SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
INFRASTRUCTURE DIVISION
PROCEDURES MANUAL
PROGRAM & PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SECTION 6: QUALITY ASSURANCE
APPROVED:
PROCEDURE: PM 6.01
DATE: 7/31/13
TITLE: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
REVISION: 4
1.
POLICY
A successful Quality Management program results in facilities that work and are
operable and maintainable. To maximize the ability to meet budgets and schedules, the
Project Team, including Operations, must support and comply with the requirements
and conditions of this program. The QA and Quality Control (QA/QC) activities
described in this procedure apply to all capital improvement projects managed by
Project Managers (PMs) from the Project Management Bureau (PMB), regardless of the
work being produced internally by EMB, by other SFPUC Divisions, other City
Departments, or consultants. The extent of these activities for the program as a whole,
determined by the Infrastructure Division Bureau Managers, or for each individual
project must be identified in the Project Management Plan. This way QC and QA
activities are identified, and schedule, budget, and resources can be agreed on.
Emergency contracts, Job Order Contracts (JOCs), and projects not managed by a
PMB PM are exempt from this procedure’s requirements.
2.
DEFINITIONS
2.1
Quality Control (QC): Those functions of quality management that are focused
on fulfilling project requirements. For planning, design, and bid package
preparation, QC is the responsibility of each Project Team, for thorough
checking, inspection, testing and timely feedback to ensure that necessary
corrective actions are taken.
2.2
Quality Assurance (QA): Those functions of quality management that are
focused on providing confidence that the QC requirements are being fulfilled.
The goal of QA is to achieve and maintain technical excellence through the
establishment of organizational responsibilities and implementation of
approaches to verify that QC activities are occurring in accordance with
procedures implemented by each Project Team. QA activities ensure the
Page 1 of 8
delivery of projects that will meet the requirements of the Operations Division and
applicable regulatory agencies.
2.3
Quality Assurance Audits (QA Audits): QA Audits are planned and systematic
verifications necessary to provide sufficient confidence that each Project Team
consistently implements procedures and performs and properly documents QC
activities.
2.4
Quality Management (QM): Uses measures and various types of project reviews
to ensure the technical quality, completeness and accuracy of work products. It
is a useful tool to manage the risks of design errors and omissions and minimize
construction changes and claims.
Refer also to Definitions List (eDOCS DM #488573) for other Definitions and
Responsibilities.
3.
RESPONSIBILITIES
3.1
Project Teams perform both QA and QC functions.
3.2
Assistant General Manager (AGM), Infrastructure Division, oversees the
Infrastructure Division QA Program to enforce and ensure compliance to the
requirements of Infrastructure Division Policies, Procedures, and Standards.
3.3
Project Management Bureau (PMB), Engineering Management Bureau (EMB),
Construction Management Bureau (CMB), Contract Administration Bureau
(CAB), and Bureau of Environmental Management (BEM) are responsible for
enforcing and ensuring compliance to the QA requirements for their respective
Bureau’s deliverables. Similarly, other City Departments, operations, and
consultants are likewise responsible.
3.4
Chief Engineer—Quality & Standards (CEQS) is responsible for managing the
Infrastructure Division QA Section (IQA). IQA is responsible for QA audits,
administration of the Infrastructure Division Procedures, QA training and
assistance for QA support, and verification of the official Project Reviews as
listed in Attachments 1.0, 1.1 and 2.
4.
IMPLEMENTATION
The development of projects must include QA and QC activities, documented in the
Project Management Plan (PMP). Project Teams perform the bulk of QC activities and
also some QA activities while personnel outside a given project perform the bulk of the
QA Activities. QC activities are embedded into the Infrastructure Division Procedures
for designs. Thus, a work deliverable should be referenced to the applicable procedure
to determine the QC requirements involved.
When other City Departments and consultants are doing planning, design, and
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 2 of 8
construction management of a project, they are expected to perform their work following
SFPUC Infrastructure Procedures and are to submit a Quality Plan explaining how the
QA and QC requirements will be met.
All projects must address various QC activities in addition to the QA/QC activities in the
procedures. Refer to the list of required and optional activities as listed in Attachment
1.0 or Attachment 1.1. The extent of these QC activities is determined by the
Infrastructure Division Bureau Managers, based on complexity, scope, and client
requirements. Any deviations from Attachment 1.0 shall also have the concurrence of
the respective Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Director.
The following sections address QC and QA activities for a typical project.
4.1
QC, Project Reviews
In addition to the QC requirements listed in the individual Infrastructure Division
procedures, the Quality Management Program for CIPs include eight (8) different
reviews at various milestones of the planning and design phases of projects, as listed in
Attachment 1.0. Three (3) of these reviews – Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) Review,
Value Engineering (VE) Review, and Project Management Review – are optional,
unless required by the CIP Director.
It is critical that reviews do not impact approved project schedules (both the phase level
schedules and the overall project schedules). The various reviews required at each
specific milestone of the planning and design phases should therefore be planned and
scheduled well in advance, coordinated, and conducted simultaneously whenever
possible. In some cases it may even be advantageous and efficient to combine
reviews. Durations of reviews are to be strictly enforced so as not to impact project
schedules. Except for a few exceptions, individual reviews will be limited to three (3)
weeks. To assist with the timely completion of all required review activities, each review
must be clearly defined in the Project Management Plan (PMP) and included as a
separate and distinct activity in the project schedule.
The following is a brief description of each review.
(1) Technical Review
The Technical Review is performed by EMB, Operations, Construction Management
Bureau (CMB), Bureau of Environmental Management, Health and Safety, Security,
and, as applicable, Information Technology Services (ITS), consultants, DPW, and other
City Departments, with the purpose of reviewing the technical adequacy of project
deliverables at the planning or design phase. The scope of this review is determined by
the PE, under the direction of the EMB Manager.
(2) Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) Review
Review performed if needed to solicit current, high-level technical input and guidance
from recognized experts in specialized fields. This review allows the Project Team to
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 3 of 8
benefit from the TAP members’ experience on comparable external projects and
provides a forum for consideration of innovative ideas and new design concepts and
methodologies. TAPs are typically required for tunnels, dams, water treatment plants,
and other complex projects, as determined by the Bureau Managers. The PE, under
the direction of the EMB Manager, coordinates and oversees this review.
(3) Cost Estimate Review
Review performed to support the development of an accurate Engineer’s Estimate. The
review to be performed at the 35% design milestone consists of checking the cost
estimate prepared by the Project Team. This first review provides the data necessary to
determine early whether adequate funding is available to complete the project. The
review to be performed at the 95% design milestone consists of preparing a totally
independent cost estimate to ensure the accuracy of the final Engineer’s Estimate. To
do so, this cost estimate requires validation of the preliminary construction schedule to
ensure long-lead-time purchased items and system shutdowns do reflect a reasonable
time frame and are indeed accounted for in the construction schedule critical path. The
PM, with the assistance of the Cost Engineer and under the direction of the project
controls lead or the PMB Manager, coordinates and oversees this review.
(4) Independent Technical Review
Review performed by third-party multi-disciplinary experts to provide an additional
guarantee of the technical soundness of the design documents. The review focuses on
the engineering design presented in the drawings and specifications. The emphasis of
the review varies depending on the level of completion of the design documents. It
should be noted that the 95% review includes a “biddability” assessment to minimize (or
eliminate) errors, omissions, and ambiguities in the design documents. The PM, under
the direction of the PMB Manager, coordinates and oversees this review.
(5) Constructability Review
Review performed to verify and enhance the “buildability” of a project. The review
evaluates the design for completeness, field efficiency and ease of construction. One
main objective of the review is to eliminate impractical and inefficient designs that do not
meet construction requirements as well as address construction-specific deficiencies in
contract documents. The PM, with the assistance of the Review Manager and under
the direction of the CMB Manager, coordinates and oversees this review.
(6) Steering Committee Review
Review performed when specific milestones are achieved to provide SFPUC Senior
Management with the reassurance that the project as a whole is being undertaken
within the parameters and guidelines established. The Steering Committee essentially
provides the validation required to proceed to the next phase of a project. The Steering
Committee may also be convened on an as-needed basis if a critical policy decision is
required from the SFPUC Deputy General Manager (DGM) or SFPUC General Manager
(GM) on a specific issue that could not be resolved through the normal chain of
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 4 of 8
command within the Infrastructure Division. The PM, under the direction of the PMB
Manager, coordinates and oversees this review.
(7) Value Engineering (VE) Review
Review performed if needed to analyze and evaluate possibilities of significant
reductions in the cost of a project. At its “highest” form VE identifies innovative ways in
which project costs may be minimized by the use of new technologies, changed
operational criteria, unconventional construction methods, etc. The review uses a
systematic application of analytical, creative, and evaluation techniques with the
objective of looking for cost savings without compromising functions, reliability,
performance, or quality. The PM, under the direction of the PMB Manager, coordinates
and oversees this review.
(8) Project Management Review
Review performed if needed to address specific issues that have not been adequately
dealt with in the other required reviews. It is the discretion of the PM to initiate this
additional review if he/she feels a specific issue of concern needs to be assessed
further. For example, the PM may create an independent construction schedule to
validate the schedule generated by the project, or to complement the findings in the
95% Cost Estimate Review which may have used but not validated the construction
schedule; request a shutdown review, an Operations Plan, and/or a ITS-SCADA/ITSDCS review at the 65% and 95% design stages; or coordinate required regulatory
agency review. If beneficial, the PM may also choose to include optional reviews from
outside agencies (e.g., courtesy reviews by local jurisdictions or agencies) under this
review category. The PM, under the direction of the PMB Manager, coordinates and
oversees this review.
4.2
QA Plan
PMs shall provide approved QA Plans to the CEQS within 7 calendar days of approval.
4.3
Project Bid Approval
All PMs are required to complete Attachment 2 before a capital improvement project is
advertised for bidding. It addresses the various planning and design QC reviews listed
in section 4.1 of this procedure and requires that a higher-level review be conducted by
management to ensure completeness in the design documents as they become
construction contract documents and require approval by the CIP Director. PM shall
provide a copy of the fully signed Project Review & Construction Contract/Bid Checklist
to the CEQS.
4.4
Construction Phase Requirements in the Resident Engineer’s Project QA Plan
The RE shall create a project-specific QA Plan at the beginning of the Construction
Phase to address how the RE will verify Contractor compliance with the requirements of
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 5 of 8
the Specifications. Topics include, but are not limited to:











Project Quality organization and authority
Field quality control procedures (refer to paragraphs below)
Quality personnel experience qualifications and/or training
Independent materials testing firm(s) qualifications
Quality orientation training of site personnel
Contractor and subcontractor interface and coordination
Control of special processes
Type and frequency of materials testing verification
Control of measuring and test equipment
Control of deficiencies and non-conformances
Quality records/test data control
4.4.2 Before NTP, the RE shall thoroughly review the Specifications and related codes
and standards to identify unique inspection requirements, including but not
limited to:












Dimensional tolerances
Material receiving
Weld testing/certification
Finish requirements
Special equipment/systems
Unique concrete mixes
Work sequencing
High voltage electrical
Rotating equipment
Specialty testing/inspection services
Equipment testing and performance
In-factory inspection/testing
4.4.3 The RE shall also review existing Construction Management procedures and
criteria and shall prepare project-specific criteria where indicated. As many of
the accepted codes and standards incorporate varying definitions of compliance
or offer several options for acceptability, the PE shall identify and establish the
acceptance level for the specific circumstance. Some considerations include, but
are not limited to:







Concrete surface tolerances
Maximum weld inclusion or voids
Tighter or looser dimension tolerances
Special storage requirements
Drywall finishing, straightness, and/or joint quality
Defining “square and plumb” for conduit and piping runs
Defining “in a workmanlike manner” to incorporate acceptable/unacceptable
standards
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 6 of 8

4.5
Rough/finish grade tolerances
QA
The Infrastructure Division QA Section performs the following tasks to support the
Quality Management Program:
4.5.1 Update Infrastructure Division Procedures – Facilitate revision to procedures with
Infrastructure Division Bureaus and other PUC Divisions and programs to reflect
organizational structure and policies, and to minimize inconsistencies and
duplications.
4.5.2 Support CIP Quality Management Program – Assist Bureaus to establish internal
QA/QC process, as requested by the AGM, and track Project Reviews listed in
Attachment 1.0 or Attachment 1.1.
4.5.3 Quality Assurance Audits – Conduct project audits as determined by and on
behalf of the AGM.
Planning Phase: Between Final Alternative Analysis Report (AAR) and Draft
Conceptual Engineering Report (CER)
Environmental Phase: Six (6) months before first Administrative Draft of
Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration
Design Phase: Before 50% Design (midpoint of 35% and 65% design milestone
dates)
Construction Phase: 20% elapsed time from start of construction (subject to
requirements by CIP Director)
Note: Additional random audits may be performed at the discretion of the CEQS
or AGM, Infrastructure Division.
4.6
Training – With input from Infrastructure Division Bureau Managers and
Operations Divisions, identify training needs regarding procedures tailored for
specific Bureaus, and assist in the training effort.
5.
REFERENCES

PM 2.01 Project Development Process

PM 2.02 Project Management Plan

PM 6.02 Quality Assurance Audits
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 7 of 8
6.
ATTACHMENTS
(1.0) Project Reviews for Planning and Design Phases
(1.1) Water R&R and Wastewater R&R Project Reviews for Planning and
Design Phases
(2)
Project Review and Construction Contract/Bid Checklist (eDOCS DM
#840490)
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Rev. 4, Page 8 of 8
ATTACHMENT 1.0 – PROJECT REVIEWS FOR PLANNING AND DESIGN PHASES
Project Reviews for Planning and Design Phases
Bureau
Lead
Project Review
Reviewers
Budget
PE
Technical Review
Refer to Paragraph
4.1 (1) in
procedure.
Engineering
Design Fees
PE
TAP Review
Outside Dam and
Tunnel Experts
Engineering
Design Fees
Program Controls
2
or Consultant
Project
Management
Engineering
Design Fees
Engineering
Design Fees
EMB
CE
RM
RM
PM
PMB
PM
PM
1
Cost Estimate
Review
Independent
Technical Review
Constructability
Review
Steering
Committee Review
Value Engineering
1
Review
Project
Management
1
Review
Consultant
2
CMB and
2
Consultant
Selected
Infrastructure
Division Managers
Consultant
Varies
2
Schedule
AAR, CER SubPhase or Design
Phase
AAR, CER SubPhase or Design
Phase
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
N/A
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Engineering
Design Fees
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Project
Management
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Planning
Design
AAR
CER
DCR
35%
65%
95%






As-Needed


2
PE PM PMB RM TAP -




As-Needed
List of Acronyms:
Alternative Analysis Report
Cost Engineer
Conceptual Engineering Report
Construction Management Bureau
Design Criteria Report
Engineering Management Bureau
Health and Safety


As-Needed
Review to be conducted on as-needed basis only (i.e., review will not be required for all projects).
Via Consultants through various contracting means as determined by the Program Manager and/or Bureau Managers.
AAR CE CER CMB DCR EMB H&S -


Footnotes:
1

Project Engineer
Project Manager
Project Management Bureau
Review Manager (in Program Controls)
Technical Advisory Panel
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Attachment 1.0, Rev. 4, Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT 1.1 – WATER R&R AND WASTEWATER R&R PROJECT REVIEWS FOR PLANNING AND DESIGN
PHASES
Water R&R and Wastewater R&R Project Reviews for Planning and Design Phases
Bureau
3
EMB
Lead
Project Review
Reviewers
Budget
PE
Technical Review
Refer to Paragraph
4.1 (1) in
procedure.
Engineering
Design Fees
CE
PM
PMB
PM
Cost Estimate
Review
Constructability
Review
Project
Management
1
Review
Program Controls
2
or Consultant
3
CMB and
2
Consultant
Varies
3
Schedule
Project
Management
Engineering
Design Fees
AAR, CER SubPhase or
Design Phase
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Project
Management
Project Mgt
Sub-Phase
Planning
AAR
CER
Design
DCR
35%

2
3
AAR CE CER CMB DCR DPW EMB H&S -
Alternative Analysis Report
Cost Engineer
Conceptual Engineering Report
Construction Management Bureau
Design Criteria Report
Department of Public Works
Engineering Management Bureau
Health and Safety
PE PM PMB RM R&RTAP WWE -
Project Engineer
Project Manager
Project Management Bureau
Review Manager (in Program Controls)
Renewal and Replacement
Technical Advisory Panel
Wastewater Enterprise
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Attachment 1.1, Rev. 4, Page 1 of 1


As-Needed
Review to be conducted on as-needed basis only (i.e., review will not be required for all projects).
Via Consultants through various contracting means as determined by the Program Manager and/or Bureau Managers.
Responsible Bureau can include DPW and Wastewater Enterprise for projects led by those organizations.
List of Acronyms:
95%

Footnotes:
1
65%
ATTACH. 2 – PROJECT REVIEW & CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT/BID CHECKLIST
PROJECT REVIEW & CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT/BID CHECKLIST
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name:
Project No.:
Contract Name:
Contract No.:
Region:
Date:
Design Performed By:
(check all that apply)
SFPUC-EMB
City Department
Consultant(s) - List below
Name of Prime Consultant(s):
Name (and Firm/Organization) of Engineer of Record:
REQUIRED PLANNING & DESIGN PHASE REVIEWS
Technical Reviews
All Completed
Some Completed
None Completed
AAR: By:
Date:
35%: By:
Date:
CER: By:
Date:
65%: By:
Date:
DCR: By:
Date:
95%: By:
Date:
Cost Estimate Reviews
35%: By:
All Completed
Date:
Independent Technical Reviews
All Completed
35%: By:
Date:
65%: By:
Date:
Constructability Reviews
All Completed
35%: By:
Date:
65%: By:
Date:
Steering Committee Reviews
All Completed
AAR: By:
Date:
CER: By:
Date:
Some Completed
95%: By:
Some Completed
95%: By:
Some Completed
95%: By:
Some Completed
95%: By:
None Completed
Date:
None Completed
Date:
None Completed
Date:
None Completed
Date:
Important: If "All Completed" box is not checked for all required reviews, attach explanation to checklist.
AS NEEDED REVIEWS
Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) Reviews
Completed
Not Completed
Completed
Not Completed
Completed
Not Completed
Briefly Describe Reviews:
Value Engineering Reviews
35%: By:
Date:
Project Management Reviews
Briefly Describe Reviews:
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Attachment 2, Rev. 4, Page 1 of 2
ATTACH. 2 – PROJECT REVIEW & CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT/BID CHECKLIST
May substitute
specific
Program titles,
where they
occur (e.g.,
“SSIP
Shutdown
Coordinator”)
May substitute specific Program,
where occurs (e.g., “SSIP” instead
of “CIP”)
PM 6.01 Quality Assurance Program, Attachment 2, Rev. 4, Page 2 of 2