revision historymatthewjohnson/review setup/als-u review... · web viewthese additional reviews are...

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 13

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Revision History..................................................................................................32 Approvals.............................................................................................................33 Abbreviations and Acronyms...............................................................................34 Introduction.........................................................................................................45 Review Process....................................................................................................4

5.1 Review Definitions.........................................................................................45.2 Review Preparation and Timeline.................................................................5

5.2.1 Charge Questions..................................................................................55.2.2 Review Presentation Topics..................................................................7

5.2.2.1 Design Phase Review Presentation Structure...................................75.2.2.2 Implementation Phase Review Presentation Structure.....................7

5.3 Review Execution..........................................................................................95.3.1 Step 1 – Identify Reviews......................................................................95.3.2 Step 2 – Assemble the Review Plan.......................................................95.3.3 Step 3 – Execute the Review Plan and Prepare for Review..................95.3.4 Step 4 – Hold the Review....................................................................105.3.5 Step 5 – Execute Post-Review Activities..............................................10

6 Applicable Documents.......................................................................................11

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.


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 EngineerWindchill Approved / Concurred By

3 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACL Acceptance Criteria ListALS Advanced Light SourceALS-U Advanced Light Source UpgradeARR Accelerator Readiness ReviewBOM Bill Of MaterialBRR Beamline Readiness ReviewCAD Computer Aided DesignCAM Control Account ManagerCDR Conceptual Design ReviewCMM Coordinate Measuring MachineDCC LBNL Document Control CenterDOE Department of EnergyDR Deviation RequestESD Engineering Specification DocumentFDR Final Design ReviewICD Interface Control DocumentKPP Key Performance ParameterLBNL Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryMRR Manufacturing Readiness ReviewNCR Non-Conformance ReportORR Operational Readiness ReviewPDR Preliminary Design ReviewPRR Procurement Readiness ReviewQA Quality AssuranceSAR System Acceptance ReviewSOW Statement Of WorkTIP Test and Inspection Plan





WI 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 wide review process has been developed to ensure a unified expectation of a review. The review process provides definitions, and processes leading up to, executing, and closing out a review.

5 REVIEW PROCESS

The following sections describe the review process to be applied to any of the reviews outlined in the ‘ALS-U Project Review Cycle’ (AL-1134-1533). This is to provide guidance to the required steps prior to carrying out the review, carrying out the review, and items required to complete the review.

5.1 Review Definitions

The following list provides definitions to the different terms used prior, during, and after the review:

Agenda – is a list of high-level items that will be presented during the review, and includes durations and presenter names.

Charge Questions – are questions to be answered by the review committee. Questions are typically broad in scope with yes/no answers. Section 5.2.1 lists example questions.

Comments – are items that are opinions or items of interest from the review committee. Comments are documented in the Review Report.

Dry Runs – are practice sessions for review presenters.

Findings – are factual restatements of important points presented during the review. Findings are documented in the Review Report.

Recommendations – are items that require a response by the project team. Recommendations are documented in the Review Report and are tracked to closure.





Review Date – is the date the review takes place. Depending on the review scope, a review can last one hour to multiple days. The date selected should reflect availability of the review committee members and the developed Primavera P6 schedule.

Review Materials – are documents supplied to the review committee. The minimum documents provided to the reviewers are described in the specific review deliverables found in Windchill under AL-1134-1533.

Review Report – is a document that contains the findings, comments, recommendations, and answers to the charge questions. The Review Committee Chair is responsible for completion of the Review Report and delivery to the Review Manager. The Review Report template can be found in Windchill under AL-1016-9437.

Stakeholder – are ALS-U members that are directly affected by the review outcome. Stakeholders at a minimum shall include CAMs that are identified as interfaces.

5.2 Review Preparation and Timeline

The Review Manager is responsible for executing or delegating the items listed in

prior to performing the review. The table and the items described within it comprise the review plan. The Review Manager shall generate a table specific to the review of interest that includes columns specifying the following for each table item:

Specific target completion dates, Name of the responsible individual (the Review Manager or a

delegate), Name of the approver, Names of individuals to be consulted, and Names of individuals to be informed.

Approvers are typically the technical manager one level above the Review Manager within the project organization.





5.2.1 Charge Questions

The following are examples of charge questions that can be used during the different phases of the review processes.

Preliminary and Final Design Review (PDR and FDR):

Are the specifications clearly defined? Does the design meet the specifications? Are technical risks identified and mitigations for addressing these

risks adequately defined? Are there other issues we should be aware of? Are the required materials for passing a PDR (or FDR) completed?

Table 5.1: Items that the Review Manager needs to complete prior to a technical review.

Description Minimum TimelineDevelop draft charge questions 4 – 8 weeks prior to

reviewDevelop draft agenda 4 – 8 weeks prior to

reviewSelect possible review date(s) 4 – 8 weeks prior to

reviewDetermine list of potential reviewers and review committee chair

4 – 8 weeks prior to review

Invite potential reviewers and review committee chair


Generate ALS-U stakeholders list that should be included in the review


Reserve room and invite attendees via Google Calendar


Arrange for review committee logistics (e.g. airfare, hotel, site access, parking) 4 weeks prior to reviewRequest conference services for any food and drink accommodations 4 weeks prior to reviewGenerate website or folder for reviewers to access review material and update invitation to include link to website or folder

2 weeks prior to review

Upload review material to website or folder and inform review committee that material is available for review

1 week prior to review

Perform dry runs 0.5 week prior to review

Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR):

Are the necessary maturity levels of the documents achieved and released to DCC?

Are all the CAD models, drawings, and Bill of Material (BOM) released to the DCC?





Any QA related items that need to be addressed such that the as built system can be evaluated?

Does the production rate and schedule meet the project overall delivery schedule?

Procurement Readiness Review (PRR):

Is Statement of Work (SOW) complete and clearly defines the procurement scope, schedule, and processes.

Are all the required documents to procure the component(s) and or system sufficient and released to DCC?

Does the procurement strategy meet all DOE regulations? Are there any procurement related items that need to be addressed

prior to initiating the procurement process?System Acceptance Review (SAR):

Are all the non-conformance reports (NCR), deviation requests (DR) documented and released to DCC?

Were all the accepted non-conformance reports (NCR) and deviation requests (DR) evaluated to meet the technical objective of the projects?

Did any of the accepted non-conformance reports and deviation requests indicate any concern for the project to meet its objective?

Are there any other component(s) or system(s) tests need to be performed prior to start of the Removal and Installation phase of the project?

Operational Readiness Review (ORR):

Was the project able to demonstrate that it has met its KPP thresholds?

Was the project able to demonstrate that it has met its KPP objectives?

Are there any other operational tests that need to be carried out prior to closing out the project?

Any other items that need to be addressed prior to closing out the project?

5.2.2 Review Presentation Topics

The following describes the suggested structure for the Design and Implementation Phase reviews.

5.2.2.1 DESIGN PHASE REVIEW PRESENTATION STRUCTURE

Depending on the scope of a review, the items outlined in Table 5.2 could be covered in a single presentation or in multiple presentations. The goal is





that the items should be addressed to show the review committee that the required level of maturity along with supporting evidence that the design selected meets project performance, cost and schedule.

5.2.2.2 IMPLEMENTATION PHASE REVIEW PRESENTATION STRUCTURE

The Manufacturing Readiness Review (MRR), Procurement Readiness Review (PRR), System Acceptance Review (SAR), Beamline Readiness Review (BRR), Accelerator Readiness Review (ARR), and Operational Readiness Review (ORR) are all part of the Implementation Phase of the project review cycles. Each of these individual reviews have specific items that should be addressed during the review.

Error: Reference source not found provides guidelines of the topics to be covered during the reviews.





Table 5.2: Guidelines for topics to be covered during a PDR or FDR.Item Description

Overview Show overview of the design Explain the primary function of the design Explain how subassemblies are connected Show project team

Specifications Show how are specifications are captured in DCC with revision control

List major specifications (can be categorized in shall and goals) of the design for reviewers to adequately evaluate the design (e.g. global requirements, National Codes, vacuum, stability, alignment, material restrictions, safety system)

Provide reference to Engineering Specification Document (ESD)

Interfaces Reference Interface Control Document (ICD) List major interfaces (e.g. volume claims, mechanical and

electrical interfaces, utilities)Design Show and describe the design details

Use analysis and or test results to show that specifications are met

Show integration and alignment strategy as a story board. The story board shows major assembly and alignment steps.

Alignment methods (e.g. use of laser tracker, levels, CMM, tape measure)

QA Documentations Show overview of QA documents How will specifications be verified

Maturity Show number of documents in progress vs completed and the maturity of these documents (e.g. ESDs, ICDs, ADs, CAD models, drawings, BOM, ACL, TIP, WI)

Safety and Ergonomics

List safety issues or concerns that are inherent with the design (e.g. stored energy (springs, pressure vessel), exposed electrical contacts, radiation shielding, high magnetic fields, noise and or thermal hazards, pinch points

List safety concerns during assembly, integration, and alignment

What engineering controls are in place EH&S items that govern the design

Risks and how they are managed

Show top risk items and how they are being managed Mitigation strategy What is the consequence if the risk occurs? Cost and schedule implications

Cost and Schedule Show overall schedule (design, manufacturing, procurement, assembly, integration, and alignment)

Highlight interdependencies to other portions of the project with milestones

Provide cost and effort estimates How many FTEs?





Table 5.3: Guidelines for topics to be covered during a PDR or FDR.

TopicApplicable Review Description

Overview All

Show overview of the design Explain the primary function of the

design Explain how subassemblies are

connected Show project team

Documents Released to DCC All

Show the number of documents released to DCC.

Indicate any documents that still need to be released to DCC.

Test results SARORR

Show and discuss how the results met the specifications

5.3 Review Execution

5.3.1 Step 1 – Identify Reviews

Required reviews are identified using a graded approach as outlined in AL-1134-1533, with specific component/subsystem granularity determined by the CAM in consultation with the associated System Manager. Additional technical reviews may be identified by CAMs, Systems Managers, or other project staff as needed. These additional reviews are proposed to the Chief Engineer, Systems Engineering Manager, QA Manager, Procurement Manager, or Project Office and may be added to the project’s list of reviews. The project’s list of reviews is managed by the Systems Engineering Manager and approved by the Chief Engineer, Project Manager, and Project Director.

5.3.2 Step 2 – Assemble the Review Plan

System Managers, in consultation with the Chief Engineer, identifies a Review Manager for each review on the project’s review list as the date of the review approaches (two to three months prior to the review). The Review Manager creates a review plan table (ref. Section 5.2) and communicates the plan to the review plan’s approvers, consultants, and informed individuals.





5.3.3 Step 3 – Execute the Review Plan and Prepare for Review

The Review Manager executes the activities on the review plan, or delegates their execution. The following items are available to the Review Manager for developing review plan activities:

Example charge questions (Section 5.2.1) Guidelines for topics to be covered in review presentations (Section

5.2.2)The Review Manager also ensures review deliverables are on track to reach the required maturity levels prior to the review, using the following review checklists:

AL-1130-4638 for CDRs AL-1130-4636 for PDRs AL-1130-4637 for FDRs AL-1130-4639 for MRRs AL-1134-3102 for PRRs AL-1130-4640 for SARs AL-1130-4641 for BRRs AL-1130-4642 for ARR AL-1130-4643 for ORR

The primary role of the Review Manager during this step is preparing the review presenters and the project team for a successful review. In this capacity, the Review Manager is expected to take an active role in shaping the message, anticipating potential reviewer questions, and unifying the presentation material into a cohesive narrative.

The Review Manager should reach out to the Review Committee Chair in preparation for the review, to ensure common understanding of the purpose and nature of the review, agreement on the agenda proposed by the Review Manager, and to provide an opportunity for the Review Committee to request specific information of interest.

5.3.4 Step 4 – Hold the Review

The Review Manager serves as the primary point of contact to the ALS-U project team and the Review Committee Chair serves as the primary point of contact to the Review Committee. A quorum is achieved, once all the review committee members are present; unless the Review Committee Chair deems that it appropriate to continue without the full review committee. During the review, the Review Committee Chair directs the flow





of the review and may request additional information or modifications to the agenda. The project’s response to requests are directed through the Review Manager, typically in consultation with the other project team members such as System Managers, Chief Engineer, Project Manager and Project Director.

5.3.5 Step 5 – Execute Post-Review Activities

Technical reviews typically include a draft presentation of initial review findings, comments, recommendations, and charge question answers during the close-out portion towards the end of the review day(s) given by the Review Committee. This is followed by a formal written Review Report in the days or weeks following the review date.

Activities to be completed after the review is held include:

Documenting the recommendations in the project’s Recommendations Tracker

Responding to recommendations that arose out of the review Updating and finalizing documents as needed Completing remaining checklist items, if any Releasing the review checklist to DCC with approval by the requisite

project staffo Refer to AL-1134-1533 for the list of approvers for different

reviews

6 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 TitleAL-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 ChecklistAL-1130-4639 ALS-U Manufacturing Readiness Review ChecklistAL-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 Checklist





AL-1134-1533 ALS-U Project Review CycleAL-1134-3102 ALS-U Procurement Readiness Review Checklist


