ML20197B287
| ML20197B287 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/31/1998 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197B295 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9803100288 | |
| Download: ML20197B287 (180) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . --- !O NRC Agency-Wide Financial and l Resource Management System l l i STARFIRE i l l Phase 1 Completion
- PROJECT CHARTER i
- CPIC l - PROJECT ACTION PLAN
.O H j January 1998 i i 1 i U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission pa a* cog
- 40 s.
.e i l e ,
1 . RBR288ERSZR8a26
- CORRESPONDENCE PDR
4 FOREWORD On April 10,1997, the Chairman approved the request of the Executive Council to proceed with phase one of the development of an agency-wide integrated resource management system, using the agency's System Developraent Life Cycle Management Methodology. A full-time ! team with representatives from program, administrative and regional offices was established j - and a Project Manager designated. The team named the project STARFIRE, an acronym for Standard Einancial and integrated Besource Enterprise system. Over the past eight months, the team completed, with periodic briefings on progress to the Executive Council, the following: [ e Developed System Requirements. The agency's requirements for each module of i STARFIRE were developed by use of collaborative sessions involving office j- representatives from the CFO, ClO and EDO organi2.ations and interviews with various office representatives, including all office directors. These requirements formed the , [ basis of the solicitation document for the system. j e Solicited Contract Proposals. This process involved developing a contract solicitation j document that met agency contract requirements. Federal Agencies Soliciting for a core accounting system are required to use vendors on the General Services 4 . Administration's Financial Management System Software (FMSS) schedule. Vendor
- products on the schedule have been certified as meeting Joint Financial Management improvement Program standards. The Letter of interest (solicitation document) was therefore addressed to the nine vendors currently on the FMSS schedule. Four vendors ly submitted proposals to supply software in accordance with our solicitation for an integrated resource management system using client-server based technLlogy.
s e Evaluated Bid Proposals. The four propusals were carefully reviewed, evaluated and numerically scored. A series of vendor demonstrations were conducted which provided a first-hand opportunity to view and evaluate the vendor's system capabilities. This ' included Operations: Capabilities Demonstrations for selected vendors; these a smonstrations displayed how well the vendor's system responded to NRC generated i transactions. The team nas recommended a vender for selection and the CFO has forwarded his endorsement to the contracting officer, if this project is approved to ' l p M. The awarded contract will include an option to purchase additional software modules recently introduced into the Federal market. The team will thoroughly evaluate i these additional modules in order to determine if they satisfy the agencies needs in these areas.
, o Project Documentation. The following deliverables are provided s.s part of the Phase I i
product. Project Charter - Defines the overall direction of the project. t Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) - Analyzes benefits, costs and f risks associated with the project. 7 h . Project Action Plan - Defines the steps of the preject through system deployment. 1
l l I i 4 2 , ( Based on the benefits STARFIRE will bring to the agency and toe estimated cost savings to be realized, the Executive Council endorsee the STARFIRE team's recommendation to proceed as outlined in the ahhd Project Action Plan, i jf AJ i WW , ~-, Galante p EJ L.Funches - L. J ph alan Chief Financial Officer Ch rmation Officer Ex e Diredor for l, Operations 4 4
- l b
d
/
1, 4 2
, J
'O NRC Agency-Wide Financial and Resource Management System f
PROJECT CHARTER
- L l
O December 1997 l j,eu c, U. S. Nuclear
'; Regulatory f
ig ,,p j Commission !n V;g/ (U
STAMPIREPrnglect Charter Foreworti A FOREWORD The information contained in the Project Charter was prepared with reference to: (1) the agency-wide financial management system Development Plan submitted to the ' Chairman on March 31,1997, (2) the Development Guidance prepared in April 1997, and (3) in accordance with the Systems Development and Life-Cycle Management (SDLCM) methodology. The Development Plan contains the Executive Council's overall view of the goals and objectives of the project to develop an agency-wide financial and resource management system. The Development Guidance expands upon the Developmen@Al and contains more detailed background and guidance. Together, the Developm6at Plan and the Development Guidance form a strong foundation for the initiation of Phase One of the system implementation process, to define initial project requirements. The Project Charter, required for all NRC projects developed using the CISSCO Program and the SDLCM methodology, describes the ) project management requirements for the implenx "stion and success of this project. a v 4 J l - A i i _ _ , , , , , , _ _ . _ , _ _ - -_ . - - - - - - - - - - - ^ - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - ' "' - - - ' ^ '
- swtmneprep etchwsw Towe orcontents k .
TABLE OF CONTENTS F OR EWOR D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I LIST OF EXH I BITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii EXEC UTIVE
SUMMARY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
- 1. I NTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1.1 Project Beckground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Project Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.3 Pr oject Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........
....... 3
- 2. PROJECT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1.1 Executive Council and Steering Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1.2 Executive Sponsor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Project Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........
....... 5 2.3 Key Project Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3.1 Business Team Project Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3.2 Technical Team Project Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3.3 Team Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4(m 2.3.4 Key User Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7 2.3.5 : Implementation Team Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
- 3. PROJ ECT APPROAC H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.
3.1 Oversight and Coord; nation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2 Technical Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3 Best Practices Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.4 Other Supporting Aspects to the Overall Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
- 4. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
- 5. . RI SK ANALYSI S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 i!
II l U
1 sTAMNtf Pnpoet Chener .. Ust of AxWWm LIST OF EXHIBITS , Exhibit 2-01. Team Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1 l 4 l i i l' i s > l l l~ 1 . 1 ene j 111 l ' i-I 4 1.-.-.
J ( V s1ARRRE Po}ect Charter
~
Executive Skmmary EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This document presents the Project Charter for the agency-wide integrated financial and resource management system, referred to as STARFIRE. The Project Charter identifies the high-level goals and objectives of the project. It specifies the project's key personnel and resources, it provides the background, scope, high-level approach for development, project constraints, and critical success factors necessary to the mar.3gement of the project. The project will be completed in phases over a two-year period utilizing the System Development and Life-Cycle Management (SDLCM) methodology. The STARFIRE project goals are to define requirements to design, develop, implement, and maintain an integrated agency-wide financial and resource management system l with major components operational by March 1999. The strategy is to develop this system primarily with commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software. The STARFIRE system development goal is to more efficiently and effectively accomplish agency financial and resource management within the NRC, STARFIRE will serve as the single, authoritative source for financial and resource information to support decision-making necessary to carry out program ar,d fiduciary responsibilities. The system will (n significantly enhance and affect the way in which the agency does business, helping the NRC to streamline and change current processes of business and mission operations. When operational, the system will impact every NRC employee. Key personnel have been designated and a project team, consisting of NRC staff and contractors, was identified for full-time participation to complete Phase One. Full-time participation is essential during subsequent phases, through system deployment. Therefore, a " core" project team will be established and supplemented, as needed, through project completion. Additionally, continuing program office participation, input, and support throughout the development and implementation of the system is essential to ensure the proper " fit" of the system for agency operations. A commitment to adequately fund the project is critical. Some initial funding has been identified to begin implementation of the project, however, estimates are being developed for overall system funding requirements.
\
;y
sweenetengutchmer
- . =
k 1. INTRODUCTION
~
1.1 Project Background Historically, financial and mixed financial and administrative systems development within the NRC evolved independently as requirements were identified. There was a general perception that the needs with regard to these systems were very different from ' one organization to another. Planning and coordination of systems development at the agency level wss not considered. Therefore, the current situation, whereby many separate, independently operating systems support financial activities and provide
- management information, is the result of independent office system planning and development. The Office of Inspector General Report 96A-11, /mprovements Needed in Agency Oversight ofInformation Resources Management Activities, highlights this
. problem, l
in a memorandum dated February 11,1997 to the Acting CNef Financial Officer (CFO), the Chairman expressed that it was essential that tiie NRC begin to articulate a plan to develop an agency-wide financial management system designed to integrate financial planning data with financial performance data. In response, the initial planning for STARFIRE was performed by a group of Subject A[ ' - Matter Experts. The group confirmed signiiicant andimmediate need for a new and integrated agency-wide financial management system. The group's findings are documented in the " Agency-wide Financial Management System-Development Plan" dated March 1997. This plan was approved for implementation by the Chairman in a memorandum dated April 10,1997. A project team was formed in May 1997 to complete the first phase of the project, which would last for app oximately 6 months, to define the agency needs and requirements, to procure n suite of state-of-the-art software, and to prepare a detailed project action plan.
~ 1.2- Project Cbjectives
' The overarching goal of the new system is to eliminate the need for multiple financial tracking systems, ultimately resulting in a unified financial management system that will serve as the single, authoritative source of financial and resource information. This integrated system will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of financial and resource management in the agency. It will provide for an automated and integrated approach to conduct agency-wide financial and resource functions, including core accounting, budget formulation, travel management, property, funds control, cost accounting, payroll, debt managsment/ fee billing, labor cost distribution, procurement, and 1
i i sTAnrwtEw chum- onueducson ! ) performance measurement. The system will coinply with Government-wide laws, regulations, and guidance.
- The specific objectives of the system are:
2 l . provide a system that offers: (1) a high degree of functionality; (2) complete ! management and detailed financial resource information in a readily accessible,
- reliable, consistent, and timely on-line mode; (3) period-based or real-time hard l copy reports available upon request; (4) access end maneuverability in a Windows-based network environment; and, (5) financial and resource information query capability at detail or summary levels.
provide management reporting, support decision-making necessary to carry out
- i fiduciary responsibilities, and support the preparation of auditable financial L ,
statements. l provide information management capabiliti3s which are geographically indifferent l and can be fully accessed and utilized at alllocations, including headquarters, j regional offices, and resident inspector offices. 3- . interface with or replace current NRC financial, resource, and mixed systems, lV resulting in improved capability, fewer systems, and decreased maintenance. The system should improve the timeliness and user-friendliness over multiple existing systems, i
. significantly decrease NRC's ieliance on manual effort to collect and analyze
! financial and resource data, and provide the information and tools necessary to ! complete critical analyses. i
. develop the system using a best practices approach, i.e., using commercial off-
^
the-shelf (COTS) software where practicable. This may require some process l change in the way NRC carries out financial and resource management j _. functions, manages the associated agency operations, and reports financial i status to OMB, Treasury, Congress, and the public. ! . provide staff efficiencies and improve data quality and integrity through several
- means which include single entsy of information, sharing of information across applications, central maintenance of common files and tables, inherent data i quality design to include up-front validation of data upon entry and reduction of I manual entries where possible. The system should provide for effective and I
j k 2 4 f
--m.
1 srMenepr%ect chener utmeucean efficient computer security measures which are incorporated as part of the system design. design the system in an integrated manner interfacing with other critical systems and using NRC's modem agency-supported sohare.- The system should be designed to fit within the agency's currently envisioned client server and LAN infrastructure and be accessible via agency-standard PC workstations. interface with the planned agency document management system (comprised of document generation and storage, version control, workflow management, electronic approval and electronic signature capabilities), and with electronic commerce enabling technologies to streamline and facilitate intemal and extemal business processes and transactions. 1.3 Project Scope The STARFIRE project will implement an agency-wide COTS based client server system that fully integrates financial accounting, financial planning, performance measurement, a labor cost distribution system, and eliminate the need for many office level systems. The system will include a core financial module which will accommodate f( s the general ledger, reporting, office management support, and budget execution, in addition to the core, system modules will support the following:
. Budget Formulation,
. Funds Control,
- Cost Accounting,
. Payroll,-
. Debt Management / Fee Billing,
. Property,
. Travel M'anagement,
. Automated Procurement, and,
. - Pe.iormance Measurement.
The NRC Enterprise Model will be used to analyze the Business Areas and systems - that STARFIRE will interface with or replace. STARFIRE will also utilize data warehousing and will establish the warehouse using the existing Sybase Database. In addition, STARFIRE will utilize the document management, workflow, and electronic signaturing capability of the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) now under development. 3
+n-, - - < - - --v - ---
srAnentemchereer oneonuccan
\
The project will be completed in phases over a two-year period dt:lizing the System Development and Life-Cycle Management (SDLCM) methodology. The schedule calls for major components of the system to be operational by March 1999. To accomplish this, STARFIRE will incorporate to the maximum extent practicable, COTS softwaire, with custom development of only those critical capabilities, if any, that cannot be met through a COTS acquisition. Interfaces will be created between STARFIRE and toe retained office financial / resource systems. This will be accomplished using the NRC's common operating environment for network computing. All NRC employees will be users of STARFlRE. System administration and operation will be the responsibility of the Division of Accounting and Finance, OCFO. l O 4
l 1-i i CTARRRE Predect Cherter PrudectMooes and MeepenendHales
- 2. PROJECT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES i
I STARFIRE teams and the following key personnel are charged with fulfilling the goals
- and objectives identified in this Charter.
i
- 2.1.1 Executive Council and Steering Committee i The NRC's Executive Council consists of the Chief information Officer (ClO), the i
- Executive Director of Operations (EDO), and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO). The CFO, working with the Executive Council, will be the senior business advocate for the i STARFIRE Project. The Council established an Executive Council Steering Committee ;
l to oversee the evolution of STARFIRE and monitor its impact on business areas l L ' enterprise-wide. The Executive Council will support or seek authorization and approval ifrom the Commission for the necessary resources during each stage of the development of STARFIRE. Members of the Steering Committee (ClO Advocate: l Amold E. "Moe" Levin; CFO Advocate: James Turdici; and, EDO Advocate: James L. i- Blaha) will hold key roles in the business areas where the system is being implemented.
- They will drive system nequirements both as users and as the functional area managers
[ responsible for the business area where the solution is applied. 2.1.2 Executive Sponsor j Jesse L. Funches, NRC's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) will be STARFIRE's Executive
- Sponsor, and has overall responsibility for the project, including effecting necessary
[j business process changes, and defining the project'c scope and objectives. The Executive Sponwr is the chief decision-maker and the person with overall responsibility j : for the project, in this capacity, the Executive Sponsor will be supported by ble Executive Council and the Executive Council Steering Committee to ensure adequate !- resources for and strategic compliance of the emerging STARFIRE system. As the Executive Sponsor's advocate, James Turdici is the Chairman of the Steering I Committee.
- 2.2 Project Manager i '
STARFIRE's Project Manager, John Bird, will report directly to the Executive Sponsor and the Executive Council Steering Committee. The Project Manager plans the project, allocates and directs the staff and other resources to accomplish project tasks,. maintains control over the project and is responsible for project coordination, day-to day contacts, and developing the business and technical aspects of the project. He oversees two key project teams: the business stakeholders and the technical staksholders, and is also responsible for the schedule, cost, and quality of the project. 5
...,w - , . . - .
SDLRRRC Wt Charter Project Roles and Responsibilities 'O- 2.3 Key Project Personnel 2.3.1 Business Team Project Manager John Bird is also the Business Team Project Manager, in this capacity, Mr. Bird is responsible for reporting progress to the Executive Sponsor and for recommending whether or not to proceed at critical milestones of the project. He is also, responsible for involving appropriate customer and business experts; managing project resources in the design, engineering and deployment phases of the SDLCM methodology; gamering support for policy and business practice changes; and, obtaining funding for project completion. 2.3.2 Technical Team Project Manager George Mothews ill serves as the Technical Team Project Manager, reporting to the STARFIRE Project Manager. Specific responsibilities include managing the technical plan, assisting the Project Manager in managing STARFIRE's technical design, development, and daployment, managing technical staff and contractor support, controll!ng the implementation schedule, coordinating implementation activities to p conform to business requirements, and serving as the Contracting Officer's Technical Representativs. 2.3.3 Team Members The Phase One team members are listed below: Name Organization John Bird, Project OCFO - Office of the Chief Financial Officer Manager George Mathews lil, OClO - Office of the Chief Information Officer Technical Manager Les Bamett NRR - Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Rickie Beall OCFO - Office of the Chief Financial Officer Abe Eiss NMSS - Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Ray Gustave RES - Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 6
- srAmmePrWeet chwier erWeetwas amth;riwpes Marty Kerlin Region lli Jeff Lankford Region ll Ron Thompson ADM - Office of Administration Exhibit 2 01. Team Members A " core" project team wi'l M esiablished and supplemented as needed through subsequent phases of system implementation. Team members will be drawn with emphasis given to having broad representation from throughout the agency. - 2.3.4 Key User Organization The STARFIRE project is broad in scope and interfaces with all agency offices. The OCFO and the Office of Administration, along with the administrative divisions of the Program Offices, will be most affected by the implementation of STARFIRE.
2.3.6 Imp'ementation Team Members An implementation team will be established upon completion of Phase One. Gec ge Mathews, Ill is responsible for the technical implementation team which will be ( , comprised of technical staff from within the NRC, supplemented by contractor personal under the CISSCO contract. In this capacity, Mr. Mathews is responsible for establishing the technical foundation for the application to effectively integrate with and efficiently perform in the NRC technical infrastructure. He will be assisted by a CISSCO Technical Development Team which will be given responsibility to utilize the SDLCM methodology to build any necessary custom applications, assist in the development and selection of hardware, assist in the scheduling for COTS / Custom deployment planning, assist with interfacing agency systems, and participcie in the long term maintenance strategy for the chosen software solution. He is also responsible for review and approval of all CISSCO project deliverables, and the management and control of project costs. The CISSCO team will, if custom software design is required, be responsible for exploring and presenting technical attematives, defining, designing, developing prototypes, deploying, and maintaining the custom solution. The team will also be tasked to control the project baseline and changes to that baseline, and ensure that quality is built into the system. This entails requirements gathering, validating, and testing. A business implementation team will be established to assist the Project Manager, Mr. Bird, in tailoring the COTS software and defining system tables so thay are: 7
swerweewchereer wRosee andneaponasmen consistent with NRC coding structures and naming conve'ntions;
.- consistent with NRC business processes; and, capable of achieving user acceptance.
The business implementation team will follow'on much of the work of the Phase One team, particularly to ensure. dat STARFIRE satisfies the requirements document. This team will develop the coding structure required to be used in the COTS software. An analysis will begin with reviewing the current codes used within NRC and modifying them when necessary to satisfy the input requirements of the COTS software, and to , insure intemal consistency with NRC business processes. - This team also will analyze current busines practices, and attend facilitated sessions in which the COY 3 vendor will present initial capability tests of their software. The goal of these sessions will be to determine how well tha business rules embedded in the software are consistent with the existing NRC business processes All divergences between the software business rules and NRC business processes will be identified ' and the business team will make recomrnendations on how to reengineer these processes to be consistent with the software. (;' Further, the team will assist in achieving user accepta:.ce by recommending s implementation strategies that are user friendly and have the highest potential to increase the productivity of the NRC staff and satisfy the business rule requirements, The team will also advise on screen layout and navigability to increase acceptability by the NRC staff, 1 1 8
- 3
L b srAmwPrnut chener proectAppnmes s
~
! 3.' PROJECT APPROACH i i The core financial system software will be obtained from a licensed vendor whose system has been certified by GSA. In order to simplify the integration of the new - p system, the NRC will also purchase as many additional modules as possible from the core financial system vendor, STARFIRE will follow the NRC's SDLCM methodology to develop tim component activities to be accomplished over the total life of the project. Using this approach,
- project activitics willinclude:
1 3.1 Oversight and CoordieJon The Executive Council /Steenng Committee will perfoim project oversight to ensure ' productivity, progress, performance, and adequacy / acceptability of the emerging sottion. This will be accomplished through periodic briefings by the Project Manager and the Technical Team Manager. In addition, periodic information exchange forums will be held with non-financial management systems (e.g., ADAMS, FOSSFACTS)
, proponents to assess and coordinate the level of technical and functioncl integration.
3.2 Technical A'pproach ,, The technical approach will make maximum use of COTS financial management . products, being mindful to balance the need for a timely implementation of the STARFIRE system against the need for organizational flexibility. The selected COTS products will, to the extent practicable, adhere to NRC's Technical Reference Manual
- (TRM) and fit the overall client / server architecture envisioned for STARFIRE. The l-
_ system will be deployed in phases as described in the project action plan. This will include a comprehensive analysis of the existing systems components to determine the - ! most effective method of incorporation of the current systems support into the emerging ! new system. Further, business process changes will be identifed and effected as I necessary to avoid having to customize software to fit existing business processes. l 3.3 Best Practices Approach l Central to the development of STARFIRE is the use of a best practices approach, l which includes: (1) top-level management commitment and involvement, (2) leaming i- from the experiences of others, and (3) minimizing software modification, s 9 L 1 . - - ,
sr w net en %ctchu me en&ctAppmech
~
3.4 Other Supporting Aspects to the Overall Approach Enterprise-Wide Access: STARFIRE will deliver network-based computing and will utilize the existing NRC LAN/WAN infrastructure, providing access to staff from their desktops, Data Warehousing: STARFIRE will provide for a data warehousing approach to build component system applications, support data-mining, and meet NRC's
- management information needs including an Executive information System (EIS).
Incremental Improvements / Modular Components: STARFIRE will be modular in nature. Modules will have the capability to interact and submit data mapped to the data warehouse. User-Friendliness: STARFIRE appfbalbns will provide a graphical user interface (GUI) with Windows-type features including graphical scraens, drop-down menus, on-line help and tables, and other work facilitating features. Users will be presented those menus / screens necessary for their input / work and not have to traverse screens unnecessarily to find the s::reen they require. o G. w
arAmewerwcherwr : cr#oe.tsue F.e ars s 4. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
~
The items listed below are expected to have the greatest effect on the successful completion of this project. The availability of adequate funding to complete the full development and implementation of the STARFIRE system in accordance with the project action plan. Continued management support, at all levels, through implementation and deployment of STARFIRE, Full-time participation of a team of dedicated staff supplemented, as needed, by part-time Program Office representatives through full system dep'oyment. , The timely acquisition and deployment of NRC infrastructure upgrades, e.g., PC refresh, and resolution of connectivity issues for remote inspector sites, The availability of an ADAMS interface for electronic signature. Successful interface development with those existing Agency systems that will be retained. Agency acceptance of the new system and attendant business process changes, O - Overall, STARFIRE will be considered a financial and programmatic success if its utility l V enables the agency to function in a mote efficient and effective manner, Even though STARFIRE is projected to significantly reduce costs over its life, the overriding benefit will be the availability of more current and accurate information for financial management and decision-making. N. 1)
swernetwchereer sekk Anotysk
- 5. Rl8K ANALYSIS Mission Risk (Potential to restrict agency's ability to psrform mission, or conduct programs to cany out mission requirements)
The STARFIRE Project will provide information that allows managers to assess the "value added* quality of available resources and make informed decisions about deploying those resources to achieve the highest level of sur> port for the agency mission. Therefore, the risk of restricting the NRC's ability to support the mission is minimal with STARFIRE. The risk is greater if the agency continues to operate under the current environment, because the lack of timely and accurate resource data hinders a manager's decision-making abilities. Financial Risk (Uncertainty of cost estimated forphase up to pro}ect becoming fully operational) l All cost estimates for the STARFIRE Project are based on preliminary information, such as publicly available information, and costs published by GSA for software on the FMSS Schedule. These costs are subject to change as the project proceeds. The financial y risk scores are progressively higher for each attemative oue to the increased
\
uncertainty of estimating costs for more technically complex solutions. The attematives ' considered are addressed in detail in the Capital Plann!ng and investment Control (CPIC) document. However, as revealed in the CPIC plan, the projected savings for implementation of STARFIRE far exceed any possible risk in this area. ' Project Execution Risk (Likelihood that the.oroject could fail due to design and development complexity, lack of agency - experience with similar sizeAype project, technicalchallenges, [e.g., off-the-shelf software vs. custom development, extent to which similarprojects are operationalon same hardware platforrn at the agency], required interfaces with other systems) STARFIRE has a relatively high project execution risk because of the broad scope of
. the undertaking. However, the SDLCM Phase One STARFIRE team is recommending the use of COTS software that will operate within the agency's current infrastructure, therefore mitigating some risk in this area. It must be noted, however, that much of the available COTS software is newly developed and has yet to be extensively utilized in an operational environment.
l' 12
sTAntwtEW Cherw Risk Analysis Operation and Acceptance Risk (Likelihood tha! project can be successfully implemented. Constraints on success include failure to implement full functionality promised, inavility to overcome resistance to necessary culturalchanges, orothernon-technicalobstacles) The STARFIRE Project has the full support of the Chairman of the NRC and other senior-level managers, and therefore should not encounter a very high level of operation and acceptance risk. Given continued support, STARFIRE will be implemented with full functionality. Extensive user / Office involvement in defining STARFIRE'S functional requirements was obtained during the initial phase of the project. Continued effort to assure these requirements are met through the system's deployment should minimize the potential g for operational and acceptance risk. ( O N'J n
(D NRC Agency-Wide Financial and Resource Management System CAPITAL PLANNING AND INVESTMENT CONTROL l l
'O oecember 1997 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission .
- (C
TABLE OF CONTENTS . P.A91
. g - 1. OBJE CTIVE S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1
- 2. BACMGROUND STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
- 3. ASSUMPTI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
- 4. ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
- 5. COS TS AND BENE FITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 5.1 Cost Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 5.2 Cost Date Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Exhibit 5-1:Altemathre 1-Status Quo Cost Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3 Exhibit 5-2:Altemathre 2-STARFIRE with SYB ASE Core Cost Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 Exhibit 5-3:Altemathre 3-STARFIRE with ORACLE Core Cost Summary . . . . . . . . . . 5-6
- Exhibit S-4:Altemathre 1-Status Quo FTE Sur. mary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8 -
Exhibit 5-5:Aitemathre 2-STARFIRE with SYBASE Core FTE Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9 Exhibit 5-6:Altomathre 3 STARFIRE with ORACLE Core FTE Summary . . . . . . . . . . 5-10 5.3 Benetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 1 5.3.1 Benett 1 - Better Mana0ement Control . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-11 5.3.2 Benett 2 - Easier for the A0ency to Comply with New and Changing Federal Laws and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 11
- 5.3.3 Benett 3 - More Accountabitty for Financial / Resource Expenditures , . . . . . . . 5-12 5.3.4 Benett 4 - Process improvements from Adopting Recognized Best Prectices
..............................................................512 5.3.5 Benett 5 - Better Ar slysis Capabitties for Management Decolon Malcing . . . . 5-12 f 5.3.6 Benett 6 - More Consstent Data from Single-Source Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-13 5.3.8 Benett 8 - More Timely and Eftcient Shanng of Information . . . . . . . . . . , , . . 5-14 "
5.3.9 Benett 9 - Better Data Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-14 6J RISK ANALYSI S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
' 7. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1 Exhibit 7-1 Comparison of Altematives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-2 Exhibit 7-2 Retum on investment Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Exhibit 7-3 Comparison of Life Cycles . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-4
- 8. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
- 8.1 EEmination of Year 2000 Compiance Costs . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1 8.3 increase in implementation Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1 8.4 Implementation Deley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2
, . - 8.5 Worst case Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2
- 9. RE S U LTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9- 1 S .1 Wst S ummary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G-1 9 2 FTE Summa ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1 9.3 Benetts Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-6 9.4 Risk Summa ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-7 9.5 Sensitivity Analysis Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-8
- 10.
SUMMARY
OF ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1 APPENDIX A: CPlc DATA ASSUMPTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 s APPENDIX B: CPIC DATA SPREADSHEET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 APPEN D IX C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1
FOREWORD
~
\ This report presents the results of the isonefit Cost Analysis for an agency-wide integrated resource management system (STARFIRE). Development of this agency system is being coordinated by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) with close coordination with the Omoe of the Chief Information Officer (Clo) and the Office of the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) through a multi-omce project team including ropeesentatives from NRR, NMS$, RES, CFO, ADM, Clo, and the regional offices. The project tcam is comprised of a butaness team and a technical team, with contractor support being provided by CISSCO. Development of this system is being funded by the Office of the Chief Financial omcor. The primary objective of this system is to provide for an automated and integrated approach to conduct agency-wide financial and resource functions including core accounting, funds contrcl, budcot formulation, cost accounting (including actMty-based costing), procurement, travel, debt management / fee billing, labor cost distribution (including time and attendance management, and manpower tracking), payroll, property, and performance measurement. These functions provide the basic information and controls needed to carry out NRC's financial and resource management functions, manage the associated agency operations, and report financial status to the Omce of Management and Budget (OMB), the Department of the Trsasury, the Congress, and the public. The implementation plan for this system was developed by the CFO and approved by the
' Chairman. A team of agency staff was commissioned to accomplish the goal of more efficient - and effective agency financial and resource tranagement through the acquisitxm of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software. As a secondary solution to the development of the system, custom development of software will be utilized when there is no acceptable COTS solution.
Based on this approach, three altematives were chosen for this analysis. Each of the altomatives was evaluated in terms of costs red benefits (quantifiable and non quantifiable), risk, and sensitivity analysis. The altematives included in this analysis are status quo, use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software, possibly from multiple vendors, using the agency relational database (SyBase) with custom components, and a similar attemative using Oracle as the relational database. When completed, STARFIRE will replace approxiwte 100 existing systems (automated, semi-automated, manual) associated with financial and resource management (none of which are client-server based), and will interface to several other critical agency systems. As reflected in this analysis, the development of STARFIRE includes the integration with the planned agency document management system (ADAMS) currently under development. The analyses that follow were developed jointly by a Benefit-Cost Analysis team comprised of the following members: Leslie Bamett NRR George Matthews CIO Rickie Beall CFO John Sullivan CIO John Bird CFO Ron Thompson ADM Abe Eiss NMSS Sherman Bemard Ray Gustave CSC (CISSCO Contract) RES Frank Hopkins Marty Keriin CSC (CISSCO Contract) Region 3 William Pitts CSC (CIGSCO Contract) \[ Jeffrey Lenkford Region 2 Russell Smith Mary Patricia Smith FEDSIM (IRM Contractor) FEDSIM (IRM Contractor)
.-. - - - - - ~ . - . - -. - . _ - - . - .- - - .-. - . _ _ . . -. .- _ .-
i-STAMEMME CMC e 08KCnVEs !L
- 1. OBJECTIVES i
' In order to further the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) goal for improving the ! efficiency and effectiveness of financial and resource management, the NRC plans to develop j ' an agency-wide integrated financial and resource management system. This agency-wide integrated system is being designed to provide for an automated and integrated approach to l j conduct agency-wide financial and resource functions, including core accounting, budget 3 formulation, travel management, property, funds control, cost accounting, payroll, debt ' management / fee billing, labor cost distribution, procurement, and performance measurement. It is the intent to deploy a financial and resource management system which fully complies with all Govemment wide regulations, and guidance, including the applicable laws and policies, The primary objectives of STARFIRE are: ! provide a system that offers: (1) a high degree of functionality; (2) complete management and detailed financial and tesource information in a readily accost.We, !- reliable, consistent, and timely on-line mode; (3) period-based or current hard-copy } reports available upon request from a Windows basect icon and directed to a LAN i printer; (4) access and maneuverability in a LAN based, Windows environment; (5) financial and resource information query capability at detail or summary levels, and (6) complete integration of funds control, budget formulation, cost accounting, procurement, travel, debt management / fee billing, labor cost distribution, payroll, property, ar.d performance measurement. . !: - serve as the single authoritative source for financial and resource information to , support the mission of the agency, provide management reporting, support decision-making necessary to carry out fidudary responsibilities, and support the preparation of i audit able financial statements.
- provide information management capabilities which are geographically indifferent and can be fully accessed and utilized at alllocations, including headquarters, regional
- oCices, and inspector offices.
- interface with or replace current NRC financial, resource, and mixed systems, resulting i
in improved capability, fewer systems, and decreased maintenance. Th;s system should improve the timeliness and user-friendliness over multiple existireg systems.
- significantly decrease NPC's reliance on manual effort to collect and analyze financial
- and resource data, and provide the information and tools necessary to complete critical analyses, i
- the use of a best practice approach, that may require some process change in the way NRC carries out financial and resource management functions, manages the associated j agency operations, and reports financial status to OMB, Treasury, Congress, and the j public.
- provide staff efficiencies and improved data quality and integrity through several 1-1 l
y ETMtEMME CMC OBJECMVES i - means which include single entry of information, sharing of information across applications, central mainten.snce of common files and tables, inherent data quality design to include up front validation of data upon entry and reduction of manual entries where possible. The system should provide for effective and efficient computer security measures which are incorporated as part of the system design process.
- designed in an integrated manner interfacing with other critical systems and using NRC's modem agency-supported software. The system should be desigrM to fit within the agency's currently envisioned client server and LAN infrastructure and be accessible ;
via agency-standaro PC workstations.
- interface with the planned agency document management system (comprised of document generation and storage, version control, workflow management, electronic i
approval and electronic signature capabilities), and with electronic commerce enabling technologies to streamline and facilitate intomal and extemal business processes and transactions. e 9 S U 1-2
( t srMrmscmc SACMOROUND 1 SACKGROUND STATEMENT , i. In February 1997 the Chairman requested that the CFO develop a plan to achieve j in piementation of an agency wide integrated financial management system. The CFO a presented a plan in late March 1997 which commissioned a team of agenei staff dedicated to i the acquisition of corie iCal off4he shelf (COTS) software to accomplish the goal of more j ofholent and effective agency financial management, and performance data collection and j reporting. The team was chartered to employ the agency System Development ufe Cycle l Management (SDLCM) methodology that uses a seven phase development strategy. The first '
- Interirn deliverable of the project, identined in Phase One, requires a definition of the project 4
requirements. A Functional Requirements Document was completed August 8,1997 The second interim deliverable is a recommendation for the purchase of COTS software. l l It is the intent of the NRC to acquire as much of the functionality as practical via purchase of 1 COTS software (including installation, data conversion, training, and technical assistance) while ; j ensuring the end tesult exhibits high performance, is fully inter opotable, and efficiently p interfgoes with other NRC information systems. The inter operability and open standard access to data and processes will be key factors in the COTS selection. It is not likely that all modules . l will be available from one vendor, and that certain modules may be procured from other ' sources or may require custom deve'opment and integration with the system. ' The NRC carrently maintains over 100 financial and resource management systems (identified in Appendix B). These systems have been separated into two categories. Category 1 systems will be retained and will interface with STARFlRE. Category 2 systems (automated, semi- ,
- k. , automated, and manual) that support agency financial and resource management that will be
, eliminated by STARFIRE. In addition, several manua! orocesses, such as budget formulation ! and procurement, will be automated through the devolepment of the agency-wide irr.* Crated firincial and resource management system. Essentially all agency personnel (appeJmately 3,000) will be affected by the process changes proposed in the development of the Labor cost i - Distribution module and the Travel module. Additional precess change recommendations will be dependent upon the COTS software product selection and its relationship to how NRC currently conducts business. j A concurrent activity is underway to implement r.n infrastructure document management j system comprised of documen, generation ano storage, version control, workflow management, l - electronic approval, and electronic signature capabilities, it is currently planned thot the ! STARFIRE COTS software solution willinterface with the planned Agencywide Documents
. Access and Management System (ADAMS). This, in addition to reducing the cost of the COTS l procurement, takes advantage of software separately acquired to be utilized for financial and j resource document management purposes.
? [ The proposed system reflects a unified set of system components that will be planned for and } managed together, operated in an integrated fashion, and linked together electronically in an ! officitmt and effective m mer. The envisioned trodular system, encapsulated in a data " . warehousing enviv at and supported via network computing, is depicted in the following exhibit: .I l 2-1 i l _ _ _ _ ~ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ , . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ , . _ _ . .
l STARFIRE CMC BACKGROUND (/D O ConceptualApproach Pr*C'** M* '" 'i' Sinvie Source of
~
*f**
FinanelalDqLq - Funh Contnv -
*'""***
- N g Executive staff
- CoreFinancial; a ~~c w Agency Wide Financial System -
WSystem? - C
~
<p4e. y , ,+ n
*9' '
/ N Cost Accenating' . E-C ~
pyg c > t Accounting T U' w Deld Mgmt/ Fee BlBing y 0 Data Server i r
; Property ; -
k e TravelManagement ] ~ Staff 0.[fices
' Automnted Procurement -
I
' Performance Meemmest -
fpWcc.= w% der GrepMoti1%cnonahrr When completed, the system will share essential data and directly Interface with other agency systems including the following:
- 1. ADAMS (Automated Document Administratica and Management System)
- 2. PAY /PERS (Payroll / Personnel System)
- 3. PAS (Property Accounting System)
- 4. RPS (Reactor Program System)
- 5. RIMS (Resource Information Managernent System)
The STARFIRE system has been designed from a geographically indifferent perspective. A
. basic prerWse of the system is that there will oe central maintenance of common files, with a single point of data entry, and sharing of information so that data will be entered only once and used throughout any process or application. Where possible, inherent data quality design will be installed up front to preclude the entry of invalid or inaccurate information and the resulting problems and inefficiencies. STARFIRE and its associated modules are being designed using client server technology, COTS products, and possibly some custom module development.
The project team has met with office representatives, collected information, conducied facilitated sessions to determine agency wide system requirements, conducted office director interviews, and met with program office branch and section chiefs to shace system development q information and to ensure that data these offices require are considered in the development of 2-2
STARMME CMC BACKGROUw ( the system. These requirements are identified in the STARFIRE Requirements Document
\ dated August 8,1967.
- The acquisition will use a tiered approach that will permit a COTS selection that includes a phased approach to implementation. The Core Accounting Module, including Funds control, is in the first (highest weighted) tier. This module has been assigned the highest weight because it is the module that must interface with all the other modules and as such will be the comerstone of the STARFIRE system. The remaining modules will be implemented based on a combination of importance to the agency and availability of the modu'.e.
The development of STARFIRE will replace older mainframe systems and PC-based systems with new technology, it will replace older systems before the year 2000 to insure compliance and eliminate the timesharing costs now required to run the mainframe systems. STARFIRE components will reside on a client server infrastructure installed in each region and headquarters. System modules will access a relational database with common tables. The system must coexist with Novell Netware 3.1.1. or higher network operating system (NOS). The NOS is used for file and print services throughout the NRC. There are plans to upgrade to Novell Netware 4.x in the near future. The aystem should support the ONNET version 1.2 for l Wln3.X and version 2.5 for Wing 5/NT TCP/IP network protocol that is employed by a majority of I desktops for access to the Intemet and for communicating with UNIX Servers. NRC's current l relational database server is SyBase version 10.x with plans for upgrade to version 11.x. This relational database resides primarily on IBM's RISC System 6000 UNIX hosts running the AIX operating system. Each user will require access to an agency standard personal computer that O is an Intel 486,33Mhz,16MB of RAM,1.2 GB disk space, or better. The agency has plans to upgrede the desktop to a Pentium class machine 200Mhr,2.108 disk space, and 32 MB of RAM. The current workstation configuration will sufflee to operate the STARFIRE program for all employees, therefore no additional client hardware cost is anticipated as a result of STARFIRE implementation. The proposed system should be compatible with the use of data warehousing tools (e.g., decision support, executive information system, or data mining tools). The proposed system is projected to be operational within two years. The core financial system and a suite of modules are expected to be implemented by the end of the second quarter 1999, it is anticipated that this will include approximately 60 70% of the proposed total system. As i additional modules are purchased or custom-designed, they will be phased in to the STARFIRE system. Funding for the system has not been established, however, an initial funding of 42.5 million dollars in FY 1998 and $0.5 million dollars in FY 1999 has been allocated for initial costs for system development, contractor support, software acquisition, and hardware. Based on the t
. assumptions identified in the CPlc, additional funding for custom development may be required. In addition, under STARFIRE's conceptual structure, the initial payroll module may be provided by the planned payroll / personnel (PAY /PERS) system. As assumed in this CPlc, this module willl e replaced as part of the HRIS project in FY 2002 and STARFIRE willincur costs in that year to interface with the replacement module.
In summary, STARFIRE will create an integrated financial and resource management system that will capture data once at the source and eliminate the need to re-enter the same data in multiple applications and/or systems, it will reduce the data entry requirements as well as the O errors and inconsistencies created by multiple entry of the same data in different systems. It will create program efficiencies and improve program management by maximizing the sharing 23
- STAMMME cmc BAcKenovuo
.' of information among programs and applications. It will reduce the current burden of staff end management to compile, review, and analyze financial and resource information that is needed to carry out management functions, and report financial status to OMB, Treasury, Congress, and the public, it will provide access to data by inspector offices and regional offices, as well as head >iuarters, so that financial and resource data is accessible, accurate, timely, and reportable. 2-4
STAMnet cmc _ __g&&%ik,
- 3. ASSUMPTIONS
. t l The Benefit-Cost Ana'ysis Team made the following assumptions related to the STARFIRE j system:
2 NRC Mission: All altomatives included in this analysis are based on the current NRC ! mission and the unique financial and accounting requirements needed to fulfill this i ' mission. If the NRC is assigned new responsibilities, such as oversight of the Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear-related programs, another analysis will ned to be I developed to reflect the cost of integrating financial information from any transferred program, and for other changes such as ar increase in transaction volumes and I additional reporting requirements. COTS Solution: Based on the CFO Council Financial Systems Committee guidance advising agencies to use COTS products and based on market survey that have i determined that there are COTS systems available to meet many NRC needs, the [ agency has determined that H will purchase COTS software for most of the required system software solution. { ! +
. Limited Sources for SoRware: Because the agency requires a suite of financial
' software products including the core accounting system and the use of the Financial Management Systems Software (FMSS) Muhiple Award Schedule (MAS) program is
- mandatory for all agencies in the Executive Branch of the Federal Govemment t
(excluding the U.S. Postal Service) for the acquisition of commercial software for core i accounting systems and for the acquisition of services and support related to the ! Implementation of such software packages, all attematives except the Status Quo i feature software products that are available through the MAS program. Consequently, if the NRC determines that none of the systems available through the MAS program can satisfy the agency's requirements for primary financial management (accounting) ' systems, this analysis will need to be revised to reflect the impact of requesting a waiver ! from GSA and of other conditions which may change, such as the additional time ! required to receive approval for the waiver, and the additional cost of systems not available through the FMSS Schedule.
+
Timeframe for implementation: The Chairman has requested that the new integrated ! financiathesource management system be operational within two years (spring of 1999). i This aggressive schedule to implement the system supports purchasing a COTS ' software solution rather than designing and building a custom system. Experience has l proven customizing to be a time consuming and expensive process, therefore, this was l not considered as a viable aHomative. ' Agenoywide Finanolal and Resource Management Policy: All altematives except . the Status Quo entail the implementation of a comprehensive financial and resource management system with features to allow the agency to replace approximately 100 existing systems. To facilitate the transition, the NRC will implement a management policy requiring that all current and future financial and resource management and accounting needs be satisfied using the STARFIRE system, and that all transactions ] pertaining to financial and resource management will be performed through the use of 31
sTAnnna cnc AssuurnoNs (. the new system, its associate components, and necessary interf.scing systems. This policy is essential to fu!!y realize the system's benefits and to meet the Chairman's guidance. Agoneywide Finanolal and Rasource Management System Tranaltion: The CPlc analysis locludes estimated costs and savings for the new system to interface i1 and - replace appe oximately 100 systems (automated, semi automated, and manual). The CPic assumes the operation of all current financial and resource systems through fiscal year 1998. Except for FFS, it also assumes an average of six months of operation for all current financial and resource systems during fiscal year 1999 with 90 days of parallel operation for all systems. Scope and Requirements: All attematives, except the status quo, will provide the means to comply with all relevant laws, regulations, and guidance for financial manabement information systems including: Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, Govemment Performance and Results Act of 1993, Govemment Management and Reform Act of 1994, Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996, Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996, OMB Circular A 127, " Financial Management Systems", and Joint Financial Management Improvement Program Guidance. ( These altematives will also provide for most of the requirements in the areas of Core accounting, Budget Formulation, Funds Control, Property, Travel Management, Cost Accounting, Payroll, Fees, Labor Cost Distribution (Manpower Tracking and T&A), Automated Procurement and Peiformance Measurement identified in the STARFIRE Requirements Document, dated August 8,1997. Relationship to Planned Payroll / Personnel System: STARFIRE altomatives will provide unified systems that are planned for and managed together, operated in an integrated fashion, and linked together electronically in an efficient and effective manner instead of simply one software application covering all financial and resource management system needs. Under STARFIRE's conceptual structure, the initial payroll module may be provided by the planned payroll / personnel (PAY /PERS) system, which is scheduled to become operational in April of 1998. For cost estimation purposes, the team assumed that the PAY /PERS module will be replaced as part of the HRIS project in FY 2002 and that STARFIRE will incur costs in that year to interface with the replacement module. Relationship to Agency Property Accounting System: The property module will be provided by the Property Accounting System (PAS), a client server application that was implemented at the NRC during fiscal year 1997. Currently, this module is fully operational, and there are no specific plans to replace this module during the STARFIRE life cycle. I ( 3-2
STARFIRE CPic ASSUMPTIONS Acquisition Requirements: The NRCis following the regulations for the Financial , Q Management Systems Software (FMSS) Schedule which entalls issuing a solicitation document (Letter of interest) and associated requirements package to all nine vendors on the FMSS schedule. Since this procurement is being conducted in parallel with the CPlc effort, the software suite that best meets the agency's needs is not known at this time. Therefore, the estimates included in this document are based on software l package and customization expenditures that are representative of typical schedule . offerings. These figures will be refined once the NRC completes the COTS selection l process, l Electronic Signatures and Approvals: The team examined current signature and approval requirements for most financial and resource related transactions. Based on this assessment, the team assumed that several current signature requirements could be replaced by electronic approvals. Where signatures were determined to be required, (approximately 700 users) the team assumed that the required technology to comply
' with NIST standards for electronic signature could be made available by the ADAMS project.
System Development Process: The NRC System Development and Life Cycle Management (SDLCM) Methodology is being used in the development of the STARFIRE. This methodology assumes an implementation of a *best practice" approach that will capitalize on current, proven, state-of the-art practice approaches consistent with the NRC Business Enterprise and Technical Reference Model. These j^g include Enterprise-Wide Access (Network Based Computira), Decision Support, Data iy Warehousing, Reuse Proven Support (Off the-Shelf Products), Incremental improvements (Modular Components), User Friendly and a Paperiess Environment. Intemal Processes: The tearn assumed that use of a "best practice" approach in the system development process would require some process changes and that offices and the agency as a whole would incorporate these changes as part of doing business. This assumption is key in minimizing costs required to utilize comrnercially available off the-shelf software, and in achieving significant savings by modemizing the way in which we accomplish financial and resource transactions. This may also require revisions to several NRC management directives. With respect to specific processes within the agency, the team assumed the fol'owing: Document and Workflow Management: ADAMS' full document and workflow management capability, available earty FY 1999, wil' support some of the systems document and workflow management processes electronically. Budget Process: Assumes that sufficient flexibility would reside in off the shelf software selected to accommodate reasonable changes in the budget formulation process in future years. Fees: Aside from the implementation of process improvements resulting from the recent business process reassessment, the team assumed that the current Part 170 and Part 171 requirements would continue to be in place through out the system life m\ cycle. (J . - _ . _- 3-3
STARFIRE CPIC A55UMPDONS / - i Performance Measures: The team assumed that all resource related collections and aggregations of information will be performed by the new system. Performance outp';t measures would be available from other systems being developed or already in place which would be interfaced with the current system. External Processes: With the exception of the status quo, all attematives pertaining to individuals or orgarilzations extemal to the NRC will accommodate both electronic transactions as well as paper based transactions, however, the focus will be toward evolving to complete electronic transactions procedures. Life Cycle: For the purposes of this analysis, the life cycle for the STARFIRE system is the seven year period from the beginning of FY 1998 through the end of FY 2004. The team assumed that any new system developed can be expected to have an operational life that lasts through 2004 before it will need to be replaced due to new requirements and/or technology changes. Although, beyond the scope of this analysis, the team observed the following during the COTS selection process: Vendors, in an effort to maintain established customers, are responsive to changing requirements (e.g., new laws and regulations) and to the changing technical environment, thus making it possible through new version releases to extend the usefullife of the chosen solution to go well beyond the seven year period used in this analysis. Requirements: A parallel effort has solicited proposals from vendors having software on the GSA FMSS schedule that could be used to satisfy these requirements. Although specific details may change during the design and engineering phases, the (oV). requirements are defined, allowing for the reasonable estimate of the cost and complexity of the project.
- Technical Reference Model: One of the attematives, Altemative 3 - COTS Software using ORACLE for Database Management, analyzes the costs, risks and benefits associated with a COTS package that requires a database management system that is outside the current suite of capabilities identified and supported by the NRC Technical Reference Model.
Hardware Infrastructure: With respect to hardware, the estimates included in the analysis cover costs for STARFIRF. specific hardware components such as dedicated servers, and data storage devices. The team assumes that Pentium-based desktop resources needed to optimally utilize STARFIRE will be provided to all NRC staff through the PC Refresh Program, and necessary network resources will be provided by the Next Generation Network (NGN) Program including the required connectivity upgrades throughout the agency nationalinfrastructure (HQ, regions and sites). Year 2000 Compliance: Preliminary analyses of off-the-shelf packages plus any custom development utilizing current versions of COTS packages provides a reasonable basis for assuming that Year 2000 compliant software will be purchased or developed as an inherent part of the system development process. Moreover, the team assumed that all other systems that will be integrated or interfaced with the new financial and
') resource system will become Year 2000 compliant before implementation of the system
-(/ and associated components. 3-4
i i STARMRE CNC Al.TERNAnygs { i 4. ALMNAMES , l The Benefit-Cost Analysis Team identified the following three attomatives for the STARFIRE i Project: l Alternative 1 - Status Quo System: In this altomative, the NRC will continue to ! maintain the existing OCFO financial management systems, and approximately 100 l office automated, semi automated, and manual systems, without any functional l upgrades or enhancements. Modifications will be limited to those required to make the systems Year 2000 compliant, and other maintenance modifications that may be l required to keep the systems operational, j - l 4 Alternative 2 - COTS Software using SYBASE for Database Management: Inthis altomative, the NRC will implement a COTS-based solution which utilizes SyBase for the database management functions (NRC currently owns a license for a SyBase l } relational database management system). This would entall the purchase of a suite of , software from a single vendor. This suite would include a module that will meet the CORE Financial Requirements, and other modules for as many other processes and requirements that the NRC determines can be met cost effectively by the selected i vendor. When necessary to meet remaining requirements, the NRC will either purchase i COTS based solutions from other vendors or build custom applications. The existing OCFO financial systems, including approximately 100 office automated, semi-i automated, and manual systems, will be eliminated after an initial transition period is
- h completed.- THE NRC will also implement a management policy requiring all financial -
- i and resource needs be satis 5ed through STARFIRE, its associate components, and
- interfaced systems.
L Attornative 3 - COTS SoRware using ORACLE for Database Management: inthis j altemative, the NRC will implement a COTS based solution which utilizes ORACLE for the database management functicns, and custom development when required, to ! support the same requirements as those identified in Altemative 2. j Other Alternatives Considered: Four other attematives were considered for this analysis, however, based on the agency requirements, CFO Council guidance, the aggressive schedule established for the project, cost i considerations, value to the agency, and best practice considerations, the following attomatives ! ; were not considered: 1 L . Modifloation of Existing Systems: The current systems do not meet all of the NRC's } current informational needs. In an August 26,1996, survey conducted by the chair of the j Financial Managers Coundl, offices noted that only minimal information needs were being met. In addition, the Office of the inspector General has noted financial system i- defidencies regarding interfaces with payrollin the annual audit of the financial
; statements, it would be difficult and costly to modify the current systems to provide the data required in today's environment, especially since there are a number of financial and mixed financial / administrative systems in use in the agency outside the core -
l' financial system that use diffsrent software and hardware for a variety of purposes 41 a 9
,o - rw r a .9 -- .va ,--, -.r--,,--,m-* -e7,, cye-,-,,-,w,-**=t- y r - e v- v w ww w -n ~ - t w evv eeve----*-%-wm -- ey e-- v--,-e,*,w-w=-m--nwr v ,r r- w - wwv vw- -v--'w=-w-v e+ ,,e -w-+wr-
. l STAMNRE CMC ALTEMNeTrvEs l[
l ranging from budget planning to contract / pro}ect management. In, addition, the FFS vendor is developing a new clienuserver version of the system, therefore, the mainframe version in use at NRC is near the end of its useful life and desired modifications may be ] unavakble or very costly. 1 l
- Custom Development: Market surveys have determined that there are COTS systems ,
! available to_ meet many of the agency's needs, in addition, the CFO Council Finanolal i Systems Committee guidance advises agencies to use COTS products. Furthermore, ' l custom software could not be developed and deployed on the aggressive schedule for - implementation that complies with the Chairman's request. l COTS Systems Not on the GSA Schedule: The NRC is following the JFMIP-l prescribed procedures for evaluating the software systems that are available through t the GSA schedule. Nine different vendors have software packages that have ! successfully completed GSA's software capabilities verification test to ensure the l systems comply with the core financial management functional requirements set forth in , ! Section C of the FMSS solidtation and other Govemment Accounting Manuals j referonood in the solicitation. An initial market survey indicates that at least one of these l products will satisfy a large percentage of the agency's requirements. However,if the ! NRC determines that none of the systems offered by these nine vendors can satisfy the agen :y's unique requirements after issuing a Letter of Interest to all vendors and i evaluating the responses, then the agency may request a waiver to allow the NRC to i procure from an altemate source. Typically, agencies that have received waivers have paid the vendor to customize their software to meet the Joint Financial Management l Improvement Program, Core Financial System Requirements, which is a lengthy and expensive process, in addition, it becomes the spency's responsibility to insure that
- these requirements are belt,g property met and continually updated as requirements change.
'-
- Custom Modifloations of COTS Systems: When Federal agencies buy commercially developed financial software, they traditionally modify that software to meet " unique agency requirements." This practice has been very costly, and complicated, especially
, when vendors upgrade or release new versions of the software. Private sector 1 experience has shown that instead of modifying COTS software, whis raises the costs i of operations and systems maintenance, businesses should modify or improve their ' j business practices in order to reduce or eliminate the need for systems modifications, i and therefore eliminate the need for custom modifications by the vendor. Additionally, . on June g,1997, the NRC Office of the Inspector Generalissued a Special Evaluation i Report (g7E-10), Evaluation of the Best Practices for Developing and implementing an 1 Integrated Financial Management System, one of the best practices ched in this report is " minimizing sofware modification " 1 i 4 42
-~,,--<w,.,- -----,,,,-,-w.,., r,_,,m._,m_,..w.-,. ,r,-_.,,,_-,,..m.,-w,.,,_,v.,,,..m.,. . , ,, y. .,.m.,,. - . . _ , .
smtrwtacmc cost 4 asMrpris
- 4. COSTS AND BENEFITS ,
The following paragraphs cover the approach used to collect and analyze cost and benefit data for the three aHematives identifed in Section 4: 5.1 Cost Data Collection The STARFIRE Benefit-Cost Analysis Team utilized data collected from the following sources as the basis for developing cost and FTE estimates for the status quo: Historical billing information for timesharing and applications maintenance and enhancement oosts Survey data obtained from all NRC offices on FTE support levels CIO cost projections of Year 2000 compliance efforts t The Team grouped applications and compiled current oosts and FTE levels using the following four categories: i
. - Federal Financial System (FFS): Major application which STARFIRE will replace
. . Category 1 Systems: Applications that willinterface with STARFIRE Category 2 Systems: Applications that STARFIRE will replace Category 3 Systems: Applications which will be unaffected by STARFIRE and, therefore, ^
are excluded from the cost analysis. The Team then developed cost and FTE projections for the two COTS-based STARFIRE altematives based on this data compilation plus: Independent govemment cost estimates (IGCE)
- Price quotes from vendors
- Special studies and analyses performed by Team members Appendix A presents complete details of the sources and assumptions the team used to develop cost and FTE estimates. Appendix B provides the compilation of costs and FTE resources associated with each current system under all three attematives.
4 51
I ,
- srNerwnq cnc costs sENtnis 5.2 Coot Data Analysia ,
l The STARFIRE Benefit Cost Analysis Team used the cosi data that was collected to establish ! life-cycle cost proJoctions in accordance with OMB Circular A 94 Guldelines and Dscount Rates ! for Sene#f-Cost Analyals of Feders/ Programs (Guideline dated October 29,1992 with l Appendix C Discount Rates revised February 1997). The resdtant estimates are based on the ' following methodology: j A seven year life cycle (FY 1998 and FY 2004) is used. This period provides for up to two years of system implementatiot, followed by five years of system operation. , Sunk costs (the costs incurred in the past that will not be affected by any present or ; future decision) are excluded. + Costs and FTE resources are itemized separately.
. The operational costs of the Status Quo during the irnplementation period are added to L the costs for Altematives 2 and 3 to reflect the parallel expenditures that will occur during this period.
No inflation factors are included in the cost estimates. l Beginning in FY 1999, costs for FFS Financial Management Servios (FMS) Hourty , Charges, FFS American Management Systems (AMS) Normal Charges, and FFS Timesharing include an annual escalation factor of 3.1%. This factor is based on total increases in these line items which have averaged 6,1% por year over the past four . years minus 3% per year to remove the inflation component of the increase. The 3.3% midyear discount rate specified in OMB Circular A 94 (Appendix C dated February 1997) is applied to all costs to establish a present value total. The following cost and FTE estimates for each aNomative are detailed on subsequent pages:
. Exhibit 51:ANemative 1 Status Quo Cost Summary I Exhibit 5 2:ANomative 2-STARFIRE with SYBASE Core Cost Summary Exhibit 5-3:Altemative 3-STARFIRE with ORACLE Core Cost Summary 4
. Exhibit 5 4:Altemative 1-Status Quo FTE Summary Exhibn 5 5:Altemative 2-STARFIRE with SYBASE Core FTE Summary Exhibit 54:Altemative 3-STARFIRE with ORACLE Core FTE Summary 4
;, - wm , . 4 ~ +,--
- 5-2
<g _N w\ / '
[ ( xs .. (~ V l SF1RES-1.WK4 12n5m vers.on
- E
=
3 a m o EXHIF,lT C-1: ALTERNATIVE 1 - STATUS QUO COST
SUMMARY
3
" i COST ELEMEMTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY awJ FY 2004 i Totet
__idON PelastRBIGM_%2dWim W645 * .! W:Mr ; *.riEM". N Y9 sW T& M MAfW . :H ^ % FfS Essenties Enhancements $0 30
. s ; i ,.,
; a p;
$0 $0_ $0 30 FFS Year 2000 Fires $0 $0 30
$0 30 30 $0 W m-L>M&;b4%2=tthimm nh G 30 $0 30 nt&& EMMi4E132?it =sm a=2& 2Hk-2p+ 2:w h wirkh
_Lete9ery1 Systems E_ssentielE.f y..m. ,# $0 $3 $0 $U n n; Category 1 Systems Yeer 2000 Fines * $0 30 $3
$0 $0 $3 $0
$3 30 $0 irrm e rt.uiRW M*h P O W r.W W M m:tW mm3 WWM % 4 Wamw - 90 W 30 m= : .& g -r i. . g 3 30
_Cetw1_2 Systems Essentist E.-(-+M. 377,500 30 30 $0 $0 30 Cateaory 2 Systems Year 2000 Fotos $552.100 $552.100 _30 $77 10 10 SO $0 $1.1R,500 Total Non-H+0.+ m $629.600 1552.100 50
$0 M SO 506 30
_RECpRRiidG xemmte.mmmrJ tnw-- r FTya- rce mT*h = +m :. -MI Miv mm : ..; u.m- W 30 l
$1.18130n
_FFS FMS Hourly Charges" mi c c.my cm pp [ FFS AMS No_rme_t Charges" __ $373,400 $384,975_ 3396,910 $409.2W $421,899 $434,978 5448463 _ 32,869,839
$599,800 $6_18,394 $637,564 $657,328 Accounting Support $677J06_ $696,715 $720,375 $4,s09,881
$470 M_, $L70,500 $4 10,500 }L70X0 $4ID,500 $470,50J
_TraveI Dete Entry _S_upport $748,200 $470,500 $3,293,500
$748,200 $748,200 $748,200 $7_48,200 $778,200 FFS Timesharing" $703,300 $ m 102 $747,580 $7_48,2Wi~$5,237,403
$770,755 $794.649 $319.283 $844,68 f 4!Mpd'i'!MMMin WrrWM' W M M3@s WWQ' $5.405,351
_Ce @ 1 1 Sysems Cor*ecturi_Swi^ Sh3iMN ME i?Nbte! n*- cA?2 : !;,f.67%e . . ; M. 4 __ 50_ 30 $0 30 50 _ Category 1 Systems Timeshariv 30 30 30_ 30 30 30 $0 30 30 w.c~nr.-e,lim m etri,.g _y ner.e g m . m;w.y 30 30 _ Category 2 Systerns Contractue_l Support
.mH0axw%_ ds .;1-rgy ynge 3a;q pg g w .g y
$629,200 $629,200 frm,200 _$629,200 3629,200 3629,200 Cateoorv 2 Systems Timeshanna $268.600 $268.600 $268.600
$62?,200-$4,404,400
$2se.s00 Lws00 E w s00 r w s00 st880;00 aoJ^i.cosrs M .umEsS$s$ldi M M usMaEsiMuun 7
_ DisCOUNTBCICfh_3.3%_)41D-YRRATE) _ _ _ . o __$v22.6mt_$4.39m2L33.easso$193 0.9639] 0.952s 0.9220 08926 0.36411 mets.ammLSMmmEaIEE o69mt14 moist $2s.882.2n
~ ~ ~ ~ -
'PR$$fNTVAI.UE T6Thi.CD$T$~~~ ~
--~ $4:35138$ T~i4388 06i' tiso4 6i8 0.63651' ~~0.0097
~~$i52iD96" li46$.$6sl~ii401978 f ' tis 44250~~1255 M ses
- Resources in the Status Quo and Alterr e6ves 2 & 3 for Colegory 1 Systems (Systems that wB irWorfaz with STARFIRE) are reGected as cost O di5eren en
" Beginning in FY 1999 these costs ers projected to bcreese by en ennuel 3.1% ecceletion factor associated with product ege. This factor is based on toteilnc which have everaged 6.1% per yeer over the post four years minus 3% per yeer to remove the inflation s w-. of the increese
)
gn E r., D ol
7 O ( SFIRES-2.WK4 12r15/97Versen '* 31 r
=
3
=
m n 3 EXHIBIT 5-2: ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST SURESEARY ' COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2we FY 2003 FY 2004 Total e r-m ,.s. -
;~ v-- ,w r - - ,
r>. -- STARFIRE COTS SW (Core / Base Modules) 31,200.000 30 30 30 _30 _ _ 30 30 $1.200.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Cw,"",.a) - 3800.000 30 30 30 30 _ .._ 30, _ _ 30 STARFIRE COTS SW(Adddenal Modules; 3800.000 3500.000 30 30 30 30 30 30 _ $500.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Adddenal) 3350.000 30 50 30 30 . . _ ,_._ . 30 30 _ _ $350.000 STARFIRE RDBMS _ _ 30 30 30 30 30 . _ _ _ _ ._ 30 $0 30
$181,800 30 STARFIRE. Warehouse /SYBASE tQ 30 30 STARFIRE Warehouse Design 30
. _ _ 30 _. ._ 30 30 _ _ S181.800
$365.000 30 30 i STARFtRE Implementaten* 3870.000 3290.000 30
. 30 _ ._ 30 _ _ 30 _ 7365.000 30 _ $0 _ _ _ . _ 30 30 _ $1.160.000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS $166.000 $166.000 SO $0 30 ..___. _ 30 SO _ _ $332.000 l STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems $307.500 3307.500 _ 50 30 30
_ 30 50 _ 3615.000 [i .STARFIRE Specalized HW(Servers) . ._ _ $1,000.000 . 30 ._ 30 30 30 30 _ , 30 _, 31.000.000
.STARFIRE Core Data Converson _ .
3235.900 30 30 $0 _ SO 30 30 _ _ _ $235.900
, STARFIRE Polioes and Procedures Devel $100.000 .$100.000 _ _ _ _ 30 30
__ SC .__ __ 30 30 , $200.000 { STARFIRE Travet (NRC Staff)
$25,000 $25.00C 50 10 30 $0 30_ 350.000
~
FFS Systems Transiten , _ _ _ _ _ $3' N _ 30 30' 30 _ _ . . . _ 30 ~$0 36 FFS Year 2000 Fixes $0 30 $0 SO
. SO 30 30 30
.: , *m -
._1 _
~
_ Category 1 Systems Transdr3n 30, 30 30 $0
' _ _ _ _ _ 30, . _ _30 30 _ . 30
_ Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fires SO $_0 $0 TO . SO
,_ SO 30 30
- Y _ . _ - . .. -
Category 2 Systems Transden .___ 30 . _ 30 30 30- 30 , _ _ _ _ 30 Cateaory 2 Systems Year 2000 Fines 1552.100 _ 1552.100 30 30_ _ .. 30 30 10 SO 10 St 104.200 ' Total Non-Rect.,iin u i $6.288.300 I $1.805.600 t 508 108 10t 30t 10* 1809?900
- Includes Design and Erigirreering. C; .4. . . InstaW Deployment, and Approx. 3300K of OC30 Infrastructure Integ stion Support Costs.
o a < M i De ' ny ili l Part 1 2 g
f% fM O I V
\ \
1 (u^), SFIRES-2.WK4 12/15/97 Version # 5 a 3 m m n 3 EXHIBIT 5-2: ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
COST ELEMEMIS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY ivuJ FY 2004 ' Totet 7pFct,Q s'fsgr27m %9.+r "sii raq -w - 7+wMe t wwwq'; :** x u n ew vm my,r*~i x _STARFIRE COTS _SWhp_(CoWBosic) 30 $240,000 $256,800 p , ve wgy_A ge3ge3_,c.,g g g
$274,800 $294,000
_STARFIRE COTS SW UcensejAdditione9 30 $100,000 $107,000
$314,600_$336,600_$1,716,800
$114,500 $122,500 $13L100 $140,300 STARFIRE Warehouse License $0 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700
$715/00
_STARFIRE_ Technical Support $32,700 $32,700 $196,200 SO 3150,000 _$300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $ M 000 $300,000 ~$1,650,000 _STARFIRE lrderfaces Maintenance M $75.000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $525,000 STARFIRE_Systes/Detabases Ops _/ Admin $0 SO $0 _30 $0 $0 _STARFIRE Hardware M_aintenance te 3150,000 $150.000 $150,000 SO ~ $0
$150,000 STARFIRE Training $150.000 3150.000 3900,000 -
$50,000 $75,000 $75.000 $25,000 30 30 30 6 000 ki3? WTt& AlddiE 2 h & S M f Wh MMi*nS twh?W M?rO4& % 4 Wik.a '- % + s;' M%t&P 'Eua%w FFS FMS ;;wACharges $373,400 $0 SO $0 mm.3sn
$0 30 30 $373,400
[ FFS AMS NormelCharges $599,800 SO $0 30 $0 30 $0 $559,800
.. Accounting Support $470,500 $0
_ $235350 $0 $0 $0 $0 $705,750
.Trevel Data Entry _ Support $748,200 _ $374,100 30 $0 30 $0 30 ~$1,14300 FFS Timesharing $703,300 $0 . 50 SO $0 30 diimitet&B!fUfSIMME#tTid h +&d $0 5 % 300
$1dsknl MfdWs iWn T. M.%dtM $
Cele 20f11 Systems Contractual Support $0 30 $0 30 ,_30
. E i;sEn RR4% . 7..n je;g Category 1 Systems Timeshering 30 $0 30 30 30 30 SO $0 A- .- weeggp/% SO 50 $3 e.t W : -
WP w m un % 4%4r i rte ; sawn men 3 t w2m . a m-_ m .q g _CeW2 Systems Contradoof Support $629,200 $314,600 30 30 Cateaory 2 Systems Tirneshonno 30 30 30 $943,800 1268.600 $134_300 50 10 SO SO 10 5402.900 _TOTALCOSTS _ _ ____ ____ __ L$10J 3h300l=$3MS.550 0,96391 MMM L$t0IL500 LS1.047,000l__31,049,200 LSLO78.400LSL109,600 L~$19,1DM _DISCOtJNTfACIOR (3.3%#fD-YILPAIE) 1 09525 0.9220 0 89261 0.8641I
~~-
0.8365 F 0.8097I
~- ~PRESEN$Vhl.U$ TDtAI. CDSis " T 19.9sB.160 Fli5f t3it $967.965' ~1934 535 f- ~190s.58i1 - $G01r~)45 T $69549IF SiSj09.092 o
O i w t M De IB m k Part 2 a y
p n
/
\ (% V N
SFRE5-3 WK4 12(15/97 Ve=sion ** h-3 m ni o 3 EXHIBIT 5-3: ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
0 1 COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Totet l NON.fHtt'IC - F ndWW@i<"~C &WM %. % 7 wpw C s1 m y m ww h =n m ,jt_q ,. y w% STARFRE_ COTS SW(CoreSesc Modusse)_ _ 31,200,000 30_ 30 30 30 30 30 $1J00,000 l STARFRE CO_TS VendqServices (Coresese)_ $300,000 30 30. 30 30 30 3500,000 30 3800,000 ; _STARFRE_COTLSW (Addeonel Modules) _ 30 30 30 30 30 30 3500,000 _STARFRE_CO_TS Vendor _S_ervices (AdcMioner)_ 3350,000 30 30 30 l _STARFIRE RDBMS _ $2,226,000. 30._ 30 30 3350,000 _ 30 $0 30 30 30 30 _ 32,226,000 _STARFRE Middlewere 3277,000 30 30 30. 30 30 30 3227 000 STARFIRE Worehouse_SW 3181,800 30 30 30 30 30 30 $181,800 _STARFIRE_Worehouse_ Design 30 . _ 3365,000 30 30_ $0 30 30 3365,000
.STARFRE lrnplementation* $870,000 _ __3290,000 30 30 30 30 30 3.1,160,000
_STARFRE hierface unth_ ADAMS 3205,000 $205,000 30 30 30 Y 30 30 3410,000
- STARFRE Interft:e with_Other_ Systems _ . 3385,000 3 M 000 30 30 30 30 W
30 3770,000 STARFRE Specialized H___(Servers) _ 31,000,000 30 30 30 30 30 STARFIRE_ Core Dete_Cc,yA, 3235,900 30_ 31,000,000 30 30 30 30 30 30 $235,900 _STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel 3100,000 3100,000 _- 30 30 30 30 10 3200,000 STARFIRE Travel (NRC $teff) 325,000 325,000 30 30 30 l 30 30 350,000 _ t m+yxpffk%d#;ig = v<tw wn < % >Ot G 4w kr=J: y - W Wa.: :itum i _FFS Systems Transition m= :=er_w h 2%s q ;-M. a LM 30 30 30 30 10 30 30 30 FFS Year 2000 Fines 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
- >+
. : n v. R H :W?t*? m - O h ** --
- 3 } :n :O _%W shW)WW 9: : *W2 ?22 WJ ?%Mt.'- * ;@#b'TN .,+ % Q q Category _1 Systems _Transton 30 3 30 30 30 10 30 30 Category 1 Systems Yeer 2000 Fines 30 F! 30 30 30 30 30
.n. cithidtu. PMW'2e er1 wTi ti
_Cwy.2 Syy_.._Transmon
-s3@ M 1_fW mmc e M Mist- Wr3 9 b Wy rtas 1 % 3r =
30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Coleoory 2 Systamn Year 2000 Fines 30 30 W 100 1551100 30 30 $0 50 Total P40"t-Rec;,,,,,,, 38.907.800 SD 11.104.200
$1.922.100 30 10 10 ' 30- 10 $?0.829.900
- Includes Design and Engineenng. C;- ' v.e.:. Iristelistion and Deployment o
o to M N ED Port 1 1 el
p)(v {C T O O SFIRES-3 WK4 12nSe7 version ** i s= 3
=
m O J! EXHIBIT 5-3: ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
O COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY awg FY 2003 FY 2004 Total picussmocsmwm e e +e mm www e em *mw =-e~- m m.mm- .-# no STARFIRE COTS _SW LkM{ Core / Basic) _ $0 $240,000 _ _ 3256,800 $274,800 __329fpJO $314,600 $336,600 31J1_,800 6 STARFIRE_ COTS SW UcenselAMtionst)__. _ $0 $100,000 _ 5107,000 _$114,500 $122300 ._ _3131,100
. STARFIRE_RDBMS_SW Ucense
$140,300 3715,400
__ _ $0 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 3258,200 3258,200 _ 31,549,200 STARFIRE Middlewere_SW Ucense 30 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 $50,000 $50,00G $300,000 -
. STARFIRE Warehouse _Ucense $0 _$32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700
_STARFIRE Technical Support $0 332J00 $32,700 $_196,200
$150,000 ___$300,000 3300,000 $300,000 3".00.000 ___3300,000 31,650,000
_STARFIRE Interfaces Meirnenence 50 375,000 _ _31_50,000 3150,000 3150,000 $t 50,000__ _ 5150,000 3825,000 _STARFIRE Systems /Detsbeses OpstAdmin _$200,009 $200,000 $200,000__ 3203,000 $200,000 $200,000_ $200,000 31,400,000 STARFIRE_ Hardware Meinte sence 30 $150,000 $150,000 3150,000 STARFIRE Training $150,000_ 31_50,000 $1_50,000 3900,000 350,000 375,000 375,000 $25,000 Y
" % W = W a"V.s 9t h # n % W i*~ *~f 4 6 ^5M it MR:sff 2 d';Y d-
- 30 30 30 522 1000 FFS FMS_ Hourly Chorges
^+r *
- r9C - " ;NM
~
imrEr
$373,400 $0 $3 30 SO 30 30 3373,400
_FFS AMS_ Normal Che' Des $599,800 30
$0_ $0 30 30 30 A.hSupport $470,500_ _ 3235,250 . 30 30
$599,800 3G 30 30 3'05,750 TraveIDeta Entry _ Support __ $748,200 _ 3374,100 30 FFS Timesharing
$0 30 $U $0 $1,122,300 3703,300 $0 30 30
..m, :e rt SC 30 %) 3703,300 nC&;mL P rH.iw WW * *-. W d *2 5 WM/ MR@ *" BtF N1 UJWir M -R
_CategorylSysm Con _troctualSuppc1 4M 9 fv 5 5 I u;W
$0 $0 30 $0 30 Category 1 Systems Tirreshering $0 50 30 SO So 30 SO So g rz b a M b d 3 A M # 6 1f*7 " ; dele 30 30 30 90 wh is l'Mrbn t.rv ' MI i;a cla ga- &
_ Category 2. Systems _Cw u f
.4 Support $629,200 3314,600 $0 Mhi 4
- m. -d %
Cateoory 2 Systems Timesberina $0 30 $0 30 ' $943,800
$268.600 1t34.300 30 30 30 30 30 3402.900
_ TOTAL COST $ I MsmiIsS2dEhMmeiMilm$1 T mMmiMalBa*l&
~ DisCOUNileCIQ43,3%#iD-Ya RAtu $12.950,800L$4,311,250 L$ tS79,700 L31,555.200 L$ t557,400 L3 tS86.000 l_ $1 A1.7,800 L325,j 58J50
' 0.9e39_ 0521 0.9220. o.e92s c:s41I- ~ 0 e3e5 eser- ---
~PRESENTV4UJG TQTAEC65TS 'siif42.iS9 id.iO6.3i9 fil56.545 li.396.i46 ~lf.34510i Fli 327 i37 ti 310 004 I' 123 $76.iif G i O
w M ee (It m m Part2 x* 0:
srARnRE CPic COSTS & BENERis f') E N o8'8 488fj2 R R f8 + E %01 1 9' E
;V R g
, o -
1 oio y vo~ ~ e U E .y;g kc~E E$;. ,
~ -
g - g - y r c 5 Jj .
..t i< t O i ,
H 88 3 88 3 u;o88 8 j R ;l A .'.? R E8 E g*, g o,o d o,o t o Hgq ' t W EE l n La e !1 t-g s N h ?h EN $ r w x V: ;y f> l- 883 8;8 d 8l8 8 9 R y A* R E8 6 l t g + [Ey *f G EE g t a-4u e
$... ki i >
- G 8'8 A 88 4 8.8 8 '; R g
L E f R E8
'j g; o'o g oio -: oo o g g *
% ; ; :; I b " - ~ J'- b E w t 4 4 '$ !d if &
E g m ? w r g. , g E _ 4 8:8 :,li B8 g59 8 jM sEfR E8 15 0 j f'" E ' EE L $ I NI j 8 t t s hx. - c
- :e 6 a
g
- t4 43 4
+ r, p 5 8,8 N 8l8 11 88 8 ) R $ M' $ R E8 1 /
m s< W lt u 1 x a; 1 ,y s x HE I g j @ EE I Q)
- N m
' d h (j < i
!S 8 &
F r
$ 88 3 8i8 F 8.S e p R $ M t{ R E*_ 1]
s p li j '"
- id E f ' 0 6 E2 E
( > !J m-7:
-, 6q $.> (i
- 2 Y
,7 g g
+
k - f- 5 g _ m
? 8.8 5 8!8 7
$ oo g- 2lS $ $8M M$ $ $E "
g
~
n> on m a nag*x W n r 41 Ea
, Y k '
W 1., d j [ y $ { ! -}- d. - t -n a d s m i p l i W 7 h F 4.,
=
n e hg h s ,d ~k E lO h M h g i a t il g c x - 2 j :. {
'n 1:
2 1 L le i
; i4:
3 i .?n m a ct. g
- e. rs 1-m!l 3; W at n .
a 3 g&- h-y en a!h m ,!I 5 e - k 5 - 3 n b g
~
. py .i-e:uA - ~~ n m; ~ !. -
a ,
+
8
,1 /m E
mt?n ly
,t
?
% g- ' *g *
, 3 s,; ,1 w 3
\
h m m .o k y iy } ( )s g 9 m: J , ; I s 4 w/ g . b!tt d. nltr 5 5p - E b> 0 L a 3E e 5-8 N _..
a!=3:nm s: n3" e n 8,,y > (Dv%@mIw I r
~ o s 00 00 m80 g 30 a9 2 7 0053 M i
50 ; 7 00 6 0 1 i 0008 8) 1 07 5 ve 3 5 d. 1 6
)G
~
5
- e. 02 h. 7 8 J, 3 #W 6 n;50 0 0
,e d 8 2 44 w2 03 4 1 51 l 1 ; 1 1 R i
a t t I 1 , 4 25 5 m 5 To 7-
?
y- p y a
& e n 9 b ; _
2 1 M> m m n m v _ s e
; 00 0.0 E. 0 0 00 g 0_0 00 QN0 0 0 0
e0003 . 00 m 1 0 i 0 M 0 2 24
< i 1 4 I
4 0 0 00 h : 00 0_ z O0 0 w 4O000.5_5 23 m 0 4 0 4 34 ? 9 2 O _0 F $~
& i 6 6 B _
Y Y F m T W w N v V C
- M R t i -
h V e A e 00 00 i O_0 y 00 00 00
- 0. 0 00 -)
00 C k- 0 5 1 0003 0 0 1 4 4 I I M 3 0 r. 00 N 00 T 00 0 4 0 O 5._0 2 0 0 m0 4 2 2
? 9
&0a @W0 0 L M 2 9 m 3 _3 ? 6 U Y r d r -
G F a S i 7 d ? & d e
- M 9 r > d . ! f 00 00 - 00 1 00 0 000_3 0 _0 t
z u ( 00 00 O 000 -5 0. 0 f 00 0 w 0552 20 D 0 0 C0 2 2 1 4 4 O0 00 00 0 4000 0 ? 4 7 9 E R i-Y u 5 g M 3 n O X 3 $ 6 5 O 4 W F m M C r 5
% m S M k L O E
! I 00 00 ;00 m 0 N~ 0_0 =3 00 i
l 00 0 0 0 0003 0 0 M 0 1 4 4 S 1 0_0 M 4. 5 5_2 W 0 0 0 2 2 . A B 0 0 2 " t
- O
?
2 00 w00 '
- a. 00_0 0 M
0O0 3 ' 0 s 0 e W 3 4 2,.
- f. 6 9
e Y S Y F 7
~
S f 4 7 1 n n E
?
r E J f rc n o a H LI is
,-0000 F 00 00 00 0 0003 f f 0 5 5.2 hn 00 0 h 04 4 4 1
T u 00 00 M. 00 0 N 0 2 2 r e I - 00 N 0 0 v m 00 s i O__0 0 4000 W aw D W 3% 0 R 0 5 3
? 9 f 6 n o
a M 9 C E Y F r I e M - % A i u a R n N S M: t a m)G
,/ R R 00 5i 00 w"
? 50 80 3 S
0003 0 E ' 7 i 9 M 12 I D e A 00 5 1 00 r 0.0 @ 80 I 41. 4 0.5.0 2 o A 9 9 P._ 51 f 00 n1 0 E9 1
- s 6 * , . 0 C
T 9 1 f i i 5 1 M 0010 3 L 42 " E 9 2 2 3 7 9 d n S Y ': M. w # N _P 0 1 a .
- F d e, e s M 9 w C.
2 e
? - h t # c ai fr vr c
E I 00 50 500 id 4. V 8 a 00 N 8. 0 & 8. 80
- 1. 2 8
W 0000 0000 8 3 3f 34 . Ln 63 I 6 Q 3 t ee n s I T 9 9 e 5 1 d 70 g 1 0 S-91 6 2 0 0 1 0 W3 1 L 4 5 Z. 8 4 j 0 i. r o A 1 Y & v G M > 1 t t nc ea N F
?
W d % n& M _ mt yn ooc r R
- Y F V
E '%. N " : _ e _ lp e i n T _ e I D 0 l e ~ I L M
'm g A V'_ W ._ d0 A 2 g " "r @
n0 a0
- v h
- n05 5- i l ev 4 d W T d A_P k
7 o$ it lar 5 W e d - e T D @D / s C "s v " s lep t I B W s e r P T 7 g F u Fhe i e n W n.O y't.ps wE L c s nE I.g T F du N I H i7 ; e a in1 g ni2no dr i2n0 k
~
e E ' r r X M* c o r 5 e00 m ie t nm p Mtr s i eo ef E t s r W s r ab piA nd r w vP n n & sMse e f. c m y a e4 a e m r e 1 r e t u M u ige En n L. w i-
/..adnU s n, TY 5 T v 1
% n D o/ n d d S
i i&Sd e sd 2si em n e isgh s i dh me L m vM mnt f x mmM me ut nt F g ee se nr fm s s Y - an i 5 ic $ e i i eio no t t w M g-.m o [7i ;w 00 e ysie t T r tssd s u i s i N l yy y yrapM l i y e SW m gd
;P d SS h se i
i 22 s.bG ASTO 4 E C FE 5 0g SS S K N EEEE E es M e % p.2g d1 t e1 W 2 - Dab r w z T W E t RR FF N r. a g po e a y y
. n t o J RRRR % i y s 5 L E A - RR I I TY r r N*FRFFFF I I I n- S *e og r .
i,. %!F. dee sr
,h ) g g RR~ t w ts A 5
_E E Nd AA S_S; r ee o- te SCTTTT e AAAAD e uu
.,' ( S "S T R T TT
'O,FF FF ta a t to -. t F
- t a n teT eO lcg i F hSS ". CC nF I
F S p E.C_C L JRS_S_SS vF &C kC T I 9'
- i ,
a5=3.=m n3" O$g s. Dt%n i , Cn e h),/ n o
# i, p00 00 a80 53 M 00 60 1 j00O8 ? 8 1 g 07 6 U 102 t 7 0+e 3 0 e92 70 7 00S Prt ve t
a s 82 4 d 1 4 a2 064h8 ::;3 1 Q6 I 3 5 i1 6 5 t 54 9
\ 7 s
t o
, y 1 *- s25 0 54 s T 5 + r ;
9 x i* n m M 2 N y - g J ; 1 M z p 8 e
- d g 00 00 A 00 4 00 6 I e
4 0_0 00 4 00 00 0 0 0003 0.052 K 0 M 0 10 74 47 0 0t 0 O_0 M O0 # 00 S 00 0 w 4100 e 0 0 s 34 6? 69 0 2 Y W 4 i f Y E, q-3 m
? *t Y F ? 2 s R 4 i '
l *: ? a M M@ A - 00 d 00 00 00 00 00 l 00 00 0 w 0003 4 0 0 10 47 4 1 0 0 I M M J W 00 W 00 i 00 0 n _0052 F 0 t e 4 1 00 3 M_0&0 i% 4 9 9 U YwM_00 2 n ' f 3 6 6 S F R f ep E M i
& h t, Z*
E d E d T I 00 4 00 L 1 m 041000.5.23 M'x 00 nl 00 X 04 00 r 00 0 0003 0 0 1 4 4 00 00 F 2 0 00 9 00 G 0_0 O0 M 0_ O0 0 0 0 - l 7 7 E 0 2 M # w f E 3
? 9
? 6 R Y 1 M. e O F T 5 d % 'M i b h
i C i N T i L M % E T !_ E 00 I 00 00 0 0 L 1 WO_0 N00 00 00 E 2 90 0 0 0003 0 0 5.2 0 0 h00 E 0 74 74 1 C 0 0 E v 0 d. - 00 D
?
00 P4 1030 5&: 0 E 3 f. 6 4 2 9 u Tn A 2 R0 R F Y 5= T
% h M"r E t
A
+ h c
O 5 9 k a H . 00 M 00 i 00 M 1 000 e 0003 s 0 1 0 4 4
,. 1 le n
- 5. 2 M 0 E 0 3 0. 0 1 100 T 00 XO 0_0 0 e 0_0=
T 00 0 0 I 0 0 0 im00 L 00 4100 3 f 0 0 d 0 4 2 7 9 9 m W 2 G E ? M W % N i 3 a mew E R Y F c V h 2 5 U W-T K E S E J6 C t a a
/
R W & # X W . D e R 00 E00 I 50 r 4,_1 80 3 000 3 0 7 9 P_ 21 A 9 M 00 00 T 80 i 4 000 2 + 0 A 1. t 6 2 5 r o 9 9 51 M 00 1 0 M 91 5 M 011 0 i 0 2 d 39 Z_. 4. 2 C T S 1 5 C E W E 1 3 t e E E 9 d n Y F i E M i W G d E I _ a, s e e 3 7 M W T T # cc _ ai fr vr E . h 80 1 00 s 50 50 6 t 0000 i 8 i 4 6 0 6 ees V 6 00 A 80 80 41 2 W 0_0 0.0 3 s! 3 h 3 9 3 t n I T 9 9 w 51 ST 70 M 10 t 9 2 1 2 6 O010 M_31 4 d4 5 2 8 0 0 I, h-1 G 4 S 1 t n c A Y S ' d M ' e - N F E b # e W m y R ~ d 'r & ;; C l eA n E ~ h em. T " 3 S
! I D 0 L 5 # d0 A 7 K_ @
M J
" w n0 a0 N
6-0 71 W 6 t N O e n0 e5 l e 4: v h- J
$_ a. N Or 6$
sr 5 e M L. p e v ep W e/ A _D 2 T t
^
s t s e r "s cnps e t sE I E E e C r & e e W r % n T I r u d F b F aO n s M t 1 1 I. ,F H d e i d i0 o0i M o n0 nw & e e 2 t" f. r1 X E P' - o M nr / c 3 R_2 s 1 it i2 s r 0 ny Msb ds e e M P u o i 4 v Mf
;d e r
o oP M nre n a mga t t nC ed C a r e F r e a m ru/D yt a X wW i-u Gne ve s - TY 12 T Y n W S S s h ex k mm ss"s sm sm u 9 U, sm gio s G - dh S e s ie M c i F ee ee meia nt W' J E m E nt an tss s.# pyr nr t T t n n 00 M ss t t yy Z-t psieap % M t te s' I^e, n no M :A.P o I f N I yy - 0 y gd 4 E M de0 G SS A SS R. MG ASTOd a 5 S W'S i se es K s 2 2 a E l _ W M E eF EE RRI I ?i. n r t a v_ 1_1 M 22y n-u EEEE - RRRR
% v 1 9 1 y M -1 v T Dab L '- R FF l a r e5 +i y r 1r o r I I I I w1 %F s s
/ 4 E RR i o g o N a FFFF M t c U RRRR 3 S M g- e H L r1 o 1 de e 5 E N AA l SS TYM %e 4 1^ wt e t AAAA l' S tae -m la T A uur 4ta 1 aa Ta e EC TTTT cg t s l m~,'f\vE R T t
;; F e o O
[OTTLFFMCC NSS R_S_S_S S F EC 9 C T T i I F F _ FF I nF S C_C - 9a0
srANMntcMc costs s asNarrys . . ..: Benefits - I i The STARFIRE project will produce several key benefits for NRC programs in headquarters i ) and the regions. The following ser;tions contain a description of each benefh and an l l explanation of the rating that each ehemative received for that benefit. Ratings are ehher A,8, ' ' or C, depending on how much of a benefh will be realized if the particular ahomative is implemented (A is best result, C is least desirable). A summary table for the non-quantifiable benefhs is presented in Exhibit 5-7. This analysis of benefits is designed to supplement the cost data analysis contained in Section 5.2, and ignores the benefits associated with costs savings or reductions in FTEs because these are already included in the costs analysis portions of this report. . i 5.3.1 Benefit 1 Better Management Control by integrating Finanolal/ Resource Planning l , and Execution Data 1 i
'An automated system that integrates financial / resource planning and execution data will be a i
valuable asset to the agency's managers who are responsible for controlling fiscal expendhures and monhoring resource usage. Since accountability is a key component in managing .' resources, easy access to the agency's corporate financial data through an integrated database , will permit the NRC to achieve better management control through agency wide budget > formulation and variance analysis.
- _ Ahematives 2 and 3 eliminate the need for supplemergary financial management support systems and provide the opportunity to merge many diverse systems into one, to achieve the '
Chairman's goal of integrating financial / resource planning and execution data to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness. Therefore Ahematives 2 and 3 are the best attematives for achieving this goal and these two ahomatives are rated A. Since Attemative 1 cannot l deliver this benefit, Altemative 1 is rated C. 4 5.3.2 leonefit 2. Easier for the Agency to comply with New and Changing Federal Laws j and Regulations i- --The NRC is mandated to comply with all fedsrallaws and regulations relating to financial and reseurce management, and in recent years there have been new laws and regulations issued as well as changes to the existing laws and regulations. S he most relevant laws and guidance for financial management information systems include the following: { 4 , Chief Fin.ncial Officers Act of 1990 Govemment Performance and Resuhs Act of 1993 Information Technology Management Reform Act of igg 6 Federal Financial Management improvement Act of 1996 i' . OMB Circular A-127, " Financial Management Systems' Govemment Management and Reform Act of 1994; and Joint Financial Management improvement Program (JFMlp). 2 The NRC's current environment, where many different and diverse systems may be impacted by a change in legislation, makes h particularly burdensome on the agency to comply with these 5 11
srArntcMc costs a asArpris s' laws. An acute example of the problem facing the NRC is the fact that the NRC's current ; environment makes it impractical to interface with electronic commerce software, at a time ; when electronic commerce is becoming the standard for federal business transactions. Consequently, Altematives 2 and 3 are rated A, and Ahemative 1 is rated C. 5.3.3 Benefit 3 More Aeoountability for Finanolal/ Resource Expenditures through 3 implementation of Cost Accounting and Performanoe Measures The ability to monitor financial / resource expenditures by associating the expenditures with specific activities is vNel information for managers who are now being required to define results. t oriented program objectives and create outcome-based performance measures in accordance with the Govemment Performance and Resuhs Act of 1993, Attematives 2 and 3 are the best aHematives for achieving this benefit because these two ahomatives provide full support for cost accounting and performance measures; consequently the rating assigned to these two attematives is A. Ahemative 1 does not support cost accounting or performance measures and the rating for this ahomative is C. ! 5.3.4 Benefit 4 Process improvements from Adopting Recognized Best Practices The NRC can improve the proossses and procedures associated with financial and resource i management by adopting some of the best practice guidance in this area. For example, through the use of data warehousing, planning data orttered into a warehouse from a budget i planning application can be compared with data warehoused from the budget execution (core ' l ' financial) application which also can use data warehoused from the payroll application. Also, L this allows the NRC to realize numerous improvements in associated processes ranging from data entry to report generation. The COTS products that are available with AHematives 2 and 3 have been tested and proven in the commercial marketplace prior to certification by the federal govemment, which means the - NRC will benefit from the lessons loamed at other organizations by these vendors. Data warehousing, modular components, and minimal software customization are just some of the
- distinct features of Altematives 2 and 3; consequen0y the rating assigned to these two l aHomatives is A. Ahemative 1 does not support any process improvements so this altemative is rated C.
l 5.3.5 Benefit 8 - Better Analysis capabilities for Management Doolslon Making NRC managers make important decisions based on the information reported by the agency's financial and resource system, and a system that provides more accurate and timely information to managers will be a significant asset to the agency, in addition, a system that reduces the increasing burden on staff and management to compile and review data which is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of agency-wide programs by consolidating the information in one easily accessible location would be a great aid to managers responsible for making decisions about the agency's resources. Altomatives 2 and 3 are the best for achieving this benefit because the COTS r 'tware 5-12
STARFIRE CPIC COSTS & BENEFITS o soNtions being presented in these attematives track detailed information'such as the status of a procurement action or the date for receipt of goods and services so that managers can analyze expenditure information and take corrective actions when necessary Attematives 2 and 3 are rated A. Attemative 1 provices no support for this benefit so this attemative is rated C. 5.3.6 Benefit 6 More Consistent Data from Single Source Entry A system that captures data once, at the source, will not only eliminate the need to reenter the same data in multiple systems and thereby reduce the data entry requirements, but also reduce errors and inconsistencies and eliminate much of the manual effort required to check the data. The NRC will save resources by utilizing technology, rather than personnel, to ensure more consistent data. Altematives 2 and 3 are the best attematives for achieving this benefit because these two attematives are specifically designed to capture data at the source and electronically share the information, thereby eliminating many of the errors and quality assurance prsblems associated with duplicate data entry. Consequently, the rating assigned to these two attematives is A. Altemative 1 provides no support for this oenefit, resulting in a rating of C. 5.3.7 Benefit 7 - Simpler Technical and Operational Environment The ability to eliminate the agency's collection of non interoperable systems that use a variety of incompatible languages and database management. systems and create a simpler technical V and operational environment, plus eliminate the agency's reliance on another govemment agency to support a critical agency function would be a substantial benefit to the NRC. In addition, a system thr capitalizes on recent technologicalimprovements in software applications such as graphical user interfaces, client server architecture, and intranet browser systems, to make access easier for users would be an even greater benefit. Altemative 2 presents a simpler technical and operational environment that focuses on products that use SyBase, which is an NRC standard product already, which means the programmers and developers will be working with a familiar product base and access to centralized financial data will be made using all Windows GUI screen and intuitive reporting tools which are easier to use and more user friendly. Therefore, Attemative 2 is rated A for creating a simpler technical and operational environment. Attemative 3 relies on a set of products that use ORACLE, which is a new database product for the NRC. This produrt will create a more complex technical and
. operational environment for the programmers and developers because middleware will need to be used in conjunction with the ORACLE products to mask the differences in the operating environment so that the impact on end users is minimal. Therefore, Altemative 3 was rated B for creating a more complex technical environment for the programmers and developers.
Attemative i represents a continuation of the NRC's complex technical and operational environment, so this attemative is rated C. 5 13 m
-]
I I
~
sTAMMRE CMC ! COSTS A BENEFITS O . 5.3.8 Benefit 8 More Timely and Efficient Sharing of information A system that centralizes the agency's financial and resource data in one database will allow the NRC to realize staff efficiencies by maximizing the sharing ofinformation, in addition, this type of a system would also allow the agency to reduce the time associated with paper information flow and realize significant savings in processing time by transmitting information electronically. Ahematives 2 and 3 will promote more timeiy and emclent sharing of information. For example, by automating the procurement process, managers will previewinformation on-line concoming the status of procurement actions, receipt of goods and services, and status of invoice payments. The time savings associated with Altematives 2 and 3 are significant, so these two attematives are rated A. Altemative 1 provides no support for this benefit so that attemative is rated C, 5.3.9 Benefit 9 Better Data Integrity A system that stores the agency's financial and resource data in one consolidated database, that serves as the authoritative repository of resource information agency-wide for a variety of different applications ranging from budget to license fee billing and cost accounting, will allow the NRC to better manage the data and provide more consistent information to the intemal and extemal NRC stakeholders. ( Attematives 2 and 3 are the best for achieving this benefit because the COTS software solutions being presented in these attematives support a centralized database that will be the agency's sole repository of financial and esource information for tracking and reporting. This will provide better data integrity, and both altamatives are rated A. Altemative 1 provides no support for this benefit, so this attemative is rated C. ( 5 14
STARFIRE CPic COSTS & BENEFITS
, ]i Exhibi. J.7 Sur.tmary Table for Non-Quantifiable Benefits N
Comparison of Afternatives Description of (A is best result, C is least desirable, duplicate Non-Quantinable BeneAts scores allowed) MematWe 1 MematWe 2 MematWe 3 Status Quo
- 1. Better Management Control by C A A Integrating Financia' /Resource Pinnning and Execution Data
- 2. Easier for the Agency to Comply C A A with New and Changing Federal Laws and Regulations
- 3. More Accountability for C A A Financial / Resource Expenditures through implementation of Cost Accounting and Performance Measures p 4. Process Improvements from C A A Adopting Recognized Best Practices
- S. Better Analysis Capabilities for C A A Management Decision Making
- 6. More Consistent Data from Single- C A A Source Entry
- 7. Simpler Technical and Operational C A D Environment l
- 8. More Timely and Efficient Sharing C A A of information
- 9. Better Data Integrity C A A O
5 15
l STARr/RE CPtC RISK ANALYSTS
,e A 6. RISK ANALYSIS Q .
The risks associated with implementing each of the three attematives were exami:ad by the Benefit Cost Analysis Team. The risks were divided into four categories: 1) Mission Risk;
- 2) Financial Risk; 3) Project Execution Risk; and 4) Operation and Acceptance Risk. The followin3 risk analysis worksheet contains the risk scores for all three attematives.
Category of Risk Score (1 = low risk,5 = high risk) Ahemative 1 Attemative 2 Attemative 3 Status Quo
~
Mission Risk (Polential to restn'ct agency's ability to 4 2 2 perform mission, or conduct programs to carry out mis *" requirements) The 3TARFIRL L,ect will provide information that allows managers to assess the 'value added* qualty of available resources and make informed decisions about deploying those resources to achieve the highest level of support for th) agency mission. Therefore, the risk of restricting the NRC's abilty to support the rdssion is O(
'y rdnimL 2 Attemative 2 or Attemative
- 3. The riskis greaterif the agency continues to operate under the current scenario, as proposed in Attemative 1, because of the lack of timely and accurate resource data negatively impacts a manager's decision-making abilities.
Financial Risk (Uncertainty of cost estimated for phase 2 3 4 up to project becombg fully operational) Allcost estimates for the STARFIRE Project are based on prelirnnary information, such as estimates for Year 2000 conversion, and pubbely available information, such as costs pubbshed by GSA for software on the FMSS Schedule. These costs are subject to change as better informa. lion becomes available. The finandal risk scores m progressively higher for each attemative due to the increased uncertainty of estimating coets for more technically
,_ complex soluthns.
) 6-1
STARFIRE CPIC RISK ANALYSIS p]
% Category of Risk Score (1 = low risk,5 = high risk)
Ahemative 1 Attemative 2 Ahemative 3 Status Quo Project Execution Risk (Ukelihood that pro}ect could fall due to 2 4 5 design and development complexity, lack of agency experience with similar sizeRype project, technical challenges, fe.g., off-the shelf software vs. custom development, extent to which similar projects are operationalon same hardware platform atthe agency), requiredinterfaces with other systems) The project execution risk for Attemative 1 is trinimet since IRM plans to complete the Year 2000 fixes independent of the STARFIRE Project. Attemative 2 has a I higher project execution risk because of the broad scope of the undertaking, and Allemative 3 has the highest project erecution risk b9Ause of the programmerlearning curve and the [_ \ difficult task of integrating ORACLE , I\ software into a predorrinantly SYBASE environment. Operation and Acceptance Risk (Ukelihoodthatproject can be 2 3 3 successfullyimplemented. Constraints on success include failure to implement full functionality promisedinability to overcome resistance to necessary cultural changes or other non-technical obstacles) The STARFIRE Project has the full backing of the Chairman of the NRC and other senior-levelmanagers, so Attematives 2 and 3 should not encounter a very high level of operation and acceptance risk. Attemative 1 has some associated risk because of the uncertainty sunounding the Year 2000 reprogramming effort. Total Risk Seores 10 12 14 CN V 6-2
STAMMME CMC COMPARISON OF ALTERNATTVES
- 7. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES .
; o I
The following exhibits provide a comparison of the three attematives for STARFIRE. Exhibit 71 l provides a chart which shows co:,ts, FTE levels, bensfrts, and the risk sco:ws for the altamatives. Exhibit 7 2 shows the projected retum on investment for Altematives 2 and 3. Retum on investment is calculated using life cycle totals expressed in present va:ue for the following projected figi,res: Retum on investment = Status Quo Costs ($25,876,965)- Altemative Costs The exhibit also shows Ufe Cycle FTE Year savings. This is the diffarence between the total FTEs associated with the Status Quo over the life cycle ($69.92) and the FTE Years for the 91temative. Art additional cost comparison chari ls included to show the differences in the attematives from another perspective. Exhibit 7 3 compares alllife cycle (FY 1998 FY 2004) non-recurring and recurring cost line items for each attomative. Attornative 1 Status Quo has a life cycle cost of $25,876,965 and 569.92 FTE.
/ Alternative 2 has a life cycle cost of $18,109,092 and.546.58 FTE. Compared with Altemative
( 1, this rcflects a life cycle cost savings of $7,767,873 and 23.34 FTE. Alternative 3 has a life cycle cost of $23,676,112 and $49.58 FTE. Compared with Altemative 1, this reflects a life cycle cost savings of $2,200,853 and 20.34 FTE. 71
(" c' SFIRE7-1.WK4 " 12/15/97 Version N m 3 O EXHIBIT 7-1: COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES Criteria Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Afternative 3 Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core
.=__=.:_===.._ . _ _ _ _ . .
Ufe Cycle Costs $25,876.965 $18,109.092 $23.676,112 (FY 1998 - FY 2004) (Present Value Do!!ars) Y w _ . - . - - . - . . _. .. - _ - - - . . Ufe Cycle 569.92 . 546.58 549.58 (FY 1998 - FY 2004) FTE-Years I Non-Quantitativo A=0 A=9 A=8 Benefits: B=0 0 B=0 B=1 t f (Grade Distribution) C=9 C=0 C=0 Gi O j Risk Score 10 12 14 y ' (Lower Score =Less Risk) " n a N
=
% p..
SFIRE7-2.WK4 12/15/97 VersionI " E n 3 ; EXHlBIT 7-2: RETURN ON INVESTMENT CALCULATIONS i Alternative Life Cycle Cost Savings
- Life Cycle" FTE-Yost Savings ;
(Present Value) Altemative 2 $7.767,873 23.34 STARFIRE with SYBASE Core
?*
u Alternative 3 $2,200,853 20.34 ! STARFIRE with ORACLE Core I i 8 t !
. 2 i
- Difference Between Alternative Life Cycle Costs and Status Quo Life Cycle Costs $
O
" Difference Between Alternative Life Cycle FTE and Status Quo Life Cycle FTE #
S > k 5 n t
- s N
.w t i
f [
STARFIRE CPIC SENS171VITYANALYsts Q SFIRE7 3.WK4 12/15/97 Version h ~ EXHIBIT 7-3: STARFIRE ALTERNATIVES LIFE CYCLE (FY 1998 - FY 2004) COST COMPARISON COST ELEMENTS Altemative 1 Altemative 2 Altemative 3 Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core TNONan-cdRRtNGte9WC23Wu N iaMer mW+eDWMMVeM WMW4M%=J STARFIRE COTS SW (Core / Basic Modules) $0 $1200.000 I $1200.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core /Basici $0 $800.000 $800.000 STARFIRE COTS SW(Additional Modules) $0 $500.000 $500.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Additiona0 ! $0 $350.000 $350.000 STARFIRE RDBMS i $0 ! $0 $2.226.000 STARFIRF. Middleware 50 i 50 $277.000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW $0 I ,3181.800 I $181.800 STARFIRE Warehouse Desian 50 $365.000 I STARFIRE implementation $365.000
$0 $1.160,000 I $1.160.000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS $0 $332.000 i l STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems $410.000 1
50 $615.000 ! $770.000 STARFIRE Speciahzed HW(Servers) 50 i $1.000.000 $1,000.000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion i 50 $235.900 $235.900 _STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel i SO I $200.000 $200.000 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staf0 i VO ( $50,000 I $50,000
=&
"5=,2%c34 P CC#@5%r#bf@idtfM-ssstrM147.:skWWMeMi&RiMMgg sta:mirtM-dsii!
Cateoory 2 Systems Transttion ~ I $77.500 6 $0 ! $0 f@.~ Cateoorv 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes I
$1.104.200 I $1.104.200 1 31.104.200 i Total Non-Recumno i
$1 181.700 i $8 093 900 i $10 829.900 l @EcuRR1NG r:-: - - "=wwe#==t am s+im &6 w w smas nr%shir:m=
STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core / Basic) I
$0 I $1.716.800 $1.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Addrtiona0 i $6 i $715.400 $715.400 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License t
$0 l $0 $1.549200 STARFIRE Middleware SW License t
$0 l 50 $300.000 STARFIRE Warehouse License i 50 i $196.200 i STARFIRE Technical Support $196200 j t
$0 I $1.650.000 I $1.650.000 STARFIRE Inter + aces Maintenance i 30 6 $825.000 STARFIRE Systems / Databases Ops / Admin
$825.000 I $0 t 50 $1.400.000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance >
$0 t $900.000 ; $900.000 STARFIRE Trainina $0 I $225.000 t $225,000
< mm.tn 4m % st my&~ ngpq g:gs-gpgsps.h wm;;g FFS FMS Hourty Charoes i
$2.869.839 $373.400 I $373.400 FFS AMS Normal Charges $4.609.881 Accountina Support t
$599.800 i $599.800 t
$3293.500 $705.750 1 $705.750 Travei Data Entry Support t
$5237.400 $1.122.300 I $1.122.300 FFS Timesharino 1 $5,405,351 $703,300 I $703.300 wwww m::ow &m n+.4Wipx> R:w?t&i?&=zGN 'W4+:m # W M m d x 5 & ?m c a, & % in Category 2 Systems Contractual Support I
$4.404.400 I Catacent 2 Systems Timesharino $943.800 I $943.800 i
31.880 200 I $402 900 i $402.900 Total Recumne t i i y27 700 571 y11.079 650 y14 326 850 T,OTAL COSTS _ i 128.882.271 I $19.173.550 i $25.151750 EESENT VALUE TOTAL COSTS i 125.876JL65 1 $18.109.Q92J $23.676.112 PRESENT VALUE SAVINGS i N/A i $7.767.873 i
/
$2.200.853 7-4 o
sTAnnnE CMC SENsmWTYANALYSIS
- 8. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS .
In this step, the STARFIRE Benefit-Cost Analysis Team varied assumptions which affect the results of the analysis to expand the single incremental cost figure calculated for each altomative (i.e., the base case detailed in Section 5) into range estimates. The exhibits at the end of this section summarize the results of the sensitivity analyses. Appendix C includes the detailed spreadsheets the Team developed for each case. 8.1 Elimination of Year 2000 Compliance costs The base case includes costs to achieve Year 2000 compliance for Category 2 systems even though these systems will be replaced by STARFIRE before the end of the century. The first sensitivity analysis replaces this conservative estimating approach with one in which Year 2000 compliance efforts are not conducted for those systems that STARFIRE will replace. As shown in Exhibit 8-1, this would increase the present value cost savings associated with the two STARFIRE altomatives by over $1 million, 8.2 Acquisition / Implementation of Electronic Signaturing The second sensitivity analysis examines the impact that would occur if initiatives to implement electronic signaturing needed to accomplish financial management functions are not accomplished by other NRC projects and this responsibility must be bome by STARFIRE. The Team gathered information from the State Department on their efforts to acquire and implement electronic signaturing. Based on this data, the Team developed the following estimate: Software development: 8181,600
. Hardware: 870,000 Boards: $490,000 (700 desktops at $700 each)
Smartcards: 88,400 (700 at users at $12 each) The figure of 700 is based on 1 each for the Chairman, CFO, Clo, and EDO; 20 for contracts, ' 651 for Time and Attendance certification staff, and 25 for future growth. The resultant 5750,000 is spread evenly over FY 1998 and FY 1999. Exhibit 8-2 summarizes the results of this analysis. 8.3 Increase in implementation Costs iThe third sensitivity analysis involves the estimates of implementation costs for STARFIRE. The base case cost estimates for vendor services, warehouse design, implementation, interfaces with ADAMS and other systems, and core data conversion, and are built around the best information available at this early stage of the project. The projected total costs for these items are approximately twice the estimated cost for the STARFIRE Warehouse and Core COTS software in Altemative 2. Surveys performed by Newport Consulting Group, a firm that conducts market research on the use of packaged software for business applications, indicate that the ratio of implementation costs to COTS costs generalty ranges from 2:1 (i.e., the ratio in the STARFIRE base case) to 3:1. Therefore, the Team conducted an analysis to determine the impact that would occur if 8-1 i
i STARMME CMC SENSl11VTTYANALYSIS STARFIRE implementation costs are actually at the higher end of the normal spectrum. As ( shown in Exhibit 8-3, the impact of this variance is reflected by a 50% incret.se in costs for implementation line items. The analysis shows that this increase in STARFIRE implementation costs would reduce present value savings by approximately $1.9 million in Attemative 2 and by
$2.0 million in Altemative 3.
1 8.4 Implementation Delay The fourth sensitivity analysis examines a variation in the implementation schedule for STARFIRE. The cost estimates in the base case are predicated on a schedule in which the STARFIRE Core module will be fully operational at the beginning of FY 1999 (October 1,1998) 4 and all other STARFIRE modules will be fully operational by the middle of FY 1999 (April 1, 1999). Cost savings result from termination of FFS and other systems in accordance with this
- implementation schedule. The Team conducted an analysis to determine the impact of a six month delay in the planned STARFIRE implementation schedule. The Team did not vary non-l recurring cost totals but did shift some investment dollars from FY 1998 to FY 1999. As shown j in Exhibit 8-4, the impact of the delay is reflected in increased costs associated with six additional months of operation for FFS and Jategory 2 systems. The analysis shows that a six i month delay in STARFIRE implementation wuld reduce present value savings by
- approximately $1.5 million dollars in both STARFIRE attematives.
. 8.5 Worst Case Scenario f The final sensitivity analysis assesses the combined effect of additional STARFIRE costs for electronic signaturing, a 50% increase in implementation costs, and a six month implementation delay, This worst case scenario includes all of the variations included in Sensitivity Analyses 2, 3, and 4. The analysis shows that in this worst case scenario, present value savings would be ! reduced approximately $4.1 million in Altemative 2 and by $4.2 million in Altemative 3. In this j case, Altemative 3 actually has higher life cycle costs than the Status Quo. 4 I 4 I s 1 i i B-2 e l l
l l . STARM.'E CPIC SENSITIVITYANALYSIS SFIRE81,WK4 12/15/97 Version EXHIBIT 8-1: STARFIRE ALTERNATIVES LIFE CYCLE (FY 1998 - FY 2004) COST COMPARISON SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS IM . ELIMINATION OF YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE COSTS COST ELEMENTS Anemative 1 Anemative 2 Anemative 3 Changed Costs Highlighted in Bold Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core
!!NON3tBCORR1 NOM %N*eWEPEM$5hM6:W'A+mnWN apsamMmmnN;ys D=%tn;mN%g STARFlRE COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules) i $0 $1.200.000 I $1.200.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Sennces (Core / Basic) $0 $800.000 t $800.000 STARFIRE COTS SW(Additional Med6) I
$0 $500.000 $500.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Addrtiona0 $0 $3m.000 $350.000
_STARFIRE RDBMS $0 $0 $2.226.000 STARFIRE Middleware $0 $0 $277,000
... STARFIRE Warehouse SW $0 $181.800 $181.800 STARFIRE Warehouse Desion $0 $365.000 STARFIRE Irr(Aerr.entation $365.000_
$0 I $1.160.000 $1.160.000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS $0 t $332.000 1 STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems $410.000
$0 t $615.000 I $770.000 STARFIRE Specialized HW(Servers) $0 I $1,000.000 $1.000.000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion f $0 I $235.900 $235.900 STARFIRE Polecies and Promdures Devel I
$0 I $200.000 $200.000 STARFIRE Travet (NRC Stafh i SO i $50,000 $50,000 Category 2 Systems Transition
$77.500 i $0 SO Cateoorv 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes $1.104.200 i SO SO Total Ne wRecumna i $1.181.700 i sRECLIR tlNG %* *
- MemhMt.nwm:4e
$6.989.700 i s9.725.700
'n me -
emmmendwWiebrews ' STARFIR_ E COTS SW Licorce (Core / Basic) I $0 $1.716.800 $1.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Addrtionan I
$0 $715.400 $715.400 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License I $0 SO $1,549,200 STARFIRE Middleware SW License I
$0 SO $300.000 STARFIRE Warehouse License I
$0 $196,200 t $196,200 STARFIRE Techrdcol Support $0 $1.650.000 I $1.650.000 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance 50 t $825.000 I STARFIRE Systems / Databases Ops / Admin $825.000
$0 $0 i $1.400.000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance 6
$0 $900.000 I $900.000 STARFIRE Trainino Lyn SO $225.000 I $225,000
, nMW %g:Sm FFS FMS Hourly Chams w '= mr2.w "n % up % f$ w W M m nar;3 e mi n .
I $2,869,839 i $373.400 $373.400 FFS AMS NormalCharges I
$4.609.881 I $599.800 $599.800 Accountino Support I
$3.293.500 t $705.750 $705.750 Travel Data Entry Support $5.237.400 I $1.122.300 I $1,122,300 FFS Timesharino $5.405.351 1 $703,300 ( $703,300 wn:w %M&anunkw&%dyxCw%:=w %%wlMM@iMQM&M&#cmW#s Category 2 Systems Contractual Support I $4.404.400 I $943.800 $943.800 Catessiv 2 Systini. Tirresharino i
$1880.200 I $402.900 $402.900 Totat Recumne i i y?7.700 571 y11079 650 i y14 328.850
~T&TT G QSTS i S28.842.271 i $18 069.350 7 s24&5L550_
JESEff V_6LUET_QI6L.CO. SIS i S25.876.965 s17.040&2s s22.607p45 J ESEN" VALUE SAVltGS i N/A ILS_36JJ9 ! fr CHANGE IN SAVINGS FROM BASE CASE ' $3J69.920_ N/A t $1069 066 i $1.069 066 8-3
FTARFIRE CPIC SENS111VTTYANALYsts SFIRE8-2.WK4 12/15/97 Version m EXHIBIT 8-2: STARFIRE ALTERNATIVES LIFE CYCLE (FY 1998 - FY 2004) COST COMPARISON SENSITMTY ANALYSIS #2. ACQUISITION / IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURING COST ELEMENTS Attematrve 1 Altematrve 2 Altematsve 3 Changed Costs Highlighted in Bold Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core e auea;;40-, m+W2.W@n&Ap;;&Wmm:E preaiWmMM W@rpipreeg STARFIRE COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules) i SO $1.200.000 I $1.200.000 STARelRE COTS Vendor Services (Core /Basici $0 $800.000 i $800.000 STARFIRE COTS SW(Additional Modules) SO SW1000 l $500,000 STARFIRE COTS Ver. der Services (Additional) $0 $350.000 $350.000 STARFIRE RDBMS SO $2,226,000
$0 STARFIRE Middleware $0 SO 1 $277.000
' STARFIRE Warehouse SW $0 $181.800 i $181.800 STARFIRE Warehouse Desion 80 W5.000 STARFIRE Irr.p; err rdstion $365.000 SO $1.160.000 $1.160.000 STARFlf,E Interface with ADAMS
$0 $332.000 $410.000 STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems i SO $615.000 $770.000 STARFIRE Speciskred HW(Servers) I $0 $1.000,000 STARF!RE Electrur,ic Sionaturina $1.000.000
$0 $750.000 $750.000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversoon 80 $235.900 $235.900 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel $0 $200.000 I $200.000
""STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) l
$0 $50.000 I $50.000
, _ _- O _ _ E<e"Wr#MnalRisW%mglis%BaM!MWaMMWiUnia;MRir!'Nsii@iW T Catescre 2 Systems Transstion I $77.500 I $0 30 Ccaecerv 2 Systen,; Year 2000 Ftxes I
$1.104.200 i $1.104.200 $1.104.200 Total Non-Recumna i $1.181.700 i - $8.843.900 $11.579.900 mFrM m;NG;: n ._7;;;;;;;pp.y enigyw-gitypt%m s tit 4y r m. m w 45 W ;gif w w q @ a STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core / Basic) I $0 $1.716,800 $1.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Additional) $0 $715.400 $715,400
_ STARFIRE RDBMS SW License 80 SO $1.549.200 STARFIRE Middleware SW License 30 i SO Svv1000 STARFIRE Warehouse License $0 I $196.200 $196,200 STARFIRE Technical Suppert i SO $1.650.000 31.650.000 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance I $0 $825.000 STARFIRE Systems / Databases Ops / Admin $825.000 i SO $0 $1.400.000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenarice i SO l $900.000 t STARFIRE Trainino $900.000_ inw9w e, I $0 I $225.000 I $225,000 2,-t e-2.-@mbWMcmehW FFS FMS Hourly Charges ' mdwin:sig.w:wwwm
$2.869.839 $373.400 $373.400 FFS AMS Neririsi Charoes I $4.609.881 $599.800 Area.--fuas Support
$599.800 i
$3.293.500 $705.750 $705.750 Travel Data Entry Supperi i $5.237.400 $1.122.300 I $1.122,300 FFS Tirneshanno i $5,405.351 $703.300 t $703.300
&#rAWWaemsw4crd??CWWW.dWWI'S--TC Catescry 2 Systems Cedu.ciual Support W S"C.--
iWif4 C WW I $4.404.400 $943.800 $943,800 Catecere 2 Systems Timesharino i $1.880.200 $402.900 $402.900 Tntal Recumne' i I y27 700 571 y11.079 650 i y14 328 850
'DTAL COSTS $28.882271 4 S25.908j50 3 $99.923.1 6) i RESET 6 VALUE TOTAL COSTS $25.876.965 i t' 8.84,226 6 n ) RESENT VALj,1E SAVINGS $D4 m 402.248_
t N/A I ( CHANGE IN SAVINGS FROM BASE CASE
- N/A -
U7 A1.736 6 (5726 137) s U1.474.717 (5726 137) > k s-4 ( j
f? TARFIRECPIC SENSf7WITYANAL YSIS e SFIRE8-3.WK4 12/15/97 Version ( - EXHIBIT 8-3: STARFIRE ALTERNATIVES LIFE CYCLE (FY 1998 - FY 2004) COST COMPARISON SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS #3 50% INCREASE IN IMPLEMENTATION COSTS COST ELEMENTS Altemative 1 Altemative 2 Attemative 3 Changed Costs Highlightedin Bold Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core 4 DON REi3RRINGF7w ,_; *24trMg41 4sg warig wsngegeS9:My@
@Mer.W:wipi STARFlRE COTS SW (Core / Basic Modules) $0 $1200,000 t $1.200.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic) $0 T1,200,000 $1.200.000 STARFIRE COTS SW(Addrtional Modules) SO $500.000 $500.000
_ STARFIRE COTS Vendor Sennees (Additional) $0 $525,000 $525,000 STARFIRE RDBMS $0 $0 $2.226.000 STARFIRE Middleware 30 $0 I $277.000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW $0 $181.800 l $181.800_ STARFIRE Wardasse Desian $0 $547,500 STARFIRE implementation $547.500 50 $1.740,000 $1.740,000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS $0 $498,000 STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems $615.000 I $0 $922.500 I $1.155,000 STARFIRE Smiehzed HW(Servers) t 50 $1,000.000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion $1.000.000
$0 $353.850 $353,850 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel $0 $200.000 $200,00_0_
STARFIRE. T avel(NRC Staff) $0 $50,000 i M_l~~~ $50 40 p\ ~ _lilp@@dgmissedWsW:WMv54219ENe#N40@Wi@*M Catworv 2 Systems Transition t'}s 1 Cateoorv 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes
$77.500 I $0 i SO
$1.104.200 t $1.104.200 i $1.104.200 Total Non-Recumna i 51.181.700 i j 510.022.850 i $12.875.350 dtECLIRRING WW1 hint r,<s4 mid5edreemn? nee 9:2:En amts-:4:
l STARFIRE COTS SW Ucense (Core / Basic) WreemhW:a:m!Assa i SO I $1.716,800 $1,716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Additionan 30 $715.400 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License $715.400 50 $0 $1,549.200 STARFIRE Middleware SW Limnse $0 $0 $300,000 STARFIRE Warehouse Ue=nse t $0 $196,200 STARFIRE Technical Sert $196.200 t 50 $1.650,000 $1.650.000 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance t
$0 t $825,000 STARFIRE Systems / Databases Oos/Admm $825,000
$0 I $0 $1.400.000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance i $0 I $900,000 STARFIRE Trainino $900.000 I $0 t $225.000 $225.000
% . w-w Wy 9::t:W#me.gn:ph;mr:qm:wx epg mspgr9y.;a g pg 4 g g my:n4 FFS FMS Hourty Charoes
$2.869.839 I $373.400 $373.400 FFS AMS Normal Charnes $4.609.881 l $599,800 Accountino Support $599.800 Travel Data Entry Support
! $3.293300 t .__ $705.750 I $705.750 I $5,237.400 _ _ $1.122.300 t FFS Timesharina $1.122.300 I $5,405,351 $703,300 I $703,300
.arw um.M::AmML&;tgaiaMsmWaew154:L:minishhibieis%E#jsf&sdnM&:1 drpy Catwory 2 Systems Contractual Support I $4.404.400 I $943,800 i $943,800 Catecorv 2 Systems Timesharino 6
$1.880.200 i S402 900 I $402.900 Total Recumne i $27 700.571 i
~
y11079 650 i y14 328.850 36thi~COS1S
~
! T2B,842271 i
$H10.2.500 i S2Z.204.200 ;
...fRESEt[LYALUE TOTAL CQSIS I 125.876.965 i s' REI 76 JRISENT VALVf,LSAVINGJ i N/A '
325MRA19_ p USABI,I_19 $207.906 CHANGE IN SA VINGS FROM BASE CASE u N/A i (C1.880154l < ($1.992 948)__ (i\L 8-5 U
(TARFIRE CPIC SENSillVTTYANALYSIS g SFIRES-4.WK4 12/15/97 Version EXHIBIT 8 4: STARFIRE ALTERNATIVE 3 LIFE CYCLE (FY 1998 - FY 2004) COST COMPARISON SENSITMTY ANALYSIS f>4. SIX MONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS Altemative 1 Altemative 2 Altemative 3 Changed Costs Highlighted in Sold Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core tHON RECtJRRINGW%'*Cti;MetV;%:sub - M @ W E 2diH M;M:i:7 " W Is$1 P +i W C W r!P STARFIRE COTS SW (Core / Basic Modules) $0 $1,200.000 I $1,200.000 _. STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core /Basici 50 $800.000 I $800.000 STARFIRE COTS SW (Additional Modules) $0 $500.000 I $500.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Additional) SO $350.000 $350.000 STARFIRE RDBM!.; $0 $2,226,000
$0 STARFIRE Middleware 30 SO $277,000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW $0 $181.800 $181.800 STARFIRE Warehouse Desion $0 $365.000 $365.000 STARFIRE implementation $0 I $1.160.000 $1.160,000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS $0 I $332,000 $410.000 STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems t $0 i $615.000 I $170.000 STARFIRE Specialized HW(Servers) i $0 I $1,000.000 I $1,000.000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion i 30 $235.900 t $235.900 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel t $0 $200.000 I $200.000_
-STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) i SO $50.000 I $50,000 p) Category 2 Systems Transition
_ wAi.PWtWOFSWM@f@NWF "'MiM'L"#LM@M%hW# I $77.500 t $0 6 50
\d $sserv 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes Total Non-Recumna 4
$1.104 200 I $1.104.200 I $1.104.200 i $1 181.700 t $8 093.900 i $10.829.900
?RECtJRRANG SMgrcNN rjA%;,immeu %: mm s m m nera = n w y w M w a m m a crm:4 STARFIRE COTS SW Lkeree (Core / Basic) i $0 $1,716.800 $1.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Additionar) I SO $715.400 $715,400 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License i 50 $0 $1,549.200 STARFIRE Middleware SW License i 50 $0 ! $300,000 STARFIRE Warehouse License I $0 $196,200 I $196,200 STARFIRE Technical Support i SO $1.500.000 t $1,500.000 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance i $0 I $750,000 t $750,000 STARFIRE Systems / Databases Ops / Admin '
$0 I $0 t $1.400.000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance i SO I $825,000 i $825,000 STARFIRE Trainino i 50 t $225,000 I $225.000
, air # . w. .g. s
- n.mp ; p#:a g.ma +=4sg.d;new:4#ign er FFS FMS Hourty Charoes I $2.869,839 1 $560,100 $560,100 FFS AMS Normal Charges I $4.609,881 i $899,700 $899,700 Accountino Support t $3.293.500 t $941,000 ! $941,000 Travel Data Entry Support 4 $5.237.400 I $1,496,400 I $1,496,400 FFS Timesharino i $5,405,351 1 $1,054,950 t $1,054,950
% M wa m.g gn ,nepa wn m:arMsMa&w=wJ1.mn~mme.uV: sic @sarM Cateoory 2 Systems Contractual Support $4.404.400 i $1.258,400 i $1,258,400 Cateoorv 2 Systems Timesharino $1.880.200 I $537.200 i $537.200 Totat Recumne *
$27 700 571 i i T,15 925 350 y12_676150
[ TOTAL C6STS
~
t S28.882371 ' S20 7/0.050 4 S26.755.256-PRESEN" VALME TOTAL COSIS _j $25.876.965 i
$115AL239 s2L M L684_.
JRELSET VALUE SAVINGS I N/A i SL2SL$66 SI2L281 CHANGE IN SA VINGS FROM BASE CASE N/A i ($1.474 207) i ($1472.573) Q
- 8-6
I?TARMRE CMC SENSfTIVTTYANALYSis SFIRE8-5.WK4
. 12/15/97 Version %=
EXHIBIT 8-5: STARFIRE ALTERNATIVES LIFE CYCLE (FY 1998 - FY 2004) COST COMPARISON SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS #$ ELECTRONIC SIGNATURING,80% INCREASE IN lMPLEMENTATION COSTS, AND SIX MONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS Altemative 1 Attemaove 2 Altemative 3 Changed Costs Highlighted in Sold Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core (NON. RECURRING " - g 4.ea.:V: r$T @ ::'": Mash 4M:c D Unsmntdsi'iw.L i MWieci&rese STARFIRE COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules)
$0 $1.200.000 $1.200.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core /Basici 80 $1.200,000 $1.200.000 STARFIRE COTS SW (Additional Modules) SO 4
$500.000 $500.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Additionau $0 I $525,000 $525,000 STARFIRE RDBMS $0 SO $2.226.000 STARFIRE Middleware $0 $0 $277.000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW $0 $181.800 $181.800 STARFIRE Warehouse Desian 80 $547,500 $547,500 STARFIRE 1mplementation 30 $1.740,000 $1.740.000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS !
$0 t $498,000 i $615,000 STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems $0 t $922,500 $1,155.000 STARFIRE Specialized HW(Servers) SO l $1.000.000 $1.000.000 STARFIRE Electronic Ser.&turino $0 $750,000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion 8'60.000 80 $353.850 $353.850 l STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Deve' i SO sEC,000 $200.000
'/ STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staf0 I . 80 $50,000 $50,000 O sTa n n #r.i # d Bl$im e fp Cateoory 2 Systems Transition 1 $77.500 t SO I $0 CatsGerit 2 Systerr,s Year 2000 Fixes 4 51.104.200 I $1.104.200 6 $1.104.200 Total Non-Recumno i
$1.181.700 i 810.772.850 i S13.825.350 rNECLK;isi,1G-.Hm mevywswnrsweW=wwwmwst:=mem a;.. .:JesesMmw STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core / Basic) I
$0 t $1.716.800 $1.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Additiona0 SO I $715.400 $715.400 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License 50 i 80 $1.549.200 STARFIRE Middleware SW Ucense i $0 t
_STARFIRE Warehouse License '
$0 i sNC.000 STARFIRE Technical Support
$0 t $196,200 i $196,200 t
$0 * $1.500,000 4 $1.500,000 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance i SO i $750,000 $750,000 STARFIRE Systems / Databases Ops / Admin i $0 SO $1.400.000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance i SO , mas 5,000 $825,000 STARFIRE Trainino i 50 ' $225,000 n 4wm:sm r,w $225,000
.,n m e m y m w m m s,m w + 4 e m m y p a g e m ugs q FFS FMS Hourly Charges I $2,869,839 : ? man,100 ?"80,100 FFS AMS Ne,rr.si Charges 1 $4.609.881 i $899.700 S&&i,700 Anwintino Support I
$3293.500 $941,000 Travel Data Entry Support $941.000 I $5.237.400 e $1.496,400 $1,496.400 FFS Timeshanno I $5.405.351 1 81,054,950 $1,054,950 piffM6;Tsim@M@immiti4Me:Wi3i#BMaWE W#1MiiMWp;&E t -. %UMg;dtfqsE Cataserv 2 Systems Contractual Suppert 4
$4.404.400 I $1.258,400 Cateoorv 2 Systems Timesharino $1.258,400
' $1.880.200 i S537.200 S537.200 otal Recumno i $27.700,571 ' $12.67 i.150 i $15.9P5.350 "OTAL CMTF- $2T882.271 i SR. 4410 00 $:1 5l 0.700 PRESEN' VA UE 70TAL COSTS $25.876365 8 i P RESEN" VA UE SAVINGS $F.L171016 SN7.8. 3.17" N/A +
;3.701 149 i 0 :1.976.212L CHANGE IN S4VINGS FROM BASE CASE t N/A .
(C4.066 724) i (D4 177.066) 8-7
STARMRE CMC RESULTS
- 9. RESULTS
\ .
9.1 Cost Summarf
- Exhibits 9-1 and 9 2 graphically compare the life cycle costs for Attemative 2 and Altemative 3 against the Status Quo. As shown, in Exhibit 9-1, Altemative 2 requires approximately $5.6 million in additional expenditures over the Status Quo in FY 1998. In FY 1999, Attemative 2 actually begins to show cost savirsgs as the remaining investment costs are more than offset by major reductions in costs for current systems. In subsequent years, when STARFIRE is fully operational, the NRC will realize significant cost savings (approximately $2.5 million annually in present value dollars).
As shown, in Exhibit 9-2, Altemative 3 requires approximately 88.4 million in additional expenditures over the Status Quo in FY 1998, in FY 1999, this attemative also begins to show cost savings as the remaining investment costs are more than offset by major reductions in costs for current systems, in subsequent years, when STARFIRE is fully operational, the NRC l will realize significant cost savings (approximately $2.0 million annually in present value dollars). 9.2 FTE Summary Exhibits 9-3 and 9-4 graphically compare the FTE levels for Altemative 2 and Attemative 3 against the Status Quo. The only difference between FTE requirements in these altomatives is k that Attemative 3 requires .5 FTE more than Altemative 2 beginning in FY 1999 to provide ' additional support needed for system administration / operation in an ORACLE environment. As shown in the exhibits, approximately 26 additional FTE are required in FY 1998 in both STARFIRE altematives. These FTE are needed to direct the implementation of STARFIRE and to transition existing systems to the STARFIRE framework. A lower level of approximately 10 additional FTE are needed to complete transition activities in FY 1999. In subsequent years, when STARFIRE is fully operational, the NRC will realize an annual savings of approximately 12 FTE due to the efficiencies obtained through agency-wide use of a single, integrated, authoritative financial management system. In addition to these FTE reductions, some of the cost savings described in Section 9.1 will be achieved by reallocating other NRC staff who are freed up from current activities because of efficiencies inherent in the new system. These FTE would accomplish accounting support functions currently performed by contractors thus saving the NRC approximately $6.7 million in actual year dollars over the life cycle. This approach has the additional advantage of reducing the NRC's reliance on contractors to perform govemment financial management functions. 9-1
O ,: /
'd .
SFIRES-t.M4 ,
, _ .m_ _ _. .,__- I O
14 _ _ . . . . .._ 12 - to - e
\
S - \ N 8 - N
,4 _
.__...-e-N. .A-
.-e__.____-e--..
.&. ....--g
_e _ _. 4 1 - ' ' - ~ ~ '~ *~ ~*--- g, ,_,
,A A' -
-e- -
-_e O
w , 2 4 - ,'.
.e - A
-8 -
8 8 10 'l- I e a FREElYear FY 19W~' FY1985 ryanus ry 205f rr acuz 5 SIdlue 005 $4.35f.25 54.185.551 33.554.8vs 55.525.cF ' TV 3155 FYM , e Antr 64Wv6 r 83.5f f.3fg s3.485.5er 7 ,485.wru 33.ss4.2W 95 555.185 5587.555 5554.535 5555.58 K Aneutepiig7C5gfW_95.5W7P'~ - 9878.747- ~ 82.ees.ssi n.SDE.555 3352. ass meer2 sz.550. sus sz.501.533 32.485 3
- AlternMive 2 includes costs to develop Implement and operate STARFIRE poing SYBASE core modules. It else heludes peregel costs in FY 1998 and part et FY 1933 to nsn cu,,ent p w STARFIRE le operemonet.
4 e, r~ W
. _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _. m _.
- p. '%
/
SFIRES-2 WK4 12f1547 Version 48 i EXHIBIT 9-2: STATUS QllO VERSUS ALTERNATIVE 3 C05TSl o 9 14 . . . . - - - - - - --- ~ --- - ~ - - , 4 12 -- ',
's 10 -
's ~ b s
a '. '
, i 6 -
's h s i ya 4 _ E -. -.
y....._____-a..
-e_ _,
N l g.3 2 -
' \ '-< A, -...
A-
. ' ~_._ ..'..
A'
~A'
-A
[ 89 0 - - - - - . o -.-A-~ 2 - 4 . . - ) 8 - I L
.e - , i 10 ' L- ' I 8
+
8 Fis(ElYear
~
~ M 1995 FY19N~ FY 2015 FY 2Mlf I_ $
FY 2002 TYmas ny . s Stett:4 0uo $4.351.385 ~~~ $4.lM.00 s 53.554.818~- ~73.529.005 e Attemstv43' B12.742.259 ~~ S4.105.318 St.498.545 53.465.565 33.403.9F 13.344.255 ! 51.388.148 SI.345.70f S t.327.135
, QJIeiH& liv 53C55t SK 182.574) 90f.742 32.135.073 32.140.945 ~ $2.115.885 51.3fD.004 32.079.945 12.OM.255- I L
i
- STARFIRE Attemative 3 Irctudes costs to develop implement and operate STARFIRE using ORACLE awe modules. It s% indudes perseet costs in FY 1909 and part of FY 1999 to run carrorg systems unld is operational ?
t m% w I h 31 i I r
s? s SFIRE9-3 WK4 - gg7% g, y
=
=
lERHlBIT 9-3: STATUS QUO VERSUS ALTERNATIVE 2 Fil! 3 0 120 - - - -. .- A ~ .s. too . N, 80 - E' ~~E * - - '
'---~S - - - - - - -
-E +
E- - --
-3 - _ _ . _ _ g
' , . . . _ .-._.,_..,.._ 4.___._,_____,,4 _ _ , _ ,
E _ 1 r 20 -
.A- ,
A -A- .A g 0 . - - A 20 A*
.g s . . _
s e a a s y r d, [ Fide 61Y5C FY1998- FYY995 FY2005' FY2001- -- -~' 7 2002 r y m, . Ii Stefue uuo ~ 82.34 8218 of og 31 OO 8I ce 31 33 at gg-i e Alkwnellvi2 -~105 38 "- ~ ~ ~92 Oz 88 24 80 24 30 24 m 2. gy 24- [TAMrdelFv52 r It sewn 0s 26 02 -9 84 11.84 If 84 11 84' 11 M 13 34 -
- Allemative 2 Includes FTE to develop, implement and operate STARFIRE using SYSASE core modules. It also indudes porosol eNorts in FY 1998 and part of FY 1990 to rura current systems unW STARFif'E is operemonel and FTE needed in subsequent years to perform Anoncial management scWvlues prewtously associated wMh replaced systems
.R 9
SFIREb
- Wir4 I 12r1547 Version tft E
= r 3 !
- ret !
l EXHIBIT 5 4:~~STATilBT)UOTERSUS AUERNATNE iWE] 9 O gro .. ...-_ _ _. __ _ . I O f 100 ' t
' ... Ny i i
g n -s . -. -- m-.-.- .- m
----e--- - - - -
.s-------------a
~.. .. _ .. .. . ,_ . _ .
60 - i 40 - , 1 . W 20 -
,A A A
, A g !
0
. A'
\
20 ' A [ e 40 8 8 1 1 : FIRRTear -7 71995' FYlues t Y muu IT2001 i a Stefut Uuo 7 254- 82 18 Bl.05 31 05 TY'1002 ry m yyd
- 81 08 51 05 at Og -
, Alfern60v6 y ' ice 35- 92 52 W 74 W 74 W 74 se ye g 74-
. RAM 6rrleUv63FTESEW 71502 10.34 11.34 15.34 11.34 itsi g g 34-k i
- Ahernetve 3 includes FTE to develop, implement and operate STARFIRE using ORACLE core modules. R e6so heludes pereHel esorte in FY 1998 and part of FY 1990 to nm current systems are STARTME Is operanonal and FTE needed in subsequent years to perform Enencial management actMIIee previoush assodeled seith replaced systems k
E ! i;f b
STARMME CMC RESULTS 9.3 Benefits Summary . The grade distribution for each attemative is summarized below. Grade Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Status Quo STARFIRE with STARFIRE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core A 0 9 8 8 0 0 1 C 9 0 0 l As summarized above and detailed in Section 5.3, using Attemative 1, the Status Quo, as a l baseline, the attematives were rated as follows: Alternative 2 provides all of the potential benefits envisioned for an agency wide integrated financial and resource management system. It will meet the NRC goal for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of financial and resource management and will provide a system which allows the agency to fully comply with all Govemment-wide
, regulations, guidance, including applicable laws and policies. This attemative will create s
a simpler technical and operational environment by eliminating the agency's collection of non-interoperable systems that use a variety of incompatible languages and database management systems. Alternative 3 also allows the NRC to meet the majority of its financial management system goals and objectives. However, this altemative relies on a set of products that use ORACLE, which is not the NRC-standard RDBMS. Middleware will need to be used in conjunction with these products to mask the differences in the operating environment to minimize the impact on end users. Therefore, this attemative receives a lower rating than Altemative 2 (but higher than the Status Quo)in terms of providing a simpler technical and operational environment.
STAMMRE CMC RESULTS 9.4 Risk Summary ' s The table below shows the risk categories and the rankings for each altemative Category of Risk - Score (!= low,5=high) Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Status Quo STARFIRE with STAR >1RE with SYBASE Core ORACLE Core-Mission 4 2 2 Financial 2 3 4 Project Execution 2 4 5 Operation / Acceptance 2= 3 3 Total Risk Scores 10 12 14 As summarized above and detailed in Section 6: Status Quo, Alternative 1 has a high degree qf mission risk. The lack of timely and ( accurate resource information in the current environment will continue to negatively ; impact management decision-making about how to deploy available resources to best support the agency mission. Since this attemative requires only a moderate investment to make necessary enhancements to existing systems and achieve Year 2000 complWnce for these systems, its financist risk is relatively low. The need for Yaar 2000 activities also results in some limited risks in the areas of project execution and operation / acceptance. Alternative 2 has a higher risk than Altemative i primarily because it is a broad undertaking that requires several million dollars in investment funding. Since STARFIRE has the full backing of the Chairman of the NRC and other senior-level managers, cperation/ acceptance risk should not be very high. This attemative reduces the mission risk inherent in the current environment by providing the capabilities and data needed for informed decision-making.
. ~ Alternative 3 has the highest risk of all attematives because it requires the. greatest investment and requires accomplishment of the additional task of integrating ORACLE aoftware into a predominantly SYBASE environment. It provides the same level of mission risk and operation / acceptance risk as Attemative 2.
9-7
STAMMM CMC RESULTS 9.6 Sensitivity Analysis Summary . Exhibit 9-5 summarizes the results of the five sensitivity analyses. The table presents cost savings as a range of values rather than as a single base case. As shown, Attemative 2 is still projected to provide significant cost savings even under scenarios in which implementation costs are higher than the base case or unplanned expenditures (i.e., electronic signaturing) must be bome by the STARFIRE project. Even in a worst case scenario which combines the effects of additional STARFIRE costs for electronic
. signaturing, a 50% increase in implementation costs, and a six month implementation delay, the NRC still will realize a present value life cost savings in excess of $3.7 million.
Altemative 3 provides cost savings over the Status Quo except in the worst case scenario in ' which it actually has estimated costs exceeding those of the Status Quo by nearly $2 million. Attemative 3 cost savings are less than Altemative 2 in all cases, i l s O 9-8
O O O SFIRE9-5.WK4 12/15/97 Versen 5 m ' 9 EXHIBIT 9-5: STARFIRE COST SAVINGS (RANGE) (ORDERED BY AMOUNT OF SAVINGS) Alternative Sensitivity Case Cost Savings : (Present Value)
--: . - -.__ -._ = , = v , = = - - - -
. . _ i Altemative 2 Elimination of Year 2000 Compliance Costs $8,636,939 l STARFIRE with Base Case $7,787,873 t SYBASE Core Acquisition / Implementation of Electronic Signaturing included in STARFIRE $7,041,736 Six Month Implementation Delay $6,293,666 ep 50% increase in implementation Costs S $5,867,719 Electronic Signaturing, 50% increase in implementation Costs, Six Month implementation Delay $3,701,149 Alternative 3 Elimination of Year 2000 Compliance Costs 33,269,920
- STARFIRE with Base Case $2,200,853 ORACLE Core Acquisition / implementation of Electronic Signaturing Included in STARFIRE $1,474,717 Six Month implementation Delay $728,281 l 50% increase in implementation Costs
$207,906 Electronic Signaturing. 50% increase in implementation Costs, Six Month Implementation Delay ($1,976,212) t P
R l 4
STARFIRE CPic _
SUMMARY
OF ANALYSIS
- 10.
SUMMARY
OF /OALYSIS The table below presents the relative rankings of the a ttematives in terms of their costs, FTEs, y benefits, and risks. Afternative Rank (1 is Best: Lowest Costs /FTEs, -E __ Greatest Benefits, Least Risk) Costs FTE Benefit Risk
- s Altemative 1 - Status Quo 3 3 3 1 Attemative 2 - STARFIRE with SYBASE Core 1 1 1 2 Attemative 3 - STARFIRE with ORACLE Core 2 2 2 3 As shown in the table, Altemative 2 offers the lowest cost and FTE levels, and greatest benefits while providing only limited additional risk over the Status Quo. This additional risk,
] which is inherent in any development project, will be minimized by implementing STARFIRE using an off-the-shelf Federal financial management software package operating within the NRC's standard technical reference framework. Altemative 3 does not rank as high as [ Altemative 2 in any category.
- The potential cost savings associated with STARFIRE are significant. Exhibit 101 presents the cumulative cost savings for Attematives 2 and 3. As shown in the exhibit, the projected life cycle cost savings for Attemative 2 are nearly $7.7 million.1he graph also shows that while this attemative requires investment costs in FY 1998 and FY 1999, these costs are quickly offset by recurring cost savings and a break-even point is realized in late FY 2001. Altemative 3 provides lower life cycle cost savings (approximately $2.2 million) and requires a longer period of time (until very late in FY 2003) to reach a break-even point because it includes significant additional expenditures to acquire ORACLE products and build STARFIRE in this environment.
Exhibit 10 2 summarizes the non-recurring (investment) costs for Attemative 2. The NRC will need to make an investment (in actual year dollars) of approximately $6.9 million to implement this attemative. The majority of these costs are associated with COTS software, vendor
' support, implementation, interface development, and server hardware. The recurring cost savings that more than offset this initialinvestment are itemized in Exhibit 10-3. As shown, major savings result in the areas of processing and applications maintenance. The NRC also will realize savings by reallocating FTE that become available due to STARFIRE efficiencies and using these FTE to perform financial management functions previously performed by support contractors.
Exhibits 10-4 and 10-5 present similar charts for Attemative 3 which has higher investment costs and lower cost savings than Altemative 2. 10-1 mm--- -m
k sl(a) ( 1~ t SFIRE101 WK4 12r15/91 Version #
- N
= l 3 '
=
fvt lEXHlBIT 10-1: STARFIRE SAVINUS VERSUS STATUS QOO] 3 O 14 _ _ _ _ . . - . . . l 12 t 10 . I e <
- p, e !
j 6 -
'/
> p j
,.a 4 ,/
l "'
# ~
,e-y ,/"
- h3
<h o . .. _ ---- . _ .-. --. - - -
E' -v' 2 - ,./y e ,7 ,
/y' e
-4 -
-e'
,/
,/
, e '/- ,
~
.a -. E ' ,/
p /' 8 - , ..< i
-10 ' I ' ' ' '
' 1 E65N_FliTTHr rYives FY1ses Rm RN FT M R 2005 FTW '
i Alf6fMWiC f ru N 15.816.7751 - -(54.54Dws: (82333'C' 7DOF- ' sf.5N.175 eiAftsiHeBv63"CuHiiidve 'te.3sO.874)- -{t8.305.f32) (36.171.055) (s4.D35.ffDP
' 35 m.ms sr.m,373 e '
(s t,.5fD.24g _S tes.C 32.200.853 C t t
- Anemeuve 2 includes costs to develop Implernent and operate STARFRE Using SYBASE core inodules It also indudes perslief costs in FY 199e and port of FY 1999 to run current systems u STARFIREls opert.'ional.
~ STARFRE Anemeeve 3 Indudes costs to develop Irnp% ment and operate STARFRE using ORACLE core modules. It also heludes peresolcosts h FY 1998 and partof FY 1998 to run curfent systems ongl is operoWonal.
Y is
v - . SFtRE102.WK4 12/15#97 Versien se i EXHIBIT 10-2: ALTERNATIVE 2 NON-RECURRING (INVESTMENT) COSTS BY CATEGORY i
= i g
(ACTUALJEAR_ DOLLARS) o ! STATUS QUO LIFE CYCLE ALitsueATNE 2 i l COST CATEGORY LINE ITENIS ' COSTS LFE CYCLE LIFE CYCLE ' IFY 19s8-19981 STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE uMEITEIRS COSTS (FY 133313g3) m
- gNESTMENT IFY 199819001 investments in Existing Colegory 2 Systems Essensel Ermancements $77.500 4
Category 2 Systems Essensel Enhancements 30 ! yotegory $UO4 $_s%@ geol 000 Fines 2
.Loia%mg*uno a __2 SystemeJger,2000Eines_
__ _meD,200 oo _$1,104)00
- SMod.200 ___any j STARFIRE NotAppuceble i STARFIRE COTS SW (Coreseele Modules) St.200.000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Servius (Coremesic) 3800.000 STARFORE COTS SW(Addulonel Modules) 5500.000 ,
STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Adduonel) 3330.000 -* STARFIRE RDBMS 30 ; 9 W STARFIREWarehouse#SYBASE 10 S181.800 STARFIRE Warehouse Development $365.000 1 STARFIRE implemonicelon $1.160,000 l
- STARFIREIreerface wNh ADAMS S332.000 STARFIRE Interface wNh Olher Systems $615.000 >
STARFIRE SpedeAred HW(Servers) 31.000.000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion
$235.900 !
STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel $200.000 t
~Toiel _STARFIRE Travel 1NRC SteIO $50,000 !
w-,5TARFIRE w e e w % .mamar e .e - -
~ , - -
-~ - - - - --
5L999 # . m ,95E70055 _2 ;
**a=5 "*
5G.912.200 . The chart above summerites the additional investment (in ocluel year doWors) the NRC will need to make to implement STARFIRE with a SYBASE Core. Th shows that even in the Status Quo Allemative, the NRC wlE need to invest opproximately $1.16 million to implement essenliel enhancements and Yeer 2000 for existing financial systems in the STARFIRE Allemstive, the NRC wlR avoid e.tleling system enhenmment costs but wdI stNI spend ,,,,k4.1.i $1.10 m! Year 2000 fixes to these systems. The NRC wAl need to invest neerfy 36.99 miulon to build STARFIRE. The mejority of these costs are for COTS sonwe vendor services. Implementation, interface development, and server hardware The resultent addihonal investmord required over the Status Quo is 36 $ ~ 3r .91 muuon. i* h ! I a - i
h -
]
SFfRE103 WK4 12fts/97 Version 88 3 EXHIBIT 10-3: ALTERNATIVE 2 RECURRING COST SAVINGS BY CATEGORY g (ACTUAL.Y. EAFLDOLLARS) o COST CATEGORY STATUS QUO LIFE CYCLE ALTERNATfVE 2 LIFE CYCLE LFE CYCLE LINE ITEMS COSTS STARFORE WITH SYBASE CORE COSTS SAvles05 i LINEITEMS j
' processing rFS Timeshering $5.405.351 FFS T*.neehering (Treremon Perlo@
Category 2 T'- .e ..., $1.800.200 Cm 2 Timesharing (Trenomon Period)
$703.300 l S402.900 i STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core /Beelc) 31.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Addsonal) 5715.400 COTSWarehouse License 3198.200
_Herdetero Meintenance 8900,000 lES C.v_ ___ _ 57E32 3 ,463 E4 qB M Appucevons Maintenance FFS FMS Hourly Charges $2.889.839 FFS FMS Hour 9y Chorges (Treneillon Period) 8373.400 FFS AMS Normel Charges 54.809.881 FFS AMS Normel Chorges (Tronellion Period) 3599,800
^
Category 2 Systems 54.404.400 Cseegory 2 Systems (Treneinon Period) $943.800 [ TechnicalSupport S1.850.000 interfaces Meineenance 3825.000 _ _ _ Jtening $225.000 7M3DB IoieIFpNcMione .__ _ _ _ 54.817.000 17J_6L120 Support Contrecie Accounnng Support $3.2s3.s00 Accounung Seport(Trenomon Period) 8705.750 Trevel Dela Er*yyupport ___ $5.237 400 Lre4Dete_ERSgpo_rt (Tpnemon_ Period) 122,300 Totei support contracts _ __ . _ _ _ _S8J36,.fle0 $1'828,0$0_$6JD2.850 nl
.,_.,m. -
._ < .m. . - m . - . . .. - . - - - - - . ~ ~
.... ~ g . _ _ _ . . _.
TOTAL RECURRING $27.700.571 S' 1.079.880 $14.820.921 The chart above summarizes the recurring cost savings (in actuel year dellers) the NRC will reente by implementng STARFIRE with a SYBASE Core. The chert shows that the NRC win save approximately $2.65 melon in Sie cycle sma., costs by replacing ei~...'. ;; timeshering services wilh e OTS-based 8ntstem
- that operates on a modern hardware plet8orm The NRC also wRI save nearly $7.27 million in Rfe cycle app 5 cations maintenance costs by replacing nunm ,
applications that use ver!ous software packages with a single integrated system, Finally, the NRC will save approximately $6.70 mimon in life cycle costs by E reallocating FTE that become svedeble due to STARFIRE efRclencies and using these FTE to perform financial management funchons previously performed by support contractors. The resultant savings to the NRC is $16.62 mimon which more then offsets the initial h.. . .; expenditures { 2 I
, i;
7 A N U ~ SFIRE104.WK4 12/15/97 Version e N
=
5 I EXHIBIT 10 4: ALTERNATIVE 3 NON-RECURRING (INVESTMENT) COSTS BY CATEGORY g (ACTUAL _ YEAR DOLLARS) 3 COS I CATEGORY STATUS QUO UFE CYCLE ALTERNATIVE 3 . UFE CYCLE LINE ITElWS COSTS (FY 1990-1999) STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE LINEITEMS l LFE COSTS CYCLE ADDITIONAL
,'(FY 1996-1999) INVESTRIENT 8
(FY 1998-1999l Investments h Existing Category 2 Systems Essentiel C-th..m..:s $77.500 Colegory 2 Systems Essensel E.-J c_....;. 30 Colegog 2 Sysleys, Year,200,0 Fpes_ _ _ _ $1,104J00 ,C_fjegog 2 Systems Y_eer 2000_ Fires _ $1 WInPa**n't Ep!bg , , , , _ , , _ , , , ,,, _ , _,$M8JJ00 --
$y,10E4 gq(g ,,,,,,gs g l STARFIRE Not Applicable STARFRE COTS SW(Coreseeic Modules) $1.200.000 STARFRE COTS Vendor Services (Core /Besic) 5800.000 !
STARFRE COTS SW(Additional Modules) 5500.000 STARFRE COTS Vendor Services (Additionel) 3350.000 a STARFRE RDBMS(ORACLE) 52.226.000 STARHRE Middlewere $277,000 9 W STARFRE Warehouse SW $181,800 STARFRE Warehouse C;.;:y.. ..; $365.000 STARFRE implementoson $1.160.000 [ STARFRE Interface with ADAMS $410.000 STARFRE Interface with Oswr Systems 5770.000 STARFRE Specialized HW(Servers) 81.000.000 STARFRE Core Data Conversion $235.900 STARFRE PoReles and Precedures Devel $200.000 _ _ _ _ _ _STARFIRE Travel (NRCAsfD 550,000 To __Tel57AylMK_c 50
-- .,... : a .w sfJ2$J00 ,_ 5,9J25J00
=. nmc n TOTAL INVE5TWIENT 51.181.700 510.829.900 59.848.200 The chart above summer!zes the additional lr.shn;(in actual year dollars) the NRC will need to make to implement STARFIRE with an ORACLE Core. The chart 4 shows that even in the Status Quo Allemative, the NRC will need to invest approximately $1.18 million to implement essential enhar cements and Year 2000 fixes E
for existing financial systems. In the STARFIRE Alternative, the NRC will avoid existing system enhancement costs but will still spend approximately $1.10 minion for I: Year 2000 fixes to these systems. The NRC will need to invest nearly $9.73 million to build STARFIRE. Tt:s majority of these costs are for COTS software and COTS $ vendor servi::es. ORAC1.E RDBMS software, implementation interface development, and server hardware. The resultant adddionalinvestment required over the Status T Quo is $9.65 milflon.
m m SFIRE105.WK4 as 12f1547 Version t 0 EXHIBIT 10-5: ALTERNATIVE 3 RECURRING COST SAVINGS BY CATEGONY (ACTUAL _ YEAR. DOLLARS) $ COST CATEGORY STATUS QUO UFE CYCLE UFECYCLE ll ALsevasAT8VE3 UFE CYCLE UNEITEMS COSTS ~ STARFIREWITHORACLECORE COSTS SAynsOS UNE ITERES Processing FFS Timeshering $5.405.351 FFS Timesharing (Trenelilon Perice $703.300 Category 2 Timesharing Sf 880.200 Cologory 2 Timoehering (Trenellion Period) S402.900 STARFIRE COTS SW Liconee (Coreessic) 81.716.800 STARFIRE COTS SW License (Addllionel) 8715.400 RDBMS SW Liconee (ORACLE) 31.549.200 Middlewere SW License $300,000 COTS Warehouse License S196.200 ORACLE Systemoestabases OpetAdmin St.400.0tr' ^ _ToIe'%_oc*es!ng__,
. , . - ~ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . hM*i'Jh'l*!LC' 5 A7551 _M_883,800$o00.000
_ (5598.2 3 Applications Maintenance FFS FMS Hourly Chorges $2.889.839 riS FMS Hourly Charges (Tranellion Period) $373.400 FFS AMS NormelCharges $4.809.881 FFS AMS Normel Charges (Trenelgon Period) $599.800 - Category 2 Systems S4.404.400 Category 2 Systems (Transalon Portog 8943.800 Technicer Support St.e50,000 ineerfaces Meienence Ss25.000 Training 1225 000 jR@LC [ C [_," C i~C C--- ~l M 8H@ 7__ _ _____ Z54.8tJjo00 -- 37J8p7 , Support Contracts Accounting Support $3.2s3.500 Accountng Support (Troneman Perioe $705.75c I JJewelDe E *y L Support __ $5.237 4M ,LrgyplDe Erey,Suppgrtirer!gmonfoM_,,J1 122.300 _58.sst00 _t5iil support Corescio_ ${42e.080 e; .,m mm - >~< .m m , . _v.m - - . - m m.- m, m-=m.m ss.702.850 mm tm TOTAL RECURRING S27.700.571 S14.328.850 S13.371.721 The chart above summarizes the recurring cost savings (in actuel year donors) the NRC wm reeNze by implemenung STARFRE wNh an ORACLE Core. The chart f shows that the NRC wM actueNy spend an addmonal $.00 mRNon in life cycle processing costs by replacing Umeshanng services wth a COTS-booed system that l requires ORACLE-speelAc Ncenses and support. However, the NRC wW save nearly $7.27 milBon in Me cycle appNeshons maintenance costs by replacing D numerous appNcaHons that use various soRware packages with a single integrated systen Finopythe NRC wm save approximately $6.70 mIRon in Ble cycle
- costs by resNocating FTE that become available due to STARFIRE efilciencies and using these FTE to perform financial management funesons previously k performed by support contractors. The resultant savings to the NRC is neerfy $13.37 muBon which more then oNeets em intel investrrent expendNures
.n si
STARRRE CMC APPENDIXA ( APPENDIX A: CPlc DATA ASSUMPTIONS
~
COSTESDMADON SOURCES AND ASSUMPDONS The following pages present complete details of the sources and assumptions the STARFIRE Benefit Cost Analysis Team used to develop cost and FTE estimates for each attemative. o - O A-1
STARPNtE CMC DATA AssuntPn0Ns. GENERAL n (j CPic DATA ASSUMPTIONS General Assumptions:
- 1. Interfaced Systems (Category 1 Systems) . Status Quo and Altomatives 2 & 3: The resources reflected in the Status Quo and in Attematives 2 & 3 for systems that will inte: Tace with the STARFIRE system are reflected as cost differences for operation (i.e., if a system will require more FTE effort or dollars to operate in the current environmalt (Status Quo), only those additional FTE or dollars are reflected in the CplC. Conversely, if there is more effort associated with operating in Alterative 2 or 3 than in Status Quo, only those additional FTE or dollars would be reflected in Altematives 2 or 3.). This assumption to reflect the CPlc costs in this manner for those systems that will interface with the STARFIRE system reflects the conclusion that if total operating costs for such interfaced systems as PAY /PERS and ADAMS were included in this CPIC, it would inaccurately represent the cost data for STARF!RE and create a significant distortion of the data.
l
- 2. Replaced systems (Category 2 Systems) . resources reflected for replaced systems in the Status Quo and in Altematives 2 & 3 reflect total resources for operation.
- 3. Based on the large number of systems and semi-automated processes to bs replaced by
- h. STARFIRE, the team selected the systems that would be included in this review based on the following criteria: 0.5 or more of NRC staff support, contractual support costs, or-timeshare costs. Based on this criteria,45 of the 101 systems or processes to be replaced by STARFIRE were included in this review and for which mourring costs wem collected and are reflected in Alternatives 2 & 3. .This selection reflects 90% of systems FTE costs,100%
of contractual support costs, and 100% of timeshare costs for all replaced systems and > semi-automated processes. A-2
STARFIRE CPic DATA As5UMPTIONS ALTERNATIVE 1 Alternative 1: Status Quo NON-RECURRING COSTS Contractual Support: Essential Enhancements: FFS: No estimate was developed for essential enhancements for FFS. Costs for essential enhancements would be reflected in the cross-servicing charge to the NRC (FFS recurring costs). [FY 1913-2004:-0-) 3 Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1. [FY 1998-2004: )
)
Category 2 Systems: Information was collected from the offices by the team, and information was provided by 0C10. This information was used to develop an estimate for FY 1998 only. [FY 1998: 577,500] YR 2000 Compliance: FFS: No estimate was developed for FY 2000 comp.iance for FFS. Costs for FY (G 2000 compliance would be reflected in the cross-servicing charge to the NRC (FFS recurring costa). [FY 1998-2004:-0-) Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1. [FY 1998-2004: ) Category 2 Systems: Contractor hours were provided by 0C10. This data was converter 1 to a contractual support dollar value at a cost of $65/hr. plus a 25% additional cost for overhead. The resultant cost was divided equally between FY 1998 and FY 1999. [FY 1998: $552,100; FY 1999: $552,100) (9 A-3
srAMMME cmc DATA AssuupnONS
- ALTEMNAnW 1
~
RECURRING COSTS Contractual Suppori: FFS: Historical billings vare used to develop a FY 1998 estimate. A 3.1% annual factor (through FY 2004) was added for increased costs for the support of an aging system. This factor is based on historicalincreases. Accounting support and travel data entry support was collected from historical contract costs and were used to develop FY 1998 estimates. Assumes costs will be consistent through FY 2004. . [FMS Houriy Char 9es: FY 1998: 5373,400; FY 1999: 4384,975; FY 2000: $396,910; FY 2001: $409,214; FY 2002: $421,899; FY 2003: $434,978; FY 2004: $448,463) [AMS Normal Charges: FY 1998: 8599,800; FY 1999: 6618,394; FY 2000: 8637,664; FY 2001: 4657.328; FY 2002: 5677,706; FY 2003: 8698,715; FY 2004: 8720,375] [ Accounting Support: FY 1998 2004: 5470,500) [ Travel Data Entry: FY 1998 2004: 8748,200) Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) Category 2 Systems: CSC provided data from their Portfolio database that reflects ams contractor costs for system enhancement and maintenance from FY 1993 through g Q], August 1997. The ustabase does not currently. include CSC contractor costs for FY 1997; this data was orovided by CSC via a fax dated 9/5/97. The data provided was used to develop an averego cost for FY 1998 and assumes costs will be consistent throu9h "Y 2004. [FY 1998 2004: 5629,200] Timeshare: FFS: Historical billings weie used to develop a FY 1998 estimate. A 3.1% annual factor (through FY 2004) was added for increased couts for the support of an aging system. 41s factor is based ori historical increases. [FY 1998: $703,300; FY 1999: $725,102; FY 2000; $747,580; FY 2001: $770,755; FY 2002: $794,649; FY 2003: $819,283; FY 2004: $844,681) Category 1 Systems: refer to General Ast.umption #1 [FY 1998 2004: .r).) Category 2 Systems: Based on historical data provided by 0C10 from a tirneshare run dated 9/2/97. Assumes FY 1998 costs will be consistent through FY 2004. [FY 1998-2004: $268,600) ' A4
_ - - . - _ = . . . _ . . . _- .____.- -.- .__-.. _ _ _.-_ _- _ _ . STAMMME CMC DATA ASSUMPTIONS. ALTERNATTW 9 i
) .
- NON RECURRING COSTS /FTE FF8: Assumes no NRC level of effort for essential enhancements and FY 2000 compliance. Assumes all costs for FFS essential enhancements and FY 2000
- compliance would be reflected in FFS recuning costs. [FY 1998-2004
- -0-)
Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1. [FY 1998-2004:-0-) Category 2 Systems: Assumes a 1 FTE level of effort for every $500K of non-recurring contractual costs. [ Essential Enhancements: FY1998: .16 FTE] fFY 2000 Fixes: FY 1998: 1.10 FTE: FY 1999: 1.10 FTE) RECURRING COSTS /FTE FF8: Data was collected from OC and was used to develop a FY 1998 FTE estimate and assumes FY 1998 FTE estimate will be consistent through FY 2004. [FY 1998 2004: 31.38 FTE] i Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1 and assumes FY 1998 FTE estimate will be consbtent through FY 2004. [FY 1998-20e 1: 4.34 FTE] O
'Q Category 2 Systems: Hours expended for data e[1try/ data maintenance, system utility programs, data reporting and analysis, and system management / project management activities were report 3d by the offices via system information forms that were provided to the offices. This office input data was calculated by CSC and was used to develop FY 1998 estimates.
The hours data collected was conver.ed to FTE based on 1800 hrs./per year (OMB standard of 1776 hrs /yr. rounded to 100 hrs /yr.) and assumes FTE estimate will be consistent through FY 2004. [FY 1998 2004: 45.36 FTE] 9 l U A5
l l . l STAMFNtt CMC i DATA AstUMPTIONS ALTERNATrVE2 Attemative 2 assumes that: , f . all Status Quo systems will be operational in FY 1998, j the STARFIRE Core will be implemented for FY 1999 operation (October 1,1998), I
- - additional modules will be phased-in as appropriate, Category 1 systems will be interfaced with STARFIRE based on a phase-in plan,
- Category 2 systems will be phased-out and eliminated as required.
NON-RECURRlNG COSTS i Contractual Support: ll STARFIRE: FY 1998 and FY 1999 estimates were developed based on an independent Govemment cost estimate (IGCE), prios quotes from vendors market surveys, data from l Planning Research Corp, (PRC) under Govemment wide Super Minicomputer (SMP) contract, estimates developed by the STARFIRE team, FEDSIM contractors, and Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), it should be noted that there is no estimate for a relational database management system (RDBMS). This is based on the fact that NRC currently has a 8Aase licence through FY 1999. This also assumes NRC will continue to use Sybase as its technical reference model (TRM) [FY 1998: 85,736,200; FY 1999: 81,253,500; FY 2000 2004:-0-) O Systems Transition: . FFS: Assumes FFS will be fully operationalin FY 1998 and assumes there will be no FFS costs associated with the transition to STARFIRE in FY 1999. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) Category 1 Systems: Assumes all Category 1 Systems will be fully operational in FY - 1998. Costs for transition are reflected in STARFIRE estimate for *interfeos with other systems."_ Assumes approximately $100K in FY 2002 for interfacing with the planned payroll / personnel system, however, this cost is not reflected as the cost will remain the same for Status Quo or Altomative 2 (General Assumption #1) [FY 1998 2004:-0-) Category 2 Systems: Assumes all Category 2 Systems will remain fully operational in FY 1998. - Assumes no contractual costs (all costs will be reflected in FTE) for systems
+
transition as all Category 2 systems will be replaced by STARFIRE. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) A-6
STAMMME CMC DATA ASSUMPTIONS
- ALTEMNATIVE 2 \
(/ YR 2000 Compliance: FFS: No estimate developed for FY 2000 compliance consistent with Attemative 1 4 (Status Quo) non recurring costs assumption. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1, [FY 1998 2004: 0-) Category 2 Systems: Consistent with Attomative 1 (Status Quo) non recurring cost assumption. Assumes FY 2000 fixes will be implemented and no assumptions are made concoming the impact of STARFIRE development and implementation. (FY 1998:
$552,100; FY 1999: $552,100)
RECURRING COSTS Contractual Support: STARFIRE: Assumes STARFIRE Core module will be fully operational for FY 1999 (October 1,1998). FY 1999 estimates were developed based on an independent govemment cost estimate (IGCE ) market surveys, price quotes from vendors, data from Planning Research Corp. (PRC) under govemment wide Super Minicomputer (SMP) contract, estimates developed by the STARFIRE team, FEDSIM contractors, and
) Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). . \V [FY 1998: $50,000; FY 1999: $822,700; FY 2000-2004: $1,071,500 $1,109,600)
FFS: Assumes FFS will be fully operationalin FY 1998. Costs are consistent with Altemative 1 (Status Quo) recurring cost estimates. Assumes FFS operation will terminate in FY 1999 and that the S TARFIRE Core module will be operational for FY 1999. Assumes, however, M level of effort of Attomative 1 (Status Quo) estimate for accounting support and travel data entry support for STARFIRE implementation in FY 1999. [FMS Hourly Charges: FY 1998: $373,400; FY 1999 2004: ) [AMS Normal Charges: FY 1998: $599,800; FY 1999 2004:-0-) [ Accounting Support: FY 1998: $470,500; FY 1999: $235,250; FY 2000-04: ) [ Travel Data Entry: FY 1998: $478,200; FY 1999: $374,100; FY 2000-04:-0-) [Timeshare: FY 1998: $703,300; FY 1999 2004: ) Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1 for both contractual support and timeshare costs. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) A7
STARFIRE CPIC DATA ASSUMPT10HS ALTERNATIVE 2 p ' k " Category 2 Systems: Assumes all Category 2 systems will be fully operationalin FY 1998. Costs are consistent with Attemative 1 (Status Quo) estimates for recurring costs for contractual support and timeshare. Assumes M level of effort in FY 1999 for contractual support and timeshare as STARFIRE modules are implemented and Category 2 Systems are phased out. < [ Contractual Support: FY 1998: 5629,200; FY 1999: $314,600] [Timeshare: FY 1998: $268,600; FY 1999: $134,300) NON RECURRING COSTS /FTE STARFIRE: Estimates were developed by the STARFIRE team, FEDSIM contractors, and Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), assuming a STARFIRE tcam consisting of support from OCFO (3 FTE), OClO (2 FTE), and support for policy and procedures development (1 FTE) for FY 1998 and FY 1999. [FY 1998: 6 FTE; FY 1999: 6 FTE] Systems Transition: FFS: Assumes some level of FTE effort required to transition from an independent system to the STARFIRE system. The assumption for the level of effort is estimated to be 1/4 of the status quo FTE effort for FY 1998. [FY 1998: 7.85 FTE] y Category 1 Systems: Assumes some level of FTE effort to transition interfaced systems with STARFIRE. Assumes .5 FTE for contractualinterface estimates over
$100K and .3 FTE for contractual interface estimates less than $100K expended over a 2 year period (FY 1998 and FY 1999).
[FY 1998: 1.85 FTE; FY 1999: 1.85 FTE) Category 2 Systems: Assumes some level of FTE effort to transition to STARFIRE. Assumes % of the annual Status Quo FTE expended over a 2 year period (FY 1998 and FY 1999) [FY 1998: 9.48 FTE; FY 1999: 9.48 FTE] Year 2000 Compliance: FFS: Assumes no NRC FTE efrort for FY 2000 compliance consistent with Altemative 1 (Status Quo) non-recuning cost assumption. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) Category 1 Systems: refer to General Assumption #1. [FY 1998 2004:-0-) Category 2 Systems: Assumes a 1 FTE level of effort for every $500K of non-recurring contractual costs consistent with Attemative 1 (Status Quo) non-recurring cost assumption. [FY 1998: 1.10 FTE: FY 1999: 1.10 FTE]
.c v
A-8
STAkflME CPIC DATA ASSUMPTIONS. ALTERNATTVE 2
,m
~
RECURRlNG COSTS /FTE STARFIRE: Estimate of STARFIRE FTE was devcloped based on estimates t f current FFS system operation (Status Quo) and identification of projected FTE savings in transitioning from FFS to STARFIRE. [FY 1998: 1.0 FTE: FY 1999: 31.73; FY 2000 2004: 35.23 FTE) FFS: Assumes FFS will be fu'/ operationalin FY 1998. FTE estimate is consistent with Attemative 1 (Status Quo) F7 E estimate. Assumes FFS will be eliminated in FY 1990. [FY 1998: 31.38; FY 1999-2004; 0 ) Category 1 Systems: Assumes all Category 1 Systems will be fully operationalin FY 1998. FTE estimate is consistent with Attemative 1 (Status Quo) FTE estimate. FY 1999 estimate is based on estimate of approximately 6 months of Category 1 Systems operation in a Status Quo environment. FY 2000-2004 estimate is consistent with General Assumption #1. [FY 1998: 4.34 FTE: FY 1999: 2.17 FTE: FY 2000 2004: 0-) Category 2 Systems: Assumes all Category 2 systems will be fully operationalin FY 1998. FTE estimate is consistent with Alternative 1 (Status Quo) FTE estimate. FY 1999 estimate is based on M of projected FTE savings in FY 2000. FY 2000 estimate is based on the identification of projected FTE savings in transitioning to STARFIRE and eliminating the Category 2 systems. [FY 1998: 45.36 FTE: FY 1999: 39.69 FTE; FY 2000-2004: 34.01) V[N
\
f!d A9
STAMflRE CPIC DATA AssUMP110NS. ALTERNATIVE 2 (
- NON RECURRING COSTS COTS SW (Core Easic & Modules): Based on independent govemment cost estimate (IGCE) and market surveys. [FY 1998: $1,200,000)
COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic): Based on IGCE and market surveys [FY 1998: l
$800,000) '
COTS Software (Additional Modules): Based on IGCE and market surveys (Fy 1998:
$500,000]
- COTS Vendor Gervices (Additional): Based on IGCE and market surveys [FY 1998: $350,000]
,RDBMS: Assumes no cost for a Sybase relational database management system. NRC currently has a Sybase ;icense through FY 1999. Also assumes NRC will continue to use Sybase as its technical reference model. [FY 1998 2004: 0-)
Warehouse /Eybase 10: Based on Sybase price quote cbtained by Computer Sciences Corp. (CSC). [FY 1998: $181,800] Warehouse /Sybase IQ Design (includes costs to establish the warehouse and design the data O retrieval tool for NRC standard reporting): Cost estimate is based on 1 senior systems analyst Q (at estimate of $200,000/yr.),1 systems analyst (at estimate of $100,000/yr.), and 1 technical writer (at estimate of $65,000/yr.) for a one-year period of performance. [FY 1998:-0 ; FY 1999: $365,000) Implementation (includes definition, design, engineering, development, installation, and deployment): Cost estimate is based on 3 senler systems analysts (at estimate of $200,000 per analyst /yr.),2 systems analysts (at estimate of $100,000 per analyst /yr.) and 2 technical writers (at estimate of $65,000 per writer /yr.) for a 15-month period of performance. Assumes approximately 75% of effort in FY 1998 and 25% in FY 1999. [FY 1998: $870,000; FY 1999:
$290,000)
Interface with ADAMS (includes costs for contractor effort to work with the software vender to integrate workflow, electronic signaturing solutions, document scanning, document storage and
. retrieval): Cost estimate is based on 2 senior systems analysts (at estimate of $200,000 per analystlyr.),2 systems analysts (at estimate of $100,000 per analyst /yr.), and 1 technical
- writers (at estimate of $65,000/yr.) for a six month period of performance. Assumes l approximately 50% of effort in FY 1998 and 50% in FY 1999.
[FY 1998: $166,000; FY 1999: $16F,000) Interface with Other Systems: Cost estimate is based on 2 senior systems analysts (at estimate of $200,000 per analystlyr.),2 systems analysts (at estimate of $100,000 per analyst /yr.), and 1 technical writer (at estimate of $65,000/yr.). Assumes a one year period of m performance for the senior systems analysts and the technical writer, and a 3/4-yr. period of IG h performance for the systems analysts. Assumes approximately 50% of effort in FY 1998 and l A 10 l
STARFIRE CPic DATA ASSUMPHONS. ALTERNA11VE 2
] 50% in FY 1999. [FY 1998: $307,500; FY 1999: 307,500)
Specialized HW(Servers): Cost estimate is based on vendor quotes for estimated baseline equipment. STARFIRE will require a production environment consisting of a main server and application tier servers (with a potential for 32 bit client desktop software). Included are costs for a data warehouse / transaction restoration server, an Intemet web server, and a disaster recovery server. Also included are costs for application development hardware for modules that will require custom development. The estimate also includes some funding for potential requirements for agency desktop upgrades to support development and implementation of the system. [FY 1998: $1,000,000) Core Data Conversion: Assumer Core data conversion at an estimate of 15% of hourly charges and 30% of normal charges for current FFS operation. [FY 1998: $235,900) Policies and Procedures Development: Estimate based on 1 contractor level of effort at approximately $200,000 per contractor expended over a two year period. [FY 1998: $100,000; FY 1999: $100,000) Travel (NRC Staff): Estimate based on prior NRC systems development and assessment of STARFIRE level of effort. [FY 1998: $25,000; FY 1999: $25,000] p V RECURRlNG COSTS COTS SW License / Core / Basic: Based on independent govemment cost estimate (IGCE) and i ' market surveys. Assumes systems will not be operational until FY 1999. Estimate includes FY 1999 2004 costs with a 7% annualincrease. [FY 1998:-0-; FY 1999: FY 2004 $240,000 - 336,000) COTS SW License (Additional): Based on IGCE and market surveys. Ast,ume system wi'l not be operational until FY 1999. Estimate includes FY 1999 - 2004 cost and manualincrease. Estimate includes FY1999. Estimate includes FY 1999 - 2004 costs, with a 7% annual incr* .se [FY 1998: -0 ; FY 1999-FY 2004 $100,000 - $140,300).
. Warehouse License / Support: Based on Sybase price quote obtained by Computer Sciences Corp. (CSC). Assumes system will not be operational until FY 1999.
[FY 1998:-0 ; FY 1999 2004: $32,700) Technical Support contractor level of effort at appmximately $200,000 per contractor. Assumes custom modules will not be operational until FY 1999 and assumes % level of effort required in FY 1999. [FY 1998: -0 ; FY 1999: $150,000; FY 2000 2004: $300,000) A 11
e STARM~E CMC DATA ASSUMPnONS
- ALTERNAnVE 2 Interfaces Maintenance: Assumes .75 contractor level of effort at approximately $20b,e20 oer contractor. Assumes system will not be operational until FY 1999 and assumes M level of effort requires in FY 1999. [FY 1998:-0 ; FY 1999: $75,000, FY 2000 2004: $150,000)
Systems / Database Ops /Adm.: Assumes no cost for system database operations and administration. This requirement is currently met by NRC capabilities. (FY 1998 2004:-0-) Hardware Maintenance: Assumes approximately 15% of hardware costs for maintenance in FY 1999 2004. [FY 1998: -0 ; FY 1999 2004: $150,000) Training: Based on independent govemment cost estimate (IGCE). . [FY 1998: 50,000; FY 1999: $75,000 FY 2000 75,000; FY 2001 25,000) NON RECURRING C_0_STS/FTE Estimates were developed by the STARFIRE team, FEDSIM contractors, and Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), assuming a STARFIRE team consisting of support from OCFO (3 FTE),0C10 (2 FTE), and support for policy and procedures development (1 FTE) for FY 1998 and FY 1999. [FY 1998: 6 FTE: FY 1999: 6 FTE] (( RECURRING COSTS /FTE Estimate of STARFIRE FTE was developed based on estimates of current FFS system operation (Status Quo) and identification of projected FTE savings in transitioning from FFS to STARFIRE. [FY 1998: 1.0 FTE; FY 1999: 31.73; FY 2000 2004: 35.23 FTE]
.O (V
A 12
i l
\
STAMMME CMC DATA ASSUMPRONS ALTERNAnVE3 l All assumptions for Altemative 3 are consistent with Attemative 2 except for those costs , directly required to support an Oracle operating environment as follows. NON-RECURRING COSTS: includes additional costs for an Oracle relational database management system (RDBMS), middleware to transition Sybase data to an Oracle i environment, and additional costs to interface ADAMS and other NRC systems to STARFIRE. l [FY 1998: $2,619,500; FY 1999: 8116,500) RECURRING COSTS: includes additional costs for Oracle RDBMS SWlicense/ support, middleware SW license / support, and for systems database operations / administration.
; [FY 1998: 5200,000; FY 1999 2004: 8508,200]
i EIE: Includes additional FTE for STARFIRE systems / databases operations / administration to support an Oracle operating environment. [FY 1998:-0-; FY 1999: .5 FTE] A 13
ETAMMME CMC DATA ASSUMPTIONS ALTEMNATIVE3 ( ' All assurnptions for Altemative 3 are consistent with Attemative 2 except for those costs dir required to support an Oracle operating environment as follows: NON RECURRING COSTS: RDBMS: Estimate based on Planning Research Corporation (PRC) data available under 9ovemment wide Super Minicomputer Program (SMP) contract with a 60% discount based on FEDSIM contractor experience [FY 1998: $2,226,000) Middleware: Estimate based on price quote obtained by Computer Sciences Corp. (CSC). [FY 1998: $277,000) Interface with ADAMS: Assumes approximately 25% additional cost in contractual support to interface with an Oracle RDBMS. Assumes 50% level of effort in FY 1998 and 50% in F [FY 1998: $205,000; FY 1999: $205,000) ' interface with Other Systems: Assumes approximately 25% additional cost in contractual support to interface NRC systems with an Oracle RDBMS. Assumes 60% level of effort in FY 1998 and 50% in FY 1999. [FY 1998: 385,000 FY 1999: $385,000) il RECURRING COSTS: RDBMS SW License / Support: Estimate based on Planning Research Corporat'on (PRC) data available under govemment wide Super Minicomputer Program (SMP) contract with a 60% discount based on FEDSIM contractor experience. [FY 1999 2004: $258,200) Middleware Maintenance: Based on independent govemment cost estisnate (IGCE) [FY 1999 2004: $50,000) Systems Database Ops /Adms.: Assumes 1 contractor level of effort at approximately $20r' 000 for requirement for an Oracle database systems administrator, [FY 1998-2004: $200,000) RECURRING COSTS /FTE: Assur, o an additional .5 FTE level of effort in system operations / administration to support an Oracle operating environment. [FY 1998-2004: .5 FTE) 3 O A-14
STAnnnE cmc m, .. \
^
APPENDlX B: CPic DATA SPREADSHEET COST /FTE DETAILS FOR CURRENT SYSTEMS The following pages provide a listing of costs and FTE resources associated with each current system under all three altematives. 1 e 4 e B-1
m . _< _ , .m. m--- . _.m, -
- . _ - . . . . .- - - ..-..- _ _-. _ -- __ - m -_ ...._. -_ _ -- -- - - - . -- . - - -. -. .
A s I i-l. SFWEESC VWie G. i SMTUS M t P P"'""' 96 a C f 3 o - . C g U N MMM NNM i
*tsuses Aensey se sTapP sPPT. cessuscT.1usessut. FYtese fysess fTsees EY1ege i j
Osg cassessy e T 980W515 QF1tl SPT. COST EppeaseCE TEAft 3I00 E9WesseCE TEast sees Assesamou tamme l l sent gust gese seso seg gese
*pagget PAIDOS ADes t snamente
- 1 3380 188 1
- Mess ADas 1 Ismovemeo
- Demannsd emmasseum syseme 1 45F2 2 94 ,
Peupesty Ammandug Spaanse )- **es,,.e,e Pas somer3 suas neueste * *
.e .ese a semeyesseesm (
,m ro
. u.racts
.t is es -
i . ==
= c s m.s s Oo rosanesew
.m r. cts m % s,.i nm ;
Tares 88859 9 temenee
- 1 8 9 99 -
> *,305
= us Tsunagust W Pusampr esumsuman s,sene u.a.o - i . .= {
'9795 UOpsg sesgS 1 basemme
- 1 9 0 80 e e ,
4 *gpes stPS seput t tituents
- 1 0 9 98 timmungsietussessunOW 9,same {
i' *tege PA 6 OP 1 anessemee
- f 9 9 99 Itemunerpengsme W !
3sgo stess Passempuumummes MEs 1 temento
- 1 9 SSB {
l Tomat tuensemeo
- 11 7992I 4 Jet esI 55E 55I 8tusem e h causeymnume9,unse ('
I,. 5.51 est 9.33 ,
! t i I l
i s h3 > I 4 ! J i ! [
; 4 l
t i f t l i ) 1 4
?
t ie t Patt ',
- . . . _ _ . . . ~. . .- .-. . - .
+ .+,---~...+----a . ~ ~ . . - . . . ,,n, a.ns~-=.. .. --.<~.-_.a..n,,...a -x-._~--,--.-a-n j .
5 0 - - 111111 I Illlll I11!!!1 .
- i$ , ;
[$ r
; k
'lls si '
Ilir - O jg m ; ti ilirn a llIllI U O D E s. I
. paat 8 888888E I}
I En [t. lEEE1
! .....! !I.!!.!!-
B ?.
75 y D SFWtE80 VIK4 s, _ _ STATU5 0UO % P MWCsfG SMEETS D R C 2
- - O 9 C U JIECUUIFRUS_ COSTS KACpt ?EAfD ff0Pf ret,UfWWUSIONEnWEECSTSB O E
*Invefe Attisee ps sTArF sprT. CwfstCT Tueesset. FTigge ry1ges FTiese FTtsee I Osg Category Dopoelnen T NOURS grTE) SPT. COST EteMANCE YEA 8t3eOS ESIMA8eCE YEAft 3000 mam poem. O f980 198Q 498 0 19N) 888Q 198Q
*pfS006 EDI ADM 2 Repeace 1 1800 1 00 SO Enocerede Dees tiewcpunge
'3030 AOC ADef 2 Repence 9 1S8 0 00 09 30 38 3 35 g Aesenseessee si,sget Caseuf
'H0020 CAPS ADef 2 Stepeace 1 1144 0 94 Caseecas and Paymsseg gyses,.
'Ns3029 IPcvfRACK ADh5 2 8tepeace 1 200 0 14 02 busesce inscheng Symese
'HnO29 CTTRACK ADRS 2 Reptoco 1 572 0 32 47 Cente t Tweettig Syssem
*NS007 CoastReposesig ASt.5P 2 Replete 1 1920 1 01 ASt9P aussmesse enst % % eysey,
- 3SS4 FTTS(AODED) EDO 2 Stepeace 1 103 0 00 04 SS 95 EDO Footpo Tseous sysseen
- S010 Rf73 CARD Ires 2 Stepsees 1 175 0 90 42 0 70 0 90 og patTSCARDEawy
*1298 84TS-Nef$$ NheSS 2 floresce 1 4100 2 31 95 t3 passessie,y seemesse vs geng 3,sium. gensS3
*0F14t Nh4SS-CTS pdhfSS 2 Repisco 1 2000 1 44 SepSS.OTS eyesume i
*e629 PC-RITSCARO NttSS 2 Stey8ece 1 0 0 00 190 9 22 3 22 3 FC4eso4 RITSCese
*0F140 Nh4SS FP f#f5S 2 flop 8ece t 1144 0 94 SetBSS FP opeasse i
l
*0F121 JCNTvect(t) fdRR 2 per ance 1 1404 0 79 l
*120e TAPSS NRft 2 Repeace t 1884 0 92 11 3 C9 de 9 40 0 Tecte4cer Amassemico Psugson Seqspost Syeamu i
*1213 48PS PsRR 2 Repesce 1 190 0 05 26.1 132 0 193 5 l 901S tseipesser $ yeses, j
*S112 tttSP " NRR 2 flepesce 1 0900 3 81 Vuesesses edesmesse & Sefieesosig Pseyswa l
*0Ft3$ CpticoneeFeeDese NRR 2 fleplees 9 o053 O SS
*1290 ft!TS NRR NRR 2 Rep 8eco 9 0 0 00 eS 38 4 38 4 Regidsiasy teusmomen Tsectens Syssue.985184
*0Ftt$ APP NRR 2 Repsoco 1 1912 0 90
*E0004 INVTS OC 2 saepeace 1 0 0 00 74 4 tewoneyy Tveiseig Sysassis
*f200 FEES OC 2 Stepsece 1 154 0 00 90 4 22.1 33 9 S3e tieeneeFeoftspermissynesso
*3$08 84ATSV OC 2 Repiece 1 424 4 24 12 0 12 9 12 9 tessuesso ticonses Fee Sysswa
*3544 FUEL OC 2 Stapesce 1 eso 0 47 14 8 14 5 14 5 Fuse Cycle Syeess
*e033 asATF8 OC 2 Step 8ece 1 0 . 0 00 13 . teasesest ree gmeig
*3543 AAATREV OC 2 Repeace 1 Sep 0.30 12 ee ee nessesseseF,ee
*35e0 RAC*3 LOG OC 2 Repesco t e84 0 40 23 53 4 11 4 noeneyLeg
*3001 OCS9 OC 2 flapsoco 1 14S8 0 91 88 83 S 90 t to 1 Ones of sie Ceweser Sunny and sensene sysaem
- 1261 teAJANN OC 2 Reyeses 1 129 0 07 47.1 21 8 21 S Assises teusmeet tiennes Fee
- 3907 FACFEES OC 2 Stepeace 1 9e0 0 47 22 7 18 2 90 2 Fedesse tiepecean Fee. Sysses.
*3549 COndEDO - OC 2 Replace 1 5304 2 SS 19 S e0 eO Comesselen EDO Sodpot Tsuetsig Syseem
*3S92 FACACT OC 2 Replete 1 See 047 2e 9 15 4 15 4 Facmey Accesso
*0Ftte AFPS OC 2 feepiece 1 2498 130 AseteesisFtiencesf Pime Syeesse
[ *E0003 ATP OC 2 Repeace 1 8240 3 47 mensmesse Tsewee tus, mass.posesemeng 3,eems.
*1400A TSACest OC 2 Repesce 1 5183 2 88 TaA
*stTe PCaAATAfdN OC 2 Repence 1 3432 1 91 14 F 14.7 PC4eems Asmunes teensees tecense Foo ,
*E0009 CCROS OC 2 floresco 1 1040 0 SS Centeser Cast Center Rosee,ce ce
+n80002 LEXf3#sEXf5 OCC 2 Replace 1 1370 0.TT LEXtS88EXrS
*3540 OfGTRY OIG 2 flestace 1 208 0 12 to 8 10.1 tat 010 Tsoost Syeesse
*31to PBC M OP 2 Repeace 1 1125 0 93 Poseensses gespot Coneef Synapne
*C0001 SUD RES 2 flopence 9 130 0 07 SF ftES.Sedget Syeesse
*0F100 Prec(WWO) SIGNIV 2 Steposee 1 1100 0 94 flogien 4 psocessmens eyesese
'OFtes ABC SyeIPC) RGNIV 2 fleplore 1 2498 1.30 91egeous4 ASCsyseene
*OFtes TrevesasenessmensSystem RGN4 2 fleptoce 1 1912 8 90 fluglas t Desef syseen
*0F v47 Tvesestsunegement stGr* sie 2 Reposee 1 300 0 17 tS Steele= 3 Doest oreses.
*t2sf fuTS.RG(A00Em 8 3895 2 Repeace 1 3ese 2 00 154 3 2e3 Reg tme Tvecean,$,et.negie e b
, TOTAt. repeacewessee se estre 37.e3 stel 3ee e Fr.s see e ese sess 5 x GB Pet 3 L. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
L-- . C' ' i g 11 1 s tj . i} 1 l 11 }ll1 i
; 1I 1111li i gg:: 5 E ,
lili iE E llt"*
- 11<
Ihs i (O I,gt gl ((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- y sannaanna stssessansanaanx=-
I111111111111111111111111111111 j
... .. -~~~-~~ ........ --
tlilll!!ItiIIIl1111111111111118 i 1 a1 11 8 I Jli1 ]!il!!!! bI J O I ,.. a iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!iiiin!!!!!i B-5
g . . - SrstE90 Vtut4 m. 974T48080 se Psecess SMEETS n C 6 O C tt SEEctisteNS_. COSTS WWl3t FEAOS IIOst44ECWeWeStipWWECSISI e se STAFF SPPT. C9ffmCT.1sBEsset. FY1ees FY1ste f11850 771888
*sevene Antes, (>e Casmessy W 7 MOUste (FTES SPT. COef EppendeCE TEast30es tusensuCE 94 Nest 3eOS Weemme O 19 4 0843 19 4 4e43 4814 toutt 3e25' OCAAveOfC OCAA 2 stupeam 1 3e eof 14 4 14 4 OCAADuhutt OleJie Day OF11$ toutuerTsuset OCAA 2 stesseco 1 9 ese OCAAenemmertoasttemsyssum Orte vue8WBOAO OOC 2 Repesco 1 20e e 16 vuheet One As Omy surm posset t>BBAT OGC 2 stupante i ese ede ooc tJtenT ennemet, temas, tennene s emposessman eye 3et3 OIGCondEDO OIG 2 stepames 1 age e14 O's h EDO Gudeus Tsusanne Sysasse 3See 84PS4ADDEOp Ces 2 storesco 1 e ese Oue Oudene & Poe==== Syamme 35ee STATS CIO 2 stupamen 1 tse ese to 1 to1 OIG seassesse 4 Assaymanse Tseemme 3,esume OFitT semesser Sussey Ammet. OIP 2 stepimes 1 100 ese CF empusumans toissue eyoJenomer Smasey AegestCEC seeses Travel OF 2 shapenes t 088 e33 OIP manueltausete m symmuse CF117 nessualTseusene OIP 2 storesco t se ee5 OIPsmenus seenhe surCEE Fenen ORIDsummusp OF117 FinestemsTsessene OP 2 sensemeo 1 se eSS OP essepasse tungesus temen, eyesume OFit3 namnessene.Emac.SessACd OPA 2 sempesee 1 See ese IEWyees OPA mesumus seme.tmust een eysemus OF100 PferesEF(RIGAmesmal stON e I I Ise OI% Elesle*IF4pA8Iy eyEEmme OFee7 shEPAC stoet s 2 stupasee 1 9e 8 03 stuslue 21merec epenese OFies Teosus(seessaut stese B 2 pensions 1 see e28 semenon 2teser syeunse Ortes Psectesseems nome 2 stupemes t see e 17 semesse2; - _ _ eysaem OF11e Tsouse(Opsel H01 y 2 stayence 1 SM e32 pegue 4 teneteyuape CFt12 CsuptenethBSAccommt RON N 2 sempesce 1 52 ee3 stepmo4Csuetbue eyamme OFsit FTE Eup(Opsop stON fy
- paramum 1 se o OS semesme e FTE Espens. syssese Y
OF143 shoessummaTseemene OF144 PtseuseOscarTesteene noss4 RGest 2 2 stepsmes storesee 1 1 ese e 28 aos 9 12 stuense t sesmassumeyanuse i stuulee 1 puseammesseur eyensne OF142 PeoposeyPlue 580884 2 stageste 1 20e e12 semeine1esapeep spanne . OFles FundoCentedSyssene st044 2 stagesco 1 tes ees sempus t tendeesatie openese ! OF14e peuposeymenneemment nostar 2 simpame. 1 tes ese . nagine 3 pse,.ey miyne. e,se,= 1 OrSee n - non er 2 se.,emco 1 300 eit mages 3, . : e,,,,,e OFtte hamnessTseemine SOCst 2 stuposes t et 0 03 SeCRouseastasessgeyes, ogne (t eessg,er:3 i TOTAL N se TSSPs T.4e e4 98 SS h.e em se.e TOTAL stapemee ist Z - ; 4eSel em2B 3esel U SI see il 9.e91 at.t l STATUS OUO TOTAL FFS*8 tup 0*tiesst. tts 14eeme St.85 I 1 ~ i } 1 I Y e Pee 5
! ri IL! i![: ,!i I' '[ij;!j5ii lp; l{- I! [!!<1iti!:ii
\ ! j! :L l'
' i
,O3O e s
es i b #. _ t sy e _ e e_ s s n_ . _ pe - 0, _ _ S; . en g s 1
. gs e e n e es s e
s-y _n e e
- e. en ey. e ne ey
_ s e e e n i s n , s _ , e e g yn n e _ s,sens sno.e seSssS-j y yr T s S y m m _Sb e ys i nam yreo ne y asisn e - oo is, _gs yeya es k
- ma a mus tse es S, ne5 t S- _ei e snt n t
. e .s s e
. e s,.ss e e_ .s yss es i
e F e g? ,sTos ne e gsena ni e em s e
,es
, s _se,sse s _
ps s a eSe s Ao _ Cm e n .n i n s agse y e m e 0eem 43e en sen ne n,aym y Sn gT s wn :_. e e . ie
.TseFe s
ee s T se e c e t ar n ams TsAs eme e g e sedn .
- r. _esA s t _e s me epse u u o
m m sn Wrps e s sss u nee ne esea.s n e nse tee e ee sTEe s # vc s a s e e ;psC e r_ s net r n s of e n e _ l a m ec ,Acne s mgu ene mee ns _!n ns s e Tn e ne stO- mps s.C%Fa oee ef o. e er P e p ne e _t nAeeA e A- n t e sse m ehee nasssLso e, u eou c c o t ru h sf o 1 e eee ,M Od t s s3e i r e t c ns oisee e eese ne ense Fe m s o o dt u em et r e oane s rst uo- _- reescCe r s, W s u Aemseaye=tptem n e ndeymdydaoc ssen m oet s nTw e e r s.feELC=EsT h P e weOh aaeah ee u ue oe eioa s A WCCFSTTCTCsDbeTbFtFF t n s t EfnCOOm en nee
.OEPDOctOFFE eT ^ _
s eo S 9 3.1 e S e 7. 3 9 3e J4 94 y ee 29241 1 192 S017 9 en t 56 O1 r N Swa9 3 a9 8 471 t 91 S3 e g e TTm6 Sr n e C Ev e t s a e ec Te Fts4s Etm N r ee 89' o g g a_
^
Orwt n e SI d I e S.93t8 e s 5973 9 3 7. 4 94 y a s I s 2920 1 5017 9 0 .9 59 81 r
'Bma9 t 1 192 871 91 91 93 e g
e s UTiR8 I Cr af 1 a r o E I e y om J s e l e t g se 0ec Ntse9 e T e te8 8 . Tnf rg e e e s sc lt 5 3 1 0 9 . e t s 3 9 d f a t 0 3 e A s. ts4 7 2 1 9 u p 9 EEO9 8 3 YsC 6 e
! h s .
e 8 T C . a
^ ./ AT.
E J4 9 9 7193722e S 29 8 ICT. O SR Ot t f 3 5 8262S31e 12 2 S S 01 9
?
TrP'S SwSI 3 OC - S C T. 3 904e0gD30e00e0179s00 e00sle500s9e0s m r u T E sP E 26090oS00e06s0009e00 e000O909e2e0e a s Oe T 0e1O0e09ef000000000C ePsqF e S000900090S04 I UM R - Q5 R S. - SG UrS 09200002ee0089300700 2 70 5 e 0 13 5 e000009O00e09 7 2S R UM CFn S 91 3 1 1 1 1 SS 9 9 E TQ Ae IEAu S To 1 3 1 9 P Y Tn SP SN A P %1 g 3
- 1911111t1111t11191111111t1St11113 3 a n
ru COIF =T t s e n tp n e e se n eny e d aa 4^dddda ddd- dd-e a dddddd^ - dnee d d^- e eee - .dd: ees ^- e e eee - eeee oe e s du J. J. tcdtcc s eee t J. diet ess c
- e e _ J. J. tte ncdndetJ
_ e o s s s d st M ^J J.cde
..ss y
t_ eLt' s s s_ nenm- _- nee-e asee ee sm-se
- _ - nemeee-
_e- -
.^ _ese- _e _
auases n sse _ _
>s >>^ 0
e n _ ny t rhn>rt tt J t r 0 (M stt0tt8. hru>r>'.P' tttttttLt0Ettt* i
> >>^ .a
_P r y a to r n e d e E o s 333323333333333333333333333333333 os de sF 4 e a e p e e t f C s r p A u T SS 8 A e s S
, kuMssst t sSSRRRRRS C S7 e eps
. 0ODeeaeeee# ERNS RRRRRCCCCCEEEEEG PPE0 O AAAsempRRR' s1 G s s #t se e t pOOOOOOCOOCOOGGOOf s
7 t
-e eSo P q
S e s y r : b o d _f _ 2 e s e t 0 e e 0 t lp Sy e. _2 Y u CD m Y F s F n e AE m a e eg b TD nS h e t s C CO s CT e t 8 d n s u SAT d AC S ssq 0 e A tSTg
# EE e
s RE e M SAT T/SrSPsSPyr 5 p S a h0S ng SSsSSATLFe 8 _ R e eSs v e s TRt s SEpRv T CELL v SRTELTs AeEE#
._ OaOINts
= MCPFSTTCTFRDIPaA f I
OCALTE NEST I arc eT RI AEOAsyTFFCFPiOEPDVOLOFFf A EACOt eEnTTIl 4 d n a~ s o W O _ S p6 CE- n o e s. e c0t20e9 0 2e000 0 0S9020 H33381 551s1 1 S20eemo2209950000e0 0 920t 1 G3# 939eg11333333J03JN30013tC se52500330900000 s042 50 e003030030200 5 2 S00 20 S000 3 15 00 03 s fq
e-4 a,,ase 4-,=A. A u-. +we u- ds. n 'w---4.L-
-- 4'"* W^Mk~ L Awk'-"aA-J -*
j ;TAMMME CMC Appgyogy y i hjflI 1 I1111lkfbl1 s 1I11 lItc l g sesserns !
!!s l [!!!!!!!!!!!! _
O ust""l, i n
;; g,reiiiiiiiii u--a 3
, niiiiiiial I g g l !!lliish!!
V li . . . .! !!!!!!!!!.!! D-8
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " - " - ' - - ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' - - ' ' - ^ ^ ~ ~ ^ ^^ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ' '
, ~ " ~ ^ ~ l I 1 I i \ i i yg4E263 M4 l, TA ~ - - - - f p ALTEmeenTIWE 2rs R C PRICese SDEETS , g 0 1 C U _HECupW!seSRAct0EAft JUDIH4CufWWeeBIDIWmMI g se starr STATUS ALTas fr1ges EY1est rytees Effect n j j *m h Osg Cseege y e T MOURS OUD SPPT. 3897- SPPT. Agr, m Beame g ! 1 SPPT. n v FTE3 IPTER FTER 188 0 FTER 550
*Esec FFS OC FFS Repee 1 90404 3tJe I M J31 F eel 9 01 S ept l 0.91 FecessFDendesSyWest 1
l l 4 'i I Y e 4 e ? I ~! ! 2 I A h t t ', I t Part 2 l l i i
- . , l s--- .-.
l lO - i 11 1: 1 I i i j }}j ll J }lJl }lillj,l 1 t 1
- i L i ill 1
lilli111IIihliiik;lilllllli ,
- =
L , l11r geninnenunununininennununin l lll1 : llgmunnuinununununununnuun l , O Il l t ' " " " " ' " ' " " ' " " ' " " " " " ' " " ' " " " ' E i g llggg!!!nenu!!ntu!!!n!!!n!!!!nunutun!! p ggg15!asI55tt*!!IntiI55Pinisigtigggigans!:Ingl
- c. , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
j r tantisililitil:IIIsun8nsunn88susiilill ! I i O I ...J in!!!m;#;ngninnnmn!!!!!!n!!!!b 1 onll0lllli!idllaedililllinilil B-10 hiiummhmma r--- - , , - .-w+w,w.-N+Wv%de wr++erw_e,ww-. - e'e we umew7 y hup-r are Wmomf--- we*u- ef-*'-+-M4* yw * -*tN-m-= m- P--N-# g9- "
TAMMME CMC ApptNOW8 l!!oi , , 1i 1 ,I r il Illh;i i iii. Il E lir l llt g yo ggg:genststen!!!!!!ss!!!!!!!!!!!! l
!ggg555!!!!!!!!!!!!!55!!!!!!!!!!!!
gggnunaannaexan=vvissan==axx=-
~
; miim,,,aiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiie I
et 1 11 8 O I I!!Iiiiiiiiiiiiigging l!!!!!!! ei I .. a ::::::::: B-11
t
$ a,fvO}o u
s s i 6na s _ t r r - a t e t s
] e m
s e p e s s ee 9 s ts p e c s A e e w e y ss g y m a t ro p p c, mu oS n r es sa n a y a m an e p i s e* yu a t e ae St c I e t m ge A e
. ga > es ( i o
n e y s.cs o
> c oTmesw ee me o mr e u eTmeeFani, Dn%
s nug s y e s s esn e , M s es o y t e m s wos,e mm enetsdge3oysEeoe, ee n r eEcm o s ms s e eyee mysosoe sete t e nBnonemCtc e ys ys y r%w a i o r t.O ss u e e tayger c st mte9 efe e. e m m soanoetmnytes c ye sn y e e e seeoe s yss f r eyeyg e e e s n h g
, t.g yoymavpee i
sDo e e s >g eespa en i s A e. syeEg i e u s. e n e m n r u h c m we s nn ne eAee w sc ehmeeor CseaDv s e eg yi s sysys e ee s e e 0r
- esoeeP naTs&soetse e t&sseet r ease pP v es c apes t Ens rios.
s epe,es t. sstt s n e e m o si wse3ro n A seo t ror es poms n s snspRtpwCFeo ee es e ro.rT e i arerpptppri es e,seee o n sse ineere22224441111s3i n e c sp vncAoeessess AAaLCgRaree AArCe i a insnnnm=nnnnnm e eo oeeiileeooo ioeeR w p CCnG10oGprrP AingggggggggggggC l i i i i n A e s e OOvO0OCOOOOORsssssssssRssS I PeaeoeoaaaaeaaB t t l i t t t t t t t e g$ l g f. g t) e 4 l1e g e EYp ( lu F. s t T l
!9 e E9 R9 i
E g e 4 D1 IY T F g9 ( GF e W8 g l e R 98 r. Q R 1e I g g9 UYp ( CFs E l T8 3 S I 9 ] s9 E 0 4 o1 T g4 sY F Jf l 1 5 t I3 Rr2 T. )00t20ee40063538t3S72358228s733 8 0003000t 0J1300211001 04 1 9 J 4 e P E00000000000000O000000090007 g M A ele YAs TP T F I 4 4 3 8 C S R 3s A UO 20oe408t3538t387235822Bs733S8 IT T. uPR E 0 0 t 41 00c3000t02130021 1 G 0 1 0 4.J 8 r aT E tE A P F T 000e00OO00000000000e000000Ts1 ve s n STOSI I e8 Ts WS A R e s14o00S00s000000e20s0840019e8 a eo9 S00t900500759e0000081d4 me s n UFrRFs 2s2 T18 12 535 422* t3 3e0 Ee Tm CAuETo 3i0 1t4 Li 1 AP R_ S H 1t1 1e ttt11St 11111 1e11gt3 le go1 cots 7 tt t
. r e
r e e
. p e n
e is + s u ep e e ale eeo se e p ecc eee rceaeoeaaoaasaseesaeaasaanaa8 et ce ce cecet ec ec e o et ec ccc c cc e e cecec ec e: o ccte e e. f e s, p isppps p t i e e t e e i e e pppppppppppppppppspppp3 e i e l e sl e e e + e u et eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoe%eehaeeeeF t ssRRRRRRRRRsRRsRRsRsRsspRRsRF t t l t t y 22222222222222222222222222 e g AA AACC 5N8NwtvN4444m1 ANNftNNN8 6 P p NNNN06
- R RAAA LLL r cCGGIGGGPpPP PG3GGGGGGOOOG0OOOO p e I e I CTTT O OOOOCOCOOCOORRRRRRRRRRRs3STTT t 0 s
C t n g e L B ) h k We &. )s o e s go nr c m e c_ 3 7 e gmecs s ss 3 A esc e ) c MT y e S A )e ra e s mh cr
) v) c y nh E oass OD es uc ce E. S A iv s
sissee 5pTrs s se lurn _etntet d V n ora eo DE0E s a eTrde es I T Bmp(t e P, ee- A r e sT ms o M 0 ae tett te A S r Tt is B ly da eora tors ( on piO_ s _ C r mTr t e AewTO(Seuenee.Ct d tI m s , o r sete i _- t 4 u AC3 reeEi e^ ei a s
** e v
Anse v nenpAe( vev pc ne E s CneBG AI AA PTlc s rennn oPeoemTepEg ~
,dn eee T 3
8 A OuwtOBRt e ThFRPtre hTPTCFR7nFPPb e i e r r r ur r i L A 2 . s 1 T5773a74So2t3428sse g E R s s e 5 2 t t s t 00 1 38st04 t 0101 t1tt 1 t 1000Ot1 t t1 it t t 1 1 444t l t 4eet n eF 7s855 FSFFFrFFFrFFrFFFrFF sOet 333OSOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOCO e i t r rRsCE- i
~ S
.y l l l
,' ]:' 2 e 1
TAMMME CMC APPENOlX B : O' ii l:j 4 1 Ii 11 i Id!Ilb}I!!ji!1lbrl$}r bi!$! i lri[ ! I Ij
=i
- l
,o llllE E I I iare .
'" i
;gllggi!!!!!!!!!!
hb.''"'""!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!l
"""""d
.................................p i111111111111111111111111111111 g__________;j!;;
8 1 aIllittittlilliff88888sssssssessaEl!! y 11 1 i-i lsilih!!leartirlllalslilititi!!rI!l 601....;1 inniinininininninisiinii B-13
- i STAMMME cmc AMNDIX C \
1 l APPENDlX C The following pages present the cornpiete spreadsheets prepared by the STARFIRE Benett-Cost Analys6s Team for each sensitnrity <ase, I 6 I L L
)
t t I ( .... .. . . . . ._ . . t C-1 f w-,-------e~--ee.,--..,,-w,---.:-,-ww.e,-
. w # e.-+,------% ,.ve,-2----e-..-we* ew---.-e---w-*+.--r+-,-=,-. w+1--me v-----v e rev
s
- T s
SFmES12.WK4 12r15/97Varsen ** 2 a 3
=
ni n 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITTVITY ANALYST 5 #1 - ENTION OF YEAR 2000 COSTS COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2tX)4 Total y~7l-"rp q ,e n--r ~.- -m - -
- m ~. 7-~ r a m ,..y ,
e -- u 3 .: ; -- STARFIRE COTS SW (Core /Bese Modules) . 31.200.000 _ 30 . 30, 30 _ _ _ 30 _ __ _ _ 30 , ____ __ 30. _ __ $1,200,000 STARFRE COT 3 Vendor Services (Core /Bese) 3800,000 _. 30 30' 30 30 v. _ 30 3800,000 STARFRE COTS SW(Add *onal Modues) _ _ 3500.000 30 30 30 __ 30 __ _ _ a0 30 3500,000 STARFIRE_ COTS Vendor Services (Add *one! _ _ $350.000 _ . _ . 30 __ 30 30 . _ 30 _ ___ _ 30 30 _____ 3350.000 STARFIRE RDBMS _. _ __ _ _ _ _ _)___
. 30 . . _ _ _ 30 __ 30 30 _ _30 _.__ _ _ _ 30 _30 . 30 STARFIRE WorehouserSYBASElQ STARFRE Warehouse Desgn___ _ __
_ _ _ _ _ _.._ $181.800 _ . 30 _ _ _ 30 . . 30 ., _ 30 30 30 $181,800 30 ._ $365.000 30 30 STARFIRE Implementshon* _ 30 ._. __ _ _ _ 30_.__.____ _ 30 _._ $365.000
. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ 3870.000 $290.000 _
___ 30 30 ___ 30 _ 30 _ _ _ _30 _ __.51,160.000 STARFIRE t erface with ADAMS __ . _
$166.000 3166.000 _ 30 30 30 __ _ _ 30 30 __ $332,000 STARFRE Interface with Other Systems __ _. _ _ $307.500 __3307.500 ___ _ . _ _ 30 9 " STARFIRE Speoelized HW(Seevers)_ $1,000.000 30 _ _ _ _ 303 30 30
_ __ _ 30 30 30 . 30 _ _. 3615.000 30 31,000.000
.._____30
_STARFRE Core Data Comrersen____ _ $235.900 30 30' 30 STARFIRE Polices and Procedures Devel .__ _ $100,000
$100.000 30 30
_ 30 _ _ _30 _ _ _ 30 _ _3235.900 STARFRE Trowel (NRC Staff) $25,000 _ 30 _ _ _ _ 30 _ . _ _ _30 _ _ 3200.000
$25,000 30 30 30 30 30 350,000 FFS Systems Trans*on fFS Year M Fixes
_ _ _30 .
~6 3 E ~ ~50 ~ ~63 " 30 .
30 . . _30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 i
'^
Category 1' Systems Transden _. Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fhres _ 30 M ~~ ~30 30' _ _ 30 $ [_ 30 ___ __. _ 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Category 2 S temsT Cateoory 2 Systems Year 2000 rixes 30 So 30 36 3 30 30 30 30
$0 30 30 10 10 . 30 . _ 10 Totat Non-Recw .u <
SS 736.200 i 5125 3.500 t SO8 Soe Soe 30t 30* 26.999 700
- includes Desgn sno Ergineenng. C .4-4 Instseoliori, C.y:v, .-4 and Approx 3300K of 000 L J. L oco,e Integraban Steport Costs.
6 Part 1 , o
>:s (~N
[mV) V) k' SFmESizwx4 '
., 127t5r97versien <=
32 a 2! a ru o 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
O SENSITMTY ANALYSIS #1. ELINIINATION OF YEAR 2000 COS15 COST ELEMENTS FY 1995 F Y 1999 j FY zwu FY 2001 FY Aw FY 2003 FY 2004 Total RECO M m e a P + _ + - W IOS 4 "IW' MP" " M MP , . . W m e m-
~_STARFIRE. COTS SW hq(Core /Besic}_._ _
.m
-m3 30 $240,000 $256,800 SF4,800 $294,000 $314,S00 _ 333S,600 $1.,716,800 STAR [ IRE _ COTS SW License (Additonar) . $0 __$100,000 $107,000 $114,500 $122,500 $131.100 $140,300 t $715,400 STAR [ IRE Werehouse Ucense $0_ $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700
$32,700 l Si95,200 STARFIRE Technical Support 30 $150,000 _ _3300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 .__31,650,0T
_STARFIRE_kestfaces Maintenance __ $0 $75,000 $150,000 $j50,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 _STARFIRE Systems /Detsbeses OpstAdmin $825,000 30 30 30 30 30
$3 30. 30
_STARFIREffardware Memtenance 30 $150,000 Sj50,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 STARFIRE Training
$900,000
$50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $25.000 30 30 $0 $225.000 w-M M d % @ r Wjb N. W "a' N * " Nt:M 'h'* MEIkJiv Esh :4 " * :it FFS FMS Mcu1y_Ct%s $373,400 las _.it dmG eat &
30 30 $0 30 9 W _EFS AMS Normer cherges _ _ _ S599,800 30 $0 $0 30 30 30
$3 30
$373,400 3599,e00
_ Accounting Support $470,500 _ _ 3235,250 $0 30 $3 SO $3 $705,750 TravelDets Entry Support $748,200 $374100 30 $0 30 _ _ _ 30 __ _30 $1,T22,300 FFS Tl-Me v $703,300 $0 - 30 SO SO $3 2ek.trimu,. $0 $703,300 sM:-Mr> t'a =" MMM %'M 2 EnVii ; W^rw n.,f s t M m3 L&K?:M .re:i M g _ Category _LSystr_ns Cor tractual Support $3 _ 30 $3 $0 $3 So 30 $0 Category 1 Syshwns Tuneehering 30 30 $0 $0 SO 30 so s0 W ps -r7.shtuneine- v c c ,-- + a - m is MWL M_e w +c w- _CAjw1_ 2Systems ContractualSofy-1 2 ---
~t w - --
me s- : c , 3 3629,200 _,, _33_14,600
$3 $0 30 30 $0 1943,800 Cateoory 2 Systems Tirnesharina $268.600 $134.300 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $402.900 Totaf R&w, $3 643.000: 11.880.950" 11 071.500' 11.047.000i 11.049.200 ' 51.078 400 t $1.1093300 6 111079f;*0 " TOTAL COSTS _j _$9.579,200 LS3.134.450 ,$LOIt,500 L $1.047.000L$1.049.200L$ t,07s.400 Lt Lt09.600Jis.csy tHSCOUNiihCTCRl3,5 MitD-YR HATEL_,il Z.__09639 ] 3 525' O.92201 ~D 292Sl~D 864il- OR65 ' ' - ~ ' ~-
0.0097 PRf$ENii/ALUGi T^L~ COST $~ -- l ^ ~ 99 4fi.95i T ~ $2.965 457
$967.965I-'193i1 $361 1906.58iI- $902.045 $896 '492 I-~ tif.040.0?_s 6
e.r,2 R o
f~ O (n% L \v) SFIRES13WK4 12r15s7 Version i!= 3
=
m o 3 STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIWITY ANALYSIS #1 - ELMINAT10N OF YEAR 2000 COSTS i COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total mm- r.-r*wpnv~y 2*y v:w : y ~' ~- - m y t3 - n -mv qmq ,_ r y , gv*~~ r- g. .c _.STARFIRE_ COTS SWICore/Basac Modules) . _ _ $1.200,000 __ , 30 30 30 30 _ __ _ 30 _ __ _ 30 __ sty n1 STARFIRE . COTS Vendor Serwces (Coresesic)_. . _ 3800,000 30 _ _ _ _ 30 _ . __ _ _ 30 _ __ _ _30 30 __10 _._,.380t J STARFIRE COTS SW(Addeone! Modules) _ , 3500,000 30 30 30 30' 30 ___._ _ , _ _ 30 ._ _ _3500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Serwces (Addeoner) _ $350,000 30 _ _ 30 30 30I _ 30 .,__ _ 10 __.__ 3350,000 _STARFIRE_RDEMS _.
._ $2,226,000 30 _. 30 _ __ 30 . _ _ __ ___30 30 _.___ _ 30 ._ 32,226,000 STARFIRE Middlewere . ._ _ _ _ , _ _
_ $277,000 _ _ 30 . _ _ . _ 30 __ 30 30 _____ __ _30 _ _ _ __ 30 _ _ 3277,000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW $181.800 30 SO _ __._ 30 _ _ __ _ __ 30 _ _ ____ _30 __ _ . _ 30 _ _ _ $181,800 STARFIRE Warehouse Design __ _, . 30 _ . _ _3365,000 30 __, _ _ _ _30 30 30 30 . 3365,000 STARFIRE L.W. J. L ? _ ___ __,,_ _ , _ , 3870,000 3290.000 30 _ __ 30 . _ __ _ _30 _ _____30 _ __ 30 _ 31,160,000 STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS _ , 3205,000 $205,000 ___ ___ 30 _ __. _30 . __,___ 30 30 { 30 _ 3410,000
.STARFIRE 'nterface with_Other Systems _ .. _ $385,000 ._ _ $385.000 ._ _ _ 30 ._ _ _ _ _30 30, 30 _., , _ 30
_ . _ _ 3770,000 _STARFIRE Speciskred_HW(Servers) 31,000,000 30 _ ___ 30 _ ._ ___ _ 30 30 30 . _ _ , . _ 30 _ _ $f,000,000 _ _ 30 STARFIRE Core Date Conversson____ _ __ $235,900 30 30 30 30 __ _ _ __ 30 __ $235,900
$100,000 _ 3100,000 _ _ __ _ 30 _ _ .___ 30
_STARFIRE Ponoes and Procedures Devel___ _ _ _ STARFIRE Trevel(NRC Stef0 _ _ _ 30 ___ _ _ __ _ 30 _ _ _ 30 ._ _ $200,000 325.000 325.000 30 30 30 30 30 350,000 3q , .
- c. 'g. .,
, 9 .
FFS Systems Transition 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 FFS Year 2000 Fues 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
, ~; ~ v_c- r_ a;a ~
~ - - -
y <_ a x .* i _C."+1_1 Systems Transson 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Ce negory 1 Systems Year 2000 Fines 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 - g c7" M . _ _- ,e-+- >- -
< . + -
i ; C.'+1_2_ Systems Transeon 30 30 30 00 30 30 30 . _30 Cateoory 2 Systerns Year 2000 Foes SD 10 30 50 30 10 10 10 Total Non-Recurnna $8.355100 t $1.370.000, 50t SOe 30t 10t 30t 39 725 700
- Includes Design and Ergneenng, C;.4-.L ; _ -T.m. Deployment, and Approx. 3300K of OCIO Infrastructure Integration Support Costs. >
h i E i O : PM1 I t
SFIRES13 WK4 to 12/15/97 Version s a 2r
=
rn S STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
0 SENSITMTY ANALYSIS #1 - ELIImNATION OF YEAR 2000 COSTS COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2002 F Y 2003 FY 2004 Total l FY 2001 t REcuRRtNG*mp1sitver*opmra.-mtwW s empf rt* rn&"i M7 hvTmdig wesSm *v:wmin;w .ec umw
$240,000 wew am rmmm STARFIRE COIS SW License { Core / Basic)
$0 5256,800 $274,800 $29_4,000 $314,600 $336,600 $1,7_16,800
_STARFIRE_ COTS SW Licen.se_(Additionaf)____ _ $0 $100,000 1107,000_ __ $114,500 _$122,500. _ _$131,100 __ _$140,300
$7_15 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License 50 $258,200 $258,200 $259,200 $258,200 $258,200 _,_3258,200 __$1,549M,400 STARFIRE.Mjddleware SW License
$0 _ _ 550,000 $50,000_ $50,000 350,000 $50,000 $50,000 7 00,000 STAREIRE. Warehouse. License _ $0 $32,700 00
$32,7__ $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 1- d,200 STARFIRE Technical Support $0 $150,000 _$300,000 __$300,000 $300,000 _$300,000 $300,000 Ac50,00i)
STARFIRE interfaces Maintenance 50 $75,000 _ 5150,000 $150,000 __$150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000 __STARFIRES. ystems/ Databases Ops / Admin ____ ._ __$200,000 $200,000 $200,000, __ $200,000 __$200,000_$200,000 $200,000 $1,400,000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance $0 $150,000 $150,000 $150.003 $150.000 _$150,000 $150,000 st00,000 STARFIRE Training $50.000 $75,000 $75.000 $25.,000 $0 $0 $0 $225.000 9 J/ c3;gjn/NBs.;s umidiW mvis ^- d94h JME % snr@H M B 4@: , W8 W Nb.s JNh4jt @@ a.Wi tuJNi?R _EES FMS Hourfy_ Charges _ _ _
._ $373,400 $0 $0 30 $0 $0 $0 $373,400
._[FS..A_ MS_ Normal _ Charges $599,800 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $5991800 Accounting Support $470,500 $235,250 +
$0 $0 $0 .
$0 $0 $705,750
_ Travel. Data Entry _ Support $748,200 __$374,100 $0 $3 $3 $0 $0_ _ _11,122,300 FFS Timesharing $703,300 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $703.300 n .+ s ,L Muw:WidW 1;&r h,, _ MF# Mi&M Mt ~WM :Wh Sb @ M3w.: ag -M AW6R ;n%p'5 _ Category 1 Systems _ Contractual Support
$0 So $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharing SO 10 $0 $3 $0_, _
$0 so 50
#:MDtiMiMehEGLMfMsnM "uMMi #
#WWd W9h4 .eM '
- W W11Did 9&Mip . d h ri W M.m
_ Category 2. Systems Contractual Support $62$,200 _ _$31_4,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $943,800
$0 Ca'eoory 2 Systems Omesharina $268.600 $134.300 $0 $0 $0 10 T;tal Recurring $4,Q4),QQQ H,)Q9,1$Q
$0 $4 g
$1,$79,700 $1,$$$,lQQ $1,$$7,4QQ $1,$50,000 $1,617 000 $14 328 850 10 TALCOSIS L_$12.398J00LS3.zS9150L$1.579J00L$1.555.200L$1.557A00L81.586.600L$1.61Z.000_ _$24.054.550 ilSCOUNTJACfDRif3DieirRIMTGL.
0,9639. 0.9525' O.9220 -~ 0.e926 -~0.664if~ 0.6365 ().3091
~
PRES $Nt VhEUs TOTAi. COSis ~~~ ~~ $12.199.049 $3.580.463ili358.54$ lf.388.146 if545 761T lf327.i37 ' !1.5i').D04 ~~iff507.655 r.v: l R o
,Q ( --
/ s i
\ ['\
( N ,/
) kv /
l
\~ I SFIRES22.WK4 12/15/97 Version M E
m 3 m m n 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYr3ASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITMTY ANALYSIS # 2 - ACQUISITION / IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURING INCLUDED IN STARFIRE COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total g gy v.~~ m .y g~- ~;- ,~ n +
'~
-nn r---~ g w . - ~m.m e ;, ; 3-,y ;. 7. ; p . , n o n ~~
~
[1M680
~STARFIRE COTS SW(CoIe/7B sic Modules).
STARFIRE COTS Vendor _ Services (Core / Basic) . _ _ $800,000
.I . $0 30
_ _ _ $6 ' _ _
$0
$0 _ _ _ $0 _ . _
$ IN 8.0 7,30I STARFIRE COTS SW(AdditionalModules) . _. _ $500,000
____ .$0 $0 SO _$0._ $800,000l _ 50 $0 $0 50 $0 $0 $500 'Xn STARFIRE COTS Vendor. Services (Additional) ._ $350,000 $0
. _ _ _ .$0 $0 _ _ __50 _.
50 __ __ _ $0 __ $3,% STARFIRE RDBMS __ _ _ _ _._ _ _. . _ . 50 $0 __. $0 $0 _ ._ $0 $L $0 SO STARFIRE Warehouse /SYBASEjQ __ _ _ __ _ _ $181,800 $0 . _ . 50 $0 SO $0 30 . _ _ ,$141,800 STARFIRE Warehouse Design _ _ _ ,_ $0 $365,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 f.365,000
$0 STARFIRE lmplementation! _ . . . _ . ._ . . _ _ _$870,000 $290,000 $0 $0 . 30 $0 $0 .$ 160,000 STARFIRE interface with ADAMS _ $166,000 $166,000 $0 SO $0 $332,000 SO $0 STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems _ . $307,500 $307,500 $0 $0 $0 $615,000 SO $0 STARFIRE Specialized HW(Servers)_ _ $1,000,000 . $0 . _ _ _ $0 $0 30 STARFIRE Electronic _Signaturing _ $375,000
_ _ _ $0 _ _ .50 _ $1,000,000 _ _ . _ . $375,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750,000 STARFIRE Core Dati Conversion $235,900 . $0
.$0 _ $0 _ _ SO . _ _ . _ SO ._ __._ 50 _ $235,900 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel ._ _ $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff)
. SO _
_ . 50 _ _ _ _ $0 . _ $200,000
$25,000 $2A000 $0 $0 $0 So $0 $50.000
+ , . , ,m,
< ~
, , 1 FFS Systems Transition
__ . _ _ _ _ _ ._ . 50 $0 50 $0 50 $0 , _ _ 50 $0 FFS Year 2000 Fixes $0 $0 , _ _ . $0
$0 $0 50 $0 $0 Category 1 Systerns Transition Jategory 1 Systems Yeer 2000 Fixes
$i) . _ . _ $0 _
$0 $0 50 $0 $0 S0
$0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 SO
_ Category 2 Systems Transition ___ _._ _. _
-r
-u e
- _l Cateaory 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes
_ 50 _. .
$0 _
$0 $0 _ _
$0 50 $0 SG
.$552.100 ' $557100 $0 50 50 50 $0 $1.10474 Total Non-Rectnano $6.663.300 $2.180.600 t $0! $0 50 $0 SO $8.643.900
- Includes Design and Engineering. Development, instattation Deployment, and Approx. $300K of OC10 Infrastructure Integration Support Costs.
b s Part 1
(p
/- (,
J
)
b b} SFIRES22.WK4 12/15/97 Version to b
=3 m
o 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
0 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS # 2 - ACQUISITION / IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRON!C SIGNATURING INCLUDED IN STARFIRfi COST ELEMENTS F Y 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total " gggstgglNGnsw$w n wc + g .<4 wu as m mu mrw ~ e+ tsw nmmw wnm m+esan us wup: STARFIRE. COTS _SW License]Qore/ Basic) _ _ , 50 $240,000 ___$256,800 $274 t'~X) $294,000 $$14,600 l
$336f00
_STARFIRE COTS _SW LicenseJAddit_lonal) . , . _ . $1.716,800 _ $0 $100,000_ $107,000_ _$114,5q _$122,500 $140,300 STARFIRE Warehouse License $131.10Q _ $715,400 30 __ $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,70Q $32,700 $32,700 STARFIRE Technical Support _ ,, $196,200
,._.___$0 _ $150,000 $3,00,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000. _$300,000__$1,650,000
_STARFIRE interfaces Main _tenance $0 $75,000 $1_50,000 . _$150,000 $150,000 $L50,0_00 $150,000 $625,000
.STARFIRE_Syst_e_ms/ Databases Ops / Admin 30 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
.STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . $0 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $15,0 000 STARFIRE Training
$1.50,000 $900,000
$50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $25,000 $0 30 $0 $225,000 shdi WilG@%i!bMIMM-MA%. ErAM & TiW5M "i M e dfM XEsindNPR f$diWM2 #!DPMit iddii >3HE 'r%h2%mh FFS FMS Hourly Charges $373,400_ $0 ciM1:MM 9
N FFS AMS_NormalCharges $599,800_
$Q
$0 $0
$Q
$0
$0
$0 SO
$0
$0
$0
$373,400
_ Accounting Support $470,500 $235,250 $599,800
$0 _ _ $0 $0_ $0 $0 $765
_ Trave 1 Data Entry _ Support $748,200 _$374,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1j22),750 FFS Times % ring $703,300 * $0 00
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 hk WRMnelLMiWlEbdHMsMM@iWY WhEOMilt N St%ih!M !EM@ial W.t'~hiM V 5Ydiff TEM Mii t EcliM .- 30 $703,300 Category 1 Systems Cor:tractunt support .jticME
$0 $0 50 $0 $0 Cateoory 1 Systema Timesharing
$0 $0 $0 $0 SO
$0
$0
$0_ $0
. ;M + W:R.UMiGG fMidWMM M P ' " + $0 SO
/ 90H6 R PRM Wi' BW%E Y AMMl? iNe6ttJ '% PMi %&- W d?7bf? d
_ Category 2_ Systems Contractual _St,ypeii $629,200 __ $314,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $943,800 Category 2 Systems Timesharina $268.600 $134.300 $0 $0 SO $0 SO $402.900 Total Recurrina $3.843.000 $1.880.950 $1.071.500 $1.047.000 $ , 049.200 $1.078.400 ' $1.109.000 $11.079.650 JOTALCOSIS _ $10.50s 300 L $4.061,550 L s t0tt,500 L$ 1.04 L000 L$ t049,200 L$ t078.400 L$uC9.6001_$19.923.550
= DtS.COUNIfACIOfy3.J% MID-YftRATE)_
~
0.9639 PRESENT VALUE TOTAL COSTS _ 0352% 0 922Q1 ~ 'Q4926 ~_0 06dil" 0434$ E C309f E ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ $_0.337.122 _ 13.868.489 1 __is87.96sl $934.535 ~~1906.5811 $902 045 " $898.492^ ti86)s.229 h i Part 2 N o
~ . .- ._ . .-. . - - . . .- _ _ . . .. . . . _
J*"*w ( i SFIRES23 WK4 8' 12/15/97 Version E .l
=
3 i
=
un 3 ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITMTY ANALYSIS # 2 - ACQUISITIONilMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONZ SIGNATURING INCLUDED IN STARFIRE LOST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 1 FY 2003 FY 2004 lotel M3y~~ylty:7-r~~ T *rggy wme 77~!$ VTT7~[~ 77*ip. Y yam '9* ; ; v.; q lT*>?'"* STARFIRE COTS SW (Core / Basic Modules) __ 51,200.000 50 _ , _ . _$0 _.. 30 $0 _ $0 30 __S1,200,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic). _ $800.000 _ . 30 _ 30 SO . 50 ___ _ 30 __ _30 _ _ ,. 3800,000 STARFIRE COTS SW(Addibonal Modules). _ 3500.000 _
$0 30 _ _ 30 _ _ _ _ 30 ___ _ _. 50 . _ __ _ _ $0 ___ $500,000
___ 30 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Additional) _ . _ $350.000 _ . 30 _ . _ _ . 30 .., 30 __ ___ 30 ,30 __ ___ $350.000 l _STARFIRE RDBMS _ $2.226.000 30 _ , _30 _ _. , 30 . _ _ _ 30 30 30 ____ $2,226.000
.STARFIREM. iddleware _
l _ _ _ ___ _ _ $277.000 30 _ _ 30 _ SO _. 30 _ 30 30 $277,000 i
.STARFIRE Warehouse SW_ ._.__ . . $181.800 . . . 50 30 30 30 30 50 5181,800 STARFIRE Warehouse Design . . $0 $0
. $365.000 _______ 30 30 SO _ ,,,_ __,. 50 _ _ $365.000 STARFIRE ImplementationE..__ __ _
_ $870.000 $290.000 . _ _ $0 __
$0 _.____.30 . __ __ _ $0 . _ _ ___._, $0 _ _$1,160,000 :'
STAitFIRE interface with ADAMS $205.000 $205 $0 9 SO $0 $0 30 $410.000
~
- STARFIRE Interface with Other SysAsZ ' [ T $385,000 , . 3385[000 000 ~~ ~ _30
__ ^ l T SO TSO' __ ,_[ 30 -___.____30 . ,__ _ $770,000
- STARFIRE Specialized HW(SeewQ_ _ ._ $1,000.000 . SO __ 30 30 , 30 STAh.jRE Electron:c Signaturl:'
_ . . . _ . _ 30 ___ __ . __ 30 __ $1,000,000 _____:_ _ _ . $375.000 , $375,000 , _._._30 $0 .__ $0 , _ _ _ _ _ $0 _ _ . . _._ 30 . ., _, _ $750,000 _ STARFIRE Core Data Conversion. $235.900 . _ 30 _ 30 $0 $0 30 . _ . . . 50 . _ 3235,900 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures _Deve!___ . $100,000 $100,000 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) $25,000
$0 30 30 _. . _ 30 _ _ _ _ 30
_ ,_, _$200,000
$25,000 30 30 $0 30 SO $50,000 un ;. ,m W j- gg
_ FFS Systems . '-'=ition a
< - e. ;__ .v'c w =q FFS Year 2000 Fixes
_ _ _ ___ . SO _ _ 30 _ _ SO _ 30 30 _ _ _ _ _ $0 _ _ _ . _ , 30 _ _ _ __. 30 SO SO SO SO _ $0 30 $0 $0 - sw : + d:e ' 2- w.__ ~ J. . =
^ "
~
*~
':L__..- ~Y ? :
. Category 1 Systems Tmnsition. .__ _._ . _ _
30 _ SO 30 30.. 30 . 30 __. _ .30 30 Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fixes . . _ _
'a2 30 SO SO SO SO ___ SO SO SO i
-d.lu-a i.kr
. Category 2 Systems Transitio.1
'[ .a *
< E Mf - M'M '
_ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ $0 $0 $0 30 30 . _ __ _ 30 . . _ _ _ , _ $0 , _ _ 30 Cateaory 2 System
- Year 'mnn Fixes _ $552.1D0 ,.$552.100 Total NWiect,.ium SO SO SO 10 SO . _ _ _$1.104.200 i
$9.282 800 12 797.100 50 $0 i_i SC So ' $11.579.900
- Includes Design and Engineering, cc.c,.,,,..aa, Installation, C4,..., 4, and Approx. $300K of OClO Infrastructure Integrahon Support Costs.
t Part 1 O
% b ,O-k SFIRES23 WK4 12/15/97 Version i!a 2r a
rn o 3 ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 8 2 ACQtMSITION/ IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATUR1NG INCLUDED IN STARFIRE COST ELEMENTS FV 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total RECT 1RRINGT**e M:W Ww ~. <me r WMWW MFM 'iM NMMW WM*E N W"4 " TM> "W A margre +,rw,v m [STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core / Basic) __ 50 $240,000 $256,800 $274,800 $294,000 $314,600 $336,600
$1,7]S,800
_STARFIRE_ COTS SW License (Additional) ,_ $0 __$100,000 $107.000 $114,500 __$122,500 $131,100 $140,300 $715,400
.STARFIRE RDBMS_SW License 50 $258,200 $258,200 $253,200 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200
$1,549,f00 STARORE Middleware SW Lice.nse _ ___ _ , 30 __ $50,000 $50p00 $50,000
$50A00 $50A00 $50800 $300p00
_STARFIRE Warehouse license $0 $32,7_00_ $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 332,700_ $32,700 STARFIRE TechnicalSupport $196,200
. _ , _ $0 $150,000 $300,000 _$300,000 $300,000 _._$300,000 $300,000 _ _ 31,650,000
_STARFIRE interfaces Maintena_nce _ , _ _ _ _ . $0 __$72000 _$150p00 $150,000 $150p00
$150800 $150,000 $825,000 STARFIRE_Systerns/ Databases Ops / Admin _ _ 3200,000 $200,000 $200,000 _$200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance
$1,400B00
$0 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150p00 $1_50,000 $150,000 STARFIRE Training $50,000 $900,000 175.000 $75.000 9 da..<w & WiEWi@% WthVUt V'E: MWB e FYIF; EMU N!~O W N!
$25.000 $0 li"i! M% ltGIMUT n%H@R
$0 $0 $225.000 FFS FMS Hourfy_ Charges $373,400 50 WNMR e: WEMM
$3 $0 $0 $0 $0
_ FFS_A_MS_ Normal Charges
$373,400
$599,800_ _$0 SO $0 $0 30 $0 $599,500
. Accounting Support 3-i?O,500 $235,250 -
$0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $705
.Travet_ Data Entry _ Support __$748,200 $374,100 _$1,~i22j,75d FFS Timesharing
$703,300 $0
$0 $0 $0 _ $0 $0 00
$0 $0 50 $0 $0 $703,300 g d.iii!E MWR&;MPi:JEMiMiWe?Bi 9W-OJi U MM N:"th M ni&JiW imbt@dQ .WL Sib mVWa Category _1. Systems _ Contractual support $0 igg
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharing $0 $0 50 $0 $0 $0 $0 n:.bpD" O@sE!@4 iia WiiW W 30 $0 50 "erf G"iG 'mMiMM Whi G nd.iet M wishMs ?ir W kt sig;&t q ~aggy
_ Category _2 Systems Contractual Support $629,200 $3J4,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $943,800 Cateoorv 2 Systems Timesharina $268.600 $134.300 $0 $0 50 50 50 $402.900 Total Recurring ._.14 9M.999____12,$69.1.QQ. _It@72.790._11.h5.200 $1.557.400 $1.586.600 $1.617.600 $14.328.850 . _IOTALCOSIS
~
__ _ LS13,325.000LS4,686,250L$tSI9JooL$ts55.200L$t557.400L$1.588.600L$telleooL$25.908. Iso
~DJ$COUNtfRlUn]DWNitEVilRhtEj 1 103639 ~~ ~DS525 ~~03220_ ~ 0,0926I 0;8641 -0,B36$ 0;609 F - ~ '
PRESENT VALU5 TOTARDST5- ~ l~l13.111.221 $F46i494 ~$il56.54's ~5i388.i46Bi345} 1 $1327.i37 ~ ti.3i0.004It2430fl48 Part 2 l
.q m ^
SFIRES32.WK4 88 12115/97 Versen , 3 9 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS #3 - 50% INCREASE IN IMPLEMENTATION COSTS l COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total J@l.)ttdjgggf; . :r > ; i??q '"9'"m'""'N ' M T' P */"**' W wq V V '*~ ~~~"'PT ~,@T% - es w
@_' . M STARFIRE COTS SW(Core / Basic _ Modules) _ . $1,200.000 . SO 30 30 ___._ _ _ 30
_. . _ $0 ,_ 30.4__,$1,200,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services _(CoretBasic) __ $1,200.000 _ _ $0 $0 _ _ 30 __.$0 _ $0 80 _ __$1,200,000 l STARFIRE COTS SW(Add #tionalModules) _ _ ._. _ $500.000 _ __30 _
$0 $0 _ $0 _ _ __. __30 _ 30 ___ $500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor _Sennees (Additional)_ . _ $525,000 30 ._
$0 _
$0 _ ._ __ SO _ __30 30 ___ $525,000 STARFIRE RDBMS..__ _____ ___ _ ,. _ _ _ _ ____..__$0 _ _ $0 _ _ _ 30 ,
30 _ .. _ _30 ._, ____ .30 30 _ _ _ . 30 STARFIRE_ Warehouse /SYBASE IQ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,$18_1,800 _ . . $0 STARFIRE Warehouse Design __ .$0 $0 _ __. ._ _ $0 ___.___ _ 30 __.__ __,_ _ $0 _ _ _. 3181,800 _ _ _ _. ._ _ . 30 . $547,500 $0 30 _ 30 _ _. __. ._ 30 _ STARFIRE implementabon! _ _____ _ ____ _ _ __ ._ _ _ 30 .__ _ $547.500 ! _ $1,305.000 _ _ $435.000 __ . . ,_ _30 30 30 30 $0 __ $1,740,000 . STARFIRE Interface with_ ADAMS . $249.000 $249,000 . _ _ _ $0 $0 30 30 ____ $496,000 __ 30 p . S_TARFIRE Interface _with _Other Systems _ _ _ ._ _ $461,250 __ $461,250 _STARFIRE Specialized.lfW(Servers), _ _.__ _ _ _ 30 __ _ 30 $0 $0 30 $922.500 a . _ $1,000.20 _. 30 _ _ _ $0 $0 _ $0 o _ STARFIRE Core Data Conversion 3353,850 _ _ __. _.30
._.__ __ 30 __ ___ 30 ___31,000.000
_ . 30 _ $0 . _ __ . . . So ._ _ _ _ 30 . ,_ _ ___ 30 __ ,. $353,850 STARFIRE Policies.and Procedures Devei__, _ _ _ _ ,, $100.000 _ _ $100,000 SO 30 _,,____$0 _$0 __ .__ __ _30 __ _ $200.000 __ $0 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff)
$25.000 $25a 000 $0 $0 30 30 $50.000 j f . ,s 3 - J <6 3 , g wy.. <
p.a t. ,. 2: 9%jtr g, q .< g s FFS. Systems Transition
, 4 < , 7 3: g FFS Year 2000 Fixes
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ $0 __ . _ 30 30 30 _ 30 _ _ _ _ _ 30 ___ ___30 _. ___, _ _ _ _ 30 SO $0 $0 30_ $0 $0 SO
, % W sy 9%ug w# <
,i #- '
<* r
__ 30
,f ,. .
, , , , u >
- eA Category 1 Systems Tmnsition 50 30 $0 30 _ $0 30 30 30 Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fbres 30 _. SO $0 30 $0 $0 30 SO
- % W t 6 ama t.e % 5 g ,-e m q a, .
- j. . . c ...;<. Ou w . J it -
W .A i
. Category 2 Systems _ Transition _ 30 ._. _ SO
_., $0 30 . _ 30 ___ _ _ _30 30 SO Cateaory 2 Svstems Year 2000 Fixes j _ _ _ . . .$552.100 $552.100 _ __ SO $0t SO SO SD $1.104.200 t Tota 1 Non-Rectdiw.u $7.653.000 D 'me850 SO $06 $0 $0 $0 $10 m a50 ; r f
- Includes Design and Engineering, Cr. A. ..;. Instasaten, Deployment, and Approx. $300K of OCIO Infrastructure integrahon Support Costs.
i Part 1 0
A Q ] v\
/
fI v v
)
SFIRES32.WK4 '8 12/15/97 Version 2!
- =
m o 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 83 - 60% INCREASE IN IMPLEMENTATION COSTS COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total E REQURR' e 3N/SNMWrniMSe: T'M* ! ?*MWWW "0"TW N&WW hrfrRI?iN W ,sieuw : tim;?FM retz n_m.T perfyrery,, _STARFIRE COTS _S_ W Ucense (Core / Basic)_ ,. _ _ _ $0 .__ $240,000 $256,800 $274,800 $294,000 $314,600 $336,600 _$1,716 8001 STARFIRE COTS SW IJcense (Additional) _ _ 50 $100,000 __$107,000 $114,500 $]22,500 $131,100 $140,300
$715,400
_STARf1RE_ Warehouse ucense , __
,,___ _ 30 $32,700 $32,700 $32,7_00 $32J00_ $32,700 $32,700 $196,200 STARFIRE Technical _ Support $0 $150,000 $300,000 $300,000 _$300,000_ _$300,000 $300,000 $1,650,000
_STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance ._ $0 $75,000 $150,000 $150,000. _$150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000 _STARFIRE_ Systems / Databases Ops / Admin $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 SO $0 _STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance 50 $150AM ___$150p@ $150,000 _$150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $900,000 STARFIRE Training $50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $25.000 SO $0 $0 $225,000 jdii REkis?MM.%9!Widhhe.PWh MM2 Mli MM&M inSMHW M4Mk rii W i@ 4%dii tddi:JMt MrMNi p rFS FMS Hourfy Ch.arges $373300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $373,400 a f[S AMS NormalCherges _ _$599,800 SC $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $599,800
" _Accoun%g Support $470,500.. .___$2_35,250 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $705,756 Travel _ Data Entnf Support $748,200 $374.100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,122,500 FFS Timesharing $703,300 $0 *
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $703,300 iWME!!'sMWiELiMHdt5Es!MWrB ':-EP'!!EMEMb E4M!IiR4 XMMR ESisiti@ MIEMl'@:+ 5 EP/idi i stW$$51 ~ 5i?@f;MM
_ Category 1 Systems Contractual Support $0 $0 50 $0 $0
$0_ 30 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharino $0 $0 $0 $0 50 $0 SO SO
,E" U AW W 'W WW:W Efn i snM MMOWM,N!@s?:W,W4:4s '
C hin d M F n7sMM;r + tmpp, gggn;;g ma .;r,3 _ Category _2_ Systems Contractual Support $629,200 $314,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $943,800 Cateoory 2 Systems Timesharina $268.600 1134.300 50 SO 50 SO SO S402.900 Total Recurrina $M43,QQQ $1,01)Q,95Q $1,Q71,59Q $1,047,Q00 $1,049,200 $1,070 400 $1,109 000 11107%M) JOTAL COSTS ___ _ L S11.496.000 L34.250.000 L$1.0Lt.500 L $1.047.000 L $ w49.2001_$ 1.078.400 L$ 1.309.6001_$11.102.500 _ DISCOUNT FACTOR (32% MtD.YREATE) 1 0.9639 0.9525I~- 0,9220] 0.8926 0.8641 0,6365
~~
~
Om8091
~ pitesGNfV4i.UE f6 TAI.CD$T5 l~tiF31D.885 ~ $4.b4sf43I 198f.9651- 1934.535l $906.581 $902.045 5896A92~ti9.98pi46 a
Part 2
Q ] (%
. J SFIRES33.WK4 12/15/97Versen s**!
=
3
=
m n 3 ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITMTY ANALYSIS #$ - 50% INCREASE IN MPLEMEATATION COSTS COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total _ggMWW@rg*vrpt7F &w 6]{*{ " Tg 7 y,.Ww i'N N'"; p@;f*M "7!@*'U Q M ** STARFIRE COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules).. . . 31.200.000 . . _ . $0 _
$9 .,_
30 30 30 30 .._ $1,200.000 _ STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic) . $1,200,000 _ . . _ $0 $0 50 30 30 . ._____ _ 30 .__._31,200,000
...STARFIRE COTS SW(Additional Modules)_ _. __.. . $500.000 _.
30 , 50 30 _ _ 30 _. $0 30, ._ ___S500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor _Servkar (Aldstional)_ _ _ $525.000 _ _. . _ _ $0 _ _ _ $0 SO __ . . __ $0 $0 $3 __, _ 5525.000 STARFIRE.RDBMS __ _ .
. _$2,226.000 _ . _ , SO _ _ _ _ . 30. _ _ _
30 . _ . . _ .30 30 30 ____S2,226,000 STARFIR E _Middleware . ,. _ ____ .___ _ __ .__.
$277.000 _ _ _ . SO 30 30 30 SC $0 $277,000
,STARFIRE Warehouse SW _
_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ $181.800 .. ._.30 SO $0 ._. 30 SO $0 ____$181.800 STARFIRE , Warehouse. Design.____ _ _ , _. _, . _ SO _ . 5547,500 _$0 30 _ __ _ SO $0 SO __ $547,500
~STARFIRE implementationi __ _ __ ___._, _ _. __$1,305.000 _. $435.000 ,50 $0 30 30 $0 ___S1,740,000 g
,STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS __ . $307.500 $307,500 30
._ SO . _ _ .30 ___ 30 $0 , ,_ 3615.000 STARFIRE Interface with_Other_ Systems __ _ _ _ _ $577,500 _ .$577,500
- N STARFIRE Specialized HW(Servers) _
__ . _ 30 $0 30 $0 $0 . ,,_$1,155.000 31,000.000 30
- ._ SO , . 30 _ 30 $0 _ __ _ , $0 _ $1,00C,000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion _.___ _ . _ $353.850 . _ . .._SO SO SO 30
.__ _ _ $0 __ 30 __ _ S353.850
_STARFIRE Policies.and Procedures Devel _ $100.000 _$100.000 $0 30 $0 30 , 30 . __. $200.000 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) $25,000 $25,000 $0 30
.c , w 30 30 $0 $50,000
- m. ;
. m_ e m: w .
- - e -.- -
FFS Systems Transition 30 $0 30 30 30 30 30 FFS Year 2000 Fixes _ .. ..__30 SO $0 50 $0__ 30 $0 $0 SO u- u ;<i .: h y;..nsw n
'w+
Category 1_ Systems Transition
?
, y n m. n F-r 30 SO $0 SO SO $0 SO . . _ _ ___ 30 Category 1 Systems Yeter 2000 Fixes $0
;- r rq + #
50 30 30 $0 $0 30 so
' < a (.
_ Category 2 Systems Transition
- e. . sg : ,+ c,
$0 50 SO $0 SO Cateoorv 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes '1552.100 $552.100
______ SO _ _. 30 _ , ._ 30 SO SO $0 SO SO 31.104_200 _ Tota! Non-Recumna $10.330150 $2.544.600 - 10 101 SO SO $0 $12.875.350
- Includes Design and Engineering. Ca.4ae.a. Installation, DM.,,a .t. and Approx. $300K of OCIO Infrastructure Integration Support Costs.
Part 1 M O
4% %
/
\ I)
G (0 d
)
SFIRES33.WK4 88 12/15t97 Version s!
=
3 m en S ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS #3 - 50% INCREASE IN IMPLEMENTATION COSTS COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 F) 2003 FY 2004 Total l
- RECtJRRING We't;4iffwivJ ,- '
rwNW 4 "SW ' e MS "c N% 9M v 1*##w" eti Mn r
- Mer lrMesye s r, :%=
_STARFIRE_ COTS _SW Ucense (Core / Basic) , 30 _, $240,000 $256,800 $274,800 $294,000 $314,6_00 $336,6001 $1,7_16,800
..STARFIRE COTS SW License (Additionaf) _ $0 , , $100,000 _$107,000 $114,500 _$122,500 $131,100 $140,300! $715,400
_STARFIRE RD.BMS SW License _ _ $0 $258.200 $258,200 __$258,200 _ _ 3258,200 __._3258,200 _$258,200 _$1,549,200 STARFIRE Middleware SW License. _ _ $0 350,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000 STARFIRE Warehouse License , . _ _ $0 , __$32,70_0 $32,700 $32,7_00 $32,7_00 $32,7_00 $32,7.00 $196,200 STARFIRE TechnicalSupport $0 $150,000 _$300,000 __.$300,000 $300,000 _$300,000 $300,000 $1,650,000 ,
. STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance __.__ . _ _ . $0 $75,000 $150,000 __$150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000
_STARFIRE_ Systems / Databases _ Ops / Admin _ __ $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 __$200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000.. _$1,400,000 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance 50 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $1:i0,000 $150,000 $900,000 g STARFIRE Training IIDid/aeFF!t@j;UiE%WdWhif9fP <
$50,000 r;J'M-M:5 M :!4 ' ' :
$75,000 $75.000 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $225.000
'B!NMMMr run m E:Gerih- yn di@en e@is mg y,y . spit,g (a rFS FMS Hourly Charges $373,400 $0
-~
$0_ $0 $0 $0 $0 $373,400
. FfShjS}iormalCharges $5?9,800 _ _ $0 $0 $0 $0 50
* $0 $599,800 Accounting _S.upport $410,500 _$235,250 $0 $0 $3
$0 $0 $705,750 Travel Data Entry _ Support $748,200 __$374,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,122,300 FFS Timesharing $703,300 $0 $0 SO $0 50 $0 $703,300 5 41!ihinEWEwi,iMiRsMiAdS%iW P@*@Wii iM&fr#- ihnWCWI mbiWNW @%MiM W Mir4 M ,. 96WM&:il;& W Category _1 Systems Contractual Support __ __ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharina $0 50
$0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Mi:&}!WdthMEMWM6M G/A f % c W 11 C < MMOih W LMid M *"N n SitMW MMNS cNAM4 ,, EMW Category.2._ Systems Contractual Syport $629,200 _$314,600 $0 $0 $0 50 $0 $943,800 Cateoory 2 Systems Timesharina $268.600 $134.300 SO $0 $0 SO $0 $402.900 Total Recurring $4,94),9QQ $UDP,1$9 ,_1L}79,799 11,$$$,7Q9 $1,$$7,40Q $1,$00,000
$1617.000 $14 328 650 L.514.373.750 _54.933.750 L_$ tS79.700 L,$j.555.200 L$jtS57A00 LS L586.600 L_S te t te00l_$2L204,200
,TOTAI. COSTS _ _ _ .___.__m
_D19COUNLEACTOR(3,3 _ _%_MD-YRRATE) 0.9639 _ 0,9525 0.9220 L_0.e920. - - - 0.eeti_I 0.83e51
' PRESENT VALU$ t6 TAI. CDSTs~~ ~ ' ~ '-~ ~ ~ lid.i42 296 Fli.699.230 ^$il56.54s l $1.388.146 'II.545j0f f'$i.327.i37 I~iT310 0040.809 .
[~
^ 1 5659559 h
a Part 2
% C (*'
SFIRES42.WK4 12/15/97Verskm # k 3
=
m n 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITMTY ANALYSIS 84 -SIX ISONTH IISPLERIENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Totet
' HON-necuRRnt:2mTmmEE ~E E,2. qm r~n NZ mmI'~ mW rWF WN
.STARFIRE COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules) _. , 31,200,000 30 $0 30
._. 30 __._ _ 30 _ _ . _ _ . ._30 _$1,200,000
. STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services _(Core / Basic)__$800,000 . ._. .$0 . _ _ _ , 30 _
SO ,____ 30 SO $0 $800,000 _STARFIRE COTS SW (Additional Modules)_ . . _ ___ $500,000 _ $0 _ _ .$0 $0 __ __ _ $0 30 50 $500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Adddionsi) . . $350,000 30 , _ _ _ 30 $0 _ STARFIRE RDBMS
. 30 $0 $0 .,_$350,000
$0 $0 30 $0 _, __ _ __30 $0 _, _ __ _.__ $0 _ ______$0 STARFIRE Warehouse /SYBAS.i.lO _ , $181,800 $0 *0 $0 30 $181,800
.STARFIRE Warehouse Design _
__. _ __. . _ _ _ _ _ 30 __30 __ _ _ _. 30 . . . . _. $365,000 ___ 9 $0 . _ _ _ _ _ $0 $0 $0 ._ .._ 3365,000 STARFIRE implementation *.. _.
. . _ _ __ $435,000 ST25,000 ,L _ $0 $0 $0 _$0 _ _$1,160,000
$83,000 STARFIRE Interface.with ADAMS _____ _.._ _ . $249,000 _ . _ _ 30 _ . .
$0 30 SO _ _ __ _____ _ $0 $332,000 STARFIRE Interface.with.Other Systems ____ _ _. _. $185,000 . $430,000 _ _ _ _ SO $0 . _ . _ ___ _ SO $0 $0 . ,, _ $615,000
_STARFIRE Specialized _HW(Servers)__ _ _ __ _ $500,000 $500,000 _ $0 a SO _.__ _30 _ _ __ $0 ___. __ _ . 30._._31,000,000 _ STARFIRE Core Data Conversion ___ __ __ __ 50 . $235,900 SO SO _ _ .30 __ _ _30 , ,__ . , _,.30 . _,.$235,900 _STARFIRE Policies and. Procedures.Devel. _.. _. 50 $200,000 $0 SO STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) $25,0')0 _. _ 30 __ _ _ $0 . . , _ _ . . $0 _ _ $200,000
$25,000 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $50,000
~_-: w x ew nm wn y 8
,m y ,. ... ,_; ; ,; 1 ,~. ._ n +; v
, ..o
. FFS Systems _Transihon
_ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ . . 30 . , _ . _30 .,. _ $0 $0 _ $0 $0 ,_,. _ _ _$0 _ _ 50 FFS Year 2000 Fixes $0 30 p M , at = , $0~ $0 30 $0 $0 $0 a qe w , O # f. s _- p
,,,,e , e*< .. . ;.-
_ Category 1 Systems Transition . $0 $0 30 $0, Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fixes _. _ SO $0 $0 SO
, ; w. m
- sp . m ;.~
._ $0 $0 $0 $0 SO _ SO SO 30
- y. ., nq_ , w ,,_ .
4._
. Category 2 Systems Transition
. . 30 . . _ _ $0 _$0 $0 30 ___.. 30 _ _ . . _ _ . 30 Cateaorv 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes $552.100
_ _ _ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ 30 I
$552.100 SO $0 SO SD So $1.104M Total Non-Recta =4 $4.811.900 $3.282.000 SO $0 SOI SO $0 $8.093.90Q_
- Includes Design and Engineering, C .4,+ a, installation, Deployment, and Approx. $300K of OCIO Infrastructure triograbon Suppo t Costs-I R., , I O
/@* I
\
) ')
i v j NA SFIRES42.WK4 12/15/97 Veision 88 k 2!
- =
rn n 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
0 SENSITMTY ANALYSIS #4 - SIX MONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Totat
' RECURRtNG ww;if#&a m f m e"" M W Ni'n!'m"' 4"^*fe'T'Mu't. ~' K t wictf a 41'1 pi'F fn n+"c+-i=s *sr Ormt m g,ym m STARFIRE COTS _SW License (Core / Basic)___
_ 30 $240,000 $250,800 $274,800 $294,000 _$314,600 _$336,600
$0 $100,0C7 $1,7_16,800
_STARFIBE_C_OTS S. W_Ucense_(Additional)____ _. . _ $107,000 $114f00_..___$122,500 $131,100 .__$140,300 $715,400 STARFIRE Warehouse License ____ _ ._ . 30 $32J00 $32,700 $32J00 $32,700 $32,700 STARFigE TechnicalSupport $0 $0 $300,000 $32J00 $196,200
$300,000 $300,000 $300 000 $300,006 _$1,500,000
_ STARFIRE Interfaces Majntenance _ ,_ _ $Q $0 __$150,000 $150,000 _$150A00
$150,000 $150,000 $750,000 STARFIRE Systems / Databases Ops / Admin _ _ . __50 30 SO _ _50 $0 $0 $0 $0 STARFJRE Hardware Maintena.nce , _, , _. $0 ___$75,000 $150,000 $150,000 _$150,000 STARFIRE Training $150,000 $150,000 $825,000
_ $50.000 $g000 $75.000 $25,000 30 $0 ~ $0 m # s%i Wia W idt BEL A' fin eMMb "O ein idPh db b' 96 C_ n B r% c ti A e@r ,'M & WWM $225.000 g FFS FMS Hourfy_ Charges $373,400 $180,700 30 '$0 53 30 $0 $560,100 a ,FFS AMS N_orm_alCharges $599,800 $299,900 m $0 $Q $0 $0 30 Accounting. Support $470,500 $470,500 $89' 9,700
$0 $0 $0 $0
_ Travel _ Data Entry Support $748,200 __$748,200 $0 $941
$0 $0 Sq $0 $0 _$1/f63,000 FFS Timesharing $703.300 $351.650 - 00
$0
$0 $0 $0 $0 sr#PrdMMtMMfdiWietmW 3 rHWFW - M3WOT %2nM Min NW PWiM'M Hif M W $1.054.950
_ Category 1 Systems Contractual Support $0 $0 $0 dt#:'Fi M .F-M Categor $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 30 30 $0 W ~y 1 Systems TimesharinD MAiME-eiiDuidOMMN $0 $0 $0 m i S 3:Mi M M ii!I 9W>in 9 t?
- 41 fiW.M %%& w.,
$0
, Category 2_ Systems Contractual Supped $629,200 $629,200 i% pyg,ig
$0 $0 30 $0 Cateaory 2 Systems Timesharina $268.600 $268.600 $0
$0_ _$1,258,400
$0 $0 50 $0 Totn9 HecuHnw $3 843.000 $3 477.450 $1.071.500 $537.200
$1.04 7.000 $1.049.200 $1.078.400 ' $1.199 600 ~ 512.676.150
,TO. TAI.,COSIS l_$8.654.900 0.9639 L56.759.450 0.9525 L$1.0Z1.500 L $1.047.000 09220 03926 '
0,6641 1 L$_1.049.200 L$1.078.400 L51.109.6
%2seNf vAwe VoTAi.coSTsDISCOUNIfACIOR(13%MID-YREATE)----
~ ~ ~
~18.515.534 $6.438.147 19stbs5 8934 535 0 03651 0,2097
~ 190s.55iCt902ii45F~t898.4sf tiH81}69 s
Part 2 R O
w (e % SFIRES43.WK4 12/15/97 Version 3
=
m o 3 ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY AhALYSIS #4 - SIX IIIONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total
, NC$1-IttCtStAINOMPW~""'"m'F' STARFIRE. COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules) _ _
35*? " J M "r vi+ _ $1,200.000 .,_ _.30 e PPE *MWW m'
- 30 . . . __, 30 "W S"v'~W
__ _SO ._ ._ 30 30, _ _31,200,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic)_ 3800,000 ._ _ $0 _ .30 _. , 30 $0 $0 _30 _ _ $800,000 s STARF)RE COTS SW(Addrhonal Modules) _ _ _ $500.000 _ So _ _ , _ _ $0 ___
$0 30 _. 30 30 $500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Addrhonal) _. ._. 3350.000 30 30 _.
30 _ _ .$0 30 __ . _ 30 , _. 3350,000 _. _ 30 STARFIRE RDBMS . . _ $2,226,000 _ __ SO ___ 30 . _ . _ ._ $0 _ _ _ ._ __ _ _. SO _._ SO _ $2,226,000 > _ STARFIRE Middleware _ ___ _____ _ __. . . _ _ _ $277,000 _ $0 . . _ _ 30 30 _ $0 . _ _ _ _ _ _ 30 30 _ _$277,000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW __ _ _.__.. ___ $181,800 . _. 30 , 30 .SO 30 ___ _ _ SO _ _. _ ._30 _ ,.3181,800 _STARFIRE Warehouse Design $0 . 3365,000 _10 30 _ $0 _ __._. _ . $0 _ __ _30 . __ __. 3365.000 STARFIRE implementation * ..
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ .$435.000 _ $725,000 . , _ . , ., . . $0
. _ _ __. . 30 __ _ _ SO $0 , __ _ 30 _ 31,160,000 g STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS
_STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems _ _ . __ _ $102,500 _. .$307,500 __ _ __ $0 _ . . _ _ _ $0 _ __ _ .30 . _ _ ._ _ _ _ SO $0 _.__ $410,000 a ____ _ $230,000 3540,000 30 30 o> __.__ 30 _ , __ SO _ _ SO ..,_ _ S770.000 STARFIRE Speaalized_flW(Servers) ._
. $500,000 $500.000 _ _,_ _, , 30 30
$0 . . _ _ . _ _ 30 _ ,_ _ _ . ,30 ,,_ _11,000,000 l
_STARFIRE Core Data.. Conversion _ _. __.__ _ 30 . $235,900 30 __
$0 30 30 30 $235,900 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel _ 30 5200,000 _.,_SO __ ._, , 30 ___ $200,000
_ _. _ 30 . _ . . $0 _ SO STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) $25,000 $25,000 SO $0
.;g/ -
z m - + 3, .g ,
$0 30 30 $50.000
- z. -
- g. . , ;<, , - 9 ri w -
.FFS Systems Transition 30 . 30 30 30 30 30 30 -
30 FFS Year 2000 Fixes $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 10 $0
%gg -2., m gm p. o -
;c _ -
. Category 1 Systems Transition u m .> e:1; . < m v. .
Category 1 Syste ns Year 2000 Fixes 30 30 $0 5 30 SO 30 $0
$0 $0 30 30 m xWW p .m . cm ; n - -
< , - . - , n
$0 30 30 30
_. Category 2. Systems Transition
., . w 1 ; $, % r M ,m 30 SO $0 30 $0 30 _ . _, .__ $0 ., _ __ ,_ _ _ $0 Cateaory 2 Systems Year 2000 Fixes ,j552.100 5552.100 SO $0 30 SO SO S1.104200 Total Non-Recumna _ jf .179.400 $3 450.500 !
$0- SO $0 10 $0 $10.829.900 *
- Includes Design and Engineering. Development, Installetion, Deployment, and Approx. $300K of OClO Infrastructure Integreton Support Coets.
t b i Part 1 i 0 .
y (u.) 1 i' ms SFIRES43 WK4 12/15'97 Version s'8 a 3 m ni o 3 ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY ANALYST 5 #4 - SIX MONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 - Total RECtJRR:NGgjteWwt:a*w w N N - N'+ W c+ e iM#im =m. <fe '%CM"M pm&w ww wcm 5 tty.rm _ e m.m STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core / Basic)___ $0 $240,000 $256,800 $274,500 $294,000 $314,600 $336,60q _STARFIRE_QOTS,SW Lignse (Adddional)_ _, $1,716,800
$0 $100,000 $107,000 _$114,500_$122,500 $131,100 $140,300
_STARFjRE RDBMS SW License $0 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $715J00
$258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $1,549,200
..STARFIRE Middleware_SW License,, . _____$0 ___$50,000 $50,000 $50,000 350,000
$50,000 $50,000 $300,000
_STARFIRE Warehouse License.__._ __ _.. . _ _ __$0 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700_ $32J_00 $32,700 $196,200 _STARFIRE Technica1 Support $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000
$300,000 $300,000 _ 31,500,000 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance $0 $0 $150,000 $150,0C0 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $750,000
_STARFIRE Systems / Databases . Ops / Admin $200,000 _ _ $200,000 $200,000 $2VO,000 __$200,000 __$200,000 $200,000 _ $1A00p00 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance $0 $75,000 $150,030 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000 g STARFIRE Training $50.00C $75.000 $75,000 $25,000 $0
$0 50 $225,000 m *
n#2EiWiU M M W1?nM? M M M#l5GWi CM M NbM N ; Tuns;&n WWMtM MP,7
-4 FFS FMS Hourfy_ Charges $373,400 $186,700
&# Hyd M M;ttif
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FFS AMS NormalCharges $560,100
$599,800 $299,900 $0_ $0 30 $0 $D $899,t00
_ Accounting Support $470,500 $470,500 -
$0 $Q $0 $0 $0 $941,000
_Trayel Data Entry _ Support $7_48,200 $748.200
$0 $0 $0 30 $0 _$1,496,400 FFS Timesharing $703.300 $351,650 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $1,054.950 R@WiS5Wr; "@!WBtNMMW6fel ? W Ma nd4Bi %P;iiJWW74 P;M
_ Category _1 Systems Contractual Support $0 $0 $0 MC in .WW. FiM WmWW g.MpJy
$Q $Q $0 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharing _ $0 30 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 30 WN##*nNEPWMENMMM M:r? $0
??#REL LGT!?dfM OPEFd MkN E TlNM Writ dd Wn SM:4N #ind Q
_ Category _2 Systems Contractual Support $629,200 _$629,200 $0 10 $0 Cateaory 2 Systems Timesharina $268.600 $268.600
$0 $0 _$_1,258,400 50 $0 SO SO SO $537.200
_IOTALCOSTS MM L $11A22A00 LS7,436.150 L$1.579.700 L$i.555.200 i _ $ L557A00 L$1.5BS SCO L$1617.800L_$26.755.250
~
~
Di$COUNifhCf6ff(UKkild:VnsdiET 0.9639 03525 1 922 W ~ 0.8926I ' ~~05641 CJ6C ~ C,6097]
~~
PRn5ENtFAT.UE T6TA~ L ~C6sf9-~ ~~l ii33837 17.08268i ~fi358.54$Fli388.i461 ti345.76i ti327.137 ti3i6.664T-- s25.148.684 Part 2 l O
4- L " " " _ - , . -. . .. . _ -. .- - -- - - - - - -- l C SFIRESS2.WK4 O 12/15/97 Version 88 5
=
3
= .
en g ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST SUtfRAARY " ( SENSI e*lVITY ANALYSIS #5. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURING,50% INCREASED IMPLEMENTATION COSTS, AND SIX MONTH WPLEMENTATION DE1AY t COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total m eu,me rm w w w v. g wn _ STARFIRE. COTS SW (Core / Basic Modules). _ _ $1.200.000 nrn 30 __ _ _ $0 mm- yrm 30 __ _ 30 m.m m mm , _. ._ _ 30 50 $1,200,000 l STARFIRE . COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic) , $1,200,000 _ _. _ _ __. $0 $3 _ _ _ $0 $0 30 $0 _$1,200,000 STARFIRE COTS .SW (Addebonal Modt. es) _ _ $500.000 _ .._ $0 _.__ _ _50 __ _ _ . 30 __ _ $0 _._30 SO _ . .. _$500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor _ Services (Additbnal) __ $525,000 _ _._ _ $0 _ 30 $0 _30 _ $0 $0 $525,000
- _STARFIRE RDBMS__.._ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ $0 __ . . _ _ _ SO_ _ _ _ _ . , .__ _ __,$0 _ ___ 30 _ _ ,_ $0 $0 i
! ___ SO __ _ _ _ $0 l _ STARFIRE Warehouse /SYBASE lO__ _ _..__ .. _ 3181,800 _ _ _ . _ $0 _ _ __ $0 . . ,. $0 __ _ _ 30 30 $0 $181,800 _STARFIRE_ Warehouse _Desagn_. ._ ._ __ _STARFIRE implementetion* _ _ _ _ . . . _ 30 _ $547,500 30 . $0 _ _ _ . _ . 30 _$0 _ $0 .__ $547,500 _ _ $652.500 $1,067,500 __. _ . $0 _, . _ 30 30 30 30 ___ $1,740,000 _STARF1RE Interface with ADAMS _.. .__..._ _ _ __ . $124.500 $373.500 _ _, _ $0 SO $0 $0 _30 ___, _ $496,000 _STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems _ __ _ _. $277,500 $645,000 _ . ___ $0 SO _STARFIRE Specialized HW(Servers) . ._ 30 _ _ _ _ _ 30 . _ ____ _30 _ __ _ $922,500
. _ $500,000 . $500.000 $0 $0 SO , _ _ .___ $0 _.. 31.000.000 in _STARFIRE Electronic Signaturing_ _. $375,000 $375.000 . _ . . _ $0
$0
_ SO _ 50 _ ._ 30 30 $750nn0 _STARHRE Core Data Conversion _ __._ _ _ _ . _ $0 _ $353.850 .___.. _ $0 _ 30 30 $0 . _____ __30 _._$353, .. i
._STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel ._ _ _ ._ 30 , $200,000 _ _ $0 30 $0 .__ ,, _ SO _ SO . 5200,000 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) $2_5,000 $28,000 $0 $0 p .+ o.x,y m -- 30 , $0 30 $50,000 9_ e u_ m w n,. m. -u, . -< ,
a n;;y ye 6
> 1
_FFS Systerns Transstion 30 30 $0 30 50 30 30 .__ __ _ _ 30 FFS Year 2000 Fixes $0 30
- y. " ' * $0 $0 $0 30 SO i
., i;3;, ,,; r .
.n- -~< $0_
. 3 ;5. s y , 8 ,w ,.t +
< h nZ, > I 8 :n : > ^ ;
Category 1 Systems Transition ___ . _ __ ._ $0 _ 30 10 _ Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fixes ,_ _ $0 ___. _. _ SO ,. 30 ... _.._ $0 . _ . _ ___ _. _f0 ______..._30
> , $0 $0 $0 30 $0 10 30 Y ;g j (
m.<' sy.16 - ,y s *: m a Ca:c+.nj 2_ Systems Transition _____ _ _ $0 ___ ___$0 30 50 $0 _ _ _ ___ _30 Cateaorv 2 Svstems Year 2000 Fixes _ _ , . . _$552.100 _ _ .$G _._ . _30
~ $552.100 So $0 $0 $0 $0 $1.104200 Total Non-Recumna $6.113.400 $4.659.450 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0! $10.772.850
- Includes Design and Engineering Development, insta8ation, Deployment, and Approx. $300K of OClO Infrastructure Integrabon Support Costs.
_1 l
I j g 3
$FIRESS2.WK4 to 12/15/97 Version il=
3
- =
m . o ' 3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - STARFIRE WITH SYBASE CORE COST
SUMMARY
O SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS #5 - FLECTRONIC SIGNATURING,50% INCREASED IMPLEMENTATION COSTS, AND SIX MONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total rRECURRiNGimNiMWPSS:W N : #**m 9ff$#fmM NWNE EhMfWMM" Pi':Sffif+ht MTM:G"W.% N m W Oib- ,.!ftmtenu genmwi STARFIRE COTS SW License (Core / Basic}_ _, 50, _$240,000 $256,800 $2_74J00 $29_4,000 $314,6_00 $336,600 $1.716,800 _STARFIRE COTS SW License _LAdditior.al)_ _ 30 ___$100,000_ $1Q7,000_ $1J4,500 $122,500 $140,300 $715,4R
$131100
_STARFIRE_ Warehouse License $0 S??,700 $32,700 $32J00 $32,7_00 $32,700 $32J00 $196,200 STARFIRE TechnicalSupport $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $3%,000
$300J)0 $1,500,000
_STARFIBE interfsces_Malntenance __ $0 $Q $150,000 __$150,000 $1_54000_ $150,000 $150,000 _STA R FIR E_Sy_ stems /Databas_es_ Ops /Adtnin
.$750.000 30 _$0 $0 $0 30 SQ
$75,000 $150,000 _$150,000
$0_ $0
_ STARFIRE Hardware Maint_enance $Q $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000 STARFIRE Training $50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $225.000
@ nis Wic n4 3 e sa :i d p M i % #
- d % W:iMsi s mTht:WG kWWJ rst Wimts shafs; what mjE;wn :my g.gf.2 FFS FMS Hourly Charges _,__$373,400 _$186,700 9
m FFS AMS_ Norm _al_Cha'ges 3599,800 $299,900
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0 $0 $560,100
$0 $0 $0 $899200 O Accounting Support $470,500 $470,500 30_ $0 $0 $0 $0 $941,000 TraveIData Entry Support $748,200 $748,200 $0 $0 $0 FFS Timesharing
~
$0 $0 $1,56,400
$703,300 $351,650 $0 $0 $0 $5
~
idMiM n,Usi&EiWNMMBINVWifMW $0 $1,054,950
<"/ @ fif!M. 3"W#nsk dits?W AM%*E !H&nebl tMGmw di.>04% ; 3r4hf 5n
_ Category 1_Syste_ms Contractual Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharing $a $0
$0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0
%W,in, $0 u< WTMuMr iWr:1:@!- miH 141MP.- $NWWI WWine Krn Md5 ti *'rsiUH MiM rW %W;@ m s;efdy.
Category 2 Systems Contractual S_upport $629,200 $629,200 $0 $0 __. $0 $0 $0 $1,258,400 Cateoory 2 Systems Timesharina
$268.600 $268.600 SO $0 SO $0 $0 $537.200 umsNaIA$nEmmNa$lula!Es mMeSEslEiumMa3$mnEm umMaimEa$$u usMaidSl$Es umEEm$al
_IOTAL COST 3_ _ __$9.9WA001_$0.136.900($ LOR 500L$t04L0001_$1049.200 JLOI8.400 m 8U09.600LS23A49.000 "DISCOUNTJAGIOR(3.3%. . ._ __.. . _ __ mfd-YRIMIE)
- - ~ ~
0.96391 _ _ 0.9525 ' O9220 03926] 0.0641' 0.8305 0.0097 PRES $NiVALU5 TDTAL CDSTS ~ !D9s.D77I !TJ5032i ~5987.965 $93tS35I 1908.58h ~~~190f045' '-~$898.492 121 0 518i6 R._ l
J U SFIRES53.WK4 12/15t97 Version C' s ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACLE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITMTY ANALYSTS 95 - ELECTRONIC SIGNATURING 50% INCREASED WPLEMENTATION COSTS, AND SEX MONTH IW'LEMENTATION DELAY COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total
]ON-SttW:WdM#dW2K _W21 YWw *DTV
_ .31,200,000 , _ _ _ 30
- A M'MT MWM YTW f3%J' STARFIRE COTS SW(Core / Basic Modules) _ _
_30 ._ . . _ _ . 30 _ _ ____ 30 30 __30 __$1,200,000 _STARFIRE COTS Vendor Services (Core / Basic) _ $1,20C,000 _ _ _ _ _ SO _ _ _ ._ _ . _ $0 . _ , 30 . _ , ,_ _ 30 $0 $0 _._$1,200,000 _.STARFIRE COTS _SW (Addeonel Modules),_ _. , ._ _ $500,000 __ __ . 30 . . _ . 30 ._ 30 . _30 30 $0 3500,000 STARFIRE COTS Vendor _Servems_{Additinnel)_. ._ _ $525,000 __ __ , 30 30 30 _ _ _ ._, . 30 $0 30 $525,000
, 30 STARFIRE _RDBMS___ ____ _ _ _ _ _ .
__ $2.226,000 __.30 _ _ . _,_ _ , _ SO _.._ ,,___30 ._ 30 30_ _ 32,226,000 _STARFIRE Middleware _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ $277,000 _.__ _ ___ . 30 _ __, $0 __ _ , ,. $0 . __ _ _ _$0 30 30 ___ $277,000 STARFIRE Warehouse SW _ __ _ $181,800 . . .. _ 30 __ _ __.30 _ 30 30 ._ 30 30 _ _ 3181,800 _ STARFIRE Warehouse Design 30 $547,500 , , _ SO ,_. 30 . __ _ _ . ., 30 30 30 __ $547,500 _STARFIRE 6, J ;.s.*_ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , , _ _ $652,500 . .$1,087,500 _ _ . _ _ _ 30 __ . $0 __. _ _ 30 _ _ __ __30 _ _ ____30 _ _ 31.740,000
._STARFIRE Interface with ADAMS _ _ __ _ _ _, $153,750 $461,250 , . 30 30 _ 30 . _._ _ _30 . __ _, _ , 30 ._.._S615,000 m ..STARFIRE Interface with Other Systems. _ __ _ _ _ _ $345,000 , $810,000 _ . _ .__ _ 30 30 __ _ _ $0 30 30, _$1.155,000 o
.STARFIRE Specalized HW(Servers) . $500.000 . $500,000 30 $0 30 .__31,000,000
. _ . . __ __ _. _ _ 30 ____ ___ $0 _ _ ,
STARFIRE ElectronicSignatunng ___ _ ___ _ ,_ $375,000 . $375,000 30 $0 __.. 30 _ 30 .
,_ _._30 _,. 3750,000 STARFIRE Core Data Conversion _ . . $0 $353,850 , _ . . . _ _ . $0 30 _., _ SO 30 .___ $353,e50
. _ 30 STARFIRE Policies and Procedures Devel . _ __. __._ __ _ _._ _ $0 _ $200,000 ____ _ 30 _ 30 30 __ __. 30 _. __ 30 __ $200,000 STARFIRE Travel (NRC Staff) Q OOO $25p 30 30 30 30 $50,000 m ~- - .W :,u.- w , t , g~ , - gg e gn e. . . -e. w: n v .w
- s +& u
. _ _ 30 m'-
_ FFS Systems Transition _ _ _ _ __, 30 . , _. _ $0 30 30
, ._ _ __ _ 30 30 ,
30 ._ _ $0 FFS Year 2000 Fixes $0 $0 $0 30 30 30 30 30 b m wuiidelMMMbw. L w :& . m
- v s1 ns; w - +
~>W MWk MWLG ' % ; J~
_ Category _1 Systems Transeon_ _ ._ __ , 30 _ _ _ , 30 _ _ 30 , 30 _ _ ,, 30 _ 30 _ __ __ __ 30 , ___ _ _ 30 Category 1 Systems Year 2000 Fbres 30 $0 $0 $0 30 SO SO SO y & M. , A ; a h n i N E .p g
,s .y g g g- ' u ; __
;; % 4 %%n M N $ iW:i n .m
-Category _2 Systems Transeon . _ . , . _ 30 $0 30 __ _ _, $0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . $0 _. . _ . 30 , _ . 30 __ _ _ . _ ._ . 30 Catonorv 2 Svstems Year 2000 Fixas $552.100 t m 100 SO $0 . . . _ SO SO .__ $0 $1.104M Total Non-Racumna $8.713.150 $4.912.200 30 SO SO $0 SO $1 M 350
- Includes Design and Engineenng, C-._' ,,,.. .,^., installeCon, Deployment, and Approx. $300K of OCIO lnfrastructure Integration Support Cools.
~1 I
( ,/ V % - SFIRESS3 WK4 12/15f97 Version 88 s
=
2! a m o 3 ALTERNATIVE 3 - STARFIRE WITH ORACIE CORE COST
SUMMARY
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 85 - ELECTRONIC SIGNATURING,50% INCREASED IMPLEN MTION COSTS, AND SIX MONTH IMPLEMENTATION DELAY
- COST ELEMENTS FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 200I FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total JEC_URRINGwe; o~,N%mru W t e' w ' SN r + Cat 3 ?RMN4 UN +.N ?r Yt " M#* "Y wm NN eg e- S K+mq
_ST.ARFIRE_ COTS _SW Uc,ms_1 Core / Basic) $0 $240,000 $256,800 $2_7_4,800 $294,000
$314,600 $336,600 $1,716,800 STARr'89E QOTS_SW License (Additional) $0 $100p00 $107,000 $114,500 $122,500 $131,100 $140,300 $715,400 STARFIRE RDBMS SW License $0 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $258,200 $1,5_49,200 STARFIRE Middleware SW License $0 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000
_ST_ARFIREWarehouse_Ucense 30 $32,700 $32,700 $32,700 STARFIRE TechnicalSupport
$32J00 $32.700 $32,700 $196,200 30 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300p00 $1,500p00 STARFIRE Interfaces Maintenance 30 $0 $150,000 $150,000 $150$00 $150A00 $150A00 $750f00
_STARFIRE Systems / Databases _ Ops / Admin $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,400p00 STARFIRE Hardware Maintenance 30 $75p00 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $15_0,000 $150,000 $825,000 g STARFIRE Training $50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $25,000 SO $3 $3 522 > 000 9 a M.?m : MnM% MW'%IRW!a%WR ; d.r!L Mah.:M WDVQdd 24tr;.K: R n?%a C+n M'!! %?1;+ J n@ Qarey - FFS FMS Hourly Charges $373,400 50
$186200 $0 50 $0 $0 $560,100 FFS AM_SJJormal Charges $599A00 $299,900 $0 50 $0 SO $0 $B99,700
_AccountsSupport $470,500 $470,500 *
$0 $0 $0 50 50 $941,000
_ Travel Data Entry _ Support $748,200 $748,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,496,400 FFS Tirnesharing $703,300 $351,650 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,054.950 Ma fMBE%itt/W W R1 Tc
- A 4_M~- t m M.6R BRIN"M W ' M: f fi 64 *b @ N:w Q g '. W qm t
_ Category _1_ Systems _C_ ontractualSuyev.i 50 $0 __ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Category 1 Systems Timesharing $0 SO $0 $0 50 50 $0 SO
- s m:MefG WfN h W W 94 JWs2 MMMs ^" ' b'.::s 'ML 23 E.? - et b-rn s tin; cri di thm
_ Category.2_ Systems _ Contractual Suggai $629,200 $629,200 $0 30 Catecory 2 Systems Timesharina $0 SO $0 $1,258m400
$268.600 $268.600 30 50 50 $0 Total Recuis%
SO $537.200
$4,043,QQQ $),985,$5Q $1,$79,799,, $1,5$5,299 $1,557,400 t $1,586 600 $1617 800 8 $15 925 350
_TOTALCOSIS $12.Z56J 50 LS8.897,850LS L579.700L5L555.200 L$ L557.400 L$tS86.600. _5 L617.800 L529.550,700
~ ~ 0,9639 F~ 10.9526I 03220E ~ 0.6926T~ ~e64iT-- 0.8365 0,e097 I_~DISCOUNtIndi PReSeNT Vhl.tje TOTAL COSTS R]MMlitETRiiAIE)
Sif550.fiil 58574.900I $1.456.54sI $i.388.i46I~!i'545 70i1 ti 527.137l 11.310.004 $27.853.177
=
0 Part 2 R O
O NRC Agency-Wide Ff:lancial and Resource Management System PROJECT ACTION PLAN i O December 1997 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission p n.,9, O IM.....I
STARFIREProject Action Pla;s Table of Contents - Q~ STARFIRE PROJECT ACTION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF EXHIBITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii F O RE WO RD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv EXECUTIVE S UMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v l . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................. 1-1 1.1 Proj ect Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1 1.2 Proj ect Obj ectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -2 l . 3 S c ope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -3 1.4 Assumpti ons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -5 1.5 Applicable Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -8 1.5.1 NRC Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -8 1.5.2 CISSCO Program Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 1.6 Defmition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -9 1.7 Document Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -9
- 2. PROJECT MAN AGEMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
. 2.1 Proj ect Dermition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2 2.1.1 Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 2.3.1.1 COTS Vendor Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 2.1.1.2 NRC STARFIRE Team Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 2.1.2 Management Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 2.1.3 Technical Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 2.2 Proj ect Performance Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 2.2.1 Work Breakdown Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 2.2.2 Project Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 2.2.2.1 Gantt Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9 2.2.2.2 Task Assignment Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9 2.2.3 Project Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9 2.2.3.1 Roles and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-10 2.2.3.2 Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-10 2.2.3.3 Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12 2.23.4 Staffmg Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12 2.3 Risk Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 2-12 s 2.3.1 Risk Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12 I
sTMeruttenteet Acdon Plan row orcanona 2.4 Quality Assurance, Configuration Management, Data Management, and Records Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 14 ; 2.4.1 Quality Assurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14 2.4.2 Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14 2.4.2.1 ~ CM Responsibilities and Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15 2,4.2.2 Establishment of Baselines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15 2.4.3 Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 2.4.4 Records Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 2.5 SDLCM Methodology Tailoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 APPENDIX A: LIST OF ACRONYMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 APPENDIX B: STARFIRE HIGH-LEVEL CORE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, FY98
....................................................................B-1 .
AhPENDIX C: DETAILED STARFIRE GANTT CHARTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
)
v ii
- - - ^ "
O STARFIREProjectActionPlan List of Exhibits LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit ES-1 : Schedule of Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Exhibit 2-1: STARFIRE's SDLCM Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 Exhibit 2.1 -1 : Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 Erhibit 2.2 1, Work Breakdown Structure (part one of two) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7 Exhibit 2.2-2. Work Breakoown Structure (part two of two) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8 Exhibit 2.2-3: Module and NRC Application Interface Implementation Schedule . . . . . . . . 2-9 Exhibit 2.2-4: STARFIRE Project Team Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-10 Exhibit 2.2-5. STARFIRE Skills Requirements Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11 ] Exhibit 2.5 1: STARFIRE Exceptions form SDLCM Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16 111
l' STNtMRE Pro}ect Actkwu Pien Foreword FOREWORD , The STARFIRE Project Action Plan (PAP) was directed by DO#K0096AJ9611-TAC C90116 and prepared collaboratively by the STARFIRE team. The STARFIRE team consists of representatives from the OCIO, OCFO., the Program Offices under OEDO, and the CISSCO Contractor. l IV
I srAmweepr%ect Acean non Erecuen sunmmy A EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
'Ihe pulpose of STARFIRE is to implement an agency wide financial and msource management
, system that integrates financial and usource planning and performance measurement. Financial
- and resource functions including core accounting, funds control, budget formulation, cost j accounting (including activity-based costing), procurement, travel, debt management / fee billing, labor cost distribution (including time and attendance management, and manpower tracking),
payroll, ymymy, and performP.nce measurement. 4
- This Program Action Plan (PAP) presents the management and technical approach expected to i i accomplish STARFIRE, consistent with the direction of the Chairman of the NRC and the process described in the NRC's Systems Development Life-Cycle Management (SDLCM) methodology. It contains the overall plan for performing and managing STARFIRE through a Project Management Plan, which includes (1) Definition; (2) Performance Plan, including the software implementation schedule; (3) Risk Management; (4) Quality Assurance, configuration '
management, data management, and records management; and (5) tailoring the SDLCM methodology to meet the needs of the STARFIRE project under the following schedule (Table ES-1): Exhibit ES-1: Schedule of Events k SDLCMesponmaar Mgior/-- , Desar (3 serv 41sp7r) (1) Define Initial Project 1.1 Requirements are defined. 04S712S7 Requireaients 1.2 LOI for COTS software completed /sent ta GSA vendors Allleems Completed 1.3 Cots sotware vendor recommended (2) Acquire Resources 2.1 COTS software acquired 947 548 2.2 Hardware acquired (3) Design the solution 3.1 COTS Vendor Logical, Physical Design and Data Doctonary 188-07S8 3.2 NRC Application laestface Logical and Physical Design 3.3 Data Warehouse and Els Design (4) Eagmeer the solutim 4.1 COTS vendor software codes and tables tailored to NRC sequirements . 03SS-4/99 4.2 NRC system Interfaces completed 43 Data Warehouse and Els C-- , f (5) Deploy the Solution 5.1 lastalled sTARFIRE Software 9/98-1049 Project Phase One r, , - Compone 10/2/98 Pv 9ect Phase Two Deployaient Complete 6/199 Project Phase Tlues Deployment Complete -10/189 (6) service the schmien 6.1 Help Desk support 10/1/98-2004 6.2 COTS vendor snansmas COTS seaware 63 CissCO Contractor maintains NRC application interface, Data Warehouse and Els O V
simwwetnqinct Acelan non Mroducelon
\ 1. INTRODUCTION This Project Action Plan describes the management and technical approach, schedule, organizational commitment, and risks associated with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
'(NRC) STARFIRE project. STARFIRE is NRC's integrated financial and resource management -
system. The approach to developing STARFIRE is consistent with the NRC's System - Development and Life-Cycle Management (SDLCM) methodology.- 1.1 Project Background Historically, financial and mixed financial and administrativre systems development within the NRC evolved independently as requirements were identified. Tnere was a general perception that the needs with regard to these systems were very different from one organization to another. , Planning and coordination of systems development at the agency level was not considered. Therefore, the current situation, whereby many separate, independently operating systems support financial activities and provide management information, is the result ofindependent office system planning and development. The Office ofInspector General Report 96A-11, improvements Needed in Agency Onrsight ofInformation Resources Management Activities, highlights this problem. In a memorandum dated February 11,1997 to the Acting Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the
. - Chairman expressed that it was essential that the NRC begin to articulate a plan to develop an -
agency-wide financial management system designed to integrate financial planning data with financial performance data.
'In response, the initial planning for STARFIRE was performed by a group of Subject Matter Experts. The group confirmed sigmycant and immediate need for a neve and integrated agency-
= wide financial management system. The group's findings are documented in the " Agency-wide F'mancial Management System-Development Plan" dated March 1997. This plan was approved for implementation by the Chairman in a memorandum dated April 10, !997. A project team was formed in May 1997 to complete the first phase of the project, which would last for -
approximately 6 months, to define the agency needs and requirements, to procure a suite of state-of-the-art software, and to prepare a detailed project action plan. 1-1
sTA n wtE W AeGon Men htmduc6en (' 1.2 Project Objectives The overarching goal of the new syst:m is to eliminate the need for multiple financial tracking systems, ultimately resulting in a unified financial management system that will serve as the single, authoritative source.of financial and resource information. This integrated system will
- improve the efficiency and effectiveness of financial and resource management in the agency. It will provide for an automated and integrated approach to conduct agency wide financial and resource functions, including core accounting, budget formulation, travel management, progdy, funds control, cost accounting, payroll, debt management / fee billing, labor cost distribution, procurement, and performance mewarement. The system will comply with Govemment-wide laws, regulations, and guidance.
The specific objectives of the system are: l provide a system that offers: (1) a high degree of functionality; (2) complete ' management and detailed financial resource information in a readily accessible, reliable, consistent, and timely on line mode; (3) period-based or real-time hard copy reports available upon request; (4) access and maneuverability in a Windows-based network environment; and, (5) financial and resource'information query capability at detail or summary levels. i provide management reporting, support decision-making necessary to carry out fiduciary responsibilitics, and support the preparation of auditable financial statements. provide information management capabilities which are geographically indifferent and can be fully accessed and utilized at all locations, including headquarters, regional offices, and resident inspector offices. interface with or replace current NRC financial, resource, and mixed systems, resulting in improved capability, fewer systems, and decreased maintenance. The system should improve the timeliness and user-friendliness over multiple existing systems. significantly decrease NRC's reliance on manual effort to collect and analyze financial and resource data, and provide the information and tools ewy to complete er deal analysis. develop the system using a best practices approach, i.e., usino commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software where practicable. This may require some process change ! in the way NRC carries out financial and resource management functions, 1-2
STARFIRE Project Action Plan Introduction O- manages the associated r.gency operations, and repons fmancial status to OMB, Treasury, Congress, and the public. "
=
provide staff efficiencies and improve data quality and integrity through several means which include single entry ofinformation, sharing ofinformation across applications, central maintenance of common files and tables, inherent data quality design to include up-front validation of data upon entry and reduction of ' msnual entries where possible. The system should provide for effective and efficient computer sectrity measures which are incorporated as part of the system design. 3 R - design the system in an integrated manner interfacing with other critical existing systems and using NRC's agency-supponed software tools. The system should be designed to fit within the agency's currently emisioned client server and LAN infrastructure and be accessible via agency-standard PC workstations. E . interface with the planned agency document management system (comprised of ] document generation and storage, version control, workflow management, electronic approval and electronic signature capabilities), and with electronic commerce enabling technologies to streamline and facilitate intemal and extemal business processes and transactions. 1.3 Scope This PAP communicates the overall plan for performing and managing the STARFIRE project to NRC management, the Comprehensive Information Systems Suppon Consolidation (CISSCO) management, and STARFIRE project members and stakeholders. The primary objective of STARFIRE is to provide for an automated and integrated approach to conduct agency-wide financial and resource functions including core accounting, funds control, budget formulation, cost accounting (including activity-based costing), procurement, travel, debt management / fee billing, labor cost distribution (including time and attendance management, and manpower tracking), payroll, propeny, and performance measurement. These functions proside the basic information and controls needed to carry out NRC's fin acial and resource management functions, manage the associated agency operations, and report financial status to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Department of the Treasury, the Congress, and the public. It is the intent of the NRC to acquire as much of the functionality as practical sia purchee of COTS software (including installation, data conversio,n, training, and technical assistance, while ensuring the end result exhibits high performance, is fully inter-operable, and efficiently interfaces with other NRC information systems. The inter-operability and open standard access 1,3
A sTMemtMuseet Acea nu koodecum
.\ to data and processes will be key factors in the COTS selection. It is not likely that all modules will be available from one vendor, and that certain modules may be procured from other sources or may require custom development and integration with the system.
. When complete, the system will eliminate approximately 100 current office systems (automated, semi-automated, and manual) that support agency financial and resource management. Interfaces will be created between STARFIRE and the retained office financial systems. Several manual p;ocesses, such as budget formulation and procurement, will be automated through the development of the agency-wide integrated financial and resource management system.
Essentially all agency personnel (approximately 3,000) will be affected by the process changes proposed in the development of the Labor Cost Distribution module and the Travel module.
. Additional process change recommendations will be dependent upon the COTS software product selection and its relationship to how NRC currently conducts business, l
A concurrent activity is underway to implement an infrastructure document management ystem comprised of document generation and storage, version control, workflow management, . electronic approval, and electronic signature capabilities. It is currently planned that the STARFIRE COTS software solution will interface with the planned Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systeni (ADAMS). This reduces the cost of the COTS procurement by . taking advantage of software separately acquired to be utilized for financial and resource document management purposes. { , The STARFIRE system has been designed from a geographically indifferent perspective. A basic premise of the system is that there will be central maintenance of common files, with a single point of data entry, and sharing ofinformation so that dsta will be entered only once and used throughout any process or application. Where possible, inherent data quality design will be installed up-front to preclude the entry ofinvalid or inaccurate information and the resulting problems and inefficiencies. STARFIRE and its associated modules are being designed using client server technology, COTS products, and possibly some custom module development. The project team has met with office representatives, collected information, conducted facilitated sessions to determine agency-wide system requirements, conducted office director interviews, and met with program office branch and section chiefs to share system development information
. and to ensure that data these offices require are considered in the development of the system.
The development of STARFIRE will replace older mainframe systems and PC-based systems with new technology. It will replace older systems before the year 2000 to insure compliance and eliminate the timesharing costs now required to run the mainframe systems. ' STARFIRE components will reside on a client-server infrastructure installed in each region and headquarters. System modules will access a relational database with common tables. The system must coexist
.w ith Novell NetWare 3.1.1. or higher network operating system (NOS). The NOS is used for file and print services throughout the NRC. There are plans to upgrade to Novell NetWare 4.x in the 1-4
' ', STARRREProject Action Men Introduction (4
~
near future. The system should support the ONNET version 1.2 for Win 3.X ar d version 2.5 for Win 95/NT TCP/IP network protocol that is employed by a majority of desktops for access to the Intemet and for communicating with UNIX wrvers. NRC's current relational database sen er is Sybase version 10.x with plans for upgrade to version 11.x. This relational database resides primarily on IBM's RISC System 6000 UNIX hosts mnning the AIX operating system. Currently, each user will require access to an agency standard personal compu'i:< that is an Intel 486,33Mhz,16MB of RAM,1.2 GB disk space, or better. The agency has plans to upgrade the desktop to a Pentium class machine 200Mhz,2.1GB disk space, and 32 MB of RAM. The proposed system should be compatible with the use of data warehousing tools (e.g., decision support, executive information system, or data mining tools). 1.4 Assumptions l Listed below are assumptions made by the project team for complete and successful l unplementation of STARFIRE: i NRC Mission: All altemadves included in this analysis are based on the current NRC mission and the unique financial and accounting requirements needed to fulfill this mission. O pb - Time frame for Implementation: The Chairman has requested that the new integrated financial / resource management system be operational within two years (spring of1999). Scope and Requirements: STARFIRE will provide for the means to cotaply with relevant laws and guidance for financial numagement information systems including: Chief Financial Offices Act of 1990, Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, Govemment Management and Reform Act of 1994, Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996, Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996, OMB Circular A-127, " Financial Management Sy. stems", and Joint Financial Management Improvement Program Guidaree. Relationship to Planned Payroll / Personnel System: STARFIRE will proside unified systems that are planned for and managed together, operated in an integrated fashion, and linked together electronically in an efficient and effective manner instead of simply one software application covering all financial and n resource management system needs. Under STARFIRE's conceptual structure, 1-5
., sranenenW Aenen mn sneeduesca the initial payroll module will be provided by the planned pa> Toll / personnel {
(PAY /PERS) system, which is scheduled to become operational in April of 1998, i O I
. == ~
srAnrwetM&ct Aenen non mooducson
,
- Relationship to Agency Property Accounting Systemi The property module will be provided by the Pig ty Accounting System (PAS), a client server application tint was implemented at the NRC during FY 1997. Currently, this module is fully operational, and there are no plans to replace this module during the STARFIRE lif., . ycle.
- Acquisition Requirements: The NRC is following the regulations for the i Federal Management Systems Software (FMSS) Schedule which entails issuing a solicitation document (Letter ofInterest) and associated requirements package to all nine vendors on the FMSS schedule.
- Electronic Signatures and Approvals: The team examined current signature and approval requirements for most financial and resource related transactions.
Where :lgnatures were determined to be required, (approximately 700 users) the team assumed that the required technology to comply with NIST standards for electronic signature could be made available and is working with the ADAMS - development team to ensure this capability is implemented within NRC.
- System Development Process: 1he NRC System Development and Life Cycle Management (SDLCM) Methodology is being tailored for use in the development
( of STARFIRE. This methodology assumes an implementation of a "best practice" approach that will capitalize on current, proven, state-of the art practice approaches consistent with the NRC Business Eaterprise and Technical Reference Model. These include Enterp ise Wide Access (Network Based Computing), Decision Support, Data Warehousing, Reuse Proven Support (Off the Shelf Productsy, incremental Improvements (Modular Components), User Friendly and a Paperless Environment. O ,.,
, - sTAnenetpreteet Aenen non heonues6en y" .
*- la ernal Processes: De team asm d that use of a "best practice" approach in the system development proceu %d require some process changes and that offices and the agency as a whole would incorporate these changes as part of doing business nis assumption is key in minimizing costs required to utilize commercially available off the shelf software, and in achieving significant savings by modernizing the way in which we accomplish Anancial and resource transactions. With respect to specific processes within the agency, the team assumed the following:
Document and Workflow Managemes.t: ADAMS' full document and workflow management capability, available early FY 1999, will support all of the systems document and workflow management processes electronically.
*i -
Budget Process: Assumes that sufficient flexibility would reside in off the shelf
, software selected to accommodate reasonable changes in the budget formulation process in future years.
Fecs: Aside from the implementation of process improvements resulting from the recent business process reassessment, the team assumed that the current Part 170 and Part 171 requirements would continue to be in place through-out the system ( life cycle. Performance Measures: The team assumed that all resource related collections and aggregations ofinformation will be performed by the new system. Performance output measures would be available from other systems being developed or already in place which would be interfaced with the current system. Life Cycle: ne life cycle for the system is the seven year period from the beginning of FY 1998 through the end of FY 2004. De team assumed that any new system developed can be expected to have an operational life that lasts
, through FY 2004 before it will need to be replaced due to new requirements and/or technology changes.
- Hardware and Software Infrastructure: STARFIRE specific hardware components will include dedicated servers, and data storage devices. The team assumes that Pentium-based desktop resources needed to optimally utilize -
STARFIRE will be provided to all NRC staff through the PC Refresh Fivgisin, and necessary network resources will be provided by the Next Generation Network (NON) Program including connectivity upgrades throughout the agency. i.s .
sTAnnntPrefect Aedon Men In o coon Year 2000 Compliance: Preliminary analysis ofoff the t.helfpackages plus any custom development utilizing current versions of COTS packages prosides a reuonable basis for assuming that Year 2000 compliant software will be purchased or developed as an inherent pan of the syster.1 development process. Moreover, the team assumed that all other systems which will be integrated or , interfaced with the new financial and resource system will become Year 2000 compliant before implementation of the system and essociated components. 4 j
- STARFIRE Interfaces: 'lhe STARFIRE COTS solution will provide interfaces
- to_ other NRC systems. The basic COTS solution will not be significantly j modified; any current capability not available in the COTS will need to be
- assessed to determine if process change will be hitroduced into NRC's business i
processes to be consistent with the COTS solution.
- Resource issues: Adequate funding, staffmg and business subject matter experts will be provided during the implementation phase. There will be timely resolution of business and technical issues, aid Agency wide acceptance of process changes resulting from the implementation cf GSA mandated software.
1.5 Applicable Do. uments The fcellowing NRC, OMB, CISSCO Program and STARFIRE publications were used as reference documents or contain related information to the Program Action Plan: 1.5.1 NRC Documents
- a. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Financial Management Status Report and Five Year Plan, September 1996
- b. US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Directive Transmittal, January 10,1992
- c. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Organizational Chart, Augus: 19,1996 d US Nuclear Regulatory Commission TechnicalReference Model
- e. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accountability Report Fiscal Year 1995 f US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Budget En curion Report, December 1996
- g. Ofice ofInspector General (O1G) Report 96A-11. Improvements Needed in i
Agency Oversight oflegformation Resources Management Activities k NRC Financial Management System Developmen! Plan. March 1997
- 2. Agency-Wide FinancialManagement System Guidance, April 1997 J. NRCSTARFIREProject Charter s
"' N j.9
1 sTAnrwetw Aee6en non koodueuw, (,.
- i k NRC Letter ofInterest H: CON 98 201 Financial Management System Sqport
! l. NRCSTARFIRERequirements Document
- m. NRC STARFIRE Capital Planning andIm'estment Control j 1.5.2 CISSCO Program Documents i a SDLCMMethodology Handbook
- b. Required Contents ofthe CISSCO Program System Documentation Library, October 1997 e
! 1.6 DeSaltion of Terms } See Appendix A for a complete list of acronyms and their definitions. ! 1.7 Document Oven'lew J i This PAP communicates the overall strategy for managing the STARFIRE project from defining initial requirements to deployment. It is a working document created initially as an activity i within Component 1 of the SDLCM Methodology. The PAP is updated during the project's
- lifecycle.
\ The PAP's Project Management Plan, defines the activities to be accomplished to satisfy STARFIRE project requirements, provides a master schedule for the perfermance of these activities, describes the management and technical approach to accomplish the project objectives,
, and identifies the risks associated with the project. Since STARFIRE is a COTS software solution and is not a custom softwwe development, it is
- not necessary to develop a Software Development Plan. The detailed methities and schedules for evaluating, designing, integrating, testing and implementing the COTS softwwe modules are
{ presented in Section 2, the Project Management Plan, i i ) s 1 10
, STARFIRE Pro}ect Action Plan Pro}ect Managernent Plan N
- 2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN i
*lhis Project Management Plan is divided into five major sections: '
- Project Definition; Project Performance Plan, including COTS implementation schedule;
. Risk Management; Quality Assurance, configuration management, data management, and records management; and SDLCM Methodology tailoring.
(U%RFIRE will be defined and deployed using the SDLCM Methodology, as illustrated in Exhibit 2 1. The components, activities, and deliverables have been tailored to meet the unique
' requirements of the STARFIRE project. Detailed activities are scheduled and tracked by the CSC CISSCO team in full coordination with the NRC Project Manager.
E ' SI p 1 Define Initial Project Requirements O\ Needs Assessment and Detail Project Planning A ctivin' V u D =
-_ 2 Acquire Support Resources b 3 Design the Solution C
\ -i 4 Engineer the Solution
\; %
I. s g
~
i- 5 Deploy the Solution l cerca ocaw nun E
-_ 6 Service the Solution Erhibit 21: STARFIRE's SDLCM Approach ,?
Y 21
sTARPnetPreiert Aeden Non Wt n=.;=z: Men 2.1 Project Denalties The STARFIRE project will implement a fully integrated agency wide client server based system that supports all agency financial and resource management functions, eliminating some office level systems that will not be interfaced with the new agency system. The system will include a core accounting module, which will accommodate the general ledger, reporting, office management support, and budget execution. In addition the system will support:
. Budget Formulation Funds Control
. Cost Accounting Labor Cost Distribution System
. Payroll Debt Management / Fee Billing
. Property
. Travel Management
. Automated Procurement, and Performance Measurement.
The NRC Enterprise Model was used to identify the Business Areas and systems that will interface with or be replaced by STARFIRE. In particular, STARFIRE will utilize data b- warehousing and will establish the warehouse using the existir.g Sybase Database. In addition, STARFIRE will utilize the document management and workflow of the ADAMS now under development. To meet the project schedule, the new system will incorporate, to the maximum extent practicable, COTS software, with custom development of only those capabilities that cannot be met through a COTS acquisition. Non-automated interfaces between the existing financial component systems will be simplified by implementing STARFIRE using the NRC's common operating environment for network computing.
' All NRC employees will be users of STARFIRE. Synem administration and operation will be the responsibility of the Division of Accounting and Finance, OCFO.
The remainder of this section identifies the STARFIRE deliverables and describes the technical and management approaches for developing STARFIRE. 22
STAMMMEProject Action Pian Project MenegementPlan
\ 2.1.1 Deliverables The deliverables for the STARFIRE project, include documents, software and services.
Deliverables will be produced by either the COTS solution vendor or the NRC STARFIRE team. 2.1.1.1 COTS Vendor Deliverables The COTS vendor deliverables are identified in the NRC Letter offnterest #: CON-98-201 FinancialManagement System Support. They are presented in the second Column of Exhibit 2.1-1, which also identifies their SDLCM Methodology component and anticipated date of delivery. WBS 1 VENDOR DELIVERABLES DAE 5 WBS
- a. .._. ^
STARFIRE TEAM - DAE DELIVERABLES SDLCM Component 1: Define laitial Project Requirements Responu to Letter ofinterest 087 Requirements Document atS7 j , Project Charter 12/1$47 Project Action Plan 12/1$S7 Tacticalintegraion Plan 2/15S8 f(,/ ADAMS Detailed Interface specifications 2/188 CPIC 12/1547 SDLCM Component 2: Acquire Support Resources COTS Implementation Plan 2S8 Acquisition Plan. Hardum 2/15&8 hoeurement CORE Data Conversion Plan 198 Installation and Enablishment 1/3498 f of Acceptance Ten Environment Schedule Install vendor Baseline Software 2S8 NRC Applications Stailed - 2/15.98 Interface specirm Install Vendor Baseline Software 3S8 Recomrnandations and Cost 2/1S8 Modifications Etr-
- i for CoTSGoTS cc Custom Code SDLCM Component 3: Design the Solution Physical Design and Data Dictionary 198 Interface Design Documents $S8.1498.2S9 Sottware System Acceptance Test 2S8 Data Warehouse Design 1298 Plan Document System security Plan 2S8 SDLCM Component 4: Engineer the Solution i
A 23 .
BTAMMME Pro}ect Action Man ProjectMenegementMan MS" VENDOk,DELIVERAntrR1
'Di%%* ';j W STARFIRETEAh@it'S A /
- ");f V y :,y.f. $)::,'l.%.<y: j'p *,BS 9
',{,j:.7,3d ,
._! ,W iD' TEbGl$@L DELIVERABM QiUb " GE 3 ' ' '. Y':
Training Plan 498 Interface Test Plans $St,1098,199 User Guide 4.98 Develop Data Warehouse Test IS9 Plan On-l.ine llelp Sysum and Tutoelais 4SB
$ystem Documentation 2S8 Program Documentaten 2/98 Schnee Maintenance Plan 4S8 SDLCM Component 5: Deploy the Solullon install CORE Sobare on Servers 9.98 Interface implementation Plans 698.11/98.499 Install Optional Module sobwe on 9.98 Data Warehouse 2S9 Servers implementation Plan lastall STAPIIRE Cleent 198 sonware ADAMS laterface 198 h NRC ApplicationInterfaces L98-4S9 Data Warehouse and Els COTS 4S9 software SDLCM Component 6: Service the Solution soAware Maintenance Revisens 4/98 Help Desk Support 9.98 Technical Services 498 Maintenance Support 998 l Exhibit 2.1-1: Deliverables 2.1.1.2 NRC STARFIRE Team Deliversbles The NRC STARFIRE team deliverables are presented in the fifth column in Exhibit 2.1-1, which also identifies their SDLCM Methodology component and anticipated date of delivery.
n y
srAnrwes&Aenen Men endetnonerement non l lgw 2.1.2 Management Approach ;
; STARFIRE will be developed and implemented using the SDLCM Methodology. SDLCM i
! . provides a framework for successfully designing, developing, and deploying major systems. It i j requires project management to plan, monitor, and coordinate resources. SDLCM components, ! activities, and deliverables will be tailored to meet any unique requirements of the STARFIRE - project. . l
- 1 Because ofits size and scope, the following are fundamental, management concepts critical to ;
the STARFIRE project: 4 . User Involvement. Recognizing that the user is an integral pan of the system )
. development process, there was considerable user involvement in project i definition workshops. For any system, the user must participate in the creation of :
- requirements, prototypes, and test data. Users will be involved in system business ,
s fit analysis to determine procen changes and tailoring required to effectively meet l user needs. , j- . !
- Management Oversight. The criticai importance of STARFIRE warrants high level management oversight. The development of STARFIRE will be reviewed by i the Chairman, the Executive Council, the Steering Committee. .
Change Management. Change is inevitable on all large projects. The project team will be prepared to act quickly to rapidly changing system requirements by
- establishing an environment that anticipates changes, documents them, and controls them in an efficient manner. i
- . Basleess Goals. Business goals will drive the success of STARFIRE, by ; e determining how well the solution meets the targeted business requirements. The i Project Manager will ensure that everyone on the project team understands the i' , business goals which drive the project. I .
- Incremental Soccesses. Due to the demands oflarge-scale systems, the project
- team advocates delivering tangible, base functionality as early as possible, 4 followed by additional capability. With this approach, working components of the systems can be implemented in a shoner period of time.
1 4 25 i' i 4
,,,~.-.r..,-- ..-..,_~._,----.,u-_.~+,--~~,,,,-.-,.,-,_,,,,-.-~~r ._... - - , ,. ...,--.,c-,,m.. -._,_--,%y- ,
\ sTAnnapnpet Aenen Men en&ctatenerementMen ' 2.1J Toebalcal Approach The STARFIRE technical approach will make maximum use of COTS financial management products that allow the NRC to balance its needs for a timely implementation of the STARFIRE system and its needs for organizational flexibility. The selected COTS products will adhere to ! NRC's Technical Reference Model (TRM), as much as possible, and fit the overall client /sen er architecture envisioned for STARFIRE. Finally, COTS softwwe development and deployment activities will be performed under the auspices of NRC's SDLCM Methodology presented in Exhibit 21. ! Initially, the project team focused on identifying COTS financial management softwwe which satisfied NRC's functional and technical requirements. A formal selection process was used to identify the financial and resource management system software modules that best fit NRC's business practices. The selection process will also ensure that the Core accounting module is selected from OSA-certified vendors. Project risks are mitigated by a focus on field. proven components rather than cum a development. Use of COTS software will significantly minimize the cost and risk of implementing STARFIRE. 2.2' Project Perforianace Plan The project performance plan describes the overall context for managing and integrating STARFIRE, and it specifies the overall schedule r.nd organization critical to the project's success. This plan specifies a three phase deployment of STARFIRE (see Exhibit 2.2 3). This will permit incremental implementation of functionality to the user. 2.2.1 Work Breakdows Structure
'Ihe second columns of Exhibits 2.2 1 and 2.2-2, on the next two pages, present a work breakdown structure for the STARFIRE project.
2.2.2 Project Schedule The STARFIRE project schedule is consistent with the SDLCM Methodology. SDLCM Component I will be completed by January 1998, while Component 2 will be completed in May 1998. Components 3,4, and 5 of the Methodology will be performed, partially in parallel, for each implementation phase of the STARFIRE project. Each imp'ementation phase includes the
" design"," engineer", and " deploy" components of the SDLCM. Exhibit 2.2-1, presents the STARFIRE major milestone dates for the SDLCM components. A detailed schedule of the list of deliverables is presented in Exhibits 2.2 1 and 2.2 2. Exhibit 2.2 3 presents the COTS 2-6
r ( STARFIRE Prv)ect Action Plan Project Management Plan \ rnodules, and the NRC Application interfaces that will be implemented in each iterative phase.
- D Tash Name 1997 l tIIB { III9 [ 2D00 j Start FWsh if2 03 04, Q1. Q2 03 04 Q1 G2 R3 04 Q1. Q2 Q3've i nrw e :i.o n e _; a_ nw an w T aswer >,w f.en a. P,.a 6.s.r w rewm an ew ' mm g T ~ 0 ,'c t i.o n - ew mw -
T w en - o,c -. met , T = e tta innw an w M i ! T Pne E.va n t? w innts? gj i T . - = - . inw inn w yi j T ~
- cric sea mm n,w l
T e =. c,.- ew i n ,7 g. T e an a.-n.n aw innw g , T c= . inw - w- g' l T wen c :.*- w n imm == g ; T em su,, -- - imm - in = T m -.o. - v e, l
- n. inw an w !
g l g iT i.w r ,o.=a '.=is 'rswi===. uw ew g i T Cott v.n.s c.w a.we M. ame T $ % aswa cots > := an =
, i V 4 . em . s-so 22 . m j j T s.a Pwinaw op.m me.e m4.s T 4 s.a m4 .n= 1 I
Tm euc u .. s, o ==--m I Er e.iau s.coas.suoo roam.mmovims a.= == 77 -c mc % -.a n sma-. w. s 7
~
0 mnw.o mp n n.mem en e stweg S.e pnee g T o nsww s c c na- em T wv
~
s icorsie m - an=- viw T mm a. me e,mi - - - an - ~s.=- , Exhibit 2.2-1. Work Breakdown Structure (part one of two) Ie\ U 2..,,
1 O STARFIRE Project Action Plan ProjectManagementPlan d l ID Task Name 1997 l 1995 1 1999 i 2000 l Start Finish Q2 03 04 Q1, Q2 03 Gd 01 Q2 03 Gd Q1 Q2 03 Q4 28 **m www- r 1. 6an w. som.e mp usas *im y T ~ P.4wm and ver.y bee Corwer.m en orv.eapmen 4290 ' '4/1090 g y e st w mecotsa t mo ei m om jg 3T ~ o e o aoa. t w o==' . . v= . e ^m ;g
,r .m . . .t - m _ ., m me l T ~ ~ Portarm'$t4At ni F4 p.egrahan temerig c twa " ' ' 4294 ' M49e i gj
~Q" Portma tru$.or tr.r 4 elves M4/se !
g 3r up.e ar** o w a on um um - g, j 3r c, r,-=. ew o - s e.r. aus evos E ! T Cr ts See.or. .W Sr.e.1 pecumaraman tosse M&es Wii44 g li' ~ ow.s ceas ser, w. te an i e ,K pics. term a49s 1 g; ;
"Tf ti. ins optiomt edasus. en (n.aamari we App 6 74748 449e g
T e ii v, ,on c .n er as n s ra m nm g l , q 3r e st w ar u. - . mm nm g } ~27 ososoy Phe.e i Sousori . trev. ors imme 10T90 l
,T .m . - ,- m _ o. .e =
T s s ime e,.v im imos. l -
; g ir os o t o - .. im = mm ir e m arov t, . m - lM, 3T % en ees - .e,.u.-. me ' ~ m i g V ruse s.tum.cnocem, rnocunement, o m im '
g,
~3r e-a s n. n me e,.u m == j g gir o. go ,:v oo . - inm - - e ve.
gr ,,, no t, ie--
- ra =7 g
gf soccu G,m.nie nwwttamca newsoa.w t
- imme *
- imme
~
! oThu 1ott19s Exhibit 2.2 2. Work Breakdown Structure (part two of two) fim)
TU 28
STAMMMEW Acelon Men Pro}ectMenegementMen
~
Components implementstion Modules 3,4,5 NRC Appileation Date laterfaces Project Phase 1 10598 CORE, Debt ManagementTees, RIMS, SSDS, LTS Deployment Budget Formulation Project Phase 2 6/1/99 LCDS, Perfonnance ADAMS, PAY /PERS, PAS, Deployment Measurements, Payroll, Full Cost RPS(Fees), FOSS/ FACTS Accounting Project Phase 3 10/1/99 Travel, Procurement, Propeny ADAMS Deployment Exhibit 2.2 3: Module and NRC Application Interface Implementation Schedule 2.2.2.1 Ganit Chart A high. level Gantt chart of STARFIRE for all SDLCM components is shown in Exhibits 2.2 1 and 2.2-2 The SDLCM Components 3,4 and 5 are presented in these exhibits three times, once for each of the three Phases of the implementation plan. Appendix B illustrates the STARFIRE q High Level " CORE" development schedule for FY 1991 A detailed Gantt chart depicting the STARFIRE project WBS and schedule is provided in Appendix C. 2.2.2.2 Task Assignment Schedules The overall STARFIRE "High Level" CORE development schedule is described in Appendix B, which indicates task completions required to maintain the STARFIRE schedule. Task assignments for the COTS vendor, the NRC team, and the CISSCO contractor are presented in Appendix C, 2.2.3 Project Organization The structure of the STARFIRE organization is presented in Exhibit 2.2-4. The Project Charter
, contains a detailed explanation of the structure of the STARFIRE organization.
29
STAMMME W Ac6en Men Meet hienagement Men V ~ l c h airm e n l EstroHve Countit l l clo l lcro l lrpo l n Esecullve Sponsor i Steering Com mittee ClO A dverste C F O A d ve rg E D O 4 droenen M oe Leels Jim Tardiel Jim Blaks Pro!ect M an aver John Bird l I I B usiness Team Tech nical Tecm Jobs Bird George M sabews Ill I. I B u sin es s Te c h nical S ta k eh olde rs S ta k eh olde rs O' L Exhibit 2.2-4: STARFIRE Project Team Structure 2.2.3.1 Roles and Responsibilities The responsibility for overall project management of the STARFIRE program is shared between the NRC Business Team, consisting of NRC business stakeholders, and the Technical Team, comprised of the NRC technical stakeholders and the CISSCO technical team, as illustrated in Exhibit 2.2-4. Their roles and responsibilities are more fully defined in the Project Charter. 2.2.3.2 Sidlls The sets of skills, presented in Exhibit 2.2 5, are required to perform the work described in this
' PAP for each SDLCM Component. Primary and specialist skills will be prosided by NRC's business team, the combined NRC/CISSCO technical team, and the COTS vendor (s). NRC executive management will provide overall project guidance.
2 10 1
..-y . _ _ . _. - , . _ . . _ . _ , _ - _ _ _ . - , - , ,. _ . - . _ . - _
rx STARFIRE Project Action Plan Project Management Plan SKILL / STAFF SDLChi l 1 REQUIREh!ENTS COh!PONEhTS
- 1. Define 2. 3. 4. Engineer 5. Deploy 6. Senice initial Project Acquire Design the the the Requirements Support the Solution Solution Solution Resources Solution Executive Oversight NRC Chainnan e e e e e e 1
NRC Executive Council e e e e e e l NRC Steering Committee e e e e e e COTS Vendor COTS Project Team e e e
=
COTS Technical Support e e e e Primary Skills Project Manager e e e e e e A i Business Team Manager e e e e e e (J N Technical Team Manager e e e e e e NRC Business Function e e e e e F.xperts System Users e e e e Team Facilitator e e System Architect e e e e System Analy.ts e e e e e Data Administrators e e e e 9 System Documenters e e e e Testing Specialists e G e e e Exhibit 2.2 5. STARFIRE Skills Requirements hiatrix O V 2.ii
I sTAnnet& Aeden non endurasenneementnon 2.2JJ Interfaces STARFIRE business ares coordination will be performed by the NRC project team representatives whose member consist of experts from their respective business areas. 5 fARFIRE has the potential to interface with the following major applications:
- ADAMS
- Combined FOSS and FACTS Systems (FOIA Office Status System / FOIA Action Tracking System - FOSS/ FACTS)
- Licensing Tracking System (LTS)
Payroll Personnel System (PAY /PERS) j Resource Information Management System (RIMS) 5
- Property Accounting System (PAS)
,
- Reactor Program System (RPS)(Fees)
Scaled Source and Device System (SSDS) Transport Approval Package Information System (TAPIS) 2.2.3.4 Stafnns Pronle i This is TBD until contract award. 2.3 Risk Managessent The process established to manage risks on the STARFIRE project contains two components: risk assessment and nsk control. Risks and their associated impacts are identified and analyzed. Risk mitigation activities are pl.mned to reduce the occurrence of risks. To ensure that identified risks are under control, risk resolution activities are monitored. Risk assessment is performed at the beginning of the project and re assessment will be performed throughout the project life cycle to determine if the risks identified are still valid and if priorities have changed, thus requiring an t>pdate to the risk management strategy.
, 2J.1 Risk Description R!ak management is an iterative process established when the project begins and is continuously performed until the project ends, it involves periodic resiew of the status ofidentified risks and of the existence of program plan deviations, representing new risks. This is followed by the structuring of work activities and application ofresources to counteract disruptive situations created by realized risks. Six major risks in the STARFIRE project include:
- Mission
(' 2 12
srAwwetPn#et Acelen Men Pn#etWanspanent Men
- Project Execution
- Schedule
- Operation and Acceptance a
Resource Risk
- Financial The nature and approach for mitigating these risks follows.
Mission Risk (Potential to restrict agency 's abiltry toperform mission, or conductprograms to carry out mission requirements) The STARFIRE Project will provide information that allows managers to assess the "value added" quality of available resources and make informed decisions about deploying those resources to achieve the highest level of support for the agency mission. Therefore, the risk of restricting the NRC's ability to support the mission is minimal with STARFIRE. The risk is greater if the agency continues to operate under the current em'ironment, because the lack of timely and accurate resource data hinders a manager's decision making abilities. Project Execution Risk (Likelihood that the project couldfait due to design and development complexity, lack ofagency experience with similar sise/typeproject, technicalchallenges, (e.g., of-the shelfso)hsare vs, custom development, extent to which similarprojects are operational on same hardnereplatform at the agency), required interfaces with other systems) STARFIRE has a relatively high project execution risk because of the broad scope of the undenaking. However, the SDLCM phase one STARFIRE team is recommending the use of COTS software that will operate within the agency's current infrastructure, therefore mitigating some risk in this area. It must be noted, however, that much of the available COTS software is newly developed and has yet to be extensively utilized in an operational environment. Schedule (Likelihood that the schedule may vary, based on internal and externalfactors.) Further delays in COTS software and HW acquisition will impact schedule. Operation and Acceptance Risk (likelihoodthatproject can be successfully implemented. Constraints on success includefailure to implementpil)\mettonalitypromiseoinability to overcome resistance to necessary cultwal changes or other non locAnicalobstacles)
'Ihe STARFIRE Project has the full support of the Chainnan of the NRC and other senior level O
V 2 13
sTAnnns Meyect Acoon men muenerementMen managers, and therefore should not encounter a very high level of operation and acceptance risk. Given continued suppon, STARFIRE will be implemented with full functionality. Extensive user /Oflice involvement in defining STARFIRE'S functional requirements was obtained during the initial phase of the project. Continued effort to assure these requirements are met through the system's deployment should minimize the potential for operational and acceptance risk. Resource Risk (Likelihood thatfinancial, personnel, and mats. lal necessitiesfor successful completion ofIhe project willbe available or unavailable.) i Select NRC support staff must be available to provide prerequisite suppon to STARFIRE implementation. Competing Agency projects could dilute resources requested for STARFIRE. , Financial Risk l (Uncertainy ofcost estimatedforphase up toproject becomingfully operational) All cost estimates for the STARFIRE Project are based on preliminary information, such as publicly available information, and costs published by GSA for software on the FMSS Schedule. kN However, as revealed in the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) plan the projected savings for implementation of STARFIRE far exceed any possible risk in this area. 2.4 Quality Assurance, Configuration Management, Data Management, and Records Management I This section describes the quality assurance (QA), configuration management (CM), and data management (DM), and records management (RM) applicable to the STARFIRE project. 2.4.1 Quality Assurnace Peer reviews will be conducted for all deliverables. The QA representative will resiew all products to ensure quality standards compliance. There is no requirement at this time to collect and report on quality metrics. The QA function is described in detail in the CISSCO Quality Assurance Plan. 2.4.2 Configuration Management CSC will form a Project level Configuration Control Board (CCB) designed to resiew, assess, and advise STARFIRE management on all proposed changes to the target emironment and established baselines. The CCB is responsible for assigning resolution responsibility and determining the implementation schedule for all approved Change Proposals (cps). _ 2 14
srantEMejertheden FM WManagementMen All COTS software and hardware on the master program list form the product baseline. All char.ges to the Master Configuration item List are inade only in response to an approved New Change Package (NCP), 2.4.2.1 CM Responsibilities and Authority CM responsibilities include the following: Implementing the CM program for STARFIRE e Rejecting .mauthorized changes to approved baselines and developmental configurations i . Developing and maintaining CM Standards and Procedures Establishing and controlling all baselines and developmental configurations
. Supporting the configuration audits Appointing a system administrator for software libmry control, preparing O backups, and monitoring audit / access trails to ensure the integrity of established V configurations '
Maintaining problem reporting and CP reporting mechanisms Appointing a Secretary to the CCB, to schedule meetings, prepare agendas, distribute review packages, and prepare minutes. 2.4.2.2 Establishment of Baselines COTS products provided by the hardware, software, and other deliverable vendors will be placed lit the project baseline and controlled through the CM process. G 2.ns J
,q STARMRE Prqlect AeGon Men Project Management Men 2.4.3 Data Management The Data Management (DM) portion of CM will control establishment and maintenance of the STARFIRE Program Library, which will contain a master hardcopy and, if available, electronic copy of each deliverable document, reference documentation, and project correspondence. In addition, DM will ensure the preparation of documentation updates and change notices, maintain distribution lists for all documentation and program correspondence, and inventory and distribute documentation as required.
2.4.4 Records Management The current records of the finance and resource management functions are currently maintained according to NRC Management Directive Handbook 3.53, "NRC Records Management Program," Part IX, " Procedures for Creating, Maintaining, Using, and Disposing of Electronic Rt; cords" "Ge description of this process for each area is contained in NRC Comprehensive Records Disposition Schedule. NUREG-0910 Revision 2, February 1996. These descriptions will be updated during SDLCM Component 3 to account for the changing requirements of STARFIRE. 2.5 SDLCM Methodology Tailoring G. Several exceptions to the SDLCM Methodology have been identifie ~ st this time for the STARFIRE project, since the SDLCM Methodology is designed for the development of Custom Software, and not a COTS based solution used in STARFIRE. The exceptions to the SDLCM are d identified in Exhibit 2.5 1, w tich also states the reason for the deviation and its location in the PAP. All exceptions to SDLCM Methodology policies, directives, procedures, and standards for STARFIRE have been approved by the Project Manager. No, SDLCM Description Location in PAP Exception -
- 1. Deletion of the The COTS software has already been 1.7 Document Overview Softwwe Development developed. The COTS vendor will supply an 3. Softwwe Development Plan Plan implementation plan.
- 2. Modification of ne COTS vendor will deliver different but 2.1.1 Deliverables Deliverables equivalent deliverables
- 3. Modification of WBS COTS toftware integration requires a 2.2.1 Work Breakdowm differer.t WBS than custom development Structure Exhibit 2.51: STARFIRE Exceptions form SDLCM Methodology
(.D ,'{ 2 16
STAMMME Project Act@s Men LJst of Acronyms tO APPENDIX At LIST OF ACRONYMS Ittat Definition ADAMS Agency Wide Document Access and Management System CCB Configuration Control Board CFO ChiefFinancial Officer CISSCO Comprehensive Information Systems Support Consolidation Office. CM Configuration Management COE Common Operating Environment. COTS Commercial off the Shelf. CP Change Plan ! CPIC Capital Planning and Investment Control. CSC Computer Sciences Corporation.
-DB Database.
DM Data Management DOE Department of Energy. DSI Directional Setting Issues, (q EC EDI Executive Council. Electronic Data Interchange. FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board. FFS Federal Financial System. FMS Financial Management System. FMSS Financial Management System Software. FOIA Freedom ofInformation Act. FOSS/ FACTS FOIA Office Status System /FOIA Action Tracking System. FTE Full-Time Equivalent. IGCE Independent Governmen Cost Estintate. GPRA Government PerformWe and Res's , Act. GUI Graphical UserInterfact IRM Office ofInformation Resources hagement. ITMRA Information Technology Management Reform Act. JFMIP Joint Financial Management Improvement Program. LAN Local Area Network. LCDS Labor Cost Distribution System. LTS Licensing Tracking System. MYIP Multi YearImplementation Plan.
STAMMME ho}ect Acelon Man O Isrm NCP Definition Ust of Acronyms New Change Package NOAC Nature of Action Codes ! NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NTE Not To Exceed. OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Omcer. OlG Office ofInspector General OMB Office of Budget Management. PAP Project Action Plan. PAS Performance Appraisal System. PAWPERS Payroll / Personnel. PMR Program Management Review. PP Performance Plan. PR Process Requirement. QA Quality Assurance. RAD Rapid Application Development. RFPA Request For Proposal Authorization. O RIMS Research Information Management System. k RM Records Management. RPS Reactor Program System (Fees). SARSC Strategic Assessment and Rebaselining Steering Committee. SDLCM System Development and Life Cycle Management Methodology. SFFAS Statement of Federal Financial Accounting S';andards. SGL Standard General Ledger. SP Strategic Plan. SSDS Scaled Source and Device System STARFIRE Agency's integrated financial and resource management system. TAC Task Assignment Control. TRM Technical Reference Model. WBS Work Breakdown Structure. Y2K Year 2000. O' v A2
4 l sTARFIRE Projed Aeon Plan STARFIRE H$h Level Core Development Schedule, FYM APPENDIX B: STARFIRE HIGH LEVEL CORE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, FY98 8 g ( y
a ^ . . StARFat Propet Actlas Pfee g,,,,,, g STARFIRE CORE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE FISCAL YEAR 98 Feteveer uesch Apes me, June Jw, A.,,,, % % l
- \ YhbNbN\rYY@[\[Y\[\/MT CONTRACT AWARD
- CORE
- SUf7E E EVALUATION OF ADDITIONAL MODULES E BUSINESS
- FIT
- ANALYS!$ FOR ' CORE
- PURCHASE OPTIONAL & ADDITIONAL MODULES '
CONVERT TEST DATA M
- CORE
- ACCEPTANCE TEST E
- CORE
- END USER TRA!NTNG "
" CORE
- TNTEGRATION TESTING
- CORE
- PARALLEL TESTING MM FORMAL DATA CONVER$80N EMM
- CORE
- DEPLOYMENT PLAN EME IMPLEMENTATION OF
- CORE
- MODULE - -
MMMMMMMI HARDWARE CAPACITY STUDY M PURCHA3E HARDWARE MM INSTALL ACCEPTANCE TEST ENytRON. MM INSTALL DEV. HW & SYS. SW . IMSTALL PRCO. HW 8 SYS. SW M I DEY. NRC SYS. INTERFACE SPECS I END-USER DESKTOP UPGRADES MM
STANMRE Prnloct Aeden Men DenniMSTAMPNtE Genit Cherte APPENDIX C: DETAILED STARFIRE GANTT CHARTS 9 (G c.,
. - . . . - - - - - . -. . . . . .- -. . - - - - - - _ - ~ . .- . . ~ . - - . . . . . .
- n. m r-i t
. STARFIRE Piei.c.Schedulo , 5 t i C3 Toeit Mome Status MIIsokme Dureteen Seert Finleh E i - _-- . , g soncee- r--t.omanoneuesp-pecemogumomense C ves Moeource leesuw Ineselstuste ! wee - ;- sueccooCo aTaarene se== I 2 **" *"8 U Pr*f*** "*Epebemones jPR3 C Ne los L.-. seer sueccooCo ' I stampetsame ! i 3 88"**F '"o"8 7" "8 8** **cherwe's C ve. m m-i sr3est osecossco i stammt v- i 4 Cerumste __ . edennge se peopy,enge es ymose C see toe (
$rt997 SOW 97 )
secQssCo sTanretE Team - { 5 " G*** P - - i C '*' m i srswer er2est micossco stam m ere 1 3 12- r, a a a cossa c see ese l sraerer i-- suecossco stanrestTo e t y 1J Useng Commeesesse Tassnegese to Desseep nogshemosas C see i see evteer tr3ter sencostCo siamouse Teen
- ' 3 cowns, c _ rne, suomese enassee serLTene e se osee C see se enerer erJorer' sencessco stanrateTo g menemPseetoteessneeuemorr r_1_ . C Ne )
, 4e ec3er eGerer suecossco sTamrset reme , I 10 assemm swic swenen pnnman torp C me se er23er e2ser seicossco stammt Tes= ! jj ; hoosse Ppe to T4.M_ ^_ _ stoqpeemente C ses 3e gr23rti ! Sr2styr seeCosSCO sTaferWEE Tese I jg Pessa nnroeuesseeene ! C No 2se frIrSr FOWWF i setCossco itTasqranE feon t i 13 *
- Pueiman nique nores ey cempewe ,
C vee 2ee mer eerer uncessco ' stanroeE fee. f i 14 sep, wow sea P=cenament c me me eraer anese k mooseco stamme ve l 15 18 8'**"ees es ummee ser acessenes ofs senseen C see 2N I SGer 771947 eWeCOsero sta IFEseE Tome [ gg suevese rness i _S_--- C see re erger erfrsr speCossCo STaseFW4E fee. 1T C- B- c s wor' see 2e arscrer successco . staservit fe I 13 conosce veneure trepss) C ! see 32e erzer mser estccssco si e Teen i tg course es. nee sww.y: __ _ . _ . C see are eGror Frvster sencessco staserset Ten. 20 te Devensetos C vos are 12rt2rer 2nese senem stasirset Towe 21 Devesap7 ,seneswveneersyene me.es. c i see tse erJost srtstyr 1 wicossco stasims vs . 22 tJ Proposof t. C see ele SG997 12F1997 speCce9Co sfastrust seene ! 23 Prope asseness-top C see t see erseer twzoor sueCoosCo sT m te== 24 Phase 1- neenessey stegehemesee i C see 3e ' 9G6P97 ' 90097 ~ WoCessCo sfaseFueE Towe S.98RC\ TASK _2Evu2uoGCHEDULEWTARF_13 MPP 1/21198 1008 AM y1 j
,t, ( i [t !. ?L{! [ijt a rl* 1!-!{r I i i r hlilI!!:p i' l t n m e n n n n e e a m e w n m n e , e e n e m n n n e e e e e a
'm 2 s
s m e e e e o e e m e e m e a a e s a e e e p m t T T T T T o e e e e e e e e e e e e s a e E E E T T T T f T g T T T T T T T T f e o e g E E E t E E t E g T 4 s 4 I t 4 u E E E E E E E E E G a 5 W s 5 4 u 4 4 uq E e E t u P 4 r W 8 5 W g E E I 4 r W u 8 s W W W 4 M 6 W s ses tF tF s e p F 4 F p u r u qF F r r F p F n F F F n r P W f t g R l a at e T 7 A T A T s A T E A T s A s A s A A s A s m 4 f A a s a 4 s A a p a 4 f A u s A sI A u s A e d A q s d uS S 9 S S S S T S T S T S T S T S g y T S t T S T T T T T T A T S S S S S S S S dn m-.
/ g eer
- s e
i . s _ s e - M eO C C O C O C O C O O O O O O O .
-_ O O O O O O O O r S C C C C C C C _
C C C C C C O O e S 9 S 3 S S S S S S S C C C C t S r S 9 S $ S S S S 5 S r S S S S S s S S e S S O o C I C 3 C O r C C I C I E C 0 0 0 O I S r s S I S n S S S o C C c U O N C O O O C O O O R e o s s se N 9 E I s g u O t s 8 9 e s e O e p s e O t s s u O s u s 0 4 s e 0 4 8 8 0 sv e w O e ss e O p s e C u se o t s e O t e s O n e e O e u s wN O t s O e e s C s s e J i _ 7 r 7 7 F t t 7 r
~ s e
h e 9 9 S s s w 9 g t g 7 9
. 7 ,
7 f 't s f t 7 s e s ev 9 9 e s r 6 8 1 3 r y t 9 t r 9 . r 8 e r i, 9 s m n so 2 s e u 3 2 - 1 e 2 ;, e e 9 e i Fi 0 9 r e t 0 1 t 2 r o t s. 2 1 1 f s e t r r t t N T 9 1 2 1 i t 2 1 1 1 a t 7 2 r M f W i, t t r 2 1 t r a 1 2 1 r t t t r
, F 7 7 r 7 s f r F 7 F tr w 9 9 9 p 9 y o e T g 9 F
9 f e t s f 7 r 7 ," 7 i 7 3 9 r s r O s e 5 g o .P 9 a u 8 O G 6 2 u s t s t 0 3 r e S f e e r a r f 2 f 3 r e G r w 9 t S w T 9 W o t
~
t r o t i m e t r 3 0 9 1 1 N 2 1 r J t t r t r F t er i r G e fr e t r 9 G e Q S 1 2 1 r 1 o w 2 2 r 2 1 s S d W d e G o d e d 4 d e d e d d e s S S t e t e O d d d d 6 d d o l f 1 1 W 6 t o t e 3 1 0 3 i D e t 5 7 7 e 2 2 7 2 e 9 8 M lt s A r 6 u . 0 D . 0 1 , 6 9 1 1 o 0 e e e ee e e e eo ee oo e e s o e 2 h o 0 e e se e e e ee ee se o e t 8 f f se s t e s D s t V p s e p e s e e s s e e ie e e I t 8 S v v C C C C C C C h *. C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C O
~
e o r e e S 2 ._ - s e e e 1 - n o n C - m P ; e e t s 9_ s e u " o r e g u E - e n A
~
e 4 C m e n e f a r s e _ 1 2 P D c e o - ; P S e h C. n e E e 3 o n s o n e P r M t e sa. a s e - s 3 r e e u es s _ , o N e 1 es P n o es s_ E ^
- E n s e e n u C 4 F_
r We n e n 4 ia o e o e _ e E o n C t r m m o m e 4 s t ra P n la e n e u R e n t s e D o - n e o e e p
._ e r u P ss e
s u C t A o o D : _ P a P' cc er r ir L st T h s D, t _ es D D r S e s , e h 8 I
; e se F e 8' s . a -
r P - g Ae h i -
- - S p 1 a r r E
** n e a n
E "
- D e E p d n
r e 7
. c C O F ^. e e h
e p e r r p ap L e ' o e t c
- i l 2
e " 3 e C C 4 P s T C' p u r a m a e r ie r :. P n P n ; w s_ U e " s a - A - S C L T e f e r e 9e e e e . D M c
' h ^-
E 7_ C c n P r h r i . cc uc E e P 8' P C
^
^
P I s n e C C r A A _ H l u C d t ; s
, ? C d
e A-.
- e r
iu 8 fe n n a. PW ;.._ l t e
- e. tse u
2 S n h T._ 3 _ q e 7 7 _
. Pre r o e n 0t c 7 ee D r e e e 2 S e s e t p n i
0 e e p e p 0 p s s 1 t L t. t a i e n W C ( m a o M _ n t C 2 r k r O t a o C X_ E o L S t 4 T D S A I T E D A T S D2 3 6 2 7 2 g 2 9 2 g 3 g 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 g 3 7 3 3 3 g 3 0 4 g 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 g 4 7 4 g A W S
j j j i t I l 1 1 I I ! 1 1 }V V ! ! ! A n c, n : r n r i d l o'l. I t r % a. (( ! I I ! q d ! d n
'[ f f I I 5 l !, !
O ] 1 1 1 ! ! ! 1 8 8 l2 a a 99 f f f f f D E 3 8 8 8 0 8 $ 8
.1 3 8 8 8 8 8 Q
8 8 la 8 8 V VV E E i
<i u . .
k . E E x :
=
j a! l !. l ! !. I s! 5 s! I 8 8 i 8 I I
! Is 5 k. i ! If a
!a s s A s s . n a Il l i ! ! ! ! ll fil l ! lli!!!!Ill i x i m i n =i n - i n i miin = z = a -
g s ii i a a a a a a a 7 a a a a a a a a a a a a i e u i i i j o o o o o o o o o o o o e o j , i: i
. a I 'L ,
i *
} } l '
1 l u S
. i! . .
- 4 I
- N 4
f f I b ii i c 1 ' 8 l ~l s . , i m' l f
- I
! j
' [
5 il. f
. O r, i l
)
. !. , .i i l 3
, i, ! !
t i i i i t e. : s .. a j e
- u I i 3 e. ~
~
, i s s 8 4
a s . W . !
! $ ,, ! ;! j i ! E
~
T v i I
- : c -
i i, < 8 e a v y t a
; : : c e z t
g
- r. 5
!. e = = s = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = e c e G
5
C e d e e g e r o e d.
- o. s _
s T o m 4, e t p i F t
% o e
e r c g o r m ;
% p
,9 l
e s A g e u T d S - . g i _ iv d n .m . i ws-o
+ -
.g:
e t s e o o N y W t N v 4 g 6 8 e c r O C S r g g W C S E g 6 0 o d e u g m R V W o s O C g o o O m R O R O R o w R o g f O g N f O n R e g C R s f A m g NC S S I m s e r w o w f p w o n t v o f f E v o, s e v w t o s p v g C S S r C g g v S S t C C S S C f o w s r o s. Ae r T g e e , , e o e e e
~ g 2 3
3 9 4 9 h g g , g g g e e e e e e o e e e n s 9 s e s s s y e e , M s r y 9 g g ri , m 5 e f r g r r g g r s dr 32r e m2 r 0 0 C t r s r
, ,e 2 2
M r 3 n 2 1 2r 2 r 0 2r m mr e s sr s i i r o s w i 2 2 2 r 8 3 a F 2 2 2 2 w e e 8 e 8 e 8 e 0 e e e e a - t r 9 , 9 9r 9 g 9 9 g 9 s 8 e e e e s e 5 8 e n t S 1 3 2 r m , 2 2* g 2 f 9 2 e 2 9 2 r s 2
- r g
f 2 2 a r 2 9 N 2 2 e r r 9 2 s r r s m 2 9 M 2 2 e e g r e t r 3 9 r g r 9 6 2 r 7 52 1 n i 2 3 e d o , d d d
~4 n i t , o 3 d d d d d d d 8 d d d 0 1 0 0 a o o d 4 6 d 4 d d o t 1 3 e
r t 1 2 2 2 2 t t t 0 1 0 1 0 0 o s e 3 5 5 0 5 7 s M e 9 1 it a r A u 8 0 D 0 1 e 8 n 9 t o s e e e 1 s e e e e o o o o io o o o o o o o 1 2 e Y y v v N N N N . o o o o e o s o l p N N N n N N N N N v N Y e N e N
/
t i Y M s t u t a s e v r e e D w n h e c e s S n e d o y n o C # te r E r a a R T _ e R n e w N r e s o t s c v U I F t t a ro E r 1, ic e c e E o m se fe o S s RI N e n p i, ^- F S Er s h u i r e dr s o e e o
- e R A o e o ta t g n eu s
e 4 R m s ru 1 t s F R d R e o T N p P
) d n t - tc u s e A n n e w s e i o P s
e a e Fs - t r me w T a n o r o U r e e to v M r S d e a t i a is f) d w w e . 3 m .o T C g s c o i P r e s n n o
)
s D n a n er n r o t a n v E i 1 d e es w e i e o P r e e m O n n n e io n o t o C S n t o w m F_
- w m w fe t w n e re a n as C R e C n d P.
- t p o c
er e d la m c M ie r e nr o e C( N n ( ie e n e R S e e o c e n e P n *r m u i
- o r A p
D le A c n W y e e e r er n e e ry C i mo c. t v e d n m e r e g a P e r a ts h P T vr u n
, a m
D E m e w M n
- o. s r
o ne e T S a L ( e R D a i u n e %_ av e c m o t e n S( o C T q
- e r :
e c o D s P( s o. O r o g e a c n n s c F o W T S f L M
- O i
a R e e e e te n h e F fg eo p n r u C te ip s m m e R A i r o o C n a U o d s u c g D t O p c r u n a o u ew d g u t t o a o e A e e m e m ie o e c c we y e my ce T S ee n s e E R o c s fr y D E le P. 4 w s e - s o L A s s P r b s F-I F e e r H e - s. F C D - M r t "w w w r e w
- r e R r V s C d -
_ 3 E n R s o w S o *
- A o d T e, ^
R o h e N
- w C
O u C * * * *
- e w
s
- F F
d n e r e T S d n a n O C S
\
i c _- 5 C. e n s e n
=
= d s tp w e
0 D 0 o o o 0 p o v n B u e e v m av 6 0 S s ee
- r r
- : e h e e e e n ie a d fo a o 2 d d
- v e E 0 t
c m - t m D D A A D e ee r e te fr e a ~ s 9 D m N P m mO j P E e o r N -- k s a T C C m C L o
- A N
P P D' C
\
2_ K S R s A FI T
\
R C A D I 73 4 7 8 7 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 9 9 R T 7 7 7 7 8 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 8 S 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 N A
$~ S l
m A
?n
[""~ h (% STARFIRE riefin;t Schedule - ID Task Name Status RINootone DurstlOn Start Finleh 97 ees or onune Het 0,Cc. No $3 e13rps esMe PTodeCocoore hh m W800R
$$ Desver Syeom T.- No 1d e1398 et3rge wegDon 99 Deew, user Ouwe No id etsrse etwe we. con 100 De6*er Traireas Pian No sd essree essrse , w, Don 101 Deew, Sari. ore . Pian No w es3se eswe wNgan 163 Provice COTS Sea ore unwonence ewesone No se etarse etarse wNDoR 103 == COTS Ta.w S u. No sd starse etsse irENDo,i
)
104 PerMem STWIRE COTS Accepsence Test on Deveenprnere Server Yee 78 4r13rge 4r21#9e e5 psutoCr$3COwedDOR STARFo4E Tease 106 Da'os Da*P. Tat and Doesn=n serences w Aeoney syme = vos med eTse ertree oneCOrweisDOR sTARrweE Tosin 106 ^ ;,a*. Doom Documes ADApS wors ec. ese 40d enee eruse CISSCOrwesDOR 107 Doo'en. Deve*op. Test. Documens PAY 8PERS beerface No 40d 4rTf98 ertige psROCISSCO 108 Dum DmWop. Tut. Decames RiuS Hwf.cs No 40d e7798 erW98 4733 MnOCfSSCO 109 Dewys Dewsop. Tut. Doanne $$DS inewhee e ed enge arise 30eSS isRoCesSCO 110 DnM Dadop. Tat Doannet TAPfS kembce h ed eMe Wise 1095$ M8tC8Cr SCO 111 D=% Dadop. Tat. Domane LTS aremvece no 40d eres arise t TOSS esRoCISSCO 112 Doetyt Deveop. Test. Documore RPS (FEES) Interence No 40d erffr* erV9e 11133 CISSCO j13 Denver Herface Desden Decamerne No 1d e249e 42ege CfSSCO , 114 Deew, erswese. Tem pine no .e utse suse CnSSCO 115 D*'ar ***r*ce N - _. Plane No to crise artse OSSCO 116 Pweed Tut of FTARFIRE godser and Journess f.eh FFS) 90o toed $re9e Br30 rte F2 esROCISSCOrW9fDOpt STAfqFist Teen 117 Dador D*rbs*** P'en ('ncS8a Medeannes a Support m) No asd er23se W2e9e Ce5SCO 118 Perform 8TARFIRE Fue Weyotion Teeths h r_ , . ; Envronmore Yee 60d er2r9e W24790 105 CISSCO 119 Perform En:f User Treinks No e06 et2r9e er2498 tieSS NROCISSCOrWNDOR 120 tiP8
- End-Unre DasMpe WWere Appetzt*s No 00d er2se 92et, 19955 CtSSCO
~
S.\NRC1 TALK _20902cmSCHEDULE\STARF_13.MPP 1/21/96 10.06 AM Page 5 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __- . -~
I l Il1 ll 6 e g r a P e le M u O id i d I v n s t e s o t f O m D D a s t f P R t p t N f E' O E O O f O V r e O O r O D A D o D c N O N s s N r C C C E C E E E u S S S rV S V v V o O O O S t O O O O O O O S S O 6 f r O r O r r O O O O s 3C C C O O O I C C C C C C C C e $r S S S S S S S S S S C C C C f C C S D C S C S C S C S C S C S C C S S S S S S S S S N S 3 R C C r C t C T I C I C T C C I S C C f R
*E t
w t f ef I C h E V S I C C S r S r C S C I C SI S C S I C r C s r o s s e c e d $ 3 3 $ er o $ 3 3 $ 3 3 t 0 9 1 5 8 r 9 0 P i 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 2 s 3 1 4 4 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 e 9 8 8 = 8 e 9 8 8 8 e h s 1 m 9 U 9 f 9 9 9 9 9 g r 9 f 9 r 9 e 9 9r 9 9 e 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
, 8 9
8 e
=
1 i t r r r r r 4 dr t r r 0 2 r 2 0 0 # r 1 r i i 1 t 9 1 r e e 3 3 1 r 2r 6 9 9 9 t e 8 e in i g W r e 9 W W W t r
= 1 e O 2
e r 2 1 1 r 2 tr a 1 2 r 2 1 1 2 t r t r 1 r t r 2 2 2 F t t 1 1 1 8 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 t 9 m 9 9 9 9 8 9 8 8 5 e 8 8 8 8 e 8 8 8 8 e r a r 3r s r s 9 9 9 9 57 91 9r 9 s g i 9 r 9 9 U 9 9 9 9 "9 e 9 v B 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 2 2t T 2 4 1 s r $r 9 r f f9 i t 1 r T r 7 t r i 7 f i r t S er nr O r e r 9 r B 1 7 7 1 7 W 1 3 1 8 1 0 1 0 1 2 r o 2 i r i r t r 1 r t r 1 r t r f 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i d e e d d d d dl d d d d n 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 T 7 8 3 2 d 2 2 6 d 2 d d 6 d d d d a d d o 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 7 1 1 1 3 7 4 7 4 7 4 7 4 r e 2 2 M it a A 6 D r u e n o o 6 0 0 1 6 9
/
1 t s N u o o o o 4 o s e s e o o o s o o o o o 2 N N N N N e e e o o 1 l e Y 6 N Y - m V N N N Y N N N N N N N 1 Wi I
~1 s
t u t a S se v . e e er D n e e s e w n my e n e e v o o S v r s e S C d t e r e r S iro v d R s rv ) n n N T w s e e n r E T a f e s o e e n S e e n C s ' e m o rv C er g A c s
. s u
a t A c p p S e n io lo
*r A T
S k e m e e s n r o e W C R e e ss 8 2 r
'e e c
a fr e e c
%r w S
M O u e c S e te C P
*m r t c q r T N A g
e _ d u P C e e M k h P s - . n d n s s S e J a o i L R U w m A S S S B dr d n r t s L n d e e a D A P A s M. o n a P e U e n R ) H A P F e 3 l e a ec n T h c S a
- er Rt
- m F. c E
- n w 1 d
o n b u o e s S e C S T w e e
- o d n O m M c e o e c
n w e A R C n e m m m m F_ s ir v r E E N u u m R eo D. D m e n e n m E n n o w 7 P ( n e s r e v n o tap e c c U d E n M F R ta D a e w W M ( ( e r a w D d c o m o D. c o D. t c o D. m o D. t D o n g e n ie P A T S ts m 8e e M e A E s m n ta s te s
- y c n s C 2 E n S o a e e e is e w
. s H c
e u e uc o r e n P. R o T S T. T. f D T E er e m d e e s L 8 is O e p T. L
. d m o o U io F s C n p , P e e U a.
E n e e e W m m o P r e
- M D y E Mo L
O R R A S e E a W. o e o ee
- fa c c e D e
r e R o e D o D E R L A d r e R F I S Y T 8 a F t W e m 'a D e v a r te f e
- E le w S r e m a
I F N V R i A 4 e
- F R % D.
C D i n k H
- O u S E A s r n C r
- R P. A r rm SD d r e
e T
- r g
A R I T n T R e k
= o % % m e e d .
s O a e o O P a S i H m T S c n s s v v S e F e C 8
- r P
T 8 C O P C p e u e D. 'a e e a t e n e
\
6 h c e - p s n m m r y B n n v n D D D D D D 0 ta m u e a ro fo bp L. W e e 2 S e e e d fo s 6 f C r C r te ta v r e r e e W c lo r e te 'a 0 t c m S m n r P P D E O H P m D 9 e a S C j N A \ o r H 2 P k P s K_ E a S R T A I F T
\
R j 2 3 C A 0 3 2 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 6 2 9 2 0 3 j 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 R T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 N S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ S 11
ll l 7, e p l e u O d i i v d I n
; R
; g O o
N D o r m R O n R O e C r u o O O a o O O O C S O S O C S S n O C S S S S O C O O C 3 m S R E o N rv o n D N E
/
S s C M C C C C C C I I C C I C r O O I O O o O O O O R e S S C I S C I S S C f m S S r C S C S I S C S I S S, C C R N J C N J R w m C R N S S C C C R N C S E C C S S I C C C R N o E V N C S S t C c 3 c C C S S I S C C S C S C r C S S I C s r o s s ec e d S S S S e r e S S S S 3 5 7 e t 2 3 F e P 3 1 4 1 s e s e s i 5 1 s i s 9 s 1 6 s t o o 1 1 1 i i t 0 g 9 9 , 9 g 9 9 9 9 t 9 h 9 y 9 9 r e 9 9 g 9 s 9 9 e 9 9 9 9 9 9 t 9 t 9 9 is 8 r 9 9 n M r r r e r e f n t
! 1 6 t r 2,
9
/
M 9 9 P s o 9, 9 s 9 r 9 r n 2 4 4 w e s s i i e r e 2 2 e 5t r 2 t
, 3 t 9 C i s t t s t 3 r r 4
s G 2 r 3 s s n , r e M n e 2f 2 r F F S F 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 s t 9 9 9 9 s 9 9 , 9 r a Fn p n f n 9 1 9, 9 7 9, e t r 9 t 9 B 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 g 9
, 9 9 9 9 9 2
2 2 n 2 r e s a 7 f r e s t r s @ @ @ @ r 3 e 9, 9 t a 9 r 9 7 9 n 1 t r 2 i s t 9 9 0 S t 2 1 2 2 W c s s t r i i n 2 r 3 4 4 4 3 2f s i n n e r 2/ 2 l 3 e s 6 F 8 d d d
~
d 8 d d n 2 o a s o o 6 e e d e d 2 d d o d o s d d d d e d s d d d e 3 s s 6 0 0 0 O g , 1 9 s 0 D s , o o 1 S lt 1 2 4 2 4 1 3 e d s M er A u 6 0 D 0 1 e n '8 9 o t o o s e
/
1 s e 0 o o e s e e s o 2 r N N 8 N N N e e e e n o o o o e o o h Y 1 v Y Y V Y n v N N N N n v N N m N o N
/
1 i M s t u ~ t a S se e w w er e E S
~ o n
n a m U e _ s n
- 2. n o IO C a E o r
iv D R t a y c er n n R N T n e a c r E A e. r e e m e e n W r me g e o p . v n
. fo A c w c p .
r e io A o g e a u io A t c T s n p e f o v 4 we s. u A i r o e- s s re e d O d n C o e h. 0 n o n e R 9 o
*e r a e c P n.
e P T. T e S
- h
"= e n w N W P t
" t n b se h s e i r h g
n a e e w e r a m an A ne P' n m, n e l e e u n e dr P. d w e D A e s M.
- e p M- e n e . m n s
er 3 e A w o T e R er a - E fto s) t n t e 1 L T n n n e c w u e u H :_ C S, T e n e w e m
- e, u m n e C m c
o e n O n F_ u e o e_ c e *e U O e D s u la R N r C u m m u c R a h _ o r p e R i ru o P e a m c e n g r w -
. D e v e n P.
q e h e t h e e w o e c o o la A n c e p T o e p Z m o c E V n r n , m o. c. P n e n 9 o S e C A w T R o a i s ; n
. d n w t S sa i
la s e" k i S ie y e r e R s w w e n o s o a e u u
\
E P u v E e s T s D
^- -
F E T a r o n T O C s d n n oy U e s
- P O -
h e u o n o h u o h u o We e O C e e n t. u T. p o T. p o ec a T s o e L U R r e a R . o e S E te d D le I F R U e s u r n E R - rr v e R I F R S P 2 7
- e ro s
e re W w W e t f R I e e n T. P D a D a f r ta dr E H l F u A d r A e s t e s W h a e R
- O
- R n C d r d C T
s E n d n A r n a T S
- v A
'e D *
- d n ta te e n
A T d o a M M ** w v S e U n T ! P' D a D D S n
- h o m m E. a
*s m m R -
e p p Wu e D. n =
- d \
6 r r T
" i v o D e
c ie o r o m s e r r a
- o o B m n D D 0 S e v e r f op e fo fo 8r
, m le a s e 2 vo r e aa r r
e r e e s i e : d' a v e d sr e 0 t D P P u 9 C P P D c lo e dn tn c m e ' D A D D H P O 9 " e o S I C j o N A i r M 2 P k P e K_ E e S R T A t F T
\
R 5 6 7 8 9 0 C A D 4 4 4 4 4 5 1 5 2 5 3 5 4 6 5 5 6 7 8 9 G 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R T I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 8 6 6 6 6 6 8 6 0 6 6 N S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \. S
!l I
8 y s P l a u d i i v d . I n s o e N m w e O O O c r u O O N S O q q C S S C S S C S S O C S o I C O O W C I I C C c C c C C I C s S S f C S 3 S 3 f f I
,M C e S S S R S 3 S 3 C C C S S
R C I C I C I I g I g R R R n N C c C g N N N n t C s r o s e o C e d F F F 5 3 e r F s S F t 2 r 3 3 4 3 e e 3 6 7 P t t 7 1 7 1 7 1 7 1 7 1 7 1 7 t
, s g 9 9 g y s g h e o 97 9 s g o y 9 s p c s e r f 9 e e g e crs r t
r 7 2 D 2 7 2 t
@ n r $
t f 6 t i r vr vr u ln i e o e r e r r e g s t r g 1 r t o t e s e s r o f F s s 9 9 9 y , g 9 e e t r e r p r 9 9 9 y , g 9 p e s o e g a o e
! 7 y s 7 4 m
r a r e % t 7 t t v u t t r s n 1 7 f 8 3r r g e 1 9 r r S o 7 i r e r e 1 o 0 1 o d 4 d d d d d d o g n t 6 1 i l
$ y e 7 t d
e o d O o 1 3 d e 1 M it a r A u 8 0 D 0 1 e 8 n 9 O / s No t o s o o o s s e 1 e n o e e a 2 e N Y N N N v N Y Y e v u / l Y Y 1 i M s t u t a S
- s r
e ;- S E v r C I e V
- a. S R E n . E
- a S m n a
c r E L e e v n A p r 0 C p n e 9 e A i n S x 39
& s -- ee C t n n E
e P o r
- eo e -- P T e h n s b
e itx n t- h d n P te m e c eo o n n to a T e M. P. e p r ta o S 3 e p P n n T e N he 1 T A n e n o e e r C 1 e e e n c n s t s
- r e e a ee a U 9 F_
L. h r a t v W R e r e tp d n E n W n w D v e c E R e A e p a m n o c o E A T n fe
% *9 t o S e ts C A r
I
- C d n
S
\
R u k S y te e N e E P d F #r s e T O s a U s - A N e L e E T D C d n D E e t c n U __ n R r o a y i a o D
. y F n s r
e E R e W' R F t P m p p n o E le _r
- R U r A u u e t A U - FI R
e V' 8 R A w m S We H d e v e T S M E d n A wo a T e ee M C e e D, E T
- S h e S P m n S " P t D m \
h r n te S. a . y n e 6 C o a es e- p R fo ee e bp ts 0 e r r e f* d p te n r d
- A. e e p w S y 2 0
t C m P P U e C P 7 D 9 o m ev Wv @ N o C C o r o \ 2 r k s m C P Pr K_ E a t S R T o I S A F T R 9 0 1 2 3 5 y
\
C A 0 9 7 7 7 7 4 7 7 6 7 y 8 7 9 7 0 1 R T 1 1 1 1 1 1 j 1 1 j 8 8 N S 1 1 1 1 \: S i1 1
g p , e g S e p e l g u A lu lJ l n u J l y a l M r p m lA i r a l M b e l F n a J l c e l D v o l N t c O
< j p l e
S l g u l A l u J l n u J l y a M e m i l l M lA M b a r p r 7 A 6 0 0 1 s Tet 1 2 1 e 1 l F 1 M n / 2, a 1 J l d F e D l
?
y k Nt l t c O ll p e S 7 l gg g u M 1 l A 7 7 4
~
l u 9 w P T P J g 1
/
8 l n u n o
$ M.
3 1 J M l F_ M y a $g R A T S
\
3 s 3 3 s 3 3 : s a y ., s 5 5 s s 5 s 3 e s s 3 5 3 s 3 5 1 9 3 8 3 s 3 5 E B i t 1 i t 1 t s t s 1 t 1 9 1 1 L e c c c e o 8 e e c e c c
- e s t.8 c U d . e e e e e 8 e e e . e a a
- T T T T T T 7 T T T T T T T T Y e
7 T e D
" E le
- H u C S
d e g \ 6 e h R 0 c 2 S 0 t c 9 e y j t = a n n a a = s n a 0 o i
= m = n = * = n 2 r a a
*o m m
** = r h o r as as as *a ** u
** w =
*o E
R i P r ^
^
M m u M . u u
*a M M ae p M
*a M
M M as u a* M ee M M mo u ee M 8 M M K_ S A I T F \ R C A 2 3 g 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 g R T 10 1 4 5 6 7 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 j 0 j 2 3 4 N 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 S i. S l l
, l j I 1 , l p 0, l
e S g u l A lu v J . l n u J l y e l M r p 9 9 A 9 lr 1 a M l b e F l n a J l c e l D v o l N t c O ll p I e l S g u l A lu J l n J u l y a M l r p R 8 9 9 l A b 7 9
/
7 9
/
2 e 0 6 2 F ,
/
l 1 2 2 n 1 1 a ) r J d l e F c W > e D 4 l v g$ o l N , pg t c O gl p j fi e S l g u l A ta . l J nu l J y a . M A 1 a , 3 3 3 3 s s 3 y s s , S 5 5 5 s 3 3 3 3 s 3 . s 3 : ' s t , 1 u 5 , 5 e 5 a s . s 8 s 3 3 e 1 5 B e e
- e 'c e i
c 1 c
. 1 1 t i . i 1 t 1 5
t " z d t e e T e T T T e T 7 8 s T 7 8 8 T e T e .c T e T e e T T e e e e T e T e T e e T c e T e e T e e T T c e
- s e
T fe e u o d u q h S t e c R e m^ i
- c 1,
4c t y ir o es n, h a _ a m a n a m a m n, n
=
=
n n n a a n n a n a -
. n n
n n n n n n a n _ i r i r s d a 8
- s.
a e oo d e e h d - n e e d a w
- e. e *o ** w
- a. x.
E R P a M u n s
- w M
- m *
- w e
M m m M " u S I F R A 0 5 6 , 6 g 0 , 2 3 4 . 6 7 8 9 0 , T S 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 4 6 4 .e. S I,
) I Ij l 1
p 1 e e S g l a g u P l A l u J
- l n
u . J l y a l M r p 9 A 9 9 lr 1 a M l b e l F n a J l c e l D y b f l d O
!l p
e S l g u l A l u J l n u J l y e M M l A r p q 8 0 mU I 8 9 9 1 lr A a M9 4
/ /
8
/
4 8 9
/ /
2
/
6 9 2 0 1 8 qg 2 1 M d 2 d 2 2 9 l e e n n / 1 b o o e W W 2 g MM / F 1 l l Ig gii a._ g* l J l c e _ l D _ v o l N d O p e S l g u l A l
~
u P J P l n M. u 3 J 1 l y F_ a R M A T S B y
** N8 sc M c
N M N ** N m N N ** N
- m N ** ne m ** ** ae
\
E L de T* 7 8 T s a T T T 7" T 7" e m " C
*
- 5 8 " e a
*
- e e e
*
- a U
t i T T T 7 7 T T T T f T T T D s E le e H d a u q C o e S
\
G R 6 0 L S 2 0 d, y 9 j t = = n, a = a a = a
- a a = n C s e i
=
- m m " s = =
" a \
r i io r
*
- m. m
=
8* m ** =
** a
** a a
*a s
*a h no 2 E PM r
- M a
p a M M a M M M M M M M
** m. y % M e
N H K_ M M M m M M M S R I A F T
\
R C A 0 94 0 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 R T 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 N S 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 A S
l1 i lll 2 p 1 e e g S l a g P u l A lu J ' l n _ u J l y a l M r p 9 A 9 l 9 r 1 a l M _ b _ e _ F . l _ t _ r a _ J l c e l D s c l N t c O l p e S l g u l A l u J l n u f, g l p 8 y 8 , 9 a 9 4 /
/ 8 2
/ M M 0 A l
r p 1 3 ll L, , 4 h u 8 0 8 8 e T 9 9 1 lA r a T u 9 1 9 2 ky 0 1 8 M $ n
- gggg l o ,M 9/
t l b F e n gggEEggM k M 2
/
1 J a l l c e l D v o l N t c O p e S l g u l A l u P J P l n M. u 3 1 J l y F_ a R M A T S
)
y E B L d U e D t s E le e H u u C d q S e e \ h R 6 c 0 S 2 0 t c y 9 e t
- m C j
o t
- m m m a m m \
r h m " P r f o* g H
- u s
a u o u u s
* ~ u u
u
* ~ ~ ~ u s
m u s m 8 u m u s
~
m u sa m u 8* 2 K_ E R P r M M M M M M M M a M M M M M a M e W M " u M M M M
- S A
IF T
\
R C A D 3 4 8 8 7 8 9 0 , 2 3 4 s 8 8 R T S I I 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 n 8 9 8 0 9 I 8 2 9 9 4 9 5 9 8 9 N
\.
S
, . 11
ljj ll l i
- 3 r 9, e
l S g g p u l A 2.0 l lu J n u J l y a i M g e g A
~
g lr i a l M b e F l n a J l c e l D v o l N t c O ll j !
;~
p ;i e l S g u l l A 8 9 lu / 2 J / l 6 8 n 9 m u / e l J y 3 1
/
4 g I i g T a I r M l M r lo R Mug n A ^0 8
, Emg r '
p 0 8 A l l 9 9 lr 1 a m - 0 1 8 l M 9
/
1 b 2 e / 1 l F n a J l c e l D v o l N t c
- O p
e l S g u l A l u P J P l n M. u 3 1 J l y F_ a R M A T SL y E B L d U e D t s E le e H u u C d q S e e \ h R 6 c 0 S 2 t 0 c 9 m0 e y C j o i t r
- "" m u
m u m u m u m u
= m "" m m " mu
)
a u u m m m m 2
- u r o^
- s m s " u u
*o
~
s " u u
- ee P
E i P^ r " M M e. u M M 8 M M a
~
M s M M ee M m u 8 M m M a ee M m M K_ S R I A F T
\
R C A T S 0 1 7 9 " 9 9 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 5 0 1 6 0 1 n i 0 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 5 1 1 6 1 1 7 1 1 0 2 1 R N
\ :
, S
,l
, l
I i : p 4 1 e e S g l g a u P l A l u mU '( l J n u J l y a y l M r p 1 l A r a l M b 8 e 0 l F n
/
9
/
2 g a 1 ggMl J l d c e D e 8 9 W j l 9
/
/
5 - v 8 1 / o 9 / 0
/ 0 N 8 4 1 1
l 9 1 n t t 5
/
9 u o c h ll O jii8. p e 2 1 2 8 9 Mih
/
n o T Wg l S g g E
/
7, y k u t l A y g l lu J Eg$ n u J l y a M M l A r 8 p ne 8 9 l A 0 o
' 9 r t 1 a M 8, l
9
/
b 1 e 2 1 F 1 l n a I J l c e l D v o l N t c O p
- e S ,
l g u l A lu P J l P n M. u 3 J 1 l y F_ a R M A
- T y
S
\
B E L d ) 8 t e D s E le e H d u u q C e e S h R
\
6 c 0
/ S 2 de y 0
9 n
- l t m " "
" C m(C P or r o
i m *** e.u *e ** m u "
*- "u n
m s u
- m u
m u 8
*a m
u a - m u n n m m m 2 E R I ir P M u M M M " m a M W "'" *
^
e. M M M e* M 8" M
^
^
ca M a. u
*u M
8 M u
- S M
u
- K_
S A F T R 1 2 3
\
C A D 2 2 2 4 2 5 2 8 2 '2 8 2 9 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 0 R T I 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 3 4 S 1 1 1 3 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 W . S [
l ) ) 5 p 1 e e S g l a g P u %,} l A lu 9 9 1 p 's! J 7 1 . l J n u f 7 m5on I S
/
9 9 9
/
4
/
5 g' l 9 9 l y 7 4 o u M
/
8 o a T / u j M 9 n 4 T 9 o gh* $ u [ gig l
/
r 2 h p 2 l T 9 A / 9 9 1 lr a 2 j 7 J 4 l M h 8 1
/ g 1
b F e $
?
n o M n a l J c e l l D v o l N t c O p e S l g u l A lu J l n u J l y a M M A T l r 8 p 0 q[ 8 9 9 1 l A r a 0 1 6 M 9/ l 1 b 2 e / F 1 l n a J l c e l D v o l N d O p e S l g u l A l J u P P l n M. J u 3 l 1_ y F a R M A T S y ~ t E B L d U t e D s E le e H u u C d q S e e \ h R 6 c 0 S 2 t 0 c y 9 e C % j o t i r m u h m n i u n i m u a a "
=
n n n m a m m
\
2
/ r m u iu iu
- m w'
^ n u =
P E R I io' P r ^ 1
~
8 M m M u e.u
- u 8
M
- m M
n a
- s m
u n a w iu s M M 8* M 8 M u s M u K_ S A F T
\
R 5 6 7 8 9 0 C A D 14 4 4 4 4 8 1 5 2 5 3 5 M 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 . 7 8 R T I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 . 6 N S 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 \ S
p 9 3. l S e g 9 4 1 1 t i v da + 9, p u 7 e
, a A i r
l F lJ lu
*k 0 n
u J l y a l M r p m lA i r a l M . b e F l n a J l c e l D N v o 8 9
/
1
/
0 1 Il l O t c p i h T u ki t . e S l g u l A lu J l n u J l y a e l M M r p M 0 i m lA r a l M b e l F n a J l c e l D v o l N t c O Il p e S l g u l A l u J l nu J l y a M y B d t e le s u e d u q e e h c R e S i c y s j t = m m m m m = s t i r - = u u u u u m u m u P o- - s ee *+ ^ ee ir ' E P ' M M M M M M M ^ M ' R I F R 9 0 2 A 1 3 4 5 0 6 7 7 6 7 8 T 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S 1 1}}