PROVOST AND EXECUTIVE VICE CHANCELLOR GREY
Office of the Provost
CHAIR ROMSTAD
Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Re: Network 21 Budget and Policy Oversight Committee Quarterly Report-March 1995
Dear Bob and Karl:
The Network 21 Budget and Policy Oversight Committee initiated its review of the Network 21 Project budget in early January. The immediate and urgent business of the Committee was to respond to the $23 million cap established in Provost Grey's November 23, 1994 letter to Associate Vice Chancellor Barone. The Committee considered the following information during its re-assessment of the Project budget: (1) the Adamson Consulting firm's updated estimate of costs of outside and inside wire plants; (2) the size of the project budget contingency; (3) the costs of implementing the new asbestos abatement regulations (between $300,000 and $1 million) which became effective on January 1, 1995; (4) a possible project add-on (increase in fiber count from 72 to 144 strands); and (5) specific reductions in scope to stay within the new $23 million Project budget.
The Committee approved reductions to the scope of the Network 21 Project by eliminating outside plant to certain sectors, terminating outside plant at the nearest point to others, and by reducing the population of electronics. The Committee also approved an increase to the Project by doubling the fiber count in the outside wiring plant to assure network capacity will be adequate well into the 21 at Century.
In addition, the Committee reviewed a detailed breakdown of the budget contingency and concluded that it should be increased by $400,000 to a total of $2.5 million. The Project Management Team will treat the contingency funds as a reserve requiring that expenditures from those funds receive the prior approval of the Budget and Policy Oversight Committee. This procedure provides the opportunity to consider whether to use unexpended contingency funds to: (1) add additional value to the Project; (2) reduce the total cost of the Project so that funds saved may be used for non-Network 21 purposes; or (3) some combination of both these alternatives.
Attached are revised copies of the Network 21 Project Budget Worksheets identifying the elements of the new Project budget including the changes noted in the above paragraphs.
The Committee used the following criteria for deleting buildings to stay within the $23 million project cap: (1) outside of the core campus; (2) low density occupancy, (3) temporary building; (4) bams, greenhouses, utility structures; (5) availability of another funding source; and (6) availability of temporary alternatives for connectivity. The Project originally included approximately 300 structures. The revised Project is reduced to 131 definite connections and 88 "add alternates."
Carole Barone, on behalf of the Committee, notified the unit heads affected by the outside and/or inside plant deletions and discussed options Mth them. If a unit head was able to make funds available, the deleted building/plant has been included in the Request for Quotations (RFQ) as a regular part of the Project. Otherwise, the deleted buildings/plant are being bid as "add alternates" in the RFQ. The Commiffee's decision to bid the Project with the deleted buildings included as "add alternates" provides yet more time to work with the affected units to identify alternative funding. The Project team is keeping the Committee apprised of its progress.
The issues raised during the Committee's discussions about whether to extend Network 21 connectivity to Temporary Buildings (TB's) have caused considerable anguish and frustration for both Committee members and those persons who may be adversely impacted by the priority-sefting. There are serious concerns about maldng substantial capital investments in TB's and other small, older structures. However, it is clear that there are many very important campus programs housed in these facilities. Painful compromises have allowed Information Technology to proceed with the project, but the Campus will be forced to continue making these choices. The Committee has agreed to further consider the capital investment issues posed by the TB's and similar structures with the o active of developing a Campus strategy for consideration by the Campus Administration.
The Budget and Policy Oversight Committee reviewed construction schedule altemaflves and has recommendedthat IT implement the more conservative of the two schedules (attached). The selected schedule will add approximately five months to the length of the Project. However, the schedule has the advantages of avoiding new burdens to the contingency fund and having work progress at a pace that minimizes the risk of construction errors and conflicts.
The Committee moved expeditiously to finalize the building list for the Project and to provide Information Technology,vAth the decisions needed to finalize specifications for the RFQ. However, the reductions in the Project and associated delays may cause problems. For example, the change in scope and the delays may require the reopening of negotiations with the Digital Equipment Corporation and increase the cost of electronics. In addition, delays have resulted in the loss of the window of opportunity to do the trenching for the Project during this coming summer. Moreover, a gr,ovang number of units are realizing that they are unable to wait for Network 21 connectivity and are placing work orders for interim connections, parts of which will be incompatible with Network 21. Finally, IT projections indicate that, at the current rate of network traffic growth, the existing network will be saturated by October 1996. The present schedule anticipates a fully implemented Network 21 several months after that date on July 1, 1997. IT and the Oversight Committee will do everything possible to minimize those potential problems.
Carole Barone sent a letter to the Deans and Vice Chancellors informing them that electronics cabinets will require space in the buildings to be connected. The letter identified the buildings to be connected and the specific space needed for the electronics. Units have requested substantial changes in the location of the electronics cabinets. Compromises %(ill be necessary.
The Oversight Committee has appointed three subcommittees to develop the various components of "a detailed Network 21 Completion and Utilization Plan" as requested in Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor Grey's November 23, 1994 memorandum to Carole Barone. The Committee will work as quickly as possible to provide the Plan, but we are not optimistic about meeting the May 1, 1995 deadline. The Committee believes that it will need more time to develop a well-conceived Plan. Attached are copies of the Subcommittee descriptions and their memberships.
The three Subcommittees are meeting regularly to pursue their respective parts of the Plan. Following consultation with the Oversight Committee, the Network Build-Out Subcommittee is working on establishing pdority-sefting guidelines for Network Build-Out, developing a process for approving buildings for addition to the network, and identifying a pool of funds to cover all or part of the costs for build-out. The Network Operations Subcommittee is collecting a broad range of financial information to use as background in its consideration of how the campus should fund ongoing network operations. The Desktop Capability Subcommittee is revievang the hardware and software configurations recommended by a separate Information Technology Outreach Program (ITOP) committee that is chaired by Joan Gargano.
Several Network 21 status reports have been provided during the VVinter Quarter. Jerry Hallee, Doug Hartline and Carole Barone met vath Karl Romstad on January 12 to apprise him of the initial Committee decisions. Carole Barone, Doug Hartline, and AJan Jackman briefed the Senate's Committee on Academic Planning and Budget Review and the chair of the Senate Committee on Research on February 2. Madi Stratton and Susanne Rockwell were also briefed so they could produce the February 10, 1995 Dateline UCD story on Network 2 1. Additional stores will appear in Dateline during the Spring Quarter.
The next, quarterly wriften report will be provided to you at the end of the Spring Quarter. Periodic briefings for interested Senate Committees and other community organizations will likely also be presented during the Spring Quarter.
Sincerely,
Carole Barone
Gerald R. Hallee
/dy