revision history - lawrence berkeley national …matthewjohnson/review setup/als-… · web...

Technical Note Template

Release Date:

Document Number: AL-1008-7759 Revision: A

Document Status: WorkingDocument Type: Category Code:

AL-1008-7759 Rev. A Doc. Status: Working of 25

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Revision History..................................................................................................42 Approvals.............................................................................................................43 Abbreviations and Acronyms...............................................................................44 Introduction.........................................................................................................55 Scope...................................................................................................................56 Roles and Responsibilties....................................................................................67 Definition and Description of the Project Review Cycle......................................7

7.1 Graded Approach to Reviews........................................................................77.2 Maturity Definition........................................................................................9

7.2.1 Completing the Design Phase of the PRC.............................................97.2.2 Maturity Definition..............................................................................10

7.3 Design Phase...............................................................................................107.3.1 Conceptual Design Phase and Review................................................10

7.3.1.1 Conceptual Design Phase Deliverables............................................107.3.2 Preliminary Design Phase and Review................................................11

7.3.2.1 Preliminary Design Phase Deliverables...........................................117.3.2.2 Required Approval for Preliminary Design Phase Completion........11

7.3.3 Final Design Phase and Review..........................................................127.3.3.1 Final Design Phase Deliverables......................................................127.3.3.2 Required Approval of Final Design Phase Completion....................13

7.4 Implementation Phase.................................................................................137.4.1 Manufacturing Readiness Phase and Review......................................14

7.4.1.1 Manufacturing Readiness Phase Deliverables.................................147.4.1.2 Required Approval for Manufacturing Readiness Phase Completion

147.4.2 Procurement Readiness Phase and Review.........................................15

7.4.2.1 Procurement Readiness Review Deliverables..................................157.4.2.2 Required Approval for Procurement Readiness Phase Completion.16

7.4.3 Fabrication and Assembly Phase and Review.....................................167.4.3.1 System Acceptance Review Deliverables.........................................16

Advanced Light Source Upgrade ProjectLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Latest version of this document can be found in the LBNL Document Control Center.

A hardcopy of this document is for reference ONLY.


7.4.3.2 Required Approval for Fabrication and Assembly Phase Completion16

7.4.4 Removal and Installation Phase and Reviews.....................................177.4.4.1 Beamline Readiness Review............................................................177.4.4.2 Accelerator Readiness Review.........................................................17

7.4.5 Commissioning Phase and Review......................................................177.4.5.1 Operational Readiness Review Deliverables....................................177.4.5.2 Required Approval for Commissioning Phase Completion..............18

8 Approvers of the Review Checklists..................................................................189 Applicable Documents.......................................................................................19Appendix A: Maturity Definition for ESD, ICD, and AD...........................................21





1 REVISION HISTORY

Rev. CM Number Description of ChangeA Initial release

2 APPROVALS

The following individual(s) shall approve this document:

Approver Project RoleRoberta Leftwich-Vann ALS-U Project ManagerKen Chow ALS-U Chief EngineerKen Goldberg Beamlines and Optical Systems LeadDaniela Leitner Removal and Installation LeadChristoph Steier Accelerator Systems LeadJiani Niu ALS-U QA ManagerKaren Lingua ALS-U Procurement ManagerWindchill Approved / Concurred By

3 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACL Acceptance Criteria ListALS Advanced Light SourceALS-U Advanced Light Source Upgrade ProjectARR Accelerator Readiness ReviewBOM Bill of MaterialsBRR Beamline Readiness ReviewCAD Computer Aided DesignCAM Control Account ManagerCD Conceptual DesignCD-1 DOE Critical Decision 1 – Approve Preliminary Baseline

RangeCD-2 DOE Critical Decision 2 – Approve Performance Baseline

RangeCD-3 DOE Critical Decision 3 – Approve Start of Construction





CD-4 DOE Critical Decision 4 – Approve of Operations/Project Closeout

CDR Conceptual Design ReviewCM Configuration ManagementCX CommissioningDCC LBNL Document Control CenterDOE Department of EnergyESD Engineering Specification DocumentEVMS Earned Value Management SystemFD Final DesignFDR Final Design ReviewFRD Functional Requirements DocumentF&A Fabrication and AssemblyGRD Global Requirements DocumentICD Interface Control DocumentKPP Key Performance ParameterLBNL Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryMRR Manufacturing Readiness ReviewORR Operational Readiness ReviewPD Preliminary DesignPDR Preliminary Design ReviewPR Procurement ReadinessPRC Project Review CyclePRR Procurement Readiness ReviewQA Quality AssuranceR&I Removal and InstallationSAR System Acceptance ReviewTIP Test and Inspection PlanTPRD Technical Procurement Requirements DocumentWI Work Instructions

4 INTRODUCTION

The Advanced Light Source Upgrade project (ALS-U) upgrades the existing Advanced Light Source (ALS) to achieve an increase in soft x-rays





brightness and coherent flux. A Project Review Cycle (PRC) has been defined as a measure of project progress in terms of project, schedule, and scope. The PRC includes a set of reviews tailored towards the different project wide procurement avenues.

5 SCOPE

This document defines and describes the Project Review Cycle (PRC) implemented within the ALS-U Project, and includes descriptions of roles and responsibilities, review procedures, and review deliverables. A common review process is defined in ‘ALS-U Review Procedure’ (AL-1145-4408).

6 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILTIES

Chief Engineer – approves project wide technical review plans, and identifies and initiates additional reviews at the system level (WBS L3). This includes working with System Managers to formulate and approve the charge questions, identifying review committee members, and ensuring that all necessary stakeholders are included in the technical review. The Chief Engineer also supports and advises the Systems Engineering Manager with subsystem level (WBS L5 and lower) technical reviews.

Systems Engineering Manager – develops and coordinates the design review process for the ALS-U project. The Systems Engineering Manager assists the Chief Engineer with system level (WBS L3) technical reviews and project wide review plans. Additionally, he or she is responsible for identifying and initiating additional technical reviews at the subsystem level (WBS L5 and lower). This includes working with CAMs and System Managers to formulate and approve charge questions, identifying review committee members, and ensures that all necessary stakeholders are included in the review.

Quality Assurance (QA) Manager – develops and coordinates QA processes and procedures for the ALS-U project. The QA Manager assists the Chief Engineer with ensuring quality assurance policies and procedures are adhered to throughout the project, and reviews/approves the QA documents (e.g. Acceptance Test Procedure, Vendor Surveillance Procedure, Work Instructions, etc.) developed by System Managers and Control Account Managers. The QA Manager ensures sufficient review of QA processes, plans, procedures and documents are included in technical reviews.





Procurement (PROC) Manager – provides project wide procurement guidelines and ensures procurement methodologies adhere to LBNL and DOE procurement requirements. The Procurement Manager ensures sufficient review of procurement processes, plans, procedures and documents are included in technical reviews.

System Manager (WBS Level 3) – serves as Review Manager for WBS Level 3 technical reviews. System Managers also serve as approver for lower level technical reviews in their areas.

Control Account Manager (CAM, WBS Level 5) –serves as Review Manager for technical reviews in their respective areas.

Review Manager – develops the review plan for the specific review for which they are the Review Manager (charge questions, review agenda, scheduling the review, identifying and inviting review committee members, selecting a review committee chair, arranging review logistics, and setting up a review site). The Review Manager ensures review readiness (i.e. all documents are at appropriate maturity level). The Review Manager is also responsible for review close-out. Review Managers for technical reviews are typically CAMs, System Managers, or the Chief Engineer, depending on the level of the review.

Review Committee – reviews presented material and answers charge questions. The committee provides a Review Report that documents answers to charge questions, findings, comments, and recommendations. The committee may request additional information from the Review Manager.

Review Committee Chair – serves as lead spokesperson for the Review Committee. The Chair ensures completion of the Review Report and its delivery to the Review Manager.

7 DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT REVIEW CYCLE

The ALS-U Project Review Cycle (PRC) is depicted in Figure 7.1. The PRC is partitioned into a Design Phase and an Implementation Phase, and is tailored at the component and subsystem level for different design, manufacturing and procurement methodologies. Details of the two PRC phases are described in subsequent sections.





7.1 Graded Approach to Reviews

The ALS-U project follows a graded approach to reviews as shown in Figure7.1. For components and systems designed and manufactured by a vendor (design to spec), Error: Reference source not found specifies review requirements for the technical reviews that take place at the vendor after the contract is awarded.

Review plans developed by System Managers and CAMs are reviewed and approved by the Chief Engineer, Systems Engineering Manager, QA Manager, and Procurement Manager. Review cycles indicated in Figure 7.1 and Error: Reference source not found may be modified on an individual basis as appropriate given additional factors such as schedule, complexity, and risk.





Figure 7.1: Illustrating typical project phases for: A) Integrated System; B) Components and systems designed manufactured by LBNL; C) Components and systems manufactured by vendors (build to print); D) Components and systems designed and manufactured by vendors (design to





spec); and E) Components and systems that are commercially available (off-the-shelf items).

Table 7.1: Graded review cycles for the tailored PRCs.

PRC

Total Procureme

nt Value PDR FDR MRR PRR SAR

Components and Systems Manufactured by LBNL

< $150k Combined X≥ $150k< $500k X Combined X

≥ $500k X X X XComponents and Systems Manufactured by Vendor (Build to Print)

< $150k Combined X≥ $150k< $500k X Combined X

≥ $500k X X Combined X

Components and Systems Designed and Manufactured by Vendor (Design to Spec)

< $150k XRef. Error:Referencesource not

found

Ref. Error:

Reference

sourcenot

found

≥ $150k< $500k

Combined with PRR

Ref. Error:Referencesource not

found

Combined with PDR

Ref. Error:

Reference

sourcenot

found

≥ $500k XRef. Error:Referencesource not

foundX

Ref. Error:

Reference

sourcenot

foundComponents and Systems that are Commercially Available (Off-the-Shelf Items)

< $150k Combined X≥ $150k< $500k Combined (No MRR required) X

≥ $500k Combined X X

Table 7.2: Graded approach of the required reviews to be performed with the vendor after contract is awarded, for





components and systems designed and manufactured by the vendor.

PRC Value

CDR with

Vendor

PDR with

Vendor

FDR with

Vendor

MRR with

Vendor

SAR with

Vendor

Components and Systems Designed and Manufactured by Vendor (Design to Spec)

< $150k Combined X

≥ $150k

< $500k

Combined Combined X

≥ $500k X X X X X

7.2 Maturity Definition

7.2.1 Completing the Design Phase of the PRC

Table 7.3 lists overall design maturity levels for ALS-U. Design maturity reaches 100% at the end of the Final Design phase, upon completion of all design recommendations that arise out of the FDR. Project progress during the construction and transition to operations phases of the project is monitored using the Earned Value Management System (EVMS).

Table 7.3: Project Credit definition towards completing the CDR, PDR, and FDR.

Design Phase Review

Design Maturit

yConceptual Design Review 30 %Preliminary Design Review 60 %Final Design Review 90 %Addressed all recommendations after FDR 100 %

7.2.2 Maturity Definition

Overall maturity is defined as a cost-weighted maturity, Mw, based on the following equation:

Mw=1T c

∑i=1

n

P iC i 7.1





Where, T c is the total cost of the system or subsystem, P is the maturity of the component, subsystem or document, and C is the cost of the component, subsystem or document.

7.3 Design Phase

The design phase includes the conceptual design, preliminary design, and final design phases.

7.3.1 Conceptual Design Phase and Review

The Conceptual Design phase produces alternative conceptual designs which meet project objectives in terms of schedule, cost, and technical performance. The conceptual design phase in concluded with a Conceptual Design Review (CDR).

The outcome of the conceptual design phase is clear identification of a conceptual design that has been evaluated to be technically achievable (no show stoppers) within the project defined schedule, cost and risk.

7.3.1.1 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHASE DELIVERABLES

The deliverables for the conceptual design phase are listed in Table 7.4.

Table 7.4: Deliverables for the conceptual design phase.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMCDR presentation(s) 100 % YesEngineering Specification Document (ESD)* ≥ 25 % No‡Interface Control Document (ICD)* ≥ 25 % No‡Assumptions Document (AD)* ≥ 25 % No‡Completed CAD models (≥ 60 % of the model exists) ≥ 30 % No‡*see Appendix A for maturity definitions.‡Required to be clearly labeled with a ‘DRAFT’ watermark, if provided to an external review committee (not a LBNL employee).





7.3.2 Preliminary Design Phase and Review

The purpose of the preliminary design phase is to demonstrate that the design has progressed and continues to meet the required technical objectives, schedule, cost, and acceptable risk in comparison to the conceptual design phase. The preliminary design phase is concluded with successfully completing a Preliminary Design Review (PDR).

At the conclusion of the preliminary design phase, by means of the PDR, the project is baselined and commits to accomplishing the project’s objectives for a given cost and schedule.

7.3.2.1 PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE DELIVERABLES

The deliverables for the preliminary design phase are listed in Table 7.5. Error: Reference source not found lists additional deliverables for those components or systems designed and manufactured by a vendor. Maturity level details for QA deliverables (ACL, TIP, and WI) are defined in QA Document Maturity Definition matrix (AL-1145-6967). An internal ALS-U PDR checklist (AL-1130-4636) shall be completed to assist the System Manager and or CAM to plan and execute the review.

7.3.2.2 REQUIRED APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE COMPLETION

To successfully complete the preliminary design phase, the ALS-U PDR checklist (AL-1130-4636) is officially released to DCC by the appropriate approvers as defined in chapter Error: Reference source not found. Approval is performed after the PDR is performed and all items listed in the checklist have been completed.

Table 7.5: List of deliverables for the preliminary design phase.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMPDR presentation(s) 100 % YesEngineering Specification Document (ESD)* ≥ 90 % YesInterface Control Document (ICD)* ≥ 90 % Yes





DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMAssumptions Document (AD)* ≥ 90 % YesAcceptance Criteria List (ACL)** ≥ 65 % No‡Test and Inspection Plan (TIP)** ≥ 45 % No‡Work Instructions (WI)** ≥ 45 % No‡Completed CAD models (≥ 90 % of the model exists) ≥ 60 % No‡Drawings (layouts, integrated systems, assemblies) ≥ 30 % No‡*See Appendix A for maturity definitions.**See AL-1145-6967 for maturity definitions.‡Required to be clearly labeled with a ‘DRAFT’ watermark, if provided to an external review committee (not a LBNL employee).

Table 7.6: List of additional deliverable items required for component(s) and system(s) designed and manufactured by a vendor (design to spec)

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMTechnical Procurement Requirements Document (TPRD) ≥ 90 % YesInterface Drawing(s) ≥ 90 % YesDraft Statement of Work ≥ 60 % Yes

7.3.3 Final Design Phase and Review

The purpose of the final design phase is to demonstrate that the overall design is complete. It is concluded with the Final Design Review (FDR) which shows design validation in terms of requirements and advancement of QA documentation. The design state of the CAD model and drawings shall be such that they are ready to be released to the DCC after successful completion of the FDR.

A successful review outcome confirms that the design is completed and system requirements are met with an acceptable risk level, cost, and schedule. Completion of the FDR marks the start of the Implementation Phase.

7.3.3.1 FINAL DESIGN PHASE DELIVERABLES

The deliverables for the final design phase are listed in Table 7.7. Maturity level details for QA deliverables (ACL, TIP, and WI) are defined in the QA Document Maturity Definition matrix (AL-1145-6967). An internal ALS-U





FDR checklist (AL-1130-4637) shall be completed to assist the System Manager and or CAM to plan and execute the review.

7.3.3.2 REQUIRED APPROVAL OF FINAL DESIGN PHASE COMPLETION

To successfully complete the final design phase, the ALS-U FDR checklist (AL-1130-4637) is officially released to DCC by the appropriate approvers as defined in chapter Error: Reference source not found. The approval is performed after the FDR is performed and all items listed in the checklist have been completed.

Table 7.7: List of deliverables for the final design phase.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMFDR presentation(s) 100 % YesEngineering Specification Document (ESD)* 100 % YesInterface Control Document (ICD)* 100 % YesAssumptions Document (AD)* 100 % YesAcceptance Criteria List (ACL)** ≥ 80 % No✤

Test and Inspection Plan (TIP)** ≥ 70 % No✤

Work Instructions (WI)** ≥ 70 % No✤

Completed CAD models ≥ 90 % No‡Drawings (layouts, assemblies and fabrication drawings) ≥ 90 % No‡Bill of Materials (BOM) ≥ 90 % No‡Draft Production Rate and Schedule ≥ 30 % No‡*See Appendix A for maturity definitions.**See AL-1145-6967 for maturity definitions.✤Required to be clearly labeled with a ‘DRAFT’ watermark, if provided to an external review committee (not a LBNL employee)‡Are completed and ready for release to DCC immediately following the FDR. Required to be clearly labeled with a ‘DRAFT’ watermark, if provided to an external review committee (not a LBNL employee).

7.4 Implementation Phase

The implementation phase includes the manufacturing readiness, procurement readiness, fabrication and assembly, and commissioning phases. The following reviews are included in the implementation phase: Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR), Procurement Readiness Review (PRR), System Acceptance Review (SAR), Beamline Readiness Review





(BRR), and Accelerator Readiness Review (ARR). These reviews are described in further details below.

7.4.1 Manufacturing Readiness Phase and Review

The manufacturing readiness phase is an evaluation of all QA and technical documents to ensure they have attained sufficient maturity to proceed with either the procurement readiness phase, if manufactured externally, or the start of fabrication, if manufactured by LBNL. A Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR) is performed to conclude the manufacturing readiness phase of the project. Per the graded approach, it is common practice to combine the MRR with the Procurement Readiness Review (PRR); refer to Table 7.1 to determine if the MRR is combined with other reviews. Additionally, it is also common that the MRR is held as an internal review (external reviewers can be invited if warranted by the Chief Engineer).

7.4.1.1 MANUFACTURING READINESS PHASE DELIVERABLES

Table 7.8 indicates the deliverables required to complete the manufacturing readiness phase. The manufacturing readiness phase is concluded with a MRR. Maturity level details for QA deliverables (ACL, TIP, and WI) are defined in the QA Document Maturity Definition matrix (AL-1145-6967). An internal ALS-U MRR checklist (AL-1130-4639) shall be completed to assist the System Manager and or CAM to plan and execute the review.

Table 7.8: List of deliverables for the manufacturing readiness phase.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMMRR presentation(s) 100 % YesAcceptance Criteria List (ACL)** ≥ 90 % YesTest and Inspection Plan (TIP)** ≥ 90 % YesWork Instructions (WI)** ≥ 90 % YesCompleted CAD models 100 % YesDrawings (layouts, assemblies and fabrication drawings) 100 % YesBill of Materials (BOM) 100 % YesProduction Rate and Schedule ≥ 90 % No‡**See AL-1145-6967 for maturity definitions.‡Is completed and ready for release to DCC immediately following the MRR. Required to be clearly labeled with a ‘DRAFT’ watermark, if provided to an external review committee (not a LBNL employee).





7.4.1.2 REQUIRED APPROVAL FOR MANUFACTURING READINESS PHASE COMPLETION

To successfully complete the manufacturing readiness phase of the project, the ALS-U MRR checklist (AL-1130-4639) has to be officially released to the DCC by the appropriate approvers as defined in chapter Error: Referencesource not found. The approval is performed after the MRR is performed and all items listed in the checklist have been completed.

7.4.2 Procurement Readiness Phase and Review

The procurement readiness phase is an evaluation that all the necessary documents have been developed to proceed with procurement. The procurement readiness phase is concluded with a Procurement Readiness Review (PRR). Per the graded approach, the PRR is commonly combined with the MRR; see Table 7.1 to determine if the PRR is combined with other reviews. Additionally, it is also common that the PRR is reviewed internally (external reviewers can be invited if determined by the Chief Engineer or Project Manager).

7.4.2.1 PROCUREMENT READINESS REVIEW DELIVERABLES

Table 7.9 indicates the deliverables required to complete the procurement readiness phase. The procurement readiness phase of the project is concluded with the completion of the PRR. Maturity level details for QA deliverables (ACL, TIP, and WI) are defined in the QA Document Maturity Definition matrix (AL-1145-6967). An internal ALS-U PRR checklist (AL-1134-3102) shall be completed to assist the System Manager and or CAM to plan and execute the review.

Table 7.9: List of deliverables for the procurement readiness phase.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMPRR presentation(s) 100 % YesAcceptance Criteria List (ACL)** ≥ 90 % YesTest and Inspection Plan (TIP)** ≥ 90 % YesWork Instructions (WI)** ≥ 90 % YesCompleted CAD models 100 % YesDrawings (layouts, assemblies and fabrication drawings) 100 % YesBill of Materials (BOM) 100 % Yes





DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMTechnical Procurement Requirements Document (TPRD), if applicable 100 % Yes

Interface Drawing(s), if applicable 100 % YesStatement of Work (SOW) ≥ 90 % YesProduction rate and schedule ≥ 90 % No‡**See AL-1145-6967 for maturity definitions.‡Is completed and ready for release to DCC immediately following the MRR. Required to be clearly labeled with a ‘DRAFT’ watermark, if provided to an external review committee (not a LBNL employee).

7.4.2.2 REQUIRED APPROVAL FOR PROCUREMENT READINESS PHASE COMPLETION

To successfully complete the procurement readiness phase, the ALS-U PRR checklist (AL-1134-3102) has to be officially released to DCC by the appropriate approvers as defined in chapter Error: Reference source notfound. The approval is performed after the PRR is performed and all items listed in the checklist have been completed.

7.4.3 Fabrication and Assembly Phase and Review

The purpose of the fabrication and assembly phase of the project is to have all components fabricated and assembled into subsystems. To ensure that the fabricated and assembled subsystems are completed in accordance to the technical specifications outlined either in the Engineering Specification Document (ESD) and/or Technical Procurement Requirements Document (TPRD), a System Acceptance Review (SAR) is performed. The completion of the SAR concludes the fabrication and assembly phase for a subsystem and allows for advancing the subsystem to assembly at the next higher level, or if at the highest assembly level, for installation into the ALS facility.

7.4.3.1 SYSTEM ACCEPTANCE REVIEW DELIVERABLES

Table 7.10 indicates the deliverables required for the fabrication and assembly phase of the project. The fabrication and assembly phase is concluded with a SAR. The SAR is to ensure that all the technical performances of the subsystem is achieved and can be integrated into the next higher level assembly or integration into the ALS facility. An internal





ALS-U SAR checklist (AL-1130-4640) shall be completed to assist the System Manager and or CAM to plan and execute the review.

Table 7.10: List of SAR deliverables.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMSAR presentation(s) 100 % YesNon-Conformance Report(s) 100 % YesDeviation Request(s) 100 % YesChange Request(s) 100 % Yes

7.4.3.2 REQUIRED APPROVAL FOR FABRICATION AND ASSEMBLY PHASE COMPLETION

To successfully complete the fabrication and assembly phase, the ALS-U SAR checklist (AL-1130-4640) has to be officially released to DCC by the appropriate approvers as defined in chapter Error: Reference source notfound. The approval is performed after the SAR is performed and all items listed in the checklist have been completed.

7.4.4 Removal and Installation Phase and Reviews

The purpose of the removal and installation phase is to remove existing systems (if necessary) from the ALS facility to be replaced with a new system developed by the ALS-U project. The removal and installation phase will ensure that all subassemblies are integrated and aligned into the ALS facility. The removal and installation phase is concluded with the Beamline Readiness Review (BRR) and Accelerator Readiness Review (ARR). The deliverables for the BRR and ARR are currently being developed between the ALS and ALS-U teams. The subsequent sections on the BRR and ARR will be completed once an agreement is reached between the ALS and ALS-U.

7.4.4.1 BEAMLINE READINESS REVIEW

TBD

7.4.4.2 ACCELERATOR READINESS REVIEW

TBD





7.4.5 Commissioning Phase and Review

The purpose of the commissioning phase is to demonstrate that the system meets the Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) and is ready to be turned over to ALS Operations. To complete the commissioning phase of the ALS-U project, an Operational Readiness Review (ORR) is conducted to demonstrate the performance of the system.

The outcome of the ORR is to demonstrate the operation a fully functional accelerator that meets the technical objectives defined by the KPPs and GRD, and have the as-built system fully documented.

7.4.5.1 OPERATIONAL READINESS REVIEW DELIVERABLES

Table 7.11 indicates the deliverables required to conclude the commissioning phase of the project. The conclusion of the commissioning phase is achieved by successfully completing the Operational Readiness Review (ORR). An internal ALS-U ORR checklist (AL-1130-4643) shall be completed to assist the System Manager and or CAM to plan and execute the review.

Table 7.11: List of deliverables for the commissioning phase.

DeliverableMaturit

yUnder

CMORR presentation(s) 100 % YesNon-Conformance Reports 100 % YesDeviation Requests 100 % YesUpdated CAD models to reflect as built condition 100 % YesUpdated drawings to reflect as built condition 100 % YesUpdated Bill of Materials (BOM) to reflect as built condition 100 % YesUser Instructions 100 % Yes

7.4.5.2 REQUIRED APPROVAL FOR COMMISSIONING PHASE COMPLETION

To successfully complete the commissioning phase, the ALS-U ORR checklist (AL-1130-4643) has to be officially released to DCC by the appropriate approvers as defined in chapter Error: Reference source not





found. The approval is performed after the ORR is performed and all items listed in the checklist have been completed.

8 APPROVERS OF THE REVIEW CHECKLISTS

Table 8.12 lists the approvers for the individual review checklists, which marks the completion of the particular review. The approval of the checklist occurs in Windchill and completion of the review is marked once published to the DCC.

Table 8.12: List of approvers required for the review checklist.

Review Approvers

Conceptual Design Review (CDR)

Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerLine Manager ‡

Preliminary Design Review (PDR)

Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerLine Manager ‡

Final Design Review (FDR)Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerLine Manager ‡

Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR)

Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerQA ManagerLine Manager ‡

Procurement Readiness Review (PRR)

Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerQA ManagerProcurement ManagerLine Manager ‡

System Acceptance Review (SAR)

Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerQA ManagerLine Manager‡

Beamline Readiness Review (BRR) TBD

Accelerator Readiness Review (ARR) TBD

Operational Readiness Review (ORR)

Chief EngineerSystems Engineering ManagerQA ManagerLine Manager‡





Review Approvers‡Work lead of the review manager: System Manager, Chief Engineer, Project Manager, Project Director.

9 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

This section identifies applicable documents that are considered to be a part of this document. All information contained in an applicable document shall be valid to the full extent, unless specifically noted within this document. Applicable documents shall be obtained from the LBNL Document Control Center (DCC).

Document Number Title

DOE O413.3B Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets

AL-1016-9437 ALS-U Design Review Report TemplateAL-1130-4636 ALS-U Preliminary Design Review Checklist AL-1130-4637 ALS-U Final Design Review Checklist AL-1130-4638 ALS-U Conceptual Design Review Checklist

AL-1130-4639 ALS-U Manufacturing Readiness Review Checklist

AL-1130-4640 ALS-U System Acceptance Review ChecklistAL-1130-4641 ALS-U Beamline Readiness Review ChecklistAL-1130-4642 ALS-U Accelerator Readiness Review ChecklistAL-1130-4643 ALS-U Operational Readiness Review ChecklistAL-1134-3102 ALS-U Procurement Readiness Review ChecklistAL-1145-4408 ALS-U Review ProcedureAL-1145-6967 ALS-U QA Maturity Document Matrix





Appendix A: MATURITY DEFINITION FOR ESD, ICD, AND AD

The definition of the maturity of the ESD, ICD, and AD are defined in Table9.13, Table 9.14 and, Table 9.15, respectively.

Table 9.13: Description of the maturity level for an Engineering Specification Document (ESD).

Phase (Review) Description

Maturity

1 (CDR) Identify stakeholder(s) Basic specifications are listed 25 %

2

High level specifications (from the conceptual design phase) are documented within the ESD template

Assigned unique ID number to each specification ESD is uploaded to Windchill

40 %

3

Complete list of specifications with unique ID numbers are documented within the ESD

All specifications are assigned a ‘specification definition’ (may, shall, should, or will)

ESD is uploaded to Windchill

75%

4 (PDR)

Specifications are understood and agreed upon with stakeholders; no ‘To Be Determined’ (TBD) and minority of specifications are at the ‘To Be Confirmed’ (TBC) state

Traceability of all specifications is completed ESD is checked and approved for release to DCC

90 %

5 (FDR)

All specifications are confirmed, understood and agreed upon with all stakeholders

ESD is checked and approved for release to DCCo Requires approval from the Change Control Board

100%

Table 9.14: Description of the maturity level for an Interface Control Document (ICD).


Maturity

1 (CDR)

Identify stakeholder(s) Basic interface connectivity and design envelopes are

identified Basic list of items to be delivered Basic list of hardware interfaces

25 %






Maturity

2

High level interfaces (from the conceptual design phase) are documented within the ICD template, including links to supporting documents

Assigned unique ID number to each interface ICD is uploaded to Windchill

40 %

3

Complete list of interfaces with unique ID numbers are documented within the ICD, including links to supporting documents

All interfaces are assigned a ‘interface type’ (ex. Mechanical, electrical, vacuum, volume claim, etc.)

ICD is uploaded to Windchill

75%

4 (PDR)

Interfaces are understood, agreed upon with stakeholders and implemented into the design; no ‘To Be Determined’ (TBD) and minority of specifications are at the ‘To Be Confirmed’ (TBC) state

The owner of each interface is defined and agreed upon ICD is checked and approved for release to DCC

90 %

5 (FDR)

All interfaces are confirmed, understood and agreed upon with all stakeholders

Interface agreements are fully implemented into the design

ESD is checked and approved for release to DCCo Requires approval from the Change Control Board

100%

Table 9.15: Description of the maturity level for an Assumption Document (AD).


Maturity

1 (CDR) All assumptions are documented in AD template that support phase 1 of the ESD and ICD 25 %

2

Verify that all assumptions from Phase 1 are still applicable

Update the AD to support phase 2 of the ESD and ICD AD is uploaded to Windchill

40 %

3


Update the AD to support phase 3 of the ESD and ICD AD is uploaded to Windchill

75%

4 (PDR)


Update the AD to support phase 4 of the ESD and ICD AD is checked and approved for release to DCC

90 %






Maturity

5 (FDR)


Update the AD to support phase 5 of the ESD and ICD AD is checked and approved for release to DCC

o Requires approval from the Change Control Board

100%


