1. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 1 LCLS Ultrafast Science Instruments (LUSI) Felix B. Fernandez – Project Controls August, 2008 Project Management Control System

2. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 2 PMCS Topics: System Overview PMCS Development Process PMCS Current Status Summary and Questions

3. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 3 PMCS Overview The LUSI Project Management Control System: Complies with DOE Order 413.3A Complies with the 32 criteria from ANSI/EIA-748-A Complies with the LUSI Project Execution Plan Modeled after the LCLS Project PMCS

4. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 4 PMCS Overview

5. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 5 PMCS Overview SLAC/LCLS PMCS Procedures Schedule Reports Schedule Baseline SLAC Accounting System Analysis Tool “Hammer” Cost Reports

6. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 6 PMCS Overview LUSI PMCS is defined and controlled by LCLS Procedures: Earned Value Management System Description – LCLS 1.1-015 CA and WP Planning Procedure – LCLS 1.1-018 Change Control Procedure – LCLS 1.1-019 Project Schedule Procedure – LCLS 1.1-020 Cost Estimating Procedure – LCLS 1.1-021 Monthly Status and Reporting Procedure – LCLS 1.1-022 Subcontract Management Procedure – LCLS 1.1-023

7. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 7 PMCS Overview Using Primavera (P3) as the Scheduling tool Have established a Project group with supporting project files maintained independently: LUSI Project Group Project Management (SLAC) XPP Instrument (SLAC) CXI Instrument (SLAC) XCS Instrument (SLAC) Diagnostics and Common Optics (SLAC) Controls and Data Acquisition (SLAC) XPP and XCS Detector Systems (BNL)

8. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 8 PMCS Overview Using Cobra as the Budgeting tool Have created a Cobra project file for MIE funded effort. The project also uses a web based tool called the “PMCS Hammer” that integrates Primavera, Cobra and Accounting data. The “PMCS Hammer” is updated monthly following the month end cycle and provides team members a way of accessing/analyzing their data and writing their VARs.

9. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 9 PMCS Overview

10. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 10 PMCS Overview

11. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 11 PMCS Development Process

12. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 12 PMCS Development Process Define Schedule and Budget assumptions Finalize the WBS, WBS Dictionary Finalize a Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM) Finalize the Milestone Hierarchy and Dictionary Finalize the set of SLAC/BNL Resources and Rates Finalize the resource loaded Integrated Master Schedule Use the Schedule baseline to create a Budget baseline Establish a prelim Performance Measurement Baseline

13. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 13 PMCS Development Process Schedule Assumptions Within the funding limitations, get to an Early Science capability with the Instruments as early as possible. Establish priority order of Instruments as XPP, CXI and XCS. Establish multiple CD-4 milestones, one for each Instrument. Components not required for Early Science operations can be installed for final CD-4 milestone. Establish multiple CD-3 milestones to allow procurement of components for each Instrument as early as possible. Establish a complete performance measurement baseline for all project equipment and conduct one CD-2. Assume a Long Lead Authorization approval for Key critical components following CD-2 and prior to CD-3.

14. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 14 PMCS Development Process Budget Assumptions Plan for an MIE funding profile of: Plan for a Continuing Resolution for the first half of FY2009 (approx. $500k/month). The balance of FY2009 funding will be available in the third quarter($12M). Use Resources and Rates (Direct/Indirect) provided by SLAC and BNL.

15. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 15 PMCS Development Process Project WBS and WBS Dictionary The Work Breakdown Structure has been placed under change control PM-391-000-96 The WBS Dictionary has been updated to reflect the latest structure and has been placed under change control PM-391-001-12 The Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM) has been developed that identifies Control Accounts and CA Managers

16. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 16 Control Account Managers T. Fornek - WBS 1.1 Project Management J. Langton - WBS 1.2 XPP Instrument * P. Montanez - WBS 1.3 CXI Instrument E. Bong - WBS 1.4 XCS Instrument * E. Ortiz - WBS 1.5 Diagnostics & Common Optics G. Haller - WBS 1.6 Controls & Data Acquisition Niels van Bakel - WBS 1.2.03 & 1.4.03 BNL Detectors * Except for BNL Detector effort PMCS Development Process

17. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 17 PMCS Development Process Project Milestone Hierarchy and Dictionary The Milestone Hierarchy has been created and defines the relationship between the levels of milestones. Six levels of milestones have been identified Level 1 & 2 - DOE Level 3 – Project Level 4 – Instruments/Systems Level 5 – Interface / Handoff Level 6 – Commitments / Awards The Milestone Dictionary has been developed to assure a thorough understanding of agreements

18. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 18 PMCS Development Process Several types of Level 5, Interface / Handoff Milestones have been defined and represent contractual agreements. LUSI is currently monitoring 904 Interface Milestones

19. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 19 PMCS Development Process

20. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 20 PMCS Development Process Level 6 milestones have been identified as the Awards of subcontracts / procurements and supports funding reconciliations efforts. Planning when the budget is to be spent will support performance measurement. LUSI is currently monitoring 224 Award Milestones.

21. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 21 PMCS Development Process

22. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 22 PMCS Development Process Project Resources and Rates Define a set of Resources for effort to be performed by SLAC with the appropriate planning rates. Define a set of Resources for effort to be performed by BNL with the appropriate planning rates. Use the appropriate indirect rates, as defined by SLAC/BNL, and apply to the direct rates as defined. Apply a consistent escalation to activities as they get scheduled. The Bay Area uses a 4% escalation rate for labor Used standard 2.3% escalation for non-labor

23. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 23 Integrated Schedule Development Process Use WBS as foundation to assure 100% of scope covered Define the detailed tasks required to accomplish the scope Define the required resources to accomplish the tasks Based on the detailed Basis of Estimates Define the optimal logic relationships between tasks Incorporate all levels of DOE and Project milestones Incorporate all Interface / handoff milestones. PMCS Development Process

24. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 24 Integrated Schedule Development Process (cont.) Validate links to confirm timephasing and float calculations are accurate and appropriate. Where applicable, base activity durations on recent LCLS and/or related experience. Define and use standard calendars throughout with all the appropriate non-work days. Plan for a standard work week (8 hours/day & 5 days/week) except where appropriate. Develop flexible and appropriate activity coding for reporting and summarizations PMCS Development Process

25. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 25 Integrated Schedule Development Process (cont.) Because the project recognizes the importance of managing schedule contingency like it manages money contingency, blocks of time will be built into the schedule to mitigate the inevitable schedule issues. These reserves of time will be planned as activity relationship lags between the Project controlled Level 3 milestones and the DOE controlled Level 2 milestones. These blocks of schedule contingency were used during the development of the detail schedules and were removed to set preliminary baseline dates. The blocks will be added back into the schedule to impose control over float utilization. PMCS Development Process

26. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 26 The project has reserved time between DOE level 2 milestones and DOE level 1 milestones to allow for DOE processing: “Project Ready” + 40 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-3a “Project Ready” + 60 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-4a “Project Ready” + 40 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-3b “Project Ready” + 60 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-4b “Project Ready” + 40 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-3c “Project Ready” + 60 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-4a PMCS Development Process

27. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 27 For the purposes of managing Total Float, time reserves will be set aside between project level 3 milestones and DOE level 2 milestones: “Project Ready” + 40 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-3a “Project Ready” + 60 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-4a “Project Ready” + 40 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-3b “Project Ready” + 60 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-4b “Project Ready” + 40 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-3c “Project Ready” + 60 days = DOE Review + 40 days = CD-4a PMCS Development Process

28. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 28 PMCS Development Process Each one of the 3 Instruments will have 100 days of schedule contingency controlled by the project office.

29. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 29 In addition to the WBS, project phase coding for each activity will facilitate the creation of summary schedules as well as define the budget work packages. Management / Administration Design / Engineering Procurement Subcontract Fabrication / Assembly Testing Installation PMCS Development Process

30. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 30 Additional activity coding will facilitate sorting, filtering and additional summarizations Work Breakdown Structure Control Account number Work Package number Project Phase Milestone Level Control Account Manager name Performance Measurement Technique Earned Value Milestone (EVM) ID number EVM Weight Design Maturity Judgment Factor PMCS Development Process

31. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 31 Funding Reconciliation The project started with a “bottom-up” planning approach which required budget authority inconsistent with the levels that were established. Reconciliation required the identification of opportunities and the prioritizations of effort to adjust for funding issues at the lowest level. The project next used a iterative “top-down” approach to shift entire blocks of effort to optimize the schedule flow while accelerating the Instrument availability. PMCS Development Process

32. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 32 Once the schedule was iterated and a reasonable schedule was achieved that met the project objectives and stayed within the available funding, the preliminary schedule baseline was established. With a baseline established in the Primavera file, the next step was to import the schedule data into Cobra to create the budget baseline and to establish a preliminary performance measurement baseline (PMB). PMCS Development Process

33. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 33 Control Account and Work Package planning is based entirely on the time-phasing as defined by the schedule. Work packages are based on the project phase and represents the cost collection intersection with the SLAC accounting system. The work package is the lowest level at which earned value is calculated. PMCS Development Process

34. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 34 The majority of the near term effort for the project will be focused on Engineering and Design. Procurement, Subcontract, Fabrication & Assembly, Testing and Installation work packages are coded as Planning Packages. The detail planning for work packages coded as planning packages will be reassessed at the appropriate time. PMCS Development Process

35. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 35 LUSI uses only a subset of the Performance Measurement Technique (PMT) codes used by Cobra to calculate Earned Value are coded into the schedule as a reference PMCS Development Process

36. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 36 PMCS Status

37. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 37 Critical Decision Requirements Employ an Earned Value Management System that is compliant with ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998 for projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $20M. Projects having a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost between $20M and $50M must have an Earned Value Management System that is self-certified by the contractor as ANSI/EIA- 748-A-1998 compliant. Projects having a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $50M require an ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998 compliant system certified by the Office of Engineering and Construction Management. For projects not required to utilize an Earned Value Management System (e.g., firm fixed-price contract projects), an alternative performance management system must be described in the Project Execution Plan. Completed – SLAC/LCLS Project was reviewed and successfully demonstrated compliance at a review in June 2008 Subsequent to the June review a formal letter from DOE was received confirming the compliance of the SLAC Earned Value Management System.

38. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 38 Critical Decision Requirements

39. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 39 Perform a Performance Baseline Validation External Independent Review or a Performance Baseline Validation Independent Project Review. External Independent Reviews are conducted by the Office of Engineering and Construction Management to validate the Performance Baseline for projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $100M. Independent Project Reviews are conducted by the Project Management Support Office to validate the Performance Baseline for projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost less than $100 M. The Independent Review is to be accomplished as part of the CD-2 review Critical Decision Requirements

40. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 40 EIR Lines of Inquiry EIR ELEMENTCOMMENTCD2 Ready 1. Work Breakdown StructurePM-391-000-96 (Structure) 2. Project Cost & Resource Loaded Schedule Working baselines set as of month end March 2008 for both the schedule in P3 and the project cost in Cobra 3. Cost & Schedule AssumptionsCovered in this presentation 4. Critical PathCritical paths for CD-4a, CD-4b and CD-4c available 5. Risk ManagementMgmt presentation 6. Funding ProfileMgmt presentation 7. Project Controls/EVMSOverview and status covered in this presentation 8. Basis of DesignEngineering presentation 9. Design ReviewEngineering presentation 10. System Functions & ReqsEngineering presentation 11. SustainabilityNot applicable 12. Hazards AnalysisPM-391-001-01 13. Value Management/EngineeringLUSI Value Management Plan (Doc No. PM-391-000-02) 14. Start-up Test PlanSP-391-001-15, -16, -17 (XPP, CXI, XCS) 15. Project Execution PlanDraft ready for signature pending CD-2 review changes 16. Acquisition Strategy 17. Integrated Project TeamThis presentation & the PEP

41. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 41 PMCS Status

42. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 42 PMCS Status Using Primavera (P3) as the Scheduling tool Currently the statistics for the LUSI Project group with supporting project files are: LUSI Project Group - 4131 activities & 6159 relationships Project Management (SLAC) - 191 activities XPP Instrument (SLAC) - 531 activities CXI Instrument (SLAC) - 899 activities XCS Instrument (SLAC) - 539 activities Diagnostics and Common Optics (SLAC) - 599 activities Controls and Data Acquisition (SLAC) - 1297 activities XPP and XCS Detector Systems (BNL) - 75 activities

43. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 43 LUSI Project Summary Schedule

44. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 44 Schedule Critical Path(s) Because each Instrument represents a separate major deliverable, critical paths have been identified and are being monitored to the Approve Start of Operations milestones: CD-4a for the XPP Instrument CD-4b for the CXI Instrument CD-4c for the XCS Instrument As a general rule, critical paths/envelopes are regularly monitored for all three instruments and the two supporting systems. LUSI Critical Paths/Envelopes

45. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 45 XPP Schedule Critical Path Driving Milestones LL Approval, CD-3 & CD-4 Diffractometer Design Effort Diffractometer Awards & Vendor effort

46. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 46 XPP Schedule Critical Path Diffractometer deliveries to the Installation effort

47. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 47 CXI Schedule Critical Path Driving Milestones LL Approval, CD-3 & CD-4 KB Mirrors Reqmts/Design Effort KB Mirrors AWARD & Vendor Design Post Vendor Effort and Installation

48. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 48 CXI Schedule Critical Path

49. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 49 XCS Schedule Critical Path Driving Milestones LL Approval, CD-3, CD-4 & Funding M/S Delayed Design Start due to Funding XCS Path moves to DCO Procurements XCS Instrument Installation effort

50. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 50 XCS Schedule Critical Path Procurement of DCO components delayed to FY11 due to funding Design & initial procurement was completed for the XPP Instrument

51. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 51 XCS Schedule Critical Path

52. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 52 DCO Schedule Critical Envelope DCO has one design effort and multiple procurements to support the Instrument reqmts. The project will monitor strings of activities with the least float

53. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 53 DCO Schedule Critical Envelope

54. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 54 CDA Schedule Critical Envelope CDA has multiple deliveries to the instruments and is heavily driven by their needs. The project will monitor strings of activities with the least float

55. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 55 CDA Schedule Critical Envelope

56. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 56 PMCS Status

57. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 57 PMCS Status

58. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 58 PMCS Status

59. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 59 PMCS Status

60. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 60 PMCS Status

61. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 61 PMCS Hammer

62. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 62 Statusing and Reporting SLAC/LCLS PMCS Procedures Schedule Reports Schedule Baseline SLAC Accounting System Analysis Tool “Hammer” Cost Reports

63. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 63 Statusing and Reporting LUSI Project data is now stored on the LCLS website. https://slacspace.slac.stanford.edu/sites/LCLS%20Document%20Storage/default.aspx Toward the bottom there’s a PMCS section.

64. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 64 Statusing and Reporting PMCS data will be stored and available in the folders as described. The PMCS Hammer is an interactive tool team members will use to view, analyze data and write VARs

65. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 65 Statusing and Reporting The PMCS Hammer is a utility that was customized for SLAC/LCLS that integrates Primavera, Cobra and Accounting data for any team member to use. The LCLS Hammer and LUSI Hammer pages are access controlled and access is granted as appropriate.

66. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 66 Statusing and Reporting The Drilldown CPR and DCE will probably be the most often used utilities, but other information is available.

67. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 67 Statusing and Reporting The CPR Drilldown identifies areas that have broken a threshold that requires a VAR.

68. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 68 Statusing and Reporting By double-clicking on the highlight variance, the VAR form will be enabled.

69. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 69 In Conclusion The project set preliminary schedule and budget baselines as of March 2008. The project team is ready for CD-2. We are ready to formally establish a performance measurement baseline and to proceed with the project. Thank you for your participation

70. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 70 PMCS Backup

71. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 71 PMCS Status

72. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 72 PMCS Status

73. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 73 PMCS Status

74. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 74 PMCS Status

75. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 75 PMCS Status

76. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 76 PMCS Status

77. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 77 PMCS Status

78. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 78 PMCS Status

79. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 79 PMCS Status

80. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 80 PMCS Status

81. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 81 PMCS Status

82. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 82 PMCS Status

83. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 83 Milestones with PO Contingency

84. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 84 Milestones without PO Contingency

85. Felix B. Fernandez fbf@slac.stanford.edu LUSI DOE Review August 20, 2008 PMCS Overview p. 85 Milestones with no Funding Limits