The Department of Energy (DOE) is engaged in numerous multimillion- and even multibillion-dollar projects that are one of a kind or first of a kind and require cutting-edge technology. The projects represent the diverse nature of DOE's missions, which encompass energy systems, nuclear weapons stewardship, environmental restoration, and basic research. Few other government or private organizations are challenged by projects of a similar magnitude, diversity, and complexity. To complete these complex projects on schedule, on ...
Read More
The Department of Energy (DOE) is engaged in numerous multimillion- and even multibillion-dollar projects that are one of a kind or first of a kind and require cutting-edge technology. The projects represent the diverse nature of DOE's missions, which encompass energy systems, nuclear weapons stewardship, environmental restoration, and basic research. Few other government or private organizations are challenged by projects of a similar magnitude, diversity, and complexity. To complete these complex projects on schedule, on budget, and in scope, the DOE needs highly developed project management capabilities. This report is an assessment of the status of project management in the Department of Energy as of mid-2001 and the progress DOE has made in this area since the National Research Council (NRC) report Improving Project Management in the Department of Energy (Phase II report) was published in June 1999.
Read Less
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Good. Connecting readers with great books since 1972! Used textbooks may not include companion materials such as access codes, etc. May have some wear or writing/highlighting. We ship orders daily and Customer Service is our top priority!
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Very good. xi, [1], 128 pages. Wraps. Figures. References. Appendices. In 1997, Congress, in the conference report, H.R. 105-271, to the FY1998 Energy and Water Development Appropriation Bill, directed the National Research Council to carry out a series of assessments of project management at the Department of Energy (DOE). This report, the 2001 Assessment, is the first in that series. It presents an examination of DOE's progress in improving program management and offers recommendations regarding project management methodology and project oversight. Prepared under the auspices of the Committee for Oversight and Assessment of U.S. Department of Energy Project Management, Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environments, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, National Research Council. The 105th Congressional Committee of Conference on Energy and Water Development in its appropriation conference report directed the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to undertake an independent review and assessment of its project management structure and processes for identifying, managing, designing and constructing facilities. The concern was the quality of the technical scopes, cost estimates, schedules, and supporting data regarding these construction projects as well as the validity of the proposed costs, scopes, and schedules. The study was to also include a review of large operating projects such as environmental projects which may or may not involve much construction, but should clearly be managed with the same principles and guidelines. The overall objective was achieve departmental processes that controlled the projects' cost and schedule as well as reduce cost growth and schedule slippages. While the original congressional direction was for the US Army Corps of Engineers to perform the review, the final version allowed the DOE to ask the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct such a study. In 1998, prior to delivering the later general study in 1999, NRC completed a short time frame study using a generic approach to assess DOE's FY98 budget request, which did not attempt to address the broader issues of systems acquisition and project delivery within DOE raised by the conference report.
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Good. xi, [1], 128 pages. Wraps. Illustrations. References. Appendices. Acronyms and Abbreviations. Staple holes in front cover, distribution memo laid in. Prepared under the auspices of the Committee for Oversight and Assessment of U.S. Department of Energy Project Management, Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environments, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, National Research Council. The Department of Energy (DOE) is engaged in numerous multimillion-and even multibillion-dollar projects that are one of a kind or first of a kind and require cutting-edge technology. The projects represent the diverse nature of DOE's missions, which encompass energy systems, nuclear weapons stewardship, environmental restoration, and basic research. Few other government or private organizations are challenged by projects of a similar magnitude, diversity, and complexity. To complete these complex projects on schedule, on budget, and in scope, the DOE needs highly developed project management capabilities. This report is an assessment of the status of project management in the Department of Energy as of mid-2001 and the progress DOE has made in this area since the National Research Council (NRC) report Improving Project Management in the Department of Energy (Phase II report) was published in June 1999 (NRC, 1999). The Phase II report findings and recommendations are reproduced as Appendix C. The findings presented in this report reiterate and expand on those given in the committee's January 2001 interim letter report, Improved Project Management in the Department of Energy (NRC, 2001), reproduced here as Appendix D. The Phase II report estimated that DOE projects costed taxpayers 50 percent more than comparable projects would cost if performed by the private sector or other government agencies, in large part because DOE did not use industry-standard best practices for project management. The Phase II report recommended, inter alia, that DOE develop policies, procedures, models, tools, techniques, and standards; train staff in their use; and require their use on DOE projects. It recommended further that DOE should develop and deploy a comprehensive project management system with clear definition of the specific roles and responsibilities of all parties associated with a project. As noted in the interim letter report, the department has taken a number of positive steps since the Phase II report. On June 25, 1999, subsequent to the release of that report, the deputy secretary, as the DOE chief operating officer, issued a memorandum announcing a project management reform initiative. This memorandum directed a number of actions to be taken to improve project management capability. These included the formation of the Office of Engineering and Construction Management (OECM) in the office of the chief financial officer (CFO) and the formation and strengthening of project management support offices (PMSOs) in the three major program secretarial offices (PSOs). On January 3, 2000, the deputy secretary issued an interim instruction to serve as policy guidance on critical decisions by acquisition executives (AEs) and the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board (ESAAB) and on the conduct of corporate-level performance reviews. On June 10, 2000, DOE issued Policy P413.1, which addresses project management accountability, the establishment of project management organizations, project management tools, and training of personnel. DOE Order O413.3 was issued October 13, 2000, to implement the DOE policy document. O413.3 covered department policies on project management; provision for project engineering and design (PED) funding for preconstruction planning; reestablishment of the ESAABs; and other matters related to the management and oversight of DOE projects. Finally, the Program and Project Management (PPM) manual and a companion volume, Project Management Practices (PMP), were released in draft form in October...
