ERM Integration with Contractor Assurance System Integrated Performance Management Community of Practice (CoP)- Enterprise Risk Management
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Littleton, Seth Corey↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Contractor Assurance”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Issues Management Process Course # 38401
The purpose of this training it to advise Issues Management Coordinators (IMCs) on the revised Contractor Assurance System (CAS) Issues Management (IM) process. Terminal Objectives: Understand the Laboratory’s IM process; Understand your role in the Laboratory’s IM process. Learning Objectives: Describe the IM process within the context of the CAS; Describe the importance of implementing an institutional IM process at LANL; Describe the process flow for the Laboratory’s IM process; Apply the definition of an issue; Use available resources to determine initial screening risk levels for issues; Describe the required major process steps for each risk level; Describe the personnel responsibilities for IM process implementation; Access available resources to support IM process implementation.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
FY17 LLNL LDRD Annual Report
The LDRD Program achieves continual improvement through internal and external reviews of Program management, execution, and oversight of each LDRD project. In accordance with DOE Order 226.1B of the prime contract between NNSA and Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, a contractor-assurance system is in place at the Laboratory; the LDRD office uses this system and tools provided to support improvements in LDRD Program performance. The FY17 portfolio was carefully structured to promote the Program’s vigorous strategic vision and the long-term goals of DOE, NNSA, and Livermore.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
2017 BEA Self-Assessment Report for Idaho National Laboratory
This report provides Battelle Energy Alliance’s (BEA) self-assessment of performance for the period of October 1, 2016, through September 30, 2017, as evaluated against the goals, performance objectives, and notable outcomes defined in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plan (PEMP). BEA took into consideration and consolidated all input provided from internal and external sources (e.g., Contractor Assurance System [CAS], program and customer feedback, external and independent reviews, and Department of Energy [DOE] Idaho Operations Office [ID] quarterly PEMP reports and Quarterly Evaluation Reports). After considering the information related to performance during the rating period, including feedback from the Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), Idaho Operations Office (ID), and other programmatic sponsors, BEA has self-assessed the Laboratory’s performance at a grade of A, an adjectival rating of “Excellent.” Table 1 documents BEA’s assessment of performance to the goals and individual performance Objectives. Table 2 documents completion of the Notable Outcomes. A more-detailed assessment of performance for each individual performance objective is documented in the closeout reports (see the PEMP reporting system). Table 3 includes an update to “Performance Challenges” as reported in the FY 2016 Self-Assessment Report.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
Panel Session 33: Aligning Decision-Making to Deliver Timely Performance in Large Results-Based Programs
The panel focused on results-based project execution and ways to improve the effectiveness of program and project-specific decisions by gearing them to consistently achieving timely, cost-efficient, and sustainable results. Panelists discussed the complexities of making sound, actionable decisions in the face of budgetary, resource and technological constraints. Toward that end, the 10 panelists responded to the following questions: 1. What decision-making process has been most effective for you and your project team? 2. How effective are the incentives in your contract? 3. What would you be doing differently if your project were being executed on purely commercial terms? 4. Are your Contractor Assurance Programs effective? 5. Have we challenged industry and national laboratories to deliver revolutionary rather than evolutionary technologies to solve challenges? 6. What can we do to make stakeholder involvement more meaningful? 7. How do you apply lessons learned from events and issues like the Mixed Oxide Facility (MOX), the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) event, and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) incident?.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Biosafety- A Regulatory Primer for DOE/NNSA Sites
The objectives of a biological safety program, and this are to ensure that work with biological materials are conducted in compliance with applicable biosafety standards and ensure that protection of workers, facilities, the public, and the environment.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NQA-1 Indoctrination
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Contractor Assurance↗
ERM-CAS Integration
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
ERM = Enterprise Risk Management CAS = Contractor ↗
Integrated Issues and Risk Management: A Theoretical Framework Overview
The contractor requirements document for DOE O 226.1B, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy, requires DOE/NNSA contractors to establish an assurance system that includes, among other things, “Rigorous, risk-informed, and credible self-assessment and feedback and improvement activities. Assessment programs must be risk-informed, formally described and documented, and appropriately cover potentially high consequence activities” and “Contains an issues management process that is capable of categorizing the significance of findings based on risk and priority and other appropriate factors….” However, the term “risk-informed” is not defined in this or any other DOE order, and no formal guidance on how to integrate the two concepts currently exists. The Risk Management Guide for Defense Programs released by NA-18, Office of Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I), states it is “a framework and general guidance to program office personnel on the effective management of program risks and issues”, however it then defines issues as “events with 100% likelihood of affecting program objectives” and states “unless specified otherwise, the term “risk” will also serve to represent issues for the remainder of this plan,” severally limiting its ability to provide adequate guidance on this topic. Outside of DOE scope, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. NRC) imposes similar requirements. ASME NQA-1-2015 Requirement 16 states “Conditions adverse to quality shall be identified promptly and corrected as soon as practicable. In the case of a significant condition adverse to quality, the cause of the condition shall be determined, and corrective action taken to preclude recurrence. The identification, cause, and corrective action for significant conditions adverse to quality shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of management. Completion of corrective actions shall be verified”. The purpose of this document is to provide a best-in-class framework for an integrated risk and issues management process. This process would provide a robust feedback loop between risk management and issues management to: Enhance risk identification and characterization, use risk handling principles to improve corrective action planning, and ensure regulatory compliance.
96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC, Continuity Readiness Assurance Report — Fiscal Year 2017
Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC, the prime contractor for Idaho National Laboratory (INL), provides this Continuity Readiness Assurance Report (CRAR) in accordance with DOE O 150.1, “Continuity Programs.” This CRAR documents the readiness of the INL Continuity of Operations Program using emergency response planning, recovery actions, and preparedness activities, and where applicable, summarizes and/or provides supporting information for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017. This CRAR also provides goals for Fiscal Year 2018. Specifically, this CRAR assures the Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office that the emergency capabilities at INL are sufficient to implement the INL Continuity of Operations Plan.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
Idaho National Laboratory Emergency Readiness Assurance Plan — Fiscal Year 2017
Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC, the prime contractor for Idaho National Laboratory (INL), provides this Emergency Readiness Assurance Plan (ERAP) for Fiscal Year 2017 in accordance with DOE O 151.1C, “Comprehensive Emergency Management System.” The ERAP documents the readiness of the INL Emergency Management Program using emergency response planning and preparedness activities as the basis. It describes emergency response planning and preparedness activities, and where applicable, summarizes and/or provides supporting information in tabular form for easy access to data. The ERAP also provides budget, personnel, and planning forecasts for Fiscal Year 2018. Specifically, the ERAP assures the Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office that stated emergency capabilities at INL are sufficient to implement PLN 114, “INL Emergency Plan/RCRA Contingency Plan.”
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
pnnl/Remote-QA-Web-App
set of data collection forms implemented as a web app to be used for quality assurance purposes by residential efficiency contractors during the installation process. There are data collection forms for several efficiency measures including heat pump, heat pump water heater, attic weatherization, and basement weatherization.
Holly, Charlie↗
EM Program Expectations on Implementation of DOE O 458: Radiation Protection of Public/Environment - 19553
DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment, was issued in 2011. DOE sites were given 18 months to implement. The revised Order promulgates requirements for property clearance actions and independent verification. DOE Order 458.1 allows for preapproved authorized limits for the clearance of property. However, when property with the potential to contain residual radioactive material does not meet preapproved authorized limits, an authorized limits package must be developed. The Order contains a range of requirements for demonstrating with reasonable assurance that dose constraints are met for any actual or likely future use of the property to be released. EM has developed a draft guidance document that provides the elements of an authorized limits package. These elements are used to review all authorized limits packages that are submitted to EM. Expected elements include property description and process knowledge documentation, current and likely future use, the conceptual site model, dose modeling methodologies, specific authorized limits, dose- or concentration-based constraints, collective dose estimate to the potentially exposed population, stakeholder communications, description of the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) analysis, implementation plan, evaluation of difficult to assess surfaces, and independent verification plan. The draft guidance document also provides further explanation of the desired elements of an independent verification (IV) plan. An IV plan should describe the planning phase, implementation phase, assessment phase, and decision phase of an activity. The planning phase includes scope and cost, concurrent with cleanup contractor procurement, and review and approval of site radiological survey clearance program and IV program plans. The implementation phase assures sufficient collection of data and adjustment can be made as necessary. During the assessment phase, data and reports are reviewed, and coordination between the clean-up contractor and IV personnel occurs. A decision of whether or not the clearance actions need to be altered occurs during the decision phase. IV certification that the clearance action is complete also occurs during the decision phase. Issuance of the final guidance document is meant to improve the consultation process and minimize iterative interactions with EM. Standardizing and formalizing property clearance and IV actions also helps assure that cleanup actions are transparent and sustainable for future scrutiny. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
2021 Idaho National Laboratory Site Environmental Report
The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup, necessarily involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for the DOE-ID in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” Its purpose is to: • Present the INL Site, mission, and programs • Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations • Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities • Summarize results of environmental monitoring • Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site • Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park • Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data • Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
High-Quality Home Performance: Arizona's Home Performance with ENERGY STAR (R) Program
Arizona Public Service (APS) has created a high-quality Home Performance with ENERGY STAR (ENERGY STAR) program. In addition to being based on the ENERGY STAR guidelines developed by the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, they have used two other national guideline/standards to improve quality and contractor satisfaction: DOE's Standard Work Specifications for Home Energy Upgrades (SWS) and the Home Performance Coalition's Home Performance Extensible Markup Language (HPXML). As the program found areas for improvement, they worked with their implementer FSL Home Energy Solutions (FSL) to develop a quality assurance (QA) program based on the SWS. They also worked with energy assessment and other software providers to implement HPXML in a program administration software platform. This gave contractors a choice in what energy assessment software they used - each tool allowed in the program exported HPXML seamlessly to the program administration platform. APS worked closely with FSL and contractors to implement the QA program and roll out the software improvements. After implementing the QA program and software, the program saw approximately 15% improvement in measure and work scope quality.
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
2022 Site Environmental Report: Idaho National Laboratory
The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup mission involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” The purpose of the report is to provide the following: (1) Present the INL Site, mission, and programs, (2) Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, (3) Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities, (4) Summarize results of environmental monitoring, (5) Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site, (6) Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park, (7) Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data, and (8) Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Panel Session 68: Key EFCOG Actions: Risk Communication, Supply Chain Management, Human Capital and More
Overview on the Energy Facility Contractor Group's (EFCOG) most recent work in partnership with DOE to improve performance and EFCOG's mission is to ensure safety, security, and quality across the US DOE complex. Best practices were highlighted in discussions with US DOE/ NNSA leaders and key project executives. EFCOG's key priorities for 2020 were featured in the panel discussions to include: addressing human capital issues to ensure future mission needs can be met; addressing supply chain issues for nuclear projects; improving the data quality and performance assurance; and improving risk communication and stakeholder relations. EFCOG accomplishes its mission through working groups that provide forums to address common challenges and exchange proven techniques and other management and technical information among member contractors. Panelists with presentations: WM EFCOG Panel Slides (Morgan Smith); EFCOG DOE Supply Chain Initiative (SCI) - Enabling The DOE Mission - (Darrell Graddy); Data Quality and Performance Assurance (JD Dowell); Risk Communication - Different Events - Very Different Responses from the Community (Rick McLeod); Current State of Cybersecurity (Liz Porter)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Annual LDRD Report (FY2019)
The performance of Nuclear Deterrence (ND) systems could be improved by adopting advanced commercial CMOS technologies. However, the radiation hardness of these ND systems must be assured. This project quantified dose rate upset thresholds, allowing us to evaluate whether advanced commercial technologies can be used in rad hard applications. This project also evaluated the susceptibility of advanced commercial technologies to neutron displacement damage and single event effects, and developed hardness assurance methods. As a result of this work, Sandia is now collaborating more closely with DoD agencies and their contractors to understand and improve the radiation hardness of advanced commercial technologies. Sandia Capabilities (SPHINX, lon Beam Lab, FPGA test capabilities) were developed and are being utilized by other programs. Staff were trained to do radiation survivability testing and developed proposals that were funded. Internal and external collaborations and partnerships were developed, including with Georgia Tech. This project received the Best Paper award at the 2019 Hardened Electronics And Radiation Technology (HEART) Conference.
36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗