Attachment J.23 QMP_Outline and Guide_USACE_ecb_2017_20.pdf

ENGINEERING AND

CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN

No. 2017-20 Issuing Office: CECW-EC Issued: 19 Sep 17 Expires: 19 Sep 19

SUBJECT: Quality Management Plan Guide

CATEGORY: Guidance.

1. References:

a. Project Management Business Process (PMBP) Manual 2009

b. Engineer Regulation (ER) 5-1-11 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Business Process

c. ER 1110-1-12 Quality Management

d. ER 5-1-14 USACE Quality Management System

e. Dalton, James (2013) Memo Quality Imperatives for Engineering and Construction Products and Services

f. Engineer Pamphlet 715-1-7 Architect-Engineering Contracting in USACE

g. ER 1180-1-6 Construction Quality Management

h. ER 1110-2-1150 Engineering and Design for Civil Works Projects

2. Purpose.

a. This guidance provides additional information with regard to the requirements of the Quality Management Plan (QMP). The QMP is an integral part of each Project Management Plan (PMP), as outlined in the Project Management Business Practice (PMBP) Manual (Reference a.). The PMBP is the fundamental method to deliver quality projects as part of the USACE Business Process, and is required by existing policies (References b. and c.).

b. Attachment A to this ECB provides an outline of the structure for a typical QMP.

c. Attachment B to this ECB provides a comprehensive guide to each section required within a QMP. It is structured to identify which sections can be standardized in accordance with each District’s Quality Management System (Reference d.) and other standard operating procedures. Additionally, the QMP Guide identifies which sections must be updated on a project specific basis and provides examples through narration and appendices.

d. A word version of the guide is accessible to USACE employees on the Technical Excellence Network (TEN) at the link below and may be used as a starting point to develop a District template if one is not already in place:

ECB No. 2017-20 Subject Quality Management Plan Guide https://go.usa.gov/xRTdS

3. Background.

a. The QMP Guide has been compiled in direct response to Mr. Dalton's Quality Imperative Memo (Reference e.) which focuses on improving the quality of E&C deliverables. Improving the quality of our QMPs promotes planning for quality through a consistent approach across teams and districts, while streamlining processes as much as possible.

b. Excerpts from specific policy documents further emphasize quality management:

(1) Dalton, James (2013) Quality Imperative Memo (para. 6, p. 3), “… A disciplined focus on continuous quality improvement will help us achieve the Commander's intent that USACE continue to increase its public value as a national asset, a DoD asset and professional asset.”

(2) ER 5-1-14 USACE (para. 7(a), p. 5), “…USACE has sought the achievement and/or assurance of quality in the services, work products and projects provided to our customers for many years, using a variety of management approaches. Quality management planning requirements for specific programs and projects have been established as integral elements of the Program or Project Management Plans (PgMPs/PMPs) required by the USACE Project Management Business Process (PMBP).”

4. Applicability. This ECB applies to all projects that develop a PMP and are executed by USACE either in-house or through an AE Contract (Reference f.). Consistent with the USACE Business Process, development of the QMP and other planning documents can and should be scaled commensurate to the risk and complexity of a program or project.

5. Update. This policy is issued as guidance. As improvements to the QMP process are identified, they will be incorporated in the next appropriate policy document update.

6. Points of Contact. HQUSACE point of contact for this EC is Brandon Tobias, CECW-CE,

(202) 761-0505. Civil Works Review Plan point of contact is John Clarkson, CEIWR-RMC,

(304) 399-5217.

//S//

LARRY D. MCCALLISTER, PHD, P.E., PMP

Chief, Engineering and Construction Directorate of Civil Works

Attachment A: Quality Management Plan: Outline Attachment B: Quality Management Plan: Guide https://go.usa.gov/xRTdS

ATTACHMENT A

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN: OUTLINE

The outline below provides an abbreviated view of key components included in each Quality Management Plan (QMP); the guidance in Attachment B is comprehensive. The notation at the end of each heading refers to requirements documents where more information can be found;

however, many requirements are cross referenced in both the Project Management Business Process (PMBP) and ER 1110-1-12 Quality Management.

Many PDTs will utilize QMP template developed and maintained by their district, which should feature each of the components listed below. For Civil Works projects, district Review Plan templates should satisfy the requirements for Quality Control and Quality Assurance as they are required to be project-specific. If district templates do not address each focus area, they should be updated accordingly; use the guide in Attachment B to help streamline this process.

If a District does not have a QMP template, use the outline and the guide to create one that meets the intent of the PMPB while minimizing repetitive work. Additionally, the word file for Appendix B is available on the E&C Technical Excellence Network (TEN) to use as a starting point.

SECTION 1. QMP PURPOSE

1.1 OVERVIEW PMBP REF8008G

1.2 PURPOSE PMBP REF8008G

1.3 DISTRICT QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROCESSESS ER 5-1-14

SECTION 2. PLAN, DO, CHECK, ACT

2.1 OVERVIEW PMBP REF8008G

2.2 SCOPE & COST VALIDATION

SECTION 3. QUALITY OBJECTIVES PMBP REF8008G

3.1 REQUIREMENTS

3.2 COST AND BENEFIT OF QUALITY OBJECTIVES PMBP REF8008G

3.3 QUALITY OBJECTIVE THRESHOLDS PMBP REF8008G

ECB 2017-20 ATTACHMENT A

SECTION 4. DESIGN QUALITY MANAGEMENT ER 1110-1-12 (1-8.C)

4.1 DESIGN QUALITY CONTROL PLAN ER 1110-1-12 (1-8.C)

4.2 DESIGN QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN ER 1110-1-12 (2-4)

SECTION 5. CIVIL WORKS REVIEW PLAN EC 1165-2-217

5.1 PURPOSE

5.2 DOCUMENTATION

5.3 GENERAL INFORMATION

5.4 REVIEW PLAN

5.5 AGENCY TECHNICAL REVIEW (ATR) TEAM

5.6 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CIVIL WORKS)

5.7 DELIVERABLES

5.8 SPECIALIZED REVIEWS

SECTION 6. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 SPECIALIZED REVIEWS EC 1165-2-217

6.2 ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIELD

PERSONNEL (ECIFP) ER 1110-2-1150

SECTION 7. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN ER 1180-1-6

7.1 PRE-AWARD ACTIVITIES ER 1180-1-6 (7.B-2)

7.2 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL

7.3 GOVERNMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE ER 1180-1-6 (7.B-1)

SECTION 8. PROJECT SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS PMBP REF8008G

ATTACHMENT B

QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN: GUIDE

This document provides additional guidance with regard to the requirements of the Quality Management Plan (QMP). The QMP is an integral part of each Project Management Plan (PMP), as outlined in the Project Management Business Practice (PMBP) Manual 2009. The use of the PMBP is required by Engineer Regulation 5-1-11 USACE Business Process.

Quality is planned for and managed in accordance with the QMP, which includes Quality Control and Quality Assurance Plans. The Project Manager (PM), the Technical Lead (TL) and the rest of the Project Delivery Team (PDT), are responsible for determining the procedures necessary to achieve the level of quality established for the project and agreed upon by the stakeholder.

PDT members ensure that the stakeholder’s quality objectives are effectively defined and clearly articulated in the QMP.

The guide below follows the structure of the PMBP requirements for the QMP. Each section consists of three parts:

GUIDANCE: Indicates if this section of the QMP can be standardized within a district, must be project specific, or any other recommended paths forward.

GUIDANCER: Guidance annotated with a superscript “R” indicate recommended additions to the QMP. While not formally adopted in the PMBP, these recommendations are based on lessons learned and feedback from multiple districts and are will likely be added to the PMBP and applicable engineer regulations in subsequent updates.

BACKGROUND: Provides explanation of the intent of the section and recommended ways to draft the QMP effectively and efficiently.

EXAMPLE: Illustrates how each section may look in a drafted QMP. The examples do not come from a single QMP and range in program, size and complexity.

The examples should not be construed as the minimum requirements of a QMP – that can only be determined depending on the project specific circumstances.

ECB 2017-20 ATTACHMENT B

SECTION 1. QMP PURPOSE

1.1 OVERVIEW PMBP REF8008G

GUIDANCE: Can be standardized.

BACKGROUND: PDTs can utilize a standardized overview of the QMP for each PMP, as the intent should not vary. This can typically been found in the District Quality Management System, or the example below can be modified.

EXAMPLE: “Engineer Regulation 5-1-11 defines quality as “the degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfills requirements.” Furthermore, quality should be regarded as the conformance to established objective requirements; not a degree of goodness. Therefore, the awarded construction documents (i.e.

drawings and specifications) establish the contractual baseline for quality. As metrics are developed for individual projects, it is imperative that the PDT understands and endorses what the quality product characteristics will be, and ensures that the construction documents are developed and administered to appropriately reflect these quality requirements”

1.2 PURPOSE PMBP REF8008G

GUIDANCE: Can be standardized.

BACKGROUND: PDTs can utilize a standardized explanation of QMP purpose for each PMP, as the intent should not vary. This can typically been found in the District Quality Management System, or the example below can be modified.

EXAMPLE: “The Quality Management Plan (QMP) is the quality component of each

Project Management Plan (PMP). The QMP documents the project-specific Quality Objectives, each threshold for achieving the objectives, and other project specific requirements.

The QMP also identifies Quality Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA) procedures appropriate to the size, complexity, and nature of the project.

These plans identify QC and QA requirements for the entire project, to include work performed by in-house personnel as well as that performed by contractors (i.e. Architect-Engineer, Construction, and/or other).

The Project Manager, in concert with the Technical Lead and PDT, determines the procedures necessary to achieve the level of quality required for the project. The PDT ensures that the stakeholder’s quality objectives are effectively defined and clearly articulated in the QMP.”

1.3 DISTRICT QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROCESSESS ER 5-1-14

1.3.1 Overview

GUIDANCE: Can be standardized.

BACKGROUND: ER 5-1-14 USACE Quality Management System requires each district to establish a comprehensive management system for ensuring stakeholder quality objectives. Some districts refer to these standard operating procedures as Business Quality Processes (BQPs).

The district quality processes should be the baseline for this overview section, and can be referred to within the QMP. However, a complete QMP can and should not refer to the district process without alteration. Project specific requirements, and any variances to the district processes must be documented.

EXAMPLE: “This QMP is based on and refers to established Regional and District QM processes:

[QMS numbers].

Project specific requirements and changes to these procedures are indicated below, in accordance with ER 1110-1-12.”

1.3.2 Variances from District Quality Management Processes

GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: Changes to district-established QMS procedures should be documented and based on a risk assessment that accounts for the complexity, budget, schedule, and quality objectives established by the PDT in coordination with the stakeholder. In general, these variances should be limited, but may be addressed in an overarching Program Management Plan (PgMP), if applicable.

EXAMPLES: “To accommodate project schedule requirements, the PDT has agreed to reduce the peer review timeline from 14 calendar days to 7 calendar days as reflected in Section 4.1 Design Quality Control below.”

“Due to the complexity of the project and lack of in-house technical expertise, the PDT has agreed to issue a scope of work for AE services to augment the design team with structural engineers specializing in seismic retrofit design.

Section 4.2 Design Quality Assurance addresses the means through which the AE will be managed to ensure stakeholder quality objectives are met.”

SECTION 2. PLAN, DO, CHECK, ACT

2.1 OVERVIEW PMBP REF8008G

GUIDANCE: Can be standardized.

BACKGROUND: PDTs can utilize a standardized explanation of the Plan, Do, Check, Act

Cycle for each PMP, as the intent should not vary. This is outlined in ER 1110-1-12.

EXAMPLE: “The ‘Plan-Do-Check-Act’ (PDCA) Cycle is the guiding quality management procedure for USACE business processes. The quality management policies and procedures of PDCA are outlined in Engineer Regulation 1110-1-12, Engineering & Design Quality Management. The purpose of each PDCA step is summarized as follows.”

2.1.1 Plan

EXAMPLE: “As a part of the PMP, the QMP defines stakeholder quality objectives and defines how they will be measured.”

2.1.2 Do

EXAMPLE: “The management procedures outlined below for quality control, quality assurance, and measuring quality objectives will be executed as described.”

2.1.3 Check

EXAMPLE: “Quality objectives will be measured against the established thresholds after each phase of the project (i.e. planning, design, construction, and post-occupancy) as described.”

2.1.4 Act

EXAMPLE: “Results of the quality objective measurement will be analyzed after each phase of the project, captured as lessons learned, and either incorporated into the updated PMP or District QMS as appropriate.”

2.2 SCOPE & COST VALIDATION

GUIDANCER: Should be project specific.

BACKGROUND: Each QMP must include a plan for scope and cost validation throughout the project execution. While this may include a process for initially accepting work from stakeholders, scope and cost validation must continue throughout the life of the project.

This includes but is not limited to: verifying scopes of work solicited for design services and construction contracts; generating and validating Independent Government Estimates (IGE); utilizing QC/QA procedures to substantiate appropriate scope and cost are reflected in construction documents;

utilization of Value Engineering as required by regulation, and; administering all contracts effectively to ensure stakeholder cost and scope objectives are achieved.

EXAMPLES: “The PDT for the 28th BN HQ and DFAC project was involved in the planning phase and helped to define the scope authorized in the DD1391. Prior to design, a scope validation workshop will be held on site with the stakeholder to verify all requirements are understood and that no additional funding is required. Once this is complete, a memo reflecting this validation will be included in the project file and the design charrette will be executed per the project schedule. If, however, the validation workshop indicates mis-programming either in scope or budget, the PDT will provide a recommendation to the PM to either cut scope or request additional funding.”

“Prior to accepting this project, the E&C Cost Engineering Section will provide an initial evaluation of scope and the Programmed Amount and offer a recommendation on whether or not to request additional funds or re-program the project. This evaluation will be reflected in a memo included in the project file.”

SECTION 3. QUALITY OBJECTIVES PMBP REF8008G

BACKGROUND: PDTs are responsible for documenting stakeholder expectations and achieving a consensus for quality management objectives on a project-specific basis. These quality objectives should be accurately reflected in each deliverable for which the PDT is responsible, whether created in-house or contracted (e.g. solicitation, contract, and construction documents).

Objectives should be written concisely and effectively identify a verifiable measure of quality.

3.1 REQUIREMENTS

3.1.1 Baseline Quality Objectives

GUIDANCER: Should be standardized.

BACKGROUND: The baseline project quality objectives are considered minimum quality standards against which all projects will be measured. Each objective requires a project-specific cost and benefit analysis, evaluation process, and performance threshold.

3.1.1.1 Code Compliance & Life Safety

EXAMPLE: “The project must be compliant with all applicable codes, specifically inclusive but not limited to federal, Department of Defense, agency and life safety codes. Any variances to life safety codes must be addressed by the Authority Having Jurisdiction and appropriately documented in the Project File. A complete list of codes is included in the Appendix ZZ: Quality Control Plan.”

3.1.1.2 Contract Compliance

EXAMPLE: “At project turnover milestones, there must be no outstanding, known defects;

the project must be completed to the standards required by the contract.”

3.1.1.3 Life Cycle Analysis

EXAMPLE: “The project must be designed and constructed based on the findings of a Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA). This analysis should be carried through to completion of the project to influence stakeholder decisions.

Any decisions made during the lifecycle of the project (i.e. planning, design, construction, post-occupancy) that do not conform to the findings of the LCCA must include appropriately documented justification and include the stakeholder’s concurrence.”

3.1.2 Stakeholder Quality Objectives

BACKGROUND: The stakeholder quality objectives must be tailored for each project. At a minimum, each project should address the six areas outlined below: cost, schedule, functionality, maintainability and sustainability, professional standards, and unique objectives. Each objective requires a project-specific cost and benefit analysis, evaluation process, and performance threshold.

3.1.2.1 Cost PMBP REF8008G

BACKGROUND: Identify any concerns with funding availability, phased funding, and impacts of cost growth.

EXAMPLE: “The Programmed Amount for this project is $2.8M and includes design as well as construction costs. In order to maximize the scope achieved during construction, the PDT has decided to accelerate the design schedule and reduce the number of solicitation documents. The risks associated with this decision are reflected in the Risk Register.”

“This project utilizes phased funding, appropriated each year from FY17-

FY20: $120M in FY17; $140M in FY18; $180M in FY19 and $200M in FY20.

As such, the planning and design scopes and schedules will be structured to account for providing complete and useable features of work to coincide with the possibility that phased funding will not be available.”

3.1.2.2 Schedule PMBP REF8008G

BACKGROUND: Identify overall schedule requirements due to funding availability, applicable phased turnover of facilities, milestones due to programmatic requirements, and impacts of schedule growth. If there are no specific driving forces with regard to schedule and the stakeholder’s needs, then this needs to be indicated in the QMP.

EXAMPLE: “Temporary housing for the 110th Chemical BN is available from 30 Jul 2017 until 30 July 2018; at that point the permanent battalion will return from deployment and no other temporary facilities will be available. Because of this, the Barracks renovations must be complete and ready for the 110th Chemical BN to move back in NLT 30 Jun 2018. These requirements will be included specifically in the Design Build scope of work and will be part of the proposal evaluation criteria as part of the best value acquisition strategy.”

3.1.2.3 Functionality

GUIDANCER: Should be project specific.

BACKGROUND: All projects shall meet the functional requirements as set by the project stakeholders. While it should be assumed that each project that is turned over is functional in accordance with the programming documents (e.g.

standard design documents), specific functional requirements must be included as quality objectives. Include any specific feature that impacts mission execution.

EXAMPLE: “The CBRN Training Facility includes both training and administrative functions, which means students, contracted instructors, and post personnel will need varying access to specific areas of the building. A comprehensive accessibility and security study will be performed to ensure the functional layout of the facility will meet this requirement.”

3.1.2.4 Maintainability and Sustainability

BACKGROUND: All projects shall be maintainable and sustainable utilizing the available operational resources as identified by the project stakeholders. Prepare documentation of stakeholder resource capabilities for the ongoing operation of the project and maintain an updated status. This will serve as a means of tracking project history and a measuring tool to determine the maintainability and sustainability of the project.

EXAMPLE: “Due to the industrial nature of the functions within the TEMF and the limited resources available to the installation DPT, durable and easily maintainable finishes and fixtures are a priority to the function of the facility. The DPW maintenance personnel will be included in the review of finishes and functional layout to ensure maintenance equipment can readily move throughout the building.”

3.1.2.5 Professional Standards PMBP REF8008G

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder professional standards objectives must be project-specific and identify legal, environmental, economic, code, life safety and health. If the programmatic requirements of the project require specialized certifications on behalf of the design and/or construction team, they should be identified here.

EXAMPLE: “The installation DPW is authorized and has included additional funding in the DD1391 to seek LEED Gold certification. Due to this requirement, a LEED AP BD+C will be included as a fulltime member of the PDT.”

“The inclusion of a SCIF in the Brigade HQ is a mission essential feature of this project. Due to this requirement, the installations security personnel will be included throughout the design review process to ensure all technical requirements are being met and the SCIF will be certified and functional at the time of facility turnover.”

3.1.2.6 Unique Objectives

BACKGROUND: Any additional stakeholder objectives unique to the project should be explicitly included. Project specific objectives should be described in such a way that they can be appropriately included in solicitation documents and administered through the contract documents. This allows impartial metrics to be established for achieving quality objectives.

EXAMPLE: “The Troop Medical Clinic requires specific programming validation by the

Army Institute for Public Health. Representatives for the institute will be included both during design reviews and periodic construction inspections to ensure all requirements are being met.”

3.2 COST AND BENEFIT OF QUALITY OBJECTIVES PMBP REF8008G

GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: Each quality objective must be analyzed for an impact to cost and schedule and what benefits will be achieved. This cost and benefit analysis must be documented in the QMP. If the district has an existing form to perform these analyses, it’s acceptable to include that as an attachment to the QMP and reference it below. The examples below are narrative in nature, but should be expanded as necessary to ensure they are described appropriately.

3.2.1 Baseline Quality Objectives

3.2.1.1 Code Compliance & Life Safety

EXAMPLE: “Design and construction to meet applicable building codes is considered standard practice and, thus, does not add additional cost to the execution of the project. Failure to ensure compliance risks significant additional costs during construction (for remediation) or loss of life or lawsuit (catastrophic failure of the facility).”

3.2.1.2 Contract Compliance

EXAMPLE: “Effective contract administration is a core USACE principle and is included in the cost of managing our projects, thus, does not add additional cost to the execution of the project. Facility turnover with known contractual defects risks significant additional cost to our stakeholders for remediation.”

3.2.1.3 Life Cycle Analysis

EXAMPLE: “The additional cost associated with completing and maintaining a Life Cycle Cost Analysis is more than offset by the savings achieved through systems optimization over the useful life of the facility. While design savings may potentially be achieved by removing the LCCA, the price of additional operational costs is compounded over the expected 30 year life span of the facility. Premature maintenance exacerbates overall operational costs at a return of between 5 and 15 times the expense of preventative measures.”

3.2.2 Stakeholder Quality Objectives

3.2.2.1 Cost

EXAMPLE: “The decision to expedite the design process and remove the 65% design submittal creates the benefit of reducing the design budget and providing additional funding for construction. It does come at an increase in risk to quality being compromised, which may result in additional cost during construction or operations and maintenance. These risks are being mitigated as described in the Risk Management Plan.”

3.2.2.2 Schedule

EXAMPLE: “Potential additional costs associated with an expedited design schedule to meet the 30 July 2018 deadline for the arrival of the 110th Chem BN are more than offset by the cost impacts associated with finding temporary housing for the unit if the facility is not completed on time.”

3.2.2.3 Functionality

EXAMPLE: “The additional design time and cost to perform an accessibility and security study will generate the benefit of fewer RFIs and corrective action during construction. The facility will not be allowed to function without these requirements being coordinated fully, and any potential delays to turnover will come at a cost that exceeds those associated with proper planning and design.”

3.2.2.4 Maintainability and Sustainability

EXAMPLE: “Deliberate coordination with DPW maintenance personnel does not add additional cost to the design process. Furthermore, correct specification of materials that can be readily maintained may lead to a decrease in construction costs. Even if construction cost savings are not impacted, the additional costs associated with maintaining finishes and fixtures that are inappropriate for a TEMF more than justify the inclusion of the DPW staff during design review.”

3.2.2.5 Professional Standards

EXAMPLE: “As the funding has already been programmed into the project, there is no additional cost associated with a including a LEED AP in the PDT to achieve the sustainability objective of LEED Gold certification. The value in energy savings and associated characteristics of a high performing facility will increase expected return on investment in addition to typical life cycle cost analyses.”

3.2.2.6 Unique Objectives

EXAMPLE: “The additional time required to include the Army Institute for Public Health as part of the review process ensures the Troop Medical Clinic will be designed appropriately and will be certified at each major project milestone. The facility will not be allowed to turnover without these certifications, and any potential delays to turnover will come at a cost that exceeds those associated with proper planning and design.”

3.3 QUALITY OBJECTIVE THRESHOLDS PMBP REF8008G

GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: The means through which each stakeholder quality objective is evaluated must be documented in the QMP and be consistent with the PDCA Cycle.

Objective evaluations should happen at multiple intervals throughout the project lifespan and may require updating the QMP and/or the overall PMP.

Performance thresholds for each stakeholder quality objective must be quantifiable, impartial, and measureable against agreed awarded contract requirements. The example below is a recommended frequency and process by which thresholds can objectively be evaluated.

EXAMPLE: “After each phase is complete, as identified below, a stakeholder survey will be provided by the PM for input. This survey utilizes quantifiable measures of satisfaction that each quality objective has been achieved.

Planning Design & Acquisition Construction Post Occupancy (at one year after BOD)

Once the survey results are collected, an AAR will be held and lessons learned documented and incorporated into an updated PMP and QMP (if applicable).

Refer to Attachment XX for samples of the survey. Completed surveys are included in Attachment YY.”

SECTION 4. DESIGN QUALITY MANAGEMENT ER 1110-1-12 (1-8.C)

GUIDANCE: Should be project specific.

BACKGROUND: Quality Management must address both Quality Control and Quality

Assurance processes for in-house and contracted work, to include review team members, schedules, and budgets to accommodate each type of review throughout the project lifecycle. While each plan may be based on a generic template managed by the district, they need to be tailored as necessary and the schedule, budget, risks, and special considerations should be project specific.

Each QMP must identify a Technical Lead who is responsible for coordinating with the PM to lead the development of product-specific components of the QMP to ensure the technical quality of E&C deliverables.

For projects that are executed as part of an overarching program, have low complexity and higher tolerance for risk (e.g. SRM projects), generic QC/QA plans may be utilized, provided they are based on district-established QM processes.

Civil Works projects utilize the Review Plan to meet Design Quality

Management requirements, outlined in Section 5; all other projects for any business line or stakeholder must follow the guidelines in this section.

4.1 DESIGN QUALITY CONTROL PLAN ER 1110-1-12 (1-8.C)

GUIDANCE: Should be project specific.

BACKGROUND: The Quality Control Plan is a component of the QMP and PMP and must be prepared and approved prior to commencement of project design. The PDT will prepare the QCP in order to monitor specific project deliverables to determine if they meet performance thresholds defined in the QMP. However, during design, changes may ensue which require additional updates and implementation to ensure project success during the project execution phase.

At a minimum, the Plan will: describe how quality control through peer checks and independent reviews (ITR/ATR) will be performed; list the PDT and review team members and their review responsibilities; identify stakeholders and other subject matter experts (SME) that will be involved in the QC process; provide a schedule for the frequency and durations of QC reviews;

describe risks inherent to the project that should require special attention during QC reviews; and, address any special considerations and/or crucial design features that should require special attention during QC reviews.

The Design Quality Control Plan must identify a Technical Lead and describe the utilization of a design deficiency tracking (e.g. DrChecks) system to incorporate independent technical and peer reviews.

EXAMPLE: See Attachment D: Design Quality Control Plan.

The narrative descriptions in the rest of this section describe the requirements and intent of the components of the QC Plan and should be used for reference in conjunction with the regulation cited. Additional examples are provided in the Attachment referenced above.

4.1.1 Project Delivery Team (PDT) PMBP

PROC2020GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: This PDT is typically identified during initial drafting of the whole PMP and should be kept up to date when a member of the PDT/ITRT is added or replaced. Rather than repeating the same information provided in the overall PMP, it is appropriate to refer to that PDT list.

However, if the PDT list is incomplete with regard to quality control, then the remaining PDT members must be included in the QC Plan. For example, if only the technical discipline lead is included in the PMP PDT list, then supporting designers assigned to the project must be include in the QC Plan.

Similarly, peer reviewers, support functions (e.g. BIM/CADD support, specification writers, etc.) and team members outside of E&C (e.g.

contracting, legal, safety, etc.) should be indicated to as well.

4.1.2 Design Budgets PMBP PROC2040

BACKGROUND: Typically, districts have a template for PDTs to use when estimating design budgets. These are a good starting point – and they may have built in metrics to ensure the budget stays near a specific threshold overall (e.g. 6% of PA) or by discipline (e.g. Architecture is 17% of the total design) – but they should be updated on each project to ensure they are accurate.

Other districts have set design budgets for projects of a certain size or value;

a good example of this is a dedicated budget for SRM projects under $1M that stays the same across projects. Regardless of the approach, the QC plan should reflect what is being delivered to ensure keeping within that budget.

Any change to the project that affects the budget – user requested changes, re-programming, changes in the design process – must be coordinated through the Technical Lead and to the PM to ensure the scope and schedule will still be met. Design budgets should not be unilaterally cut by any one member of the PDT without proper coordination.

4.1.3 Deliverables PMBP PROC2010

BACKGROUND: Deliverables must be looked at through two lenses. The first of which is the typical identification of what is being provided as part of the project itself – a complete design is generally thought of as contract documents, to include construction drawings, specifications, and design analyses. These items must be identified for each specific project so every PDT member is on the same page as far as what must be produced, whether it be an RFP or a full design.

The second consideration is what deliverables are produced as part of the

QC process itself. Generally this will be the documents required for the each submittal, marked up drawings from peer reviews, QC checklists that indicate specific items have been reviewed, Specs Intact error reports, review meeting minutes, etc.

The QC plan should clearly indicate: what is being delivered for the project;

as well as the documentation provided to verify the quality management process has been followed.

4.1.4 Schedule PMBP PROC2030

BACKGROUND: The schedule consists of activities which comprise the total work that needs to be performed in order to complete the project. Each activity should be clearly defined by activity type, durations, responsible offices for each activity, funds scheduled for each activity, and primary milestone dates.

Project schedules are often driven by outside factors that the PDT may not have the ability to influence. The PM coordinates these influences with the stakeholder and works with the TL and PDT to validate the schedule can be met. This may require changes to the QM and/or overall design process to include a reduction in project deliverables, abbreviated review schedules, etc.

Each of these decisions must be made as a PDT and accurately reflected in the QMP within the PMP. Any decision made throughout the project that may affect the schedule should be identified immediately and communicated through the TL to the PM.

4.1.5 Design Quality Control

4.1.5.1 Codes and Criteria

GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: All projects must be compliant with all applicable building code and criteria, which are typically identified in the Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs) which are found on the Whole Building Design Guide (wbdg.org).

At a minimum, references to standards, codes, and criteria must be included and must specifically identify life safety and welfare related codes. Depending on the scope of the project, special criteria may also be included and must be identified. Lastly, any waivers to standards, criteria, or code should also be identified in this section of the QC Plan.

4.1.5.2 Stakeholder Criteria

BACKGROUND: Any stakeholder specific criteria, either in addition to or in lieu of typical codes and criteria, must also be identified. The decision to use stakeholder criteria that differs from Army/USACE requirements is generally documented in a Memorandum of Agreement or Interagency Agreement document; these should be coordinated with the PM and understood by the PM prior to starting the project. Stakeholder specific criteria does not inherently mean that specific codes do not need to be followed. Projects where the Authority Having Jurisdiction is questioned must be well coordinated and clearly documented in the PMP and QMP.

4.1.5.3 Risk/Hazard Factors & Complexity ER 1110-1-12 (2-5.b.) | REF8007G

BACKGROUND: The Risk/Hazard Factors and Complexity of a project should be identified within the Risk Management Plan, which is a systemic process of identifying, analyzing, and responding to risk for the entire project life-cycle. The RM Plan should be actively managed by the PM and implemented by the PDT throughout the project in order to provide the required level of quality.

This section should be used as a preliminary introduction to project specific concerns and risk management, which should be fully explored in the Risk Management Plan. Essentially, complexities associated with the project should be identified here and highlighted as features that must be accounted for during Quality Control reviews.

4.1.5.4 Quality Control Process

BACKGROUND: In general, each district should have a defined process for performing Quality

Control to ensure qualified individuals are performing complete technical reviews of project deliverables. The QC process should also identify when and how changes to the PMP and QMP are to be made. This should be repeatable and consistent for all disciplines associated with the PDT and maintained through the life of the project. Any variance to these processes must be identified within the QC Plan.

4.1.5.5 Adapt Processes to Specific Project to Achieve Quality ER 1110-1-12 (2-3.b.)

BACKGROUND: All district-established Quality Management processes should be scalable to the level of complexity of each project. Any variances to District QMS required to achieve the established quality objectives should be described here. This may be a strategic reduction from a robust Quality Control process in order to expedite the project schedule. It may also be a modification these processes to allow additional time for review due to a particularly complex project.

4.1.6 Independent Technical Review (ITR) Team ER 1110-1-12

(4)GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: Independent Technical Review (ITR) is a review by a qualified person or team not involved in the day-to-day production of a project/product, for the purpose of confirming the proper application of clearly established criteria, regulations, laws, codes, principles and professional practices. ITR team members should demonstrate senior-level competence in the type of work being reviewed. An ITR is an integral part of design Quality Control and is required for all projects.

All project deliverables will be subjected to an ITR. At a minimum the design

QCP will describe how Independent Technical Review (ITR) will be performed; list the PDT and ITR Team members and their review responsibilities; state the risks inherent to the project; and address any special considerations and/or crucial design features that must be addressed.

4.1.7 AE Design Quality Control EP 715-1-

7GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: When contracting work to be performed by an AE, that office – whether acting as a consultant or designer of record – is required to follow the same Engineer Regulations with regard to Quality Management. The QMP should describe this requirement and the PDT must ensure it is accurately reflected in the Scope of Work. A project specific QCP must be developed and submitted by the AE and reviewed by the PDT. Additionally, EP 715-1-7 includes detailed information about the AE contracting process to include a sample AE Scope of Work in Appendix W of that document.

4.2 DESIGN QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN ER 1110-1-12 (2-4)

BACKGROUND: The Quality Assurance Plan is a component of the QMP and PMP and must be prepared and approved prior to commencement of project design. The PDT will prepare the QAP in order to monitor specific project deliverables for which they do not have direct technical responsibility. That is to say, any work that is either partially or completely contracted to an AE must be reviewed for compliance with the contract and ensure that the AE is following its own Quality Control procedures. Furthermore, the scope of work issued to the AE, and its subsequent deliverables, must also be developed to meet performance thresholds defined in the QMP. Refer to EP 715-1-7 for additional guidance on contracting to an AE.

At a minimum, the Plan will: describe how quality assurance will be performed; list the team members responsible for QA review; identify stakeholders and other subject matter experts (SME) that will be involved in the QA process; provide a schedule for the frequency and durations of QA reviews; state the risks inherent to the project; and address special considerations and/or crucial design features that must be addressed by another district, Government agency, or AE firm.

The Design Quality Assurance Plan must identify a Technical Lead and describe the utilization of a design deficiency tracking (e.g. DrChecks) system to incorporate independent technical and peer reviews. For projects that have both in-house and AE contracted design deliverables, a single Technical Lead can be identified.

EXAMPLE: See Attachment E: Design Quality Assurance Plan.

The narrative descriptions in the rest of this section describe the requirements and intent of the components of the QA Plan and should be used for reference in conjunction with the regulation cited. Additional examples are provided in the Attachment referenced above.

4.2.1 Design Quality Assurance (DQA) ER 1110-1-12 (5-2)

GUIDANCE: Should be project specific.

BACKGROUND: For products or services being prepared by the owning district or activity, QA will be performed by Regional Headquarters which conducts its QA using an audit process defined by its regional QMS. QA responsibility can also be delegated to the district for designs prepared by another district, government agency, or A-E contract where actions include preparation of the QAP, review and approval, and QA oversight.

4.2.1.1 Codes and Criteria ER 1110-1-12 (5-4)

BACKGROUND: All projects must be compliant with all applicable building code and criteria, which are typically identified in the Unified Facilities Criteria (UFCs) which are found on the Whole Building Design Guide (wbdg.org). The code and criteria requirements indicated in the QAP should match those that are required in the scope of work or memorandum of agreement for the project.

At a minimum, references to standards, codes, and criteria must be included and must specifically identify life safety and welfare related codes. Depending on the scope of the project, special criteria may also be included and must be identified. More often than not, the list of codes will already be provided in the QCP and should be referred to rather than duplicating in the QAP. Lastly, any waivers to standards, criteria, or code should also be identified in this section of the QC Plan.

4.2.1.2 Risk/ Hazard Factors & Complexity of Project ER 1110-1-12 (2-

4.B)GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: The Risk/Hazard Factors and Complexity of a project should be identified within the Risk Management Plan, which is a systemic process of identifying, analyzing, and responding to risk for the entire project life-cycle. The RM Plan should be actively managed by the PM and implemented by the PDT throughout the project in order to provide the required level of quality.

This section should be tailored to introduce any specific project concerns associated with the technical quality of work being performed outside of the district, which should be fully explored in the Risk Management Plan.

4.2.1.3 Quality Assurance Process ER 1110-1-12 (5)

BACKGROUND: In general, each district should have a defined process for performing Quality

Assurance to ensure qualified individuals are performing appropriate reviews of project deliverables prepared by an author outside of the district. These reviews should include a complete review of the AE’s QC Plan and spot checking the technical aspects of the project deliverables to verify the QC Plan was followed. QA review process should not require a complete technical review of the deliverables; rather, the PDT should be checking for contract compliance.

4.2.1.4 Quality Assurance Review Team ER 1110-1-12 (5-2)

BACKGROUND: For engineering and design products or services being prepared by a geographic district, the district’s Regional Headquarters is responsible and accountable for QA of the District’s engineering and design products.

For deliverables prepared by another district or center, government agency, or AE contract, the QA responsibility and accountability for engineering and design are assigned to the geographic district for which the work is being performed. The District’s engineering organization is responsible for leading the QA of engineering and design products and should be identified within the QA Plan.

4.2.2 Deliverables ER 1110-1-12 (5-10)

BACKGROUND: Quality assurance must be documented through a statement of technical review that includes: a statement of completion of an ITR and QA review and a statement of certification of the ITR and QA review. These reviews must include validation of the QCP, designer/checker/ITR personnel technical qualification, and compliance with requirements of the contract, USACE and the stakeholder.

ER 1110-1-12, Appendix F, provides a sample of this documentation. QA personnel will perform a BCOES review, and the review will be certified with a signed statement of completion.

SECTION 5. CIVIL WORKS REVIEW PLAN EC 1165-2-217

BACKGROUND: Specifically for Civil Works projects, the Quality Control and Quality

Assurance component of the QMP must follow the Review Plan format. More often than not, the Review Plan will be an attachment to the QMP and should be referred to appropriately. However, Sections 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8 of the

QMP must still be addressed and are not inherently included as part of the Review Plan.

The outline below provides a general overview of its contents, but refer to the

Engineer Circular cited for specific guidance with regard to structure and content.

5.1 PURPOSE

5.2 DOCUMENTATION

5.3 GENERAL INFORMATION

5.4 REVIEW PLAN

a. Reviewers' Expertise and BalanceReviewers' Conflicts

c. Reviewers' Independence

d. Reviewers' Privacy

e. Reviewers' Compensation

f. Reviewers' Charge

g. Confidentiality

h. Choice of Review Mechanism

i. Reviewers' Access to Information

j. Disclaimer

k. Opportunity for Public Participation

l. Transparency

m. Documentation of Responses

5.5 AGENCY TECHNICAL REVIEW (ATR) TEAM

5.6 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CIVIL WORKS)

5.6.1 Design Quality Assurance (DQC)

5.6.2 Codes and Criteria

5.6.3 Risk/ Hazard Factors & Complexity of ProjectQuality Assurance Process

5.7 DELIVERABLES

5.8 SPECIALIZED REVIEWS

SECTION 6. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 SPECIALIZED REVIEWS PMBP REF8008G

6.1.1 Stakeholder Review Team PMBP REF8008G

GUIDANCE: Must be project specific.

BACKGROUND: Specific personnel that need to be included as part of specialized reviews as a part of, or on behalf of the Stakeholder must be identified.

EXAMPLE: “Since utilities such as electric, sanitation, and water are privatized at Fort

Lee stakeholders such as Dominion Virginia Power, Old Dominion Utility Services, Inc., and Virginia American Water Works, respectively, are involved with project review for utility coordination and design purposes.”

6.1.2 Mandatory Center of Expertise Review ER 1110-1-8158 (5.a.)

BACKGROUND: Centers of Expertise (CX) are designated USACE organizations (District, Lab, or Center) that have demonstrated capability and expertise in a specialized area. CXs improve capabilities and management, eliminate redundancy, optimize the use of specialized expertise and resources, enhance Corps-wide consistency, facilitate technology transfer, help maintain institutional knowledge in key areas, and improve service to customers, including rapid response to emergencies.

EXAMPLE: “The new Brigade Headquarters includes a Sensitive Compartmented

Information Facility (SCIF). In order to ensure the design meets all security requirements and will be certified by installation personnel, the Protective Design Center (CENWO) will be included as a part of the review team during design and for follow on coordination during construction. These PDT members are identified in the Quality Control Plan.”

6.1.3 Technical Center of Expertise ER 1110-1-8158 (5.c.)

BACKGROUND: A Technical Center of Expertise (TCX) is a USACE organization that has been approved by HQUSACE as having a unique or exceptional technical capability in a specialized subject area that is beneficial to HQUSACE, USACE commands, and other organizations. The services to be rendered by a TCX are not mandatory, are available upon request, and must be reimbursed by project funds. Minimum customer service quality standards established in operating procedures are also maintained by the TCX. TCXs and services rendered can be found on the E&C Technical Excellence Network (TEN).

EXAMPLE: “The restoration work to be completed on the tainter gates includes removal of existing corrosion protection system and application of a new system. In order to ensure the technical specifications are written correctly, and the QA procedures during construction are executed effectively, the Paint Center (CERL) has been identified as part of the PDT as indicated in the Quality Control Plan.”

6.1.4 Center of Standardization Review ER 1110-1-8158 (5.d.)

BACKGROUND: Each year the strategy for Military Programs Delivery is authorized via Operations Order, which establishes the Centers of…