FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

S?gvan mag
Sieven


HG)

steven.mEHer@osd.mil




 

 

FOR USE ONLY

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 

?e  Her

 BSD CAPE  ..

 

?b'?d?7:43:21". 339%? Wdi'hrwerain?

93:4: 

 

Production schedule



        

 

I. '5 .-

63 through FPU cost

. 

   

- - gt. . . . ..L: a
Era-pn"Tani-?xv.--. . . I - 



33.3; L. .I.

?E'otal To-Go' cost

-. I 
$333377! .. . . -, '11. li?lff .Additional estimate 1. Bottoms?up estimate boil! by site 1. increases upfront system
contractor teams assuman an FY19 engineering and siows component
eta H5 FPU daie design
2. Does not include management reserve 2. ICA rephases FTE staffing for 2022
3. Includes of Ef?ciencies? FPU date
3. ICA escalation labor costs at 4%
4. RCA funds a more robust Govi program
of?ce -

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY . 2

FOR USE ONLY

stirnating cnaenaesiietmt

 

-. . 1W. . . l-o 

Data issues
Minimal historical information (costs, statiing', d: sci'ieduie)
initiai B??l WIS and criticai path just completed in Hate Jone 
Detailed risk burn-down pian unciear 

Site statiing plans do not identi? source of statfing (is, new hire, transier?in,
existing), so of sta "ing ramp-op is unknown

[No format Forward Price Rate Agreements to support labor cost estimate

a No documented detaiied technical! it; programmatic definition of the
program, a Cost Analysis Requirements Document (CARD)

Data from many different sources late in process (PM/site briefs, emaiis,
handouts, discussions); need to validate internal consistency of data

a Not a tail iite cycie 

Estimates are limited to development 8: production costs, no estimate oi
sustainmentlsurveillance costs

Equivalent to an independent Cost Assessment {iCAi

ifiicut to assess reiative technical and programmatic complexity oi
[861 compared to prior LEPs
Sandie claims efiort is 3 to 4 times the etiort oi WJB LEP

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

FDR USE ONLY
.
roamaoa

-.-.-- .-.. .- .. .-. 

18 major components 29 major components

 . - Tit;
. 1 Percussion battery assem 
2 . 4
31369591 3 Main battery assembiy

43Puise battery assembly 

S'Center bom'o assembly

??coded switch a
option control switch 5
3- Electron-11:5 easembiy controller 
9 Firing set- coo I 4?

41Poco 

5 Over voltage gap

6?Gei myiat capacitor
7_Terminal protection device


n.
t.

L?r.
ur-

35?

.T
I

3-7.
i.


   

 8 intent Stronglink 
 9 Trajectory Stronglink  10 Foams'pads?g' o?r'rfgs 
..55.. 11 5
JO'Laanch accel lmpantsensor I 5?
ll'Thermai battery assembiy . 13 Junctionth 4
- 14?Eletronic neutron generator 5
35.:Nese 1.19mi? .Sebassembiv
laival IVE -- -- 16:Pre?ight bomb so baasembly
_14-igmter 1?fPreflight controller 4
15: Preoet oabie 18:Pn'mary 3 I I 
16 LAC 19.?uliout switch assembly 
4
17 Thermal battery - - 21 Holamite . 
i .
5C0 pe '18 Purge ya we - a  SCOPQ 22 secondary 5
13 Spun rocket motor
Full NEP 8; upgrade Fui? NEP 8: upgradeplatform integration mi) 3?39 mos non?nuc 335' 26 Componentsuite
components 27.5y5tem cables 
2E. weapon control unit 2
5 platform integrations, ZQ'System 1/2 adapter

requiring much more system
integration, quali?cation, 8:
certi?cation activities

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 4

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Sosa Esrlmaro Memoo?ology

 

05D CAPE 

-. -. n; 

a Cosk Estimate 3 Schedule a FTEs/yr 3: annual Labor a- ll-llaterlal 

0 Schedule evaluation
Comparison to historical programs
AsseSsment of program plan
Modeling of program schedule

0 Labor costs
Assessmen?adjus?ment or staf?ng plans and labor rate

a Material
of labor costs by phase

*9 Many embedded assumptions duo Eo sparse data
Material costs as function or [labor costs
Labor rate cost growth
Executability of staf?ng plans
Production schedule, producl?oo stalling levels, 8: ?xed costs

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY . 5

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 

GSD CAPE 

 

.H l. . 

.. ..- .. 

FY01 FY02 was W04 Innewme em: I mo
W75 action starts

 
 


. r? 




 

FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY 21

 

   
 

  

.. "n  . .- #F?th?
853 we?  --  3. FPUIProductIon starts

 

 

weamt  FPUJPmduc?onstans

 

9 W76 9 B61 

7 day work weeks (via 01') for 4 5 day work weeks
Years 0? componems Constrained by FY19 due date

2002 Planning Estimate projec?ied initial EMS critica? path just
2007 actual FPU in 2008 finished

13+ months 0f deveuopment reqUired Sandia estimates 861 is exex more
post-FPU to correct issues due E0 compaex man W76, but WDCR
?ow ?ech maturity/concurrency [projects a Shorter development

schedu?e with more concurrency

Concurrent with W88 Alt (new 
1/2 the scope of BM

Sempee?sen ice W?m EH3 eeteeg echedme Endim?es
eel LEP execution are very eggress?ve ?e meet eme

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 6

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 

 

 

   
 

 

  

     
  

 

- - ..   - . - .0.  . -. .. .. BSD 
FY12 FY13 H14 FMS
- j; .  61 - '9  Sandia compenent design staffing pian
      {02) appears {to iead System Engineering
373;: 535 if; if; 01) effort 4% requirements flow-down SE
  3.23:. 2321.:   staffing {01.01)

    



 

eel-35502.91. . . . .

 0am.  -

raga; 303.91.. 

02-26.. 
@155 EEC. . .
 12.1.4 .   .
. .-

 

Capital Equlpment

FOR OFF1CIAL USE ONLY

    

am. .. 

59000500313; - ..  . 

_qre?e?sa'at?r. ..  -.- 
rem- _cpuelraumnmeb.-. 
  .  ..  .
.  

02?33.; - lmp??SFUier. - . .

Elia-.13. - - 
sh?aev??inareer 

 .. managearww . . . . . - . . -
Freezes Mqrm?sew?lr. .

9113.5 . . . 
 .- -.

033-?! .  . 

93. - - rmmadslnem?qn - . .
5:191 .. - - 
. -Elsweresmem. . .. . .
010.3 . .B?ll?rmlw 

9.2201. . ..

??41.55. .- 593.529.951.35 .. - 

0.90
1.21
5.35
4.22
9.57
1.1.5
2035
2.47
2.35
5.02
15.94:
9.85
0.00
13.0:
14.59
2.26
2.01
1.54
1.15
18.06
34:02
14.51
3.34
3.50
7.45
0.10
0.00

4.11
338
1.53
38.11
SLDB
15.20
4.75
17.05
14.50

58
52.50
1.5.20
4.25

17.05
16.00

17.05
15.73
SLED
E53
11.98
5.61
5.25
4.58
3.11


FTEs

54.120

15. 20
4.5

13.05
1.150

700

600

500

300

200

100

if??
00


5?



:0

 

  
       
 
  
 
  
 
  

10 Program matics

   
 
  
  
      
   





  
 
   
 
  
 
   

   
   
         
     
 

13:3 i' *j 
   Engineering
:95 529;

55"" Other 558.:

2

I
n.

p. 


  
  
  

?a'r --


-:


3.. 5 

 

 a Component Deveiopment

 

 

 

?77 Ea?

 

 
  
    
  

 

at .

at 

1'
Hul?.? 

somv?

.w  

. ?95'  .. . 3c:- 

 ?54 -.  
arm-I may {u 

FYLZ FY13 FYlti FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24

 
 

 

effort is unusuaiiy low for a
program of this size

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 

- Ire-hunt    

 

.

oro'nl- 

it. - 
FY12 FY13 FY14 I FY15 FY16 FY18 - FY19 FYgo FY21 3 FY23
.10 4121210 2Q 30 40 1a 20330?40?10?2d3?=4d10 20:30:40 '10220 30kg 

        
  
  

. . ,Assumed . 
FY19 FPU 1

 

 

 

. 
timer

my?; .
dag-?12811?

.79..

 

1- - i 

FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY15 FY18 FY21 . FY22
10 2c. 30 40 10:20:30 40413-20 30 Maegan-221510120 30 40:10 20.305401102030549 020330 40:10 20:30:40

I
1'

Enghearing Gale

are?Fact Reduction 13am 

 

1% east we yeatr sEEp due Fedm?ng the mmwa?emy ?n Cche 3

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 8

FOR OFHCIAL USE ONLY

   

1FY12 FY13 'Fm . FY15 ms FY17 FY13 Fm me m1 m2
30340 10203:: 40.10 zufao 40.10 20'?30}!0 10.20 30 40 1o .20 30 rec?1a 20 40 10 20 30.{mgga??a??i Radar FRT

I  

  
   
   

 

 

 

 

 

 ?.GmupPRTS assumed FY19 FPU

 

Han 1-m-
glagqgg?tji?fggfaaw?aFY15 FY16 FY17 . FY19   
30.40 10_20_30 4O 10 10 20 60:10520 30340 20 30140 10 '20530 40 10:20;

a BEISCthuli: 9 5.3i 

.
44 391.Radar FRI   - Dav ?uid Chant! PET 5
i

  
 

     
                   

 

- mas

Emma 

 

 

 

  

?2 ..  - I 1

 

 

 

-
31:" 35-331 Mfr-z.  

 

Ream?ag m1?mw'a??aegaacw?a?e :11 aa?s?awmsn magma apnea 533p 

 

- . .. - . . -
- .14 .
3-. . .

       

  

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 

.. - .  ..  059 CA PE 

I A- most likely doration

Step 1: Use PM input to fit a Weibull distribution 5 3
?Start with PM estimates of PRT min/most likely/max costs  
.Convert to schedule duration (Time S), max duration 125% of PM dlu?a?lm max duration
duration if max cost 125% of PM most likely costs 5 t} \l 

=Fit a Weibull distribution using derived min/most likely/max durations 5 ?J?h?li'lbviEB on PM inpult

 

 

Step 2: Model 861 3~cycle development with Weibulls
-Use ?tted Weiboli from Step 1 for each development cycle, using PM cycle duration as input for most likely
~Stochastical y sum up resolts of each distribution to get aggregate distribution (probability distribution function 

 

      

 

 

 

 
 
    
 

 

 
 

 

i a 
333it; +211: +i'535 Fri-2'  FY13 FY14 Fins  FY16 FYW FY18 FY19 5 . .1: .1  ?Hui i I
PM 861 PI _io'2o;3ci 4o 1o;2o 30.4o?io 2o so 40:10:20530 nio?io 2ofao=4ojioaogao 40 
i-ussas,? Jr." ?c - ?Ti-"Ti?some 
hank-71w?? urn-f- aAaabw?Jl?-u?lnm

 

 

 

Probability vs FPU Da

     

1m 
Step 3: Convert PDF to (SPF (cumulative distribution function) to g.  
Show cumulative probability of FPU tor a given date Lg 75" 
'3
503:
.2



 

0%

aageognaagmazzoowaaoigea
FOROFFICIALUSEDNLY 



 

WA mm 

. -. urn-.-

 

. 

uu.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

. a!
 
. I?l 
InfStaf?ng Plan an I   wrote  
359 Enga Integration
300 1' ?Component

3 Development
- 25o 
'FY12 FYM FY16 FY18 FY20 FY21 FYM FY25

 

   
  
 
 

  
    

 

 

61 Development Staffing at Sandia

FTEI350 1.-.. . ., -.  -.  .. 5753138?  
3'50 f"  
Dwelopmenl
250 - - 

200  I


I- .. 

 

. 1.. .-. 

FY12 FY15 FY36 FY15 FY20 m4 FY25

 

ICA adjusts Sandie B61 development sitaf?ng to achieve moderate risk FY22 FPU
- increases SE in FY13-22 and slows component design staf?ng relative to WDCR
Other site?s staffing plans shifted by 3 years to tie ?nnto SNL effort

Ia Realistic labor cost growth
ln general. NNSA labor cost has grown at lwice
lhe OMB in?ation rate, resulting in significant
loss. of buying power over the past decade
reflects 4% per annum labor cost growth
Assuming only 2% annual labor cost growth

results in a 16% loss of buying power 

FOR USE ONLY

-
{501$ -

ran-5?

 

Direct Labor Loss o5 Buying Power

 

4 



5%

 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
050 CA PE

I .

- wuru?hgurganh'uovr'r .

Tota? contractor staffing at:

BSandia

aKansas City Plant

?Pentax

91.05 Alamos
?Hf-12

 

 Sia?mg Pm?

 

Eng

?mm Staff

{r p- .Itrr. .. .. . 

?tvvl . in:

?n 



. ?Enriquu? 




5m ICA Pmductlm hourly
mm: 103 Producticn salary

mica Contact edmln

 

 



.

  



    

  



gawn?w?ggaging?g,

          

  

 

 ONE

 

GSavannah River

handy

mm ICA Pmduction




.wan


 

54;:qu ICA Contract Ech dev

kahuna? ??hn 4 ??uu?nrra
ring-{l 



at?  

 

  

wraith.er IETFE
. .

 nun-Kr??an wn . {Ear-f. 

.

um?rl . .3. .1. ?hurrah: H. .. aunt.

Ludhr?r?turnvh

   

.l. lu

.
.. .1

 

 

     

913w

 

 

 

 

 

  NH:



mwmo

311

 

 

aim ICA Employee admin
 ICA Employee tech dew


 

Contract admin
tantrum tech dev

 


  2E
mg

 

..
 

mum-J. Employee admin
Employee ted.II.. Iii-huh Hui.?

 

 

 

 

 

Total Deveiopmen?t Staffing 

 

QQmpar?sm? WA and




 

q.

?wam?nmiu?h?hgm?? NE


 Hglanl.

 



5 A. 3..

 

12

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

 

 

  
  

 

   

  

    
  
 



Suntotai

  

.. 

Recommendations:

 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ly?di

 

     
 

 

510.0 50.2 wocn Kce ef?ciencia

net in ICE

$0.3 a Adequaielv started Gav
PMO

51.1 Realistic la but cost
gram}: 

51.9 a FY12 FPU

30.3 a Sun I: costs

WDCR CAPEJCA

 

52.0:?
9[

Federal PM office needs growth above onrren?i size (3 FTE) to reasonabiy

manage a $108 861 program
HCA esiima?ied 45 FTEs by FY15

Program Review shouid inciude

Presentation of detailed risk burn down pians
Risk mitigation plans and decision points

Compietion of a written program de?nition CARD)
Review of Earned Value meirics and of coniraetuai daia requirements on cosi data

renaming

CAPE ice shouid be requested prior to 5.4 auinorizaiion

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

?13

P.1d!