Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 1 DOE/NSF Review of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Project SC 6/7 Cost, Schedule and Funding Committee Mark Reichanadter, SLAC Kem Robinson, LBNL

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 2 6. Cost Estimate - Findings DECam – –The DECam project team presented a TPC of $32.9M, which can be compared to a CD-1 TPC of $25.0M. Cost increases from CD-1: Increased equipment costs ($1.5M) Incorporated university labor into TPC ($1.1M) Incorporated R&D from CD-0 into TPC ($5.3M) –Includes $5.1M (32%) MIE contingency, $500K R&D contingency. –Cost basis is in $FY07. Costs are fully-burdened and include DOE/FNAL out-year escalation. –Installation/commissioning are not included in project. –HEP base program supports FNAL scientists. Zero cost to project. –Request CD-3a for ~$2.1M for long-lead procurements: CCD Processing 3Q-08, CCD Packaging 3Q-08, Hexapods 1Q-09

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 3 6. Cost Estimate - Findings DES-DM – –The DES-DM team presented a TPC of $7.6M using a mix of funding sources. –DES-DM includes software testing and commissioning, but zero contingency. CFIP – –CFIP is estimated at $390K for equipment upgrades and $470K for labor ($860K total). –Zero contingency included in the CFIP project. CTIO Director holds contingency outside the TPC. Summarizing, the DES Total Project Cost (TPC) is estimated at $41,436K

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 4 Cost and schedule estimates for the DECam, DEC-DM and CFIP are developed as separate projects. An integrated project schedule will greatly improve overall project coordination. DECam Cost – –Resource-loaded WBS and schedule are well developed. Estimates are supported with a documented cost basis. –Adequately developed to support CD-2, however cost contingency appears too low particularly in integration, telescope simulator and activities in Chile. –Cost estimates for CD-3a items (long-lead procurements) are adequate although some technical issues are unresolved. –~$2M of foreign procurements are exposed to currency risk. Strategies should be considered to mitigate risk. 6. Cost Estimate - Comments

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 5 DES-DM Cost – –Resource-loaded WBS and schedule were presented based upon technical judgment. –Estimate is primarily labor estimates supporting a software project. –Distributed labor and partial FTE’s will require strong management and coordination CFIP Cost – –Cost and schedule estimate are not resource-loaded. –Primarily an upgrade to an operating facility. 6. Cost Estimate - Comments

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 6 6. Cost Estimate - Recommendations 1.Reevaluate and update the DECam cost and contingency estimates based upon recommendations in this report. 2.Reevaluate and update the DES-DM cost estimates based upon recommendations in this report. 3.Recommend DECam for CD-2 after updating cost and contingency estimates. 4.Recommend DECam for CD-3a after satisfying earlier recommendations on CCD’s and hexapods.

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 7 7. Schedule and Funding – Findings DECam Schedule – –Logically-linked schedule containing ~1000 activities for delivery of the camera to CTIO. –Critical path identified and is driven by FY10 procurements Primarily filters, crate cooling system –CD-4 Milestone is 3Q Schedule float is 12 months. DES-DM Schedule – –Resource-loaded schedule containing ~800 activities –Total DES-DM development labor is ~44 years –Schedule follows a series of spiral development cycles –DES-DM complete w/acceptance tests 4Q Schedule float ~9 months. CFIP Schedule – –Summary schedule was presented. Roughly 12 months of float is available.

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 8 7. Schedule and Funding – Findings DECam – –The project team presented a funding-constrained schedule based upon a bottoms-up resource-loaded schedule. Zero funding is planned for the final year of the project (FY12). –MS Project and COBRA (DECam) are the primary scheduling tools chosen to monitor schedule progress. –Monthly Status and Earned Value Reporting have been in place for 5 months, and the DOE/Director’s EVMS review concluded DECam was in compliance for self certification. DES-DM – –Proposal submitted to NSF for $2.94M to support project. CFIP – –Infrastructure improvements using operating funds

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 9 DES funding profile summarizing the three subprojects is shown below: 7. Schedule & Funding – Findings

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review Schedule and Funding – Comments The Committee judged that the schedule maturity for the DES projects to be at the appropriate level to support CD-2. –Schedule contingency of 12 months (DECam) and 9 months (DES- DM) is considered adequate. –Schedule contingency is not costed. Delays draw from contingency should be estimated by the project for planning purposes. Although the project has identified the primary project activities overall integration should be improved. An integrated DES project schedule with identified subproject linkages will facilitate coordination of the entire DES project. Obligation profile is front-loaded and early use of contingency will need to be carefully managed. –Long-lead procurements are important to retire risk

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review Schedule & Funding - Comments DECam project team should work closely with Fermilab to minimize potential CR effects on the project’s procurement plans. –FNAL PMG will play important role. Effective use of milestones on all projects to monitor overall progress. Commendable. Each project has identified the critical path activities and is actively managing float. FTE estimates or manpower profiles provided for most areas of the DES project.

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review Schedule and Funding – Recommendations 1.Develop an integrated DES project schedule which effectively connects the three projects. 2.Recommend DECam for CD-2 and CD-3a

Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 13 6/7 Cost, Schedule & Funding LOI’s EIR Lines of Inquiry and Responses 1. Work Breakdown Structure / Satisfactory 2. Project Cost and Resource Loaded Schedule / Satisfactory w/updates to cost estimate 3. Key Project Cost and Schedule Assumptions / Satisfactory w/updates to contingency assessment 4. Critical Path / Satisfactory 6. Funding Profile / Satisfactory 7. Project Controls / EVMS / Satisfactory