Office of Science Perspective and Project Management Kin Chao PE, CCP, PMP June 6, 2017 http://science.energy.gov/opa

Topics of Discussion SC Overview SC Office of Project Assessment SC Contractors and Contract Types Strong HQ Roles and Responsibilities Project Types and Sizes Contingency Funding Stakeholders Motivation

SC Overview SC Mission: To deliver the scientific discoveries and major scientific tools that transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic, and national security of the United States. SC budget is ~$5B to $5.5B per year Construct and Capital Assets (fusion reactors, accelerators, laboratories, instruments, infrastructure, others) Operation and Maintenance of facilities and assets Grants and Small Business Innovation Research/Technology Transfer SC is exempt from requirements of DOE Order 413.3B

# of Completed Projects Initial Baseline TPC ($M) (Completed projects since 2002) SITE # of Completed Projects # Cost Success % Success by Cost # Schedule Success % Success by Schedule Initial Baseline TPC ($M) Final TPC ($M) % Cost Increase Argonne National Laboratory 5 100% 3 60% $59.5 0% Brookhaven National Laboratory 14 $1,223.8 $1,221.3 Fermi National Laboratory 11 10 91% $1,069.2 $1,095.7 2% Jefferson National Accelerator Facility 2 $84.1 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 15 93% 13 87% $460.2 $462.8 1% Oak Ridge National Laboratory* $1,702.3 $1,772.8 4% Pacific Northwest National Laboratory $256.5 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory 4 75% $235.7 $236.1 Sandia National Laboratory (NNSA Operated) 1 $75.8 Stanford Linear Accelerator Center 8 80% 9 90% $757.8 $800.1 6% TOTAL SC PROJECTS 78 73 94% 71 $5,924.9 $6,064.6 * SNS—directed change and counted as success  

Office of Science Organization Chart Chicago Office Roxanne Purucker Office of the Director (SC-1) J. Steve Binkley (A) Advanced Scientific Comp. Research (SC-21) Barbara Helland Workforce Development for Teachers/ Scientists (SC-27) Jim Glownia Basic Energy Sciences (SC-22) Harriet Kung Fusion Energy Sciences (SC-24) Edmund Synakowski High Energy Physics (SC-25) James Siegrist Biological & Environ. Research (SC-23) Sharlene Weatherwax Nuclear Physics (SC-26) Timothy Hallman (A) Acting 01/2017 Deputy Director for Science Programs (SC-2) J. Steve Binkley for Resource Management (SC-4) Jeffrey Salmon for Field Operations (SC-3) Joseph McBrearty Office of Project Assessment (SC-28) Stephen W. Meador Office of Budget (SC-41) Kathleen Klausing Office of Information Technology and Services (SC-45) Vasilios Kountouris Office of Scientific and Technical Information (SC-44) Brian Hitson Office of Grants & Contracts (SC-43) Michael Zarkin Office of SC Communications and Public Affairs (SC-47) Rick Borchelt Office of Management (SC-48) Cynthia Mays Ames SO Cynthia Baebler Thomas Jeff. SO Joe Arango SLAC SO Paul Golan Pacific NWest SO Roger Snyder Princeton SO Peter Johnson Oak Ridge SO Johnny Moore Fermi SO Michael Weis Brookhaven SO Frank Crescenzo Berkeley SO Argonne SO Joanna Livengood SC Integrated Support Center Office of Safety and Security Policy (SC-31) M. Jones Laboratory Policy (SC-32) J. LaBarge Small Business Innovation Research (SC-29) Manny Oliver Oak Ridge Office Ken Tarcza Office of Operations Program Management (SC-33) M. Jones(A)

Office of Project Assessment Functions Advise the Director of SC on the construction and operation of major research facilities as required. Develop and implement policies and procedures for the design, fabrication, construction, commissioning, operation, and decommissioning of research facilities and devices consistent with Departmental and SC project management requirements. Conduct technical, cost, schedule, and management peer reviews of SC construction projects (~ 30 per year). SC Secretariat for Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board (ESAAB) and the Project Baseline Change Control Process (~ 30 per year). PMCDP, Exhibit 300s, EVMS, assistance and support, etc.

SC Contractors and Contract Types SC projects and management of the facilities are executed through the SC Laboratories (and one university) SC Laboratories are M&O contractors and SC does not have a direct contract for projects SC Laboratories are Not-for-Profit Projects are typically built to cost

SC HQ Roles and Responsibilities SC Associate Directors Project owners Initiates and prioritizes projects and needs based on available funding Requests, defends, and provides the project funding Seeks advice and recommendations from Subject Matter Experts through project peer reviews, ESAAB, regular communication with the project team, etc. Approves critical decisions and allows a project to proceed to the next phase Approves major changes to the project

SC HQ Roles and Responsibilities SC HQ Program Managers Very strong technical backgrounds with a many having PhDs. Understand technical issues and thus can challenge contractors Typically have responsibilities for more than one project Interacts with the Federal Project Director Present to SC-2 during monthly Watchlist meetings

SC Projects Typically have ~40-50 active projects at any time ~99% of SC projects are Non-Nuclear projects ~50-60% of projects are less than $100M in TPC thus funding challenges are less

Contingency Cost contingency is included in the TPC regardless of who owns the risk (external or internal) Schedule contingency and the cost associated with potential schedule delays are included in the baseline Scope contingency (the difference between the Threshold and Objective KPPs) is identified in the PEP Contingency is based on project status, complexity, and risks. Analysis of contingency is performed continuously throughout the life of the project Contingencies (cost, schedule, and scope) are held by the FPD and released to the project using a formal change control process identified in the PEP % Contingencies at CD-2 Cost—30% to 40% Schedule—20% to 30% Scope (Prioritized list of items for additions/deletion)—10% to 30%

Funding Project funding needs to be affordable in the context of the total Program Project funding profile needs to be realistic Funding must include adequate project contingency (regardless of who owns the risk) Funding must be stable and should not be changed after CD-2 is approved Funding for smaller projects are less risky than for larger projects

Stakeholders SC has very supportive stakeholders Typically do not encounter regulatory issues (EPA, citizens, state regulators) associated with EM projects SC typically does not have “not-in-my backyard” issues

Motivations A large part of SC success is due to contractor/laboratory motivation Having best-in class facilities means more prestige and attract best scientists in the world Having successful projects results in bringing in more jobs/work Having successful projects results in more money for Operations and Maintenance—which are much greater than the TPC If the laboratories do not have world class facilities—existence of the lab would be in jeopardy

FACTORS AND CHARACTERISTICS Established Processes Summary of SC Project Characteristics   FACTORS AND CHARACTERISTICS SC Culture Ownership--Clear Lines of Management, Accountability, and Responsibility Org Chart Motivation--Benefits if Project is Successful Sites get more work HQ Personnel Technical Strength Yes--Most of HQ Programs staff are highly technical Up Front Planning Yes Established Processes Independent Oversight with Support from Senior Management (Engagement and Access) Regular Peer Reviews with direct report to SC-2 % Contingencies at CD-2 Cost Schedule Scope (Prioritized list of items for additions/deletion) 30% to 40% 20% to 30% 10% to 30% Changes to Funding Profile after CD-2 1 (NCSX) Other Number of Nuclear Projects in the Past 15 years (Nuclear Projects adds complexity) 1 (PSF) Contracting Type 100% Not-for-Profit M&O Security/Clearance Issues No Stakeholder Complexities Statistics Mega Projects (>$1B) in past 15 years 1 (SNS) Number of Current Projects Past CD-2 with TPC greater than $750M 2 (LCLS II, ITER) Number of Current Projects Past CD-2 with TPC less than $750M 15 Total Program Annual Capital Asset Funding ~$400M

SC Decision and Requirements Matrix Although SC is exempt from DOE O 413.3B—we still implement it because we believe in good project management practices