1. East Hall under construction - 1962
East Area Renovation Project Cost and Schedule review – Preliminary Conclusions
R. Steerenberg, C. Rembser, H. Wilkens, L. Serio,
L. Scibile, S. Prodon, J.P. Tock
Many thanks to S. Evrard

2. Many Thanks…
First of all many thanks to all speakers that provided an overview of the different parts of the project and the related cost and schedule aspects
Thanks to all the participants for their availability and fruitful discussions, which were very valuable for our discussions
Last but surely not least thank to the organizers of the review
We are convinced that preparing the review was already beneficial for the project
S.Evrard,
IEFC

3. In General
The project is still young and many work was done and progress was made.
The WBS at the higher levels is clear, but in some places the details are not yet clear, which will make monitoring difficult
They are known by the groups but should become clear to the project management
The review committee is positive on the fact that the project has taken 6-7% in the central budget to be able to balance the scope of the different WPs.
S.Evrard,
IEFC

4. In General
The highest priority is to get a frozen layout and apertures.
Magnets and power converters can be decided upon.
This is an iterative process that can take time.
March 2017 the technical specifications should be clear
For the aperture decision losses and activation should be considered
Prioritise all activities that are beyond the baseline such that a staging approach can be applied, with clear milestones for the decisions
Some risk analysis were made, but there is no cost attached to them. Complete the risk analysis for the baseline activities.
Since the first estimate additional items had to be added.
Are we sure that no more needs to be added ?
All groups were contacted for input.
S.Evrard,
IEFC

5. In General
B263 will become idle, is an other project in search of building surface than can then be saved (partly) on an other project
Part of B251 will also be available.
Clarify the missing resources issue
For some the financing is clear but the availability not yet
S.Evrard,
IEFC

6. Magnets
The baseline for the magnets (reuse present dipoles) is actually no option for EPC .
It does not fit their foreseen (standard) power converters
The option to rebuild the magnets and re-use the coils is also no real option
Also not good for the power converter side
Not desired by the magnets to reuse ‘old’ coils
The budget is 2.6 MCHF and the ‘performance’ option is now 3.25 MCHF
600 kCHF is presently missing and this is a high priority activity on the critical path
The project has to go for the extra cost and in a later stage see if this money can be recuperate on other lower priority parts (EPC, B251, ….)
S.Evrard,
IEFC

7. Civil Engineering
The B157 is fully covered financially, but the 400 kCHF overrun is due to the renovation of Building 251 (power converters)
The false floor (structure might be recuperate and this money could be saved)
The 251 envelope (not mandatory yet, especially as the power converter dissipation will be lower)
Somebody should study if with the present building they can maintain the present building and make this renovation a lower priority
The essential parts for B251 are costed in other budgets Demin, light,..)
Perhaps Make a separate work package for the 251 building.
include all related activities
This will give a clear picture of the total cost for B251 allow prioritisation
At least make a full analysis of the cost and get the details
For CE there is no contingency anymore in the planning until the FC of December 2017  Critical path
S.Evrard,
IEFC

8. Beam stoppers The scope is not clear yet
Functional spec of beam stoppers should be established
Input from RP and safety units required.
Cost higher than budget  to be detailed and clarified
S.Evrard,
IEFC

9. EN-EL
The DC cabling campaign in 2nd half of 2020 relies on the extra 2 FTE.y
If the 2 FTE.y are not available then the activity should move outside the LS2
EN-EL resources are fully committed in LS2, hence all resources allocated
The resources should be ensured as this is a major risk for delay of the project
EN-EA has taken a part of the work, but the budget was not reduced
Clarify the change of scope and share the budget accordingly
S.Evrard,
IEFC

10. CV
Additional required resource identified, but if these do not materialise then the risk of schedule delay is big
Make risk analysis
Details still to be clarified hence cost to be refined.
Input needed form different groups/WPs
S.Evrard,
IEFC

11. Scheduling
The review committee is pleased to see that the project planning is made in collaboration with EN/ACE, taking into account the big picture of LS2.
The running of CLOUD under the present schedule is possible. For the last run the schedule was accommodated. The project should consider the option to use the period foreseen to complete the project in case delays were accumulated.
Machine related LS2 activities have priority above the East Area project. This increases the risk on the schedule and possibly cost
The reviewers recommend to add:
Milestones to the panning
Show the critical path activities
Show dependencies
S.Evrard,
IEFC

12. Cost over run
Not yet a clear picture to be able to prioritise the WBS and associate risks
The asbestos removal has a important cost overrun
Safety systems
S.Evrard,
IEFC

13. Final conclusions to come…...
Many thanks to all
Final conclusions to come…...
S.Evrard,
IEFC

14. Thanks for your contribution!