Effectiveness and Efficiency of Defense Environmental Cleanup Activities of the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management

Report 2

______

Committee on Review of Effectiveness and Efficiency of Defense
Environmental Cleanup Activities of the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management

Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board

Division on Earth and Life Studies

Consensus Study Report

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This material is based on work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-EM0001172. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-69002-7
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-69002-1
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26610

This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.

Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Effectiveness and Efficiency of Defense Environmental Cleanup Activities of the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management: Report 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26610.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.

Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.

For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.

COMMITTEE ON REVIEW OF EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY’S OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

KATHARINE G. FRASE (NAE), IBM Corporation (retired), Co-Chair

JOSEPH S. HEZIR, Energy Futures Initiative, Co-Chair

BURCU AKINCI, Carnegie Mellon University

JESUS M. DE LA GARZA, Clemson University

CLIFFORD C. EBY, Independent Consultant

G. EDWARD (EDD) GIBSON, JR., Arizona State University

GERALDINE KNATZ (NAE), University of Southern California

ROBERT PRIETO, Strategic Program Management, LLC

GEOFFREY S. ROTHWELL, Longenecker & Associates

KIRK SMITH¹ (NAS), University of California, Berkeley

HANS A. VAN WINKLE, Van Winkle Consulting

Staff

ALAN CRANE, Senior Scientist, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems, Study Director (from April 2, 2022)

JENNIFER A. HEIMBERG, Senior Program Officer, Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB), Study Director (from December 3, 2021, until April 1, 2022)

MARTIN C. OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer, Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment (BICE), Study Director (until July 28, 2021)

KATIRIA ORTIZ, Associate Program Officer, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board

PEYTON GIBSON, Associate Program Officer, BICE (until July 28, 2021)

RADAKA LIGHTFOOT, Finance Business Partner (from January 1, 2022)

HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Senior Finance Business Partner, Office of the Chief Financial Officer (until December 31, 2021)

DARLENE GROS, Senior Program Assistant, NRSB

JOSEPH L. PALMER, Senior Project Assistant, BICE

CHARLES D. FERGUSON, Director, NRSB

CAMERON OSKVIG, Director, BICE, Study Director (from July 28, 2021, until December 2, 2022)

___________________

¹ Deceased June 15, 2020.

BOARD ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT

THOMAS P. BOSTICK (NAE), Bostick Global Strategies, Chair

STEPHEN T. AYERS, The Ayers Group, LLC

DAVID GOODYEAR (NAE), Independent Consultant

DAVID J. HAUN, Haun Consulting, Inc.

SANJIV GOKHALE, Vanderbilt University

ANDREW PERSILY, National Institute of Standards and Technology

CHRIS D. POLAND (NAE), Chris D. Poland Consulting Engineer

JAMES RISPOLI, North Carolina State University

DOROTHY ROBYN, Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy

SHARON L. WOOD (NAE), The University of Texas at Austin

Staff

CAMERON OSKVIG, Director

JAMES C. MYSKA, Senior Program Officer

DANIEL Q. NAGASAWA, Senior Program Officer

BRITTANY SEGUNDO, Program Officer

JOSEPH PALMER, Senior Program Assistant

NUCLEAR AND RADIATION STUDIES BOARD

WILLIAM H. TOBEY, Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, Chair

JAMES A. BRINK, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Vice Chair

SALLY A. AMUNDSON, Columbia University, New York, New York

STEVEN M. BECKER, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia

AMY BERRINGTON DE GONZÁLEZ, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland

MADELYN R. CREEDON, The George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia

SHAHEEN A. DEWJI, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

PAUL T. DICKMAN, Argonne National Laboratory, Washington, District of Columbia

ALLISON M. MACFARLANE, The University of British Columbia, Canada

ELEANOR MELAMED, National Nuclear Security Administration (retired)

PER F. PETERSON (NAE), University of California, Berkeley

R. JULIAN PRESTON, Environmental Protection Agency, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

MONICA C. REGALBUTO, Idaho National Laboratory

HENRY D. ROYAL, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri

Staff

CHARLES D. FERGUSON, Senior Board Director

JENNIFER HEIMBERG, Senior Program Officer

MICHEAL T. JANICKE, Senior Program Officer

OURANIA KOSTI, Senior Program Officer

LAURA D. LLANOS, Finance Business Partner

DARLENE GROS, Senior Program Assistant

LESLIE BEAUCHAMP, Program Assistant

This page intentionally left blank.

Acknowledgments

The committee would like to thank the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM), the sponsor of this study, and DOE-EM staff Rodney Lehman and Catherine Bohan, who have supported this project since it began in 2018. The committee also would like to express its gratitude to Beth Moore, the Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB) liaison within DOE. In addition, individuals from DOE-EM performed a fact-check of portions of the report and the committee is thankful for their work to help ensure the accuracy of the content.

In addition, the committee would like to thank the many individuals who supported the virtual site visits, who are acknowledged in Appendix B (those who presented information to the committee) and Appendix D (those who gathered information shared with the committee before and after the visits and who organized the agendas). The committee especially would like to acknowledge the contributions by Dae Chung (Associate Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Corporate Services) and Ike White (Senior Advisor for Environmental Management), both of DOE-EM, through several briefings to the committee (see Appendix B).

The committee and the study directors are indebted to Kevin Crowley, technical editor (and former NRSB director), whose contributions in the final editing of this manuscript cannot be overstated. He provided valuable editing and technical and policy review at a critical point in the writing process.

The committee is grateful to the staff of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s (the National Academies’) Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment for organizing and facilitating this study and NRSB for their collaboration with the study. Numerous study directors, Jennifer

Heimberg, Alan Crane, Cameron Oskvig, and Martin Offutt, contributed to the management, review, and production of the final report. Darlene Gros and Joseph Palmer managed the logistics of the meetings, report review, and publication. Additional National Academies’ staff assisted with report review and production: Alan Crane and Katiria Ortiz.

Reviewers

This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Lt. Gen. Henry Hatch (NAE), U.S. Army (retired), and RADM David Nash (NAE), Dave Nash & Associates International, LLC. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National

Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1INTRODUCTION

Background

Information Gathering for Phase 2

Format of Phase 2 Findings and Recommendations

Report Organization

References

2PHASE 1 REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

Project Management Policies, Processes, and Procedures

Project Management Metrics

Contract Structures

Contract Management Metrics

Finding on Phase 1 Report

References

Annex 2.A: Recommendations from Phase 1 Report

Annex 2.2: Key Terms and Concepts Discussed in This Report

3PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTRACTING

Introduction

End-State Contracting

Order 413.3B

Technology Innovation

References

Annex 3.A: Committee View of Outcomes-Based End-State Contracts; Definition and Examples

Annex 3.B: Key Findings from NASEM (2019)

4OUTCOMES AND PRIORITIZATION STRATEGIES

Introduction

Performance Measures

References

5PORTFOLIO AND CONTRACTOR OVERSIGHT

Introduction

Portfolio Oversight

Contractor Oversight

References

6ENHANCING THE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF THE CLEANUP PROGRAM

Introduction

Finding and Recommendation on Enhancing Effectiveness and Efficiency

Technical Challenges in Executing the Cleanup Mission

Constraints Created by the Requirements and Preferences of Multiple Federal, State, and Local Stakeholders, Including Inflexible and Outdated Regulatory Agreements

Lack of Clearly Defined Strategic Goals, Objectives, and Outcomes for Completing the Overall Cleanup Mission and Assessing Progress

DOE-EM’s Short-Term, Risk-Averse Focus on Planning and Implementing Cleanup Tasks Absent a Longer-Term Strategic Portfolio-Management Framework

Cleanup Program Funding Uncertainties and Restrictions

Frequent Gaps and Changes in Top-Level DOE-EM Management and Changes in DOE-EM Reporting Relationships Within DOE

References

APPENDIXES

A Committee Biographies

B Committee Data-Gathering Meetings for Report 2

C Acronyms and Abbreviations

D Site Visit Acknowledgments