The PDF version 
Display Related Directives to this directive.
Display Reference Documents to this directive.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Washington, D.C. 20585
DOE G 413.3-15
9-12-08
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY GUIDE FOR
PROJECT EXECUTION PLANS
[This Guide describes suggested nonmandatory approaches for
meeting requirements. Guides are not requirements documents and
are not to be construed as requirements in any audit or appraisal
for compliance with the parent Policy, Order, Notice, or Manual.]
FOREWORD
This Department of Energy Guide is for use by all DOE elements
and provides approaches for implementing project execution plan
(PEP) requirements of DOE O 413.3A, Program and Project
Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, dated 7-28-06.
Guides, which are part of the DOE Directives System, provide
nonmandatory suggested approaches for meeting requirements and
are not to be construed as requirements in any audit or appraisal
for compliance with the parent Policy, Order, Notice, or Manual.
1.0 Introduction
The project execution plan (PEP) is the governing document that
establishes the means to execute, monitor, and control, projects
which are subject to DOE O 413.3A.
The purpose of this Guide is to:
• Provide guidance for the federal project director to
produce a useful and flexible plan.
• Provide guidance on how to appropriately apply tailoring as
defined in DOE O 413.3A.
The scope of this guide includes basic aspects of the development
and maintenance of the plan for projects of any size and
complexity for the benefit of the federal project director, who
is approved by the acquisition executive, and incorporates
contractor input as appropriate. Integrated project teams,
program managers (if applicable), program offices, acquisition
executives, and contractor project managers can also benefit from
the suggestions in this guide.
This Guide includes three major sections:
• Approaches and interfaces.
• Plan development.
• Suggested content for each section of a PEP.
This document also includes information on tailoring projects
(Section 4.4) and PEP examples (Attachment 1), a suggested
outline for a communication plan (Attachment 2), and a
compilation of recommended references used to develop a PEP
(Attachment 3).
1.1. Approaches and Interfaces
The plan serves as the main communication vehicle to ensure that
everyone is aware and knowledgeable of project objectives and how
they will be accomplished.
The plan is the primary agreement between Headquarters and the
federal project director and a preliminary plan should be
developed and approved at Critical Decision-1.
1.2. Plan Development
Project objectives are derived from the mission needs statement,
and an integrated project team assists in development of the PEP.
The plan is a living document and should be updated to describe
current and future processes and procedures, such as integrating
safety into the design process. Updates are common as a project
moves through Critical Decision stages.
Preliminary PEP (Critical Decision-1). The preliminary PEP is
part of the Critical Decision-1 approval package. Depending upon
the type of project and team experience, information could range
from greater detail regarding current or near term activities
(i.e., the design phase systems, processes, procedures and
personnel) to less detail for future activities concerning
procurement and construction activities to even less detail
regarding testing, start-up and operational transition.
Critical Decision-2. The plan should be updated as part of the
Critical Decision-2 approval package. At this point the plan
should contain a greater depth and breadth of information,
detailed enough to bound the systems, processes, procedures and
personnel and to support a well-defined scope, resource loaded
schedule, definitive cost estimate, and defined key performance
parameters for project execution. If any systems, processes,
procedures and personnel requirements are yet to be fully defined
(e.g., for testing, start-up, or operation transition) the plan
should clearly identify relevant assumptions/constraints and
associated risks.
PEP Updates. The plan is a living document that should be updated
to capture changes to project systems, processes, procedures and
personnel and revisions to the approved performance baseline or a
post-construction contract award. The process for configuration
control should be defined, including definitions of minor/major
revisions and their associated approval authorities.
2.0 Suggested Content for Each Section
2.1. Cover and Signature Pages
2.1.1. Cover Page
The cover page should include the title of the document, document
control number, project name, project number, Department of
Energy program, site name, document date, restrictions or
classification (as applicable), and any appropriate disclaimers.
2.1.2. Revisions Page
All revision numbers and associated dates should be captured
along with the date the document was approved.
2.1.3. Signature Page
The signature page (only one page in length) is the second page
and should contain the following:
• project name and number,
• site name,
• date,
• restrictions or classification
• signature block for the acquisition executive,
• approval authority,
• program office point of contact, and
• signature block for the primary author (i.e., federal
project director, any other names of reviewers,
concurrences).
2.1.4. Table of Contents
The document table of contents should include lists of tables and
figures.
2.1.5. Acronyms List
The list should include acronyms used in the document and their
definitions.
2.2. Main Body
2.2.1. Introduction
This section should state the purpose and organization of the
plan. Major sections should include project background,
justification of mission need, and project description.
2.2.1.1. Project Background
This section should provide a brief history/background of the
project identifying important chronological items/issues and key
drivers including external drivers such as Congressional or
Presidential mandates, should state the project’s purpose and
major objectives, and should include a clear, concise statement
of what the project will accomplish and the time frame required.
2.2.1.2. Justification of Mission Need
The mission need statement should be summarized and should list
potential hazards, including safety, security, and strategic
review of overall project risk.
2.2.1.3. Project Description
Provide a summary-level description of the project, including:
• the project vision (i.e., concept of operations),
• major system components and their functions,
• major project assumptions and uncertainties,
• project requirements,
• key performance parameters,
• project scope,
• major interfaces,
• required site development, permits and licensing,
• major safety systems and assumptions and uncertainties
related to safety, where appropriate, and
• key stakeholders.
2.2.2. Management Structure and Integrated Project Teams
The project organization should be described, including an
organization chart that identifies the various participants
(i.e., organizational breakdown structure), their roles and
responsibilities (i.e., responsibility assignment matrix),
interfaces and reporting relationships. The discussion of
resource requirements should include the necessary resources from
inception to operational turnover. If a critical capability gap
is identified on the IPT, the FPD should take action to close the
gap with appropriate government or contract support before
progressing further with the project. Lower tier documents will
capture all the details and plans of resource cost/schedule/scope
project life cycle from initiation to start of
operations/closeout. When developing the project organization,
refer to the DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 6-17-05,
and/or Quality Assurance Rule [Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance]
requirements that are applicable for project organization.
Depending on the complexity of the project, a separate human
resources and staffing plan may be appropriate.
Reference or attach the integrated project team charter to the
PEP.
2.3. Tailoring Strategy
This section should document how the requirements of DOE O 413.3A
will be met through a tailored application of project management
and project controls.
Tailoring is a flexible approach that allows appropriate levels
of effort or analytical rigor to be used in fulfilling all
requirements of the Order. Tailoring does not mean waiving
requirements, nor does it imply the omission of essential
elements in the acquisition process.
In the context of nuclear safety, tailoring is addressed in
DOE-STD-1189, Integration of Safety into the Design Process. It
should indicate how the information and approvals for
documentation will be sequenced, organized, and bundled
throughout the phases of the project, such that all requirements
of the standard are met, including development of a safety design
strategy. For large, complex, one-of-a-kind nuclear facilities
(i.e., Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3), tailoring would not be
expected.
Tailoring should be implemented in relation to the cost,
complexity, and risk; project type; past experience; and lessons
learned. This section should identify major assumptions or risks
affecting the project, the project management requirements to be
tailored, how tailoring will be applied, and the rationale or
benefit to be derived. Prior to each Critical Decision, it should
be updated based on any changes in project risks, cost, or other
factors. One or more of the following examples of tailoring
applications may be considered as elements of the strategy.
Consolidated or Phased Critical Decisions. Consolidation may
facilitate some projects, such as single-contract procurements
with well-defined requirements and low complexity, cost, and
risk. However, critical decisions should not be combined if doing
so would preclude meeting other DOE requirements, such as
developing a preliminary documented safety analysis. Critical
decisions also may be phased when prudent or necessary, such as
long lead-time procurements or site preparation work (i.e.
Critical Decision–3A).
Graded Approach. This approach means that the level of effort or
detail may be reduced to the degree needed to satisfy
requirements. For projects involving existing missions or assets
a graded approach may be more appropriate than for those
involving new missions or capabilities. For example, substituting
an equivalent document or addressing multiple requirements in a
single document may be acceptable. For project reviews, a graded
approach could involve fewer technical reviewers or reduced lines
of inquiry. Use of a graded approach to documentation for nuclear
facility construction is addressed by DOE G 413.3-2.
Delegated Decisions and Responsibilities. Where approval
authority is not identified, tailoring may be allowed according
to other directives or program office policies (see Tables 1 and
2 of the Order).
2.4. Integrated Baseline
The project baseline evolves and is defined differently
throughout the life cycle of the project and should be defined
for technical scope (i.e., requirements), schedule and cost.
Refer to DOE O 413.3A for project baseline requirements. Prior to
CD-2 during preliminary baseline development, the project scope,
schedule, and cost may change as the project continues with
design and planning.
2.4.1. Scope Baseline
Technical performance parameters and deliverables should define
key features of the asset and how the asset will perform when
completed at CD-4 including characteristics (quantity, size,
etc.), functions, requirements, or the design basis that, if
changed, would have a major impact on system or facility
performance.
Examples include:
• The high-level waste vitrification system shall be capable
of 100 liters per hour of qualified chemical makeup;
containing 40 weight percent high-level waste; loaded into
Department of Energy approved canisters for shipment to the
storage facility; with a plant availability of 66% or
greater.
• The Research Office Building, at 160,000 Gross Square Feet,
shall be capable of housing 300 scientists, engineers, and
other support personnel. The building shall have
building-level utility meters to track and continuously
optimize energy performance.
• The summary level project work breakdown structure and
dictionary should be included and should be comprehensive
and contain sufficient levels to divide project work into
elements (work packages).
2.4.2. Schedule Baseline
The schedule baseline for a project submitted for approval at
CD-2 should include an overall project summary level schedule. As
applicable, contents include but are not limited to the
following:
• Key activities/milestones, etc.
• Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board deliverables.
• The Chief of Nuclear Safety (Department of Energy) or Chief
Defense Nuclear Safety (NNSA) review and approval in the
Level 1 milestone schedule.
• Major cleanup agreement milestones, regulatory milestones
or actions and completion of projects and tasks on the
critical path.
• Critical Decision approval dates.
• Major reviews conducted by the field and Headquarters.
• Major shipments of waste or materials to other DOE sites or
commercial facilities.
• Major procurements and/or when major procurement decisions
were made including foreign owned determinations and
approvals.
• When major Headquarters policy decisions are needed and
from whom.
• Major activities (contractor and/or Federal) associated
with project completion.
• Government-furnished service item (particularly if from
Headquarters/site).
• Key decisions required by other agencies.
(Note: for “projectized operations” such as many Environmental
Management projects, refer to the Environmental Management
Guide).
2.4.3. Cost Baseline
The cost range in the preliminary plan and the cost baseline
should include all costs as defined below at the level 2 or 3
work breakdown structure, depending on the size of the project.
Prior to CD-2 approval, cost baseline estimates should be a cost
range.
• Total estimated cost, such as costs associated with the
acquisition of land and land rights; engineering, design,
testing, 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, that are not identified within the
total estimated cost; generally, 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.
• Contingency, the portion of the budget that is set aside
for risks within the project scope but outside the
performance measurement baseline. Contingency may be
included both within the total estimated and other project
cost.
• Management reserve, budget withheld by the contractor for
management control purposes. It is included in the total
estimated cost but is not part of the performance
measurement baseline.
• Performance measurement baseline, the time-phased budget
plan against which contract performance is measured. It
includes all allocated or distributed budgets plus the
undistributed budget but does not include Management
Reserve.
• Total project cost, the sum of total estimated cost and
other project cost.
2.4.4. Funding Profile
The overall purpose and scope of this section is to ensure that
the project clearly illustrates its requirements for time phased
funding over the course of the project. This should be considered
essential, as it is recognized that any given project will most
likely not receive all its funding in any given year but over
multiple years in accordance with the Departments annual budget
cycle with Congress.
Funding profile information should clearly designate by fiscal
year how much funding will be needed for the project. Cumulative
time phased budget requirements will be the total project cost.
• A project cost summary (baseline and budget data) table by
fiscal year should be included to reflect cost baseline
information at Work Breakdown Structure Level 2. For EM
projects, the layout could be prior years in one column and
performance measurement baseline near term baseline by
fiscal years and out years in the last column.
2.4.5. Life Cycle Cost
Life-cycle costs should delineate clearly a total for the
estimate as well as breakouts that correspond to each major phase
of the project (i.e., construction, operations etc.). In
addition, this discussion should also include the estimated
duration (i.e., years) for each of the major phases of the
project along with a statement on which phase of the project
dominates or drives the overall life-cycle cost. It should also
be clear what reference point is being used to describe the costs
as (i.e., base dollars, as spent dollars, etc). Key applicable
assumptions should be stated. Highlighting life-cycle analysis
factors associated with sustainability features is also
suggested.
2.4.6. Baseline Change Control
The baseline change control framework which includes applicable
change management processes, threshold requirements, and change
control board charter and the procedures to be followed should be
established or referenced. A summary table of baseline change
control thresholds; and approval authority for scope, schedule,
and cost for the Secretarial Acquisition Executive, Program
Secretarial Officer, acquisition executive, federal project
director, project manager, and others as applicable should be
included in the PEP.
2.5. Project Management/Oversight (Strategy)
2.5.1. Project Management Approach
The overall project management approach for the project should be
described under the following topics:
2.5.1.1. Project Reporting
Briefly describe the reporting process which includes both
internal and external requirements and as appropriate, types,
content, distributions, frequency of reporting, level of control,
and review and approval requirements.
2.5.1.2. Risk Management
This section should describe the policies and practices for
managing risk management and a summary of the results of the risk
analysis. Risk management should be addressed in the plan or
included by reference and should summarize the key project risks.
Key risks (identified as “critical risks” in DOE O 413.3A) are
those estimated to have the most impact on cost and schedule and
could include project, technical, internal, external, and other
sub-categories. For projects involving Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3
nuclear facilities, refer to DOE-STD-1189, Appendix F. Ties to
contingency/management reserve development based on identified
project risks should also be included.
2.5.1.3. Engineering and Technology Readiness
Briefly describe readiness of the project and plans to manage and
control engineering and technology development and deployment. If
a technology readiness assessment has been completed or a
technology maturation plan has been developed, these should be
summarized.
2.5.1.4. Alternatives Analysis and Selection
Briefly summarize the alternative analyses and selections
associated with accomplishing the mission and associated key
parameters.
2.5.1.5. Environment, Safety, and Health
Provide a reference or identify all documents that establish the
ES&H plan for the project or establish requirements for the site
as a whole. The ES&H section should include the following:
• a brief assessment of environmental permitting,
• the status of and plans for National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) compliance,
• a description of all safety documentation, such as the site
Integrated Safety Management System and/or a
project-specific safety management plan, and
• a description of environmental management documentation,
such as the site’s Environmental Management System and/or
project-specific waste management or pollution prevention
plans.
The PEP need not address ES&H work required for actual facility
operations. However, for nuclear facility projects, the ES&H
section should describe how safety-in-design requirements of
DOE-STD-1189 will be accomplished.
2.5.1.5.1. Integrated Safety Management
Document that safety is integrated into daily work activities
along with the Environmental Management System (EMS) requirements
of DOE O 450.1A, Environmental Protection Program, dated 6-4-08,
which also addresses design with requirements to optimize worker
and environmental controls and to consider pollution prevention
and sustainable designs. Refer to the appropriate ISM documents,
listed in the Attachment 3 of this Guide.
2.5.1.5.2. Industrial Safety and Occupational Health
Document or reference the means of implementing worker and public
protection measures. See references on Industrial Safety and
Occupational Health listed in Attachment 3 of this Guide.
2.5.1.5.3. Nuclear Safety
Document or reference implementation of nuclear safety
requirements and integration of safety into design. See
references on Nuclear Safety listed in Attachment 3 of this
Guide.
2.5.1.5.4. Hazard Analysis
Reference the Hazard Analysis document or identify the hazards
related to the project and discuss mitigation/elimination plans.
2.5.1.5.5. Value Management
Value management should be performed early in a project
life-cycle and referenced or documented in the plan.
2.5.1.5.6. Value Engineering
Refer to DOE P 413.2, Value Engineering, dated 1-7-04, DOE O
430.1B, Real Property Asset Management, dated 9-24-03, and Office
of Management and Budget Circular A-131, Value Engineering.
2.5.1.6. Safeguards and Security
Safeguards and security systems, processes, procedures, and
personnel should be identified and/or developed to establish a
framework that will systematically integrate Safeguards and
security management into the project acquisition process. Refer
to/include the project’s safeguards and security plan.
2.5.1.7. Configuration Management
Configuration management is used to identify and document the
configuration of the end products and control changes to the
configuration during the life cycle. The federal project director
should initiate a configuration management system early in the
development of the project and ensure the delivery of complete
as-built documents at the close of the project. See references on
configuration management listed in Attachment 3 of this Guide.
Refer to/include the project’s Configuration management plan.
2.5.1.8. Records Management/Document Control
• Describe how records will be managed on the project.
Federal records should be maintained in a manner that
addresses DOE policy and regulations. See references on
records management listed in Attachment 3 of this Guide.
Refer to/include the project’s records management plan.
2.5.1.9. Systems Engineering
• The primary goal of the systems engineering process is to
transform mission requirements into system architecture,
performance parameters, and design details. The process
begins with the definition of a need and progresses through
the establishment of the baseline and ending with
verification that the need has been met. See references on
systems engineering listed in Attachment 3 of this Guide.
Refer to/include the project’s systems engineering plan and
documentation.
2.5.1.10.
2.5.1.11. Earned Value Management System
• Describe how earned value management will be implemented
and closely integrated with acquisition plan. EVMS is not
necessary for acquisition of commercial products that are
designed and built from commercial off-the-shelf
technologies. Such acquisitions are generally single
payment upon acceptance or phased payments based on
well-defined delivered performance with payment values
founded on market or competitive pricing See references on
earned value management listed in Attachment 3 of this
Guide. Refer to/include the project’s earned value
management system plan.
2.5.1.12. Quality Assurance
Describe the quality assurance requirements for the project.
Depending on the project size and complexity, a project’s Quality
Assurance Program may be based on a corporate quality assurance
plan or a project-specific plan. Also refer to regulatory and
contract requirements for the QA Program and DOE O 414.1C,
Quality Assurance, dated 6-17-05. See further references on
quality assurance listed in Attachment 3 of this Guide.
2.5.1.13. Communication Management Plan
Describe policies and practices for communication to the multiple
stakeholders and interested parties. Provide the mission,
strategy and objectives of the project as the structure within
which the communication should be provided and address project
performance, inputs to decisions such as risk, and methods and
frequency for keeping stakeholders informed. Either refer to or
include the project’s communication management plan. Attachment 2
to this Guide is a suggested format for a communication plan.
2.5.1.14. Testing and Evaluation
Limited test and evaluation activities can be incorporated into
the PEP. Where the test and evaluation effort is significant, a
dedicated plan is recommended.
2.5.1.15. Project Reviews
Include a description of major reviews that would occur during a
project’s life cycle and the results of those reviews. Refer to
the project review plan.
2.5.1.16. Transition to Operations
Project transition to operations begins during design and
continues until the new facility is completely operational and
commissioned. Refer to/include the project’s transition/closeout
plan.
2.5.1.17. Project Closeout
Project closeout is initiated once the construction has been
completed and the project facilities are fully operational and
commissioned. Refer to/include the project’s transition/closeout
plan
ATTACHMENT 1. PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN EXAMPLES
Examples of project execution plans can be found on the DOE
Office of Management website. The examples can be found under
Policy Guidance/Project Management:
http://management.energy.gov/
ATTACHMENT 2. SUGGESTED COMMUNICATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Background and Purpose
a. Responsible Office and Key Individuals
b. Necessary Oversight and Signatory Responsibilities
II. Project Review
III. Target Objectives
a. Development of Standard and As Needed Communication
Formats and Messages for Identified Stakeholders
b. Development of Communication Flow Diagrams
IV. Strategy
a. Statement of Overall Strategy Elements
b. Assumptions and Uncertainties
c. Process for Validating and Verifying Assumptions and
Uncertainties
V. Key Target Stakeholders
a. Identification Process
b. Known Stakeholders
VI. Identified Communication Channels for Each Target
Stakeholder Grouping
a. Process for Identifying Key Points of Contact
i. Primary Point-of-Contact
ii. Back-up Point-of-Contact
b. Process for Identifying Key Points of Contact for
Emergency Communications
VII. Key Messages
a. Site Communication Requirements
i. Goals and Objectives
ii. Processes
b. When Certain Communications may be Issued
c. Definition of Various Modes of Communication
d. Situational Requirements
e. Definition of Special Circumstances
f. Definition of Special Approval Channels
g. Communication Development
i. Who Should be Involved in Construction of
Communications
ii. Who Should Review
h. Standard Messages
i. Key Interfaces
j. Communication Distribution and Feedback
VIII. Roles and Responsibilities
a. Identify All Parties
b. Responsibility Assignment Matrix
IX. Overview Metrics for Responsible Persons/Message Approval
Process
Revisions and Updates
Communication Management Plan Example:
http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:V9SpEq_WHE4J:www.mbe.doe.gov/
cf40/i-manage/ENG5036CommunicationsManagementPlan.pdf+project+man
agement+sample+communication+plans&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=106&gl=us
ATTACHMENT 3. REFERENCES
General Program and Project Management References:
• DOE O 413.3A, Program and Project Management for the
Acquisition of Capital Assets, dated 7-28-06.
• DOE O 226.1A, Implementation of Department of Energy
Oversight Policy, dated 7-31-07.
• DOE P 226.1A, Department of Energy Oversight Policy, dated
5-25-07.
Acquisition Strategy Reference:
• Federal Acquisition Regulation 7.1.
Alternatives and Analysis References:
• Clemen, R. T. (1996). Making Hard Decisions. Boston: PWS
Kent Publishing.
• Dyer, J. S. and Lorber, H. W. (1982). The Multi-Attribute
Evaluation of Program-Planning Contractors. OMEGA, 6,
673-678.
• Holloway, C. A. (1979). Decision Making Under Uncertainty:
Models and Choices Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
• Keeney, R. L. and von Winterfeldt, D. (1991). Eliciting
Probabilities from Experts in Complex Technical Problems.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
Transactions on Engineering Management, 38, 191-201.
• McNamee, P. and Celona, J. (1990). Decision Analysis with
Supertree. 2nd edition. San Francisco: Scientific Press.
• Raiffa, H. (1968). Decision Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison
Wesley.
Configuration Management References:
• 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 830, Nuclear Safety
Management.
• American National Standards Institute/ Electronic Industry
Alliance-649, National Consensus Standard for Configuration
Management.
• DOE G 420.1-1, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria
and Explosives Safety Criteria Guide for use with DOE O
420.1, Facility Safety, dated 3-28-00.
• DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety, dated 12-22-05.
• DOE O 433.1A, Maintenance Management Program for DOE
Nuclear Facilities, dated 2-13-07.
• DOE, Project Management Practices, Configuration and Change
Management, Rev E, June 2003.
• DOE-STD-1073-2003, Configuration Management.
• Process safety management provisions of Title 29 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.119.
• Project Management Institute Configuration Management
Resources.
• DOE O 5480.30, Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria,
dated 1-19-93.
Earned Value Management System References:
• American National Standards Institute/Electronic Industry
Alliance-748-1998, Earned Value Management Systems.
• DOE G 413.3-10, Earned Value Management System (EVMS),
dated 5-6-08.
Environmental Management References:
• DOE O 450.1A, Environmental Protection Program, dated
6-4-08.
• DOE O 451.1B Chg 1, National Environmental Policy Act
Compliance Program, dated 9-28-01.
External Independent Reviews and Independent Project Review
References:
• Office of Engineering and Construction Website;
http://www.management.energy.gov/project_management.htm
• Independent Project Reviews, For Construction Projects and
Related Programs, Conduct of Independent Project Reviews,
No. NA54-IPR-01, Rev. 0 in draft).
• NA-54 intranet web site on project reviews, Technical
Independent Project Reviews training module.
• National Nuclear Security Administration Policy Letter:
Business Operating Policy 50.003, June 6, 2007.
Industrial Safety and Occupational Health References:
• DOE Office of Health, Safety and Security
http://hss.energy.gov/.
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration compliance–40
CFR 1910.120 and www.osha.gov.
• 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 851, Worker Safety and
Health Program.
Integrated Safety Management References:
• DOE-STD 1189, Integration of Safety into the Design
Process.
• DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, dated
10-15-96, which establishes the basis for ISMS.
• DOE O 450.1, Environmental Protection Program, dated
1-15-03.
• DOE M 450.4-1, Integrated Safety Management Manual, dated
11-1-06.
• Integrated Safety Management Systems (ISMS) Verification
Team Leader’s Handbook, online at:
http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/standard/h
dbk3027/hdbk302799.pdf.
• NNSA Best Practices and Guidance Document for Effective
Incorporation of ISM and QA at the Activity Level.
http://www.hss.energy.gov/HealthSafety/ism/NNSA-WorkPlannin
g.pdf
• DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 6-17-05.
• 10 CFR Part 830, Subpart A.
• DOE O 226.1A, Implementation of Department of Energy
Oversight Policy, dated 7-31-07.
Life Cycle Asset Management References:
• Life Cycle Asset Management, Good Practice Guide-FM-001,
Project Management Overview, March 1996.
• Life Cycle Asset Management, Good Practice Guide-FM-005,
Test and Evaluation, March 1996.
Management Reporting References:
• Office of Management and Budget Circular A-11 Part 3,
Planning Budgeting and Acquisition of Capital Assets.
Including Exhibit 300.
• DOE O 361.1B, Acquisition Career Management Program, dated
1-24-08.
• DOE O 361.1B, Acquisition Career Management Program,
Chapter IV, "Project Management Career Development Program
Module."
• American National Standards Institute/ Electronic Industry
Alliance-748-1998, Earned Value Management Systems.
• Department of Energy Project Assessment and Reporting
System (online at http://pars.energy.gov.
Non-Nuclear Security References:
• DOE O 470. 4A, Safeguards and Security Program,
dated 5-25-07.
• DOE G 413.3-3, Safeguards and Security for Program and
Project Management, dated 11-15-07.
• DOE O 551.1C, Official Foreign Travel, dated 6-24-08.
• DOE M 471.1-1 CHG 1, Identification and Protection of
Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information Manual, dated
10-23-01.
• DOE M 475.1-1B, Manual for Identifying Classified
Information, dated 8-28-07.
• DOE O 471.1A, Identification and Protection of Unclassified
Controlled Nuclear Information, dated 6-30-00.
• DOE P 205.1, Departmental Cyber Security Management Policy,
dated 5-8-01.
Nuclear Safety and Design References:
• Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations 830.
• DOE-STD 1189, Integration of Safety into the Design
Process.
• DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety, dated 12-22-05.
Quality Assurance References:
• Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations 830 Subpart A, Quality
Assurance Requirements
• DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 6-17-05.
• ASME NQA-1-2000, Quality Assurance Requirements for Nuclear
Facility Applications or later editions.
• ANSI/ASQ Q 9001-2000, Quality Management System
Requirements (for non-nuclear activities).
• ANSI/ASQ Z 1.13, Quality Guidelines for Research, 1999 (for
non-nuclear activities).
• NNSA Quality Management Policy, QC-1 (Quality Management
System for the nuclear weapons complex and weapons-related
activities), Rev. 10, February 10, 2004.
• Department of Energy/RW 0333P, Quality Assurance
Requirements and Description for High-Level Waste & Spent
Nuclear Fuel.
Records Management References:
• DOE O 243.1, Records Management Program, dated 2-3-06.
• 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 830.6.
• National Archives Requirements for Federal Records.
Scope Baseline References:
• Project Management Institute is the accepted standard on
Work Breakdown Structure [A Guide to the Project Management
Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) - Third Edition].
• American National Standards Institute/ Electronic Industry
Alliance-748-1998, Earned Value Management Systems.
• DOE G 413.3-10, Earned Value Management System (EVMS),
dated 5-6-08.
Systems Engineering References:
• DOE, Project Management Practices, Systems Engineering and
Interface Management, Rev E, June 2003.
• Department of Defense, Defense Acquisition Guidebook,
Chapter 4, Systems Engineering.
• International Council of Systems Engineering (INCOSE)
Handbook for Systems Engineering, version 3.
• DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety, dated 12-22-05.
Value Engineering References:
• DOE P 413.2, Value Engineering, dated 1-7-04.
• Office of Management and Budget Circular A-131, Value
Engineering.