1 LHC-DFBX Procurement Strategy Joseph Rasson LBNL Presented at the DFBX Production Readiness Review October 2002, LBNL Brookhaven - Fermilab - Berkeley US LHC ACCELERATOR PROJECT

2 Outline  Vendor Scope of Work  List of Government Furnished Materials  Vendor Pre-qualification Process  Project Schedule  RFP Strategy and Schedule  RFP Package  Information Requested in Bidder’s Response  Proposal Evaluation Criteria  Summary

3 Vendor Scope of Work  Fabricate, assemble and test 8 feedboxes per LBNL Specification M-993 (Statement of Work)  Integrate LBNL provided parts/assemblies into the feedboxes  Complete all electrical and tests per provided specs  Provide all necessary tooling, fixtures, instruments and cryogens needed for assembly, handling, test and acceptance activities  Pack and ship to CERN in accordance with Shipping Spec  LBNL will perform the acceptance tests at CERN  Final acceptance requires passing the acceptance tests at CERN

4 List of Government Furnished Materials Complete list is generated from BOM Major Components: 1.HTS leads (Pirelli) 2.Vapor cooled leads (subcontractor) 3.Bus duct and lambda plug assemblies (LBNL) 4.Beam tube assemblies (LBNL) 5.Magnet instrumentation conduits (LBNL) 6.Specialized bellows and flanges (FNAL) 7.Specialized cryogenics sensors (CERN) 8.Support jacks, tooling balls, name plates, etc. (LBNL)

5 Vendor Pre-qualification Process  FNAL commissioned experienced vendors to conduct fabrication study  Vendors were visited several times to discuss specifications and design intent  Submitted an LOI for price and schedule estimates to five vendors in Dec 2001  Cost and schedule for the full scope of work for 8 DFBXs based on DFBXG design and 5 variants  Received positive expression of interest from three companies, two were not interested

6 Vendor Pre-qualification Process (cont.) Progress since May 2002 Review:  One vendor dropped out leaving two interested in DFBX fab  Vendors reviewed Acceptance Specification  They accept responsibility for mechanical integrity of the box after shipping to CERN, but  Will not accept responsibility for electrical components  Vendors were qualified to perform lead splice operation.  Vendors and their subcontractors reviewed the Crating and Shipping Specification

7 Project Schedule  Additional schedule constraint  US-LHC Accelerator Project ends Sept. 2005

8 Project Schedule (cont.) Schedule forecast  Based on the LOI schedule provided by the manufacturers:  First DFBX Delivered 13 month ARO oMeets CERN requirement  Last (8th) DFBX Delivered months ARO oMeets DOE-LHC requirement  However, production schedule is aggressive  To meet schedule extensive oversight is required  Highlights the urgency to get process started

9 RFP Strategy Based on discussion with the Project Management Office and vendors:  Decision was made to release the RFP based on the fabrication drawings for DFBX-C/G and top level assembly drawings for other 5 variants  Get vendors started on preparing their proposals  To get the vendor subcontractors started  To develop the bid framework and fabrication plan  Release all other drawings 4-6 weeks before proposal response due date  RFP schedule allows time for BAFO cycle (if needed)  Working closely with LBNL Procurement Department and the LHC-PMO to get the RFP out

10 Conditions for BAFO  After receiving the responses to the RFP we may request a BAFO  BAFO address include:  Exceptions requested by vendors  Design changes requested by LBNL  Changes in integration tasks and schedule

11 RFP Schedule Production Readiness Review23 Oct 2002 Issue RFP5 Nov 2002 Complete Remaining Drawings28 Nov 2002 Vendor's Response14 Jan 2003 Issue Request for BAFO28 Jan 2003 Vendor's Final Response11 Feb 2003 Place Order4 Mar 2003

12 Post Award Conference  Meeting to be held at vendor’s facility 4 weeks after award  Complete list discussion topic is in the SOW documents  Major points are: 1.Review fabrication and assembly plan and schedule 2.Coordinate the delivery schedule of GFM 3.Coordinate in-process inspection 4.Resolve any inconsistencies in the LBNL provided drawings or documents

13 Initial RFP Package  Technical Specification (SOW)  Engineering drawings  Detailed fabrication drawings for DFBX-C/G  Top level assembly drawings for other 5 variants  Acceptance Specification  MLI Specification  Power Lead Splice Specification  Bill of Materials List  List of GFM and their replacement cost  Installation specification of LBNL supplied materials  Crating and Shipping Specification  Flow Schematics  Wiring Diagrams  LBNL QA plan

14 Information Provided During Proposal Activities  Detailed fabrication drawings for other 5 variants  Changes resulting from pipe interconnect specifications

15 Information Requested in Bidder’s Response RFP Appendix A contains proposal response information requested to evaluate and rank proposals  Two separate proposals are required: Price and Technical  Technical Proposal includes:  Delivery Schedule  Fabrication Milestone Schedule  Qualifications: Experience and Past Performance  Production Facilities and Planning  Understanding the Requirements and Technical Approach  Project Management, Quality Assurance and Quality Control Implementation

16 Proposal Evaluation Criteria RFP Appendix A contains proposal evaluation criteria:  Price  Delivery schedule  Technical Evaluation Factors:  Production Facilities and Planning  Conformance with Specification and Understanding the Requirement  Qualifications: Management Experience and Past Performance  Quality Assurance and Quality Control Implementation  Site Access

17 Bid Evaluation  Evaluation criteria and weighting factors are set before releasing the RFP  Price has the highest weighting factor  Evaluation committee members from LBNL and FNAL  Committee will review and evaluate the technical and schedule responses to the RFP  Knowledge of price information will be limited to LBNL Procurement Officer

18 Basis of Award  Award contract to the bid that contains the combination of those factors offering the best overall value to the Laboratory  Lowest overall price will be the primary concern in making the award  Credibility of vendor’s delivery schedule and technical performance are important, but ranked slightly below price

19 Summary  Vendors are familiar with the scope of work and are pre-qualified  Fabrication plan is developed  RFP documents are nearly complete  4 months are allowed from issuing RFP to placing award  Meeting production schedule remains a major challenge