National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Part 5: Integration of Science, Engineering, and Health in Program Implementation
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×

References

Alternative Futures for the Department of Energy National Laboratories , prepared by the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board. February 1995. The report, also know as the Galvin Task Force, examines the role of Department of Energy National Laboratories and reviews the Department of Energy Environmental Management Program. Strongly critical of its activities, the report recommends changes in governance, economic role, science and engineering role, and environmental role. One of the most important challenges facing the Department and its laboratories to achieve greater integration of its various applied and fundamental energy R&D programs. Many fields of research and technology development could make up an appropriate energy agenda for the laboratories.

Benchmarking for Change: A Workshop Resulting from the RI/FS Benchmarking Study, February 1995. Organized by the Department of Energy Office of Environmental Restoration. The workshop summaries are not yet available, but copies of the presentations have been compiled. The workshop, chaired by Ned Larson (EM-45) focused on the highlights of the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Benchmarking study. Such issues as partnerships, project management, procurement, and pilot projects were discussed in breakout sessions.

Building Consensus Through Risk Assessment and Risk Management in the Department of Energy Environmental Remediation Program, NRC (National Research Council). 1994a. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Cleaning Up the Department of Energy's Nuclear Weapons Complex, Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office, May 1994. The report outlines the Department's environmental goals and its cleanup program, including such policy issues as understanding risks, weighing costs and benefits, setting priorities, and investing in the development of technologies. The report acknowledges that the Department’s cleanup program must address a problem that was created and

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×

largely ignored over the last 50 years. The department is faced with doing so during an especially tight budget climate. CBO recommends that understanding of risks and costs better would be the best way to determine priorities for allocating the scarce cleanup funds. It also recommends investing more heavily in technology development, delaying technically difficult projects, and cutting overhead costs to improve the efficiency of cleanup efforts. In addition, new management systems might help the Department of Energy and Congress track the performance of cleanup projects.

Complex Cleanup: The Environmental Legacy of Nuclear Weapons Production , OTA (U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment), 1991. OTA-O484. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Environmental Management 1995: Progress and Plans of the Environmental Management Program, February 1995, US Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. The report identifies 1994 accomplishments in the topics established as goals of the Environmental Management Program :

  • Eliminate and manage urgent risks in the system.

  • Emphasize health and safety of workers and the public.

  • Establish a system that is managerially and financially in control.

  • Demonstrate tangible results.

  • Focus technology development on overcoming obstacles to progress.

  • Establish a stronger partnership between the Department and its stakeholders.

National programs and site summaries provide an overview of the activities in environmental regulation, waste management, environmental restoration, technology development, nuclear-material and -facilities stabilization, safety and health, risk management and priority-setting, and public accountability and outreach.

Hanford Integrated Planning Process: 1993 Hanford Site Specific Science and Technology Plan. Pacific Northwest Laboratory. 1993. U.S. Department of Energy Richland Operations Office Report DOE/RL-93-38 . Richland, WA.

Health and Ecological Risks at the US Department of Energy's Nuclear Weapons Complex: A Qualitative Evaluation. Consortium for Environment Risk Evaluation (A Tulane/Xavier Program for the US Department of Energy). CERE Interim Risk Report. March 1995.

Independent Technical Review of the Brookhaven National Laboratory Environmental Restoration Program. June 1995. US Department of Energy, Chicago Operations Office, chartered an Independent technical review team to assess the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) Environmental Restoration Program on the basis of commercial business practices and metrics and to recommend improvements and BNL practices, processes, or performance differed substantially. The overriding environmental-restoration goal in the commercial realm was defined to protect human health and the environment within the legal framework and within costs and schedules while providing immediate, open communication with interested and affected parties. In industry, protecting the ability to make money was considered paramount, so liability was often reduced quickly by investments in environmental activities. The team provided recommendations for business-process improvements and commercial environmental-restoration strategies.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×

Independent Technical Review of Environmental Restoration at Los Alamos National Laboratory, January 1995. Conducted by the Environmental Management Program at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. “To assess the barriers facing the program and develop approaches to ensure restoration success,” the independent technical review team developed commercial standards by which to compare the restoration activities at Los Alamos. Benchmarking analysis included costs of operation.

Independent Technical Review of the Rocky Flats Program, June 1995. US Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization, requested an independent technical review of the FY 1995 liability reduction and building baseline activities at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site. To achieve liability reduction and improve efficiency, it was recommended that the DOE Rocky Flats Field Office senior management translate the strategic plan into a work logic based on budget and contractor performance measures. The change from a manage and operate (M&O) contractor to a performance based integrating contractor (PBIC) was thought to provide a unique opportunity to establish a new working relationship based on commercial business-like conduct and cleanup.

Management Changes Needed to Expand Use of Innovative Cleanup Technologies , US General Accounting Office, August 1994. The report identifies internal and external barriers to the use of new environmental technologies. It notes that although the Department has spent much to develop waste-cleanup technologies, little new technology is being implemented in the agency's cleanup actions. Part of the agency’s problem, the report notes, is that the Department does not have a well-coordinated and fully integrated technology-development program. The Department’s plan to restructure its technology-development programs is a step toward alleviating the problem. Field offices will also consider new and innovative technologies more seriously.

Organization and Staffing Review, January 1994. Office of Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management. At the request of the Assistant Secretary of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and Administration led a review of program-related organizations, their staffing, and the associated environmental-management functions at headquarters and field locations. The review provides a perspective on how environmental-management programs are being administered by federal personnel and what issues attended their performance.

Project Performance Metrics Study, November 1993. Prepared by Independent Project Analysis, Inc., Reston, Virginia. The report was commissioned by the Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) of the US Department of Energy to asses the status of the EM project systems and to provide a baseline for measuring improvements against industry and other organizations. The report compares key measures of the environmental restoration and waste management project systems with the Independent Project Analysis proprietary industry Environmental Remediation and Capital Projects databases. The study establishes a comparison with industry and other organizations with respect to cost, schedule performance, project duration, and management turnover. Conclusions are drawn about the competitiveness of the project systems, and recommendations identify opportunities for improvement.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×

Ranking Hazardous-Waste Sites for Remedial Action, NRC (National Research Council). 1994b. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Environmental Security , Department of Defense, Office of the Undersecretary of Defense, Acquisition and Technology, April 1995. The DOD environmental-remediation effort is a multi-billion-dollar endeavor. Among the possibilities for improvement that the report addresses is acceleration of environmental-technology development and deployment. It notes that many existing technologies offer substantial potential for risk or cost reduction that is not being realized, in part because of regulatory barriers. It identifies the barriers to deployment of new environmental technology as the worst bottleneck and expresses concern that with today’s shrinking environmental budgets sufficient environmental science and technology investments that could reduce future costs will not be made. The group made several recommendations for accelerating technology development and deployment, including devoting an additional $150 million/year for accelerated environmental-technology demonstration and verification, clarifying assignment of responsibility, developing a set of incentives for federal site directors to use new technologies, and expanding cooperation among agencies and with industry.

Risks and the Risk Debate: Searching for Common Ground, The First Steps, June 1995. US Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management. The Department has taken preliminary steps in the creation of a department-wide uniform process to evaluate risks to the environment and to health. Ultimately, this process should be capable of identifying the location and situations that pose the most serious risks across the nation to workers, the public, and the environment. Imminent risks to the environment and health should be of highest priority for action. For non-imminent risks, risk assessment should be used to identify the benefits of risk reduction as part of overall cost-benefit analyses, which should form the basis for further priority-setting and the timely resolution of contamination problems that must be addressed as required by law or compliance agreements.

Technology Needs Crosswalk Report, First Edition, Abridged Version, Chem-Nuclear Geotech, Inc. 1993. U.S. Department of Energy Albuquerque Field Office Report DOE/ID/12584-117 Ed. 1, Grand Junction, CO.

Train Wreck Along the River of Money—An Evaluation of the Hanford Cleanup, 1994. Written at the request of the US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the report evaluates the cleanup of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state. It critically examines such issues as cost of cleanup, management of programs, regulatory compliance, assignment of responsibilities, and future land use. .

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×
This page in the original is blank.
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×
Page158
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×
Page159
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×
Page160
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×
Page161
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1995. Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5173.
×
Page162
Next: Appendix A: Charge to the Committee »
Improving the Environment: An Evaluation of the DOE's Environmental Management Program Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $40.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

This book addresses remedial action and waste management problems that the DOE and the nation are now facing that are the result of 50 years of nuclear weapons development and testing—problems that require a reengineering of systems and a reexamination of the scientific, engineering, and institutional barriers to achieving cost-effective and safe stewardship of the nation's resources. Improving the Environment evaluates the DOE's environmental management program in four areas: regulatory measures, organization and management, priority-setting, timing and staging, and science and technology.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!