Exhibit 300 (BY2009) - PHIN: National Electronic Disease Surveillance System, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

PART ONE

OVERVIEW

1. Date of Submission:: 2008-02-04

2. Agency:: 009

3. Bureau:: 20

4. Name of this Capital Asset:: CDC PHIN: National Electronic Disease Surveillance System

5. Unique Project Identifier:: 009-20-01-03-01-0362-00

6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2009?: Mixed Life Cycle

7. What was the first budget year this investment was submitted to OMB?: FY2002

8. Provide a brief summary and justification for this investment, including a brief description of how this closes in part or in whole an identified agency performance gap.: NEDSS (National Electronic Disease Surveillance System) is an Internet-based infrastructure for public health surveillance data exchange that uses specific PHIN (Public Health Information Network) and NEDSS Data Standards. NEDSS also relies heavily on industry standards (including standard vocabulary code sets such as LOINC, SNOMED, and HL7), policy-level agreements on data access/ protection of confidentiality. NEDSS represents an ongoing close collaboration between the CDC and its public health partners. NEDSS is not a single, monolithic application, but a system of interoperable subsystems, components and systems modules that include software applications developed and implemented by the CDC; those developed and implemented by State and Local health departments and those created by commercial services and vendors. During FY2007, CDC's NEDSS Project strategically realigned its funding and long range planning to better address changing information technology capabilities and to meet emerging needs in local, state, and national public health surveillance. These realigned resources will support standards-based PHIN and American Health Information Community (AHIC)-approved, electronic message exchange between public health stakeholders (providers, labs, local and state public health, and CDC). When NEDSS began in 2001, no state had integrated public health surveillance systems as articulated in the NEDSS vision; today over 35 states have implemented surveillance systems based on this vision. Initially, CDC responded to requests from states seeking assistance to obtain NEDSS software solutions, often based on local and state information technology resource constraints. The CDC NEDSS Base System (NBS) was designed and developed by CDC to meet those needs. Today, 16 states use the NBS (mission-critical application). Additionally, the NEDSS project will increase the resources, technical support, and training required to accelerate successful adoption of the NEDSS Message Subscription Service (MSS). A CDC strategic mission critical area supported by NEDSS include: "People Prepared for Emerging Health Threats": 1. Detection & Reporting - Communications: Improve the timeliness and accuracy of communications regarding threats to the public's health. 2. Investigation: Decrease the time to identify causes, risk factors, and appropriate interventions for those affected by threats to the public's health.

9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request?: yes

9.a. If "yes," what was the date of this approval?: 2007-06-26

10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit?: yes

11.a. What is the current FAC-P/PM certification level of the project/program manager?: Mid/Journeyman-level

12. Has the agency developed and/or promoted cost effective, energy-efficient and environmentally sustainable techniques or practices for this project.: yes

12.a. Will this investment include electronic assets (including computers)?: yes

12.b. Is this investment for new construction or major retrofit of a Federal building or facility? (answer applicable to non-IT assets only): no

13. Does this investment directly support one of the PMA initiatives?: yes

If yes, select the initiatives that apply:

Initiative Name
Expanded E-Government

13.a. Briefly and specifically describe for each selected how this asset directly supports the identified initiative(s)? (e.g. If E-Gov is selected, is it an approved shared service provider or the managing partner?): The expanded E-Government initiative is focused on increasing efficiency, controlling IT costs, developing and implementing common solutions. NEDSS has been architect ed to enable states and public health departments to access records that were only available by paper based reports in the past. The NEDSS initiative provides technical standards to facilitate electronic communications between the CDC and public health state labs, health departments and other health facilities open to the public.

14. Does this investment support a program assessed using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)?: no

15. Is this investment for information technology?: yes

16. What is the level of the IT Project (per CIO Council's PM Guidance)?: Level 3

17. What project management qualifications does the Project Manager have? (per CIO Council's PM Guidance): (1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment

18. Is this investment identified as high risk on the Q4 - FY 2007 agency high risk report (per OMB memorandum M-05-23)?: no

19. Is this a financial management system?: no

19.a.1. If yes, which compliance area:: N/A

19.a.2. If no, what does it address?: Public Health Surveillance

20. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2009 funding request for the following? (This should total 100%)

Area	Percentage
Hardware	0
Software	0
Services	100
Other	0

21. If this project produces information dissemination products for the public, are these products published to the Internet in conformance with OMB Memorandum 05-04 and included in your agency inventory, schedules and priorities?: yes

22. Contact information of individual responsible for privacy related questions.

Name	Alice M. Brown
Phone Number	770-488-8223
Title	IT Security Project Manager
Email	AMBrown1@cdc.gov

23. Are the records produced by this investment appropriately scheduled with the National Archives and Records Administration's approval?: no

24. Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas?: no

SUMMARY OF SPEND

1. Provide the total estimated life-cycle cost for this investment by completing the following table. All amounts represent budget authority in millions, and are rounded to three decimal places. Federal personnel costs should be included only in the row designated Government FTE Cost, and should be excluded from the amounts shown for Planning, Full Acquisition, and Operation/Maintenance. The total estimated annual cost of the investment is the sum of costs for Planning, Full Acquisition, and Operation/Maintenance. For Federal buildings and facilities, life-cycle costs should include long term energy, environmental, decommissioning, and/or restoration costs. The costs associated with the entire life-cycle of the investment should be included in this report. All amounts represent Budget Authority Note: For the cross-agency investments, this table should include all funding (both managing partner and partner agencies). Government FTE Costs should not be included as part of the TOTAL represented.

Cost Type	Py-1 & Earlier -2006	PY 2007	CY 2008	BY 2009
Planning Budgetary Resources	4.300	0.000	0.000	0.000
Acquisition Budgetary Resources	78.021	12.616	6.027	6.002
Maintenance Budgetary Resources	4.000	0.680	6.050	5.972
Government FTE Cost	6.230	1.158	1.671	1.679
# of FTEs	7	15	15	15

2. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's?: no

2.a. If "yes," how many and in what year?

3. If the summary of spending has changed from the FY2008 President's budget request, briefly explain those changes.: The summary of spending has changed the allocation of the extramural funding therefore increasing the NEDSS intramural funding

PERFORMANCE

In order to successfully address this area of the exhibit 300, performance goals must be provided for the agency and be linked to the annual performance plan. The investment must discuss the agency's mission and strategic goals, and performance measures (indicators) must be provided. These goals need to map to the gap in the agency's strategic goals and objectives this investment is designed to fill. They are the internal and external performance benefits this investment is expected to deliver to the agency (e.g., improve efficiency by 60 percent, increase citizen participation by 300 percent a year to achieve an overall citizen participation rate of 75 percent by FY 2xxx, etc.). The goals must be clearly measurable investment outcomes, and if applicable, investment outputs. They do not include the completion date of the module, milestones, or investment, or general goals, such as, significant, better, improved that do not have a quantitative measure.

Agencies must use the following table to report performance goals and measures for the major investment and use the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Performance Reference Model (PRM). Map all Measurement Indicators to the corresponding Measurement Area and Measurement Grouping identified in the PRM. There should be at least one Measurement Indicator for each of the four different Measurement Areas (for each fiscal year). The PRM is available at www.egov.gov. The table can be extended to include performance measures for years beyond FY 2009.

Row	Fiscal Year	Strategic Goal Supported	Measurement Area	Measurement Grouping	Measurement Indicator	Baseline	Planned Improvement to the Baseline	Actual Results
1	2005	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	25 State/Sites have integrated disease data repositories (April, 2005)	Increase by 3	25 States have NEDSS systems that capture relevant disease surveillance data
2	2005	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	10 States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format (5/24/05)	Increase by 3	11 States are reporting to CDC in a standard message format
3	2005	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	29 States/Sites can receive standard electronic lab result messages (April, 2005)	Increase by 3	29 Sites can receive standard electronic lab result messages
4	2005	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	29 States/Sites are using web-based disease reporting systems (April, 2005)	Increase by 3	30 Sites are using web-based disease reporting systems
5	2006	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	28 (est.) States/Sites have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 3	37 States have NEDSS systems that capture relevant disease surveillance data
6	2006	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	13 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 3	16 States are reporting to CDC in a standard message format
7	2006	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	32 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	36 Sites can receive standard electronic lab result messages
8	2006	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	32 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	38 Sites are using web-based disease reporting systems
9	2007	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	31 (est.) States/Sites have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 9	44 States/Sites have integrated disease data repositories
10	2007	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	16 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 34	19 States/Sites are reporting to CDC in a standard NEDSS compatible message format. 50 States agreed to adoption of NEDSS-compatibility public health surveillance systems.
11	2007	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	35 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	41 states/Sites can receive standard electronic lab result messages
12	2007	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	35 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	44 States/Sites using web-based disease reporting systems
13	2008	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	40 States/Sites (est) have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 5	TBD
14	2008	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	50 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 2	TBD
15	2008	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	38 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	TBD
16	2008	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	38 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	TBD
17	2009	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	45 States/Sites (est) have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 5	TBD
18	2009	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	52 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 2	TBD
19	2009	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	41 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages (April, 2005)	Increase by 3	TBD
20	2009	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	41 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	TBD
21	2010	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	50 States/Sites (est) have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 5	TBD
22	2010	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	54 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 2	TBD
23	2010	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	44 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	TBD
24	2010	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	44 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	TBD
25	2011	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	55 States/Sites (est) have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 5	TBD
26	2011	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	56 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format )	Increase by 2	TBD
27	2011	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	47 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	TBD
28	2011	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	47 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	TBD
29	2012	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	60 States/Sites (est) have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 5	TBD
30	2012	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	58 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 2	TBD
31	2012	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	50 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	TBD
32	2012	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	50 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	TBD
33	2013	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Mission and Business Results	Population Health Management and Consumer Safety	Number of state health departments/sites that have integrated disease data repositories	65 States/Sites (est) have integrated disease data repositories	Increase by 5	TBD
34	2013	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Processes and Activities	Participation	Number of states/sites reporting to CDC in standard message formats	60 (EST) States/Sites are reporting to CDC in standard message format	Increase by 2	TBD
35	2013	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Number of States/sites that can receive standard electronic laboratory result messages	53 States/Sites (est) can receive standard electronic lab result messages	Increase by 3	TBD
36	2013	S.O. 2.1 - Prevent the spread of infectious diseases	Technology	Accessibility	Number of States/sites that have Web-based disease reporting systems	53 States/Sites (est) are using web-based disease reporting systems	Increase by 3	TBD

Enterprise Architecture

In order to successfully address this area of the business case and capital asset plan you must ensure the investment is included in the agency's EA and Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process, and is mapped to and supports the FEA. You must also ensure the business case demonstrates the relationship between the investment and the business, performance, data, services, application, and technology layers of the agency's EA.

1. Is this investment included in your agency's target enterprise architecture?: yes

2. Is this investment included in the agency's EA Transition Strategy?: yes

2.a. If yes, provide the investment name as identified in the Transition Strategy provided in the agency's most recent annual EA Assessment.: CDC PHIN: National Electronic Disease Surveillance System (NEDSS)

3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture?: yes

3.a. If yes, provide the name of the segment architecture as provided in the agency’s most recent annual EA Assessment.: Public Health Information Network

4. Identify the service components funded by this major IT investment (e.g., knowledge management, content management, customer relationship management, etc.). Provide this information in the format of the following table. For detailed guidance regarding components, please refer to http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/. Component: Use existing SRM Components or identify as NEW. A NEW component is one not already identified as a service component in the FEA SRM. Reused Name and UPI: A reused component is one being funded by another investment, but being used by this investment. Rather than answer yes or no, identify the reused service component funded by the other investment and identify the other investment using the Unique Project Identifier (UPI) code from the OMB Ex 300 or Ex 53 submission. Internal or External Reuse?: Internal reuse is within an agency. For example, one agency within a department is reusing a service component provided by another agency within the same department. External reuse is one agency within a department reusing a service component provided by another agency in another department. A good example of this is an E-Gov initiative service being reused by multiple organizations across the federal government. Funding Percentage: Please provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount used for each service component listed in the table. If external, provide the funding level transferred to another agency to pay for the service.

Row	Agency Component Name	Agency Component Description	Service Type	Component	Internal or External Reuse?	Funding %
1	Inbound Correspondence Management	Defines the set of capabilities that manage externally initiated communication between an organization and its stakeholders.	Routing and Scheduling	Inbound Correspondence Management	No Reuse	5
2	Outbound Correspondence Management	Defines the set of capabilities that manage internally initiated communication between an organization and its stakeholders.	Routing and Scheduling	Outbound Correspondence Management	No Reuse	5
3	Case Management	Defines the set of capabilities that manage the life cycle of a particular claim or investigation within an organization to include creating, routing, tracing, assignment and closing of a case as well as collaboration among case handlers.	Tracking and Workflow	Case Management	No Reuse	15
4	Record Linking / Association	Defines the set of capabilities that support the correlation between logical data and information sets.	Records Management	Record Linking / Association	No Reuse	5
5	Knowledge Capture	Defines the set of capabilities that facilitate collection of data and information.	Knowledge Management	Knowledge Capture	No Reuse	15
6	Information Sharing	Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of documents and data in a multi-user environment for use by an organization and its stakeholders.	Knowledge Management	Information Sharing	No Reuse	10
7	Information Retrieval	Defines the set of capabilities that allow access to data and information for use by an organization and its stakeholders.	Knowledge Management	Information Retrieval	No Reuse	10
8	Ad Hoc	Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of dynamic reports on an as needed basis.	Reporting	Ad Hoc	No Reuse	5
9	Graphing / Charting	Defines the set of capabilities that support the presentation of information in the form of diagrams or tables.	Visualization	Graphing / Charting	No Reuse	5

5. To demonstrate how this major IT investment aligns with the FEA Technical Reference Model (TRM), please list the Service Areas, Categories, Standards, and Service Specifications supporting this IT investment. FEA SRM Component: Service Components identified in the previous question should be entered in this column. Please enter multiple rows for FEA SRM Components supported by multiple TRM Service Specifications. Service Specification: In the Service Specification field, Agencies should provide information on the specified technical standard or vendor product mapped to the FEA TRM Service Standard, including model or version numbers, as appropriate.

Row	SRM Component	>Service Area	Service Category	Service Standard	Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name)
1	Knowledge Capture	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes
2	Inbound Correspondence Management	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT)
3	Outbound Correspondence Management	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	International Classification of Diseases
4	Outbound Correspondence Management	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes
5	Outbound Correspondence Management	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT)
6	Case Management	Component Framework	Security	Certificates / Digital Signatures	VeriSign
7	Case Management	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Windows Internet Explorer 6.0
8	Record Linking / Association	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	International Classification of Diseases
9	Record Linking / Association	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes
10	Record Linking / Association	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT)
11	Information Sharing	Component Framework	Data Interchange	Data Exchange	Electronic Business using XML
12	Information Sharing	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	HITSP
13	Information Sharing	Component Framework	Presentation / Interface	Static Display	Hyper Text Markup Language
14	Information Sharing	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Hardware / Infrastructure	Wide Area Network (WAN)	SONET, Bellsouth
15	Information Sharing	Service Access and Delivery	Service Transport	Supporting Network Services	T1
16	Information Sharing	Service Access and Delivery	Service Transport	Supporting Network Services	T3
17	Information Retrieval	Component Framework	Data Management	Reporting and Analysis	SAS Enterprise
18	Information Retrieval	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Windows Internet Explorer 6.0
19	Ad Hoc	Component Framework	Data Management	Reporting and Analysis	SAS Enterprise
20	Graphing / Charting	Component Framework	Data Management	Reporting and Analysis	SAS Enterprise
21	Graphing / Charting	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Windows Internet Explorer 6.0

6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?: yes

6.a. If yes, please describe.: This investment leverages: Federal Health Architecture (FHA)

PART TWO

RISK

You should perform a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of the investment's life-cycle, develop a risk-adjusted life-cycle cost estimate and a plan to eliminate, mitigate or manage risk, and be actively managing risk throughout the investment's life-cycle.

Answer the following questions to describe how you are managing investment risks.

1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?: yes

1.a. If yes, what is the date of the plan?: 2006-01-01

1.b. Has the Risk Management Plan been significantly changed since last year's submission to OMB?: no

3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:: The NEDSS scope and budget planning is based on a work breakdown structure technique that decomposes each work element into its fundamental components. Each component is evaluated based on a risk assessment. This technique helps to clearly define the deliverables to the customer. The budget is determined based on the cost and risk value of the work element. The budget for each element is derived from the most likely scenario that has been risk adjusted. The total of each element comprises the full budget for NEDSS.

COST & SCHEDULE

1. Does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard 748?: yes

2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%?: no

3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?: no