The PDF version 
Display Related Directives to this directive.
Display Reference Documents to this directive.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ORDER
Washington, D.C. DOE O 413.3A
Approved: 7-28-06
SUBJECT: PROGRAM AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF
CAPITAL ASSETS
1. OBJECTIVES.
a. To provide the Department of Energy (DOE), including the National
Nuclear Security Administration, with project management direction for
the acquisition of capital assets with the goal of delivering projects
on schedule, within budget, and fully capable of meeting mission
performance, safeguards and security, and environmental, safety, and
health standards.
b. To implement Office of Management and Budget Circulars A-11 Part
7, A-123, A-127, and A-130.
c. To implement DOE P 413.1, Program and Project Management Policy
for the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Acquisition of Capital
Assets, dated 6?10-00.
2. CANCELLATIONS.
DOE O 413.3, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of
Capital Assets, dated 10-13-00. Cancellation of an Order does not by
itself modify or otherwise affect any contractual obligation to comply
with the Order. Contractor Requirements Documents containing directive
requirements that have been applied to a contract remain in effect
until the contract is modified to eliminate or replace requirements
from canceled directives.
Further, DOE O 413.3A cancels Chapters 1 through 3 of DOE M 413.3-1,
Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, dated 3-28-
03, and takes precedence over the Manual where conflicts exist.
3. APPLICABILITY.
a. DOE Elements.
The requirements identified in this Order are mandatory for all DOE
Elements (unless identified in the exclusions paragraph), including the
National Nuclear Security Administration, for all capital asset
acquisition projects having a Total Project Cost or Environmental
Management Total Project Cost for Clean-Up Projects greater than or
equal to $20 Million (M).
The principles as set forth in this Order and Project Assessment and
Reporting System reporting requirements apply to all projects with a
Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost
greater than or equal to $5M. While all requirements are to be
addressed, the approach to meeting the requirements should be tailored
consistent with the risk, complexity, visibility, cost, safety,
security, and schedule of the project. All programs and projects shall
comply with applicable laws, regulations, Executive orders, and DOE
directives.
The Under Secretary, National Nuclear Security Administration will
assure that National Nuclear Security Administration employees and
contractors comply with their respective responsibilities under this
directive. Any reference in this Order to the Program Secretarial
Officer is also applicable to the Deputy Administrator/Associate
Administrators, National Nuclear Security Administration.
b. DOE Contractors.
The Contractor Requirements Document, Attachment 2, identifies specific
requirements of this Order that will apply to management and operating
and other prime contracts that include the Contractor Requirements
Document. The Contractor Requirements Document must be included in
contracts making the contractor responsible for project execution at
DOE-owned or -leased facilities.
c. Exclusions.
(1) Naval Reactors, National Nuclear Security Administration is
excluded in accordance with Executive Order 12344 and P.L.106-65.
(2) Bonneville Power Administration is excluded in accordance with
Secretarial Delegation Order 00-033.00A, dated 09/27/2002.
(3) Financial Assistance awards (grants and cooperative agreements),
which are covered under 10 CFR 600, are excluded.
4. IMPLEMENTATION. DOE-STD-1189-2006 provides implementation
guidance for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities safety
requirements. Implementation of this order for Hazard Category 1, 2,
and 3 nuclear facilities is delayed until six months after issuance of
the Standard.
5. REQUIREMENTS. Topics addressed in the following paragraphs are
accessible through links in the following topic list.
a. Project Management Principles.
Fundamental project management principles provide a framework for
successful project execution. The requirements set forth in this Order
are established to ensure adherence to the following principles:
(1) Line management accountability
(2) Sound disciplined up-front planning
(3) Development and implementation of sound acquisition strategies
(4) Well-defined and managed performance baselines
(5) Effective project management systems (e.g., quality assurance,
risk management, change control, performance management)
(6) Implementation of an Integrated Safety Management System
(7) Effective communication among all project stakeholders
b. DOE Acquisition Management System.
The DOE Acquisition Management System establishes principles and
processes to translate user needs and technological opportunities into
reliable and sustainable facilities, systems, and assets that provide a
required mission capability. The system is organized by project phases
and Critical Decisions (CDs), which represent a logical maturing of
broadly stated mission needs into well-defined requirements resulting
in operationally effective, suitable, and affordable facilities,
systems, and other products. Tailoring is an essential element of the
acquisition process and shall be applied to all projects, although the
greatest amount of tailoring will typically be applied to smaller, low-
risk, and non-complex projects. Figure 1 illustrates a typical
implementation of the DOE Acquisition Management System for Line Item
Projects.
c. Project Phases.
(1) Initiation Phase.
During this phase, preconceptual planning activities focus on the
Program’s strategic goals and objectives. User needs are analyzed for
consistency with the Department’s strategic plan, Congressional
direction, administration initiatives, and political and legal issues.
One outcome of the analysis could be a determination that a user need
exists that cannot be met through other than material means. This
outcome leads to the development and approval of a Mission Need
Statement. The information developed during this phase also provides
the basis for the Project Engineering and Design budget request when
preliminary design activities are planned.
Figure 1. Typical DOE Acquisition Management System for Line Item
Projects.
(1) Definition Phase.
Upon approval of mission need, the project enters the Definition Phase
where alternative concepts, based on user requirements, risks, costs,
and other constraints, are analyzed to arrive at a recommended
alternative. This is accomplished using Systems Engineering and other
techniques and tools such as alternatives analysis and Value
Management/Value Engineering. This ensures the recommended alternative
provides the essential functions and capability at optimum life cycle
cost, consistent with required performance, scope, schedule, cost,
security, and Environment, Safety and Health considerations. During
this phase, the required Value Management assessment is completed, and
more detailed planning is accomplished which further defines required
capabilities. The products produced by this planning provide the detail
necessary to develop a range of estimates for the project cost and
schedule.
(2) Execution Phase.
Following the Definition Phase, preliminary design activities mark the
beginning of the Execution Phase. Systems Engineering continues to
balance requirements, cost, schedule, and other factors to optimize the
design, cost, and capabilities that satisfy the mission need.
Engineering and design continue until the project has a sufficiently
mature design that can be implemented successfully within a firm
Performance Baseline.
During this phase, the initial design concepts and the preliminary
design are developed into detailed and final designs and plans. These
plans are used to procure or manufacture components, fabricate
subsystems, or construct, remediate, decommission or demolish
facilities. Major activities in this phase include:
(a) Establishing Performance Measurement Baselines and implementing
change control procedures;
(b) Satisfying environmental and safety requirements;
(c) Obtaining approved National Environmental Policy Act
documentation, if required, prior to the start of detail or final
design;
(d) Continuing to refine and optimize cost estimates, schedules, and
designs; and
(e) Approving the final design for procurement and implementation.
(f) Identifying and addressing security concerns.
Execution comprises the longest and most costly phase of a project.
Value Management and Value Engineering are implemented throughout the
project Execution Phase to ensure the most effective solutions are
implemented.
If the delivery method is Design-Build versus Design-Bid-Build and a
single contract is awarded for both design and construction, it may be
necessary to tailor the project’s execution process to allow the
project team to propose cost-effective innovative approaches that
reduce project duration and cost.
(3) Transition/Closeout Phase.
When the project nears completion and has progressed into formal
transition and commissioning, which generally includes final testing,
inspection, and documentation, the project is prepared for operation,
long?term care, or closeout. The nature of the transition and its
timing depends on the type of project and the requirements that were
identified subsequent to the mission need.
b. Critical Decisions.
The five Critical Decisions are major milestones approved by the
Secretarial Acquisition Executive or Acquisition Executive that
establish the mission need, recommended alternative, Acquisition
Strategy, the Performance Baseline, and other essential elements
required to ensure that the project meets applicable mission, design,
security, and safety requirements. Each Critical Decision marks an
increase in commitment of resources by the Department and requires
successful completion of the preceding phase or Critical Decision.
Collectively, the Critical Decisions affirm the following:
· There is a need that cannot be met through other than material
means;
· The selected alternative and approach is the optimum solution;
· Definitive scope, schedule and cost baselines have been
developed;
· The project is ready for implementation; and
· The project is ready for turnover or transition to operations.
The amount of time between decisions will vary. Projects may quickly
proceed through the early Critical Decisions due to a lack of
complexity, the presence of constraints that reduce available
alternatives, or the absence of significant technology and
developmental requirements. In these cases, more than one Critical
Decision may be approved simultaneously. Conversely, there may be a
need to split a Critical Decision.
(1) CD-0, Approve Mission Need.
The Initiation Phase begins with the identification of a mission-
related need. A Program identifies a credible performance gap between
its current capabilities and capacities and those required to achieve
the goals articulated in its strategic plan and/or in the DOE Target
Enterprise Architecture for IT capital asset projects.. A Mission Need
Statement is the translation of this gap into functional requirements
that cannot be met through other than material means. It should
describe the general parameters of the project, how it fits within the
mission of the Program, and why it is critical to the overall
accomplishment of the Department mission, including the benefits to be
realized. The mission need is independent of a particular solution, and
should not be defined by equipment, facility, technological solution,
or physical end-item. This approach allows the Program the flexibility
to explore a variety of solutions and not limit potential solutions.
Approval of CD-0 formally establishes a project and begins the process
of conceptual planning and design used to develop alternative concepts
and functional requirements. Additionally, CD-0 approval allows the
Program to request Project Engineering and Design funds for use in
preliminary design, final design, and baseline development.
(2) CD-1, Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range.
CD-1 approval marks the completion of the project Definition Phase,
during which time the conceptual design is developed. This is an
iterative process to define, analyze, and refine project concepts and
alternatives. This process uses a systems methodology that integrates
requirements analysis, risk identification and analysis, acquisition
strategies, and concept exploration to evolve a cost-effective,
preferred solution to meet a mission need. Approval of CD-1 provides
the authorization to begin the project Execution Phase and allows
Project Engineering and Design funds to be used. For design-build
projects, Project Engineering and Design funds may be used to develop a
Statement of Work/Request for Proposal. Additionally, long-lead
procurements may be approved during this phase, provided National
Environmental Policy Act documentation is prepared, where applicable.
(3) CD-2, Approve Performance Baseline.
Completion of preliminary design is the first major milestone in the
project Execution Phase. Preliminary design is complete when it
provides sufficient information for development of the Performance
Baseline in support of CD-2. The Performance Baseline is developed
based on a mature design, a well-defined and documented scope, a
resource-loaded detailed schedule, a definitive cost estimate, and
defined Key Performance Parameters. Approval of CD-2 authorizes
submission of a budget request for the total project cost. For projects
with design periods less than 18 months, a budget request may be
submitted prior to CD-2 approval as part of tailoring.
(4) CD-3, Approve Start of Construction.
With design and engineering essentially complete, a final design review
performed, all environmental and safety criteria met, and all security
concerns addressed, the project is ready to begin construction,
implementation, procurement, or fabrication. CD-3 provides
authorization to complete all procurement and construction and/or
implementation activities and initiate all acceptance and turnover
activities. Approval of CD-3 authorizes the project to commit all the
resources necessary, within the funds provided, to execute the project.
(5) CD-4, Approve Start of Operations or Project Completion.
CD-4 marks the achievement of the completion criteria defined in the
Project Execution Plan and approval of transition to operations. This
decision is predicated on the readiness to operate and/or maintain the
system, facility, or capability. Transition and turnover does not
necessarily terminate all project activity. Rather, it marks a point at
which the operations organizations assume responsibility for operation
and maintenance. All projects must have a project transition/closeout
plan that clearly defines the basis for attaining initial or full
operating capability or meeting performance criteria as required for
project closeout, as applicable. The key attributes in turnover are the
Government’s readiness to operate, the ability to assume operational
responsibility, and the acceptance of the asset.
c. Critical Decision Approval Authority and Thresholds.
The Deputy Secretary serves as the Secretarial Acquisition Executive
for the Department and promulgates Department-wide policy and
direction. The Critical Decision authorities, thresholds and
delegations are identified in Table 1.
· Major System Projects.
Projects with a Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $750M or
Environmental Management Clean-Up Projects with an Environmental
Management Total Project Cost of $1B are Major System Projects. All
Major System Project Critical Decisions must be proposed by the
appropriate Program Secretarial Officer and approved by the Deputy
Secretary as DOE’s designated Secretarial Acquisition Executive before
proceeding to the next project phase or Critical Decision.
· Non-Major System Projects.
Projects with a Total Project Cost less than $750M or Environmental
Management Clean-Up Projects with an Environmental Management Total
Project Cost less than $1B are Non-Major System Projects. The
designated Acquisition Executive must approve all Non-Major System
Project Critical Decisions, except for CD?0, which cannot be delegated
below the Program Secretarial Officer.
The Chief Information Officer will function as the Acquisition
Executive for all Information Technology capital assets deemed by the
Deputy Secretary to be Department-wide with total project Development,
Modernization, and Enhancement funding of $20 M and greater, and
Development, Modernization, and Enhancement funding of $5 M or more in
Current year or Budget year. Departmental Information Technology
capital assets will be defined by the Deputy Secretary and are
characterized by: 1) their widespread and continuous use among multiple
Departmental organizational units; 2) their vital importance to
accomplishing the Department’s business functions; and 3) their special
importance to agency senior management.
Table 1. Critical Decision Authority Thresholds
See tables and figures in the PDF.
Table 2 provides a list of mandatory prerequisites to obtain
Secretarial Acquisition Executive/Acquisition Executive approval for
each Critical Decision. Additionally, Table 2 provides approval
authorities. Where no approval authorities are noted, authorities are
established through other directives or the Programs (e.g., Functions
and Requirements Assignment Matrix). Any reference in this Table to the
Program Secretarial Officer is also applicable to the Deputy
Administrator/Associate Administrators, National Nuclear Security
Administration. Appropriate to project risk, size, and complexity,
requirements are expected to be tailored to the project and be approved
by the Secretarial Acquisition Executive/Acquisition Executive.
Projects must utilize the five Critical Decisions; however, in unique
circumstances, Critical Decisions may be combined or split by
appropriate tailoring. The tailoring approach must have a rational,
clear, and documented basis. DOE-STD-1189-2006 provides implementation
guidance for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities safety
requirements.
Table 2. Critical Decision Requirements
See tables and figures in the PDF.
CD Requirements
Order 413.3A Requirements* Approval Authority
CD-0 Requirements
Perform Pre-conceptual Planning activities that focus on the Program’s
strategic goals and objectives, safety planning, and design.
Prepare a Mission Need Statement that documents a mission requirement
that cannot be met through other than material means. Additionally, the
Mission Need Statement will document the potential hazards and their
safety, security, and risk implications. Program Secretarial Officer
(with recommendation from Program Analysis and Evaluation for projects
with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project
Cost > $100M)
Prepare a Tailoring Strategy, if required, that describes the project’s
approach for appropriately adapting Critical Decision requirements
based on the project’s risk and complexity. The Tailoring Strategy may
be included in the Project Execution Plan at later Critical Decisions.
Secretarial Acquisition Executive or Acquisition Executive
Perform a Mission Validation Independent Project Review on all Major
System Projects. Program Secretarial Officer
Prepare a Program Requirements Document (for National Nuclear Security
Administration only) that defines the ultimate goals which the project
must satisfy.
Evaluate projects for Information Technology elements within the
Departmental Enterprise Architecture framework. Chief Information
Officer for Departmental Information Technology capital assets with
Development Modernization Enhancements funding > or equal to $5M in
Current Year or Budget Year, or Development Modernization Enhancements
funding > or equal to $20M.
CD-1 Requirements
Prepare a Conceptual Design Report which is an integrated systems
engineering effort that results in a clear and concise definition of
the project.
Prepare an Acquisition Strategy that describes the high-level business
and technical management approach designed to achieve project
objectives within specified resource constraints. Program
Secretarial Officer (with recommendation from the Office of Engineering
and Construction Management for Major System Projects).
Comply with the One-for-One Replacement legislation (excess
space/offset requirement) as mandated in House Report 109-86.
Prepare a preliminary Project Execution Plan, including a Risk
Management Plan and Risk Assessment, that establishes the initial
policy and procedures to be followed to manage and control project
execution. Secretarial Acquisition Executive or Acquisition Executive
Approve appointment of the Federal Project Director. Secretarial
Acquisition Executive or Acquisition Executive (with Program Manager
recommendation)
Establish and charter an Integrated Project Team. An Integrated Project
Team, led by the Federal Project Director, is a multi-disciplinary
team, which includes safety expertise. The Charter includes membership,
roles and responsibilities, decision making authority and operating
guidance. The Charter may be included in the Project Execution Plan.
Secretarial Acquisition Executive or Acquisition Executive
Conduct a Design Review of the conceptual design. Design Reviews are
performed to determine if a product (drawings, analyses, or
specifications) is correct and will perform its intended functions and
meet requirements.
As part of the Design Review, for high-risk, high-hazard, and Hazard
Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, conduct a Technical
Independent Project Review, the focus of which is to determine that the
safety documentation is sufficiently conservative and bounding to be
relied upon for the next phase of the project.
For Information Technology projects, the design review is a review of
the preliminary System Description Document.
Prepare a Project Data Sheet for Line Item Projects to request Project
Engineering and Design funds for preliminary and final design.
Approve Long-Lead Procurements, if necessary. Secretarial Acquisition
Executive or Acquisition Executive
Implement Integrated Safety Management into management and work process
planning at all levels per DOE P 226.1.
Prepare environmental documents including National Environmental Policy
Act strategy and analyses, and permit applications.
Document High Performance Sustainable Building considerations, also
referred to as “sustainable environmental stewardship” per DOE O 450.1,
chg 2, is documented in the Conceptual Design Report and Acquisition
Strategy, as appropriate.
Prepare a Preliminary Security Vulnerability Assessment Report as
defined in DOE M 470.4-1.
Prepare an Initial Cyber Security Plan for Information Technology
projects in accordance with DOE O 205.1.
Prepare a Conceptual Safety Design Report for Hazard Category 1, 2, and
3 nuclear facilities.
Prepare a Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report for facilities that are
below Hazard Category 3 threshold as defined in 10 CFR 830, Subpart B
and obtain DOE approval (field level).
Prepare a Preliminary Safety Validation Report on the DOE review of the
Conceptual Safety Design Report for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear
facilities.
Determine that the Quality Assurance Program is acceptable and
continues to apply. The Quality Assurance Program must fully address
all applicable Quality Assurance Criteria as defined in 10 CFR 830
Subpart A and DOE O 414.1C.
CD-2 Requirements
Establish a Performance Baseline to include Key Performance Parameters,
total project cost, schedule and scope. The key project milestones and
completion date shall be stated no less specific than month and year.
The scope will be stated in quantity, size and other parameters that
give shape and form to the project. The Performance Baseline may be
included in the Project Execution Plan. Secretarial Acquisition
Executive approves Performance Baselines for Major System Projects,
Acquisition Executive for Non-Major System Projects. For performance
baseline deviation approvals, see Section 5.i. Baseline Management
Update the Project Execution Plan to incorporate changes resulting from
the design effort in all areas including design considerations,
performance baseline, risk analysis, project management, configuration
management, and roles and responsibilities. Secretarial Acquisition
Executive or Acquisition Executive
Employ an Earned Value Management System that is compliant with
ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998 for projects with a Total Project Cost or
Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to
$20M. Projects having a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management
Total Project Cost between $20M and $50M must have an Earned Value
Management System that is self-certified by the contractor as ANSI/EIA-
748-A-1998 compliant. Projects having a Total Project Cost or
Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to
$50M require an ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998 compliant system certified by the
Office of Engineering and Construction Management. For projects not
required to utilize an Earned Value Management System (e.g., firm
fixed-price contract projects), an alternative performance management
system must be described in the Project Execution Plan. Secretarial
Acquisition Executive/Acquisition Executive for Alternative Performance
Management System
Perform a Performance Baseline Validation External Independent Review
or a Performance Baseline Validation Independent Project Review.
External Independent Reviews are conducted by the Office of Engineering
and Construction Management to validate the Performance Baseline for
projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total
Project Cost greater than or equal to $100M. Independent Project
Reviews are conducted by the Project Management Support Office to
validate the Performance Baseline for projects with a Total Project
Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost less than $100 M.
The Office of Engineering and Construction Management for
projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total
Project Cost ³ $100M, The Project Management Support Office for
projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total
Project Cost < $100M must issue a Performance Baseline Validation
Letter to the Program Secretarial Officer that describes the cost,
schedule, and scope being validated.
Develop an Independent Cost Estimate or perform an Independent Cost
Review for Major System Projects as part of the Performance Baseline
Validation External Independent Review performed by the Office of
Engineering and Construction Management. An Independent Cost Estimate
should be performed where complexity, risk, cost, or other factors
create a significant cost exposure for the Department.
Determine that the Quality Assurance Program is acceptable and
continues to apply. The Quality Assurance Program must fully address
all applicable Quality Assurance Criteria as defined in 10 CFR 830
Subpart A and DOE O 414.1C.
Prepare a Preliminary Design. This stage of the design is complete when
it provides sufficient information to support development of the
Performance Baseline.
Update the Project Data Sheet, if applicable.
Conduct a Design Review of the preliminary design. Design Reviews are
performed to determine if a product (drawings, analyses, or
specifications) is correct and will perform its intended functions and
meet requirements.
For nuclear facilities, design reviews should include a focus on safety
and security systems.
For Information Technology projects, the design review is a review of
the updated System Description Document.
Prepare a Preliminary Safety Design Report based on the Conceptual
Safety Design Report for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear
facilities.
Prepare a Hazard Analysis Report by updating the Preliminary Hazard
Analysis Report based on new hazards and design information and obtain
DOE approval (field level).
Update the Preliminary Security Vulnerability Assessment Report.
Update the Initial Cyber Security Plan for Information Technology
projects.
Prepare a Preliminary Safety Validation Report based on DOE review of
the Preliminary Safety Design Report for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3
nuclear facilities.
Incorporate Preliminary Sustainable Environmental Stewardship-High
Performance Sustainable Building provisions into the preliminary design
and design review.
Complete (or obtain approval of) final National Environmental Policy
Act documentation, which must be completed prior to the start of final
design.
CD-3 Requirements
Complete and review Final Design or determine that the design is
sufficiently mature to start procurement or construction.
For Information Technology projects, the Final Design review is a
review of the final System Description Document.
Update all CD-2 project documentation and required approvals to reflect
any changes resulting from final Design, including the Project
Execution Plan, Performance Baseline, Project Data Sheet, etc.
Various: See prior approvals
Perform an External Independent Review for Construction or Execution
Readiness. An External Independent Review is performed by the Office of
Engineering and Construction Management on all Major System Projects to
verify execution readiness. A similar Independent Project Review must
be performed by the appropriate Program Secretarial Office for Non-
Major System Projects unless justification is provided and a waiver is
granted by the Acquisition Executive.
Prepare the Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report based on the
Preliminary Safety Design Report for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3
nuclear facilities.
Update the Hazard Analysis Report and obtain DOE approval (field
level).
Update the Preliminary Security Vulnerability Assessment Report.
Update the Cyber Security Plan for Information Technology projects.
Prepare a Safety Evaluation Report based on review of the Preliminary
Documented Safety Analysis for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear
facilities.
Prepare a Construction Project Safety and Health Plan** and obtain DOE
approval (field level).
Incorporate Final Sustainable Environmental Stewardship-High
Performance Sustainable Building provisions into the Final Design and
the External Independent Review.
Update the Quality Assurance Program for construction, field design
changes, and procurement activities.
CD-4 Requirements
Verify Key Performance Parameters or Project Completion Criteria have
been met and mission requirements achieved.
Complete a Readiness Assessment or an Operational Readiness Review and
resolve all pre-start findings including ensuring Operations and
Maintenance Staff are properly trained and qualified to operate and
maintain the equipment, systems, and facilities being turned over.
Issue a Checkout, Testing, and Commissioning Plan** that identifies
subtasks, systems, and equipment. The Commissioning Plan ensures that
the equipment, systems, and facilities including High Performance
Sustainable Building systems, perform as designed and are optimized for
greatest energy efficiency, resource conservation, and occupant
satisfaction. The Commissioning Plan includes checkout and testing
criteria required for initial operations.
Issue a Project Transition to Operations Plan** that clearly defines
the basis for attaining initial operating capability, full operating
capability, or project closeout, as applicable. The plan includes
documentation, training, interfaces, and draft schedules.
Issue an updated Quality Assurance Plan to address testing, identified
deficiencies, and startup, transition, and operation activities.
Revise the environmental management system to ensure that it
incorporates new environmental aspects related to turnover and
operations
Prepare the Documented Safety Analysis Report with Technical Safety
Requirements for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.
Update the Construction Project Safety and Health Plan**
Finalize the Hazard Analysis Report and obtain DOE approval (field
level).
Finalize the Security Vulnerability Assessment Report.
Finalize the Cyber Security Plan for Information Technology projects
and complete the Certification and Accreditation, as required.
Prepare a Safety Evaluation Report based on a review of the Preliminary
Documented Safety Analysis for Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.
Post CD-4 Requirements
Perform final administrative and financial closeout and prepare a Final
Project Closeout Report once all project costs are incurred and
invoiced and all contracts are closed. The report includes final cost
details as required (including claims and claims settlement strategy
where appropriate).
Prepare a Lessons Learned Report and submit to OECM for broader sharing
among the DOE project management community.
Complete project required Operational Documentation.
Conduct Post Implementation Review for Information Technology projects
and document that the project has attained the desired results and met
the Key Performance Parameters in accordance with the Capital
Programming Guide, Supplement to Part 7 of the Office of Management and
Budget’s Circular A-11.
* Documents and reports are not intended to be stand-alone and may be
combined.
** Not applicable to Clean-Up Projects. See DOE M 413.3-1 for
additional Environmental Management Clean-Up Project guidance.
d. Tailoring.
Tailoring is an essential element of the acquisition process and must
be appropriate considering the risk, complexity, visibility, cost,
safety, security, and schedule of the project. The requirements of this
Order are to be applied on a tailored basis as appropriate to the
project. Tailoring is subject to the Acquisition Executive’s approval
and is identified prior to the impacted Critical Decision and approved
as early as possible starting at CD-0, if appropriate. In the Tailoring
Strategy or the Project Execution Plan, the Federal Project Director
will identify those areas a project plans to tailor and an
explanation/discussion of each tailored area. The Project Execution
Plan/Tailoring Strategy is updated prior to each Critical Decision
request. Tailoring does not imply the omission of essential elements in
the acquisition process that are necessary for all projects, or other
processes that are appropriate to a specific project’s requirements or
conditions. Moreover, concerning matters relating to integrating safety
into the early design of a facility, it is not anticipated that
tailoring or modification of the acquisition process would be
desirable. Details concerning the application of tailoring are provided
in DOE M 413.3-1.
e. Application of Critical Decisions to Unique Projects.
Although most DOE projects will follow the outlined Critical Decision
process, there are some unique project situations where customizing the
process is beneficial, such as the following:
(1) Environmental Management Cleanup Projects.
These projects include Environmental Clean-up work, Environmental
Management Clean-Up Projects, and Environmental Restoration projects.
These “projects” could include hundreds of release sites at the lowest
level, that are aggregated into Environmental Protection Agency
regulated Operable Units or Performance Baseline Summaries. These are
further aggregated into a total site-wide program. Decontamination and
decommissioning activities may also be aggregated in the same manner.
Other projects may range from a single project for a closure site, to
disposition of a waste stream, to a grouping of similar work activities
or geographic locations within a large site. See DOE M 413.3-1 for
additional Environmental Management Clean-Up Project guidance.
(2) Information Technology Projects.
Departmental Information Technology capital assets will be defined by
the Deputy Secretary and are characterized by: 1) their widespread and
continuous use among multiple Departmental organizational units; 2)
their vital importance to accomplishing the Department’s business
functions; and 3) their special importance to Agency senior management.
Information Technology projects are not meant to encompass process or
control systems that are an integral part to a broader project.
Additionally, this policy is applicable to commercial-off-the-shelf
acquisitions.
The DOE Critical Decision process is normally tailored for Information
Technology projects to provide sufficient flexibility during the phased
or spiral approach required for these projects. Generally, system
design and development using a combined CD-2/3 process is required to
support various procurement alternatives and software/firmware
implementation in lieu of conventional construction. This tailored
approach does not reduce or eliminate management, performance to
baselines or technical requirements. The Federal Project Director uses
this framework to guide development of documentation to plan, manage,
and execute the project and designate appropriate design approvals at
the Integrated Project Team level.
(3) Design-Build Projects.
Design-Build is a project delivery method where a single contract is
awarded for both design and construction. Design-Build can be used most
successfully with projects that have well-defined requirements, are not
complex, and have limited risks. This applies to projects that have few
“unknowns” or new technology requirements, little to no program or
system integration, and are not unique or first-of-a-kind. Projects
such as road building, administrative facilities, fire stations, and/or
replication of previously accomplished projects are generally the most
appropriate for design-build consideration. The Design-Build approach
requires the development of a functional design and clearly stated
operating requirements that provide sufficient information to allow
prospective contractors to prepare bids or proposals, but also allows
them the flexibility to implement innovative design and construction
approaches, value engineering, and other cost and time savings
initiatives. This overall objective of the Design-Build approach is to
reduce the total cost to the government and deliver projects more
quickly than the traditional Design-Bid-Build approach.
Projects for which Design-Build is an appropriate delivery method will
generally have clear and well-defined requirements early in the
process. Accordingly, at the time of CD-0, much of the cost and
schedule information is known along with key design criteria. For such
projects, CD-0 and CD-1 may be accomplished simultaneously.
Essentially, in requesting a simultaneous approval CD-0 and CD-1, the
Integrated Project Team is asserting that:
· There is no advantage to the government of further evaluation of
alternatives;
· The project functions and requirements are well known; and
· A reasonable cost and schedule range can be established.
In some instances, design-build projects may be managed in a close-
coupled or fast-track fashion, whereby the initiation of facility
construction precedes the development of detailed facility design,
e.g., construction begins during the preliminary design stage of a
project. In these cases, the project's technical risks are typically
much more significant than for a traditional design and construction
approach. To address potential complications, aggressive risk
mitigation strategies are required to address the unique
characteristics of close-coupled or fast-track design-build projects.
Risk management strategies must be outlined in the risk management plan
and at a minimum address: (1) all technical uncertainties, (2) the
establishment of design margins to address the unique nature of the
design, and (3) increased technical oversight requirements.
Approval of CD-0 and CD-1 establishes Design-Build as the project
delivery method and allows the project to go forward with development
of sufficient design work to establish the Performance Baseline and
solicitation package. Because of the maturity of the requirements, the
lack of complexity, and the cost and schedule knowledge gained from
similar efforts, establishing the Performance Baseline may be
expedited. In most cases, CD-3 may be requested simultaneously with CD-
2. A tailored External Independent Review would be accomplished to
support validation of the Performance Baseline.
Design-Build projects generally will not use Project Engineering and
Design funds. The Project Data Sheet must be submitted for the budget
year in which the Design-Build contract is to be awarded and must
include the costs of design as part of the Total Project Cost. The
program office may budget for Project Engineering and Design funds if
there is a need to develop significant performance or technical
specifications for the project.
(4) Projects Requiring Long-lead Procurement.
For particular projects, including those requiring long-lead
procurement or major equipment items, it may be necessary to split CD-2
and/or -3. For example, long-lead procurement might constrain
construction, and an early or phased CD-3 could be initiated and
justified. While there is potential risk in procuring equipment before
the design is complete, the potential schedule improvement may be
significant and more than compensate for the risk. The need to phase or
segment CD-3 should not be confused with minor, early activities that
are necessary and generally performed prior to CD-3. Activities such as
site characterization, limited access, safety, and security issues
(i.e., fences, etc.) are often necessary prior to CD-3, and may be
pursued as long as funding approvals are in place. If an early or
phased CD-3 is anticipated, the need for this decision and the process
is normally documented in the Project Execution Plan/Tailoring
Strategy.
(5) Projects Authorized by the Annual National Defense Authorization
Acts.
The following are requirements from Title 50 United States Code for
projects authorized by the annual National Defense Authorization Acts:
(a) The Secretary shall submit a request for funds for a conceptual
design for a project if the estimated cost of the conceptual design
exceeds $3 million.
(b) The conceptual design for a project shall be completed before
requesting funds for a construction project.
(c) If the Total Estimated Cost for construction design for a project
exceeds $600,000, funds for that design must be specifically authorized
by law.
(d) Construction on a project may not be started if the current Total
Estimated Cost of the project exceeds by more that 25% the amount shown
in the most recent data sheet submitted to Congress.
This is only a sampling of the more common unique projects that may
require tailoring of the Critical Decision process or project phases.
Therefore, rather than accommodate these as exceptions, guidance is
provided in DOE M 413.3-1.
f. Reviews.
Reviews are an important project activity and must be planned as an
integral part of the project and tailored appropriate to project risk,
complexity, duration, and Critical Decision or phase. The following is
a summary of key reviews organized by Critical Decision.
(1) CD-0.
(a) Mission Validation Independent Project Review.
A Mission Validation Independent Project Review is a limited review
prior to CD-0 for Major System projects. It validates the mission need
and the cost range. A Value Study may also be conducted, as
appropriate, to assist in CD-0.
(b) Mission Need Statement Review.
The Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation within the Office of the
Chief Financial Officer will review the Mission Need Statement and
provide a recommendation to the Program Secretarial Officer for
projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total
Project Cost greater than or equal to $100M.
(2) CD-1.
(a) Acquisition Strategy Review. Acquisition Strategies for Major
System Projects must be sent to the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory
Board Secretariat for review by the Office of Engineering and
Construction Management prior to scheduling CD-1 decisional briefings.
The Federal Program Manager, Federal Project Director and Contracting
Officer must concur with the Acquisition Strategy prior to the Office
of Engineering and Construction Management review. The Office of
Engineering and Construction Management will provide a recommendation
to the appropriate Program Secretarial Officer or Deputy/Associate
Administrator who holds approval authority. Approval of the Acquisition
Strategy does not constitute approval required by the Offices of
Procurement and Assistance Management (DOE or National Nuclear Security
Administration, as applicable) for specific contract clearance
purposes, including contract acquisition plans.
(b) Technical Independent Project Review. Prior to CD-1 approval, the
Program Secretarial Officer will perform a Technical Independent
Project Review to ensure safety and security is effectively integrated
into design and construction for high risk, high hazard, and Hazard
Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. The review should ensure
safety documentation is complete, accurate, and reliable for entry into
the next phase of the project.
(c) Design Reviews. Design Reviews are an integral part of a project.
Beginning at CD-1 and continuing through the life of the project, as
appropriate, Design Reviews are performed by individuals external to
the project. Design Reviews are performed to determine if a product
(drawings, analysis, or specifications) is correct and will perform its
intended functions and meet requirements. Design Reviews must be
conducted for all projects and must involve a formalized, structured
approach to ensure the reviews are comprehensive, objective, and
documented.
(3) CD-2.
Performance Baseline Validation Review. A Performance Baseline
Validation Review is required to provide reasonable assurance that the
project can be successfully executed. Independent Project Reviews are
required to validate the Performance Baseline for projects with a Total
Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost less than
$100M. The Acquisition Executive may request an External Independent
Review in lieu of an Independent Project Review through the Office of
Engineering and Construction Management, and must do so if the
Acquisition Executive has no Project Management Support Office to
perform the review. For all projects with a Total Project Cost or
Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to
$100M, the Office of Engineering and Construction Management utilizes
the external independent review in support of the performance baseline
validation. As part of the External Independent Review, either an
Independent Cost Estimate or Independent Cost Review is employed.
(4) CD-3.
Construction or Execution Readiness Review. An External Independent
Readiness Review must be performed by the Office of Engineering and
Construction Management on Major System Projects to verify execution
readiness. At a minimum, this review verifies the readiness of the
project to proceed into construction or remedial action. The findings
of the Execution Readiness Review and any corrective actions must be
presented to the Secretarial Acquisition Executive as a part of CD-3
approval. A similar Independent Project Review may be performed by the
appropriate Program Secretarial Officer for Non-Major System Projects
as requested by the Acquisition Executive.
(5) CD-4.
Operational Readiness Review or Readiness Assessment. As appropriate,
an Operational Readiness Review or Readiness Assessment is conducted
prior to approving CD-4.
g. Baseline Management.
(1) Performance Baseline Deviation.
A Performance Baseline deviation occurs when the approved cost,
schedule, performance, or scope parameters cannot be met. The Federal
Project Director must ensure management is promptly notified whenever
the project performance indicates the likelihood of a Performance
Baseline deviation. When a deviation occurs, the approving authority
must make a specific determination whether to terminate the project or
establish a new Performance Baseline. The Secretarial Acquisition
Executive must approve Performance Baseline changes under any of the
following circumstances for Projects:
· An increase in excess of the lesser of $25M or 25% (cumulative)
of the original CD-2 cost baseline.
· A delay of six-months or greater (cumulative) from the original
project completion date.
· A change in scope that affects the ability to satisfy the mission
need, an inability to meet a Key Performance Parameter, or non-
conformance with the current approved Project Execution Plan, which
must be reflected in the Project Data Sheet.
The Secretarial Acquisition Executive must approve Performance Baseline
changes under any of the following circumstances for Clean-Up Projects:
· An increase in excess of the lesser of $100M or 25% (cumulative)
of the original CD-2 Environmental Management Total Project Cost
baseline.
· A delay of one year or greater (cumulative) from the original
project completion date.
· Any change in scope that affects the site end-state.
The Under Secretaries for Projects and the Program Secretarial Officer
for Environmental Management Clean-Up Projects are the approval
authorities for Performance Baseline changes below Secretarial
Acquisition Executive approval level. These approval authorities may be
delegated to the Program Secretarial Officers or below. New Performance
Baseline approval thresholds and authorities should be documented in
the Project Execution Plan for project changes below the thresholds
identified above. Additionally, all Performance Baseline deviation
decisions must be reported to the Secretarial Acquisition Executive.
These approval levels must be incorporated into the change control
process for each project. New performance baselines to be established
because of a deviation must be validated by the Office of Engineering
and Construction Management for projects with a Total Project Cost or
Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to
$100M and by the Project Management Support Office for projects with a
Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost less
than $100M.
(2) Directed Changes.
Project changes caused by DOE Policy Directive, Regulatory, or
Statutory action, such as changes in approved budget or the addition of
new requirements are to be called Directed Changes. Directed changes
follow the appropriate baseline management process.
(3) Change Control.
Change control ensures that project changes are identified, evaluated,
coordinated, controlled, reviewed, approved/disapproved, and documented
in a manner that best serves the project. The change control process is
defined in the Project Execution Plan. One key goal of change control
is to ensure Performance Baseline thresholds are not exceeded. Changes
can be classified into two broad categories: those that impact the
Performance Baseline and those that do not. Approval authority for
changes depends upon the impact of the change and can range from the
contractor to the Secretarial Acquisition Executive, usually with the
involvement and support of a Change Control Board. Significant changes
could require Congressional notification. Additional information
concerning change control is provided in DOE M 413.3-1.
h. Project Reporting and Progress Reviews.
Monthly project status must be reported using the web-based Project
Assessment and Reporting System. Approval of CD-0 initiates a
requirement for project status reporting which continues through the
approval of CD-4 for all projects with a Total Project Cost or
Environmental Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to
$5M. Additionally, the Acquisition Executive or designee must begin
holding quarterly progress reviews. The requirement for quarterly
reviews cannot be delegated below the Acquisition Executive for Non-
Major System Projects. The Secretarial Acquisition Executive may
delegate quarterly reviews for Major System Projects to the Under
Secretaries. For Environmental Management Clean-Up Projects, quarterly
reviews may be delegated to the Program Secretarial Officer. The Office
of Engineering and Construction Management must be invited to quarterly
reviews for all projects with a Total Project Cost greater than or
equal to $100M.
At CD-2 and continuing through CD-4, critical performance information
must be reported in the Project Assessment and Reporting System.
Projects having a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total
Project Cost greater than or equal to $20M must report Earned Value
performance. All projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental
Management Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $5M require, at
a minimum, the input of Key Performance Parameters, key milestones and
a project performance assessment (Green, Yellow, or Red) as determined
by the:
· Federal Project Director for projects having a Total Project Cost
greater than or equal to $5M and less than $20M (or up to $100M for
Environmental Management Clean-Up projects);
· Program Secretarial Officer for Projects having a Total Project
Cost greater than or equal to $20M and less than $100M (see above
bullet for Environmental Management Clean-Up projects);
· Program Secretarial Officer for Environmental Management Clean-Up
Projects having a Total Project Cost greater than $100M and less than
or equal to $400M; and
· The Office of Engineering and Construction Management for
Projects having a Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $100M and
Environmental Management Clean-Up Projects having an Total Project Cost
greater than $400M.
Project performance assessment is determined using the following
criteria:
· Green – Project is expected to meet its cost, schedule, and
Performance Baseline.
· Yellow – Project is at risk of breaching its cost, schedule, and
Performance Baseline.
· Red – Project is expected to breach its cost, schedule, and
Performance Baseline.
i. Topical Areas.
(1) Acquisition Strategy.
An acquisition strategy is a high-level description of a business and
technical management approach designed to achieve project objectives
within specified resource constraints. The acquisition strategy conveys
the Integrated Project Team’s approach for the successful acquisition
of the project, its intended outcomes, and rationale for that approach.
This document is a CD-1 requirement and is the framework for planning,
organizing, staffing, controlling, and leading a project. Key elements
of an Acquisition Strategy are provided in DOE M 413.3-1.
(2) Conceptual Design/Conceptual Design Report.
Following approval of CD-0, Approval of Mission Need, the project team
will commence development of the alternative strategies that will
satisfy the Mission Requirements identified in the Program Requirements
Document. These alternative strategies will culminate in the proposed
path forward for the project, the Conceptual Design. The activities
that support the development of the Conceptual Design are funded
through the Program Office and these costs will eventually be collected
and included in the project’s Total Project Cost. Title 50 U.S. Code
for Projects authorized by annual National Defense Authorization Acts
requires that any time during the development of the Conceptual Design
or the Conceptual Design Report the cost will exceed the $3M
notification threshold, Congress must be officially notified. Until the
approval of CD-1, Approval of Preliminary Baseline Range, there is no
capital funding authorized for the project, i.e., all funds expended
will be Program funds. In view of the Congressional notification
requirement, the project must keep track of the costs that are allowed
for the Conceptual Design.
The specific information that is included in the Conceptual Design and
the allowable and prohibited costs are identified in DOE M 413.3. As a
minimum, the Conceptual Design should develop the following: the scope
required to satisfy the Program Mission requirements, the project
feasibility and attainment of specified performance levels, reliable
cost and schedule range estimates, project criteria and design
parameters, and identification of requirements and features.
(3) Earned Value Management System.
An Earned Value Management System is the integrated set of policies,
processes, procedures, systems, and practices that meet the intent of
the guidelines identified in ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998. This system is
generally documented by a system description and procedures that
translate the Earned Value Management Policy into specific
organizational approaches of how the 32 guidelines in ANSI/EIA-748-A-
1998 will be executed. For projects executed under firm fixed price
contracts or level of effort contracts, the Secretarial Acquisition
Executive/Acquisition Executive may approve an alternative performance
management system. The Earned Value Management System or alternative
performance management system is described in the Project Execution
Plan. A complete description of the Earned Value Management System
capabilities are provided in ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998 and is discussed in
the DOE M 413.3-1.
(4) Environment, Safety and Health Documentation Development.
At CD-1, for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear projects, a Conceptual
Safety Design Report is developed to:
(a) Document and establish a preliminary inventory of hazardous
materials, including radioactive materials and chemicals;
(b) Document and establish the preliminary hazard categorization of
the facility;
(c) Identify and analyze primary facility hazards and facility Design
Basis Accidents;
(d) Provide an initial determination, based on preliminary hazard
analysis, of Safety Class and Safety Significant Structures, Systems,
and Components;
(e) Include a preliminary assessment of the appropriate Seismic
Design Category for the facility itself as well as Safety Significant
Structures, Systems, and Components;
(f) Evaluate the security hazards that can impact the facility safety
basis (if applicable); and
(g) Include a commitment to the nuclear safety design criteria of DOE
O 420.1 (or proposed alternative criteria).
At CD-2, a Preliminary Safety Design Report is developed from the
Conceptual Safety Design Report to reflect more refined analyses based
on the evolving design and safety integration activities during
preliminary design. The Preliminary Safety Design Report should include
the results of process hazards analyses and confirm or adjust, as
appropriate, the items included in the Conceptual Safety Design Report.
At CD-3, a Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report is prepared
and updates the safety information in the Preliminary Safety Design
Report and identifies and justifies changes from the design approach
described in the Preliminary Safety Design Report. At CD-4, a
Documented Safety Analysis Report is developed based on information
from the Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report and the Safety
Evaluation Report. Technical Safety Requirements are developed to
document and establish specific parameters and requisite actions for
safe facility operation. DOE-STD-1189-2006 provides the technical
guidance on the preparation of nuclear facility safety documents.
For CD-1, projects involving facilities that are below Hazard Category
3 threshold as defined in 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, must prepare a
Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report to identify and evaluate all
potential hazards and establish a preliminary set of safety controls.
Hazardous chemicals are analyzed in accordance with Integrated Safety
Management requirements (DOE P 450.4), 29 CFR 1910.119, Process Safety
Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals, and 40 CFR 68, Chemical
Accident Prevention Provisions. For CD-2, a Hazard Analysis Report is
developed by updating the Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report to include
any new or revised information on facility hazards and safety design.
For CD-3 and -4, hazard analysis and controls are updated in the Hazard
Analysis Report
All projects must comply with environmental protection requirements
including National Environmental Policy Act documentation, anticipated
permitting requirements, and cost-effective environmental stewardship-
high performance sustainable building principles. A Construction
Project Safety and Health Plan is prepared prior to construction
activities per 10 CFR 851 Appendix A. paragraph 1(d). An Operational
Readiness Review or Readiness Assessment is conducted for Hazard
Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear projects in accordance to DOE O 425.1C.
The Program Secretarial Officer will need to determine what level of
readiness review is needed for projects involving facilities that are
below Hazard Category 3 threshold.
(5) Integrated Project Team.
The Integrated Project Team, organized and led by the Federal Project
Director, is an essential element in DOE’s acquisition process and is
used during all phases of a project’s life cycle. This team consists of
professionals representing diverse disciplines with the specific
knowledge, skills, and abilities to support the Federal Project
Director in successfully executing a project. The team membership will
change as a project progresses from initiation to closeout to ensure
the necessary skills are always represented to meet project needs. Team
membership may be full or part time, depending upon the scope and
complexity of a project. The Federal Project Director and the team will
prepare and maintain a Team Charter that describes:
(a) membership;
(b) responsibilities and authority;
(c) leads (as appropriate);
(d) meetings;
(e) reporting; and
(f) operating guidance.
Additional information on Integrated Project Teams is provided in DOE M
413.3-1.
(6) Integrated Safety Management System.
The Department is committed to performing all work so missions can be
accomplished with adequate controls in place to protect the public,
workers, and the environment. The fundamental premise of Integrated
Safety Management System is that accidents are preventable through
early and close attention to planning, design, and physical execution
of a project. The Integrated Safety Management System is designed to
ensure that safety is appropriately addressed throughout the life cycle
of a project. Identification of potential hazards must begin early in
project planning and continue throughout the life cycle of the project.
DOE policy requires safety management systems be used to systematically
integrate safety into management and work processes at all levels. The
Integrated Safety Management System is characterized by DOE’s
expectation that project management will effectively implement seven
guiding principles:
(a) Line management responsibility for safety;
(b) Clear roles and responsibilities;
(c) Competence commensurate with responsibility;
(d) Balanced priorities;
(e) The Conceptual Safety Design Report must identify safety
standards and requirements to include preliminary seismic design
category for the facility itself as well as Safety Class and Safety
Significant Structures, Systems, and Components;
(f) Engineered controls tailored to the functions being designed or
performed; and
(g) Approval to proceed.
Tailoring is to be applied to a project’s Integrated Safety Management
System to enable tasks to be managed at the appropriate levels. In
effect, management systems function to optimize task planning and
performance to enable those closest to the task plan to assume
responsibility. Additional Integrated Safety Management System
information is provided in DOE M 413.3-1 and the OECM, Project
Management Practices, Integrated Safety, Revision E, June 2003. This
document defines the five Integrated Safety Management core functions:
(h) Define work scope;
(i) Analyze hazards;
(j) Establish and implement controls;
(k) Perform work/design; and
(l) Provide feedback and improvement.
(7) Key Performance Parameters.
A Key Performance Parameter is a vital characteristic of the project or
facility mission. It is a characteristic, function, requirement, or
design basis that if changed would have a major impact on the system or
facility performance, schedule, cost, and/or risk; or, the ability of
an interfacing project to meet its mission requirements. They could be
applicable either to the overall system/facility level as a whole
and/or to one or more major subsystems. Parameters that are appropriate
for Key Performance Parameters are those that express performance in
terms of accuracy, capacity, throughput, quantity, processing rates,
purity, or others that define how well a system, facility, or other
type of project will perform. Additional details concerning the
application of Key Performance Parameters are provided in DOE M 413.3-
1.
(8) Performance Baseline.
The Performance Baseline, as established in the Project Execution Plan,
defines the cost, schedule, performance, and scope commitment to which
the Department must execute a project. When the development effort has
reached a phase where the requirements and design are mature and the
uncertainty and risks have been eliminated, reduced, mitigated, or
accepted a project is able to establish the parameters within which it
will be executed. These key parameters, when completely identified,
define the Performance Baseline. The Performance Baseline includes the
entire project budget (total cost of the project including contingency)
and represents DOE’s commitment to the Congress and the Office of
Management and Budget. The Performance Baseline must be controlled,
tracked, and reported from the beginning to the end of a project to
ensure consistency between the Project Execution Plan, the Project Data
Sheet, and the Exhibit 300 (a requirement of Office of Management and
Budget Circular A-11, Part 7).
(9) Project Execution Plan.
The Project Execution Plan is the core document for management of a
project. The Federal Project Director is responsible for the
preparation of this document. It establishes the policies and
procedures to be followed to manage and control project planning,
initiation, definition, execution, and transition/closeout, and uses
the outcomes and outputs from all project planning processes,
integrating them into a formally approved document. A Project Execution
Plan includes an accurate reflection of how the project is to be
accomplished, resource requirements, technical considerations, risk
management, configuration management, and roles and responsibilities. A
preliminary Project Execution Plan is required to support CD-1. This
document continues to be refined throughout a project’s life cycle and
revisions are documented through the configuration management process.
Key elements of a Project Execution Plan are provided in DOE M 413.3-1.
(10) Quality Assurance.
Quality Assurance begins at project inception and continues through the
project’s life cycle. The Federal Project Director is responsible for
planning and implementing a Quality Assurance Program for the project.
Quality affects cost, availability, effectiveness, safety, and
performance. Appropriate aspects of Quality Assurance need to be
considered during the preparation of project documents. The project’s
application of Quality Assurance is documented in either the
organizational or project-specific Quality Assurance Program that
addresses 10 basic criteria: program, personnel training and
qualification, quality improvement, documents and records, work
processes, design, procurement, inspection and acceptance, management
access, and independent assessment. The key requirements/elements of a
Quality Assurance Program are provided in DOE O 414.1C and 10 CFR 830
Subpart A.
(11) Risk Management.
Risk Management is an essential element of every project. The DOE risk
management approach must be analytical, forward looking, structured,
informative, and continuous. Risk assessments are started as early in
the project life cycle as possible and should identify critical
technical, performance, schedule, and cost risks. Once risks are
identified, sound risk mitigation strategies and actions are developed
and documented. As a project progresses, new information improves
additional insight into risk areas and allows the continuous refinement
of the risk mitigation strategies. A close relationship between the
Integrated Project Team and the contractor promotes better
understanding of program risks and assists in developing and handling
project risks. Additional risk management information is provided in
DOE M 413.3-1.
(12) Safeguards and Security.
Safeguards and security refers to an integrated system of activities,
systems, programs, facilities, and policies for the protection of
classified information and/or classified matter, unclassified control
information, nuclear materials, nuclear weapons, nuclear weapon
components, and/or the Department’s and its contractors’ facilities,
property, and equipment.
In order to support overall project planning and design, applicable
safeguards and security requirements must be identified at the earliest
possible project phase. Project success will depend upon the
satisfaction of safeguards and security requirements. Using the
preliminary safeguards and security plans developed in the previous
phase and the increasing maturity of program planning will allow
project personnel to determine that all safeguards and security
requirements can be met and are appropriately factored into project
cost and schedule.
Following the identification of applicable safeguards and security
requirements, their potential impact on mission objectives;
satisfaction of environment, safety, and health requirements; and other
aspects of the project must be evaluated. Preliminary identification of
alternatives (including facility design and the incorporation of
safeguards and security technologies) must be made and these
alternatives evaluated with respect to their impact on mission needs,
satisfaction of other requirements (such as safety requirements), and
other cost effectiveness. The applicable safeguards and security
requirements, the alternatives considered in the first project phase,
and the preliminary approach to satisfying safeguards and security
requirements must be documents and this documentation should be
reviewed as part of CD-0. This input becomes part of the conceptual
design requirements for further development.
Identification of potential security risks must begin early in project
planning as part of implementing Integrated Safeguards and Security
Management. DOE P 470.1 requires safeguards and security management
systems be used to systematically integrate security into management
and work practices at all levels. Approval authorities of the
safeguards and security documents are prepared according to DOE M
470.4-1. Starting with CD-1 and continuing through CD-3, for safeguards
Category I, II, and III, nuclear material assets are identified and
vulnerability and risk assessments are performed. The Security
Vulnerability Assessment Report, developed in CD-1 and updated in
subsequent CDs, describes the methodologies used in vulnerability
analyses, sets forth supporting information used, provides the results
of vulnerability analyses and risk assessments, and establishes risk
ratings. A security plan is developed and submitted to DOE for
approval.
Identification of potential sources of elevated safeguards and security
risk and/or avoidable safeguards and security costs must begin early in
project planning and continue as project planning and design efforts
proceed. DOE P 470.1 requires that a balance must be achieved among
safeguards and security, programmatic, and operational considerations
and that safeguards and security strategy must be tailored to the work
being performed to mitigate risk. Achievement of this balance and the
tailoring of safeguards and security strategy within capital projects
is best accomplished through the systematic application of security
expertise operating in conjunction with the project management system.
To that end, the preliminary assessment of potential safeguards and
security concerns and alternatives developed prior to CD-0 must
continue and the results be documented as the project matures. A
critical review of the integration of safeguards and security into the
overall project plan and design must be included as a portion of the
CD-1 decision process.
Prior to CD-2, the set of applicable safeguards and security
requirements, the methods selected to satisfy those requirements, and
any potential risk acceptance issues must be reviewed and validated as
complete and accurate. During the CD-2 decision process, the Project
Execution Plan and the Performance Baseline must be reviewed to ensure
that cost, schedule, and integration aspects of safeguards and security
are appropriately addressed, that all feasible risk mitigation has been
identified, and that the safeguards and security concerns for which
explicit line management risk acceptance will be required are
appropriately supported.
2. KEY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Three themes regarding roles and responsibilities necessary to achieve
defined project objectives as well as the objectives of this Order
include:
· Strengthening line management accountability for successful
project management results;
· Clearly defining the roles, responsibilities, authority, and
accountability of the Federal Project Management Team relative to the
contractor Project Management Team; and
· Developing effective Integrated Project Teams to assist the
Federal Project Director in planning, programming, budgeting, and
successfully acquiring capital assets.
Line managers are responsible for successfully developing, executing,
and managing projects within the approved Performance Baseline.
Delegation of authority from one line manager to a lower-level line
manager must be documented and consistent with DOE delegation
authorities and the qualifications of the lower-level line manager.
Although the authority and responsibility for decision-making may be
delegated to a lower-level manager, the senior manager remains
accountable for the decisions made by subordinate managers. Key roles
and responsibilities of line managers are described in the following
sections:
a. Deputy Secretary.
(1) Serves as the senior manager responsible and accountable for all
project acquisitions.
(2) Exercises decision-making authority, including Critical Decisions
for all Major System Projects.
(3) Identifies special interest projects and ensures senior
executive-level quarterly reviews are provided for those projects.
(4) Approves disposition of projects and Performance Baseline changes
at the Secretarial Acquisition Executive approval level upon
Performance Baseline deviations.
(5) Serves as Chair for the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory
Board.
(6) Approves site selection for facilities at new sites.
(7) Conducts quarterly project performance reviews for Major System
Projects, which may be delegated to the Under Secretaries.
b. Under Secretaries.
(1) Receive Acquisition Executive authority from the Secretarial
Acquisition Executive, as appropriate.
(2) Delegate Acquisition Executive authority, as appropriate (refer
to Table 1).
(3) Exercise decision-making authority, including Critical Decisions,
functioning as the Acquisition Executive.
(4) Hold line accountability for applicable program and capital asset
project execution and implementation of policy.
(5) Hold accountability for project-related site environment, safety
and health, and safeguards and security.
(6) Serve as Chair and appoint members for Acquisition Advisory
Boards.
(7) Approve disposition of projects and Performance Baseline changes
below Secretarial Acquisition Executive approval level upon Performance
Baseline deviations (may be delegated to Program Secretarial Officers).
(8) Maintain a list of special interest projects and ensure senior
executive-level quarterly reviews are provided for those projects.
(9) Establish Project Management Support Offices or delegate this
responsibility to Program Secretarial Officers.
(10) Address and resolve issues between projects reporting to them.
(11) Conduct quarterly project performance reviews when serving as the
Acquisition Executive. These reviews may be delegated to the Program
Secretarial Officer.
c. Program Secretarial Officers and Deputy Administrators/Associate
Administrators for the National Nuclear Security Administration.
(1) Hold line accountability for applicable program and capital asset
project execution and implementation of policy.
(2) Hold accountability for project-related site environment, safety
and health, and safeguards and security.
(3) Approve Mission Need Statement documents and Acquisition Strategy
documents for all capital asset projects (cannot be delegated).
(4) Approve disposition of projects and Performance Baseline changes
below Secretarial Acquisition Executive approval level following
Performance Baseline deviations. If delegated, this authority cannot be
further delegated.
(5) Exercise decision-making authority, including Critical Decisions
when functioning as Acquisition Executive.
(6) Approve CD-0 for all projects with a Total Project Cost or
Environmental Management Total Project Cost less than $100M (cannot be
delegated).
(7) Delegate Acquisition Executive functions, as appropriate (refer
to Table 1).
(8) Nominates Federal Project Directors, when the Acquisition
Executive is above the Program Secretarial Officer, no later than CD-1
(can be delegated). The Federal Project Director appointment is subject
to the approval of the Acquisition Executive.
(9) Serve as Chair and appoint members for Acquisition Advisory
Boards.
(10) Direct Independent Project Reviews.
(11) Establish Project Management Support Offices when responsibility
is delegated or directed by the Under Secretaries.
(12) Ensures that safety is fully integrated into design and
construction for high-risk, high-hazard, and Hazard Category 1, 2, and
3 nuclear facilities.
d. Project Management Support Offices (when established).
(1) Provide independent oversight and report directly to the Under
Secretaries, or Program Secretarial Officer, as appropriate.
(2) Serve as the Secretariat for the Program Secretarial
Officer/National Nuclear Security Administration-level Advisory Board
functions.
(3) Coordinate quarterly performance reports.
(4) Perform Performance Baseline Validation Independent Project
Review and other Independent Project Reviews as required by the Program
Secretarial Officer.
(5) Develop Program-specific implementing guidance, policies, and
procedures.
(6) Collect, analyze, and disseminate lessons learned and “best
practices.”
(7) Coordinate with other DOE organizations and offices, including
the Office of Engineering and Construction Management, to ensure
effective and consistent implementation of project management policies
and directives.
(8) Provide assistance and oversight to line project management
organizations.
(9) Analyze project management execution issues.
(10) Actively assist senior management on issues related to project
management performance, including implementation of corrective actions.
(11) Provide support to the Federal Project Directors.
(12) Validate the Performance Baseline for capital asset projects with
a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost
greater than or equal to $20M and less than $100M.
e. Program Managers and Heads of Field Organizations.
(1) Direct initial project planning and execution roles for projects
assigned by the Acquisition Executive.
(2) Initiate definition of mission need based on input from Sites,
Laboratories, and Program Offices.
(3) Establish the Integrated Project Team.
(4) Oversee development of project definition, technical scope, and
budget to support mission need.
(5) Initiate development of the Acquisition Strategy before CD-1
(during the period preceding designation of the Federal Project
Director).
(6) Perform functions as Acquisition Executive when so delegated.
(7) Develop project performance measures, and monitor and evaluate
project performance throughout the project’s life cycle.
(8) Allocate resources throughout the program.
(9) Oversee the project line-management organization and ensure the
line project teams have the necessary experience, expertise, and
training in design engineering, safety and security analysis,
construction, and testing.
(10) Serve as the Federal Project Director until the Federal Project
Director is appointed.
(11) Ensures that safety is fully integrated into design and
construction for high-risk, high-hazard, and Hazard Category 1, 2, and
3 nuclear facilities.
f. Acquisition Executives.
The following roles and responsibilities are for illustrative purposes,
and each designated Acquisition Executive is guided by the specific
limits of his/her delegated authority.
(1) Approve Critical Decisions (CD-0 cannot be delegated below the
Program Secretarial Officer level).
(2) Appoint and Chair Acquisition Advisory Boards to provide advice
and recommendations on key project decisions.
(3) Approve the appointment of the Federal Project Director.
(4) Designate the Design Authority at CD-1.
(5) Monitor the effectiveness of Federal Project Directors and their
support staff.
(6) Approve project changes in compliance with change control levels
identified in Project Execution Plans.
(7) Conduct monthly and quarterly project performance reviews.
(8) Ensures that safety is fully integrated into design and
construction for high-risk, high-hazard, and Hazard Category 1, 2, and
3 nuclear facilities.
g. Federal Project Director.
Successful performance of DOE projects depends on professional and
effective project management by the Federal Project Director. The
Federal Project Director is responsible and accountable to the
Acquisition Executive/Program Secretarial Officer or delegated
authority, as appropriate, for executing the project.
The Federal Project Director’s assigned project must meet cost,
schedule and performance targets unless circumstances beyond the
control of the Project direct result in cost overruns and/or delays.
Federal Project Directors must demonstrate initiative in incorporating
and managing an appropriate level of risk to ensure best value for the
government. In cases where significant cost overruns and/or delays
occur, the Federal Project Director alerts senior management in a
timely manner and takes appropriate steps to mitigate these cost
overruns or delays.
Roles and responsibilities of the Federal Project Director’s team must
be clearly defined relative to the contractor management team. Further
guidance is provided in DOE M 413.3-1.
(1) Attains and maintains certification in concert with the
requirements outlined in DOE O 361.1A before they are delegated
authority to serve as a Federal Project Director.
(2) Plans, implements, and completes a project using a Systems
Engineering approach.
(3) Initiates development and implementation of key project
documentation (e.g., Project Execution Plan).
(4) Defines project cost, schedule, performance, and scope baselines.
(5) Is responsible for design, construction, environmental, safety,
security, health, and quality efforts performed comply with the
contract, public law, regulations, and Executive Orders.
(6) Is responsible for timely, reliable, and accurate integration of
contractor performance data into the project’s scheduling, accounting,
and performance measurement systems.
(7) Evaluates and verifies reported progress; makes projections of
progress and identifies trends.
(8) Serves as the single point of contact between Federal and
contractor staff for all matters relating to a project and its
performance.
(9) Serves as the Contracting Officer’s Representative, as determined
by the Contracting Officer.
(10) Leads the Integrated Project Team and provides broad program
guidance. Delegates appropriate decision-making authority to the
Integrated Project Team members.
(11) Prepares and maintains the Integrated Project Team Charter and
operating guidance with Integrated Project Team support.
(12) Approves changes in compliance with the approved change control
process documented in the Project Execution Plan.
(13) Ensures that safety is fully integrated into design and
construction for high-risk, high-hazard, and Hazard Category 1, 2, and
3 nuclear facilities.
h. Departmental Staff and Support Offices.
Departmental Staff and Support Offices develop policy and related
implementing guidance, perform review functions, and provide advice and
recommendations to Department leadership. Key roles and
responsibilities of these offices regarding the acquisition of capital
assets follow.
i. Office of Environment, Health and Safety.
(1) Serves as a member of the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory
Board.
(2) Advises the Deputy Secretary in his/her role as the Secretarial
Acquisition Executive on environmental and safety matters related to
all Critical Decision approvals.
(3) Serves on the Independent Project Review as a team member at the
request of the Secretarial Acquisition Executive, Program Secretarial
Officer, Program Manager, Operations/Field Office Manager, or Federal
Project Director.
(4) Participates on External Independent Reviews as an observer at
the request of the Office of Engineering and Construction Management.
(5) Participates in safety documentation and Quality Assurance
reviews for acquisition projects at the request of the Office of
Engineering and Construction Management and/or the Acquisition
Executive when considered appropriate.
(6) Participates in Operational Readiness Reviews or Readiness
Assessments at the request of the line organizations.
(7) Supports the Central Technical Authorities as requested.
j. Office of the Chief Information Officer.
(1) Holds delegated Acquisition Executive authority over Departmental
Information Technology Projects between $5M < $100M.
(2) Develops and maintains Department-wide policy, requirements, and
guidance for Information Technology projects, including Information
Technology hardware, software and application, and capital assets.
(3) Advises and provides programmatic support to ensure that
Information Technology is acquired and information resources are
managed in accordance with all applicable statutory, regulatory, and
agency requirements.
(4) Provides Information Technology investment management process
assistance to Program Offices, field elements, and contractor
locations, as requested.
(5) Regularly collects process performance measurement information,
and prepares a summary report on the status and performance of
Information Technology investments.
(6) Establishes Enterprise Architecture policy and practice within
DOE to ensure the development and maintenance of a sound and integrated
Information Technology portfolio of investments that are aligned to the
strategic business goals of the Department.
k. Office of Engineering and Construction Management within the
Office of Management.
(1) Serves as DOE’s principal point of contact relating to project
management.
(2) Develops policy, requirements, and guidance for the acquisition
of capital assets.
(3) Assist in the planning, programming, budgeting, and execution
process for the acquisition of capital assets in coordination with the
Program Secretarial Officers and Project Management Support Offices.
(4) Supports the Office of the Secretary, the Secretarial Acquisition
Executive, the Under Secretaries, and the Program Secretarial Officer
in the Critical Decision process; and oversight of the acquisition
management process.
(5) Serves as Secretariat for the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory
Board.
(6) Serves as an Acquisition Advisory Board member for Non-Major
System Projects with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management
Total Project Cost greater than or equal to $100M.
(7) Manages the Project Management Career Development Program.
(8) Manages the Earned Value Management System certification process.
(9) Reviews Acquisition Strategies for Major System Projects.
(10) Maintains a corporate project reporting capability.
(11) Establishes, maintains, and executes a corporate independent
review capability to provide an independent assessment and analysis of
project planning, execution, and performance.
(12) Validates the Performance Baseline for all capital asset projects
with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project
Cost greater than or equal to $100M to permit inclusion in the DOE
annual budget.
l. Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation.
Reviews Mission Need Statements for all capital asset projects with a
Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost
greater than or equal to $100M, and makes a recommendation to Program
Secretarial Officer prior to CD-0.
m. Integrated Project Team.
(1) Supports the Federal Project Director.
(2) Develops a project contracting strategy.
(3) Ensures project interfaces are identified, defined, and managed
to completion.
(4) Identifies, defines, and manages to completion the project
environmental, safety, health, security, and quality assurance
requirements.
(5) Identifies and defines appropriate and adequate project technical
scope, schedule, and cost parameters.
(6) Performs periodic reviews and assessments of project performance
and status against established performance parameters, baselines,
milestones, and deliverables.
(7) Plans and participates in project reviews, audits, and appraisals
as necessary.
(8) Reviews all Critical Decision packages and recommend
approval/disapproval.
(9) Reviews and comments on project deliverables (e.g., drawings,
specifications, procurement, and construction packages).
(10) Reviews change requests (as appropriate) and support Change
Control Boards as requested.
(11) Participates, as required, in Operational Readiness Reviews or
Readiness Assessments.
(12) Supports preparation, review, and approval of project completion
and closeout documentation.
(13) Ensures that safety is fully integrated into design and
construction for high-risk, high-hazard, and Hazard Category 1, 2, and
3 nuclear facilities.
n. Central Technical Authorities.
The Central Technical Authorities are responsible for maintaining
operational awareness, especially with respect to complex, high-hazard
nuclear operations, and ensuring the Department’s nuclear safety
policies and requirements are implemented adequately and properly. In
this context, it is important to recognize that the Central Technical
Authorities have responsibilities related to nuclear safety directives
that apply to projects. The overall roles and responsibilities of the
Central Technical Authorities include:
(1) Concur with the determination of the applicability of DOE
Directives involving nuclear safety included in contracts pursuant to
DEAR 48 CFR 970.5204-2(b).
(2) Concur with nuclear safety requirements included in contracts
pursuant to DEAR 48 CFR 970.5204-2.
(3) Concur with all exemptions to nuclear safety requirements in
contracts that were added to the contract pursuant to DEAR 48 CFR
970.5204-2.
(4) Recommend to the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and
Health issues and proposed resolutions concerning DOE safety
requirements, concur in the adoption or revision of nuclear safety
requirements (including supplemental requirements), and provide
expectations and guidance for implementing nuclear safety requirements
for use by DOE employees and contractors.
o. Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety and Chief of Nuclear Safety.
The Chiefs (and staff) are responsible for evaluating nuclear safety
issues and providing expert advice to the Central Technical Authorities
and other senior officials. For Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear
facilities, the Chief:
(1) Participates as part of the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory
Board, or similar advisory boards.
(2) Provides support to both the Central Technical Authorities and
Acquisition Executive regarding the effectiveness of efforts to
integrated safety into design at each of the Critical Decisions, and as
requested during other project reviews.
(3) Validates that integration of design and safety basis activities
include the use of a system engineering approach tailored to the
specific needs and requirements of the project.
(4) Determines that nuclear facilities have incorporated the concept
of defense-in-depth into the facility design process.
(5) Validates that Federal personnel assigned to the Integrated
Project Team as nuclear safety experts are appropriately qualified.
p. Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board.
The Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board advises the Secretarial
Acquisition Executive on Critical Decisions related to Major System
Projects, site selection, and Performance Baseline deviation
dispositions.
q. Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board Membership.
(1) Secretarial Acquisition Executive as Chair
(2) Under Secretaries
(3) DOE General Counsel
(4) Director of Management
(5) Chief Financial Officer
(6) Director of the Office of Engineering and Construction Management
(7) Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health
(8) Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management
(9) Director of the Office of Security and Safety Performance
Assurance
(10) Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs
(11) Director of the Office of Science
(12) Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy
The Deputy Secretary may designate other Program Secretarial Officers
or functional staff as Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board
members (temporary or permanent) as needed.
r. Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board Secretariat.
The Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board Secretariat resides in
the Office of Engineering and Construction Management and provides
administrative and analytical support and recommendations to the Energy
Systems Acquisition Advisory Board.
s. Non-Major System Project Advisory Boards.
The designated Acquisition Executive will appoint an Advisory Board to
provide advice and recommendations on actions for projects that are not
designated as Major Systems. The designated Acquisition Executive is
the Chair of the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board replicates and
conducts identical functions to those performed by the Energy Systems
Acquisition Advisory Board. Members may be selected from within the
Acquisition Executive’s organization. However, at least one member from
an office not under the Acquisition Executive will be designated as a
contributing representative. The Office of Engineering and Construction
Management will provide a member to each Advisory Board for projects
with a Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project
Cost greater than or equal to $100M. The Office of Engineering and
Construction Management will not be a Board member for projects with a
Total Project Cost or Environmental Management Total Project Cost less
than $100M, but may be invited to attend the Advisory Board meetings.
The implementing documentation and composition of each Advisory Board
along with meeting agendas and minutes will be provided to the Office
of Engineering and Construction Management.
3. REFERENCES.
a. 10 CFR 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements.
b. 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, Safety Basis Requirements.
c. 10 CFR 830.206, Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis.
d. 10 CFR 851, Worker Safety and Health Program.
e. 29 CFR 1910.119, Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous
Substances.
f. 40 CFR 68, Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions.
g. ANSI-EIA-649, National Consensus Standard for Configuration
Management.
h. ANSI-EIA-748-A-1998, Earned Value Management Systems.
i. DEAR 48 CFR 970.5204-2, Integration of Environmental, Safety, and
Health into Work Planning and Execution.
j. DOE O 205.1, Department of Energy Cyber Security Management
Program, dated 03-21-03.
k. DOE P 413.1, Program and Project Management Policy for the
Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Acquisition of Capital Assets,
dated 06-10-00.
l. DOE O 425.1C, Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities, dated
03-13-03.
m. DOE O 430.2A, Departmental Energy and Utilities Management, dated
04-15-02.
n. DOE O 451.1B, Chg 1, National Environmental Policy Act Compliance
Program, dated 09-28-01.
o. DOE P 470.1, Integrated Safeguards and Security Management, dated
05-08-01.
p. DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, dated 10-15-96.
q. DOE P 226.1, Department of Energy Oversight Policy, dated 06-10-
05.
r. DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 06-17-05.
s. DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety, dated 12-22-05.
t. DOE M 413.3-1, Program Management for the Acquisition of Capital
Assets, dated 03-28-03.
u. DOE M 470.4-1, Safeguards and Security Program Planning and
Management, dated 08-26-05.
v. DOE O 361.1A, Acquisition Career Development Program, dated 04-
19-04.
w. DOE O 450.1, Chg 2, Environmental Protection Program, dated 12-
07-05.
x. DOE-STD-1189-2006.
y. House Report 109-86, “Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Bill, 2006.”
z. OECM, Project Management Practices, Integrated Safety, Revision
E, June 2003.
aa. OMB Circular A-11, Part 7, Planning, Budgeting, Acquisition, and
Management of Capital Assets, dated June 2006; and Supplement to Part
7-Capital Programming Guide.
bb. OMB Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Internal
Control, dated 12?21?04.
cc. OMB Circular A-127, Financial Management Systems, dated 07-23-93.
dd. OMB Circular A-130, Management of Federal Information Resources,
Transmittal Memorandum #4, dated 11-28-00.
4. CONTACT. Questions concerning this Order should be directed to
the Office of Engineering and Construction Management, 202-586-1784.
BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY:
CLAY SELL
Deputy Secretary
DEPARTMENTAL ELEMENTS TO WHICH
DOE ORDER 413.3A IS APPLICABLE
Office of the Secretary
Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board
National Nuclear Security Administration
Office of Chief Financial Officer
Office of Chief Information Officer
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs
Office of Economic Impact and Diversity
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Office of Energy Information Administration
Office of Environment, Safety, and Health
Office of Environmental Management
Office of Fossil Energy
Office of General Counsel
Office of Hearings and Appeals
Office of Human Capital Management
Office of Inspector General
Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence
Office of Legacy Management
Office of Management
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology
Office of Policy and International Affairs
Office of Public Affairs
Office of Science
Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board
Southeastern Power Administration
Southwestern Power Administration
Western Area Power Administration
CONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT
DOE ORDER 413.3A, Program and Project Management
for the Acquisition of Capital Assets
This Contractor Requirements Document sets forth intended requirements
to be applied to contractors responsible for performing program and
project management of Department-owned facilities and for other
contractors as determined by the Federal Project Director and
Contracting Officer, in conjunction with the Federally-assigned
Integrated Project Team members. Regardless of the performer of the
work, the affected contractor is responsible for complying with the
requirements of this Contractor Requirements Document as included in
the contract. The contractor is responsible for flowing down Contractor
Requirements Document requirements to subcontractors at any tier to the
extent necessary to ensure contractor compliance.
The contractor’s project management system must satisfy the following
requirements:
1. The industry standard for Performance Management Systems,
described in ANSI/EIA-748-A-1998, must be implemented and self-
certified on all projects with a Total Project Cost greater than $20M.
For projects not required to utilize an Earned Value Management System
(e.g., firm fixed-price contract projects), an alternative Performance
Management System must be described in the Project Execution Plan and
utilized. For projects with Total Project Cost equal to or greater than
$50M, the Earned Value Management System must be validated by the
Office of Engineering and Construction Management. It is to be used for
control and reporting of project performance as defined in the Project
Execution Plan and no later than CD-2.
2. Cost and schedule performance, milestone status, and financial
status no later than CD-2 must be reported to DOE on a monthly basis
using DOE-approved work breakdown structure elements and data elements
for all projects with a Total Project Cost greater than or equal to
$20M, except firm fixed-priced contracts. The report must also include
variance analyses and corrective action plans that integrate cost,
schedule, and scope if variances exceed DOE-established reporting
thresholds. Analyses of cost and schedule trends, financial status, and
baseline change control activity, including the allocation of
management reserve, potential problems, and critical issues will also
be reported. Reporting by the contractor may be required earlier than
CD-2 as specified by the Contracting Officer.
3. For project contracts to be awarded as subcontracts by the
contractor, the contractor must have a written Acquisition Plan that is
appropriate for the requirement and dollar value of each subcontract
and consistent with its contract’s provisions. The Acquisition Plan for
a project contract to be awarded by the contractor is to be developed
by a team of contractor employees including, at a minimum, the
prospective Project Manager and Contract Negotiator. The Acquisition
Plan must receive the concurrence of both the Federal Project Director
and the DOE Contracting Officer.
4. Technical performance analyses and corrective action plans must
be reported to DOE for variances to the project baseline objectives
resulting from design reviews, component and system tests, and
simulations.
5. A critical path schedule and a project master schedule must be
developed and maintained.
6. Cost estimating must be an integral part of cost baseline
including life cycle cost development and maintenance, budget request
development, and estimates at completion.
7. Project technical, cost, and schedule risks must be identified,
quantified, and mitigated throughout the life of the project. Risks
must be identified, evaluated, and mitigation strategies developed and
implemented.
8. An integrated contractor technical, cost, and schedule baseline
must be developed and maintained using a contractor-level Change
Control Board.
9. A configuration management process must be established that
controls changes to the physical configuration of project facilities,
structures, systems, and components in compliance with ANSI/EIA-649,
National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management. This process
must also ensure that the configuration is in agreement with the
performance objectives identified in the technical baseline and the
approved quality assurance plan.
10. A Value Management/Engineering process must be used that
identifies high-cost project activities in order to realize a maximum
return on investment through the use of systems engineering tradeoffs
and functional analyses that identify alternate means of achieving the
same function at a lower life cycle cost.
11. A quality assurance program must be developed and implemented for
the contract scope of work when the contractor’s requirements include
DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance or 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality
Assurance Requirements (as applicable).
12. An Integrated Safety Management system must be developed and
implemented for the contract scope of work when the contractor is
complying with the requirements of DEAR 48 CFR 970.5204-2, Integration
of Environmental, Safety and Health into Work Planning and Execution.
13. Contractors performing design for projects must at a minimum
conduct a Preliminary and Final Design Review, in accordance with the
Project Execution Plan. For nuclear projects, the design review will
include a focus on safety and security systems.
14. High performance sustainable building principles must be applied
to the siting, design, construction, and commissioning of new
facilities and major renovations of existing facilities.
DEFINITIONS
1. Acquisition Executive. The individual designated by the Secretary
of Energy to integrate and unify the management system for a program
portfolio of projects, and implement prescribed policies and practices.
2. Acquisition Strategy. An acquisition strategy is a high-level
business and technical management approach designed to achieve project
objectives within specified resource constraints. It is the framework
for planning, organizing, staffing, controlling, and leading a project.
It provides a master schedule for activities essential for project
success, and for formulating functional strategies and plans.
3. Capital Assets. Capital assets are land, structures, equipment,
intellectual property (e.g., software), and Information Technology used
by the Federal government and having an estimated useful life of two or
more years. Capital assets include environmental restoration
(decontamination and decommissioning) of land to make useful leasehold
improvements and land rights, and assets whose ownership is shared by
the Federal Government with other entities. Capital assets may be
acquired in different ways: purchase, construction, or manufacture; a
lease-purchase or other capital lease (regardless of whether title has
passed to the Federal Government); or exchange. This Order does not
apply to land, structures, equipment, intellectual property (e.g.,
software), or Information Technology acquired by State and local
governments or other entities through Financial Assistance (i.e., DOE
grants and cooperative agreements), or to assets acquired under General
Plant Projects for maintaining infrastructure at a site.
4. Conceptual Design. The concept for meeting a mission need. The
Conceptual Design process requires a mission need as an input. Concepts
for meeting the need are explored and alternatives considered to arrive
at a set of alternatives that are technically viable, affordable and
sustainable.
5. Configuration Management. The technical and administrative
direction and surveillance actions taken to identify and document the
functional and physical characteristics of a configuration item; to
control changes to a configuration item and its characteristics; and to
record and report change processing and implementation status.
6. Contingency. Contingency is the portion of the project budget
that is available for risk uncertainty within the project scope, but
outside the scope of the contract. Contingency is budget that is not
placed on the contract, and is included in the Total Project Cost.
7. Construction Manager. The individual or firm responsible to DOE
for supervision and administration of a construction project to ensure
the construction contractor's compliance with construction project
requirements.
8. Contractor Requirements Document. A Contractor Requirements
Document is the DOE document that identifies the requirements that the
Prime Contractor’s project management system must satisfy (Attachment
2).
9. Critical Decision. A formal determination made by the Secretarial
Acquisition Executive/Acquisition Executive at a specific point in a
project’s life cycle that allows the project to proceed to the next
phase or Critical Decision.
10. Deviation. A deviation occurs when the current estimate of a
performance, technical, scope, schedule, or cost parameter is not
within the threshold values of the Performance Baseline for that
parameter. It is handled as a deviation, not through the normal change
control system.
11. Directed Change. A change imposed on a project(s) that affects
the project’s baseline. Example of directed changes include, but are
not limited to (a) changes to approved budgets, or funding, and (b)
changes resulting from DOE policy directives and regulatory or
statutory requirements.
12. Earned Value. Earned Value is the budgeted value of work actually
accomplished in a given time. Simply defined, Earned Value represents
the value of work accomplished during the period.
13. Earned Value Management. Earned Value Management is a program and
project management methodology of which organization, planning,
progressing, tracking, management control, reporting, and communication
are essential elements.
14. External Independent Review. A project review conducted by
individuals outside DOE. The Office of Engineering and Construction
Management selects an appropriate contractor to perform these reviews.
15. Final Design. Completion of the design effort and production of
all the approved design documentation necessary to permit procurement,
construction, testing, checkout, and turnover to proceed. Final design
occurs between Critical Decision-2 and -3.
16. Independent Cost Estimate. A “bottoms-up” documented, independent
cost estimate that has the express purpose of serving as an analytical
tool to validate, crosscheck, or analyze cost estimates developed by
project proponents.
17. Independent Cost Review. An essential project management tool
used to analyze and validate an estimate of project costs by
individuals having no direct responsibility for project performance.
18. Independent Project Review. Independent Project Reviews are
important project management tools and serve to verify the project’s
mission, organization, development, processes, technical requirements,
baselines, progress, etc. Independent Project Reviews are performed by
reviewers from within or outside the Program, but having no association
with the project being reviewed.
19. Integrated Project Team. An Integrated Project Team is a cross-
functional group of individuals organized for the specific purpose of
delivering a project to an external or internal customer.
20. Integrated Safety Management. The application of the integrated
safety management system to a project or activity. The fundamental
premise of Integrated Safety Management is that accidents are
preventable through early and close attention to safety, design, and
operation, and with substantial stakeholder involvement in teams that
plan and execute the project, based on appropriate standards.
21. Key Performance Parameters. A vital characteristic of a project
or facility mission. A characteristic, function, requirement, or design
basis, that if changed, would have a major impact on the facility or
system performance, scope, schedule, cost and/or risk, or the ability
of an interfacing project to meet its mission requirements. Thus, a Key
Performance Parameter may be a performance, design or interface
requirement. Parameters that are appropriate for Key Performance
Parameters are those that express performance in terms of accuracy,
capacity, throughput, quantity, processing rate, purity, or others that
define how well a system, facility or other project will perform.
22. Life Cycle Costs. The sum total of the direct, indirect,
recurring, nonrecurring, and other related costs incurred or estimated
to be incurred in the design, development, production, operation,
maintenance, support, long-term stewardship (if applicable), and final
disposition of a project/system over its anticipated useful life span.
Where system or project planning anticipates use of existing sites or
facilities, restoration and refurbishment costs are included in the
life cycle costs.
23. Line Item. An appropriation by Congress for a specific effort,
activity, or project.
24. Long-Lead Procurement. Equipment or material that must be
procured well in advance of the need for the materials because of long
delivery times.
25. Maintenance. Day-to-day work required to sustain property in a
condition suitable for its designated purposes, including preventive,
predictive, and corrective maintenance.
26. Major System. A project with a Total Project Cost of greater than
or equal to $750M or an Environmental Management Total Project Cost of
$1B or designated by the Deputy Secretary.
27. Management Reserve. An amount of the total contract budget
withheld for management control purposes by the contractor. Management
Reserve is not part of the Performance Measurement Baseline.
28. Mission Need Statement. A concise document that details a mission
requirement the Department cannot meet through nonmaterial method.
29. Non-Major System. Any project with a Total Project Cost less than
$750M or an Environmental Management Total Project Cost less than $1B.
30. Performance Baseline. The collective key performance, scope,
cost, and schedule parameters, which are defined for all projects.
Performance Baseline includes the entire project budget (total cost of
the project including contingency) and represents DOE’s commitment to
Congress.
31. Performance Measurement Baseline. The Performance Measurement
Baseline is the baseline that encompasses all project work packages and
planning packages. The Performance Measurement Baseline provides a view
from the bottom-up where work packages are summed within the Work
Breakdown Structure. Management Reserve, contingency, profit, fee and
similar cost items separately identified in the contract are not part
of the Performance Measurement Baseline because no work is associated
with those budgets.
32. Project. A unique effort that supports a program mission having
defined points for starting and ending, undertaken to create a product,
facility, or system and containing interdependent activities planned to
meet a common objective or mission. A project is a basic building block
(in relation to a program) that is individually planned, approved, and
managed. A project is not constrained to any specific element of the
budget structure (e.g., operating expense, plant or capital equipment).
Projects include planning and execution of construction, assembly,
renovation, modification, environmental restoration, decontamination
and decommissioning, large capital equipment, and technology
development activities. Work that does not include the above elements,
e.g., basic research, grants, ordinary repairs, maintenance, and
operation of facilities are not considered projects. However, these
activities can be managed as projects.
33. Project Data Sheet. A generic term defining the document that
contains summary project data and the justification required to include
the entire project effort as a part of the Departmental budget.
34. Project Engineering and Design. Design funds established for use
on preliminary design, which are Operating Expense funds. Typically,
Project Engineering and Design funds are used for preliminary and final
design and related activities for design-bid-build strategies, and for
preliminary design and related costs in design-build strategies.
35. Risk Management. Effective risk management is an essential
element of every project. The DOE risk management concept is based on
the principles that risk management must be analytical, forward-
looking, structured, informative, and continuous. Risk assessments
should be performed as early as possible in the project life cycle and
should identify critical technical, performance, schedule, and cost
risks. Once risks are identified, sound risk mitigation strategies and
actions should be developed and documented.
36. System Engineering. A proven, disciplined approach that supports
management in clearly defining the mission or problem; managing system
functions and requirements; identifying and managing risk; establishing
bases for informed decision-making; and, verifying products and
services meet customer needs. The goal of the System Engineering
process is to transform mission operational requirements into system
architecture, performance parameters, and design details.
37. Total Project Cost. DOE has traditionally identified
project costs in two categories: (1) Total Estimated Cost, and (2)
Other Project Cost. The sum of the Total Estimated Cost and Other
Project Costs make up the Total Project Cost.
· Total Estimated Cost includes project costs incurred after CD-1
such as costs associated with the acquisition of land and land rights;
engineering, design, and inspection; direct and indirect
construction/fabrication; and the initial equipment necessary to place
the plant or installation in operation. Total Estimated Cost may be
funded as an operating or capital expense.
· Other Project Costs include all project costs that are not
identified as Total Estimated Cost costs. Generally, Other Project
Costs are costs incurred during the Initiation and Definition Phases
for planning, conceptual design, research and development, and during
the Execution Phase for startup and operation. Other Project Costs are
always operating funds.
38. Value Management. Value Management is an organized effort
directed at analyzing the functions of systems, equipment, facilities,
services, and supplies for achieving the essential functions at the
lowest life cycle cost consistent with required performance, quality,
reliability, and safety. Value Management encompasses Value
Engineering.
39. Value Engineering. Value Engineering is a planned, detailed
review/evaluation of a project to identify alternative approaches to
providing the needed assets.
40. Value Study. Value Study is an intensive review of requirements
and the development of alternatives by the use of appropriate value
techniques utilizing aspects of engineering, requirements analysis, the
behavioral sciences, creativity, economic analysis, and the scientific
method.
41. Variance. A variance is a deviation from the approved scope,
cost, or schedule performance. Variances must be tracked and reported.
Variances should be mitigated through corrective actions and not
eliminated through baseline change control unless valid rationale can
be presented to justify a change in baseline. Baseline changes are
submitted for changes in technical, work scope, funding, or directed
changes.