The following list
includes the "is/are required" and "must" requirements in the FPIG. These are statements imposing a necessity
to act. Users should review the guide for
"shall" statements, which are obligations to act; "should" statements, which
implies obligation or preference, but not absolute necessity; and
"will" statements, which are predictions of future action. The "is/are required" and "must" statements
are presented here for quick reference.
Users should review the referenced paragraph to ensure that the
statement is not taken out of context.
| Paragraph Reference |
Subject |
Description |
| 2.2.3 |
Fragmentation |
In establishing the scope of a facility project care must be exercised to include
all of the needs generated by the same set of circumstances in a single project to avoid
fragmentation or even the appearance of fragmentation (see Appendix A, Definitions, for "fragmentation"
and "facility project" definitions). Work cannot be fragmented (separated) solely to avoid approval requirements. |
| 2.2.4 |
Incremental Programming for Facility Requirements |
Each increment must be planned to provide a usable facility on a schedule that meets the need date established by the functional requirements. |
| 2.2.4.1 |
In these cases, the project scope should be determined by the amount of work that is scheduled to be in place during the program year. A limitation of funds clause (see NASA FAR Supplement (NFS)), 48 CFR Chapter 18 Part 1852, Subpart 1852.232-77 Limitation of Funds -Fixed- Price Contract) must be included in contracts that are incrementally funded in this manner. |
| 2.2.4.2 |
|
For proposed CoF projects, which are an increment of a larger total requirement, the individual project justification must highlight this relationship and include the following: (see paragraph 2.2.4.2 for list.) |
![[NASA Logo]](../Images/nasaball.gif)