"A prior Office of
Inspector General report ... found that planning and execution of that
project was not effective and resulted in a system that did not meet
pre-established goals and objectives. In addition, a prior Government
Accountability Office report identified NNSA project management as an
area of high risk for fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement.
These
issues were attributable, in part, to ineffective project planning
practices related to the development and implementation of the 2NV
initiative. For instance, essential components of a well-developed
project management approach, such as charters, business cases,
alternatives analyses, and implementation schedules, were often
inadequate, outdated, or had not been developed in a timely manner. In
addition, monitoring and oversight activities were not always sufficient
to ensure success and hold project managers accountable for delivering
the project within cost, scope, and schedule."
http://energy.gov/ig/downloads/audit-report-doe-oig-16-05
10 comments:
It may not be appropriate to extend this critique, possibly a widely misunderstood one genetally to all DOE operations. Thisp critique regarding alleged weak project planning of as yet unnamed projects does not necessarily apply to ongoing operations, which are the lions share of DOE work. Time-limited projects form a small fraction of any yearly budget.
Those interested in this subject should read the short study by Rand, "Why large projects fail".
Merrow EW, Understanding Outcomes of Megaprojects, Rand Corp, 1988.
And of course, the DoD and its private contractors have a superb record of bringing major acquisitions in on time and under budget.
NIF ring any bells, 10:09 pm. DARHT? How about the Antares laser?
10:09PM replies:
I didn't say Energy had no issues, just that Defense has had some whoppers, too.
Inertia.
The Cold War is over. Congress doesn't care about the weapons complex as long as certification occurs.
What's wrong with the DOE and the DOD...from the Wall Street Journal (Dec 31, 2015) "With so many layers and offices needed to concur on every decision, it now takes an aver-age of 22½ years from the start of a weapons program to first deployment, instead of the four years it took to deploy the Minuteman ICBM and Polaris submarine missile system in the Cold War era. Yet the U.S. intelligence community es-timates that it takes only seven years for Chinese and Russian procurement systems to produce the advanced ships and fighters of the so-called fifth generation."
Think of all the started and stopped plutonium facilities in the DOE: MPF, IESL, CMRR, PDCF, APSF, MFFF. They get written up by the GAO and the DOE-IG as Decades lost and billions spent with little to show but paper. Too big to succeed is the management mantra that underlines our nuclear security. We have lost our way as science and engineering; common sense and the acceptance of risk is replaced with design build, poor budgeting and execution, zero risk, failure to manage consequences, and a lack of leadership. Thus our security rests in a 40 year old facility that is currently paused for operations because of paper, and a workforce managed by a for profit entity that has no equity in the survival or future of the institution.
Whatever you think of DOE and NNSA, I can only assure you that management by DoD would be far worse. DoD is NOT set up to manage hard, long-term projects. They are set up to solve incremental problems related to soldiers day-to-day needs. It really would be the end of the labs as we know them.
It really would be the end of the labs as we know them.
January 2, 2016 at 3:13 PM
"as we know them"
Security failures that make the front page (and lots more that don't)
Safety lapses that put lab employees in hospitals
Cost overruns that gut the federal budget
Project schedules that expand from years to decades
Environmental destruction on a grand scale
Ethical scandals among the most senior lab leadership
Shutdowns of key nuclear facilities for years at a time
Yes, as a mater of fact "the end of the labs as we know them" would be a most welcome change.
Post a Comment