Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 3 Charge Questions 1.At this stage of the project, is the project scope, if successfully completed, sufficient to achieve the project’s key performance parameters? 2.Is the bid solicitation package for Phase B scope consistent with the approved Project Execution Plan? Are bids or quotes already in hand? If so, are the base bids or quotes within the cost estimates, and consistent with the approved cost and schedule performance baseline? 3.Are cost, schedule, and scope contingency adequate to address the remaining risks? Are project risks being actively managed? 4.Are environment, safety and health requirements properly addressed? Are Integrated Safety Management principles being followed? 5.Has the Integrated Project Team responded appropriately to recommendations from prior reviews including those applicable to the proposed Phase B work?
Citation preview
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
1
Closeout Report on theDOE/SC CD-3b Review of the
Utilities Upgrade Project (UUP) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
August 11-12, 2015
Raymond WonCommittee Chair
Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energyhttp://www.science.doe.gov/opa/
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
2
SC Organization
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
3
Charge Questions
1. At this stage of the project, is the project scope, if successfully completed, sufficient to achieve the project’s key performance parameters?
2. Is the bid solicitation package for Phase B scope consistent with the approved Project Execution Plan? Are bids or quotes already in hand? If so, are the base bids or quotes within the cost estimates, and consistent with the approved cost and schedule performance baseline?
3. Are cost, schedule, and scope contingency adequate to address the remaining risks? Are project risks being actively managed?
4. Are environment, safety and health requirements properly addressed? Are Integrated Safety Management principles being followed?
5. Has the Integrated Project Team responded appropriately to recommendations from prior reviews including those applicable to the proposed Phase B work?
OFFICE OF
SCIENCEReview Committee Participants
4
Raymond Won, DOE/SC, ChairpersonObservers Stephanie Short, DOE/SC David Michlewicz, DOE/SC Steve Neus, DOE/FSO
Review Committee Subcommittee 1: Technical *Shane Wells, SLAC Michael Finder, ANL Subcommittee 2: ES&H *Betsy Dunn, ANL Neil Gerrish, PPPL Subcommittee 3: Cost and Schedule *Stephen Langish, PPPL Laurie Casarole, BNL Jesse Saldivar, DOE/SSO Subcommittee 4: Management *Gary Bloom, ORNL Teresa Danforth, TJNAF Carolyn Galayda, SLAC *Lead
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
5
2. Technical S. Wells, SLAC / Subcommittee 1
• Findings• Comments• Recommendations
1. At this stage of the project, is the project scope, if successfully completed, sufficient to achieve the project’s key performance parameters?
2. Is the bid solicitation package for Phase B scope consistent with the approved Project Execution Plan? Are bids or quotes already in hand? If so, are the base bids or quotes within the cost estimates, and consistent with the approved cost and schedule performance baseline?
5. Has the Integrated Project Team responded appropriately to recommendations from prior reviews including those applicable to the proposed Phase B work?
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
6
3. Environment, Safety and HealthB. Dunn, ANL / Subcommittee 2
4. Are environment, safety and health requirements properly addressed? Are Integrated Safety Management principles being followed?
5. Has the Integrated Project Team responded appropriately to recommendations from prior reviews including those applicable to the proposed Phase B work?
• Findings• Comments• Recommendations
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
7
4. Cost and ScheduleS. Langish, PPPL / Subcommittee 3
1. At this stage of the project, is the project scope, if successfully completed, sufficient to achieve the project’s key performance parameters?
2. Is the bid solicitation package for Phase B scope consistent with the approved Project Execution Plan? Are bids or quotes already in hand? If so, are the base bids or quotes within the cost estimates, and consistent with the approved cost and schedule performance baseline?
3. Are cost, schedule, and scope contingency adequate to address the remaining risks? Are project risks being actively managed?
5. Has the Integrated Project Team responded appropriately to recommendations from prior reviews including those applicable to the proposed Phase B work?
• Findings• Comments• Recommendations
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
8
4. Cost and ScheduleS. Langish, PPPL / Subcommittee 3
PROJECT STATUS
Project Type MIE / Line Item / Cooperative Agreement
CD-1 Planned: Actual:
CD-2 Planned: Actual:
CD-3 Planned: Actual:
CD-4 Planned: Actual:
TPC Percent Complete Planned: _____% Actual: _____%
TPC Cost to Date
TPC Committed to Date
TPC
TEC
Contingency Cost (w/Mgmt Reserve) $ _____% to go
Contingency Schedule on CD-4b ______months _____%
CPI Cumulative SPI Cumulative
OFFICE OF
SCIENCE
9
5. Management G. Bloom, ORNL / Subcommittee 4
1. At this stage of the project, is the project scope, if successfully completed, sufficient to achieve the project’s key performance parameters?
2. Is the bid solicitation package for Phase B scope consistent with the approved Project Execution Plan? Are bids or quotes already in hand? If so, are the base bids or quotes within the cost estimates, and consistent with the approved cost and schedule performance baseline?
5. Has the Integrated Project Team responded appropriately to recommendations from prior reviews including those applicable to the proposed Phase B work?
• Findings• Comments• Recommendations
