DUSEL Beamline Working Group Meeting March 09, 2009 11:00 AM – Snake Pit (WH2NE) By Dean Hoffer - OPMO

DUSEL Beamline Working Group Meeting

March 09, 200911:00 AM – Snake Pit (WH2NE)

By

Dean Hoffer - OPMO

OPMO 09-Mar-09 DUSEL Beamline WGM

2

Outline

Reviews and preparing for them • DOE vs. Director’s Reviews• Review Preparations

– Determine Review Dates– Developing Agenda– Presentations– Document Preparations

• Conducting Review• Post Review Actions


3

DOE and Director’s Reviews

• DOE– Independent Project Reviews (IPRs)– External Independent Reviews (EIRs)– Status/Progress Reviews

• Director’s– Technical, Project Management, Cost, and

Schedule– Design Reviews


4

Independent Project Reviews (IPRs)

• Normally Conducted by SC-1.3 (Lehman Reviews)

• May be conducted prior to CD-1, 2, 3

• Normally 2 – 3 days long depending on size of project

• Look at Technical Scope, Project Management, Cost, and Schedule


5

External Independent Review (EIR)

– External Independent Reviews are performed by OECM with contractor reviewers

– A week long review– EIR conducted prior to Project Performance

Baseline (CD-2) for project $100M or greater– Additional EIR conducted prior to

Construction/ Execution Readiness (CD-3) for project for Major System Projects ($750M or greater)


6

Status/Progress Reviews

• These reviews are performed after receiving CD-3 and conducted through CD-4

• Generally performed every 6 or 12 months depending on size of project and health of the project

• Duration generally 1-2 days depending on size of project and health of the project

• Purpose is to assure project is acceptably progressing per plan


7

Director’s Technical, Project Management, Cost, and Schedule

• Requested by Associate or Deputy Director

• Purpose is to assure the project meets the requirements for CD-1, 2, and 3 and is prepared for the DOE IPRs/EIRs

• Normally 2 – 3 days long depending on size of project


8

Director’s Design Reviews

• Purpose is to determine if a product (drawings, analysis, or specifications) is correct and will perform its intended functions or meet requirements

• In past have taken credit for design reviews as part of the Technical, Project Management, Cost, and Schedule. Now it looks like there will need to be a separate reviews, especially for large projects

• Design Reviews are conducted by individuals external to the project and ahead of CD- 1, 2 and 3 IPRs


9

Review Preparations

• Determining Review date– When does the project need the review done

to meet the CD milestone?– When can the project be prepared and ready

to pass a review?– Director’s Reviews are usually scheduled 4-6

weeks before a scheduled DOE review.


10

Review Preparations

• Developing an agenda– Plenary Session

• What talks should be given?• Who should give the talks?• How long should they be?• How much detail should be in the plenary talk vs. in the breakout

session?– Breakout Sessions

• How many breakout sessions are needed?• Who should lead the breakout session?• What breakout presentations should be prepared and who will give

them?• What documents should be available in the breakout room?• Will video or audio conferencing be needed because project

members will not be able to physical attend the review?


11

Review Preparations

• Project Presentations– Consistent slide format

• Same PowerPoint template• Same type of information covered in each

presentation (i.e. scope, schedule, cost, risk, etc.)

– Dry Run• When to schedule to allow sufficient time to make

changes before posting?• Who should attend to give feedback to presenters?


12

Review Preparations

• Project Document Preparations– Develop Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)– Develop WBS Dictionary– Development fully Resource Loaded Schedule (RLS)

• Latest schedule changes have been incorporated?• Does the obligation profile fits within funding guidance?• Is the schedule mechanically sound (predecessor, successors,

durations, etc)?– Develop Basis of Estimate (BOEs)– Implement Risk Management – Develop MOUs and SOWs– Implement Earned Value Management System– Bottoms-up/Top-down estimate of direct and indirect costs in

then year dollars


13

Review Preparations

– Project’s Review Material made available to review team

• All materials to be posted on project’s review webpage (target is 2 weeks before review, but minimum of 1 week prior)

• Materials also made available on memory sticks for reviewers (materials to be organized and easily to find)

• Some limited number of paper copies of materials made available in the reviewers home base room and in breakout sessions (project to work with chair to determine what materials needed)


14

Conducting Review

• Review team consists of 8-22 people• Review conducted over 2 – 3 days• Charge directs scope of review with list of

charge questions• Review consists of plenary presentations, and

breakout sessions by discipline area• Closeout presentation and final report generated

to answer the charge• Findings, Comments and Recommendations are

generated


15

Post Review Actions

• Project to take Comments and Corrective Actions identified in final report and determine actions to be taken and track actions to closure

• Next Director’s review to confirm that the prior review’s Recommendations have been addressed


16

Questions?

Documents

DUSEL Beamline Working Group Meeting March 09, 2009 11:00 AM – Snake Pit (WH2NE) By Dean Hoffer - OPMO