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
Chg 1: 11-17-08
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 413.3 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. Nothing in this Order will be construed to interfere with the
NNSA Administrator’s authority under Section 3212 (d) of Public Law (P.L.)
106-65 to establish Administration-specific policies, unless disapproved by the
Secretary.
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. In accordance
with the responsibilities and authorities assigned by Executive Order
(E.O.) 12344 and to ensure consistency throughout the joint Navy and
DOE organization of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, the Director
of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program will implement and oversee all
requirements and practices pertaining to this DOE Order for activities
under the Director’s cognizance.
(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. For the design and construction of Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3
nuclear facilities, or for projects including major modifications thereto (as defined in 10
CFR Part 830), the requirements in DOE-STD-1189, as amended, must be fully
implemented.
5. REQUIREMENTS. Topics addressed in the following paragraphs are accessible through
links in the following topic list.
a. Project Management Principles 4
b. DOE Acquisition Management System 4
c. Project Phases 5
(1) Initiation Phase. 5
(2) Definition Phase. 5
(3) Execution Phase. 6
(4) Transition/Closeout Phase. 7
d. Critical Decisions. 7
(1) CD-0, Approve Mission Need. 7
(2) CD-1, Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range. 8
(3) CD-2, Approve Performance Baseline. 8
(4) CD-3, Approve Start of Construction. 9
(5) CD-4, Approve Start of Operations or Project Completion. 9
e. Critical Decision Approval Authority and Thresholds. 9
f. Tailoring. 17
g. Application of Critical Decisions to Unique Projects. 18
(1) Environmental Management Cleanup Projects. 18
(2) Information Technology Projects. 18
(3) Design-Build Projects. 19
(4) Projects Requiring Long-lead Procurement. 20
(5) Projects Authorized by the Annual National Defense
Authorization Acts 20
h. Reviews. 21
(1) CD-0. 21
(2) CD-1. 22
(3) CD-2. 22
(4) CD-3. 23
(5) CD-4. 23
i. Baseline Management. 23
j. Project Reporting and Progress Reviews. 25
k. Topical Areas. 26
(1) Acquisition Strategy. 26
(2) Conceptual Design/Conceptual Design Report. 26
(3) Earned Value Management System. 27
(4) Environment, Safety and Health Documentation Development. 27
(5) Integrated Project Team. 29
(6) Integrated Safety Management System. 29
(7) Key Performance Parameters. 31
(8) Performance Baseline. 31
(9) Project Execution Plan. 31
(10) Quality Assurance. 32
(11) Risk Management. 32
(12) Safeguards and Security. 32
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.
Figure 1. Typical 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.
(2) 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.
(3) 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.
(4) 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.
d. 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.
e. 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 THE TABLE 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, as amended,- provides implementation guidance for
Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities safety requirements.
Table 2. Critical Decision Requirements
SEE THE TABLE IN THE PDF
f. 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.
g. 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.
h. 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.
i. 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.
j. 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.
k. 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, as amended, 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.
6. 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.
(13) Appoint a Safety Basis Approval Authority no later than CD-0 for
projects including the design and construction of Hazard Category 1, 2,
and 3 nuclear facilities, or for projects including major modifications
thereto.
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 Health, Safety and Security.
(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, safety, and security 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 and security 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 Environmental Management
(8) Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer
(9) Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs
(10) Director of the Office of Science
(11) 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.
7. 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, as amended.
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.
8. 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
ATTACHMENT 1. 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 Environmental Management
Office of Fossil Energy
Office of General Counsel
Office of Health, Safety and Security
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
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board
Southeastern Power Administration
Southwestern Power Administration
Western Area Power Administration
ATTACHMENT 2. 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 970.5223-1-, Integration of Environment, 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.
15. For projects including Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities or for projects
including major modifications thereto (as defined in 10 CFR Part 830), the requirements
in DOE-STD-1189, as amended, must be fully implemented. The following documents
must be submitted: Safety Design Strategy (CD-1), Conceptual Safety Design Report
(CD-1), Preliminary Safety Design Report (CD-2), Preliminary Documented Safety
Analysis (CD-3), and Documented Safety Analysis with Technical Safety Requirements
(CD-4). For major modifications, the Conceptual Safety Design Report and the
Preliminary Safety Design Report may either be separate documents or be subsumed
within the Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis.
ATTACHMENT 3. 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.
U.S. Department of Energy PAGE CHANGE
Washington, D.C. DOE O 413.3A Chg 1
Approved: 7-28-06-08
Chg 1: 11-17-08
SUBJECT: PROGRAM AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF
CAPITAL ASSETS
1. PURPOSE. To transmit revised pages to DOE O 413.3A, Program and Project
Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, dated 7-28-06.
2. EXPLANATION OF CHANGES. To incorporate the requirements of DOE-STD-1189-
2008, Integration of Safety into the Design Process, mandatory for Hazard Category 1, 2
and 3 nuclear facilities into the directive.
3. LOCATION OF CHANGES.
Pages Paragraphs
2 3a, 3c(1) and 4
11-13 and 15-17 Table 2
28 5k(4)
36-37 6c(13)
40 6i and 6i(2)
41 6i(5)
45 6q(8)
47 7x
Attachment 1 All
Attachment 2, page 2-3
After filing the attached pages, this transmittal may be discarded.
BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY:
JEFFREY F. KUPFER
Acting Deputy Secretary