1. 1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES NSLS-II Project Baseline Jim Yeck NSLS-II Deputy Project Director NSLS-II PAC Meeting November 20, 2007

2. 2 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Outline NSLS-II Performance Baseline Scope Cost Baseline and Contingency Estimates Schedule Baseline and Float Estimates Funding vs. Obligation Profiles Discussion Issues Preparation for Construction Management Funding Management Staffing Ramp-up Requirements Documentation

3. 3 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Baseline Summary Design, Construct, Commission a highly optimized synchrotron facility capable of meeting the mission need through delivery of: - extremely high brightness and flux - exceptional beam stability - suite of advanced instruments, optics, and detectors that capitalize on these special capabilities Total Project Cost $912M CD-4, Project Completion, June 2015

4. 4 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Project Scope Accelerator Systems Storage Ring (~ ½ mile in circumference) Linac and Booster Injection System Conventional Facilities Improvements to Land Ring Building with Operations Center and service buildings (~ 341k gsf) Laboratory/Office Buildings for beamline staff and users (~71k gsf) Utilities including upgrades to the BNL Chilled Water Plant (2 chillers) Experimental Facilities Initial suite of 6 insertion device beamlines and instruments Capable of hosting at least 58 beamlines

5. Design Documentation Global Reference Documents Global Requirements Document and Global Parameters List Work Breakdown Structure and Dictionary Requirements, Specifications, and Interface Documents Description of the technical attributes and design basis for major NSLS-II systems and facilities. Includes system-level technical interface requirements and design authority definitions. Still a work-in-progress. Preliminary Design Report (PDR) Updates Conceptual Design Report (CDR) to current scope and design Comprehensive draft complete with the final report planned for December Design Drawings Conventional Facilities Preliminary Design Drawing Packages Accelerator Preliminary Design Drawings and Advanced Conceptual Design Drawings for the six project beamlines 5

6. Baseline Assumptions Base estimates developed in FY07$ and do not include contingency, escalation, or burdens Construction Rate of 10.5% Escalation rates of 5.0% per year on construction contracts and 3.2% per year on all other activities Basis of Estimate Estimates prepared by experienced accelerator and light source staff Majority of the estimate supported by vendor quotes and catalog prices Project staff begin transitioning into operations in 2012 after beneficial occupancy of experimental floor space 6

7. 7 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES NSLS-II Cost Baseline ($M) 1.1 Project Management53 1.3 Accelerator Systems242 1.5 Conventional Facilities241 1.4 Experimental Facilities73 Total Construction Cost Baseline609 Contingency (~30% of Cost Baseline)183 Total Estimated Costs (TEC)792 1.2 R&D and Conceptual Design60 1.6 Pre-Operations (includes 20% contingency)60 Other Project Costs (OPC) 120 Total Project Costs (TPC)$ 912

8. 8 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES DOE – Science Experience

9. 9 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Funding Profile with Operations TPC = $912M TEC = $792M (including 30% contingency) Note: Operations funding is not part of the TPC.

10. 10 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES 12 Months Total Schedule Contingency Baseline Schedule

11. Schedule Development Cost Estimate Emphasis at CD-1 with Schedule at Planning Level Increased Emphasis on Schedule in Preparation for CD-2 Created technically limited resource-loaded schedule with 2013 early finish. Relaxed early completion date to April 2014 (CD-1 preliminary date) and delayed work to accommodate funding constraints. Incorporated latest risk information (contingency) prior to tuning the schedule in an attempt to bring obligations in line with funding, moved completion date two months to June 2014. Delayed Conventional Facilities (CF) given the large demand on funding in early years. Delays in CF considered unacceptable given the cost and schedule risk; elected to pull CF forward and delay other activities, e.g., the accelerator injection system, to reduce risk. Assessment The resource-loaded schedule is of high quality with adequate activities and interdependencies to allow the management team to proactively manage schedule within the available resources. The project will ensure that the CF schedule has priority and will manage activities in the shadow of the CF schedule to ensure they do not become critical to the overall schedule. 11

12. Summary Schedule 12 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

13. 13 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Schedule Float & Critical Path CD-4, Start of Operations, June 2015 12 months after the early project completion date Early Project Completion, June 2014 Conventional facilities design and construction is recognized as the most critical activity until the BOD of the storage ring tunnel in February 2012. There is six months of float on the CF schedule. Some accelerator subsystems will become critical if there are delays in CF. Critical Path(s) Analysis Conventional facilities  CF/Booster Ring  Storage Ring Commissioning –Conventional facilities design and procurement until April 2009 –Booster ring and CF until February 2012 and Booster installation and commissioning until September 2013 –Storage ring commissioning is the critical path from October 2013 until project completion

14. 14 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Funding vs. Obligations Funding Profile is less than optimum in FY2009 and FY2010 Plan to carry-over funding from FY2008 and FY2009 into FY2010 Construction contracts placed in mid FY2009 Contingency profile adjusted based on management evaluation Labor during ramp-up unlikely to exceed cost plan, cost risk at later stages Manage to baseline budget in FY2008 Funding must enable award of construction contracts on schedule, 20% contingency Funding vs. Obligation Plan ($K)

15. 15 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES NSLS-II FTEs by Year Today

16. 16 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Conclusion Technical Baseline NSLS-II preliminary design provides a sound basis for the start of final design. Technical risk factors are manageable and are being addressed by a modest R&D program and mitigation plans. The approach to conventional facilities is realistic and responsive to recent experience. Cost Baseline The cost baseline is sound and contingency is adequate. Schedule Baseline The resource-loaded schedule is very well developed and the the critical path(s) are clearly understood. The schedule baseline is reconciled with the anticipated funding plans. Project Management Systems The management tools are commensurate with the size and complexity of NSLS-II.

17. 17 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Discussion Issues Preparation for Construction Management –Are we going to be ready for the issues and challenges? –What can we do to be better prepared? Funding Management –Are the funding management plans realistic? –Are there other ways to more fully exploit the funding profile? Staffing Ramp-up –Are the staffing plans realistic and what more can be done to increase our chances of adhering to the plan? –What options can we pursue to hold schedule if we fall short of hiring plans? Requirements Documentation –Is the current plan workable?