line-item basis down to level 5 in each WBS element, is held by the Project Manager to allow central control of its use. Small amounts of contingency were estimated for low-risk items with very close comparable work previously done. Large amounts were estimated for high-risk items such as primary mirror polishing costs and commissioning needs. Figure 5.3 details the contingency assigned to the major areas, which is about 19% of the base cost.

Systems Engineering: Systems engineering costs encompass labor and associated supplies to manage system activities such as configuration control, error budget and performance-model updates, interface-control activities, and documentation control. Systems engineering will also lead the integration, test and telescope commissioning activities, which will include further expenses of staff and test equipment. The systems engineering manager and librarian/documentation coordinator labor are included here. Telescope Fabrication: Telescope fabrication includes the following WBS elements:

1.2.3.1 Telescope Assembly 1.2.3.2 Wave front Correction (active and adaptive optics) 1.2.3.3 Instrument Systems 1.2.3.4 High-Level Controls & Software 1.2.3.5 Enclosure 1.2.3.6 Support Facilities & Buildings 1.2.3.7 Remote Operations Facility

Figure 5.3. Contingency Breakdown



Estimates for most of this equipment were based on known expenditures of previous large telescope projects, scaled by size, weight, volume, complexity and inflation as appropriate. Beyond the vendor studies listed previously, comparisons were made with SOAR, Gemini, as well as other nighttime and solar projects as appropriate for the remaining items. The WBS dictionary (element descriptions) in Appendix 2 contains more information under each of these areas. Integration, Testing, & Commissioning: The costs for integration, testing, and commissioning (IT&C) are based on assumptions of required ATST personnel during this latter part of the project. These costs include salaries, benefits, estimates for computers and supplies and relocation expenses. The cost values were compared with other recent large telescope project IT&C efforts such as Gemini. A large contingency has been assigned to this stage of the project. The contingency is held under the Project Management expenses in the WBS element and is controlled by the Project Manager. Science Support: Science support costs include the labor and benefits, supplies, travel, and relocation expenses for the Project Scientist and two supporting scientists:

• AO scientist to support continued AO development. • Instrumentation scientist working closely with the instrumentation manager for instrument

oversight. A third operations scientist will be hired prior to telescope commissioning to lead scientific operations planning, as budgeted in the Operations Preparation WBS element. Monies have also been included to support ASWG meetings. Operations Preparation: Operations preparation activities include setting up procedures and policies as needed for optimized operations of ATST. We include labor, benefits and supplies for a dedicated operations business administrative position and a dedicated operations scientist to develop scientific operational procedures, such as queue scheduling plans and business tracking procedures, which may be unique or different from current NSO procedures. Operations preparation activities are scheduled for the last one to two years of this construction project. Education and Public Outreach: The costs for Education and Public Outreach associated with ATST are not included in this proposal as per guidelines from the NSF for Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC). The funds described in Section V of this proposal will be sought through a separate supplemental proposal. Support Services and Overheads: Support services and overheads are items ATST pays other organizations, currently NOAO and AURA, for services rendered. These include payroll, benefits administration, accounting/contract administration, facilities support, and the ATST share of the AURA management fee. Current rates are assumed (FY 2003) in this budget. Approximately 8% is applied to labor costs to cover facility use and general support, less than 2% of contract costs are estimated for contract administration, and 2% of the overall project costs will cover AURA management. The contract administrative percentage is low due to the number of large contracts (we pay a capped amount per order) and the use of a dedicated contracts manager and a financial controller (budgeted in Project Management Expenses) for day-to-day needs. Project Staffing: Personnel costs for each WBS element were developed using Table 5.2. This includes salaries, benefits, supplies, travel, and relocation. Overheads outside of these items are covered in support services and overheads.



6 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND CONFIGURATION CONTROL Designing a state-of-the-art facility like the ATST requires concurrent engineering, i.e., the design and development activities have proceeded in parallel. As the designs evolved, there was continuous adjustment of requirements and rebalancing of the interfaces between different subsystems. Moreover, during the current D&D phase, the project is preparing procedures and plans that will be required for the construction phase. To accomplish these goals in an efficient manner, the project has developed a strong systems engineering program involving all key engineering managers and led by the systems engineer. This will ensure technical success as well as cost and schedule control. Systems engineering staff work closely with project management, scientific staff and the engineering team to accomplish the activities outlined below, throughout the construction phase of the project. However, systems engineering transitions from identification and development of interfaces, for example, to a critical system configuration control function during the construction phase. Systems engineering activities that relate directly to the technical aspects of the program (requirements flow down, error budgets and performance predictions) are described in Part III of this proposal. The management tools that apply to the systems engineering configuration control function required during the construction of ATST are described in the sections that follow. To facilitate formal control of change, the Project Manager will set up a Change Control Board (CCB) that includes the systems engineer, key technical managers, and scientific staff to review changes to the system, once a final configuration is set at the end of the D&D phase. The major systems management functions are outlined in the sections that follow. Though managed by the systems engineer and documentation coordinator, the entire ATST team is involved and has participated in development of system concept, subsystem definition, and interface control organization. This has resulted in the buy-in and direct involvement of the lead mechanical, optical, and thermal engineers as well as the adaptive optics manager. The deputy project manager has played a key role in aiding the systems group to organize many areas and continues to work with the systems engineer on the management of requirements, interfaces and other areas as needed. 6.1 INTERFACE CONTROL Project management has set up a division of responsibilities for the project. Based on the designs, systems engineering has developed a matrix to define where interfaces exist between responsible groups. Interface Control Documents (ICDs) are developed for each interface from this structure. An ICD is an agreement—essentially a contract—between two or more groups in the project. It may be between two groups of project staff, or it may be between the project and a contractor or partner organization. The document not only defines the interface, but also identifies who does what. Like a contract, each ICD is negotiated. If a contractor will perform the work, the ICD becomes part of the contract. In general, ICDs cover optical, mechanical, electrical, and software interfaces as appropriate. All the ICDs for any given subsystem are controlled. A formal revision process has been set up to control changes to the ICDs. There will often be situations where a change in an ICD affects the plans of several groups, including ones that may not have been part of the original agreement. Therefore, as changes in ICDs are required, it is important that these changes are communicated with all affected groups. In some cases, when an ICD is changed, revision of budget allocations or error budgets may be required to maintain top-level performance.



6.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN The quality assurance plan, which is the responsibility of systems engineering, defines quality control procedures to be used in the construction phase of the project to ensure that manufactured and purchased parts meet specified requirements. This plan must be applied equally to instrumentation activities and the construction of the telescope and facilities. The central management team will work with vendors, funded partners, and contributions in kind to help assure the ATST community gets the highest quality facility at the end of the construction phase. Indeed, many of these procedures can and will be used for ongoing instrument and facility development in the operations phase of the observatory. The quality assurance plan includes:

• Configuration control procedures for drawings, Design Requirements Documents (DRD) generated during the D&D phase, and ICDs used for the fabrication of parts or subassemblies. Included will be the process using the CCB to control changes once a final design is approved.

• Procedures for incoming inspection of purchased parts to ensure they meet specifications. • Procedures for identification and control of parts in inventory. • Requirements on contractors who are manufacturing parts or subassemblies for the project.

Each contractor will be required to have a quality assurance plan that meets project guidelines. The contractor’s quality assurance plan will cover:

• Acceptance test plans. • Inspection methods and calibration of inspection equipment. • Disposition of discrepant parts. • Traceability of critical materials.

6.3 ACCEPTANCE TEST PLANS During the construction phase, each contractor will be required to prepare an acceptance test plan that will ensure that the part or subsystem it manufactures will comply with the requirements specified. Among other things, the acceptance test plan will define tests and inspections to ensure:

• Compliance with all dimensional requirements, surface properties, welding qualities, material qualities and coatings.

• Proper form, fit and function of all components. • Compliance with all interface requirements including weight limits. • Verification of requirements on operating conditions such as power dissipation, electromagnetic

compatibility, or vibration levels. The contractor will submit its acceptance test plan to the project for approval in advance. In addition, project staff will develop acceptance test plans for any subassemblies or equipment items that will be manufactured or assembled under their supervision. Systems engineering will work with the engineering team to define standards for the acceptance test plans, review plans submitted by contractors, and develop acceptance test plans for any subassemblies produced by the project. 6.4 INTEGRATION PLANS Carefully prepared plans will be needed to guide the integration of subassemblies into the completed ATST facility. For each subassembly or separate piece of equipment, a formal integration plan will be prepared. The integration plans will cover:

• Required equipment and tools • Safety precautions for personnel and equipment • Step-by-step procedures to define the proper sequence of tasks



• Test procedures to verify that the subassembly is functioning properly Systems engineering will work with the project team to develop the integration plans during the latter portion of the design and development phase. 6.5 STANDARDS Systems engineering works with the other engineering staff to develop hardware and software design standards, documentation standards and standardized terminology. Standards are being developed for both hardware and software to ensure the use of common components, compatible subsystems, and a modular approach wherever possible. This is important to help control life-cycle costs for the facility, such as operating costs, maintenance costs, staffing requirements, the quantity of spare parts required, and the cost to upgrade systems as new technology becomes available. Established industry standards, such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), etc. will be used wherever appropriate and adequate; in the unlikely event an industry standard does not exist or is inadequate, one will be developed by ATST staff. Documentation standards include standard drawing formats and file types, as well as standard templates for project documents such as ICDs and integration plans. Systems engineering compiles a glossary of standardized names and definitions on an ongoing basis. When writing ICDs or contracts, it is important that the terms used are clearly defined in a manner that is consistent across the entire project. 6.6 DOCUMENT CONTROL Systems engineering coordinates the collection and control of technical documents, including:

• Science requirements document • Interface control documents • Design requirements documents • Error budgets • Technical reports • Drawings • Quality assurance plan • Acceptance test plans • Integration plans

In addition to the responsible engineer and engineering manager, systems engineering signs approvals for release and revision of:

• Interface control documents • Design requirements documents • Drawings • Quality assurance plan • Acceptance test plans • Integration plans

7 CONTRACTING APPROACH The ATST project team has begun creating detailed specification documents that will become the basis for contracts for the final design and fabrication of most items. Documentation for long-lead items will be prepared first, including the primary mirror blank, primary mirror polishing, telescope mount, enclosure, and site buildings and infrastructure. Competitive industrial contracts are planned for all of these items.



Instruments will be purchased by contract or sub-award. All the instruments will be developed from detailed designs produced by collaboration of partner organizations with the project during the design and development phase. The NSO will be responsible for instrument infrastructure, active and adaptive optics, and a common camera/detector program. The detailed but modular interaction of the detector systems and common control systems is being defined through work the partners and NSO are currently performing for the D&D phase. This will allow for standardization of common design elements and minimize duplication of effort in electronics and software development. 7.1 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION Contract administration will be performed in-house and includes a contracts administrator with sufficient support staff to administer and monitor all aspects of contracts and procurements. Personnel familiar with government contracting procedures, federal acquisition regulations (FAR), and NSF contracting policies will administer all contracts. All procurements will comply with applicable Federal regulations. 7.2 CONTRACT TYPE The contract type employed will depend on the nature of the specific task. However, most contracts will be firm fixed price. Contracting clauses will be negotiated with the awardees to provide AURA with sufficient protections to ensure contract completion on schedule and within budget. Contract form will correspond to the nature of the contract, the provider/vendor, and the method of funding (contract, sub-award, sub-grant, etc.). In all cases, any required flow-down provisions from applicable regulations will be included. 7.3 CONTRACTOR SELECTION All purchases over $5K will be made using competitive procurement unless there is an adequate justification for using a sole source. This approach maximizes competition, which helps to minimize costs. The PI and co-PIs may make exceptions to competition for some partner sub-awards and contributions. Likely sub-awards include two instrument work packages described below. All will have appropriate management requirements for tracking progress that includes measurable milestones, payment and reporting needs. Detailed procedures currently in place for AURA procurements will be used or adapted to any unique project needs. Any unique procedures will be documented prior to the beginning of the construction phase. For a standard item purchase, existing procedures for obtaining quotations will be followed. For non-standard high-cost or risk items, the project contracts office will prepare a formal solicitation plan, which includes a Request for Proposal (RFP), establishing a source selection board, and a set of formal evaluation criteria to be used in grading each proposal. The RFP package will consist of a document that requests vendors to submit technical proposals to perform the work; management and cost proposals; a proposal form; a sample contract form for the work, which includes a detailed statement of work; and the requirements document for the work. The procurement will be publicized through the Federal Business Opportunities website, the ATST website, and through partner agencies as appropriate. Notices will be sent to vendors known to the project and partners. The RFP will be sent to all vendors who request it. Vendors will not be selected based on price considerations alone. A small selection committee will evaluate each vendor's proposal, assigning scores to criteria such as proposed design, management, experience, facilities and staffing. Vendors will be selected by balancing their technical scores and prices in order to ensure that the project obtains the best value, considering both price and capability.



Whenever possible, contracts will be on a fixed-price basis so that the project will be able to effectively manage its budget. In instances where the extent of the work cannot be reliably determined in advance, it may be necessary to use other approaches, such as paying hourly rates or distributing the work in ways that reduce risk. The award of custom design and fabrication work will be based on an evaluation of bid price, ability to meet specifications, ability to meet schedule, experience, resources, personnel and other similar factors. The Project Manager must review and approve all sole-source procurements. The required final approval level is based upon delegated financial authority to the responsible technical manager, Project Manager, NSO Director, AURA and the NSF, as agreed to upon ATST construction project start. Currently, these approval levels are $100K for the Project Manager and $250K for the Director with any higher amount requiring AURA and NSF approval. 7.4 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT Once a contract is in place it must be monitored, to ensure that the work is completed successfully and on time. The contracts will identify information that will be supplied to the project office so that ATST will have early warning of problems relating to schedules, costs and performance. A project staff member will act as the technical representative for each contract and will be solely responsible for monitoring the vendor's performance. This person will communicate with the contractor frequently to make sure the work is on track, provide needed technical information, coordinate work being done by different contractors when necessary, and evaluate whether progress milestones are being met on schedule. In special cases, where particular activities are critical, the project technical representative may reside for some period at the contractor's facility. The objective is to resolve problems before they impact schedule and to provide the Project Manager with insight into contractor progress. Contracts will be structured with objectively verifiable progress milestones so that it is possible to detect early on if a vendor is getting into trouble. Contract payment provisions will be tied to these milestones that represent completion of concrete, quantifiable performance objectives. Milestones payment provisions based on elapsed time alone will be avoided to the extent possible for fixed-price contracts. The responsible manager and contract administrator must approve any modifications to a contract as consistent with established financial authority levels. Modifications must also be evaluated, negotiated, and formally changed by a contracting officer. Technical changes must be reviewed and approved by the responsible systems engineer and change control board to enforce configuration management. 7.5 INSTRUMENTATION MANAGEMENT The instrumentation program is a critically important component of the ATST facility. Therefore, it is placed at the same priority as the telescope design, development and construction and the management of those phases. The ATST instruments approach in size and complexity instruments for 8 to 10-m nighttime facilities, such as Gemini, Keck and VLT. We have reviewed extensively the “lessons learned” from those nighttime instrumentation programs and are using that experience along with our own to form our ATST instrumentation program. Important examples of these lessons include the following: Strong, central instrumentation management. Close and frequent communication within the partner and project teams. Contracts with detailed specifications and measurable milestones with financial ties. Progress reports including detailed cost, schedule and scope tracking information. Solid configuration and change control. A team attitude focused on both the project’s and instrumentation partner’s success.



A detailed plan is under development with the partners to ensure a strong, centrally managed, and coherent instrumentation program through the end of design, development, and construction, that will continue during operations. This coherency is important because building instruments will continue through the life cycle of the ATST facility. The project will continue to manage the instrumentation program centrally through construction. The partner organizations, through the Director’s Co-PI and advisory group meetings are directly involved with the project team in the establishment of instrumentation design, development, construction, and instrument commissioning priorities. This allows the partners to participate in the final approval of instrumentation sub-awards. No award will be granted until adequate management and project plans are in place, including agreed upon detailed tracking requirements, as outlined below, and successful review of the instrument preliminary design. Provisions for cancellation of work not meeting expectations will be included in all awards. ATST will have a manager for the instrumentation program and an instrumentation scientist who will work together to ensure adequate progress or to recommend action for changes to the project manager. Currently, this is the role of the deputy project manager, to ensure high visibility. Instrumentation work packages conducted directly by the project include the instrument facility and associated infrastructure, outfitting of labs and support facilities, acquisition and guiding, engineering first-light imager, active and adaptive optics, and the camera detector program for all instruments, as well as high-level software and controls including the command and data communication infrastructure and data handling systems. Some of these work items will be contracted out as subcontracts that are to be determined. Sub-awards for two instruments we expect to make are as follows: High Altitude Observatory: Visible Spectro-polarimeter Institute for Astronomy: Near-IR Spectro-polarimeter Other instrument sub-awards will be reviewed as the D&D phase progresses and partner involvement is refined. Instrument concepts currently in work are: New Jersey Institute of Technology: Near-IR Tunable Filter NASA Marshall Space Flight Center/NSO: Visible Tunable Filter Lockheed Martin/NSO: Broad Band Imager/Filter The ATST instrumentation program is separated into three categories: 1) instrument contracts, 2) instrument sub-awards, and 3) international contribution of instruments. We will follow the same procedures outlined in Section 7.4 for non-instrumentation procurements. To do this, each instrument effort will have measurable milestones with financial ties. We will implement internal procedures such as requiring the contract administrator to approve any modifications to an instrument activity. The contract administrator will circulate an approval memo for such changes that includes distribution to the partner representative, technical representative, responsible manager, systems engineering team and the Project Scientist or his designee at a minimum. Modifications also must be evaluated, negotiated, and formally changed by a contracting officer. Technical changes also must be reviewed and approved by systems engineering and the change control board to enforce configuration management. Monthly progress reports will be required and will contain information adequate to evaluate the technical, schedule, and financial status of the instrumentation work package. At a minimum, these progress reports will contain:

• A written narrative, in a standard format determined by the technical representative, which provides the following:

o Technical status of the work overall, and in each engineering discipline, including progress accomplished since the last progress report.



o Problems encountered and the solutions the contractor is pursuing. o Any changes in key personnel.

• Revised WBS; • The following earned value metrics: Planned Value (PV) which is the budgeted cost of the

scheduled work, Earned Value (EV) which is the budgeted cost of the performed work, Actual Cost (AC);

• A table of financial data, in a standard format determined by the technical representative, including, for direct labor dollars, capital dollars, and total dollars, the following categories: planned value for the report month, actual value for the report month, actual minus planned value for the report month, cumulative to date planned value, cumulative to date actual value, and cumulative to date actual minus planned value. An estimated cost at completion (if not fixed price), total dollar value of invoices, and payments received to date will also be included;

• Action Items (open and closed) for ATST and the contractor, which will include a summary of actions closed during the reporting period and new actions opened; and

• MS Project schedule in electronic form to show progress with percent complete for each task and the overall project percent complete through the end of the report month.

Instrument Contracts: The instruments will be developed from detailed designs produced by the collaboration of partner organizations with the project during the design and development phase. Detailed specification documents will be created from these designs. The detailed specification documents will form the basis of contracts for the final design and fabrication of the instruments. Instrument source selections will be made by the project using competitive procurement unless there is an adequate justification for using a sole source. Once an instrument contract is in place, it will be monitored closely. Each instrument contract will have a project staff member who will act as the technical representative and who is solely responsible for monitoring the vendor's or partner’s performance. This person will communicate with the contractor frequently to make sure the work is on track, provide needed technical information, coordinate work being done by different contractors when necessary, and evaluate whether progress milestones are being met on schedule. Sub-awards: In special circumstances, a sub-award may be given when a particular partner organization has demonstrated unique capabilities, knowledge, and skills required for the design and construction of a specific instrument during the D&D phase. However, these sub-awards will be managed as contracted instruments are managed. Detailed specifications will be developed from the designs and a contract will be executed. A technical representative will be assigned and the contract will be monitored closely. The process outlined in Section 7.4 will be followed as for any other contract. Sub-awards are reviewed and must be approved by the PI and Co-PI team. International Contributions: In some cases an instrument may be all or part of an international partner’s contribution to the project. As with the other instrument program categories, detailed specifications will be documented and agreements will be formed based on these specifications to ensure that interface, acceptance and schedule issues are addressed and managed. A technical representative will be assigned to each contributed instrument to ensure that communication between the project and contributors is clear and successful and that interface requirements are understood and met. These contributed instruments must also be approved by the Co-PI team. 8 RISK MANAGEMENT Risk management is a proactive management approach to meeting project objectives and keeping risk at an acceptable level. There are three types of risk associated with a project such as ATST: 1) Technical



Risk consisting of the risk of not meeting performance requirements; 2) Programmatic Risk which consists of the risk of project failure due to cost or schedule overruns; and 3) Risk of Harm, in other words Personnel Safety. All three of these risk types can interact and must be carefully managed. The first step in managing these risks is careful project definition, followed by risk identification, assessment, proactive response planning, action, risk monitoring and control. 8.1 EARLY D&D RISK MANAGEMENT Project definition is the critical first step in risk management, and was performed early in the D&D phase of the project. The highest priority was given to the development of science requirements, which were then documented in the Science Requirements Document (SRD). Refinement of the science requirements and their flow down into design requirements occurred next (see Part III of this proposal, Design of the ATST, Section 1.1). By developing stable requirements, the project team ensures that design requirements, fabrication statements of work, and test and acceptance plans can be directly traced back to science requirements. After project definition, we proceeded with risk identification. Methods used to identify and mitigate risks early include:

- Identify key performance and cost drivers - Identify the critical path through the system-level schedule through construction

completion - Use existing proven designs, concepts and lessons from other systems - Strive for good fit at major subsystem level for industry - Use experienced experts for independent review of design progress

Inputs to risk identification included the WBS, project budget, schedule, and information collected from other large telescope projects by way of interviews of key personnel and attendance at relevant project workshops and reviews. After risk identification, we proceeded to assessment, proactive response planning, action, risk monitoring and control. Several critical tasks designed to identify and reduce technical and programmatic risks to the project have already successfully been completed. Others are well on their way to completion at this time. These are discussed in the sections below. Trades and early design evaluations completed: Early in the D&D phase, the team identified major performance and cost drivers, developed a system-level schedule through construction, and used critical- path and critical-chain analysis to prioritize the early studies, demonstrations, and trades required. Substantial progress has been made through the conceptual design phase. Design trade, design evaluation, and fabrication studies were performed in critical areas that drive performance cost and schedule. Table 8.1 outlines the major studies completed with references to the summary documents. Highlights include:

Adaptive Optics: Identified prior to the D&D phase, AO on solar telescopes is a relatively new technology that is required for successful implementation of the ATST. A major design goal was to develop AO technology that is easily scalable to the higher depth of field (needed for the ATST. Under separate award in collaboration with the New Jersey Institute of Technology, the Air Force Research Laboratory and Kiepenheuer-Institut für Sonnenphysik, the system developed for the Dunn Solar Telescope at Sacramento Peak is capable of providing diffraction-limited observations during median seeing conditions (r0 at 500 nm = 9 cm) and has already produced excellent results at visible wavelengths. This success achieved by our AO team, which has years



of experience in developing, commissioning and operating solar adaptive optics systems, results in confidence that the ATST AO system can be constructed and successfully commissioned. Telescope Mount: An example of a very early trade was in the area of mount configuration. Our early choice of the Alt/Az makes use of the latest typical large telescope designs, thus providing a very low-risk approach. We also gained the ability to spend more of our efforts on areas that were not as clear for a large solar telescope such as the choice of an off-axis design and ventilated enclosure. Off-axis Design: Early in the ATST concept development, analysis and discussion at community design workshops resulted in another early choice in favor of an off-axis optical layout that is capable of superior performance. Primary-mirror cost and manufacturability concerns led to five successful industry studies (Table 8.3) to develop approaches for manufacturing, testing, and quantifying the cost and schedule. With the cost and schedule bounded and folded into the project schedule with adequate contingency, risk areas such as heat-stop thermal performance concerns were reduced. This was due to the fact that the off-axis design allows much more flexibility to implement the cooling infrastructure given the better access to prime focus when compared to an on-axis case.

Enclosure Concept: Given the early trades of mount and optics configuration, we were able to concentrate on enclosure design, judged as the most critical conceptual trade study. After extensive study and design efforts, two competing solutions emerged. One, a hybrid, co-rotating, vented enclosure and the other an open telescope with a retractable enclosure. Both concepts were developed in parallel in enough detail to allow performance modeling. The enclosure trade study balanced the two highest priority risk areas: 1) telescope performance and protection, and 2) cost and technical risk. As a result of analysis of the trade study data, and in light of the advice offered by the various reviews and workshops, the ATST project adopted the hybrid, co-rotating enclosure as the best able to meet the science requirements with minimum cost and risk.



Table 8.1: Major early trades and studies completed in the D&D phase. Area Risk Result Reference

Mount Configuration Trade

Cost due to size of facility

Alt-Az selected - Smaller telescope and enclosure - Very low risk

RPT-0009, TN-0003, TN-0004, TN-0006, TN-0007, TN-0008, TN-0010, TN-0012, TN-0011, TN-0014

On- vs. Off-Axis Trade Performance, Cost, Schedule

Off-axis selected - Fabrication study required - See below

RPT-0007

Enclosure Trade Performance Hybrid ventilated dome chosen - Most flexible configuration - Thermal control underway

RPT-0013, Enclosure Trade Study Workshop presentations, available online

AO System Concept Performance High-order AO demonstration on Dunn Solar Telescope successful

RPT-0010

Scattered Light Studies

Performance Pinned realistic mirror specifications, baffling concept, dome effects, and cleaning needs

TN-0013, “Further Stray-Light Reduction Design Considerations for ATST” (UCSD); “ATST Stray and Scattered Light Analysis” (Photon Engineering)

Site Construction Feasibility

Cost, Schedule Can build at all sites with varying degree of cost and schedule risk - Input from M3 Engineering

Feasibility reports for each site, available online by request

Mirror Blank Material Cost Multiple vendor estimates - Budget is consistent with all

Vendor Proprietary

Mirror Fabrication Performance, Cost and Schedule

Four funded studies plus one at no cost - Can be made and tested - Schedule consistent with all - Budget consistent with 4/5

Vendor Proprietary

Telescope Mount Cost Multiple vendor design evaluation complete - Budget consistent with all

Vendor Proprietary

Enclosure Performance, Cost

Multiple vendor design evaluation complete - Budget consistent with all - Thermal control aspects requiring work

Vendor Proprietary

Primary & Secondary Mirror Assemblies

Performance, Cost

Multiple vendor design evaluation complete - Budget consistent with all - More thermal & lateral support work

Vendor Proprietary

Table 8.2. Design concepts adopted from other successful projects Subsystem Project Hydrostatic Mount Bearings Keck and Gemini Drive System Design Gemini Mount Base Design Gemini Cable Wraps Gemini Solar Adaptive Optics Dunn Solar Telescope M1 Assembly SOAR M2 Assembly SOAR Software Communications Model SOLIS and ALMA Software Device Model SOLIS Software Observing Tool ESO Telescope Pointing Kernel Gemini, SOAR

Proven Designs: The use of proven design concepts as used on other projects is a solid method to reduce risk on new projects. Given we are building a solar telescope, not everything can be copied from recent nighttime telescope examples, but major areas of need are similar. Table 8.2 gives examples of concepts taken from existing systems that are proven to work well.



Industry Fit: Early involvement of qualified vendors who have extensive experience in large telescopes continues to help focus our efforts, provide realistic solutions early, and develop understanding and buy-in from several key potential manufacturing bidders. Table 8.3 gives examples of vendors and their areas of expertise that we have involved in this process to date.

Design Reviews: To complement the impressive solar experience contained within our partner community and the ASWG, our design reviews have included the ASWG and an engineering design review committee consisting largely of engineering expertise from some of the best large telescopes in the world, such as VLT, Gemini, Magellan, VISTA, and WIYN. Representatives previously involved with large solar telescope design studies, including LEST and CLEAR, are also included. The Conceptual Design Review Committee and ASWG reports, along with our responses, can be found at the ATST web site (http://atst.nso.edu/meetings/codr/). 8.2 CONTINUING RISK MANAGEMENT Through early D&D efforts, many areas once considered high risk have been addressed, and more moderate areas of concern are the key drivers to near-term priorities. The technical section of this proposal gives details of our design to date and includes discussion of risk mitigation in detail. Here we summarize the major areas that remain for risk mitigation, which is primarily a cost and schedule risk at this point. Our contingency held in the project plan at just under 20% is adequate to cover the remaining moderate to low risk areas of current concern for risk mitigation, which is primarily a cost and schedule risk at this point. Examples of ongoing studies and trades are listed in Table 8.4. Because risk management is a continuous process, risk management plans are reviewed and updated as the project progresses. We will develop a “risk register” that is maintained and constantly reviewed by the team. This document will consist of a prioritized list of risks that includes not only technical risk, but programmatic and safety risks. The risk register will assign a responsible person, summarize actions to mitigate, and log significant changes or results of mitigation efforts. It will be the subject of internal review every quarter and a part of all external management and progress reviews. It will be maintained by a designated safety officer, for adherence to health and safety requirements, and the systems engineer, for technical and programmatic risks.

Table 8.3. Early Vendor Involvement Vendor Expertise AMEC / Coast Steel, Port Coquitlam, BC Telescope Enclosure M3 Engineering, Tucson AZ Telescope Enclosure and Site Development Vertex RSI, Richardson, TX Telescope Mount Assembly and Enclosure Telescope Technologies Limited, Liverpool, UK Telescope Mount Assembly EOS Technologies, Tucson, AZ Telescope Mount Assembly, Optics Goodrich Optical and Space Systems, Danbury, CT Mirror Fabrication Brashear LP, Pittsburgh, PA Mirror Fabrication SAGEM / REOSC, Saint-Pierre Du Perray, France Mirror Fabrication Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Oxfordshire, UK Pointing Kernel Observatory Sciences, Cambridge, UK Telescope Control Software



Acquisition and Contract Management: It is understood that, in large telescope projects, late delivery and/or cost overrun by a vendor can seriously impact the project cost and schedule. This is most clearly understood by consideration of the schedule for delivery of the large primary mirror blank and its subsequent polishing which forms the basis for the project’s critical path. To mitigate this type of risk, a strong and rigorous approach to vendor selection, contracting and contract monitoring has been developed (Section 7). This approach is the result of input from seasoned professionals with extensive experience with large telescope project contract management. Still, the best that can be done up front is to begin any activity that may remotely affect the critical path as soon as possible. We not only reserve financial contingency that may be used to solve scheduling problems, but we also manage and protect schedule contingency wherever possible. There may be cases where we consider changes in functional scope to protect the highest priority scientific goals. Changes here can only occur with review by the Project Scientist with input from the ATST Science Working Group and the approval of the Director. Project and Collaborator Integration: Our project management approach will rely on clearly defined work packages, which include detailed specifications and interface requirements, with aggressive but achievable schedules and agreed-upon deliverables. Participating organizations will be held accountable for their contracted work packages and the project will have the authority to curtail or terminate participation of groups that do not produce results. Funding and Budget: The project schedule could be delayed due to delays at a funding agency and/or in partner funding, and therefore the project would not meet schedule goals. A funding delay of this kind results in increasing the overall project cost and, if the delay is severe enough, can lead to loss of project team personnel to other projects. This is an issue during the transition from D&D to construction if funding is delayed. Maintaining close and clear communication between the project and funding agencies is critical to mitigating these risks.

Table 8.4. Major trades, design studies and issues in the process of being resolved. All are considered low to moderate risk, with work being prioritized to further reduce this risk by construction start in 2006.

Area Risk Mitigating Action Status M1 Schedule risk

• Critical-path item Submitted proposal for purchase of long- lead item

Rejected by NSF, seeking other avenues

Primary Optics Cleaning

Fast dust accumulation will limit time available for best coronal viewing

Designing in-situ cleaning that includes washing capability • Incorporating filters in active

ventilation system

Designing filter system and washing system built into mirror covers

AO DM thermal performance • Impacts to system optics

Prototyping Pending

Instruments Instrument feasibility, cost and schedule

Design studies at experienced partner institutes • Visible Spectro-polarimeter at HAO • Near-IR Spectro-polarimeter at UofH • Visible Tunable Filter at NASA/NSO • IR tunable Filter at NJIT • Visible imager/filter at Lockheed

Instrument preliminary designs to be completed by end of D&D phase

Enclosure Thermal performance Vendor thermal and CFD analyses to finalize design details and range of options

Vendor and project studies in support of PDR

Site Environmental permitting process

Early involvement by appropriate agencies and consultants; public out -reach, backup site

Working in conjunction with site selection process – end of ‘04

Lab Environment

Thermal interface between cold telescope area and warm lab environment will degrade performance

Lab tests of this interface are being planned in a test tower arrangement during 2004 • To determine detailed interface

approach

Planning



Another risk associated with funding is the development of an unforeseen construction problem or overrun that requires additional funding. Trades on use of contingency, functional and performance trades will occur to resolve any issue. If an issue cannot be resolved in this manner, requests for guidance or additional funds from the funding agencies will be used as a last resort. The funding agencies will be kept apprised and will be invited to participate in any activities that may lead to this result. Schedule: Critical-path analysis is used to identify schedule risks as plans are developed and work progress and schedules are tracked. The critical path is defined as the longest path in the schedule network. The path is critical because the associated tasks determine the total completion time of the project. Moreover, at least one of the associated task’s duration times must decrease in order to decrease the total completion time. Conversely, if a critical task’s duration time increases the total completion time increases by the same amount.

The ATST primary mirror (M1) blank acquisition, generation, and polishing, testing and delivery drive the project’s schedule and form the basis for the critical path. Figure 8.1 summarizes the time phasing of the WBS elements that form the critical path. The completion and delivery of the M1 assembly forms a critical milestone in the telescope integration effort at the site. Telescope commissioning with adaptive optics and an imager takes place once the M1 assembly has been integrated with the telescope assembly,

Figure 8.1. ATST Critical-Path Schedule. The primary mirror is clearly the current schedule driver. Major items considered near the critical path that are not shown include the site work that can begin with site selection and permitting process during the D&D phase, enclosure, primary mirror assembly, and telescope structure. Slack for most other items ranges from 6 months to over one year.



along with the M2 and feed optics. At that point, completion and delivery of science instruments for commissioning with the telescope assembly begins to drive the critical path. Commissioning of the science instruments leads to initial operations, and finally full ATST operations. Along with the critical path, we also monitor multiple tracks in the schedule to identify associated paths that risk pushing their way onto the critical path if task duration times on those paths increase. This is sometimes referred to as critical chain analysis. Examples of associated paths that we are already monitoring through critical-chain analysis include the site selection, permitting and preparation tasks, the enclosure fabrication, delivery and integration, as well as the science instruments fabrication and delivery tracks. The slack ranges from a few to twelve months for these examples. Other items have either larger slack or the time estimated to perform is more certain. Employing critical-path and critical-chain analysis allows us in-depth understanding of the interactions between the various tracks in the schedule. This understanding of the critical and near-critical items allows us to manage schedule issues as they arise. Schedule contingency and consistent tracking are critical to advanced warning of problem areas. Earned Value Analysis gives an estimate or indication of budget and schedule problems. A detailed understanding of the interaction of the various critical and near-critical items is required to actively manage schedule issues as they arise. Making decisions early protects project slack. Follow through by beginning each item early is also required to manage schedule issues effectively. Cost: The project team is following a design-to-life-cycle cost philosophy. As designs are developed, value-engineering principles are employed to ensure that costs are driven only by the science requirements, not by mere goals. The cost of each subsystem is estimated, and where areas of high cost are identified, targeted technology development will be initiated to mitigate the cost risk. Accurate cost estimates for both the construction and operations phases of the facility are essential, and ATST has been steadily refining these estimates as the design work progresses. These estimates have been compared with recent large telescope projects as well as design analysis and estimates performed by independent vendors. This comparison allows for continuous monitoring and verification of the overall project costs. These costs include item-by-item estimates of uncertainty to determine an appropriate level of financial contingency. We currently have a contingency that is just under 20% of our total base costs. We expect that the relative fraction of contingency costs will come down as we complete the D&D phase. During the preliminary and detailed design phases, realistic cost goals will be set for each subsystem. In order to be most effective, cost goals will be allocated not only to groups but also to specific individuals, and a system of accountability, reporting and review will be established. Just as tradeoffs between subsystems are required in the error budget, so too will there be a need for frequent tradeoffs in the cost of subsystems. Design studies will indicate which cost targets are hardest to achieve, within a fixed overall cost budget. Interfaces and Integration: A strong systems engineering team has been formed. One of the most critical functions of systems engineering during the construction phase is configuration control. The ATST configuration control approach is based on careful definition of project requirements, identification and definition of interfaces and control of interfaces using ICDs. The philosophy of our systems and WBS breakdown is to strive for a good fit of subsystem requirements and scope to industry or partner capability that result in a testable unit. Following this path lowers the relative risk of performance, budget, and schedule surprises that would otherwise have to be addressed at a later date.



During construction, interface control between various vendors and the project team will be handled through the development of detailed specification documents that will form the basis for the fabrication contracts. Acceptance test plans will be developed to ensure that interface requirements have been met. This approach will also apply to instruments. The interfaces between the various telescope systems and instruments will be carefully documented and controlled. Location and Site: The most difficult technical site factor to predict, and therefore the source of the greatest risk, is the potential for controversial environmental issues. This is especially true where public hearings are required as part of the process. Some of these have been described in Section 7 of the Technical Section of this proposal. This risk has already been somewhat mitigated by early involvement of the appropriate agencies and consultants via regional public outreach efforts. We are working to further mitigate this risk by maintaining multiple potential sites into the environmental permitting process. The ATST site will be selected during 2004 in order to maintain the overall project schedule and to meet the milestone for initiating the required site Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). Contingency Management: Contingency is a key feature of risk management. It gives the program flexibility to solve unforeseen issues impacting the budget, schedule and performance. We reserve three types of contingency: financial, schedule, and functional contingency. This applies both to programmatic risk and performance risk. Wherever possible, contingency is based on the experience gained by others who have built similar large telescope facilities (e.g., Gemini, SOAR, Magellan, and WIYN). Contingency funds are carefully tracked as the project progresses and are only used after a high-level review of the need. The Project Manager controls the contingency funds. No part of the internal project is allowed to “own contingency.” Upon any contract or sub-award, we will review the parties’ schedule, performance and financial margins to assess the level of risk with each effort. The project will maintain contingency centrally outside of any built-in contract contingency as appropriate. Contingency funds are used as a safety valve in case of genuine unforeseen circumstances, are an appropriate means to deal with project uncertainties and risks, and are a key to risk mitigation. It is also important to develop schedule or time contingency. We have assumed the earliest possible dates for most non-critical path items to conserve as much schedule contingency as possible at this point. The project team is following a design-to-life-cycle cost philosophy. As designs are developed, we will refine costs for the construction and operations phases of the facility. These estimates are compared with recent large telescope projects as well as design analysis and estimates performed by independent vendors. This comparison allows for continuous monitoring and verification of the overall project costs. These costs include item-by-item estimates of uncertainty to determine an appropriate level of financial contingency. We currently have a contingency that is just under 20% of our total base costs, which is $25.5 million USD. We expect that the relative fraction of contingency costs will come down as we complete the D&D phase, but require this level to cover the unknown results of the preliminary and final design efforts that are currently underway. Personnel Safety: The ATST team will consult with partners and vendors when considering environmental, safety and health issues. As the scope of construction work is defined and prioritized, and resources are considered, the hazards associated with the work are identified, analyzed, and categorized. This is done in coordination with relevant partners and vendors. Applicable standards, requirements and controls to prevent or mitigate the hazards are being identified and the plans and controls will be implemented. Opportunities for improving the definition and planning of the work and controls are identified and implemented.



The heavy construction work at the site will need emphasis that is outside the normal level of safety concern at an established observatory. AURA has experience from recent projects, such as the Gemini Observatory, to use as a starting point to help develop our detailed construction safety plan. The safety plan will include features such as a dedicated construction safety officer, specialized training for staff, flow down of project and government standards to contractors, safety meeting and reporting requirements, and independent mechanisms to report and correct any issues at the highest level. 9 REPORTS The project office will prepare reports as discussed in the following sections. The quarterly report will be sent to the NSF program officer. The others will be made available on the ATST web site with protection of any proprietary information and will be made available to the NSF program officer upon request. 9.1 MONTHLY TECHNICAL ACTIVITY REPORTS The project manager, from project team input, will prepare a monthly report. This report will cover the monthly activities of the project team and will relate them to schedules and milestones for the construction phase. 9.2 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORTS NSO’s accounting system will provide the program manager and project administration with monthly processed reports that describe:

• Program costs itemized by tasks and subtasks, by performing organization and by element cost. • Direct labor hours and dollars itemized by task, by performing organization and by labor code. • Commitments of funds itemized by tasks, subtasks and outstanding commitments.

9.3 QUARTERLY REPORTS The project office will produce a quarterly report that provides a summary of project status, budget, subcontracts and technical problems, as measured against project schedules. The quarterly report will include the following:

• Summary of work accomplished including major milestones achieved. • Comparison of actual cost and schedule to planned cost and schedule. • Earned Value analysis to predict and track total cost and schedule variance for project

completion. • Review of current or anticipated problem areas and corrective actions. • Management information such as changes in key personnel, subcontracts and subcontractor

performance, and any other information about which the NSF program officer should be aware. 9.4 TECHNICAL REPORTS A series of reports, prepared by the project team, will provide a record of the technical work involved in the construction of the telescope. These reports will document analysis, studies and simulations and the results of experiments with prototypes and subassemblies. The technical reports will be assigned document numbers, catalogued, and made available to others working in the field of telescope design. 9.5 MAJOR REVIEW REPORTS Reports will be prepared within one month of each major review. These reports will summarize the conclusions and recommendations made during the review and include the project’s response to each item.



9.6 MAJOR CONTRACT REPORTS The project office will prepare reports as major contract milestones are completed. These contract reports will summarize the statement of work, including schedule and cost compared to actual performance, and will indicate any significant changes in status. Measurable milestone completion and associated payments will be reflected in the ATST Earned Value Analysis. Periodic Status Reporting will also be required. 9.7 ACCEPTANCE TEST REPORTS A series of reports, prepared by the project team, will provide a record of the acceptance testing. These reports document the methods of tests and analyses performed and their results and related conclusions. 10 SITE SELECTION AND PREPARATION PROCESS Six promising sites for ATST were selected for site testing in 2001. The six sites have clearly separated into two groups as a result of this site testing. The initial results give confidence that any one of the three remaining sites would be acceptable for ATST. As a result, the ASWG has unanimously recommended that three sites continue for further evaluation, Big Bear Lake, Haleakala, and La Palma and will recommend a final ranking for down selection during 2004. The site for the ATST will be selected in 2004 in order to maintain the overall project schedule. Required site Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) will be started immediately following in 2005. The site goals for ATST were derived from the science requirements. A Site Survey Working Group (SSWG) was formed and has completed the following charge:

• Established site test criteria and testing methods. • Verified validity of site testing procedures and data. • Developed a report on quality of sites with respect to site test criteria.

o Completed November 10, 2003 During the Design and Development phase, the six candidate sites were tested for seeing, sky brightness, dust, and general weather conditions. They were also studied for feasibility of construction and operation of a major observatory facility. All six sites met the minimum basic criteria for feasibility. The significant logistical and cost differences between the sites were identified and brought to the attention of the project management and the SSWG. The Science Working Group has recommended a down selection to three sites for a second phase of testing and verification of previous results. The PI and Co-PI’s will balance the recommendations with the feasibility reports, costs, and other risks to approve the final phase efforts and make the final selection in 2004. The project will discuss with and obtain approval from the NSF for the final ATST site selection. 11 OPERATIONS AND LIFE CYCLE COSTS The design and construction of the ATST is predicated on achieving very ambitious science goals. The ATST will have tremendous capabilities and will need a dedicated staff to fully realize its potential. During the final stages of construction, including telescope and first-instrument commissioning, support to begin initial operations at the ATST site will be required. Operational support needed during this period is part of this construction proposal and has been included in the proposed budget for activities directly associated with telescope and instrument commissioning. The first scientific use of the facility will mark a shift in priorities from telescope commissioning activities to early scientific observational priorities. The scientific observing costs will be part of early operations and the costs are not included in



this proposal, though an estimate is presented here. The management and science teams will work together for a smooth transition, starting with this first scientific use of the telescope. We envision a ramp-up of full operational support to begin during telescope integration and continue through final commissioning of the first major science instrument, with the organization structure needed for science operations in place at the end of telescope commissioning. This will provide the time needed to fully train personnel who will operate the ATST. The ramp-up to commissioning and preparations for full operations will be accompanied by a ramp down in temporary construction staff. We assume in our budget that operations funds will cover the initial scientific operations with an overlap of the final construction funds paying for the commissioning of each construction-phase instrument as they come on-line. A detailed plan will be developed during the early construction phase. Transferring staff involved in commissioning, as well as existing NSO staff to operations, and new hires will fill the positions needed for full operational support. Staff best suited for the requirements of operations will be recruited to fill other positions. 11.1 INITIAL OPERATIONS Initial scientific operations would commence upon completion of commissioning of the first major scientific instrument and mark the first community competitive access. Time will be allocated at a percentage that is to be determined for use of the facility with this instrument. It is anticipated that the majority of the telescope time would be used for commissioning of the remaining science instruments to be phased in individually. As each new instrument is commissioned, more time is made available for scientific operations until the full complement of construction phase instrumentation is complete. This would mark the beginning of full scientific operation. Operations funding that is not part of this proposal would cover the expense of initial scientific operations, and construction funding would cover the remaining construction phase instrument commissioning activities. Goals for Initial Operations:

• Initial precision astronomical measurements will be used to identify implementation or design deficiencies in the telescope system, instrumentation, or software and controls. These deficiencies may then be prioritized and addressed while the engineering team remains in place.

• These initial measurements will be used to characterize the affect of various atmospheric conditions on the system performance. This can lead to refinements in the calibration and control systems, extending on those accomplished with the telescope commissioning.

• This early experience will allow the development of a model for system operations that follows the desires and expectations of the scientific and technical staff.

• A professional team of scientists, engineers, programmers and technicians will be trained to become the ATST operations staff.

• Initial scientific users will be exposed to the ATST to provide informed advice on development priorities and to be trained as the initial cadre of users to whom other prospective users can go for assistance and guidance.

The system will be available to transition from telescope commissioning to Initial Operations in 2012. In order for initial science operations to use the facility effectively, it will be necessary to establish an operating observatory staff in 2010. This will include:

• An observatory management structure. • Telescope operators. • Support scientists, programmers and data analysts. • Maintenance engineers, programmers and technicians. • Maintenance support staff (kitchen, housekeeping, maintenance crafts, road maintenance, etc.). • A data handling system to store and provide data desired to the user community.

o This includes a basic interface to the Virtual Solar Observatory.



Maximizing ATST scientific output will require a combination of queue-based and PI-based observing. For many observations, quality of certain conditions (seeing, sky clarity, water vapor, solar activity levels) will be more important than others. By having several observing programs ready to observe in a queue, they can be implemented when conditions are optimum for their goals. However, because solar physics is also very much a laboratory science, where progress often comes from developing new instruments or using existing instruments in a novel fashion, PI programs that turn control of the telescope over to PI groups for some period are also planned. Observations, in which the ATST is used to collect data in support of community-wide campaigns in collaboration with space and other ground assets will also be scheduled and given high priority. Additionally, some fraction of time (~20%) will be reserved for engineering/maintenance and development of new facility-class instruments. A telescope allocations committee (TAC) with broad community representation will rank proposals and help determine whether they are allocated to the queue or PI modes. NSO will maintain a copy of all data collected with the ATST. Data collected by PIs, whether collected automatically from a queuebased observing sequence or from runs where they have control, will be proprietary for a period of 12 months. After that period, the data will be publicly available at the NSO Digital Library or via the Virtual Solar Observatory, which is currently under development. Data collected as part of communitywide campaigns will become public immediately. The ATST Data Handling System (DHS) included in this proposal provides a common data transfer and storage service for all ATST facility instruments. The DHS supports four areas of instrument data requirements: transfer, storage, quick-look display, and retrieval. Data handling begins with the high-speed transfer of large data sets from one or more instruments. The data are organized and stored according to observation type and originating instrument, then integrated with observatory data such as experiment, investigator, and telescope status. Users requiring a real-time display of the data can request a quick-look display. The data set created by an experiment can be stored to permanent, removable media and the Virtual Solar Observatory. As the need arises for more sophisticated data handling, the DHS is extensible to add features such as in-line data reduction, pipeline processing, extended archiving and additions to the VSO. When this work is defined, separate proposals or a change request will be submitted as required to provide these services, which can easily be integrated into the baseline DHS design prior to operations, or as an ongoing operational upgrade. Estimates indicate that an operations staff of roughly 20 people will be needed for telescope commissioning. This would be slowly ramped up over the final year of commissioning to the full operations staffing level, currently estimated at approximately 50-55 personnel (Appendix 2). The transition plan from initial to full operations will be refined during the early years of the construction project. 11.2 FULL SCIENCE OPERATIONS Goals and Background: While this ATST construction proposal does not specifically request funding for the operation of ATST, it is appropriate to indicate the approximate level of support that will be required once full science operations begin. Although international participation may change the way operations are funded, the operational needs described below are not anticipated to change. Because the NSO will operate ATST on behalf and in support of the solar community, the goal is to integrate the new facility with those already in operation such as the Global Oscillations Network Group (GONG) and the Solar Optical Long-term Investigation of the Sun (SOLIS). This will achieve a cost-effective operation



throughout the organization. Data from the ATST will be included in the NSO Digital Library and made part of the Virtual Solar Observatory currently being developed. The objective of operations planning is to provide the services for efficiently maximizing the scientific output of the telescope and instruments. In view of the large investment in the facility and instrumentation, together with the expected high demand for its use, we must plan to operate ATST at peak efficiency in a cost effective manner. This will require staff to support the following areas:

• Queue observing and support for visiting PI programs. • Carrying out PI observing programs that are not practical to be done by visiting observers. • Training visiting scientists to be effective users of the facility. • Establishing and maintaining a data archive open to the community as part of the VSO. • Providing for the development of new instrumentation along with upgrades of existing

instruments and computers so that the telescope remains at the forefront of technological capability.

• Performing preventive maintenance to maintain very high telescope availability for observing. • Responding quickly to failures. • Conducting an education and public outreach program.

Planning for operations of ATST begins with the consideration of existing facilities and capabilities. NSO already has a fully staffed and operating observatory upon whose resources ATST will draw. In Sunspot, NM and Tucson, AZ, the NSO maintains the resources for supporting the operations of NSO-wide activities in computing, instrumentation, detector development and administrative support. NSO currently has no operations at the three possible sites. For ATST to be located at those sites, NSO will need to provide new support or to purchase support services from existing observatories. Most likely, some combination of the two will be required. Organization: NSO and its Director will be responsible for the operation of ATST and its integration into existing programs. Support for the operations of ATST will be allocated by the NSO Director according to the annual program plan, which is submitted to the NSF for review and approval. To involve the community in the operation of ATST, we propose to establish an ATST Users Committee that would be concerned with the telescope, its instrumentation, and support infrastructure. We also propose that there be a single Telescope Allocations Committee (TAC) that would advise the NSO Director. The exact make-up of the TAC will be strongly influenced by the level of international participation in funding of the ATST. Staffing and Budget: Based on resources required to operate the current national facilities and the need to ensure maximum scientific exploitation, we have estimated the resources needed for ATST operations (Table 11.1). Support for a visitor and outreach center located near the ATST is also estimated. Assuming ATST is a remote operation, some of this staff will be located at NSO Headquarters. The primary categories of staff required include: Scientific Staff: A dedicated ATST scientific staff is required to optimize ATST scientific capabilities. Early on, scientists will participate in commissioning, testing and acceptance. After final commissioning, the staff will be ready to provide expertise in all areas of ATST science operations. Particular areas of needed expertise for science and engineering include conventional and multi-conjugate adaptive optics, active optics, polarimetry in the visible, near-IR and thermal IR using both spectrographs and filters, image restoration through techniques like phase diversity and speckle, and coronal observing techniques and analysis. Expertise in various areas where the ATST will provide break-through data, such as plasma-field interactions, magneto-convection, atmospheric heating and origins of solar activity will be required.



Because much of the ATST data will involve sophisticated processing and will be archived for public access, dedicated data scientists are required. Science staffing will come from members of the current NSO staff and from new ATST positions. The former will be an NSO contribution to the project while that latter will initially be funded by the project and then transitioned to the NSO after final commissioning. These positions will be ramped up as needed during the commissioning phase with a detailed plan in place before the start of commissioning. With ATST planned as a remote operation, these positions will be divided between the operating site and NSO Headquarters. The ratio will change as the support needs for the ATST change. Daytime Operations Staff: The ATST will require an observing staff to operate its complex array of telescope controls and instrumentation. They will need to ensure telescope performance at optimal levels (adaptive and active optics, wind control, dust control, thermal performance), implement queue observing, assist visiting scientists in obtaining their observations and perform routine maintenance that can be done during the day. The staff will need technical training in several areas including optics, electronics, computer control and data handling, thermal control systems, etc. In addition to the daytime operations, operators highly familiar with the telescope will need to be available at night to assist in scheduled maintenance and instrument rotation and implementation, and to perform other tasks such as supporting nighttime observing runs. Ramping up the operations staff will begin during commissioning to ensure adequate training, familiarization with telescope systems, and the ability to make preliminary observations needed for testing and acceptance. During this period, they are funded as part of the construction of the telescope. Technical Staff: During the D&D phase, the ATST project created a small team of engineers and technical personnel to develop the ATST concept as well as oversee detailed design and construction contracts for major components of the ATST. During construction and commissioning, we will begin to build the technical team needed for telescope integration, implementation of control systems, development, acceptance, and integration of instrumentation and support of overall ATST operations. At final commissioning, some from this team will transition to NSO operational positions. Other new hires to support ATST operations and further instrument development will be added as required. Facilities Support: In addition to the technical staff required for telescope operations, maintenance and instrumentation, personnel will be needed to support and maintain the ATST facilities. This includes the telescope structure and enclosure, support buildings, recoating facilities, and, depending on location, various aspects of the site. Comparisons with needs from current telescopes of similar complexity have been made to support this estimate. Administrative Support Staff: Administrative and business support staff will be needed for efficient site operations. These include a site manager responsible for the overall operation and safety of the site, clerical support, purchasing and local contracting, shipping and receiving, computer system maintenance and linkage to Headquarters and the outside world. Some of these positions will need to be filled during the construction and commissioning phase and are costed as part of the construction proposal. Others will need to be filled just before final commissioning to conduct full ATST operations. Outreach Staff: Although not part of this proposal, we anticipate having a visitor center located at or near the ATST site. Alternatively, depending on the site, we may share a visitor center with organizations already established. This will require a small operations staff. An outreach staff is needed to conduct the programs outlined in this proposal (to be submitted in a separate proposal) and future programs that take advantage of the exciting science that ATST will generate. Some of these positions will be at the ATST site and some at NSO Headquarters, again with the exact split being determined by that phase of the project.



Total Staff on Site: A preliminary estimate of the total number of positions that will be required is 57 (Appendix 2). We anticipate that 45-50 of these positions will be located at the ATST site and the remainder at NSO Headquarters. In addition, the ATST will receive support from the NSO Director’s office, and will share services with other NSO programs, such as the NSO Digital Library and Virtual Solar Observatory, SOLIS and GONG, and Headquarters instrument laboratory Annual Operating Budget: The cost of operating the ATST depends somewhat upon where it is located. Typically, operations require 5-10 % of the capital cost. For the ATST, this would be between $8M and $16M in FY 2004 dollars. A bottom-up estimate, based on our knowledge of current operations at the Dunn Solar Telescope and the McMath-Pierce Solar Telescope Facility, must be increased to account for the higher level of technological complexity to be used in ATST. Comparisons with new nighttime facilities that use similar technologies imply approximately $10M. This assumes a dedicated staff for ATST operations of approximately 57 people. In addition, we estimate a need for ongoing development of new instrumentation every few years at $2M per year. We anticipate incorporation of major telescope upgrades during the lifetime (e.g., adaptive primary and/or secondary, MCAO) and perhaps a few major maintenance items not covered in routine maintenance. Facilities upgrades, such as implementation of MCAO add another $1M to $2M to the operations phase, each year, for the first 5-10 years for a total of $13-14M per year in today’s dollars (see Table 11.1). The current NSO operations budget is $8.4M, which includes the science program, GONG operations, and SOLIS operations at a minimum level and operation of the existing telescopes. Given that about $4M of the current operation would shift from existing telescopes, an additional $9M to $10M will be needed to sustain ATST operations along with the remainder of the NSO programs, giving the need for an overall NSO budget of $17.4 to $18.4M in FY 2004 dollars, depending on the level of new instrument development.

Table 11.1. FY 2004 Estimated Annual Cost for ATST Operations ($K) Total Payroll 5,435 Non Payroll 4,516 Instrument & Facility Development (e.g, MCAO)

3,000- 4,000

Total 12,951 – 13,951 Life Cycle Costs: The ATST is being designed to provide forefront solar data for the next 30 to 40 years. Built in flexibility and careful attention to future upgrade options will ensure a robust growth path as new discoveries are made and other areas of science open up. Estimating a cost range of $13M to $14M for ongoing ATST operations including the ATST instrument and facilities upgrade programs, and a 30-year operations lifetime gives a total cost between $390M to $420M in 2004 dollars. These estimates will need to be inflated to actual years of expenditure.