- Home
- Agencies
- Department of Agriculture
- Department of Housing and Urban Development
- General Services Administration
- Department of Commerce
- Department of the Interior
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- Department of Defense
- Department of Justice
- National Science Foundation
- Department of Education
- Department of Labor
- Office of Personnel Management
- Department of Energy
- Department of State
- Small Business Administration
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Department of Transportation
- Social Security Administration
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of the Treasury
- U.S. Agency for International Development
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Veterans Affairs
- Goals
- Initiatives
- Programs
Primary tabs
David KlausDeputy Under Secretary for Management & PerformanceOffice of the Under Secretary for Management & Performance
Dr. Franklin (Lynn) M. OrrUnder Secretary for Science and EnergySC
Lieutenant General Frank KlotzUnder Secretary of Energy for Nuclear Security and Administrator for the National Nuclear Security AdministrationNNSA
FY 16-17: Agency Priority Goal
National Laboratories
Priority Goal
Goal Overview
Deliver the highest quality R&D and production capabilities, strengthen partnerships with DOE headquarters, and improve management of the physical infrastructure of the national laboratories to enable efficient leadership in science, technology, and national security.
Strategies
Strategy #1: By the end of FY 2017, the percentage of assessed DOE laboratory facilities categorized as “adequate” will increase by 2 percentage points from the FY 2015 baseline
DOE is responsible for managing an infrastructure portfolio that stretches over 50 sites across the Nation. The DOE infrastructure portfolio has been developed over the past 70 years, with origins in the Manhattan Project. In 2014, the Department’s Laboratory Operations Board led a first-ever enterprise wide assessment of general purpose infrastructure across all 17 National Laboratories, using newly-established metrics to provide a uniform assessment of infrastructure such as utilities, HVAC systems, and office buildings. The assessments established a system for a qualitative rating of the condition of assets as adequate, substandard, or inadequate. These ratings evaluated both the physical condition of the asset and the asset’s ability or inability to support the mission.
Strategy #2: Sponsor an annual “National Laboratory Big Ideas Summit” in FY 2016 and FY 2017.
Sponsor an annual “National Laboratory Big Ideas Summit” in FY 2016 and FY 2017 - The National Laboratory Big Ideas Summit (BIS) is a key mechanism used to engage the National Laboratory enterprise in strategic, technical planning by the Department. The Summit brings together subject matter experts from DOE’s science and energy offices as well as from its policy office, the NNSA, and all 17 National Laboratories to propose and explore innovative ideas for solutions to key energy issues.
Strategy #3: Develop and implement a consistent, annual process to track and assess laboratory planning and evaluation.
Establish a Laboratory Planning Working Group (LPWG) with representatives from all programs that steward a national laboratory and/or support R&D at a National Laboratory. The LPWG will hold strategic planning meetings to share best practices and work to define common elements of DOE programs’ Laboratory planning processes. The LPWG will establish a common framework for Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plans (PEMPs) across all National Laboratories and implement a common evaluation process and schedule starting in FY16.
Progress Update
Strategy #1: By the end of FY 2017, the percentage of assessed DOE laboratory facilities categorized as “adequate” will increase by 2 percentage points from the FY 2015 baseline.
DOE is on track to categorize 47% of active real property assets as adequate by the end of FY 2017. The DOE Infrastructure Executive Committee has been meeting regularly and is focused on improving DOE’s general purpose infrastructure. DOE programs are working to ensure appropriate investments in active assets required for mission adequacy and functionality and the reduction in the backlog of deficiencies. DOE programs are also working to retire to the inactive status or declare excess those assets that are beyond their lifecycle or do not support mission adequacy and functionality.
Q2 Milestones & Updates:
Issue guidance for preparation of Annual Lab Plans and Campus Strategies.
- Status: Completed. The Office of the Under Secretary for Science and Energy (S4) issued the Annual Lab Plans/Campus Strategy Guidance for its laboratories (Science, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Fossil Energy and Nuclear Energy) in February 2016.
NNSA is revising its annual infrastructure planning process to adopt best practices from the SC approach and will identify an NNSA National Laboratory to pilot the new process.
- Status: Completed. NNSA has outlined a path to implement its Master Asset Plan (MAP) a new, NNSA-wide, risk-informed, long-term infrastructure strategic planning process, including MAP Deep Dives at all NNSA sites. NNSA completed its pilot MAP Deep Dive at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in February 2016.
The strategic laboratory infrastructure plan for EM laboratory will be issued.
- Status: In Progress. Savannah River National Laboratory is developing a strategic infrastructure plan.
Strategy #2: Sponsor an annual National Laboratory Big Ideas Summit (BIS) in FY 2016 and FY 2017.
Q2 Milestone & Update:
Set date for FY 2016 National Lab BIS.
- Status: The program met its milestone for this quarter. Work is proceeding on schedule for the FY 2016 Big Ideas Summit scheduled for April 21-22, 2016. A location has been determined and invitations issued. An agenda has been drafted and speakers invited.
Strategy #3: Develop and implement a consistent, annual process to track and assess laboratory planning and evaluation.
Progress Update: Laboratory planning and evaluation activities progress, including regular meetings of the Laboratory Planning Working Group, as well as feedback from DOE senior leadership and from the Laboratory Policy Council.
Q2 Milestones & Updates:
Issue guidance memorandum to program offices with laboratory stewardship responsibilities to institute strategic planning meetings in FY 2016.
- Status: Completed. S4 issued final guidance memorandum to program offices with laboratory stewardship responsibilities to institute strategic planning meetings in FY 2016. EM is developing and implementing a Lab Governance Framework and approach that will guide the annual laboratory planning process with SRNL.
Lab Planning Working Group defines core elements of the various DOE programs’ laboratory planning processes; working group members observe the SC laboratory planning process as a best practice.
- Status: Completed. The Lab Planning Working Group defined core elements of the various DOE programs’ laboratory planning processes and working group members observed the SC laboratory planning process as a best practice.
Report on DOE’s progress to establish a common framework (e.g., Goals, Objectives, Indicators) for Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plans (PEMPs) across all national laboratories.
- Status: Completed. S4 reported on DOE’s progress to establish a common framework for PEMPs across all national laboratories. A draft of the EM Laboratory Governance Framework is being developed, which outlines the PEMP requirements for Savannah River National Laboratory. NNSA corporate PEMP process is completed for FY 2016.
Propose and refine a coordinated annual laboratory planning approach for the applied energy offices that is modeled after that used by the Office of Science and includes appropriate participation from the relevant applied energy programs and the SC programs that fund the applied technology laboratories.
- Status: Completed. S4 proposed and refined a coordinated annual laboratory planning approach for the applied energy offices that is modeled after that used by SC and includes appropriate participation from the relevant applied energy programs and the SC programs that fund the applied technology laboratories.
NNSA is revising its annual infrastructure planning process to adopt best practices from the SC approach and will identify an NNSA National Laboratory to pilot the new process.
- Status: Completed. NNSA has outlined a path to implement its Master Asset Plan (MAP) a new, NNSA-wide, risk-informed, long-term infrastructure strategic planning process, including MAP Deep Dives at all NNSA sites. NNSA completed its pilot MAP Deep Dive at LLNL in February 2016.
Next Steps
Strategy #1: In order to achieve the increase in the percentage of assessed DOE laboratory facilities categorized as adequate, programs are beginning to incorporate comprehensive repair needs and condition assessments in the planning and budgeting process for facilities and general purpose infrastructure.
FY16 Q3:
- Review Annual Lab Plans and Campus Strategies, NNSA pilot sites, and EM laboratory strategic infrastructure plan.
- Develop budgets to support improving adequacy.
FY16 Q4:
- Sites update condition assessment status and enter data into FIMS.
- Issue EM laboratory strategic infrastructure plan.
FY17Q1:
- Identify performance for FY16.
Strategy #2: DOE will confirm presenters, finalize an agenda, and host the Big Ideas Summit on April 21-22, 2016.
FY16 Q3: Hold FY 2016 National Lab BIS.
FY17 Q1: Set date for FY 2017 National Lab BIS
FY17 Q2: Set agenda, determine location, and issue invitations for FY 2017 National Lab BIS.
FY17 Q3: Hold FY 2017 National Lab BIS. Develop and implement a consistent, annual process to track and assess laboratory planning and evaluation.
Strategy #3: The Department expects to continue its progress toward a consistent, annual Lab planning and evaluation process through the coordinated efforts of the Lab Planning Working Group.
FY16 Q3:
- DOE programs implement laboratory planning processes adhering to the common elements agreed upon by the LPWG. NNSA will implement the pilot project laboratory planning process.
- Issue guidance memorandum to all DOE offices with lab stewardship responsibilities to establish a common evaluation process and schedule for assessing FY 16 performance at each DOE national laboratory.
- Propose and refine an annual laboratory planning process for EM that adapts to EM's context the processes and procedures used by the Office of Science and includes appropriate participation from EM sites and other DOE/NNSA organizations that fund the EM laboratory work.
- FE, with the applied offices, will draft a set of recommendations for how NETL (as a GOGO) can provide unique support to S4, the applied offices, and the Labs through their federal role.
- Pilot the coordinated annual planning and evaluation approach.
FY17 Q1:
- LPWG meets annually to review all proposed changes to common elements of the laboratory planning processes as well as to share best practices and challenges from the previous year
Finalize Lab plans.
Expand All
Performance Indicators
National Laboratory Big Ideas Summit
"Adequate" Laboratory Facilities
Laboratory Planning and Evaluation
Contributing Programs & Other Factors
EM, FE, EE, NNSA, SC
Expand All
Strategic Goals
Strategic Goal:
Management and Performance
Statement:
Position the Department of Energy to meet the challenges of the 21st century and the nation’s Manhattan Project and Cold War legacy responsibilities by employing effective management and refining operational and support capabilities to pursue departmental missions
Strategic Objectives
Statement:
Continue cleanup of radioactive and chemical waste resulting from the Manhattan Project and Cold War activities
Description:
DOE has been working for nearly 25 years to clean up the radioactive and chemical contamination left by six decades of weapons production and energy research during the Manhattan Project and the Cold War. While much has been completed, some of the highest risk and most technically complex work still lies ahead. The challenges include designing, building, starting up, and operating complex, hazardous, and unique nuclear facilities. These facilities include the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant in Hanford, Washington; the Integrated Waste Treatment Unit at Idaho National Laboratory; and the Salt Waste Processing Facility at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. Successful cleanup depends on overcoming technical, quality assurance, schedule, regulatory, and management challenges. The Department will leverage past experience, applying best practices and lessons learned; identify, develop, and deploy practical technological solutions derived from scientific research at the national laboratories; and look for innovative and sustainable practices that make cleanup more efficient.
Statement:
Manage assets in a sustainable manner that supports the DOE mission
Description:
Investment in world-class physical assets will continue, from brick and mortar facilities to cutting edge technology systems, to enable the United States to remain a world leader in scientific and technological advances. Sites and laboratories will address current and future use of land and facilities including sustainable operations and post-closure responsibilities. DOE efforts to operate more efficiently, perform cleanup, and address post-closure responsibilities are resulting in sites and laboratories with a smaller footprints and more efficient and effective infrastructure. Mission objectives, energy efficiency, and sustainability principles will drive decisions on capital infrastructure, real property, and information technology. This includes planning, divestiture, acquisition, and sharing of assets with other governments, communities, academia, and industry; supporting conveyance and reuse of unneeded land and facilities; and performing long-term surveillance and maintenance of legacy sites.
Statement:
Effectively manage projects, financial assistance agreements, contracts, and contractor performance
Description:
Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of DOE’s financial assistance agreements, contract and project management performance remains a top priority. These efforts are central to delivering mission critical facilities and capabilities on time and within original budget. Contract provisions are being incorporated into contracts that will enhance the oversight of contractor cost and technical performance systems and ensure contractors are not rewarded unless performance standards and requirements are met. The use of small business vehicles and strategic sourcing for both federal and contractor management and operating procurements will be expanded.
Statement:
Operate the DOE enterprise safely, securely, and efficiently
Description:
The employees of DOE are its strongest asset. When employees’ health and safety are protected and they are well trained, empowered, and free from discrimination, they will ensure mission success efficiently and effectively. DOE is entrusted with a unique mission to protect the nation’s federal nuclear industrial operations, and thus holds a special responsibility to maintain oversight of the safety and security of those hazardous operations. Rigorous self-analysis is employed, including performance evaluations and testing conducted independent of site or headquarters line management. Because public trust is vital to success, DOE emphasizes openness, transparency, and collaboration with workers and their representatives, and the communities in which DOE operates. The DOE enterprise—including government-owned, contractor-operated sites—is also being strengthened to address a range of cyber threats that can adversely impact mission capabilities.
Statement:
Attract, manage, train, and retain the best federal workforce to meet future mission needs
Description:
DOE faces serious workforce challenges over the coming decade, with 15-25% of its federal employees projected to retire, including many of its most experienced and highly skilled professionals. To meet these challenges, the Department must engage in workforce planning and improve its outreach and recruitment programs in order to maintain a federal workforce with the technical skills and experience required to accomplish its science-driven missions. The Department must also significantly improve the quality and efficiency of its human resource operations. DOE is committed to improving human capital policies, programs, and systems through a corporate approach that reduces organizational redundancies and uses capable and cost-effective information technology systems. Since implementation of the President’s Hiring Reform initiatives in FY 2010, the recruitment process for general schedule positions has been reduced from an average 174 days in FY 2009 to 97 days in FY 2013. Efforts are also underway to improve hiring quality and on-boarding processes and outcomes, with a continued focus on promoting diversity and inclusion within the workforce. There are plans to implement a strategy for leadership development across all levels of the organization. Skill gaps will be addressed by using such tools as employee skill assessments and individual development plans. Employee accountability will be addressed through employee performance plans and organizational annual action plans resulting from employee surveys. DOE will also advance its Women in Clean Energy, and Minorities in Energy programs to draw upon the entire American talent pool.
Agency Priority Goals
Statement:
In support of this goal, DOE will:
- Retrieve tank waste, close tanks, and dispose of transuranic waste within cost and schedule through FY 2015
- On a three-year rolling basis, complete at least 90% of departmental projects baselined since the start of FY 2008 within the original scope baseline and not to exceed 110% of the cost as reflected in the performance baseline established at Critical Decision 2 through FY 2015
- Achieve full operational capability of the Joint Cybersecurity Coordination Center (JC3), including TS-SCI operations, by the end of FY 2015
Description:
Overview of the Environmental Management part of the goal:
The Department and its predecessor agencies generated radioactive liquid waste as a by-product of the production of nuclear weapons. The EM Program has an estimated 88 million gallons of highly radioactive waste from the legacy of the Cold War stored in 239 tanks at Idaho, the Savannah River Site and the Office of River Protection. By reducing and disposing of the liquid waste tank wastes, EM is demonstrating tangible evidence of the program's goal to reduce the highest risks in the complex. By eliminating high-risk material, corresponding life-cycle cost reductions are achieved for an activity that is a major cost driver to the EM program.
Management and removal of legacy Transuranic (TRU) waste across the EM complex directly supports risk reduction and the goal of reducing the EM site footprint. The EM Program also coordinates with all DOE sites that generate transuranic waste to retrieve, repackage, characterize, ship, and dispose of transuranic waste resulting in cleaning up sites, reducing risks, and decreasing the Department’s nuclear footprint.
Challenges for meeting EM’s Agency Priority Goal (the retrieval of tank waste, closing waste tanks and disposing of transuranic waste) include designing, building, starting up, and operating complex, hazardous, and unique nuclear facilities. These facilities include the Waste Treatment Plant in Hanford, Washington; the Integrated Waste Treatment Unit at Idaho National Laboratory; and the Salt Waste Processing Facility at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
Successful completion of these cleanup goals depends on overcoming technical, quality assurance, schedule, regulatory, and management challenges. The Department will leverage past experience, applying best practices and lessons learned; identify, develop, and deploy practical technological solutions; and look for innovative and sustainable practices that make cleanup more efficient.
Overview of the Project Management goal:
The Department of Energy (DOE) is the largest civilian contracting agency in the Federal Government and spends approximately 95% of its annual budget on contracts to operate its scientific laboratories, engineering and production facilities, and environmental restoration sites and to acquire capital assets. The Department has been challenged, both externally and internally, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its contract and project management processes. The Department remains committed to making continuous improvements in contract and project management performance.
DOE has been on the Government Accountability Office (GAO) High-Risk List since 1990. During the past several years, the Department has launched and completed several initiatives to address its challenges including a Root Cause Analysis (RCA) and associated Corrective Action Plan (CAP) in 2008, Contract and Project Management Summit-related corrective actions, and issuance of several Deputy Secretary policy directives. Many measurable improvements have been implemented resulting from these efforts to include: improving front-end planning by requiring sufficient design maturity prior to establishing performance baselines; defining required project staff-size and required skill-set across the project lifecycle and enhancing training and qualifications of project and contract management personnel; stabilizing project funding and affordability by adhering to baseline funding profiles for incrementally funded projects in annual budget requests; strengthening DOE Order 413.3B inclusive of new independent cost estimating requirements at Critical Decision (CD) gateways; deploying a new and more robust Project Assessment and Reporting System (PARS II), which allows for direct upload of contractor project performance data; and implementing Project Peer Reviews, a best practice successfully employed by the Office of Science, across the Department to better monitor project development and execution and foster sharing of design, procurement and construction lessons learned.
Based on the Department’s progress, GAO narrowed the scope of the high-risk designation in 2009, removing the Office of Science and focusing on the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the Office of Environmental Management (EM). GAO issued a scorecard with five criteria for removing all DOE programs from the High-Risk List:
- Demonstrate strong commitment and leadership;
- Demonstrate progress in implementing corrective measures;
- Develop a corrective action plan that identifies root causes, effective solutions, and a near-term plan for implementing the solutions;
- Have the capacity (people and resources) to resolve problems; and
- Monitor and independently validate the effectiveness and sustainability of corrective measures.
GAO acknowledged the Department met the first three of these criteria in February 2011. In GAO’s February 2013 High-Risk List update, GAO acknowledged the Department’s continuing improvement in contract and project management by shifting the focus of DOE’s high-risk designation to major contracts and projects executed by NNSA and EM with values of $750 million or greater.
Progress toward achieving this goal, project success, is tracked in the Department’s Project Assessment and Reporting System (PARS II) and reported to Program Offices, GAO and OMB on a quarterly basis.
Overview of the JC3 part of the goal:
The Joint Cybersecurity Center (JC3) is a Departmental enterprise asset designed to improve information sharing and coordinated incident response for all cybersecurity events. Accordingly the DOE Chief Information Officer (CIO) is responsible for developing and maintaining the Department’s overall cybersecurity strategy in coordination with the Undersecretaries of Science & Energy, Nuclear Security, and Management & Performance.
Statement:
Restructure the relationship and interactions between the Department and the national laboratories and sites to ensure the continued status of the national laboratories as world-class research institutions best able to achieve DOE’s mission, maximize the impact of federal R&D investment in the laboratories, accelerate the transfer of technology into the private and government sectors, and better respond to opportunities and challenges. In support of this goal, DOE will:
- Establish the National Laboratory Policy Council to address high-level policy challenges and develop initiatives to build and focus the laboratory system on critical economic, research and national security priorities
- Establish the National Laboratory Operations Board to address operational and administrative issues and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of DOE’s management of the national laboratories
- Improve stewardship of national assets across the national laboratories and DOE operating sites to assure that DOE physical plants and their operating practices comply with DOE Directives and achieve Administration priority initiatives by end of FY 2015
Description:
Cross-cutting initiatives that leverage the science, technology and engineering capabilities in program offices and the DOE national laboratories will enhance and provide opportunities for economic growth by strengthening the Department and supporting the Department’s missions and other national missions.
The Department of Energy National Laboratories are engaged in a broad program of scientific research and technological innovation supporting the Department’s mission responsibilities in energy, nuclear security, science and environmental management.
The National Laboratory Policy Council will provide a forum for the National Laboratories to provide strategic advice and assistance to the Secretary in the Department’s policy and program planning processes and for the Department to provide strategic guidance on National Laboratory activities in support of Departmental missions.
The objectives of the National Laboratory Operations Board are to strengthen and enhance the partnership between the Department and National Laboratories, and to improve management and performance to more effectively and efficiently execute the missions of the Department and the National Laboratories.
