1 EM Recovery Act Lessons Learned Presenter John Lee EM Recovery Act Program Presented to: DOE Corporate Operating Experience Committee Spring Webinar May 14, 2013

2  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) was an economic stimulus package – Feb 2009 by President Barack Obama.  DOE’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) has demonstrated tremendous success in accelerating the environmental cleanup of contaminated facilities and lands across its complex utilizing the nearly $6B in ARRA funds.  The primary objective for ARRA was to save and create jobs almost immediately – EM: Over 11,000 highly-skilled, paid technical jobs in 12 states.  Secondary objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and 'green' energy – EM: Nearly $6 billion dollars in 12 states.  134 specific cleanup projects/activities initiated at 17 sites across 12 states.  Reduced the footprint of its cleanup operations by 74 percent, exceeding original goal of 40 percent footprint reduction.  Exceeded All of EM ARRA’s Key Performance Metrics (Footprint Reduction, Mill Tailings Disposed, Transuranic/Low Level Waste Disposed, etc.)

3  Partially in response to IG investigations and GAO reports, EM reviewed/recommended expansion of its Project Management Lessons Learned (PMLL) Program to capture Lessons Learned (LL) earlier in project life-cycle rather than only at the end.  Initial documents reviewed included Recovery Act Readiness Evaluation (RARE) checklists, formal Project Reviews, Monthly Reports and Information Exchange briefings.  HSS Database architecture and previous work with NNSA and OECM supported use of the database as a corporate system.  EM approved use of Project Management module in HSS database for the entire EM Portfolio, regardless of funding source.

4  In 2010, EM-ARRA Program started collecting LL and using PMLL, which resulted in a EM PMLL Guide for all of EM in May/June  EM-ARRA Program developed user friendly templates (fillable PDF) for the Sites to enter project LL into the HSS database.  EM-ARRA Program proactively collected project LL during the project life-cycle rather than just at closeout.  EM-ARRA Program shared LL during MPRs and collected them in the HSS Database.  All of these actions fostered better communications of LL across the EM Complex. Implementing Lessons Learned Program

5 Lessons Learned Information Exchange  In March 2012, EM-ARRA Program conducted, EM ARRA Best Practices and Lessons Learned Workshop at the Waste Management Symposium in Phoenix, AR. The Objectives were to:  Share LL among participants.  Review LL that could be incorporated into the EM Base Program.  Develop a path forward to incorporate the LL gathered.  Gather LL to be incorporated into Congressional Report on EM ARRA LL.

6 Lessons Learned Information Exchange  66 LL gathered were grouped into the following Categories:  Stakeholders/Regulators (8)  Implementation (37)  Employees (9)  Contracts (12)  EM-ARRA prepared the Report to Congress, Environmental Management Recovery Act Program Lessons Learned on November 2012 based on the 66 LL collected at the Information Exchange and the HSS PMLL Database.

7  January 2013 – Formed EM ARRA LL Team composed of EM, NNSA, HSS.  Make it as simple/easy as possible for Sites to met DOE-EM LL reporting requirements.  Eliminate duplication of effort as much as practical – enter data once.  Develop LL models/templates and improve LL process.  Provide draft update to ARRA LL Report to Congress by September  Answer GAO/IG ARRA recommendations/concerns.  Analyze/Trend/Report Recently Submitted EM LL

8  In March 2013, EM-ARRA developed a Comprehensive Questionnaire that was sent to all EM Sites.  The Questionnaire allowed the EM Sites to:  Assess their Understanding of the PMLL Requirements and Process.  Evaluate the Overall ARRA Experience.  Provide Programmatic Recommendations.  Rate Recently Submitted PMLL.

9 Lessons Learned Questionnaire

10 Low High

11

Received 26 responses from 19 of 19 DOE EM Sites 2 Data Source: PARS II Databae as of January Description of each PM LL are on 2nd page IDHighest Rated (80% or More): Project Management LL Description (PARS II Database) 10 Adequate Project Management resources must be available. 30 Weekly DOE/Contractor status meetings facilitated timely resolution of potential issues. 4 The project must ensure that the vendors and contractors understand the quality-level expectations at the beginning of the work. 7 The relationship between the FPD and the Contractor Project Director must be positive. 19 The project must provide adequate field inspectors and adequate oversight staff. 24 Conduct daily pre-job briefings with all applicable oversight, subcontractors, and vendors.

13 Summary  HSS Database, PM and H&S Modules have successfully enabled sharing of LL across the EM Complex.  LL can and should be captured/shared throughout the project Life Cycle, not just at project conclusion.  EM Base Program has benefited from EM-ARRA LL.  LL is an Interactive Process and Should be Made Easier to Report, Analyze/Trend, and Share/Implement.  Questionnaire format can be used as a method to obtain and validate LL or Lessons-to-be-Learned.