PURPOSE: This rule establishes requirements and provides guidance for planning facility programs for Capital Improvement and Maintenance.

1. (1) General. Each department/agency must examine the duties imposed by law and the programs or policies necessary to carry out those duties. This examination will enable the department/agency to establish goals that can be translated into objectives and functions assigned to specific sites, complexes or institutions. A careful study of these objectives and functions shall be made to identify facility requirements (types, sizes, arrangement, etc.) that are necessary for support of the assigned objectives and functions. The existing facilities at the site/complex shall then be compared with the identified facility requirement. That comparison will provide the information necessary to plan and establish effective utilization of existing facilities, along with identifying requirements for new facilities, or requirements for modifying or disposing of existing facilities.

2. (2) Master Plans. The master plan for an existing site/complex is the comprehensive plan for effective utilization and development of the site/complex and facilities as required to support assigned objectives and functions. The master plan shall include a drawing which shows the site/complex boundaries, location of all existing facilities, proposed changes, improvements or disposal of those facilities, proposed areas for site expansion or disposal and location for known new facility requirements. Each facility (existing or proposed) shall be identified along with the principal function it serves. The master plan also requires a written discussion of the existing facility utilization (identifying the principal function located in the facility) and facility deficiencies that prevent complete support for the assigned objectives and functions. The discussion shall identify work necessary to correct the identified facility deficiencies, including construction, acquisition of real property or facility and disposal of unneeded real property or facilities. Discussion of proposed construction or acquisition will address all changes in utilization or reassignment of functions between facilities. A master plan should be examined regularly and updated, when necessary, to reflect significant changes required to support assigned objectives and functions.

   1. (A) Feasibility Studies. Feasibility studies may be made to determine the most effective solution for any substantial construction or maintenance/repair requirement. For each identified deficiency where acquisition or construction estimated to cost in excess of two million dollars ($2,000,000) is proposed, a feasibility study shall be made to determine the most effective solution. The study will develop the data necessary to complete the eleven (11)-paragraph justification for budget submission indicated in 1 CSR 30- 2.040(8)(C) and must examine forecast of needs, allocation of functions to various site/complexes and/or facilities and all practical alternatives. Funding, except for architect/engineer planning services shall not be requested for such acquisition or construction items until a feasibility study has been completed. Prior to establishing a contract for a feasibility study, the scope and requirements for a feasibility study will be coordinated with the Office of Administration. An economic analysis will be provided as part of the feasibility study.

      1. 1. An economic analysis is a brief

resume of alternative methods of solving a problem. In this case, an economic analysis should determine the need to house a function, establish a feasible means of providing facility support, discuss the alternatives and recommend the most cost effective solution. The analysis will include consideration of the life cycle cost to determine the present value of owning and operating the facility or system over its economic life. Where appropriate, the time value of money will be considered. The lending rate being provided on shortterm state securities should be used as this value. This information will be provided by the state treasurer.

1. 2. Particular attention must be given to

defining alternative. Experience shows that frequently only two (2) alternatives are compared—the way things are being done now versus the way the department/agency would like to do them, but such a simple comparison is not acceptable. An economic analysis must include comparisons of all practical alternatives in order to provide a convincing justification for the selected alternative.

1. 3. The extent of the analysis must be

commensurate with the scope and cost of the proposed item.

1. 4. The scope of the economic analysis

considered here is intended to support the planning/justification phase of a proposed facility or system. Studies for selection of specific equipment or materials to be incorporated into the work will be made during project design. The economic justification for selection of a specific option must take into consideration not only the initial design and construction cost, but operation (maintenance/repair, energy, labor and supplies) costs throughout the projected life of the facility or system.

1. (B) Master Plan Submission. A master plan is required for each developed site with more than three (3) facilities, or with facilities having total floor space of more than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet and for undeveloped sites having an area of more than one hundred sixty (160) acres. Undeveloped sites being held or used for wilderness, farming or other purpose which requires no development are exempted from this requirement. For all sites, exempted from the requirement for a master plan, a site plan is required. The site plan shall show, as a minimum, boundaries (correlated to an easily identified reference), access, principal drives or trails, facilities, scale and north direction. Completed master plans and site plans for all sites shall be submitted to the director, Division of Design and Construction, within five (5) years after the effective date of this rule.

1. (3) Departmental Facility Program. The Departmental Facility Program is the complete listing, in priority, of all known departmental facility requirements for construction and for maintenance/repair. Once established, the Departmental Facility Program as well as the master plans for the individual site/complexes should not change materially unless there is a change in the department’s goals and objectives. Minor revisions may be required for an individual facility to support a change in function, without materially changing the Departmental Facility Program or the master plan for the site/complex.
2. (4) Facility Planning Cycle. The facility planning cycle extends over a period of seven (7) years. This includes the current year (execution year), the budget year (immediate program) and the next five (5) years. The longrange plan forecasts the facility requirements for this five (5)-year period. The immediate program is the proposed submission for the next budget year of the most urgent requirements indicated in the long-range plan.

3. (5) Long-Range Plan. The long-range plan, which covers the five (5)-year period beyond the immediate program, is the proposal for implementing the master plans for the individual site/complexes in accordance with the Departmental Facility Program. The longrange plan will include all known requirements for construction and for maintenance/repair. The long-range plan must be supported with a current copy of the Facility Inspection and Condition Report on all existing facilities for which work is proposed in that plan. These reports provide the documentation for verifying requirements, integrating them into a statewide long-range plan and reporting to the general assembly in accordance with the requirements of section 8.360, RSMo.

   1. (A) Categories. Construction items will not be combined with maintenance/repair items.
   2. (B) Priorities. The long-range plan will be prepared to show a priority order, within each of the five (5) years for the items included.
4. (6) The Commissioner of Administration or his designee shall establish the specific method of coordination for feasibility studies, long-range plans and master plans with each department/agency.
5. (7) This rule, to the extent practical, will be used to supplement Fiscal Year 1983 Budget Instructions. This rule becomes effective with the budget submission for Fiscal Year 1984.

AUTHORITY: sections 8.320, 8.330, 8.360 and 33.220, RSMo 1986.* Original rule filed July 9, 1981, effective Feb. 15, 1982. Emergency amendment filed June 14, 1985, effective July 1, 1985, expired Oct. 29, 1985. Amended: Filed June 14, 1985, effective Aug. 26, 1985. *Original authority: 8.320, 8.330 and 8.360, RSMo 1958, amended 1965 and 33.220, RSMo 1939, amended 1945, 1971.