# Presentation: 111868

## Guidance for Environmental Management Science and Technology Roadmapping

***Brent Dixon***
***Complex-Wide Science and Technology Integration ***
***Bechtel BWXT Idaho, LLC***
***Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory***
***                            ******March 1, 2001***

## The EM Roadmapping Guide

**The EM Roadmapping Guide**

-  Draft completed in
-   September, 2000.
-   Available at http://emi-
-   web.inel.gov/roadmap.html
-  Developed to provide
-   philosophy and guidance
-   for roadmapping application
-  Being “proof-tested” via
-   current roadmapping efforts

## What is Roadmapping?

**What is Roadmapping?**
- EM Science and Technology Roadmapping-
- A Planning process to help identify technical
- capabilities needed, map them into technology
- alternatives, and develop project plans to ensure that the required technologies will be available when needed.

## EM Roadmapping Goal

**EM Roadmapping Goal**
*“**The goal of EM science and technology roadmapping is to align and optimize the science and technology investment portfolio by identifying both gaps in the current program and activities that do not support the cleanup projects”*
*-EM R&D Program Plan*

## Roadmapping Has These

**Roadmapping Has These**
**Critical Core Elements**
-  Owned by the cleanup project or program
-  Needs-driven: Based on capabilities required    to accomplish cleanup mission
-  Uses a meeting/work group format
- - Multi-disciplinary participants
- - Consensus-building process
- Produces credible and defensible decisions

## EM’s Roadmapping Approach

**EM’s Roadmapping Approach**
-  Science and technology roadmaps will represent    the cleanup project manager’s definition of the    science and technology investments needed to    ensure cleanup mission success and when the    products of those investments are needed.   - *EM R&D Program Plan** *
* “**EM’s Science and technology investments must be  *
*   **driven by cleanup project managers.”**    *
*    **- James M. Owendoff*

## Why Roadmap?

**Why Roadmap?**
-  Identify technical uncertainties and develop integrated   plans to reduce those uncertainties.
-  Ensure a sound design before significant costs are  incurred.
-  Identify opportunities for significant cost and schedule   improvements.Ties together the cleanup program and R&D planning

## EM’s Roadmapping Approach

**EM’s Roadmapping Approach**
*“**The roadmaps will include a set of logical, time-sequenced steps showing activities and decision points needed to address technology gaps and reduce the cost, schedule, and technology risk associated with cleanup.”  *
- - EM R&D Program Plan

## When to Roadmap

**When to Roadmap**
- Roadmapping involves significant effort, so roadmap only when the following exist:
-  High potential for mission failure
-  Significant consequences if failure occurs
-  High $ costs, high worker exposure, or high    environmental impact
-  Multiple diverse efforts working same problem
-  Significant political or management visibility

## How to Roadmap

**How to Roadmap**
-  Scope the effort and identify participants
-  Identify _System Alternatives_ and needed capabilities
-  Identify technical risks and knowledge/capability  gaps - _Technical Needs_
-  Identify and sequence R&D activities needed to   mitigate risks and fill gaps - _Technical Responses_
-  Prioritize needs and responses and develop   _Integrated Schedule_
-  Write, review, and finalize _Roadmap Report_

## System Alternatives

**System Alternatives**

## Technical Needs

**Technical Needs**

## Technical Responses

## Integrated Schedule

## Risk Waterfall Example

**Risk Waterfall Example**

## Who Should Be Involved?

**Who Should Be Involved?**
-  Roadmapping uses multi-disciplinary teams
-  Always include:	- Project/Program technical experts and managers	- Science and technology experts
-  Consider including:	- People from shift operations, maintenance, etc.	- Experts from other sites, industry, or universities 	- Regulatory/Oversight and other stakeholders

## Roadmapping Lessons Learned

**Roadmapping Lessons Learned**
-  A number of roadmaps have now been observed,
-   confirming parts of the guide and raising some issues:
- 	- Two types of roadmaps are needed
- 	- Roadmapping works best when sponsored by the
- 	  cleanup program
- 	- The model for setting goals for program-level
-  	  roadmaps may be wrong	- Flow sheets aren’t being used at the program level
- 	- Stakeholder involvement guidance isn’t being followed	- Application should be limited to important, difficult problems

## Two Types of Roadmaps Are Needed 

**Two Types of Roadmaps Are Needed **
-  There is a significant difference between “project” and
-   “program” level roadmaps	- Project-level roadmaps are focused on one problem,
- 	  can be developed in 2-4 months, and successfully
- 	  integrate R&D activities into the project baseline
- 	- Program-level roadmaps tackle multiple related
- 	  problems, take a couple years to develop, and
- 	  usually support multiple projects

## Roadmapping Works Best When Sponsored by the Cleanup Program

**Roadmapping Works Best When Sponsored by the Cleanup Program**
-  Helps achieve the strong commitment of
-   resources necessary
-  Improves R&D integration with the baseline
-  However, some program-level roadmaps are
-   beyond the scope of any single cleanup
-   organization

## Goal Setting Model for Program-level Roadmaps May Be Wrong

**Goal Setting Model for Program-level Roadmaps May Be Wrong**

-  Based on Industry roadmaps
-  Assumes obsolescence
-  Contrary to EM emphasis on
-   technology gaps

## Flow Sheets Aren’t Being Used 

**Flow Sheets Aren’t Being Used **
**at the Program Level**
-  Flow sheets or “functional flow diagrams” aid
-   in the systematic identification of technical issues
-  All recent project-level roadmap have used flow sheets,
-   but only one program-level roadmap has employed them
-  It isn’t clear whether this is due to a lack of applicability
-   or a lack of effort at the program level

## Stakeholder Involvement Guidance 

**Stakeholder Involvement Guidance **
**Isn’t Being Followed**
-  Based on review of outside roadmaps, the guidance
-   recommends direct involvement of regulators and
-   other stakeholders in the roadmapping effort
-  Few roadmaps are including stakeholders, and their
-   involvement is usually indirect (information exchanges)
-  However, regulatory and stakeholder acceptance is
-   often a significant factor in new technology deployment

## Application Should Be Limited to Important, Difficult Problems

**Application Should Be Limited to Important, Difficult Problems**
-  Roadmapping requires a significant commitment that
-   is usually only available on the most important projects
-  One measure of project importance is the number of
-   formal independent reviews expected
-  The rigor of roadmapping stands up well to formal review
-  Roadmaps with significant reviews show better commitment
-    of resources, better follow-through on recommendations, and
-    generally a tighter, higher quality effort

## Conclusions

**Conclusions**
-  The draft roadmapping guidance has worked well in
-   providing general direction for several EM roadmaps
-  Experience gained from those roadmaps suggests
-   a number of guidance improvements or refinements
-  The application of roadmapping has also raised some
-   issues concerning the role of R&D in the EM program