The PDF version 
Display Related Directives to this directive.
Display Reference Documents to this directive.
U.S. Department of Energy GUIDE
Washington, D.C. 20585 DOE G 413.3-16
9-24-08
Project Transition/Closeout (CD-4)
[This Guide describes suggested non-mandatory 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 provides nonmandatory approaches
for implementing the requirements of DOE O 413.3A, Program and
Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, dated
7-28-06, and is for use by all DOE elements. Guides are not
requirement documents and should not be construed as such. DOE
Guides are part of the Departmental Directives Program and
provide supplemental information that may be useful for
fulfilling requirements in Orders, Manuals, and other regulatory
documents.
INTRODUCTION
DOE projects are typically divided into Initiation Phase,
Definition Phase, Execution Phase, and Transition/Closeout Phase.
This Guide is developed to provide processes and information for
DOE project transition/closeout (Figure 1). It is based on the
principles and requirements taken from DOE O 413.3A. This Guide
addresses project transition to operations, lessons learned,
physical closeout, and financial closeout. This Guide is written
for the federal project director (FPD) to ensure that processes
progress smoothly and that projects meet asset management goals
and financial closure requirements of DOE.
See the graphic in the PDF file
Figure 1. Typical DOE Acquisition Management System for Line-Item
Projects.
DISCUSSION
Part of the transition/closeout process from construction and/or
remediation to operations or long term stewardship is to develop
cost, schedule, and technical parameters that define how the
project is to be completed. This process, which is the FPD's
responsibility, should be as carefully planned and executed as
any other project phase.
Converting a facility from a construction or remediation project
to operating or long term stewardship status requires that
technical and administrative matters be addressed during early
phases of the project. As early as the Definition Phase, the FPD
should initiate planning for and development of documentation for
transition to operations.
Planning should include development of operations and maintenance
manuals, generation of as-built drawings, identification of
operations budget, and the procurement of any materials required
for initial operations. Planning should be developed in
conjunction with the DOE contractor or user/operating
organization who will operate the facility to encourage complete
mutual understanding.
DOE project transition, closeout, and termination processes can
be applied to all capital funded and expense funded projects that
meet DOE criteria for capitalization. The processes described in
this Guide should be used in preparation for project
transition/closeout and can apply to a portion of a project that
functions independently of other portions of a project.
Note: All personal property should follow requirements in
DOE O 580.1, Department of Energy Personal Property Management
Guide.
1.0 TAILORING
1.1 Action
Tailoring is not a specific DOE O 413.3A requirement for Critical
Decision- 4(CD-4) Project Transition/Closeout but is subject to
the project acquisition executive’s approval and should be
identified as early as possible. The tailoring strategy should be
developed as part of the Project Execution Plan (PEP) and should
be reviewed and updated prior to each impacted Critical Decision
request. Information on the development of PEP can be found in
the PEP guide.
1.2 Discussion
Tailoring should consider the risk, complexity, visibility, cost,
safety, security, and schedule of a project. Tailoring planning
is addressed only as a reminder to the FPD to lead and implement
a tailored approach to all activities included in this Guide.
Additional information on tailoring can be found in the PEP
guide.
2.0 PROJECT PERFORMANCE AND COMPLETION CRITERIA
2.1 Action
Verify that Key Performance Parameters or Project Completion
Criteria have been met and mission requirements achieved.
2.2 Discussion
Key Performance Parameters and Project Completion Criteria are
defined in the PEP during the project Definition and Execution
phases. The validation of Project Completion Criteria and Key
Performance Parameters is a key activity for demonstrating the
project has met DOE mission requirements. Additional information
on preparing a PEP can be found in the PEP guide.
Key Performance Parameter is defined in DOE 413.3A as “a vital
characteristic of a project or facility mission.”
Tracking progress throughout project execution is accomplished
using earned value data and other performance indicators
providing ongoing verification of progress towards meeting
Project Completion Criteria. Final verification that Key
Performance Parameters and/or Project Completion Criteria have
been met should be closely linked with project performance
testing (or project commissioning, see section 4) and DOE
acceptance as defined in the PEP. The extent to which completion
is documented depends on the nature of the project. At a minimum
the verification of meeting Project Completion Criteria should be
documented with a statement of acceptance which lists all
remaining work (corrective actions or punch list items) to be
completed prior to final closeout including responsible
individuals, completion dates, and estimated resource needs (if
any).
2.3 Guidance
A key element in verifying that Project Completion Criteria have
been met is the Checkout process. Checkout is an activity
performed largely in parallel with acceptance testing and should
be completed prior to acceptance from the construction
contractor. Checkout includes a facility walk-through for
identification of visible deficiencies. Checkout, in conjunction
with acceptance testing, provides the basis for verifying that
Project Completion Criteria have been met. For nuclear or
environmental remediation projects, a completed Readiness
Assessment (RA) or Operational Readiness Review (ORR) should be
used to support that personnel, training, equipment, and
programs/processes are in-place for safe and compliant operation
of the facility (see section 3).
Equipment, systems, and facility checkouts/walk-throughs are
typically a combined effort involving the user/operating
organization and the project organization (DOE and contractor).
The purpose of a walk-through is to visually inspect completed
work and identify deficiencies. Walk-throughs are performed by
establishing combined project organization and user/operating
organization teams to review and inspect structures, systems, and
components, and comparing the completed product against approved
requirements and design documents.
Discrepancies and deficiencies are documented, corrective actions
identified, responsible individuals assigned, and a corrective
action completion dates identified. Corrective actions are
tracked to completion and then re-inspected for acceptability.
Identification and correction of safety deficiencies should be a
key component of all checkout/walk-through activities. Funding
for all checkouts, walk-throughs, and corrective action
activities is a project responsibility.
Documentation of equipment, systems and facility acceptance
should include project acceptance checklists. Depending on the
size and complexity of the project and project management
structure, there should be multiple levels of acceptance
checklists that are tiered to allow more detailed reviews and
documentation for the acceptance of sub-systems and equipment. A
higher level checklist signoff can be accomplished based on the
successful completion of the lower level component reviews.
The PEP should define the process for documenting the
transition/closeout process from construction and/or remediation
to operations or long term stewardship. Specific information
regarding what should be included in the PEP can be found in the
PEP guide. Ultimately an inspection and acceptance report is
issued, documenting that Project Completion Criteria have been
met, technical performance has been demonstrated acceptable, and
the mission need has been satisfied. This allows the FPD to
certify that work is complete.
3.0 READINESS ASSESSMENT/OPERATIONAL READINESS REVIEW
3.1 Action
Complete a Readiness Assessment (RA) or Operational Readiness
Review (ORR) and resolve all pre-start findings ensuring
operations and maintenance staff are properly trained and
qualified to operate and maintain the equipment, system, and
facilities being turned over. ORRs and RAs are not required for
projects involving non-nuclear equipment, operations or
facilities, unless required by the head of the field organization
or acquisition executive.
3.2 Discussion
A significant challenge associated with DOE projects is planning
and managing the transition of a project from construction to
operation. Although the ORR/RA is conducted during the project
execution phase in preparation for CD-4, a project will not be
successful in completing the readiness review unless adequate
planning is started early during the conceptual phase.
As stated in DOE-STD-3006-2000, Planning and Conduct of
Operational Readiness Review, the guidance contained in the
standard should be useful to line managers when specifying other
readiness review methods and approaches for startup of
radiological facilities or non-nuclear facilities. DOE program
requirements (or guidance) are available for other readiness
reviews; for example, accelerator projects should reference
DOE O 420.2B Safety of Accelerator Facilities, for accelerator
readiness review requirements.
3.2.1 Focus on Achieving Readiness
A common mistake in readiness planning is to focus on the scope
of the readiness review, instead of identifying the scope of work
required to make the facility/equipment/processes ready to be
operated. Readiness preparation should include:
• Planning for the training and qualification of operations,
maintenance, and surveillance personnel;
• Conducting the necessary operational facility, systems, and
equipment tests;
• Developing and approving the safety analysis including
implementation of the safety and security analysis
requirements, operations, maintenance, and surveillance
procedures; and
• Documenting the completed work required to achieve
readiness.
Readiness planners should be sensitive to how facility, systems,
and equipment interface with existing operations, and plan to
include those interfaces in readiness preparations.
3.2.2 Early Determination of the Readiness Review
Readiness planning should begin early in the project lifecycle;
ideally no later than conceptual design. The FPD, with
recommendation from the IPT, decides the type of readiness review
to be performed to verify initial operations and the
authorization authority (AA) or startup authority. Management
documents (PEP, project data sheet, etc.) should identify
readiness planning schedule and cost data. For nuclear facilities
and equipment, the startup notification report is the formal
mechanism for the AA to approve the level of readiness review to
be conducted. The project should be identified on the startup
notification report prior to CD-2 supporting development of the
project baseline. For non-nuclear facilities and equipment, line
management should define the process and develop a detailed
schedule used to verify that the facility/operations are ready.
3.2.3 Developing a Project Approach to Readiness
Readiness planning includes—
• Assigning a responsible individual (i.e., a readiness lead)
for the project’s readiness preparation activities,
• Ensuring the activities are included in the project’s WBS
and WBS dictionary,
• Preparing a conceptual resource loaded schedule with
milestones, and
• Preparing a conceptual cost estimate.
The user/operating organization is key to the successful
definition of work required to achieve the necessary level of
readiness to conduct operations, and should be a key member of
the IPT starting at the conceptual design phase. Additional
information on IPT membership can be found in the IPT guide.
Readiness implementation should include a phased approach with a
staged occupancy/startup.
A desirable (but not mandatory) activity for the readiness lead
would be to prepare a readiness/startup plan to be used in
support of the readiness preparation and review. This plan should
be tailored to review needs. Prior to CD-3, the readiness/startup
plan should provide sufficient detail in the project schedule to
clearly understand relationships between facility, systems, or
equipment operations documentation, user/operating personnel
training, approval of safety and security basis documents,
testing of facility/systems/equipment, and the path to the
readiness review. The detailed schedule should be used by the IPT
to successfully navigate the next phase of the project. As with
any other project activity, readiness preparations and the
associated required reviews should be planned, assigned,
scheduled, estimated, and managed as a sub-project within the
larger project.
3.3 Guidance
The readiness lead should be project organization or
user/operating organization personnel. The FPD should have
overall responsibility to ensure adequate continuing oversight
and progress is maintained throughout all the readiness
preparation activities. The FPD ensures the review provides an
independent and credible assessment of the project’s readiness
and that the operating organization remains fully involved
throughout the execution phase of the project.
A large part of the RA/ORR is a review of project documentation.
A vital function of the readiness lead ensures that project
documentation is identified, approved (as appropriate), filed,
and maintained throughout the project. The project documentation
should be maintained in a centralized, controlled location and be
readily retrievable on short notice. In addition, a successful
RA/ORR requires communication and coordination among several
organizations, including major contractors and subcontractors,
DOE Headquarters, DOE field office/operations office, State
agencies and regulatory agencies.
3.3.1 Operational Readiness Review Scope
An ORR is a disciplined, systematic, documented,
performance-based examination of facilities, equipment,
personnel, procedures, and management control systems for
ensuring a facility can be operated safely and securely within
its approved safety and security envelope as defined by the
facility safety basis and security plan. The ORR scope is defined
in the Plan of Action which address all of the core requirements
identified in DOE O 425.1C, Startup and Restart of Nuclear
Facilities. A tailored approach should be used in defining the
depth of the ORR based on core requirements and is documented in
the ORR Implementation Plan approved by the ORR Team Leader. The
ORR is effectively the mechanism for the project organization to
demonstrate that
• the facility/system/equipment is in a state of readiness to
safely and securely conduct operations in accordance with
the safety basis and security plan;
• management control programs are in place to ensure safe and
secure operations can be sustained; and
• user/operating organization personnel are trained and
qualified.
The ORR provides the basis for the government’s acceptance of the
asset.
An RA is conducted to determine a facility’s readiness to startup
or restart when an ORR is not required or when a contractor’s
standard procedures for startup are not judged by the contractor
or DOE management to provide an adequate verification of
readiness. For restarts of nuclear facilities not requiring an
ORR as defined in DOE O 425.1C, Startup and Restart of Nuclear
Facilities, DOE line management evaluates (and ensures that
contractor line management evaluates) the need to perform an RA
prior to restart.
3.3.2 Certification and Verification
The following are prerequisites for starting the DOE ORR:
• DOE line management has received correspondence from the
responsible contractor and/or DOE user/operating
organization certifying that the
facility/system/equipment is ready for startup and this
has been verified by the ORR.
• DOE line management has verified that the contractor
and/or DOE user/operating organization preparations for
startup have been completed.
• DOE line management has certified that it meets, as a
minimum, the applicable DOE-specific core requirements.
At the start of the DOE ORR, all startup actions should be
completed, with the exception of a manageable list of open
pre-start findings that have a well-defined schedule for closure.
These results should be reviewed by the DOE ORR team. In the
certification and verification process, DOE line management
documents the actions taken to verify DOE field office and
contractor readiness, including a review of closed contractor
review findings, assessments of completed defined prerequisites,
and other assessments performed to ascertain readiness.
In addition to the preceding information, some specific
recommendations related to performing RA/ORR activities follow:
• Contractor ORRs should not start prematurely.
• Readiness should be achieved before starting the review.
• ORRs are to confirm readiness, not achieve readiness.
• ?Contractors should conduct a management self assessment
prior to starting the ORR.
• DOE should reduce last minute perturbations by providing
the ORR/RA implementation plan to oversight groups well
ahead of the review.
• When planning the contractor and DOE ORR should include
not only time for conducting interviews and observations
but also time to consolidate individual preparation,
including preparing forms, and analyzing data.
Readiness is not achieved until all pre-start findings have been
resolved. DOE line management must ensure that all prestart
findings of the DOE Operational Readiness Review or Readiness
Assessment prior to startup or restart of the facility are
resolved. If appropriate, prestart findings from an RA must be
resolved and approved by the authorization authority.
4.0 COMMISSIONING PLAN
NOTE: Much of this section is pulled from the Portland Energy
Conservation’s Model Commissioning Plan and Guide Specifications,
dated February 1998 (available online at
http://www.peci.org/CxTechnical/mcpgs.html). It has been
modified, in places, to fit DOE’s needs for developing
Commissioning Plans.
4.1 Action
Issue a Checkout, Testing, and Commissioning Plan that
identifies subtasks, systems, and equipment. The commissioning
plan ensures that the equipment, systems, and facilities
including high performance sustainable building systems, perform
as designed and are optimized for greatest energy efficiency,
resource conservation, and occupant satisfaction. The
Commissioning Plan includes checkout and testing criteria
required for initial operations.
** Not applicable to clean-up projects.
4.2 Discussion
The DOE PM Glossary (online at
http://management.energy.gov/documents/DOE20PM20Glossary.pdf)
defines commissioning as a systematic process for achieving,
verifying, and documenting that the performance of the facility
or system and that its various components meet the design intent
and the functional and operational needs of the owners, users,
and occupants. Commissioning is a systematic process of ensuring
that building/facility systems perform interactively. This is
achieved beginning in the design phase by documenting the design
intent and continuing through construction, acceptance, and the
warranty period with actual verification of performance,
operation and maintenance (O&M) documentation and the training of
operating personnel.
Commissioning, including checkout and testing, is performed to
demonstrate structures, systems, and components(SSC)/structures,
systems, and equipment (SSE) meet or exceed previously
established project requirements. The Key Performance Parameters
and Project Completion Criteria (see section 2) should be defined
or referenced in the PEP. Commissioning and the resulting
transition to operations are best achieved by—
• early project planning, organization, and preparation for
transition;
• systematically performing required inspections and testing;
and
• providing adequate documentation of testing and transition
activities.
If commissioning and testing are required for project transition
and closeout, a commissioning authority should be designated as a
member of the integration project team (IPT) at Critical
Decision-1 (CD-1). The Commissioning Authority is responsible for
commissioning and testing if the IPT believes Commissioning is
required for project transition and closeout. The Commissioning
Authority approves the Commissioning Plan including the elements
described in Section 3.Additional information on membership of
the IPT can be found in the IPT guide. If commissioning and
testing costs are considered significant enough to influence
alternative analysis, a commissioning authority should be
designated at CD-0 to be part of the gap or alternative analysis
process.
4.2.1 Commissioning Mission
4.2.1.1 Objective
The objectives of the commissioning plan specifications during
the design phase are as follows.
1. Ensure that the design team applies commissioning
concepts to the design, e.g., clear and complete design
intent documentation is developed, clear and concise
process system and integrated system performance test
requirements and acceptance criteria are specified,
defined, and conveyed for inclusion in the construction
documents, and commissioning-focused design reviews are
conducted.
2. Ensure that the design team prepares commissioning
specifications and specific forms or data sheets for
documenting construction inspections and checks and
ensure the Commissioning Authority develops a
Commissioning Plan for inclusion in the construction
documents.
By meeting the above objectives during the design phase, the
following can be achieved.
• Commissioning work can be accurately bid.
• The commissioning process can be effectively executed by the
contractor.
• Contractors or DOE user/operating organization can
understand how to efficiently execute the commissioning
process.
• There is a systematic, efficient and enforceable method to
accomplish the commissioning objectives.
• The commissioning objectives are met by—
- ensuring that applicable equipment and systems are
installed properly and receive adequate operational
checkout by installing contractors,
- verifying and documenting proper performance of equipment
and systems,
- ensuring that O&M documentation left on site is complete,
and
- ensuring that the owner’s operating personnel are
adequately trained.
4.2.1.2 Commissioning Scope Description
The scope description provides a suggested outline (and
checklist) for use in preparing a commissioning plan. A tailoring
approach should be applied to the development of the
commissioning plan, as necessary for the various types of DOE
project scope, complexity, and associated project risks. This
document provides guidance and useful references related to each
of the outline items listed. The FPD and commissioning authority
can refer to the Model Commissioning Plan and Guide
Specifications, Portland Energy Conservation, dated February 1998
(online at http://www.peci.org/CxTechnical/mcpgs.html) for
further details.
The commissioning plan describes the high-level activities
required for the project, such as testing, startup, transition to
operations, staffing, training, documentation preparation, etc.
The Commission Plan scope should be under configuration control.
4.3 Guidance
4.3.1 Commissioning Planning
The commissioning plan is comprised of the following four
separate documents designated as “parts.”
Part I. Commissioning RequirementsDesign Phase
Part II. Commissioning PlanDesign Phase
Part III. Commissioning Guide Specifications
Part IV. Commissioning PlanConstruction Phase
A brief description of each part follows:
4.3.1.1 Part I. Commissioning Requirements—Design Phase
The Commissioning RequirementsDesign Phase relates to actions to
be carried out during the development of the contract documents.
Included are lists of the responsibilities for each member of the
design team and for all players during the construction phase. If
a bid for an architectural/engineering (A/E) firm is to be
implemented, this document should be included in the request for
proposal (RFP).
4.3.1.2 Part II. Commissioning Plan—Design Phase
The Commissioning PlanDesign Phase guides the commissioning
activities during the design phase. It provides details of
responsibilities called out in Part I, Commissioning
RequirementsDesign Phase for the architect, design engineers,
commissioning manager, construction manager, project manager, and
federal project director. The plan describes the duties of the
design team and commissioning authority in developing the
site-specific commissioning specifications and for developing the
first two drafts of the Commissioning PlanConstruction Phase.
4.3.1.3 Part III. Commissioning Guide Specifications
The commissioning guide specifications contain recommended
language that describes both the requirements and the process to
incorporate commissioning into construction specifications. All
divisions and sections that relate to commissioning should
include language ensuring that the contractors or DOE
user/operating organization are clearly informed regarding their
commissioning responsibilities. An explanation of the
commissioning process is also provided. In addition,
pre-functional checklists and sample functional tests are
included for many common types of equipment and systems. There
are few systems and components that lend themselves to
pre-functional checklist (as listed within the PEIC referenced
earlier in this document) or generic type of testing, save the
HVAC systems for normal building habitability. Most new
facilities have very unique and often one of a kind process
systems requiring a dedicated test team to validate and put into
service.
4.3.1.4 Part IV. Commissioning Plan—Construction Phase
The Commissioning PlanConstruction Phase is developed in draft
form for the specific project during the design phase, which
provides direction for the development of commissioning
specifications by the design team. During the construction phase,
the plan provides direction for the commissioning tasks during
construction. The plan focuses on providing support to the
specifications and provides forms for application of the
commissioning process.
The following graphic illustrates the above process.
See the graphic in the PDF file
For details of each section including more detailed scope, roles
and responsibilities, checklists, required documents, see “Model
Commissioning Plan and Guide Specifications”.
5.0 TRANSITION TO OPERATIONS PLAN
5.1 Action
Issue a Project Transition to Operations Plan** that clearly
defines the basis for attaining initial operating capability,
full operating capability, or project closeout, as applicable.
The plan includes documentation, training, interfaces, and draft
schedules.
** Not applicable to clean-up projects.
5.2 Discussion
The Transition to Operations Plan (TOP) is a prerequisite to
obtain Secretarial acquisition executive/acquisition executive
approval for CD-4. The purpose of the TOP is to identify and plan
for project transition phase activities that are required for
approval to begin initial or full operations of project
deliverables. The overall goal is to ensure a smooth turnover of
the project deliverables (i.e., equipment, facility, product, or
asset) and a seamless hand-off of responsibility/ownership from
the project organization to the user/operating organization. A
TOP is prepared to ensure efficient and effective management of
the transition scope; align schedules, identify resources to
facilitate project transition; and provide proper
customer/sponsor/stakeholder interfaces.
A TOP is an agreement between the project organization (FPD and
project manager), DOE program, and the user/operating
organization that describes the process for implementing
transition to operations activities. A tailored approach should
be used when developing the TOP based upon the programmatic
importance and complexity of the project. Systems engineering
techniques should be applied when developing and implementing the
TOP.
The key to a successful transition to operations is early,
thorough, forward-looking planning. The TOP is a living document
that should be kept current by the IPT throughout the project
life-cycle. For additional information on the responsibilities of
the IPT see the IPT guide. A preliminary TOP should be
included/referenced in the PEP. Project funded activities
associated with transition to operations should be identified and
incorporated into the project performance baseline, and DOE
program funded activities associated with transition to
operations should be planned for by the program. A draft TOP
should be started during design and completed as soon as possible
after final design is completed. The final TOP is completed
during construction before the project’s integrated startup and
commissioning activities, and is a prerequisite for CD-4 under
DOE O 413.3A. For projects that are implemented in phases, the
TOP should be started during the initial phase of design, with
incremental updates to the plan made as necessary during project
phases.
IPT members who are responsible for TOP should prepare the plan.
It is very important to have participation (i.e., buy-in) by the
user/operating organization and DOE program. In addition,
participation by other key stakeholders should be considered.
The TOP should be approved by the project’s DOE program sponsor,
the DOE federal project director, the contractor project manager
and the user/operating organization in accordance with the roles,
responsibilities and authorities outlined in the PEP. The TOP
should be under configuration control.
5.3 Guidance
References and topics to be considered are discussed below. Using
a tailored approach, the FPD and the IPT should assess each
component of the project and their applicability for project
transition to operations planning. The TOP should be
comprehensive to address all transition phase activities but does
not need to be voluminous and should reference other supporting
documents as appropriate.
5.3.1 Project Description and Mission
The summary project description from the PEP or project data
sheet could be used.
The description should include detailed benefits that DOE and key
stakeholders will realize at the completion of the project
transition phase and list potential negative impact on DOE
mission including project cost and schedule, security,
environmental, safety, technical and operational dependencies or
efficiency if transition to operations is delayed.
5.3.2 Planning Management, Organization and Control
Describe the transition phase scope and activities such as
testing (components, equipment, subsystems, systems, facilities,
and software), activation, acceptance, beneficial occupancy,
startup, commissioning, staffing, training, and readiness review.
The transition to operations scope should be under configuration
control (see section 5.3.10 below).
5.3.3 DOE Orders and Program Guidance
List the DOE Directives and program guidance applicable to the
transition to operations scope.
5.3.4 Key Transition Phase Steps and Deliverables
Key transition phase steps should include project activities that
should be undertaken to meet requirements identified in
applicable DOE Directives and can include agreements between DOE
program offices, or with regulatory agencies and other
stakeholders (e.g., memorandum of agreement). The transition
phase deliverables include the list of CD-4 prerequisites
provided in Table 2 of DOE O 413.3A. Transition phase
deliverables can also include transition to operation
documentation. The key transition phase steps and deliverables
should be under configuration control (see section 5.3.10 below).
5.3.5 Strategy
Consistent with the PEP and project performance baseline,
describe the strategy for completing the transition to operations
scope, steps and deliverables. The strategy can be supported by a
sequence logic/network diagram or a Gantt chart. DOE Headquarters
program personnel should be actively engaged in the strategy
development because of its programmatic importance to DOE
missions and budget planning.
5.3.6 Operation or Long Term Stewardship Cost
Summarize the program’s annual and life-cycle cost estimates for
operation or long term stewardship of the project deliverables.
Include the cost basis and assumptions for operation,
maintenance, decontamination & decommissioning, and/or future
surveillance activities, as appropriate.
5.3.7 Organizations, Stakeholders and Public Interfaces
Describe the transition phase information and communications
interfaces between DOE and contractor organizations,
stakeholders, and the public. Identify the information needs and
process for meeting those needs. Transition to operations
interfaces should be consistent with the PEP, the project
organization chart, and organization breakdown structure. 1,2,40
5.3.8 Transition Team Roles and Responsibilities
Identify the membership and leader of the transition team, and
describe their roles and responsibilities for completing all of
the transition to operations activities. Lines of communication
should be clearly defined in this section. A responsibility
assignment matrix (RAM) could be used.
5.3.9 Configuration Control
The PEP provides the configuration control process and
responsibilities for the project funded transition to operations
scope. Describe or reference the process and responsibilities for
non-project (i.e., DOE program) funded transition to operations
scope. Describe how these processes will be integrated.
5.3.10Project Key Performance Elements and Completion Criteria
Describe the initial operations and/or full operations key
performance requirements, and list the Project Completion
Criteria (from the PEP or other project documentation, e.g.,
project functional requirements). Summarize the plan and process
for verifying that these standards and criteria can be met (see
section 2.0 above).
5.3.11Schedule and Key Milestones
Provide a comprehensive, integrated (project and program),
transition to operations schedule and identify key milestones.
The schedule and key milestones should be consistent with the
integrated project schedule, the transition to operations
strategy, and sequence logic/network diagrams.
5.3.12Readiness Review
Consistent with the PEP, identify the type of readiness review
process, readiness review preparation roles and responsibilities,
schedule and key milestones, interfaces with other transition to
operations activities, resource requirements, readiness review
documentation (e.g., contractor and DOE: plan of action,
implementation plan, final report, and resolution of findings),
and proposed approval authority (see section 3.3.1 above).
5.3.13Operations and Maintenance Management
Identify the operations and maintenance program requirements for
facility equipment, structures, systems and components. This
section could reference the operating and maintenance manuals for
project deliverables. Also identify spare parts, chemicals,
supplies, and required specialized vendor support for initial
operation.
5.3.14Facility Support, Operations and Maintenance Training
Summarize as appropriate the plan for training the project test
team, activation team, startup team, commissioning team,
user/operating O&M personnel, and support personnel (e.g.,
emergency response/access for fire, hazard containment, security,
etc.), including training materials development, qualification
and/or certification.
5.3.15Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H), and Quality
Assurance
Summarize the plan for preparing key ES&H documents needed to
support CD-4, such as: documented safety analysis (DSA) and
technical safety requirements (TSRs) for Hazard Category 1, 2,
and 3 nuclear facilities; hazards analysis plan; DOE safety
evaluation report; USQ procedure; updated construction project
safety and health plan; energy and resource conservation plan;
revision of the environmental management system and Quality
Assurance Plan to incorporate any new aspects related to turnover
and operations; and updated site emergency plan and facility
emergency planning hazards assessment, if applicable (see section
8 below).
5.3.16Safeguards and Security (S&S)
Describe the process for validation of S&S equipment, programs,
and processes, as applicable. Summarize the plan for preparing
key S&S documents needed to support CD-4, such as the cyber
security plan for IT projects, the security vulnerability
assessment report, and the facility and/or Site Security Plan
(see section 8 below).
5.3.17Permits and Licenses
Identify any permits and licenses that are required for initial
operation and/or full operation of the project. Discuss the
process for obtaining these permits and licenses, and providing
any formal notifications to satisfy intra-program and interagency
agreements.
5.3.18Authorization and Notification
Describe (or reference the document that describes) the process
and responsibilities for formal authorization of initial
operation and/or full operation of the project deliverables. The
description (or reference document) should list any required
notifications, both internal and external to the DOE, such as to
regulatory agencies.
5.3.19Project Acceptance, Beneficial Occupancy, and Transfer to
Operations
Describe the process for formal acceptance and/or beneficial
occupancy of the project deliverables and transfer/handover to
the user/operating organization. This should be based on meeting
the terms of the project contract, with deliverable acceptance by
the contract administrator and formal acceptance and/or
beneficial occupancy documentation which accept the deliverables
from the project organization to the user/operating organization
consistent with the PEP and transition to operations strategy.
5.3.20Business Functions
Discuss the transition strategy for project business functions;
the process to transfer licenses, contracts, equipment, assets,
real property, and records to the user/operating organization, as
applicable; disposition of any Government-furnished equipment
provided to project contractors; and the process for handling
unresolved project litigation and liabilities.
5.3.21Project Information and Records Turnover
Identify the project information and records that will be
transferred from the project organization to the user/operating
organization, and describe the sequence, responsibilities, and
formal acceptance process for turnover. Project information and
records could include test reports, operation and maintenance
manuals, training materials, agreements, acceptance documents,
ES&H documents, design basis documents, as-built drawings,
specifications, equipment manuals, warranties and configuration
management documents.
5.3.22Transition to Operations Reporting
Describe how transition to operations reporting will be handled.
For example, it could be a separate report or it could be
incorporated into the project quarterly review with the DOE
program sponsor. Discuss the report content, frequency and
responsibility for preparation.
5.3.23User/Operating Organization Staff Planning
Summarize the plan for mobilizing the user/operating organization
workforce, as required so that it can assume responsibility for
operation of the project deliverables by CD-4 or according to the
schedule stipulated in the Program Budget Decision memo signed by
the CFO. This may include a ramp up of staff during testing,
activation, startup and/or commissioning as appropriate, so that
the user/operating organization staff gain experience. This
section could reference a more detailed user/operating
organization staffing plan.
5.3.24Lessons Learned and Process Improvement
Document transition to operations lessons learned, including
performance history leading to successful operation of the
project. Implement process improvement opportunities throughout
the life of the project to improve transition workflow (see
section 9 of this Guide).
5.3.25Project Organization De-staffing Planning
Summarize the plan for demobilizing the contractor’s project
workforce and for DOE project staff, as applicable for a smooth
transition to operations. This section could reference a more
detailed project organization de-staffing plan.
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
6.1 Action:
Issue an updated Quality Assurance Plan to address testing,
identified deficiencies, and startup, transition, and operation
activities.
6.2 Discussion:
Over the duration of the project many changes are likely to
occur. They should be in the area of testing, startup,
transition, operational activities or other identified
deficiencies. These are likely to affect the existing project
quality assurance program. In addition each of these changes
should have useful lessons learned for specific areas.
Incorporation of all lessons learned for similar projects at the
same or other sites could be very useful. An update of the
Quality Assurance Plan may be necessary. The Quality Assurance
Plan should be updated under guidance of the federal project
director.
6.3 Guidance
The Quality Assurance Plan is developed at the inception of the
project and is updated, as necessary over, the project life
cycle. The FPD is responsible for planning and implementing the
Quality Assurance Program for the project. During the preparation
of the project documentation appropriate consideration needs to
be given to Quality Assurance because quality affects cost,
availability, effectiveness, safety, security, and performance.
Quality assurance needs to address the following 10 criteria:
• Program
• Personnel training and qualification
• Quality improvement
• Documents and records
• Work processes
• Design
• Procurement
• Inspection and acceptance
• Management assessment
• Independent assessment
Depending on the nature of the project, the key
requirements/elements of a quality assurance program are provided
in DOE O 414..1C and Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Part 830 Subpart A.
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REVISION
7.1 Action
Revise the environmental management system to ensure that it
incorporates new environmental aspects related to turnover and
operations.
7.2 Discussion
DOE O 413.3A requires a revision of the environmental management
system when a construction/build or remediation project initiates
project closeout and transition activities. This revision is
required upon the completion of a project and the transfer or
turnover of the project deliverables to another organization for
operations or long-term stewardship responsibilities. The purpose
of revising the environmental management system is to ensure
project facility/systems/equipment operations or long-term
stewardship activities continue to achieve environmental
protection and regulatory compliance. The revision needs to
reflect the environmental aspects necessary to ensure continued
protection of human health and the environment and compliance
with environmental regulations after a project is turned over for
operations or long-term stewardship activities.
The environmental management system is to address the
environmental aspects of project operations or activities and to
ensure ongoing compliance with environmental regulatory
requirements. Executive Order 13423 dated January 24, 2007,
Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation
Management, requires that all agencies implement an environmental
management system at the appropriate organizational levels. DOE
sites have met this requirement principally through compliance
with and/or certification to ISO 14001, Environmental Management
Systems—Specification with Guidance for Use. For information on
what should be included in an EMS, refer to the DOE G 450.1
series.
7.3 Guidance
Prior to CD-4, an environmental management system should be
revised and implemented upon the turnover/transition date to
reflect the project’s operational configuration and/or the
long-term stewardship activities This environmental management
system can either be under a site-wide management system or be
facility specific. Further, the environmental management system
should reflect the environmental aspects related to turnover,
i.e., project operations or long-term stewardship, as well as the
six elements of an environmental management system according to
ISO 14001 (online at
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/management_standards/iso_900
0_iso_14000/iso_14000_essentials.htm).
8.0 SAFEGUARDS, SECURITY, AND SAFETY PLANS
8.1 Action—Documented Safety Analysis/Safety Evaluation
Prepare the Documented Safety Analysis Report with Technical
Safety Requirements for Hazard 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.
Prepare a Safety Evaluation Report based on a review of the
preliminary Documented Safety Analysis for Category 1, 2, and 3
nuclear facilities.
8.1.1 Discussion
During the transition/closeout phase, the project team should
continue to update and finalize safety documents and procedures
that have been initiated in the prior phases of project activity.
Approved final Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), Technical Safety
Requirements (TSRs) and other hazard control documents contain
the principal safety basis for a DOE decision to authorize
facility operation. Once facility operation is authorized, the
final DSA and hazard controls will be the principal safety bases
for sustaining authorization and safety oversight. A final DSA
documents the safety basis and provides detailed information for
a determination that the facility can be operated, maintained,
shut down, and decommissioned safely and in compliance with
applicable laws and regulations. This has much the same meaning
as does the similar language for preliminary documented safety
analysis (PDSA), except that for final DSA the descriptions of
operations are complete, detailed, and based on final
information.
8.1.2 Guidance
During construction, the final DSA is developed. It is based on
the facility as built and as it will be operated and finalizes
the description of needed safety management programs. After the
construction has been completed and the DSA has been updated to
reflect the as-built drawings and development of the TSR bases,
DOE reviews the revised DSA and updates the Safety Evaluation
Report (SER) authorizing operations subject to any necessary
conditions, including the need for an Operational Readiness
Review (See section 3.1 of this document and DOE O 425.1C). DOE
issues the SER that documents DOE review and approval of the DSA.
8.2 Action—Hazard Analysis
Finalize the Hazard Analysis Report and obtain DOE approval
(field level).
8.2.1 Discussion
Additional analyses to prepare the DSA include evaluation of
equipment that was not part of the preliminary and final design,
such as government furnished equipment or specialty equipment
designs that were performed in separate design activities not
fully addressed in the PDSA, and detailed operational analysis
for those activities that did not need to be considered for
development of the design. In addition, hazards analyses that
were completed as part of the PDSA should be reviewed to ensure
that they remain accurate and changes made as necessary. Note
that Government-furnished equipment ideally should be included in
the early hazard and accident analysis activities and treated as
though it was part of the design. Otherwise the design interfaces
and potentially the acceptability of the Government-furnished
equipment may not be found in a timely fashion. Then this
additional task would be a final check on interfacing facilities
or systems that are not under the direct control of the project.
8.2.2 Guidance
To complete operational hazards analyses and analyze other upset
conditions that were not developed in the PDSA, the hazards
analysis process should engage the operations staff. Detailed
operational concepts should be developed by the operations staff
in conjunction with the safety analysis efforts and should
include government furnished equipment that should be used in
these operations.
The DSA cannot be completed until there is a high degree of
certainty that facility configuration matches the design
documentation, safety basis documentation, and the operating
procedures for that configuration. Final verification that the
DSA information is consistent with the as-built configuration is
necessary before sending the DSA and TSR to DOE for approval. A
rigorous change control process will help in this regard.
The final development of the DSA and TSR should provide for
implementation planning. The initial planning for these
activities should be included in the TOP, which should be
base-lined during preliminary design. The TOP provides the
concepts that support when and how many operations staff is
brought into the project to support transition and defines (to
the extent known at the time) the activities that need to be
performed, including those needed to implement the commitments
expected to be in the DSA and TSR. Many of the details of
activities needed to implement the DSA and TSR are based on
limited information available in preliminary design.
Consequently, the detailed strategy and activities needed to
implement the DSA and TSR should be addressed and compared to the
baseline in the TOP such that appropriate adjustments can be
made.
8.3 Action—Security Vulnerability Assessment
Finalize the Security Vulnerability Assessment Report and any
required security plan.
1.1.1
8.3.1 Discussion
During the transition/close-out, all security system
documentation is reviewed and an acceptance determination made.
System component and complete system acceptance testing is
evaluated against the test and acceptance plan. For security an
approved security plan, procedures, trained security
professionals on-hand, and, if required a successful ORR, or an
RA should be completed prior to a CD-4.
8.3.2 Guidance
Prior to CD-4, the final update of the vulnerability assessment
is required, with a resulting Final vulnerability assessment
report. This report should document the proposed security systems
and features, as well as demonstrate how the facility design,
construction, and operations satisfy security requirements. Also,
any required updates to the resulting security plan should be
incorporated for implementation.
At CD-4 there is transition from the project organization to the
user/operating organization for assumption of responsibility for
management operations and maintenance. The facility/site
management and operations group takes over the responsibility for
the management, operation, and associated support.
8.4 Action—Cyber Security
Finalize the Cyber Security Plan for information technology (IT)
projects and complete the certification and accreditation.
8.4.1 Discussion
At this stage of an IT project all training materials and
documentation should be complete. The project team should ensure
that all components of the system test and evaluation plan (STEP)
have undergone acceptance testing and operational review, as
appropriate. It is necessary to document the findings, propose an
action plan for addressing failures and issues, and identify the
residual risks by compiling all cyber security designs, plans,
agreements, test results, etc., into the cyber security plan.
8.4.2 Guidance
It is required to execute the STEP as part of the entire system,
and make necessary changes to the IT system, validate changes and
revise the Cyber Security Plan. This will allow the integrated
project team to request accreditation of the final Cyber Security
Plan. This is accomplished through the submission of the Cyber
Security Plan to a cyber system security manager for final
certification, and the subsequent request of accreditation by the
approval authority (AA) which will result in the project
receiving full or interim approval to operate. Finally, the
project can record and register the Cyber Security Plan.
9.0 POST CD-4 APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS (RELATED TO
TRANSITION/CLOSEOUT)
9.1 Action—Post Implementation Review for Information Technology
Conduct a Post Implementation Review for information technology
projects and document that the project has attained the desired
results and met the Key Performance Parameters in accordance with
the Capital Programming Guide, Supplement to Part 7 of Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-11.
9.1.1 Discussion
The purpose of the Post Implementation Review (PIR) is to track
and measure the impact and outcomes of implemented information
technology (IT) projects to ensure that they meet the program
mission. The need to evaluate a system’s ability, both
functionally and economically, is a continuous process to ensure
that the system still supports both the end user and the mission
needs of the organization. The PIR is typically conducted on
implemented projects to evaluate the actual results compared to
estimates in terms of cost, schedule, performance, and mission
outcomes; to determine the causes of major differences between
planned end results; and to help improve project management
practices. Stage evaluations are conducted on project success to
ensure a positive return on investment, and decide whether
continuation, modification, or termination of the project is
necessary. PIRs should be conducted on all major DOE IT projects
and the type of review to be conducted will be based on the stage
of project development. The goals of a PIR are to—
1. keep the Department and key stakeholders apprised of
the project’s performance and contribution in support
of strategic goals and objectives;
2. ascertain the degree of project success in terms of
meeting objectives, delivering planned levels of
benefits, and addressing the specific requirements as
originally defined;
3. ensure that the project meets mission support
objectives;
4. examine the efficacy of all elements of the business
solution to determine if improvements can be made to
optimize the benefits of the system;
5. document lessons learned to improve future projects,
the IT decision process, and overall performance of the
IT portfolio;
6. provide insight into the strengths and weakness of the
processes and procedures performed in the selection and
control phases of the Capital Planning and Investment
Control process;
7. re-assess project investment, technical compliance, and
compliance against the enterprise architecture; and
8. update the enterprise architecture and Capital Planning
and Investment Control processes.
9.1.2 Guidance
The DOE Office of the Chief Information Officer is responsible
for developing the list of potential review projects. The DOE IT
Council makes the final decision on which projects will be
reviewed. All major projects should have PIR review. In addition,
all projects prior to being reported as a steady state investment
should have a PIR. Finally, senior management should request a
PIR review if one or more of the following conditions exist.
1. Operating costs increase significantly.
2. User complains on system performance.
3. Number of software changes increases.
4. Scope or strategic plan significantly changes.
5. Major legislative changes have been enacted.
6. DOE changes policy.
In order to perform the PIR review comprehensive information
should be gathered, analyzed and documented in the PIR summary
and recommendation report. There are nine elements that should be
reviewed.
9.1.2.1 Cost and Schedule.
Earned value data is used to analyze project costs and schedule
variances. The DOE standard includes a detailed explanation for
the cause of the variance, what corrective actions are being
taken to resolve the variances, and what the impact will be on
other related work or the final project. Projects between $5M and
$20M have the option of using American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)-748, Earned Value Management System (EVMS)
Standard, or implementing a similar system that is capable of
providing cost, schedule, and performance status. For all
projects $20M or more the ANSI-748 EVMS should be utilized and
the Department will perform a validation review in accordance
with the requirements of DOE Order 413.3A. The system should be
able to report cost and schedule variances, and other baseline
performance measurement data.
9.1.2.2 Technical and Operational Performance.
A technical evaluation of the project results in an analysis of
the system’s operational readiness: project vs. actual
capabilities, statistical data, and technical effectiveness of
the system. Technical performance indicators cover both software
and hardware. Technical performance indicators include processing
cycles, response times, and storage capabilities. In addition,
the impacts of system performance to user and mission
capabilities and predetermined DOE program objectives should be
measured. Baseline requirements should be compared against the
functionality of the implemented system to determine if the
system was developed as originally defined.
9.1.2.3 Enterprise Architecture Compliance.
The original architecture plan should be compared against the
implemented system in order to determine if there were deviations
from the original requirements. The PIR should also determine if
the system components integrates with the current existing
infrastructure.
9.1.2.4 Security Analysis
The security analysis compares the systems security measures
against the DOE certification and accreditation guidelines and is
a requirement for all systems processing, transmitting, or
storing DOE information. Documentation includes a risk
assessment, system security plan, configuration management plan,
contingency plan, results of previous assessments, security
controls assessments, independent verification and validation,
and independent audits.
9.1.2.5 Project Risk Management.
The PIR should review and evaluate the process used by the
Integrated Project Team to identify risks, develop risk
strategies, employ the strategies to address the risks, the
impacts on the project, and if they were managed effectively.
9.1.2.6 Records Management.
The PIR should evaluate the documentation in support of the
records management program which provides for the systematic
control of the records captured, stored, maintained, retrieved,
used, and disposed. The disposition approvals from the DOE
Records Officer and National Archives and Records Administration
need to be requested and approved prior to implementation.
Records management addresses the life cycle of records from the
creation or receipt to the maintenance and use to the
disposition.
9.1.2.7 Impact on Goals and Strategic Objectives.
The PIR should determine if the project met the stated outcomes
and benefits and if they are in alignment with the DOE goals and
objectives.
9.1.2.8 Impact on Stakeholders.
The PIR should evaluate if the stakeholders (users, customers,
and business process owners) are satisfied with the project. This
is normally accomplished through surveys and interviews.
9.1.2.9 Best Practices and Lessons Learned.
The PIR should document in best practices and lessons learned
successful procedures, practices, issues, and problems, to
improve the Information Technology Investment Management Process
and future IT projects.
To provide a consistent approach to evaluating a project, DOE has
developed a standard template and scoring criteria. The results
will be reported to the IT Council who will review the report and
provide a recommendation to the Office of the Chief Information
Officer. The Office of Chief Information Officer will authorize
any corrective actions and the DOE program will report back on
the status of the corrective actions. The review template
includes 31 elements and covers project managers certification,
cost, schedule, and project management performance metrics
including critical decision approvals, earned value data, steady
state components, operational costs and schedule dates,
performance tables, security, and project management scores on
four pages and can be found in the Guide to IT Capital Planning
and Investment Control, dated September 20075 (online at
http://cio.energy.gov/documents/DOE_CPIC_Guide_091007_FINAL(1).pd
f)..
9.2 Action—Lessons Learned
Prepare a Lessons Learned Report and submit to OECM for broader
sharing among the DOE project management community.
9.2.1 Discussion
The DOE lessons learned program is designed to enhance the lines
of communications between all elements of the DOE including its
contractors and is a key element in organizations’ commitment to
continuous improvement. The Lessons Learned Program includes two
processes. The first is a development process that includes
identification, documentation, validation, and dissemination of
lessons learned. The second is a utilization and incorporation
process that includes identification of applicable lessons
learned, distribution to appropriate personnel, identification of
actions that will be taken as a result of the lessons learned,
and follow-up to ensure that appropriate actions were taken. In
addition, the lessons learned program contains processes to
measure operational performance improvements and program
effectiveness.
9.3 Action—Operational Documentation
Complete project operational documentation.
9.3.1 Discussion
Converting a facility from construction project status to
operating status requires that technical and administrative
matters be addressed during earlier stages of the project. As
early in the execution phase as feasible, the project
organization should initiate planning for and development of the
documentation for transition to operations. During transition,
the user/operator will normally accept beneficial occupancy of
the facility and take ownership of project documentation.
Project documentation transferred from the project organization
to the user/operating organization could include, for example,
environmental and safety, design basis, drawings (as-built) and
specifications, configuration management, equipment and operating
manuals, other project records, and other relevant information.
As appropriate, project documentation that supports transition,
turnover, Operational Readiness Review (e.g., ORR, RA, or other
readiness review) and operation and maintenance should be made
available to the user/operating organization. Project records not
provided to the user/operating organization are prepared for
storage or disposal in accordance with DOE O 243.1, . Records
should be complete, properly identified, approved, and orderly.
In certain cases, electronic and hard copies of project records
should be provided.
The project organization is responsible for delivering a
completed project to the user/operating organization. A
successful turnover for operations includes providing the
user/operating organization a comprehensive set of operational
documentation and records. This will be best accomplished by
partnering with the user/operating organization to identify all
operational documentation and records required to turnover a
completed project. The project organization is responsible for
assembling the documentation and records needed to properly
transition and turnover a completed project to the user/operating
organization. All records that are turned over to the
user/operating organization or sent to storage should be
accompanied by a complete inventory list. A duplicate of these
lists should be kept by the project organization and turned over
to the field/site project management organization when the
project office is closed.
9.3.2 Guidance
The list of operational documentation and records will depend on
the project type and the needs of the user/operating
organization. Provided below is a list of the types of documents
and records that should be considered for turnover to the
user/operating organization. Partnership with the user/operating
organization and a tailored approach should be used to develop a
comprehensive list of all operational documents and records to be
transferred from the project organization to the user/operating
organization.
9.3.2.1 Final Design
The final design is the completion of the design effort and
production of all the approved design documentation necessary to
permit Project procurement. The final design is used to permit
construction, testing, checkout, and turnover to proceed.
9.3.2.2 Procurement
The procurement documentation includes key documents used to
execute the project. These could include the
construction/restoration contract, statement of work, contract
amendments, and other related documents.
9.3.2.3 Construction
Construction documentations are the documents that record the
execution of construction. These documents could include drawings
and specifications, construction meeting minutes, inspection
reports, material submittals, and other related records.
9.3.2.4 Pre-Operational Testing
As part of the commissioning activities, most facility systems
and equipment will undergo thorough testing as part of its
acceptance process to verify that the systems and equipment were
installed correctly and satisfies the manufacture’s operational
specifications. Important for operations, this documentation
demonstrates that the systems and equipment were installed and
operated as required by the project specifications.
9.3.2.5 Startup
Startup activities of facility systems and equipments are part of
the commissioning activities. Systems and equipment installed and
completed by the construction contractor should be tested and
accepted by the project organization before they are made
available to the user/operating organization. To facilitate the
turnover to the user/operating organization, the acceptance
process should be in partnership with the user/operating
representative; in most cases this representative is a technician
or mechanic who will assume ownership of the system or equipment
once accepted and started. Startup activities are an important
part of the transfer of knowledge to the user/operating
organization. These documents could include testing and startup
procedures, checklists, and records.
9.3.2.6 Safety
Operational safety of the new or restored facility is critical at
the turnover of the completed project to the user/operating
organization. Safe operation of the facility and its systems and
equipment should be documented. Operational procedures are
developed to document the appropriate use and safe operations of
the facility systems and equipments.
9.3.2.7 Quality
Important to the project and user/operating organization is the
quality assurance of the construction activities and the systems
and equipments provided by the project. Proper documentation of
the construction and/or installation, inspection, and acceptance
will facilitate quality assurance and ensure that the completed
project satisfies the project’s objectives and specifications.
9.3.2.8 Safeguards and Security
Safeguards and security refers to an integrated system of
activities, systems, programs, facilities, and policies for the
protection of classified information and/or classified matter,
unclassified control information, nuclear materials, nuclear
weapons, nuclear weapon components, and/or the Department’s and
its contractors’ facilities, property, and equipment. Project
success will depend upon the satisfaction of safeguards and
security requirements. The project organization’s safeguards and
security plans and related documents which describes the
applicable requirements and assures these have been satisfied
should be turnover to the user/operating organization.
9.3.2.9 Permits and Licensing
Permits and licensing required for facility operations should be
identified and provided to the user/operating organization to
facilitate the transition to operations. In many cases the
project organization has the expert staff to research and
identify the permits and licensing requirements to operate the
constructed facility.
9.3.2.10 Operations and Maintenance Manuals
One method of transferring knowledge from the project
organization to the user/operating organization is the transfer
of operation and maintenance manuals for systems and equipment
provided by the various vendors. The turnover of these manuals to
the user/operating organization is critical for the proper
operation and maintenance of the facility’s systems and equipment
by the user/operating organization & maintenance staff.
9.3.2.11 Manufacturer’s Warranties
All warrantee documents for new systems and equipment installed
as part of the project should be collected, properly categorized,
and turned over to the user/operating organization to facilitate
their use in the future if necessary.
9.3.2.12 As-Built Drawings
As-built drawings record the actual construction details used to
construct or restore a facility. They record required deviations
from the original design and in most cases are recorded on
as-built drawings. This knowledge should be captured and
transferred to the user/operating organization for operation and
future reference if necessary.
9.4 Action—Final Project Closeout Report
Perform final administrative and financial closeout and prepare a
Final Project Closeout Report once all project costs are incurred
and invoiced and all contracts are closed. The report includes
final cost details as required (including claims and claims
settlement strategy where appropriate).
9.4.1 Discussion
Final project closeout begins at CD-4 or at the point when all
environmental activities are completed and the site is turned
over for alternative use. This includes long-term stewardship,
surveillance for environmental remediation, disposition, or at
project termination. Generally, closeout starts after all
physical, regulatory, contractual activities are complete.
Following the Critical Decision-4 approval, the FPD submits a
Final Project Closeout Report through the site financial officer
(FO) to the DOE Chief Financial Officer (CFO).
The purpose of the Final Project Closeout Report is to provide a
determination of the overall closure status of the project,
contracts, regulatory drivers, and fiscal condition in accordance
with performance goals and measures established for closeout.
9.4.2 Guidance
The Final Project Closeout Report should consist of two key
deliverables, a project completion report typically prepared by
the DOE contractor and a project final cost report prepared by
the FPD.
The DOE contractor, who has prime contracting responsibility for
the DOE project, is responsible for the technical, contractual,
and financial contents of the project completion report. However,
the FPD should work closely with the contractor project manager
to ensure that the project completion report is accurate and
reflects the project’s condition. For projects that are managed
directly by DOE the FPD is responsible for preparing the project
completion report. The essential elements of the project
completion report and the project final cost report are discussed
in section 9.4.2.1 and section 9.4.2.2 of this Guide
respectively. The requirement of a project completion report
should be identified in the PEP so that adequate time and
resources can be allocated to facilitate project closeout.
The FPD approves and submits the Final Project Closeout Report to
the cognizant site CFO, who reviews, assembles, approves, and
forwards to the DOE CFO a closeout package containing the project
final closeout report. In addition, the closeout package should
contain a summary of financial actions requested of the DOE CFO
for project closeout and the site FO’s signature and date of
approval of this action.
Ultimately, The DOE CFO places all unused funds into the project
overrun reserve to resolve any remaining costs of the project.
Use of these funds should be requested in writing and include a
description of the problem, causes of the problem, and corrective
actions. In addition, the current status of the contractual,
regulatory, financial, and physical project should be explained.
The DOE CFO approves all requests.
9.4.2.1 Project Completion Report
The FPD acceptance of the project completion report is the
official acceptance of the contractor deliverables and other
reporting requirements on behalf of the Government.
Elements of the project completion report should address the
following key activities.
9.4.2.1.1 Physical Closeout
Physical closeout provides documentation to affirm all work
associated with the project is complete and the Government
accepts beneficial occupancy or environmental completion of the
project. Elements of project physical closeout can include:
1. confirmation that all Project Completion Criteria were
completed satisfactorily;
2. all turnover punch list items reviewed and documented
as closed;
3. excess material and equipment identified, retrieved,
and disposed of in accordance with DOE property
disposition regulations;
4. all purchase orders (POs) closed or placed in a single
account;
5. outstanding obligations identified and described in the
contractor’s financial closeout;
6. an occupancy checklist prepared and used to accelerate
the transition process;
7. remaining project control accounts, except for
outstanding obligations, closed;
8. project lessons learned report completed and submitted
to DOE (see section 9.2 of this Guide); and
9. an acquisition executive CD-4 approval statement
enclosed.
9.4.2.1.2 Contractual Closeout
Contractual closeout is performed by the contracting officer (CO)
and includes identification and status of each project contract
and subcontract, their values and their terms and conditions. The
contract status should include any incomplete deliverables;
terms, conditions, and dates for obtaining remaining
deliverables; real and potential claims; pending and any ongoing
legal actions; warranties made as part of the contract; and any
other information that might prove useful to the user
organization in relation to legal, contractual, warranty, or
deliverables.
9.4.2.1.3 Financial Closure
The project organization is responsible for the financial
closeout. Although financial closeout and physical closeout can
occur in parallel, financial closeout is finalized only after a
successful physical closeout is complete. Financial closeout
follows two parallel paths help to identify unspent project fund
balances and deobligate them for use these funds elsewhere as
needed; these paths are adjusting the Department’s construction
and capital asset accounts and preparing the project Final Cost
Report.
The general steps involved in the financial closeout process can
include:
• Approval of Critical Decision 4 marks the beginning of
the project closeout.
• Remove Project from Construction Work in Progress (CWIP)
Account.
• Capitalize project funds and begin depreciation.
• The prime contractor prepares the Closing Statement of
Cost.
• The chief financial officer (CFO) uses the contractor’s
Closing Statement of Cost to adjust the Department’s
construction and capital asset accounts, determine
whether any unspent balances remain, prepare the Final
Closing Statement of Cost, deobligate remaining balances
using the approved funding program.
9.4.2.1.4 Regulatory Closeout
A major component of closing an environmental remediation or
facility transition projects is the demonstration of regulatory
compliance with the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA)
and/or the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA). Failure to comply could lead to legal
actions and delay closure. The regulatory process varies
depending on the type of project, applicable regulation, and the
government agencies having jurisdiction. Regulatory closeout
consists of certifying that environmental actions have met all
requirements and no additional active management is needed, with
the possible exception of long-term monitoring. Regulatory
closeout also provides for possible site turnover to other
responsible agencies or private parties and transition to other
use.
9.4.2.2 Project Final Cost Report
The contractor project manager should provide the FPD an estimate
of any outstanding costs required to complete the project
enabling the de-obligation process to start prior to complete
closeout of all actions. The FPD works with the site FO to ensure
that DOE accounting requirements are met for project closeout.
The FPD project final cost report includes the project name,
title, budget classification, original de-obligation amount and
subsequent obligations or de-obligations, actual cost summary
organized in same categories as the original project data sheet,
capital investment for the project, and the value of plant and
capital equipment adjustments. The project final cost report will
be used to zero out the uncosted balance of the project budget,
establish a reserve account for open items, and satisfy the
requirements to remove a project from the Construction Work in
Progress Account in accordance with DOE O 534.1B, Accounting,
dated 1-6-03. The accounting data from the project final cost
Report provides physical evidence that all conditions necessary
to closeout the project and/or retire the contract have been met.
Closeout document requirements differ for cost reimbursement
contracts and fixed-price contracts. A review of the final
contract modification is required for cost reimbursable contracts
with the contractor finance confirming the final contract price.
A review and payment of the final invoice is required in
accordance with DOE and field office procedures. The site FO or
designee should confirm the required closeout documents to the
extent warranted by the individual circumstances and applicable
procurement regulations, such as Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR) 4.804-5, Procedures for Closing Out Contract Files, and
advise the DOE CFO accordingly. This should include a review and
reconciliation of financial/closeout records by the site FO with
any discrepancies being resolved with the contractor’s finance
officer.
REFERENCES
1. DOE M 140.1-1B, Interface with the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board, dated 3-30-01.
2. DOE P 141.2, Public Participation and Community Relations,
dated 5-2-03.
3. DOE O 200.1, Information Management Program, dated 9-30-96.
4. DOE O 231.1A Chg 1, Environment, Safety and Health
Reporting, dated 6-3-04.
5. DOE O 243.1, Records Management Program, dated 2-03-06.
6. DOE M 413.3-1, Project Management for the Acquisition of
Capital Assets, dated 3-28-03.
7. DOE G 413.3-3, Safeguards and Security for Program and
Project Management, dated 11-5-07.
8. DOE O 413.3A, Project and Program Management for the
Acquisition of Capital Assets, dated 7-28-06.
9. DOE 413.3-series Guides.
10. DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, dated 6-17-05.
11. DOE G 414.1-2A, Quality Assurance Management System Guide
for Use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance
Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance,
dated 6-17-05.
12. DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety, dated 12-22-05.
13. DOE O 420.2B, Safety of Accelerator Facilities,
dated 7-23-04.
14. DOE G 421.1-2, Implementation Guide for Use in Developing
Documented Safety Analyses to Meet Subpart B of 10 CFR 830,
dated 10-24-01.
15. DOE G 421.1-1, DOE Good Practices Guide Criticality Safety
Good Practices Program Guide for DOE Nonreactor Nuclear
Facilities, dated 8-25-99.
16. DOE G 423.1-1, Implementation Guide for Use in Developing
Technical Safety Requirements, dated 10-24-01.
17. DOE G 424.1-1A, Implementation Guide for Use in Addressing
Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements, dated 7-24-06.
18. DOE O 425.1C, Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities,
dated 3-13-03.
19. DOE G 430.1-1, Chapter 8, Startup Costs, dated 3-28-97.
20. DOE G 430.1-1, Chapter 9, Operating Costs, dated 3-28-97.
21. DOE O 430.1B Chg.1, Real Property Asset Management,
dated 9-24-03.
22. DOE O 433.1A, Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear
Facilities, dated 2-13-07.
23. DOE G 450.1-10, Senior Manager Implementation Guide for Use
with DOE O 450.1, Environmental Protection Program,
dated 10-25-04.
24. DOE O 450.1 A, Environmental Protection Program,
dated 6-4-08.
25. DOE M 470.4-1, Safeguard, and Security Program Planning and
Management, dated 8-26-05.
26. DOE O 470.4A, Safeguards and Security Program,
dated 5-25-07.
27. DOE O 471.1A, Identification and Protection of Unclassified
Controlled Nuclear Information, dated 6-30-00.
28. DOE M 470.4-3 Chg.1, Protective Force, dated 8-26-05.
29. DOE O, 534.1B, Accounting, dated 1-6-03.
30. DOE O 580.1 Chg1, Department of Energy Personal Property
Management Program, dated 5-8-08
31. DOE O 5480.19 Chg 2, Conduct of Operations Requirements for
DOE Facilities, dated 10-23-01.
32. DOE O 5480.20A Chg 1, Personnel Selection, Qualification,
and Training Requirements for Nuclear Facilities,
dated 7-12-01.
33. DOE PM Glossary, 12-10-03 (online at
http://management.energy.gov/documents/DOE20PM20Glossary.pdf).
34. DOE PM Practices, Closeout, dated June 2003 (online at
http://management.energy.gov/documents/Closeout.pdf).
35. DOE Standard 1189-2008, Integration of Safety into the
Design Process, dated March 2008.
36. DOE Standard 7501-99, The DOE Corporate Lessons Learned
Program, dated December 1999.
37. DOE-STD-3006-2000, Planning and Conduct of Operational
Readiness Reviews (ORR), dated June 2000.
38. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) section 52.216,
Allowable Cost and Payment
39. FAR; section 4.804, Closeout of Contract Files.
40. Guide to IT Capital Planning and Investment Control, dated
September 2007 (online at
http://cio.energy.gov/documents/DOE_CPIC_Guide_091007_FINAL(
1).pdf).
41. PMBOK Third Edition Chapter 10 Project Communication
Management
42. Model Commissioning Plan and Guide Specifications, Portland
Energy Conservation, dated February 1998 (online at
http://www.peci.org/CxTechnical/mcpgs.html).
43. 10 CFR Part 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements.
44. Capital Programming Guide, Supplement to Part 7 of the
Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-11
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/all/current_year/par
t7.pdf
45. DEAR Section 904 804-1, Closeout by the Office Administering
the Contract.
46. Department of Energy Accounting Handbook, Chapter 21,
Financial Closeout.
47. DOE Acquisition Guide, A DOE Guide to the Award and
Administration of Contracts.
48. United States Code (U.S.C.), Title 42, Chapter103,
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA).
49. U.S C., Title 42, Chapter 82, Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA).
APPENDIX B. ACRONYMS
ANSI American National Standards Institute
AA Authorization/Approval Authority
CPIC Capital Planning and Investment Control
CFO Chief Financial Officer
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act
CO Contracting Officer
CD Critical Decision
CD-0 Critical Decision 0
CD-1 Critical Decision 1
CD-2 Critical Decision 2
CD-3 Critical Decision 3
CD-4 Critical Decision 4
DOE Department of Energy
DOE G Department of Energy Guide
DOE M Department of Energy Manual
DOE O Department of Energy Order
DSA Documented Safety Analysis
EVMS Earned Value Management System
ES&H Environmental Safety and Health
FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation
FPD Federal Project Director
FO Financial Officer
HAR Hazard Analysis Report
IT Information Technology
IPT Integrated Project Team
ISO International Standards Organization
M&I Management and Integrating (Integration)
M&O Management and Operating
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
OECM Office of Engineering and Construction Management
O&M Operation and Maintenance
ORR Operational Readiness Review
PDSA Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis
PEP Project Execution Plan
PIR Post Implementation Review
PO Purchase Order
RA Readiness Assessment
RFP Request for Proposal
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RAM Responsibility Assignment Matrix
S&S Safeguards and Security
SER Safety Evaluation Report
SSP Site Security Plan
SSC Structures, Systems, and Components
SSE Structures, Systems, and Equipment
STEP System Test and Evaluation Plan
TSR Technical Safety Requirement (Report)
TOP Transition to Operations Plan
USQ Unreviewed Safety Question
VA Vulnerability Assessment
WBS Work Breakdown Structure