NPR 8820.2E - Chapter3

This chapter describes and provides guidance in establishing the requirements for planning/development of a facility project. It includes initial project identification through development of the project for final design.

3.1 Facility Project Manager

3.1.1 A Facility Project Manager (FPM) is an individual who has the most direct responsibility to organize, manage, and direct the multitude of activities and complete the assigned facility project work on schedule with the approved funds. Different individuals may fill this role at different phases of a project. Titles used at the different Centers may also vary for this assigned position (see Appendix A, Definitions). The FPM is responsible for working in concert with the advocate/user, and the preproject planning team (see paragraph 3.4, Preproject Planning) in ensuring: project requirements are defined, documented, and validated; appropriate project concept studies considering alternatives are considered; applicable safety, environmental, energy, and occupational safety and health-related requirements are met; project specifications and cost estimates are properly developed and documented; planning for final design is started; and budget/approval documentation is prepared and submitted in accordance with Chapter 1, NASA's Facilities Program. The FPM, working in concert with the preproject planning team, is responsible for ensuring the Facility Project Management Plan is prepared when required for use in the budget, design, construction, and activation phases (see paragraph 3.22, Facility Project Management Plan).

3.1.2 The assigned FPM leads development of the project through ensuring the completion of the following tasks:

a. Preparing a functional requirement statement working in concert with the advocate/user and the operational and other institutional stakeholders,

b. Preparing and updating (as the development phase progresses) the facility concept study that is described in paragraph 3.6, Facility Concept Study. This should include evaluating the project requirements; the proposed site (see paragraph 3.12, New Site Locations, where new real estate is required.), utilities and infrastructure interfaces and impacts in conjunction with master planning; the project scope; reliability requirements for equipment and systems; and any historical preservation requirements,

c. Making an environmental evaluation (see paragraph 3.13, Environmental Requirements) to meet the requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 14 CFR Part 1216, Environmental Quality, in the early stages of the development to avoid problems later in the project cycle that may impact schedule and/or cost. This includes identifying an environmental categorical exclusion or finding of no significant impact, or when required, preparing the environmental assessment, analysis, and impact statement,

d. Verifying and/or identifying safety requirements (see NPR 8715.3, NASA Safety Manual),

e. Identifying options for reducing the use of energy and meeting the energy conservation performance standards of CFR, 10 CFR Part 434 (see paragraph 3.14, Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation Considerations),

f. Identifying O&M requirements (see paragraph 3.5, Operations/Maintenance Staff Involvement) including Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM), Predictive Testing & Inspection (PT&I), and Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) requirements,

g. Addressing sustainability including sustainable design principles for project siting, design, and construction per Executive Order (EO) 13123, Greening the Government Through Efficient Energy Management, design for maintainability, building commissioning and facility aspects of safety and security during project development (see Appendix G, Sustainability),

h. Assuring the Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) tool is utilized for assessing the project as appropriate,

i. Preparing the Requirements Document (see paragraph 3.7, Requirements Document) working in conjunction with the preproject planning team (see paragraph 3.4.1 ), which is the basis for budget submission and project approval documentation. provides details for PERs, if required, and project design,

j. Preparing the Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) when required (see paragraph 3.18, Preliminary Engineering Reports) and facility project cost analysis,

k. Developing an independent cost validation of the facility project work when appropriate. Cost validation is done for facility projects that are complex in nature or have unique features that require additional analysis to define and establish all of the elements of the project cost,

l. Implementing changes in project scope and project cost when approved by the Program Office and Headquarters Facilities Engineering Division,

m. Developing an acquisition (procurement) plan. This should include consideration of the need for multiple work packages (see paragraph 4.2.1.2),

p. Developing the Facility Project Management Plan, when required, working in concert with the preproject planning team,

r. Verifying and/or identifying occupational safety and health-related requirements specific to protecting workers occupying the new/renovated facility (see NPD 1800.2B, NASA Occupational Health Program), and

s. Identifying whether there are National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA - 36 CFR 800) requirements associated with this project. If there are, integrating those requirements into the project.

3.2 Risk Management

Risk management is a continuous process used throughout the life of a project. It identifies risks; analyzes their impact and prioritizes them; develops and carries out plans for risk mitigation, acceptance, or other action; tracks risks and the implementation of mitigation plans; supports informed, timely, and effective decisions to control risks and mitigation plans; and ensures that risk information is communicated among all levels of a project's management. This process is detailed in NPR 7120.5B, NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements, section 4.2, Risk Management. Variations to this requirement should be coordinated through the Facilities Engineering Division (FED) and the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance.

3.2.1 Risk management should start with the advocate/user making decisions on the basis of an orderly risk management effort that includes the following elements as appropriate:

a. Financial requirements (e.g. worst case for construction, customer equipment, customer relocation, outfitting),

e. Schedule management (ability to meet schedule requirements and relationship to costs),

f. Constructability level (e.g. multiplicity of phases, subcontract efforts, weather impacts), and

g. Facility System Safety (e.g. quantification and qualification of safety risks from concept to activation in accordance with NPR 8715.3, and NASA STD 8719.7, NASA Facility System Safety Guidebook).

3.2.2 As the project moves through the various stages of development, a risk management process should be used to ensure that risks are identified and managed in accordance with NPR 7120.5.

3.3 Requirement Definition

3.3.1 The first and most important phase of a facility project is the advocate/user requirement definition. This is a progressive process that begins with a determination that a mission, operation, or a research and development task has facility implications that lead to the conclusion that a facility project is required. Early and effective advocate/user-defined requirements are essential for successfully developing the project. Following the determination that a project is required, a functional requirement statement must be prepared to clearly define and document the requirements. This statement is necessary to provide a basis to develop a realistic scope and budget estimate for a facility project to satisfy the requirements. To accomplish these efforts, a FPM must be assigned to work in concert with the advocate/user and the operational and other institutional stakeholders to establish the facility operating parameters, functional arrangements, and project need date.

3.3.2 Strategic Resource Planning (SRP). Periodically, each existing facility should be examined to determine whether to continue using it or to safely deactivate the facility. This evaluation must be consistent with the Center's Master Plan, Enterprise Strategic Plans, and Center implementation plans. Guidelines and instructions for SRP will be provided in each year's POP.

3.3.3 Defining a Facility Project. The advocate/user requirements must be evaluated to identify proposed facility projects prior to preparation of the requirements statement. The principal objective of the evaluation is the early establishment of a solid functional requirement that can be reviewed to determine when and to what extent new, reallocated, or modified facilities are required to meet a specific need. This evaluation should use the definition for "Facility Project" in Appendix A, Definitions, and the following guidance. For a listing of typical facility cost items to include in a facility project, see Appendix D, Facility and Other Related Costs. The definition states a facility project should accomplish all the work in one facility at the same time to meet all of the needs generated by the same set of events or circumstances. In applying the definition in a large facility where more than one user exists, it is possible that two or more facility projects could be properly developed for implementation at or near the same time without fragmentation. See paragraph 2.2.3 Fragmentation, for a discussion on fragmentation and Appendix A, Definitions, for "fragmentation" definition.

3.3.4.1 Once a facility requirement has been identified, the next step is to document the requirements by preparing a functional requirements statement. In preparing this statement, emphasis must be placed on defining the need and scope of the project to successfully compete for the limited facilities resources. The primary use of the statement is to support the Center's decisionmaking process that leads to the inclusion of a proposed project in the 5-year plan or in the budget year request. The statement will also serve as the basis for the subsequent preparation of the Facility Concept Study and the justification in the budget documentation.

3.3.4.2 The requirements statement must define the capability required and evaluate options to meet the stated need. Essential to this analysis is an understanding and discussion of the work force and funding (Institutional, Science, Aeronautics and Technology-SAT, or Human Space Flight-HSF) implications of the various alternatives. The requirements statement should include a preferred option, with reasons given for its preference.

3.3.4.3 Functional Requirement Statement Content. The statement answers the questions listed below and any others the Center feels appropriate. The answers provide the baseline for preparing the Facility Requirements Document that will satisfy the functional requirements. The requirements statement clarifies the capability requirement details well in advance of the CoF cycle and provides the input for the subsequent Facility Concept Study.

a. What missions, operations, or research and development or institutional tasks require this capability?

b. Which Enterprise sponsors this project, and who is the Headquarters advocate? What is the estimate of the work force and annual operations and maintenance funding associated with the initiative? Who are the primary users/benefactors?

c. What link does this have to Strategic Implementation Plans, business goals, core competency assessments, and master plan?

d. What is the required work? What are the expected benefits of the proposed facility? What are the unique features to meet the functional requirement, including occupational safety and health-related (see NPD 1800.2 (see paragraph 3.1.2.r for hyperlink), NASA Occupational Health Program), safety (Refer to NPR 8715.3, NASA Safety Manual) and environmental issues (Refer to NPR 8580.1, Procedures and Guidelines for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Executive Order 12114)? (These are key elements of the preproject planning process because they can identify cost and schedule implications that might otherwise be overlooked.)

e. Must the capability be in a particular location, and if so why? What is the relationship to existing or proposed facilities?

f. What milestone dictates the need for this capability in the requested fiscal year? What is the impact of delay?

g. If this is an ongoing task, what facilities and other resources are currently being used to meet the requirement? Why is it not possible to continue support of the task in this manner?

h. What nonconstruction alternatives for satisfying this requirement were analyzed? What is the disposition of these alternatives?

i. Will the activities in the proposed facility use materials or processes that are potentially hazardous to personnel or the environment?

j. What organization and which individual(s) will be responsible for clarifying requirements or providing additional details, if required, to support future project development?

3.3.4.4 Statement Format. The requirements statement format will vary from a short statement of the requirement providing answers to the applicable questions in paragraph 3.3.4.3, Functional Requirement Statement Content, and any others the Center may feel are appropriate, for a project of minimal scope to a detailed statement elaborating on the answers to the questions and providing any other pertinent information for a large or complex facility project. The statement should be in a clear logical order and be consistent with the Center's decisionmaking and budget process. The statement should identify the organization(s) and individual(s) that are responsible for providing additional information as required.

3.4 Preproject Planning

Preproject planning is defined as a process of developing sufficient strategic information to address risks and decide to commit resources to maximize the chance for a successful project. NASA has adopted preproject planning as a best practice. The advocate/user must identify requirements for inclusion in the functional requirement statement (see Figure 3-1 Project Development Checklist). Once the requirements are identified, the preproject planning process starts and continues through 35-percent design of the project. The preproject planning phase establishes the project requirement and concept, and provides the basis for project budget and approval. The Construction Industry Institute's Preproject Planning Handbook should be used for additional guidance on preproject planning.

3.4.1 To accomplish preproject planning, a team effort utilizing the concepts in the NASA Partnering Desk Reference should be employed. The team must include all project stakeholders and must include the assigned Facility Project Manager (FPM). The makeup of the team may change as the project progresses through its planning/development phase. The team should consist of members with the needed skills, knowledge and authority required to support the planning/development of the proposed project. The team must review existing facilities that may satisfy the requirements and must define and document the required features and capabilities for the project.

3.4.2 Organizing for Preproject Planning. For projects of minimal scope the preproject planning effort may be informal, but for larger or complex projects the preproject planning should be more formal, rigorous, and well-documented. Partnering among the project stakeholders ensures all requirements are understood and incorporated into the facility's documentation and budget. The following are suggestions for use by the preproject planning team as appropriate:

a. Select stakeholders for the team from Center organizations based upon knowledge, skills, authority, and operations and administrative functions that are needed to develop the project requirements,

b. For a formal team, draft a charter to define the objectives. It is important that stakeholders define their respective project goals and understand each other's perspective, and

c. For large or complex projects, develop a Preproject Plan defining needs, requirements, and objectives and team member roles and responsibilities.

3.4.3 After the preproject planning team has been organized for a project, use the Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) tool (see paragraph 3.8, Project Definition Rating Index) as a check list to collectively review the project so that each team member understands the implications of the project and the team can assess what information is missing so it can be included in the facility concept study.

3.5 Operations/Maintenance Staff Involvement

The O&M stakeholder preproject planning team member should identify maintenance support requirements for inclusion in the project development and budget estimates (see NPR 8831.2, NASA Facilities Maintenance Management). Appropriate RCM practices should be incorporated into the project development and design. Elements such as facility access, built-in condition monitoring, data transfer, sensor connections and training should be considered.

3.6 Facility Concept Study

3.6.1 The Facility Concept Study is the process of evaluating concepts for satisfying the functional requirements with the most effective and minimal life-cycle cost solution for the stated functional requirement. The solution must incorporate constructability and value engineering in accordance with NPD 8820.2A, Design and Construction of Facilities, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-131, Value Engineering, (see paragraph 4.4.6, Value Engineering). The Center will normally use local resources (i.e., non-CoF funds and the assigned professional staff) to develop concept studies as appropriate.

3.6.1.1 The Facility Concept Study is a valuable tool for describing the project to Center management and for introducing the project's requirements and benefits to the Enterprise or Institutional Program Office (IPO) advocates at Headquarters.

3.6.1.2 The nature and scope of the project are major considerations in determining the extent of the concept study that will provide the basis for the following:

a. Developing project documents to support a facility proposal for the 5-year facility plan,

b. Identifying any specialized technical features or elements of the functional requirement that require further study and resolution prior to inclusion in the Requirement Documents (see paragraph 3.7, Requirements Document),

c. Developing a scope of work for preparing a detailed description of the project,

d. Determining the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental Assessments (EA) (Refer to NPR 8580.1, Procedures and Guidelines For Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Executive Order 12114),

e. Validating the proposed project's compatibility with the Center's master plan,

f. Validating that the proposed site can support the requirement without impacting other facilities, and

g. Coordinating with the Occupational Health Office to ensure that any necessary engineering controls to reduce/eliminate hazardous exposures are included in the description.

3.6.2 Content of Facility Concept Study. The basic elements of the concept study are an updated discussion of the mission, operations, or research and development tasks that generated the requirement for a new or modified facility. This study generates an expanded description of the proposed facility, with special emphasis on analyzing the relationship between the key facility features and their associated functional requirements. The Facility Concept Study documentation should include the following elements in the format recommended in paragraph 3.6.3, Format of Facility Concept Study:

a. Statement of the requirement - includes a thorough description of the function and operation of the required facility,

b. The functional relationship of the proposed facility to current or new missions or programs,

c. The intended role of the proposed facility for accomplishing the mission or program,

d. Evaluation of options - includes identifying existing facilities (including Government or private facilities) that can be adapted for the new requirement and an explanation if no existing facilities can support the requirement,

f. Project description - describes major areas and capabilities that are required for proper operation of the facility including reliability considerations for equipment and systems. The description should include numbers of people, amounts and sizes of equipment, functions to be performed, and special features such as height and weight requirements, support requirements, and any other information that will aid in establishing the project scope,

g. Site description - describes the general characteristics of the proposed project site (see paragraph 3.12, New Site Locations) and should address relationships to and/or impacts upon adjacent activities. Should include a statement that the site has been selected in conformance with the approved master plan (see Appendix F); and that no known environmental limitations exist at the site (Refer to NPR 8580.1, Procedures and Guidelines for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Executive Order 12114, Environmental effects abroad of major Federal actions, and coordinate with environmental office). See paragraph 3.12, New Site Locations, for approval requirements for obtaining new real estate,

h. Structural considerations - describes unusual conditions that should be considered in designing the structure. Requirements for unusual entrances, loading docks, special bay sizes and ceiling heights, or expected vibration requirements should be included to highlight unusual conditions that require special attention. Seismic considerations follow the most current National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) standards and EO 12699, Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted or Regulated New Buildings, or EO 12941, Seismic Safety of Existing Federally Owned or Leased Buildings, as applicable,

i. Mechanical considerations - describes unusual environmental requirements and conditions such as air cleanliness, humidity, Radio Frequency (RF) shielding, and special utility services that will influence the mechanical design,

j. Electrical considerations - describes unusual requirements and conditions that will influence electrical design,

k. Reliability considerations - describes the amount of built-in condition monitoring, data transfer, and sensor connections to be used and maintainability considerations to be included such as access, materials, stanadardization, and quantitative maintenance goals (see Chapter 5 of NASA's Reliability Centered Building and Equipment Acceptance Guide).

l. Fire protection - includes requirements for suppression systems, detectors, and alarms in accordance with NASA STD 8719.11, Safety Standard for Fire Protection,

m. Facility Safety - meets the facility safety requirements of NPR 8715.3, NASA Safety Manual and NASA STD 8719.7, NASA Facility System Safety Guidebook,

n. Life safety - includes requirements from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 101, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and local building codes, especially seismic standards that meet the most current NEHRP standards in all seismic zones as required by EO 12699, Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted or Regulated New Building Construction, and EO 12941, Seismic Safety of Existing Federally Owned or Leased Building,

o. Occupational safety and health-related issues - applies to facility projects and requires compliance with current Federal, State, and local regulations applicable to the operation of the facility.

p. Environmental issues - requires compliance with current Federal, State, and local environmental regulations applicable for the area of proposed construction (refer to NPR 8580.1, Procedures and Guidelines For Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Executive Order 12114, and coordinate with the environmental office). (see paragraph 3.13, Environmental Requirements.),

q. Sustainability - Including Sustainable design required to comply with the sustainable design principles of Executive Order (EO) 13123, Greening the Government Through Efficient Energy Management, design for maintainability, building commissioning, and facility aspects of safety and security. (see paragraph 4.4.4, Sustainable Design, for details.),

r. Energy considerations and life-cycle costs - requires careful attention to minimize life-cycle costs per the methodology established by 10 CFR Part 436, Federal Energy Management and Planning Programs, to maximize energy efficiency, to maximize the use of high-efficiency products for building systems, and to meet the design requirements of 10 CFR Part 434, Energy Code for New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings,

s. Public accommodations - includes considerations ensuring that the general public will have safe access to the Center and its facilities, as appropriate,

t. Special considerations - includes provisions for people with mobility and visual impairments and other matters that are important to the proper design of the facility that are not covered in a prior section,

u. Explanation of the project's schedule sensitivity - addresses specifically why the project must be provided in the requested fiscal year. If construction phasing is required over several years, it should be explained,

v. A description of features or components of the proposed facility that may be outside the present state-of the-art in design or construction - includes the arrangements and schedules for accomplishing the research and development work that will provide the information and database for the engineering design of these items,

w. Proposed schedule - shows the POP, budget, PER preparation, design, construction, and activation phases that are consistent with the facility need date,

x. CoF cost estimate - provides cost information developed using the scope and special considerations for the facility project and the current local experience with construction costs. The estimate should be prepared and documented on NASA Form 1510 in accordance with the instructions in Appendix C, Forms and Instructions. The FPM should lead the development of the estimate utilizing preproject planning team members,

y. Related cost estimate - provides a summary list that identifies the costs and source of funds for those elements of the project effort that are not included in the facility project cost estimate. See instructions for preparation of the Related Cost Data portion of the NASA Form 1509 in Appendix C, Forms and Instructions, for estimate details, and

z. Single-line drawings - shows facility location, size, configuration, and functional relationships - depicts unique physical features of the facility.

3.6.3 Format of Facility Concept Study. Much of the material in the Facility Concept Study will be used in the project documents (NASA Forms 1509 and 1510, and the Long Form Writeup) included in the budget submittal. The following format is recommended to facilitate this application:

a. Executive summary - a one-page overview of the key elements of justification, description, cost, and schedule, which becomes Summary of Purpose and Scope,

b. Justification statement - becomes Basis of Need. This statement must clearly present the mission and operational need for the project,

f. Related costs estimate - includes non-CoF elements and becomes part of other equipment summary,

g. Graphics - includes location and site plans, and elevations, that depict the projects scope, and

h. Appendices - includes equipment lists (existing and planned purchases), staffing information, and other detailed backup data for the basic narrative.

3.6.4 At completion of the Facility Concept Study, the proposed project's tentative scope and budget begin to have exposure at both the Center and Headquarters levels. Since scope and cost are requirements driven and initial impressions tend to be difficult to revise, it is essential that the Facility Concept Study be thoroughly reviewed (see paragraph 3.9, Requirements Reviews) and approved by the project advocates'/users' management.

3.7 Requirements Document

The Requirements Document further defines the details of the project building upon the functional requirements and Facility Concept Study as appropriate. It forms the basis for developing documents for the budget and/or project approval. The document provides facility details required for preparing the PER and/or the design. It is essential that the detailed requirements in this document are accurate and complete for use in further development of the project.

3.7.1 Content of the Requirements Document. The Requirements Document expands upon the Facility Concept Study, emphasizing the detail project description by room/area. This document includes the results of any studies that have been completed and provides detailed criteria (e.g., size, location, environmental) for each of the rooms, activities, or functions included in the facility. The project's PDRI documentation is included in the Requirements Document (see paragraph 3.7.3).

3.7.2 Format of the Requirements Document. The outline established for the Facility Concept Study (see paragraph 3.6, Facility Concept Study) should be maintained with the supplemental descriptive materials referenced to the project description section of the concept study. The FPM can help ensure the completeness of the effort by providing the project advocate/user with a checklist to document the features of each room or functions within the facility. The following elements are included as appropriate:

d. Environmental and occupational safety and health-related requirements (e.g., temperature, humidity, ventilation, workstation design, particle counts, radio frequency shielding, noise attenuation),

h. Utility metering and Energy Management Control Systems (EMCS)/Utility Control Systems (UCS) requirements,

k. Special structural requirements (e.g., access, vibration controls, floor loading),

r. Identification of the present location of the activity, if existing, or of an activity similar in nature,

s. Any special studies that influenced the criteria should also be referenced and added in an appendix as appropriate, and

3.7.3Prior to completion of the Requirements Document and prior to the CoF POP budget submittal a PDRI evaluation and scoring should be made by the preproject planning team in accordance with paragraph 3.8, Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI). This evaluation and scoring is to assess what information may be missing that may affect approval of the project. Following the PDRI evaluation and scoring the document should be revised to include any missing information since budget documentation will be prepared based on the completed Requirements Document.

3.7.4 The completed Requirements Document should be reviewed in accordance with paragraph 3.9, Requirements Reviews, and endorsed by the management of both the FPM and the project advocate/user prior to preparation of budget/approval documents and the initiation of the PER, if required, or design. See Figure 2-4, CoF Project Cycle, to see where the Requirements Document fits in a projects development cycle.

3.8 Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI)

3.8.1 The PDRI is a tool to evaluate and measure the level of scope definition for proposed projects. It is intended to evaluate the completeness of scope definition at any point prior to the time a project is considered for authorization to perform detailed design and construction. Specifically, it is a comprehensive checklist of 64 scope definition elements in a 1000-point scoring system, each element weighted based on relative importance to other elements. The overall rating helps determine whether the project should proceed through the budget cycle, allowing NASA to make the best investments and improving project success by thinking ahead and planning early. For detailed instructions see NASA's PDRI manual.

3.8.2 All Headquarters approved projects must be, and Center approved projects should be, PDRI evaluated at least three separate points during a project's development as explained in the following paragraphs. Scoring of the PDRI will be performed for most projects. Exceptions to PDRI scoring will be documented and explained by the performing organization.

a. After assembling the preproject planning team for a project, collectively use the PDRI as a checklist so that each team member understands the implications of the project, to assess what information may be missing, and to assign actions to collect missing information. Scoring is not recommended at this stage as most of the elements still need to be developed.

b. The facility project should be evaluated and scored by the preproject planning team near completion of the Requirements Document, prior to initial POP budget submittal, to provide a sense of adequacy of the project estimate, rate the completeness of the project scope definition, and to redirect efforts to correct inadequately defined areas prior to design. The PDRI documentation should be included in the Requirements Document.

c. The final PDRI evaluation and scoring is required of all projects and should take place after completion of the balance of the planning documents (planning studies, Requirement Document, Project Management Plan, Economic Analysis, Preliminary Engineering Report) and prior to the "Go/No Go" decision (normally at 30-percent design completion) for final design.

3.9 Requirements Reviews

3.9.1 Reviews of the project development including the PDRI evaluation, either formal or informal, are to be conducted as appropriate at each step of the facility project. This will ensure that the review results are available for the ensuing requirements phase, budget submittal, or for the PER and/or design. The scope and extent of the reviews are scaled to the significance or complexity of the project being reviewed. Formal reviews may be conducted when the project entails large dollar resources, is highly visible, impacts future assignments, or involves matters of substantial concern. A board whose chairperson, membership, and charter are established by a convening authority should accomplish formal reviews (normally, the next decision authority above the FPM).

3.9.2 The objectives of the requirements review is to evaluate how NASA and end-user goals are met, to verify that goals are clearly established and translated into facility requirements; facility requirements are complete; and facility interfaces, constructability, operability, and maintainability are considered and defined. The review process evaluates the completeness of each step in the project development and provides a vehicle for resolving outstanding issues or for obtaining waivers of stated requirements. The review process identifies problems, evaluates approaches, recommends options, and provides information that supports project decisions. Reviews also provide the necessary authority to proceed with the next step in the facility preproject planning process.

3.9.3 At completion of the Concept Study and the Requirements Document a comprehensive requirements review of the project should be accomplished. At these early stages in a project's development, the project direction can be modified without significant cost or schedule impact. This review process is to ensure the project complies with existing internally and externally imposed requirements including safety, security, energy, and environment.

3.9.4 The requirements review agenda should address certain major topics. The depth with which these topics are addressed may vary depending on type, criticality, and cost of the project. The following is a typical list of topics:

b. Operational characteristics, operational requirements, and general constraints,

i. Safety, environmental, and occupational safety and health-related considerations,

3.10 Coordination with the Project Advocate

3.10.1 Facility advocacy at the Center level is normally the responsibility of the facility user who also stipulates the functional requirement for the facility project. At Headquarters, the project advocate is generally the Enterprise or IPO counterpart of the facility user.

3.10.2 At the Center, it is important that the FPM and preproject planning team effectively coordinate with the project advocate/user all matters pertaining to the requirement and justification for the project being proposed. The coordination process entails frequent and effective communication between the facility user, their Headquarters counterpart, preproject planning team, and the FPM. Each of these groups must be kept advised of key elements of the requirements definition process.

3.10.3 At Headquarters, the Enterprise and IPO coordinates with the Headquarters Director, Facilities Engineering Division. The coordination efforts include the following:

b. Defining facility project costs and other related program costs and their impact on overall planning and budget,

d. Establishing relative priorities among proposed projects within the same category.

e. Coordinating priorities for facilities safety projects and corrective actions with the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance.

3.11 Unforeseen Facility Requirements

Regardless of the planning effort, circumstances occur that dictate facility work must be accomplished outside of the normal programming cycle. The following paragraphs provide information on how unforeseen facility projects may be accomplished.

3.11.1 Unforeseen National Program Changes (Statutory Reprogramming). The specific provisions are set forth in the annual authorization Act to provide facilities for unforeseen national program changes. For these facility changes the Administrator will make a determination regarding the need for the facility and will provide written notifications to Congress. A 30-calendar-day wait is required subsequent to notification. Any questions or concerns expressed during this 30-day wait must be resolved prior to initiation of the project.

3.11.2 Emergency Repair. The National Aeronautics and Space Act 1958, as amended, provides that any funds appropriated for CoF may be used for emergency repairs if the repairs are deemed by the Administrator to be of greater urgency than the construction of new facilities.

3.12 New Site Locations

To support the NASA mission, facilities are sometimes needed on non-NASA sites. Per NPD 8800.14C, Policy for Real Property Management, Center Directors are responsible for "Securing approval from the Headquarters Director, Facilities Engineering Division, prior to taking real estate actions necessary for mission performance." Center Directors should first exhaust all possibilities for using existing NASA real estate to support the requirement. Where new real property is required, the Center Director should initiate real estate acquisition consistent with the policy and procedures in NPR 8800.15, Real Estate Management Program Implementation Manual.

3.13 Environmental Requirements

For all major federal actions (as defined by 1998 40 CFR 1508.18 - page1, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to assess: the environmental impact of the proposed action; any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented; alternatives to the proposed action; the relationship between local short-term uses of our environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; and any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. Preparing the required NEPA compliance studies may take 12 to 24 months for significant projects, and may be a critical path item in project implementation. To avoid delays, the appropriate studies and fair evaluation of reasonable alternatives should begin early and becomes an integral part of the initial project planning. NPR 8580.1, Procedures and Guidelines for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, and Executive Order 12114, provide guidance for complying with NEPA regulations on NASA projects.

3.14 Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation Considerations

NASA facilities projects shall incorporate the energy efficiency and water conservation requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part 434, Energy Code for New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings, and NPR 8570.1, Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation Technologies and Practices.

3.15 Safety Requirements

For all facilities projects, implement a Facility System Safety Program to meet the requirements of NPR 8715.3, NASA Safety Manual. A facility system safety analysis is required for changes to existing facility systems whether from in-house developments, facility design/modifications, and Agency operations and activities. The program/project manager, in conjunction with the local safety and mission assurance organization, shall determine minimum mission success criteria, potential for personnel injury, mission failure, equipment loss or facility and/or property damage, the impact to cost and schedule, and the visibility of the program/project to the public. NASA-STD 8719.7, Facility System Safety Guidebook, provides the framework for implementing facility system safety goals and requirements into NASA facilities.

3.16 Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

The life-cycle cost analysis must encompass all program costs associated with a facility including planning, design, construction, energy consumption, maintenance, and salvage or residual value, if any, at the end of the intended period of use. Although some user costs such as noncollateral equipment may not be fully defined, an abbreviated analysis can still provide a valid comparison of options. The life-cycle cost shall include the requirements of 10 CFR Part 434, Energy Code for New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings, which states that the decision-making process for design of buildings shall employ the methodology for estimating and comparing the life-cycle cost of Federal buildings and for determining life-cycle cost effectiveness prescribed in subpart A of 10 CFR Part 436, Federal Energy Management and Planning Programs. In addition NPD 8820.2A, Design and Construction of Facilities, requires an economic analysis on discrete projects in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs.

3.17 Special Studies

The FPM/preproject planning team may require special studies to resolve project scope or cost issues prior to completing the project documentation for the Center's 5-year plan. These studies help identify alternative facility solutions; evaluate and determine the probable facility costs associated with requirements for technology development; and any other unique requirements that could impact facility scope or cost.

3.17.1 A special study is not a substitute for a PER, which is a more in depth analysis/translation of the program functional requirements into facility project design criteria. Special studies should be used to identify, justify, and describe mission, program, institutional, and functional requirements. In general, the study should be developed to the point that it serves as a point of departure for inclusion of the studied requirement in the PER/design.

3.17.2 Study Content. The special study document should include the following as applicable:

m. Proposed schedule showing programming, budget, PER preparation, design, and construction phases that are consistent with programmatic need dates,

3.18 Preliminary Engineering Reports (PER)

When a PER is required for a project it becomes the link between the planning phase, where the requirements are defined, and the final design. For discrete and complex projects a well developed PER is essential to establish the project's scope and cost. The PER must include preliminary engineering studies, the analysis of alternatives including the need for multiple work packages (see paragraph 4.2.1.2), definition of essential design requirements and criteria, schematic single-line drawings, siting information and plan, outline specifications, and cost estimates. When a PER is finished it should provide the level of project development necessary to make the decision to proceed with design and construction.

3.18.1 A PER is usually prepared for technically complex discrete projects, and other projects as identified by Headquarters. If a reliable concept and cost estimate exists through the planning phase, then other documentation such as the Requirements Document may suffice in lieu of a PER. For projects where a PER is to be prepared it should be started only after the preproject planning team has determined that the requirements have been fully developed and adequate information is available for engineering development. In requesting PER funds from Headquarters Director, Facilities Engineering Division, the Center must provide a NASA Form 1509 with a project title, brief description, justification and cost estimate, and a NASA Form 1510 with the project's estimated cost.

3.18.2 Policy. The following provide policies associated with preparation of a PER.

3.18.2.1 NASA Form 1509 or other documentation used for obtaining PER funding is the basis for establishing the scope and purpose of the PER. Related documents, such as the Requirements Document, special studies, and Program Office comments, must be considered when formulating the PER. Further development of the facility project (i.e., improved definition of the functional requirement or preparation of the PER) could result in some change in the project physical scope. The scope and purpose set out in the Form 1509 may not be exceeded without the approval of the Headquarters Director, Facilities Engineering Division. Approval is requested and confirmed via the submission of a revised Form 1509.

3.18.2.2 The PER may be accomplished at any time by engineering consultants or A-E firms, a support contractor, Center personnel, or another governmental agency. In those instances where the use of an A-E firm is employed, the cost of the work should generally not exceed 2.0 percent of the estimated cost of construction. The A-E contracting process in paragraph 4.3, Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services, used for contracting for design would be the same process followed to contract for a PER. If the cost of studies, analyses, and/or PER preparation is expected to exceed the upper limit (2 percent), special justification defining the major elements of work and an explanation of the basis of the costs is required by the Headquarters Director, Facilities Engineering Division, prior to the release of facility planning and design funds.

3.18.2.3 The design policies, criteria, and standards contained in this guide shall be used for preparing the PER. Deviations required to meet specific conditions or problems shall be identified in the PER. For selected materials or systems not in general use, a comparative engineering and economic analysis of advantages and disadvantages shall be provided. Safety, energy conservation, environmental concerns (including erosion and pollution control), and sustainability (see Appendix G, Sustainability) including sustainable design, design for maintainability, building commissioning and facility aspects of safety and security shall be considered as prime design factors throughout the preparation of the PER to permit the optimum application of such factors in the possible later design, construction, and operations and maintenance activities. The PER shall meet the requirements of EO 13101, Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition.

3.18.2.4 Public Release. The FPM is to ensure that organizations and personnel involved in preparing the PER know that information or work products are not released to the public or other persons without a need to know, and that contracts with A-E's or others contain similar limits. Public release of information in a PER is to be made only by the appropriate Government officials. The PER will not include any classified information. Any necessary classified information shall be submitted separately.

3.19 PER Content

3.19.1.1 This section describes and justifies the project requirements and addresses any specific problems regarding the requirements, and provides a full explanation of the required project completion date. Where possible, Center or Enterprise mission directives should be referenced to support the requirements and required completion date.

3.19.2.1 This section includes a complete and thorough descriptive analysis supplemented, if appropriate, by schematics of the functions and operations to be performed in the facility. The analysis should include the numbers and types of personnel performing each function, the interactions between organizations within the facility, the equipment and utility requirements for each function, and the materials flowing through each function. A life-cycle cost analysis meeting the requirements of paragraph 3.16, Life-Cycle Cost Analysis, shall be provided for the recommended and alternative systems. As appropriate, safety, energy conservation, environmental concerns, value engineering (see paragraph 4.4.6, Value Engineering), and sustainability including sustainable design principles, design for maintainability, building commissioning and facility aspects of safety and security should be considered as prime factors in PER development. The following are basic factors to consider:

a. Architectural design - drawings are single-line schematic plans or diagrams evolving from the facility project or work descriptions. A narrative accompanies the plans describing alternative configurations studied and the reasons for rejection. The gross and net space allocated to individual functions or organizations must be stated. Plans should also reflect the housing capacity, equipment layout, and utility requirements if appropriate. A matrix chart form may be used for utility requirements,

b. Site development schemes - for complex projects, a simplified schematic site plan may be necessary to show all pertinent information such as existing and proposed facility locations, proposed real estate or easement acquisition, site relationship factors, buffer zone, topography, general drainage, vehicular circulation system, and utilities. Normally, this information can be indicated on the site plan drawing (not a schematic) required under Section V (see paragraph 3.19.5),

c. Foundation and structural design - describes and analyzes the recommended foundation scheme and structural system and reasons for their selection and describes other systems considered and reasons for their rejection. A typical schematic foundation and framing plan may be shown if needed for descriptive purposes,

d. Design of structural systems and bracing of other systems (HVAC, piping, electrical, lighting) - describes the recommended systems designed to meet the most current NEHRP standards to comply with EO 12699, Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted or Regulated New Buildings, and/or EO 12941, Seismic Safety of Existing Federally Owned or Leased Buildings, as applicable,

e. Mechanical design - describes the recommended mechanical system and alternative systems considered. This includes all Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) systems, and plumbing. The type of HVAC control system to be used and its integration with existing utility control systems, if any, should also be described. Other mechanical systems, depending on the nature of the project, may be described in this section or under the section, Design of Special Systems and Equipment,

f. Electrical design - includes an analysis of the recommended power distribution system including all services and voltages, special power needs such as uninterruptible, emergency or backup power, communication distribution system, lighting system, and other connected loads. A single-line wire diagram is also included,

g. Selection of primary materials and finishes - all proposed materials and finishes for foundations, frames, walls, floors, and roof should be briefly specified in outline specifications,

h. Design of special systems and equipment - many facilities require additional analyses to provide a complete preliminary design. Special systems and life-cycle costs should be analyzed as appropriate,

i. Design for energy conservation - the design method to be employed in achieving compliance with the energy performance standards of 10 CFR Part 434, Energy Code for New Federal Commercial and Multi-Family High Rise Residential Buildings, should be selected and described. The compliance alternatives are as follows:

j. Design of fire protection and safety systems - an analysis and design criteria for all proposed fire protection and safety systems are documented in this section,

k. Utilities Capability - Confirmation that the utilities capacity exist to handle the project (sewage plant, water supply, power, roads, and parking) or increased capability is included in the project,

l. Inclusion of facility operations and maintenance considerations - the operability and maintainability of a proposed facilities project must be as great of a concern as constructability. Operations and maintenance considerations should be incorporated in the PER for later inclusion in the follow on design, and

m. Identification of any real estate actions required to support the project must be included.

3.19.3 Section III: Engineering and Budget Estimate. The PER cost estimates will be prepared on NASA Form 1510, Facility Project Cost Estimate, in accordance with instructions in Appendix C, Forms and Instructions. The cost estimating process includes engineering estimates and budget estimates.

3.19.3.1 Engineering Estimate (EE). The estimate shall be prepared in accordance with the following:

a. The EE represents the costs developed from the drawings and draft specifications prepared for the PER. The estimate includes the costs for materials, labor, and services coupled with contractor overhead and profit, based on cost experience at a specific given point in time. Adequate design contingencies should be included for the appropriate stage of project planning/development,

b. The EE must cover all labor and material costs for all items including building type collateral equipment that would usually be furnished by a contractor and installed as permanent in the facility (see Appendix D, Facility and Other Related Costs, for a listing of items and types to include). Installation of Government Furnished Property (GFP) will also be included in the cost estimate. All other collateral equipment will be listed or grouped and the costs made part of the facility project or work package. Estimates should consider current prices in the prevailing market at the site. Not included are amounts for escalation, construction contingencies, and Supervision, Inspection, and Engineering Services (SIES). The estimate should indicate the basis used for the computations. Estimates should identify the fiscal years in which funds are required, and

c. Units of measure, quantities, and unit cost data should be shown for each significant item that can be reasonably identified and quantified. Use of Lump Sum (LS) should be avoided as much as possible if meaningful quantities and unit costs can be applied. The cost estimate will include the following sections as applicable:

(1) Interest in real estate - if the project includes proposed land acquisition or other interests in real estate land and easement costs must be identified,

(2) Site development/utilities - costs normally associated with developing the site such as site clearance and demolition, earthwork, landscaping, storm and sanitary sewage, mechanical and electrical utilities, roads, bridges, marine facilities, and airfield pavements should be included. Elements of this work should be identified as separate procurement entities if such packaging impacts acquisition planning and project control, and

(3) Building/structure (within 5-foot line) - the following categories of construction costs are to be included (in as many entities as reasonable):

(i) Architectural/structural costs normally associated with foundations, structural framing, floors, walls, roofing, finishes, and specialties,

(ii) Mechanical - costs normally associated with mechanical building systems equipment such as HVAC and plumbing. Also includes built-in and large substantially affixed (collateral equipment) mechanical equipment,

(iii) Electrical - costs normally associated with electrical building equipment such as transformers, motor starters and control centers, lighting systems, and communications distribution systems. Also includes built-in and large substantially affixed (collateral equipment) electrical equipment, and

(iv) Fire protection/safety - costs normally associated with fire protection/safety equipment, systems such as sprinklers, alarms, and detectors.

(4) All other collateral equipment - costs for collateral equipment, other than building-type equipment, that will be built-in, affixed to, or installed in real property in such a manner that the installation cost including special foundations or unique utility services, or facility restoration work required after removal will exceed $100,000,

(5) Special features (significant special items) - include costs for plant (process systems, fueling systems, cryogenics) and personnel protection (fallout shelters, flood control, and medical facilities); environmental concerns (air, water, noise, and special sewage treatment); and, any secondary functions of the project necessary to meet community needs or interfaces with other agencies or organizations, and

(6) Total - the sum of the estimated cost in each subcategory, each category, and the total EE should be shown.

3.19.3.2 Related (Non EE) Cost - all project cost items are not included in the engineering estimate. See Appendix D, Facility and Other Related Costs, for specific items not typically included. Any related cost items that are not covered in the engineering estimate should be explained.

3.19.3.3 Budget estimate - the total budget estimate is a Current Cost Estimate (CCE) that may be developed by NASA personnel and/or by an A-E firm. It is developed in accordance with paragraph 3.20, Current Cost Estimate, and included in each PER.

3.19.3.4 Use of bidding experience - reviewing authorities should analyze current experience on construction work and develop unit costs and cost factors that are used during their evaluation of proposed facility projects. Where cost estimates for the proposed project are considered unreasonably high or low for the type of facility proposed, an explanation should be furnished. This applies to individual items as well as the estimate for the project or work as a whole. Information obtained from earlier bidding/construction experience may be useful as background material in evaluating a project cost estimate. In some submittals of bids, there may occur a close grouping of bids and one or more exceptionally high/low bid(s), which are either non-responsive or gratuitous bids. In using this bid experience to help develop budget estimates for comparable facility work, care should be taken to do the following:

a. Relate the bid spread in such a manner as to provide a reasonable engineering estimate base point of departure, and

b. Reflect potential adverse market changes reasonably. In each case, the base point should be the average of the responsive bids received. Exceptionally high or low bids separated from the main body of competition should be excluded. Contract change order costs should then be added to this base point figure. A reasonable percentage for contingencies should be applied but should be based on the lower risks and fewer unknown residuals in a design of something already built or being built. Escalation should then be applied from the midpoint of the job whose bids are being used to the midpoint of the project being estimated. This approach cannot fully account for, or be responsive to, future conditions that might dilute competition or otherwise generate exceptionally high costs. These factors would have to be incorporated and should be documented.

3.19.4 Section IV: Design and Construction Schedule. Provide a project schedule using a commercially available project planning software and identify the software in the PER. The schedule should include the estimated number of months required for each of the following: preparing the final design plans and specifications; construction acquisition; construction; and facility activation. If more than one construction contract is contemplated, an estimate of the time required for each major contract and the phasing shall be given. If a predetermined need date has been established for the facility, it should be shown in the schedule. The schedule should also comment on time required for separate A-E services, preparation of as-built drawings, long-lead procurement items, special approvals, or other special requirements.

3.19.5.1 A project location plan, project site plan, and single line plans and elevations suitable for inclusion in the budget submission will be included.

3.19.5.2 During the preparation of the PER, particular attention must be paid to required safety distances, effective land use, topography, accessibility, and energy cost trends. Any proposed land requirements, including easements, should be indicated on the project site plan.

3.19.5.3 Drawings in a PER must stay within the 8-1/2" x 11" format. Foldout drawings may be used if the vertical dimension is held to 11 inches. All drawings must be clear and drawn to scale with a graphic scale and north arrow indicated.

3.19.5.4 The number and type of drawings to be included in the PER depends on the complexity of the facility. The number of floor plans or other drawings on one sheet will also depend on the size and scale that will result in a clear presentation. The following is an example of the drawings to be provided on a single-story building with connecting utilities:

a. A dimensioned site plan indicating the total land area involved, general topography, and extent of paving, landscaping, fencing, and utilities.

b. An architectural floor plan (not a single line sketch) adequately dimensioned and noted,

c. Critical structural drawings including typical foundation and framing plans adequately detailed and noted,

e. Engineering drawings delineating the nature and integration of all proposed mechanical, electrical, and communication distribution systems with the architectural design, and

f. Any additional drawings, sketches, calculations, design data, and materials used to develop the cost estimate need not be appended to the PER but should be retained for backup support of the estimate.

3.19.6 Real Estate Interest. Real estate easement acquisition data for every project must be analyzed to determine if NASA has sufficient control of the requested real estate. If no new real estate interest is required, a specific notation to this effect should always be included in Section III of the PER. If a project involves real estate or easement acquisition, it must be specifically covered in Sections II and III of the PER. This is required for all items where any real estate interests are involved including acquisition of easements for rights-of-way. For those projects requiring additional real estate (on or offsite) or easements, an appendix will be included in the PER containing, as appropriate, the following items:

a. A tabulation segregated by type of ownership (i.e., private, state, or public domain), of only the acreage proposed for acquisition plus easements for access and utilities. The tabulation should include the assessed value of land, assessed value of improvements, current appraised value, and the number of owners involved,

b. The extent of any street and/or road closings and the extent of any road and/or utility relocations, including a cost estimate for such closings and/or relocation, separate from the land values indicated above,

c. The extent and estimated costs of required additional rights such as mineral rights, timber rights, and easement rights whether outstanding in parties other than the present owners or not; and, a statement as to whether title should be taken in fee simple absolute or subject to such rights,

d. Ancillary investigations - the requirements for soils and hydraulic surveys are to determine the soil, water, and geologic conditions that may affect the following:

(4) Soil and water adjustments required to establish and maintain vegetative covers for the land,

e. Surveys must be made in areas being developed where sufficient information is not available to firmly establish the character of the soils or to form a basis for the prescribed control measures. The installation must maintain records of the surveys. A summary of such ancillary investigations should be attached to the PER when the actual studies are not included,

f. OMB Circular No.A-94 (for hyperlink see paragraph 3.16), Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs, requires that a lease-purchase analysis be made when a decision has been made to lease or purchase (construct) general-purpose real property,

g. The PER must also indicate that coordination required by EO 12372, Inter-governmental Review of Federal Programs, has been accomplished or, if not, the basis of exception. Note: a fully circulated Environmental Impact Statement or Finding of No Significant Impact/Environmental Assessment with reasonable opportunity to comment satisfies the coordination requirement, and

h. If prior investigations or studies, in addition to those listed above, are used in support of the facility project, a summary should be attached.

A Mini-PER can be prepared for some facility projects that are not sufficiently complex to warrant a full PER. The Mini-PER should include the project scope, basis of need (justification), cost estimate, project schedule, and simple schematic drawings in the same format as a PER.

3.20.1 Format and Content. The Mini-PER consists of expanded Forms 1509 and 1510 providing more information developed through engineering evaluation and study.

3.20.1.1 NASA Form 1509. The information on the NASA Form 1509 used in the budget processes describes the facility project, outlines the scope, explains the basis of the need, includes a schedule, and discloses the related resources needed to provide an operable facility to meet the advocate/user requirements. In preparing the Mini-PER, this 1509 is expanded based on an engineering study of the requested project and prepared in accordance with the instructions in Appendix C, Forms and Instructions. The study should consider at least the following:

b. Is the proposed project scoped properly to meet the advocate/user requirements?

c. Does the proposed project meet safety, environmental, and master plan requirements?

d. Should the basis of need be expanded/revised to present additional information?

3.20.1.2 NASA Form 1510. The cost estimate on NASA Form 1510 normally has limited detail. The Mini-PER should update the 1510 cost estimate based on the 1509 prepared from the study results, and provide additional details on quantities and unit costs for the project elements. It should be prepared in accordance with the instructions in Appendix C, Forms and Instructions.

3.21 Current Cost Estimate (CCE)

3.21.1 Developing the CCE. The CCE for a project or subproject is the anticipated cost based on the progress of planning, design, or construction. It is intended to reflect the best professional analysis of the probable ultimate cost at the time of estimate preparation. As the project proceeds, the ultimate cost will be updated to incorporate project changes.

3.21.2 The use of lump sum amounts should be avoided. The CCE used by the Center in submitting the project in the budget year CoF program is critical because that estimate normally goes into the Agency's budget submission and is subject to review by senior management, OMB, and Congress. Once a project has been submitted to Congress, the CCE cannot be changed without Headquarters approval.

3.21.3 During final design, a cost estimate is required for the 30-, 60-, and 90-percent reviews. The FPM must ensure that the CCE, based on the final design, does not exceed the approved or budget amount.

3.21.4 The next major update of the CCE occurs after bids are received and the NASA Form 1579, Flash - Bid Report, is prepared and sent to Headquarters.

3.21.5 Engineering Estimate (EE). The cost estimate for a facility project includes the current local cost of the following items, which constitutes the engineering estimate (see paragraph 3.19.3.1 for additional EE detail) with allowances added per paragraph 3.21.6, Allowances.

c. Construction materials and labor. In general, items such as conduits, raceways, cable trays, ductwork, wall penetrations, terminal rooms, junction and terminal boxes, which are permanently affixed, are included in the EE of the project,

d. Material and equipment tests performed at the construction site or at an offsite location,

3.21.6 Allowances. The following allowances are added to the engineering estimate to produce the CCE.

a. Cost growth (cost adjustment) - a percentage, compounded annually to the scheduled midpoint of construction, is normally used because projecting material, labor, and equipment costs years in the future entails uncertainty. The percentage used is applied to the engineering estimate and is determined by going to the OMB Web site and obtaining their projected inflation rates (currently found here). If higher rates for cost growth are needed to reflect local conditions, they must be explained as part of the estimate.

b. Contingencies - generally, 10-percent is used for routine work and is applied to the engineering estimate and the cost adjustment. In high-risk situations, a greater percentage may be appropriate. The specific figure used must be justified by an analysis of the risks involved, and the supporting rationale must be included in the submission documentation. A few samples of high-risk situations are the following:

c. SIES - typically, 5 to 10-percent is allowed for SIES and is applied to the engineering estimate, cost adjustment, and the contingency amount. The percent figure is a total of supervision, inspection, and engineering services. The supervision and inspection funds are used to provide the necessary controls and management during design and construction. The engineering services funds provide such things as as-built drawings and facility system O&M manuals.

d. Other burden costs - costs in this category must be fully explained and justified in the budget submission documents. This category includes the costs for construction management services that are provided by contract.

3.21.7 CCE Computation. The CCE is computed from the following formula that is compatible with Form 1510:

CCE = total current cost estimate (Total Budget Estimate) for the aggregate project.

CA = cost adjustment percentage factor expressed to 2 decimal places compounded from the date of the estimate preparation to the projected midpoint of construction.

SIES = supervision, inspection, and engineering services percentage factor expressed to 2 decimal places.

OBC = other burden cost (excludes Center administrative and overhead cost) such as refurbishment of GFP.

3.22 PDRI Evaluation and Scoring

Prior to the "Go/No Go" decision for final design, a PDRI evaluation and scoring must be made in accordance with paragraph 3.8, PDRI, to confirm that no significant information is missing and to verify the project is sufficiently defined. Any missing information must be provided prior to start of final design or provisions made in the design stage to provide the information.

3.23 Facility Project Management Plan

The Facility Project Management Plan establishes a realistic schedule for implementing a facility project and assigns responsibility and authority for various actions. The FPM, working in concert with the preproject planning team, is responsible for ensuring the Facility Project Management Plan is prepared when required. The plan provides a detailed outline of the steps in the facility implementation process with well-defined milestones to measure progress.

3.23.1.1 The management plan provides the information on resources and time-phased actions that allow the FPM to direct the project and assess the impact of management decisions. It sets forth specific tasks, schedules, guidelines, and other materials developed to the extent needed to control the project work. It serves as the principle tool for determining the progress of the work and establishing the priorities for the allocation of resources during the budget, design, construction, and activation phases to ensure the ontime completion of the project.

3.23.1.2 Prior to start of final design work on discrete projects, the FPM should present a management plan for approval to the Center official exercising project approval authority. The management plan may be informal (i.e., material contained in the project file) or developed as a formal document. For projects of $5 million or more, a formal management plan is required and must be submitted to Headquarters FED for approval. Management plan approval on projects of $5 million or more is required before start of design, therefore schedules provided in the plan should include sufficient lead time to obtain the necessary approval to preclude delaying the start of design.

3.23.1.3 The project schedule in the management plan must allow adequate time for design, reviews, procurement activities, construction, and activation. The projected release date for the solicitation package is determined either by backing off from the facility need date or by determining the date of CoF funding. Funds are available each year in the November to January time period for the FY starting October 1. If a PER is required for a project, PER funds are usually released to the Centers after the budget has been submitted to Headquarters 3 years (i.e., November to January following the May/June Center budget submission) prior to the planned construction year. Design funds are usually released to the Centers after the budget has been submitted to Headquarters 2 years (i.e., November to January following the May/June Center budget submission) prior to the planned construction year. See Figure 3-2, CoF Project Funding Schedule, for a graphic presentation of the funding process.

a. Identification of the FPM and other individuals or organizations responsible for project implementation,

b. Description of the functional requirement including the operational need date and, if required, the schedule for joint or beneficial occupancy dates,

c. Description of the planned facility including capacity, scope, location, special features, CCE; and, for projects that involve less than the total requirement, the incremental phasing schedule and rationale,

e. Development of an acquisition plan ensuring the funding method supports the operational need date(s),

f. Specific Pre-Advertisement Review (PAR) procedures designed to assist tracking of the progress of the development of the solicitation package and completion of the checklist (NASA Form 1580, Facility Project Pre-Advertisement Review Checklist),

g. Network or bar-type charts depicting a time-phased schedule with intermediate milestones for the following:

(3) Translation of program requirements into project/facility criteria, description, and concept,

(6) Preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental Assessment (EA) or Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI),

k. Description of required documentation together with date required and responsible office,

3.23.3.1 The management plan will identify the need for project status reporting. In addition the Headquarters Director, Facilities Engineering Division, or the Center official exercising project approval authority, may identify other specific projects requiring status reporting. The amount of detailed information in the report increases as the project progresses through the budget, design, construction, and activation phases.

3.23.3.2 The emphasis in the report is to provide an analysis of the status and estimated cost during the planning and budget phases. No change in report format occurs as the project progresses and the report is expanded to include information on the status of design, construction, and activation of the approved facility project.

3.23.3.3 The report will consist of narrative analysis/comments of pertinent facts and financial data as may be applicable based on the current project implementation phase, planning, design, construction or activation. The content of the report should include the following:

3.24 Planning for Start of Final Design

From the requirement definition through the concept studies, the environmental analysis process, the development of the management plan, and preparation of the PER, questions are raised or problem areas are identified. These issues may be managerial or technical in nature and they should be resolved prior to start of final design to preclude false starts and/or expensive redesign with attendant cost and schedule problems. The resolution of these issues is performed by the project advocate/user for problem areas that are part of the functional requirement and by the FPM for problems that are part of the facility project engineering and construction phase. In both cases the preproject planning team is an integral part of the problem resolution process. The results of the problem resolutions should be incorporated into the facility criteria, the PER, or the final facility design as appropriate.

3.24.1 Managerial Considerations. The completed Requirements Document/PER should be adequate as a definitive criteria package that can be furnished to a designer. Some unresolved issues that may require the attention of the FPM are as follows:

a. Overall timing of the design and construction versus the established need date may be critical,

b. Consistency with inhouse project/construction management capabilities; or, should the Corps of Engineers or some other design/construction agent be considered and the necessary funding identified. Historically, facility projects have problems because adequate management resources are not applied early enough,

c. Expensive and/or long-lead time items may need Government Furnished Property (GFP) action (see discussion below),

d. Use of multiple bid packages versus a single large package and the potential impact on the cost, schedule, and scope of the required project management effort,

g. Elements of project costs not to be included in the engineering cost estimate but essential to project completion such as outfitting and noncollateral equipment and associated testing,

h. Potential real estate acquisition or leasing arrangements (covered by NPR 8800.15A, Real Estate Management Program Implementation Manual),

j. Related future requirements or costs that may result from the proposed project.

3.24.2 Technical Considerations. The planning activities and/or the PER may identify problems or options relating to some of the technical considerations that should be addressed prior to start of final design such as the following:

a. State-of-the-art investigations relative to materials, methods, applications,

b. Provisions for alternate energy sources for reasons of reliability, economy, and/or pollution control,

c. Need for special investigations pertaining to hazards (including health), pollution, and safety features, and

3.24.3 GFP. Many facility projects include large or complex equipment components that may cause the following if furnished to the construction contractor:

In order to take full advantage of such opportunities, it is essential that the FPM use the early planning effort to identify those high-cost and/or long-lead time equipment items when direct procurement by NASA would provide distinct advantages during the construction of the project.

3.24.3.1 When GFP refurbishment or fabrication work will be accomplished by contract, the possibility of accelerating the delivery schedule should be studied. It may be feasible to provide an alternative in the Invitation For Bid (IFB) that would allow early accomplishment and delivery of the GFP item well in advance of the scheduled date for the installation work. The alternative for early delivery may encourage proposals from potential contractors who could use the flexibility in scheduling the GFP work to reduce their bids.

3.24.3.2 In proceeding with a plan for early delivery of GFP items, arrangements must be made for storage in a Government facility until the scheduled installation date. Other important GFP considerations are as follows:

3.24.3.3 NPR 4200.1, NASA Equipment Management Manual, contains the procedures for establishing the availability of equipment from within the NASA inventory. Contact the General Services Administration's local or regional office, and review the current Excess Property Catalog or Bulletin for equipment that would be available from other Government agencies.

3.24.3.4 GFP items, whether a new purchase or a transfer of excess from existing Government resources, will be described in the project documents and its recorded value used in record documentation.

3.24.3.5 The FPM must closely supervise the GFP process and place particular emphasis on the following to ensure that items obtained from existing Government resources are:

a. Subjected to a hands-on-physical inspection to verify availability, condition, and the extent of required refurbishment or modification work,

b. Processed in accordance with the established schedule for furnishing these items to the installation contractor, and

c. Subjected to followup physical inspections immediately prior to the scheduled transfer to establish location, conditions, and date for delivery to the installation contractor.

NASA Procedures and Guidelines

This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used.
Check the NODIS Library to access the current version:
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov

Facility Project Implementation Guide

CHAPTER 3: Project Planning/Development

3.1 Facility Project Manager

3.2 Risk Management

3.3 Requirement Definition

3.4 Preproject Planning

Figure 3.1 Project Development Checklist

3.5 Operations/Maintenance Staff Involvement

3.6 Facility Concept Study

3.7 Requirements Document

3.8 Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI)

3.9 Requirements Reviews

3.10 Coordination with the Project Advocate

3.11 Unforeseen Facility Requirements

3.12 New Site Locations

3.13 Environmental Requirements

3.14 Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation Considerations

3.15 Safety Requirements

3.16 Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

3.17 Special Studies

3.18 Preliminary Engineering Reports (PER)

3.19 PER Content

3.20 Guidelines for Preparing Minipreliminary Engineering Reports

3.21 Current Cost Estimate (CCE)

3.22 PDRI Evaluation and Scoring

3.23 Facility Project Management Plan

3.24 Planning for Start of Final Design

DISTRIBUTION:
NODIS

This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used.
Check the NODIS Library to access the current version:
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov

NASA Procedures and Guidelines

This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used. Check the NODIS Library to access the current version: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov

Facility Project Implementation Guide

CHAPTER 3: Project Planning/Development

3.1 Facility Project Manager

3.2 Risk Management

3.3 Requirement Definition

3.4 Preproject Planning

Figure 3.1 Project Development Checklist

3.5 Operations/Maintenance Staff Involvement

3.6 Facility Concept Study

3.7 Requirements Document

3.8 Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI)

3.9 Requirements Reviews

3.10 Coordination with the Project Advocate

3.11 Unforeseen Facility Requirements

3.12 New Site Locations

3.13 Environmental Requirements

3.14 Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation Considerations

3.15 Safety Requirements

3.16 Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

3.17 Special Studies

3.18 Preliminary Engineering Reports (PER)

3.19 PER Content

3.20 Guidelines for Preparing Minipreliminary Engineering Reports

3.21 Current Cost Estimate (CCE)

3.22 PDRI Evaluation and Scoring

3.23 Facility Project Management Plan

3.24 Planning for Start of Final Design

DISTRIBUTION: NODIS

This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used. Check the NODIS Library to access the current version: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov

This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used.
Check the NODIS Library to access the current version:
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov

DISTRIBUTION:
NODIS

This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used.
Check the NODIS Library to access the current version:
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov